HomeMy Public PortalAboutCC MINS 1974
Regular Meeting of January 7, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on January 7, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Miller presiding.
/~ ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Beebe, Futch and Mayor Miller
ABSENT: Councilmen Taylor and Pritchard
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present, in
the Pledge of Allegiance.
OPEN FORUM
(re City Suit Against
Hutka & Legal Notice)
Ed Hutka, 1019 Angelica Way, read a legal notice which appeared in
the Valley Times on December 21, 1973, in which the City published
a notice stating that it was filing suit against Mr. Hutka and his
wife. Mr. Hutka stated that such was done without benefit of a
public hearing and without the Council hearing both sides of the
argument with regard to storm drainage in the industrial area on
First Street which is being developed by Mr. Hutka. He pointed out
that neither he or his wife were a party to the contractural agree-
ment with the City.
Mr. Parness explained that installation of a storm drain system
was one of the conditions for certain development and the obligations
called for the owners of the property to meet these obligations jointly
with the City and Mr. Hutka was one of the contractees or successors
to the original contract. The City has met and discussed this matter
on numerous occasions but Mr. Hutka and one other individual has re-
fused to participate financially and the City feels they are obligated
to do so. The City's only recourse was to file suit.
Mayor Miller commented that it would appear that Mr. Hutka could
have come to the Council at any time during the time the matter
was discussed with the property owners and the staff and prior to
the City's filing a suit.
Councilman Futch commented that since Mr. Hutka did not approach
the Council on the matter there was no choice on the part of the
staff but to file suit.
Councilman Beebe asked why Mr. Hutka had not spoken with the Council
in an effort to resolve the matter and Mr. Hutka stated that it was
assumed the staff would bring the matter up because they were the
party to file isuit.
Mayor Miller stated that the staff has been given the authority
to proceed with whatever means are deemed necessary for getting
the public works improvements that the contract calls for.
Mr. Hutka stated that he feels the matter could be settled without
having to go to court and the City Attorney stated that the parties
involved have 30 days to negotiate and respond to the court after
notice has been served. If the parties can come to an agreement
there need be no court expenses.
No action was taken at this time.
CM-27- 275
January 7, 1974
CONSENT CALENDAR
Re Quitclaim Deed
for Tract 3333
(H. C. Elliott)
The Director of Public Works reported that an error has been discovered
in the deeds in connection with Tract 3333 (H. C. Elliott) and would
recommend that the City Quitclaim the recorded easements and accept
the new easement deeds for recording.
Report re Police
Dept. Budgetary
Adjustment for Training
The City Manager reported that the Chief of Police has requested that
the Police Department be allowed a budgetary adjustment to provide
basic training for new officers. Approximately $10,000 would be
needed for the program but nearly all of this amount will be re-
imbursed by the state and it is recommended that the Council adopt
a motion authorizing the budget adjustment.
Airport Committee
Minutes of 12/3/73
Minutes for the Airport Committee's meeting of December 3, 1973,
were received and noted for filing.
Payroll and Claims
Dated 12/31/73
There were 200 claims in the amount of $340,682.62 and 289 payroll
warrants in the amount of $72,229.13 for a total of $412,911.75,
dated December 31, 1973 and ordered paid by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF .,L)
CONSENT CALENDAR ~~,
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman T~~'--~
and by unanimous vote, the Consent Calendar was approved.
COMMUNICATION RE
LONE STAR PROPERTY
(Trap Rock, Inc.)
A letter was received from Lone Star Properties, Inc. with regard
to the New York Trap Rock parcel located adjacent to the City of
Livermore, comprising approximately 550 acres, in which they state
that since LAFCO has placed this property outside of Livermore's
Sphere of Influence it would be inappropriate for Lone Star to
set forth plans for the property at this time. The particular
property lies south of our City, generally along the Arroyo Mocho.
RE LETTER SENT TO
LAFCO RE GELDERMAN's
LAS POSITAS VALLEY DEVELOP.
The Council received a copy of the letter sent to LAFCO from
the Citizens Committee on General Plan Goals for proposed develop-
ment by Ge1derman in which they request that LAFCO rescind their
decision to exclude from the Livermore Planning Area, that area
commonly referred to as Las positas Valley (North of Interstate
580 to the Alameda County line).
CM-27-276
January 7, 1974
(re Letter to LAFCO)
The Council expressed their approval and support of the letter
which had been sent and stated that it had been very well written.
On motion of Counilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Beebe and by
unanimous vote the letter was approved.
APPOINTMENT OF
HIGH SCHOOL REPS
TO BEAUTIFICATION COMM.
The Beautification Committee reported that student representatives
have participated on the Beautification Committee since the begin-
ning of the school year but have never been officially appointed
and requested that this be done in order that they may be allowed
to vote.
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Futch and by
unanimous vote the following students were appointed to the Beauti-
fication Committee:
Kevin Smith, 5262 Irene Way, Granada High School
Lynn Watson, 1389 Martha Street, Livermore High School
RESIGNATIONS FROM
COMMITTEES
It was noted that resignations have been received from the following,
and on motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Futch and
by unanimous vote, the staff was directed to send letters thanking
them for their service on these committees:
Cindy English - Beautification Committee
Leo Gutierrez - Housing Authority
Harvey M. OWren - Housing Authority
David P. Mandeville - Housing Authority
REPORT RE REQUEST FOR CUP
FOR EXPANSION OF ALDEN
LANE NURSERY (Williams)
Mr. Musso explained that a CUP has been submitted to allow for
modification and expansion of the existing nursery located at
981 Alden Lane, owned by John and Ruth Williams, which has been
referred to the Council by the County of Alameda. He then ex-
plained the area in which the nursery is located which is surrounded
by agricultural and residential use. He pointed out that the
County normally does not require the public works improvements
to be installed and the Planning Commission felt that such would
not be used by pedestrians if they were installed and agreed that
this is not necessary until such time as other development takes
place in the area adjacent to the Williams property. The Planning
Commission recommended that the CUP be allowed subject to the
following conditions:
1. Public Works improvements be deferred, as specified.
2. Sewer connected prior to expansion of the use.
3. Street frontage landscaping.
4. No access allowed on Holmes Street.
5. provisions re size of signs.
6. provisions limiting use of expanded area.
7. Improvement of parking lot with sufficient drainage
and dust control.
CM-27-277
January 7, 1974
(Expansion of Nursery)
Mayor Miller stated that in his op1n10n a more positive recommendation
would be to deny the application unless the specified conditions are
met, rather than to approve the application with the following con-
ditions.
Councilman Beebe felt that to force Mr. Williams into a sewer agree-
ment may force him out of business and personally speaking would
like to see that the agricultural area remain as long as possible.
The Council then discussed the property to be developed, as illustra-
ted on the map.
Councilman Futch moved that the Council adopt the Planning Commission's
recommendation, seconded by Mayor Miller.
It was noted that the Planning Commission recommended that the sewer
be connected prior to expansion, which Councilman Beebe stated he is
opposed to, and moved to amend the motion to delete this portion.
The amendment died for lack of a second.
At this time the motion passed 2-1 (Councilman Beebe dissenting).
P. C. MINUTES FOR
MEETING OF 12/18/73
The minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting of December 18,
1973, were noted for filing, on motion of Councilman Futch, seconded
by Councilman Beebe and by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE FUEL CONSER-
VATION TO CONSERVE
ENERGY
The City Manager reported that reports have been submitted to the
Council from the three principal departments operating City equip-
ment and that all cities in the County are going to work out a
coordinated program of fuel monitoring and surplus allocations.
During November the staff was informed that the City would not
receive additional fuel deliveries for the rest of the month
and although the notice was reversed and we continued to receive
de1ivieries, the staff developed a fuel conservation plan which
is now in effect. A more stringent plan has also been prepared
which can be followed should deliveries be substantially curtailed.
The report listed every City Department and means which will be used
to reduce energy consumption.
Councilman Futch wondered what is being done in the way of reducing
wattage in street lights and other means of using less energy and
Councilman Beebe responded by stating that this matter has been
discussed by municipal PG&E groups in the state of California
with the PUC staff and as a result of these meetings it has been
pointed out that street lights account for only 1/7 of 1% of the
total electrical energy used in California. Since lights add to
the safety and welfare of the citizens the PUC does not want to
make a change in the wattage of the street lights. He added that
this viewpoint may change adding that just recently the PUC has
ordered all utilities to reduce their output of energy by l5%
rather than the previous 10% reduction.
CM-27-278
January 7, 1974
(Energy Conservation)
The Council then discussed other methods which could be used to help
conserve energy such as possibly amending the Building Code to require
additional insulation on all structures. The Council agreed that this
point should be looked into in order that some type of recommendation
could be made to the Board of Appeals .i 11 ,//. / ~
~ ~,:rz L<- - . .~ ~I f/d:s;:: .
Mr. Street explained(that the state legislature has a~ready passed
a bill which requirei\~r-.~maR~ h;~.a~ and community development
to promulgate regulations which require conservation of energy through
insulation of all structures. At present these regulations are under,
going public hearings and effective July 1, it will become law.
The Council asked that Mr. Street report back to the Council regarding
the status of the bill.
RE REPORT SENT TO
SACEOA BOARD
A copy of the report written by the City Manager and sent to the
SACEOA Board was submitted to the Council and since Councilman
Futch has served as a representative the Mayor asked if he would
first like to respond to the contents of the report.
Councilman Futch stated that he feels the report was a little unfair
to the SACEOA Board as he felt the City Manager was responding to
statements made about SACEOA by the state. Councilman Futch indicated
that the state had been asked to attend a meeting and discuss the
problems and disagreements and that the representative from the state
attended but said nothing. In his opinion, the state did not have the
welfare of those who are assisted by SACEOA in mind at this time, and
defended the Board and staff by saying that they had been operatinq_
under very difficult circumstances for several years in that they
did not know where funds were to come fron for operation or even if
the staff were going to be paid.
Councilman Beebe stated that it had been his understanding that the
state had discontinued the program because all the money was going
to pay salaries to the people running the program and the money was
not getting to the poor.
Councilman Futch felt that the same salaries would be paid if run
by different people; however the program could possibly have been
managed a little better. He felt the Board had not been diplomatic
in its response to the state and Washington and this is one of the
valid criticisms; however, there are two sides of the story.
The City Manager recommended in his report that the Council formally
support the establishment of a new CAA agency for Southern Alameda
County and indicate the active participation of our City in such
an effort, and Councilman Futch moved that this recommendation be
adopted, seconded by Councilman Beebe.
The motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
REPORT RE PURCHASE
OF LAND FOR PARK
The City Manager reported that the owner of the land adjacent to
Robert Livermore Park has offered to sell the property at the same
amount per acre that the City originally paid for the land purchased
for Robert Livermore Park. The LARPD encourages acquisition of the
land priced at $7,500 per acre - approximately $67,000 for the 9
acres remaining. The staff has recommended that the Council adopt
a motion authorizing the staff to proceed with the purchase.
CM-27-279
January 7, 1974
(Park Site Purchase)
The City Manager explained that at this time he is not convinced
that the price is appropriate and would like to do some research
and consult with some of the appraisal sources prior contacting
the owner; however, if the Council would like the City Manager to
proceed with acquisition he would be happy to do so.
Mayor Miller stated that prior to authorizing the staff to proceed
he would like to have some type of report indicating what is left
in the park funds as well as the priority list for this year and
the next 2-3 years in the future, with which the Council concurred.
REPORT RE PLEASANTON
SEWER INTERCONNECTION
The City Manager reported that the City of Pleasanton has been investi-
gating alternate prospects of sewer transmission and treatment methods
and one of the alternatives is to interconnect all or a portion of
the currenty Pleasanton sewer system with our City treatment facilities.
The staff recommended that the Council indicate its favor of permitting
an interconnection of sewage flow to our treatment plant, conditionally,
as follows:
l) All capital costs are afforded;
2) A maximum gallonage of treatment capacity be allotted;
3) The requisite connection fees be payable, based on the number of
units or their equivalent to be served;
4) That an annual sewer service charge be assessable based upon
current formula which takes into account the quantity and quality
of sewage discharge; .
5) That a percentage of the added treatment capacity (mutually
negotiated) to be made available at our plant be reserved for
local commercial and/or industrial use.
Mayor Miller pointed out that he sees no reason to rush into an agree-
ment with P1easanton and Livermore should wait to see what kind of
cooperation we get over the LAFCO issue. He also expressed concern
for the possibility of Pleasanton financing commercial and industrial
at our expense by using our sewer plant.
The matter was discussed by the Council and the City Manager explained
that they are suggesting interconnection after the plant has been ex-
panded.
Councilman Futch suggested that the matter be put over for discussion
during the time a full Council is present and the Council concluded
that the matter should be discussed again next week.
REPORT RE GOLF COURSE
SNACK BAR LEASE
It was reported by the City Manager that the Council formerly auth-
orized an amendment to the Crosswinds Restaurant lease so as to
delegate the snack bar function to the golf pro. Subsequently
new managerial persons have been retained by the Crosswinds Restaurant
who are desirous of retaining the snack bar and pledged improved con-
ditions and it is recommended that the Council adopt a motion rescind-
ing the lease amendment. The City Manager added that under these new
circumstances the golf pro has agreed that the resolution should be
rescinded.
Councilman Beebe moved that a resolution be adopted rescinding the
former resolution authorizing a lease transfer, seconded by Council-
man Futch and which passed by unanimous vote.
CM-27-280
January 7, 1974
(Res. Rescinding
Former Resolution)
RESOLUTION NO. l-74
A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 153-73 RE
RELINQUISHMENT OF PORTION OF LAS POSITAS CLUBHOUSE.
COUNCILMAN PRITCHARD WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
REPORT RE VETERANS I
DAY PARADE
The Mayor reported on the discussion which took place during the
Alameda County Mayors' Conference with regard to participation
in the Veterans' Day Parade at which time it was noted that the
Veterans Day Commission is faced with the problem of the location
of the parade and financing which amounts to $7,600 each year.
It was recommended by the City Managers that the total cost be
shared by the County and cities and that the Veterans Commission
explore alternative programs other than parades for the observance
of Veterans Day utilizing large public facilities such as the
Coliseum and County Fairgrounds.
Mayor Miller explained that the City has never been involved in
the parade and would recommend that this past practice be observed.
The City Manager explained that our City's participation would
amount to approximately $400 and Councilman Beebe stated that he
would be reluctant to approve an expenditure for something he is
not sure our citizens would attend, and moved that the City not
participate this year, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and which
passed by unanimous vote.
DISCUSSION RE PROPOSED
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION
DISCLOSURE ORDINANCE
The City Attorney explained that the copy of the amendments to
the Campaign Disclosure Ordinance would be in conformance with
the state law effective January l, 1974 which the Council then
discussed.
It was noted that state law will allow this to be handled as
an urgency ordinance which could be adopted and become immediately
effective upon second reading the week after the first reading.
Councilman Futch stated that one portion he feels would be diffi-
cult to enforce or to ascertain would be the value of a person's
service on a campaign and he is against this item. Another item
of question is the requirement that if an elected candidate violated
these conditions he not be allowed to take office, and the Mayor
explained that this requirement was not removedA it wi~l ,st~ll apply.
~~e~~~~.
Councilman Futch moved that the Council accept the ordinance
which has been prepared by the staff with the following exceptions:
1) Deletion of the last sentence on Page 3 - "Failure to file...etc...~
2) Type-o correction on Page 2, (e) "...of payment of money...".
Also added are the following, from the memo prepared by Mayor Miller:
l) Items 1, 2 and 5 from the Mayor's memorandum relating, respec-
tively, to requirement of campaign statement for ballot measures,
requirement of designation of occupation and employer of donors,
and the payment of anonymous contributions exceeding $5 but
under $lOO, accumulatively, to the City's General Fund.
CM-27-28l
January 7, 1974
(Campaign Disclosure
Ordinance Discussion)
2) Item 6 from the same memorandum changing, however, the $.lO
and $.12 limitations to $.l3 and $.15, respectively.
3) Item 7 to be changed to read: The failure to report expen-
ditures by any person or committee of any money or materials of
any kind on behalf of a candidate shall be a misdemeanor punishable
by payment of triple the expenditures to the General Fund of the
City and by up to six months in jail.
4) Item 8 to adopt the penalty section of CV l63l, deleting the
remainder of the proposed section.
5) Delete Items 9 and lO.
Councilman Futch had no further changes to recommend and felt
the key provision of the Mayor's proposal was the limitation of
the total expenditure of funds which, at the City's present size,
would approximate $2,500 to $3,000.
During the discussion following the motion, councilman~
inquired whether the proposed disclosure ordinance was more or
less restrictive than the state law. The City Attorney responded
that the City may not adopt less restrictive measures, but it
does have the power to enact more restrictive provisions, which
the ordinance under discussion would accomplish. The City
Attorney further pointed out that the San Leandro and Chula Vista
campaign disclosure ordinances, used in the drafting of our
proposed ordinance, have not been applied, challenged, upheld, or
overturned.
The Mayor summarized, stating that the whole concept was that a candi-
date should disclose one's source of campaign contributions and to whom
that money is expended, and that there is no reason why that can't
be reported in infinite detail. The reason why the state law is
less restrictive is that millions of dollars are spent in statewide
elections and the ground rules for reporting are naturally on a
higher level than they need be on a local level where the amounts
of money are substantially less. Requiring that every penny be
disclosed is not so unreasonable on a City basis. The Mayor continued
saying that it is just as easy to record a $2 contribution as a
$5 one and that is the job of the campaign treasurer. One of his
major reasons for selecting the $2 figure was to cover the block
sale of tickets to fund-raising events.
During the discussion of reporting proceeds from fund-raising
events, the City Attorney suggested that subsection (f) (2)
relating to this subject, be amended to read as follows: The
purchase of two or more tickets having a cumulative cost of $5
or more dollars for any . . .
Mayor Miller suggested that the sale of blocks of tickets of
two or more be subject to disclosure. Councilman Futch wanted
to be sure to include the purchase of two tickets for $2 each
on one day and the purchase of another two tickets the next,
and so forth, be covered also. The Mayor felt, on the other hand,
that someone could conceivably purchase a ticket a day during
the entire campaign; that if someone were so determined, he could
find a way to circumvent the law and this is the reason he favors
total disclosure. Councilman ~epe~~~~Ejected that he felt
the Councilmen were trying to~~~y difficult for a
representative of the citizens to come up from the masses and
defeat them for a Council seat. In summary, Councilman Beebe
felt it adequate to report $5 contributions and unnecessary to
go any lower. The Mayor insisted that since another City requires
every cent to be reported, his advocacy of a $2 disclosure is
not unreasonable. The Mayor then moved that the proposed ordinance
be amended in that wherever it had been changed from $2 to $5,
it now be changed back to $2. Councilman Futch protested that
CM-27-282
January 7, 1974
(Campaign Disclosure
Ordinance Discussion)
a $2 disclosure would include a citizen's contribution in the form of
materials utilized in the hosting of candidate's coffees, since the
items would cost more than $2, and with such disclosure requirements
citizens would be nervous about supporting anybody.
/-
The Mayor responded that the Chula Vista Ordinance stated that it would
not be necessary to establish a monetary value for truly volunteer activ-
ities in supplying insignificant goods, materials and services, and
facilities of a de minimus nature, that is coffee and cake, use of
a home for a coffee, etc.
The Mayor felt nobody would question the coffee and cake expenditures,
but what he is after are purchases, contributions in cash, and other
things that are done to evade the reporting requirement, and that is
why the $2 minimum base. At the request of Councilman Futch, the City
Attorney suggested that perhaps the Chula Vista ordinance covers the
coffees held at private homes; that if someone opens his home as a host
to a group in order to hear a candidate and ordinary non-alcoholic bever-
ages are served, this would not be a contribution of materials to a
campaign.
In response to a call for the question, the Mayor's motion to amend
the ordinance to require disclosures of $2 contributions failed for
lack of a majority vote - Councilman Pritchard and Mayor Miller voting
in the affirmative and Councilmen and Beebe and Futch dissenting.
Returning to the issue of the sale of blocks of tickets, the Mayor inquir-
ed whether the Council would favor inclusion in the ordinance of
requiring disclosure of the purchase of blocks of two or more tickets
at $2 or more apiece. The Mayor then moved that the purchase of
tickets be disclosed as follows: "The purchase of tickets costing
$5 or more for any fund raising events both individually and in blocks
of two or more is subject to the provisions of (f) (1). The purchase
of tickets costing $2 or more cumulatively in blocks of two or more
be subject to these provisions."
After further discussion it was decided to request the City Attorney
to develop an airtight provision which would prevent substantial
contributions through the purchase of tickets, using $5 as the base
figure.
The motion and second previously made were withdrawn at this point.
Referring to Section 2.50, the Mayor requested the insertion of the
word "cumulative" at the beginning of the second paragraph, to then
read "Cumulative preliminary campaign statements shall be filed .
. ." which change was acceptable to the Council. (The Mayor so moved,
the motion was later seconded and carried.)
Relating to Councilman Futch's objections to the penalty prOV1S10ns
of the disclosure ordinance, Mayor Miller felt it important that
deliberate cheaters not be allowed to take seats on the Council because
it represents moral dishonesty. He felt the requirements were not
that difficult and that candidates are given sufficient notice of
the requirements. Further, that disclosure after the election defeats
the purpose of the disclosure and that it does no good to discover
after the election that a candidate's entire campaign was financed
by a single contribution.
Councilman Futch was concerned that a candidate could accidentally
omit an item, and if he were not allowed to then take office, Councilman
Futch felt the courts would throw out the ordinance provisions.
He would not be willing to adopt the penalty provisions without a
detailed study by the City Attorney. Mayor Miller felt that such
a strong provision, clearly stated, would serve to insure that every
candidate would see that the statements were properly made. Councilman
Futch refused to be pursuaded and reiterated that he felt such provisions
were unnecessary in the forthcoming election. That he would not
rush through such a provision tonight and would consider it again
only after a detailed report by the City Attorney. The Mayor then
CM-27-283
January 7, 1974
(Campaign Disclosure Ordinance Discussion)
suggested that if Councilman Futch disagreed with disqualifying a
candidate for office for not reporting seven days prior to the
election, perhaps he would go along with such disqualification
as regards a candidate who fails to file a statement on the day
before he takes office. Since Councilman Futch was reluctant to
allow this second provision to be included, Mayor Miller suggested
that he think about it over the weekend.
The City Attorney then spoke regarding the legal defects in
the language and suggested that the Council adopt those parts
of the proposed ordinance which are clearly acceptable so that
the ordinance is in effect for the forthcoming election and
that the other ideas be refined and developed so that they could
withstand a legal challenge and be adopted to be in effect for
the following election.
Because of the changes covered by the Mayor's memorandum,
which are substantial in nature, the Ordinance will be redrafted
and have its first reading, as an urgency measure, next week.
The motion, made by Councilman Futch, seconded by Mayor Miller,
passed 3-1 with Councilman Beebe dissenting.
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Re Possession of Western
Pacific Right-of-Way)
The City Attorney explained that the City's eminent domain action
for seeking immediate possession of the Western Pacific right-of-way
will be filed no later than Friday, January llth, and expects a
court order to be issued within this same period of time. The City
needs only to appear and make a request of the court as under the
California Constitution, the City has the right to take property
and the only portion to be litigated is the question of just compensa-
tion. He added that outside assistance has been obtained and he
wanted the Council to be apprised of the situation.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL --.J Il_~n-.'pj 4
(Re Grading Ordina ~ )~~~7k-~/~'
Councilman Futch commented that at the last coun;iI mee;ing he ha~~7i
made a motion to continue the matter of the Grading OrdinanceJand ,-
Mr. Parness explained that it appeared that the agenda was going
to be very voluminous in addition to the fact that it was known
that Councilman Taylor would not be present so he therefore took
the liberty to exclude it from the agenda.
Councilman Futch stated that in view of the fact the item was to
be discussed at this meeting he would like to move that the matter
be referred to the Planning commiSSi::~~ considcratiOft, seconded
by Councilman Pritchard and which passe by a unanimous vote.
~ U'_'''I!,L~L~'
( 1198 d '4-~<9.4.~/'..,<~ ~
re SB - Fun s . . . - - (/-
on Environmental Protection)-
Mayor Miller stated that SB 1198 would allow for the state to provide
funds on environmental protection which the League recommends support-
ing and would agree that the Council should endorse the bill.
Councilman Beebe pointed out that a problem exists in that the legis-
lature passed approximately 500 bills the last day of the session
which will cost the state $50 million every year which must come
from income tax or a raise in the sales tax. This environmental
bill would be another $100 million the people will have to pay for.
CM-27-284
January 7, 1974
(Re SB 1198)
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch
and by a 3-1 vote (Beebe dissenting) the Council endorsed SB 1198.
(re AB 2610 - Change in
Market Value in Zoning
Changes)
Mayor Miller stated that AB 2610 is particularly infuriating because
it states that if the fair market value of property is decreased due
to a change in the zoning classification, the local agencies must pay
for the difference but if the value is increased nothing is said about
it. He stated that the Council has opposed this in the past and would
suggest that it be strongly opposed again.
Mayor Miller moved that the Council oppose AB 2610, seconded by
Councilman Beebe and which passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
(re LAFCO Replacement
for Al Kant)
Mayor Miller stated that a replacement on the LAFCO Committee for
Al Kant must be made and noted that the nominating committee has a
few names to choose from and will be voted upon at the Mayors'
Conference on Wednesday, January 9th.
ADJOURNMENT-
There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor
Miller adjourned the meeting at lO:05 p.m.
APPROVE
~~~ S-) _ ~~
Mayor
7
,
.---. i
ATTEST C_ \ I C
Regular Meeting of January l4, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on January l4, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Miller presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Beebe, Futch, Pritchard and Mayor Miller
ABSENT: Councilman Taylor (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
CM-27-285
January 14, 1974
MINUTES OF 1/7/74
On motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Beebe and by
4-1 vote (Councilman Taylor abstaining due to absence at that
meeting) the minutes for the meeting of January 7, 1974, were
approved, as amended.
COUNCILMAN TAYLOR WAS SEATED DURING CORRECTION OF THE MINUTES.
OPEN FORUM
(Re Runway
Flight Patterns)
David Leibdorf, resident of Livermore and with the Alameda Naval Air
Station Fire Department, stated that approximately two months ago
he addressed the Councilmen on the flight patterns being used at the
runway in Livermore as well as the altitude of aircraft in relation-
ship to homes, schools, playgrounds and other congested areas of
Livermore. He then read an article written to the editor of the
Valley Times which pointed out that the aircraft flying over our
community cause unsafe conditions for us, as engine malfunctions
are generally unscheduled and asked that the citizens look to the
sky and observe the flight patterns being used. He then read a
letter sent to him by the Chief of the Livermore Tower which stated
that Federal Aviation Regulations prohibit landing and take-off,
except when necessary, at an altitude of less than l,OOO feet over
any congested area, etc. He then illustrated the flight pattern
presently being used by using the blackboard in the chambers and
illustrated a proposal for a change in the flight pattern.
Councilman Taylor wondered if the proposal has been presented to
the Airport Advisory Committee and Mr. Leibdorf explained that he
wanted to bring the matter to the attention of the Council for
passage to the Airport Advisory Committee and as to the problems
that the citizens of Livermore are experiencing, and requested
that the Council do something while we have the opportunity.
Councilman Taylor explained that he felt the Council should not
get into the technical details of one approach vs. another approach,
but would move that the Council refer the proposal to the staff,
the Airport Advisory Committee and the FAA for recommendation, seconded
by Councilman Pritchard.
Councilman Beebe stated that he feels it behooves the City to
cooperate with the staff and the Airport Advisory Committee and
the FAA as there is no good reason to come in over a heavily
populated area of the City if there is another route which can
be established. He agreed that there may be a number of factors
to consider but if there is any way the planes can be diverted away
from the populated area he would be for it.
Mr. Leibdorf .stated that he wished there could be some motion from
the Council, as there are some objections to changing the flight
pattern; however, it can be changed to initiate better safety for
the citizens of Livermore.
Mayor Miller expressed appreciation for Mr. Leibdorf's concern and
is the reason a study will be made of the situation.
CM-27-286
January 14, 1974
Bob Lockhart, 1001 Riesling Drive, P1easanton, stated that he feels
the allegations of unsafe flying by pilots is unwarranted and explained
that normally, pilots do not fly over schools or May Nissen Park ex-
cept when it extends due to heavy activity in the pattern and when one
is flying straight in. He emphasized that this is a matter which should
be decided upon by the Airport Advisory Committee and by experts who
understand the situation and problems involved. He felt that there
were a couple of points which should be made and one is that the
gliders can glide in this pattern of 1,000 feet and also that violations
are not taken lightly by the tower or anyone else. If a pilot is re-
ported for some violation and it is verified the matter is pursued
and the penalties are not trivial. He feels the relationship between
the airport people and the pilots has been very good and would like
to see this continue. He feels the accusations are unfair, unjust,
and totaly out of reality.
Steve Patenaude, 1043 Batavia, presented safety figures and summed
them up by stating that they indicate there is a possibility of
one fire related accident occurring in every thirty years. He
pointed out that the pilot is looking out for his own neck and
about 80% of the area is composed of fields in which he can land
which one would do rather than land on a house. He added that most
airports operate at 800 feet and that because of complaints this
airport operates at 1,000 feet. If planes are flying in lower than
1,000 feet it is because they are not aware of the l,OOO foot operation.
Mr. Lee mentioned, briefly, that the Tower management has had a very
active program of monitoring the height of aircraft and maintaining
aircraft at the 1,000 foot elevation, and there have been very few
infractions.
At this time the Council voted unanimously on the motion to refer
the matter to the Airport Advisory Committee and the F. A. A.
(Citizens Advisory
Committee Report re
BART Extension)
Gib Marguth, ll52 Farmington Way, Chairman of the Citizens Advisory
Committee for the Livermore-Pleasanton BART Extension Board, presented
a report to the Council which asks the Council to respond to proposals
regarding things which might be accomplished in the Valley to conserve
energy and get a transportation system. One of the ideas which has
been suggested has been the utilization of the school bus for local
transportation, and he asked that the Council review this report. He
pointed out that the citizens cannot really do anything to effect
a transportation system and that such must come from the Council.
A consultant will be presenting the proposal for the route selection
and station location of BART to the Citizens Advisory Committee on
Thursday, January 17th, at 7:30 p.m. at the Livermore Airport Administra-
tion Building and he invited the Council to attend this meeting.
Mayor Miller explained that there are many things in the mill at
present such as the formation of a Transportation Committee, the
updating of the DeLeuw, Cather report on Transportation Study and
the majority of the Council is in favor of widening the corridor
for bus lanes or a BART line, and the Council is interested in public
transportation.
CM-27-287
January 14, 1974
PUBLIC HEARING RE
REZONING OF WM.
JUDSON PROPERTY
(I-580 & First St.)
Mr. Musso explained that the matter of an application for rezoning
of property located at I-580 and First Street from OS-A to ID-H
District is a resubmittal of the application. The matter was
filed with the Planning Commission and came to the Council with a
recommendation to approve the rezoning which the Council denied.
The resubmittal is for commercial (acting as industrial) zoning of
the site. The Planning Commission again has recommended approval
but this time to CS District (Commercial Services), to a portion
of the site which Mr. Musso explained, and not to apply to the entire
site. He pointed out that one area of concern had been access to the
site and the Planning Commission recommends that adequate access be
provided, suitable landscaping, and adequate assurance that the re-
maining 8.7 acres will be permanent open space. He pointed out that
Alameda County shows this area to be one of the areas for commercial
on their interchange freeway plan. The rezoning is not in confor-
mance with the General Plan and the Planning Commission is in the
process of reviewing the General Plan in this area and it has been
taken into account in all their previous discussions.
Councilman Futch wondered if the City can condition zoning with
the agreement of the property owner and it was noted that the
property owner would have to agree. Councilman Futch felt that
it might be more appropriate to zone the area E District but
Mr. Musso explained that E District would not allow the uses
desired by the applicant, and Councilman Futch explained that he
was referring to the open space. His point is that he is not sure
the City can condition zoning.
Mr. Musso stated that he feels access is a legitimate condition and
that the property should not be rezoned unless adequate access is
provided.
Mayor Miller stated that on the assumption the Council could approve
this, the Council could approve it subject to working out some mecha-
nism which will provide open space on the remaining 8.7 acres and
the Council does not have to approve the zoning until there is some
feasible way to guarantee open space.
At this time the Mayor opened the public hearing.
David Madis, attorney representing the applicant, William Judson,
stated that the Planning Commission has once again recommended that
the area be rezoned commercial, the interchange plan shows that this
is one of the areas which should be commercial and it is obviously
not suitable for residential use due to the amount of traffic in
the area. It appears that there is a desire on the part of the
Planning Commission to limit the commercial use to a portion of
the property rather than all of the property and the applicant has
indicated that he would be willing to work out the access to the
satisfaction of the City and would like to see that 6 acres are
allowed to be developed as commercial and the balance of the property
would be dedicated to the City or do whatever it takes to keep the
remainder as an open space area. He felt there was nothing illegal
about conditioning an agreement mutually agreed upon. He pointed
out that a problem might arise in a case in which the City, obviously
against the will of the party involved, imposes conditions and require-
ments; the courts have said that if a person agrees it is still con-
sidered duress in such a case. Mr. Madis felt that the zoning and
recommendation of the Planning Commission should be carried through
but it would be preferable to have 6 acres of the property rezoned
and the balance left in permanent open space and access provided as
requested by the City. He added that the Judson family is agreeable
CM-27-288
January l4, 1974
(re Judson Property)
to allowing any type of agreement the City would like such as an
easement, a grant to the development rights or a contract.
Councilman Taylor asked if the applicant agrees to the Planning
Commission's recommendations and Mr. Madis stated that the applicant
does agree. The Planning Commission has not recommended that 6 acres
be rezoned but allows that density for the remainder of the property
may be used someplace else within the whole planning unit; however
the applicant would prefer that more commercial be allowed.
The Council then discussed the amount of land which might be involved
in the rezoning, as Mr. Madis had commented that the applicant is
not sure how much land has been recommended for rezoning as a line
was drawn on the map but the Planning Commission had discussed
approving 4 acres for commercial which would allow development of
a motel-restaurant complex and no more.
Mayor Miller stated that prior to a vote by the Council he would
think it best to find out just exactly how much property is involved
and would suggest a survey.
Bob Zackney, 315 Hillcrest, San Carlos, stated that he owns property
south of the channel and pointed out that there is no usable property
between the union Station and the channel because the flood control
people have control of the property. Also, Dr. Judson does not
own any property south of the center of the drainage ditch - part
of the drainage ditch is on his property and he gave up the rights
of this for the Arroyo Seco drainage canal.
Councilman Pritchard stated that the recommendation of the committee
is that the access be immediately south of the Union Station on
property that does not belong to the applicant which seems unclear
to him. He pointed out that he measured the amount of property
from the fence of the Union Station to the arroyo bank and there
is only 30 feet there; it appears that there may not even be a possi-
bility of access in this area. He would have to wonder if the Planning
Commission went out to look at the property prior to making the recom-
mendation.
Mr. Musso explained that the access area being discussed is not south
of the station as it was known that there is little land between the
station and the arroyo, but rather to provide access through the sta-
tion; perhaps even by purchasing the station.
Mr. Madis wondered if it would be possible to have some type of
condemned public right-of-way, pointing out that if the area is
ever approved for cluster development there will have to be some
type of access, and it was noted that Las Positas is an existing
street and a thoroughfare now.
The Council then discussed the access area in addition to the location
of the bridge, and the possibilities of providing access.
Mr. Musso explained that the Planning Commission felt that suitable
access would be between the creek and the gasoline station building
over the gas station site but felt that they would have ruled out
other alternatives.
There being no further testimony, on motion of Councilman Beebe,
seconded by Councilman pritchard and by unanimous vote, the public
hearing was closed.
Mayor Miller felt that the questions raised about access has rein-
forced his opinion that the parcel is unsuitable for development
at this time and that the best use of the parcel with development
rights would be for residential development.
CM-27-289
January 14, 1974
(re Judson property)
Mayor Miller continued to state his concern for allowing commercial
development at every freeway interchange used for entrance to the
City and it is not clear to him that there is a need for another
motel and restaurant in our area. For these reasons he would oppose
the recommended rezoning.
Councilman Beebe stated that he feels commercial development is the
only type of development reasonable in this area and cannot understand
the desire the place residential development so close to the freeway.
There are service stations on the other side of the interchange and
he feels that a motel-restaurant complex would be quite compatible
with those and an attraction to the community, and that the owners
could work out a good access.
Mayor Miller stated that he might feel differently when and after
the access has been worked out, but would hope that First Street
will not be turned into commercial.
Councilman Pritchard commented that he has no real objection to
having commercial at an interchange but in this instance he can
think of no location which would be a "poorer" choice than this
one, simply because of the access problem. Once the access problem
is solved he might look favorably on the situation as far as a re-
zoning.
Councilman Taylor asked if the Planning Commission had discussed
the traffic problems which might result with access through the
station property and Mr. Musso explained that they did discuss
the traffic problem but felt that the second access through the
Union Station property would probably alleviate the traffic prob-
lems. However, there was no discussion regarding the bridge.
Councilman Futch stated that he has also viewed the property and
shares the concern raised by Councilman Pritchard. There simply
is not a sufficient amount of land to provide access between the
service station and the arroyo. In his opinion the only feasible
way would be a separate bridge and he would wonder if this would be
an economical solution. He stated that he would have no objection
to the plan if it were feasible and also would like to see the
proposed access spelled out prior to approving a rezoning.
Councilman Pritchard indicated that if you have ever been at the
service station across the street and tried to go west on
First street, you could understand the difficulty - one cannot
see traffic coming at you from Livermore.
Councilman Taylor stated that there was some mention of a bridge
across the arroyo and is assuming that the street south of the
arroyo would be used in this case, as an alternative, which was
noted as correct.
Mr. Madis stated that he would like to hear from the City Engineer
with regard to access and traffic control and would like the matter
to be continued until such time as a report from the City Engineer
and Zone 7 can be obtained, and on behalf of the applicant requested
that the matter be continued.
Councilman Futch agreed that the Council does not have sufficient
information to make a decision on the rezoning and that the sug-
gestion to continue is reasonable and so moved, seconded by Councilman
Beebe,
It was noted that the Council would like to have a report from the
City Engineer with regard to the traffic problem.
CM-27-290
January 14, 1974
(re Judson Property)
Councilman Pritchard stated that he would like to amend the motion
to reopen the public hearing and continue for two weeks which Council-
man Futch accepted as a part of his motion.
The Council discussed the date for continuing the public hearing
and agreed on February 4, and voted on the motion which passed by
a unanimous vote.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Sludge
Production - Rec. Plant
A report regarding the sludge production which was requested by the
Council was submitted by the Public Works Director and Water Reclama-
tion Plant Superintendent but the Council requested that the matter
be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the agenda for
discussion at a future meeting.
Mayor Miller stated that at the same time the matter is discussed
he would like to have some running averages for a 12 month period
since 1968 with some type of calculation that corresponds with the
population count per capita.
Report re Advance
Assess. Data Notice
The City Manager reported that a new state law mandates that the
County Assessor provide an estimated local assessed value by May 15,
and a formal request must be made for such a report. It is therefore
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution requesting such a
report.
RESOLUTION NO. 2-74
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING ESTIMATION OF LOCAL ASSESSED VALUE
Report re Jaycees Re-
quest Use of Airport
for Annual Air Show
The Airport Advisory Committee reported that at its meeting of
January 7th they considered the Jaycees' request to use the Livermore
Airport for their annual air show and they have agreed to provide
sufficient insurance coverage. The committee has recommended that
approval be granted subject to the usual conditions with regard to
insurance, grounds maintenance and policing.
Beautification Minutes
The minutes for the Beautification Committee's meeting of December 5,
1973, were noted for filing.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Taylor and
by unanimous vote, the Consent Calendar was approved with the deletion
of the sludge production report.
CM-27-291
January 14, 1974
CONTINUED ITEM -
CUP APP. - EVANS PRODUCTS
The matter of the CUP application submitted by Evans Products for
construction of a building between I-580 and portola Avenue was
continued from the meeting of December 17th and Mr. Musso described
the location of the property on which the building will be located,
if approved, as recommended by the Planning Commission by a 4-1 vote.
The building is proposed for retail use and is located in an ID Dis-
trict which requires approval of a CUP. He noted that other uses
in the area are Abbes volkswagen, mobi1ehome park, RVC facility, and
gasoline stations, and that a warehouse facility has also been approved
adjacent to this site.
Councilman Futch noted that if this use is approved it could not become
effective until the General Plan has been changed, and Mr. Musso
explained that this would simply be allowing a use in the present
zoning - no rezoning would occur.
Councilman Taylor moved to adopt the Planning Commission's recom-
mendation to approve a CUP subject to conditions specified by
them, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
The Council then discussed conditions they would like such as
screening of the site or screening of the air conditioning and
ducting, and Mr. Musso explained that this had been brought up
at the Planning Commission and it was concluded that screening
could not be done due to the height involved.
Councilman Futch suggested that there be a roof on the building
and that screening could be provided along the sides and up to
the roof, and moved to amend the motion to include this as a
condition, seconded by Councilman Beebe.
Councilman Futch explained that his motion was to provide, as a
condition, that adequate screening of the open part of the build-
ing be provided so that it is not visible from the freeway.
At this time the Council voted on the amendment which passed by
a unanimous vote.
Mayor Miller stated that he views the action of the Council very
depressing because for years there have been efforts made to keep
the area from becoming a garbage area with commercial development.
The area, according to previous Council policy, was to have been
for automobiles - new car agencies, and any commercial development
was allowed with reluctance and only if the use was to be a uniform
automobile sales area. It has not been the intention of the Council
to turn this area into a commercial area with more strip commercial
at every entrance to the City. It would not seem to be reasonable
to continue allowing one parcel of commercial after another and
would strongly oppose any retail sales use other than automobile
commercial and urged that the Council reconsider.
Councilman Futch asked why Mayor Miller felt automobile retail would
look better and the Mayor explained that he does not feel it looks
better but that was what was agreed upon and that the area was to
be a uniform use. He pointed out that allowing another use will
simply be setting a precedent towards allowing a commercial strip.
Councilman Beebe asked what the Mayor thinks the proper use would
be and the Mayor stated that according to Council policy, automobile
retail use.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he would certainly hope the use,
if allowed, would look much better than the present automobile
retail does from the back.
CM-27-292
January l4, 1974
(Evans Products CUP)
Councilman Taylor stated that he feels the use would be more attrac-
tive than another car lot and that another car agency will not likely
locate there anyway. He added that there is not another use he
would feel to be more appropriate that the use requested and would
be in favor of approving the CUP.
At this time the Council voted on the motion which passed 4-1 with
Mayor Miller dissenting.
David Madis, attorney representing the applicant, stated that he
resents this fine proposed structure being called "garbage" and
would like to think that this is a needed service and that this
can become a successful commercial enterprise. Such business must
be encouraged to come here and not given to neighboring community
competitors.
Mayor Miller stated that the whole business community welcomes busi-
ness but feels there are appropriate locations for these businesses.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE
PLANNING UNITS 8, 9, & 12
The discussion regarding Planning Units 8, 9, and 12, was continued
from the meetings of December 3 and 17th and Councilman Taylor
asked if there had been any communication with the property owners
related to density transfers and what the owners' options are, legally,
and Mr. Musso explained that he had sent a letter to the owners giving
the staff's interpretation regarding density transfer.
Councilman Taylor explained that he was concerned about this because
there has obviously been a great deal of misunderstanding over the
density transfer issue and apparently this still has not been taken
care of.
Mayor Miller stated that it is possible the Council had not been
very clear in its direction but it was his understanding that the
City would prepare something in writing, restating the concepts.
However, he felt the material sent out by the Urban Land Institute
was very clear and though it did not pertain to what the Council had
in mind it did provide the fact that it was the type of thing which
was not as radical as what people had claimed it to be. He suggested
that the staff provide the various types of options available to the
property owners by sho ing a couple of parcels, not necessarily in
the Planning Unit, and describing these options.
14./"1:- ~,(!d:;"~'
Councilman Taylor stated that he is interested in the property owners
knowing what is reality and what has been discussed as possibility,
such as a City corporation buying density - this is not a reality.
Councilman Futch agreed that it would be very difficult for the
Planning Director to write something like this, because all of the
details have not been worked out. Councilman Futch felt that a basic
feature for Planning Unit #l2, as proposed by the Planning Commission,
is the requirement for some property owners to purchase land or sell
land to other property owners before they can develop. He felt that
this feature cannot be eliminated without destroying the plan that
the Planning Commission has proposed; however, it is possible for
the City to help with solving the problem and the further away we
can get from requiring property owner A to buy from property owner B
the less likely we will be to running into legal problems if it is
ever contested. He stated that with that in mind he would like to
site an example such as what if there is only one property owner left
who has density rights to sell and a price cannot be agreed upon -
what can be done. The proposal made attempts to answer that question
even though a lot of details may have to be worked out, and felt
that it should be sent back to the Planning Commission to be ironed
out.
CH-27-293
January 14, 1974
(re Planning Unit #12)
kdV~'
Councilman Futch then esponded to the remark about the City's
right to acquire deve opment rights and to sell development rights
by stating that the esearch he has done indicates that the City
does have the right not only in fee simple but just the develop-
ment rights and to sell the development rights. A question a little
less certain would be the City's right to require pn~ owner to ~//fl
purchase) from another owner...Jliz, ~1l-- i I ~o- ~tJ;L- ~itt:..' ~
&V~ ~w.lAL~~ rt5U-~12v l(1~
Mr. Musso explained that it is not required that ne property owner .
buy from another and this appears to be one misunderstanding. The
City does not say how many dwelling units are in an area - it is ~
simply a matter of whether it will be cluster or single family and ~
the owner can develop. The problem is with someone with open space ~
and in order to develop his land he must sell it to a developer and k'
in order to develop his land under conventional zoning he will have
to sell it to a developer.
Councilman Taylor stated that what Mr. Musso is saying, then, is
that the land owner shouldn't worry about it - it is the developer's
problem, which Mr. Musso stated is true. One developer said, show
me where it is and I will buy it and the problem was that a building
permit could not be issued - it was not the problem with the mechani
of the system but the fact that permits could not be issued. l
Councilman Futch stated that he could see the plan defeated if this
is not a requirement and gave an example to illustrate his reason-
:~::~~::~. _~:~~~~ ~I.:. l:~; ~~r~ I.;: ;~~~;--~;"i~' '~i~ouad t
by t:he zoning. oe t' ~ ,
This comment was followed by general discussion of the example by ~
the Council with Councilman Taylor saying suppose they develop this ~
and sell some to one person and the rest to somebody else. The fact
that the plan drawn happens to fit the property ownership helps but
is a little irrelevant. ,
Councilman Futch stated that he agrees, but happened to choose a
poor example - if it is starting out and the high density portion
is developed at regular subdivision density 3-4 to the acre then
the rest of the plan would be thrown off because the other property
owners will not be able to sell their open space. There will be
too much development rights remaining and they will not be able to
sell it in this specific plan, so this defeats the specific plan. ~
He explained his point further by saying that if the high density
portion is built at normal subdivision density without acquiring the
development rights from the people who own the open space, then the
plan will have been defeated; therefore, he feels this should be re-
quired.
Mr. Musso stated that one thing which might happen is that we might
end up will less housing being built in that area than anticipated
because the density development rights would then have to be sold
to someone out of the planning unit, and explained this point by
illustrating parcels and density transfers at the blackboard.
Councilman Beebe felt that the thing which has people perplexed is
the presumption that certain parcels of land are where a building
is to be built. People look at their property and think that nothing
is planned for their place and do not understand that they will still
have the density, can sell the density and transfer the density
elsewhere. He suggested that Planning Unit #12 not have a specified
plan but be open to transfer of density which will eliminate a
presumed development which nobody wants, and would hope that the
Council would go along with this suggestion.
CM-27-294
January 14, 1974
(re Planning unit #l2)
~tr. Musso explained that Planning Unit #12 has been open to developers
since 1962. When the staff prepared the original, it was not a manda-
tory density transfer but to be used as a guide and adjusted if neces-
sary in order to work out the plan. The Planning Commission felt that
the only way it would work would be if it were made mandatory. The
closest thing we have had to it is Springtown where we have the golf
course and the Gillice density transfer in another area.
Councilman Beebe wondered if this is too ambitious a parcel to do in
this method. People appear to be frightened of it.
Mr. Musso mentioned that Springtown, Greenville, Wagoner Farms and
two or three other developments have all been done under density
transfer, and noted that the only one with real open space was the
density transfer for the Gillice apartments.
Councilman Futch stated that he feels there are a number of details
which should be worked out and suggested that it be sent back to the
Planning Commission for working out the details and mechanics of it.
He felt the concept of density transfer is rapidly gaining recognition
and as seen in the Urban Land Institute bulletin there are a number of
cases cited in which density transfer is required. One instance is
in New York City where an ordinance has been adopted requiring air
rights to be transfered from one district to another, which is a form
of development rights. Another has passed legislation designating
planning districts where development would be permitted in which
property owners would receive development rights in proportion to the
amount of land owned. There are cases where innovative planning is
beginning to make use of these concepts. Just because we have not
succeeded in working out the details there should be no reason to
eliminate the idea and urged that it be sent back to the Planning
Commission. He stated that he would like to make a few specific
comments on the plan and one is that he does not feel the comment
should be made, for example on Page 4, that for the most part
density transfers are based on property ownership. He feels this
comment is irrelevant as property ownership can change. Also, the
proposed density should be indicated on the map as one cannot tell
what density is being talked about when there is cluster development
and the Mayor commented that development will be allowed only at
such and such a density and is the only way it can work. Councilman
Futch felt that this is correct and that it should be spelled out.
He then referred to 3. a. on Page 4, regarding acquisition or dedication
to the City of Livermore and felt that he would like the wording to
be different suggesting that it should be stated that the City would
consider dedication to other agencies, in accordance with Council
approval, as it may not be appropriate that the ACFC and WC District
have control of the land. He felt this should apply to all agencies
and that the Council should have some say as to which agency should
possibly have control.
Mayor Miller agreed that dedication to LARPD and the City is one
thing and dedication to Zone 7 is another.
Councilman Futch explained that this does not mean that the City will
not approve dedication, but that it should not be done automatically.
There was some discussion regarding specific wording to be used and
Councilman Futch stated that he would suggest, "the City will consider
dedication to other agencies such as...", and the Mayor stated that
the wording should say "may consider".
Councilman Futch stated he is sure the Planning Commission took into
consideration the possibility of placing some of the density in other
locations rather than in the areas close to the freeway. The possi-
bility exists for more density in the hills and he would like to
know what they have considered in this regard.
CM-27-295
January 14, 1974
(re Planning unit #12)
Mayor Miller stated that one of the problems that limited the
Planning Commission was their insistence for using a high density
for this kind of area, namely, 3.3. If the density is lowered
by adjustment within the various planning units and with respect
to the type of terrain involved he would suspect that a lot of
the problems in respect to density development near the freeway
will be greatly alleviated.
Councilman Taylor asked if these are suggestions to Mr. Musso or
if a motion is to be made and Councilman Futch explained that
the Planning Commission is going to wonder why the matter was
sent back to them and this will be reflected in the minutes. He
would hope that the comments made will offer some guidance to
the Planning Commission as to the feelings of the Council. He
stated that he would like to see the Planning Commission discuss
the question raised, which is, will conformance to the plan be
required?
Councilman Futch then continued with points to be considered
such as the responsibility of property owners for maintaining
open space and Mr. Musso replied that the Planning Commission
concluded that it was not the responsibility of the owner to
maintain open space. One of the findings before the density
transfer is made is that there be provision for permanent main-
tenance of the open space by the City, LARPD, or somebody, but
not the property owner.
Councilman Futch continued by saying that he felt some prov1s1on
should be made to allow a property owner to sell the development
rights to his property but remain in the home they have occupied
for years. There should be some allowance for one single family
home on 10 acres or something of this nature to take care of this
situation. He then questioned whether a new zoning district may
be needed (for Planning Unit #12) and asked what zoning will be
applied to this land, and should it be indicated on the plan.
Mr. Musso replied that it is indicated on the plan which shows it
to be zoned RS-3 and RS-4, regulated under the subdivision procedure.
Councilman Futch explained that he felt the Council and property
would be interested in this type of detail and would like to have
it spelled out. He noted that it is not clear as to whether or
not the density transfer occurs simultaneously with the tentative
map approval and perhaps this would be the appropriate point to
make the change legal, as the building permit stage is a little
late, which was followed by discussion of the provisions of the
RS Ordinance.
Councilman Futch moved that the matter be referred back to the
Planning Commission, seconded by Councilman Taylor.
Councilman Beebe stated that in addition to the motion directing
the Planning Commision to study the matter he would also like
for them to restudy the area between the collector and the free-
way, as he cannot visualize a school or residential development
so close to the freeway and would suggest that prior to the matter
coming back to the Council, the Planning Commission should hold
a public hearing with each property owner, specifically notified,
to speak at the hearing.
Councilman Futch explained that his motion pertained only to
Planning unit #12 and would like to discuss the other Planning
units separately.
Councilman Taylor pointed out that the City now is faced with
something which was considered to be beneficial to everyone
in the area and should be made obvious to the property owner.
The advantages should be pointed out to these people and a lot
more done to clarify the situation and the advantages which is
the key to make it work.
CM-27-296
January l4, 1974
(re Planning Unit #l2)
Councilman Taylor stated that the density along the freeway makes
him a little nervous also and can see no reason for not having
attractive clustering in the hills as a possible alternative.
Councilman Futch commented that he feels one reason clustering
in this area will be to the advantage of the land owner is due to
the hilly nature of the land which will make it very difficult to
build on.
David Elder, 2797 Oregon Way, stated that he once lived in Livermore
in 1958 and now lives in Nebraska, visiting here at present and views
the west end of the Valley as a mess and cautioned that cluster develop-
ment in the hills might end up looking like the development which has
taken place in Los Angeles in their canyons which use to be just
beautiful canyons which are now full of homes. He stated that
developers use to advertise the Livermore Valley as the quaint, quiet
valley with roses and vineyards. The rose people have already left
the valley and he feels that if care is not exercised the vineyards
will all disappear due to development and smog. He feels that a lot
of people moved to the Valley to look at the hills and to get away
from the factories and smog in the Bay Area.
Councilman Futch stated that he would like to include in his motion
the notes written up by him which Councilman Taylor agreed to second.
Councilman Pritchard stated that most of his concerns have been
expressed and would agree that one is the density near the freeway
and though he would prefer that a school not be placed there it was
the School District's choice.
Councilman Taylor commented that he would request some analysis of
the idea of the City purchasing and selling density rights, which
could perhaps be done by the City Manager. He pointed out that
the City stands a chance of losing if they buy and sell because
it would have to buy at whatever the people would sell at and sell
at whatever someone would buy at. The City really should not get
into buying and selling with the use of public money without being
very careful about the propriety of operating a business. He felt
that some analysis of the situation should be made.
Mayor Miller stated that he agrees, in principle, to the kind of
ideas Councilman Futch is proposing for the Planning Commission's
consideration and would like to emphasize in the wording going to
them that the Planning Commission has done the plan in an artificial
atmosphere of assuming that it is going to be 3.3 d.u./acre which
gives rise to the problems of high density near the urreeway which
the Council unanimously opposes. He pointed out that he would like
to argue that 3.3 d.u./acre is flat land density and unreasonable
to expect the hilly area of this type to be at that kind of density.
If the density is more rational, as the hillside type of densities
talked about and that the developers have insisted we have only on
hillsides, that many of these problems of high density near the free-
way will go away, and pointed out that he would like these words to
be in the minutes to go to the Planning Commission for them to consider.
Councilman Taylor stated that in his opinion the overall density is not
the cause of the problem and that a drastic reduction in density will
insure that the whole idea of density trade in cluster in the area
will be killed. It should be noted that the Mayor's comments are
personal and not a suggestion approved by the Council, and the Mayor
stated that none of these are suggestions approved by the Council.
CM-297
January l4, 1974
(Re Planning Unit #l2)
Mayor Miller's comment was followed by discussion of density
transfers and examples of transfers in the planning area, and
the Mayor stated that he would like to make one comment regarding
development rights for the benefit of those in the audience. He
pointed out that the Council is at least interested in the concept
of density transfer and transfer of development rights even though
no final decision has been made. The concept of development rights
he sees as an advantage to the property owners is in the
following way: If this were laid out as a General Plan in which
large parts were zoned in the classical sense, then the people who
have the flat land property would have high density and a lot of
profit and those with the hilly areas would be left with low density
and little profit. The concept of a uniform application of develop-
ment rights throughout the whole area means that the flat land gets
less density and not so much profit and the hilly areas get more
density and a little more profit which is more fair for those in
the whole general planning area and this is the advantage - nobody
is squeezed out while one area is making all the profit.
Arthur Bellman, part owner of one of the parcels, described the
area owned by him by using the map in the chambers and pointed
out that he has written to the Council requesting that the property
be excluded from any consideration in connection with Planning
Unit #12. Their property is outside the City limits and felt that
influence over their property at this time would be premature,
as no development of it is possible at present. The owners of
the property feel that there is sufficient time to determine
density when some plan is proposed for the area.
Norman Warnow, P. O. Box 575, Pleasanton, stated that having the
same density in the hills as on the flat land it has probably
not been taken into consideration that the cost of developing
hill land is much greater and is a disadvantage to the hillside
property owners. He expressed appreciation for Councilman Taylor's
unbiased remarks and the willingness to see the City's as well as
the property owner's point of view. He pointed out that one of
the reasons this property has not developed is because it is not
in the City limits and there are no sewers or storm drains or
any other necessary items. He then commented that if a potential
industrial client comes to Livermore with the thought of develop-
ing there is no pleasant view for entering the City, and that he
has heard remarks such as this looks like the annex to the local
prison. The Stanley Boulevard entrance is not attractive and
the portola Street entrance is likewise a poor approach. He stated
that at present, this happens to be the last approach to Livermore
that has a chance to be appealing (the Planning Unit #12 area) and
feels that it should not be high density zoning at the entrance to
the City, and urged that beautiful professional buildings be en-
couraged in this area.
Bob Ruggles from Amador Associates, commented that he would like
to restate the position taken by him at the last meeting but
would be more brief at this time. With respect to their land
which is located on North Livermore Avenue, north of Portola
Avenue, the character, topography and location is unsuitable
for residential purposes and perhaps could be used for business
not suitable for downtown - not necessarily a lumber yard but
this is an example of retail not suitable in the downtown busi-
ness area. He suggested that the Council request the Planning
Commission to consider, rather than reducing the density, to
eliminate residential use north of Las positas Road.
Councilman Pritchard commented that Mr. Ruggles' comments would
be reflected in the minutes which the Planning Commission will
have the opportunity to consider.
CM-27-298
January l4, 1974
(Re Planning Unit #12)
Mrs. Vidalin, 3680 Las Colinas Road asked if density transfer
will be optional rather than mandatory and Councilman Beebe
responded by saying that this would be his intent, and Mrs. Vidal in
felt that this would make more sense than requiring a transfer.
Mayor Miller explained that this has been incorporated in the minutes
for the Planning Commission to consider, but it is not known what
their decision will be.
Councilman Beebe suggested that the property owners interested in
the density transfer matter write to the members of the Planning
Commission to inform them of the property owners' views. It appears
that after this meeting everyone concerned is a little more knowledge-
able about the matter and possibly the City and the property owners
can reach a happy medium.
At this time the Council voted unanimously in favor of the motion
to refer the matter to the Planning Commission.
(MOTION TO ADJOURN)
Councilman Taylor moved to adjourn the meeting at midnight, tonight,
seconded by Councilman Futch, and which passed 4-l with Mayor Miller
dissenting.
Councilman Futch asked for a short recess at this time.
RECESS
After a brief recess the Council meeting resumed with all members
of the Council present except Councilman Beebe.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE PLANNING UNITS 8 & 9
Mayor Miller suggested that discussion regarding Planning Units 8
and 9 be postponed to a lighter agenda and Councilman Futch moved for a
continuance, seconded by Councilman Pritchard, and which passed by
a unanimous vote - (Councilman Beebe absent).
COUNCILt~N BEEBE WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
COMMUNICATION RE
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Mayor Miller stated that the Council has received a letter from
Robert Olson with regard to the need for public transportation
which suggests the formation of a Transportation Advisory Committee
with an outline of suggestions for them to consider. Mayor Miller
explained that earlier in the meeting it was noted that a Transporta-
tion Committee is in the mill and there is work being done with the
BART people and our congressmen to get the busses we have been promised.
Mr. Olson explained that at the time he wrote the letter he was not
aware of a Transportation Committee and that he wrote it because he
feels the needs for public transportation are changing very rapidly.
Mayor Miller thanked Mr. Olson for his letter and his interest in
the matter.
CM-27-299
January 14, 1974
COMMUNICATION RE
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
LEGISLATION - HOUS. AUTH.
A letter was received from William Struthers with regard to the
Conflict of Interests Act effective January 1, 1974 and which
applies to all Housing Authority Commissioners and officers and'
employees which was noted for filing.
It was noted that, perhaps, the resignation of three members of
the Housing Authority may have been done in haste and that the
new law may not apply to them, and the City Attorney explained
that Mr. Struthers is their Counsel but it would appear that
those who resigned are not required disclosure on an annual
reporting basis and it was suggested that perhaps the City could
offer to reappoint those who resigned.
It was concluded that this matter should be discussed further
at some executive meeting.
DISCUSSION RE
PRESENT AGENDA
It was noted at this time that the agenda for the evening is
very full and that the Council would discuss the most improtant
issues first so that there could be a midnight adjournment, and
agreed to move on to the matter of the campaign expenditures
ordinance.
INTRODUCTION OF
CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE
ORDINANCE
Mayor Miller stated that the draft of the campaign expenditures
ordinance is a result of the majority Council view at the last
meeting and it would appear that everything discussed has been
covered.
Councilman Futch stated that most of the draft was what was
included in his motion but items regarding disqualification of
a candidate was not included in the motion which was made but
have been added and wondered if there were other such additions
not included in the motion.
The City Attorney stated that he has discussed, informally,
the matter with Councilman Futch and the City Attorney's concern
has been that there is a penalty without a mechanism for implement-
ing it. What has been inserted is a different form of penal pro-
vision which is based on conviction in a court of law and we are,
in effect, adopting whatever standards a court of law would adopt,
which he further explained. He added that he is satisfied that
as a legal matter it could safely be included and provide the
City with the proper protection against improper campaign activities
and would also preserve the rights of anybody who might be accused
of violation.
Councilman Taylor moved that Section 2.54 (down to Section 2) be
removed, as the Council should not decide a person's qualifications
for office as this may discourage good people from running for
office, seconded by Councilman Beebe.
The Council then discussed this point, and the City Attorney tried
to explain that the critical word in this section is "conviction"
giving an example of what the section means.
CM-27-300
January 14, 1974
(Campaign Expenditure
Ordinance)
Councilman Taylor stated that with a little more time to reflect
on the matter he might view it differently, but to judge it in
a hasty manner he tends to feel concern and is worried about that
particular section.
The City Attorney stated that one of Councilman Taylor's concerns
can be commented on in that courts tend to take matters relating
to elections as a first priority problem. For example, the woman
in Pleasanton received an immediate hearing as to whether or not
she was entitled to a place on the ballot and added that this is
not the type of legal challenge which would be prolonged. Also,
the state allows this type of ordinance to be adopted as an
urgency ordinance because it concerns an election.
Mayor Miller stated that he feels the purpose of penalties is to
compel people to do their accounting properly and if people realize
that a penalty is involved they will do this properly, just as the
present Council has done. All this ordinance is asking, is that
the same care be taken that the present Council has been taking
in its election campaigns.
Councilman Taylor stated that up until about four years ago we have
had a City disclosure law which was stiffer than the state disclosure
law but feels there were loop-holes in that law which one could get
around and which this ordinance has tried to close and certainly
agrees with that aspect. His objection is the idea of regulating
people, in detail, because of problems imagined and not really
experienced. He added that this ordinance covers a lot of the impor-
tant things as far as disclosures are concerned but goes beyond what
is reasonable in requiring detailed accounting down to the dollar
spent and if one fails to do this a law suit can result with the
person possibly being removed from office.
The City Attorney explained that he had included the phrase, "All
expenditures in excess of one (1) dollar shall be itemized..."
because he had been asked what the bottom limit is and felt that
some specified recognizable bottom limit should be included.
Councilman Futch stated that he has not had time to consider Section
2.54 thoroughly, and for this reason will vote against the inclusion
of this section.
At this time the motion to delete Section 2.54 passed 3-2 with
Councilman Pritchard and Mayor Miller dissenting.
Councilman Futch then moved that the Council change the amount in
Section 2.49 (g) (4) to five (5) dollars rather than one (1) dollar,
seconded by Councilman Beebe, which passed 3-2 with Councilman
Pritchard and Mayor Miller dissenting.
Councilman Taylor moved that in Section 2.49 (g) (1) the requirement
for a person's occupation and place of business also be deleted,
seconded by Councilman Beebe and which was then discussed.
Councilman Futch stated that he would agree to the motion if ~-
pat ion is left in.
The Council voted on the motion which failed by a 2-3 vote with
Councilmen Futch, Pritchard and Mayor Miller dissenting.
Councilman Futch moved to delete, "and principal place of business,"
seconded by Councilman Pritchard and which passed by unanimous
vote.
CM-27-30l
January l4, 1974
(Campaign Expenditure
Ordinance)
Councilman Miller stated that he would like to make an amendment
in this same section which is to restore, to this ordinance, that
which has been in effect in the previous ordinance but does not
apply now because the state law does not say it that way anymore.
The previous version of the ordinance says that beside what you
must disclose, by law, you have to do the following things, and
the things required for disclosure earlier were the names of
everybody who contributed money no matter how much and what you
did not have to do before was associate the money with the name.
Our ordinance was designed to associate the money with the name
subject to a low limit of $5; however, everyone's name who con-
tributed had to be there because this was in the state statute.
He stated that he would like to add in Section 2.49 (g) wording
to require disclosure of names and amounts donated under $5.
Councilman Taylor felt the Council had just voted on not requir-
ing disclosure of contributions under $5 but the Mayor stated
that the Council had voted on not disclosing the amount or
their address but you still must report that these people gave
money, and somewhere you must show how much money came in and
the point is you do not have to associate the specific contri-
bution with the name. He did not think the Council was trying
to deliberately reverse the effect of the previous ordinance by
their vote and to exclude those people who were counted before.
There was a $5 limit before but those who contributed less still
had to have their names listed and Councilman Taylor stated that
he feels this should not be required and the Mayor replied that
it has been required by state statute, now no longer required by
state statute but would think that the Council would be willing
to continue with this same principle.
Mayor Miller then moved that in Section 2.49 (g) as Item 2, the
following phrase be adopted: "For contributions less than $5
the name of the person", the purpose of which is to make our
ordinance consistent with our previous ordinance. The motion
was seconded by Councilman Pritchard but failed 2-3 with Council-
men Beebe, Futch and Taylor dissenting.
Councilman Futch moved that the Council introduce the ordinance,
as amended, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
The motion was followed by a brief discussion regarding reporting
contributions and Councilman Pritchard commented that it was with
reluctance that he would second the motion, as he considers the
ordinance to have been "emasculated", and explained his view by
stating that without penalties a law is basically no good.
Mayor Miller pointed out that someone can contribute up to thousands
of dollars on the pretense that this amount of money came from people
who contributed less than $5 and whose names no longer have to be
reported.
Mayor Miller stated that he finds it most discouraging to try to
do something he feels will help and what the public has said it
wants and that campaign managers have stated they are willing to
do but whichAthe Council fee~ is not necessary.
~~~t- ~:~
CM-27-302
January l4, 1974
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT -
VALLEY WATER MANAGEMENT
--.,
Mayor Miller stated that he and Councilman Futch attended a meeting
last week as representatives of the Valley Water Interest Committee
and that the meeting was for the purpose of considering the objective~
raised by the attorney for VCSD. Some of the things proposed by~~~
were adopted and some were discussed and rejected but in general, the
intent of the agreement was the same as those previously adopted with
some things being made more explicit. The changes have been included
in a draft which the Council has received and have been underlined,
and explained that there is a change on the last page which had not
been agreed to regarding the sale of revenue bonds and which he ex-
plained to the Council allowed revenue bonds to be submitted without
the limitations that it would agree to support, which he further
explained. He stated that the Council has received a new copy called
Exhibit A which is different than the one in the Council packet and
noted that Section 54307.l describes a certain situation which would
be taken care of with the rewording, and Exhibit A (the new one)
attempts to take care of this. Such has been approved by the VCSD
people and it is assumed that the others will agree.
Councilman Futch moved that the Council approve the joint powers
agreement, as submitted, with the new Exhibit A substitute, seconded
by Councilman Pritchard.
The City Manager commented that a clause should perhaps be included
indicating that the this action would rescind the previous ability
to execute the former agreement which he believes was extended, and
with which the Council concurred, and was included in the motion and
second to the motion.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to approve the motion.
RESOLUTION NO. 3-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
REPORT RE VALLEY
WATER MANAGEMENT
AGREEMENT
The City Manager reported that one of the sections in the federal
Water Pollution Control Act requires the establishment of planning
and water management agencies for certain areas and the State Water
Quality Control Board has indicated that seven areas of the state
must do this and that one of these areas is the Livermore valley,
inclusive of Fremont. Four of the seven areas fall within the Bay
area and also within the confines of BASSA. BASSA contends that
their jurisdictional area (the nine Bay Area counties) should be
designated a Planning Area and that it should be the planning
agency or if the four separate areas are to remain, BASSA should be
given the same designation for each. The State Water Quality Board
will hold a public hearing on the matter on January 15th and must
make their final decision no later than March l2th. The staff has
recommended that since our Valley Water Interests Committee has just
about formalized a joint powers agreement for the establishment of
an agency it seems that this group should qualify and be designated
as the Water Management Agency under the 208 Planning Area requisites,
assuming that the state will agree to the exclusion of Fremont. It
would appear to be logical that BASSA be designated as a 208 Planning
Agency and it would be duplicative to form another planning agency,
assuming that BASSA would designate our new joint powers organization
as the local Water Management Agency.
Mr. Parness stated that the whole question evolves around the logic
of having either our Water t1anagement interest selected as the
regional planning agency or have BASSA established as such, or to
have BASSA be the planning agency covering their present incorpora-
ted jurisdiction (the 9 Bay Area counties), which would seem to be
the logical approach.
CM-27-303
January l4, 1974
(Valley wtr. Mgmt.)
The City Manager was asked if he felt BASSA would be interested
in acting as the regional planning agency and Mr. Parness indi-
cated that they are very much interested in doing so and would
hesitate to think that anyone else should be given the regional
planning responsibility.
There was some comment made about it being bad to throw Livermore
in with Fremont and it was noted that this is true except for the
fact that they are downstream from this valley and they continue
to complain about what we are doing to their underground water supply,
but other than this fact they have no interest regarding the valley's
planning.
Mayor Miller stated that he feels this area should retain the
right to be the management agency for our area, including Fremont,
and would not like to see this area given to BASSA without the con-
tracts already signed in advance. It is not clear as to who should
be the planning agency for this area but as pointed out, BASSA has
money and we do not. Planning demands on the valley will probably
cost us some money and if BASSA does it we will not have to pay but
on the other hand if the valley does it we have representatives to
share with the decision. We would have only one representative on
the BASSA Board to speak for the whole valley.
Mayor Miller moved that the Council ask to be the valley's manage-
ment agency for a 208 Planning Area, and ask the state agency not
to decide to ultimately make this a 208 area and not to decide
between BASSA and the Valley Water Interests Committee until we can
have further discussions with BASSA, seconded by Councilman Beebe,
and which passed by a unanimous vote.
STEP PROGRAM
BALLOT MEASURE
Mayor Miller stated that prior to adjournment it is necessary that
the Council resolve the matter of the STEP program argument to be
prepared for printing on the election ballot. He stated that he
has spoken with Bill Bankert from the Police Department who has
written a draft but which was too long. It has been rewritten to
comply with the word requirement and has been agreed upon by Mr.
Bankert. The Mayor was authorized to sign the argument for the
measure by unanimous vote of the Council.
ADJOURNMENT
At this time the Mayor adjourned the meeting at ll:55 p.m. to
a brief executive session for the purpose of discussing appoint-
ments to the Housing Authority.
APPROVE
pO~9:0./l~
ATTEST
C1 ty C er .
Livermore, California
CM-27-304
Regular Meeting of January 21, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on January 21, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called at 8:00 p.m. with Mayor Miller presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Beebe, Taylor, Futch, Pritchard and Mayor Miller
ABSENT: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
COUNCIL MINUTES OF
l2/17/73 and 1/14/74
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch and
by unanimous vote the minutes for the meetings of December l7, 1973,
and January 14, 1974, were approved as amended (Councilman Beebe
abstained from December l7th meeting due to absence at that meeting).
CONSENT CALENDAR
Re Request for Annexation
of Max Baer Park - LARPD
The City Manager reported that LARPD has requested that Max Baer Park
be annexed to the City and the staff has recommended that the Council
adopt a motion referring the matter to the Planning Commission and to
LAFCO for a report.
Report re BART Extension
The City Manager reported that the Livermore-P1easanton BART extension
project is approaching its final stages and the purpose is the estab-
lishment of a transit corridor to interconnect the Livermore-Amador
Valley with the existing BART rail system and also intra-valley rail
alignments and station locations. A final determination of these
matters is scheduled for decision by the Board of Control and in the
interim, a series of meetings is scheduled for the general public
and other involved committees. One of the most important of these
is primarily for the City Councils and Planning Commissions of Livermore
and Pleasanton and the Board of VCSD. This meeting will be held on
January 30, and 8:00 p.m. at the Kaiser Research Center. The Council
has a list of the other meetings and locations.
Departmental Reports
Departmental Reports were received from the following:
Airport - Activity, December, 1973
Financial, quarter ending December, 1973
Building Inspection Department - December and recap of
information - 1956-l973
Emergency Services - quarter ending December, 1973
Finance Department - revenues and expenditures - July 1 to
December 30, 1973
Las Positas Golf Course - quarter ending December, 1973
Library - quarter ending December, 1973
Mosquito Abatement District - November, 1973
Municipal Court - November, 1973
Planning/Zoning, quarter ending December, 1973
Water Reclamation Plant - December, 1973
CM-27-305
January 2l, 1974
Committee Minutes
Minutes were submitted by the Airport Advisory Committee for the
meeting of January 7, 1974 and by the Housing Authority for the
meeting of November 28, 1973.
Payroll & Claims
There were 158 claims in the amount of $339,643.06 and 276 payroll
warrants in the amount of $74,178.70, dated January 18, 1974, for
a total of $4l3,82l.76, ordered paid as approved.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and
by unanimous vote, the Consent Calendar was approved with Councilman
Beebe abstaining from Warrant #8618 for his usual reasons.
HEARING RE APPLICATION
FOR A TAXI SERVICE
(Security Eye Patrol)
The City Manager reported that an application for a taxi service has
been received and our Municipal Code requires the conduct of a public
hearing to show public need and necessity along with other pertinent
information and to allow the public or competing business to testify.
A notice has been delivered announcing this time and date for such
a hearing and it is recommended that following the public hearing
the Council adopt a resolution authorizing issuance of a permit for
the conduct of a public taxi service subject to the observance of the
rules and regulations applicable to such.
At this time Mayor Miller opened the public hearing.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Councilman Pritchard,
seconded by Councilman Beebe and by unanimous vote, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe and by
unanimous vote, a resolution issuing a permit for the conduct of
a taxi service subject to the observance of all rules and regulations
of the Municipal Code was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 4-74
A RESOLUTION ISSUING A PERMIT FOR THE CONDUCT OF A TAXI SERVICE
COMMUNICATION RE
FINANCIAL AID REQUEST
FOR A CAPELLA CHOIR
A letter was received from the parents of the Livermore High School
A Capella Choir stating that the choir has been invited to parti-
cipate in the International Choral Festival to be held in Hawaii"
and that there will be competition from allover the world. The
students (60 in number) are working very hard to raise the money
necessary to finance the trip and would appreciate any financial
assistance which might be given by the City.
Mr. Richard Duffas spoke to the Council on behalf of the choir
indicating the purpose of the trip and noted that the trip will
cost $305 per student.
CM-27-306
January 21, 1974
(Financial Request for
A Capella Choir)
Councilman Taylor felt that this would be a type of advertisement
for Livermore and moved that the Council approve a contribution of
$200 towards the cost of the trip, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
The Council noted that an amount had been contributed to the Granada
Jazz Band and wondered what this amount may have been and asked how
many of the 60 students would be planning to go to Hawaii and it was
noted that approximately 50 students would be going.
Councilman Beebe moved to amend the motion to contribute the same
amount as that given to the Jazz Band, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
Councilman Taylor felt that $200 should be sufficient in the way of
a contribution and support from the City and Councilman Futch noted
that these contributions may be setting a precedent and the Council
should consider the number of other organizations that could come
in with similar requests and should be concerned with the amount of
donations which could accumulate.
Councilman Pritchard stated that the Jazz Band had been given more
money because it was going to help cover the cost of a tour; however,
there are approximately three times as many students going to Hawaii
and that he could therefore equate the two.
Mayor Miller stated that he would agree the group should be given the
same amount of money as that donated to the Jazz Band but would suggest
that future donations of this type should be discussed and a determina-
tion made as to whether the Council policy will be to continue or
discontinue donating to various organizations for similar things.
At this time the amendment to the motion passed 4-1 (Taylor dissenting) .
The main motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
REPORT RE AIRWAY BLVD.
PROPERTY USE
The City Manager reported that a development firm has inquired as to
the City's reaction to leasing a portion of the property owned by the
City abutting I-580 on the easterly side of Airway Boulevard. The
intended use would be for a bowling alley which would occupy approxi-
mately 3 acres. Prior to further negotiations it is necessary that
the Council give their reaction to such a proposal. Mr. Parness stated
that the intended use for this land was for professional office build-
ings and light industrial but this appears to be unfeasible from a
financial standpoint and other uses are being considered.
Councilman Pritchard questioned whether such a use would be permitted
in an ID Zone by way of a CUP, and Mr. Musso stated that he feels it
would.
Councilman Futch stated that he would like to know which portion of
the 5.45 acres is being considered for development of a bowling alley.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would like to know if some type of
restaurant is to be constructed in conjunction with the bowling alley,
and Councilman Pritchard stated that he is sure it will.
The Mayor noted that the City should make sure that whatever potential
developers we have for the property should be taken into consideration
so that if we don't get somebody today for this particular use, there
are other uses to be considered.
Mr. Musso pointed out that during discussions regarding possible use
of the property, the location of a building or access is really not
the issue and that this can be worked out if such is a desirable use.
CM-27-307
January 21, 1974
(re Airway Blvd.
Property Use)
Mayor Miller stated that it has been a policy of the City Council
for many years, not to precommit themselves prior to having a re-
port and recommendation from the staff and Planning Commission and
would not be willing to make a decision without their consideration.
Gerald D. Eschen with National Commonwealth properties, Inc., stated
that his company has spoken with a tentative tenant for a complex of
40 lanes with a restaurant and other facilities which could be expanded
to a 60 lane alley. They are negotiating for another 18,000 - 20,000
foot building which would be for a recreational use to go along
with the bowling alley, all on the 5.45 acres. This would mean
that the entire acreage would be used for a recreational complex.
However, prior to any further negotiations the Council's attitude
towards a recreational complex would be appreciated.
Councilman Taylor asked what bowling alley would be comparable to such
a structure and Mr. Eschen explained that there would be nothing compar-
able to it in the Valley. The Valley can support one major bowling and
recreational complex. He commented that the bowling alley will have a
snack-bar and a complete restaurant included, and would be interested
in acquiring all of the land.
There was some discussion regarding the use for the land which would
be of most benefit to the City and the City Manager stated that in
his opinion a recreational and commercial in nature use would not
be in the best interest of the ultimate use of the property. However,
this use is at hand and sought after by the applicant which may
be a consideration. He feels that eventually there will be prospects
for commercial and light industrial but there has not been an offer
of this type made.
Councilman Beebe felt that a recreational use in the area might
not be a bad proposal, as the golf course is already there which
is recreational and that people interested in flying are also in
the area. A center such as the one proposed would probably bring
a lot of money to the City.
Mr. Madis, representing Granada Bowl, the existing bowling facility
in Livermore, explained that it presently has 16 lanes and has just
concluded negotiations to expand and double the number of lanes
which they feel will be adequate in serving the valley. He stated
that he is just giving information to the Council and does not know
what the demand in the way of bowling alleys might be.
Orry Bey, member of the Shamrock Bowl Board, stated that they have
been working on negotiations for developing a 40 lane bowling alley
complex on Hopyard Road and Dublin Boulevard for approximately two
years and it appears that this will be done in the later part of 1974.
He feels that with Granada's 32 lanes and Dublin's 40 lanes, that
one more bowling alley in the valley could not be supported. He
commented that at present they are in the process of selling stock
to the public for the Shamrock Bowl.
Mr. Eschen stated that they have been aware of the Shamrock Bowl
development and the competition and if the City allows a bowling
alley development, as proposed, it should be completed in 6-7 months.
Councilman Futch stated that it appears the Council must decide which
type of use would be in the best interest of the City and would like
to have a recommendation from the Planning Commission prior to making
this type of decision, as it is a significant decision.
Councilman Taylor pointed out that he would tend to agree with Council-
man Futch but the Planning Commission is going to want to see more
detail and Mr. Eschen wants to know if negotiations should be continued.
CM-27-308
January 21, 1974
(re Airway Blvd.
Property Use)
Councilman Futch stated that he can well understand this; however,
perhaps the Planning Commission can answer the question as to what
the use should be and whether or not they would look favorably upon
a change of use which he feels is independent of the plan.
Mr. Eschen commented that from an aesthetic point of view he feels
the City would be pleased with the plans for this development.
Councilman Taylor felt that there are a number of things to be con-
sidered before making a decision as to what use should be there
and moved that the Council direct the City Manager to try to work
out something financially attractive to the City but would not want
the City to have to subsidize something of this nature until it gets
on its feet. He felt that it may not be a year or two until an
industrial use proposal is expressed and that it may be more like
10 years. He added as part of his motion that the Council is in
no way approving anything, and the motion was seconded by Councilman
Pritchard.
Councilman Futch wondered if this means that the Council does not
want to send the matter to the Planning Commission, and Councilman
Taylor stated that he feels they do not have enough to go by and
should have more information for consideration.
Mr. Eschen explained that favorable terms may not be negotiable
between his company and the prospective client and such a proposal
may never actually occur.
At this time the Council voted 3-2 in favor of allowing the City
Manager to negotiate a financially attractive offer for the City,
with Councilman Futch and Mayor Miller dissenting.
COMMUNICATION FROM
BIKEWAYS ASSN. RE
STANLEY BOULEVARD
A letter was received from the Livermore Bikeways Association with
regard to the bikeway problems on Stanley Boulevard. Portions of
the bikeway along Stanley Boulevard are too narrow to allow two-way
bicycle traffic and the Bikeways Association listed suggestions to
help reduce the problems which were observed by a Mr. Ron McNicoll
in a letter written to the Council previously.
Mayor Miller moved that the Council refer the suggestions to the
staff for a report and recommendation, seconded by Councilman Taylor.
The motion was voted on and passed by a unanimous vote.
COMMUNICATION FROM
DAVID MADIS RE PROPERTY
ADJACENT TO PORTOLA AVE.
(Andersen family property)
David Madis, attorney representing the Andersen family, owners of
57 acres of land adjacent to Porto1a Avenue, south of I-580, has written
to the Council on their behalf requesting that the property be annexed
and rezoned to commercial and industrial uses.
The City Manager noted that the application is conditioned upon
being rezoned for commercial and industrial uses and the General Plan
specifies the land as residential use. Our Planning Department is
currently reviewing this category and perhaps some revisions in its
intended zoning will later be recommended.
CM-27-309
January 21, 1974
(re Andersen property)
A motion was made by Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman
Futch, to note and file the communication, pending the report
from the Planning Commission on this general area.
David Madis stated he had no objection to this being referred to
the planning Commission if that is the policy regarding annexations;
however, it was his understanding that annexations are handled by
the City Council.
Mayor Miller pointed out it was also Council policy to never pre-
commit on any annexation.
Mr. Madis reminded the Council they were requesting something differ-
ent than just annexation - they are offering a proposal of a fully
developed industrial park on at least fifteen acres of the property,
and they are willing to bond for all of the improvements as they
feel it is probably the best area in the City of Livermore for an
industrial park.
Mr. Musso commented that if this is a pre-zoning, it must go through
the public hearing process at the Planning Commission level.
Councilman Futch interjected that regardless of what it is called,
it is a major change in land use, and as such it would be inappro-
priate for the Council to indicate one way or the other that it might
be approved before it goes through the proper process.
Councilman Pritchard stated that was the reason for his motion
inasmuch as both the County and the City General Plan shows this area
as being residential, and he felt it should go through normal
channels.
Mayor Miller commented for the record that a fully developed indus-
trial park would be very desirable for the City but this location
mayor may not be the proper place for it.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time and passed 4-1 with
Councilman Beebe dissenting.
COMMUNICATION RE PROGRESS, FUTURE PLANS
LIVERMORE AIR POLLUTION STUDY COMMITTEE
A communication was received from the Livermore Air Pollution Study
Committee setting forth the charter which they had adopted and
the course of action which they plan to follow.
A motion was made by Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman
Beebe, to accept their charter which passed unanimously.
COMMUNICATION RE LIVERMORE AIRPORT
A communication was received from the City of Pleasanton together
with a resolution to solicit the cooperation of the Livermore City
Council on behalf of the residents of both cities by initiating
necessary steps to acquire the 51-acre clear zone on the west end
of the Livermore Airport by LARPD.
Councilman Pritchard asked the City Manager why there was not more
discussion from the City staff in this regard, and Mr. Parness ex-
plained that there had been considerable discussion and he went
on to give more details of the procedures which had occurred. Also
the staff has tried to reassure the City of Pleasanton that it is
CM-27-310
January 2l, 1974
(Communication re Airport)
not intended that the airport be expanded, but rather that a new plan
be drafted and, in particular, that land use in and about the environs
be carefully reviewed and forecast. Despite this the City of P1easan-
ton feels that the City of Livermore plans to have all kinds of things
happen in that area, which is of course not true. Mr. Parness
pointed out that later in the agenda there is a recommendation for
the award of a consultant's contract. If approved, it is expected
that the City of Pleasanton will participate at least as observers
throughout the planning process, which might allay some of their fears.
There are negotiations at present for the purchase of the land under-
neath the western approach zone consisting of about 33 acres which
the City feels is adequate. It is definitely the intention of the
City to cooperate with the City of Pleasanton and they have been invited
to attend discussions of the Airport Advisory Committee and staff,
and also discussions concerning the newly constituted master plan
and abutting land uses at the airport.
A motion was made by Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman Beebe,
that the communication be noted and filed, and the motion passed 4-
1 with Councilman Pritchard dissenting.
REPORT RE EAST AVENUE
BICYCLE PATH ADDITION
Mr. Parness explained that a letter had been received from the
Superintendent of Schools, recommending that there be some widening
of the bicycle path along the northerly side of East Avenue at
least from Jackson Avenue to the Robert Livermore Park, and the
staff was asked to compute the approximate cost of the widening,
which had been presented to the Council and as stated would amount
to $6,678.00. Mr. Parness pointed out that there is an existing
bicycle path although it is rather narrow, which was followed by
discussion regarding the souurce of the cost and if any of this
amount might be recovered if the street is eventually improved.
Mr. Hartwig, a member of the Bikeways Association, stated they had
looked at the problem and there are actually two problems - the poles,
which they are attempting to have painted so they will be visible
at night; there is an embankment of about two feet. Although it may
be true that maximum expenditures may not be worth while as the street
may eventually be widened, but he felt there might be some temporary
aid necessary such as keeping the path clean and painting the poles.
A motion was made by Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman
Futch, to table the major expenditures but to ask the staff to find
some minor measures, as suggested, to improve the situation and respond
to Mr. Croce's correspondence, and the motion passed unanimously.
REPORT RE LIVERMORE
PARK PROPERTY ADDITION
The report regarding Livermore Park property purchase was postponed
from the meeting of January 7. A list of the priorities that the
Council had considered and proposed expenditures in the park fund
had been furnished as requested, and the question remains as to whether
the City should acquire the parcel offered by Mr. Pestana or continue
with price negotiations before a final decision is reached; however,
LARPD earnestly recommends acquisition of the additional acreage.
Mr. Parness stated that since LARPD is very interested, he would
urge the Council to allow him to further negotiate with the owner.
CM-27-31l
January 21, 1974
(re Acquisition of
Park Land)
Councilman Taylor stated he was reluctant to approve the acquisi-
tion since that part of town had far more park per person than
anywhere else in the City.
Councilman Futch stated he was not sure he agreed with that inasmuch
as there are two areas planned for major facilities - the May
Nissen Park on the one side and this park which- are to serve as
community parks. From that viewpoint he felt it was a very worthwhile
acquisition, especially since the staff has indicated that the
price is right. Councilman Futch made a motion, seconded by Council-
man Pritchard, and approved unanimously to direct the City Manager
to continue his negotiation with the idea of possibly acquiring
the parcel.
REPORT RE ON-SITE PARKING LIMITATIONS
FROM INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
This matter was postponed from the meeting of December l7 for
consideration at this time. The Industrial Advisory Committee
had considered limitations for on-street parking for Research Drive
and North Mines Road based upon the strong appeals made by the
resident industries as street congestion is most difficult, and
the owners and tenants agreed that parking time limitation would
help. It is recommended that this be posted as a 2-hour parking
area.
A motion was made by Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman
Pritchard, and passed unanimously, to approve the City Manager's
recommendation, and the following resolution was adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 5-74
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 129-72 BY
THE INCLUSION OF RESEARCH DRIVE AND NORTH MINES
ROAD AS LIMITED PARKING AREAS.
REPORT RE ANCESTRAL TREES
- BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE
A report was received from the Beautification Committee requesting
the City Council to pass a resolution designating certain trees
as "Ancestral Trees". A recent survey was done for the city in
which certain trees were indicated as ancestral trees.
A motion was made by Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman
Pritchard, that the survey which was made be incorporated as the
official list of the city of Livermore of Ancestral Trees. The
motion passed unanimously.
REPORT RE SEWER INTERCONNECTION
(City of P1easanton)
The City of Pleasanton has retained consulting engineering services
to investigate the prospects of alternative sewer transmission and
treatment methods and one is to interconnect all or a portion of
the current P1easanton sewer system with our City treatment facil-
ities. Their staff is soliciting a formal reaction to this alter-
native. The City Manager reported that there is no current treat-
ment capacity available that might satisfy their needs, but this
limitation could be overcome if funding were made available from
their city, or from federal or state sources. If finances could
thus be made available then a judgemental decision would have to
be derived by our City Council as to the limits of treatment ca-
pacity that would be allotted since their land use control would
not be regulated by us. A recommendation was made that the City
Council indicate its conditional favor providing: l) All capital
CM-27-3l2
January 21, 1974
(re Proposal for
Sewer Interconnection)
costs are afforded; 2) that a maximum gallonage of treatment capacity
be allotted; 3) that the requisite connection fees be payable, based
on the number of units or their equivalent that is to be served;
4) that an annual sewer service charge be assessable based upon the
current formula which takes into account the quantity and quality
of sewage discharge; 5) that a percentage of the added treatment
capacity be made available at our plant be reserved for local commer-
cial and/or industrial users.
Councilman Pritchard moved the City Manager's recommendation 1 through
5 as outlined, be adopted; however, the motion died for lack of a
second.
Councilman Taylor commented that the recommendation's were probably
reasonable, but he would be reluctant. He felt that the City Manager
was not speaking of any current capacity, but it's a way of saying
to Pleasanton that we will not help them out of their current problems;
however, if they would want to pay all expenses, then we might consider
it.
Mayor Miller remarked we could just be honest and say no. There is a
necessity for cooperation between the Valley juriSdictions, and in
other times it might be reasonable to do so, but we did not get much
support from Pleasanton for example, on the LAFCO problem. He saw no
reason to distribute sewer capacity for any reason.
Councilman Taylor agreed there was no question we should avoid any
possibility to allow the City of Pleasanton to use sewer capacity that
we need; however this was one of the alternatives they wanted to
consider, and he did not feel there was any harm in allowing them to
study this alternative as we are not committing any existing capacity
or planned capacity.
Councilman Beebe made a motion that we say "no" to Pleasanton,
seconded by Mayor Miller.
Mr. Parness stated he could understand the concern and apprehension
of the Council about this prospect as it seems to be unreal, but the
City of Pleasanton is honest in the inquiry as it is an alternate
they have available to them. To just say "no" would be like sticking
our head in the sand because that attitude may, in time, be usurped
by other authority. All he was trying to make clear is that technologi-
cally it is possible for Pleasanton to be served by our plant. Aside
from that he would suggest that the other considerations be listed
as shown above.
Mayor Miller remarked he would still like to argue that to provide
sewage capacity for a jurisdiction over which we have no land use
control is not wise. He felt in no way could this be of any value
to the City of Livermore. If some higher authority should impose
the rule upon us, then they impose the rule, but he didn't think we
should ask for it.
Councilman Futch agreed with Councilman Taylor in that just to say
"no" would not be diplomatic. On the other hand, what he would favor
is the City Manager's recommendations, plus that they would consider
the possibility with restrictions as recommended, plus additional
restrictions which the City Council might feel necessary at the time
the proposal comes before them.
A vote was taken on Councilman Beebe's motion which failed 3-2 with
Councilmen Beebe, Futch and Taylor dissenting. Councilman Beebe did
in fact vote no on his own motion.
CM-27-3l3
January 2l, 1974
(re Proposal for
Sewer Interconnection)
Councilman Futch then moved that the Council would consider the
possibility at such time, including the restrictions the City
Manager has outlined, but not limited to those conditions, sec-
onded by Councilman Taylor.
Councilman Taylor commented that he would like to add the words
to reflect that the Council is in no way considering the possi-
bility of using any present capacity or any capacity that is
planned resulting from presently planned improvements, which
Councilman Futch accepted as part of the motion, adding that
there is no commitment of any type except for the fact that
the Council will take another look.
Mayor Miller moved to amend the motion that there be an Item 6,
that the City of Livermore will have land use control over all
sewer connections, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
Councilman Futch felt it would be premature to add such a
condition prior to finding out what they desire.
Mayor Miller stated that he finds it hard to understand how the
majority of the Council can open up the option to the City of
P1easanton to build their shopping centers and industrial parks
before we can, out of our sewer plant, and without any kind of
realistic restrictions on it; but Councilman Futch explained
that this is not the intent of the motion and Councilman Beebe
suggested that the motion should perhaps be clarified a little.
At this time the Councilmen voted on the amendment to the motion
which failed 2-3 (Councilmen Taylor, Futch and Beebe dissenting).
Mayor Miller stated that if Pleasanton cannot build a sewer plant
for one reason or another and they build one in our community and
expand our sewer plant by the payment of money and then use the
plant to build their shopping centers and industrial parks it
seems that a Council which has made a decision of this kind has
made a serious and stupid mistake, and Councilman Taylor replied
that the Council has not made such a decision whatsoever with
which Councilman Futch agreed.
Mayor Miller stated that if the Council is not willing to put
land use control on it, why would the majority of the Council
offer conceivable sewer capacity?
Councilman Futch stated that the Council has not said land use
control will not be considered when it comes up.
The City Manager stated that he would like to make a comment which
might help clarify the matter and stated that he feels their prob-
lem has to do with having something like 1 mgd presently connected
to their sewer system which they want to divert to a treatment plant.
This is a servicing unit already connected and residential in nature.
He noted that in his recommendation a certain gallonage should be
specified if allowed to connect to our sewer system.
Councilman Futch noted that a motion is on the floor which was
amended to state that the City does not intend for this to apply
to our present capacity or any planned expansion and the Council
voted on the motion which passed 3-2 (Mayor Miller and Councilman
Pritchard dissenting).
CM-27-3l4
January 21, 1974
REPORT RE CIVIC CENTER
LAND USE - ROCKETEERS
---.,
The City Manager reported that the Livermore Rocketeers is a youth
organization allowed the use of the Civic Center proterty for a
six month period which expired in December. They have requested
that they be allowed an extension for use of the property and
inasmuch as the Fire Marshall has reported that the Fire Prevention
Bureau has received splendid cooperation from the Rocketeers and
full compliance to the established regulations governing use of the
property, the staff recommends that the Council adopt a motion
authorizing extension of their permit for a one year term subject
to the rules and regulations of the Fire Department.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe and
by unanimous vote, the recommendation was adopted.
REPORT RE COUNTY REFERRAL
RE REZONING APP. FOR NO.
SIDE OF LAS POSITAS ROAD
Mr. Musso explained the nature of the application of Pacific Union
Conference for rezoning from A to C-2 District property located
on the north side of Las positas Road, east of North Livermore Avenue,
referred to the City by Alameda County. He stated that neither the
City's planning or the County's indicate any type of commercial or
industrial zone for the proposed use. The City's plan shows the
area to be 4 d.u./acre and the Planning Commission recommends that
the subject rezoning application be denied, based on the following
findings:
1. The proposed rezoning does not conform to the Alameda County
General Plan.
2. The proposed rezoning does not conform to the City of Livermore
General Plan.
3. The proposed rezoning does not conform to a Specific Plan now
being adopted by the City of Livermore.
Mr. Musso added that it is felt the best use for the property would
be residential, and that the County held a hearing on the matter
today which was continued.
Councilman Taylor moved that the Council adopt the Planning Commission's
recommendation, seconded by Councilman Futch.
Councilman Pritchard stated that on advice of private counsel, due
to a possible conflict of interest he would abstain from discussion
and voting.
Councilman Futch commented that he would not like to see a precedent
started in this area and that the rezoning would not be in conformance
with any of the plans.
Steve Chandler, attorney representing the applicant, stated that
the hearing was held today by the County and public testimony was
not taken and at his request the matter was continued until next
Monday in order that the City Council would have time to report
back with a recommendation. He then presented an artist's sketch
of the proposal being made for a warehousing facility on the l8
acres of land (approximate amount). The purpose is to permit
storage of boats and other recreational vehicles so that they are
not parked on the streets and there is a need for this type of thing
in the City of Livermore. It is felt that low density would be wrong
for that area because it is located adjacent to the freeway.
CM-27-3l5
January 2l, 1974
(re County Referral
re Rezoning No. of
Las positas Road)
Mr. Chandler felt that maintaining the property in residential
zoning will add to the sewer capacity problems and by allowing
a warehousing facility, sewage capacity problems will be eliminated.
It is felt that if this area is developed as residential that Las
positas will realize capacity beyond its present designed capacity.
He stated that their environmentalists and engineers indicate that
the proposed use would not necessitate any change in Las positas
Road and that due to the elevation of the freeway with respect
to the location of the property involved, the noise element of
the freeway would require the construction of a sound wall 12-14
feet high in some locations to mitigate the sound; such would not
be necessary if the proposal were approved.
Councilman Beebe asked if the buildings would occupy 18 acres of
land and Mr. Chandler stated that they would not and illustrated
the area which will be occupied, and Councilman Beebe noted that
it would appear that the storage buildings would resemble the
airport hangars, and Mr. Chandler commented that the proposal is
not a development which would be objectionable from an aesthetic
standpoint.
Councilman Taylor stated that the Council looked at the General
Plan and almost unanimously expressed the opinion that it does
not feel right about the residential use planned next to the
freeway but is concerned about the fact that it is in the County
and development is not subject to regulations of the City and
the application specifies that the zoning should be for general
commercial district. The proposed use may be carried out for
a year or so and since general commercial incorporates all types
of uses we may find outselves with a large amount of land committed
to retail sales or other such uses if the recreational storage use
proves to be unprofitable.
Mr. Chandler stated that he can well understand the concern of
Councilman Taylor but the proposed rezoning is for C-2 which is
a conditional use zoning which means that something cannot be
allowed without obtaining a CUP. The applicant, in this case, is
prepared to spend approximately one million dollars on the project
and would not spend this amount of money without some idea that
this would be successful. Mr. Chandler felt that there will be
reasonable safeguards placed on the use by the County to insure
that the property will be used only for this specific purpose.
Mr. Musso stated that this is not true, as gasoline stations and
almost every other conceivable commercial use would be allowed in
the C-2 Zoning.
Mayor Miller explained that the County and City have a policy
regarding freeway interchange use and what will be allowed in
certain areas, and this is not one of the areas allowed as com-
mercial.
Councilman Beebe stated that a problem exists because the City
does not want commercial in the area and has already said that
residential and schools are too close to the freeway.
At this time the Council voted on the motion to adopt the Planning
Commission's recommendation which passed 4-l (Beebe dissenting).
Councilman Futch stated that he feels it is very important that
someone from the City attend the meeting and would appreciate it
if Mr. Musso would attend, and the Mayor suggested that a letter
strongly expressing the Council's views be sent, as well. Also,
since this application is strikingly against our General Plan and
policies about planned use by the freeway he would like our legal
Counsel to investigate options open to us if there is approval by
the County.
CM-27-3l6
January 21, 1974
P. C. MINUTES OF
JANUARY 8, 1974
~
There being no comments regarding the minutes for the Planning
Commission's meeting of January 8, 1974, the minutes were noted
and filed.
STATUS REPORT RE ZO. ORD .
CONFORMANCE TO GEN PLAN
The Planning Director reported that the City has been attempting to
bring zoning into conformance with the General Plan and by enclosing
a map indicated the areas now under study as to future rezoning,
future General Plan amendment, or a determination by the City that
zoning is in conformance with the General Plan.
Mayor Miller stated that some wording should be included to reflect
timing and premature development to appear on the map with references
to the text of the General Plan where those things are described. They
are presently in the General Plan but should also be indicated on the
map and suggested that the Planning Commission and Planning staff
consider adding the same wording to the map.
REPORT RE AIRPORT MASTER
PLAN & LAND USE STUDY
The City Manager reported that a selection has been made of ~
professional consultant firm to conduct the study of the airport
master plan and land use study. The cost of the study would be
$28,555 with the City participating in the amount of $9,518 the
balance of which will be paid by the FAA. The Airport Advisory
Committee and the staff recommend adoption of a resolution authorizing
execution of the agreement.
Councilman Taylor moved that the staff recommendation be adopted,
seconded by Councilman Futch.
Councilman Pritchard noted that it has been his understanding that
there would be no expansion of the airport and wanted to know why
the City intends to spend $9,518 derived from the taxpayers to pay
for the study of an expansion not anticipated.
Mr. Parness explained that this is not a study for the expansion
of the airport but rather a study of the plans for the use of the
airport property and what is anticipated is finances being made
available by whatever means, not known at this time, to have some
supplementary facilities contained within the present site, such as
a parallel runway. The other consideration is the abbuting land use
for the properties surrounding the airport to extend all the way to
the west of Santa Rita Road to Livermore Avenue on the east and about
a mile north of the freeway and south to the Southern Pacific railroad
tracks. This study is to determine what types of uses should be
companion to the airport in the future.
Councilman Pritchard felt that the City Councils of P1easanton and
Livermore should be capable of determining what the land uses should
be without having to hire a consultant and also, if what we have now
is sufficient with regard to our present runway, a parallel runway
should not be necessary. It appears that our airport is becoming
an airport of convenience for several Bay Area communities out of the
valley and he would not like to see expansion of the runway to facili-
tate a greater use of the airport by people outside of the valley.
At present it appears to be sufficient to serve the valley people.
CM-27-317
January 21, 1974
(re Airport Master Plan
and Land Use Study)
Councilman Taylor stated that he believes the County Airport Land
Use Commission passes judgment on land use around the airport and
felt it would be a good idea to have a master plan that can be
referred to the Commission to consider measuring uses against. We
may feel capable of making decisions regarding land use around the
airport; however, one must take into consideration the fact that all
of this land is not in our jurisdiction and never will be. He feels
that a lot of airports have gotten into trouble due to their lack of
planning and that since our share would be only 1/3 of the total cost,
it would be reasonable to have it planned by professionals. As far
as expansion to a parallel runway he commented that we do not regulate
the amount of traffic coming in and going out of our airport. When
the number of people waiting increases, it is his understanding that
they are forced to stack in a pattern in the air until they can land
and just last week it was mentioned that sometimes when the traffic
becomes excessive the traffic pattern extends over the City. There
is no way that not expanding the runway will cut down the number of
operations at our airport. To stick our heads in the sand and say
that another runway will not even be planned may cause us to get into
real trouble because this may guarantee that more planes will become
stacked and have to wait to land.
----
Councilman Pritchard stated that he feels planes the size of Pipers
and Cherokees will not wait around to land and his point is that he
would like to discourage the use of our airport by people outside of
the valley.
Councilman Taylor stated that a limitation in the length of the
runway is one way to discourage use but that the use should not
be discouraged by making it unsafe.
Mayor Miller stated that he would have to agree with Councilman
Pritchard in that it is a waste of time and money to plan for a
second runway but that there is some merit in planning the area
around the airport. He feels that as gasoline becomes more expensive
the use of private planes is going to decrease.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would like to protect the western
portion as much as possible and to design the study around the
present length of the runway and to let the consultant know that
we are not interested in a recommendation to expand into an inter-
national airport.
Mayor Miller stated that he feels if the facilities are available
and in an area which generally has little fog, it will generate
more traffic to use a second runway.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he feels this grandiose planning
is simply a "foot in the door" to enlarge and expand to an airport
that is sufficient as it is.
Councilman Futch asked where the money will come from for the City's
participation and the City Manager replied that this will come from
the Airport fund and Councilman Futch stated that it was his under-
standing that it was the responsibility of the Land Use Committee
to take care of the land planning studies and is therefore confused
as to why the City should pay to have a study done.
The City Manager explained that they have an area defined that in-
corporates their area of jurisdiction and any intended land use that
falls within this area is subject to their review. In the process of
the review they will take into account local land use and planning
intentions and abutting public jurisdiction land use intentions. It
has not been his opinion that it was the intention that they should
compose a master plan for the abutting properties.
CM-27-3l8
January 2l, 1974
(Airport Master Plan
and Land Use Study)
Mr. Lee stated that part of the study is to make a forecast of the
airport needs and a decision that we do not need a second short
runway adjacent to the present runway in the absence of this infor-
mation could be a gross error. In the case of the old airport,
a decision was made to develop right at the end of it without really
having assessed the situation. This proposed study will tell what
the needs are, the forecast and the problems the different levels
of traffic will create. It is, essentially, an environmental study
which will show the impact regarding the levels of traffic, and
in his opinion the $9,5l8 would be well spent in getting this informa-
tion. This study will tell what type of uses should be allowed
at various locations in relation to the airport so that uses not
established at this time will not at a later time encroach on the
airport and likewise the airport will not encroach on some valuable
use that could come about in the future. It is information that
we really should have.
The City Manager stated that he would advise the Council the same
even if the City had to spend the entire $29,000.
Councilman Futch stated that he can agree with a lot of things
Mr. Lee has pointed out and can certainly see the need for such
a report.
At this time the Council voted on the motion which passed 3-2 with
Councilman Pritchard and Mayor Miller dissenting.
RESOLUTION NO. 6-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
RE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN AND LAND USE STUDY.
REPORT RE COOPERATIVE
AGREEMENT WITH COUNTY
RE EAST AVE. IMPROVEMENTS
The City Manager reported that the next item on the City's priority
list of projects of City-County expenditures is the East Avenue-
Vasco Road intersection and the public works project along East
Avenue from Nielsen Lane to Greenville Road. The design work is
to be done by the County with the exception of the traffic signals
at Vasco Road, the landscaping, irrigation for medians and sanitary
sewer or water mains required. It is important that the engineering
segment of the project be completed as soon as possible and it is
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution
of an agreement.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the Council adopt the resolution
authorizing execution of an agreement, seconded by Councilman Futch.
\. )
Councilman Futch commented that East Avenue has more bicycle traffic
than any other street in town and that there has been a 50% increase
since the bike path has been installed. It is a major avenue for
bicycle flow to and from the Lab and therefore feels that he would
like to make an amendment to say that biCYCle traffic should be
an integral part of the design of the intersection and would suggest
that input from various groups concerned with it such as LLL and
the Bikeway Association and Sandia be contacted as these groups
have been instrumental in obtaining the bikeway. He stated that
it is difficult to plan for the 5:00 p.m. traffic that occurs simultan-
eously with the automobile traffic that is there.
Councilman Pritchard seconded the amendment to the motion.
Mayor Miller stated that it has been expressed to him that care
should be taken to make sure that bicycle traffic will have no
problem in getting through the Vasco Road intersection after the
signals have been installed.
CM-27-319
"'--"'''-'_.'~'---'-'---~''-----'-'---'''--^''-'~''~''-~~"----~~-"._~~-,--.,~.._._-,.,-,._.,---
January 21, 1974
(Agreement with County
re East Avenue Improvements)
Mayor Miller stated that this had been a suggestion by one of the
members of the Bikeways Association and that a member had also
asked in what sense should East Avenue be widened? In considering
the future, perhaps widening of the automobile lanes may not be
the wise choice to make. Wh~some may have doubts as to the
reality of the energy crisi ~ 0 the1ess, the concept of energy
crisis is valid and wil:Utbe upo . us if not now, in several years, and
;~s a consequence the use of the automobile may sharply decline and
\~ ~erhaps the the widening should be to the bicycle lanes rather ...than
~ the automobile lanes or at least should be considered.
Mr. Lee explained that the standards provide for two lanes for
automobiles going each way in addition to an emergency lane which
could be used for bicycle paths but there should be some consideration
as to placing an additional bike path off the street. The design
of the traffic signal will allow a flexibility so that bicycles can
get through.
Mayor Miller stated that the amendment to the motion and the
comments by the majority of the Council indicate that bicycles
should play a major role in the design of the widening to take
place, with which the Council concurred.
At this time the Council voted on the amendment to the motion which
passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
The motion was then voted on which passed by a unanimous vote of
the Council.
RESOLUTION NO. 7-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(ALAMEDA COUNTY)
ORD. RE MUNI CODE AMEND.
RE CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS
Councilman Futch moved that the Council adopt the ordinance relating
to campaign statements, contributions and expenditures, as drafted,
seconded by Mayor Miller.
Councilman Taylor asked if this is an urgency ordinance requiring a
4/5 vote and the City Attorney replied that it is.
Councilman Futch stated that there could be three additional people
on the Council which will allow some experience after having gone
through an election using the ordinance and it might be appropriate
to reconsider it.
Mayor Miller stated that he feels there are some aspects of the
ordinance which could have been improved but in order to accomplish
the adoption it is not worth arguing at this time.
Councilman Taylor stated that he feels a 4/5 vote is required to
pass an urgency ordinance to eliminate waiting until the last min-
ute to pass an ordinance that has not been thought out. It should
be made sure that the ordinance is correct and there had been
some discussion regarding penalties and it would be correct and
reasonable to consider an ordinance such as this in due course.
Glen Strahl, 768 Adams Avenue, expressed concern over the ordinance
and one of these concerns is the fact that it is an urgency ordinance.
CM-27-320
January 21, 1974
(Ordinance re Campaign
Statements)
/-
Mr. Strahl stated that it seems to be aimed at avoiding problems
with regard to elections - perhaps influence on the part of some
wealthy person. There seems to be no indication of discussion
regarding a specific case involved in the upcoming election which
would require urgent corrective action and would agree that this
ordinance needs a lot of careful consideration, discussion and
debate. He stated that he would assume the ordinance is designed
to avoid the influence of large contributors in a political campaign.
He felt a lot of people may be discouraged from contributing if
their names are posted, as this is also an indication as to how they
intend to vote. He feels that this tends to get around the secret
ballot method of voting which he feels is important and that a lot
of people do not want others to know who they are voting for but
might feel strongly enough about a candidate to donate money for
a campaign. He feels this ordinance would destroy a lot of grass
roots support for political campaigns and that even though he feels
this was not the intent it is a possibility and urged that the
Council give the matter more consideration prior to passing the
ordinance.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would have to agree with the
comments mentioned by Mr. Strahl and as he has mentioned before
he feels we will be very well protected if we follow the state
ordinance governing this procedure, and stay away from the "nitty
gritty" little things the Council has discussed in the past.
At this time the Council voted 4-1 to adopt the ordinance, as
drafted, with Councilman Beebe dissenting.
ORDINANCE NO. 834
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE V, RELATING TO CAMPAIGN
STATEMENTS, OF CHAPTER 2, RELATING TO ADMINISTRATION, OF THE
LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, TO REGULATE ELECTION CAMPAIGN CONTRI-
BUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES.
The title of the ordinance was read by the City Attorney.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re Directional Signs)
Mr. Lee reported that there has been a request by a member of the
Council with regard to consideration of signs on First Street to
indicate directions to the freeway. The state has been contacted,
they have been out to assess the situation and should soon be
responding.
(re Traffic Congestion
at First & No. Livermore)
Mr. Lee stated that the problem of traffic congestion due to the
left turn lane going north, and that the people going north on
North Livermore Avenue were having difficulty at the intersection
at First Street. This area has been observed and it appears that
it does not constitute a serious problem in addition to the fact
that there does not seem to be a way of improving the situation.
It is anticipated that plans for the entire intersection will pro-
ceed and the State Division of Highways is processing it at present.
It is hoped that any problems will be alleviated through the improve-
ment to take place.
CM-27-32l
January 21, 1974
(re Vacancy of
Ravenswood Property)
The City Manager reported that the Ravenswood building has been
unoccupied for a couple of months and that some work has been done
to the building in anticipation of its being used. unfortunately,
as soon as it was vacated there have been problems with vagrants
and other types of persons and the only alternative appears to be
the suggestion that someone live in the structure as was originally
the case. One of the City employees has expressed a desire to live
in the building and tentative rental terms have been agreed upon
which can be discussed with the Council when the staff brings back
the rental arrangement. The important thing at this time is that
it is necessary to do some minimal work in order that it is habitable
such as a furnace, as there is no heat in the building, and a water
heater and some lights, etc. He would like to obtain permission
from the Council to spend approximately $2,000 for the needed
structural modifications in order that it can become useable
for occupancy and feel secure in the fact that the property
will not be vandalized.
Councilman Taylor moved that the request for $2,000 be granted,
seconded by Councilman Futch and which passed by a unanimous vote.
(re Track Relocation
project Report)
The City Manager stated that he is sorry that an important matter
such as the railroad track relocation project has been reported
on by him in the way of a written report which he handed the Council
just prior to the meeting and offered to read the report to the
Council. However, the Mayor felt it might be best to allow each
Councilman the time to read the report and called for a brief
recess.
RECESS
After a brief recess the meeting resumed with all members of the
Council present.
(Continued Discussion
re Track Relocation)
The City Manager explained that results regarding the track re-
location matter have transpired rather rapidly during the past
few days and inasmuch as Councilman Taylor will be absent for
about four weeks and Mr. Parness will also be gone, he felt
it necessary to inform the Council on the matter of increased
costs in the track relocation project. He reported that certain
improvement costs have been disallowed for the matching state
funds anticipated in addition to the fact that costs of construc-
tion have escalated and the low bidder estimates that these
costs will be approximately $80,000 higher than indicated.
The amount of the excess costs to borne by the City would amount
to $58,000 over the amount originally pledged by the City.
The report also stated that an appraisal has been made of the
cost-benefit which indicates that at such time as the full commer-
cialization of the Southern Pacific property is done the annual
return to the City will be in excess of $170,000 which does
not include taxes applicable to inventory and is considered to be a
conservative estimate regarding the return to the City. It
is respectfully urged that the Council authorize a City expenditure
of approximately $408,000 for the project.
Councilman Taylor stated that there is no question about the fact
that the project is well worth the money and moved that the Council
authorize a pledge of $408,000, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
The motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
CM-27-322
January 21, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Illegal Turns
Onto Pacific Ave.)
Councilman Beebe stated that people have been telling him that
they notice cars turning onto Pacific Avenue from South Livermore
Avenue into the area where cars are suppose to be coming off of
Pacific Avenue onto South Livermore Avenue, in error, which is
against the traffic on Pacific Avenue. He suggested that some
type of sign be provided to state "no entry" or something to make
the intersection less confusing.
(Resolution to
Commend Bob Yee)
Councilman Futch stated that he would like to see the staff write
a letter to Bob Yee thanking him for his service on the City staff
and Councilman Pritchard suggested that a resolution be prepared
rather than a letter, with which Councilman Futch agreed, adding
that Bob has been a very valuable staff member.
The staff was directed to prepare a resolution of commendation.
(Enos-Portola
Intersection)
Mayor Miller stated that a gross intersection has been created
by the City staff at Portola Avenue and Enos Way which he feels
is a disaster and stated that something should be done, suggesting
that it be ripped out or redesigned. It is an enormous irritation
for anyone trying to turn left from portola Avenue onto Enos Way.
Mr. Lee explained that Enos Way is askew making a difficult inter-
section and as the traffic increases the intersection becomes more
hazardous.
The Mayor stated that the fact there are dividers located there
is not unreasonable but the spread of these dividers should be
looked at again.
(Sign Ordinance
Violations)
Mayor Miller stated that there has been some discussion over a
few years with regard to a means for handling the zoning ordinance,
sign ordinance violations and at one time a citation procedure was
suggested. He felt that since we have a new judge in Livermore
the problems should be discussed and if the Council has no objection
he would like to meet with the judge and the district attorney's
representative, the City Attorney and Mr. Musso to see if something
can be worked out for handling the violations.
(
Councilman Taylor stated that he would presume that 'prior to institut-
ing any procedure the Mayor would seek the approval of the Council and
the Mayor assured him that this would be done.
The City Attorney commented that he would like to look at the broad
question of the efficiency and desirability of having the district
attorney prosecute all of our cases even though it has been traditional
in this County. He stated that if it is both efficient and traditional
as well as effective this is fine but there may be a possibility for
change.
CM-27-323
January 21, 1974
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor
Miller adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. to a brief executive
session for the purpose of discussing appointments to the Housing
Authority.
APPROVE IJ~ 9--J,~
ATTEST ~~MaYor
C~ty Clerk
Livermore, California
Regular Meeting of January 28, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on January 28, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:09 p.m. with Mayor Miller ?residing.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmen Beebe, Pritchard and Mayor Miller
ABSENT:
Councilman Taylor (Excused Business) Councilman Futch
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Mil~er led the Council members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
COUNCIL MINUTES
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard
and by unanimous vote, the minutes for the meeting of January 21,
1974, were approved as amended.
OPEN FORUM
(Request for Cab
Service Permit)
Steven paich, new owner of the A Cab Service in the City of Liver-
more stated that he would like to keep the cab service running for
the people of Livermore and especially the senior citizens and
requested that he be allowed an owners permit to own the cabs and
cab company in the City of Livermore.
Mayor Miller stated that he believes a hearing will have to be held
in order to issue such a permit and that there has to be a notice
published to inform people that a hearing will be held, and suggested
that a public hearing be scheduled for next week.
CM-27-324
January 28, 1974
(re Taxi Service)
The City Attorney explained that the cabs could be continued to
operate under the present owner's permit if this would be agreeable
to the owner and if the owner agrees to be responsible. Mr. Paich
could act as manager of the cabs in this case. He explained that
the permit for the cab business is not transferrable under the City
Code but there is a provision for an emergency permit which the
Council can award if it desires, under certain circumstances which
he read from the Code to the Council.
Councilman Pritchard commented that he has received telephone calls
from people asking what the City intends to do about providing a
taxi cab service for them and the Mayor suggested that the Council
authorize an emergency permit to last one week, and Councilman
Pritchard moved that a resolution be adopted authorizing a permit
to be granted by the Chief of Police, upon his satisfaction of the
requirements for the one week period, seconded by Councilman Beebe
and which passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
RESOLUTION NO. 12-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY TAXI PERMIT
SPECIAL ITEM - REPORT
RE RECYCLING CENTER
Lois Hill, 874 Adams Avenue, gave an oral report regarding the opera-
tion and success of the recycling center which has been in operation
for three years, beginning its fourth year. She stated that a group
of 21 young adults does the supervising and decision making in the
operations and that the center is very grateful for the cooperation
of the Livermore Disposal Service who has provided free bins and
transportation at very low rates. The balance of the loan that
the center had obtained for the can crusher has been waived and
this will mean an additional $40 profit per month to the sponsors.
She stated that business has declined, however, since the relocation
of the center behind the barn and would appreciate more signs to
indicate the location. Another reason for the decline is the fact
that various organizations are having paper drives for fund raising
and also there is less business during the cold weather. Mrs. Hill
then gave a report on the anticipated profits to the sponsors and
asked that the City continue its support as an official body as
well as individual participation.
Mayor Miller stated that one of the reasons not mentioned for the
success of the recycling center is the dynamic leadership of Lois
Hill, with which the Council concurred, and the Mayor stated that
Councilman Futch has expressed appreciation for the fine work the
recycling center has done and that this be conveyed to Mrs. Hill
and the group.
Councilman Pritchard felt that there should be a word of commendation
regarding the neat and orderly way in which the center is maintained.
It was noted that the Council, on behalf of the City, is very appre-
ciative of the work being done and hopes for continued success.
(
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Appointing Members
to Housing Authority
A resolution was adopted by the Council appointing members to the
Housing Authority.
RESOLUTION NO. 8-74
RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY
(Leo Gutierrez and David P. Mandeville)
CM-27-325
January 28, 1974
Res. Commending
Robert S. Yee
The Council adopted a resolution commending Robert S. Yee on his
departure from service with the City of Livermore.
RESOLUTION NO. 9-74
/~
( ,
~;
-_/
A RESOLUTION COMMENDING ROBERT S. YEE ON HIS DEPARTURE
FROM DISTINGUISHED SERVICE WITH THE CITY OF LIVERMORE.
Res. re General
Municipal Election
A resolution was adopted appointing election officers, consolidation
of precincts and polling places for the General Municipal Election
to be held on March 5, 1974.
RESOLUTION NO. lO-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION OFFICERS, CON-
SOLIDATION OF PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES, HOURS
TO BE OPEN AND FIXING COMPENSATION OF ELECTION OFFICERS.
Report re Salary
Resolution Modification
The City Manager reported that in accordance with a memorandum agree-
ment with the Livermore Firemens Association, a salary adjustment
should be allowed effective February 1, in the amount of 6% for
firemen and 5.1% for fire lieutenants.
In accordance with the City Manager's recommendation, a resolution
amending the salary schedule was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. ll-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 165-73, WHICH ESTABLISHES A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE
CLASSIFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE AND ESTABLISHES RULES FOR ITS USE, BY CHANGING
CLASSIFICATION CODES 804 and 805.
Report re Property
Acquisition - Water
Conservation Fund
(Medeiros Parkway Area)
The City Manager reported that we have received notice of a $64,569
state grant to be allocated to our City for the purpose of open space
acquisition. We applied for $250,000 for the purpose of acquiring
property incorporating the Medeiros Parkway west of Murrieta Boule-
vard and since the grant allowance is much less than requested, only
a portion of the total acreage can be acquired - approximately $125,000
worth of land (the City matching the state funds). However, it is
anticipated that we will receive grants in future years and it is
recommended that the Council adopt a motion referring the matter .~
to the staff for property appraisal purposes and negotiations of
property purchase within the bounds of the financial allotment.
Quarterly Report -
City Attorney
A quarterly report regarding the activities and plan of the City
Attorney's office was presented to the Council and Councilman
Pritchard noted that he appreciates these reports and finds them
very informative.
CM-27-326
January 28, 1974
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
Prior to approval of the Consent Calendar, Councilman Beebe noted
that with regard to the resolution commending Robert Yee he would
like to state that Mr. Yee has been a very fine City employee and
the Mayor stated that this certainly has been the case, and on
motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and
by unanimous vote the Consent Calendar was approved with the comments
noted as made by the Council.
COMMUNICATION FROM BASSA
RE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
A letter was received from BASSA regarding our Valley-wide Joint
Powers Agency in which it was noted that they are pleased with
this achievement - an effort to solve the Valley's water quality
problems. The letter also stated that they are prepared to assist
in this program and offered service if we so desire.
Mayor Miller stated that he attended a meeting of the Valley Water
Interests Committee last week at which time there was discussion
regarding the 208 Planning Agency situation. A statement was drafted
to submit to the State Water Resources Control Board and indicated
that the Council should have a copy of the statement by next week.
He stated that all five members present agreed on the wording of
the submittal.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE
PLANNING UNITS 8 and 9
Continued discussion of Planning Units 8 and 9 was scheduled for
this meeting but Councilman Pritchard moved that the matter be
postponed until the meeting of March 18th at which time a new
Council will be seated and there is a possibility that some of
the new Councilmen will have had a part in the planning for this
area, seconded by Councilman Beebe and which passed by a unanimous
vote.
The City Attorney noted that in connection with this item he would
like to report that the City has received service of process in a
law suit brought by the Elliott Construction Company concerning
some of the land in Planning Units 8 and 9. It is intended that
the City will take initiative in the suit rather than responding
and he will brief the Council at a later date prior to doing so.
(\
Mayor Miller stated that he would like to comment, for the record,
regarding continuation of this matter. The issues involved in
Planning Units 8 and 9 have to do with location of commercial and
some residential but behind the specific plan are the questions
ultimately involved with the General Plan review which is in process
now and there may be changes in specific zoning and density in exist-
ing zoned areas. These things must be resolved prior to adoption
of this specific plan; therefore, the continuation is a part of the
overall General Plan review. He explained that the specific planning
is done, but the final density and zoning are not resolved until the
General Plan review is finished. If it turns out that the moratorium
runs out and we have to adopt the specific plan because we do not have
the time by law to finish, then we will adopt a specific plan that
is proper.
Mr. Musso had commented that the moratorium is only good for about
two years.
~M-27-327
January 28, 1974
(re Planning Units 8 and 9)
Mr. Musso stated that the authority to have a moratorium is based
on the fact that planning is being done, and if there is to be no
planning for two years the authority to have a moratorium will be
lost.
The Mayor stated that the matter has not been dropped but has been
continued to March 18th, and the specific plan review and General
Plan review are part of an ongoing process carried on in parallel.
c)
REPORT RE SEWER
SERVICE APPLICATION
The Planning Director reported that a request has been received
from Dan J. O'Neil for a sewer connection to serve a single family
residential use located on the east side of North Livermore Avenue
adjacent to the City Limits and Sunset Homes subdivision. The
house will be located at the end of Cornwell Street and located so
as not to block future extension of the street and the staff
would like to know whether or not the Council would authorize
the execution of such an agreement.
The Council discussed the matter and Councilman Beebe asked if
this replaces an existing house, and Mr. Musso replied that it
does, and Councilman Pritchard asked what the policy has been.
Mr. Musso explained that normally the policy is to allow the
sewer connection but during the past six months the Council
has not necessarily followed this pOlicy.
Mayor Miller stated that he can understand the reason such may
not be allowed and noted that we have twice as much sludge going
through the digesters as they are ddesigned to carry and the sewer
plant is somewhat unstable. until the sewer plant is expanded, any
connections we have out that are permissible under the last amendment
to our water ordinance. Approximately 150 are inside the City and
should be available to make use of a sewer plant which is not yet
capable of handling connections outside the City. In his opinion
the people in the City limits should have the first opportunity to
connect to the sewer plant rather than somebody outside and would
argue to this point. He stated that if they annex to the City they
would be able to partake of the building permits available in the
City.
Mayor Miller continued to state that in the issuance of building
permits, in a tight situation, the oldest recorded lot should come
first, and Councilman Beebe felt that this was reasonable; however,
he stated that there appears to be no rush to take out the last
available permits because they are outside of major tracts. They
are for scattered lots and tracts not accessible.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would rather have the O'Nei1s hook
up to the City's sewer system than to have a septic tank, and
suggested that this be counted as one of the outstanding permits.
He moved that since this is an application with extraordinary cir-
cumstances in that it is so close to the City and we do not want
a septic tank there, that the Council authorize the staff to ne-
gotiate the usual papers with the applicant, seconded by Councilman
Pritchard, who commented that he assumes this motion is made with
the understanding that City regulations will be followed and Council-
man Beebe stated that this is correct.
n
At this time the motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
CM-27-328
January 28, 1974
REPORT RE ANNEXATION
APP. - 29 ACRES SO.
OF ALDEN LANE
o
The City Manager informed the Council that a request has been made
for annexation of 29 acres of uninhabited land south of Alden Lane,
west of Holmes Street. The staff reports that the area is in an odd
configuration in that it is long and narrow and that properties on
the east side of Holmes Street might be included in the annexation
if possible and recommended that the staff and Planning Commission
consider the matter for report.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe and
by unanimous vote the staff recommendation was adopted.
Prior to the vote Councilman Beebe commented that part of the annex-
ation to be considered, which is the east side of Holmes Street has
walnut trees and he would not want to see pressure put on the owners
to annex and then turned into homes immediately.
Councilman Pritchard stated that it would be better to be annexed to
the City and have it zoned Agricultural by the City rather than to
have the County Assessor put pressure on them because of the potential
development. He also raised the possibility of creating an agricul-
tural preserve.
There was no further discussion on the matter, as it will be reported
on by the Planning Commission and staff for future discussion.
REPORT RE JR. COLLEGE
UTILITY LINE EXTENSION
Mayor Miller stated that Councilman Futch plans to come t~ the meet-
ing as soon as he can arrive and would like the matter of the Junior
College utility line extension to be postponed until his arrival, at
the end of the meeting, with which the Council concurred.
REPORT RE PROPERTY
ACQUISITION ALONG
E. STANLEY BLVD.
The City Manager reported that the contract in effect with Alameda
County provides for the widening of East Stanley Boulevard from
Isabell Avenue to Murdell Lane. Five small parcels are required for
the street widening and it is recommended that the Council adopt
a motion authorizing conduct of an appraisal and property purchase.
Councilman Beebe moved that appraisal and negotiation for property
purchase be authorized, seconded by Councilman Pritchard, which
passed by a unanimous vote.
SUMMARY OF P. C.
MEETING ACTION
(\,
. i
The summary of action taken at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 22, 1974, was noted for filing.
,
ORD. RE ZOo ORD. AMEND.
RE ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
& BUILDING HEIGHTS
Councilman Beebe moved to introduce the Zoning Ordinance amendment
regarding various sections - accessory buildings, and building
heights, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and which passed by a
unanimous vote, and the title was read by the City Attorney.
Mayor Miller noted, prior to the vote, that he would vote for the
ordinance for the purpose of expediting Council business but on
principle, objects to the ordinance.
CM-27-329
January 28, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(re Inequitable
Tax Assessments)
Councilman Pritchard commented on the apparent inequities in the
method used by the County Tax Assessor's Office for the increase in
residential assessments compared to assessments of commercial and
industrial property. He pointed out that he purchased a home for
approximately $36,000 and that in 10 months the assessed evaluation
of that home increased $12,000. He pointed out that this is not an
isolated case, as he has had numerous telephone calls from irate
individuals who have experienced similar tax increases. In the
past four years it appears that increases have occurred from l8 to
57% and taxed accordingly upon residential property and that in
comparable commercial and industrial property it is found that
during this same period these properties have had possibly only
one very small increase or none at all. Some of the commercial
or industrial properties have been assessed at three times less
value than the selling price in the current year. He stated that
this is grossly inequitable and it is time that the City of Liver-
more put some pressure on the County of Alameda through the Board
of Supervisors, or whatever channel is appropriate. He added that
he does not mind if he is assessed for the true value of his property
if all other properties are being assessed in the same manner. He
asked that the Council join him in bringing pressure to bear on the
County, legally if possible or if necessary perhaps in the way of
a writ of mandamus for the purpose of bringing the County around
to the position that they should assess in a more equitable way.
Mayor Miller stated that he would agree with this statement because
when the City has purchased land or looked at land the assessment
has been twice as low as what the assessor appraises the land
as the market value. The appraisers systematically quote a price
twice as much as the appraised value, which means that there is
a systematic underassessment. This means that the residential
property owners are picking up more and more of the taxes which
should be paid by the commercial and industrial property.
Councilman Pritchard then moved that the staff be directed to write
a letter, on behalf of the Council, to the County Supervisors with
copies sent to the Assessor's Office asking them what kind of action
they intend to take, if any, and how soon. If we don't have a re-
sponse within a reasonable period of time ask our attorney to investi-
gate what legal action might be taken by the City, seconded by Council-
man Beebe.
COUNCILMAN FUTCH WAS SEATED DURING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, PRIOR TO THE
MOTION.
It was noted that the Council would like some response prior to March 1.
Mayor Miller summarized by stating that the Council would like a
letter sent soon, possibly by the next meeting, asking the Super-
visors for some relief for the residential tax payers and if there
is not a response the City Attorney will be asked what legal action
can be taken.
i \
U
~ .------...."
Councilman Futch commented that he has not heard all of the discussion
and is not sure that he will vote for the motion.
Mayor Miller stated that the Assessor's Office imposes an annual
factor in big chunks allover the City, uniformly, by which he
raises assessments and there is no reason, in principle, why this
annual factor could not be imposed on commercial and industrial property.
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
CM-27-330
January 28, 1974
(Accidents on Arroyo
Road at Concannon Blvd.
Intersection)
o
Councilman Pritchard stated that he has witnessed two cars which
have gone over an embankement while traveling on Arroyo Road, south,
where you must either turn right onto Concannon Boulevard, or jog
over to the narrow Arroyo Road and suggested the possibility of
painting a triangle or something there to help identify the prob-
lem. He stated that at present there are arrows painted on the
pavement but something additional should be done.
(Portola - Enos Way
Intersection)
Mayor Miller stated that he continues to receive a stream of tele-
phone calls from irate citizens concerning the intersection at
Porto1a Avenue and Enos Way.
Mr. Lee stated that there are a number of proposals for improvements
for this intersection that he would like to review with the Mayor.
DISCUSSION REGARDING
REPORT RE JUNIOR COLLEGE
UTILITY LINE EXTENSION
Mr. Lee reported that the Council has asked that the staff look into
the question of the sizing of the utilities to be installed up to
the junior college site which has been done and has been included
in the Council's agenda. As previously indicated, the fire flow
requirements for the junior college dictates the size of the water
main leading up to the junior college rather than the consumption
by the college; therefore, there would not be a reduction of the
cost for providing water to the north side of the highway, whether
or not areas outside of the junior college are included. As for
the sanitary sewer lines, there would be a difference - there could
be lines sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the junior college
or a line that would serve the entire area. It is recommended that
the Council adopt a motion reaffirming the intention to install
sanitary sewer lines and water lines at sizes that could accommodate
abutting land uses at some future date.
Mayor Miller stated that he originally objected to the placement
of larger lines because it would spur the leapfrog development
and he has not changed his mind regarding this aspect.
Councilman Futch felt the Council is facing something which is
inevitable which is that we will have to provide utilities to
service the north side of the freeway and that there is not much
of an alternative except to approve facilities to serve the north
side. If we don't someone else may provide services which may cause
more problems than what we will face if we provide them. If we pro-
vide facilities we can collect fees sufficient to pay for expansion
of our water and sewer plants as well as parks and schools. If the
County provides these facilities there is no guarantee as to what
will happen.
('\i
'. /
Mayor Miller stated that larger lines will not influence LAFCO
or the County, as their minds are already set adding that we have
a better chance of understanding by the EPA, the Air Pollution
Control District and State Water esources Control Board and Air
Resources ,Board due to the air q 1ity problems in the valleYJ~
to-L r;~r ~7UJ-.J-.
~f;~ t~j ~
~~~~cP,t CM-27-33l
January 28, 1974
(Junior College Utility Lines)
Councilman Futch stated that if the County develops the land
the City cannot control development; however, if the City pro-
vides the lines and develops the area then citizens can come
down and speak to the Council regarding their wishes for develop-
ment which might take place.
Mayor Miller stated that he feels this would be committing the
City to a leapfrog development and Councilman Futch replied
that he does not feel this is true because the timing and type
of development can be controlled.
u
Councilman Pritchard suggested providing facilities to serve
the present needs and if and when development does occur which
may be sometime in the future, those who develop should pay
for the utilities they will be using.
Councilman Futch stated that he feels the image of Livermore
is important and that we may win the battle but lose the war
and to prevent this from happening he felt we should provide
for reasonable development on the north side of the freeway.
Mayor Miller stated that he feels this would be making a
serious planning mistake and that the image the City has
received is due to the Associated Home Builders' pressure,
and approving oversized lines will not reduce the pressure
or image they are trying to create. Also, while only $60,000
is saved, it means that the junior college will have to put
up $30,000 less for the smaller lines since they have agreed
to pay for half of the cost of the lines.
Councilman Pritchard commented that he detects a standoff
among the Council members and would suggest that the dis-
cussion be postponed until the meeting of February 19th,
the next date a full Council is expected to be present,
with which the other members of the Council agreed. He
stated that if he felt the image of Livermore would be
improved by installing the larger lines he would agree to
it; however, he felt that this action would not change the
views of the public.
Councilman Beebe stated that he feels the Council's op1n1on
is negative and that even at this stage, if the members of
the Council met with the people north of the freeway who are
proposing a new town outside of Livermore with no control by
the City of Livermore that they would be willing to discuss
the matter and would understand that when our rezoning is
finished and that after there is some relief at the sewer
plant that there could be some modest annexation and develop-
ment on that side of the freeway. Until the problem is faced
head-on, the Council is fighting a negative war.
At this time Councilman Pritchard moved that the Council con-
tinue the matter until the meeting of February 19th, seconded
by Councilman Beebe and which passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council,
the Mayor adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. to a brief
executive session for the purpose of discussing appointments.
APPROVE
()~~ 3J.I\\i~'V
Mayor
ATTEST
C1ty C erk
Livermore, California
CM-27-332
Regular Meeting of February 4, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on February 4, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Miller presiding.
,---
\~)
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Futch, Pritchard and Mayor Miller
ABSENT:
Councilmen Beebe (Seated Later) and Taylor (Excused -
Busines~ Trip)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
COUNCILMAN BEEBE WAS SEATED AFTER THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
COUNCIL MINUTES
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard
and by unanimous vote, the minutes for the meeting of January 28,
1974, were approved as amended.
SPECIAL ITEM -
RES. OF COMMENDATION
(Lee Estes - Photography)
At this time Mayor Miller read a resolution commending Lee Estes
for his outstanding photography award recently received and contri-
butions to the community which was adopted on motion of Councilman
Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch and by unanimous vote.
RESOLUTION NO. l3-74
A RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR OUTSTANDING
PHOTOGRAPHY BY LEE ESTES
OPEN FORUM
(re Springtown Petition
in Support of New Town)
Bill Older, l524 Hollyhock stated that he would like to read an
article which appeared in the weekly periodical circulated among
the members of the Springtown Association, for the record, as follows:
FROM YOUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS - A series of articles has appeared in
a local newspaper within the last week which sets forth the apparent
plans of the so-called Geldermann-Las positas City development which
proposal includes 9,000 acres north of Highway 580 and is very close
to, but not wholly contiguous to our boundary limits. The most recent
.~. article outlines a forthcoming petition which is purportedly prefaced
as follows: "We the residents of the Greenville North, Greenville
West, Proud Country, Springtown, Casa Pacific, Driftwood (et all --
-do hereby petition the county Mayor's Council to approve Mr. Geldermann
proposed New Town proposal." Mr. Older stated that the Board then
stated , "We sincerely urge all residents of Tracts 2370 and 2240
to refrain from signing this or any similar petition until the problems
of increased Taxation, Ecology and kindred matters have been resolved".
CM-27-333
February 4, 1974
(Springtown Petition in
Support of New Town)
Mr. Older commented that two copies of the Geldermann proposal and
phasing have been sent to the City Managers Office which he read
portions of to the Council while pointing out various problems that
will arise with the various stages of development including availa-
bility of water to the New Town and ecology problems, as well as the
statement that, "it is anticipated that the New Town will be served
by the existing School District, Recreation and Park District and
Zone 7...". Mr. Older stated that in his opinion the proposal for
a New Town is an "ill wind that can blow no good". Mr. Older added
that Springtown stands for balanced growth, what the City Council
stands for, and that the people of springtown are behind the City.
\ )
"'--- ~
Councilman Pritchard stated that he appreciates the points brought
out in the prospectus and would like to see a copy of it.
Mayor Miller stated that he is sure the Council will get copies of
the prospectus but the City received only two copies.
Councilman Futch stated that he appreciates the viewpoint of Mr.
Older and those he speaks for but also feels that the people in
Greenvi11e North have legitimate complaints with regard to services
they are receiving. He stated that he disagrees that they will
get these services by supporting the New Town development, however.
PUBLIC HEARING
RE JUDSON PROPERTY
REZONING - So of I-580
Mayor Miller explained that a continued hearing has been scheduled
regarding a rezoning application by Wm. Judson for the property lo-
cated south of I-580, west of First Street, until this time and
that the Public Works Director had an oral report to present.
Mr. Lee explained that since the last time the matter was dis-
cussed (January 14) he has met with the representatives of the
Judson property and has been told that the property owners are
prepared to provide a 30-foot driveway access south of the Union
Station, adjacent to the Arroyo Seco channel and which might in-
clude some of the Union Station property. The precise amounts have
not been stated at this time but there will be a 30-foot driveway
and in addition they will provide a merging lane onto First Street
which Mr. Lee feels would be satisfactory and would eliminate prob-
lems associated with entrance on the north side of the station.
The Mayor wondered what can be done to insure reconstruction of
the bridge and Mr. Lee explained that it will be the same as with
any other improvement - this could be a condition of approval of
the site plan, bond required for improvements at the time the
permit is taken out, etc.
Councilman Futch asked what the distance would be between the drive-
way and the channel and Mr. Lee replied that negotiations are still
going on and this has not been decided; however, a 30-foot driveway
will be provided, and Councilman Futch stated that his concern is
over the fact that there possibly may not be sufficient width re-
maining for Zone 7's right-of-way, and Mr. Lee stated that this
had been mentioned and Zone 7 will still have the present right-of-
way.
Councilman Beebe wondered how many acres were involved and if this
detail had been worked out. It was noted that it was intended to
be four acres. Councilman Futch felt that perhaps the rezon1ng should
not be approved prior to details such as this being worked out and
Mr. Musso explained that this can be done at the time of the final
ordinance, and could be a condition of the ordinance. Councilman
Futch stated that he believes the property owners should agree to
such a condition being included in the ordinance.
CM-27-334
February 4, 1974
(Judson Property
Rezoning)
o
Mayor Miller stated that the amount of land to be dedicated to the
City and the amount to be rezoned to commercial is not clear and it
seems that it would not be very wise to approve something when all
the details have not been resolved and when it is not known how much
property is involved. He commented that he believes the City was to
have been provided with a survey done by the property owners, and
Mr. Musso felt the City could provide this information.
David Madis, attorney representing the property owner and developer,
stated that they have no objection to putting the matter into such
form that the staff may feel is proper and necessary. He commented
that they would be pleased to come back next week if this is the case
but would like some idea as to how the Council will vote on the re-
zoning. They concur with Mr. Lee's suggestion for the access to be
worked out as a proper condition of approval and as far as the exact
acreage to be rezoned it was their understanding that the City would
provide this information. They would, however, like to have 5 acres.
They would like approval, subject to conditions of access, etc. being
worked out with the City staff and if necessary will come back next
week for approval on the conditions. They would like to have the con-
currence and approval of the CS Zoning, bearing in mind that the Plan-
ning Commission has endorsed the use for this property. The Union
Station is willing to work out any difficulties which may exist as
far as property lines are concerned and the use of the property for
access.
Councilman Futch stated that it is his understanding that the portion
not rezoned to CS will remain as open space and that the property owner
is willing to dedicate the property rights to the City, and Mr. Madis
replied that the sisters of Dr. Judson (the property owner) would like
to retain title for the property but will sign whatever type of docu-
ment the City Attorney would request, dedicating the development rights
for the property.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he would like to see a copy of the
Assessor's map showing more precisely where the access might be
proposed and one which would indicate exactly where the property
lines of the Union station are located and the exact distance between
the channel precipice - there are two grades involved, one dropping
off of the Union station property and another one dropping down into
the channel.
Mr. Zackney, representing the applicant, stated that he would be
happy to furnish this information and interjected that he has
been concerned with this aspect more than anyone else and has
researched this matter and knows exactly who owns what, and where.
However, he cannot state the exact location of the easement area
due to the fact that the legal staff of Union Oil which is located
in Los Angeles is deciding whether or not an easement will be
allowed. The top management in San Francisco has indicated that
the Judsons have their full cooperation and are recommending to
the legal staff that this be allowed.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the hearing be continued for another
week until all the information showing detailed maps of the channel
area has been presented to the Council.
(/
Councilman Futch stated that he would like to amend the motion to
endorse, in principle, the Planning Commission's recommendation,
subject to the discussion regarding the entrance being worked out
satisfactorily, and subject to the development rights which Council-
man Pritchard agreed to add to his original motion.
CM-27-335
February 4, 1974
(P.H. re Rezoning Judson
Property - So. of I-580)
Councilman Pritchard stated that he would like to also informally
ask that the staff provide the Council with the bridge costs and
who will share what portion of these costs and where this money
will come from.
At this time Councilman Futch seconded the motion which passed by
a 3-1 vote (Mayor Miller dissenting).
/
l
P.H. RE ZOo ORD.
AMEND OFF-STREET
PARKING AND ADOPT
NEW I DISTRICT
Mr. Musso explained that at present there is an ID and IM Zoning
District and for all practical purposes these have been treated
much the same. The proposed ordinance attempts to eliminate zones
with different permitted uses relying rather on an ordinance that
allows all industrial uses with different performance standards.
In the new ordinance industrial uses will be subject to performance
standards which have not yet been adopted and also different set-
back and other building regulations. The I District has no interior
setbacks, 3 different front yard setbacks, and off-street parking
are, in effect, eliminated, except for that amount stated to be
necessary for the use - 1 space for every 1-1/2 working employee on
the maximum working shift, which he explained is the bulk of the
regulation. He then explained the work that has gone into the amend-
ments suggested and the various committees that have reviewed them
and Councilman Pritchard asked if there were any particular areas in
which there was disagreement and Mr. Musso replied that the main
issues were off-street parking requirement$ and coverage.
Councilman Futch commented that the Planning Commission and the
Industrial Advisory Committee has taken trips to various cities
to see what their requirements are and what development has taken
place and wondered if there has been any type of written report
giving the comparison of the standards of other communities with
those of Livermore and Mr. Musso replied that this was a report
which was done some months ago.
At this time Mayor Miller opened the public hearing.
Bob Tieke, speaking on behalf of the Industrial Advisory Board,
stated that the Council has a copy of the ninth draft regarding
amendments to the ordinance and that there are a few minor cor-
rections which should be noted which he explained, noting that some
of the changes were not agreed upon by the Planning Commission and
are recommended changes by the Industrial Advisory Committee only.
He noted recommended changes in 14.77 with regard to sites abutting
an R or E District which was followed by Council discussion.
Mr. Musso opointed out that under 14.75 there are no restrictions
to maximum allowable floor area which means that the building
could be three stories high if they desire which he felt the
Council should be aware of. He noted that he is not making
any type of recommendation but would like to point this out.
Mayor Miller stated that as he recalls it is customary that indus-
trial and commercial standards for coverage have to do with floor
area and wondered if site coverage or floor coverage is considered
when they are talking about 50-60 and 70% and Mr. Musso stated that
this refers to site coverage.
CM-27-336
February 4, 1974
(P. H. re Indus. Ord.)
Mr. Tieke stated that the Industrial Advisory Board recommends that
there be no street parking - the industry itself must provide parking
for all employees and the Mayor replied that there is no way of insur-
ing this.
/
(
Ed Hutka, l015 Angelica Way, developer, stated that in general the
ordinance is good but most people do not realize the costs involved
in obtaining a CUP and is concerned for the uses left under CUP. He
noted the steps one must go through and stated that he can verify
figures which indicate that a CUP he obtained ended up costing him
$1,700. The CS Zone allows only two types of uses at this time which
happen to be lodging and a restaurant. He stated that he feels Sec-
tion l4.3l - Uses involving public assembly and recreational activities
should be encouraged and that private enterprise should be encouraged
to put in all the recreational services possible without having to
obtain a CUP. The necessity of obtaining a CUP is telling clients
that they will have to go away because it will cost them the $1,700 -
$2,000 to get the CUP. He commented that this is his only area of
concern and that the rest of the ordinance appears to be good and
would recommend its adoption.
Earl Mason, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Industrial Committee,
asked if the Council had received a copy of their letter dated October
17th sent to the Planning Commission which was accompanied by five
letters from industrial developers, and when the Council stated that
they did not he replied that he was very sorry they had not because
there were four pages of comments from the Chamber as well as the
five letters which he felt were very informative. He pointed out
that a lot of effort and communication has taken place in preparing
this ordinance and commented on Section l4.77 - Sites Abutting ...etc.
He noted that they had recommended structure development within 25
ft. of a property line will require approval of a CUP which had been
left out and they would recommend that this be included so that develop-
ment will have a setback of 25 ft. on the side and back yard. Mr.
Mason felt there is concern for the 70% coverage allowance by people
who feel that all development will take advantage of the 70%. He
pointed out that this impossible due to the parking requirement and
would be used probably only by warehousing or low employee type uses.
If the ordinance is adopted with the ~l, 2, and 3, and the 50-60-70%
coverage it will be very difficult to determine where to put these
zones and there are going to be arguments over where to put one or
the other; therefore, all the letters the Chamber has received from
various developers have encouraged the 70% which include Southern
Pacific Land, Hexcel, National Commonwealth (airport development
people), and Western Pacific Railroad. He stated that he will see
that the Council receives copies of the letters.
Ebert Lounsbury, local realtor, stated that the requirement for side-
walks in an industrial area is extremely expensive for the industrial
client and when expenses keep piling up and become prohibitive they
decide to locate elsewhere. He pointed out that it has just been
recommended by Mr. Tieke that there be no street parking requirement
and if this recommendation is adopted he feels it is unnecessary to
require the five foot sidewalk. If the Council feels it is necessary
to require the sidewalk he would ask that they make it conditional
upon whether or not the location is in a residential area, where
a lot of people will use the sidewalk.
~
Mr. Musso explained that the ordinance does not speak to the sidewalk
- the policy has been adopted that normally a sidewalk will be required
except in certain instances where there is not a need or alternate
access.
Councilman Futch pointed out that even though development is taking
place in an industrial area and non-residential in nature sidewalks
may be necessary for people walking to a restaurant or recreation
facility such as a skating rink and others may use the sidewalks for
riding bicycles to work.
CM-27-337
February 4, 1974
(re Indus. Areas)
Mr. Lounsbury stated that if sidewalks are required he would suggest
that they be required on one side of the street, only, and Mr. Musso
again explained that the ordinance does not speak to sidewalks and
has nothing to do with sidewalks; it is a matter of Council policy.
Mr. Lee pointed out that at the time the Council adopted the policy
regarding sidewalks it was noted that it was not any more expensive
to install than irrigated landscaping.
L)
Councilman Futch moved to close the public hearing, seconded by
Councilman Pritchard, and which passed unanimously.
Councilman Pritchard moved to continue the full discussion and to
look over the changes mentioned by the various individuals, seconded
by Councilman Beebe.
Mayor Miller commented on the section having to do with real estate
and insurance business services and offices in that he feels they
really belong in the office zones rather than industrial zones and
would like to go over this portion, and possibly deleting some of
them.
Councilman Pritchard suggested that it would be helpful if the
Council could receive a list of the professional services the
Planning Commission had in mind which was followed by discussion
regarding uses allowed possibly with the approval of a CUP.
Mayor Miller then brought up the items concerning sewage and
waste disposal sites deletion which Mr. Musso explained, as well
as the street frontage yard which he felt is inadequate and stated
that this is another item the Council should consider. He then
noted that in his opinion 70% coverage will never allow sufficient
parking and pointed out that out on Research Drive the parking
nroblem is terrible due to too much coverage, and would suggest
coverage of 45-55 and 65. He stated that his concern is actually
the parking rrequirement which is related to coverage.
Councilman Futch felt if 70% coverage is allowed it is being done
to cater to warehouse type uses and would like to consider the possi-
bility of limiting I-3 to real industrial type uses. He also ex-
pressed concern for no limitation to height because such may be
allowed adjacent to residential uses and suggested approval of
a CUP for construction of a building 3-4 stories high.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to postpone discussion
of the ordinance until the next meeting.
Mayor Miller stated that even though the public hearing has been
closed and there will be discussion at the next meeting, brief
comments from the public will be allowed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Denying
Claim
Our insurance carrier has recommended that the Council adopt a
resolution denying a claim which was filed with the City in
error.
n
RESOLUTION NO. 14-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAIM OF JAMES BAKKER
AND DOUGLAS BAKKER
CM-27-338
o
(\
\ )
, /
February 4, 1974
Res. Designating Streets
for Legal Consideration
The Council adopted a resolution officially designating existing
streets in the airport golf course area, as public streets for legal
considerations.
RESOLUTION NO. 15-74
A RESOLUTION SETTING ASIDE CERTAIN CITY-OWNED
STREETS FOR PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES
Payroll & Claims
There were 183 claims in the amount of $254,092.12 and 285 payroll
warrants in the amount of $74,252.29, dated February l, 1974, for a
total of $328,344.41, ordered paid.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch
and by unanimous vote the Consent Calendar was approved, with
Councilman Beebe abstaining from Warrant #8900.
APPLICATION TO OPERATE
A TAXI CAB SERVICE -
Steven A. paich
The City Attorney explained that prerequisites for holding a public
hearing tonight regarding a permit for the operation of a taxi cab
service have been satisfied and the City Council may hold a public
hearing.
Mayor Miller opened the public hearing at this time and asked if
Mr. paich, the applicant, had anything to say to which Mr. paich
replied he did not.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Councilman Pritchard,
seconded by Councilman and by unanimous vote the public hearing was
closed.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the application requesting operation
of the Yellow Cab Company be approved, seconded by Councilman Beebe
and which passed by unanimous vote.
The City Attorney stated that it might be a good idea to extend the
temporary permit for an additional week for Mr. Paich's protection,
and on motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch
and by unanimous vote the extension was approved.
COMMUNICATION FROM
BART RE NEEDS FOR
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
The staff recommended that the communication from BART relative to
itsneed for financial operating assistance be referred to the staff
for report and on motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman
Beebe and by unanimous vote the recommendation was adopted.
CM-27-339
February 4, 1974
COMMUNICATION RE
ORGANIZATION OF
FILIPINO-AMERICAN
POLITICAL ASSN.
A letter was received from the County Chairman announcing the
organization of the Filipino-American Political Association
for the purpose of recognition and correction of socio-economic
ills effecting the minority group.
Councilman Pritchard asked that a response be made in writing
to let these people know the Council received their letter and
to thank them for their liaison with the Council, and with the
concurrence of the Council the City Clerk was asked to take care
of the matter of correspondence.
,
I I
~ ~/
COHMUNICATION
FROM SACEOA
A letter was sent to the Council by SACEOA to clarify the
status of SACEOA and the plans for continuance in addition to
their gOalsr~'
Councilman Futch stated that it is his understanding that
SACEOA will be continuing with volunteer effort and feels
that this is what is being said in the letter.
The letter was noted and filed.
The City Attorney explained that prior to the City Manager's
absence he instructed the City Attorney to draft and submit
to seven other jurisdictions in Southern Alameda County, a
proposed joint powers agreement to continue operating an
anti-poverty program under local and county governmental
sponsorship. The document has been drafted and submitted
to six other cities in the county. The draft document will be
pursued with the expectation of receiving federal OEO grant funds
with the understanding that such funding might be received in
approximately 45-60 days.
REPORT RE COMMUNICA-
TION FROM SOC. OF AM.
INDIANS RE TOTEM POLE
A letter was received from the Society of American Indians
indicating their distress over the manner in which the Indian
totem pole was installed at Centennial Park. It was pointed out
that the lower portion was not handled properly so'that the mean-
ing and overall effect has been lost.
Mr. Lee reported that the Livermore Shopping Center Merchants
group paid to have the totem pole carved and later asked that
it be removed from the center at which time it was stored in
the City's Corporation Yard. The Beautification Committee
suggested that Centennial Park would be a proper place for the
totem pole and inasmuch as it was not known that the bottom
portion had particular significance, the pole was installed
to a height in proportion to the symmetry of the park area.
It is unfortunate that the importance of the entire totem pole
was not conveyed to those who relocated the pole and it appears
that no reasonable solution is available and recommended that no
action be taken.
CM-27-340
February 4, 1974
(re Totem Pole)
The City Attorney suggested that before there is further discussion
he would recommend that the City Council draft a resolution accepting
the contribution of those responsible for allowing us to implant the
pole in the City park property and he would respectfully request
that the intention would be to leave it in the care and protection
of the City henceforth prior to closing the books on the matter.
Councilman Futch suggested that if the Council concurrs he would
request that the staff check into the matter of ownership and report
back to the Council with an appropriate resolution.
This item was continued awaiting a report from the City Attorney.
REPORT RE ARROYO
SECO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. Lee briefly summarized the Arroyo Seco Channel improvement stand-
ards which are proposed by stating that the Council had made its wishes
known with regard to having a trail system along the Arroyo Seco but
the extent of the development was never discussed and the matter was
referred to the Planning Commission who recommends the following:
1. That the Arroyo Seco Channel from the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
to Interstate 580 be made a part of the Arroyo Parkway System,
including the area through Valley East, which is acknowledged to
be concrete lined; however, pre-exists adoption of the Arroyo
Parkway Plan.
2. That the Chnnel be designed in accordance with the Arroyo Parkway
standards (225 ft. width) wherever feasible in order to preserve
the natural character of the Arroyo and any tree groves along its
bank.
The Planning Commission also directed the staff to investigate means
by which the City could acquire the necessary extra land along arroyos
within industrially zoned and planned areas to provide for a channel
designed in accordance with the Arroyo Parkway standards (225 ft. wide)
wherever feasible.
Mr. Lee explained that he has written a memorandum to the City Council
which indicates three alternatives for the Council to consider such
as (a) Full Arroyo Parkway; (b) Minimum trapezoidal earth channel; and
(c) A compromise in between. It was noted that the Planning Commission
felt it should be a complete trailway system - an Arroyo Parkway of
225 ft., which they adopted as a recommendation as noted above.
Mr. Lee stated that such a park design will come from the park funds.
Councilman Pritchard asked if LARPD had been contacted as to how
they feel about accepting lineal parks of this size and Mr. Lee
replied that various committees involved have spoken with the LARPD
subcommittee who felt that the LARPD Board should reply. The LARPD
Board was notified just last week and are meeting tomorrow night to
discuss the matter.
r-....
The Council then discussed the proposal for an Arroyo parkway and
proposals related to the parkway. Mr. Lee noted that there are
always problems along any channel and one of them is, for example,
that part of it is already developed as a concrete lined channel.
He stated that he did not recommend anything concerning this and
that a decision should be based on how badly a trai1way is desired
through that area.
Councilman Futch stated that it appears the Planning Commission
has definitely come to the conclusion that there should be a parkway
through that area though it may not be appropriate to have the full
treatment as that in the Arroyo Mocho, for example. In general he
would favor adoption of a plan for a parkway at some reduced width
which would be more economical as well as to serve the needs.
CM-27-34l
February 4, 1974
(re Channel Parkway)
Councilman Pritchard stated that he agrees with Councilman Futch in
that development for a width of 225 feet is a lot of land to buy
and that in his opinion we have other priorities that are higher on
the list.
Mayor Miller stated that this area has a deep narrow channel and it
might be satisfying the needs to have a deeper natural channel than
225 ft. would call for and satisfy the land widths on both sides to
take care of the parkway aspect.
o
Councilman Pritchard felt that provisions for less than 225 ft. would
still be sufficient to save all of the trees - it is not necessary to
take a 225 ft. width to save the trees, which Mr. Lee stated is correct.
This could be done by allowing approximately l70 ft. and would be wide
enough to take care of the necessary trails. He noted that perhaps l80
ft. would be a closer estimate.
Mayor Miller stated that it is his understanding that Councilman Futch
would like to adopt the recommendation of the Planning Commission for
Arroyo Seco to be declared as part of the Arroyo Parkway System and
the width can be discussed at a later time, and Councilman Futch stated
that his feeling is that a width of 180 ft. would appear to be reasonable.
Councilman Pritchard stated that it appears the matter will have to
be continued because he would like to hear the comments from the
LARPD people but would not want to hold up the people who are getting
ready to develop on the property and the Mayor suggested that there be
a motion declaring this a portion of our Arroyo Parkway with the ques-
tion of the width being put over for another week.
Councilman pritchard moved that the Council adopt the Arroyo Seco
Channel as part of the Arroyo Parkway System (from LLL to I-580),
seconded by Councilman Futch.
Jane Staehle, on behalf of the League of Women Voters, indicated that
they support the Arroyo Parkway standards as shown in the Arroyo
Parkway study of September 1971 for the full length between its
intersection with East Avenue and joining with the Arroyo Las positas.
They support open space preservation as well as provision for bicycle
and pedestrian traffic and that the Arroyo Parkway concept fulfills
both of these objectives and would urge that the Arroyo Seco be in-
cluded in the plan. Inasmuch as the entire 250 ft. width may not be
feasible in some areas it is suggested that there be sufficient width
to accommodate the necessary trails and that care should be taken to
avoid a straight "alley-like effect".
At this time the Council voted to adopt the Planning Commission's
recommendation (Item 1) as stated by Councilman Pritchard which
passed by a unanimous vote.
Councilman Pritchard moved to continue the matter of the width for
one week, seconded by Councilman Futch.
Earl Mason, of Associated Professions, representing his client OGO,
and another industrial client on the corner stated that they have
no objection to any width desired as long as there is a concurrence
that it will be paid for beyond the minimum width of the standards
normally required by Zone 7. He stated that as a personal opinion,
however, if the park funds or in lieu of land fees paid by develop-
ment is used to acquire these strip parks it means that less neigh-
borhood parks can be acquired.
n
CM-27-342
February 4, 1974
(re Channel Parkway)
~
E. Lounsbury, 1787 So. Vasco Road, explained the topography of
the channel noting that it is a box-like channel which is very
hazardous during the time it is flooded, and if a child were to
fall into it during the flood stage one would never be able to
retrieve the child. If the Council is speaking of widening the
arroyo through subdivisions there will be no control of the poten-
tial danger involved, and if the banks are disturbed there will
be flooding and damage occuring.
Carolyn Odden, 5846 East Avenue, owner of industrial property
in the vicinity being discussed stated that they plan to fence
their property because of the vandalism that has taken place in
the area noting that OGO had trees mutilated and there have been
other incidents of vandalism in the arroyo area. She pointed out
that a water line and sprinklers will have to be installed to take
care of the plants in addition to mowing and care of the strip which
she feels would be very costly, particularly, if a wide strip is a-
cquired. She urged that a small channel proposed by various individ-
uals would be an intelligent approach to the matter.
Councilman Futch stated that he has examined the area and realizes
that it is steep and narrow and it would be in the interest of pub-
lic safety to spread it out and restrict the flow to a shallow depth
with banks which would allow a child to climb out if necessary. He
noted that any plan would have to be approved by Zone 7 and they would
not approve anything that does not meet their safety and flow standards.
At this time the motion to continue the discussion was passed by a
unanimous vote.
REPORT RE COUNTY
REFERRAL - PROPOSED
REZONING OF 5 PARCELS
(I-580 - Grantline Road)
A referral has been received from the Alameda County Planning
Commission regarding consideration of possible rezoning of five
parcels of land located within all four quadrants of intersection
I-580 and Grantline Road.
Mr. Musso summarized the Planning Commission's response by stating
that the interchange being considered is not one which has been
designated as a commercial freeway interchange on the County Inter-
change Land Use Plan and the Planning Commission has recommended
that this not be turned into a major commercial interchange and that
the area be reverted to agricultural zoning.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the Council accept the Planning
Commission's recommendation, seconded by Councilman Futch.
After a brief discussion regarding the area involved, the Council
voted unanimously to adopt the motion.
P. C. MINUTES
The minutes of the Planning Commission's meeting of January 22, 1974,
were noted for filing.
REPORT RE PUC
RATE INCREASE HEARING
A memorandum from the City Attorney regarding the PUC rate increase
hearing was noted for filing, and was informational in nature.
CM-27-343
February 4, 1974
RESOLUTION RE PARKING
PROPOSED BY EPA REGULATIONS
The City Attorney had prepared a resolution which should be
addressed to appropriate members and committee chairmen of the
u.s. Congress asking for a six-month study to ascertain the impact
of the proposed California Transportation Plan. The resolution
(l) affirms our support of the objectives of the Clean Air Act and
(2) asks Congress to take affirmative action by making a study
lasting not more than six months to ascertain what alternatives
may be available in meeting the goals of the Clean Air Act and to
assess the social, administrative and economic effect of each
alternative.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe,
and by unanimous vote (Councilman Taylor absent), the following
resolution was adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 16-74
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE ENACTMENT OF FEDEP~L LEGISLATION
WHICH WILL NULLIFY THE PARKING SURCHARGE, MANAGEHENT OF PARK-
IN SUPPLY AND THE PREFERENTIAL BUS/CARPOOL LANES PROVISIONS
OF THE CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION CONTROL PLAN PROMULGATED BY
THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ON NOVEMBER 12,
1973, AND POSTPONE FURTHER SUCH REGULATIONS UNTIL CONGRESS
REVIEWS AND APPROVES A STUDY INCLUDING THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF
SUCH REGULATIONS AND ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF \~HICLE ~1ILE RE-
DUCTION.
ZONING ORDINANCE N1ENDMENTS
RE VARIOUS SECTIONS - RS DISTRICT,
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, MAXIMUM HEIGHT
LIMITS, GENERAL PROVISIONS
ORDINANCE NO. 835
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS AMENDED, RELATING
TO ZONING, BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTIONS 5.23, RELATING TO PER-
MITTED USES, 5.42, RELATING TO MINIMUM YARDS: 5.45, RELATING TO
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA: 5.60, RELATING TO ATTACHED DWELLINGS: AND
5.64, RELATING TO MAXIMUM COVERAGE ( ATTACHED DWELLINGS), ALL OF
CHAPTER 5.00, RELATING TO RS - RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: AND BY THE
AMENDMENT OF SECTIONS 6.44, RELATING TO ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND
STRUCTURES, AND 6.45, RELATING TO MAXIMUM HEIGHTS LIMIT, OF
CHAPTER 6.00, RELATING TO RS-LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
AND BY AMENDING SECTIONS 20.50 and 20.5l, RELATING TO ACCESSORY
BUILDINGS, OF CHAPTER 20.00, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS.
Councilman Pritchard moved the odoption of the above ordinance
and to waive the second reading. Motion was seconded by Council-
man Futch and passed 3-1 with Mayor Miller dissenting (Councilman
Taylor absent).
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Designation of
208 Planning Area)
Donald Bradley, Assistant to the City Manager, presented the
Councilmen with a copy of a letter addressed to the State Water
Resources Control Board, Division of Water Quality Control, by
the City of Pleasanton.
Mayor Miller suggested that perhaps the Council should read the
208 Planning Area position paper and discuss it a bit later in the
meeting as he wished to report on several other items at this time.
CM-27-344
February 4, 1974
MATTERS INIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Report re Meeting of
February 2, 1974)
.;---
Mayor Miller reported on the meeting he attended along with Council-
man Futch, Don Bradley, George Musso, Manuel Prado from the School
District, Bill Jamieson from the School District and Mike McCracken
from LARPD. This meeting was with the people of Greenvil1e North
in which expressions of opinions and complaints were aired, and he
felt that many of their concerns deserved some attention. He had
agreed to bring these items to the Council for formal consideration
with the idea of directing the staff to work on these particular
things. Some of the items will be placed on the agenda in the next
few weeks, one of which is park dedication for the Greenville area
which includes consideration of acquisition priority of neighborhood
or community park or both in that area. He explained that the neighbor-
hood park was to have been acquired by dedication this year, but
did not come about for various reasons, and he indicated that the
community park is scheduled for next year. One question was raised
as to whether park funds should be used for acquisition or park develop-
ment. Another item was the legality of issuing building permits for
the Greenville area only, and this item is to be researched by the City
Attorney and will be on the agenda in the future. It was brought
out that the developers have been misrepresenting the property of
the houses they have built, and there is a law, "Truth in Subdivision",
which unfortunately does not apply to the original sale or for two
years thereafter. There are houses out there that have been up more
than two years and it is not clear if they have been sold and are
lying vacant, but this will have to be investigated. The residents
at the meeting also requested bicycle trails on Vasco Road and,
particularly on First Street, going into Livermore. There are many
items which are to be directed to the staff for action and report,
as follows: l) the uncompleted homes - these should be inspected by
the building inspector for structural stability, the City Attorney
should check into legal means to abate these nuisances if no other
action is taken and have the staff continue to work with the loan
company which is foreclosing to seek completion as soon as possible.
2) front yard storage - the staff should have the area checked for
campers, abandoned cars and illegal storage, for enforcement of our
ordinance; 3) the staff should check to see that the street trees in
the area and walls are properly maintained and watered; 4) check with
the county and state on the complete repaving of Vasco Road and also
for a bicycle trail; 5) the excessive speed by the garbage trucks and
subsequent hazards; 6) check re the maintenance of A1tamont Creek as
it is a public hazard; 7) resolve the question of city limits with
all departments of the City so that emergency vehicles can promptly
respond; 8) maintenance of the brick wall, as previously mentioned,
and 9) enforcement of law against the discharge of BB-guns and
firearms in the city limits. Mayor Miller stated if there was no
objection from the Council, he would like to have the staff directed
to pursue these items, some to be placed on the agenda and other
things to be carried out by the staff or given to the Council in a
report.
Councilman Futch indicated that one of the major concerns was the
timing of the shopping center development. For example, if the
shopping center develops along First Street, this side of Springtown,
it would significantly postpone any development in their area, and
the question is whether the City has any legal authority under
what was known as AB-130l to stage the development of the shopping
center so as to require the one in the Springtown area to develop
first.
Mr. Musso pointed out that the Zoning Ordinance provides that a
shopping center is only by a year to year approval, and this can
be controlled.
CM-27-345
February 4, 1974
(Meeting re Green-
vil1e North)
Councilman Beebe remarked that the City has laws to cover many of
the items brought up by the Mayor, and wondered why they are not
being enforced. He felt that there are other areas in the City
which may have similar complaints, and the Mayor agreed, stating
it might be a good idea to get this same type of feedback from
these other areas. Unless the Council and staff are aware of
the conditions, nothing ~~~: ~
A motion was made by Councilman Beeb~ direct the staff to
follow up on the recommended improvements and policing matters,
and the five items to be placed on the agenda. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Futch and approved unanimously.
Mayor Miller suggested that if a number of these items are pre-
sented to the Council at one time, that the members of Greenvil1e
north be notified so they can attend the meeting.
(Setting P. H. re Ext.
of Interim Ordinance)
The City Clerk commented that something must be decided upon
regarding extension of the Interim Ordinance and Mayor Miller
suggested that discussion be set on the Council agenda for February
19th and if Councilman Taylor is not present the public hearing
can be continued.
On motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Pritchard
and by unanimous vote the public hearing for the Interim Ordinance
extension was set for February 19th.
(re League of Women Voters
Recommendation re Arroyos)
Councilman Beebe suggested that the League of Women Voters recom-
mendation should probably be reviewed which is in reference to
arroyos and he commented that this may be at the sacrifice of
neighborhood parks.
(re SB-4 91)
Councilman Pritchard commented that he noticed in the League
Bulletin that Senator Nedjedly plans to introduce SB-491 which
will prohibit some uses on airport runways and would hope that
the Council will support and apply to our local airport. It
was noted that there will probably not be an opportunity for
a hearing and it is suggested that interested airport officials
express objection to the governor and moved that the Council
write to the governor expressing no Objection to the Bill,
seconded by Councilman Beebe and which passed 3-1 (Councilman
Futch dissenting as he has not reviewed the Bill).
(re AB-882 - LAFCO)
Councilman Pritchard asked if the City Attorney would look into
the Knox Bill AB-882 regarding LAFCO and give the Council a
better breakdown on the measure.
CM-27-346
February 4, 1974
(re Petaluma Suit)
Mayor Miller stated that Peta1uma lost the case of the "Petaluma Plan"
at the first level of federal court and since the decision of the Plan
may affect our future planning he would move that the Council send
a letter to the City of Petaluma asking them to appeal the decision
~ and to offer our support in the appeal as this City did in the past.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
The City Attorney asked if this support is in the way of financial
support, moral, legal, or what, and the Mayor replied that the City
contributed $250 for legal assistance last time.
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
RECESS
Mayor Miller called for a brief recess for the purpose of reviewing
the response of the Joint Powers Water Management Agency regarding
the 208 Planning Area as well as the letter drafted to be sent to
the County Assessor regarding establishing equitable assessment
methods.
After the recess the meeting resumed with all members present
with the exception of Councilman Taylor who was absent.
MOTION RE LETTER
TO COUNTY ASSESSOR
On motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and
by unanimous vote, the letter which was drafted with regard to
assessment practices, to be sent to the County Assessor and the
Board of Supervisors, was approved.
LETTER RE 208
PLANNING AREA
On motion of Mayor Miller, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and
by unanimous vote, the draft of the letter regarding the Valley's
position regarding designation in the "208 Planning Area" was
approved for submittal to the State Water Resources Control Board.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, the Mayor adjourned the
Council meeting at ll:05 p.m. to a brief executive session for the
purpose of discussing legal matters.
APPROVE [) ~ 9-~. ~Ut"
~
ATTES~) ~
t Y Clerk
Livermore, California
CM-27-347
Regular Meeting of February ll, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on February 11, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Miller presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Beebe, Futch, Pritchard and Mayor Miller
ABSENT: Councilman Taylor (Excused Business)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
COUNCIL MINUTES
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and
by unanimous vote the minutes for the Council meeting of February 4,
1974, were approved as amended.
RE COUNCIL ENDORSEMENT
OF MARCH OF DIMES WALK
Ben Davidson of the Oakland Raiders asked the Livermore City Council
to endorse the Alameda County March of Dimes Walkathon in the Dublin-'
Livermore-Pleasanton areas which will take place on the l6th of March.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe and
by unanimous vote, the Council endorsed the Walkathon.
It was also requested that Mayor Miller join with Mayor Pearson of
Pleasanton as Co-Chairmen of the Walk and the Mayor replied that he
would be happy to be there.
OPEN FORm1
(re Bar in Louis
Shopping Center)
Colonel Peeke, 4291 Amhurst Way, stated that several months ago he
addressed a letter to the Mayor and City Council members objecting
to the establishment of a bar to be located in the East Avenue (Louis)
Shopping Center and that he has not had the courtesy of receiving a
reply to it. He also asked that he be allowed to appear at a hearing
to oppose the bar and as far as he knows there has not been a hearing
regarding the bar and it is now open. He voiced irritation over the
fact that a bar has been allowed in a residential area and asked if
the people of the community really have a voice.
Harry West, ll26 Tulane Court, commented that he and his wife also
wrote a letter of protest over the bar which he felt has been an
extremely bad decision on the part of the City to allow. He
pointed out that a bar is allowed only if it is connected with a
restaurant and to accomplish this a doorway has been constructed
to allow passage into the adjacent pizza parlor. He pointed out
that in addition to getting around the rules by doing this, the
pizza parlor happens to be a place in which the young people
congregate.
C~-1-27-348
February ll, 1974
(Re Bar in Louis
Shopping Center)
Mayor Miller stated that as a result of the letters received from
Mr. and Mrs. West and Colonel Peeke, the issue of this bar was dis-
cussed at the City Council meeting as well as the ordinance governing
bars. He stated that the Council instructed that a separate bar would
not be allowed in the shopping center and that if allowed, it would
be in accordance with the regulations. The Mayor then asked the
staff to respond to the circumstances of there being a separate entrance
to the pizza parlor and the bar as well as a separate name for each
establishment. It would appear from what has been said that there
has been some gimmick allowed for getting around the ordinance.
Mr. ~1usso explained various other bar-restaurant facilities in
neighborhood shopping centers and explained that as long as food is
served in a bar it can qualify.
The City Attorney stated that he met on three occasions with the
owner and architect of the pizza parlor and the bar and was assured
that they had every intention of following the ordinance and to his
knowledge all the requirements were satisfied and the building was
given an occupancy permit. He noted that the Building Inspector
would not have given final approval of the building if the integrated
operation had not been carried out.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he has been to the pizza parlor and
noticed that there was a seoarate entrance to the bar which did not
appear to be a restaurant-type bar and went inside to investigate the
matter and found out that one could not be served food but was told
that one could go get a pizza and bring it back to the bar. He stated
that he feels this in no way satisfies the City regulations and is a
use being permitted contrary to the ordinance and suggested that the
use be abated as soon as possible.
Councilman Futch stated that he has not seen the establishment so it
is hard to determine whether or not it is in conformance with the City
regulations but from what has been said it would appear that the opera-
tion would be questionable. He commented that he would have assumed
that any possible violation would have been brought to the attention
of the Council prior to approval of a permit.
The Planning Director stated that there is a common entry on the north
side of the building for the bar and restaurant but on the East Avenue
side there are two separate entries.
Councilman Beebe wondered why the bar was allowed to open and Hr. Musso
explained that the City was of the understanding that it would be an
integrated operation but under separate ownership, and Councilman
Beebe stated that either it does comply, or it does not.
The City Attorney explained that it was his understanding that the
Council instructions were that if the business arrangement were to
be undertaken it would conform with all the applicable statutes and
is really the only standard which can be applied. If the words of
the statute are in question then we should clarify or modify the
statutes. The plans presented prior to commencement of operation
did comply with the statute which the Council adopted and to his
knowledge there were no special instructions with respect to this
particular operation except that it be given careful attention.
Perhaps the City should look at the operation now that it is in
service and determine whether or not they have subsequently violated
the intent and purpose of the statute and then take appropriate action.
He noted that he has not personally entered the premises nor is he
aware of the manner in which they conduct business; however, all the
structural accommodations may not mean that they are not conducting
separate enterprises.
Councilman Beebe moved that the City Attorney be directed to
investigate the matter to determine if they are complying with
the intent of the law and if not, the City should start proceedings.
01-27-349
February 11, 1974
(re Bar in Louis
Shopping Center)
The motion was seconded by Councilman Futch and passed by a unani-
mous vote of the Council.
(re Totem Pole)
The public next spoke on a matter which has been a matter of dispute
between the City and the person who carved a totem pole purchased
by Livermore merchants and who later gave the pole to the City.
The pole was placed in concrete at Centennial Park and prior to
placing it in cement a meaningful portion of the pole was sawed off
and the artist has asked that it be restored to its original design
and height or that it be given back to him.
Mr. pachine, an American Indian who lives on Bluebell Drive offered
to help put the totem pole back together and to chisel off the con-
crete after it has been removed.
Barry Schrader, 811 ~~ohawk, stated that he feels the location
chosen for the totem pole is proper, that the park was dedicated
in peace and goodwill and would hope that the issue over the totem
pole can be resolved without further ill will on the part of the
City and the artist. He then explained how the pole can be
properly repaired by inserting dowels into the portion which was
sawed off and then suggested that the totem pole be anchored at
the site and if the City feels that the time involved in replacing
the pole would be too costly, four people have already volunteered
to help.
Bob O'Sullivan, 24050 Silva in Hayward, stated that he feels that
when any injustice is done to a work of art it is much the same as
attacking Michaelangelo's pieta with a sledgehammer. He stated
that he would like to see the Council being a little more sensitive
to the cross-cultural sensitivities involved in a matter such as
this and respecting the heritage and traditions from which this
comes.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he feels the final decision should
be left to the discretion of the artist, but would move that the
Council accept the offers for assistance but use the City staff as
much as possible to correct something which has been an unintentional
mistake on the part of the City, to remove the pole and attach the
portion which has been severed and then replace the pole at the
same location if this is agreeable with Hr. Nordwa1l, the artist.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would second the motion but would
like to hear from Mr. Nordwal1.
Adam Nordwall, Chairman of the united Bay Area Council of American
Indian Affairs and carver of the totem pole thanked the Council
for allowing him to speak on behal f of the American Indian community
in reference of what was designed in good will and a cross-cultural
relationship of a beautiful community and city. The totem pole
depicts the history of Livermore from its formation - with the
founding father, Robert Livermore, sitting on the lap of the eagle
which represents the protector of the Village of Livermore and the
village is depicted by a small home on which the eagle sits. Beneath
the figure of the eagle is a farmer holding a cluster of grapes which
represents the agricultural contribution of this area and the indus-
trialization of Livermore is represented by the industrious beaver
holding a symbol of atomic energy - atomic power, and the entire
meaning is that mankind has harnassed atomic energy for peaceful
purposes for the protection of the children and the face of a child
is on the bottom of the pole. Beneath the face of the child are 10
CM-27-350
February ll, 1974
(Re Totum Pole Placement)
(
rings and each ring is symbolic of lO years representing the City of
Livermore's lOa year history. Everything ties together and is a
total story and to have the lower portion completely eradicated
or eliminated, the 100 year history is eliminated. He stated that
he naturally felt a shock as an artist and as all artists would feel
if they saw their work desecrated but felt that patience on his part
was necessary. He stated that he waited for some type of civic res-
ponse to the error for as long as two months. Last week after the
letter of protest from the Society of American Indians was read to
the Council, the Council voted no action. Only after this was he
prompted to write an open letter to the Council objecting to the way
in which the pole was installed, and declaring that if the pole was
not restored to its proper form, he would reserve the right to reclaim
it which he stated he would regret because the whole intention of the
pole was to stimulate community good will and pride among all resi-
dents of the City of Livermore.
Mayor Miller stated that the motion is to correct what has been done
and asked if Mr. Nordwall would help in resetting the pole and ~1r.
Nordwall replied that he would be delighted to help reset it.
Councilman Beebe stated that in addition to his second to the motion
he would like to make an amendment to state that after the pole is
reestablished in its proper and dignified setting the City order a
plaque explaining the symbols denicted on the totem pole and Council-
man Pritchard agreed to add this to his motion.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would be happy to personally donate
$25 towards the plaque and Councilman Pritchard stated that he also
would match this amount and would like to add to the motion that the
Council adopt a resolution of sincere apology to Mr. Nordwall for
causing embarrassment to his artistic sensitivity.
Councilman Futch stated that the Council did not really discuss the
matter and then not do anything about the totem pole but that
the City Attorney had been instructed to check into the matter of
the legal owner of the pole and for the record he would like this
to be noted.
The City Attorney suggested that at the time a resolution of apology
is presented, there also be a resolution accepting the gift of the
totem pole from the artist which will state that the City will main-
tain the totem pole to the best of its ability.
Councilman Beebe agreed to amend the motion as suggested by the City
Attorney, which was seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
Mayor Miller stated that he would like to publicly apologize to Mr.
Nordwall on behalf of himself and the City of Livermore for the
misunderstanding which has taken place over the proper display for
a very attractive and important monument for our City.
Mr. Nordwall thanked the City Council and the Mayor for the action
taken and feels that everything has been taken care of satisfactorily.
Ayn Weiskamp, Vice Chairman of the Beautification Committee, stated
that she would like to know if the City intends to have a grand
ceremony when the totem pole has been properly restored and the
Mayor stated that he sees no reason for not holding an appropriate
dedication ceremony and would appreciate recommendations from the
Beautification Committee.
Councilman Pritchard felt that at the time the plaque is installed
and there is an unveiling of the plaque that this would be a proper
time.
At this time the Council voted unanimously in favor of the motion
regarding the totem pole.
CH-27-351
February 11, 1974
(re Proposal to Burn
Old Livermore Sanatorium)
Mary K. Berg, 4642 Almond Circle, representative of the Livermore
Cultural Arts Council stated that it has recently been brought
to their attention that the County Board of Supervisors has decided
to allow the burning of the old Del Valle Sanatorium for fire fight-
ing practice and at the last meeting of the Cultural Arts Council
a resolution was passed opposing the burning. A tour was arranged
which took place last Sunday and about 100 people toured the grounds
and looked at the buildings which they still feel should not be
burned for various reasons although there is a certain amount of
decay which has occurred. She stated that they would like to have
some of the buildings resurrected and used as a cultural or recrea-
tional site. There has also been concern expressed for the surrounding
native plants which would be damaged by fire. She stated that in speak-
ing with the people who toured the area there was a very strong feeling
of enthusiasm for opposing the burning of the buildings. She asked that
the Council contact the Board of Supervisors and request that the build-
ings not be burned; hopefully, there can be some preparation of a plan
for the use of the buildings.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the Council communicate with the
Board of Supervisors, immediately, and let them know the feelings
of the Council and he would suggest that perhaps some type of
ad hoc citizens committee might be formulated to study what should
be done with the sanatorium rather than to burn it, and to ask the
Board to at least hold off with the burning, seconded by Councilman
Futch.
The City Manager commented that the best form of communication re-
garding the matter would be a letter to the Board.
The motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
SPECIAL ITEM - RE
CITY POSITION ON
GELDERMANN PROPOSAL
Councilman Futch commented that as a Council representative to the
Chamber of Commerce he was in attendance at the last Board of
Directors meeting at which time plans were formulated for a general
membership lunch to hear the proposed plans for a new community north
of I-580 (Geldermann's New Town) and Councilman Futch felt the Council
might like an equal opportunity to express its views on a matter so
important to the future of Livermore. He noted that since it may be
difficult to get the members of the Chamber to attend two luncheons
regarding the same topic he would hope that the two viewpoints could
be discussed at one luncheon which he discussed with the Chamber Presi-
dent, Gene Morgan, who has indicated that this will not be possible
due to insufficient time but that they would consider a separate
meeting either before or after the date the Geldermann representative
will speak, which has been scheduled for February 26th.
Gene Morgan explained that the meeting is for the purpose of obtaining
information only and that the Chamber has not formed an opinion as yet.
Reservations should be made by any interested person no later than Feb-
ruary l8th by telephone. He pointed out that the meeting will begin
at 12:00 noon and will conclude at 1:30 p.m.; therefore it would be
impossible to hear both viewpoints in this time. He stated that
reservations have tentatively been made at the Holiday Inn for March
7th and 8th for a luncheon meeting to hear the Council's position on
the Geldermann proposal and that they tried to pick a time close to
the date the Geldermann representative will be speaking.
Mayor Miller stated that the Council agrees that a presentation
should be made and after a brief discussion it was agreed that
March 7th would be the best date on which to meet.
CH-27-352
February 11, 1974
CONSENT CALENDAR
Re. Transfer of Funds
from Airport Opere to
Spec. Aviation Fund
~ The Director of Finance reported that the City is required to deposit
\ matching money in the Special Aviation Fund to qualify for the $5,000
allocation from the California Airport Aid Program prior to submittal
of an application for the funds. It is therefore necessary to trans-
fer $5,000 from the Airport Operations Fund to the Special Aviation
Fund prior to the filing deadline date of March 1. The City Council
must authorize such a transfer.
P~SOLUTION NO. 18-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
TRANSFER OF FUNDS (Airport)
Resolution re Exec. of
Agreement - First St. &
No. Livermore Ave. Proj.
The Director of Public Works reported that a cooperative agreement
with the State Department of Transportation has been drafted regard-
ing the First Street, North Livermore Avenue project. The City will
design the project and call for bids, pay for half of the right-of-
way and construction costs but the State is limited to $lOO,OOO.
The State will acquire the remaining right-of-way (the southwest
corner) and it is recommended that the Council approve the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 19-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREE-
MENT (State Department of Transportation)
Re PUC Rate Increases
The City Attorney explained that he did not have time to prepare
a resolution regarding the PUC Western Union rate increase but
what would be proposed would be that the Council would suggest
that any rate increase not be in excess of the average cost of
living increase indicated in the Bay Area by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics calculations. The rate in question represented approxi-
mately a 1/3 or more increase. A resolution can be drafted for con-
sideration at the next meeting or can be ready for signature tomorrow.
Mr. Parness explained that the PUC considers applications regularly
and some are more detailed than others and require a great deal of
study and comprehension of the intricacies involved. Therefore, it
is seldom that local jurisdictions avail themselves of the opportunity
to state a view, and he commented that he has had personal experience
where this has been found necessary but only upon the employment of
qualified people through unification of local jurisdiction whereby
in concert they employ technicians - tax rate attorneys and specialists
in this business that can delve into the questions in necessary detail.
In his opinion the City Council should take no action because he feels
it improper to do so. The State PUC is acting in our behalf to re-
ceive and analyze all the applications for rate adjustment and he
would recommend no action on the part of the Council.
CM 27-353
February 11, 1974
(Re PUC Rate Increases)
Councilman Futch wondered what the purpose is of sending out all
of this information to the local jurisdictions, and Mr. Parness
explained that it is merely a part of the statutes that require
all local jurisdictions to be notified.
Councilman Pritchard moved that this item be tabled but the
motion died for lack of a second.
Mayor Miller stated that he does not have the same faith in the
Public Utilities Commissioners as the City Manager does, commenting
that a little study of the history of California suggests that
the PUC satisfies the old add age that "the controlled control
the controllers II and stated that the last set of appointees to
the PUC have been appointed by Governor Reagan. He felt the
Western Union application appears to be a lIclear cut gougell
that he feels the Council, on behalf of the citizens, should take
some position on. He felt that if notification to the local
jurisdictions is a part of the statute it was put there for a
reason and is within the purview of the City and something the
City should take a position on.
The City Manager stated that he feels this is a proper attitude
if the position is based upon technical comprehension of the
issues but would respectfully submit that the City does not
have the technical expertise to do this.
Councilman Futch stated that he understands what the City Mana-
ger is saying but on the other hand he feels that the City Attor-
ney brings only those matters which seem out of line to the atten-
tion of the Council and feels it would be appropriate to question
something considered to be way out of line. It might be best to
ask the City Attorney to check into this matter and if he still
feels that Council action should be taken after due consideration
has been given, Councilman Futch stated that he then would be
willing to listen to the arguments.
The City Attorney explained that we are in no position to give
something the analysis that the trained staff of the PUC can
give it; however, they have no contact with the people and with
what is going on in the world and would tend to feel that since
the PUC is required to send notices to local jurisdictions that
they must be expecting and looking for some kind of feedback and
this must be what the legislation intended. When it is evident
in a simple one page document that rate increases of 35-50% are
going to be imposed it would seem that a resolution requesting
that the PUC examine such a rate increase would seem to be a
kind of interest and concern that can only have value to all who
see it. It is not intended that the matter will be analyzed and
a contrary proposal made as we do not know the costs for providing
such a service but as representatives of consumers and those deal-
ing with the high cost of living problems daily, there is an oppor-
tunity to make an input through Council resolution. He pointed out
that he receives approximately 6-8 notices on rate increases per
month and this is the first notice he has seen in seven months that
he felt should receive some kind of response.
Councilman Beebe stated that he knows what the PUC hearings are
like and feels a Council resolution, as suggested, would do no
harm but in his opinion it would not achieve anything in the way
of pursuading them in any way.
CM-27-354
February 11, 1974
(Re PUC Rate Increases)
Councilman Futch moved that the item concerning the PUC Western
Union rate increase be continued until next week, seconded by
Councilman Pritchard and which passed by unanimous vote.
(
I
\
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Beebe moved that the Consent Calendar be approved with
the deletion of the item concerning the PUC rate increase, seconded
by Councilman Pritchard and which passed by unanimous vote.
COHHUNICATION RE
HOUSING ELm1ENT -
GENERAL PLAN
A letter '\.ITaS received from the League of Ivomen Voters commending
the City Council for its approval of the Housing Element amendment
to the General Plan and stating their position in favor of providing
variety in housing for economic, appearance and life-style reasons
and to avoid leapfrog development.
C0I1J1UNICATION RE
R. V. TRA.ILERS
ON-STREET PARKING
A letter was received from Mr. R. C. Ryall, 389 El Caminito, regard-
ing on-street parking of recreational vehicle trailers which he
noted has increased during the past year creating a number of
problems and in some cases, traffic hazards.
Mayor Miller stated that the major portion of the letter deals
with on-street parking and another point raised is what has
happened to our Trailer Ordinance that has been left in the air
for over a year regarding off-street parking.
Mr. Musso stated that on-street parking is clearly not allowed and
such should be reported to the Police Department but the City is
in the process of enforcing the on-site abatement of the trailers.
He noted that there have been numerous complaints from people who
feel there is inequity involved in their case such as a person who
lives on a corner lot and must put his vehicle in the back yard while
all the other people on the street are allowed to park in front. He
stated that perhaps it would have been better to establish zones ra-
ther than the capability of parking access. He stated that the staff
is trying to establish some type of criteria to go by such as size,
rather than trying to differentiate between a trailer or a vehicle.
After brief comments from the Council members the City Attorney
was asked to comment and he replied that he would suggest that
the staff, in cooperation with the Police Department, check other
jurisdictions to see if they come up with any solutions to this
problem. He feels that parking in the public right-of-way can be
taken care of but restrictions regarding parking related to size
would present some substantial problems and does not know what can
be done to solve the problem.
Councilman Beebe moved that the staff be directed to investigate
the matter to see what can be done, seconded by Councilman Futch,
and which passed unanimously.
CM-27-355
February 11, 1974
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE JUDSON PROPERTY
APP. SO. OF I-580
The Judson property (south of I-580) was a continued matter from
the meeting of February 4th and the Council entered into discussion
regarding the map and the acreage to be dedicated to the City.
It was noted that the Planning Commission has recommended four
acres for the requested rezoning to commercial.
Mr. Lee also explained the area depicted on the map and where
the Union station is located as well as the topography of the
land and the elevations of the channel, etc., and the property
lines of the Union Station and the channel right-of-way, and
the proposed traffic pattern to the Judson property.
Councilman Futch reminded Mr. Lee that they did not know the
location of the drive through the Union property, and Mr. Lee
stated they had not been able to provide that information.
Councilman Pritchard remarked that the state owns a certain por-
tion in that area, and yet the applicant is proposing to widen the
bridge and he asked what public utilities run along the bridge.
~1r. Lee replied that a l4-inch City water main follows the top
of the bridge, however a sanitary sewer line on the other side
would not be affected; also California Water has a line there
but he does not know the exact location.
Councilman Beebe asked if the access into the commercial proper-
ty was really adequate, and Mr. Lee replied he felt it would be
adequate with the conditions they have considered; it would be
no different than the station that is there now.
Mr. Musso stated that the condition is that they provide the access
and also it is to be provided before it is approved. The Council
would not want to grant the zoning until they have this assurance.
Councilman Beebe agreed that is what the Council has been saying;
the Council wants to condition the zoning.
Mr. Musso added that there is no difference between conditionally
zoning and getting assurance and not granting the zoning until
you have the assurance. In other words, you could say that as a
condition to the zoning they have to give access to the property
and you grant the zoning and before the permit is issued they
have to provide the access. The other way is to withhold grant
of the zoning until they furnish an agreement from Union Oil to
make sure you have the proper access.
Councilman Pritchard pointed out that whatever the amount of the
land is the City is supposed to receive, they may be bargaining
off a piece of land the City can do absolutely nothing with and
which might have a lot of channel in it.
~1r. Musso stated that this was the Commission's attitude about
this offer - that it really did not have any public value except
just visual open space. There is a requirement in what he had
proposed that requires access to that property through this same
easement.
Mayor r1iller stated that there are several things missing - 1) the
appropriate letter from Zone 7, 2) the proof of access, 3) the
text of the conditions and then there is still the question, beside
the access, whether the amount of property is a reasonable exchange.
These items should be discussed later.
David Madis, Attorney at Law, representing the applicant indicated
he had anticipated a long list of conditions on the zoning. They
CM-27-356
(
I
'\
February ll, 1974
(Re Judson Property
South of I-580)
would like to have a decision as to what the Council wants as far
as access is concerned as it would make it much easier in working
out the details and arriving at the engineering estimates of cost.
An indication of what the City wants regarding the width of the
roadway and what the City ~Tants in access would be useful in his
client's discussions with Union Oil Company. Hr. Lee has informed
them ,\..,hat vJOuld be necessary for the First Street area, and they can
wait and go through an actual detailed plan with all the conditions
spelled out. There was some concern that all dedication rights to
be deeded to the City would not be very useful to the City except
for permanent open space. One of the concerns of the Planning Com-
mission was if you allowed some commercial of a limited nature on
adjoining property, eventually there would be a demand for that to be
commercialized. The applicant has indicated they wanted about half
of this property, which consists of 9.64 acres, for their use, and
the other half would be the open space rights, or dedication of the
building or developing rights on that portion of the property to the
City. They have no objection to this matter being put over so that
the actual roadways can be developed, and the conditions can be de-
veloped by the City staff and the actual review of those conditions
as he appreciates these conditions can run into a great deal of
consideration. Mr. Madis concluded that on behalf of the applicant
they would like the Council's approval, but could understand if the
matter is continued.
Councilman Pritchard pointed out it is the business of the applicant
to present to the Council what is being proposed, not for the Council
to dictate to the applicant what should be done or where it should be
done. The proposal should be brought to the Council for a decision
as to whether it is proper or not.
Hayor Hiller stated he had not heard that it was to be a half and
half deal; that is not what the Planning Commission recommended, and
there still remains the question of how much acreage there actually
is.
Councilman Futch indicated he would like to see the details especially
in view of the fact that the amount of land has shrunk considerably.
Councilman Pritchard asked Mr. Madis what his understanding was as
to the amount of land, and Mr. Madis reolied he did not think there
was ever any understanding as to the amount of land. The Planning
Commission had said they were not concerned with the balance of the
land; they simply drew a line and rejected the proposal regarding open
space; they did not think it had much utility for the City and were
not interested, but said the area is properly zoned CS. The first
time he appeared before the City Council there was no understanding
but they had said they would lik to have six acres and the balance,
whatever it was would be in permanent open space deeded to the City,
but the Judson sisters would like to keep ownership of the property
if at all possible, but they would furnish the City with whatever
document was necessary.
Mr. Musso explained that there were varying numbers regarding acreage,
but in the staff report they called it l2.7 according to one of the
maps they had; a letter from the Judsons referred to 9+ acres and a
map submitted bv the applicant referred to l8 acres. The Planning Com-
mission indicated approximately 4 acres for commercial.
Councilman Beebe stated he would like to make a motion of intent,
that the Council approve the Planning Commission recommendation of
4.0 acres of CS and the balance of 8.7 acres that the development
rights be transferred to the City of Livermore in a manner that
would satisfy the City Attorney so that the City would have perpetual
development rights and also that the road~..,ay into the newly created
C~1-27-35 7
February 11, 1974
(Re Judson Property Rezoning
Property South of I-580)
CS Zone be at least a 30 ft. roadway to the south, to the Union
station and be to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director
as to proper size, channelization and so forth.
Councilman Futch stated he was not sure he would second this tonight,
but this was generally the way the Council felt previously,
however there was no longer 8.7 acres.
Robert Zackney, representing Dr. Judson, stated he did not know
where the misunderstanding lies, but the size of the parcel has
never changed; the boundaries of the line remain the same. There
is the exact amount of acreage there today that there was twenty
years ago, the only difference in the size of the parcel is in
numerals presented. They never gave any indication there was any
more than 9.7 acres involved in the parcel and the Assessor's
Parcel Map explains very vividly that there is 9.7 acres.
There was some discussion regarding the misunderstanding of
the size of the parcel, and Councilman Futch continued by saying
that he did not believe that the land would be useful to the City,
and the Planning Commission recognized that. It would only act
as a buffer to separate the commercial from the residential area
proposed for the other part.
Councilman Pritchard stated that the application with all the un-
answered questions was premature and even though the Council has
been discussing the matter for several weeks, they have not come
to any conclusion.
Mr. Zackney, in answer to Councilman Pritchard, asked what the
vote was last week as it was his understanding that the vote
was consenting to the decision of the Planning Commission upon
zoning of four acres of this property, conditioned upon 1, 2, 3
and 4 which conditions were to be outlined this evening to him
and to his attorney as to what the City required them to do.
Councilman Futch stated they had voted 3-1 to approve the recom-
mendations of the Planning Commission, but they wanted the details
for this meeting and specifically the details on the location of
the street, and the entrance and if there would be any conflict
on egress from First Street. The Council does not have this in-
formation.
Mayor Miller explained that what Mr. Zackney heard was an expres-
sion of general intent, which is not a commitment by the Council,
because there is no zoning action before them. In fact, before
the second reading of the zoning ordinance is complete, it is
always possible for the Council to change their mind about whether
they will approve a rezoning. Mayor Miller added that besides
feeling it should not be zoned commercial at all, which was his
reason for dissenting last week, the access to the parcel does
not make sense to him; the rezoning seems unreasonable.
Mr. Madis stated it is his understanding the purpose of zoning is
not to acquire the City property; the City decides whether the
property should be zoned commercial, industrial or some other
uses, regardless of whether or not the city is to receive land.
He also understands that the City has a duty to its citizens to
protect their health, welfare, safety and well being, and to do
that it designs streets and imposes conditions. The Planning
Commission has indicated this property should be zoned for this
use, and it is a right and proper use. They have volunteered
that the balance of the property go into open space. The purpose
is that this property is located in an area in the City that has
no other feasible use except for commercial. The minutes of the
last meeting indicated there was a resolution asking for the con-
ditions and they were to discuss the conditions of the approval.
CM-27-358
February 1l, 1974
(Re Judson Property So.
of I-S80)
(
i'1ayor Miller commented that it ,,,as obvious they did not have the
conditions; also some of the Councilmen are not satisfied with what
has been presented so far. He stated there are alternate zones
available, which are not as satisfactory to the property owners,
but still available such as Agricultural, and the other is zoning
as Residential as shown on the General Plan, and it could stay that
way and the development rights could be sold on the assump~ion
that the Council would adopt the density transfer concept. He
pointed out also that the Planning Commission's recommendation had
tied to it the considerations of what would happen to the balance of
the parcel.
Councilman Futch again pointed out that the only use for the property
is as a buffer. At this time he seconded the motion made by Coun-
cilman Beebe. Councilman Futch continued that it was the intent of
the Planning Commission to zone a portion of the parcel to CS and
the remainder to be dedicated to act as a buffer between that and
the residential area. Even though the amount of the land is less,
he felt the intent of the Planning Commission is still there. Prior
to any final decision, he would want to see the street layout.
There was some question regarding the motion, and Councilman Futch
stated the motion made by Councilman Beebe was the same as the motion
made last week with a change in the acreage, however Councilman
Pritchard stated the motion last week was to continue, and t1r. Musso
read from the minutes the motion that had been made last week.
Councilman Futch stated they had aoproved that motion and all they
were waiting for was the road layout.
f~r. Madis indicated he was confused and wanted to know if his client
was supposed to present an exact layout to the City Engineer for his
approval.
Councilman Futch clarified his intent to mean that he wanted to see
the exact property lines and where the road is to be located.
Mayor Miller asked Councilmen Beebe and Futch if they had withdrawn
their motion, and Councilman Futch stated it did not make any sense
to make a motion as they had approved a motion last week and all they
are waiting for to implement what they approved last week as far as
he was concerned is a map showing the road location.
Councilman Pritchard reminded them that the motion was still to
continue for another week, which was amended, but it would have to
be for another week which was not amended, and they are at that point
now and they have no new information that they asked for. He felt
the applicant was hoping for rezoning and then hoping to work out an
easement with Union Oil, which has not been resolved. He still
objected to any type of access north of that building and between
the channel. He felt the only thing the applicant could present that
would satisfy access to that property would be to buy the Union Oil
station.
At this time Councilman Futch moved that the matter be tabled for
one week, which was not debatable; motion was seconded by Councilman
Beebe, however the motion failed 2-2 with Councilmen Beebe and Futch
in favor and Councilman Pritchard and Mayor Miller dissenting.
Hayor Niller then moved that the application for rezoning be denied;
motion was seconded by Councilman Pritchard. This motion also failed
2-2 with Councilman Pritchard and Mayor Hiller in favor and Council-
men Beebe and Futch dissenting.
CM-27-359
February 11, 1974
(Re Judson Property
So. of I-580)
Mr. Madis suggested that they continue the matter until such time
as there is a full Council.
Councilman Futch moved that they continue the matter until there
is a full Council as suggested, and Councilman Beebe seconded the
motion with the condition that they also have the information re-
quested at that time.
Mayor Miller asked for a roll call vote, indicating that he very
reluctantly would vote "aye" on the motion, and the motion passed
3-1 with Councilman Pritchard dissenting and Councilman Taylor was
absent.
Mr. Musso reminded the Council that there was a time limit, but
it was determined that there are still three meetings at which time
this matter can be considered. Mayor Miller apologized for the
length of time consumed, but remarked that there are some concerns
on the part of the Council.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE
ZONING ORDINANCE &~mNDMENTS
(Industrial Districts)
Mayor Miller explained that the continued discussion regarding pro-
posed zoning ordinance amendments in Industrial Districts was due
to the fact that a number of questions had been raised by the In-
dustrial Committee and the Chamber's Industrial Committee, and
copies of letters were included in the agenda from the various
companies for the Council's review. Mayor Miller asked for any
comments or suggestions.
Councilman Futch suggested that the Council answer some of the basic
questions first, i.e. the Chamber had suggested that there be just
one zone because they recommend 70% coverage for all three. The
question is whether there should be one zone or three zones, and
the coverage, and maybe the parking. He felt the Council might like
to discuss these before they get into the text of the letters.
Mayor Miller stated that unless there is a motion to amend, he saw
no reason to discuss it further. unless there is some general dis-
cussion, he suggested they go over the ordinance point by point.
Councilman Futch stated he thought there might be some general dis-
cussion on that as the matter of philosophy is the approach you must
take, and Hayor ~.1iller agreed his point was well taken.
Councilman Beebe mentioned that Milo ordyke, Chairman of the City's
Industrial Committee was present, and suggested that he be invited
to address the Council on the points of the letters from the other
companies to ascertain if they concur with the percent of coverage
or whether there should be some amendments made.
Milo Nordyke stated that in looking at other industrial areas and
at what other cities used and in talking to the industrial develop-
ers they contacted they found with regard to the point of coverage
from the industrial developer's standpoint a diversity of views
ranging from only 50% to 78%. In analysis, it seemed what people
were talking about were different kinds of developers who were in-
terested in different kinds of development from an economic stand-
point or from a use standpoint. So in designing the ordinance they
actually designed three different economic zones for industry -
zones where no matter what your taste is with respect to industrial
development, there is a zone for you. Taking that point there is a
large amount of industrial land and we have great need for indus-
trial uses, we should not put ourselves in a position of limiting
CM-27-360
February 11, 1974
(Z.O. Amendments in
Industrial Districts)
in any way the type of industrial developments so long as it is a
good, clean, respectable and taxpaying industry. In looking at many
communities, in particular those in the East Bay that we compete with -
Union City, Fremont, Hayward, San Leandro, Oakland and Pleasanton,
they found the range of coverage to be the minimum of 50% in Livermore
and Pleasanton, ranging un to 100% in San Leandro and Oakland. That
is the background for the 50%, 60% and 70% which they discussed at
some length with the Chamber as well as their concern and recommenda-
tion that it be modified to be one zone of 70%, their argument being
they would not like to have anything stand in the way of industrial
development. ~r. Nordyke felt to do that would be to destroy the
structure the Committee tried to build into the ordinance of the
three economic zones. One section which he felt had a lot of pro-
blems written as it is is 14.77 re the requirements for a CUP when-
ever it abuts an "R" or "E" District, and he would like some dis-
cussion on this. The Committee would like the opportunity to discuss
any suggestions for amending the ordinance that the Council might
have.
Mayor Miller suggested that Mr. Nordyke state his view on Sec. 14.77,
and ~1r. Nordyke commented that the section as worded requires that
whenever there is a parcel abutting an "R" or "E" District, develop-
ment or use can only proceed under a CUP. That procedure is time
consuming and consequently money consuming, and the requirements
for a CUP are the same legal requirements as amending the ordinance,
and is a very strong protection in the ordinance which, in his view,
should be reserved for those things the Council feels requires
Council action. The section gives no hint as to ",'hat the Council might
require in order to utilize a parcel abutting an 'R" or "E" District.
The original wording of that section was that the setback for a parcel
abutting such districts should be 25-ft minimum, and if there was
any desire to place the building closer, then it would require a
CUP. He felt that when there was a quantatative number the applicant
would have some idea of where to begin.
Councilman Putch brouqht up the point that there was no height
specified and this point \~as discussed, as there was concern voiced
if the setback were only 25 feet.
~1r. Musso stated that one of the things the Planning Commission
pointed out is that there is virtually no place where this would
be applicable after they utilize the CS Zone.
~1r. Nordyke agreed there are a realatively small number of areas
where this section could be imposed, but that does not pertain to
the question which is the best way to write the ordinance.
Hayor ~1iller commented that it still allows a 2-story building,
25 feet from the property line; it allows external uses within that
setback area. The Planning Commission's concern was for the resi-
dential property owners who are already there get fair protection.
Although a CUP is slow, it is not as major as an amendment to an
ordinance.
Mr. Nordyke stated that most of the designated residential areas where
an industrial area abuts have no residences there now. If indus-
trial is there first, it should have some protective rights from
having residential uses imposed upon it and the use of its property.
The Council could adopt wording which would take care of height
problems if it is felt that is a serious problem.
CM-27-36l
February 11, 1974
(z.o. Amendments -
Industrial Districts
Mr. Musso suggested that the section might be amended to read rather
than ll..except along a public right-of-way," continue by saying
"...right-of-way of a street, railroad or stream channel". There
may be residences along the south side of the SP tracks.
Councilman Futch stated that in view of the very small number
of problems in these areas, he would tend to stick with the Planning
Commission's recommendation, as he did not feel it was a major
point in the ordinance.
Hr. Nordyke suggested the Council at least delete the wording,
1I..0r use" as he felt it was an unworkable provision, however Hayor
Miller felt this was the most important point because if there was
something in the setback that would go right up to the property line
it would be needed.
Mr. Musso suggested that the the section could be qualified further
by excepting a parking lot if it would he1?
Councilman Beebe asked if any of the suggestions answered the pro-
blem, and Mr. Nordyke stated they did help, and Councilman Beebe
moved that Sec. l4.77 be amended to read: liThe development and/or
use of any lot, parcel, or site abutting an "R" or "E" District,
except along a public right-of-way, street, railroad, stream channel
or parking lot," etc. Motion was seconded by Councilman Futch.
Mr. r1usso asked if he could qualify the parking lot in a later
draft, and the size of the parking area was discussed, and it was
determined that if the parking lot was 60 ft. in depth, the de-
veloper would not require a CUP.
A vote was taken on the motion which passed unanimously.
~1r. Nordyke referred to Sec. l4.7l with regard to minimum street
frontage yard which states the minimum is l5 ft. and the average
25 ft. ~ihat was attempted there was to try to get approval for
use of a part of the front yard for driveway, rather than having
the 25 ft. strip being denied from any use. The Planning Commission
inserted the averaging, but in averaging frontage, it doesn't help
very much. The Chamber made the suggestion in Zones I-l and I-2,
if 10 ft. of the setback were available for parking, it would pro-
vide more flexibility in use of the site. The question is how wide
a landscaped strip is needed in order to have the effect the
Council is striving for. Is a 15 ft.1andscaped strip wide enough
or does it have to be 25 ft. in order to look like the I-l.
The counter to that item is that the landscaped strip is far more
dependent on how it is maintained rather than on how wide it is.
When asked what he would suggest, Mr. Nordyke stated that in
Section 14.71 (a) he would recommend minimum 25 ft. of which 10 ft.
may be used for driveway, plus the public right-of-way which is
also required to be landscaped, which would mean a 15 ft. landscaped
strip.
Councilman Futch stated this sounded reasonable to him and moved
that they have a minimum of 25 ft. with a 10 ft. driveway allowable,
and strike through the minimum 15 ft. Motion was seconded by
Councilman Beebe. The motion was further clarified that the
inside 10 ft. could be a driveway.
Mr. Musso suggested that instead of a yard, perhaps the section
should read building setback, and should indicate building setback
of 25 ft. and a front landscaping of 15 ft. The Council agreed
that it would be better worded in that manner.
cr1-27-362
February ll, 1974
(z.o. Amendments -
Industrial Districts)
(
\
Mayor ~1iller moved to amend the motion that the same requirements
be added to 14.71 (b) and (c), the object being that a 5 ft setback
is useless as a setback. The amendment died for lack of a second
as the Council felt that the public right-of-way would take care of
the additional frontage.
A vote was taken on the main motion which passed unanimously.
Councilman Futch was asked to comment on amount of coverage in the
three zones, and he stated he would like to see the one with 70%
coverage (I-3) restricted to real industrial and warehouse type uses
which they are modifying the ordinance to obtain. He questioned
whether they should allow other uses with 70% coverage even though
they are philosophically contrary to the recommendations of the Indus-
trial Committee. He would limit the 70% coverage to manufacturing
and warehousing, and not allow a skating rink for example.
~1r. Nordyke pointed out that recreational uses require a Conditional
Use Permit according to Sec. l4.3l, and he would think that the
Council would not even consider a recreational use such as a bowling
alley or an obvious permitted use unless it was in the proper zone
and had proper parking.
Earl Mason, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Industrial Committee
stated that he feels one of the important issues in the I-3 area is
that only businesses with very few employees will ever be able to build
on 70% coverage - it is going to have to be based on its parking
requirements so the worries of manufacturing going in with 70% coverage
are needless unless it is a tyne of manufacturing with very few
employees. If it is limited to warehousing then all the ware-
housing will be located in one area and not near the other uses. He
stated that in the first place it is going to be very difficult to
determine where to put the zones and then secondly it would be hard
to try to decide vJhat use should be alloHed if it is to be limited..
He pointed out that the main purpose of the various zones is to allow
a warehouse to go in anyone of them and 50% coverage would mean
restricting warehousing in that area.
Councilman Futch stated that he can see the City is going to start
getting into a lot of problems if they don't stick with the City's
Industrial Committee's recommendation.
Mayor ~iller stated that his opinion is that there should be three
zones, and explained that he feels this way because he agrees with
Hr. Musso's comment as well as some of the Planning Commissioners
in that it is very difficult to change the use once it has been
established, and it is found that they do not have sufficient parking
and have too many employees. If is very bad politically to say that
the City is going to throw them out or will not accept the new indus-
try.
Earl ~.1ason replied that in an industrial area, forces are at work
to require that if an employeer wants to go into a building it must
be adequate for his use or it will not be rented to him. It must
have large enough water and sewer lines as well as power utilities
and parking facilities to serve the use. He pointed out that he could
site an example in which someone started with a very small business
with very few employees, was very successful, and now has many employees
and a lot of parking but if the City had forced him to provide this
same amount of parking in the beginning he ~~ou1d have gone to Dublin
to establish the businessp rather than to choose Research Drive.
C'1-27-363
" -----..,.-..,'~.---- ....-....-----.-.-.,.-..,-- ~ -. -.----""-"~~---_-.".~___"_...__"._.____.,....,,."_____M_'_.,...___.__..._.......
February ll, 1974
(Z.O. Amendments -
Industrial Districts)
Councilman Futch at this time moved that the Council approve the three
zones - I-I, I-2, and I-3 with the coverages of 50% for I-l, 60%
for I-2 and 70% for I-3, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
Mr. Nordyke stated that in his opinion, and he feels the majority
of the Committee agree that if the three zones are removed some
flexibility is added but some structure of the ordinance would
be removed in doing so and feels that it is not unreasonable to
try to structure the industrial area without making it truly limited.
He feels that warehousing in one area and manufacturing in another
is not unreasonable and the ordinance accomplishes this and that
it would not lead to abuse of the ordinance because he feels that
industry is responsible and willing to compromise.
~ayor Miller stated that he has commented in the past that he feels
the 50-60-70% coverage is too high and would agree with Commissioner
Seldon's proposal to allow 45-55-65% and moved to amend the motion
to reduce the coverage to this amount but the motion died for lack
of a second.
At this time the motion passed by a unanimous vote.
Ed Butka, lOl5 Angelica Way, developer, stated that he feels the
ordinance is basically good but that it is still not too conducive
for new industry and would suggest that a longer time be given
for them to pay various fees that are required on a five-ten year
program at $lOO-200 per month rather than $40-50,000 in a lump
sum for improvements, etc. He stated that unless something like
this is done the City of Livermore ~vill continue to receive only
a pittance of the industry other cities are receiving that are
no larger than Livermore.
RECESS
At this time Mayor ~1:iller called for a brief recess after
which the meeting resumed with all members of the Council
present as during the roll call.
l'10TION TO CONTINUE
DISCUSSION OF ZOo ORD.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe
and by unanimous vote, the discussion regarding the industrial
ordinance amendments was continued to the next Council meeting.
llEPORT RE ARROYO
SECO CHANNEL DESIGN
The matter of the Arroyo Seco Channel design was continued from
the last meeting and Mr. Lee explained that LARPD has recommended
that the channel be developed as a full arroyo parkway along the
C~1-27-364
February ll, 1974
(Re Arroyo Seco Channel
Design)
~
,
\,
residential area and somewhat reduced through the industrial
property. He stated that they did not state, specifically, in
their letter to the City but when he attended their meeting it was
his interpretation that the reduction would be to l80-l85 feet wide.
Lo~~ell Bergman, LARPD representative, stated that it was the feeling
of LARPD that they do not want to give un too much of the dedicated
land or dedication fees for the purchase of industrial property on
the industrial side of the arroyo and the general feeling of the
Board is that at this time the 225 foot minimum in the parkway from
Charlotte Way up through the OGO property to the industrial property
would be satisfactory if it could be reduced to the minimum Zone 7
width on the industrial side on through to Vasco Road. If, at a
later date when the north side of the arroyo has been annexed to the
City and the parkway is extended then a variation in width can be
considered.
Jane Staehle, representative of the League of Women Voters, stated
that they would like to cOMmend the City Council for their decision
last '>leek to include the Arroyo Seco in the Arroyo ParkV-lay plan but
is concerned for how this will be planned and developed. She stated
that they would prefer to see the full 225 foot width along the
entire arroyo, and a variable width parkway with a minimum width
sufficient for provision of a trail and arroyo parkway grading
standards would be an acceptable compromise. The League members
fully support the importance of planning for parks and land acquisi-
tion including only minimum development. They feel the arroyos are
a part of the Valley heritage and preservation of them in their
natural state are imoortant to the members. They feel the citizens
should be provided with the variety of recreational areas ranging
from small developed parks to the primitive and undeveloped areas
as represented by the arroyos.
~ayor ~iller stated that it is his understanding that ~hat the minimum
width required by Zone 7 is about lOa feet and ~1r. Lee replied that
this is what the minimum is with a 2-l side slope but with 3-l side
slopes the minimum would be more like l25 feet and is what should
be allowed if there are going to be trails next to the sl0ge. If
there are going to be 3 to 1 slopes plus trails and trees a minimum
~vould be more in the area 0 f l6 a -180 feet.
Councilman Futch moved that the Council aonrove a 180 foot minimum
through the industrial area and a 225 foot width through the resi-
dential area, seconded by Councilman Pritchard which nassed by
unanimous vote.
Prior to the vote Councilman Beebe noted that this will mean that
a certain portion along the industrial property will have to be
purchased by the City without receiving park dedication funds for
industrial development.
Mr. Lee noted that not all of this will be purchased at this time,
such as portions along Vasco Road which the owner does not want
to develop.
Earl ~'Iason suggested that the minimum requirements of Zone 7 should be
noted so that there will not be future arguments and the Hayor
replied that the standards of Zone 7 today may be different than those
at the time of development which would be the ones that would apply
and Mr. 71ason stated that the standards have not changed since they
were adopted in 1964 and the ~1ayor stated that if this is the case
it does not need to be stated in the Council's words.
CM-27-365
February 11, 1974
REPORT RE DENIAL OF
ZO. USE PERJ'.lIT
(Hichael Robles)
~r. Musso stated that an application for a home occupation permit
for the purpose of a cement contracting office was considered by
the Planning Commission and the home occupation policy indicates
the use to be the type of a home occupation that might be permitted.
The public hearing was held and though there was no adverse testimony
from the neighborhood the Planning Commission felt due to the issue
of equipment storage, and since it would be a full time business
it did not qualify as a home occupation use without some detriment
to the surrounding area, and denied the application.
Mike Robles, 1932 College Avenue, stated that it was not clear
to him as to the reasons for the Planning Commission's denial of
his application other than the site of the equipment to be stored
and he explained that the only equipment which would be stored would
be one vehicle.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he knows what the operation was
when owned by Mr. Robles' father previously and to his knowledge
there was never an incidence of the property appearing to be un-
sightly and moved that the permit be granted for a period of one
year with the conditions set forth by the Fire Department and then
at the end of the year if there are no complaints or problems the
permit can be reviewed for possible extension. with the addition
that the vehicle must be parked in the garage, seconded by Council-
man Beebe.
Councilman Beebe stated that he also was familiar with the business
when owned by Mr. Robles' father and did business with him over the
telephone, the office was located there for years without any prob-
lems as far as he knows.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to approve the applica-
tion for the permit, as specified.
P. C. SUMHARY
OF ACTION
The summary of action taken at the Planning Commission's meeting
of February 5, 1974, was noted for filing.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Resolution Endorsing LARPD Tax Override)
Mayor Miller stated that the Council has been asked by the
People Need Parks Committee to endorse the LARPD tax override
which will be on the upcoming March election ballot. In
talking with the Recreation District, along with Councilman Beebe,
regarding their needs this would appear to be a very reasonable
thing to do. It would provide for the undeveloped parks desperately
needed in the community.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch
and by unanimous vote, a resolution was adopted endorsing the
LARPD tax override.
RESOLUTION NO. 17-74
A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE LIVER"10RE AREA RECREATION
AND PARK DISTRICT TAX OVERRIDE MEASURE APPEARING ON THE
MARCH 5 LOCAL ELECTION BALLOT
Cf.1--2 7 -3 6 6
February 11, 1974
(re SB-90 Amendment)
Councilma~ Beebe stated that the League of California Cities has
recommended an amendment to SB-90 which would give the home owners
tax relief because this would put a freeze on the assessments as of
a certain date and perhaps this is a bill the Council could endorse.
The staff was directed to obtain copies of the bill for the Council
to review and consider.
(re Disclosure of
Funds Forms Not
Available at City Hall)
r1ayor ~liller stated that he has had complaints from people who have
said that the City of Livermore does not have the forms necessary to
comply with the disclosure ordinance regarding campaign statements
and the City Clerk exnlained that two sets were given to every candi-
date and it was her understanding that this would be sufficient.
The City Clerk exnlained that the sets were quite voluminous and
it would be very costly to provide additional sets unless they
are necessary.
It was noted that perhaps the complaint was over the fact that
there were not enouqh sheets to list all the contributors and
it was felt the matter could be resolved.
(re Chestmobile
Service Elimination)
~ayor Miller stated that he has received a letter from the Junior
Womens' Club informing him that the services provided by the Alameda
County Chestmobile are no longer available to the City of Livermore
and feel that the Alameda County Health Agency is failing in its
responsibility to people who pay the taxes for its operation, and
ask that the Council support the Chestmobile's continued operation
in the Livermore Valley.
Mayor Miller suggested that a letter be sent requesting continuatio~
of the services to the appropriate people and the Council agreed.
On motion-of Councilman Futch, Seconded by Councilman Pritchard, and
by unanimous vote the City Manager was directed write the letter.
(re Gillice Units)
Mayor ~1iller stated that he has been studying a file of the Gillice
condominiums and the second unit was approved by the State Department
of Real Estate without having all of the City's requirements satis-
fied, and in particular, there was no filing of a subdivision map
which is required by state law., and would suggest that a letter be
sent to the State Department of Real Estate pointing out that the
approval for Unit 2 was given without a subdivision man having been
filed with an explanation about what appears to have happened.
The City Attorney replied that he would prefer, if the City
intends to take any action with res~ect to the attorney involved
in the approval, that he check into the matter further and make
a recommendation to the Council after looking at it carefully.
Until he feels confident that the City can demonstrate an inten-
tional misrepresentation on two occasions he would feel that the
City should not act precipitously. If it is, in fact, a matter
of misconduct then it should be referred to the State Bar Associa-
tion; however there should be definite evidence of such. The acts
CQ.-27 --367
February ll, 1974
(re Gillice Units)
have all been done and if it constitutes improper conduct it will
still be improper conduct after the matter has been examined care-
fully.
It was the consensus of the Council that the City Attorney should
investigate the matter.
(re LAFCO Issue
at Mayors Conference)
Mayor Miller stated that he is sure everyone is aware of what
happened at the Mayors Conference with regard to the LAFCO
issue and the Spheres of Influence Boundary and that there is
not much to report other than the fact that the City did not
win support. He stated that we did receive four votes in our
favor, however. If the City had received support it would have
aided us in getting a rehearing but there is no reason why we
can't request another hearing and if such is refused we can
examine what other options might be open to us later.
~~TTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re RR Relocation Proj.)
The City Attorney stated that in January the PUC issued an order
authorizing the City to proceed with construction of the railroad
relocation project and a petition for rehearing was filed on Febru-
ary 1 by the Southern Pacific Railroad because it did not feel the
50-50 sharing of cost ordered was acceptable. Last Friday the Western
Pacific Railroad filed a petition with the PUC asking that they deny
the Southern Pacific Railroad petition for rehearing and this after-
noon the City of Livermore filed a request with the PUC asking that
an interim order be made so that construction can begin as soon as
we are ready to proceed rather than to have to wait for a decision
on the litigation of cost division. There is a provision in the
PUC law which allows the City to make the request as long as it
is willing to advance the funds for the Railroad's share of the
project - to be credited against the City's contribution after the
construction is under way. As far as the condemnation action, there
were promising indications last week at which time discussion among
representatives of the City and Railroad indicated that there was
a settlement in the offing. It appears that further negotiations
will be necessary and the City Manager is now back and can carry
on these negotiations. We have agreed with Western Pacific to
defer the effect of the order of possession from the 15th of this
month to not later than March lst - not more than a two week delay.
He noted that the negotiations have been pursued and one of the
railroads is reluctant to adopt the settlement package and the
City Manager has set up a meeting for later in the week to discuss
the issue.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, Mayor Miller adjourned the
meeting at 12:00 p.m.
APPROVE
Mayor
ATTEST
City Clerk
Livermore, California
CM-27-368
Regular Meeting of February 19, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on February 19, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Miller presiding.
('
\
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Taylor, Futch and Mayor Miller
ABSENT:
Councilmen Pritchard and Beebe (Both seated later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
P.H. RE EXT. OF
INTERIM ZONING ORD.
Mayor Miller stated that no action can be taken with regard to
the extension of the Interim Ordinance on zoning until there are
at least four members of the Council present and suggested that
the matter be postponed until later in the evening.
INFORMAL HEARING RE
OPERATION OF AIRPORT
LIMOUSINE SERVICE
Mr. Parness explained that there has been a request for a permit
to operate a limousine service on a telephone call advanced reserva-
tion basis, with no set schedule for service to the airport. There
is no objection on the part of the Police Department and it is felt
that there would be no intrusion into any other comparable business
that is now underway in the City and the staff has no objection to
the issuance of a permit for this purpose.
It was noted that the Council received a letter from Mr. Struthers
just prior to the meeting asking that the matter be postponed.
There was some discussion regarding the procedure for an informal
hearing and it was noted that an informal hearing is basically the
same as a formal hearing but the 10 day requirement for publishing
a notice of the hearing is not necessary - it requires notice only
3 days prior to the hearing.
At this time the Mayor opened the public hearing and asked if there
is public testimony regarding application for the permit.
Bill Struthers, attorney representing Holiday Limousine Service,
noted that he is not sure whether this service would fall under
the taxi cab service permit or would need a business license which
would pay taxes to the City. He stated that if this business is
in the taxi cab category the application would have to be considered
on the basis of public necessity and the rate structure reviewed.
He then requested that the matter be continued so that all the aspects
of the application might be reviewed.
Brian Wilson, Manager of the East Bay Division of Airport Limousine
Service, stated that on July 31, 1973, the PUC granted a certificate
of public convenience and necessity to Airport Limousine Service in
Alameda County as well as other counties and that the rate sheets
presented to the Council are published rates. They have been advised
of the regulations and rules they would have to comply with to operate
in the City of Livermore.
CM-27-369
February 19, 1974
(re Limousine Service)
COUNCILMAN BEEBE WAS SEATED JUST PRIOR TO THE DISCUSSION REGARDING
THE AIRPORT LIMOUSINE SERVICE.
The City Attorney commented that the applicant organization has been
providing this service to the City of Livermore and it came to the
attention of the City that the frequency of operation, which was
about 6 transactions per week, warranted their obtaining a business
license and they have willingly agreed to cooperate with the City
and to obtain any license or permit the City might require so they
might continue to maintain the level of business they were conduct-
ing. He would suggest that they be allowed to transact business
pending a final decision. The applicant corporation could be granted
a license contingent upon satisfaction of all the requirements of
the taxi cab and other public conveyances ordinance with the right
for Mr. Struthers to react to any materials they may submit.
Councilman Taylor asked if the Airport Limousine has been operating
in the City without a permit, and the City Attorney replied that in
the process of transfering the ownership of the local taxi cab service
it was discovered that the former taxi cab service had been in opera-
tion without a permit and that Airport Limousine has been doing the
same; however, it has been determined that this was an oversite and
a lack of communication and not intentional on their part.
Councilman Futch moved that the matter be continued to the meeting
of March 18th, with permission to operate until this time, seconded
by Councilman Beebe, and which passed unanimously.
Councilman Taylor asked the City Attorney if public necessity is an
issue and the City Attorney replied that it certainly is a considera-
tion - the convenience of the public must be weighed with the reasonable
expectation of a profitable operation and the fair right of the other
competing party to supply equal or better service.
Councilman Taylor felt it would be worthwhile to have some kind of
recommendation on this point and the City Manager noted that he
feels this is a different situation as there is no schedule or spe-
cific route available to the public user, with which the City Attorney
agreed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Departmental Reports
Departmental reports were received from the following:
Airport Activity - January
Building Inspection - January
Fire Department - quarterly, October/December 1973
Mosquito Abatement District - December 1973
Municipal Court - December 1973
Police and Pound Departments - December and January
Water Reclamation Plant - January
Minutes
Minutes were received from various committee meetings as follows:
Airport Advisory Committee - February 4
Design Review Committee - February 6
Beautification Committee - January 2
CM-27-370
February 19, 1974
Communication re
Designation of Board -
Joint Powers (Valley
Water Interests)
A letter was received from Kenneth Scheidig, Pleasanton City Attorney,
regarding designation of Board representatives for the Joint Powers
Agreement - Valley Water Interests. He pointed out that Livermore
and Pleasanton will be holding municipal elections in March which
may mean a change of the Council members on the Board and suggested
that the Council designate two members as interim representatives
on the Joint Powers Board until such time as the new Councilmen take
their seats.
The Mayor indicated that he and Councilman Futch would act as
interim appointees to the Valley Water Interests Joint Powers
Board until the Council reorganizes after the election, which met
with the concurrence of the Council members.
PARC Progress Report
A PARC progress report #8 was submitted to the Council by the
Committee which included pending legislation pertaining to
ridgelands and action pending in various areas.
PG&E Rate Increase Notice
Notice was received from PG&E regarding an application filed with
the PUC requesting rate increases for several catagories of services.
Res. re Fee
Adjustments
It was noted by the Public Works Director that not all the fee
adjustments were supplied in the report regarding fee adjustment
for storm drainage and sewer connection for 1974, and the matter
was continued to next week and removed from the Consent Calendar.
Payroll & Claims
There were 136 warrants in the amount of $l45,777.28 and 275 payroll
checks in the amount of $71,755.07 plus replacement of lost Warrant
#8361 in the amount of $107,7l9.9l for a total of $325,252.86 ordered
paid by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Futch moved that the Consent Calendar be approved by
the Council with the continuance of the item regarding fee adjust-
ments for the storm drain and sewer connection, seconded by
Councilman Beebe and which passed by unanimous vote.
/-
I
JUDSON PROPERTY
REZONING APPLICATION
Mayor Miller stated that the attorney for the owners of the Judson
property has asked for a continuance on the matter of the rezoning
application and on motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman
Beebe and by unanimous vote, the matter was continued for one week.
CM-27-37l
February 19, 1974
DISCUSSION RE SPRINGTOWN
BOULEVARD ALIGNMENT
Councilman Futch stated that he thought the Council had made a
decision regarding the alignment of Springtown Boulevard and Mr.
Musso explained that the Council had directed the Planning Commis-
sion to make a recommendation on the matter.
Mr. Musso commented that the last Council decision was to approve
the realignment suggested by the Public Works Director. The matter
was referred to the Planning commission because there was a PUD per-
mit in effect and a tract map in effect and the Council wanted the
Planning Commission's comments.
Councilman Taylor stated that some of the points noted in the Plan-
ning Director's position were:l) the separation already exceeds the
standard by 3,000 ft. so another 1,000 ft. is not significant; 2)
development of the Reeder and other properties would mean that child-
ren would have to cross the major street for school and park access,
3) the elimination of the Larkspur crossing would complicate east-
west traffic movement and 4) the present location spreads the cost
of its ultimate improvement over more properties.
The Planning Commission concluded that the best alternative would
be to continue Springtown Boulevard approximately at its present
alignment.
Councilman Taylor stated that he cannot understand the point of
the east-west traffic which Mr. Musso explained by illustrating
this on the map in addition to explaining the other points men-
tioned, such as the spread of cost, which was followed by general
discussion of these matters.
Councilman Taylor commented that it is his understanding that Mr.
Lee is suggesting that the whole street be placed on Reeder's prop-
erty in the existing PUD to assure that the whole street is im-
proved with Reeder paying for it. Mr. Lee stated that this is
correct except that the City will pay for the center portion of
the street so it is not as bad as it sounds - ~he cost would be
the same as any collector street to the developer.
Mr. Musso argued that this would be putting the burden of the cost
all on one side of the street and that to try to spread the cost
to other property owners such as the example of the widening of
porto1a Avenue does not work.
Mr. Lee felt that the main point of the realignment or improvement
is not the spread of the cost but rather the other considerations
such as the fact that the westerly street is 1,400 feet longer.
There was discussion regarding the east-west traffic problem and
Councilman Taylor stated that he can see no difference in getting
from east to west from any point by use of either route and sug-
gested that if this is a major point another map should be used
to express the advantage of one over the other.
Mr. Lee noted that the route recommended by him would be less
expensive, straighter, and would probably be improved sooner
than extension of the current street alignment, as well as the
point of splitting the two planning areas much better than the
present alignment. He felt the people in the Proud Country area,
for example, would prefer to use Bluebell rather than to make a
1,400 ft. detour to go over to the westerly alignment. He noted
CM-27-372
February 19, 1974
(Springtown Blvd. Align-
ment)
.~..
I
\
that one of the reasons major streets are planned at 1 mile inter-
vals is so that people will use them to go from neighborhood to
neighborhood rather than to follow the internal network of streets.
If it is made to be inconvenient, people will continue to choose
the internal streets for traveling.
COUNCILMAN PRITCHARD WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
Councilman Futch stated that he does not see a lot of traffic
as a problem for quite a few years and it would mean that the
children would simply have to cross a bigger street and feels
that the Planning Commission's concern is really not that justi-
fied. As pointed out by Councilman Taylor there is not much
population there at present and by the time there is he felt the
realignment proposed by Mr. Lee would be the most desirable alter-
native.
Councilman Beebe moved to adopt the recommendation of the Public
Works Director, seconded by Councilman Futch.
Councilman Taylor pointed out that it would not have made sense
to swing Holmes Street, for example, l,OOO feet to the east to
accommodate a lot of the Sunset property on the west side so that
the children would not have to cross the street for awhile. It
is now developed and if this had been done there would be a zig-
zag street through the neighborhood and he felt this is an example
of the same type of planning now being discussed.
Mayor Miller stated that he feelsfue proposal made by Mr. Lee would
speed the development of the ultimate development which was to have
taken place 5-6 years ago.
Councilman Pritchard stated that the people of Springtown have been
promised that access to the area would be taken off of Bluebell and
continues to receive complaints about the amount of traffic on Blue-
bell and that the staff alignment would relieve this problem.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to approve the realignment
proposed by Mr. Lee, which is located generally north from its
present alignment rather than along the western annexation line.
P. H. RE PROPOSED
EXT. OF INTERIM
ORDINANCE RE ZONING
It was noted that incidental to the proposed extension of the
interim ordinance regarding zoning the Planning Commission has
recommended that certain property be excluded from the moratorium.
The City Attorney reported that there are certain periods during
which a General Plan review moratorium may be enacted by the City,
according to the state statutes, these are - 4 months,
8 months, and 1 year. The option, therefore, is for the Council
~ to adopt an additional l2 month extension from and after March 19,
1974, running until March 20, 1975. The ordinance could be
adopted, as it is an urgency ordinance, as late as March l8th.
He pointed out that the ordinance, as drafted, is an effort on
his part to meet the requirements of the state statute and
the desires of the Planning Commission and does not represent
a conviction on the part of the City Attorney that the ordinance
should be adopted as drafted.
CM-27-373
February 19, 1974
(Extension of Interim
Ordinance re Zoning)
Mr. Musso reported that under the interim ordinance, three specific
plans have been prepared and submitted to the Council; we are about
half-way through with determining if zoning conforms to the General
Plan as required. An RL Ordinance is being amended, the RG Ordinance
is being amended and a General Plan amendment has been adopted to
establish some growth regulations to allow implementation of the pro-
visions introduced by AB-130l. He stated that he mentions this
because the City is required to conduct studies of planning dur-
ing the two year moratorium, and it is anticipated that these can
be completed prior to the expiration of the two years. He noted
that this is exclusive of the General Plan review which will be
commencing this spring.
Councilman Taylor stated that it is his understanding that the only
power the Council has is to extend the moratorium for 12 months
and there can no longer be a moratorium based on planning and the
City Attorney replied that based on this section of the government
code that assumption is correct.
Mr. Parness stated that incidental to this matter he would like to
comment on the status of the building permits in the Bevilacqua -
Springtown area, some of which are active and some of which are in-
active, revoked by staff order. There are several hundred permits
involved in this matter and there is a process underway at this
time by the mortgage company to instigate foreclosure proceedings
against the holders of the permits. They are actively pursuing
this but there are certain time intervals which must be observed by
them. Some of these involve houses partially constructed and others
are for lots on which no construction has taken place. There is an
appeal which has been received by us in letter form and upon the
request of the appellant it will be on the agenda next week for the
City Council's consideration. He felt it might be reasonable to
extend the interim ordinance adoption since this matter might affect
the wording of the interim ordinance, in the event the Council de-
cides to give some form of special concession to this application.
Mayor Miller suggested that the public hearing be opened, testimony
recorded, then continue to next week or until sometime prior to the
19th and resolve the entire matter at once or another alternative
would be to extend the interim ordinance as it stands for the full
year which can be amended at any time, after the other matters are
resolved.
Councilman Taylor pointed out that the only problem with waiting
to adopt the ordinance is that there is always a possibility that
there will not be enough Council members present to act on the
ordinance which requires a 4/5 vote.
At this time Mayor Miller opened the public hearing.
Gene Morgan, President of the Chamber of Commerce, stated that he
would like to comment on behalf of the Chamber and the official
position of the Chamber will be forwarded to the Council in writing.
He stated that the Council began a moratorium one year ago and gave
the General Plan review as the basis for action. The progress of
the Citizens Committee has been observed and it appears that this
work will be concluded around April of 1974. The Council has made
no public plans, at least to his knowledge, for interviewing or
making decisions relative to the procedure it will take in the
ultimate General Plan. He feels the original idea was for the
Citizen Committee to be formed and take about one year to conclude
their work on the input from the citizens and it was also his
understanding that simultaneously with this input the City Council
would be progressing with the staff or consultants as to how the
ultimate plans would be made up as well as funds available in the
budget to accomplish this. It was also his understanding that
CM-27-374
February 19~ 1974
(Re Extension of Interim
Zoning Ordinance)
(,
,,~/'
the Council would be ready with a decision as to how it would
proceed at the conclusion of the General Plan review - the idea
being that this portion of the project would take approximately
one additional year and the General Plan would be completed two years
from the initiation of a year ago and wondered if his understanding
is correct.
Mayor Miller stated that his understanding is correct but the inter-
pretation of what has happened is not completely correct and Mr.
Morgan stated that this is his concern as it appears that the Council
has been lagging behind in making a decision and the Mayor explained
that this is the part that is incorrect.
Mr. Morgan stated that the Chamber would like to see a decision
made by the Council as to what it plans to do with the General Plan
prior to the continuance of the moratorium and if there is some legal
reason why it cannot be continued beyond a certain point this would
be something different. The Chamber would also recommend that the
continuance be completed at least to the completion of the Citizens
General Plan review and that the new Council be allowed the privilege
of continuing or not continuing, relative to the moratorium. It
should be noted that the Planning Commission has recommended that
some property should be exempt from the building ordinance (moratorium)
and the Chamber would recommend that various available properties be
examined, that the recommendations of the Planning Commission be taken
into consideration. It is felt that during this time of examination
there is no need to completely stop growth - during the General Plan
review. They would urge that the Council consider the matter of
the General Plan review, the due date of the Citizens Committee report
and the Planning Commission's suggestion to allow some building during
this time.
Mayor Miller explained the action which has been taken by the Council
and the Planning staff thus far, as follows: 1) has directed the
City Manager to examine possible consultants to serve for the second
phase of this program noting that someone cannot be interviewed and
hired until the Citizens Committee review is complete; and 2) the
Planning staff and Planning Commission have proceeded in their plan-
ning studies on three areas (Planning Units 8, 9, and 12) that are
in the mill and a few others forthcoming in the next couple of months.
This work has been taking place through the Planning Commission
and the City staff in this time period so that we have, in fact,
followed through with the things the Council has said the City
would do and are preparing for the next stage. The final preparations
for the last stage will take place once the General Plan review
Committee's report and recommendations have been received and
it will be easier at that point to determine what format can
be used.
Mr. Morgan stated that it was his understanding that the entire
process should take approximately two years and wondered if it
would be fair to assume that within the following year the City
would be able to budget and to arrive at a procedure for redoing
the General Plan and have it concluded within one year from April
(the date the Citizens Committee General Plan review is anticipated
to be complete)?
~ The Mayor commented that, personally speaking, he would hope that
the entire process would be concluded within the two year time
period originally recommended.
Councilman Futch stated that, legally, two years is all the City has
for holding a moratorium, noting that the water moratorium is a
different issue because the Interim Ordinance prevents designing of
subdivisions where the water ordinance pertains to obtaining building
permits.
CM-27-375
February 19, 1974
(Extension of Interim
Ordinance re Zoning)
Mr. Morgan stated that approximately $10,000 of the $20,000 allo-
cated in the budget for this work has already been spent in the
first phases of the project and that the $10,000 remaining would
not be sufficient to cover the rest of the costs. He pointed out
that when this thing is completed it will then take 6-9 months
to get things started again such as permission for tract maps, etc.
~-
Mayor Miller commented that growth has not stopped in the City of
Livermore since April 1972 - houses have been constructed and are
being constructed in the last two years and there is a substantial
inventory of unsold houses and there are 150 building permits still
out that have not been used. Building and growth has not stopped
since April of 1972 in Livermore.
Councilman Beebe moved that the public hearing be closed, seconded
by Councilman Futch, which passed by unanimous vote.
Councilman Futch commented that Councilman Pritchard will not be
able to attend the next meeting and that Councilman Taylor will
be absent at one of the next meetings and felt that while a full
Council is present some decision should be made which can always
be amended by the new Council. He then moved that the Interim
Ordinance be extended for a period of one year, subject to the
conditions of the Planning Commission regarding building.
It was noted that the conditions are included in the draft.
Councilman Taylor seconded the motion.
Mayor Miller felt that there might be some merit in extending
the Ordinance as it stands and let the new Council discuss the
conditions set forth in the Ordinance which resulted from the
Planning Commission's recommendations.
Councilman Futch stated that the modifications suggested by the
Planning Commission were very reasonable and extremely limited
and that opening up these few building permits would not have
a significant effect but may mean a lot to an individual who
wants to develop a lot.
Councilman Taylor stated that in his opinion this Council did
instigate the Interim Ordinance, extended it once, based on the
planning process going on, requested the Planning Commission to
investigate certain cases and have stated that the Council policy
is to have a moratorium based on planning and not to prohibit
development on all available lots and to prevent anyone from
building when the planning of a lot is not going to change.
What the Planning Commission has recommended covers this and he
feels that it is incumbent upon this Council to make the de-
cision.
Mayor Miller stated that the motion is to adopt the written draft
of the Interim Ordinance but would like to make some amendments,
as follows: Section 3, Page 2, the City Attorney has redrafted
the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has stated,
"where municipal services are apparently adequate", the Planning
Commission talked about schools and water which are not munici-
pal services - he would suggest the wording "school housing and
water supply" be added after municipal services. He noted that
it continues on to say "...are apparently adequate to serve a
limited additional residential development..." he would like to
add the wording "after its development".
Prior to proceeding with amendments to the draft the City Attorney
explained that the language in the draft was carefully calculated
CM-27-376
February 19, 1974
(Extension of Interim
Ordinance re Zoning)
so as to leave the City the widest possible option in a selection
of standards that it would use to approve or disapprove and the
effect of the Mayor's language would be to narrow the possible
grounds and standards for making this judgment. He would suggest
that there are other means available to the City and other sources
of specific standards in the issuing of various permits, etc., that
make it possible for us to give the exact reason for approving or
disapproving a particular action. He felt that it might be legally
advisable to leave the City more discretion than to specify the
specific standards which were mentioned and further expressed concern
for the standards because they are not standards over which the City
has any control. He noted that the schools, for example, are some-
thing over which the City has no control and it may be difficult to
enforce or defend legal action if such is used as a standard for
City action. He felt it best to rely on things over which the City
has control and to leave the full range of options by the broad
language suggested in the draft.
At this time the Council discussed the pros and cons of the amendments
suggested by the Mayor with respect to the comment made by the City
Attorney.
Councilman Taylor stated that the problem of schools has always
been a major concern of the public and that this standard has been
included in other ordinances against the advice that the City is
walking on thin ice and cannot see where this instance is any
different.
The City Attorney stated that he can understand that what Councilman
Taylor is saying is that the standards already exist and there can
be little doubt as to what the City's standards are; however, in
his opinion this is not the place to once again list them but rather
to allow the City all the options available.
The Council then discussed the Housing Element of the General Plan.
The City Attorney felt that a phrase could be included in the draft
from the previously adopted standards that will clarify the situa-
tion without changing any of the meaning and would make it possible
for the Council to adopt at this meeting, and Councilman Taylor
stated that he would much prefer to see this also.
The Council then discussed the wording to be used with Mayor Miller
protesting that school housing and water supply is not the same as
municipal services and that it should be included.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the Council adopt the wording as
follows: "...where municipal services, and where public facilities
as set forth in Section such and such" be added and the City Attorney
suggested that the Council state, "...public facilities and municipal
services, as set forth..", which the Council agreed would be the
proper wording, so moved by Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Mayor
Miller and passed by unanimous vote.
Mayor Miller noted that the Council had no objection to the
addition of the wording, "after its development", and went on
to say that in Section 3. I., the last line should read, "...contrary
to their original intention, providing such properties are not in an
area subject to General Plan review or change".
The City Attorney stated that the intention of the first part of
Section 3. was to incorporate that notion, and read this to the
Council. He felt this would be a reiteration of that point and
the Mayor agreed to delete the wording suggested by him.
CM-27-377
-.-....-...---.--.----____~.______.____..__"._.____M..~_'_"_'~_.,_"_.__..._.~.__.,,_____~_,_._.,__,____.__._~_"
February 19, 1974
(Extension of Interim
Ordinance re Zoning)
Mayor Miller suggested adding to section 3. III., RS-3 or lower
density, and Councilman Taylor felt this would be combining
planning standards and that this is a prejudgment of the review,
and the Mayor stated that, on the contrary, this would allow
consideration of tract maps for RS-3 or lower density during
the moratorium and that the higher density would have to wait
until the General Plan review has been finished, which prompted
discussion regarding density and inasmuch as there was not a
consensus of approval by the Council over the wording the Mayor
withdrew the wording.
Councilman Pritchard asked if he is correct in assuming that
if the ordinance is continued at this time that any subsequent
Council can amend or repeal any action taken by the present
Council, and the City Attorney replied that this is correct if
there is a 4/5 vote.
At this time the Mayor restated the motion made by Councilman
Futch and seconded by Councilman Taylor to adopt the Planning
Commission's recommendations as written in the draft with the
following amendments: Section 3, "...and where public facilities
and municipal services, as set forth..." with the words, "after
its development", added after the words "residential development".
Prior to the vote the City Attorney noted that if the Council
adopts the ordinance at this time as an urgency ordinance, it
will be necessary to add a phrase which is required in urgency
ordinances and asked permission to add the phrase, which met
with the approval of the Council.
At this time the Council adopted the ordinance by a 4-1 vote
with Councilman Beebe dissenting, and the City Attorney read
the title.
ORDINANCE NO. 836
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE EXTENDING
FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR ORDINANCE NO. 813, PRE-
VIOUSLY EXTENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 825, PROVIDING
FOR THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE CITY
OF LIVERMORE, AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "A", FROM RESI-
DENTIAL LAND USE TO AGRICULTURAL.
JR. COLLEGE PUBLIC
WORKS EXTENSION
The discusssion regarding the Junior College Public Works exten-
sion was continued from the meeting of January 28, due to a tie
vote - Councilmen Futch and Beebe favoring the oversize line and
Councilman Pritchard and Mayor Miller against the oversize line.
Councilman Futch asked Mayor Miller to define what he meant by
the oversize line, and Mr. Lee offered to reply to the question,
explaining that the oversize line is a combination of IS-inch
and l8-inch lines south of the college site to the sewage treat-
ment plant that would provide for development in the area that
drains into Collier Canyon Road and then to the plant, which is
based on reduced densities as indicated in the current General
Plan. There is a total of 1,100 acres in the service area of
which perhaps 250 acres are in the City.
CM-27-378
February 19, 1974
(Jr. College Public
Works Extension)
Councilman Futch moved that the Council approve sanitary sewer lines
having dimensions of 12 and 15 inches, respectively, and water lines
of 14 inches to the Jr. College site; motion was seconded by Council-
man Beebe.
Councilman Futch explained the reason for his motion is that he can
see some expansion sometime in the future, but he felt it was the
Council's pOlicy that development will not occur in that area until
it is contiguous to the present residential developments, assuming
they would allow development in the Springtown, Greenville North and
Proud Country prior to development in the Jr. College area, with the
exception of housing for the students which might be allowed.
After this explanation by Councilman Futch, Councilman Beebe decided
to withdraw his second to the motion as he felt the IS and IS-inch
size was the only reasonable way to install a line.
Mayor Miller argued that this was not a good expenditure of the
taxpayers money if development is not expected for a decade or more.
Councilman Taylor stated there could be the argument of spending
money now when development is so far in the future; on the other hand
he did not feel it was true that an oversize line would encourage
development. Every sewer line placed in the City has been sized
to take care of what was expected, and it has been necessary to tear
up streets to add a second line, and he felt it would be reasonable
to size these utilities to what is reasonably expected according to
the general plan. It is just not true that to change the size of
the lines from 8" to l2" will bring about development or even encourage
it. On the other hand, if development around the junior college is
not expected in the forseeable future it is the same as saying that
we don't intend to grow in that area or service it; he felt the City
does not want to say that because we have assured LAFCO that we stand
ready to service the area and that it should be in our Sphere of In-
fluence because of this. We can't very well say two different things
at the same time, telling LAFCO one thing and the property owners
another, and would agree with the motion made by Councilman Futch.
Mr. Lee interjected that the Council might be mislead by the estimate
for putting in a future parallel line for $152,000; actually the cost
for the 12 and 15 inch lines vs. the 15 and 18 inch lines is a differ-
ence of about $27,000. The Council then discussed the estimates
regarding future lines.
Councilman Pritchard stated that in his opinion no matter what the
City of Livermore decides to do nothing will change the image that
LAFCO has of us and also it should not be assumed that development
will be desired there. It may happen that we do not want development
in that particular area and if this is the case the oversized lines
would be useless.
Councilman Taylor stated that first of all he is not concerned with
the image LAFCO has of us but feels that we have some obligation
to the property owners and they should know whether their future is
with Livermore or with Geldertown. He felt it is important to es-
tablish creditability in the City of Livermore. If the Council does
not want development over there, then come right out and say so;
don't try to fool people by saying we want controlled growth while
at the same time saying that we don't want to service the area be-
cause growth might occur if the lines are large enough to accommodate
growth.
Councilman Pritchard commented that this would mean an expenditure
of tax dollars now for development that might or might not ever
occur rather than letting future development pay for itself.
CM-27-379
February 19, 1974
(Jr. College Public
Works Extension)
Councilman Pritchard stated that it makes no sense to go over
and over the matter when it is apparent that two members of
the Council want lines the size to service only the Junior
College while three members of the Council wish to have the
larger lines and would suggest that the three in favor of the
larger lines now determine what size they would like and get
on with the matter.
Mayor Miller stated that he would like to comment that: 1) this
City has learned through bitter experience that leapfrog
development is never reasonable and by any definition, develop-
ment around the Junior College is leapfrog development; 2) the
fact that we have two-thirds of a million dollars in the ground
did not stop LAFCO from taking land from our Sphere of Influence,
and 3) to spend another $60,000 is no assurance that LAFCO will
not take the same area out of our Sphere of Influence again and
as pointed out we may decide not to have some of our areas develop-
ed at all and this may be one of them. He then pointed out that
there will be a new Council in about three weeks and if a decision
is made tonight it can reversed by the new Council and he would
suggest that it might be advisable to table the matter until the
new Council has been seated and has had a chance to review this
matter and moved that the matter be continued to March 25th,
seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
Mr. Lee commented that a decision is important relative to the
Junior College schedule and what they have asked us to do relative
to calling for bids and award of bids.
At this time the motion to continue failed 2-3 with Councilmen
Taylor, Futch and Beebe disseting.
Prior to a vote on Councilman Futch's motion he stated that he
would like to comment that in no way does his motion approve
residential development. We are not even approving an assess-
ment district but approving a benefit district over which the
City has complete control and it is the adopted position of the
Council to insist on contiguous development and are writing
requirements of timing in our General Plan so that the area
will be developed at such time as it is contiguous to present
residential development and would like these facts to be made
clear, and then called for the question.
The motion Councilman Beebe stated that he would like to say one thing
before the motion is voted on and that is that he cannot vote
to waste money which is the case if a size smaller than that
recommended after engineering studies have been done, is approved.
He stated that the engineer has recommended an 18-inch line and
to vote fo~a ything smaller would be derelict,. "- J .I '" 'I
. ' . ~~~~~~~r-~
Mayor M1ller p01nted out that~s 16 fte~ ~ money of the taxpayers
but rather money provided by the developers and if development
takes place in the future reqUiring~, arrgg:e,r or additional lines
the develOper~ay for this als~ot the taxpayers.
Councilman Pritchard called for the question and Mayor Miller
asked for a vote to the main motion which passed 3-2 (Councilman
Pritchard and Mayor Miller dissenting).
Mayor Miller moved to direct the staff to prepare alternate bids
for the 8 and lO inch lines, seconded by Councilman Pritchard which
failed 2-3 (Councilmen Taylor, Beebe and Futch dissenting).
AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS
PRESENT.
CM-27-380
February 19, 1974
DISCUSSION RE Z. O.
AMEND. RE INDUS. DIST.
/~,
(
Mayor Miller stated that the matter of the zoning ordinance amendment
regarding the Industrial District was continued from last week's
meeting at which time the ordinance was being reviewed section by
section making changes and reaffirming Planning Commission amendment
recommendations.
Councilman Futch commented that the general overall philosophy of
the ordinance was that there should be three districts and was
probably the major item discussed, in addition to districts abut-
ting residential property. Those were the major considerations
as well as the comments made by the Chamber of Commerce.
The Council then reviewed the contents of the ordinance draft,
section by section and Mayor Miller stated that in Section 14.22
he would like to delete Legal Services (652); Other Professional
Services (659); and that Business Services (63) should be non-sales.
Councilman Futch stated that he feels Mayor Miller is concerned
with real estate, in general, but it was concluded that real estate
sales pertaining to the industrial area would be allowed, and there
should probably be some provision for this, and which the Council
then discussed.
Mayor Miller moved that Insurance and Real Estate Services, other
than for sale of industtial property be deleted from Section 14.22,
which died for lack of a second.
Councilman Futch felt that there should be some limit to height
of the building (Section l4.73) and moved that if the proposed
height of a building is more than 4 stories high it would require
a CUP, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and which passed by unanimous
vote.
Councilman Pritchard moved to introduce the ordinance, as amended,
to be read by title only, seconded by Councilman Beebe and which
passed by a unanimous vote.
Milo Nordyke, speaking on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce Indus-
trial Committee thanked the Council for the support they have
received.
REPORT RE PUC APP. -
CHARTER AIR TAXI SERVICES
The City Manager reported that Marin Aviation is making application
to the PUC for a permit to furnish charter/air taxi service for
commuter service from our local airport and is interested in solicit-
ing the support of the City Council as well as to inform the City as
to what their intentions are. Mr. Parness added that there are
a few minor matters to be resolved that the staff would like to have
delegated to it if the permit is approved, such as the points of
boarding the plane and ticket purchasing arrangements.
Councilman Taylor moved that the Council support the application
with the details to be worked out by the staff, seconded by Councilman
Pritchard.
(
Dave Smith, representative of Marin Aviation spoke briefly on the
application and thanked the Council for any support given them.
At this time the motion passed by a unanimous vote.
CM-27-38l
February 19, 1974
REPORT RE BAR IN
EAST AVENUE SHOPPING CENTER
Based on a complaint by a citizen in the neighborhood of the Louis
Shopping Center (East Avenue Shopping Center) regarding a bar hav-
ing been allowed there by the City, the staff was directed to in-
vestigate on a possible violation and Mr. Musso gave an oral report
regarding the history surrounding the permit for the bar to be loca-
ted in the shopping center, noting that there is a common entrance
from the parking lot and two separate entrances to the pizza par-
lor and bar on the East Avenue side and that they are owned by two
different individuals with two separate liquor licenses. Mr. Musso
stated that he has investigated the bar as well as the pizza parlor
(each place on two occasions) and that on one occassion the wrought
iron gate separating the bar from the pizza parlor was closed sometime
after lO:OO p.m. and on the other occasion he did order food at the
bar and was served a sandwich and observed that out of the group in
the bar, three were eating lunch. It was his observation that there
was a free flow of customers from the bar to the pizza parlor and
that food is served in the bar, which in his opinion would be an
operation in the manner proposed by the City.
The City Attorney explained that he feels the City must look at
what the choices are, at this point, and would not view the setup
as a model of conformity with our ordinance but it would appear that
the efforts put forth by the owners of the establishments to coordi-
nate their enterprises could reasonably be viewed as falling within
the terms of our ordinance. The choices would be: 1) to allow the
operation to continue with a warning to the operating parties that
we expect as fully an integrated operation as the laws of the state
will allow with respect to liquor service and food service in con-
formity with our zoning ordinance; 2) to close down the operation
which he felt the City has no basis for doing; and 3) to examine
it in terms of a CUP in which he felt the standards would not be
any more difinitive than those previously examined. He stated
that his suggestion would be that the operation, as it exists, is
within the general terms of the ordinance and to perhaps address
a letter to the owners and operators as to the expectation of as
fully an integrated operation as the state and local law allows.
Councilman Taylor moved to adopt the City Attorney's recommendation,
seconded by Councilman Beebe.
Mayor Miller stated that another alternative would be to close off
the separate entrances and have a common entrance and Councilman
Pritchard stated that he thought this is what the law requires.
Councilman Pritchard stated that there is not a common entrance
on either the East Avenue side or the other side of the building
and that the common archway inside the building between the two
establishments does not satisfy this requirement, in his opinion.
Tbe City Attorney explained that the common entrance is a physical
means of demonstrating that the two operations are integrated and
coordinated - not a standard provided by statutes. He stated that
as far as he is concerned they did everything the City asked them
to do although he was not aware they intended to have separate
entrances but is not sure that the City, at this point, could
legally require them to provide a common entrance.
Councilman Taylor felt that people should not have to go through
the bar to go into the pizza parlor which would be the case with
a common entrance.
CM-27-382
c
February 19, 1974
(Report re Bar in East
Avenue Shopping Center)
Councilman Futch stated that he feels the ordinance should be
tightened up to reflect the intent of the Council but is not
sure what can be done about the present problem.
Colonel Peeke, 4291 Amhurst Way, stated that he has been in
the bar on two occasions and could not get food from the bar
and telephoned to ask if food was served in the bar and was
told that it is not, that a customer would have to go next
door to the pizza parlor. He stated that he has also been
to the pizza parlor and is very pleased with the service and
the manner in which it is run and is very happy to have it in
the neighborhood; however, he would call the bar next to it a
saloon. He pointed out that when he first found out that some-
one was applying for a liquor license he contacted Mr. Musso
who explained that if the establishment was to be a restaurant
with a bar this would be permitted, but if the liquor license
was to be issued for a bar there would have to be a public hear-
ing to hear protests from the citizens, as was done in another
case and subsequently not permitted as a result of the public
testimony. He stated that he told Mr. Musso if there was such
a public hearing he would like to have the opportunity to pro-
test at the hearing. He stated that to his knowledge there was
no public hearing and that the license, therefore, was illegally
obtained and should be revoked. He felt the license should be
applied for properly, if they wish to have a bar there, hold a
public hearing so that the people in the neighborhood can testi-
fy in protest to the bar. He stated that he has spoken to a
number of residents of the area who object and felt that the
entire matter should be investigated.
Harry West, 1126 Tulane Court, stated that his understanding
of the ordinance is that it allows liquor to be served for
dining patrons which he feels makes sense and is the intention
of the ordinance. He feels that the interpretation of the City
Attorney and the Planning Director is very revealing and that
he feels the common entrance is a way of getting around the ordi-
nance and that the City has done a disservice to its citizens by
having done such and that something should be done to rectify the
situation.
Mayor Miller stated that he does not like this situation and does
not approve of the layout and if they do not serve food there is
a possiblity they can be closed down.
There was brief discussion regarding the Twilight Zone bar and
the Courtroom bar (adjacent to the Sizzler) and it was noted
that the Twilight Zone Bar had been occupied without City approval
except through issuance of a business license which at that time
was considered to constitute City approval while the Court Room Bar had
been approved in a similar manner except that the building inspector
did not follow the approved plot plan.
The City Attorney stated that these instances would indicate that
perhaps the portion of the ordinannce pertaining to the neighbor-
hood shopping center restaurant-bar uses should be spelled out
in considerably greater detail, as each person's interpretation
is as valid as the next person's interpretation.
At this time the motion to adopt the City Attorney's recommendation
passed 4-1 (Councilman Pritchard dissenting).
Councilman Taylor moved to direct the Planning Commission to re-
examine the City's ordinance regarding neighborhood shopping
center restaurant-bar uses, seconded by Councilman Beebe.
CM-27-383
February 19, 1974
(Report re Bar in East
Avenue Shopping Center)
David Eller, 3797 Oregon Way, asked for the definition of a common
entrance and it was explained that the condition of a common ent-
rance is not in our ordinance so this is not a condition that one
could apply. He then commented that there are times in which the
bar serves food and when it is not available and the Mayor explained
that this is exactly the type of thing which is going to be monitored,
and hopefully the people residing in the area will keep the City post-
ed if they do not obey the condition of providing food and then the
City may be able to act.
Colonel peeke insisted that the City give some response to the fact
that five years ago there was a hearing regarding a bar in the area
which was turned down due to the opposing testimony at a public
hearing and that there was no such public testimony this time.
Mayor Miller explained that the reason there was no public hearing
was because it was the City's understanding that this was going
to be a restaurant with a bar and Colonel peeke stated that if this
is the case they obtained their liquor license illegally and the
use should be abated.
Mayor Miller explained that our ordinance which talks about bars and
restaurants is not sufficiently specific so as to distinguish this
particular case from the situation which requires a hearing and agrees
that this particular instance is wrong but the ordinance does not have
the proper wording to allow the City to make the distinction and we
can do nothing about it. He explained further that five years ago an
application was made for a bar only, which required a public hearing
and for which public protest was received.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to send the ordinance to
the Planning Commission for consideration.
Mayor Miller felt that a resolution of the matter is to ask the City
Attorney to examine the question of whether or not the issue can be
reopened from the standpoint of a public hearing, so moved by Council-
man Pritchard and seconded by Mayor Miller.
Mr. West stated that he spoke with both the City Attorney and Mr. Musso
long before permission was given for the use and at this time there
should have been attention given to the fact that people were ques-
tioning the application of the ordinance regarding the matter.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote to ask the City
Attorney to find out if the matter can be reopened and a public
hearing held.
REPORT RE BART EXTENSION
STUDY - CORRIDOR SELECTION
The City Manager reported that the major planning effort of the Liver-
more-Pleasanton BART extension study regarding corridor extension
is in its final stage and a decision must be made as to the selection
of a rail extension corridor. Two possibilities remain in contention,
i.e., Dublin Canyon (Route 1-580) and San Ramon via Walnut Creek. The
Dublin Canyon route is a service to the Livermore Valley people and
would be the most beneficial to us and it might be noted that the
Walnut Creek City Council also adopted a resolution opposing the San
Ramon corridor and it is recommended that the Council declare its
favor of the Dublin Canyon corridor so that our representative may
vote accordingly at the February 22nd meeting of the Board of Controls.
The Council has received a copy of the summary and conclus-
ion of the consultants report on the project as well as a report from
the Planning Commission and Robert S. Allen of the American Taxpayers'
Union. It was also mentioned that the intra-valley route can be
decided upon at a later time.
CM-27-384
February 19, 1974
(Bart Extension Study -
Corridor Selection)
~"
Councilman Futch moved that the City Council declare its support
for the Dublin Canyon corridor and continue the issue regarding
the intra-valley route to a later date, seconded by Councilman
Beebe and which passed by unanimous vote.
P. C. REPORT RE APP.
FOR REZONING OF LASSEN
RD. FROM A TO CN DIST.
Mr. Musso reported that at the Planning Commission meeting of
February 5, 1974, it considered the referral from the Alameda
County Planning Commission regarding the application of the
Lassen Investors for rezoning the stub end of Lassen Road near
the intersection of Springtown Boulevard from A to CN District,
and recommends approval based on certain findings which he
explained and subject to annexation to the City of Livermore
and that the zoning be considered temporary and that if annexa-
tion to the City or development does not occur within l~ years,
action be initiated to rezone the property. Mr. Musso also
illustrated on the map the area considered for the rezoning.
Councilman Taylor expressed concern for ending up with a lot
of undeveloped commercial land out in the Springtown area and
it would appear that a bad situation is developing.
Councilman Beebe moved to adopt the Planning Commission's recom-
mendation, seconded by Councilman Futch which passed unanimously.
P. C. REPORT RE
ANNEXATION OF MAX
BAER PARK
A report was submitted to the City Council by the Planning
Commission regarding the proposed annexation of Max Baer Park
and it was noted that the report is required for all annexa-
tions and can be filed pending further action.
On motion of Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman Beebe
and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted the Planning
Commission recommendation to annex the subject property.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES - Feb. 5, 1974
The minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting of February 5,
1974, were noted for filing.
RE PUC HEARING - WESTERN
UNION RATE INCREASE
/
The City Manager reported that the matter of the PUC hearing re-
garding Western Union rate increases was postponed from the last
Council meeting. Since that time he has spoken with a company
official who indicated that it has been a number of years since
there has been a rate increase and that the basic purpose for
the adjustment is to make the rates equal throughout the country.
All states are being asked to adopt the same interstate rate which
the company argues is necessary to sustain their new computerized
system. At present about 14 states have agreed to the rate in-
crease, and it is recommended that such matters are involved and
highly technical in nature which would require a thorough investi-
gation by knowledgeable persons and that an official position in
opposition to their request would be inappropriate.
CM-27-385
February 19, 1974
(Re Western Union Rate Increase)
Councilman Taylor moved to adopt the City Manager's recommendation,
seconded by Councilman Beebe.
Mayor Miller stated that he would disagree with the motion and feels
that the City should protest the rate increase.
Councilmen Futch and Pritchard stated that they would have to agree
with Mayor Miller and would support the resolution drafted by the
City Attorney opposing the rate increase, and Councilman Pritchard
stated that he feels the rate increase appears to be blatant.
The City Manager commented that on the surface it may appear to be
blatant but the Council has only seen a one page summary sheet of
what the essence of the recommendations are which merely gives some
of the comparative rate adjustments. In speaking with the vice
president of the company, some of the background has been revealed
concerning the justification for the rate increase. He sent a copy
of the application to Mr. Parness, unsolicited, and an example of
what he is trying to impress upon the Council, which is that the
document consists of 31 pages of written statements with 8 exhibits
and about 50 pages of technical detail that serve as justification
for the request. He emphasized that the matter is highly complex
and a subject inappropriate for any agency to state a view on unless
we are well versed and have ample justification for such a position.
He added that he feels the prestige~ and official voice of the City
should be very carefully preserved and reserved.
Councilman Futch stated that it isn't as if the City is taking a
stand on a particular price and the resolution is mild and the
City Manager replied that he feels the resolution is an unnecessary
expression, and the PUC is there for the public interest in making
sure that there is economic justification for rate increases.
Mayor Miller stated that he just does not believe this, as he has
seen the PUC as a body which does not represent him at all and
that some response from public agencies should be made.
Councilman Futch stated that he can well understand the concern
of the City Manager but presumably the law was drafted in such a
way as to give public agencies the opportunity for input directly
to the PUC and to say that we will never investigate rate increases
might also be an unreasonable approach and the City Manager noted
that if the Council wishes to respond to this rate increase it
should be consistent and take a stand on all rate increases which
he felt is an impractical impossibility.
Councilman Futch stated that this is much the same as acting on
some legislation but not all legislation, as far as making any
type of recommendation - if is considered important to act, the
Council takes a position.
At this time the Council voted on the motion made by Councilman
Taylor to take no position, which failed 2-3 (Councilmen Pritchard,
Futch and Mayor Miller dissenting).
On motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and
by a 4-1 vote (Beebe abstaining) the resolution concerning the
revision of the Wester Union rates was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 20-74
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE PROPOSED REVISION
OF WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY RATES.
CM-27-386
February 19, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
r'
(re Underground Salts)
Councilman Beebe stated that Marti Kardinal would like to speak
to the Council regarding the study she has done regarding the
underground salts in the channel and wondered if she would be
able to speak to the Council on March 4th and on motion of
Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and by
unanimous vote the Council agreed to schedule the report for
the meeting of March 4, 1974.
(re Motion to Purchase
Engravings for Art Trophy)
Councilmam Pritchard moved that the Council authorize an expen-
diture not to exceed $25 for two small engravings to go on the
perpetual plaque of the art trophy which has recently been placed
in the public library as part of our Cultural Arts Fair. Each
year there are two awards and the two plaques that go on it are
about $11 each and would like these to be added to our purchase
award money, and to be considered in the budget. The motion
was seconded by Mayor Miller and the motion passed by unanimous vote.
(Motion Authorizing
ABAG Delegate)
Mayor Miller stated that he will not be able to attend the all
day ABAG meeting to be held on Thursday and asked if any member
of the Council would be able to attend, and Councilman Futch
stated that he plans to attend.
On motion of Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman Beebe
and by unanimous vote, Councilman Futch was nominated as the
ABAG delegate.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Re Railroad Negotiations)
The City Attorney briefly commented on the status of the railroad
pertaining to the two week delay allowed by him for the immediate
possession as a gesture of good faith and to avoid litigation.
He reported that the railroad (WP) under that agreement had until
February l5th to file a demurrer or some other pleading resisting our
order for immediate possession and they did file such a demurrer which
will be heard in Superior Court on February 28th and our order will
presumably take affect on March 1, as scheduled.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, Mayor Miller adjourned the
meeting at l2:05 a.m.
(
I
APPROVE
ATTEST~
{)~~'~I,
Mayor
C1ty C erk
vermore, California
CM-27-387
Regular Meeting of February 25, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on February 25, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Miller presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Beebe, Taylor, Futch, Pritchard and Mayor
Miller
ABSENT: None
BOY SCOUT ATTENDANCE
Mr. Sutliff, Scout Executive, thanked the Council for allowing
the Boy Scouts to attend the Council meeting. He spoke briefly
on the viewpoints of boys not yet of voting age regarding the pOliti-
cal aspects of our local community and stated that these young
men may one day assume the role of politician and because of exposure
at an early age may perhaps be more prepared to handle the tasks
involved.
Mayor Miller introduced Wes Chapman, the equivalent of the Mayor
this evening, who introduced the boys attending from his troup
and asked those of other troups to introduce themselves.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Mayor then asked the Boy Scouts to lead the Council members
as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Alle-
giance.
COUNCIL MINUTES
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard
and by a 4-1 vote (Councilman Taylor abstaining) the minutes for
the meeting of February ll, 1974 were approved as corrected.
OPEN FORUM
(re Proposed Bowling
Alley)
Durwood Green, l337 Kathy Court, as the President of one of the
evening bowling leagues spoke in favor of the proposed new bowl-
ing alley to be located over by the airport and listed complaints
regarding the local bowling alley adding that a number of people
drive to Danville and Castro Valley to bowl because the only time
the bowling alley is not taken over by leagues is at 1:00 a.m.
and during church service time. He felt that another bowling alley
could be supported by the community and due to the energy and gaso~
line situation it would be nice if people did not have to go out
of town to bowl. In summary, Mr. Green stated that the local bowling
alley is reluctant to provide the services normally expected in
an alley and would urge the Council to approve the application
for the bowling alley.
Mayor Miller thanked Mr. Green for his comments and stated that
these will be considered when the matter again comes before the
Council.
CM-27-388
February 25, 1974
SPECIAL ITEM - REPORT
RE YOUTH SERVICES
CENTER PROGRAM
('''\
(
\
Dr. Mike Petrillo, Director of the Valley Youth Services Center,
commented that he is pleased to see the Boy Scouts attending the
meeting and is sure that if there were more such organizations
that the Valley Youth Services would not be needed; however there
are many young people in need of the services provided by the Center.
It has been in existance for the past II months and has been refunded
for a second year. It is suggested that the name of the program be
changed, as there is a Valley Youth Service in the valley and this
is a Youth Service Project, which has been causing some confusion.
He suggested that the name be changed to "HORIZONS" which has been
suggested by the Board, and noted that it will not change the nature
of the program but will offer a new public relations name. He then
gave an oral report of the work being done through the program and
the number of people and families being served, and urged that the
Council approve the requested name change.
Councilman Beebe commented that he thought the program was a three
year program and Dr. Petrillo explained that the first two years are
funded and the third year's funding is reduced considerably and this
should be a consideration during next year's budget planning.
Councilman Beebe moved that the Council adopt the name of "HORIZONS"
for the project, seconded by Councilman Taylor and which passed by
a unanimous vote.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Livermore
Police Reserves
Chief of Police Lindgren submitted a written report regarding the
activities of the Livermore Police Reserves for the year 1973
noting that it would be difficult to imagine the level of service
being maintained without the tireless efforts of the Citizen-Police
Officer.
Mayor Miller stated that the Police Reserves is of great value to
the community and that they and the Police Department deserve our
support.
Report re Bay Delta
Solid Waste Project
The City Manager reported that in order to maintain the progress
of the Bay Delta solid waste disposal study a six month budgetary
commitment in the amount of $875 must be made by the signatory
agencies to the joint powers agreement of which we are a part ani
it is recommended that the Council authorize this financial pledge.
~
I
(
Report re Doolan Canyon
Reservoir Site Condemna-
Proceedings
The City Manager reported that as a part of our water reclamation
plant modification, installation of a reservoir is planned which
will be located on property adjoining Doolan Canyon. The site is
CM-27-389
February 25, 1974
(Doolan Canyon Reservoir)
located north of I-580 which consists of approximately 7.11 acres
and has been appraised at $1,500 per acre. The owner has rejected
our appraisal value for this property and it is recommended that
the Council adopt a resolution authorizing conduct of eminent domain
proceedings.
RESOLUTION NO. 21-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF FEE SIMPLE
ESTATE FOR PUBLIC SEWAGE TREATMENT, RESERVOIR AND RELATED PUR-
POSES, A PARCEL OF LAND APPROXIMATELY 7.11 ACRES ADJOINING
DOOLAN CANYON NORTH OF 1-580, ALAMEDA COUNTY.
payroll & Claims
There were 37 claims in the amount of $54,820.64 and 286 payroll
warrants in the amount of $72,839.83 for a total of $l27,660.47,
dated February 2, 1974, and ordered paid.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would like to abstain from
Warrant #9l15 for his usual reasons.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman Futch and
by unanimous vote, the Consent Calendar was approved with Councilman
Beebe's abstention from the warrant, as noted.
COMMUNICATIONS RE
COMPLAINTS RE SALE
OF GASOLINE
Roman J. Morkowski, 1987 De Vaca Way, wrote a letter to the
Council regarding the gasoline situation and asked that the
matter be placed on the agenda so that he might explain his
situation. He noted that he is receiving unemployment insurance
which necessitates three trips to Hayward every two weeks, thus
costing him $50 a month for gasoline. He stated that he is in
need of this money and the $50 is a burden to him. They have
indicated that if he fails to keep his appointment his payments
will be delayed or withheld and there are times when he is unable
to get gasoline. He pointed out that there are predictions of
unemployment rates of 8% in the state of California and that
there are many chain reactions to this problem which make it
more tragic than stated. He urged that something be done to
get an unemployment office in our area.
Councilman Taylor stated that it is his understanding that the
unemployment office is a state function and that it is up to
the state as to the location of such offices. He commented
that perhaps the Council should encourage location of an office
in this area.
The City Manager stated that in sympathy with the comments made
by Mr. Morkowski he has spoken with three parties associated
with the State Employment Office regarding the problem and it
is true that in the past, strict regulations were enforced and
people were required to appear on a given day; however, in view
of the current circumstances regarding the difficulty of travel
this requirement has been modified considerably. He has been
told by the head of the Hayward office that a person may apply
for benefits on any day if they have their certification with
them and the City Manager stated that this may help. He stated
that he has the assurance of Mr. Humphries that one need appear
and can qualify for payment when certification has been given.
Mr. Morkowski stated that his point is that one trip a month
would be too much. He is required to appear at the union hall
CM-27-390
February 25, 1974
(Gasoline Problems)
once a week and then at the employment office once and asked that
the Council consider those even less fortunate than him - those
who have to drive all the way to Hayward to collect only $30.
~
Bob Graybow stated that he is in complete sympathy with the comments
made by Mr. Morkowski and is one of the few people in the valley
who has been working on the problem of having to commute and spend-
ing money to obtain money. He pointed out that certain businesses
are required to belong and abide by the union rules and that they
are hiring out of our area while it is still necessary to drive to
Hayward and Oakland to collect unemployment checks.
Mayor Miller stated that from the letter received from Mr. Morkowski
and from things that have come to his mind while listening to the
comments this evening, it would appear that there are perhaps two
alternatives that might be put into action to help alleviate the
existing problem: I) arrange for mailing of checks to those receiv-
ing unemployment money; and 2) arrange to have a representative come
to Livermore one day a week to the County offices which are located
in Livermore, and agreed that Mr. Morkowski's request for a resolu-
tion to be sent to the state regarding the matter is reasonable. He
added that perhaps concurrent resolutions by all the jurisdictions
might be valuable.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the Council take such action but
would like to add that it might be a good idea to contact Mr. Bee
and ask for an appraisal of the situation and if there is some help
that he can lend us in the manner of a bill that might change some
of the procedure. He suggested that the League of California Cities
also be asked to join in this endeavor and that the City Attorney
be requested to draft a resolution which would reflect the intent
as a result of the discussion, seconded by Councilman Taylor.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to adopt a resolution
which would express the desire of the Council, on behalf of its
residents to contact the state with respect to unemployment, contact
Assemblyman Bee and Senator Bradley, ask for support from Pleasanton
and Dublin and to contact the League of California Cities with re-
gard to representation in isolated cities.
Councilman Pritchard stated that our situation is not unlike other
communities of our geographical and numerical status in other urban
counties where they are isolated and feels there are other cities
that would be happy to join us in this effort.
Mr. Chapman stated that he once lived in Lancaster which is about
80 miles from Los Angeles and that they experienced the same prob-
lems and it was arranged for a representative from the State Employ-
ment Office to meet at the Lancaster Social Security Office so that
people would not have to travel to Los Angeles.
The City Attorney stated that essentially the resolution is that
rather than have the people go to the government the government
should come to the people, which the Mayor stated was well put.
The City Attorney commented that since the State Employment service
is 100% federally funded and acts as an adjunct of the federal
government it would probably be wise to communicate with Congressman
Stark and our two Senators.
Mayor Miller suggested that those persons interested in this matter
as individuals contact Assemblyman Bee and Congressman Stark. Congress-
man Stark has an office at the Livermore Airport and can be reached
by telephone. He added that Congressman Stark is fairly responsive.
RESOLUTION NO. 28-74
A RESOLUTION SEEKING IMPROVED SERVICE TO THE LIVER~ORE/fu~DOR
VALLEY BY THE DEPARTr1ENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT.
CM-27-39l
February 25, 1974
(Communications re
Gasoline Problems)
Mayor Miller stated that a letter has been received from Gerald Fulk,
1330 Juliet Court, regarding gasoline distribution and availability
to the citizens of Livermore. The letter indicated that he feels
the City has cause to investigate whether or not the City is receiv-
ing its allocation of gasoline as specified by the federal government,
whether the amount is adequate and if the dealers are acting illegally
by conspiring to limit the sale of gasoline.
Mayor Miller stated that he has been contacted by a number of people
regarding the gasoline shortage situation and one of the points raised
has been that a substantial fraction of the citizens of Livermore are
commuters who depend on gasoline, as are the residents of Dublin and
Pleasanton.
Mr. Fulk spoke to the Council regarding the problems in the valley
and the reasons which promped him to write to the Council. He noted
that the deteriorating situation in Livermore is not consistent with
the announced federal policy for fair and equitable distribution,
and feels that the problem is serious enough to warrant investigation
by the City government. He stated that he feels the minimum solution
would be to ask the dealers to cooperate by posting their hours if it
is necessary for them to operate during short periods of time. He
stated that he feels it unnecessary that people should have to line
up for blocks to find out, in some cases, that the station is not
open or out of gasoline.
Herbert Slack, 1944 Linden Street, stated that upon speaking with a
representative of the IRS in San Francisco he was advised to circulate
a petition regarding the gasoline problem, and that in two hours
he received 150 signatures on the petition. He stated that if
he can get a sufficient number of signatures on the petition it
could be sent to our Congressmen asking that stations open at a
certain time and that they be required to post their hours, and
also that the stations stagger their hours. At present all of
the stations are opened during the same few hours causing the tie-
up in traffic. He then read the text of the petition to the members
of the Council.
One member of the audience stated that he believes the City govern-
ment has the power to require the station operators to post their
hours for the convenience and public welfare of the citizens.
Mayor Miller commented on the fact that there is one station in
the City which has a $3.00 minimum and if you buy $2.00 worth of
gasoline you are charged $3.00. He stated that this would appear
to be a violation of law and it would seem that something should be
done to get this stopped, and Councilman Pritchard replied that re-
garding this particular situation the IRS has been contacted and has
replied to him in writing which he will release for publication by
the newspapers. He then read the section regarding prohibition of
the sale of gasoline in this manner. The customer may be charged
only for the amount of gasoline pumped at the lawful price authorized.
He stated that he would hope the newspapers will publicize this and
that people will report any such "gougingll.
Councilman Taylor stated that rarely is a private enterprise type
of business interfered with; however, when it comes to a matter
concerning public necessity something must be done and feels the
federal government has been wrong in not adopting a reasonable
rationing plan. He stated that he feels the City may not be able
to step in and do anything but that the state probably can do some-
thing to regulate business and moved that the staff give the Council
a plan of action, and that the City contact the owners to ask if they
will cooperate in posting hours. He felt it would be better to have
them volunteer to help than to try to force them to cooperate, sec-
onded by Councilman Futch.
CM-27-392
February 25, 1974
(Gasoline Problems)
~
Mayor Hiller listed the items of concern, as follows:
1) Is there anything that can be done with respect to regulating
stations' hours?
2) How can we find out if our gasoline stations are receiving
their fair allocations?
3) Where can we push for receiving a more equitable allocation?
The City Attorney commented that he has shared the same frustration
of waiting in line for gasoline and feels that it may be possible
for the City to do something, but it may be the least appropriate
level of action because it can influence the situation in only a
limited area but maybe we can get the ball rolling. He stated
that we will probably have to prove the exisbance o~lem,
if we are to do anything sufficient to warrant the noe of
the police ~3r~t and the basis on which we would act. There
are two thingson which to base action, such as the threat to the econo-
mic welfare of the citizens by the fact that without transportation
they are unable to get to their employment creating a potential economic
crisis and the other is the number of cars lined up for blocks, possibly
blocking public highways due to the conduct of private business. He
pointed out that the dealers are under fire also because they would
much prefer to sell gasoline to all the customers they could possibly
service and are put in the position of being policemen as well as
service station dealers and would believe that a good number of them
are uncomfortable. He mentioned that there have been some tentative
ordinances drafted in other places in the state which include a number
of steps which can do no more than make the inconvenience a little
less frustrating and all concern matters of public information, as
follows: I) having clear visible current information regarding the
state and availability of gasoline such as a brand, grade and price
per gallon of the gasoline being sold that day and also any restrictions
regarding the purchase of gas, such as minimum or maximum amounts,
2) posting the amount of the current lawful price of gas under federal
regulation, and 3) the posting of hours. He felt we can not get to
the point where we can dictate hours but can certainly, by legal means,
require the posting of hours they choose to be open and perhaps with
cooperative negotiations with the owners the City can get them to
stagger their hours. The final possibility would be the alternate
day system according to numbers on license plates. He stated that
it could be adopted on a City level but would be much more effective
and influential if it were adopted on a County level and proposed
that with the Council direction the matter be approached both at the
federal level working down and the County level working up and see
where we get the most response.
Wes Chapman (Mayor for the evening) stated that the Governor today
approved a plan for the counties of the state to implement a gas
rationing program, voluntarily, such as that adopted in the state
of Oregon.
One member of the community stated that it has been noted that about
50% of the people waiting in line are getting only two gallons of
gasoline in cars that hold 20 gallons, thus, merely topping off, and
if these people would stay out of lines this would help alleviate
the problem.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to prepare a plan of
action for later implementation.
RECESS
Mayor Miller called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM-27-393
February 25, 1974
COMMUNICATION FROM
LARPD RE SEWER
CONNECTION FEE WAIVER
A letter was received from LARPD requesting that the Council
waive the payment for the sewer connection fee incurred as a
result of the Max Baer Park-Murdell Lane improvements noting
that a similar waiver was granted when the existing restrooms
at Max Baer Park were connected to the City sewer system in 1968.
The City Manager explained that this case is somewhat different,
as this involves a private residence, and on motion of Councilman
Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe and by unanimous vote, the
request was denied.
REPORT RE GREENVILLE
NORTH CITIZENS COMPLAINTS
Mayor Miller reported that a joint meeting was held on February 2,
between the residents of Greenville North and City representatives
with Councilman Futch, Don Bradley, George Musso, representatives
of the School District and Park District attending the meeting
headed by the Mayor. The Mayor explained that complaints and
grievances were noted and promises made that there would be some
response to these issues and written statements have been prepared
by four major City departments as well as a comment from the Liver-
more Disposal Service. He then read a list of complaints over matters
that would have to be taken care of through long range planning such
as neighborhood park acquisition priority or community park or both.
He explained that this is a budgeted item which will take place in
the next 12 months (the acquisition ) and should be discussed by
the new Council as far as priority is concerned; 2) the use of park
fund money for acquisition vs. park development, and should also
wait until the new Council can discuss this; 3) the legality of issuing
building permits for the Greenville area only despite the present
moratorium; 4) developer misrepresentation in the sale of homes,
which the Mayor explained is a civil matter which should be handled
by the District Attorney but it is possible for the City to work
with a complaint in this matter which was also commented upon by
the City Attorney.
Mr. Lee then briefly reported the bike route plan being worked out
which includes a bike rou~on Vasco Road and First Street noting
that these streets are, however, in the County jurisdiction,."
Mr. Musso commented that a plan has been adopted by the Planning
Commission which should be coming to the Council sometime in March
regarding a dirt trail along the Arroyo Seco.
Mayor Miller stated that the next item concerns the timing of shop-
ping center development - there is an approved shopping center at
portola and First Street and a question has been rasied as to whether
the City has the legal authority to stage the development of shopping
centers. The City Attorney has responded that it can stage the develop-
ment only within some very restricted limitation. If all the standards
are satisfied the City cannot stop a shopping center in an already
approved zoning; however, that one does not satisfy all the standards.
CM-27-394
February 25, 1974
(Greenville North
Discussion)
~
\~ -
Mayor Miller stated that the other items of concern have to do
with uncompleted buildings in the area and the Building Inspector
has reported that the buildings are not unsafe structurally but
the citizens in that area have been asked to report any type of
vandalism or anything that would make them unsafe structures.
In response to the possibility of abatement of these nuisances,
the City can proceed to abate the uncompleted buildings as nuisances
if nothing else is done. It is possible to have them torn down but
obviously it would be better to get the buildings completed. It was
also suggested that the staff work with the successors to get these
houses completed which the Mayor stated is in the process and is
scheduled for discussion as the next agenda item.
Violations regarding abandoned vehicles and other items as well
as trailer storage violations are being investigated by the staff
at this time and it is asked that violations be reported to City
Hall.
Mr. Lee commented on the maintenance of street trees in certain
areas by the City as well as the repaving of Vasco Road and the
bike trail on Vasco Road noting that this will be done contingent
upon the availability of asphalt and there are no plans at this time
for a bike trail along that road.
Mayor Miller stated that the City has put some pressure on the
Livermore Disposal Company regarding the speed of their trucks
on Vasco Road and they have responded in writing stating that
their drivers are being instructed to drive at 35 m.p.h. on Vasco
Road and have suggested that the City consider changing the speed
limit in the developed area from 45 m.p.h. to 35 m.p.h.
As far as the responsibility for the maintenance of Altamont Creek,
it has been revealed that it belongs to Zone 7 who has been con-
tacted and notified of the complaints.
Regarding the boundaries of the City limits with respect to
emergency response, both the Police and Fire Departments have
stated that everybody has been notified to pay attention to the
boundaries and to respond whenever there is doubt.
Mr. Lee reported on the maintenance of the masonry fences noting
that if problems are observed these should be reported to the
City who will take care of them as soon as possible. The brick
fence along Dalton Avenue is still the responsibility of the
developer to maintain until the City has accepted the tract and
if problems are reported to the City it will see that the developer
takes care of it or that it is somehow taken care of. As far as
the City knows, there is no problem with the fence at present.
As far as the B-B gun episode, the Mayor stated that the Police
Chief commented that without knowing who the officers were that
were involved it is hard to follow up; however, if there is any
question of B-B gun violations, complaints should be directed to
the department head and if one feels uneasy about contacting the
head of a department it is asked that they contact a member of
the Council.
The Mayor stated that for the most part the list of things within
the staff's power have been done, hopefully to the satisfaction
of the residents of the Greenville area, and if not, comments can
be made later in the meeting.
CM-27-395
February 25, 1974
(Greenville North)
Mr. Musso commented that the City is presently preparing a spe-
cific plan for Area 18 (the Greenville Springtown area) and the
matter of the Springtown Boulevard realignment has now been resol-
ved. It is anticipated that there will be a public hearing regarding
the planning for this area sometime in the summer.
Mayor Miller then asked for comments from the public regarding
the complaints regarding Greenville North.
John Brumer, 5713 Running Hills, stated that someone from the
City was supposed to supply a list of the various City committees
and volunteer committees upon which vacancies exist that the people
in Greenville North might be interested in serving on, and also
that he has given his name and telephone number to two members of
the Beautification Committee expressing a wish to have them visit
the Greenville North area and as yet has not been contacted. He
stated that he would like the City to be a bit more specific re-
garding action being taken using the fence along Vasco Road as
an example. He stated that a portion of the fence has been crumb-
ling for months and they would like to know if the City is taking
care of this or if a contractor has been contacted to do the job.
He stated that their primary concern, at present, is that if the
City grants any request to the KissellCompany regarding completion
of the homes, that it first require dedication of the park for
the park adjacent to the school.
Councilman Futch stated it was his understanding some of the
funds for the purchase of the community park would be in the
next year's budget, and questioned if it was some or all, and
Mr. Musso stated there are some funds and if they are not needed
for neighborhood parks, they will be available for the acquisition
of a portion of the community park, and there has been some dis-
cussion regarding the location of the community park.
Councilman Taylor suggested that if Mr. Brumer did not have copies
of the various reports that they be furnished,~, in order that he
might know which department to contact.
Mayor Miller remarked that the point Mr. Brumer raised concerning
specifics was a good one, however the Council is not aware of all
the specifics and suggested that these be supplied to the staff
directly. If the listed items are not taken care of within a
reasonable time, the Council should be contacted again.
Mr. Brumer remarked that he was aware of the fact that there would
have to be some necessary followup.
Councilman Futch commented that the fire department has been out
trying to get some of the rubble piles and weeds cleaned up, and
asked if there had been any noticable difference, and Mr. Brumer
replied not recently. The residents are concerned with the debris
in the garages of the unfinished homes, and yet they were not consid-
ered a fire hazard by the fire department. Councilman Futch sug-
gested that the Fire Chief respond to the time scale, and Fire
Chief Baird stated he planned to check these out again in the morn-
ing regarding fire hazard.
Dan Silberberg, 5725 Idlewild, stated he accompanied the building
inspector when he inspected homes, and he indicated that all the
homes he inspected were within the building code. If that is a
fact, Mr. Silberberg felt that the building code needs to be
amended.
Mayor Miller stated this has been suggested before, but they
have not had any luck in attempting to do this; one of the problems
being that if the code differs from the uniform building code,
state law requires that the differences be justified.
cm-27-396
February 25, 1974
(Complaints re
Greenville North Area)
/~'
(
\
Mr. Silberberg stated there is also a lot of motorcycle riding in
the area, and drag racing, and he felt this to be very dangerous.
Mr. Silberberg wondered it it would be possible to establish a
police substation in the area, however Mayor Miller stated there are
no other substations in the City. It had been suggested that there
be more intensive enforcement in the area.
June Hamilton, 948 Florence Road, stated she was a member of the
Beautification Committee, and through the Planning Commission they
were advised there should be some observation in Greenville North, and
their chairman has been out and surveyed the area.m She invited any-
one from the Greenville North area to attend one of their meetings,
and stated there is a vacancy on the Committee and would invite
someone from that area to apply for the position as there is no re-
presentative from either Greenville North or Springtown on the Com-
mittee.
Diane Winters from Greenville West commented favorably on the speed
in getting answers from the Council and staff as she realized there
were certain channels to go through; however she got the impression
that these problems will be handed to the new Councilmen. She stressed
their concern for the conditions and questioned the building inspec-
tor's okay on the houses as she considered them to be a def nite
hazard now, and not what might happen later on. She also had a ques-
tion for the park department as she had read it would be likely there
would not be a park in the Proud Country area due to the alkali
content in the ground. There are people living there who know how
to grow lawns and plants in that soil, and the park department should
be able to follow suit.
Mayor Miller reminded Mrs. Winters that the LARPD is a separate entity
and although the City does cooperate with them they are not a part
of the city government, however the Council will convey her concerns
to them through their liaison committee as they have the responsibility.
Mr. Musso advised that park land does, in fact, exist in Proud
Country on Galloway Street; there are approximately six acres, however
it is not developed.
Mayor Miller felt that the override bond issue on the ballot includes
that particular park on their priority.
Joe Urban, 1758 Broadmoor Street stated that the people of Greenville
North appreciate the fact that the City was willing to meet for so
many hours to discuss their problems and appreciates what it is try-
ing to do for them, even though the City may feel that they are
hounding the City but they intend to continue doing so until every-
thing has been taken care of; other than that, he stated that he would
just like to personally thank the Council for its cooperation.
Frances Harper, 5291 Oakmont Circle, stated that they have over 600
children in the area and want a park now - not a year from now. She
stated that she also feels the uncompleted homes are hazardous and
would like them to be removed or something done about t~em ~.
Councilman Pritchard remarked that discussion regarding the unfinished
houses will continue and with regard to the park situation it is in
~~ the hands of LARPD and the City can do nothing about that problem.
Mayor Miller explained that the park will either be dedicated or
purchased but before any action can be taken with regard to the
park, negotiations have to be worked out with Kissell Company.
Mrs. Mondon, 4873 Singing Hills, requested the City to start purchas-
ing the community park that is planned and stated that this was asked
specifically during the meeting which took place a month ago, and the
CM-27-397
February 25, 1974
(Complaints re Greenville North)
Mayor explained that there is park land in the Proud Country area
which has not yet been developed and she stated that this is her
point - there is not another area as far away from a developed
park as the people out in that area, and they have no way of rid-
ing a bike or walking to a park that is developed.
Mayor Miller stated that there was a question of whether the resi-
dents wanted a community park or small neighborhood parks which
has not yet been resolved and is a decision which must be made
by the Greenville North people. Until this has been resolved
there is no way purchase of property can be made because there
is a difference of opinion, among the people, as to where the park
should be located, and there is also a difference of opinion as to
which should be developed first - the neighborhood park or the com-
munity park. He explained that the City has every intention of
doing its best, as promised, to get the neighborhood parks as soon
as possible, pointing out that there is absolutely no advantage
to the City to stall.
Phyllis Dugan, 5874 Singing Hills, stated that the point they are
trying to make is that they want a park and do not care what kind
of park it is. She stated that her children have nowhere to go
after school and that this was brought up one month ago. She
added that she realizes it takes some time to develop a park but
wants to know when something will be done. She stated that they
are willing to put in some time and to push people, and asked that
they be given a date as to when development can start. She stated
that receiving park land as a dedication by the developer can take
10 more years.
Councilman Taylor moved that rather than refer the matter to the
next Council the Council appoint a committee of the three remaining
Councilmen to meet with LARPD and specifically get a timetable in
writing for communication to the Greenville North spokesman; however
the motion did not receive a second.
Councilman Beebe suggested that the City take the money that it has
and purchase the property and then let LARPD develop it.
Mayor Miller stated that he feels the suggestion made by Council-
man Taylor to meet with LARPD is excellent and directed the City
Manager to contact Bill Payne to arrange for a meeting with the
LARPD people.
~~MaYOr Miller explained that a budget decision should not be left
~~ to the decision of the new Council alia U6l:ila like ~6 g'c~ t.he ftla~t.er
G~Qgol~QQ pri9r to tRa~ ~ime7 and explained the difference in the
~different types of parks and how each relates to the budget.
~ .
The problem of the bugs in Altamont Creek was then mentioned and
the Mayor explained that this is a responsibility of Zone 7 who
have been contacted regarding the problem and the Mayor asked that
the City Manager again contact Zone 7 as well as the Mosquito Abate-
ment people.
~trs. Mondon asked who Zone 7 is and the City Attorney explained that
it is adjunct of Alameda County - a district of the Alameda County
government and operates in this part of Alameda County and would
suggest that the Greenville North contact Supervisor Murphy who
represents this district with the kind of communications given
to City representatives. It was noted that Zone 7 Board members
could also be contacted, Robert Becker and Joseph Concannon,
and Leo Callaghan who are Livermore residents. The City Attorney
further explained that they may be able to help with the mosquito
problem and that a number of these functions appear on the tax bill
and perhaps another pressure point might result in constructive action.
CM-27-398
February 25, 1974
~~~~ k1 (Complaints re Greenville
7~ t -.<~7~p/ North Area)
. ~i./ 'CU!~4.-~ ~
Diane tated that if land is dedicated to the City by
the developer t would mean that the City would not have to pur-
chase park prop rty and wondered if the City could spend park
acquisition mon y for the development of the land rather than to
purchase the la d, and the Mayor stated that this is not possible
because the deve oper can either give land or money to the City
and explained t workings of the system. The Mayor explained
that the policy has been in effect for about 10 years and any
change in the policy would require a major discussion which would
be a function of the Council approving the budget; therefore, if
the policy decision is made tonight that says all the park fund
money will be spent for development of a park in Greenville North,
on March 12th when a new Council takes over they can reverse this
instantly so it would be foolish to try to resolve it now. This
should be a matter to be resolved by the new Council who will make
decisions regarding the expenditure of the park funds in the next
budget session in June.
The staff was directed to place the matter on the agenda as soon as
possible after the new Council is in office.
One member of the audience commented that the unfinished homes are
"rubbishll which should be removed during the time the Fire Department
posts notice that rubbish and weeds should be removed. The Mayor
stated that if the houses are declared a public nuisance because
children are climbing around them, the City has the legal authority
to tear them down; however, it is the general consensus of opinion
that it would be best to see that they are completed which will be
discussed as the next agenda item.
Mayor Miller stated that there are still a number of things to be
resolved such as the bike trails and the question of what can be
done in regard to actual construction which also should be brought
up in 2-3 weeks so that the City will have time to contact the
County to find out what posibilities exist as well as a time scale
for construction of the bike trail in the area.
Mayor Miller suggested that the people keep in touch with Mr. Brumer
who will receive copies of letters that come back to the City in
response to various problems and that if the people are still con-
cerned about specific things that are not being taken care of fast
enough, to contact the appropriate City department. As far as the
matter of the timing for the park and whether part of the City's
money will be used for the development or not, will appear on the
agenda in approximately 3 weeks. He stated that the Council is
trying its best to do everything it has said it would do and urged
the residents of the Greenville North area to continue to push if
things seem to be moving too slowly.
REPORT RE CONSTRUCTION
ACTION RE TRACT 2619
(Reliance Builders)
(
The City Manager reported that an appeal has been filed by the
Kissell Company, the lending institution involved in the Bevilacqua
subdivision seeking an extension of certain permits and a promise
for issuance of the remainder of permits.
Mr. Lee reported that a letter was sent to the developer of Tract
2619 indicating that the building permits for this tract will be
revoked in the near future, as there is a four month time limit
on building permits. Subsequent to this action, the Kissell Company,
has contacted Mr. Lee to notify him that they intend to take possession
of the tract and have appealed to the Council to allow them to finish
building the houses that have been started in the tract and to reacti-
vate the permits in the areas where they." have been previously revoked.
CM-27-399
February 25, 1974
(Bevilacqua Tract)
Mr. Lee then explained the areas involved using illustrations on
a color coded map which show the area where 69 permits have been
issued and are valid and for which the houses are in various sta-
ges of completion, (which are soon to be revoked). Another area
consists of 104 lots for which permits were previously issued
but subsequently revoked. One area north of Hagen Road consists
of about 32 lots for which permits have never been issued.
The question was then posed by Councilman Futch as to why the
building permit money was not refunded for the l05 permits that
were taken out and allowed to expire - fees were paid and not
refunded, and Mr. Lee replied that they did not expire, but were
revoked because no work was done on them.
Mayor Miller stated that it was his understanding that they had
been returned to the City - not revoked, and Mr. Lee felt that
this had not been done voluntarily, but was action upon request
by the City.
It was noted that storm drainage fees, park fees, sewer connection
fees and other things are involved in obtaining a building permit
and the City Attorney was asked to respond to the situation with
regard to returning these fees to the developer and Mr. Wharton
replied that "refunding" is misleading and that the fees paid
are a combination of ingredients, some of which may be eligible
for refunding and others which are not. He then commented that
he felt it would be useful to read the provision of the Building
Code regarding expiration which he felt might clarify the issue,
which he then read to the Council. He pointed out that "revoca-
tion" is not the proper word but that the permits simply expire
if certain events occur, and was followed by discussion regarding
the Building Code wording.
It was noted that if building were to begin or resume within a
certain time period, half of the building permit fee would be
charged for the new permits required for the construction of
the buildings and Mr. Lee stated that a half-price fee would
amount to approximately $30-$40 a permit.
Mr. Wharton explained that it is not clear by reading the Code
as to what the fees referred to are, exactly, and would not want
the City to be bound by the comment made by Mr. Lee regarding
the amount - it may be that the fees are larger than the amount
of the building permit itself, and if the Council wishes he will
check into this aspect of the Code.
Mr. Parness commented that the houses called for in the tract
did proceed but ceased midway and due to increasing inquiries
on the part of the City, feeble attempts have been made to resur-
rect the activities but to no avail. At present, some of the
building permits have expired and others have been revoked be-
cause they have not been activated and the City has sought con-
tinuously during the term of the effectiveness of the subdivision
to try to find out what the status of the development would be
but to no avail. The mortgage company is now trying to foreclose
and the legal timing will not permit them to enter the field
either through marketing the subdivision to some development
firm or by some other method until about May. The purpose of
their appeal for some type of continuance is to allow them to
gain occupancy rights to the property to market it to some
development firm and thereby allowing development to proceed.
CM-27-400
c
February 25, 1974
(Bevilacqua Tract)
Dewey Watson, representing the Kissell Company, explained the
role of the Kissell Company regarding this matter and explained
that the Kissell Company is not a developer and their intention
to hire a contractor to build the tract and then sell the homes.
He pointed out that they are not the owners of the property which
creates a very difficult situation - if they owned it they could
enter it tomorrow and start erecting buildings and finish the tract.
Barring any unforseen circumstances it is anticipated that they
week in May. ~explained that there is a 110 day waiting period from
the date of default on a deed of trust and the reason it takes llO days
to obtain title. He stated that they are anxious to develop the 69
units that have been partially developed and must have the assurance
that they will obtain permits for the other 104 permits in the
other area, to be available at the normal renewal rate which the
City Attorney implied may be higher than what the Kissell Company
has been led to believe. He pointed out that they have already
invested more than $300,000 in building permits for the units and it
is their hope that it will not be more than $30-$40 a unit to renew
a permit. He pointed out that if the City will guarantee that they
can obtain these permits they will go ahead with development at their
own risk. As far as the park dedication is concerned, as soon as
approval is given for the subdivision they are more than willing to
dedicate land for this purpose, and they are assuming that park dedi-
cation is, in fact, a condition of the subdivision approval. He
stated that their intention is to provide housing for the middle class
families which is not being provided elsewhere in the City of Livermore
at a price in the range of $29,000-$34,000. He stated that in his
opinion there is a need for the master plan of Livermore to include
a balanced housing program.
Councilman Futch asked questions regarding timing, and Mr. Watson
stated that he would estimate May 6, as the date they would be
able to obtain the property, and they would like to start construc-
tion in 60 days which will allow them to hire a contractor to build
the home s .
Councilman Beebe asked what action the Kissell Company would request
from the Council at this time, and Mr. Watson replied that they seek
two things: I) a continuance or guarantee that the existing permits
will not be cancelled on March 6th (for the 69 units partially con-
structed) and; 2) a resolution or by whatever means necessary to
direct the Building Department to reinstitute the 104 building permits
that previously existed.
The City Attorney suggested that it might be best for all concerned
to have some sense of the Council as to whether it would be useful
to begin negotiations leading to a memorandum of understanding con-
cerning what the City would expect the company to do and what con-
ditions should be imposed as well as fees expected and what the company
may expect with regard to City cooperation. He stated that these ques-
tions probably cannot be resolved at present but would suggest negotia-
tions for the purpose of adopting a memorandum of understanding that
the Kissell Company could approve. He felt the matter of major con-
cern to both sides, theirs being financial and ours being a matter of
public interest and would urge that we work toward a written agree-
ment so that there is no further misunderstanding. It would appear
that the Kissell Company has approached the City in good faith and
is innocent of the neglectful conduct which may have created this
problem.
CM-27-40l
February 25, 1974
(Bevilacqua Tract)
Mayor Miller stated that it appears there are three categories
of building permits which are involved in this issue, as follows:
1) 69 which are in a partial stage of completion,
2) 104-l05 for which building permits were taken out but revoked
due to failure to act, and
3) 3l or so for which building permits were never taken out.
Mayor Miller stated that he felt it would be advisable to discuss
each category separately and decide what is to be done about each
group.
Councilman Beebe brought up the point that Mr. Watson had stated
that it would not be feasible for them to proceed due to financial
investments unless the entire package is approved and felt that
it should be discussed as one item.
Councilman Futch pointed out that there are separate issues associa-
ted with the different groups, however, such as the water ordinance
that limits the number of building permits, and Councilman Beebe
stated that this should apply only to the last lots for which no
permits were ever taken out.
Councilman Taylor stated that he would assume the reason Mr. Watson
is here this evening is due to the pressure of the March 6th dead-
line, which Mr. Watson stated is correct.
Councilman Futch stated that in some respects, regarding the other
permits, the City's hands are tied because of the limitation of
building permits due to the water shortage but the valley-wide
bond issue that has been passed may remove this issue when there
is more water available, but is not sure if this would affect the
104 permits.
The City Attorney stated that this is the type of question which
has to be explored and nailed down definitively and perhaps a
very simple resolution by the Council this evening would solve
the immediate problem in the way of a motion stating that the build-
ing permits shall remain in full force and effect through June l.
Councilman Taylor stated that there are a number of facts to be
informed about regarding permits for the l04 lot area and the 32
lots and moved that the matter of timing and facts concerning
these lots be considered at a later date, giving the Kissell
Company the assurance that the 69 permits will not be cancelled,
which failed for lack of a second.
The City Attorney commented that it is possible to refine the red
section a little more clearly. It is possible, for example to
reissue or revalidate the permits assuming that it is legally
possible and that the Kissell Company is willing to pay the fees
the City feels appropriate.
Councilman Taylor moved to continue the 69 lots to the first regu-
lar meeting in June (June 3), seconded by Councilman Futch.
Councilman Futch stated that he would expect to see information
in about a month regarding details as to the time schedule, as
the Council will be allowing longer than initially requested and
would appreciate having information due to the great interest.
Mr. Watson stated that in return for a time schedule they would
like to know if they can develop the rest of the lots.
CM-27-402
February 25, 1974
(Bevilacqua Tract)
/~
Councilman Taylor stated that the streets are in and there is no
question but that this will be developed as residential property
and the only question is the time involved and whether or not
anyone would want to rezone the area, and would suggest that the
staff discuss the fee situation with the developer and that the
City Attorney try to work this out in a very nice way, as he feels
the Kissell Company is not going to flatly agree to fees the City
feels appropriate. Also, since the property is bordering the School
District property it might be a good idea to invite a representative
of the School District to discuss the possibility of paying a fee to
take care of the school problems caused by the development.
\~
Councilman Futch commented that there are a couple of points which
might be considered, for clarification, and to make sure the City
is not in violation, and one is whether or not the permits would be
in violation of the water ordinance because they are in the pool,
and would assume that there is no violation there. The City Attorney
stated that he would assume this also but would like to check.
The next issue discussed was the situation of the Interim Ordinance
possibly interfering with the reissuance of the permits if they
are not in effect and the City Attorney stated that possibly this
building permit issuance can be purified subject to the fee question
but the other question is, whether or not they can be issued under
other applicable ordinances. This may depend upon whether or not
cbe reissuance is treated as a new act or a revitalization of something
which has previously been done, which was followed by discussion of
the areas and what work has been done, if any.
Councilman Futch moved that the Council consider the reactivation
of the building permits, subject to negotiation of the appropriate
fees, provided that the City is not in violation of any of its
ordinances, seconded by Councilman Pritchard.
Mayor Miller moved to amend the motion to change the word "reactivate"
to "considering the issuing" of the 105 building permits, which died
for lack of a second.
Mayor Miller stated that there are I05 lots for which no school
connection fee is being paid and if these lots are developed without
a school connection fee, the residents of Greenville North are going
to have their school attendance increased by a factor of 1/3 with
no facilities to accommodate the increase. He felt that the Council
should make sure that if the City issues 105 building permits that
all of the fees required for park development, school connection fees
and all the others are a condition of the permits and that the present
rates be charged with a credit going toward the money they owe that
has already been paid. If this is not done, the issuance of the
permits will overcrowd the schools. The word "reactivate" may not
allow the City to get these fees.
Councilman Taylor stated that he can understand this point of view
but is not sure the wording would make a difference, as the school
connection fee is a voluntary agreement, thus far, between the School
District and the developer.
;-
The City Attorney stated that he feels the City has probably pro-
tected itself with respect to the financial aspect by saying
"appropriate fees" and secondly thinks that we can specifically
read into the record that we do not wish to be bound by the verb
that we select to express the sense of the Council - if we are
going to develop a memorandum of understanding with the Kissell
organization. When when we do so we will have very carefully selected
our verb and it will be II reactivate II , "issue-'or whatever else is
in the best interest of the City. He stated that he feels we are
looking for the sense rather than the language.
CH-27-403
February 25, 1974
(Bevilacqua Tract)
eouncilman Beebe asked if this matter would be coming to the
Council prior to the 11th, because if not, he would abstain
from the vote because he will not be present after that time
to vote and felt this Council could not commit the new Council.
The City Attorney commented that he is not sure this is an
accurate expression of the law but may be a fervent desire of
the present Council and can be considered in this manner. If
this Council adopts something, the next Council is bound by it
unless it specifically changes it.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would choose to abstain from
the vote.
At this time the Council voted on the motion to consider and
reactivate (or wording equivalent) the permits providing there
is no violation of our ordinances, which passed 4-l with Council-
man Beebe abstaining.
Mayor Miller suggested that Mr. Watson contact Mr. Parness and
arrange to meet with him and the City Attorney, Mr. Wharton
to work out the details of the matter and Mr. Watson stated
that apparently he had misunderstood because he thought the
motion had included the green area of the map and the Council
explained that this had not been a consideration.
Councilman Taylor explained that the only difference is that
the green area's permits were apparently applied for but not
issued; however, the staff is not sure of that and the fees
should be discussed with regard to the entire area. Fees in
the green area are new fees and it may be that the red area
is subject to new fees, as well.
The Mayor felt discussion regarding the 31 lot permits should
be deferred until a report has been received from the staff and
that the major issue is with the 69 permits and the 105 permits.
Councilman Futch stated that the difference between the red and
the green refers to our Interim Ordinance. There have been build-
ing permits issued on the red group which would probably put them
in a different category than the green group and though he felt
there would be no difficulty in obtaining permits for the green
group (31) by the time the developer is ready to develop.
REPORT RE ANNEXATION
OF NORTH FRONT ROAD
The City Manager reported that the annexation application re-
garding North Front Road Annex No. 1 has been processed by
LAFCO and the matter can proceed. It is recommended that the
Council adopt a resolution of intent to annex and set the
matter for a public hearing.
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard
an by unanimous vote a resolution was adopted to reflect the
intent to annex North Front Road Annex No. I.
RESOLUTION NO. 22-74
A RESOLUTION GIVING NOTICE OF PROPOSED ANNEXATION TO
CITY OF LIVERMORE OF UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED
HEREIN AND DESIGNATED "NORTH FRONT ROAD ANNEX NO. I"
AND GIVING NOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING PRO-
TESTS THERETO.
CM-27-404
February 25, 1974
REPORT RE AGREEMENT
FOR MUTUAL FIRE PRO-
TECTION - LLL & AEC
The City Manager reported that officers of the fire services of the
,-- City and LLL have prepared a mutual aid, fire response plan, that
should be beneficial to both parties. The plan calls for the LLL
Fire Department to respond to all alarms from the central-eastern
portion of our City (Wagoner Farms and Research Drive) and in return
the City would maintain crash protection coverage for the AEC aircraft
landings and departures at the local airport. The special equipment
provided by LLL will be at no cost to the City and housed at Station
No. 2 and will be available for use for any form of emergency air-
craft response at the airport, which is a service that has not been
available to the airport due to lack of equipment. The mutual aid
coverage will afford needed fire protection to a sector of the City
that is top priority and the new station to be installed under the
auspices of the City can be located in the next priority sector which
is the southwest area. The agreement has no term, no party compensa-
tion, and may be cancelled upon a 30 day notice of intent and it is
recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing execution of
the agreement.
Councilman Pritchard noted that he did not recieve a copy of the
contract and wondered if the Council should act on a contract they
have not reviewed and the City Manager explained that he did not ask
for the contract to be copied for the Council to review as it is a
simple contract.
Councilman Taylor stated that as he understands the contract it pro-
vides protection in areas where it is needed at no cost to the City
and can see no reason for not authorizing execution of the agreement
even though the Council might like to read the fine print. However,
it is not as if the City is dealing with a developer and the essen-
tials are very clear.
Councilman Pritchard stated that his only reason for wanting to
review the agreement is because he is concerned about liability.
For example, would the City be liable if LLL does not respond to
a call in Valley East?
Mr. Parness stated that in this situation he would suppose that we
could be liable; however, he could not visualize this happening any-
more than one of the City's station's failing to respond.
Councilman Pritchard stated that the City is clearly liable if one
of its stations does not respond and felt this is a point that should
be considered.
~
The City Attorney stated that he has not had the document in his
office for review either but would suggest that the least that should
be done is to ask our insurance carrier to review it to ascertain what
impact it might have on our insurance protection. He felt that fail-
ure to respond would be a clear matter; however, there may be more
difficult questions posed such as, was the response soon enough, could
the City have done better, and whether or not the wrong equipment was
sent. He felt this is an invitation to someone else into our area
of responsibility and this may have some legal consequences, though
he felt they could be worked out.
Councilman Taylor stated that he would assume the calls for the
Fire Department would still be corning through the City Fire Depart-
ment and would assume that the City would know whether or not LLL
intended to respond, and Chief Baird stated that this is correct.
CtJI-27-405
February 25, 1974
(Mutual Fire Protection)
Chief Baird stated that relative to liability, one of the things
which brought about the initiation of this program was the desire
of administrators to eliminate duplication of services and to
utilize resources to the fullest advantage for efficiency and
economy. The insurance service office is now on a grading sche-
dule that we are judged by and receive insurance rates from.
Councilman Taylor moved that the Council authorize execution of
the agreement subject to approval of our insurance carrier and
City Attorney, seconded by Councilman Futch.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he would not vote in favor of
the motion because he does not like to approve contracts he has
not read, and suggested that the matter be continued for one week.
Mayor Miller stated that he agrees with Councilman Taylor in that
he feels there is nothing wrong with the agreement that is in-
volved but too would like to see the agreement.
Councilman Beebe stated that he would also like to read the
agreement.
Jim Georgis, 251 Clarke Avenue, representative of the Livermore
Fireman's Association, stated that approximately every lO years
cities are graded and that this will be done again next year.
He stated that the City has allowed growth in areas without
coverage such as Valley East. The south side (south of Concannon)
is without coverage, as is the airport and it is felt that some-
thing such as that which has been proposed may be very useful
and again it may not. He pointed out that consideration should
be given to what controls will be placed on the City by the ABC
and would suggest that there be consolidation and then place
stations where they are needed.
Councilman Taylor stated that it is clear that Valley East is
not receiving the protection they should have and this has
been a concern for a long time. The alternative is to build a
station out there at a large cost to the taxpayers or to make
use of the LLL fire fighting facilities. He stated that as he
recalls the next priority for a station is on the south side and
the motion takes care of the liability and insurance questions that
might be involved and feels that a decision should be made at
this time.
At this time the motion failed 2-3 with Councilmen Beebe, Prit-
chard and Mayor Miller dissenting.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the matter be continued for one
week, seconded by Councilman Futch and which passed unanimously.
REPORT RE SPECIAL
CENSUS - NOV. 1974
The Planning Director presented a written report regarding
population census matters and recommended that the Council
adopt a motion that the staff include within the next fiscal
budget, an appropriation for the conduct of a special enumera-
tion for our City in November, 1974.
Mayor Miller stated that his understanding of the principle be-
hind a census in addition to information, is to qualify for
more per capita funds, which Mr. Parness stated is correct.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch
and by unanimous vote, the recommendation of the Planning
Director was adopted.
CM-27- 406
February 25, 1974
REPORT RE FEE
ADJUSTHENTS
As a result of the written report from the Public Works Director
regarding fee ajustments for storm drainage and sewer service
charges, water and park fees, which are adjusted proportionate to
the revisions in the Construction Price Index, on motion of Council-
man Taylor, seconded by Councilman Futch and by unanimous vote, the
following resolutions were adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 23-74
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF
STORM DRAINAGE FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1974
RESOLUTION NO. 24-74
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF
SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION FEES FOR CALENDAR
YEAR 1974
RESOLUTION NO. 25-74
RESOLUTION FIXING AND ESTABLISHING
WATER RATES AND CHANGES
RESOLUTION NO. 26-74
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTHENT
OF PARK FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1974
Mayor Miller noted that the park development fee related to the
bedroom tax has not been included and Mr. Lee explained that this
is a new fee and adjustment of it was not written into the ordinance.
It has been explained that there is no reason it cannot be tied to
the Construction Price Index by simply adding a section to the ordinance
stating that it can be changed by resolution and if this is the wish
of the Council such can be prepared.
Councilman Pritchard moved that the Council direct the staff to pre-
pare the wording for the amendment to the License Ordinance, secon-
ded by Councilman Futch and which passed by unanimous vote.
ADOPTION OF INDUSTRIAL
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and
by unanimous vote, the amendment to the Industrial Ordinance, Ordi-
nance No. 442, was adopted.
Mayor Miller stated that prior to the vote he would like to say that
he is voting for the ordinance but with reluctance because he feels
the coverage is too high and does not like the setback standards.
ORDINANCE NO. 837
AN ORDINANCE A~ENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS A~ENDED, RELATING TO
ZONING, BY THE ENACTION OF A NEW CHAPTER, CHAPTER 14A.00, ESTABLISHING
THE "I" (INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT, AND BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION
21.42(h), RELATING TO MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
CM-27-407
February 25, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Complaints re
Use of Firearms
in Wagoner Farms Area)
Councilman Futch stated that he has received complaints regarding
the use of firearms in the area behind Wagoner Farms and that both
young people and adults are shooting into a hill near the tracks.
The problem is that police cannot drive in there which makes it
hard to control. There is also an added danger in that children
are riding motorcycles in the same area.
(re Council Position
re Widening of I-580)
Councilman Futch stated that he feels the Council position regard-
ing the widening of 1-580 should be sent to our Senators, the EPA
and the Federal Department of Transportation, in particular the
fact that continued transportation based on the automobile is not
being responsible, due to the present petroleum shortage, and so
moved.
There was then discussion regarding the Council position on the
widening which Councilman Beebe stated had been a 3-2 vote opposed
to the widening, and Mayor Miller explained that had been a 3-2 vote
opposed to the increasing number of automobile corridors and widening
of a corridor was agreed to providing it would be used for bus lanes
or BART traffic.
In view of the fact there appeared to be a difference of opinion
regarding exactly what the Council position is on the matter, Council-
man Futch withdrew the motion and the matter is to be scheduled for
discussion at the next Council meeting.
(re Underground
Utilities)
Councilman Pritchard stated that at the next Council meeting an
item regarding undergrounding utilities in connection with an
industrial development is to be scheduled and pointed out that
it is imperative that the Council act on it and not "talk it to
death" then continue it to the next meeting, and asked that the
staff make sure the Council has everything they might need to be
able to come to a decision at that meeting, or the City may stand
the chance of losing this industrial client.
(ReSOlution
re Measure A)
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Futch
and by a 4-l vote (Beebe dissenting) the resolution supporting
Measure A on the March 5th municipal ballot was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 27-74
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MEASURE A ON THE
MARCH 5th MUNICIPAL ELECTION BALLOT
~
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, Mayor Miller adjourned
the Council ~eting~t l2:l5 p~m.
APPROVE __ . __' _ () 5)~ ~ . ~
~ Mayor
ATTEST . 9 ~~
C1ty Clerk
- Livermore, California
CM-27-408
Regular Meeting of March 4, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on March 4,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Miller presid-
ing.
c~
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmen Beebe, Futch, Pritchard and Mayor Miller
ABSENT:
Councilman Taylor (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES FOR FEB. 19th
AND FEB. 25th
COUNCILMAN TAYLOR WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Pritchard
and by unanimous vote, the minutes for the meeting of February 19th
and 25th were approved, as amended.
SPECIAL ITEM - MONITOR-
ING OF ALAMEDA CREEK
Marti Kardinal, 3239 Runnymede Court, Pleasanton, Chairman of the
Water Studies Group of the Valley Ecology Center, gave an oral
report regarding the recommendations for a monitoring program
for Alameda Creek which she stated would be of benefit to the
Niles cone users and those at the end of the Niles cone which
the City has approved and will financially support. She pointed
out that it was discovered that while studies have been done re-
garding the quantity and type of water available, studies for
quality have never been authorized. She explained that applications
for funding must usually be made about two years in advance and that
the studies being considered regarding quality would take about four
years to complete at a cost of about $50,000 per year to valley com-
munities and at the end of this time, which would be about six years
away, a program for monitoring quality would probably be recommended.
It appears that unless the monitoring program before the Council for
consideration is considerably improved, we will be without adequate
monitoring of our ground water for a number of years. At a time we
are being pressured by the Regional Board to dispose of our own
sewage in our own valley we have the right to know what affect
disposal of sewage will have upon our drinking water. The only way
this can be determined is through a proper monitoring system of past
disposal practices. Slides were then shown to the Council which
were followed by discussion of the matter.
(\
\
"
Ms. Kardinal stated that her recommendation would be to return
the proposal to the United States Geological Survey for revision
and addition of monitoring sites to more adequately detect the
areas of degredation that are a threat to the wells used for
drinking water in Livermore Valley and that the GeOlogical Survey
seriously consider incorporating many of the recommendations made
by the Department of Resources in 1964 and that the monitoring
plans should not receive final approval by the Council until it
is satisfied that the citizens are protected. She sta~ed that
the recommendations of the Department of Resources are available
to the Council for review.
CM-27-409
March 4, 1974
(re Alameda Creek)
Mayor Miller stated that it seems clear from what has been reported
and the map, that continued approval of septic tanks is asking for
trouble with respect to nitrate contamination and that land disposal
of sewage effluent appears to be a method which will also contaminate
our underground water supply.
Councilman Taylor pointed out that once again the question should be
raised with respect to contamination already being allowed in certain
areas due to septic tank development - there is a heavier and heavier
concentration of septic tanks with continuous development
and at some point this contamination will have to be abated. He then
suggested that the report be forwarded to the appropriate agencies
such as the USGS and Zone 7 and moved that the report be referred to
these two agencies as well as the Water Management Group and the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, seconded by Councilman Beebe.
~)~
Councilman Beebe stated that it is his understanding that Ms. Kardinal's
viewpoint is to see that the whole Valley is adequately monitored
and that money should be appropriated by the government to pay for
this, and Ms. Kardinal explained that if it could be incorporated
in the present program it would have the assistance of the five
agencies, including Fremont, and the USGS and if the Council waits
for the Department of Water Resources to fully go into this program
there may be a waiting period of at least six years.
Mr. Lee stated that he feels the recommendations are very appropriate
and that we must know what is going on here in the Valley and must
be concerned in the future about monitoring which is the reason the
staff and Council supported the monitoring program and worked it out
with the Regional Water Quality Control Bord through the cooperation
of the USGS. Councilman Taylor replied that it was his understand-
ing that the monitoring taking place was to measure discharges in
stream effluent and Mr. Lee responded by saying that this is correct
but also it does include some wells in the Valley but not as broad
as it should be. He added that this does not mean the program being
proposed is not a good one but feels it could be broader and by work-
ing with the various groups we have been working with it could be
made broader, and would suggest that we start at the Regional Water
Quality Control Board staff level, and the Valley Intrest group should
pursue the matter.
Councilman Taylor stated that he would like to amend the motion to
include direction to the staff to bring this to the attention of
the Regional Water Quality Control Board and USGS through normal
channels and also to the Valley Water Management ~-MMil lie, seconded
by Councilman Beebe, and which passed by unanimous vote. ~
OPEN FORUM
(re Greenville Nonth
Area Park)
John Bremer, 5713 Running Hills, spoke to the Council regarding
comments made at the last meeting about the park to be developed
in the Greenville North area by members of the Council as well as
the attorney representing the Kissell Company in addition to reading
the letter from the Kissell Company regarding extension of the date
of expiration for building permits in the area. The people from the
Greenville North area observed that the Council extended the permits
to May 6th, which means that construction of the homes does not have
to take place until about that time and that also the letter mentioned
that dedication of park land would be done by the end of the completion
time of development which means that this may take as long as next
September or even next June and they are concerned inasmuch as they
desire park development as soon as possible. He has been requested
CM-27-410
March 4, 1974
(re Greenville
North Area)
1Ci
1/
to speak, on behalf of the residents, and to request that the
Council consider immediate purchase of the park land and possi-
bly have the builder dedicate the land at a later date, pending further
action.
Councilman Futch moved that the City Council purchase the land in
the vicinity of the Christiensen School for a neighborhood park and
to instruct the staff to obtain an appraisal and report back to the
Council as rapidly as possible in order that funds may be appropriated
for this purpose, seconded by Councilman Pritchard, and which passed
unanimously.
Mr. Bremer then asked if it would be possible to have the water connec-
tion fee waived so that the people could go ahead and work with LARPD
in getting the park land developed and the Mayor explained that this
is the jurisdiction of Zone 7 and that the people would have to receive
permission for the waiver from Zone 7. He commented that the City
simply collects the fee for this agency and noted that he is not
sure that Zone 7 has ever cancelled the fee for park development
but the people could check with them to see what could be done.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Air Pollution Study
Committee Minutes
The minutes of the Air Pollution Study Committee's meeting of
January 23, 1974, were noted for filing.
Res. of Intention
to Abate Weeds
A resolution of intention to abate weeds is the first step in
the annual program for the abatement of weeds, rubbish, etc.,
and provides for the posting of all properties, and notification
of a hearing to be held at a later date. Approximately 650 par-
cels are involved.
RESOLUTION NO. 29-74
RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT THERE EXISTS WEEDS GROWING ON
OR RUBBISH, REFUSE AND DIRT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND/OR
STREETS ADJACENT TO PRIVATE PROPERTY PARTICULARLY DES-
CRIBED IN THIS RESOLUTION AND DECLARING THE SAME TO BE
A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING SAID CONDITIONS ABATED.
Res. Providing for
Adjust. of Res. Bldg.
License Tax for 1974
The Council adopted a resolution providing for the adjustment of
the residential construction business license tax for 1974.
r
RESOLUTION NO. 30-74
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS LICENSE TAX FOR
CALENDAR YEAR 1974.
Res. Providing for
Canvass of Muni.
Election Votes
A resolution was adopted to provide for the canvass of the votes
cast at the March 5th General Municipal Election, by the City
Clerk, with a report to be made to the City Council for later
action.
CM-27-411
March 4, 1974
RESOLUTION NO. 31-74
RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CITY CLERK TO CANVASS VOTES CAST AT
THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD AND CONDUCTED 3-5-74.
Payroll & Claims
There were l09 claims in the amount of $245,624.37 (less check
#9124 in the amount of $150,000.00) for a total of $95,624.37,
dated March 1, 1974, and ordered paid.
\0
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman Beebe and
by unanimous vote, the Consent Calendar was approved with the
deletion of the item concerning the joint fire response agreement
with LLL which was postponed for later in the meeting for discussion.
REPORT RE EAST AVENUE
BAR-RESTAURANT - SHOP-
PING CENTER
The City Attorney gave a brief oral report regarding the meeting
with the owners of the cocktail bar, pizza parlor, and the developer
of the shopping center, simultaneously, reviewing the history of
events leading up to the creation of the business arrangement as
it currently exists. He stated that the proprietors are aware of
the fact that the City will be observant of their conduct and he
would recommend that aside from asking patrons to advise the City
of any improprieties occuring, the Council take no further action
at this point.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he feels something should be done
because regardless of all the window dressing, nothing is going to
change the fact that there is a bar in the shopping center and a
pizza parlor (not a bar-restaurant as allowed) and that even though
food is served in the bar it does not meet what the Council's inten-
tion was, which is not to allow a bar in the shopping center.
The City Attorney commented that there is no doubt that that particu-
lar section of the zoning ordinance should be revised to make the
City's policy more clear and readily enforceable and when he says
there should be no further action he is referring only to action
with respect to this particular business hoping that the ordinance
can be clarified to prevent any ambiguous situation such as this
from occuring again.
A motion was made by Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman
Taylor to accept the City Attorney's recommendation and ask for a
review in six months on this particular matter. Motion passed
unanimOUSly.
REPORT FROM PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR RE UNDERGROUNDING
OF UTILITIES - S.P. INDUS. AREA
- VASCO RD. & EAST AVE. (OGO
PROPERTY & FRY DEVELOPMENT)
The Public Works Director reported that there are three develop-
ments which are being planned and the City policy is that utilities
are to be placed underground which is being questioned by the develop-
ers. The three developers questing the location of the utilities
are the following: I) Southern Pacific Industrial Tract #3379;
2) Fry Industrial Development; and 3) OGO development of 96 multi-
ple family units along East Avenue. A written report regarding
the matter was submitted to the Council along with letters from
the developers and exhibits of the areas to be developed, in addi-
tion to a copy of the City's policy regarding undergrounding of
utilities of properties being improved other than subdivisions.
~,
CM-27-4l2
\.0
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding Utilities)
~e City Manager explained the requirements that are to be im-
posed upon the developers of the Southern Pacific Industrial
Park and noted that if the City requires undergrounding of lines,
the cost to the developers will be in excess of $IOO,OOO which is
a tremendous burden to the worth of the property and the developers
have appealed the requirement.
Councilman Pritchard stated that it is his understanding that if
such is required as development occurs that this will mean that later
on, public funds will have to be expended for undergrounding in other
areas where it is not done at present, and the City Manager stated
that this is correct, and explained that properties on the westerly
side of Vasco benefit as much as those on the easterly side and yet
these properties will not be sharing in the cost - it will have to
be borne by the developing property.
Mr. Parness pointed out that a portion of this cost should be borne
by the properties across the street and there is no way to require
that they pay for a portion and for that share of the responsibility,
public funds will have to be used. He noted that he is not sure
a use of some public money would be wrong but Mr. Nordyke has pointed
out that the overhead installation of the utilities lines were done
with the municipality's full knowledge of the extent several years
ago and from this point of view there was consent from the local
government and perhaps this does carry some type of a financial liabili-
ty with it and to what extent is not known but he feels it would
be inequitable to require the full burden of cost on the frontage
property simply because the lines happen to be there.
Mayor Miller pointed out that this type of argument is not considered
in other public works improvements as property is developed and as
property on one side of the property is developed using one standard
and in lO years development occurs in the vicinity but with different
standards, the properties developing must comply with the standards
which are current and considerations at this time are not waived.
Councilman Beebe felt that a property owner with a small amount of
property would realize a very large hardship in trying to pay his
share of the utilities, when everyone on both sides of the road will
benefit from the utilities and felt that this is what makes the cost
inequitable.
Councilman Futch then commented on the possibility of forming some
type of benefit district and Mr. Parness replied that he feels equity
would be served by the formation of a benefit district in the event
we have the statutory authority to use some type of vehicle such as
a benefit district. If we do, we must appraise the proper dimension
where the district assessment might best be applied.
r
Mr. Parness continued to say that the benefit district would be
a proper vehicle with which to work if it is determined to be
fully beneficial which must be a consideration to be weighed,
and someone must look into how it will be defined within a given
area and depending upon whether or not we have the legal authority
to do it. In his opinion each lineal segment of our streets and
highway system will have to be defined separately because if a
uniform application is used allover the City it may mean that
an undergrounding fee may have to be imposed for every type of
development, including single family lots, to pay for underground-
ing fees notwithstanding the fact that such may not take place for
years and years.
Milo Nordyke, 2143 Chateau Place, stated that as a representative
of the Industrial Advisory Committee, he would like to say that
they would support the judgment, with respect to the railroad
that this is not the intention to apply the policy to this
situation and that it would be an undue hardship to require under-
grounding of that line and would have no clear benefit since
it is only two feet inside the property line and immediately
adjacent to the railroad line. They would recommend that this portion
of the requirement be deleted. They also feel that it is inequitable
CM-27-4l3
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding Utilities)
the developers with frontage property to pay for all of the costs
and is particularly a hardship on the individual with the small
parcel of property. He stated that the policy really is not uniformly
endorsed, as a developer building a duplex is not required to pay
for undergrounding because this is not part of the undergrounding
district. He agreed that a benefit district might be a way of ()
spreading the cost. However, the person who originally develops ~~
must pay the total cost with those benefiting making reimbursements
as future development occurs, which means that something in the
order of $lOO,OOO must be spent now with the expectation of receiv-
ing half of this amount back over a period of ten years or so.
They would suggest that rather than form an assessment district
that the City define an improvement area adjacent or connected
with the major street and adopt some type of fee to try to put
some kind of reasonable fee into a fund together with the Rule 20
fund to be used over the years for the undergrounding. This would
mean, essentially, that undergrounding would not be required immedi-
ately but to be done in portions as felt to be appropriate. He
stated that this would be their recommendation at this point but
the problem is to determine what the areas of benefit would be
which will take time to define actually and philosophically.
Councilman Taylor wondered if Southern Pacific wanted to have an
agreed amount specified and the City Manager responded by saying
that not necessarily. The Southern Pacific Company is willing
to participate to the extent that their liability would require,
as long as it is reasonably applied to the balance of the properties
along a given area.
Councilman Taylor stated that he understands that the proposal
would be to trade this obligation for some type of fee structure
that will be applied uniformly and competing properties in the
area would pay the same type of fee and the City Manager replied
that this is essentially what the developers would like.
Mr. Nordyke commented that since the OGO property is such a large
parcel the Industrial Committee would suggest that decisions re-
garding this property be delayed for a month or two and that the
Southern Pacific property be discussed at this time.
Councilman Futch stated that it would appear the Council has reached
a consensus of opinion regarding the Southern Pacific property
and would like to consider making a motion.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he realizes the S.P. property
is large and important but feels that the size of the development
should not be a consideration in trying to determine what is fair.
Councilman Futch stated that there are two separate issues at hand
in that the OGO property is residential in nature and the S.P.
development is industrial and is not sure but there may be a differ-
ence in policy regarding the two.
It was noted that there is industrial as well as residential
zoning on East Avenue (the OGO property and that on the corner of
Vasco Road and East Avenue).
Councilman Futch moved that the Council waive the requirement
for the undergrounding of utilities along the railroad tracks
(the S. P. parcel) in addition to directing the City Manager
and staff to work out a contract that would be appropriate to
spread the cost of the undergrounding of the utilities along
Vasco Road, seconded by Councilman Taylor.
Mayor Miller cautioned that if the spread of cost for this
undergrounding is not spread uniformly it means that the resi-
dential tax payers will end up subsidizing the undergrounding
of these utilities.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
CM-27-4l4
'0,
(\
,,~-- ~
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding Utilities)
Earl Mason of Associated Professions stated that he felt comments
should have been allowed from the public prior to taking a vote on
the motion and the Mayor apologized for not noticing that Mr. Mason
wanted to speak and stated that it is possible that the Council might
reconsider the motion just now adopted.
Mr. Mason stated that the Chamber Industrial Committee has discussed
this matter at length and are concerned over the problem and how this
should be applied and whether or not it is fair to the property owners
to be required to put any of the overhead lines underground. The
property owners have had no say as to where the lines would go and
it is their understanding that the only purpose for placing them under-
ground is for aesthetics. He felt if aesthetics is the only reason
for doing this then everyone in town will benefit and would suggest
that the Council carefully consider requiring something to be done
that is extremely costly and that PG&E will do at no cost to the proper-
ty owner or anyone else if its done by using the overhead lines.
If the public desires undergrounding then they should be willing to
pay for it the same as everyone pays for a park that everyone will
use. He stated that it is unfair to single out the property owner
who had nothing to do with the original installation and had no control
over where the lines were to go and becoming the unfortunate victim
if they go along his property. He then presented an illustration
of the new poles which have been installed along Stanley Boulevard
that PG&E will put in at no cost, as development occurs, which he
feels are quite acceptable and that the undergrounding is not worth
the cost.
Councilman Futch stated that undergrounding is required in residential
areas and a spread of cost has been arranged:to take care of this
cost and Mr. Parness explained that this is correct but feels that
this is the reason areas should be designated where undergrounding
is to take place and what depth dimension should be considered as
being incorporated within the benefited area.
Councilman Futch summarized the City Manager's point by saying that
if the spread is community wide this would also not be fair to the
citizens in the very old areas of town in which undergrounding may
not take place for 50 years. Obviously, those living in areas near
major streets will benefit to a greater extent so it would not be
fair to assess everyone equally.
Councilman Pritchard pointed out that he would agree with what Mr.
Mason had said about it being equally unfair to assess the property
owners for the undergrounding simply because the undergrounding happens
to go along their property in spite of their desire and the fact that
this was not requested by them.
The City Manager agreed that the entire pubilic has some obligation
to help with the cost but to what extent must be determined.
Mr. Mason suggested that the Council come to some kind of a decision
regarding a policy of whether there is to be undergrounding or not
and there is urgency to this matter because the OGO people have plans
for the property and cannot commence until it has been determined
that the lines will be overhead or underground and this decision is
holding up development of their land, and if this is to be required
there is one developer who cannot afford to go ahead with development.
He suggested that the Council adopt some kind of policy regarding
the lines and then decide how to work out the cost of installation
if they are to be underground.
Robert Hirsch, representative of the property at 5774 East Avenue,
stated that they are "joint venturing" with OGO Associates and their
plans are in the Building Department at present and it is anticipated
that a building permit will be issued shortly. Their plans are 98%
complete and are waiting to hear the resolution of this problem tonight.
In the original zoning of this property there was no requirement for
undergrounding - it was a requirement that came up late last year
in an engineering consideration after their plans were well under way.
He stated that if they were not already faced with astronomical fees
CM-27-4l5
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding utilities)
there would be no question regarding any requirement of them, includ-
ing undergrounding. However, they are at the point of "fail or goal"
condition and the reason he is standing before the Council asking that
they consider the appeal. He then explained the things that are
required of them and the reason they are faced with such high costs.
He felt that it is highly unfair to require those first developing,
to pay for the cost of undergrounding simply because they are first
and later development will not have this burden because they will
need only to hook up to the existing conduit and extend lines to
their property and that the existing conduit will be something he
has paid for. He pointed out that the lines PG&E will provide at
no cost are more than adequate and would like the Council's permis-
sion to allow installation of these lines. He pointed out that all
of the on-site power will be undergrounded from the PG&E pole and
there will be no wires going on their site. He added that if the
undergrounding is required this will be a substantial financial bur-
den to the developers and felt that this would result in East Avenue
not being developed for a substantial length of time.
~
.L)
Dan Hainsworth, representative of Southern Pacific Land Company,
asked that the Council reconsider the motion it just passed for
two reasons; one being that he feels there is a bigger issue to be re-
solved and that secondly he would prefer that no motion be passed
to obligate Southern Pacific to agree to some type of contractural
relationship or agreement prior to an official statement from Southern
Pacific.
Ebert Lounsbury, l787 South Vasco Road, noted that he has approxi-
mately l,OOO feet of property frontage on Vasco Road and problems
such as this always tend to fall upon the individual without the
financial capability of Southern Pacific, Western Bell or PG&E and
pointed out that the small property owners are being "benefited to
the extent that we can't afford it". He pointed out that he is sure
the Council can understand his situation. He owns l,OOO feet of
frontage for which he will have to pay something in the order of
$100 per lineal foot for undergrounding utilities - essentially
this is more than the property is worth. He stated that between
the Park District trying to take part of his land and the City
requiring payment for undergrounding it appears that the proposition
for living in this community is too expensive. He stated that
he does not know whether this is happening because the Council
members who make the decisions have small City lots and have no
regard for the individual with 5-l0 acres and are on the outskirts
of the City, or what the problem really is; however, the fact re-
mains that they cannot afford to pay $100 per lineal foot to
have PG&E install underground utilities. He stated that he feels
he has little ground to stand on when the Council has already eloquent-
ly and decisively "sunk a battleship (S.P.) and are trying to kill
all the canoes". He feels that he is in the canoe with no basis
to stand on to protest the undergrounding in front of his property
and urged that the Council not vote for the undergrounding of this
area until there is some form of equitable payment established.
He stated that in his opinion PG&E should not be required to pay
for undergrounding, S.P. should pay only for the portion that would
be fair and that he, personally, cannot afford to pay for the under-
grounding.
Ben M. Rishwain, attorney representing P. G. Fry Properties, Inc.,
explained that Mr. Fry is in the process of purchasing the land
at the corner of Vasco Road and East Avenue and is~ in a sense,
an outsider; however, the party selling the property to Mr. Fry
is a citizen and would like his comments to be considered. He
stated that he agrees with the comments made with regard to requiring
the property owner to pay for the undergrounding which he stated
is "blatantly unfair" and in this case is manifested more readily
than any other case spoken of and that is that the estimates on
the particular property at Vasco and East Avenue would cost about
$67,000 to underground the utilities on both sides and is for an
8 acre parcel, which amounts to about $8,000 per acre. A cost
of this magnitude should at least receive considerable consideration.
CM-27-4l6
~
,( );
"----- j4
c
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding Utilities)
In view of the fact his client has frontage on both Vasco and East
A2enue this means that his portion is double and unfortunately there
are wires on both sides of this frontage which he would be required
to pay for. He pointed out that the fact that spread of cost equity
is a difficult decision to make it should not mean that the cost
burden should automatically be shifted to the property owner though
he could offer no suggestion for an equitable formula to go by.
He then commented on a case he has come across in researching the
matter which he stated is not a conditions case but a case of eminent
domain in which the police power is brought out in the County of
San Joaquin. He then cited particulars regarding the case as it
relates to the requirements the City has moved to adopt. He then
pointed out that it would appear that the City is embarking upon
a possible unconstitutional policy where it falls upon the responsibili-
ty of one owner due to location. In the case of his client, it means
that by the simple location of this piece of property he will have
to pay what very few people in the City would have to pay. In addition
to all the other expenditures such as dedication of land for park
purposes and the arroyo channel as well as improvements for the channel,
this additional condition becomes unduly burdensome. They would like
to move ahead with their project and would request that a decision
be made tonight. He stated that he is sure the Council would agree
that the problem is grossly unfair to the property owner and a need
for help is in order which they are requesting at this time.
Richard M. Callaghan, attorney representing L. S. Conner for
the property at East Avenue and Vasco Road stated that he
would first like to endorse the presentation just given by
Mr. Rishwain in that the burden placed upon the property owner is
unduly high and estimated to be $67,000 for one piece of property.
He pointed out that the property has not been desired for purchase
for many years and that when it was originally purchased this re-
quirement was not mentioned at all but came about as a condition
of the building permit. He stated that he would have to agree
with the comment made by Mr. Mason in that the public would benefit
from the undergrounding and should share the cost, particularly when
the lines PG&E are willing to install meet with the approval of the
property owners and, in fact, would be their desire. He also asked
that there be immediate decision over the matter, as deferring it
may mean a delay in development or kill the development entirely
and possible prevention of the sale of the property.
Carolyn Oddon, 5846 East Avenue, stated that she is co-owner with
Mr. Oddon of a five acre parcel in between the parcels being discussed
this evening and naturally is concerned and would like to express
in her own words that whenever fees, which are a form of taxation
under whatever guise they are placed, become so excessive that
they prohibit the feasibility of development of land this would be,
in her opinion, an illegal means of condemnation. She pointed out
that there has been no mention of undergrounding of the utilities
due to public safety or health and can see no way in which the
public's health or safety would be jeopardized if the utility lines
remain overhead. If, for the reasons of health and safety the
overhead lines must be undergrounded she would suggest that this
be the responsibility of the utility company involved who receives
the reimbursement from customers as the utilities are used and
reflected in the normal billing. Let those who chose the location
and manner of installation bear the cost and do not seek to penalize
any individual seeking to develop privately owned property.
Mayor Miller apologized to the public once again for not having
opened the discussion prior to the vote and that though he is
personally satisfied with the motion, as stated, anyone who might
wish to reconsider may do so, and in view of the testimony just given
he felt it would be only fair to reopen the discussion.
Mayor Miller moved to reconsider this item, seconded by Councilman
Pritchard.
. .
Councilman Taylor stated that he feels the Council must first decide
whether or not the Council wants to underground the lines in this
CM-27-4l7
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding utilities)
part of the City or any other similar part of the City. It has
been assumed that undergrounding is desirable and the state, recog-
nizing the need, has applied approximately a 2% increase to each
person's bill so that eventually many of these areas will receive
underground utilities. If we ,et a fee structure that would grossly
reduce the cost to the property owners it may still be a burden to
those such as the owner of the property on the corner of East Avenue
and Vasco Road. He would hope that the Council would not give up the
hope of eventually getting undergrounding of the utilities but would
like something to be done about the fee schedule so as not to create
a burden to anyone, and felt that this issue may be somewhat dead-
locked.
/-""
u
Councilman Futch felt that S.P. would not disagree with the first
part of the motion that was made so it would appear that there
needs to be discussion only regarding the second part of the
motion and the wording of the second part would not be binding
S.P. at all, as well as the other property owners. In the mean-
time this would allow the staff the opportunity to look over a
reasonable area for the spread of cost and a report back to the
Council. This does not mean that anyone would be agreeing to a
particular fee.
Councilman Pritchard felt the Council should try to come to some
kind of decision tonight and noted that it is clearly an unfair
burden to expect the owner of an 8 acre parcel to pay what amounts
to $8,000 per acre and would really discourage industrial develop-
ment, and will force an individual to develop elsewhere. He pointed
out that if the City really is serious about trying to attract indus-
try in Livermore we had better do something about this matter and
not push the matter into the lap of the new Council which will be
seated next week.
Councilman Futch stated that it would appear that Councilman Prit-
chard as well as some of the public testimoney has implied that
the Council feels the fees should be assessed against the property
owners on both sides of the street when, in fact, the Council is
trying to arrive at an equitable method for spreading the cost
over as many property owners as possible by means of some type of
benefit district. Councilman Pritchard stated that he agrees
with this intent but there must be some mechanism for being able
to say yes, go ahead and do this until the matter can be worke out.
Mr. Nordyke commented that the Industrial Committee agrees that
undergrounding should take place at some time but the question
was as to where the lines should be placed and a problem they
felt to be very complicated in terms of placement and burden of
cost. He felt an analogy of the situation would be a sewer line
that services the industrial area as well as the other areas in
the vicinity, and assessments made accordingly.
Councilman Futch felt that it would not be necessary to make a
new motion but to ask that the staff report back to the Council
with their recommendations as soon as possible.
Mayor Miller commented that in his mind there is one area that
must be required to put in the undergrounding and that is the
OGO property because it is in a residential area and besides
the fact that undergrounding has been required all along East
Avenue so the issue remains with respect to the industrial park.
He added that the arguments that have been made about equity and
fairness can't help but sway the Council to some extent; however,
exactly the same argument has been made in the past such as the
undergrounding of all residential properties by the developers.
At one time they argued against this but the City insisted upon
it and it has taken place and does make a difference. Similar
arguments have also been made about the burden falling on a par-
ticular property in the development of major streets and is just
one of the problems a property owner has when he purchases a par-
ticular parcel. The same argument has been made about aesthetics
with regard to street trees and it was felt by many that the whole
CM-27-4l8
'c)
--_/
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding utilities)
City should pay for these street trees but these are required on
each individual lot and there are many requirements imposed per
lot or parcel for public works improvements and many other things.
TheJprice of a parcel is based upon its advantages and disadvantages
an~elt that someone interested in developing on industrial property
should investigate all the fees involved in development of the property
and the conditions of development which would have indicated that
undergrounding is required. The argument that costs fall heavily
on single parcels is certainly a point well taken but there are other
counter arguments that are also well founded and he would agree with
he motion made by Councilman Futch that the staff try to work out
something equitable to get the undergrounding of the lines installed,
and would urge that the Council adopt the motion that was originally
made.
Councilman Taylor noted that the motion took into consideration the
Vasco Road lines, only, and did not include East Avenue or anything
else.
Councilman Pritchard urged that something be done to insure that
the City does not lose any industrial client, and would suggest some-
thing like bonding for a portion of the cost or some other vehicle
for working this thing out.
Mayor Miller asked the City Manager the length of time he would esti-
mate for bringing back a proposal to the Council and Mr. Parness
felt that it would be about four weeks.
Councilman Taylor felt that perhaps some expression regarding the
amount should be given if the Council is interested in giving the
property owners anything to go by at this time.
Councilman Futch stated that if the cost is spread equally on both
sides of the street this would reduce the cost now estimated by
about 50% and would think that this would be a maximum amount re-
quired. If there is a real urgent need for development, perhaps
the property owners and staff could work something out that both
sides would be willing to agree to, and that the cost to the property
owner should not exceed 50% of the cost involved.
Councilman Pritchard stated that possibly the developers would be
willing to bond for the other half of the cost until such time a
stable fee structure is developed so that they can at least get
started with their development.
Councilman Taylor stated that he can see no reason to waive the
requirement and the City's Industrial Advisory Committee has not
suggested that this requirement be waived and it has never been
waived except in a very unusual case and it would be a major change
in Council pOlicy.
Councilman Pritchard stated that he also is not in favor of waiving
the requirement but as the motion stands without further action be-
ing taken, he would like to withdraw his vote in favor of the motion
because the vote was taken improperly.
Mayor Miller stated that unless there is an alternate motion the
original motion will stand.
(
~-
Councilman Pritchard moved to rescind the original motion and
action, seconded by Councilman Beebe.
Councilman Taylor stated that rather than to rescind the motion
the staff should be given additional instruction.
At this time the Council voted on Councilman pritchard's motion
which was defeated by a 3-2 vote (Councilmen Futch, Taylor and
Mayor Miller dissenting).
CM-27-4l9
~".-
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding utilities)
Councilman Taylor commented that the only problem with the
motion is the fact that it only gives the staff direction and
guidance and is not binding and just suggests a fee schedule. He
pointed out that it can be changed on one week by the new Council.
The Council then discussed and debated the original motion made
by Councilman Futch, and the extent to which the Council felt the
property owners should participate, financially.
Councilman Taylor noted that a point of view has been expressed
in the past to the effect that industrial land should be con-
sidered somewhat differently than residential properties due
to the interest of the City of Livermore to have them develop
and we have, in the past, bent our normal policy over other
improvements in favor of the industrial client because public
interest was involved. The City originally made a substantial
contribution for industrial development in this area by extend-
ing the sewer line to the area to make it available for develop-
ment at some cost to the taxpayers. He stated that if a decision
must be made tonight he would suggest that the cost be split 50-50
and Councilman Pritchard concurred with this suggestion.
~
~~
The Council then debated this suggestion and Mayor Miller pointed
out that he feels enough direction has been given to the staff
and that the Council should wait to debate the matter after the
staff has reported back to the Council.
Councilman Taylor raised the question of whether or not this delay
in doing a total undergrounding would result in keeping the present
cross-arm type of poles there for a number of years, or if PG&E
would, during the interim, replace these with new poles.
Dick Wright, speaking on behalf of PG&E explained that the poles
would be replaced during the time of the street widening process
and that this would be the procedure in any case.
It was concluded that the consensus of the Council would be that
the property owner would pay 25% of the cost for the Vasco Road
portion of the undergrounding. (Miller and Futch preferring ~
<[50% participation) ~~.~ -d P<<. .. ""1 ",.;r-
Councilman Pritchard moved that the ~n~l also include the East
Avenue properties which are industrial, to be included in the same
fee scale recommended by the staff, seconded by Councilman Futch.
The motion then passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
Mayor Miller pointed out that with regard to OGO, when they first
came to the City for a building permit it was pointed out that
there were a number of large fees involved and that the repre-
sentative had said they were aware of the fees involved and would
be willing to pay all of them and would check these things out
and the Mayor felt that they should have been aware of the under-
grounding fees if they followed through as indicated.
Mr. Musso commented that the issue of many of the public works
improvements is not a subject of the zoning and the only procedure
which is different between an Industrial Zone and a Residential
Zone is a site plan approval procedure and the industiral apli-
cant receives a sheet of conditions to be applied to the area;
however, if the applicant does not receive this sheet he is
still required to comply with the conditions. There is not such
a procedure for residential development - one need only apply for
a building permit.
Mr. Hirsch stated that he, on behalf of OGO, has written requesting
that the undergrounding be waived but they would be willing to
amend this request.
CM-27-420
March 4, 1974
(Undergrounding Utilities)
Councilman Taylor stated that he feels the requirement for the
undergrounding cannot really be waived, as it has never been
allowed in the past and moved that the request be denied, seconded
by Councilman Futch and which passed by a 4-0 vote (Beebe abstaining).
o
Mr. Hirsch pointed out that he needs only the use of a 220 volt line
for his property which is available at the street but because they
are located very close to a large industrial area they will be re-
quired to install a 12,000 volt line which raises the cost signifi-
cantly and asked that some consideration be given to the fact that
the line would be servicing the industrial area and LLL.
Mayor Miller stated that, again, it depends upon where the parcel
of land is located and what conditions are placed upon it by the
nature of its location and if undergrounding of lines is a require-
ment of the parcel this must be considered at the time the purchase
of the property is made. The same type of argument was made by
K&B and is made regularly about the undergrounding of lines along
East Avenue and which the Council has insisted be done, as has been
the case with all other residential development. It would seem that
the only reasonable thing to do would be to follow the policy that
has been set which requires the undergrounding of residential lines.
He pointed out that without the requirements for the undergrounding,
parcel by parcel, the Council is essentially backing away from a
policy the City has had regarding public works for at least 20 years.
Councilman Taylor felt there was some confusion regarding this
policy and pointed out that the Council has not really applied the
policy in cases in which there are existing lines - they do require
that new lines be placed underground.
Councilman Taylor moved that the staff be directed to also report
to the Council, ways on which the cost can be shared 50-50 between
both sides of the street when residential properties are involved
on major streets, seconded by Councilman Pritchard, and which passed
4-1 (Miller dissenting).
Prior to the vote Mr. Hirsch commented that they were totally unaware
of the undergrounding requirement and he is not positive but believes
his engineers made a complete review with the Public Works Department
as recently as last July and a complete catalogue of the costs was
sent to him which did not include undergrounding of these lines.
RECESS
Mayor Miller called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE RAILROAD
AVENUE ALIGNMENT
~.
The Director of Public Works reported that a final site plan for
the Southern Pacific commercial improvement has been reviewed
and approved by the City Council, the Design Review Committee and
staff and building permits are about to be issued. Prior to issu-
ance, however, it is requested that the City Council make a final
review and take a position regarding Railroad Avenue alignment
and its intersection with East Stanley Boulevard. He then gave a
brief history concerning the project and the Railroad Avenue right-
of-way illustrating the approved plan on a map and showed the inter-
section being questioned by the Planning staff, and what the Public
Works Department feels is a proper design for the intersection.
CM-27-42l
March 4, 1974
(re Railroad Ave. Alignment)
Mr. Lee explained that the record of survey is based on the
design felt to be appropriate for the intersection and the one
which has been presented to the Council on other occasions but
has not been discussed in detail as yet. Since it has been
questioned, however, it was felt that it should be brought to
the attention of the Council. He explained his reasons for
feeling that the design is appropriate and should be approved.
Mr. Musso of the Planning Department explained the events and
concerns which led up to the questioning of the intersection
being proposed, stating that at the time of the LDC discussions
it was determined that First Street was not the future core of
the shopping area but rather the area located around Railroad
Avenue, and that it is felt that Railroad Avenue should be re-
stricted or limited to downtown shopping access rather than a
thoroughfare. He pointed out that the City was trying to get
the traffic out of the downtown area before it was realized that
First Street was not the center of the shopping area, and traffic
was being planned for diversion to Fourth Street and Isabel Avenue.
Even though Railroad Avenue is a major street it is hoped that it
will be a two-lane road with emphasis on bicycle and pedestrian
traffic with parking facilities. He pointed out that he feels
the redevelopment of Market Street in San Francisco is placing
more emphasis on the needs of the pedestrian and there is a
trend to try to discourage the use of the automobile, and offered
his concept for the reasons mentioned, adding that this may not
satisfy the traffic engineers but would be the proposal offered
by the Planning Department out of concern for the pedestrian and
the bicycle traffic and shoppers.
Councilman Taylor stated that this development which involves
the Southern Pacific Railroad, land, and underpasses, has been
the major planning consideration for central Livermore for the
past two years and in his opinion the major problem Livermore
has been confronted with during this time and wondered why this
alternate proposal has never been brought up in the past or dis-
cussed by the Planning Commission during these two years. The
project is at a point where they are ready to commence and now
there appears to be a question as to an acceptable plan for the
intersection.
Mr. Parness noted that there is nothing critical about a decision
on this but that the Council is being asked if the plan for the
intersection can ever be effectuated, whether the plan suggested
by Mr. Lee would be acceptable, or that of Mr. Musso. This may
not take place for many years but it is asked that the Council
state a position regarding the concept of connecting "S" Street
with Railroad Avenue.
Mr. Lee stated that, on the contrary, it is important to know
which plan the Council would favor, as the agreement with S.P.
that provides that in the event the railroads are moved, it must
spell out, precisely, what their obligations are, and their par-
cel maps which include their surveys indicate the lines with res-
pect to that intersection.
The Council then discussed the pros and cons of the two proposals
mentioned and Mr. Lee interjected that there are already numerous
problems which exist because of the amount of traffic on Railroad
Avenue and there being no access from "S" Street to that area.
Mr. Hanesworth, representative of Southern Pacific, was asked if
he has an opinion regarding preference for one plan over the other
and was amused at being appointed arbitrator but stated that speak-
ing from a strictly monetary point of view, the design has gone
"pretty far downstream" while taking Mr. Lee's proposed intersec-
tion plan into consideration. Also, there has been a continual
emphasis on the orientation regarding the phases concerning
Railroad Avenue and would like to know if they should abide by
this plan in going ahead with the other phases involved.
CM-27-422
,
o
o
March 4, 1974
(re Railroad Avenue)
Mr. Street of the Building Department commented that the Design
Review Committee, in discussing this matter, was in favor of the
pedestrian oriented type of traffic flow for Railroad Avenue and
indicated that they would not like to see this street conducive
to traffic and would like a meandering type of two-way traffic way
with parking and landscaping provided in an attractive way with easy
access for the pedestrian from one shopping area to the other and
would like this access to shopping on both sides carried out as a
theme for the entire length of Railroad Avenue.
Councilman Pritchard wondered why this concept could not be provided
while at the same time allow for the intersection proposed by Mr. Lee
and by which other plans have been made in accordance.
Councilman Taylor moved that the alignment for the intersection, as
suggested by the Public Works Director, be approved, seconded by
Councilman Beebe.
Councilman Futch stated that he could sympathize with both points of
view in that he would like the better intersection and would like the
street to be appealing to shoppers.
Mayor Miller stated that he would prefer the proposal made by the
Planning staff and the recommendation of the Design Review Committee.
Mr. Lee pointed out that the design proposed by him is the design
S.P. has been working with for the past year and even though the
Design Review Committee would prefer another design for the street
this would not take into consideration other needs in the area.
At this time the motion to approve the Public Works Director's proposal
was defeated by a 2-3 vote with Councilmen Futch, Pritchard and Mayor
Miller dissenting.
The City Manager suggested that perhaps the best alternative would be
to send the matter back through the Planning Commission, so moved by
Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Pritchard and passed by unani-
mous vote.
REPORT RE AGREEMENT
WITH LLL FOR FIRE AID
AND AUTOMATIC RESPONSE
It was noted that the matter regarding the agreement between the City
and LLL for mutual fire aid and response was removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion by the Council members and that it was post-
poned from the last meeting in order that possible City liability
might be discussed and the contract reviewed by the Council and the
City Attorney. A letter has been received from the Fire Chief recom-
mending that the City enter into the agreement, a memorandum from
the City Attorney commenting that he sees no problem provided that
there is a slight change in the language in one paragraph, and from
the City's insurance agent who has indicated that there is not a
problem with respect to liability for the City, and the staff has
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execu-
tion of the agreement.
r
Councilman Pritchard commented that his only concern would be the
fact that the ABC might not accept the wording suggested by the
City Attorney and Mr. Parness replied that unless the City Attorney
feels very strongly about adopting the language suggested by him he
would suggest that there be no modification to the agreement, as
processing the agreement back and forth from the City to LLL is
very time consuming.
Mr. Wharton stated that he did not suggest the wording as a "fluke
or to keep busy" but if this is the only change which would hold up
signature of the agreement, he would like the Council to weigh the
pros and cons of it; however, if he were writing the agreement he
would not consider the modification indispensable.
CM-27-423
March 4, 1974
(re Fire Protection Agreement)
Councilman Pritchard then stated that apparently the matter was
discussed by telephone with our insurance carrier and in his opin-
ion the carrier should review the agreement prior to making a rec-
ommendation as to whether the City is liable.
The City Manager pointed out that this is essentially no different
than the agreement the City has with the City of Pleasanton and the
County and Councilman Pritchard wondered why the agreement is neces-
sary in that case and Mr. Parness replied that it is necessary be-
cause it calls for specific equipment to be used and Councilman
Pritchard stated that this is exactly what he is referring to and
that the insurance carrier should be advised of this.
o
The City Attorney, Mr. Wharton, replied that he also feels that this
is more than the usual mutual aid contract inasmuch as the City is
giving the first response responsibility to someone else. It is his
understanding that a mutual aid pact is usually a backup for rein-
forcement and assistance between jurisdictions. In this case, we
are setting aside certain jurisdictions and stating that LLL will
respond to calls in our name. He stated that he would agree that
the insurance company should review the contract to determine the
City's liability, and would not base approval of the contract on a
report received fro~ the insurance agent regarding his telephone
conversation with the insurance company, and feels that the insurance
company would be the first to disclaim any responsibility based on
such a communication. He would suggest that the Council request a
letter of approval from the insurance company, if it feels this is
important enough.
Councilman Pritchard stated that, hopefully, this agreement will
result in better coverage for the City and would like to know if
the insurance office that does the ratings has indicated that this
might lower our insurance rates and Chief Baird responded by saying
that he was in the office of our insurance agent at the time the
telephone call was made to the insurance company and that a complete
discription of what is called for in the contract was reported to
Mr. McNamara of the insurance company and they also have received
a copy of the contract. The representative of the insurance company
has indicated that there would be no adversities to the City of
Livermore in setting up this program. He added that more and more
cities are doing this type of thing in trying to eliminate duplica-
tion that sometimes exists but that Livermore is one of the first
to use governmental facilities and the representative has stated
that this would benefit Livermore in the future but did not indicate
to what extent with regard to evaluation and insurance rates.
Mayor Miller stated that perhaps the best course of action for the
City Council to take would be to approve the execution of the agree-
ment subject to a written response from the insurance company, so
moved by Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman Futch.
Councilman Taylor stated that in addition to better fire protection
for the citizens of Livermore there may be a tax relief in the
amount of several thousands of dollars that the City would be
obligated to pay for another fire station to serve the Valley East
Area which will now be covered by LLL. Until the contracts have
been signed it means that these people live from day to day with-
out adequate protection and it would not be in the public interest
to delay the matter.
Councilman Pritchard felt that it is in the public interest to see
that the necessary agencies recieve copies of the contract and respond
to it and still feels concern about the AEC and whether or not we
are dealing with Washington, or what, and it may be a possibility
that the City is not dealing with the proper layer of the AEC.
There is a department of the AEC located in Washington which deals
with public safety. He stated that befor approving the motion he
would like to have a written response from the insurance company
and the AEC.
CM-27-424
March 4, 1974
(re Fire Protection
Agreement - LLL & City)
o
Councilman Taylor pointed out that there is a clause provided in
the agreement which allows the City to terminate the agreement
at any time if it is determined that such an agreement is not in
the public interest and feels that adequate protection for the City
has been built into the contract and would urge that the motion not
be amended.
Ray Weingarner, 736 Adams Avenue, President of the Firemans Associa-
tion asked why the Valley East area has been without fire protection
for the past lO years and Councilman Taylor responded by saying that
it has been without adequate fire protection for the past lO years
because they are too far away from the fire station nearest to them
and the only solution to this problem would be to build a station
out there which would be very costly, in addition to the fact that
there are other areas of the City which also need a station and if
LLL will handle the Valley East area it means that a station can be
built on the south side of town to give them adequate fire protection.
Mr. Weingarner pointed out that this Council approved only 4 men to
be hired to open the new station in the southwest portion of the
City and that there are three shifts which would mean that there
will be only 4 men at Station 1, 2 men at Station 3, and 2 men at
Station 4 which he stated is not manning, in any sense, let alone
of any mutual aid pact or so-called formal agreement.
Councilman Taylor stated that if money is taken to build a new sta-
tion it means that there will be less money to staff the stations
and feels that making use of the Lab's fire department will only
help to improve our own Fire Department.
c
Mr. Weingarner charged that there is no guarantee that the AEC will
allow the response and that the Council is allowing a shortage in
the Fire Department and in the City of Livermore. He admitted the
situation in the area is bad and yet he and other firemen living in
the area are even more opposed to the contract as drawn up which he
read from, specifically the portion which states that if either
party is unable to carry out its reciprocal obligations, the other
party shall be given as much advance notice as possible so that al-
ternate means of protection may be provided. It was his feeling
that if an alarm came in, it would take more time to relay the call
out to the Lab than the original delay; in addition, maybe they will
respond or they may say they have a bomb scare and the gates are
closed and they are unable to respond. In that instance, it would
be necessary to find enough men to respond which might mean a delay
of at least twelve minutes which could be disastrous. He suggested
the money be taken from the deficit of the golf course and other such
misallocation and use it where it is needed - to protect human life.
Mr. Weingarner stated that other things become problems also such as
legal aspects inasmuch as the firefighters at the Lab are classified
by the state as miscellaneous employees which means they are not
covered by the same laws as safety employees of the City of Livermore.
Also, if they are injured in the City while acting under the terms
of this contract, the City could be subject to suit. On the other
hand if one of the local firemen is injured while on a call in the
Lab's behalf he is not able to sue which fact was brought out by the
City Attorney. He stressed that all the firemen were concerned
about just such issues, and he could not understand why there should
be haste at this time to execute such an agreement.
Floyd Hibbits, president of the Homeowners' Association of the
Rhonewood Park area, stated they are not really opposed to the act,
but there are some uncertainties they would like to have clarified.
He personally has suffered loss by fire and he cited an incident
in November wherein his car was completely totaled and destroyed.
CM-27-425
March 4, 1974
(re Fire Protection
Agreement - LLL & City)
Mr. Hibbits stated the response time from the time he phoned until
the firemen arrived was approximately 5~ minutes. His reason for
mentioning this is the fact he does not feel there is any guarantee
that if, in the event there is an emergency crisis at the Lab and
one in the Valley East area, that they would receive priority
as there is no guarantee that the Lab would respond. It appears
from what was read that the right to respond is left to the agency
that is called, and he felt if the Lab had an emergency crisis, they
would naturally consider their crisis priority over something else
and create a greater time delay for the Livermore Fire Department.
Legally that area looks to the City for fire protection and fire
coverage; also he feels that in that area they are paying higher fire
insurance premiums because of the fire protection coverage and the
distance to the nearest fire station. They pay the same taxes but
do not get the same coverage from the Fire Department.
James Adler, 5430 Betty Circle, voiced his agreement with what had
been said by Mr. Weingarner and Mr. Hibbitts, and asked the Council
to think about the crash trucks which would have to come from the
Lab to take care of heart attacks in the area. The response time
would be longer as the call would be first made to the City who in
turn would call the Lab, and reminded them that it takes only three
minutes for brain damage and five minutes for death, stressing the
fact that every minute counts.
Councilman Taylor asked the Fire Chief if it was true that the Lab
could respond faster even considering the telephoning, and Chief
Baird replied in the affirmative adding that the alarm systems would
be tied together, both would know when the other is on call and
both would receive the call at the same time, and the system would
be similar to the one at the fire station.
Mr. Weingarner stated there was one other thing - the City's respon-
sibility to the crash truck. The truck has to go to the airport
twice a day to meet the AEC aircraft and the truck requires three
men to properly operate and there are only three men at the station,
which would leave the west side and most of the north side of the
city unprotected, and he again stressed the time element.
Fire Chief Baird stated that this has all been considered by his
office with the insurance service office who are basically fire pro-
tection engineers. He stated he is and always has been on the side
of the firemen, however every time Sta. 2 has a commitment and it
could be sent out to Collier Canyon Road which is out of the area
and has to be protected from Sta. l; every time they go on a single
resusitator call, the area has to be protected from Sta. 1 and this
has been done for years. He further explained he could cover resi-
dentially nearly all of that area from Sta. l, and balance it out
from the airport and recall of those personnel. This has all been
considered and he has the interest safety and life safety of the
people of Livermore like he always has had.
Councilman Beebe asked the representative of the Homeowners' Assoc.
if the answers that the Fire Chief has given satisfies the questions
they have and Mr. Hibbitts replied he did not really think so as
they were not sure of the obligations to the Lab. Another question
he had was what the requirements are of the City in order to have
fire alarm boxes in a residential area as there are very few fire
alarm boxes in the area, and Mr. Hibbitts was advised there are
no fire alarm boxes in the city.
Councilman Taylor pointed out that the contract can be terminated
anytime the City determines it is not beneficial.
CM-27-426
o
i"..
~-)
~
:it
March 4, 1974 ~~
(re Fire Protection) ~
Mr. Wharton stated there is one aspect about which he remains con- :j
cerned and that is that the contract deals carefully with liability
among the parties signatory to the contract, but not with the pO&&ir~
bility of the parties to the contract with respect to everyone else. \
While it is true we can begin to enjoy the benefits immediately, if
there is an accident and a law suit and our insurance carrier decides
we are not covered, we might lose more money in a law suit than it
would take to build several fire stations. He felt we should have
the benefit of our insurance carrier's observations on this contract.
Councilman Futch called for the question at this time, and the motion
passed 4-1 with Councilman Pritchard dissenting.
The City Attorney was directed to contact the insurance company and
in the event there are any problems the contract can be abrogated
with 30 days notice.
Mr. Parness offered his personal commendations to the Fire Chief for
what he considered to be a very high standard of professionalism in
the fire fighting service working out this contractual arrangement
with another department; he felt it was entirely to the benefit of
the community and the people therein.
RESOLUTION NO. 32-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT -
MUTUAL FIRE AID AND AUTOMATIC RESPONSE - LLL & AEC
REPORT RE COMMUNITY
ACTION AGENCY
The City Manager reported that by federal and state order SACEOA
is to be dissolved on or around March 15. The federal regional
office of OEO had encouraged the involved governmental jurisdictions,
i.e., seven South County cities and Alameda County, to become the
Community Action Agency. A joint powers agreement has been drafted
and has received the tentative approval of the state and federal
offices and the chief administrative officers of all of the local
jurisdictions. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted
authorizing execution of the agreement.
Councilman Taylor moved that the Council adopt the City Manager's
recommendation and motion was seconded by Councilman Beebe.
Councilman Futch stated he had already commented to the City Man~~~
that he felt there should be more than one fr _.. sur gily- A. I ~ad1;~
administrative board; for example three based on geographical location
which is quite a major change and two of the SACEOA representatives
from our city who have regularly attended the meetings feel this very
strongly.
r
Councilman Taylor commented that the biggest point of friction that
kept SACEOA from being effective was that they amalgamated three
existing agencies, and the valley with its special interests never
felt adequately represented by that board.
Councilman Futch stated you cannot be knowledgable about what is going
on in other areas when you are so removed and he felt there could
be separate boards which are concerned with their own localities.
Mr. Parness explained that before the draft was put together there
was a lot of discussion as to whether or not that kind of a struc-
ture would be most appropriate and in his opinion it was the unanimous
conclusion of those representing the 8 jurisdictions involved that it
was not practical or feasible to so write it and Mr. Parness explained
that he argued for the structure, as it is, so that we would at least
receive specific representation for our valley due to the fact that
appointments to the board are based upon geographical location with
a singular board. If you fractionalize this and call for 4 of them
CM-27-427
March 4, 1974
(Community Action Agency)
this would amount to something like an award system in a govern-
mental jurisdiction entering into a great deal of provincialism
where you get more personalized representation but which is pro-
vincial in nature. It is felt that it would be cumbersome for a
board to receive and process recommendations from 4 separate ad-
ministrative boards under them who would all be fighting and vying
for monetary allocations and for this reason it was felt that it
would be in the best interest of all involved to have a single
board with geographical representation on this board.
. )
~-
Councilman Futch stated that from what Mr. Parness has said it
would seem that there would be 4 representatives and asked why
only 3 are mentioned and Mr. Parness explained that the three
would be from the valley, the Tri-cities area and Eden Township
with the County of Alameda, in general.
Councilman Futch felt that there should be a separate panel from
each of these areas and Mr. Parness explained that if this is
done there would be 6 (for example) from the Tri-cities area,
6 from Eden Township, 6 from the valley, and according to the
representative of the Board of Supervisors, Alameda County would
include Castro Valley, Russell City area, possibly VCSD and the
unincorporated segments which would be equivalent with respect
to population as the other three elements and Councilman Futch
felt that they could appoint one member to each of these three
boards. Mr. Parness explained that one of the Board of Supervisors
members feels that they are already being improperly represented
on the governing board by having just one member.
Mayor Miller stated that he would tend to share the concern of
Councilman Futch and no matter what the pressure is, at present,
perhaps the matter should be postponed for discussion again.
The City Attorney commented that there is more than just a policy
question at hand and that there is also the legal question. OEO
is the probable funding source and would not likely fund an organi-
zation of the kind described by Councilman Futch except for what
is already embodied in the document. There will be a three man
committee from the valley and from each of the areas plus three
at large in the discretion of the County Board of Supervisors.
There is no reason why this three man unit could not function inde-
pendently and act as a delegation if it so chooses in its participa-
tion in the administering board activities. OEO would require that
there be some area-wide jurisdiction-wide administering board and
would probably consider a larger board but would feel that they
would require this board to act in concert and not leave to the
governing board, resolution of conflicting actions by different
administering boards. Unfortunately, none of the areas are indi-
vidually large enough to warrant funding and is the reason the
joint powers document has been created and designed to avoid any
plus or minus aspects of the previous anti-poverty agency. It
would appear that dispite frustrations and problems that may
exist it is the next best thing to a fresh start.
The new structure was briefly discussed and the City Attorney
explained that all members would, in any case, have to meet in
joint session and make joint decisions because uder the OEO
regulations the final decision making power must be made by one
of the tri-part type boards and the governing board will be 8
public officials and does not meet the OEO standard. He pointed
out that there is some additional premium placed on a decesion
being made in the reasonable near future which is that the fed-
eral fiscal year is coming to an end and there is sufficient
money waiting in San Francisco to make it worthwhile to act
before it is parcelled out elsewhere and it is his understanding
that this is in excess of $250,000 for the balance of this fiscal
year and it would be helpful to use these resources to get the
CM-27-428
o
('
~
March 4, 1974
(Community Action Agency)
organization started prior to the new fiscal year and the tighter
funding prospects the new fiscal year brings.
Councilman Futch then expressed concern for the fact that the cities
are getting involved in the "war on poverty" and that the federal
government may withdraw its support which will leave the cities with
the financial burden and suggested that perhaps the language could
be such that cities could be excluded from receiving assistance
unless the state provides additional sources of revenue for such.
He noted that we are hemmed in with SB-90 and it would be unreasonable
for the state to expect us to pick up the "war on poverty" without
allowing us additional tax revenue.
The City Attorney commented that as it stands, the agreement would
allow another city to be added without any major change in the joint
powers agreement but with respect to the future of OEO funding it is
his understanding that the President's budget for next yea~oses
transfer of OEO into the Department of Health ~ Educatio lfare.
This would indicate that for one more year the OEO Community Action
Program will be continued and the fact that it is going into an
ongoing agency would suggest that it may have a longer life than
anticipated in the past.
The Council then voted on the suggestion by Councilman Futch to
ask for three boards in the contract which was defeated 2-3 with
Councilmen Pritchard, Taylor and Beebe dissenting.
The main motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council.
RESOLUTION NO. 33-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(Associated Community Act Program)
REPORT RE MINIMUM
WAGE ADJUSTMENT
The City Manager reported that an increase in the minimum wage level
is pending federal legislation which reportedly has considerable
support. However, a provision of the bill requires the payment
of time and one half for all public personnel working in excess
of 40 hours per week. When applied to the Fire Department, the
financial effects this would cause are shocking as it is estimated
that converting the Fire Department work week to a 40 hour a week
schedule would exceed $250,000 per year - approximately 25~ to the
general fund tax rate. The California Firemen's Association opposes
this legislation and the staff recommends that the City Council adopt
a resolution urging opposition of the measure.
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe and
by unanimous vote, the staff recommendation was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 34-74
A RESOLUTION OPPOSING INCLUSION OF FIREMEN
IN PREMIUM PAY FOR OVERTIME PROVISIONS OF
S.2747.
BAPTIST CHURCH CUP APP. &
REPORT RE PUBLIC WORKS
IMPROVEMENTS ON PORTOLA
AVENUE & NO. LIVERMORE
Mr. Musso reported that the Planning Commission discussed the appli-
cation for a CUP to allow construction of a church and related off-
street parking at the northeast corner of North Livermore Avenue
CM-27-429
March 4, 1974
(Baptist Church CUP App.)
and Portola Avenue which it did conditionally approve. The Plan-
ning Commission also recommends that the backing lot treatment
requirement be waived and that approval of the church be condi-
tioned to eliminate the masonry wall, as they felt that access
to the church should not be through the neighborhood in the
Harewood area. It was also noted that the Planning Commission
expressed concern for the church buying the property and then
not constructing a church and it was felt that there should be
some assurance that if the church does not proceed that the ob-
ligation still rests with the property owners regarding construc-
tion of the wall.
,~,
U
The Council then discussed the frontage requirements and the obli-
gations involved and Mr. Lee stated that the Council would have
to have a bond, if a bond is to be used, that would guarantee
the work to be done no matter what happens and wondered if the
Council would require the public works improvements to be done
for what might possibly be someone else's frontage. He pointed
out that this obligation is to the developer and now there
would be some question as to whether the Council could morally
require the developer to pay for someone else's frontage.
It was the consensus of the Council that if there is to be a
church constructed, there should not be a wall; however if a
church does not go in, they want a wall along those streets.
Mr. Lee commented that he is not going to make a strong case
for the wall but pointed out that the Council wanted the wall
in the first place and would keep the intersection nice and
clean. The wall would be a good idea but he does not feel strongly
one way or the other about it.
Councilman Taylor moved that the Council adopt the Planning
Commission's recommendation with the provision that the Council
require the developer to post a cash bond in lieu of construct-
ing the wall, explaining that he is referring to the developer
who is now obligated to build the wall. He stated that he feels
this developer is still obligated to build the wall and put in
the public works improvements regardless of whether or not the
church is developed.
Mr. Lee stated that he would suggest that the Council receive
a bond from the church that will insure that they will assume
this responsibility so that the developer will be relieved.
The Mayor pointed out that the reason the developer was required
to pay for the cost of the wall was due to the fact that the cost
involved is too much for a small piece of property to assume
and it appears that this cost will be dumped back onto the small
parcel. This comment was followed by discussion over the wall
and who should be responsible for paying for it.
Mr. Lee stated that the developer was required to underground
the utilities, put in curbs, gutters, sidewalks, walls and street
work and now the Council is saying that the backing lot treatment
is not necessary and someone else is going to benefit from all of
these improvements.
Councilman Taylor pointed out that the backing lot treatment re-
quirement was only for the sake of aesthetics and everybody in
the development will still benefit from all of the improvements
which have been done.
Councilman Futch commented that there have been former misunder-
standings over this property with the developer and would feel better
about coming to some type of decision at this time to clarify the
matter.
01-27- 430
March 4, 1974
(Baptist Church CUP App.)
Councilman Beebe suggested that the staff work out some type of
contract that would protect the City and to get all the developments
in at this time, except for the walls.
o
Councilman Taylor moved that the Council adopt the policy of not
requiring a backing lot treatment in the event the church is built
on that corner and that the details of the obligations to the developer
be worked out between the developer, the City staff and the church
people. The motion was seconded by Councilman Beebe and passed by
a unanimous vote.
MOTION TO CONTINUE
AGENDA ITEMS
On motion of Councilman Pritchard, seconded by Councilman Beebe
and by unanimous vote, the items on the agenda regarding the
Council policy regarding the widening of 1-580 and possible
organization of a Valley Planning Committee were continued.
PLANNING COMMISSION'S
SUMMARY OF ACTION
The summary of action taken at the Planning Commisison's meeting
of February 26th was noted for filing.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Public Hearings re
New Town)
Councilman Pritchard commented that he would like the staff to
ask that any public hearings that are to be held concerning
the development of the New Town, be held in this valley, with
which the Council concurred.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, the Mayor adjourned the
meeting at l2:l5 a.m. to a brief executive session for the purpose
of discussing appointments.
APPOINTMENT - Housing
Authority (H. Newkirk)
The Council reconvened the meeting to adopt the following resolution
appointing Herbert Newkirk to the Housing Authority to fill the
unexpired term of Harvey Owren who had resigned:
RESOLUTION NO. 35-74
o
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD
(Harvey Owren)
APPROVE
~~~.~
Mayor
ATTE
~ ;
/ \ I I
/ (':(~~L
__ C1ty Clerk
~ivermore, California
CM-27-43l
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 12, 1974
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council was held on March
12, 1974, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore
Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. with Mayor
Miller presiding.
ROLL CALL
.~~
. ; ~
U' l
. .
,- " '
PRESENT: Councilmen Beebe, Futch, Pritchard, Taylor and Mayor
Miller
ABSENT:
None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Miller led the Council members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
CANVASS OF RETURNS
MUNICIPAL ELECTION-MARCH 5, 1974
The City Clerk reported the outcome of the Election held on March
5, 1974, and certified that it was correct.
On motion of Councilman Beebe, seconded by Councilman Taylor, and
by unanimous vote, the following resolution was approved:
RESOLUTION NO. 36-74
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CANVASS OF VOTES AT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF MARCH 5, 1974
WHEREAS, a general municipal election was held and conducted in
the City of Livermore, on Tuesday, the 5th day of March, 1974,
as required by law; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 31-74 the City Clerk was ordered
to canvass the results of said election and certify the same to
this Council; and
WHEREAS, it appears that notice of said election was duly
and legally given, that voting precincts were properly established,
that election officers were appointed and election supplies fur-
nished, and that in all respects said election was held and con-
ducted and the votes cast thereat received and canvassed, and the
returns thereof made and declared in time, form and manner as re-
quired by the general laws of the State of California governing
elections in General Law Cities; and
WHEREAS, the Council of said City of Livermore met at the
Council Chambers thereof on TueSday, the 12th day of March, 1974,
to receive the canvass of the returns of said election from the
City Clerk and install the newly elected officers, and having can-
vassed said returns, the Council finds that the number of votes
cast, the names of the persons voted for, and other matters re-
quired by law to be as hereinafter stated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED
AS FOLLOWS:
That said regular general municipal election was held and
conducted in the City of Livermore, on Tuesday, the 5th day of
March, 1974, in time, form and manner as required by law; and
CM-27- 432
March 12, 1974
(Resolution of Canvass)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED, THAT there
were twenty-five (25) voting precincts established for the purpose
of holding said election, consisting of a consolidation of the
regular election precincts established for holding the last general
;--. state and County elections as follows:
Consolidated voting Precinct "A" comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30010, 30011
Consolidated voting Precinct "B", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30020
Consolidated voting Precinct "C", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30031, 30032
Consolidated voting Precinct "D", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30030
Consolidated voting Precinct "E", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30040, 30050
Consolidated voting Precinct"F", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30060, 30091
Consolidated voting Precinct "G", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30070, 30090
Consolidated voting Precinct "H", comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30080, 30100
Consolidated voting Precinct "I", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30110, 30120
Consolidated voting Precinct "J", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30130, 30140
Consolidated voting Precinct "K", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30200, 30201
Consolidated voting Precinct "L", comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30202, 30161
Consolidated voting Precinct "M", comprising State
and County precincts numbered Livermore 30141, 30150, 30190
Consolidated voting Precinct "N", comprising State and
County precincts numbered L vermore 30170, 30180
Consolidated voting P ecinct "0", comprising State and
County precincts numbered LJvermore 30160, 30191
~
Consolidated voting Precinct "p", comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30181, 30183
Consolidated voting Precinct "Q", comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30182, 30184
Consolidated voting Precinct "R", comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30220, 30230
Consolidated voting Precinct "S", comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30210, 30221
Consolidated voting Precinct liT", comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30250, 30260
CM-27-433
March 12" 1974
(Resolution of Canvass)
Consolidated voting Precinct "U"" comprising state and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30271, 30290
Consolidated voting Precinct "V"" comprising State and
County precinct numbered Livermore 30280
Consolidated voting Precinct "W"" comprising State and
County precincts numbered ~0240" 30270
Consolidated voting Precinct "X"" comprising State and
County Precincts numbered Livermore 30272, 30273
Consolidated voting Precinct "y"" comprising State and
County precincts numbered Livermore 30241, 30274
That the whole number of votes cast in said City of
Livermore was 7,,798; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED that the
names of the persons voted for" the offices for which they were
voted, together with the whole number of votes which they re-
ceived in the entire City of Livermore, are as shown on the
attached" marked Exhibit "A".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED, that at
the said general municipal election held in said City on Tuesday"
the 5th day of March, 1974" the following persons were elected to
the respective offices for the terms stated and until their
successors are duly elected and qualified" as follows:
ROBERT A. PRITCHARD was
term of four years;
elected Councilman for the full
HELEN M. TIRSELL was elected Councilwoman for the full
term of four years;
DALE M. TURNER Was elected Councilman for the full term
of four years; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED" DETERMINED AND DECLARED that at
the said general municipal election held in said City on Tuesday"
the 5th day of March" 1974" Measure "A" was adopted" receiving more
than a majority of votes cast on said proposition" and Measure "B"
was not adopted, receiving less than a majority of votes cast on
said proposition; the full text of said measures is shown on the
attached" marked Exhibit "B".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED that the
C erk shall enter on the records of this Council a statement of
the result of the said election" showing:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The whole number of votes cast in the City of Livermore;
The names of the persons voted for;
For what office each person was voted;
The propositions that were voted upon;
The number of votes given at each precinct to each
person and to each measure; and
The number of votes given in the City to each person
and each measure.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED THAT the
City Clerk shall immediately make and deliver to each of such per-
sons elected a certificate of election" signed by her and duly
authenticated; she shall also impose the constitutional oath of
office, whereupon they shall be inducted into their respective
offices to which they have been elected.
CM-27-434
I
STATEMENT OF ALL VOTES CAST
AT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION
HELD
MARCH ')
, 19~
IN
CITY OF
LIVERMORE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
(When the City Clerk makes the Official Canvass, he must
fill out Certificate on back page.)
'--
EXHIBlT IIA"
I
STATEMENT OF ALL VOTES CAST AT THE
'-r' ~ ~ ,~.
'-'f ~
ELECTION
PRECINCTS
e
z:
e
CIl:
A.
LI.
e
Ll-'
l-
e
::-
-I
==
I:
o
()
()
o
~
I
Firehouse,1389 BluebeJlA 152,,149. 235; i 224il [233:
Rec . Cen. ,931 Larks pur B , 75. I 90, 110, , 107 ,121,
Garage,988 Lynn st. C 166 '188, 98, 245, .196,
Garage,1396 Juliet ct D , 130 i I 133: 63, , 134 . 93,
Jackson Ave. School E _. .252. _+- 2.73,__ _ 129. .286'1 .2QJ.,
East. Ave. School F ;297: ,300; 141 ,323,; ,215,
Garage,3866 Pes tana Wy, G : 177 i i 157, III i ' 186 .151
Livermore High School H ;172, ,147, 138, ,183 ,154,
Fifth Street School I 358 1213, ,165, 154. ,175 .192.
1617 ~ Q()l+~g~.AY~!. .+_~___J~52"-_..-l-l.8,B-+-.____ i 129."_____ ._J--.93._______J.74_ __.202_______-:.._._________.__
Garage, 1145 Florence K 433 .227, :252, 162 318' .243.
Garage, 1731 Cairo St L 367 ,169, 204 158. ,250 .220.
Joe Michell School M 557, ,274, ,309. 232. .364: ,313 i
Sonoma Ave. School N 373 ,203 194: 168, ,237 ,215,
,! r
. Mend enha 11 S.cl}g() 1____..._~__lL~2__-.--j-1411----~ 4B~._~I~....-. ._~~35+_ 212.-+__...____ ~__.
Emma C. Smith School P 318. .158, : 166. 125, .236:' 188
Garage, 217 Elvira St. Q 285 ,154. :156, 112, .200 .161,
I
Junction Ave. School R 152 ,90, ! 65 87 69 82
Garage,2756 Kennedy St. S 335 ! 197. ,195. 123, 209 ,173.
May~ ~~ Nl s p ~l} I~twjlll._.c e n t e r T 183-..~ ._-.-l_2.L__~._ _.--9~--~---93.--- 1 0 ~---9R.--~--------.- .
Marylin Avenue School U 287 147, i 123 ' 150, ,199 .156.
. I
Garage, 168 Albatross V 108 . 59. ! 70. 51 ,69 52,
Rincon Avenue School W 278 ,154, ; 155 116 ,1861 159.
Garage, 677 Brighton Wy X 210 1110, ,101: 99 i .152 108.
Rec. Ba1J.,,,835___.PQT.:tQla_u_y __11.2____._139__._. _9(L~..____69-- 123 ____..135_____.:.____ ._J.__.._
Absentee
81
; 50 i
44 :
22'
42
47 i
TOTALS
.7798
14173.
i4 09 3.
3247
.5023
.4272,
,
-_._._-------_._._-------~---_._----- ....j.o.------+--....,---:--~---------........_-_._----_..-.....---:------~-------~--..--".--------.-.--
~-..--/
- .~ .----t"
--. --r- --r' ~--r --r--~-
I
General Municipal ELECTION HELD
March !)
, 19 74
MEASURE MEASURE
f1AlI f1BfI
Yes i No Yesj' No
i
I I I I!
A 22~ 130' 15~ 19(3:
s 10~ 63 41, 125
c 259: 68 199 129
D 153i 48 122, 79
__ . _~ ~3-Q~ J-.LL2 3Sl m 182..
F 364. 106, 261 210
G 191i 92 132; 153
H ' 214. 69 122 164
I 221, 123 145 197
._____ ____ _L.:_203..J:1-_2..____9l.-2l9.._____-+-________-i
K 308 115 224 204
I. 313. 51, 207, 154
M, 40~ 138 244 308
N, 259! 107, 164, 198'
---- _ ~ -- -.<?-__3J--s+--3J--2~-EL-~---_ ------~-_m--_------r--.--'-_-'-- __ "~_ __n.~
p 248, 66 170. 143,
Q 225: 56 159, 124
R 8~ 58 42, 103
S 23Q 102 143. 187
_____--.-!~ 118 69, 68 116
U 189, 96 144, 139
V 60, 45 34, 72
w 176: 98 114, 159
X 151, 52 106, 104
____ ___ Y 1 ~O ~8 8l__~___-r___-___~-__.-~,-_-___________.________
.. -
Absentee, 62 18 35, 45,
Total
5524/21263661,3979
~ _.______________._~_~__________.____+__-.---.--_----...-~.-- _________..__...--.- ___.__.._, __.___-+-.m______..._. ___ ..
'-
+--___________._____...____--4--___._____.__ ..._..._.._.n.+...____ ',' _.__._
---r ----or-- '---r--
-oor---.---
I
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
TO RESULT OF THE CANVASS
OF ELECTION RETURNS
County ~~~~~.:~~:::~~~~:mm_m.. }ss.
I, .........................................DOROTHY....J.......HO.CK..............................................................................................C ity C ler k
of said City, do hereby certify that) in pursuance of the provisions of
Section 22932.5 of the Elections Code and of the resolution of the
governing body of said City, heretofore adopted and entered upon
the minutes of said governing body, I did canvass the returns of the
vote cast in said City, at the.........~.....~"..................................m.................................................h..
...........................G.e.n.e.r.al...Munic.ip.al........................~.~.~.....................E lection held on
.............h..M.?-.r..~.h........5................, 19....7.0:..) for elective public offices, and/or for
and against each measure submitted to the vote of the voters, and that
the Statement of the Vote Cast, to which this certificate is attached,
shows the whole mtmber of votes cast in said City, and the whole num-
ber of votes cast for each candidate and/or for and against each meas-
ure in said City and in each of the respective precincts therein, and
that the totals of the respective columns and the totals as shown for
each candidate and/or for and against each meas~tre are full, true and
correct.
WITNESS my hand and Official Seal this...........12.t.h..............day of
..........m...M.?x.~..h.........................., 19.....7.~..
(SEAL)
By .....................................................................................~............., Deputy.
(The above certificate is to be used only when the governing body has ordered the City Clerk to make the official canvass,)
: r
MEAS URE "A 11
''----
"Shall the City of Livermore Police Department conduct,
in cooperation with the City of Pleasanton Police De-
partment, a Strategic Team Enforcement Program concen-
trating on crime 9revention and increased citizen
security by using funds available under the federal
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968?"
MEASURE "B"
"Shall the proposed increase in the maximum tax rate
from sixty cents ($0.60) to eighty cents ($0.80)
(increase of twenty cents ($0.20)) per One Hundred
Dollars ($100.00) of assessed valuation, such rate
to be in effect in the LIVERMORE AREA RECREATION AND
PARK DISTRICT for the years 1974 - 1975 to and
including 1980 - 1982 (eight (8) years) be authorized
for the purpose of financing capital development and
acquisition of athletic facilities, community 8ctivity
facilities, parks and open space, arroyo trails and
neighborhood parks?"
("
,
'EXHIBIT
I
UR"
,~\
~;
~
March 12, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEN
(Term of Office - Beebe)
Councilman Beebe stated he had been asked to comment on what had
transpired during his term in office, and remarked he felt a lot
of good things had happened, for instance the sale of the 200 acres
to Sears, who will build when their economics permit; the Intel
Corporation locating in the City; the new Police building which is
almost complete, the initiation of the building fee for the benefit
of the schools, the beginning of the railroad relocation project and
shopping center. Councilman Beebe stated that one of the first
challenges for the new Council will be the results of the "new town"
on the City, which in his opinion should have been built within the
corporate structure of Livermore, however he felt that Livermore
must show a more outreaching look if they are going to prepare for
such things as "new town" in the future. He felt that the new Council-
members would be outstanding as leaders, and he looked for nothing
but good for Livermore in the future years.
(Comments by Councilman Taylor)
Councilman Taylor indicated he was just as proud as Councilman Beebe
of the accomplishments of the Council during his term in office, and
wanted to add that the City has a chance to present to the County,
and the citizens our own plan for what happens on the north side
integrated with the City. He remarked that the new council has a
chance to revise the General Plan for the first time in ten years.
He expressed his pleasure in working with the staff and with the
rest of the Councilmen, and stated it had been a great privilege to
serve the people of the City as Councilman and as Mayor.
(Comments by Councilman Futch)
Councilman Futch stated he felt Livermore was fortunate in the caliber,
integrity and honesty of the Councilmen who have served, and wished
Councilmen Beebe and Taylor the best of luck in their retirement
from the Council.
(Comments by Councilman
Pritchard)
Councilman Pritchard stated that although he would have some comments
to make when the new Councilmembers were seated, he wished to take
this opportunity to thank the retiring Councilmen Beebe and Taylor
personally for their four years of service to the City which he
greatly appreciated.
(Comments by Mayor Miller)
Mayor Miller stated that people who have not been closely associated
with the Councilmen and other public officials do not realize the
personal sacrifice in time and to their familes that public service
requires, and expressed his appreciation for their efforts of the
retiring Councilmen on behalf of the citizens. Mayor Miller added
that before he steps down as Mayor, he would like to make a few
comments as he had been asked what his accomplishments as mayor have
been. With respect to legislation, the Mayor has no right to take
credit for the accomplishments of the whole Council as the accom-
plishments of the mayor are zero, but it is the accomplishments
of the Council that count, and he was pleased to be a member of a
Council that has accomplished a large number of things. He
hoped that as mayor he had accomplished fairness with the gavel
as he tried to treat the public as partners in our political
system by allowing people to express themselves and their
views at the meetings without trying to limit debate. He also ex-
pressed appreciation to the staff.
CM-27-435
March 12, 1974
ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE
On motion by Councilman Taylor, seconded by Councilman Beebe, and
by unanious vote the meeting was adjourned sine die.
CALL TO ORDER
~i.~_)
The City Clerk called the meeting to order after having delivered
certificates of election to each new councilmember and administering
the oath of office. The City Clerk then asked for a motion to
select a mayor for the coming year. Councilmember Futch nominated
Councilmember Pritchard and the nomination was seconded by Council-
member Turner. Upon call for further nominations, there being none
made, the City Clerk declared the selection of Mayor Pritchard by
acclamation.
NOMINATIONS-VICE MAYOR
Mayor Pritchard took the chair at this time and asked for nomina-
tions for Vice Mayor. Motion was made by Councilmember Turner,
seconded by Councilmember Tirsell to nominate Councilmember Futch
as Vice Mayor. There were no other nominations and Councilmember
Futch was unanimously declared to be the Vice Mayor.
MATTERS INITIATED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS
Vice Mayor Futch at this time thanked the former Mayor Donald Miller
for the fine job during his term as mayor, and the audience responded
by a standing ovation.
(Comments by Councilmembers)
Councilmember Miller expressed his appreciation indicating he had
only tried to do his best, and he wished Mayor Pritchard good
luck in his office.
Councilmember Turner remarked that he only hoped he could do as good
a job as had been done by the other members.
Councilmember Tirsell stated that she planned to work very hard and
to do her best.
Mayor Pritchard expressed his thanks to the people who helped in
his reelection, and more especially Dick Wright who helped in his
campaign, priscilla Payne who was his campaign manager, and to
his wife Effie as he felt she had put up with a lot during the past
four years, and knows what she must look forward to, and to his
daughter Renee. He thanked his colleagues on the Council who had
entrusted the Mayor's chair to him for the coming year, and he ex-
pressed his thanks to the staff for their cooperation.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council the
meeting was adjour ed at 8:08 p.m.
ATTEST
APPROVE
Mayor
CM-27-436
Regular Meeting of March 18, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on March 18, 1974,
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: Councilmembers Futch, Miller, Tirsell, Turner 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.
RE SITE LOCATION
Fire Dept. Station 4
Mayor Pritchard announced for the benefit of interested citizens
present at the meeting that the Council had been informed by the
City Attorney that legally the firehouse cannot be placed on the
parksite on Neptune and they would have to seek another location,
therefore this matter has been tabled.
MINUTES APPROVAL
On motion of Councilman Futch, seconded by Councilman Miller, and
by unanimous vote, the minutes for the meeting of March 4 were
approved as corrected.
OPEN FORUM
The Mayor invited anyone in the audience to speak on any item not on
the agenda at this time, however there were no comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Resolutions Annexing
Murrieta Blvd. Annex and
Arroyo Annex No.3)
The Planning Commission has reported favorably on the proposals for
the annexation of Murrieta Blvd. Annex,which involves the street area
only located at the northerly end as it intersects portola Avenue,
and Arroyo Annex No. 3 which involves the property recently acquired
by the City, adjacent to Robertson Park. The maps and descrip-
tions have been finally approved, and the final steps may now be
taken to complete the annexations by resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 37-74
/
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN
UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESIGNATED "MURRIETA BOULE-
VARD ANNEX" TO THE CITY OF LIVERMORE PURSUANT TO
THE "ANNEXATION OF UNINHABITED TERRITORY ACT OF
1939" AND SECTION 35015 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
CM-28-1
March 18, 1974
(Arroyo Annex No.3)
RESOLUTION NO. 38-74
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN
UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESIGNATED "ARROYO ANNEX
NO.3" TO THE CITY OF LIVERMORE PURSUANT TO THE
"ANNEXATION OF UNINHABITED TERRITORY ACT OF 1939"
AND SECTION 35015 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
(Report re Police Admin-
istration Bldg.
Construction Schedule)
The City Manager explained that time delays have been experienced
by the building contractor for valid reasons as certified by
our architect and Building Department. It is recommended that a
motion be adopted authorizing extension to March 29.
(Departmental Reports)
Departmental reports were submitted as follows:
Airport Activity - February
Building INspection Department - February
Municipal Court - January
Alameda County-Mosquito Abatement District - January
Police and Pound Departments - February
Water Reclamation Plant - February
(Beautification Committee
Minutes)
Minutes of the Beautification Committee for their meeting of
February 8 were received.
(Payroll and Claims)
There were two hundred sixteen claims in the amount of $77,749.79
and payroll warrants in the amount of $71,289.24 ordered paid as
approved by the City Manager.
(Approval of Consent Calendar)
At the request of Councilmember Tirsell Item 2.3 regarding the
Carnegie Building occupancy was removed from the Consent Calendar,
and on motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember
Futch, and by unanimous vote, the remaining items on the Consent
Calendar were approved.
COMMUNICATIONS AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(Re Airport Master Plan)
A communication was received from the City of Pleasanton expressing
support of our airport master plan. Mr. Parness stated that in
this regard the staff concurs with the City of Pleasanton's atti-
tude and they expect to bring them into the planning process.
(Notification from North I-580 Citizens Group)
A letter was received from the North 1-580 Citizens Group advising
the Council of the formation of the group, stating that their purpose
CM-28-2
March 18, 1974
(I-580 Citizens Group)
(~
is to unite the citizens north of the freeway to improve their area
and address themselves to the various needs they have. The chairmen
of the City Council liaison committee are Bob DeSimon and John Fox.
The committee also thanked the representatives who attended the
meeting in February and listened to their complaints.
(Resignations-Industrial
Advisory, Beautification Comm.)
Letters have been received from R. S. Hampton, tendering his resig-
nation from the Industrial Advisory Committee and notification from
the Beautification Committee advising that Floyd Hibbitts has resigned.
Mayor pritchard proposed that in the future, perhaps resignations
could be placed in the Consent Calendar for appropriate action.
(Request for Funds-Admission
Day Celebration Committee)
A request for funds in the amount of $100.00 has been received from
the Alameda County Admission Day Celebration Committee. The offi-
cial celebration is proposed for September 7-9, 1974.
Councilmember Miller suggested that the letter be filed without
comment.
COMPLAINT RE CITY OF
LIVERMORE SIGN LOCATED
ADJACENT TO I-580
A letter was received from Elizabeth Mondon, 5873 Singing Hills Avenue,
protesting the City of Livermore free-standing sign located adjacent
to I-580 and which does not conform to the City ordinance regarding
signs.
Councilmember Miller stated that Mrs. Mondon is correct in her state-
ments about the sign and would move to direct the staff to take the
sign down, seconded by Mayor Pritchard.
The City Manager stated that he would like to say, in support of the
sign, that the sign is directional in nature and that everyone does
not know that the golf course adjacent to the freeway is the Las
positas Golf Course. He noted that a great deal of the people who
play golf at the golf course come from the Bay Area and have some
difficulty finding the turn-off place. He stated that this is also
true of the airport and the industrial properties. He felt that it
is directional rather than advertising in nature and has proven to
be very beneficial.
(
i
Councilmember Miller stated that he would like to amend the motion
to include that the Design Review Committee be requested to review
designs for a sign that might be used for direction to the airpor~~IU~ .
and the golf course and Councilmember Futch JR~~ that it was '\i'~~ .
his understanding that a sign had already been as an alterna e
when the sign is removed and that this is the sign that would cost
$4,000-$5,000 of the taxpayers money to erect and is also smaller
than the existing sign. It was noted that this is correct.
One member of the audience commented that even if it does cost the
taxpayers money for the sign it is not fair that the merchants had
to replace signs at their own cost and that the City is still allow-
ed to have its sign standing which is not in conformance and was
the basis for the letter.
CM-28-3
March 18, 1974
(City Sign Adjacent to I-580)
Councilmember Turner commented that he feels it is very important
to have directional signs in the area but would not like to spend
$5,000-$6,000 of the taxpayers' money for a sign. He felt a small
directional sign should suffice and that the present sign could be
removed.
At this time the motion and the second was withdrawn at the
suggestion that the matter be continued, so that the past
action and the past design submitted might be reviewed.
On motion of Councilmember Tirsell, seconded by Councilmember
Turner and by unanimous vote, the staff was directed to furnish
a report regarding the sign and what alternatives are available.
Councilmember Miller asked which committee had furnished a design
to be used and it was noted that this had been done by the Planning
Department. Cbuncilmember Miller felt that it would be appropri-
ate to ask the City Design Review Committee for their opinion of
the design also.
COMMUNICATION FROM
LARPD & SCHOOL DIST.
RE PARK & SCHOOL SITES
A letter was received from the Board of Education for the School
District and the Board of Directors for LARPD requesting that
the City planning guidelines and criteria be adjusted to require
developers to consult with these agencies prior to filing tract
maps, which generally show school and park site locations, in
order that the sites are located to provide maximum advantage to
the residents to be served.
Mr. Parness stated that he is going to try to arrange a meeting
for the City staff and these two agencies to review the communica-
tion devices to see that their suggestion is being used.
Councilmember Turner suggested that possibly at the time a developer
applies for a tract map, prior to approval or as a condition to
approval, the land price be settled and agreed upon rather than
to wait until the tract is complete and arguing over the price
at the time of completion. He noted,that this is simply a sugges-
tion, it may not be legal or there may be some problem.
COMMUNICATION REQUESTING
PLACEMENT OF WRECKED CAR
AT FIRST. & SO. LIVERMORE
A letter was submitted to the Council by the Junior Women's Club
requesting permission to place a wrecked car at the intersection
of First Street and South Livermore Avenue to call attention to
need to use safety belts, and to use the display during Safety
Belt Week.
The City Manager recommended that the Council adopt a motion
approving the display for a brief period subject to the assurance
that traffic visibility will not be impaired and that the display
will be promptly removed.
On motion of Councilmember Futch, seconded by Councilmember Turner
and by unanimous vote, the City Manager's recommendation was adopted.
REPORT RE AIRPORT
LIMOUSINE SERVICE APPLICATION
The City Manager reported that Airport Limousine Service has made
application for a limousine service to the airport and the matter
CM-28-4
March l8, 1974
(Airport Limousine Service)
was postponed at the request of the representative for the Holiday
Limousine Service which is operating the same type of business in
the City.
Brian Wilson, Manager of the Airport Limousine Service commented
that he would like the Council to make some type of decision regard-
ing their application in order that they might move along with the
necessary business for obtaining a license to conduct the service.
The City Attorney explained that Airport Limousine Service has been
providing this service into and out of the City at the rate of about
six trips per week and it came to the attention of the City that they
were operating without a business license. When they were notified
of this they agreed to apply for a license to continue conducting
business and have done so. The existing Holiday Limousine Service
wanted the Council to take consideration of the fact that it might
have an adverse economic effect on its business and, consequently,
the matter was postooned to allow the City to obtain more information
from each of the parties involved. The Council must now determine
whether the public convenience and necessity would be served by hav-
ing two limousine companies operating in the City. He then reported
on the various checks that have been made regarding reputation and
liability as well as financial status of the applicant which has
been conducted by the Police Department staff and found to have
been satisfactory.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the Council can, legally, consider whether
or not it would be an economic disadvantage to another company and
the City Attorney stated that this can be considered and can conclude
from it that the public interest is being served in either allowing
it or not allowing it. He commented that the usual procedure is
to lean toward allowing another operation and reviewing the two
operations after a given period to see whether or not public con-
venience and necessity is still being served. He stated that the
length of time for operation prior to being reviewed is a matter
of policy but would feel that a six month period would be reasonable.
Wm. Struthers, attorney representing Holiday Limousine Service,
stated that this discussion is not regarding a taxi cab type of
service and that misconduct is not a consideration in this type
of business. He stated that he feels there should be equal treat-
ment of these applications and pointed out that Holiday Limousine
has been servicing the area (primarily the people at the labs) for
a period of two years and getting their customers to the airport,
also handling the overloaded schedules and mixups that occur in
traveling schedules. He stated that Airport Limousine Service
operates on a rate schedule they feel is not realistic. He pointed
out that Holiday Limousine operates a business that is very spec-
ialized and it saves the people at the Lab and Sandia from having
to rent cars which alleviates wear and tear, time and energy.
Mayor Pritchard asked if Airport Limousine advertises in the
City of Livermore and Mr. Wilson explained that only through
the travel agencies and in servicing some members of the Lab that
Holiday Limousine does not cover, such as to Brentwood, which the
other service does not cover. He pointed out that in the past
Airport Limousine Service operated on a charter party permit and
is the reason the rates were higher.
Mayor Pritchard stated that if the Council were to deny approval
of the application, what would stop them from operating as they
have been in the past, and the City Attorney replied that after
CM-28-5
March lS, 1974
(Airport Limousine Service)
investigation of this company and its past business practices
they have been found to be reliable and to try to conduct busi-
ness without the necessary permit would be inconsistent with
their business reputation and felt this should not be a con-
cern of the Council. He stated that he felt the concern of
the Council should be regarding the public convenience and neces-
sity and would have to have substantial evidence to indicate that
this would not be served if an additional permit were issued.
Councilman Futch felt that without indication that the service
would be detrimental it would not be in the spirit of free enter-
prise to deny the permit and therefore moved that the Council
approve the issuance of an owners permit for a period of six
months and at the end of this time it be reviewed for evaluation
of public convenience and necessity, seconded by Councilmember
Tirsell and which passed 4-1, Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
Mayor Pritchard commented that he opposes approval of the applica-
tion due to the fact that they are not located in Livermore, do
not advertise in Livermore and would consider them an out of town
business conducting business in our City.
Councilmember Miller commented that he, personally, is very satis-
fied with the service Holiday Limousine has been providing but
could not justify not allowing someone else the right to conduct
the same type of business.
DISCUSSION RE PLAN-
NING UNITS S & 9
(Continued from
meeting of l-2S-74)
The Planning Director explained the history regarding Planning
Units Sand 9 which he stated has been referred to the City
Council by the Planning Commission and that all of the council
members are familiar with the matter regarding the location of
residential and commercial development and for which the proposal
is essentially preconceived on the basis of the General Plan. He
explained that one density transfer is involved with the industrial
area and there is a proposal for a mandatory density transfer due
to the approach to the airport and the noise contour.
Councilmember Futch stated that he would not like to approve any-
thing that would be in conflict with the General Plan, and Mr. Musso
explained that there is nothing in the proposal that is not in the
General Plan - industrial is indicated as industrial on the General
Plan also, as well as density and open space. He commented that
the only thing which might not be in conformance would be the
school and park sites.
Councilmember Tirsell wondered if the Council needs to work with
the difference in the Isabel Freeway right-of-way between the
area south of 1-5S0 where it is indicated as a major street and
Mr. Musso replied, yes, the difference between the right-of-ways
is really significant because if the freeway is to be abandoned
that right-of-way would be reduced to about half the size of the
major street and approximately a 52 foot width difference. He
pointed out that steps have not been taken to abandon Isabel Free-
way but it is his understanding that this is the intention and he
CM-2S-6
March 18, 1974
(Planning Units 8 and 9)
c
felt that as far as approval of the Elliott property there would
be no problem. He stated that there are 62 dwelling units involved
and would guess that the whole major street would be shifted into
the freeway right-of-way to stay away from the sewer plant (regard-
ing the freeway north of Las Positas).
The Council then discussed the Elliott property and the 62 dwelling
units which is a tract approved within the freeway right-of-way.
It was noted that the tract map expired in January but could be
resubmitted.
Councilmember Miller stated that the question of the freeway has
not yet been resolved and also we are in the middle of a General
Plan review in which there may be substantial density changes in
all the planning units in the City. If there are changes in density
there may be changes in these two planning units and if the Council
were to approve these two units tonight there may be problems with
respect to these things which have not yet been resolved and for
which the moratorium was invented. If they are approved at this
time it may not be possible to later make the density changes found
to be desirable during the General Plan review. He felt it might
be reasonable to adopt the general concept, in principle, but put
the final approval over until the General Plan density has been
resolved in addition to school abandonment and park acquisition being
resolved, and so moved. The motion was seconded by Councilmember
Turner for discussion purposes.
The City Attorney commented that he feels there is a potential
legal problem which might be avoided by taking Councilmember
Miller's motion and adopting it as the view of the Council. He
explained that the law regarding inverse condemnation is uncertain
but there is some indication, also, that the contents of the General
Plan are not likely to be the basis for any kind of law suit or re-
covery in inverse condemnation. There is some indication that
suggests that the contents of a specific plan may lead to and
support the recovery of property by property owners in inverse
condemnation. He felt that under these circumstances, since
there seems to be no urgency in adopting it right now, it could
be left until the end of the moratorium period when all the specific
plans can be considered and coordinated with the overall final General
Plan. He would suggest that it be supported, in principle, but saved
for final adoption. Mr. Wharton stated that the Elliott firm has
filed a complaint concerning the freeway strip that has been dis-
cussed and feels that our litigation position would be strengthened
if we did not have to operate and litigate this space on an adopted
specific plan.
Councilman Futch stated he need some explanation regarding the inverse
condemnation and how the adoption of a specific plan is going to
create the problem.
('
Mr. Wharton explained that in the most recent California decision,
it was stated that a general plan which indicated a road going through
a piece of property was no more than a concept which the municipality
in question might decide to initiate at some future time, but it
had no committal quality which the courts found not to be the basis
for a suit in inverse condemnation. On the other hand a specific
plan which, by virtue of its name and its purpose, takes a General
Plan which is a conceptual picture of a given part of the City
and imposes considerably more detail and may be viewed by a
property owner who does not like the disposition of his property
under a specific plan to say there is no indication other than
that the City is going to do such and such with his property and
in effect, destroys the purpose for which the property was purchased.
CM-28-7
._"._.._...._..'"__....",...._._......_.._..'wn...._.__.________~,_~____~ ,.' ."...____ ___.__..._....._
March IS, 1974
(Planning units Sand 9)
Councilmember Futch commented that his interpretation of what the
City Attorney has just said is that if the Council does anything at.
all it has a problem, and if this is the case the Council had better
think about it very carefully.
,
The City Attorney replied that his remarks go to the timing of the
adoption of a specific plan rather than the desirability. He felt
the Planning staff would clearly advise as to the desirability and
explained that what he is saying is that he feels the City does not
lose anything in a moratorium period when things are, theoretically
under review, to adopt in the middle of that moratorium period a
specific plan for part of the City which in effect deprives the
Council of some of its layered choices and options when the whole
General Plan review has been completed and all the specific plans
can be judged in relation of each one to the other.
Councilmember Futch wanted to know if the City Attorney is advising
that the Council adopt a policy of not approving any specific plan
until the General Plan is finished which may be a couple of years
and Mr. Musso pointed out that it would appear that the Council
and Planning staff is being advised to not do any planning until
all of the decisions have been made which he feels would be completely
contrary to the whole purpose of planning.
Councilmember Miller stated that if it is the intention of the Coun-
cil to adjust the ultimate holding capacity of the City and to ad-
just the final density in the various planning units of the City,
to adopt a specific plan at this point pre-empts the possibility
of the chance to make a change afterward in the time period between
adoption of the specific plan and the end of our General Plan review,
in particular our moratorium. It may be possible for all that area
to have tract maps and permits requested and consequently the Council
will have lost the opportunity that the General Plan review was
designed to provide - namely, to adjust our planning to take care
of changes in environmental conditions and possible holding capacity.
Therefore, it would seem only reasonable to put over for final
adoption these things until the moratorium runs out. He felt that
it does not seem useful to have gone into a General Plan review
if the Council intends to preempt without waiting for the results.
This does not mean that the Planning Commission cannot continue
to layout the ideal distribution or what they consider to be the
ideal distribution as they have been doing.
Mr. Musso commented that the specific plan must agree with the
General Plan and if the General Plan is changed it means that the
specific plans will have to be changed and added that when the
Planning Commission discussed the three plans they did consider
the possibility of amending the General Plan concurrently but did
not think that at this point there were any changes in view. At
present the staff is studying a plan and is going to propose a
General Plan amendment concurrent with the adoption of the specific
plan because it is felt that there should be some specific changes.
He stated that the City started out deciding whether or not to
go into a petaluma type of growth control measure and our City
Attorney, at that time, proposed the moratorium program with the
adoption of specific plans and a General Plan amendment in lieu
of the petaluma approach and for this reason we proceeded with
General Plan amendments and ordinance amendments for those areas
where development is eminent. The General Plan amendment, at
least in his opinion, is separate and sets up growth controls
CM-2S-S
March 18, 1974
(Planning Units 8 and 9)
C~
needed presently for denying subdivision maps that do not conform
to a specific plan or a General Plan.
Councilmember Turner stated that it was his understanding that the
specific plans being done were required by law and the reason they
are being considered.
Mr. Musso responded by saying that we are required to do some General
Plan amendment, some ordinance amendment and we could do some specific
plan adoption in order to implement AB-130l - the General Plan was
another issue.
Councilmember Turner stated that in his opinion to approve this
item during the moratorium would not seem to be opening the doors
for developers to file tract maps for approval in these areas and
it is his understanding that the City is only complying with the law.
Councilmember Miller felt that the City Attorney's point is that
once there has been adoption of a specific plan the City's position
becomes weaker.
Councilmember Turner pointed out that the Planning Commission spent
many hours working on a specific plan and now it is being said that
if such is adopted it will weaken our position during the moratorium.
It was his understanding that it was very important that these areas
should be set in priority and that Planning Units 8, 9 and 11 be
given top priority for recommendation of approval to the City
Council.
Councilmember Futch felt that Councilmember Turner is exactly right
and the City wanted to be protected from a subdivision coming into
a location not adjacent to the City and wanted to have grounds on
which to deny its development and was the reason the Planning Commis-
sion was directed to proceed. The City cannot wait until the end
of the General Plan review and then do all the specific planning in
a month or so and then approve it. The reason the Planning Commission
was instructed to proceed was so that we would have these plans availa~..
ble and would be adopted so that at the completion of the moratorium ~
anything that comes in will have to conform with AB-130l and with ~
our specific plans. ~
Councilmember Miller commented ~ in response to the remark made ~
by Councilmember Turner about the Planning Commission going to all ~
the work of the specific plan just to have it not approveg,~ that
the motion made was not a motion for disapproval but a motion to ~
approve, in principle, the plan which is the result of the work ~
which is extremely desirable. The motion is that the plan not ~
be adopted until it is known if there are to be changes in density
and is probably the major change that may take place as a result of
the General Plan review and at that point changes in the specific
plan to correspond with the General Plan would be relatively minor.
(
\
",
Councilmember Tirsell asked if, at the end of the moratorium, there
is any indication as to whether or not Isabel Avenue will be a major
highway or freeway and Mr. Musso indicated that this is possible which
was followed by discussion regarding possible change in density in
this area, and where it may occur.
CM-28-9
March 18, 1974
(Planning Units 8 and 9)
Councilmember Tirsell stated that although there may be some
change in density she feels that she is hearing something
completely different tonight than what she understood the
intent to be. She commented that when she worked on the plan
as a Planning Commissioner she was under the impression that
this was to be a source of protection for the City and that
specific plans were being filed with the intent that they
would be adhered to and had felt more favorably disposed
towards this planning unit because there are limited spaces
undeveloped.
Councilmember Miller stated that he feels the purpose of the
work done earlier was to protect the City and to prepare the
specific plan so that most of our work is done prior to expira-
tion of the moratorium so that they can be adopted. If we adopt
the concept, in principle, we are saying that we like the general
idea and if we put over the adoption of it until the moratorium
begins to run out, what we have done is to have left options
open and none of the work that has been done will be lost.
Councilmember Futch commented that if it is relatively easy to
change the density at the end of the moratorium, as pointed out
by Councilmember Miller, why not go ahead and approve the plan
with the present densities which can later be changed. He felt
that with the exception of the strip along the highway, there
will be very few areas that will be changed. He stated that he
would be in favor of approving the specific plan as presented.
The City Attorney stated that there mayor may not be a planning
or legal problem but would have to say that it would be consider-
ably easier to have the consistency of the City's position maintained
by delaying the formal adoption of the plan in the detail in which
it has been proposed. He stated that in response to Councilmember
Tirsell's comment about what the Planning Commission was led to
believe, perhaps this was not inaccurate at the time as the legal
decisions he is referring to came down in late October of last year
making them only three months old. These decisions cast a somewhat
different light and significance regarding distinction between
General Plan and specific plans. Both are mandated by state law
and provide a valid tool for the City to govern its development
and both must ultimately be adopted.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the point which the City Attorney has
made and which he had intended to make was the fact that the Plan-
ning Commission and the Council did not have the benefit of counsel
at the time this was at the Planning Commission level and as aptly
pointed out by the City Attorney there have been certain matters
which have come to light since the specific plan was worked on he
and would urge the Council to carefully consider the City Attorney's
advice.
Councilmember Tirsell asked if the City Attorney is advising that
because we are in a moratorium period we should not adopt specific
plans and the City Attorney replied that he feels this would be
the advisable strategy from a legal standpoint and explained that
as he recalls the legal decisions that came down in October did
not relate to a moratorium period but generalized that a specific
plan is much more likely to give rise to actions in inverse condem-
nation than a General Plan, and Councilmember Tirsell stated that
they have been aware of this fact all along.
CM-28-l0
March 18, 1974
(Planning Units 8 and 9)
c
Councilmember Tirsell commented that this plan took about a year
of work and it would probably take six months to get the densities
changed on each one of these as they come in. Only two have been
done and there must be about 15 in the works and if this is an
indication of the time that will be involved we may have the specific
planning done by the year 1995 and is the reason she feels a great
deal of concern.
Councilmember Futch moved that the matter be continued for a period
of one week as it would appear that we are getting into a basic
policy change and legal questions have been brought up at this meet-
ing that the Council did not expect and would rather not act without
a staff report. He stated that this may be setting a precedent for
the other specific plans that will come in and he would like to
have a report from the City Attorney. The motion to table the dis-
cussion was seconded by Councilmember Turner and passed 3-2, with
Councilmember Miller and Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
Mayor Pritchard commented that he would prefer the matter be con-
tinued for two weeks rather than one week with which the Council
concurred.
REPORT RE BART
INTRA-VALLEY ALIGNMENT
The City Manager reported that we are coming to the end of the plan-
ning portion of the BART intra-valley rail alignment in which our
City is participating. The planning process is being done on behalf
of BART and the MTC with a federal grant and has been in process
for about a year with just a few short months left. Our City has
been actively participating since the beginning and thus far our
City Council has decided in their favor with regard to the transit
corridor from the three alternatives that were studied at great
length. It is his understanding that the Board of Control and the
BART Board of Directors have concurred with the 1-580 designation
for the corridor to be used and the next most important phase of
the planning is to select an intra-valley rail alignment system.
This is very important, as it determines precisely where the rail
lines will be located and will service our City. The staff has
recommended that the rail routing that would best service our area
would be one which would intersect with the Central Business District
and our consultant has suggested selection of Site "L" for the station
location due to the minimum of congestion. He stated that he has
invited representatives of the BART planning staff to attend the
meeting and hopefully the City Council will be able to make a final
judgment regarding the rail alignment because it is expected that
the Board of Control will have to come to a decision at their meet-
ing which is to take place in a week to 10 days. He then introduced
Mr. Howard Goode of the BART planning staff who is prepared to ex-
plain the alternates available to the City.
r
Mr. Goode explained that the lines illustrated on the map before
the Council are the final results of a year of study done by
regional and City staff people in trying to select a route. He
then explained the various stations on the map ("K" , "0" and "L")
and the courses available for the BART line. He stated that the
Council must decide whether the line should go through the downtown
area, or along the northerly edge of town, explaining that both of
these routes are related to "0" so the choice is between "K", "L"
or "Mil. If the lower route is chosen the Council must then decide
between flL" and "M". The other consideration is whether the rail
should be elevated or at grade level, or even subway.
CM-28-11
March 18, 1974
(BART Intra-Valley Alignment)
Mayor Pritchard asked if Pleasanton is considering this same
matter at their meeting and Mr. Parness stated that they are
and Mr. Goode interjected that they did take a vote tonight
which was in favor of the southerly line through "J" in down-
town Pleasanton and the Mayor asked what would happen if this
Council would vote for another route, and it was explained that
their desire would not be in conflict with the route preferred
by the Livermore City Council, whatever that choice might be.
Mr. Goode briefly explained the recommendations of the consultant
with regard to the alternatives which was for the southern line
throughout the valley - through downtown Pleasanton, continuing
along Stanley Boulevard and through downtown Livermore at grade
level with the stations located at "L" and "0". The reason for
this recommendation was that it would provide a much better
service to the total citizenry of the City of Livermore and "L"
was chosen over "M" because it was somewhat out of the downtown
area in which there would be less congestion and better parking
facilities.
Mayor Pritchard noted that the consultant had recommended that
the line be underground for Pleasanton and wondered why this
had not been the recommendation for Livermore and the City
Manager replied that when it comes to the financing that aspect
of construction he feels that the consultant and the BART staff
arenot in a position to say that this should be sustained by the
District. Mayor Pritchard continued that it was his understand-
ing that Pleasanton was voting on whether they should go under-
ground, and wondered if this was contrary to the consultant.
Mr. Goode stated there were some reasons the consultant's recom-
mendations were for underground in Pleasanton and not in Livermore,
and he would ask Mr. Hans Corve who is representing a consulting
team and is present tonight to elaborate very briefly.
Mr. Corve explained that in Pleasanton the undergrounding of BART
is to minimize obstruction on the east end of town, abutting resi-
dential, and to act as a vehicle for consolidating the railroad
through town. This does not apply to Livermore since Livermore is
nearing an agreement on having the tracks consolidated through
the City. The track will be just north of the WP tracks after
the relocation. Either at grade or aerial alignment is possible
without any major differences in effeot, with the exception that
with the aerial you would have less chance of creating an effective
noise barrier between BART and the adjacent residential area, and
you have the problem of visual obstruction. Having BART at grade
adjacent to the track assures that the remaining grade crossings
that will remain after the consolidation is completed will be grade
separations, because you must have all crossings grade separated
for BART because of the third rail. It is not possible to put
BART in a subway in this same alignment due to the presence of
the railroads and also the conflict that would arise with the
overpasses at the major crossings and BART below grade. The align-
ment for a BART subway would be under Railroad Avenue and east
of station "L" which route he explained adding that this would
mean that Railroad Avenue would be open for a period of about
two years for construction of the. subway, and that stations "L"and
"M" would have to be located slightly further south.
Councilmember Miller raised the question of where the money is to
come from to pay for these grade separations and Mr. Parness felt
the question would have to be addressed at the time construction
is contemplated.
CM-28-l2
March 18, 1974
(BART Intra-Valley
Alignment)
Councilmember Miller mentioned the possibility of receiving aid
through the state underpass program and Mr. Parness stated that
to his knowledge the grade separation construction fund does not
address local mass transit system, but rather railroad transit.
Councilmember Futch felt that the most important question to be
answered at this time is not the grade level, as this will most
likely be discussed at length at another time, but rather the route
determined to be the most desirable and in his opinion by looking
at the population that would be served by the lower route he would
tend to agree with the recommendation by the consultant for this
route. This was also the route selected by the Pleasanton Council.
Mayor Pritchard commented that he would agree with the selection of
the lower route because of the relationships within the valley and
his feeling that a number of people need to go to Pleasanton and if
BART was available as a means of transportation to Pleasanton people
would probably use it.
Councilmember Futch moved that the Council approve the line through
Pleasanton, going through Station "J", "L" and out to "L" and approve
Station "L" in Livermore, in addition to the desire that BART be
placed underground, seconded by Councilmember Miller.
There being no further discussion regarding the matter the Council
adopted the motion by unanimous vote.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess at this time which was
followed by continuation of the meeting with all members of the
Council present.
REPORT RE TRACT 2619 -
Bevilacqua Tract -
KISSELL MORTGAGE COMPANY
The City Manager reported that the matter regarding continuation
of development of the Bevilacqua Tract 2619 (Springtown area) was
discussed at the meeting of February 25th and referred to the staff
for report. At present, the status of the development is as follows:
69 partially constructed structures
104 expired permits, and
32 lots for which permits have never been issued
The mortage company is in the process of foreclosing on the property
and their rights and entitlements for the occupancy of the land will
not become effective until the first part of May this year at which
time, if they do have the right to occupy and in the event that build-
ing permits will be declared valid and obtainable, they will imme-
diately try to retain contractors for the purpose of proceeding with
development left uncompleted by Reliance Builders.
r
The City Attorney explained that meetings have taken place regarding
the matter in an effort to reach an agreement between the Kissell
Company and the City with respect to the development. He pointed
out that 69 of the 205 lots have been issued building permits and
by Council action were declared to be valid through June 3rd of
this year. The Kissell Company is prepared to build these units
as soon as possible after it takes legal possession of the property
and in no event would the work be undertaken later than June 3rd.
CM-28-l3
March lS, 1974
There will be no additional fees or charges of any kind levied against
the Kissell Company inasmuch as these are valid building permits
which were issued at a time when the school fee was not required,
as has been adopted since that time and for this reason there are
nee_school fees built into the 69 units. The 69 units are contiguous
to existing completed occupied residential units. The next
series of units are the 104 units immediately north of the
uncompleted 69 units and the essence of the agreement is that
renewal permits would be issued to the Kissell Company at any
time within one year of the Council decision of this matter
at the then prevailing fees at the time of issuance of those
permits including the $SOO per unit school fee. The last unit
of 32 is the most northerly of the three and the agreement pro-
posed for your consideration is that the 32 original building
permits be issued at any time within one year after the Council
makes a decision on the matter at the then prevailing fees at
the time of issuance of the building permits. Although these
are original permits and not renewal permits the sewer, streets,
and sidewalks are in and another provision is that the park dedi-
cation, which has been overdue in that area, would be made by the
Kissell Company as soon as it takes legal title to the park land
which would be, in all probability, not later than mid- May.
Another aspect of the agreement would be to credit the Kissell Com-
pany with interest at 7% per year from the time the initial build-
ing fees were paid to the City but which have not been refunded
to the Kissell organization or to the original developer even
though the City cancelled those permits. Further, it would be
a possibility to ask that the Kissell organization pay interest
on any fees which are overdue to the City as a result of this
project and would be a rather minimal amount. There are some
minor additional matters requiring the payment of the unpaid
inspection fees totaling $lS,OOO, the provision of a cash bond
for street trees totaling $3,075, the reparation of the damaged
brick fence and the replacement of a tree well cover that is
broken - all of this would have to be reduced to a resolution of
the Council and the exact dollars and cents would need to be calcu-
lated and of course that could be done after the Council makes its
decision.
The Council then discussed the terms agreed upon as outlined by
the City Attorney with his explanation of these items.
There was some question regarding the funds involved and the City
Attorney explained that we have held $19S,000, after cancellation
of some of these permits, for a period of approximately two years
and it is proposed that we would credit the Kissell organization
with the value of that interest during the time the City has held
the funds. He stated that he would assume the City has earned at
least 7% on these funds and this is the amount of interest that
will be credited to them.
Councilmember Futch stated that in order to get a motion on the
floor he would move approval, in accordance with the recommendation
of the City Attorney, seconded by Councilmember Turner.
Councilmember Turner wondered if the 7% interest should be con-
sidered from the time of cancellation rather than from the incep-
tion, in that we don't do this for any other builder, and the City
Attorney felt that this was aperfectly fair suggestion - the fee
should be calculated only for the period during which the City had
the beneficial use of the money.
Councilmember Miller moved to amend the motion to delete the 32
building permits (the original permits) from consideration at
this time and explained that the reason for doing this is because
CM-2S-l4
March 18, 1974
(Tract 2619 - Kissell
Mortgage Company)
(
there exists approximately 50 building permits in the City by our
water ordinance that remain for development and this would give
all of the building permits to Kissell which he felt is an unreason-
able number to grant to Kissell at this time. By the time they build
out the 104 units it is conceivable that the water problem will be
eased or there will be other options open but these are new permits
that have never been applied for and there is no history on the 32
lots and he felt it would be gossly unfair to the other parcels in
the City. Motion was seconded by Mayor Pritchard.
Councilmember Tirsell stated that she would like to know how many
permits are available, as it is her understanding that there were
considerably more than the 50 mentioned by Councilmember Miller.
The City Manager replied that he is not sure that the credit and
debit tally mentioned by Councilmember Miller regarding the number
of permits taken by Mehran and the OGO development and the number
which remains is exactly true and that there is a possibility that
Tract 2619 was calculated earlier in the tabulations.
Mr. Street of the Building Department explained that the 105 units
were tabulated as part of the 1,500 initially rationed and also
that the 32 units were applied for by Reliance but the 1,500 limit
had been reached so they could not obtain them.
Councilmember Miller stated that he understands that all but the 32
units were counted but there are only 53 permits available and it
does not appear to be reasonable that Kissell should take 32 of them.
Councilmember Tirsell stated these are clearly new permits and
asked the City Attorney to speak to that, and Mr. Wharton stated that
merely applying for them does not give the applicant any vested
rights. They are treated as entirely new building permits.
Mrs. Mondon , 5873 Singing Hills, stated they would appreciate if
the Council would allow these permits to be issued if it would help
Kissell put in what should be put in as it might also help them to
get some shopping facilities out there, especially since so many
permits were granted to Mr. Mehran.
Mayor Pritchard felt Mrs. Mondon's point was well taken, even though
some of the Councilmembers did not wish to see them issued.
(
Dewey Watson, representative of the Kissell Company, stated for the
benefit of the new councilmembers he felt he should elaborate on
the 32 permits and tie them into the 104 and 69. The Kissell Co.
has invested $2~ million in the subdivision which includes work on
the improvements on the l04 units and for the 32 which have not
shown any return to the present. They have already paid approximately
$200,000 for permits already on the 104, and they have been asked by
the City to pay an additional $153,000, or around $3,600 per lot,
which additional cost per lot considering they are not $40,000 or
$50,000 houses, but were originally to sell for $20,000-$25,000, and
now they will be up around $30,000 to $35,000 if they are able to
obtain approval. The Kissell Company is willing to take the chance,
however they must receive some assurance they can build out all of
the units. If they are given only the 69 permits and they are re-
quired to build them with the investment they now have in for the
improvements on the other 136, they will be losing some $l~
million. In order to regain some of their investment, they must have
the 104 and the 32 which could make the whole project worthwhile,
economically. The Kissell Company is in the position and can just
walk away from the project if it is made uneconomical.
CM-28-l5
March 18, 1974
(Tract 2619 - Kissell
Mortgage Company)
Mr. Watson continued to say that originally the Kissell Company
came to Mr. Parness and Mr. Wharton with a proposal that the
Kissell Company would pay the additional $800 school fee on the
104 lots and it would then request, from the Council, a freeze
on the City fees, effective of the date that the original permits
were taken out (April 1972). This would mean that they would
have paid $800 and received a credit of about $550 per unit. Dur-
ing these negotiations it was agreed that the Kissell Company would
try to succeed by using the higher building permit fee at the time
they make the proposal before the Council. He pointed out that if
it is necessary for them to have to make further concessions it
just may be the straw that breaks the camel's back of this project
leaving the 69 units uncompleted or make it necessary for the City
to demolish the partially constructed units. He emphasized that
if they do not have assurance that all of the units can be con-
structed the Kissell Company will not even try to get the project
started and urged that the project be considered in total.
Councilmember Futch wondered if it might be possible to avoid
some of the City's problems concerning the present moratorium by
agreeing not to issue the 32 permits until after the moratorium
has been lifted and Mr. Watson stated that this would be perfectly
satisfactory with the Kissell Company, and Councilmember Miller
explained that this is exactly what his amendment to the motion
is saying, and Councilmember Futch felt that the amendment should
say that the Council will recognize these 32 units at the end of
the moratorium and Councilmember Miller stated that in this case
the amendment he made is different than the consideration Council-
member Futch just mentioned.
Mayor Pritchard wondered what this would mean if there are no per-
mits available and Councilmember Futch stated that he is suggesting
that the 32 permits be set aside but be issued after the moratorium
so as to guarantee that they are available.
It was Councilmember Miller's opinion that the City would be open
to a law suit from everyone else north of the highway saying that
they should receive the remainder of the permits because they are
all covered in exactly the same way, by the moratorium ordinance.
The City Attorney felt that the distinguiShing characteristics in
this instance would be the fact that it is part of a comprehensive
decision with respect to the entire development, and any legal
plausibility would be based on the fact that the City is making a
single decision with respect to an entire problem area. He commented
that he feels some concern with the reservation of these permits and
that this would be a speculative decision; however if this is con-
sidered as a unit it is less likely that a precedent will be set
which would ever exist again in which there are partially completed
structures and a major investment involved which must either be saved
or abandoned. viewing this as a unitary transaction may make it a
unique transaction and give us some legal protection.
Councilmember Futch felt that the Kissell Company has been very
fair during the negotiations and it would appear that they are
doing all they can to cooperate with the fees and that the City
really should make some attempt to solve this problem, and the Mayor
pointed out that it would appear that the problem is one of legality,
and suggested that perhaps it would be better to state what the
Council's intention is in the matter and the City Attorney agreed
that this might really be the best course of action to take and
to say that the City is willing to do everything it can to see
that they are issued the permits. He explained that he would not
CM-28-l6
March 18, 1974
(Tract 2619 - Kissell
Mortgage Company)
suggest the Council violate any other City ordinance in order to
issue these permits and if it were legally impossible to do it he
would not counsel in favor of it but would suggest that the City
say that at the time Kissell makes application for the permits the
City will cooperate to the legal extent possible.
Councilmember Miller felt it would not be reasonable for the City to
guarantee the 32 permits for Kissell and the Council might wish to
do something else about amending the moratorium or whatever is neces-
sary to make this possible but at present he felt there is no way this
can be guaranteed.
Mayor Pritchard explained that what the City Attorney was suggesting
and what he had in mind was that the City would state that it would
do nothing in violation of our ordinances which should be sufficient
protection.
Councilmember Futch stated that in his op1n10n there will be no prob-
lem for Kissell at the time they wish to obtain permits; however,
they want assurance at this time and this is the problem.
Councilmember Miller stated that he is perfectly willing, in the
interest of expediting business, to change the wording of the motion
as long as there is not commitment to reserve these permits.
Councilmember Turner pointed out that even though a unique problem
does exist he feels that the City has no way to reserve the permits
in addition to the fact that in his opinion the end of the moratorium
will not mean an open door to building permits. He felt that he
would not be able to say more than at the time Kissell applies for
permits every consideration will be given them because of the problem
in the Bevilacqua tract.
Councilmember Futch commented that it appears to be the unanimous
opinion of the Council that it is willing to cooperate with Kissell
Company and would like to delete any reservation of the 32 building
permits from tonights consideration and that when Kissell does come
in for permits every effort will be made within the City's power
to expedite their receipt of the building permits and the second
agreed to this amendment.
Mr. Parness commented that it is his understanding that there should
be an insert with regard to the subject 32 units whereby this declara-
tion of intent would be spelled out and be a part of the contractu-
ral document and subject to the Council's formal and final review
which the Council stated is true and Mr. Watson replied would be
acceptable; however, he cannot agree to any modification of the
agreement as it would have to be adopted by the Board of Directors in
Ohio and he would like to obtain such a document for them to sign.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to adopt the amendment.
The main motion also passed by unanimous vote.
r
REPORT RE CHURCH
CONSTRUCTION AT
PORTOLA AVE. & NO.
LIVERMORE AVENUE
The matter of an application for construction of a church at the
corner of portola Avenue and North Livermore Avenue was discussed
CM-28-l7
--"~.~-~._......_..__......_..._-_.._."._-_._,,---------,"~._'--'-"'--'-"'-""_.
March IS, 1974
(Church Construction -
portola Ave. & No. Livermore Ave.)
at the last meeting at which time tentative approval was given
for the construction subject to negotiations with regard to
improvements (fence construction) scheduled as a condition of
Tract 332l (Mehran's development).
Mr. Lee reported that in summary the recommendation is that the
church should be allowed to develop facing internally and that
the Council allow access from the major street, portola Avenue,
so as to keep the majority of the traffic on the major street
but sufficiently away from the intersection at North Livermore
Avenue so as to alleviate congestion at this intersection which
will also allow left hand turns onto the church site. This
would appear to be an excellent solution to the problem of the
corner and will take care of the backing lot treatment and will
be very acceptable from an aesthetic viewpoint.
Councilmember Tirsell moved to adopt the recommendation of the
Public Works Director, seconded by Councilmember Turner.
Councilmember Tirsell stated that she would like to see a
break in the wall with some green area visible from the street
which would be a relief from the long wall along portola Avenue.
Mr. Musso felt that a church should not be located behind a wall,
as this is a community function and not a neighborhood facility
and should be oriented toward the community.
The Council then discussed the possibility of providing a
four foot high fence rather than the usual six foot fence, and
Mr. Lee stated that this is a possibility and if the architect
knows what height the fence will be he can design the structure
aesthetically pleasing with the major features within view and
compatible with the wall - either way, it can be done properly.
Bob Martin, 536 Olivina, representative of the church stated
that he has spoken with Mr. Lee and agrees that it might be best
to have the six foot high fence while they are in the development
stage but looked at it with mixed emotions. After the site is
fully developed, and all the buildings are in possibly they
could get permission to modify the fence as far as height
is concerned.
Councilmember Futch commented that he would like to amend the
motion to drop the height of the fence to four feet which might
be a pleasing variation to the standard backing lot treatment on
portola Avenue and allow more greenery to show, seconded by Council-
member Tirsell.
The Council then discussed the possibility of the four foot high
fence and as to whether or not this would be aesthetically pleas-
ing being contiguous to the present 6 foot fence and Mr. Lee
explained that this is done in other areas and looks fine and
Councilmember Futch commented that perhaps it could be decreased
gradually.
Mr. Martin commented that one of the main concerns of the church
people is that Mr. Mehran is not prevented from developing on
a normal schedule while these negotiations are taking place.
Councilman Futch added to the amendment that Mr. Lee be direc-
ted to work out the most agreeable height with the church people,
seconded by Councilmember Tirsell.
Mr. Martin added that the church people would like to arrange for
some type of guarantee that in the event the church is not develop-
ed for one reason or another that they would put in the sidewalk
and fence in the area Mr. Mehran is leaving open for access.
CM-28-lS
March 18, 1974
(Church Construction -
Portola Ave.-No. Livermore Ave
At this time the amendment to the motion passed unanimously and
was followed by unanimous adoption of the main motion.
REPORT RE ANNEXATION
OF PORTOLA AREA (Ander-
son Property)
A progress report regarding the planning study for annexation of the
portola Avenue area (Anderson property) was noted for filing.
REPORT RE PROJECT
APPROVAL PROCEDURE
A report regarding the procedure of the approval of a project from
its inception to its final approval was submitted to the City Council,
at its request, and was noted for filing.
REPORT RE ANNEXATION
OF PROPERTY ON ALDEN
LANE (Baker Assoc.)
Mr. Musso reported that the Planning Commission discussed the
referral from the City Council, the request of Baker Associates
(James C. Maxwell) for annexation of property located on the south
side of Alden Lane and it was felt that annexation at this time
might be a disadvantage to the property owner to be in the City and
not be able to develop for a year or possibly longer and would recom-
mend that annexation not take place at this time and that the property
owner be sent a copy of the City's adopted Housing Element for
edification as to the City's orderly development criteria.
Councilmember Futch moved to adopt the Planning Commission's recom-
menda~ion, seconded by Councilmember Tirsell.
Prior to the vote the Council discussed the possibility raised by
Councilmember Miller that this land could be annexed to the City
and then protected for agricultural purposes by the Williamson
Act Preserve, with Mr. ~1usso explaining that the property owner
is not interested in maintaining this property as agricultural but
would like to develop.
Councilmember Futch stated that he would like to amend the motion
to direct the staff to go back to the property owner to see if he
would like to pursue annexation, in addition to contacting other
property owners who wish to enter into it, and if so, refer the
matter back to the Planning Commission, seconded by Councilmember
Tirsell, and which passed by unanimous vote.
DATE SET FOR HEARING
RE ARROYO ANNEX NO. 3
('
\
"'-.
On motion of Councilmember Futch, seconded by Councilmember Miller,
and by unanimous vote, the hearing regarding rezoning of property
recently annexed to the City (Arroyo Annex No.3) was scheduled for
April 15th.
P. C. MINUTES FOR
FEBRUARY 26th
The minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting of February 26th
were noted for filing.
CM-28-l9
,.,.- --'~-----------'----'--~--'--- ------~,---_. " '-'--"--~-'._''''_____''+'''_'_''_"'''_'',_~_,"__,,___,.m~.",..^
March lS, 1974
REPORT RE MUNICIPAL
REPORT PROGRAM
The City Manager reported that the Tri-Valley News recently
announced its forthcoming bicentennial publication for May 19th
and solicited advertisement from our City and that the intent
was overlooked which is that the program invites the City to
produce a "Municipal Report" covering the City's departmental
operations, programs, accomplishments and forecasted projects.
We would be responsible for preparing the captions, statistics
and photographic subjects with the newspaper providing the layout
and photography. The cost for the tabloid size would be $700
per page and estimated that three pages would suffice. This
municipal report insert would be distributed as a part of the
bicentennial edition on May 19th and also in the shopping news
so that all properties are served and it is recommended that
the Council adopt a motion authorizing our City's participation
in the program estimated at a cost of $2,lOO.
The City Manager stated that it was pointed out by a member of
the news media that some of the information he has given the
Council is incorrect and that this program is not on behalf of
the Tri-Valley News but rather the Tri-Valley Herald, they are
not celebrating a bicentennial but a centennial and the cost
per page is correct but the tabloids come only in multiples of
four so the cost would be for four pages, which would be a total
cost of $2,SOO. Also this would be an insert in the Tri-Valley
News and not the shopping news. He explained that this has been
done in the past and has been proven to be very valuable and
that it is worth consideration on the basis of information
which will be available to the entire citizenry as an education-
al tool and public relations tool thereafter.
Councilmember Miller moved that the Council decline the recommenda-
tion of the City Manager explaining that while he respects the
City Manager's interest in trying to establish some type of bro-
chure he felt that one could be done for the City at considerably
less money. He felt that this is not a wise expenditure of the
City's money when it is for the purpose of providing public relations
material and that there are more pressing needs throughout the City
for the use of this money. The motion to decline was seconded by
Councilmember Futch for discussion purposes.
Councilmember Futch wondered if it would be possible to accomplish
something like this by going out to bid and Mr. Parness stated
that this may be possible but would guess the other newspaper
would not be able to produce an insert such as this, and if they
were to do it he is not sure that the same coverage would be made.
He felt that it would be important to get the material to as many
homes as possible and has been told that by this method previously
mentioned, that there would be virtually lOO% coverage.
These comments were followed by discussion regarding the pros and
cons of the project and whether or not it would be justified to
spend money for such a project.
Mayor Pritchard felt that this appears to be a very large expendi-
ture and that in his opinion people do not pay that much attention
to newspaper inserts.
Councilmember Turner called for the question and the motion passed
by a unanimous vote of the Council.
CM-2S-20
March IS, 1974
REPORT RE ASSEMBLY
CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT 90
c
The City Manager reported that at the request of the Council the
legislative matter relating to the restriction of a homeowner's
assessed value increase was placed on the agenda for discussion
and resolution of a position; however, this bill was killed in
the Assembly and no action is necessary.
REPORT RE PROPERTY
PURCHASE OF 5.55
ACRES FOR SLUDGE LAGOON
The City Manager reported that the water reclamation plant modifi-
cations require the addition of 5.55 acres abutting for sludge lagoon
purposes. The property has been appraised and negotiations conducted
with the owner for its purchase and a settlement has been reached
for a purchase price of $46,000 which is approximately 5% higher
than the appraised value. It is recommended that the Council adopt
a motion authorizing the purchase.
It was mentioned that the federal grant will be paying for SO%
of this cost.
On motion of Councilmember Tirsell, seconded by Councilmember Futch
and by unanimous approval the recommendation was adopted.
REPORT RE REQUEST TO
HAVE SOUTH "Q" STREET
PORTION VACATED
The City Attorney reported that the legal status of South "Q" Street
extending north from First Street to its terminus near the Southern
Pacific Railroad right-Of-way (adjacent to the Safeway property) has
been the subject of extensive title research for the past two years
and Southern Pacific Development Company has requested that the
street be vacated because it will be absorbed within the proposed
commercial development. If the street is vacated the City's rights
will be cleared but the applicants may have to resolve the matter
of reversionary rights of the abutting private ownerships if desired.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution declaring the
City's intention to abandon South "Q" Street and setting a hearing
at a later time so that the area may be posted and the resolution
published.
On motion of Councilmember Turner, seconded by r1ayor Pritchard and
by unanimous vote, the City Attorney's recommendation to adopt a
resolution declaring the intention to abandon the street and to
set the matter for a public hearing was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 39-74
~.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LlVER~ORE DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CLOSE UP AND
ABANDON ALL THAT PORTION OF SOUTH Q STREET IN THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE, AS SAID PORTION OF SAID STREET
IS PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THIS RESOLUTION.
Councilman Miller asked the City Attorney if the City could decide
not to vacate or abandon the property after the public hearing and
was told they could. Councilman Miller also asked how much property
is actually involved, as he felt the City should not abandon any
property, as property has value, although in this instance he was not
sure if the City actually had title to the property.
CM-2S-21
--"--'-_._._~'-"...__._~~.._'--~--,---~--"-~-~---________""'_"_.',_,',,'...___'_n_.,n..._
March 18, 1974 ~ J
~~C:::::o:fs::~e: ::~: the parcel is ~41 X 80~ot: 19,520 square
feet, and he continued that since ~2~~lifornia statute states that
abutting property owners have an ownership right which extends to
the center of the street, which is a rebuttable presumption. What
would be required to establish an interest of the City in this pro-
perty is to see whether between l869 and l872 we had any interest
which was not extinguished by subsequent ownership of the land.
It is presently owned according to the current title report, 50%
by the abutting Safeway property and 50% by the abutting Longs'
Drug property. Mr. Wharton stated it would be very difficult to
trace our interest through 100 years of transactions, and he felt
it would be to the City's best interest to allow the commercial
development of the land as intended by the present record owners.
Councilman Miller stated it was his idea that if the original tract
map filed by Mr. Mendenhall in l869, it might indicate that he had
dedicated the streets to the City, and if it showed an ownership to
the City, perhaps it could be followed through; otherwise it would
be a waste of time and effort.
REPORT RE POSSIBLE LITIGATION
EPA INDIRECT SOURCES REGULATIONS
The City Attorney explained that the u.s. Environmental Protection
Agency has recently issued regulations controlling the construction
of facilities which generate indirect sources of pollution such as
shopping centers, colleges, government facilities, or any facilities
that would cause a major grouping of motor vehicles. The regula-
tions are typical of the EPA's California Transportation Control
Plan which are next to impossible of reasonable implementation.
The first steps of this were resisted through petitioning of the
court for a stay in their implementation, an action which was
undertaken by better than 200 California cities including Livermore.
This is a related action which the City Attorneys and certain County
Counsel are discussing as a cooperative enterprise, If they feel it
likely to petition the federal court they can do so on a joint
basis and minimize the legal research and cost to nothing more than
the filing fee and pursue it after the petition is filed. It does
not commit the City to litigate anything, but merely asks the court
to consider whether the standards have been adopted, taking into
account that the executive branch may be preempting legislative
proragative that belongs to the Congress. Mr. Wharton stated he
needed the Council's direction as to whether, after reviewing it,
they would authorize our participation.
Councilman Futch stated he would like to know what EPA's proposals
are regarding indirect sources, and Mr. Wharton stated these are
regulations promulgated February l5, and he would be glad to furnish
the councilmembers with a copy of them.
Councilman Futch moved that they approve the City Attorney's request
to participate in the discussion of the problem, and to join in
the petition; seconded by Councilmember Tirsell.
Mr. Wharton stated he would furnish a copy of the regulations, and
we could always withdraw our participation, if for some reason the
Council feels that it is ill advised, but they would not be able
after the deadline date at the end of this week to file.
Councilmember Miller stated he has reservations about joining with
other cities, as he felt that there are many cities that do not care
about the goal of the Environmental Quality Act or EPA's goal, and
CM-28-22
Harch 18, 1974
(EPA Indirect Sources
Regulations)
(
I
\
their attempt is to block any attempt to try to improve air quality
if it effects them in some way they don't like. He is concerned that
all they do is keep putting back those times when they can do some-
thing significant about improving our air quality.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time and it passed unanimously.
REPORT RE CARNEGIE
BUILDING Occupancy
The item regarding the occupancy of the Carnegie Building was removed
from the Consent Calendar for discussion at this time. The valley
youth program is occupying a portion of the upper floor of the build-
ing, and the balance is available for other public or civic use.
Councilmember Tirsell stated that Janet Newton of the Heritage Guild
had asked that this item be postponed until a time their committee
members might be present when it is discussed.
Mr. Parness stated he had talked with Mrs. Newton and explained
arrangements are being made for the occupancy of the building in
accordance with Council directives issued about three years ago,
however she insisted on being present as the historical society would
like to occupy the whole building.
On motion of Councilmember Tirsell, seconded by Councilmember Miller,
and by unanimous approval, the item was continued until the next
regular meeting.
PROJECT APPROVALS
Councilmember Turner stated he had some comments to make regarding
a report submitted by the Director of Planning regarding project
approvals, however the item was noted for filing before he had an
opportunity to say anything. The report indicated that the Council
had requested copies of building permits for industrial developments
to be submitted in the Council agenda, and was not sure of the reason
for the request but felt it was to allow the Councilmembers to review
industrial applications. Councilmember Turner stated he would prefer
to have a weekly log on all industrial applications, whether verbal
or written, as a part of the regular agenda and the log should also
contain progress reports and if there is no action within a certain
period of time, it would be removed from the log. If the application
is withdrawn, the Planning Director should determine the reason, and
relay this to the Council as he felt this would be of some value in
determining the reasons this City is not penetrating the industrial
market as he felt it should.
('
Mr. Parness explained that the practicality of the matter is we can
get contacts from industrial inquirers for a variety of sources and
in different guises as they not only come to the Planning Departmnt
but also to his office as well as the Finance Department and other
departments and it is extremely difficult at times to know the reason
one might be dropped or become inactive or the progress or status
of any of them. He felt it was difficult to gather this information,
and did not feel it could be done with any meaningfulness on a weekly
basis. The departments are asked to refer all industrial clients to
his office for initial consultation in an effort to try to answer
their questions and problems.
Councilmember Futch stated if a weekly report could not be made,
that a monthly report be submitted, and Mr. Parness replied the staff
would try to prepare such a report, which might be meaningful.
CM-28-23
".,- ..--.'---.----.-------_._._._,.....___.__......__ _ _"_'_.N__~__,"".._,.,___.~.__....~__"... ...__.,_,_,._.~___.__.
March 18, 1974
(project Approvals)
Councilmember Tirsell stated perhaps they should have a staff proposal
on how to really efficiently process an application as the applicant
might talk to different people and get conflicting fee schedules as
she has heard this several different times.
Mr. Musso pointed out that by the time an application is filed,
they have accumulated all the necessary information and admittedly
although they have talked to several departments in the process of
gathering the information, it is possible that they may have some
conflicting information.
Councilmember Tirsell felt that one person should handle the applica-
tion completely even if it meant walking that person through to the
various departments, especially if it was a "hot" prospect.
Mr. Parness assured Councilmember Tirsell that the staff tries very
hard to do that, and also they try very hard to make sure that a
"hot" industrial prospect is given valid, reliable, thorough informa-
tion, but there is no system that is foolproof. A new small type
of informational brochure is in the process of being printed, which
was primarily done at the instigation of Councilman Miller, which
he hoped would help to some extent.
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Industrial Rezoning-Las positas Road)
Mr. Musso advised that there will be a public hearing on April 4
before the Board of Supervisors on the industrial rezoning on Las
positas Road, and suggested that there be some Council representa-
tion. Councilmernber Tirsell was asked to attend this meeting.
(P.H. - Regional Water Control Board)
Mr. Parness advised that there is to be a public hearing before the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the action they are being
asked to take is almost unbelievable to him in its content, and the
notice has come too late to do much, however the City will have a
representative at the hearing in Hayward and the City Attorney has
been asked to check into some of the legal aspects, and he hoped
that the City Council would have one or two formal delegates to the
Water Management Agency who can also attend, to try to counteract
the action that is being advanced by the staff. If nothing else,
just ask to have the matter postponed to allow time to analyze the
matter.
Councilmember Futch stated that he and Councilmember Miller would
try to attend the meeting.
(Meeting re Gasoline Regulations)
Mr. Parness advised that the County Board of Supervisors was holding
a meeting to consider the odd-even gas regulations and he asked the
Council if they had any problems.
Mayor Pritchard remarked that he thought the lines were much shorter
and Councilmember Futch agreed.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Appointments to be Made)
Councilman Futch stated that the Water Management Committee is very
anxious to have regular members appointed in order that they might
appoint officers, and conduct regular meetings. He asked that they
make these appointments, and was advised there would be an executive
session to make these and other appointments.
CM-28-24
March 18, 1974
(Truck Parking)
Councilmember Miller stated he had noticed a large number of trucks
parked on Portola Avenue over the weekend, and similarly on Stanley
Blvd.and even though it was his understanding that the Police Depart-
ment was supposed to curtail this, he did not see any tickets on
any of these trucks.
(
\
Mr. Parness stated he would discuss this with the Police Department.
(Planning Commission Appl.
Councilmember Futch asked that the papers be notified to place an
article in the paper with regard to applications being received
for Planning Commission.
The City Attorney reminded the Council that if the press is to be
encouraged to print they are seeking Planning Commissioners, they
should clearly indicate that the appointees are subject to the
disclosure of assets law and must file their papers ten days before
they take office, so that the timing of the appointments should also
take that into account.
Councilmember Miller suggested that they also set a deadline date
for receiving applications, perhaps by 5 p.m. April I, to which
the Council agreed.
(Public Hearing re Gelder,":,1
town)
Mayor Pritchard stated that they had asked the Board of Supervisors
to hold their public hearing re Geldertown in Livermore and the
City Manager has received an acknowledgment stating the matter will
probably not come before them before September or October. He
suggested that the Council submit the request again shortly before
the matter comes before them and wondered if we would be informed
of the time, and Mr. Parness assured him that we would be.
(Change in Council
Meeting Schedule)
Mayor Pritchard stated that the staff has asked that the Council
consider meeting every other week at which time there would be a
large concentrated agenda.
Mr. Parness added there is a tendency that some cities are working
towards to have a meeting every other week. This would give a little
more staff time for more adequate preparation of agenda items. He
would like to prepare some rationale for it in and submit it to them
in the next two or three weeks for Council consideration, and they
could try it for a month or two, and the Council agreed to look at it.
ADJOURNMENT
ATTEST
There being no further business to come before the Council,
meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m. to an executive session
::::::r counCil;;;t:;s to ~ conunittees.
(~L. . /- -
~, ~ ; ~re; cai1fornia
the
to
('
CM-28-25
Regular Meeting of March 25, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on March 25, 1974,
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: Councilmembers Futch, Miller, Tirsell, Turner and
Mayor Pritchard
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES OF 3-l2-74
There being no additions or corrections to the minutes for the
adjourned regular meeting of March 12, 1974, on motion of Council-
member Miller, seconded by Councilmember Turner and by unanimous
vote the minutes were approved as submitted.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Notification of
Hearing re Bus
Loading Facility
A notice of a public hearing has been received regarding a proposed
parking and bus loading facility to be located northwest of the inter-
section of Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Road in the Dublin area of
Alameda County which has been set for Tuesday, April 23rd at 7:30 p.m.
at the Shannon Park Community Center in Dublin.
LAFCO Resolution
re Reg. Water. Qual.
Control Board
The LAFCO resolution regarding procedures assuring cooperation with
the Regional Water Quality Control Board was submitted to the Council
for informational purposes.
Resolution Annexing
Max Baer Park
LAFCO has informed the City that it may proceed with annexation of
Max Baer Park, the map and description have been approved and a
favorable report has been received from the Planning Commission.
RESOLUTION NO. 40-74
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED
TERRITORY DESIGNATED "MAX BAER PARK ANNEX" TO THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE PURSUANT TO THE "ANNEXATION OF UNINHABITED TERRITORY
ACT OF 1939" AND SECTION 35015 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
Resolution Denying
Claim of PT&T
RESOLUTION NO. 41-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAIM OF PACIFIC
TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CO.
CM-28-26
March 25, 1974
Res. Appointing Member
to Design Review Comm.
RESOLUTION NO. 42-74
;-
~
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE DESIGN REVIEW
COMHITTEE (Robert Wendt)
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Contract Amendment re
Youth Service Center
The youth service center contract needs to be amended to extend the
contract dates and to permit budgetary amounts which were reserved
for rental to be expended for other purposes for the balance of
this fiscal year.
RESOLUTION NO. 43-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT (Criminal Justice Planning Board)
Committee Minutes
Minutes were received from committees, as follows:
Air Pollution Study Committee - February 27th meeting
Airport Advisory Committee - March 4th meeting
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Councilmember Tirsell, seconded by Councilmember Turner
and by unanimous vote, the Consent Calendar was approved with the
deletion of the item regarding the sludge production report and
also the report with respect to conservation of energy in buildings.
COMMUNICATION FROM
BIKEWAYS ASSN. TO CTY.
The copy of the communication from the Livermore Bikeways Association
which was sent to the Alameda County Public Works Department was noted
for filing.
Councilmember Tirsell wondered if it would be possible to emphasize
to the County, our concern regarding the two-way bike trails. She
pointed out that all such bike trails have been deleted from the map
which will be coming to the Council from the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Turner commented that he feels there should be a speed
limit of 25 mph along East Avenue because of the bike trail and also
due to the number of children going to and from school.
Mr. Parness responded by saying that the County Public Works Department
was contacted regarding these concerns and they responded by saying
(. that due to the lack of warrants a reduction of the speed limit was
( not feasible but are keeping this area under surveillance. Unfor-
tunately this is under their jurisdiction and the City can do nothing
about the speed limit. The only recourse the City has is to keep
writing letters to the County asking that the speed limit be changed.
CM-28-27
March 25, 1974
(re East Avenue
Speed Limit)
The staff was directed to send a letter to the County reiterating
the concerns of the Council regarding speed on East Avenue.
COMMUNICATION FROM
HERITAGE GUILD RE
USE OF CARNEGIE BLDG.
A letter was received from the Livermore Heritage Guild requesting
the assistance of the City in establishing a Historic Resource
Center in the Carnegie Building which is now owned by the City.
Mayor Pritchard wondered if this building is once again the
property of the City and the City Manager explained that it is
not. In May of 1967 LARPD was given management and operation rights
and at that time it was specified that the upper floor should be occu-
pied by the Livermore Art Association and the historical organization
active at the time and to be used for civic purposes. He then
read the terms of the agreement to the Council. Mr. Parness com-
mented that he feels the Livermore Heritage Guild can be assumed
to be the successor institution of the Livermore Historical Society.
A staff meeting has been held to discuss this topic and it was his
understanding that the youth services program and the Historical
society would use the upper floor, as well as the Livermore Art
Association, and the staff has recommended that a motion be adopted
approving allocation of space assignments for these groups.
Mayor Pritchard questioned as to what action is necessary and the
City Manager explained that the reason this is before the Council
is because of the letter written by the Livermore Heritage Guild
reiterating its interest in occupying a portion of the upper floor
and in time to occupy the entire building as a historical institution.
Roger Brown, 1154 Tesla Road, representative of the Livermore Heritage
Guild, stated that they would hope to receive some backing from the
Council for a museum in Livermore - a Historic Resource Center for
use by the schools and citizens of Livermore. He explained that
it is necessary to receive the backing of the Council in order
to take advantage of funds which are available only to organiza-
tions backed by a government body which can be used for buildings
and centers.
Janet Newton, 2l3l Chateau Place, commented that the Carnegie Build-
ing would be quite suitable for the needs of a museum whereas it
would not be suitable for many other organizations and felt that
a fine research center could be established in the building. She
urged that the Council give backing to a facility the community
could be proud of. She felt that the proposal to divide it up
is causing negligible value of its use and that the Livermore
Heritage Guild would use it to its fullest extent. She pointed
out that this was the purpose of their letter.
In answer to questions regarding the occupancy of the youth service
program (Horizons) Mr. Parness explained that they are conducting
a full time operations business at this locality which appears to
be a very valuable public service but does not consider these quar-
ters to be permanent in nature. He stated that the City would pre-
fer that this service be located elsewhere - a location that would
be more amenable to the use but during a six month search for space
it was found that there is no place for them and this appears to
satisfy their needs quite adequately.
CM-28-28
March 25, 1974
(re Carnegie Building)
Jean Pefley, President of the Livermore Art Association, reported
that they were offered the building in 1967 and were ready to go
into it then but did not because the Livermore Historical Society
could not decide whether or not they would like to use it and since
LARPD needed more office space it was vacated. They are ready to
open a full scale gallery at this time and they have the necessary
funds to accomplish this with the hope that they will soon open.
Councilmember Tirsell asked if there is a possibility that the Art
Association would expand and also desire use of the entire building
and Mrs. Pefley stated that she would tend to view this as a permanent
location for them because it is in the center of town and even though
another site such as Ravenswood might offer more room the location of
this building is a big advantage.
Councilmember Tirsell stated that she sees a potential problem in
that there are two groups who may wish to occupy the entire building
in the future.
Mayor Pritchard commented about the possibility of using the lower
floor and the City Manager explained that people are waiting in line
tQ make use of the two rooms located downstairs and that they are
us~d constantly both night and day and LAPRD feels very strongly
about not committing the downstairs to a particular use.
Muriel Doggett, 1318 North "P" Street, stated that inevitably
expansion will be necessary, perhaps in 20 years, for both the
Art Association and the Historical Society and it is natural that
they would both want to use the entire building; however, she pointed
out that the old library located in Modesto has allowed a museum on
the upper floor with the art gallery located on the lower floor and
perhaps when LARPD obtains more meeting rooms Livermore could adopt
the same type of arrangement.
Mayor Pritchard stated that since LARPD has the lease, is there any
action that should be taken by the Council and Mr. Parness explained
that the only action would be to recognize the Livermore Heritage
Guild for possible eventual sponsorship for a national grant that
they are thinking of applying for.
On motion of Councilmember Tirsell, seconded by Councilmember Futch
and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to officially recognize
the Livermore Heritage Guild and its endeavors, and act as official
sponsor in applying for grants.
Prior to the vote Councilmember Miller stated that the building
belongs to the City but the lease is with LARPD which can be
revoked at any time and felt the wording "we recognize the Heritage
Guild as a successor to the Historical Society" be included in the
motion which was agreed to by the motion and the second.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE JUDSON PROPERTY
REZONING APPLICATION
/-
Mayor Pritchard noted that the applicant for the rezoning of the
Judson property has requested that the continued discussion be scheduled
for this meeting, in error; therefore the Council will take no action.
Councilmember Tirsell pointed out that the Planning Commission had
recommended that the arroyo seco would receive trailways of ISO ft.
average which the Council adopted and if this is the case it would
seem that the access being talked about is a very moot point.
CM-28-29
March 25, 1974
(re Judson Property)
Mr. Lee responded by saying that it is very possible that in
order to arrive at this width the area being discussed for use
of a driveway would have to be encroached upon. However,
studies have not been done on it.
Councilman Futch felt that the Council should receive better
drawings of the area and Mr. Lee explained that these are copies
provided by the flood control people and it was suggested that
the applicant's attorney be notified of this request.~. One of the
objections raised was that it was hard to ascertain where the
streets were, where the channel begins and ends and if this is
not resolved the issue will remain deadlocked.
-_..-"
With respect to the comment made by Councilmember Tirsell about
the widening of the arroyo, Councilmember Miller felt it is not
justified to "dump" all the arroyo widening on somebody else's
property and asked the Public Works Director to consider ways
this can be divided equally.
Mr. Lee explained that the applicant has asked for a continuance
in order to work on a better proposal and Councilmember Miller
felt it was important for the records to indicate that the con-
tinuance is a request of the applicant as this is a zoning
matter. If the Council does not have the permission of the appli-
cant or does not request a continuance it should be noted that the
Council is ~ legally bound tq take action within a certain time
periOd~~";FtT' ..r~ ~7 ~/ft;Jc
On motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember ~
Turner and by unanimous vote, the Judson property rezoning
application decision was continued pending notification by the
applicant.
REQUEST FOR CROSSING
GUARD AT 6th & SO.
LIVERMORE AVENUE
It was noted that a petition was presented to the Council ask-
ing that a crossing guard be stationed at 6th and South Livermore
Avenue as well as the installation of a stop sign on Livermore
Avenue which was followed by a report by the Public Works Dir-
ector on the matter. Mr. Lee recommended that there be no
crossing guard at this time and that the volume of traffic
does not warrant a stop sign.
A letter from the Chief of Police regarding the situation at
the intersection was also presented to the Council for informa-
tion and Councilman Miller moved to adopt the recommendation
of the Public Works Director and the Chief of Police.
Councilmember Turner suggested that the staff be directed to
personally contact the person who originated the petition to ex-
plain the circumstances and the reason no guard is recommended at
this time.
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE TRACK
RELOCATION PROJECT
('\
Mr. Parness explained the status of the railroad track relocation
project and explained that the City had proposed a formula reqard-
ing share of cost for the project so that Southern Pacific would
pay 21% and Western Pacific 79% which he explained. This cost
split was contested and has been awaiting a decision by the PUC
which has taken six months. The decision was that there should
be a 50-50 cost split which was followed by an appeal by Southern
CM-28-30
c
(
I
I
,
March 25, 1974
(re Track Relocation)
Pacific for a rehearing which Mr. Parness explained would have taken
time the City did not have. In order to circumvent this time delay
the City Attorney filed an application for the issuance of an interim
order on which the PUC could have acted by giving the City a temporary
permit to proceed providing that the 10% contribution was placed
in escrow by the City, to be reimbursed by the railroad companies
later. The City has been negotiating with each company and is trying
to have the PUC order modified to state that the division of the
cost would be proportionate as agreed upon by the parties. He stated
that the PUC staff has expressed no contention with this request
but has indicated that such a change will take considerable time.
We have, therefore, requested that they handcarry the matter through
the PUC and have indicated that they will try to do this if the City
has the written concurrence of the three parties. In addition, the
applications for rehearings and interim orders were to be rescinded
which the City Manager commented has been satisfied through the good
work of our City Attorney. The City Attorney obtained the names
of all the parties on the rescinding application and filed it with
the PUC and the staff has indicated that they will try to handcarry
this through the offices and perhaps get the modifying order which
the City needs. He then explained the remaining paper work to be
done before the City can receive allocations and proceed with the
project.
Bob Barton of DeLeuw Cather Company and consultant for the project,
commented on the letter received from the state regarding its interpre-
tation of the Streets and Highways Code concerning fees and credits
towards the project and the amount of money needed to fund the entire
project. In his opinion the total cost of the project to the City
would be about $400,000.
It was noted that there are numerous resolutions which must be
adopted subject to receipt of the necessary documents regarding
the project and were reported in the agenda. Mr. Parness stated,
hopefully, the Council will adopt the resolution authorizing execu-
tion of agreement with Western Pacific Railroad Company subject to
review and approval of the terms and conditions by the City Attorney,
our consulting engineer, Mr. Parness and the Mayor, as the agreement
has not been received from Western Pacific Railroad Company.
On motion of Councilmember Futch, seconded by Councilmember Tirsell
and by unanimous vote, the resolutions mentioned in the agenda were
adopted with the recommendation for review and approval as stated
by the City Manager.
The City Attorney explained the agreements involved and noted that
if the S.P. agreement is executed it will lead to the closing of
approximately five street crossings, closing to public use the
grade crossings and elimination of one private crossing on the
S.P. right-of-way. There will be upgrading of the automatic
protection at Murietta, North "L", Junction Avenue, and east First
Street. He then briefly explained the remainder of the agreement
with regard to responsibility during the period of construction.
He noted that the terms and conditions consist of 26 pages which
he would not explain in detail and that the agreement with Western
Pacific would be about the same with the difference being the dis-
missal of the condemnation suit in order to obtain the long strip
of right-of-way for eventual use by S.P. He stated that he feels
the agreement adequately protects the City in this venture and
each contract allows the railroads use of Oak Street and requires
that the City give to each railroad the highest and best title
available for use by the railroads. He added that he intends to
pick up the W.P. agreement tomorrow which can be executed by the
Mayor and then he will present it to the State Department of Trans-
portation for an allocation.
CM-28-3l
March 25, 1974
(re Track Relocation)
Councilmember Miller asked how munch money the City will have to
place in escrow to cover the lOt as the final cost has not been
determined and it was explained by the City Attorney that the action
taken this past Friday will relieve the City of the obligation to
advance money to cover the railroad's share of the project and it
was explained that the railroads have come to an agreement by virture
of these agreements executed regarding the cost split which is about
the same as the original formula - now approximately 25-75% cost split.
Councilmember Miller then asked if we will lose all control over
Western Pacific with regard to complaints received as to blocking
streets, etc., if we abandon Oak Street to the W.P., and the City
Attorney explained that we have used Oak Street as a threat for
many years and that over these years much of the impact of the
threat has been lost. We are not giving Oak Street away but are
getting value for a clear and direct franchise on Oak Street. He
pointed out that it is possible the City may not be able to deliver
fee simple title and may end up giving a long term franchise instead.
Mr. Parness reported that the next hurdle to overcome will have to
be in dealing with the State Department of Transportation and really
does not know what will happen but hopefully the contractor will give
some time allowance modification.
RESOLUTION NO. 44-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY AND
WITH WESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY FOR PURPOSES
OF RAILROAD TRACK RELOCATION AND CONSOLIDATION.
RESOLUTION NO. 45-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE VERIFYING THAT SUFFICIENT FUNDS ARE A-
VAILABLE AND THAT ALL OTHER MATTERS PREREQUISITE
TO AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR GRADE SEPARATIONS OF
NORTH "P" STREET AND NORTH LIVERMORE AVENUE AT THE
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY AND WESTERN
PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY TRACKS WILL BE UNDERTAKEN.
RESOLUTION NO. 46-74
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO.
66-73, AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 88-73, IN THE
MATTER OF THE ACQUISITION OF IMPROVEMENTS, RAIL-
ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVERMORE, ALAMEDA
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
REPORT FROM BART
EXTENSION BOARD
The City Manager reported that the City is very greatful for the
work the Citizens Advisory Committee has done with the BART Board
as they have given a great deal of input and have been influential
in the planning effort of the BART extension. They have submitted
a written report which recommends that there be a study grant estab~
lished for a transit study committee and that their committee is
preparing the necessary documentation involved in the application
for a study grant.
Councilman Futch commented that the reorganized VPC would like to
get into the matter of public transportation which is a valley-wide
problem and wondered if the Council could continue discussion.
CM-28-32
March 25, 1974
(re BART Extension Board)
c
The City Manager explained that he is not suggesting that the
Council take any action at this time but the committee is the
party that is requesting that there be an application made for
a consultants grant for the technical updating of materials and
consideration of a citizens committee to assist the staff in this
effort. He pointed out that the BART staff have agreed to assist
the City on behalf of the three urban centers in the valley, hopefully,
to go to the state or the federal Department of Transportation to get
a financial grant to allow this technical service for the valley.
Councilmember Miller suggested that the City go ahead with any kind
of study possible with our Citizens Committee if the other cities
in the valley do not want to go ahead in joining us. He felt that
there are people in Livermore who need public transportation and
would hate to wait another 3-4 years for a study prior to implementa-
tion of public transportation.
Councilmember Futch stated that he realizes Livermore has been first
in pushing for public transportation but would really prefer to see
a valley-wide organization to study and support this effort, and
let VPC handle this as one of its projects.
Councilmember Tirsell suggested that if the VPC is to handle the
study that they be given a time limit for formation of a committee
and if they do not form one in a given time period that Livermore
should go ahead with one.
Gib Marguth, Chairman of the Citizens Committee stated that they
have concerned themselves with the question of transportation and
has been in existance for some two years. They have been before
the VPC and the City Council for 6-l2 months asking that something
be done to get transportation planning done for this area - not just
BART and highways but buses as well. He stated that it has been
suggested that old trucks be purchased with seats put in them for
added transportation for the City and they feel that it is important
to act now because there is a sense of urgency in the community at
present that will die if something is not done. It is felt by the
committee that some quick studies can be made and grants applied for
on behalf of the valley. They would urge that the City Council take
the steps necessary for providing transportation other than bicycles,
walking, cars and BART.
DISCUSSION RE OLD LDC
Gib Marguth commented that it was very exciting to be present during
a meeting in which the Council has taken steps to proceed with the
Livermore track relocation project and on behalf of Leo Gutierrez and
John Shirley who are not present and himself, would like to thank this
Council for taking such action and specifically would like to thank
Mr. Parness for having the persistance for staying with the project
and pushing to see it through.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE LOCAL TRANS. COMMITTEE
r
Councilmember Miller stated that he feels a certain obligation to
Councilman Beebe who felt very strongly about organizing a Livermore
Transportation Committee which was not accomplished during his time
on the Council and would urge that this be done and suggested that
this be scheduled as an agenda item for consideration.
CM-28-33
March 25, 1974
REPORT RE STATE GRANT
FOR BIKE LANE PROGRAM
The City Manager reported that we have received notice that a
proportion of a state allocation will be available to our City
for the Arroyo Mocho bike path in the amount of $l,978.26 and
must be requested prior to March 3l. It is recommended that
the Council adopt a motion requestion such an allocation and
on motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember
Turner and by unanimous vote the recommendation was adopted.
REPORT RE AIRPORT
TRAFFIC PATTERN
On January l4th complaints were received from a local citizen
regarding the flight pattern being used at the airport and
as a result the matter was referred to our Airport Advisory
Committee. Following this referral the Airport Committee had
a hearing and received testimony from citizens who agreed with
Mr. Leebhoff, the party who made the original complaint and a
subcommittee was asked to study the question. In the final analy-
sis, due to insufficient justification to consider revising the
flight pattern and based on its own judjment the Airport Advisory
Committee reaffirms its position that the traffic pattern is proper
and a staff report was prepared and submitted to the Council as well
as a letter from the FAA tower chief.
Councilmember Turner asked who testified in opposition to the
present flight pattern being used at present and Mr. Lee
explained briefly as to the testimony that was given and
that the complaintant was given every opportunity to comment and
it was determined that a flight pattern change was not a reasona-
ble request.
At this time the report was filed with no action required.
REPORT RE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS PROJ.
The Public Works Director submitted a list of the 1973-74 Capi-
tal Improvements Projects (Phase I) which indicated engineering
estimates and recommended that the Council adopt a motion auth-
orizing call for bids.
Mr. Lee commented that there is one small project which was
not budgeted for but for which there are sufficient funds in
the storm drain fund and that is for the draining of the Spring-
town lake where the fountain is located so that the water can be
changed.
Councilmember Miller brought up the point of the water and
sanitary sewer line project to service the South County Junior
College and pointed out that the previous Council had voted
for the oversized lines (Miller and Pritchard dissenting) and
since this time there have been newspaper reports stating that
these lines are not satisfactory to either the LAFCO executive
or Supervisor Murphy and it would appear that no matter what the
City decides as to the size of the lines, nothing is going to be
satisfactory to others and felt that this should be reconsidered.
He felt that a large part of the reason the Council voted to have
the oversized lines was to influence LAFCO and it would appear
that they are not impressed.
Councilmember Futch felt that to impress LAFCO was really not
the intent for approving oversized lines and that there are
many agencies to whom the question of "New Town" will be pre-
sented. It is important that Livermore has always planned to serve
the area and will continue to plan to serve it.
CM-28-34
March 25, 1974
(Capital Improvements
Projects Discussion)
(
~
Councilmember Turner stated that in his opinion by looking at the
long range planning, it would appear that the cost for the oversized
pipe is minimal compared to what it would cost if it were needed 5-l0
years from now for additional development and that the City of Liver-
more and Pleasanton have control over growth in the area so the over-
sized line does not mean that this will spur development.
Councilmember Miller pointed out that normally a developer expends
money for this typ.e of service as development occurs and in this
case the City is paying for this with the taxpayers money because
we have a commitment to the Junior College. Therefore, to expend
excess money that belongs to the taxpayers would appear to be unwise
as there ~ from $50,000-$60,000 involved that will do nothing but lay
in the ground and not being used properly. If the General Plan indi-
cates that there will be no development in that particular area it
means that we have wasted $60,000 but on the other hand if we decide
to develop out there in another 10 years then the developer can pay
for the public works improvements at that time.
Councilmember Tirsell stated that she cannot see how expenditure
of taxpayers money for use lO-20 years hence can ever be justified
except that this is the way areas are planned, and agrees that the
oversized line is the best choice as it may be the last line to ever
have to go in to serve that area, and it may mean that all the growth
planned for will be taken care of.
Councilmember Miller moved that the Council amend the decision regard-
ing the size of the line approved and approve the size of lines just
sufficient to serve the Junior College (Projects 73-25 and 73-l8),
seconded by Mayor Pritchard which was followed by discussion regarding
the pros and cons of smaller line vs. larger line.
Councilmember Turner called for the question and the motion failed
2-3 with Councilmembers Futch, Turner and Tirsell dissenting.
On motion of Councilmember Futch, seconded by Councilmember Tirsell
and by a 4-1 vote (Miller dissenting because of opposition to Projects
73-25 and 73-l8 re Junior College lines) the Council authorized the
City to advertise for bids for the 1973-74 Capital Improvement Projects.
RESOLUTION NO. 47-74
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND APPROVING PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS, ASCERTAINING WAGE SCALE,
AND DIRECTING CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS
FOR VARIOUS PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENTS.
REPORT RE "K" STREET
PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS
r
The Public Works Director reported that the "J" Street parking lot
has been substantially completed and the Beautification Committee
has been asked to inspect it and to review its cost effectiveness
which they discussed at their March 6th meeting and concluded that
it was successful and recommends that the City Council authorize
proceeding with the ilK" Street improvements with essentially the
same features.
Mr. Lee explained that this cost would have to come out of the next
year's budget and explained the funds that the "J" street improvements
were derived from, as included in a written memorandum to the Council.
On motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Turner
and by unanimous vote the recommendation to proceed with the "J"
Street improvements was approved.
CM-28-35
March 25, 1974
("K" Street Parking
Lot Improvements)
Prior to the vote Councilmember Turner pointed out that the pro-
vision for exiting from "J" Street onto First Street is very
hazardous because the parallel parking provided on First Street
creates a blind spot for oncoming First Street traffic and Mr.
Lee stated that this had been considered but that a south bound
exit would mean traffic on First street would stack up while
drivers are turning right onto "J" Street, and it is too close
to the intersection to allow this, and Councilmember Turner sug-
gested moving the First Street parking back from the exit so
that oncoming traffic could be observed easier and Mr. Lee stated
that he would look into it.
HEARING SET FOR GEN.
PLAN AMENDMENTS
The staff has recommended that a public hearing be set for
testimony regarding the l3th and l4th General Plan Amendments and
on motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Turner
and by unanimous vote the hearing was set for April l5, 1974.
P. C. MINUTES
OF MARCH l2
The minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting of March l2,
1974, were noted for filing.
DISCUSSION RE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMITTEE
REORGANIZATION
with regard to the reorganization of the Valley Planning Committee
(VPC) Councilmember Tirsell reported that she and Councilmember
Futch felt that it might be appropriate for this Council to discuss
the matter and adopt a recommendation to take to this month's VPC
meeting. The VPC seemed to endorse the idea of a forum that would
occur from two to four times a year. She and Councilmember Futch
feel that the forum should be for information, to take stands on
issues and make recommendations so that the VPC would be a steering
committee with subcommittees under it which would include citizens,
and general topics proposed would be transportation, water pollution
and air pollution as well as solid waste disposal, and generally
summarized the intent of the reorganization of the VPC.
Councilmember Miller stated that it appears that the recommendation
is not for a VPC but rather a meeting four times a year with the
five elected officials of the three jurisdictions, which Councilmem-
ber Miller stated appears to be the case with the presently constitu-
ted VPC acting as a steering committee to organize the material
that would be presented at the forum and to organize a citizens
group which might develop some of the material. He added that
the VPC has not been as effective as everyone would like and it
is felt that if all three communities meet to speak on the issues
and if groups are formed this should be more effective in valley
operations.
These comments were followed by discussion regarding the activity
of the VPC as it has been in the past and comments about a Regional
Planning Agency and the point was made that Supervisor Murphy is
strongly opposed to any valley-wide planning.
Councilmember Miller stated that it would appear the suggestion
is for continuation of the VPC with an additional branch such as
the citizens committees with joint meetings for the purpose of
hearing VPC reports and proposals for action.
CM-28-36
March 25, 1974
(VPC Reorganization)
The Council agreed that there is merit in the three jurisdictions
meeting four times a year.
Councilmember Tirsell commented that there are existing citizens
committees in every town who go over the same information and arrive
at the same conclusions without being aware of this and it would
seem to be prudent to try to eliminate duplication of effort and
offered to draw up some recommendations which can be discussed as
an agenda item later.
DISCUSSION RE I-580
WIDENING PROPOSAL
Councilmember Futch briefly reported on the discussion which has
taken place in the past with regard to the proposal for the widen-
ing of I-580. The Council's position was opposition to the widening
to eight lanes, as proposed by the State Highway Department because
it was felt that continued planning based on the use of the automobile
was not the proper way to plan for future transportation for the valley.
The Council felt that the efforts towards getting BART to the valley
should be pursued and only allow additional lanes strictly for the
purpose of buses and public transportation. A number of groups have
tried to reverse this position which the government has taken in that
widening of the freeway would not be supported because of environmental
problems. He stated that he asked that this matter be discussed by
the Council again to have the Council's position brought to the atten-
tion of various federal agencies and our representatives in Congress
and moved that the Council's position on the widening of I-580 be
sent to our state senators, to the EPA, to the Federal Department
of Transportation, to the Air Pollution Control Board and, as a part
of the letter sent, there be a statement made that the Council feels
continued transportation based on the use of the automobile is not
a responsible way to plan for the future, especially in view of the
fuel crisis which is felt to be a long term problem.
Councilmember Miller asked that MTC be included as well as our
congressmen, ABAG and the State Department of Transportation, which
was included in the motion and the motion was seconded by Councilmember
Miller.
Prior to the vote Councilmember Miller explained that the Council is
not opposed to widening the freeway but~~y for PUbli:.:~~sgOrtation
and not the increase of automobi:?= -'o-Ur;i;~-:-". <.--;:e-.u-J-._
Councilmember Turner felt that a third lane for automo~ really
is needed through the Dublin Canyon and that BART will not be here
for about lO years.
This was followed by discussion over whether or not there really is
an energy crisis and Councilman Futch stated that anyone who has talked
with knowledgeable people realize that there is an energy crisis and
that our oil resources are being depleted.
Gib Marguth read portions of the letter sent to the Council by .
the Citizens Advisory Committee regarding local action for
transportation improvements and their reasons for supporting
a BART rail through the Dublin Canyon with six lanes through
the canyon and one lane reserved for a bus lane. Rather than to expend
funds for a lane to accomodate heavy trucks that this amount be spent
to construct the BART rail line.
Councilmember Futch stated that he feels the program suggested by
Gib appears to be more reasonable than that proposed by the State
Highway Department and would be interested in seeing the Environmental
Impact Reports regarding the proposal.
CM-28-37
March 25, 1974
(I-580 Widening)
The Council continued to discuss the pros and cons of whether
or not the freeway should be widened.
Councilman Miller remarked that it would be better to spend the money
to provide public transportation - a corridor along with the ex-
isting two lanes, and felt if the freeway is not widened and the
people are delayed while they watch the buses go by, it would give
them something to think about, and get them out of their cars into
public transportation.
Councilmember Turner disagreed as he felt we were still lO-l2 years
away from BART, and we very much needed the road widened.
Councilmember Miller called for the question, and the motion passed
4-l with Councilmember Turner dissenting.
COMMUNICATION RE COMMUNITY AWARDS
PROGRAM FROM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
A communication was addressed to Councilmember Futch from the Chamber
of Commerce regarding the re-establishment of a Community Awards
program to honor Livermore citizens for significant contributions
made to the city's welfare during each year, and they have asked
the City to participate with them.
Councilmember Miller stated he thought the idea was a nice one, but
did not feel it was any of the City's business as he did not feel
it was a reasonable expenditure of the taxpayers' money. He
moved that we commend the Chamber for their idea, but decline to
join in any financial support. Motion was seconded by Councilmember
Turner, and approved unanimously. The City Manager was asked to
respond to the letter.
REPORT RE SLUDGE PRODUCTION
A report had been submitted by the Public Works Director regarding
sludge prOduction, and this item had been removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion as this time. However, since it was late,
Mayor Pritchard suggested that this be continued and made an agenda
item at a later meeting, and in addition if the other members of
the Council had any questions they should contact the Public Works
Director and discuss them with him.
Councilmember Futch suggested that the report be summarized, and
the Public Works Director was asked to make a summary, and Mr. Lee
agreed to do that and he asked if the Council would like to give
him a list of their questions.
REPORT RE CONSERVATION OF
ENERGY IN BUILDINGS
A report submitted by the Chief Building Inspector regarding con-
servation of energy in buildings was removed from the Consent Cal-
endar for discussion at this time.
Councilmember Tirsell inquired if the Uniform Building Code de-
pended on legislation alone for any changes, or if there were
other methods for upgrading the standards for insulation.
n
Chief Building Inspector Herb Street stated that the State has
adopted, by reference, Uniform Building Codes as it applies to
CM-28-38
March 25, 1974
(Conservation of
Energy in Buildings)
residential buildings, and there has been some controversy over the
years as to whether the Building Code should address itself to insula-
tion since it has not been considered a necessary minimum standard
for the health and safety aspects that the codes are concerned with.
Now with the energy crisis, the State found it necessary to mandate
adoption of energy conservation standards. The Building Code is
considering the same standards that the state has proposed for adop-
tion and also the FHA Standards, as well as the National Bureau of
Standards guidelines that have been drafted - they have not yet
come up with the standards. Mr. Street stated that the Uniform
Building Code change committee will be meeting in April and consider-
ing those regulations, but whether they will become a part of the
code remains to be seen.
Councilmember Futch stated the report doesn't state what the standards
are, and he would like that information.
Mr. Street stated that basically the standards are very simple. They
require that the walls that are exposed to the ambient and that would
be either exterior walls or walls exposed to an unheated space, must
conform to the minimum standards for transmission of heat so they are
limited to the heat loss or gain. These are to be certified, and
there are criteria on the amount and kind of insulation that is re-
quired to attain this rating. This also applies to the roof structure
and to the glass and the amount that is required to be tinted glass.
Councilmember Futch asked Mr. Street if he could summarize this
in writing as to the kind of insulation, the standards and also
the information regarding the glass.
Councilmember Miller commented that according to the report, the
standards do not apply to single family houses; however Mr. Street
stated the energy insulation regulations that the state has adopted
will be effective in February 1975 to single family. Councilmember
Miller stated that since statewide adoption is a year away, perhaps
we should adopt interim standards now, and he asked that it be placed
on the agenda for Council action.
('
When questioned if it would be possible to adopt these standards now,
Mr. Street replied we could but we would have to file a justification
with the state regarding local conditions, and it would serve as a
variance. He suggested that perhaps the Council might want to have
an opinion from the City Attorney as it is his understanding that
where the State has preempted, you cannot adopt a more restrictive
regulation unless they specifically make it permissive.
The staff was directed to prepare a report for the Council agenda
and the City Attorney was asked to check into the legalities that
might be involved.
Glenn Dahlbacka+ ll38 Aberdeen, stated he had been interested in this
question for awhile, and he has been assembling data on the nature
of insulation and the cost of energy, and was appalled at the nature
of the insulation available in most construction in Livermore. He
went on into some detail about the savings there could be if the
homes were properly insulated, and he agreed that the regulations
should be adopted immediately. He would also like to have the Council
give some considerations to the homes in Livermore that are not in-
sulated as they can be brought up to much higher standards by ceiling
insulation. He felt Livermore could set a precedent by requiring
the insulation and would like to see this matter as an agenda item.
CM-28-39
March 25, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL & STAFF
(Commending Kamps
for Being in Busi-
ness for 70 Years)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to extend his personal
congratulations to Mr. and Mrs. Hal Kamp for 70 years of business
in Livermore and on motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by
Councilmember Tirsell and by unanimous vote of the Council a reso-
lution was adopted commending the Kamp family.
RESOLUTION NO. 48-74
RESOLUTION COMMENDING KAMP FAMILY RE. 70th
ANNIVERSARY
(re Abatement of
Abandoned Aircraft)
The City Attorney commented that he would like to have the Council's
determination that the abandoned aircraft at the airport consti-
tutes a nuisance so that the City can proceed to abate it and
on motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember
Tirsell and by unanimous vote the staff was directed to start
proceedings to declare the airplane a nuisance.
(re Election of
LAFCO Members)
The City Attorney reported that there is a bill being proposed
for the election of the LAFCO Board members and wanted to know
if the Council would like to take some stand.
Councilmember Miller moved that the Council support such a bill
and that the Council ask that members of the Board of Supervisors
be prohibited from serving on the LAFCO Board, seconded by Councilmem-
ber Turner and which passed by unanimous vote.
(re Legislation re
Regulation of Campaign
Expenditure & Disclosures)
The City Attorney stated that a bill is being introduced allowing
general law cities to regulate campaign expenditure and disclosure
and on motion of Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember
Turner and by unanimous vote, the Council approved support of the
bill if introduced.
(re Interviews for
Planning Commissioner)
The Council discussed the Planning Commission vacancies to be
filled and concluded that they would meet at 7:00 p.m. next Mon-
day to discuss as many applications as possible.
(re Lights at
Concannon & Holmes St.)
Councilmember Futch asked the Public Works Director the status
of the signals to be installed at the intersection of Holmes
Street and Concannon Boulevard which was reported on by Mr. Lee.
CM-28-40
March 25, 1974
(Signals at Holmes
& Concannon)
Councilman Futch pointed out that the big pitch by Mr. Mehran for
getting rezoning of his property was that the signals would be
installed by this past September when the children started school
and Mr. Lee felt that this had been an unrealistic estimate and
would hope that the state will accommodate Mr. Mehran with the
project and that it will be done by next September, and that the
staff is doing everything possible to see that the lights are in-
stalled by next September.
Councilmember Futch requested that a report on the matter be sub-
mitted to the Council in one month.
(re Support of
AB-2090 re Low
Income Housing)
On motion of Councilmember Futch, seconded by Councilmember Miller
and by unanimous vote of the Council AB-2090 regarding low income
housing is being supported by the Council with a letter of support
going to the Governor and the committee.
(re Support of
AB-2658 re Notice of Zoo Changes)
On motion of Councilmember Futch, seconded by Councilmember Miller
and by unanimous vote the Council agreed to support AB-2658 related
to notice to the assessor if there are zoning changes.
(re AB-32l5 re Use of
polygraph in Testing
for Employment)
Mayor Pritchard commented that a bill has been introduced (AB-32l5)
which would prohibit the use of a polygraph in employment evalua-
tion and would support this legislation as he feels this is an
unwarranted invasion of privacy.
The City Manager stated that he feels it is necessary that he
state that the use of the polygraph has been extremely helpful
in screening police applicants and is being widely used through-
out police jurisdictions.
Mayor Pritchard moved to support legislation of this bill, seconded
by Councilmember Miller.
It was the general consensus of the Council that they are opposed
to the use of any such device but declined to vote on the matter
at this time in order to give the City Manager a chance to report
to the Council.
ADJOURNMENT
ATTEST
was adjourned
~
APPROVE
Liv
CM-28-4l
Special Meeting - March 29, 1974
A special meeting called by Mayor Pritchard was called to order
at l:30 p.m., Friday, March 29, 1974, in the City Hall, 2250
First Street.
PRESENT: Councilmembers Futch, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT: Councilmember Miller
The meeting was called for the purpose of Council consideration
of the following:
Resolution Authorizing Execution of Agreement
with Hensel Phelps Construction Company, Track
Relocation Project.
The City Manager explained that it was felt to be of the utmost
importance that the City proceed to award the contract for the
railroad relocation project. Also briefly discussed was the amount
of funds expected from the State and the possibility of cancellation
of the contract should this expected amount not materialize.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote
the following resolution was adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 49-74
RESOLUTION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT, RAILROAD ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVERMORE, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
The signed contract together with a check in the amount of $lOO was
delivered to a representative of Hensel Phelps, present at the meet-
ing.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner, and by unanimous vote,
the Council directed that all other bids received for this project be
rejected and the City Clerk was instructed to return all bid bonds
submitted.
:::R::ting the?~urn::; ~m.
~~
ATTEST ~ /
C1.ty Clerk
Livermore, California
Adjourned Regular Meeting - April 1, 1974
The adjourned meeting scheduled for this time was not held since the
business intended to be discussed was finalized at the above special
meeting.
~i
D. J. Hock, C1.ty Clerk
Livermore, California
CM-28-42
Regular Meeting of April l, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on April l, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
~
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmembers 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
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meetings of March 25, 1974, and March l8,
1974, were approved as amended.
SPECIAL ITEM
(re Am. Soc. of
Mechanical Engineers)
Gary Tucker, representative of the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, explained the history and purpose of their organization
and invited the City to contact them for answers to questions with
various problems and that if they do not have the technical informa-
tion available they will find out who the City should communicate
with for technical information. He pointed out that they feel that
they are an educational organization with the obligation to contribute
to the public, understanding of critical issues such as energy, environ-
ment, transportation, housing and other items. In this objective he
stated that they are offering their services to the City of Livermore.
em Miller stated that he feels it is very helpful for ASME to offer
their expertise and would suspect that the City will have the oppor-
tunity to ask for advice and that he appreciates this offer.
OPEN FORUM
(re Status of Illegal
Sign at Golf Course)
Elizabeth Mondon, 5873 Singing Hills, stated that she wrote a letter
to the Council requesting that something be done about the sign that
is located on the golf course adjacent to I-580 which does not conform
to the City's Sign Ordinance and asked what is being done about it.
(
Mr. Parness reported that the staff has not completed the reports
regarding the sign and Mrs. Mondon was asked to contact Mr. Parness
for the reports.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Notification re
Earth Day Celebration
Notification has been received from the Beautification Committee
regarding the Earth Day celebration on April 27, 1974 to which the
City is invited, and the Mayor proclaimed April 27, 1974 to be Earth
Day.
CM-28-43
April 1, 1974
Proclamations
In addition to proclaiming Earth Day, the Mayor proclaimed March
29 thru AprilS, Safety Seat Belt Week; March 3l thru April 6,
Action for Foster Children Week; and April 22 thru 26, Public
Schools Observance Week.
Communication re
East Avenue Bikeway
A copy of the letter sent to the County in response to the Liver-
more Bikeways Association request regarding safe bikeways on
East Avenue was submitted to the Council by the Planning Commission.
Design Review
Committee Minutes
The Council received the minutes for the Design Review Committee's
meetings of March 20 and 27th, 1974.
Payroll & Claims
There were 150 claims in the amount of $358,389.9l and 284 payroll
warrants in the amount of $72,748.75, for a total of $43l,l38.66,
dated March 29, 1974, ordered paid by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of em Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote,
the Consent Calendar was approved.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE PLANNING UNITS 8 & 9
A report regarding the legal considerations in adoption of specific
plans for Planning Units 8 and 9 was submitted to the Council and
the City Attorney commented that he would suggest postponement of
any adoption of the specific plans until further modifications of
the General Plan have been made. He pointed out that it has not
been legally determined whether or not a specific plan will subject
the City to any kind of liability in inverse condemnation which was
followed by discussion regarding this advice.
Cm Futch stated that the problem concerning inverse condemnation
problems will have to be faced in certain circumstances and the
legal question is simply a matter of timing which the City Attor-
ney explained is correct - it could be resolved in another suit
before we need the specific plan for some municipal purpose and
his advice is dealing with the question of timing. He explained
that if there are changes in the General Plan this could result
in specific plans, if adopted, having to be changed and felt that
adoption of the specific plans could be done in a coordinated manner,
at a time so that none of the benefits will be lost. He explained
that adoption of the General Plan is a few months away and feels there
is no reason the specific plans cannot be acted upon at the point when
we are approaching a final decision stage in the General Plan, rather
than months earlier.
CM-28-44
April l, 1974
(Planning units 8 & 9)
em Futch expressed concern for the possibility of having to hold
public hearings again if there is a lengthy delay in acting upon
some proposed specific plan after the public hearing.
The City Attorney commented that if the Council is positive that
there will be no changes in the plan before them it would be more
prudent to adopt it at this point~ however, if there is any possi-
bility that there may be a change, such as changes in the law,
everything will have to be changed and hearings held.
em Miller felt that adoption of specific plans is preempting the
General Plan review process because it will bring pressure to
release those areas from the moratorium, and that this would
remove the option of making any amendments in that particular
General Plan area, particularly when there are some unresolved
situations in Planning Units 8 and 9 such as the abandonment of
the school site, park acquisition and density.
em Tirsell stated that it was her understanding that the Planning
Commission was working on the specific plans so that at the end of
the General Plan moratorium period there would be a basis for select-
ing or approving the timing and type of growth desired. She pointed
out that the specific plans were done on the 1959 General Plan and
if these are not adopted and the moratorium expires it would seem
that the City will not have done what it said it would do - to
adopt specific planning to safeguard these areas.
Cm Miller stated that this is a continued discussion and that prior
to tabling the matter a motion had been made by him to adopt the
general concept, in principle, but postpone final approval until
the General Plan density has been resolved in addition to school
abandonment and park acquisition being resolved and stated that he
would like to amend this motion if the second (em Turner) would agree.
He stated that he would like to amend the motion so that it is re-
stated as follows: liTo adopt the general concept, in principle, of
Planning Units 8 and 9, but put over the consideration of final
approval until l) three months before the moratorium ends, or 2) until
the school abandonment, park acquisition, Route 84, and the density
questions are resolved~ whichever comes first".
em Turner agreed to second the motion for discussion purposes.
Cm Futch felt that density has essentially been established for this
area, Highway 84 has been provided for in the plans and it is his
understanding that the park sites have been chosen and it would seem
that there are few remaining problems in this area.
em Miller pointed out that there are 6-7 months left prior to expira-
tion of the moratorium and there is no advantage to the City to adopt
the specific plan in advance. If all the questions are resolved as
pointed out by em Futch then it should go very easily at the end.
It appears that there could be some possible changes in this area
and he would suggest that the City wait and not be in such a hurry
to adopt 8 and 9.
Cm Futch stated that he feels the Council should not wait to the
end of the moratorium to adopt the specific plans because if there
are changes to be made they should be taken care of with sufficient
~ time for discussion, with which Cm Turner agreed.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that he has been told by the Planning
Director that the specific plans were done on the old General Plan
and that there will undoubtedly be changes because a new General Plan
is coming up which the specific plans will have to conform to and is
sufficient reason for his voting in favor of the motion.
CM-28-45
April l, 1974
(Planning Units 8 and 9)
Mayor Pritchard called for the question and Cm Turner stated that
he would like to amend the motion to say "..l) six months before the
moratorium ends...", seconded by Cm Futch, which passed 3-2, (Cm
Miller and Mayor Pritchard dissenting).
At this time the amended motion passed 4-l by the following roll
called vote: Ayes: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Noes: Cm Futch
REPORT RE ANNUAL
RODEO PARADE
The City Manager reported that the Jaycees have planned the annual
rodeo parade and are requesting a grant of funds from the City of
Livermore which will match the $l,500 pledged by the Rodeo Associa-
tion of Livermore.
Mr. Gabriel, representative of the Livermore Jaycees explained
the budget worked out for the parade and the expenditures for the
various categories.
Mayor Pritchard moved to approve the City Manager's recommendation
to approve the request for the $l,500 contribution, seconded by
Cm Turner and passed 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting).
Cm Miller explained that every year he has been bothered by the
fact that the City subsidizes the rodeo parade because the City
has to hire additional police officers during this weekend, re-
ceiving nothing in return. While on the other hand, the Rodeo
Association contributes half of the cost of the parade but realizes a
substantial return on the rodeo and that they should therefore pay
for the entire cost of the parade.
REPORT RE ARROYO MOCHO
LANDS AGREEMENT - LA
CASTILLEJA ORGANIZATION
(Gillice)
The Public Works Director reported that letters have been received
from Mr. David Madis, Attorney representing the La Castilleja organi-
zation relative to the Arroyo Mocho Lands Agreement dated April 3,
1972, which resulted in the dedication of land along the Arroyo Mocho
between Holmes Street and Arroyo Road. Mr. Madis has requested that
the City release the Performance bond and that the City outline a
procedure for selling the small parcels provided for in the original
agreement. Mr. Lee recommended that the Performance Bond be released
and recommended that the proper procedure to be followed for selling
the lots would be for the developer to provide a parcel map and prior
to this would recommend presentation of an agreement becween the develop-
er and property owners receiving the property related to the fact that
they will not be land-locked parcels. Mr. Lee stated that the develop-
er is questioning the City's right to have required the Arroyo Mocho
land to be dedicated to the City and the City Attorney may have some
comment as to whether this should affect the Council's decision in
allowing the transfer of these parcels.
The City Attorney stated that he would like to have the opportunity
to meet with Mr. Madis and his client to see if the matter can be
resolved as a "package deal" and would like to investigate the al-
ternatives available to the City.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the City Attorney is recommending that the
release of the Performance Bond as well as outlining a procedure
for selling the small parcels be put over and left to the negotiations
of the staff and developer, and the City Attorney felt that nothing
would be lost in doing such.
CM-28-46
April l, 1974
(Arroyo Macho Land Agree-
ment Gillice)
The staff explained the density transfer involved as well as the
park dedication and Cm Miller moved that the Council do nothing on
these requests until the pending law suit is dropped with prejudice,
seconded by Cm. Futch.
Cm Miller stated that certain parcels lie in the arroyo and initially
was dedicated to the City as channel in the original annexation
agreement and the City is giving away its own property to be sold
by Mr. Gillice for his profit and felt that this should be kept in
mind.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to adopt the motion.
Mr. Madis stated that this is the third time the Council has willfully
and purposefully breached the contract that has been referred to them
and on behalf of the developer rescinds the contract, in its entirety.
REPORT RE LIGHT FIX-
TURES TO BE SELECTED
FOR THE S.P. SHOPPING AREA
Mr. Lee reported on the matter of light fixtures to be selected by
the Council for installation in the Southern Pacific Shopping Center
area and explained that both the Beautification Committee and the
Design Review Committee have reviewed various styles and it was
recommended that the "Stylevuell fixture such as that used along
First Street would be continued on First Street; the "Standard"
type placed through the underpasses; and the spherical fixtures
such as those used on Second Street be used along "P" Street and
Railroad Avenue with the amber light source.
em Tirsell asked if the new lights to be installed along First Street
would be of a different height and Mr. Lee stated that he feels it
would be improper to have a few lights lower than all the rest and
explained the reason they were designed as they were from a safety
and lighting standpoint. .
Mr. Lee's comments were followed by discussion regarding height
levels for the fixtures with regard to the underpass area.
em Miller felt that it is not necessary for all the standard (Cobra)
type fixtures to be on 30 foot poles and that those at the top, where
the underpass begins, could be at 2l or 22~ ft. and could still pro-
tect eye glare. The first Cobra type could be the same height as
the spherical fixtures in the same area and graduated
heights as you approach the underpass.
Cm Turner moved that the Council adopt the recommendation of the
Beautification Committee and leave the height decision to the
Public Works Department, seconded by Cm Futch for discussion purposes.
r
Cm Miller moved to amend the motion that Recommendation (1) which
calls for the IIStylevue" fixtures on First Street be changed to
spherical fixtures between "plI and "S" Street at the 2l foot height,
seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Mr. Lee pointed out that if the Council selects the spherical fix-
tures in this area it will mean that the "Stylevue" type will be
used on First Street up to this point then the spherical type will
be seen until the Hansen Park area and the "Stylevue" type will con-
tinue and it would be unattractive to have different types and heights
along First Street.
Cm Turner asked if it would be feasible to change to the spherical
globes and what the cost would be if the "Stylevuell were replaced
along First Street and Mr. Lee indicated that technically this could
be done but the cost would be substantial and would estimate that it
CM-28-47
April 1, 1974
(Light Fixtures for SP Shopping Area)
would cost several hundred dollars per pole and there are approxi-
mately lOO poles that would have to be replaced.
The motion and the second agreed to table Recommendation (I) that
Cm Miller asked to be revised.
Mrs. Mondon, stated that the sodium type of lights are inefficient
and very hard on the eyes and the reason they are inefficient is due
to the fact that the light goes out in all directions, and would
recommend that spherical lights are not used along First Street
and up to the overpass.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to adopt the recommenda-
tions of the Beautification with the deletion of Recommendation (l)
which is tabled.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a 5 minute recess after which the meeting
resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE SELLING OR
LEASING ARROYO DEL VALLE
& WETMORE RANCH PROPERTY
Glen Dahlbacka, ll38 Aberdeen, commented that he feels that the re-
quirement of the County to sell the Arroyo Del Valle property and
the Wetmore Ranch property as a package is restrictive to anyone
who might be interested in buying this property even though it
could subsequently be sold and would suggest that the Council con-
sider this and determine whether they could possibly request the
County to alter the way the property is being sold. He feels that
the.rtwo properties are not really connected and such a requirement
would be defining the nature of the purchaser. Apparently the reason
they are being sold together is because the Wetmore property provides
water for the sanitarium but it seems to be the only connection be-
tween the two. The buyer could get water from Zone 7 or another
source so it would seem that the Wetmore property, which might be
developed, should not have to be included in the sale.
Cm Miller felt that this is a point very well taken and that the
Council might suggest to the County that there be an easement for
water and ask them to sever the sale of the two properties.
The City Manager had recommended that LARPD be notified of the sale
of the property and em Tirsell moved that LARPD be requested to ex-
plore any means available for acquiring or leasing the property if
it would be of use to them and to explore a coalition that might be
necessary to attain this end, and that the County be requested to con-
sider eliminating the requirement to purchase both properties. The
motion was seconded by Cm Turner and passed by unanimous vote.
em Miller also mentioned the possibility of dedicating much of this
open space and continue to use the Wetmore Ranch for grazing purposes
and public open space.
David Eller, Livermore, stated that he read in the paper that the
County did not have to take any of the bids and that they could
reject them even if the City offers some very good suggestions
as they may have already concluded that the sanitarium is to be
burned and it should be important for every effort to be made to
save most of these buildings as two of them, particularly, are
very attractive and in very good condition.
Cm Tirsell moved that a letter be sent to the County asking that
this be kept in the public domain, seconded by em Miller and passed
by unanimous vote.
CM-28-48
April l, 1974
REPORT RE FORMATION
OF LOCAL CITIZENS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
o
The City Manager reported that a former Councilmember and the
Valley Citizens Advisory Transit Committee have suggested the
formation of a local citizens advisory committee to work on the
problem of providing public transportation and it has been sug-
gested that one member from each of the following committees
serve on the newly established committee:
Livermore-Pleasanton BART Extension Citizens Advisory Committee,
Senior Citizens,
Representation from a students organization,
Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee, and
Good Samaritan (Family Crises Center)
em Futch suggested that the Chamber of Commerce Transportation
Committee be replaced by a member of the League of Women Voters.
Cm Tirsell suggested that if there are any homeowners groups, per-
haps there could be representation from them also so that there
could be broad representation from allover the City.
The City Manager pointed out that if this is just a Livermore
Advisory Committee he would not be concerned about the number
of people on the committee; however, if this is to be a valley-wide
committee there could be a very large group if they allow comparable
membership.
I m Miller felt that the one area not being represented is the lower
income group and would suggest a representative from the CAPE Board
should be included ,and Cm Turner suggested that there be a representa-
tive from CAPE rather than the Good Samaritan Organization.
Cm Miller pointed out that often not all members attend meetings
and there is nothing wrong with having a large number of people serve
on a committee, as it is generally broken down into smaller committees
so that they are more workable.
Cm Futch moved that the Council adopt the City Manager's recommenda-
tion to form a committee to study the transportation situation to
be composed of a member from each of the following committees:
Livermore-Pleasanton BART Extension Citizens Advisory Committee,
Senior Citizens,
Representation from a students organization,
League of Women Voters, and
CAPE
The motion was seconded by Cm Tirsell.
em Miller moved to amend the motion to include that the mechanism
for making appointments will be for the Council to select a name
from a list of three names submitted by each organization, which
died for lack of a second.
Mayor Pritchard called for the question and the motion passed by
unanimous vote.
r
REPORT RE DESIGNATION
OF ALTERNATE REP. FOR
VALLEY WATER MGMT. AGREE.
The City Manager reported that the Valley Water Management Agreement
specifies that an alternate representative must be selected from among
CM-28-49
April l, 1974
(Valley Wtr. Mgmt.)
the City Council members to serve in the absence of either of
the two regular appointees (Cm Futch and Miller) and on motion
of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote, Cm
Turner was designated as the alternate representative to the
Livermore-Amador Valley Water Management Agreement.
REPORT RE MEDEIROS
PARKWAY ACQUISITION
o
The City Manager reported that due to insufficient funds availa-
ble for state funding our application for acquisition of lOO
acres of land along the Medeiros Parkway route allows for the
purchase of approximately only 28.6 acres. The grant is in the
amount of $64,659 and the City must match this amount which is
a provision of the grant. It is anticipated that state funds will
be available in succeeding years so that eventually the project
can be completed and there are sufficient funds in the budget to
match the amount of money being allocated by the state. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing and instruct-
ing the City Manager to proceed with the necessary property appraisal
and negotiated purchases and a resolution authorizing execution
of the project agreement.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote,
the City Manager's recommendation was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 50-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE APPROVING AND PROVIDING FOR THE EXECU-
TION OF A PROJECT AGREEMENT FOR LAND AND WATER
CONSERVATION FUND PROJECT NO. 06-00337 MEDEIROS
PARKWAY ACQUISITION, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESOURCES
AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION.
REPORT RE RESERVATION OF
SEWER CAPACITY FOR INDUS-
TRIAL & COMMERCIAL USE
A report was submitted to the Council by the City Attorney regard-
ing reservation of sewer capacity for industrial and commercial
use which was reviewed by the Council.
Cm Miller asked that the Council consider that the residential .
allocation in our existing sewer capacity be sufficient to cover
only the existing sewer assessment districts plus the rest of the
City that is undeveloped and zoned for development and divide it
up into 5-acre parcels which might be allowed to have a septic
tank and that all the rest be given to industrial and commercial
uses.
Cm Futch stated that he would like to know how many are left, how
much capacity is left and how much industrial and commercial can
be taken care based on the rate we normally accumulate and allow
a sufficient margin. He felt there should be an idea of how much
capacity is left prior to making a judgment.
Some of the contents of the report by the City Attorney were dis-
cussed and the alternatives were also mentioned.
Mr. Parness noted that it is very difficult to forecast the amount
of industrial or commercial that may need to be served through a
preservation program such as this due to so many variables involved.
CM-28-50
April 1, 1974
(re Reserving Sewer
Capacity for Industrial)
o
Cm Futch indicated that the Council would like to know how much
the City is committed for as far as building permits are concerned
for residential development and as far as assessment districts for
residential which would indicate how much is left for anything else.
What Mr. Parness is saying is that it is uncertain what the City
will be getting with what is left because some industries use much
more capacity than others and it would be hard to judge.
Cm Miller felt that we are not looking for a number of users but
capacity for industrial purposes and if one industry comes in and
uses it up because it is the first to come in this would be satisfac-
tory. It would also be alright if lO small industries come in and
use up the capacity.
The staff was directed to present some facts and figures for the
Council's consideration and there was no further discussion of the
matter.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re LAFCO Action re
Spheres of Influence)
Mr. Parness stated that this City Council and staff have been very
concerned about the past action of LAFCO with regard to the Spheres
of Influence boundaries they have set up and that he has been in-
formed by his colleagues that this has been the trend in many parts
of the state and that this agency is making such important decisions
without the assistance of a great deal of technical input. He poin-
ted out that this is no reflection on the board but they are lay
people, primarily, and not planning technicians - at least in our
area. He felt that it would be very appropriate for this Council
to suggest to the Board of Supervisors that they pay for outside
planning and consultant help to be made available to LAFCO as an
aid in making their very important decisions that so drastically
affect the economic and growth welfare of urban centers.
Cm Miller moved to adopt the City Manager's recommendation to
officially make this suggestion to the Board of Supervisors,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and passed unanimously.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(re Industrial Applica-
tion Review by Council)
Cm Turner commented that the staff has been asked to report on all
industrial applications that come to Livermore and asked if there
have been any applications.
Mr. Parness replied that the staff has been asked to make a quarterly
report regarding the industrial applications and that the Planning
Department has prepared a form for recording the applications made.
r
(re Decision of Whether
or not a Report is Desired)
Cm Miller stated that an editorial in the Herald and News had indi-
cated the Council should decide in open Council meetings whether or
not a staff report is going to be prepared on an item and agreed
CM-28-5l
April l, 1974
(Staff Reports)
that it would be appropriate to request a report if the Council
desires one. Also, it never hurts to hear what the staff has to
propose and even though he is sure he would vote against having
a meeting every two weeks it would not be unreasonable to let the
City Manager prepare a report for the Council to review and moved
to allow the staff to prepare a report as to the possibility of
having Council meetings every other week, seconded by Cm Tirsell
and passed by unanimous vote.
,~
\
o
(re Going Out of
Business Sale)
Cm Miller stated that it has been brought to his attention that
there have been examples of businesses advertising "going out of
business" sales which are not actually going out of business.
They are having deliveries made and the going out of business sale
lasts for months rather than a few days. He felt that such a sale
would appear to be fraudulent and if there is an ordinance regarding
this type of thing perhaps there should be some consideration for
using it and if there is not such an ordinance there should probably
be a determination of what the legality is.
Mr. Parness replied that this subject was reviewed in the past
and all kinds of problems were brought to light and as he recalls
an ordinance was passed which only regulated auctions which happen-
ed to have been a subdivision of the major topic but the "quitting
business" sale was deleted due to the problems encountered and the
problems were primarily over definition and regulation.
Cm Miller stated that he views this as taking unfair advantage of
competition with those merchants in the community who are abiding
by the rules and are taking an unfair beating and would like to
see if there could be some way for allowing some equity.
The City Attorney commented that if someone can furnish a state-
ment of the facts he would be happy to see if there is something
that can be done about this type of business under state law and
take the matter to the District Attorney.
(Action re
LAFCO Decision)
Cm Futch commented that the Council should discuss the procedures
that might be taken against the LAFCO decision and suggested that
it be discussed at the next meeting, perhaps in the executive
session that has been scheduled.
(re Gen. Plan
Procedure)
Cm Tirsell wondered if there is some type of staff report available
regarding how the Council should proceed with the General Plan review
since the Steering Committee has heard all final reports and the
Council must adopt the open space report and one more hearing is
scheduled for the Housing Committee.
Mr. Parness reported that under Council direction interest is
being received from a number of Planning Consultant firms that
have been specially selected and would like to recommend a process
for making a selection. Perhaps this could be submitted along
with the reports and can be ready for the Council in a couple of
weeks.
CM-28-52
April 1, 1974
(Alameda County Bi-
centennial Meeting Rep.)
(
\.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the Alameda Bi-centennial Meeting is
being held in the County building in Hayward on Thursday at 4:00 p.m.
and would like to ask Mr. Bradley, the City Manager's Assistant, to
represent the City and get an idea of what is going on and report
back to the Council.
(EPA Hearings in Los Ange-
les - Send City Attorney)
Mayor Pritchard stated that the state Air Resources Board is having
a hearing on April ll, 1974, in Los Angeles, and would like the
Council to give permission for our City Attorney to attend this
hearing. It is very conceivable that a decision may be made to elimi-
nate the residential element as an indirect source of air pollution.
The Council agreed that the residential should be retained as an
indirect source of air pollution and would like Mr. Wharton to plead
our case for us.
Cm Miller moved to send Mr. Wharton to the hearing, seconded by Cm
Turner and which passed by unanimous vote.
(re Letter from
Reliance Indus.
Bevilacqua Tract 26l9)
The City Attorney commented that a letter was received today from
Reliance Industries indicating that they have executed a quit claim
deed turning over all the interests for Tract 2619 (Bevilacqua Tract)
to the Kissell Company so that the Kissell Company will not have
to foreclose to obtain ownership of the property north of I-580 and
the construction and other plans which were contingent upon foreclosure
and possession in early May may be accelerated. The Kissell Company's
deed of trust does not include the park site which was a subject of a
lot of discussion and concern among the residents. We are therefore,
going to ask the Reliance Industries organization to dedicate the
park site and hopefully they will comply with this request.
(re Los Positas Golf
Course Lease Prospect)
Mayor Pritchard commented that the City Manager has received an inquiry
from a corporation regarding the possibility of leasing the Los positas
Golf Course and it is his understanding that the Council will recieve
further information in about two weeks. He felt that it is important
that the records indicate that the Council has taken no action and
has not participated in any such negotiation, has not leased the golf
course or sold it and is vitally interested in protecting the interests
of the citizens of Livermore, as is the City Manager and City staff.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business the Mayor adjourned the
::::: at 1::#1 ~
ATTEST ~tJ-in,,-~yj'IJ'Y~~
i ~j. ty Clerk
, Bivermore California
CM-28-53
_'__.~_..___,._.__.~,_..M"_""'_<~~_~___'~_",,,,,-,_,_.,.".._._._~_.,,__.__..~...__,._ "'_'__"'_'__._.._.,,_,.._..__,.._ ..___,._....~.~_.,_~__."...__.
Regular Meeting of April 8, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on April 8, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:l5 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers 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
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the special meeting of March 29th and
April l, 1974 were approved as submitted. (Cm Miller abstained
from voting on the minutes of March 29th due to his absence at
that meeting)
OPEN FORUM
(Complaint re Injustice
in Rehiring by City)
Danny E. Walkenshaw, 5528 Oakmont Circle, reported to the Council
on what he feels has been an injustice done to him by the City of
Livermore in not rehiring him since he is a former police officer
and current applicant for fireman. He stated that he was a police
officer for nine years and resigned with a satisfactory record and
has passed the tests required for hiring as a fireman. He pointed
out that he knows of four firemen who have been hired since this
time and asked that the Council investigate the hiring practices
taking place within the City of Livermore.
Ray Weingarner, 736 Adams Avenue, President of the Livermore
Firemens Association, presented a letter to the Council endorsing
Danney E. Walkenshaw as a successful applicant for the position
of fireman on the Livermore Fire Department, and read the letter
of endorsement to the City Council which he stated was signed by
all members of the Association with the exception of two members
who were not contacted.
The Mayor explained that this is a personnel matter which the Council
will discuss in an executive session. The matter will not be open
to public discussion.
(Complaint re
Sidewalk Damage)
John Holland, 2376 Avon Place, reported that he moved to Livermore
in June of 1973. His sidewalk was inspected in July of 1973 and
was approved, and that since this time the sidewalk has sunken
about 5 inches. He has been told that Sunset Development posts
a bond for this type of work but that the bond has expired and
that this repair would have to be done at his expense. He feels
that it is still the responsibility of Sunset Development and was
told by the City Attorney's office that he should report the matter
to the City Council.
CM-28-54
April 8, 1974
(re Sidewalk Damage)
Mr. Parness was directed to look into the matter and report back
to the Council with the facts.
~
PUBLIC HEARING RE
CLOSING AND ABANDONMENT
OF PORTION OF SOUTH "Q"
Mayor Pritchard stated that there has been no written testimony
regarding closing a portion of "Q" Street (adjacent to Safeway) and
opened the public hearing to hear objections to the closing and aban-
donment of the portion north of First Street to the Southern Pacific
property. It is recommended that following the close of the public
hearing a resolution be adopted to abandon the street.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded
by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote, the public hearing was closed.
em Turner moved to adopt a resolution to abandon South "Q" Street,
seconded by Cm Miller and passed by unanimous vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 5l-74
A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CLOSING UP AND ABANDONING
OF ALL THAT PORTION OF SOUTH Q STREET IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, AS SAID PORTION OF SAID STREET IS PARTICU-
LARLY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION NO.39-74 OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ON MARCH l8, 1974.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re League Bulletin -
Disclosure Laws)
The City Attorney reported that a bulletin was received from the
League of California Cities indicating that the provisions of the
recently enacted disclosure laws have been suspended until such
time as the Supreme Court decides its constitutionality. The
Council briefly discussed the issue and did decide to file their
statements as a way of showing support for the concept of the law.
(Board of Supervisors
Hearing - Jensen Ranch
EIR Report - Request
for Continuance)
The Air Pollution Study Committee has indicated that the County Board
of Supervisors will be hearing a proposal for development of some
l797 homes in the Crow Canyon, Castro Valley area. An appeal was
submitted from several committees and associations regarding the
evaluation of the preliminary development plan.
The Council discussed the proposal briefly and decided to request
the Board of Supervisors to forward to the City a copy of the EIR
so that our Study Committee could examine its contents and further,
that the hearing be continued to provide time for assessment of the
report and an opportunity for submittal of our comments.
CM-28-55
April 8, 1974
(Discussion re "Going
Out of Business" Sales)
Cm Turner indicated his interest in the possibility that the
sign ordinance should be reviewed to determine if anything
could be included which would regulate the "going out of busi-
ness" sales and this type of activity.
(re Appointments to
the Transit Committee)
Discussion was held with regard to the possibility of Council
appointments to the Transit Committee rather than to request
the stated organizations to submit their representatives.
The City Manager informed the Council that he had already noti-
fied all organizations and after some discussion on the subject,
including a motion made and withdrawn to throw open nominations
to the whole community, it was decided to review the appointments
in one year and to remove those members not attending meetings.
A motion was made by Cm Miller, seconded by em Turner, which
passed unanimously, to adopt a Council policy that all committees
and commissions be appointed by the Council, unless they are desig-
nated as "volunteer" committees.
The City Manager informed the Council that all committee members
would be briefed on the Council's concerns at the time of the
organizational meeting.
(Real Estate Signs)
Cm Miller expressed concern regarding the use of A-frame signs
advertising real estate sales and also the use of flags. It was
suggested that the police officers should be picking up illegal
signs.
ADJOURNMENT
The Council then adjourned at 9:00 p.m. to an executive session
to consider appointments to the Beautification Committee and Plan-
ning Commission and other personnel matters.
ATTEST
Cl.ty Clerk
Livermore, California
APPROVE
CM-28-56
Regular Meeting of April l5, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on April 15,
1974, 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: Councilmembers 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
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of April 8, 1974, were approved,
as submitted.
OPEN FORUM
(Request to Serve on
Beautification Committee)
Elizabeth Mondon, 5873 Singing Hills, stated that she would like
to be considered as a candidate for a member to the Beautification
Committee and that she has submitted her letter to the Mayor.
P.H. RE NORTH FRONT
ROAD ANNEX #l
The City Manager noted that if, after the public hearing has been
closed, it is determined that a majority protest has not been
received for the annexation of "North Front Road Annex No. l"
the Council may proceed with a resolution declaring no majority
protest and an ordinance of annexation may be introduced. He
then gave an oral report concerning the history leading to the
annexation of this area, noting that the annexation is for unin-
habited territory north of I-580 and would be highway commercial
in nature.
At this time the Mayor declared the public hearing open.
It was noted that no written correspondence of protest has been
received regarding annexation of the property and none was orally
voiced: therefore, on motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner
and by unanimous vote, the public hearing was closed.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, a resolution declaring no majority protest was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 52-74
RESOLUTION FINDING AND DECLARING THAT A MAJORITY PROTEST
HAS NOT BEEN MADE AT THE PROTEST HEARING HELD PURSUANT TO
SECTION 35313 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIF-
ORNIA ON "NORTH FRONT ROAD ANNEX NO. l".
Cm Miller moved to introduce the ordinance annexing the area known
as "North Front Road Annex No. I", seconded by Cm Turner which
passed by unanimous vote, and the title was read by the City Attorney.
CM-28_57
April 15, 1974
P .H. RE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT (Circulation
Element)
The Planning Director explained the changes proposed in the General
Plan for the Circulation Element area bounded by First Street,
parallel to and 200 ft. north, Western Pacific Railroad right-of-
way and Arroyo Seco and I-580.
Cm Miller wondered why the light industrial across from the residen-
tial area had been changed to industrial and Mr. Musso explained
that this could be a zoning matter and be light or heavy industrial.
This was followed by discussion regarding the distinction between
light and heavy industrial and the comment made that it is anticipa-
ted that in time the distinction will be removed from the General
Plan.
There was also discussion regarding multiple zoning near the rail-
road tracks.
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing for receiving public
testimony on the proposed General Plan amendments.
John Allen, resident at the corner of Martin and First Street,
stated that in his opinion the area between First Street and
the railroad tracks should be commercial zoning because of the
amount of traffic on First Street and due to the fact that there
is some commercial located there now. The size and shape of the
properties involved do not lend themselves to multiple development
and the heavy traffic and noise should be a consideration. He
suggested that some type of use be permitted that could operate
during the day and close during the night so that the noise factor
could be tolerated and pointed out that the noise from the trains
is a nuisance and there is talk of placing the two railroads together
which will create twice as much noise. He stated that this is not
residential property - it is highway frontage, on a highway, adjacent
to a railroad and should not be developed residentially, and would
like to protest the Planning Commission's findings.
There being no further oral comments voiced, on motion of Cm Turner,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote the public hearing
was closed.
Cm Miller stated that he owns a piece of property on Martin Avenue
and any discussion of Mr. Allen's property or the Hosker Lane area
would be a conflict of interest if he were to take part and would
therefore decline to comment or vote on these parcels.
Cm Futch moved to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation
for all the areas discussed, seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Tirsell stated that most of the people who spoke at the public
hearing held by the Planning Commission were in favor of retaining
the residential use for the property north of First Street and would
be opposed to any use that would commercialize this property. The
Planning Commission was concerned about this and felt that the
residential character should be preserved.
Cm Miller felt that the access problems make it very unlikely that
the properties north of First Street would become commercial and
feels that it is not necessary to continue to generate highway
commercial at every interchange. With respect to the industrial
(~\
\
CM-28-58
April IS, 1974
(Discussion re General
Plan Amendment)
c
area, he felt that the three industiral zoning categories with
different coverage should remain and if I Zoning is allowed it
will mean that the City will be pressured for the highest intensity
use possible.
There was more discussion regarding the three industrial zoning
categories which Cm Miller and Tirsell felt were necessary,
while the Planning Director defended the proposal to use an I Zoning
that would be all inclusive.
Cm Miller felt that allowing commercial development along First
Street such as the approval of the furniture store, Codiroli Ford,
and Diamond International, was not the wisest choice the Council
could have made and considers it a mistake to continue with in-
creasing the commercial development in this area. He stated that
he would argue that these properties remain ID.
Cm Turner stated that he would agree with the comment made by Cm
Miller, in part, in that a portion of the area has already been
allowed commercial development and feels that this certain area
may as well continue to develop commercially but would like to stop
the other areas from obtaining conditional use permits or variances
for commercial development when they are not in a commercial zone.
He mentioned that in considering the Judson property he feels that
commercial would be the best use for the land.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the Judson property will have a hard
time being developed as commercial due to the access problems and
particularly if the Arroyo Seco is developed and would therefore
suggest that this not be changed from the current zoning planned.
He felt that the I District should be for light industrial and
that the pattern for commercial has already been established in
the area of Codiroli Ford and would agree with Cm Turner that this
area should be allowed commercial development. He felt that the
portion designated RG-l6 for multiple dwellings is a bad choice as
he would not live there and feels that others would not want to
either - this property is adjacent to the Western Pacific Railroad
tracks and parallel to First Street which is a highway.
_;-x~~~~
em Futch moved that the area shown to beeemmeraial (south of First
Street from the railroad tracks to the back lots of Trevarno Roa~
be left as ID Zoning, seconded by Cm Turner,c.J~..c.4: ~.L~~. r'
em Tirsell commented that when the CS Zone was propos~d it-~as done
with the understanding that there are many uses which require large
amounts of land, such as automobile sales and that CS was developed
to screen certain uses, such as retail sales, and feels that this
is the best use for this property.
~
em Miller stated that he finds the argument about protecting these
areas from commercial development by requiring a CUP to be very
depressing because he has seen case after case in which it has been
argued as to why a CUP should be granted for this business and that.
He feels that it is very hard for a Council to withstand the pressure
put on them for approval of a CUP when the time comes and pointed out
that such was the case when Codiroli Ford was allowed development on
First Street rather than the area designated for this type of use
out by the Portola I-580 interchange.
CM-28-59
'"..u...____..._"......u........_________.._______.___..__.._____._,_.._,,__
April l5, 1974
(re Gen. Plan Amend.)
David Eller, 3797 Oregon Way, felt that it would have been nice
if all the automobile agencies had located in one area and asked
where the next area of pressure will be when all the commercial
has been filled up in the area proposed for commercial development
on First Street. He pointed out that he was once a resident of
Livermore and has been away for a few years and that an area that
was once one of the nicest areas has become ugly because of ticky
tacky development that was allowed to occur. ~~~~~
At this time the Council voted on Cm Futch's ~~~ailed ~
2-3 with Cm Futch, Turner and Tirsell dissenting.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to resolve the Judson property
question once and for all and that in a moment he will make a mo-
tion to remove that parcel from the table. He stated that the
part that bothers him regarding the Judson parcel is that it was
turned into commercial, in the County, by Mr. Judson when he sold
off the parcel for a gasoline station and commented that the first
law of zoning practices is that you never reward someone for his
own mistakes or creating his own problems and that the Council
should perhaps consider not having this as commercial property.
He then moved to remove that parcel (on First St. next to I-580)
from the table, seconded by Mayor Pritchard, and passed 3-2 with
Cm Futch and Tirsell dissenting.
Mayor Pritchard noted that there is a motion on the floor at this
time to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation and there
was discussion regarding the legal point of order for making a mo-
tion to remove something from the table when a motion exists re-
garding the item.
Cm Futch stated that he would like the legal point of order straight-
ened out and the City Clerk explained that taking something from
the table takes precedence over everything else so the procedure
was proper.
Cm Miller moved to amend the main motion to state that the area
on the west side of First Street, just south of I-580 (the Judson
property) not be labled commercial on our General Plan amendment
with the exception of that parcel which already exists and has
been developed commercial, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Turner stated that he feels the property zoned residential is
an improper use for that area and would be in favor of commercial.
Cm Futch commented that it was his hope that if the applicant
could show satisfaction of the conditions for rezoning the area
to commercial that he would be in favor of this but feels there
is no choice at this point but to vote for the amendment.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to explain that there may be
many such areas in Planning Unit l2 that are unsuitable for resi-
dential development but there are development rights associated
with them which can be sold and this is one of the parcels that
can fall within this category. The property owner could sell
the development rights for development elsewhere in Planning Unit
#l2.
At this time the Council voted on the amendment which passed 4-l
with em Turner dissenting.
CM-28-60
April 15, 1974
(Gen. Plan)
(
At this time Cm Turner called for the question on the main motion
and Cm Miller commented that if the Council could separate the
portion of property regarding multiple dwellings (near the tracks)
he would be able to vote on the main motion and could abstain from
any motion on the multiples.
Cm Futch moved that the Council adopt the recommendation of the
Planning Commission for'RC l6\~r/the parce~ nea~ the railroad
tracks, seconded by Cm Turner.~~>4t.7>~~~~
Cm Tirsell moved the question, Cm Turner withdrew his second on
the motion and Cm Tirsell withdrew the motion to move the question.
Mayor Pritchard repeated that this parcel recommended RG-16 near
the railroad tracks is the worst place in the City for development
of multiples. ~~~~ I
At this time the Council voted 3-1 in favor of em Futc~~~l'~~
to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation for . for
the parcel adjacent to the railroad tracks, with Mayor Pritchard
dissenting.and Cm Miller abstaining (due to his conflict of interest
in owning property in this area).
At this time the Council voted on the main motion, including the
amendment, to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation which
passed 4-l with Mayor pritchard dissenting.
The motions were followed by discussion regarding the bike path
after a brief explanation of the proposal by the Planning Depart-
ment Director.
At this time the Mayor opened the public hearing to hear public
testimony regarding the bike path proposal.
Glen Dahlbacka, ll38 Aberdeen Avenue, stated that several streets
come to an end on the arroyos and wondered what plans have been
made to connect the bike paths so that there is a continuous pattern
where the street ends and the bike trails which Mr. Musso explained
is a different case than the matter at hand, but the answer to Mr.
Dahlbacka's question is, no, there is no corridor from the end of
Florence, for example, to College Avenue. Mr. Dahlbacka explained
that he uses the area between these streets quite often and it is
really a problem and would like to see some type of connection
considered.
Robert Wendt, 319 Elvira Street, asked the Council to take into
consideration that as a general rule the two-way bike paths are
hazardous but not to close the door regarding them.
At this time the public hearing was closed on motion of Cm Turner,
seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote.
Cm Tirsell moved to adopt the recommendation of the Planning Com-
mission regarding the bike paths, seconded by Cm Turner which
passed by unanimous vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 58-74
RESOLUTION APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ZONING
P.H. RE ZONING OF
ARROYO ANNEX NO. 3
The Mayor opened the public hearing regarding the assignment of a
zoning category to Arroyo Annex No. 3 and an enlarged area of con-
sideration including property contiguous and south of the subject
annexation which was acquired for park purposes. It is the recom-
mendation of the Planning Commission that it be zoned "E" District
(Education and Institutions).
CM-28-6l
April l5, 1974
(re Zoning of
Arroyo Annex #3)
There being no public or written testimony, on motion of Cm Futch,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote, the hearing was closed.
Cm Tirsell moved to introduce and file the ordinance zoning the
recently annexed property to "E" District, seconded by Cm Miller
which passed by unanimous vote.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Designating
Signatories
Each time the signatories change in any way in regard to method
of depositing City funds, new instructions must be filed with
the bank for which the following resolutions were adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 53-74
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.
RESOLUTION NO. 54-74
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MECHANICAL METHOD FOR SIGNING
CHECKS, SELECTING A DEPOSITORY AND PROVIDING FOR
THE NAMES OF THE OFFICERS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS
AND THE METHOD OF SIGNING THEREOF. (Aircraft Hangar
Facilities Fund Loan Account).
Report re Alarm and
Communication System
A report was received from the Fire Chief regarding the need for
fire alarm modifications due to revisions in the communication
system at the new police administration building in addition to
a report regarding financing of the system which was submitted
by the Director of Finance. It is recommended that a motion be
adopted authorizing expenditure of $5,031 for this improvement and
funding in accordance with the report.
Report re Proposed County
Federal Aid Urban System Program
The City Manager reported regarding a proposed County Federal Aid
Urban System Program. The procedure as recommended would comply
with federal requirements for the designation of highway projects
for a federal urban aid system. The recommendation of the County
is that the current Alameda County Transportation Advisory Com-
mittee be the designated agency for federal programs and on which
all cities are represented together with the County, District IV,
Department of Transportation, MTC, AC Transit and BART. It is
recommended that a resolution be adopted approving the procedure
for Federal Aid Urban System Program.
RESOLUTION NO. 55-74
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PROCEDURE FOR
FEDERAL AID URBAN SYSTEM PROGRAM
Report re Claim Damage
Tidewater Sand & Gravel Co.
A report received from the City Attorney regarding the Tidewater
'Sand & Gravel Comoanv indicated that the City has continually
CM-28-62
April IS, 1974
(re Claim Damage)
requested payment for damages suffered to our golf course by virtue
of defective materials received from this vendor in the amount of
$5,652.28 and no payment has been received. It is recommended that
a motion be adopted authorizing legal proceedings.
(-
"
Report re No. Mines Rd
Improvements - Ed Hutka
A report from the Public Works Director explained that the new
industrial building recently completed on No. Mines Road was done
under County jurisdiction but the property has just been annexed to
the City, therefore the need for an agreement which would provide
for the full public works improvements along the street frontage in
accordance with City standards and the reservation of the necessary
right-of-way for street and eventual track separation structure and
bonds for such improvements as well. It is recommended that such
an agreement be authorized.
Report re One-hour
Parking Zone - Livermore
Memorial Chapel
It is recommended that the Council approve the establishment of
a one-hour parking zone at 3070 East Avenue along the frontage of
the Livermore Memorial Chapel as the spaces are needed for the
business activities.
RESOLUTION NO. 56-74
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 129-72
BY THE INCLUSION OF 70 FT. OF FRONTAGE AT
3070 EAST AVENUE AS LIMITED PARKING AREAS
Communication from County
Resurfacing of Vasco Rd
A communication has been received from the County of Alameda Public
Works Department advising that plans and specifications are being
prepared for the resurfacing of Vasco Road from North Front Street
to the Livermore City Limit scheduled for this summer.
Communication from
Beautification Comm. re
Landscaping SE Corner
First St. & So. Livermore
A communication was received from the Beautification Committee re
landscaping of the southeast corner of First St. and So. Livermore
Avenue.
Cm. Tirsell commented that at the time the Planning Commission
looked at the proposal there was provision for a screened parking
area and wondered if some type of parking could be provided and
if the Beautification Committee could make a recommendation.
~'
( Mr. Parness stated that he had intended for the Council to discuss,
in detail, the landscaping for this whole corner during the budget
session, but since the state is working so rapidly, he would like
the Council to discuss it at the next meeting.
CM-28-63
.__..".~.".---.__..--,....._,,---.-......_-,-_._--,._,.-~---~~-----"'~'---~___"_"'_'_'_'_.",m_.__._..
April 15, 1974
Communication from Brown and Caldwell
Water Reclamation Plant Constr. Cost
A communication was received from Brown and Caldwell Consulting
Engineers giving a cost estimate for the Livermore Water Reclamation
Plant Stage 3 Improvements.
Minutes - Various
Minutes were received from the various Boards and Committees as
follows:
Beautification Committee Meeting of March 6
Airport Advisory Committee Meeting of April I
Housing Authority Board Meetings of March 5, II and l3
Approval of Consent Calendar
A motion was made by Cm. Miller, seconded by Cm. Turner, to approve
the items on the Consent Calendar including the resolutions, with
the exception of Items 2.2, 2.8 (b) and 2.7 which were removed for
later discussion. The motion was approved unanimously; however,
Mayor Pritchard abstained from Res. No. 56-74.
RECESS
After a short recess the meeting resumed with all Councilmembers
present.
AIRPORT-GOLF COURSE SIGN
By Council directive the staff was instructed to investigate the
Airport-Golf Course directional sign and reports that if the sign
must be removed and replaced, the cost of a new sign structure would
approximate $5,000. It is felt that the sign is purely directional
in nature, is considered to be quite attractive and would be costly
to remove and replace, and the staff urged that the City Council once
again approve the maintenance of the existing sign.
Cm. Turner stated that although the City does not have to abide by
the sign regulations legally, he felt that the sign should be re-
moved although he did not think the $5,000 figure was correct and
that it could be replaced for much less. Cm. Turner moved that the
sign be abated within 30 days and ask the Beautification Committee
to submit a drawing or design for Council approval, together with
some cost estimates excluding labor, which he felt could be provided
by the City, and hopefully keeping the price within the $500 range.
Cm. Miller seconded the motion, but would amend the motion that the
design be approved by the Design Review Committee as well as the
Beautification Committee, which Cm. Turner agreed to.
Cm. Futch stated he disagreed primarily because of the cost and
questioned the City Manager regarding the cost of the proposed
sign, which Mr. Parness stated to be $1500 for material alone.
Cm. Futch continued that he viewed the sign as more of an entrance
into the City and serves a very large facility and felt that the
sign was in proportion to the area it serves and was a reasonable
size.
Cm. Miller stated that the proposed sign had been designed by the
City staff and might cost that much, but he felt an adequate sign
would not cost that much. He felt we had no choice but to abate the
sign.
CM-28-64
April l5, 1974
(re Golf Course Sign)
Mrs. Elizabeth Mondon who had written to the Council regarding the
removal of this sign, stated she could not see that a sign which
would conform to the sign ordinance would cost anywhere near the
$5,000 figure given.
Cm. Turner suggested that perhaps the Design Review Committee could
draw up the design for the sign and this was included as part of the
motion.
Cm. Tirsell also suggested that perhaps they could use some of the
materials from the present sign.
A vote was taken on the motion which passed 4-l with Cm. Futch
dissenting.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
LOCAL JITNEY SERVICE
A petition is pending before the PUC by some local residents for
a permit to operate a charter type bus or jitney service within
the City. Specified routes and charges are to be made with intra-
city piCkup points for the morning run at the laboratory.
Mr. Parness explained the routes proposed for the service and there
would be eight or nine pickup and deposit points along the routes.
This would require a permit from the City if they can clear state
approval. The Police and Engineering Departments have been re-
quested to comment, and the Police Chief stated that the service
is limited and a system that could serve the high schools, Spring-
town, and the business district would be far more desirable.
The Public Works Director recommended that the pickup and dropoff
points be engineered for minimum conflict, and that all costs for
signing and benches at these points be at the operator's expense.
He felt that the proposed routes looked good from a traffic stand-
point.
Mayor Pritchard remarked that he did not feel it was necessary to
have signs for jitney service.
Cm. Turner questioned why the routes did not extend to the north
side of the freeway as many people in that area also work at the
LLL and Sandia laboratories.
Cm. Miller wanted to know who the principals are in the venture.
Mr. Bob Anderson, 4142 Florida Court, stated they based their routes
on a survey conducted by the Lab so they would serve as many people
as possible with their minimum service. The Lab and Sandia are fur-
nishing them with letters attesting to the critical nature of the
situation regarding transportation. They are asking the Council
for a letter backing the nature of the situation - not backing them
as private individuals, just stating there is a need for this service.
(
I
Mr. Gigliotti, 3979 Pestana Way, stated he was Mr. Anderson's partner
in the venture. When asked what type of vehicles would be used,
he replied they have two vehicles, one of which is a 36 passenger
school bus design; the other is a coach type bus.
Cm. Futch asked if there would be any problem if this is approved
and they later have a more comprehensive transit system, and Mr.
Parness stated he did not feel it would be incompatible even if this
system were to continue as a purely localized system.
CM-28-65
April l5, 1974
(re Bus Service to Lab)
rtr. Anderson read a paragraph from their application to the PUC
which indicated that if the project is successful, it is their
intent to expand the commuter routes by using the equipment in the
off commute hours of the day as a public carrier.
Mr. Anderson again asked the Council if they would be willing to
write a letter supporting the concept, and Mr. Parness stated that
if the Council wished the staff to write such a letter that it be
made contingent upon the applicants eventually filing with the City
an application to be granted a permit for these services according
to the local rules and regulations, and that their route stops and
pickups and any facilities or appurtenances they want to use be
subject to the approval of the Police Department and Director of
Public Works.
Cm. Miller moved that the staff be directed to write an appropriate
letter, supporting in principle the application for service together
with the conditions stated by the City Manager. Motion was seconded
by Cm. Tirsell.
Glenn Dahlbacka, ll38 Aberdeen, asked if a letter from the Council
might influence the rates that would be charged.
The City Attorney explained that the PUC would approve a rate struc-
ture, and rather than getting into the business arrangements proposed,
he felt the thrust of any letter to the PUC should emphasize the
need for the service rather than an endorsement of the application
or route structure or anything else. In answer to Cm. Futch's
question he remarked that these permits are subject to annual re-
newal in the event there is any duplication of service.
Mr. Gigliotti stated that with regard to the rate structure, they
had to submit one to the PUC when they submit their final application.
PUC controls them as far as raising the preliminary rate structure.
Stephen Paich, 335 Covellite Lane, asked who would be funding these
buses, and was told that it was private enterprise.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time and passed unanimously.
REPORTS RE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS RE LAVWMA
(Joint Powers Agreement)
The Regional Water Quality Control Board staff, including their
legal counsel, has suggested several changes in the existing joint
powers agreement. Most of these matters have been discussed by
the LAVWMA Board and referred to the respective agencies for con-
sideration of amendments.
Councilman Futch explained that there were a number of changes that
were minor in nature and were just clarification as to what was
meant by the wording and were not controversial, and he did not feel
there was any need to discuss those. Two changes were more signifi-
cant - l) definition of the electorate, which had been defined
as the separate electorate of each jurisdiction, so that approval
of an item would have to go to each jurisdiction separately. The
Regional Water Agency decided that the electorate be defined as
consisting of the entire valley which was adopted by five of the six
members of the agency, with Councilman Miller dissenting. He did
not feel the City would be placed in jeopardy by going along with
this since we have approximately 50% of the population. The other
item which created a little more discussion was the amount of money
to be expended before going to the vote of the people. Previously
CM-28-66
April 15, 1974
(Amendments re LAVWMA)
the wording had been $2.5 million inclusive and the Regional Water
Board suggested that the wording be changed just by changing the word
"inclusive" to "exclusive". Councilman Futch explained the signifi-
cance of this change, however he felt that if support of the schools,
future city halls, parks and so forth~Qst go to the vote of the people,
we should go to the vote of the people for other items in the same
manner, with approximately the same costs involved, so he proposed
$l million exclusive, which would allow an $8 million facility to be
built without going to the voters. He further felt that there was
no question but that the City had to meet the standards dictated by
the Regional Water Quality Control Board and did not think that the
$l million exclusive would allow any funds over what would be re-
quired to meet those standards for the present population. His pro-
posal failed to get support and Councilman Miller felt that sum was
too large to approve, and the other members of the agency felt it
was too small, and the end result was that the wording should be
"$2 million exclusive", and that this proposal should be presented
to each jurisdiction,/~~~n~ is now asking for Council approval. He
~cerned that ~he~e~l approve something so large that it will
dictate unreasonable gro~however he expects that the growth rate
will be reduced over what it has been in the past. BASSA's response
to this concern was that we could have a consultant come in and review
or change the plan if the growth rate is reduced. The questions
that need to be resolved by the Council are whether we approve the
change in the electorate to include the entire electorate of the
valley instead of a separate electorate of each jurisdiction, and
the question of the amount we would agree to change in our agreement
without going to the vote of the people.
Cm. Miller agreed that Cm. Futch had summarized the situation quite
accurately, and presented the issues which the Council is to consider.
Cm. Miller stated he would like to make an additional comment about
what the underlying problems are and why there is this pressure upon
them even to consider making any changes after it took about nine
months to make up the contract. The reason there is discussion
about changing the contract one month after it was signed is because
the Regional Water Quality Control Board, its staff and the attorneys
for the Board, who are the same as the attorneys for the State Board,
is that they do not like the contract and it is unsatisfactory to
them so the local agencies must change. Cm. Miller questioned if
they have to change it, and if they do not, what will happen. If the
local agencies do have to make changes, he wondered if there was any
possibilities of appeal. There is a threat to bring in BASSA and
have them take over, but they cannot do that without being invited
by a local agency. It is conceivable that the Zone 7 or the County
might do that, but if there already exists an agency designed to
handle it, he suspected that the legal road by which BASSA would come
in would be a very rocky one if they chose to fight it. There is a
case for saying they have worked out an agency which will do what
the local jurisdictions claim it will do and the regional agencies
do not have full right to make the local jurisdictions change. They
could also say they are not going to make any changes at the request
of the Regional Board because there is a mechanism for appeal, namely
to the State Board as they have overruled Regional Board many times.
His argument at the LAVWMA meeting was that they should stick with
the contract and appeal to the State Board, however that was not the
opinion of the other representatives as they are concerned as to what
might happen if they do not make the changes. Cm. Miller Felt they
should hang with the signed contract, appeal to the State Board,
and in the meantime do all the things the time schedule requires.
Mayor Pritchard asked if we pursued this course and the other
jurisdictions did not, where would we stand, and Cm. Miller replied
that as he saw it the contract cannot be changed unless we sign it;
also there is one member of the VCSD Board who does not want to see
any changes and is willing to fight it and he felt that the VCSD
representatives would prefer to have the contract left as it was,
but they are worried about the pressure.
CM-28-67
April l5, 1974
(Amendments re LAVWMA)
Crn. Futch stated we do not have to agree to a change in the contract,
but BASSA is holding a hearing on May 15 to determine who will be the
agency to handle the water management for the valley, and they may
reject the joint agency which they have formed unless they show a .
reasonable attitude, so he felt there was a risk involved if thefett
do not agree to the changes. (~~L-/lIIWNIf~
Mayor Pritchard asked the City Attorney who they would appeal to~
they did not like BASSA's decision.
Mr. Wharton stated that the time table and the circumstances are
critical as he sees it as an observer. The Regional Water Quality
Control Board meets tomorrow and is expecting a progress report from
the Water Management Agency as to how far we have come since their
last meeting when we gained a thirty day reprieve from extinction,
and they expect enough of an operating plan by a month from tomorrow
so they can cast their lot with us. The Regional Board does have
options as to who they will recognize to deal with the water pro-
blems in the valley, and the local jurisdictions have offered a parti-
cular mechanism for doing that. The attorneys for the Regional and
State Boards feel that the terms of the agreement are not as tight
as they would like even though they happen to be geared to the
political jurisdictions in the valley, but those agencies who are
uncomfortable with the language are the ones who will bestow the
funding. So we may have an agreed upon satisfactory document creating
an agreed upon satisfactory agency that will never be eligible for
one thin dime. Some of the efforts at negotiation have led to the
compromise explained by Cm. Futch, but there is no assurance that
language will necessarily be satisfactory. Under the existing law
BASSA is the most logical agency to deal with the valley water
management problem because they are established by state law to do
just that and they are under their own legislation and by direction
of the State Board to hold a hearing on May IS to determine some of
the considerations that must be weighed in deciding who can run a
satisfactory valley water management program. That has been dictated
by the State Board in a resolution and it seems that the local juris-
dictions are being challenged to prove our serious intention to deal
with the problems as a unitary body, and that is the whole point.
The areas cited by Councilman Futch are those where we needed more
demonstration of a unitary view of the problem. with respect to
BASSA's authority, we have no prescribed appeal, and if he might
describe it this way we are in a position of competition with them,
and the question is which one will be qualified when they award the
funds.
The Mayor questioned the possibility of going to court and the
City Attorney explained that he is not sanguine about the prospects
of challenging the Regional Board as nobody has the right to a grant
to run a program - it is a matter of qualifying and if for some
reason one does not qualify you cannot really sue the state for
one. If the rules are unreasonable and unfair as well as discrim-
inatory there may be a chance for a suit but he stated that he does
not see this to be the case. It would appear that although the
guidelines are not crystal clear they are reasonable and are inten-
ded to help this agency be funded. A consideration must be made as
to whether we wish to bend far enough to be funded and if we are
losing more than we are gaining by doing so.
Cm Miller stated that the meeting with the Regional Board tomorrow
has to do with timetables and how we are getting started with our
CM-28-68
April 15, 1974
(Amendments re LAVWHA)
water management plan and the same thing is true of the meeting to
be held on the lst of May. It is true that these schedules are
pressing but those things which are heavily pressing have to do
with actually getting to work on the plans. As far as the contract,
as long as we are doing what are required of us, nobody can argue
that the contract is impeding the progress. Secondly, it is true
that LAVWMA could become an agency that is never funded but as
pointed out it is the State Water Board that does the funding.
The Regional Board is only advisory in nature and the State Board
has the final authority and does the funding, and is the reason
he has suggested that while we are working through the Water Manage-
ment Plan the question of the contract can still be appealed to the
State Board explaining the reasons we wish to retain our contract
for use for water management in the Valley. It is true that we
may have to concede something to begin with and the suggestion made
by Cm Futch for the three electorates may not be as simple as what
Cm Futch has indicated. He stated that many of these things can be
taken care of by majority vote and any two of the electorates at
this point could out vote a third one which could mean that two
of the agencies could provide a project which has no value to the
third and force the third to pay for part of the project. He
felt there is merit in retaining the three electorates but if we
have to make a concession this may be one to make but feels that
we should not concede on the size of the project. He felt that
a capital project of any size should be put to the vote of the
people and this argument could be taken to the State Board without
the possibility of being shot down. He urged that we follow the
process of appeal to the State Board and say to them that we may
concede on the three electorates as LAVWMA is willing to do even
though he is personally opposed to such a concession but if such
is necessary we could concede. We should not concede a thing on
the $2~ million, inclusive, and this is worth taking to the State
Board and we can be polite in dealing with the state and Regional
Board.
Cm Futch moved that the Council approve the changes of the
electorate to consist of the electorate of the entire valley
instead of that of the separate electorate of each jurisdiction
and to formally approve the miscellaneous languange changes that
have been composed by the City Attorney on everything except for
the item regarding the amount, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Milo Nordyke, 2143 Chateau Way, wondered if the wording "elector-
ate of the Valley" is the amendment the Regional Board is suggest-
ing or the electorate of the three jurisdictions and Cm Futch
explained that he believes this is the electorate of the three
jurisdictions which the City Attorney commented is correct.
At this time the Council adopted the motion by a 4-l vote with
em Miller dissenting.
Cm Miller moved that the City of Livermore continue the "$2.5
million inclusive" for the time period it takes LAVWMA to appeal
to the State Board, seconded by Cm Turner for discussion purposes.
(~
I
Mayor Pritchard stated that he intends to vote for this motion be-
cause he feels it is much more critical than the last motion and
that it is very important for the City to be able to protect
the citizens of Livermore from action suggested by the Regional
Board. Even though a little more than 80% of the money will be
CM-28-69
.-.----.-..--....... - .'.-" " _.-".......__..._-,.._----~-_._._~...,.~--"-_...~---_.~_..-..--._._.-...__."-------_..-.._~_.~..__....,..-._.,,-...._-_.._--,~_.".-
April lS, 1974
(~endments re LAVWMA)
funded outside of the City but this money is still taxpayers'
money and regardless of the cost of the project the people should
still have a say as to how this money should be spent.
Cm Turner felt that representatives are sent to serve on the board
and in his opinion they should have some power and that it is not
necessary to put everything to the vote of the people.
The City Attorney explained that he would like to clarify something
about the dollar figure involved and stated that the LAVWMA Board
(which includes six elected officials - two from each jurisdiction)
has the power to place anything on the ballot it wishes and may take
action up to whatever the set amount is without placing it on the
ballot, but it must place on the ballot anything which represents a
local contribution over $2 million, so the discretion of the
LAVWMA Board may be exercised on matters where less than $2 million
in local funds is involved.
Cm Miller commented that one of the VCSD members said that she
would never consider a big project without submitting it to the
voters (one of the board members) but the point is she may not
be there two years from now when there is a $20 million dollar
project. He pointed out that the problem with the $20 million
dollar project that does not go to the vote of the people is that
people who are not directly connected to the voters through LAVWMA
can get the first stage of a Doolan Canyon project started despite
the fact that it may not be the right way to go. The way these
contracts may be funded other than bonds are very high sewer service
charges which would be required to pay for the project if the high
growth anticipated to fund the Doolan Canyon project does not occur.
Since the growth rate is expected to be lower and since the state
is assuming lower growth rates because of the air quality question
we can expect to have enormously high sewer service charges or to
have to build sewer plants and spend capital money to get the growth
to relieve the pain of the cost of this project. There should be
some way the people will have a say in what they are going to have
to pay for and was the reason the $2.5 million inclusive was added.
Cm Futch pointed out that BASSA is going to make a decision on
May l5th and means that we do not have unlimited time to come
to some conclusion and feels that we really have lost the oppor-
tunity to get others to go along with our original proposal and
in view of the fact the April l5th date is approaching we had
better look for another compromise or go along with the $2 million
dollar figure or we will receive an unfavorable recommendation from
BASSA to the Regional Water Board about our funding and we will not
receive the funding.
The City Attorney felt that one aspect of the joint powers agreement
that has not been discussed should be mentioned because it offers
another choice in the event of discontent with the course of events,
and that is the provision for withdrawal from the joint powers
agency.
The City Attorney commented that at this point the only considera-
tion is regarding a structure for making a decision and there is
no preconceived decision built into the structure which is being
recommended, it is natural that some decisions will be won and
CM-28-70
April IS, 1974
(Amendments re LAVWMA)
I
(
some lost, just as on any deliberative body; however, the changes
being discussed tonight go only to the structure of the organization
and the way the local government will participate in it and does
not necessarily commit the joint powers agency or any of the cities
to a particular project. With a withdrawal provision, anyone of
the jurisdictions can withdraw if they are unhappy with the course
of decisions actually made when the water management options are
presented.
Cm Miller stated that this is exactly the point - the state wants
the withdrawal provisions removed also, and the City Attorney felt
that there should be some means for withdrawal.
The City Manager felt that it is doubtful that something will be
staged surreptitiously because the entire capital investment of
this newly formed agency is going to be subject to the severe
monitoring and guidance of the Regional Board and State Board
together with BASSA and they are not going to allow any such
practice of getting around any provision which might be inserted
to subvert the intent of the contract. He added that the approach
of the Regional Board was that these kind of mechanisms must be strong
and properly worded. There are five other such agreements that have
been implemented, and reportedly, ours in their assessment is the
weakest that they have looked at and for some of the reasons that
were listed by the State Attorney. They intend to see that the weak
points are erased or modified substantially. He pointed out that
this is the attitude of the Regional Board staff and he would expect
that this view would be transmitted to the State Board staff. There
is precedent that they can point to such as the San Francisco Bay
Area, in which other agencies are operating with very stringent regu-
lations.
em Miller stated that the Regional Board does not want a withdrawal
provision and if we give in then any protection we could possibly
have would be gone. The question of withdrawal is unresolved and
will remain unresolved at the time of the BASSA hearing and if we
appeal on the $2.5 million dollar, inclusive, vs. $2.5 million
dollars, exclusive, it will also be unresolved at the time of the
hearing so the point and motion is not that we will never agree
to anything except $2.5 million dollars, inclusive but says that
we will not go for anything except $2.5 million dollars inclusive
until after an appeal has been submitted to the State Board. The
point is that while we go through the operating phase and public
hearings with BASSA we can say to the state that these are disputed
contract provisions and we are intending to appeal them to the State
Board and when they are resolved the City will make whatever changes
are required to be made and in the meantime we will be proceeding.
He felt that the BASSA people will not object to this as they are
aware that there are some questions over the contract and would
like to see it resolved but are not enormously alarmed over the
matter and in his opinion this would be the reasonable course of
action to take on behalf of the people of the Valley. It is simply
a matter of an appeal to a higher authority and can see nothing
wrong with being honest about the matter.
(
Cm Futch felt that Cm Miller implied that the people should have
some right to appeal but this is not the point being questioned.
The only argument is the amount - the motion refers to $2.5 million
rather than the principle involved.
CM-28-7l
April l5, 1974
(Amendments re LAVWMA)
Cm Tirsell wondered what the consensus of op1n1on is regarding the
withdrawal provisions and the City Manager felt that discussion of
this should be delayed until we see what the attitude of the Regional
Board staff is with regard to the withdrawal provision. We do not
know their attitude as yet, but it should be received very soon.
The City Attorney felt that they will accept the withdrawal provision
because some of the other agreements found to be acceptable have
included withdrawal provisions. He felt that the question is not
whether or not one should be included but rather what it will say.
David Eller, felt that the citizens of Livermore should not have
to buckle under to the Regional Board and that we should not have
to subsidize the growth in Pleasanton and Dublin and stated that
he is not as optimistic as Mr. Parness or Cm Futch when it comes
to environmental control. He felt that in the future, what certain
citizens desire in other areas may not be the same as what Livermore
wants and yet we may be required to go along with them on large pro-
jects.
At this time the Mayor called for the question and the motion made
by Cm Miller to appeal to the state while sticking with the $2.5
million dollars, failed 2-3 (Cm Turner, Futch and Tirsell dissenting).
Cm Tirsell moved to commit ourselves only to $l million dollars,
seconded by Cm Futch for discussion purposes.
Cm Futch stated that the $l million dollar figure has been rejected,
and it might not be reasonable to take it back to LAVWMA.
Cm Tirsell stated that she, personally, would not want to obligate
our citizens to any amount of money unless they are able to vote
for a project and would like to negotiate a sum of money one more
time and perhaps the Council might come up with a sum to discuss
with them. She added that she feels concern over the withdrawal
provision and that any of the jurisdictions should have the ability
to withdraw from any project that may be detrimental to their own
jurisdiction and amended the motion to delete the $l million dollar
figure and to say that the $2.5 million dollar limit is not accepta-
ble, seconded by Cm. Futch.
Cm. Miller agreed with Cm. Tirsell that every capital project
should gO to the voters, and in fact was the original suggestion,
but they finally had to compromise for $2.5 million inclusive
because the people wanted an upper limit through which the agency
could operate. The whole intent of the Livermore representatives
at the time was to accomplish precisely what the Council wanted to
have happen. What has happened now is that the protection that
was built in by them is being weakened by the pressure of the Regional
Water Quality Control Board. They must reach a compromise, and he
pointed out again that the final authority is the State Board and
no one else, and they should try to hang in with what we think is
the best.
Mr. Wharton pointed out that at this time all available options with
respect to the dollar amount are not equally accessible to us. You
may convince the other two jurisdictions as to a certain amount, but
you still have to convince the State and Regional Boards before
BASSA makes itself eligible and available for the funding. Although
they may come up in July with an agreement that makes everyone
in the valley happy, you may not be the designated agency. To
propose an alternative now when the other two bodies are perhaps
voting to gO along with the proposal will set off another cycle of
discussion which he felt would only lead to a dead end.
CM-28-~,
April l5, 1974
(re Amendments - LAVWMA)
Cm. Miller commented that if you form an agency of this kind because
you are going to do what you are told, why not allow a larger agency to
handle it in the first place instead of wasting time amending a
contract. If they are going to try to protect the people in the
valley, they should have conditions in the contract; if they do not
wish to protect them, then they should let the Regional Board tell
them what to do, and in fact, BASSA might even do something better
for us. He did not feel we should waste our time amending a contract
when there is still the avenue of an appeal.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time, however it failed 3-2
with Councilmembers Miller, Turner and Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
Cm Turner made a motion to approve LAVWMA's original amount for
$2 million exclusive and the motion was seconded by Cm Futch for
discussion purposes; however, this motion was later withdrawn.
Mayor Pritchard stated the only thing to resolve now is whether or
not the City should sign the new contract in regard to the inclusion
or exclusion of $2 million.
Cm. Miller stated that the major issue is can the Valley Water
Management agency carry out the actual projects required to clean
up our effluent. We are in the process of preparing a time schedule
to accomplish this and working ahead to review the Brown and Caldwell
report to determine if it still applies in view of the present growth
rate. That is the provision of what the City is required to do; the
hassle is over the contract that operates the agency.
Cm. Futch wondered if they were to set a figure, to have meaning it
should be the total bonded indebtedness they would approve.
Mr. Wharton stated he would have to rely on what the City Manager
said that what happens with respect to this agency and the way it
proposes and approves projects would have to be carefully examined
at the State, Regional and local levels. If a project is going to
be a $l6 million project or if it is going to be phase I of a $32
million project, it would have to be advertised that way. That is
the responsibility of those on the Valley Water Management Board
to make sure that the public is aware of what the project is. He
felt each phase would have to meet the standard. The essence of
the decision is whether or not we are going to agree to the proposal
submitted back to the local governments by the Valley Water Board.
He stated that by acting tonight on the proposed changes, affirma-
tively, the Council is not binding anything because there is still
one major section of the joint powers agreement that is open to review
and negotiation. The Council is simply either standing with the
other two governments involved in a presentation to the Water Board,
or they are not, and their unity is to be assessed as being clear
or questioned.
Cm. Tirsell moved that the representatives Cm. Futch and Miller go
back to LAVWMA and ask them to renegotiate the figures in the new
contract and that the $2 million figure is not acceptable. Cm. Turner
seconded the motion.
Mr. Parness asked if in case the representatives to LAVWMA are
pressed, in the event that the majority decision of the six members
voting still holds for the $2 million, what would be the attitude
of this Council after this subject was raised by the Council's
delegates and a lesser figure was sought.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time which passed 4-l with
Cm. Miller dissenting.
With regard to the City Manager's question, Cm. Tirsell stated she
would abide by the opinion of our City Attorney that they should
accept the changes that the majority have voted for.
CM-28-73
April l5, 1974
(Amendments - LAVWMA)
Cm. Miller suggested that the Council leave the discretion of what
the figure should be and what should finally happen to LAVWMA to
its two representatives with Cm. Futch to be the chief negotiator;
motion was seconded by Cm. Turner and passed 4-l with Cm. Futch
dissenting.
The City Manager explained there was one other thing in this regard,
and that is the operational expense. A budget has been proposed,
drafted by the staff and agreed upon by the LAVWMA Directors in the
amount of $8,200 to finance the operations through June 30, and
the proportionate amount would be determined for each jurisdiction
based upon the formula contained in the agreement. He recommended
that the Council adopt a motion authorizing our financial partici-
pation in this budgetary amount.
A motion was made by Cm. Miller, seconded by Cm. Tirsell, to approve
this budgetary amount for the operation of LAVWMA, and the motion
passed unanimously.
REPORT RE EMPLOYEE
RELATIONS CONSULTANT
A report was presented by the City Manager regarding entering into
an agreement for labor relations services with the Industrial
Employers and Distributors Association. It was felt that such a
firm, with its experience in labor relations in both the public and
private sector, could greatly assist the overall communications
process of employer-employee relations as well as in assisting the
City to reach equitable agreements to all concerned. The proposed
agreement calls for the City to pay dues to I.E.D.A. based on the
number of employees within a bargaining unit. Based on the amount
expended for negotiations with the Fire Department alone it is
believed that such an agreement would more than pay for itself
in benefits accruing to the City.
Cm. Miller moved that the Council adopt the City Manager's recom-
mendation; seconded by Mayor Pritchard, and the motion passed
unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 57-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(Industrial Employers and Distributors Assn.)
REPORT RE STATE ALLOCATIONS
INCIDENTAL COMMITMENTS
The City Manager reported that as part of the staff negotiations with
the State Department of Transportation seeking an allocation, it was
requested that the City's commitments be given on two subjects:
l. That all costs associated with the relocation of the Southern
Pacific tracks will not be included for submission to the State for
financial participation. This is as consonant with the interpretation
of the State by the State counsel.
2. Since the State would be participating in the cost of providing
bicycle pathways the State counsel insists that the City insure that
an ordinance will be adopted prohibiting the traffic on the vehicle
traveled portion of the underpasses. So as not to cause any delays
a letter has been transmitted to the State to this extent.
It is recommended that a resolution be adopted ratifying this state-
ment of intent.
CM-28-74
April l5, 1974
(re State Allocations)
On motion of Cm. Futch, seconded by Cm. Miller, and by unanimous
approval, the statement of intent was passed.
RESOLUTION NO. 59-74
A RESOLUTION RATIFYING STATEMENT OF INTENT RE
STATE ALLOCATION FOR GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT
COMHUNICATION RE
TRACT 2619 (Reliance)
A communication from Reliance Industries, Inc. regarding Tract 2619,
and responding to a letter from Kissell Company which had been re-
moved from the Consent Calendar for discussion later was continued
to the next meeting.
REPORT RE REVISED
PERSONNEL RULES & REG.
The current City personnel rules were adopted by the City Council
several years ago and many changes have occurred, both in local
practice and mandated by state and federal laws, resulting in revi-
sions to our rules. In accordance with current state law this matter
has been presented to and discussed with the representatives of each
of our four employee organizations and all of their comments and
suggestions were given due consideration for this proposed draft.
It is recommended that the Council set a public hearing on this
matter.
A motion was made by Cm. Futch, seconded by Cm. Turner, and approved
unanimously setting a public hearing for May 6.
CONTINUATION OF AGENDA
RE ANDERSON PROPERTY AND
FIXED BASE OPERATOR LEASE
.HODIFICATION
On motion of Cm. Miller, seconded by Cm. Turner, and by unanimous
approval the following items were continued to the next meeting:
City Council referral of proposed annexation and rezoning of the
Anderson property and possible amendment of Planning Unit ll, and
lease modification of the fixed base operator.
P. C. MINUTES
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of March 26 were noted
for filing.
REPORT RE COMMUNI~Y EM-
PLOYMENT & TRAINING -
APPT. TO BOARD
A report from the City Manager was received explaininq that by vir-
~ tue of a new federal program funds are to be made available to
assist government agencies in manpower training and employment.
Agencies in excess of lOO,OOO population can qualify singularly or
join in a consortium. In our County, Oakland and Berkeley have
elected to individually pursue this matter while Alameda County and
Fremont joined in forming a consortia; hence the balance of the
cities will be served by this latter group. A County training and
employment board is proposed to be formed under the joint powers
agreement, with representatives from each public agency. Approximately
$l.l million will be available for funding for this proposal. It is
recommended that a motion be adopted designati.ng one member of the
City Council as official delegate and another as alternate repre-
CM-28-75
- ".'-...----.---.-.--_____...._._......,._._, .,__.,~.. __'m__..'__...._____.._____.__.,._.~____...,._._________.."___"'._'__"'_."""'__"._~""'_"_"'_""~'_"""'_.__.
April l5, 1974
(Community EmploYment and
Training - Appt. to Board)
sentative to this board. On a related matter, the joint powers
establishing the Community Action Agency has now been executed and
the governing board needs to be selected as well. Here again repre-
sentatives as delegate and alternate are to come from the City Council
and the other eight signatory agencies. It is recommended that the
same delegate and alternate be assigned this responsibility as is
the case with the CETA program.
On motion of Cm. Miller, seconded by Mayor Pritchard, Cm. Tirsell
was appointed as delegate and Cm. Turner as alternate to both agencies
and the motion was approved unanimously.
REPORT RE RAILROAD AVE. DEV.-
RAILROAD AVE. AND E. STANLEY BLVD.
INTERSECTION
A report was submitted by the Planning Commission regarding the
question of design of Railroad Avenue between Stanley Blvd. and
P Street which had been referred to them by the Council.
Cm. Futch stated that the Council had made a decision on this
intersection and moved that they uphold that decision which was
to approve the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee
recommendation, and since the arguments were all in the minutes
he moved the question; motion was seconded by Cm. Turner.
Dan Hanesworth stated he was confused as to why they had spent
the last month going back to the Planning Commission; the issue
now is the configuration of Railroad Avenue. His problem is
getting a parcel map approved and getting an engineering agreement
executed between the City and Southern Pacific, and he would
support any decision by the Council which would result in that.
There are two factors to consider: l) there will be traffic
generated into the site, including their shopping center, and 2)
whatever the recommendation it should consider each of the centers.
He has a legitimate interest in whatever happens to that street
as they will soon be developing the balance of their property,
and they feel that street will provide a very substantial means
of access into the balance of their property. If the Council
would approve what was indicated on their original site plan,
he would be happy and did not feel it would violate the Planning
Commission's recommendation.
Mr. Lee stated that before the Council makes a decision he felt
they would want to see a design of that intersection that was a
safe one. When questioned as to whether the designs presented
previously were safe, Mr. Lee stated that was not a safe design,
and, in addition, it would be necessary to require additional
rights of way.
Cm. Tirsell stated that the Planning Commission's report merely
speaks to how the traffic will be oriented and wanted to know
if it was necessary to commit themselves to the exact design at
this time and it was concluded that the exact design does not
need to be approved at this time with Cm Futch commenting that
the Council would just like to indicate that there is not to be
a major flow into Railroad Avenue.
At this time the Council discussed the motion to accept the basic
philosophy of the traffic going from Stanley to "s" to First Street,
and the amendment made by Cm Miller to begin the design of the
intersection and the rest of Railroad Avenue, similar to the low-
er configuration submitted by the Planning Department, seconded
by Cm Tirsell.
CM-28-76
April l5, 1974
(Rai~road Ave. and E.
Stanley Blvd.lntersection)
Prior to the vote Mr. Hanesworth commented that they are willing
to work with anyone on a design for Railroad Avenue but he has
been required to abide by the engineering considerations specifi-
cally noted by the Public Works Department, one of which is the
future dedication of property in the improvement of Railroad Avenue
and his management will not enter into any agreement without know-
ing what costs will be involved.
em Futch stated that he cannot understand why this has not been
resolved, as the Council made a decision regarding the matter the
last time this was discussed and Mr. Musso explained that it had been
sent back to the Planning Commission but Cm Futch stated that in
addition to going back to the Planning Commission the Council had
made a decision to accept their recommendation.
Mr. Lee commented that the details have been worked out but what
Mr. Hanesworth is saying is that now the street will have to be
redesigned and the cost determined and em Miller wondered why there
must be a redesign when the Council directed a different design at
the last discussion and Mr. Lee explained that the Council did not
make such a direction but that the matter had been referred back to
the Planning Commission. At this time the design had been completed
as well as the record of survey in accordance with the upper drawing
proposed by the Public Works Department.
Cm Futch felt that many times the Council makes a decision and due
to formality, sends it back to the Planning Commission and feels
that this is what took place and Mr. Hanesworth commented that as
he recalls Cm Taylor had stated that this is a major consideration
and the Council should not take action until it has been referred
back to the Planning Commission.
If
Robert Wendt, commented that he can well understand the concern
raised by Mr. Hanesworth and that the careful study of the align-
ment of Railroad Avenue is inconsistent with the need to get this
project going and would therefore suggest that the cost estimates
be based on the original design which has been completed, and a
bond required for not more than the cost of the old design, or
some negotiated sum in order that this project may proceed. He
felt that it is not in the best interest of either party to let
the matter drag on and would encourage some type of negotiation
for an acceptable sum of money, and pursue with great vigor, the
record of survey for the new configuration adopted by the Council.
Mr. Hanesworth commented that he feels this proposal, as made by
Mr. Wendt, would appear to be a practical resolution but would
have to make a formal reply to the Council.
em Miller felt that the suggestion made by Mr. Wendt is reasonable
and would like to include this in the amendment and to be based on
a negotiated sum of money based on the present day cost of the
previous alignment which the second agreed to.
At this time the Council voted on the amendment which passed by
unanimous vote, as well as the main motion to adopt the Planning
Commission recommendation which also passed by unanimous vote.
~~TTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
Request for permission
to Sign Grant Application
Mr. Lee asked that the Council adopt a resolution allowing him to
sign a grant application for the airport land use and master plan
study, so moved by Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and which
passed by unanimous vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 60~74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF GRANT APPLICATION
FOR FEDERAL FUNDS FOR MAST~R p~ AND LAND USE STUDY
CM-28-77
April l5, 1974
Discussion re
Annexation -(Vierra-Lomitas Ave)
The City Manager explained that the Board of Supervisors is meeting
tomorrow to discuss the application for septic tanks in an area
that is surrounded on three sides by the City and wondered what
the reaction of the City would be with regard to annexation to the
City, The City Council expressed favor,to this suggestion with
the comment made that the only problem is that there may be no
building permits for development for some time.
Motion re Going
Ahead on Specific Plans
Cm Miller stated that he would like to make a motion directing the
staff and requesting that the Planning Commission go full steam
ahead on specific plans in the mill while at the same time con-
sideration of General Plan revision for the areas while they are
doing the specific plans. The motion was seconded by Cm Tirsell
and the motion passed by unanimous vote.
Discussion re
New Town
Cm Futch stated that he would like to be a member of any sub-committee
that discusses the subject of New Town with regard to strategy.
Cm Miller replied that there is no committee for planning the strategy
regarding New Town but that two members of the Council will be meet-
ing with the staff to determine the options available and is a pre-
liminary meeting to a strategy meeting.
Cm Futch stated that he had moved, on April l, to discuss this
in an executive session and moved that this be discussed in an
executive session rather than April 23rd, seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Tirsell felt that she has done a great deal of reading and talk-
ing with others over this matter and would also like to be present
during any initial discussion as she feels she has some input.
Cm Futch stated that the Council agreed in the past that two members
of the Council would not meet with the staff without notification
and approval of all the other Council members and Cm Futch stated
that he would like to add this to the motion at this time, and
Cm Turner stated that if this is to be a part of the motion he
would not be able to second the motion and withdrew his second.
Cm Tirsell moved that the Council meet in an executive session on
April 22nd to review the strategy for New Town, after the regular
Council meeting, seconded by Cm Turner and passed 4-l (Cm Futch dis-
senting) .
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, the meeting was adjourned
at l2:55 p.m.
~aMa~
APPROVE
ATTEST od&tw~Aierk .
Livermore, California
CM-28-78
Regular Meeting of April 22, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on April 22,
1974, 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: Councilmembers 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.
MINUTES OF 4-15-74
On motion of Cm Hiller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote the minutes for the meeting of April 15, 1974, were approved
as amended.
OPEN FORm1
(re Las Positas
Golf Course)
Jerry Atwell, 134 Amber Way, Secretary-treasurer of the Las positas
Golf Club, presented a resolution to the Council which the Golf
Club passed at their meeting of April 18th and the Mayor explained
that this is a matter that will be on the agenda for the next meet-
ing and there will be a full discussion of the item at that time.
(re S. P. Development
Project)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, spoke in opposition to the Southern
Pacific track relocation project and its commercial development which
he stated he feels is a "farce" and that S. P. is moving their tracks
over to the W. P. tracks so that it may build a commercial development
for its own subsidiary. The project is costing the taxpayers a great
deal of money and after the development is complete it will be in
direct competition with our local businessmen in addition to the dis-
placement of a number of people and urged that something be done
about unnecessary and unauthorized spending which he pointed out
should have been voted upon by the people because the amount exceeds
$5,000.
Mr. Wharton responded by saying that he is satisfied that all the
expenditures undertaken by the City in pursuit of the railroad pro-
ject are entirely within the law.
(re Complaint re
Indus. Develop. Fees)
Mr. Ed Hutka, lOl5 Angelica v~ay, voiced a complaint over fees imposed
for industrial development which he feels are inequitable. He stated
that he has proof of the figures and would like the Council to check
into the matter of the fees.
CM-28-79
April 22, 1974
(re Indus. Develop. Fees)
~1r. Lee commented that the water storage fee was adjusted in
February, as were the other fees and that the water storage fee
is not based on the amount of consumption for domestic use but
rather reflects the storage needs for fire protection and the
size of the building, in that case, becomes a factor.
em Miller commented that to his knowledge nobody has recommended
that all industrial property should be I-I and Mr. Nordyke, rep-
resentative of the Industrial Advisory Board, commented that this
is correct.
(re Deaths Caused by
Inadequate Highway)
Milo Nordyke, 2143 Chateau Way, stated that two more deaths have
occurred on 1-580 which he felt can be attributed to the highway
being inadequate and every day the highway continues to be inade-
quate it is going to kill people and urged that the Council re-
examine its position on the widening of 1-580.
The Mayor remarked that the point is well taken but statistically
there have been about twice as many people killed on the widened
freeway between Livermore and Tracy, adding that he does not have
the figures to prove this but feels there are at least as many
that have been killed between Livermore and Tracy as from Liver-
more to Castro Valley, if not more.
P.H. RE WEED
ABATEMENT
At this time the Mayor opened the public hearing for the purpose
of hearing protests on the notice to abate weeds, refuse, rubbish
and other such public nuisances adding that no written protest
has been received.
There being no public testimony voiced, on motion of em Miller,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote, the public hearing
was closed.
The staff recommendation was to adopt a resolution ordering the
Superintendent of Streets to proceed to abate weeds, so moved by
Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 61-74
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
Departmental Reports
Departmental reports were received as follows:
Airport Activity - March
Airport Profit and Loss Statement - Quarter Ending 3-31
Building Department - March
City Attorney - Quarterly Report and Plan
Emergency Services - Quarterly - January/March
Finance Department - June 1973 to March 3l, 1974
CM-28-80
April 22, 1974
(Departmental Reports)
Golf Courses - Las Positas and Springtown - Quarter Ending March
and Month of March
Library - Quarter Ending March
Municipal Court - February and ~1arch
Mosquito Abatement District - February
Water Reclamation Plant - March
Res. Appointing
Planning Commissioners
A resolution was adopted appointing two members to the Planning Com-
mission.
RESOLUTION NO. 62-74
APPOINTMENTS OF MEMBERS TO PLANNING COMMISSION
(Glen Dahlbacka and John Staley)
Notification of
BASSA Hearing
Notification was received from BASSA regarding a hearing to be held
on May l5 for matters relating to the LAVWMA program.
Payroll & Claims
There were 216 claims in the amount of $399,Ol7.6l and 270 payroll
warrants in the amount of $74,767.10, for a total of $473,784.71,
dated April 19, 1974 and ordered paid, as approved, by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was noted that the airport is operating with a $10,550 profit
and the golf course is operating with a loss of $15,000 less than
last year.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the Consent Calendar was approved.
COHHUNICATION FROM
LARPD RE SEWER CON-
NECTION FEE WAIVER
A letter has been received from LARPD asking that the Council re-
consider its decision to reject the request for waiver of the
sewer connection fee assessed for the Max Baer park-Murdell Lane
improvements.
The Council concluded to respectfully decline reconsideration.
COMHUNICATION FROM
CO~1UNITY AFFAIRS COMM.
RE 4th OF JULY CELEBRATION
The Community Affairs Committee submitted a letter to the Council ask-
ing that the Council consider a City Fourth of July Celebration to
include a parade which will terminate at r1ay Nissen Park followed by
family picnics and a fire works display.
Cr-.'1-28-8l
April 22, 1974
(Fourth of July
Celebration)
Jim Doggett, l3l8 "p" Street, representative of the Community
Affairs Committee, explained the proposal for the celebration
and indicated that it is estimated that the cost of the celebra-
tion will be about $2,000.
Cm Miller moved that the City Council adopt a motion authorizing
appropriation of the estimated $2,000 for this event, seconded by
Cm Turner.
Mayor Pritchard moved to amend the motion to
increase the membership of this committee to
by Cm Turner which passed by unanimous vote.
passed unanimously.
include approval to
lO members, seconded
The main motion also
Cm Futch stated that he feels the Council should be somewhat con-
cerned for the number of events of this nature that are approved
and suggested that perhaps a policy should be adopted regarding
items such as this for consideration in the budget.
Mayor Pritchard commented that the Community Affairs Committee
is a City appointed committee and is directly responsible to the
Council, as opposed to other requests for financial assistance
that come to the Council during the year. The Mayor further
explained that the Council approved an expenditure of $2,000
for this celebration but only the portion that cannot be raised
to cover the cost of the event will be used.
COMMUNICATION RE
"BICYCLE COMMUTER DAY"
Charles M. Hartwig, 4319 Findlay, President of the Livermore Bike-
ways Association stated that they would like the Council to de-
clare the first week in May "Bicycle Week" and that May 8th be
declared "Bicycle Commuter Day" with as many people as possible
encouraged to use their bicycles for commuting to business and
shopping as well as pleasure activities on this day. It was also
suggested that one lane on East Avenue could be used by the bike
riders commuting to work on this day and used as the focal point
for this commuter activity.
Cm Miller moved that the first week in May be "Bicycle Neek", that
Hay 8th be "Bicycle Commuter Day" on East Avenue with appropriate
notice to the County, seconded by Cm Turner which passed unanimously.
CO'4MUNICATION FE
AB-2040 (Knox) re
Bay Area Planning Agency
The Council received a copy of the League of California Cities
comments regarding AB-2040 (Knox) regarding a Bay Area Planning
Agency which em Futch felt the City Council should endorse as it
is an action consistent with the League's action plan and so moved,
seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Miller commented on the governing aspect of this agency and noted
that in his opinion there is not as much responsiveness as there should
be toward planning and environmental issues when it consists of elected
public officials. He would therefore not like to approve 20-40 with
all public officials on the Board, until 1978.
Cm Futch commented that at the beginning of 1978 there are provisions
for going before the electorate to determine the permanent status of
the representatives and felt that at this time we cannot suggest
changes.
C~1-28-82
April 22, 1974
(re AB-2040 - Knox Bill)
Cm Miller stated that in the next four years the critical issue
for the people of the valley and the taxpayers in the City of
Livermore, is whether or not Geldermann receives approval for
"Gelderville" and perhaps agencies such as BASSA which will be
absorbed by this regional agency will not act as responsively
to our concerns.
Cm Futch replied that he agrees with the statement made by Cm
Miller but feels that by having one agency there will be a
better opportunity for the smaller cities to fill the openings
and will allow for their voices to be heard.
Cm Miller stated that he would not like to endorse the bill
as it stands and would prefer there be 50% public officials
and 50% elected and would not agree that it would be better
than what we now have - it is almost the same.
Cm Futch suggested that the Council endorse the concept but
would suggest 50-50 representation, which was included in the
motion and second and passed unanimously.
The City Hanager was directed to pass this endorsement on to
the League of California Cities.
REPORT RE FIXED BASE
OPR. LEASE MODIFICATION
RE COURTESY AVIATION
The City Manager reported that several changes have been ne-
gotiated in the lease for the fixed base operator (Courtesy
Aviation) and the Airport Advisory Committee has reviewed the
changes which they have recommended be adopted, as follows:
l. Period of property re-evaluation for the purpose of computing
ground rental is to be postponed until October 1, 1974.
2. The payments based on gross receipts are to be based on a quar-
terly basis instead of semi-annual.
3. A stipulation is made that the City has the sole rights of
dispensing gasoline and motor oils. This is the subject of
litigation still pending before the court.
4. The City reserves the right to approve all assignments of the
lease or leasehold interests.
The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a motion authoriz-
ing execution of the lease modification.
Cm Miller commented that he would presume that this lease agreement
says that the pending litigation will be dropped, which the City
Attorney explained is correct, which was followed by discussion
regarding the term of the lease and its commencement.
On motion of Hayor Pritchard, seconded by Cm ~Hller and by unanimous
vote the staff recommendation was adopted and the four points listed
above were approved.
RESOLUTION NO. 63-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Courtesy Aviation Company)
C]\1-28-83
April 22, 1974
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE REZONING OF JUDSON
PROPERTY APPLICATION
The matter of the Judson property rezoning application has been
postponed a number of times at the request of the applicant
and at the last postponement (March 25th) the Council requested
that the applicant submit maps and information which would illustrate
the placement of the channel, access to the site and all other perti-
nent matters, and Mr. Lee briefly reported on the matter and indica-
ted that in his opinion the Judson property could have good access
on the north side of the service station (which was one of the require-
ments for the rezoning) and it is unfortunate that the maps do not
clearly indicate this. He commented that he spoke with the applicant's
attorney and asked for more detailed information but the Council has
not been furnished with anything that would substantiate reasonable
access.
David Madis, attorney representing the applicant, stated that the
access is the standard access used for about 99% of the commercial
property in the City and the state determines the distance the
access should be from a traffic interchange to adjacent property
and they feel that the state will approve the access they are
proposing. He commented that they feel it is not appropriate to
submit a detailed drawing of the street because all they are asking
at this time is that the property be rezoned and the access be
approved. The actual design of the access will be subject to site
plan approval when the public improvements are to be put in.
The Council then discussed the access situation.
Mr. Madis pointed out that everyone has agreed that this property
is not suitable for residential use and that their proposed rezoning
would be proper and urged that the Council take action tonight.
Cm Miller stated that everyone who has looked at this property does
not agree that it should be commercial and in his opinion it should
remain residential - not for development of residential but for the
transfer of the development rights somewhere else in the planning
unit. Secondly, due to the configuration of the property adjacent
to the gasoline station, the sharp turn for the access would not
be reasonable. Last of all he felt that it would be wrong, in
principle, to increase the amount of commercial at this interchange
when there are other areas available for highway commercial develop-
ment. He also pointed out that the General Plan indicates that
this is not commercial and moved that the zoning request be denied.
The motion was seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Tirsell stated that she is not really opposed to commercial
development of this corner, but has not seen anything that would
indicate that there is a safe access to the property.
Cm Turner stated that he would assume it would be the responsibility
of the City to see that the access is a safe one in addition to the
fact that the details for transfering density have not been worked
out, and it may be that this can not be done for a few years.
em Miller replied that even though the details of the density transfer
have not been worked out if it is determined that density transfer
does not work then this parcel can be reconsidered for rezoning in
the future.
CM-28-84
April 22, 1974
(re Judson Property)
Cm Hiller stated that he would like to re-emphasize a comment
made by Cm Tirsell which was that ~r. Judson created his own
problems by selling off one of these parcels for a gasoline
station without considering what this would do to the rest of
his property and it is not the City's problem to resolve the
problem he created for himself even though it is unfortunate.
Cm Turner countered that it is the City's responsibility to see
that the best use of the land is allowed and if it happens to
be commercial that we should follow through which Cm Miller
commented on by saying that, in his opinion, the best use of the
land is not commercial but rather open space land after the sale
of development rights.
Elizabeth Mondon, 5873 Singing Hills, urged the Council to con-
sider seriously, not allowing access to the property north of
the gasoline station as the increase of traffic congestion in
the area just below the steep overpass would be hazardous.
Mr. Hadis stated that the County has approved a gasoline station
and that the access for the remaining portion is fine and also
that this particular interchange may be developed for commercial
use - No. Livermore Avenue is not. The City engineer has stated
that the access can be worked out, as proposed by the applicant,
and the City Planning Commission has, on two occasions, recom-
mended the access in addition to the fact that the state will
allow access that far from the interchange. It is true that the
Council does not have a clear concept of the plan in front of it
but they are asking that the property be rezoned subject to exact
plans being approved by the City Engineer. He stated that this
matter has been considered by the County and the state and that
there should be some consistency in reasoning between these agen-
cies and the City staff as well as the City Council.
Mr. Musso replied that the Planning Commission did not recommend
the proposed access but rather that access should come from the
south side of the gasoline station, and Mr. Madis stated that they
do not care where the access is approved because this can be worked
out but right now they are after rezoning.
Cm Miller stated that the point is that some of the members of
the Council feel that none of the proposals for access are plaus-
ible and it is the job of the Council to determine what is best
for this City and it is not this Council's fault that the County
approved a poor location for a gasoline station but it is the
responsibility of the Council to see that any further poor pro-
posals are not approved.
Cm Futch commented that at the last meeting the Council took action
to approve residential zoning on the General Plan for this property
which he was opposed to due to the fact that he preferred that the
Council wait to make a decision after the applicant had been given
the opportunity to submit access proposals; however, the General
Plan indicates residential and he feels the Council should be con-
sistent with what the General Plan specifies.
Mrs. Mondon commented that the state may approve the access but they
do not have to drive the access and feels that it is not a safe
access. The citizens of Livermore are the people who will have
to use the access and feels that the Council should take this
into consideration.
At this time the Council voted 4-1 in favor of the motion with
Cm Turner dissenting.
CM-28-85
~. .... ----..--..--..-.-.,.-...---.-, "~'--'. "'''--'''''-''-.''~'-''--'-''''''''''----~'~''''-''-'''--'-'-~''''''---'-~'.-'''"-''--'~--'''-----'-'--- ,-,...,..~
April 22, 1974
(re Judson property)
The resident of 1113 Florence Road stated that the City of San
Francisco has experienced complaints from people who do not
want freeways built near their parks and the Council might take
into consideration the fact that people may not want open space
near the interchange. He urged that the Council give serious
consideration as to what should go next to the freeway and in
his opinion it would be better to have a huge warehouse there
than a park.
REPORT RE THE PROPOSED
ANNEXATION OF THE
ANDERSON PROPERTY
The matter of the application by the Anderson family for pre-
zoning and annexation of their property was referred to the
Planning Commission and Mr. Musso explained the recommendation
made by the Planning Commission on the matter which was that
no action be taken on annexation nor that pre zoning be con-
sidered as it has been City policy in the past not to rezone
lands proposed for annexation.
Mr. Madis commented that the Anderson family would like some
indication as to whether or not the Council would be in favor
of the rezoning and annexation.
David Lane, l537 portola Avenue, property owner south of the
Anderson property, stated that he has appeared before the Coun-
cil many times with regard to the problems the owners on portola
Avenue face, over traffic enforcement situation, and many other
things. He felt that the Council should seriously consider annexa-
tion of property along portola Avenue and help them with these
problems. He voiced complaint with regard to the large trucks that
park near his property that we can do nothing about because they
stay outside of the City limits and the County does not have an
ordinance to prohibit the trucks from parking along portola Avenue
for long periods of time.
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden, stated that he agrees with the comments
made by Mr. Lane and that he also can hear the trucks starting
and stoping as well as the speeding cars.
Mayor Pritchard stated there are two things to be considered at
this time: 1) an indication from the Council regarding the
proper zoning, which would be to prezone, and 2) whether the City
desires annexation at this time, and the Planning Commission's
recommendation is to consider the annexation.
Cm Miller remarked that it would be reasonable to consider annexa-
tion if the applicant would like to annex under regular ground rules;
however, he was unwilling to prezone. He would not be willing
to consider a specific zoning until the Specific Plan for Planning
Unit II is available and he would not consider zoning contrary
to our present general plan. If he were agreeable to consider
any change, he might be willing to consider industrial at the time
of the General Plan amendment, but is opposed to any further commer-
cial on portola Avenue.
Cm. Tirsell agreed with the statement made by Mr. Lane in that
there has been no planning on portola Avenue, and because the
City does not have control of County zoning, we must accept a lot
of commercial zoning that has been approved by the County and the
problems we have, and is happy that the Planning Commission is giv-
ing this area first priority and it should receive immediate attention.
CM-28-86
April 22, 1974
(Anderson Property)
Cm. Tirsell further commented that the Planning Commission passed a
resolution opposing the spread of commercialism down Portola Avenue,
which she supported, and unless the Planning Commission would re-
commend that there should be commercial in that area, that would
compete with the major shopping hoped for in the downtown, she would
be adverse to commercial zoning, but would not be adverse to consid-
eration of annexation, but would like to see a specific plan by the
Planning Commission for the area.
Cm. Miller disagreed that there had been no planning; the point is
that we do not have any real control because the Planning Commission
in past years have attempted to work out something for the whole
area.
:1r. Husso remarked that it has been one of the most planned areas,
and the Planning Commission has tentatively set a public hearing for
f1ay to consider that whole area, whether it be rezoning or general
plan amendment.
Cm. Tirsell moved to support the Planning Commission recommendation,
seconded by Cm. Futch.
Cm. Futch stated his agreement with the comments made by Cm. Tirsell,
and he also felt it would be inappropriate to take action before
the Planning Commission has made a decision, and it is against Council
policy to prezone, and Cm. Turner agreed on both comments.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has always favored prezoning providing
it is done properly, and he added that our former City Attorney felt
it could be done in such a way that it could be advantageous to both
the applicant and the City; however he would accept the Planning
Commission recommendation.
ttr. Madis asked for clarification of the motion, which was explained
to him, and the motion then passed unanimously.
RECESS
AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL COUNCILMEMBERS
PRESENT.
COHMUNICATION FROM RELIANCE
IND., INC. AND RESPONSE
FROM KISSELL COMPANY
A communication had been received from Reliance Industries, Inc. re
the unfinished houses in Tr. 2619, and the position in which they
had been placed by the unilateral action of the Kissell Company. A
response to this letter was also received from The Kissell Company
explaining their position. This item had been continued from the
meeting of April l5.
Cm. Turner stated his concern had to do with the park site that
Reliance Industries had agreed to dedicate to the City; however, the
City Manager had advised him that the'land is not actually in Tr.
26l9, but that we had collected development fees for the purchase
of a park site in the area. An offer had been made to a land
owner in the area recently, and we should have a reply shortly. He
has been contacted by many citizens in the Greenville area with regard
to a park site, and was anxious that a park site be acquired this
year if possible. Another point in this regard is that Kissell Co.
has stated they would begin construction in June 1974; however, since
there are a lot of children playing in and around the unfinished homes,
CM-28-87
._..~-,._"..,....-.~_.,._.,-_.,".- <-. --"_.-.~-_.._--_.".,--_._-----_._-,~-,_..~_.~-~,---_._"
April 22, 1974
(Tract 2619 - Bevilacqua)
he would suggest that Kissell Company be requested to provide a care-
taker to prevent further trespassing in the area, and to protect the
children from injury. If Kissell Company does not commence construc-
tion in June, the City should take steps to abate the property and
return it to its natural state.
Dewey Watson, speaking for the Kissell Company, responded that he ,',
saw no problem as far as an attendant on the property as they hoped
to have contractors on the job within the next few weeks to at least
finish the homes that are almost completed. Kissell will take title
on May 8 or 9 to the tract, but not to the 4 acres which were excluded
from their deed of trust, and Reliance will still have title to
that park land, but the other 2.2 acres were never part of a dedica~
tion requirement by the developer. The Kissell Company would urge
that the Council direct the City Manager to request Reliance Indus-
try to live up to their contract to dedicate those 4 acres of land,
as they are equally anxious to have Reliance dedicate the 4 acres
then the City could purchase the other 2.2 acres which would save
the City some money. He attended this meeting with the intent of
working out some agreement and had a memo of understanding which he
received from the City Attorney. However, he did not want to raise
this on the agenda at this time if it is out of order or if the Council
feels it should be postponed for further discussion.
Mr. Wharton remarked that this should have been in the agenda packet,
but was not so stated on the agenda, and is an indication of a
progress report, and if the Council has any comments or input, it
would be useful to have them so that the staff could pursue the final
details with the Kissell Company in the next week or two.
Mr. Watson stated that the point he wanted to make is that the Kissell
Company is very anxious, and well aware of the June 4 date, to come to
a definite understanding as to subdivision approval and the amount
of money the Kissell Company will have to put forth; before it makes
a commitment to a contractor. A couple of points were included
in the memo of understanding that were not previously discussed,
particularly the problems relating to the Heather Lane Bridge which
had been a requirement of this tract. It is the opinion of the
staff that this bridge be built immediately, and it is suggested
that an immediate cash bond be posted by the Kissell Company for
completion of the bridge. The Kissell Company would urge that this
not be a requirement as there is a present bond on the bridge which
the City is currently suing on, and they would urge that the City
continue to pursue its remedy against the bond on the bridge. He
felt there are other forms of guarantee which would not require an
immediate cash outlay by Kissell, and he would suggest a form of
guarantee that in the event the litigation of the City is not success-
ful, that Kissell Co. will guarantee the cost of building the bridge.
Cm. Miller stated he read the memo and was concerned about the issues
raised by the Public Works Director, and with what he believed an un-
necessary point of interest and wanted to make sure that the bridge
is constructed in a finite time, and is not sure that the amount
of the bond will pay for the bridge now due to rise in construction
costs, and felt that these issues should be resolved.
Mr. Wharton stated we could ask Kissell to post the cash bond as
has been stated with the understanding that the City will pursue with
CM-28-88
April 22, 1974
(Bevilacqua Tract 26l9)
due diligence its legal remedies, and should there be a recovery we
would remit whatever share was appropriate to Kissell to offset their
investment. With respect to the interest payment, he felt he had
narrowed the interest paYment requirement to a responsible minimum and
did not think it unreasonable to ask for it. Direction from the Coun-
cil on this point might be helpful.
Cm. Miller questioned why Kissell should be credited anything for the
period of January 23, 1973 to July 20 as that was the time their
building permits were active, and Mr. Wharton replied that the initial
permit was cancelled in January and was reapplied for in July;
however Cm. Miller stated he could not see how that was possible as
there were no permits issued after April 27, 1973.
The Public Works Director stated that the l04 permits were valid
up until September 2l, 1973.
There followed some discussion regarding the issuance of permits and
the renewal dates and whether or not Kissell should be given credit
and Mr. Wharton stated he would check this out further.
Cm. Futch stated the issue of credit regarding the permits is complex,
and that perhaps there could be some guidance regarding the bridge,
and asked Mr. Lee to comment in this regard.
Mr. Lee stated he was concerned that if the bridge is segregated out
since it was required as a condition of the improvements in the tract
along with the other improvements, the bonding company might have a
claim against the City at a later time stating we did not pursue the
remedy with the developer, and Kissell is the developer, or rather
an asignee of the developer, and if we did not pursue it, it might
go on for a long time in the courts. He and the City Attorney both
agree there should be some assurance the bridge will be constructed,
and he recommends that plans be completed and a cost estimate be
received for the bridge, then a reasonable delay while they
are pursuing collection on the bond might be in order.
Mr. Wharton stated his agreement with Mr. Lee regarding the bridge,
by requiring that the cash bond be posted and the City will pursue
the litigation and if a recovery is made we will share it with Kissell.
Meanwhile, the cash bond will be posted and the bridge constructed
rather than waiting for the result of the law suit.
Cm. Futch moved to accept the City Attorney's recommendation with
regard to the bridge, seconded by Cm. Miller.
Mr. Watson stated his reaction would be why should the City pursue
a law suit if a bond is posted and questioned that a new cash bond
was the solution. In reply to a question by Cm. Miller that if he
were convinced the City would pursue the law suit actively would
he not be upset, and Mr. Watson stated if the City were to pursue
the lawsuit, there would be no reason to require another cash bond
as Kissell would reimburse the City if the law suit is not successful,
expecially since it is his understanding nothing has been done for
two years in this regard. The objection of the Kissell Company is
to any additional substantial up front cash outlay at a time when
they are getting no return, and Mr. Watson explained how much money
they have already expended on the project.
Mayor Pritchard advised Mr. Watson that the Council is SYmpathetic
with the problem, but wants some guarantee that the bridge will be
built.
Mr. Lee stated there seems to be some confusion as the Council seems
to think the bridge responsibility is that of the bonding company,
which is not so; the responsibility of building the bridge is the
developer's, which is Kissell now, and we must look toward him. There
CM-28-89
April 22, 1974
(Kissell - Bevilacqua Tract)
is certain action that the Council must take which is the acceptance
of the subdivision, and after that point we have very little hold on
the developer, so there must be some assurance the bridge will be
built. He suggested that perhaps the Kissell Company could defer
the date the City accepts the tract to allow time for the bridge to
be built and then accept the tract.
Mr. Watson stated this is something that could be worked out between
the Kissell Company and the staff as he feels there is room for com-
promise as he felt they might even be willing to build the bridge
immediately if this is to be a condition for acceptance of the tract.
Cm. Miller remarked that Mr. Watson's suggestion of reaching a com-
promise with the staff and then coming back to the Council might be
a good one, and he moved to table the matter to allow the staff time
to work out something with the Kissell Company. Motion was seconded
by Cm. Turner and passed unanimously.
DISCUSSION RE VALLEY PLANNING
COMMITTEE REORGANIZATION
Cm. Tirsell stated that she would like some direction from the Council
as to how they would view a reorganized Valley Planning Commission.
The meeting of VPC is May 18 and she wanted to know if they should
submit their input to the other cities prior to that meeting.
Cm. Miller suggested that this be postponed until the meeting of
April 29, and then if that meeting is too long it can be discussed
on May 6, and the Council agreed to this.
REPORT RE DEVELOPMENT
OF FIRST St. & SO. LIVERMORE
AVENUE INTERSECTION
The staff reported that development proposals for the recently
acquired properties on the northwest and southwest corners of
First Street and South Livermore Avenue have been prepared,
reviewed and approved by the Beautification Committee and if
the improvements are acceptable to the Council they should be
referred to the staff for consideration during the budget ses-
sion.
Mr. Lee then illustrated to the Council the proposals which
have been prepared and approved by the Beautification Committee
for a park as well as an alternate proposal which was prepared
allowing for II parking spaces which he indicated does cause
some access problem. He estimated that the cost for the parks
would be $l8,000 for one and $l5,000 for the other.
Cm Tirsell commented that she would like to see a park with
parking provisions, as she cannot understand why there cannot
be function and beauty in the same place.
Mr. Lee explained that a design has been prepared that would
allow dimension and be very visible which has been created with
a proposal for a mound along the back that would be green with
trees planted on it and would have a similar effect as the
Centennial Park.
Cm Tirsell stated that she does not like the bottom design and
would not vote for it and even the ll.parking spaces would pro-
vide some relief.
CM-28-90
April 22, 1974
(re Design P~oposals for
First St. & So. Livermore
Avenue Intersection)
Cm Miller commented that in his op1n1on it doesn't make sense to
buy land for park purposes and then use it for parking or something
other than a park and Cm Tirsell noted that she was not on the Council
at the time they agreed to buy the land specifically for a park.
Cm Miller explained that the study done by consultants, Ribera & Sue
indicated that this area should not be used for parking but rather
should be used to improve the appearance of the area and would agree
that the parking situation is a problem but feels this problem could
be handled in some other way, as this is a separate issue.
em Turner stated that he would agree with Cm Tirsell in that if
possible, part of this should be used for parking or at least
considered for parking and it is not true that he would like to
see the whole area in concrete but would like to work out something
with the Beautification Committee. He stated that he has visited
industrial areas that has provided parking behind mounds so that
the cars were not visible and feels that something similar might
be possible in this area. He added that he spoke to some 400 people
about the area and that about 75% of them felt that some type of
parking should be provided.
em Futch stated that he was opposed to the City spending the amount
of money necessary to acquire these properties for park purposes
since he felt the money could better be spent for parks elsewhere;
however, since the park money was used for this purpose he feels
that it should be developed as a park, especially in view of the
fact that there will always be a traffic problem with the exit
that close to the corner.
It was concluded that the Council has not really had the opportunity
to review the proposed designs and continued the item.
Mr. Parness commented that if the majority of the Council wishes
to have parking provided the staff will work on designs that would
include this; however, if the majority of the Council does not want
it, it would be appropriate to so state at this time.
em Miller moved that designs for the two corner parcels be considered
by the Council for park development only, seconded by Cm Futch and
passed 3-2 (Cm Tirsell and Turner dissenting).
REPORT FROM DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE RE
STREET LIGHT FIXTURES
A report from the Design Review Committee was presented to the Coun-
cil with regard to street lighting fixtures in which they made the
following recommendations:
l. Install spherical fixtures from "P" to "s" Streets concurrent
with development of the S.P. Shopping Center.
2. Include funds in the budget to change the fixtures on First
Street from "P" to "L" during the year following the initial
installation from "P" to "S".
3. Include funds in the budget to change the fixtures on First Street
from "L" Street to Livermore Avenue during the following year.
4. Change the fixtures on First Street, east of Livermore Avenue,
as development occurs.
CM-28-9l
April 22, 1974
(re Street Lights)
em Miller stated that the report submitted by the Design Review
Committee on the matter was excellent and moved to implement it as
follows: a) that the Council approve the report, b) approve "P"
to liS" for spherical fixtures, and c) direct the staff to prepare
a budget for 74-75 and 75-76 to replace the existing "Styleview"
fixtures. The motion was seconded by Cm Turner.
em Miller stated that he would like to add to the motion that
when the budget is prepared the staff should look for the use
of the "Styleview" fixtures elsewhere or their possible sale.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.
REPORT RE PROVISION
FOR UTILITY DISTRICTS
The City Manager reported that there is a provision in the Munici-
pal Code for the creation of underground utility districts and
the staff is investigating the prospects of separately defined
utility districts or possibly one that might encompass the en-
tire City. At present, several districts have been formed
whereby the abutting property owners are required to withstand
the cost of the underground utilities (on site) while the off
site costs have been borne by the annual contribution accruable
from PG&E and there have been complaints that the present City
policy is inequitable. Mr. Parness added that we are getting
into residential sections as well as industrial areas and that is the
reason the question of the City's authority for imposing these
costs has been raised. He stated that the City Attorney has
prepared a report on the matter which he has not had the oppor-
tunity to review and suggested that the matter be discussed at
the time the subject of the entire undergrounding is reintroduced.
He explained that this item (4.3 on the agenda) is related to the
next agenda item in that this item attempts to address the question
of authority and the next item (4.4) recommends a method for assign-
ing or apportioning costs of undergrounding.
Cm Futch stated that he is a little confused, as he cannot under-
stand how the City can assign the costs without the authority to
do so and the City Manager stated that the Industrial Advisory Board
and the staff did not take into consideration the question of 'author-
ity but has been a concern of the City Attorney and City Manager and
they are trying to figure this out. He stated that the City cannot
consider assessing a fee other than the method presently being used
unless there is an authoritative method.
Cm Futch stated that, essentially, if the next item (4.4) is approved
it will not take effect until item 4.3 has been resolved and Mr.
Parness replied that this is correct.
Item 4.3 and 4.4 were continued and the Council moved to the next
agenda item.
REPORT RE BICENTENNIAL
COMMITTEE ORG. STATUS
An oral report regarding the status of the Bicentennial Committee
organization was given to the Council by Donald Bradley, Assistant
City Manager and em Tirsell suggested that perhaps the Community
Affairs Committee in liaison with the Heritage Guild Committee could
form a basic steering committee and possibly solicit other groups
with specific projects.
CM-28-92
April 22, 1974
(Bicentennial Committee)
em Miller moved that the Council ask the Civic Affairs Committee
to convene a meeting with the Heritage Guild and Cultural Arts
Council to discuss the question of the formation of a Bicentennial
Committee which he explained is a motion based on the suggestion
made by em Tirsell, seconded by Cm Tirsell and passed unanimously.
Paul Tull suggested that the Council use somebody else once in
awhile when considering new committees and Cm Miller commented
that this is a good point but what the Council is proposing to
do is to get things going by asking these three groups to meet,
one of which is sponsored by the City, one which is partially
sponsored by the City and the third being a private group, to
meet and discuss a Bicentennial commission and he would hope that
the matter will be open to the citizens at large so that there can
be a large participation other than the same people.
David Eller, Livermore resident, stated that he attended the last
Heritage Guild meeting in which Janet Newton commented that the
City of Hayward had expended $60,000 for the same type of thing
and that they tried to get as many people interested in it as
possible so that they would have a variety of people taking part
and he felt this would be advisable.
REPORT RE LIMITATION ON
FREQUENCY OF GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT
The City Attorney briefly reported on the limitation of frequency
allowed in amending elements of the General Plan. Section 6536l
of the Government Code reads, "No mandatory element of a general
plan shall be amended more frequently than three times during any
calendar year, which amendment or amendments may occur at any time
as determined by the legislative body~. This section shall not apply
to the adoption of any element of the general plan.". He reported
that as of January l, 1974, the mandatory elements of a general
plan include 8 categories which were listed in a written report.
em Tirsell moved that the matter be referred to the Planning
Commission regarding development of a policy for considering General
Plan amendments, seconded by Cm Turner and which passed unanimously.
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE
ANNEXING NORTHFRONT
ROAD - ANNEX NO. 1
On motion of em Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote,
the ordinance annexing the area known as "North Front Road Annex
No. l" was adopted and the title only was read by the City Attorney.
ORDINANCE NO. 838
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN
UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS "NORTH FRONT
ROAD ANNEX NO. l" TO THE CITY OF LIVERMORE.
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE
ASSIGNING E DISTRICT
TO ARROYO ANNEX NO. 3
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by em Tirsell and by unanimous vote
the ordinance assigning the zoning category of E District (Education
and Institutions) to the area known as Arroyo Annex No. 3 was adopted
and the title only was read by the City Attorney.
CM-28-93
April 22, 1974
(Ordinance Rezoning
Arroyo Annex No.3)
ORDINANCE NO. 839
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS
AMENDED, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMENDING
SECTION 3.00 THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING.
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Re Air Resources Bd Hearing)
The City Attorney reported that he had attended the Air Resources
Board hearing on behalf of the City on April 1l, and stated that
the Board took no action regarding indirect source regulations
which would include residential development although that was the
Air Resources Board's staff proposal. The effect of their taking
no action is that the federal EPA regulations concerning indirect
sources will take effect July 1, 1974. These regulations do not
include any kind of residential development as an indirect source
contributing to air pollution. The BAAPCD is considering regula-
tions which at least theoretically could include residential de-
velopment and it might be appropriate for the City to make its
voice heard at that forum and pursue some aggressive input with
the federal EPA to make our problem known to them. BAAPCD has a
hearing scheduled for May l.
Cm. Futch asked at what point we would have a possible suit against
BAAPCD or EPA regarding not including indirect residential sources.
Mr. Wharton explained that the Air Resources Board has decided not
to take any action since there are other regulations which will
take effect at the federal level. He thought it might be possible
to initiate litigation with the federal agency if they consider and
reject this source, but he does not know if they have considered
this source but will learn more about it. As far as BAAPCD, until
they adopt some regulations, it is not~ for l.itigation but we
must bring our views to their attention in a forceful way.
+~~(t~ '
Cm. Tirsell recommended that the City Attorney attend th~-~AAPCD
hearing on May 1, and Mr. Wharton stated it would be desirable to
have Council representation as well as legal, but stated he would
have his assistant attend as he would be attending a conference,
and it was also agreed that Councilman Miller would attend.
Campaign Expenditure Statements
Mr. Wharton stated he had reviewed the Campaign Expenditure and Dis-
closure Statements filed by the candidates at the March 5 election,
and Candidate Rocco has not filed. He has written requesting that
it be promptly filed and also conferred with the District Attorney's
office and the DA is prepared to prosecute as soon as we request
that it be filed, and if it is not filed within seven days he asked
that the Council authorize prosecution under our Campaign Dis-
closure Ordinance.
Cm. Miller moved that the City Attorney be directed to prosecute
under provision of the ordinance; motion was seconded by Cm. Tirsell
and passed unanimously.
Water Reclamation Plant Bids
Mr. Parness stated he had a request that the Council authorize the
advertising for bids for the Water Reclamation Plant modification
as we have received approval of the State Water Resources Board for
that project. If the bid solicitation is approved, construction will
commence the first part of August. Mr. Parness recommended that a
resolution be adopted authorizing the bids.
CM-28-94
April 22, 1974
(Water Reclamation Plant
Bids)
A motion was made by Cm. Miller, seconded by Cm. Turner, and approved
unanimously to adopt a resolution to call for bids.
RESOLUTION NO. 64-74
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, ASCERTAINING WAGE SCALE AND
DIRECTING CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR THE
WATER RECLAMATION PLANT, STAGE 3 IMPROVEMENTS.
(Report re RR Grade
Separation Constr. Project)
Mr. Parness announced that this morning the contractor for the Grade
Separation Construction project delivered the signed contract, thereby
completing the last remaining obstacle to the project, and construc-
tion will commence next week.
MATTERS INITIATED BY
COUNCIL
Truth in Advertising.
Cm. Turner stated developers imply certain things in their brochures
relative to school and parks, etc. and wondered if the City could
in some way control the material that is listed in the brochures as
people are mislead, and Mr. Wharton stated this had been covered and
he would provide him with this information and also Cm. Tirsell.
Mr. Parness stated that several years ago the Council and staff
covered this item in great depth, even meeting with the state Real
Estate Commission, and it was found that the City had practically
no authority to impose a truth in advertising statute on the developer,
and even the state had no authority to do so except to require that
on the sales contract a word of direction to the prospective buyer
to investigate with the official agencies the proximity of the school
and park site.
Illegal Sale of
Gillice Units
Cm Miller stated that the Gillice condominiums are being sold and
that this constitutes an illegal sale due to the fact that Gillice
has not filed a subdivision map with the City and feels that the
. of our state and City ordinances should not go unchallenged.
He pointed out that there are dedications associated with the filing
of a subdivision map and the City should make sure that it has every-
thing it's en~Lto and not being cheated.
Mr. ~~that there has been exchange, back and forth,
with the state officials responsible for these statutes and the
state plans to take no action and that if action is to be taken
they feel it should be taken by the City. We can file a notice
of violation with the County Recorder which can be done relatively
easy and may cause the sale of the properties to be somewhat
impaired in that the buyers will be notified that there may be some
irregularities in the property. He added that he has a report
in process which should be ready by next week and will recommend
that this step be taken.
Cm Miller moved that the City Attorney's recommendation for filing
the notice be approved, seconded by Cm Futch and passed unanimously.
CM-28-95
April 22, 1974
Castro Valley Jensen Development
Cm Miller mentioned that a letter has been sent to the County
with regard to the air pollution consequences of the Jensen
Development in Castro Valley and wondered about the status of
this matter which was reported on briefly by Mr. Musso.
Status of Holmes Street
em Tirsell asked if Holmes Street is finished because the pave-
ment is really a mess and Mr. Lee replied that it is not and
that he is sorry he cannot indicate as to when it will be finished.
Cm Pritchard commented that he also has received a number of tele-
phone calls complaining about Holmes Street.
re Gun Policy
Mayor Pritchard asked Cm Miller if he could explain the new gun
policy and em Miller explained that the Chief of Police has
prepared a new gun policy which will go into effect on May 1
which reflects a recent court decision allowing the City Police
Departments to be more strict than state statutes and the court
decision lays out how this can be done and noted that for all
practical purposes, the gun policy is in defense of life only.
re Complaints Over Trucks Parking
on Arroyo Road & Holmes St.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he continues to receive complaints
from people regarding trucks parking on Arroyo Road and Holmes
Street and feels that something must be done about this situa-
tion.
Mr. Lee commented that it appears that the City will have to
post the area with "no parking" signs and they have contacted
the County regarding the area on Arroyo Road which is owned by
the County. He stated that if there is no objection he will
proceed with the posting and em Turner stated that before any-
thing is done he would like to have the opportuni~y to evaluate
the situation himself.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business the meeting was adjourned
at l2:00 a.m. to an executive session to discuss appointments and
New Town.
~t1~
~r/~
Depu y CJ.ty C rk
Livermore, California
APPROVE
ATTEST
CM-28-96
Regular Meeting of April 29, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on April 29,
1974, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore
Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. with
Mayor Pritchard presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmembers 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
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote,
the minutes for the meeting of April 22, 1974, were approved as
amended.
OPEN FORUM
(re Outcome of Meeting
with Kissell Company -
Bevilacqua Tract)
John Fox, 59ll Singing Hills, asked about the results of the meeting
which transpired this afternoon between the City staff and Mr. Dewey
Watson, attorney representing the Kissell Company regarding the
unfinished Bevilacqua tract and the City Attorney responded by way
of explaining that a memorandum of understanding had been prepared
and for the most part was agreed upon with discussion of some additionaJ
terms and conditions which Mr. Watson will be discussing with the
Kissell Company located in Cleveland. It is anticipated that the
agreement will be ready for Council approval at the next Council
meeting. Mr. Wharton then answered questions regarding the building
permits as presented by Mr. Fox.
(re S. P. Commercial
Development)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, referred to an article which appeared in
the Oakland Tribune, written by Elba Leonard, regarding the Southern
Pacific commercial development in which it was noted that a similar
example was the Oakland downtown mall for which millions of dollars
were spent to entice shoppers but which failed in spite of this
effort and Mr. Tull stated that he agrees with what Mr. Leonard has
stated.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
LEASE OF THE LAS POSITAS
GOLF COURSE
Mr. Parness explained that a written report has been transmitted to
the Council regarding the proposed lease for the Las positas Golf
Course and that about three years ago the City Council was faced
with the task of reviewing budgetary appropriations and in particular
CM-28-97
April 29, 1974
(re Golf Course)
the enterprise operation fund which should be self-sustaining
which brought about the review of the Las positas Golf Course
operation. At that time, taking into consideration the economic
imbalance, the Council suggested that it might be appropriate for
the City to look at the propects of leasing the facility to pri-
vate operators. Since that time three inquiries have been made as
to leasing the golf course but up until about four months ago there
had not been definite interest in a leasing arrangement. GOLF-
AMERICA, a newly formed corporation, has indicated sincere interest
in leasing the golf course and their only concern was whether or
not the City government would be desirous of such an arrangement.
Mr. Parness stated that it was his understanding that this was the
wish of the Council and therefore encouraged them to pursue the
matter, which was in December of 1973. He explained that since
that time the City staff has met with representatives of the firm
to discuss the prospects of a lease and the document which has
been transmitted to the Council and is very lengthy as well as very
comprehensive which he explained was based on other similar leases
which have been executed by public entities around the state. He
stated that he would like to emphasize that he would reluctantly
recommend that the lease be favorably considered and that his rea-
son for recommending this is due to the unfortunate economic con-
ditions which the City has experienced during the seven years of
operation of the golf course. He then illustrated a chart record-
ing the annual case history explaining that the aggregate deficit
over the past seven years up to and including this year amounts to
$485,000 and it is anticipated that this is expected to continue
but will hopefully reduce substantially next year and the year
thereafter. He and the staff feels that the golf course will real~
ize an upward trend in golf play and income to the City. However,
experience has not shown an upward trend but he stated that it
is felt there are honest reasons for this such as adverse weather
conditions and highway construction. He pointed out that there
are many compensating features to owning a golf course which the
Council is aware of but reluctantly feels that the Council should
consider the lease arrangement. He stated that one of the major
concerns in a lease arrangement is whether or not it will be proper~
ly maintained if it is in private hands and is the overriding concern.
Mr. Parness noted that the Public Works Department has provided
a comprehensive list of maintenance requirements that will be attach-
ed to the lease and must be observed and that this will be properly
monitored and if it is observed it will be more extensive than
is currently practiced by the City staff. Safeguards have been
written into the lease to assure the continuation of the operation
and the return to the City will be a portion of the proceeds and
it is hoped that the City will gain more from the receipts than
at present and in any event we will be guaranteed a minimum payment
of $50,000 per year for the first three years of the lease and
$60,000 for the optional second three years of the lease and $75,000
for the third term of the lease which will be for four years.
It was also noted that the Crosswinds Restaurant will not be affec-
ted by the lease.
The Mayor stated that many people have asked how a private enterprise
is expected to make money on the golf course when the City cannot
and wondered if Mr. Parness would explain this as well as how bonded
indebtedness will affect this.
Mr. Parness explained that this has been a concern of his also but
is impressed by four factors, as follows:
l. The lessee will not have the bonded indebtedness that the City
has.
2. The lessee can have a greater degree of flexibility in personnel
costs, including fringe benefits.
3. The expected return they will enjoy from the pro shop operations,
which will be expanded to about twice its size.
CM-80-98
April 29, 1974
(golf course)
4. They intend to promote the golf course operations and golf play
which should generate more rounds to the extent that they antici-
pate about 60,000 rounds.
Mr. Algie Pulley, President of GOLFAMERICA, explained that the
organization consists of professional people in the golf industry
including golf course designers and construction people as well
as golf professionals essential in carrying out a full golf program.
Their objective is to promote more sensitivity to golf for the good
of golf and the people in it and are interested in Las positas due
to its location and feels that it has potential that can be expanded
to a successful golf operation financially. He then introduced five
other members of the organization and explained their function in
the organization.
Richard Baker, Vice President of GOLFAMERICA, explained the plans
and objectives for Las positas and reiterated a point made by Mr.
Parness in that the organization is composed of golf people getting
into the business world and not businessmen getting into the golf
world which he feels makes a lot of difference in lease operation.
He pointed out that golf is their life and that they have made it
their business by choice. He then expanded on some of the points
made by Mr. Parness as to the reasons it is felt a private enter-
prise will be successful in operating the golf course while the City
has not. He explained that they intend to engage in vigorous adver-
tising and sales promotion with utilization of editorial space re-
garding the new concept GOLFAMERICA offers. They plan to have tourn-
ament play and league play to fill the slow periods on the golf course
during the week. A lady professional is available to come to Las
positas for clinics for full time instruction and to help with tourn-
ament play and is just one of the examples of how they intend to
promote use of Las Positas. He pointed out that if it is not main-
tained better and better every year that they, as well as the golf
course, will suffer.
Cm Miller commented that he would prefer not to have to vote on
this matter tonight, as a very long and complicated lease is in-
volved and he would like to have the opportunity to understand it
and reflect on what has been said.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would agree with what em Miller has
said and explained that the Council has not had the opportunity to
review the lease agreement, as they received it only last Friday
and had only the weekend to review it.
Cm Futch brought up the question of fees that the City will receive
which Mr. Parness explained and it was noted that the golf course
would have to realize approximately $250,000 gross in order for the
City to receive more than the $50,000 minimum mentioned and Mr.
Pulley explained that this would be based on varying percentages
for different areas and that they expect $200,000 for green fees
and a conservative projection for the golf carts, golf shop and
range activity. Cm Futch felt it would be worthwhile to have the
staff estimate the lOt'....J ~ fees which Mr. Baker explained should
be close to $300,000 growt revenue in all. areas.
1!JtIk&k J &~cfte6
It was noted that there is a discrep!ncy in the figures provided by
the Public Works Director and that of the City Manager and wondered
if this might be explained. Mr. Parness responded by stating that
the figures he used have come from the auditor and are accurate and
which indicate the final summary.
CM-28-99
April 29, 1974
(golf course )
Mr. Parness then explained, in detail, the figures represented
on the chart and noted that up until this time the golf course
was paying the cost for the transmission of water and it was
concluded that for the next year this is a reasonable amount to
assess against the water reclamation fund since it really is a
disposition of treated effluent water; therefore, the cost is
being transferred as of next fiscal year to the Water Reclamation
Plant and is not shown in the 74-75 budget figures, and Mayor
Pritchard wondered what it would cost to place the effluent else-
where if it were not used by the golf course. Mr. Parness explained
that through a subregional agency we are participating in, we
are going to have to do just that - impound treated effluent
waters and to cause its disposal during terms of heavy runoff,
but he did not know what the cost might be. We want to keep the
water locally and is one of the reasons we built the golf course
- to have it served in the sense of a water reclamation adjunct
to our treatment plant. The City expects to give water without
charge to the State Highway Department, the Junior College District,
and to local farming operations. We might compute what the cost
of disposal might be and charge the golf course for it, but until
now we have always welcomed anyone who would accept some of this
water so we would not have to dispose of it in streams tributary
to downstream users. It is a valuable resource.
Cm. Tirsellasked if the fees to be charged to the golfers would be
reviewed by the City, and Mr. Parness stated they would be entirely
subject to the review and approval of the City Council. Cm. Tirsell
asked who from the City would oversee the maintenance of the course,
and Mr. Parness stated we have people competent to do that under
the administrative direction of the Public Works Director, and
he felt certain the City would be able to adequately monitor the
course.
Cm. Turner stated his concern about the employees as it is indi-
cated a certain percentage will be retained and others may be
out of emploYment, and he wondered if the City accepts the lease
if these people could be reassigned.
Mr. Parness stated this was also one of his concerns and he feels
that the City can assimilate three of the seven and perhaps more,
dependent upon what the Council allows in the budget; the others
will have the option of working with GOLFAMERICA.
Cm. Turner pointed out that GOLFAMERICA had pledged to maintain
the Junior Golf Program, but wondered if it would be better in
writing, and Mr. Parness explained that the provision to guuarantee
any kind of surety cannot be written into a lease, but he expects
to have that kind of a promise stated in writing, and he feels he
can rely on what he has been pledged orally as the success of the
golf course is their success, and they know how successful the Jr.
program has been and they would promise to advance it and might
speak to that point later as they are enthusiastic about the program.
Cm. Turner remarked that they should work under the philosophy
the course can be maintained by the City rather than considering
only the lease.
Cm. Miller stated his concern that the $50,000 surety for mainte-
nance of the course was extremely low in view of how rapidly a
golf course can deteriorate and the expense to bring it back.
Mr. Parness stated the $50,000 is not meant for that as it would
cost ten fold that figure to completely rejuvenate a golf course.
The City would count on constant watchfulness and monitoring. That
amount would be only for reoccupancy expenses such as repurchase of
CM-28-l00
April 29, 1974
(re golf course lease)
equipment the City would dispose of - not for defective conditions
that might result over a year or two of ill care, and he is confident
that this will not happen as golfers will not play on a course that is
not maintained.
Cm. Miller felt we should put some thought into a maintenance surety
bond to protect our capital investment.
The City Attorney explained that the lease does provide for a default
section such that if there is any conduct which is not in accordance
with the lease, including proper maintenance~ the City has a right of
re-entry within a lO-day period, all repairs, maintenance, etc. to
be accomplished by the City at the expense of the lessee. Mr. Wharton
stated there are a number of protections other than the surety that
are built in.
Mayor Pritchard asked how long GOLFAMERICA has been in existence
and if they own or lease any other golf course, and he would also
like to have the representative of the corporation talk about the
Junior golf program.
Mr. Pulley explained that GOLFAMERICA has been in existence since
October; they do not lease any facilities; they are presently manag-
ing a club in California. Their people have been involved in plan-
ning, organizing and attempting in working with other groups, to
sustain professionally and effeciently managed facilities and this is
the reason they are together. As far as the Junior Program and all
the other programs connected with the mens and ladies clubs, they
are very enthusiastic about them and anxious to pursue a vigorous
program in working with the various clubs and any service they can
offer as their main life is golf.
Cm. Tirsell asked the staff if it would be proper to ask about the
corporation's financing, and Mr. Parness stated he has reviewed
the financial statement and he is satisfied that the proceeds of the
company and financial assets are more than adequate for the beginning
of the golf course operation; their net worth is supported by a
formal pledge by a banking institution.
Cm. Tirsell questioned what green fee would be charged and Mr. Pulley
stated they intended to leave the greens fees as they are and would
request an increase at such a time as capital improvements are made
and the golf facilities upgraded. In reply to a question by Cm.
Tirsell with regard to a senior citizens program, Mr. Pulley stated
they have not considered the programs in detail, but they are sensitive
to the needs of people who will enjoy the facilities. Cm. Tirsell
asked Mr. Pulley if he felt their increased earnings would come from
more rounds played, the improved pro shop and better ability to publi~
cize. Mr. Pulley replied they feel their primary income will come
from increased play and more efficient utilization of the facility
and explained their plans to arrange leagues during slack time, and
they have agreed on a capital improvement program and they feel strongl:
that the turf condition must be upgraded in order to receive a return
for their efforts.
Cm. Miller asked what club they operated and Mr. Pulley stated the
So. Lake Tahoe Country Club which is in poor condition and they are
trying to improve that; they just acquired that club this spring.
Mr. Pulley added that the Council might consider investigating the
background of their people if there is some reluctance on their
capability. Basically, their present participation is in the consult-
ant and management guidance business.
CM-28-l0l
April 29, 1974
(golf course)
Mayor Pritchard commented that the Council will not be taking
a vote this evening and would suggest that the staff make a
copy of the lease available to any recognized group that would
be interested in reviewing it as well as a copy to be placed in
the City Library that could be reviewed by the public and it was
noted that perhaps there should be about six copies available at
the library that could be checked out.
Jerry Atwell, l34 Amber Way, Secretary/Treasurer of the Las
positas Mens Golf Club, stated that he has been elected by the
board of directors to speak as a representative of the club
which has 345 members. He stated that when they first heard
of the possibility that the golf course might be leased they
were puzzled, as they were not aware of the facts involved with
reference to the financial picture and because of this they con-
ducted a study using the documents available from the Library
and the City. Subsequently a report was written and discussion
took place and they have concluded that the City should not lease
the golf course but continue operation by the City. He pointed
out that in reviewing the past financial status of the golf course
it is true that it has been operating in the "red" but there have
been reasons for this such as the bridge work that was necessary
which made it inconvenient for people to get to the golf course
as well as the fact that the golf course was not properly drained
and even now drainage is still being added. Maintenance equipment
had to be purchased which was an expense and means that the golf
course finally has some decent equipment for maintenance and in
their opinion most of the major items have been taken care of.
Since these necessary items have already been purchased it would
appear that some of these costs will diminish and pointed out that
there has been no mention of the fact that by making paYments on
the lease and by making capital improvements the City is increasing
the value and its net ownership of the golf course - there are no
credits given in the accounting for this. In a certain number of
years the bond paYment will cease and the City will own a golf
course. He stated that one point of contention has been that
the golfer is expected to pay for things that are not advantageous
to him and that if the City would delete the costs that are no
advantage to the golfer or golf course and remove the overhead
charges, that on an operating expense basis the golf course should
come very close to breaking even and perhaps even be making money.
He explained that with a 50~ fee increase the golf course would
realize a loss of $l,OOOi however, with a $l.OO increase a $2l,000 sur-
plus would be generated and added that those who are members of
the mens club feel that a $1.00 increase would not be unreasonable.
He stated that the budget can be controlled and some costs can be
cut and improvements delayed and they feel confident that the golf
course will make money next year (fiscal year 1974-75). He then
commented on what the club feels to be the disadvantages of a golf
course that is leased rather than remaining in the hands of the City,
and mentioned the four points listed by the City Manager as reasons
for recommending that the golf course be leased stating the club's
viewpoint on these items, as well as commenting on portions of
the text of the lease agreement. He stated that the people who
play golf realize that they do not represent a majority of the
population but feel that they are equally significant in their
needs and that the City should serve these needs. It is noted
that there are more and more people of retirement age in Livermore
CM-28-l02
April 29, 1974
(re golf course)
and that the exercise golf provides is very good for people
of this age and it is anticipated that there will be more rounds
of golf played during the week by these people because there are
more retired people than in the past. In conclusion he pointed out
that the City doesn't necessarily expect to see a return on other
recreational facilities or provisions such as the Library or bike
paths and that the City should be more concerned with the number
of people being served, including the golf course, and that the mens
club has acted as responsibly and as objectively as possible and
has made a recommendation based on information they have obtained.
The Mayor explained that, normally, a person is allowed to speak
for only five minutes but inasmuch as Mr. Atwell is the representa-
tive of such a large group this rule was overlooked.
Patrick Brosnan, Livermore resident, stated that he does not belong
to the golf club but as a local barber has quite a few customers
who are golfers and would like to speak on their behalf. He stated
that some of the older people have said that they enjoy playing
golf at Las positas because they appreciate the manner in which
the course is maintained as well as the fact that they are concerned
about prices going up if a private enterprise takes over. He stated
that he has spoken with a number of other barbers who have said that
their customers also have voiced objection to a private enterprise
operating the golf course and asked that this be transmitted to the
Council through Mr. Brosnan.
Susan Summerson, 829 Leland Court, representative of the Nine Hole
Ladies Golf Club at Las Positas, stated that they are more than
satisfied with the way the golf course is operated now and that
those who work at the golf course have exhibited tolerance towards
the junior golfers and we need people who are patient and will pay
attention to the junior golfer, and they are concerned that a private
enterprise would not be concerned with the junior golfer because
the return from the junior golfer is not as great. She stated that
the club she represents supports the resolution presented to the
Council by the mens golf club regarding retention of the golf course
by the City.
Dan Lippstreu, the golf professional at the golf course commented
that he has not said anything on this matter but feels the time
has come to speak to the Council. He stated that he is employed
by the City of Livermore, has no other source of income, has not
looked for work elsewhere and that he employs other people to work
at the golf course - all of whom are concerned about being out of
work if a private enterprise takes over. He pointed out that he
will not be working for GOLFAMERICA and if they tale over they will
not be members of the PGA which will mean that his people will not
be able to work for them and will not get credit for their time which
is something that is very important. It is hard for him to say whether
or not they should work for these people as they have been approached
and he has not. At this time he presented the Councilmembers with
a report of his operations at the golf course, which he summarized
in some detail. He stressed that the golf course is here for recrea-
tion and they want to service the people. He spoke about the
CM-28-l03
April 29, 1974
(re golf course)
high school varsity and Jr. varsity programs that play at no charge,
but which could earn an additional $20,000 for the City, and if this
is what the City wants, he can eliminate this program, but he feels
it is a very worthwhile program. Mr. Lippsteu stated that he con-
ducts clinics for the high schools and the ladies and mens clubs
for which there is no charge, which is his way of promoting the golf
course. The greens fees for April 1974 will reach $l9,000, and
he feels that the dollar figure is changing; the best figure prior
to this time was $l7,967 in May 1971. Mr. Lippstreu felt his report
would substantiate what he had said and felt that the future of the
golf course is good.
william Arrieta, 359 Martin Avenue, assistant golf coach at Granada
High School, stated he had been asked by the coaches of both schools
to address the Council regarding their concern which is the Jr. golf
program and the continued use of the course by their players. They
play most of the courses in the East Bay, San Francisco and the
surrounding area, and the only courses where they find active varsity
and junior varsity squads are at the municipal course. A decision
must be made as to whether the City is out to make a big profit, or
provide a service. He continued by saying that Las positas is well
~nown and has been recognized by Golf Digest and Golf Magazine this
year. He urged the Council to reject the lease arrangement.
Buddy Johnson, 833 Curlew Road, west coast representative for the
National Golf Foundation, remarked that it was necessary for him to
straighten out a newspaper article inasmuch as during his interview
he had stated that he thought the present golf course operation was
a very fine one and that the golf pro was very fine, and he had
stated that he thought that Ty Caplin was one of the ten top pro-
fessionals in the U. S. His job is to help people plan and develop
golf courses and advise as to feasibility, cost analysis, market-
ing, promotion and organization, and he has counseled with the City
Manager several times and in almost every case it was concerning a
lease and what the City can do about the deficit. The Council must
face the question on how it proposes to operate the municipal golf
course - as a service to the citizens even to the point of subsidiz-
ing it, which is fine, and many cities operate on that basis; a
number of municipalities are looking toward lease experiences and
some have been very successful. The golf business is getting tougher
and will continue to get tougher, and that is why cities are looking
to groups like GOLFAMERICA as maintenance costs continue to rise
and cities do not maintain green fee increases commensurate with
these expenses.
Paul Tull, 2232 Linden Ave., stated although he is a non-golfer,
he feels the golf course is increasing in value and if private enter-
prise wants to take over and make a profit, the City should be able
to do so also. He also questioned that the pro shop can be expanded
for only $6,000.
Clyde Highet, l3l7 Hibiscus, reminded the Council of the poor condi-
tion of the Springtown Golf Course when the City took it over, and
urged that private industry not be allowed to take over the golf
course.
Don Smith, Las positas Maintenance Mechanic, spoke on behalf of the
golf course employees, remarking that there is a fine shop, and
a very fine course. He stated that he had worked at Castlewood
for seven years before coming to Livermore and hoped to retire
with the City and would urge that the golf course is not leased.
Mr. Baker remarked that it is the intention of their corporation to
improve the pro shop and there is no reason to change the junior
golf program or the senior program, and provisions for this can be
included in the lease. All the members of the firm have always
lived in the bay area and have all been in the golf business all
their lives and want to do what is best for the course and the people
who play at Las Positas.
CM-28-l04
April 29, 1974
(re golf course)
Mr. Pulley pointed out that they were here to offer a service to the
City, and after a lengthy discussion with the City Manager, it was
agreed that the best approach would be a lease arrangement. Their
preliminary discussions involved several ways to assist in management,
financial problems, operational problems on a consultant basis in
several different ways. If the City does not need them, they would
be the last to say they want to come here. They are here to try to
help and hope it has been presented this way in every aspect.
The Mayor indicated that a motion would be in order to continue this
matter until whatever time is necessary to make a decision, and Mr.
Parness remarked that hopefully it would be next week.
Cm Miller suggested continuance to allow enough time to a) absorb
what they have heard, b) think of their own questions and c) have
time for the Council to discuss the matter. Mr. Parness stated
that he does not feel additional testimony will be necessary.
The Mayor suggested it be continued for one week and if more time
is necessary they could resolve it at that time.
Cm Miller moved to continue the matter for one week, seconded by
em Tirsell, and approved unanimously.
RECESS
AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE COUNCIL MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS
PRESENT.
RESERVOIR SITE LOCATION
PROPERTY ACQUISITION
The City Manager reported that as a part of the Water Reclamation
Plant construction project, a water reservoir is to be located
north of 1-580 near Doolan Canyon Road which consists of about
seven acres. The property has been appraised and the owner of the
property has rejected the appraisal price and would like to address
the Council on the matter this evening. Mr. Parness explained that
the reservoir must have an elevated topography for the flow of
gravity and will contain waters from the treatment process to be
used for irrigation purposes - one of the primary users being the
State Division of Highways for highway ground cover irrigation for
an extended lineal dimension along I-580. The other use will be
for our golf course which will allow more water for the golf course
in less time which will be a significant advantage to us. He then
presented a map which Mr. Lee used to illustrate the site as well
as an explanation as to why seven acres of land are necessary.
Mayor Pritchard commented that another site with about the same
elevation had been a consideration and wondered why this site has
been given preference for purchase and Mr. Lee felt that this was
the only site considered that would provide adequate screening and
Mr. Parness added that there is easement access by virtue of Doolan
Canyon Road which would not be available with the other site consider-
ed, plus the fact that this site is more directly north of where the
transmission lines would extend.
Cm Tirsell commented that Mr. McCormick (the owner of the property)
is concerned about retaining access and Mr. Lee explained that he
would have access which was then discussed by the Council.
It was noted that the reservoir would adequately serve the college
site, the golf course, the medians on the highway from 1-680 to
Greenville Road and also the airport agricultural land.
CM-28-105
April 29, 1974
(re Reservoir -
McCormick Propertyl
Cm Futch stated that an alternate suggestion might be to acquire
less land and to purchase additional land at the time it is felt
necessary and the problem of what to do with the soil could prob-
ably be worked out in advance with the property owner. He felt
that this might be a more reasonable approach as well as more
desirable to the property owner.
Cm Miller stated that he would prefer to buy as much property as
we feel we need at this time rather than have to pay a higher price
for the property in the future and it would seem that the major
concern of the property owner is access which Mr. Lee has stated
can be worked out by an easement.
Mr. McCormick stated that he realizes that his property can be
condemned for public use such as the reservoir proposed but
one of the conditions for the exercise of this right is that
just compensation must be measured by the fair market value
of the property and paid to the property owner and that the
owner may be entitled to damages for loss of value of the por-
tion not taken, which they feel applies to their property. He
stated that the appraisal was made for $2,200 for the lower
portion, $2,000 for the middle portion and $l,500 for the north
portion of the land and that the $l,500 figure is the figure
being used for calculating the value of the land when the middle
portion is going to be taken from them as was revealed after a
survey was conducted. He then explained the reasons they feel
they are entitled to compensation for loss of value. They would like
$5,000/acre including the roadway and easement which comes to
8.25 acres and mentioned that the easement is going to be black
topped and will become a right-of-way rather than an easement.
They are requesting $l5,000 for severance damage to cover loss
of value to the property not taken, change of the planning pat-
tern, loss of 2/3 of the flat land and other reasons listed by
him. He then discussed the matter of access and what they feel
would be necessary in order to maintain the cattle operation now
going on, as well as water rights which may be exercised at the
time the water is clean enough for cattle consumption. He then
reported on the various parcels of land surrounding them that
have been sold and the values of these parcels ($4,000 and $5,000
per acre).
The City Attorney explained that the City may not select a price
for the property without regard to the qualified and expert apprai-
sal of a properly licensed specialist and in his opinion the property
owner's interests would best be served by legal counsel experienced
in condemnation matters. He added that anything substantially
more than the appraised value would constitute a gift of public
funds. The City does have the power of eminent domain, it is
a public purpose and we have a right to take the land and the
question of just compensation is either worked out with the land
owner using the estimate of a qualified appraiser, or relying on
the wisdom of a trial with or without a jury and the summoning of
expert witnesses for either side. He added that a trial court
would award compensation and would take into account all the
factors which have been mentioned and can be translated into
monitary terms. He also noted the matter of condemnation
and evaluating all the interests becomes a complicated process
which is not something that most of us have the ability to evalu-
ate and secondly, the City Council lacks the authority to nego-
tiate a purchase price, except within very limited amounts closely
approximating that of the appraised value.
Mr. Lee recommended that since we have already called for bids
we continue with condemnation and work with Mr. McCormick to
eliminate as many problems as possible so that legal resolve
will not be necessary.
CM-28-l06
April 29, 1974
(re Reservoir -
McCormick Property)
Mr. McCormick commented that it has been suggested that he obtain
legal counsel but feels that the lawyer would end up with the money
and the City would end up with the property - it was estimated that
a legal resolution would cost in excess of $8,000-$9,000 not includ-
ing incidentals.
Mr. Parness suggested that perhaps it might be satisfactory to have
the City conduct a separate and independent appraisal of the property
to see what the results are and if the appraisal is close the matter
would be somewhat settled but if it is different this may be justi-
fication for further negotiation on the value of the property.
Mr. McCormick agreed that another appraisal would be appropriate
but would like the appraiser to take into consideration what the
reservoir will do to the property and not merely a road appraisal
and also would like an appraiser from this area - the last appraiser
being from Fremont. He added that one of the things that is upsetting
to them is that the City of Livermore has indicated that there is to
be no building north of 1-580 and are the first to violate this in-
tention by development of a reservoir.
Cm Tirsell moved that the City Manager be authorized to conduct
another appraisal, seconded by Cm Futch and passed unanimously.
Paul Tull stated that if the storage tanks being considered as a
reservoir for this water should happen to leak there could be a
lot of unclean water going down the hill and suggested that there
be excavation that would provide the same type of protection as
that used around oil tanks for catching the effluent if it should
happen to leak.
REPORT RE AWARD FROM
OFFICE OF CRIMINAL
JUSTICE PLANNING -
HORIZONS
It has been recommended by the City Manager that the Council adopt
a resolution authorizing an execution of a grant agreement for the
second year of funding for HORIZONS. The total project cost will
be $49,458 with $2,473 being funded locally and will be equally
shared with the City of Pleasanton. The grant award will come from
the Office of Criminal Justice planning.
em Miller moved to adopt the above recommendation, seconded by em
Turner and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 65-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF GRANT AGREEMENT
DISCUSSION RE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMITTEE
REORGANIZATION
The Council discussed the reorganization of the Valley Planning
~ Committee and Cm Miller commented that he would like to see the
County and Zone 7 deleted from the Valley Planning Committee and
that the Valley Planning Committee continue its present role but
add the things proposed by Cm Tirsell for utilizing existing studies
and holding two or three' forums a year. He felt Cm Tirsell's sug-
gestion is very good but should not replace meeting monthly.
CM-28-l07
April 29, 1974
(Reorganization of VPC)
em Futch felt the intent was for the reorganized VPC to have more
authority and muscle if the positions that were taken were voted
on by the agencies in a more formal manner - such as a forum and
the VPC would act as a steering committee to get the issues and
arguments in front of the forum. The other point is that the
County has stated that they would not be a part of the VPC which
would indicate that they are automatically eliminated.
Cm Tirsell stated that VCSD stated that if the VPC remains con-
stituted as it is they would withdraw at the end of six months
after the reorganization. They are very much opposed to VPC's
giving informational meetings.
em Miller stated that it may be worth trying a different format
and would like to withdraw his objection.
em Miller moved that VPC be asked to discuss the proposal with
the other members of VPC, seconded by Mayor Pritchard and
passed unanimously.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
Request for
Executive Session
The City Attorney asked that an executive session be held after
the meeting for the purpose of discussing personnel matters.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
Illegal Signs
Cm Miller stated that someone who is running for re-election to
Zone 7 has some illegal signs posted and would like the City staff
to pursue the illegalities of the signs.
BAAPCD Meeting
Cm Miller informed the Council that he would be attending the
BAAPCD, as Council representative, on May l, and the main points
he planned to make on their behalf is that residential be included
as indirect sources; that it be cumulatively counted and he intend-
ed to suggest that the number of units involved where you need a
permit be 250 instead of l,OOO as suggested by the City Attorney
as he felt that to be a reasonable number. He would also suggest
that the "grandfather clause" wording be replaced by EPA's wording,
and that the residential part of the ordinance which they pass be
effective as of the date of adoption.
Cm. Futch stated he had attended a League meeting and they also plan
to have a resolution before the BAAPCD supporting the inclusion of
residential indirect sources. He had also pointed out the weakness
of the "grandfather clause" and they plan to make a suggestion for
stronger wording.
CM-28-l08
April 29, 1974
General Plan Review
Cm. Tirsell stated that general plan review citizen's effort is
complete, and hopefully, it would be on the May 6 agenda, but
they have not reviewed any plans as to how to proceed with the
general plan review.
Mr. Parness replied~hat these are under preparation and the staff
is looking at the consultant's input brochures, etc. and should
be ready in a couple of weeks for report.
Use of Ravenswood Grounds
The City Manager stated he had a request from a private party for
use of the Ravenswood grounds for a private social event.
He stated that he hoped the grounds could be put to such use in the
future; however, there are no facilities at present. The interested
party has stated they will provide portable restroom facilities and
the people would be shuttled to the site. He asked if the Council
would allow this use.
The Council concurred that they would if the grounds were left in
good condition and the City would be protected.
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor pritchard signed the following proclamations:
Proclaiming May 1 as Law Day
Proclaiming the Month of Mayas Senior Citizens Month
Fiesta Week - May II to May 18
May l2-l8 as National Hospital Week
Good Samaritan Home
The Mayor explained that he had received a letter from Joan Sparks
of Good Samaritan and they would like to have a representative from
the City on their Board, not necessarily someone from the Council,
and suggested that perhaps the staff may have someone in mind for
this position.
Propositions
Mayor Pritchard stated that the Council had been asked to take a
position of the several propositions and asked that this matter be
placed on the agenda for the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at ll:35 to an executive session to discuss
personnel matters. The xecutive session was continued to noon, Monday
May 6 at offices of L' more Mortuar , 3070 East Avenue.
ATTEST
Mayor
~
Live r~ California
APPROVE
CM-28-l09
Regular Meeting of May 6, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on May 6, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:02 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard
presiding.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch and Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT: Cm Tirsell (seated during Special Item)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Council members as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the minutes for the meeting of April 29, 1974, were approved as
corrected.
SPECIAL ITEM - ANNUAL
AWARDS BY BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE
Mayor Pritchard stated that each year the Beautification Committee
awards certificates and decals to citizens of the community in
appreciation for aesthetic contributions to the community and the
Mayor and Ayn Wieskamp, representative of the Beautification Committee
presented the decals and certificates to the following citizens:
James and Maudie Griffin, lOl9 Marigold Road
Wilmond and Barbara Waddle, 5433 Delia Way
Sandra Henderson, l688 Third Street
Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd Graybeal, l092 Peppertree Place
Mr. and Mrs. William Searight, 4025 Fordham Way
Mr. and Mrs. Charles Waskow, 555 Colusa Way
Clark Harris, 632 Dover Way
Mr. and Mrs. Wayne Caricofe, 675 Dover Way
Mr. and Mrs. S. L. McCallister, 449 Humboldt Way
Mr. and Mrs. Larry Schneider, l2l6 Lakehurst Road
Mr. and Mrs. Carlo Ridolfi, 288 Albatross Avenue
Mr. and Mrs. Loren McMillen, 47 Diamond Drive
Mr. and Mrs. Blake Napper, 54 Diamond Drive
Mr. and Mrs. Carl Dozier, l34 Diamond Drive
Ray Post, 1233 Murdell Lane
Roger and Linda Carruthers, 655 Orion Way
Codiroli Ford & Mercury, 3737 First Street
Valley Ecology Center, 40l South "K" Street
A decal was also presented to Floyd Hibbits for service on the
Beautification Committee.
PRESENTATION OF GENERAL
PLAN REVIEW TO COUNCIL
Helen Tirsell, chairman of the Citizens General Plan Review Com-
mittee presented a copy of the completed General Plan Review
with an explanation that due to the heavy agenda discussion is
not going to take place at this meeting with regard to the find-
ings of the report.
CM-28-ll0
May 6, 1974
(re General Plan Review)
Mayor Pritchard then introduced members of the Steering Committee
of which Mrs. Tirsell was the chairman, as well as the various
other committees that worked on the General Plan review. Also
recognized was the former Mayor of Livermore, Clyde E. Taylor,
who suggested that there be a formation of a goals committee prior
to review of the General Plan.
The staff was asked to schedule discussion of the matter for some
Monday meeting when there is a light agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Appointing
Members to Beautifica-
tion Committee
The following resolution was adopted appointing members to the
Beautification Committee.
RESOLUTION NO. 66-74
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE (RaYmond Brice, Beth Mondon and
Brenda Souza).
Report Re Rodeo Parade
The City Manager reported that the State Division of Highways
must grant an encroachment permit to allow use of State Route 84
for our rodeo parade and recommended that the Council adopt a
resolution requesting the issuance of such a permit.
RESOLUTION NO. 67-74
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS FOR
PERMISSION TO USE A PORTION OF STATE HIGHWAY 84
AS THE ROUTE FOR THE LIVERMORE RODEO PARADE BE-
TWEEN 6:00 P.M. AND 9:00 P.M. ON JUNE 8, 1974.
Minutes for Various
Committees
Minutes were received from the following committees:
Housing Authority Board - March 26th, 1974 Meeting
Beautification Committee - April 3rd, 1974 Meeting
Payroll & Claims
There were l85 claims in the amount of $2l2,020.74 and 270 payroll
warrants in the amount of $72,752.l2, for a total of $358,207.44,
dated May 3, 1974, approved and ordered paid by the Director of
Finance.
(
i
REPORT RE GOLF
COURSE LEASE APP.
Cm. Futch asked if the City Manager might explain some of the additonal
costs to the City if the golf course is leased by GOLFAMERICA.
CM-28-lll
__.._..__'m_...M....,__..~.,.. .__..__,.,___.__,_,,,.... . .,.,_._'~_.__"_.~.,_._.__~~_~^_,____.____.__.~____,_._.~
May 6, 1974
(re Golf Course Lease)
Mr. Parness stated that if Cm Futch has a list of some of these
things the staff would be interested in knowing what they are,
as it has been implied that there would be certain costs to the
City if GOLFAMERICA assumes the lease of the golf course but
that they were unfounded. The only known cost that will be
sustained by the City will be the lease paYments and the insur-
ance costs for the club house.
Cm Futch commented that one fee pointed out by the Mens Golf Club
is the trustee fee to the bank in the amount of $950 which Mr.
Parness explained are the fees that we pay to the bank for the
service of collecting the debt coupons and paying the loan and
this is a cost that would still be paid for by the city.
em Futch mentioned a $500 audit charge, which Mr. Parness stated
would not be paid by the City which was followed by discussion
regarding the pumping power cost, and Mr. Parness stated that
in the past it has been incorporated into the golf course bud-
get but it is felt that this should be in the water reclamation
plant budget because it is directly associated with the disposal
of treated effluent. An explanation was also given as to the
$6,000 paid by the restaurant to the general fund which has been
part of the golf course debt, and if it does not come from the
golf course it will have to come from another source to cover
the cost of the entrance to the restaurant and the air condit-
ioning.
Cm Turner noted that we would still have the $6,000 a year
paYment for the restaurant even if the City had leased the golf
course to someone else and then made the improvements.
Cm Miller explained that the revenue from the restaurant has been
used consistently to help make up the deficit of the golf course
and the $6,000 is tied up with construction for the restaurant
and the revenue has been used as a way of trying to make up the
golf course deficit - the whole thing is one consistent operation.
Therefore, if we lease the golf course the $6,000 should come
from the restaurant operation until it is paid off. em Miller
pointed out that the lease paYment plus the restaurant does not
cover the ongoing expenses - it merely covers the debts: there-
fore it would seem that to properly cover our expenses the lease
payment is too low. He suggested that the lease paYment be about
$75,000 rather than $50,000. He felt the $50,000 surety is fine
but there are other things that should have a surety bond, and
would estimate that a $200,000 bond would be necessary for these
other things. Lastly, he noted that the description about the
termination is not what the words of the lease actually say -
the words say that the lease can be terminated with six months
notice upon mutual agreement, not on notice by one or the other
party. He pointed out that he has no fundamental objection to
leasing the golf course but wants to make sure that the City
comes out alright. The whole intent of considering a lease is
to get out from under the subsidy burden the golf course has put
upon the City and taxpayers.
The Council then discussed the reassignment of the pumping costs
to the Water Reclamation Plant.
Cm Miller explained that he has suggested a larger lease pay-
ment because we are $500,000 down in the golf course fund and need
to find some way of paying it off and the restaurant revenue was
one way of doing it: however, it will be totally committed to making
our debt paYment under the present provisions of the lease.
CM-28-ll2
May 6, 1974
(re Golf Course)
Cm Miller stated that we need to find a way to amortize the debt.
em Tirsell commented that any major service that provides recreation
and open space for the citizens will create a debt for the City and
we are lucky, in some cases, to have connection fees to help pay for
certain costs but in this case we were not so lucky. She pointed
out that she does not expect a return from these types of services
to the community - such as the library, the bike paths, open space
and recreation and does not view it as a cumulative debt to the City.
Cm Futch at this time moved to respectfully decline the proposal by
GOLFAMERICA for the fOllowing reasons.
l. It is clear that if all costs are considered the agreement
would lock the City into a net loss for a number of years,
even though it would limit the City's loss.
2. A greater economic benefit would accrue to the City if we
continue to operate the golf course.
3. City operation would eliminate any possibility of the golf
course not being maintained.
4. We have a group of dedicated and capable City employees who
have done an excellent job of upgrading and maintaining the
golf course and their service deserves consideration.
Cm Turner seconded the motion made by Cm Futch.
Cm Miller stated that he does not agree with the motion and would
like the City to renegotiate with GOLFAMERICA to provide terms
sufficiently favorable to the City and will take care of the ongoing
costs that are a concern of the Council. He felt that we should not
decline the lease, outright. He then drew a graph to illustrate
the fluctuation in rounds of golf played at the golf course and
reasons why we should not decline the lease.
Cm Futch stated that he feels the Council shares these concerns
and would be agreeable to reviewing a different lease with differ-
ent figures and would be open to reconsideration at any time.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like the records to indicate
that the Council's intention is to decline the lease before them
and to consider another lease and Cm Miller stated that this is
not really the motion.
Cm Tirsell wondered if the golf course would have to charge fees
that would "price our golfers out of the ability to play golf"
in order for the City to come out alright. If GOLFAMERICA takes
over it is a private enterprise with one source of income, not
the restaurant or other general funds. If the hours of daylight
and weather affect the City's income from the golf course it will
affect that of a private enterprise.
Cm Turner stated that he is opposed to leasing the golf course
to someone else and would disagree that there is a fluctuation of
golf playas he feels there is a trend towards more play and better
returns to the City and would tend to feel that by next year the
~ golf course will be breaking even or even returning money to the City.
The City Manager had projected an $ll,OOO deficit next year
predicated upon a 50~ per round increase based on the same number
of rounds experienced this year.
CM-28-l13
May 6, 1974
(re golf course)
Cm Miller mentioned the fact that the Mens Club had suggested
a fee increase of $l which they felt would not be unreasonable
and give some return to the City.
The City Manager cautioned the City Council about the prospects
of increasing the fees by $l indicating that in his opinion
a $l increase would not be appropriate and would suggest a 50~
increase.
Cm Miller commented that while Cm Tirsell may feel the City
should subsidize the golf course, a number of people do not
share this opinion and he has received many complaints regard-
ing the deficits at the golf course which must be made up by
people who do not play golf. He stated that whether or not this
is right or wrong, it seems to be the majority feeling of the
people of Livermore.
Cm Tirsell stated that she has spoken with about 300 people in
the past two weeks and that not one of them raised this concern.
At this time a roll called vote was taken on Cm Futch's motion
which passed 4-l as follows:
Ayes: Cm Turner, Futch, Tirsell and MayorPritchard
Noes: Cm Miller
em Futch stated that if it would be considered appropriate
at this time, he would like to move to increase the fee by
50~ to make the fee more compatible with other municipal golf
courses.
The City Manager requested that the staff be allowed to pre-
sent a modified fee scale adding that it would be appropriate
to choose a date for applying the fee and Cm Futch indicated
that he would like to include this in the motion. Also added
to the motion was the request that the Greens Committee advise
the City as to what the fee structure should be, on a yearly
basis, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
em Miller wondered if this action would preclude consideration
of possible increases at budget time and it was concluded that
it would not.
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a short recess after which the meet-
ing resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE AGREEMENT
BEVILACQUA TRACT 2619
(Kissell company)
The City Attorney reported that the exact wording of the agree-
ment between the Kissell Company and the City has not been worked
out and that the latest version of the memorandum of agreement
has been submitted to the Council but has not been reviewed.
He stated that Mr. Watson, representing Kissell Company, has
met with the City Attorney and the City Manager to discuss three
areas of concern which were: l) construction of the Heather Lane
bridge; 2) caculation of interest credit for monies paid by the
original permittee for the construction of the houses and received
by the City without refunding or being returned even though the per-
mits were cancelled; and 3) park dedication. He stated that Kissell
CM-28-ll4
May 6, 1974
(re Kissell Agreement)
was given the option of acqu1r1ng and dedicating the original park
site of four acres or in lieu of that dedication could provide a
cash sum payable to the City for acquisition or means other than
dedication from Kissell.
Mr. Dewey Watson, stated that it would appear that the only change
to the agreement that he would like to review and possibly change
would be in 2.(f) with regard to the park. He stated that there
has been no change except that the figure $36,000 has been inserted
in the blank. As for the park, Kissell and the City are in agreement
as they are either going to dedicate land or pay the City and explained
that at present they are negotiating with the owner of the property in
order to avoid paying the money if possible.
Cm Miller wondered about the timing with regard to park dedication
or paYment of money in lieu of, and Mr. Watson explained that they
want to take care of this matter as soon as possible because approval
of the subdivision improvements hinges on the park dedication. They
cannot get FHA financing until approval has been given for the sub-
division and if they cannot be financed they may as well not proceed.
Cm Miller pointed out that there really should be a date set for all
of these things to be resolved and suggested that the deadline be the
3rd of June and if necessary an extension of a couple of weeks might
be alright.
Mr. Watson stated that the 3rd of June would not be satisfactory be-
cause as he has stated they are negotiating with the owner of the
property for park dedication land and they do not want to pressure
the owner because of a June 3rd deadline. The matter involving the
purchase of this land for park dedication involves a lot of money
and complicated questions with respect to lien claims and litigation
and cannot be worked out in a short time. He explained that they
really hope to have it settled in 2-3 weeks but at this time they do
not know what problems they will run into and they are quite anxious
to get it settled so that FHA financing can be obtained.
The next matter discussed was the bridge on Heather Lane and Mr.
Watson reported that they have been meeting with Zone 7 and are
beginning work immediately. He commented that 3. (f) indicates that
in lieu of a bond Kissell will provide certification that a contract
for completion has been entered into and that the construction on
the bridge will move forward to completion without delay and he ex-
plained that they already have $2.5 million in the project and do
not want to put up a $60,000 bond and they feel that their economic
interest is sufficient guarantee that they will complete the bridge
and project.
Cm Miller stated that this same argument was presented by Mr.
Bevilacqua 10 years ago and there is still no bridge out there and
Mr. Watson stated that if the cash bond is required the City may have
to look for another contractor and stated that he cannot understand
why Mr. Bevilacqua said that because Bevilacqua didn't have any
money into it.
Mr. Wharton explained that the language of the agreement was written
assuming that the bridge is required and felt that as a legal matter
the wording offers sufficient protection for the City, and apologized
for not including this in the Council packet for their review. He
then asked Mr. Watson to read the provision to the Council which dealt
with the bridge construction.
Cm Miller felt that one of the suggestions might be to accept all
improvements of Tract 2619 upon completion of the design and con-
struction of the bridge, rather than a cash bond, and Mr. Watson
replied that the problem with such a suggestion is that it may
take as long as six months to complete the bridge.
CM-28-1l5
May 6, 1974
(re Kissell Agreement)
Cm Futch wondered if it would be reasonable to delay the signing
of the agreement until such time as the contract has been let
and Mr. Watson stated that at this point they would be going
back to February with the problem of a guarantee from the City
before Kissell Company starts committing $60,000-$200,000 more
in cash to this project. He pointed out that they have talked
with the City time and again and it was his understanding that
things were pretty well worked out and every time he thinks an
agreement can be reached, small provisions change and more prob-
lems keep coming up. He added that if this is worked out then
the next time the City will ask that the posts be put in for
the bridge first, or some other provision will have to be taken
care of. In his opinion there is enough protection written into
the agreement for the City as it isn't committing itself to any-
thing in terms of the tract acceptance until certain things are
done and they can't sell the houses without tract acceptance be-
cause FHA financing is required.
The City Attorney agreed that the general concept of this agreement
was satisfactory and proceeded with negotiations on the assumption
that the Council was satisfied with the agreement, subject to cer-
tain details. He feels that Kissell Company has acted responsibly
during the past couple of months in trying to work things out and
that it would be unwise to postpone the whole agreement.
Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Lee to respond to Zone 7's require-
ments for the bridge and Mr. Lee stated that he does not know
what they want in the way of bridge standards but they have
been reduced because some of the water has been diverted, which
will mean that the cost of the bridge construction will be re-
duced.
Cm Miller stated that he agrees that it would not be in anyone's
interest to delay the agreement but wants to make sure that the
City has some kind of provision to make sure that the City does
not have to wait five years for the bridge to be constructed.
Mayor Pritchard stated that Kissell has shown good faith in hav-
ing its engineers work with Zone 7 in trying to determine what
kind of bridge is required and that they are in an awkward position.
He wondered if there would be any way the agreement could be modi-
fied so as not to allow occupancy of the homes if the bridge is
not constructed. He pointed out that he is willing to allow them
to begin, on good faith, but if it turns out that the homes are
completed and there is still no bridge would there be any recourse
available?
The City Attorney stated that he cannot give a clear answer as to
whether or not this could be done but this might be a way of
measuring the progress of Kissell and due to the economic conse-
quences might be an incentive for them to complete the bridge.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels it would be legal if both
parties were to agree to such an arrangement which the City Attor-
ney explained is not really the case.
Mr. Watson stated that such an agreement would probably not be
an advantage in obtaining the FHA loans necessary because they
would be aSking FHA for loans for homes which cannot be occupied
until such time as a bridge is constructed. He felt that their
agreement to commence construction of the bridge should be suf-
ficient, as they are certainly not going to begin construction
and then abandon it in the middle of construction.
CM-28-ll6
May 6, 1974
~. (re Kissell Agreement)
Y;/JIktlfk .
Mayor Pritchard stated that he uu.. u" believeswhat Mr. Watson
has said about walking away from the project if the City makes
stringent provisions but would tend to go by what the City Attorney
has said in that the agreement has sufficient protection for the
City.
Mr. Wharton stated that if Kissell comes in for tract acceptance
and the bridge is 90% complete, in the estimate of the Director
of Public Works, the cash bond would have to be only about $6,000 _
however, if the bridge is lOt complete a cash bond would have to
be posted for $54,000, and Mr. Watson stated that the only problem
is that if they come in for approval in about two weeks and every-
thing is ready to go, they will have to post a cash bond in the amount
of $60,000. He pointed out that they wish to come in for approval
as soon as possible because they want to start selling these homes
and have contractors lined up to finish up construction and they
cannot sell until acceptance has been given by the City.
em Tirsell stated that it would appear the l04 building permits
which have to be obtained by Kissell could be used as leverage
in getting the bridge completed and Cm Turner stated that he
agrees with this as well as with what Mr. Watson has said and
wondered if the City could require completion of the bridge prior
to June 3, 1975, or prior to applying for the l04 building permits,
whichever comes first.
The City Attorney felt that something could be inserted in the lang-
uage in Section 3. that "Kissell or its assign shall be granted
reinstated building permits on l04 residential lots upon proper
application provided that the bridge has been completed". This
would give the City the certification, coupled with the understanding
that within a year after exection of this agreement or June 3rd, if
this is the preferred date, the bridge would be completed. This
would allow an immediate commitment and an ultimate performance date
both within the agreement.
Mr. Watson indicated that he feels Kissell Company would be agreeable
to this type of arrangement.
Mr. Watson stated that Kissell Company maintains that it should be
given credit for an additional 9 months interest because the
permits were cancelled for the first time on January 23, 1974 and
were renewed for a three month period. The original agreement
indicated that Kissell would be given interest credit for the City's
use of these funds during all the period of time the City had the
funds and when there were no active permits. He pointed out that
the fees for the l04 permits have already doubled and a question
remains as to how much of a compromise the City is willing to make
with regard to these fees.
The City Attorney responded by saying that this subject is a legal
technicality and if the City agrees to this it may be setting a
precedent. He felt that the language represents a very substantial
concession on the part of the City in that we are giving any interest
credit at all.
~
Cm Tirsell moved to approve the memorandum of understanding, subject
to the additional wording in F. (3), seconded by Cm Futch.
The City Attorney stated that what he would propose is that F would
require certification by the Kissell Board of Directors for the
construction of the bridge to move forward to completion without
delay for the contract that has been entered into.
CM-28-ll7
..~_._---_._...._-----_.._--..-.~--_.._."-_._--,~._.._->,._-.__._,-_.._.__...-......"_...,,.._.._.._"..~.. '...
May 6, 1974
(re Kissell Agreement)
Cm Miller stated that the permit fees the City is charging for
renewal are building permit fees and not development fees in
general, which is a concession because those permits expired
and by the Building Code a full fee should be paid when they
are taken out, and the City Attorney stated that he would pro-
pose insertion of a phrase which states that building permit
fees will be in accordance with Building Code 302, as amended,
which deals only with the permit fee and not with any other
development fee, which was included in the motion.
At this time the Council voted unanimously in favor of adopting
a resolution accepting the memorandum of agreement, as amended.
RESOLUTION NO. 68-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREE-
MENT (The Kissell Company).
REPORT RE PERSONNEL
RULES MODIFICATION
The City Manager reported that the staff has drafted some modi-
fications to our existing City Personnel Rules and Regulations
and copies have been distributed to the City Council. The mat-
ter has been discussed with all of the employee organizations
of our City, supervisors and department heads and it is recom-
mended that the Council adopt a resolution adopting the proposed
Personnel Rules.
Cm Miller stated that in his agenda packet which he reviewed
over the weekend there was a letter from the employees which
included a detailed list and explanation of their views about
the proposed amendments and that some appeared to be reasonable
and would like the staff to respond to the City employees sug-
gestions.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the City Manager would respond to the
employee suggestions in a report at the next meeting if the
Council decides to postpone the matter and the City Manager
indicated that he would not object to a postponement because
of the fact that there is an amendment that must be written
into the Personnel Rules due to a recently enacted federal
statute covering federal minimum wage and overtime compensation.
He suggested that the matter be continued for two weeks to allow
the staff to refer the paragraph to be inserted to each of the
employee groups and to speak with their representatives.
Bob Diaz, representing the City employees, indicated that the
study committee who put together the recommendations did not
have the opportunity to examine some of the references in
the proposed Rules and Regulations and that there is some
wording yet to be resolved by their legal committee and re-
quested a 30 day postponement.
em Miller stated that he would be agreeable to a 30 day exten-
sion and Mr. Parness explained that the matter was first post-
poned on April l5th and at that time he had no objection to
the postponement but that he can see no need for an extended
delay.
Mr. Diaz commented that the employees were not given sufficient
notice and were not informed in a formal matter nor were they
shown the proposed amendments.
CM-28-ll8
May 6, 1974
(re City Personnel
Rules & Regulations)
em Miller stated that he can understand
to get this taken care of expeditiously
ous harm in putting it over for 30 days
to look at the proposals, and so moved.
Cm Turner.
the City Manager's desire
but feels there is no seri-
which would allow everyone
The motion was seconded by
Cm Tirsell stated that it should be clearly understood that the
Council intends to act on the matter the next time it comes before
the Council, which would be June 3rd, and that there will be no
further delay.
Ray Weingarner, 736 Adams Avenue, representative of the Livermore
Firemens Association, remarked that the new law which was passed
is very involved and that what the City plans to do with it in
30 days may not be reasonable and this is based on the fact that
those provisions of the wage that require any pay retroactivity
should be installed and should be subject to employee consideration.
Therefore, the organizations would like to be notified by the staff
as soon as possible regarding their intentions concerning the new
federal law.
At this time the motion passed unanimously to continue the matter to
the meeting of June 3rd.
LETTER FROM B. C.
RE CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT LIGHTS
A letter was received from the Beautification Committee with regard
to the light standards in the central business district and Cm
Miller commented that the City has already been committed to con-
sider changes at the budget and moved that the letter be filed,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and passed unanimously.
REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE - GRANADA
HIGH SCHOOL MUSIC DEPT.
A letter was received from Granada High School's Music Department
explaining that their A Capella Choir, Orchestra and Wind Ensemble
have been invited to perform at "expo '74" in Spokane Washington
and would like the City to donate $250 towards the trip. This
request was based on the fact that Livermore High School A Capella
Choir received $500 from the City to help finance a $l5,000 trip.
('
Janet L. Pfeifer, Parent Fund-raising Chairman, explained that
the group has been invited to perform at "expo '74" after they
submitted a tape recording to the "expo '74" committee who made
the selections of those to be invited. She indicated that they
are very pleased that the Music Department is being represented
in each of the three facets and they are all to perform on the
same day.
Cm Turner moved that the $250 be donated, as requested, and that
the Council review their policy with regard to donations, seconded
by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to amend the motion to state
that this is the last request for financial assistance to be
granted this fiscal year and that none will be granted until the
policy has been resolved, seconded by Mayor Pritchard, which passed
4-l with Cm Tirsell dissenting. The main motion to allocate $250
towards the trip passed by unanimous vote.
CM-28-ll9
May 6, 1974
REPORT RE OAKLAND SCAVENGER
COMPANY CONTRACT EXTENSION
Mr. Parness, the City Manager, reported that our City is partici-
pating in the formulation of an accounting and rate review process
to be used by all of the public jurisdictions in their contracts
with the Oakland Scavenger Company which was to have been com-
pleted: however, reports indicate that it will not be done prior
to July l, 1974. Because of the joint powers agreement study
and the new accounting system the City Council requested a 6-month
extension of the collection contract to expire June 30, 1974 and
since the accounting process will not be ready for our City's
application the Oakland Scavenger Company has requested an addition-
al 6-month extension to December 3l, 1974. It is recommended that
the City Council adopt a motion authorizing the contract extension,
as requested, subject to the continuance of the current contractural
conditions, rates and charges.
Mr. Parness was asked to explain, briefly, the events that led
to the agreement with the other jurisdictions in retaining a con-
sultant firm for the purpose of conducting an accounting study which
he did.
Lou Alberti, representative of the Livermore-Dublin Disposal Company
(Oakland Scavenger) stated that they cannot live with all the recom-
mendations made and they feel that these differences can be worked
out with agreement to a subsequent reasonable proposal.
The City Manager explained that our Finance Director has been
meeting with the company about every week in an effort to come
up with a plan that will be agreed upon and added that it is
entirely conceivable that once this new system is finalized and
ready for use among the public jurisdictions that it still might
be his recommendation, and in turn the decision of the City Council,
not to use it, since this contract is now expiring. It might be
prudent for the City to receive bids after the 6-month extension,
if it is granted. It is suggested that the joint powers agreement
be reviewed but the City is not obligated to it.
At this time Cm Miller moved to adopt the recommendation to extend
the contract for an additional six months, seconded by Cm Turner
and passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE SENATE
RESOLUTION 77 -
DIRECTIVE TO PUC
A report was submitted to the Council with regard to Senate Resolu-
tion 77 which is recommended for adoption by the telephone company.
em Miller stated that he is in favor of Senate Resolution 77: how-
ever, the second paragraph of the resolution the City Council is
being asked to adopt is stronger than that of Senate Resolution
No. 77, and would vote for the resolution if the second paragraph
is deleted.
Cm Miller moved to adopt the resolution, as presented to the Council,
with the deletion of the second paragraph, seconded by Cm Turner and
passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 69-14
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SENATE RESOLUTION 77 PASSED
BY THE CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE ON FEBRUARY 6, 1974.
CM-28-l20
May 6, 1974
REPORT RE BIDS FOR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PHASE I (l973-74)
The Public Works Director gave an oral report, as well as having
submitted a written report, on the bids that came in for the
1973-74 Capital Improvement Projects Phase I. He indicated that
the cost of labor and materials have risen and the estimates for
the projects by the Engineering staff were lower than the bids
actually received (by about 20%) and Mr. Lee indicated that the
low bid is probably the best the City can expect. A proration of
cost between the City and the Junior College was also submitted for
the sanitary sewer line and water line construction, and Mr. Lee
explained that this may be questioned by the Junior COllege District
and may be subject to change. The bids submitted were as follows:
J & M Construction Co.
Mission Pipeline
Silva Pipeline
McGuire and Hester
Ernest E. Pestana
Dalton Construction Co.
Peter Cole Jensen, Inc.
$309,424.50
328,995.00
331,055.40
337,227.00
340,lOO.00
390,l09.30
402,494.00
247,043.00
Engineer's Estimate
It is recommended that the bid be awarded to J & M Construction,
however Mr. Lee added that this information has been given to the
college staff and they have indicated they were satisfied with the
bids, but he would like to have their official word before the
contract is actually awarded.
Mr. Parness explained there were additives inserted that have to do
with the casing cost and the college is aware of this, and approval
of the low bid could be made contingent upon the receipt of a formal
declaration from the college.
Cm Miller made a motion to that effect, subject to the following
which he felt could change: the bids are high and the estimate for
the Jr. College line is $45,000 over the estimate which is within
about $5,000-$lO,000 of the excess the City is paying for over size
lines, and he suggested that by building smaller size line, the cost
would be closer to the engineer's estimate. The motion was seconded
by the Mayor, however failed 3-2 with Cm. Futch, Tirsell and Turner
dissenting.
Cm. Futch pointed out that the line that has been bid is approximately
half the size that was approved previously by the Council, and did
not think they should go back on that, and made a motion that the
Council approve the bids subject to assurance from the Jr. College
District as suggested by the City Manager; motion was seconded by
Cm. Tirsell and approved 4-1 with Cm Miller dissenting.
Mr. Parness questioned if this was concurrence in the accounting
suggestion here and the Director of Public Works as to the cost that
should be assumed by the college, and Cm. Futch stated he accepted
the figures of the Public Works Director if in his opinion that was
a resonable way to proceed. Mr. Parness stated there may be some
debate with regard to the proportionate amount of the casing and the
interest attachment.
(
I
AIRPORT DIRECTIONAL SIGN
Mr. Parness explained that the subject of the airport directional sign
was transmitted to the Design Review Committee, however the committee
rejected the idea that they should design a new sign_i but indicated
CM-28-l2l
May 6, 1974
(Airport Directional Sign)
they would be glad to assist in the preparation of a design. The
Beautification Committee did review with a member of our staff an
alternate design and approved it. It has lines comparable to that
now used and uses most of the material of the present sign.
Louis Trotter of the Planning Department, who had designed the sign,
explained the features of the sign more in detail and answered the
questions put to him by the Councilmembers.
Cm Miller admitted that Mr. Trotter had done a very good job in re-
doing the old sign, but felt there would be some merit in exam1n1ng
a national park type, square rectangular sign, getting cost esti-
mates and comparing the two before a decision is made. He suggested
that Mr. Trotter and the Beautification Committee investigate the
matter.
Cm. Futch commented that the Design Review Committee had stated that
although they did not wish to design a sign, they would be happy to
review it, and rather than the Council making the judgment, he
suggested they also have input from them on both types of signs~
Mr. Musso stated that they had investigated that type of sign,
but behind a freeway fence, it did not lend itself to that type of
sign, and felt a pole type would be the only way to go, however
Cm. Miller felt that it could be raised above the freeway fence,
and moved that the Council ask the Beautification Committee and
the staff liaison prepare a cost estimate on the design for a rectan-
ular brown sign, and the two designs be submitted to the Beauti-
fication Committee and Design Review Committee for review. Motion
was seconded by em Turner and passed 4-l with Cm Futch dissenting,
as he felt the present sign is in scale with the use and favored
maintaining the present sign.
REPORT FROM LEAGUE OF
CALIF. CITIES RE STATE
PROPOSITIONS
The City Council members discussed the Ballot propositions for
the Statewide Election of June 4, 1974, and made the following
motions for the propositions:
proposition l.
Beach, Park and Recreational Bonds
Endorsed an aye vote on motion of Cm Futch,
seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote.
proposition 3.
Veterans' Bond Act of 1974
Endorsed an aye vote on motion of Cm Miller
seconded by em Turner and by unanimous vote.
proposition 5. Expenditure of Highway User Revenue For Mass
Transit and Street and Highway Bonds
Endorsed an aye vote on motion of Cm Miller,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote.
proposition 6.
Open Meetings of the Legislature
Endorsed an aye vote on motion of Cm Tirsell,
seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote.
proposition 9.
Political Reform Act of 1974
Endorse an aye vote on motion of Cm Futch,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote.
CM-28-122
May 6, 1974
REPORT FROM CITY
ATTORNEY RE CONDEMNA-
TION OF CASTILLEJA III
CONDOMINIUM GILLICE
A report was submitted by the City Attorney with regard to the course
of action the City Council might take with regard to the Castilleja
III Condominium (Gillice). It is the contention of the City that
sale of the units should be stopped because the developer had failed
to meet the requirements for the issuance of a state "white paper"
approving sales in the subdivision, as he did not have an approved
subdivision map to submit to the Department of Real Estate. After
corresponding with the State Department of Real Estate they have
indicated that a copy of map number 9ll has been received and they
are satisfied that all of the requirements have been met. The
report from the City Attorney indicated that with regard to the
course of action available to the City, direct alternatives would
be to file a suit in the Superior Court to restrain further sales,
and simultaneously we can request a temporary restraining order which
if granted would take immediate effect. We can file with the DA a
complaint charging the developer with the misdemeanor crime of violat-
ing the Map Act and in addition to the above, we can file with the
County Recorder a notice of violation of the Map Act.
Cm Miller moved that the Council adopt the recommendation for the
more direct alternatives, seconded by Cm Turner.
The City Attorney explained that there are three alternatives and
that one has already been done, which is the filing of a notice
of violation with the County Recorder. The other two would be
to file a suit with the Superior Court and to file a compalint
with the District Attorney and wondered if the Council would like
these two things to be undertaken simultaneously or, having filed
the notice of violation, to first consult with the District Attorney
to see whether or not it would be appropriate to proceed with the
misdemeanor allegation.
em Miller stated that his motion is to continue with all of these
alternatives subject to the City Attorney's judgment regarding
whether it would be best to do one or all, and would like a
report after he has contacted the District Attorney.
The motion passed unanimously.
REPORT FROM DESIGN
REVIEW COMM. RE
STREET LIGHTS
A report on the street lighting to be used at the "P" Street
underpass was submitted to the Council by the Design Review
Committee and it was noted that it may be too late for the
Council to consider design changes because the Council has already
declared that the cobra fixtures would be used and this decision
has been passed on to the electrical design engineer. If the
Council would like to consider any change it is recommended that
the matter be postponed so that the staff can determine the status
of the design work and any variances and expenses.
(
Cm Miller moved to direct the staff to see if we can get spherical
fixtures as a replacement for the cobra heads and to follow the
recommendation of the Design Review Committee which was for the
City to install the spherical fixtures using sodium vapor light
source, seconded by Mayor Pritchard.
Mayor Pritchard wondered if the Design Review Committee took into
consideration the safety problems in installing the spherical fix-
ture and Mr. Street, representative of the committee, stated that
they did discuss this point and the specific fixtures the Design
Review Committee recommended should not create any more glare than
CM-28-l23
May 6, 1974
(Street Lighting at Underpasses)
the cobra heads. He pointed out that there are various intensities
available and they chose the Sonoma style for this reason.
At this time Cm Futch brought up the question of the amount of
money that would be involved and the City Manager explained that
this should be an important consideration because the price of
the spherical fixtures originally specified was $2,000 apiece
and suggested that the staff be instructed to look into the cost
to determine how far the contractor has committed himself to the
acquisition of the cobra fixtures with a report back to the Coun-
cil and it may be the desire of the City to make modifications sub-
ject to price consideration.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to change the motion if the
second would agree, to say that it is the intent of the Council
to change the spherical fixtures subject to the ability to stop
the orders and consideration of the cost, seconded by Mayor
Pritchard, which passed by unanimous vote.
REPORTS FROM THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
A report was received from the Planning Commission regarding the
amendment to the PD-l5 zoning District (Carlton Square area) and
on motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous
vote a public hearing was set for May 20, 1974.
The Planning Commission minutes were received for their meetings
of April 9 and 23, noted for filing.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re RR Project)
The City Attorney stated that in order to proceed with the rail-
road project it is necessary to condemn properties along Railroad
Avenue and that Burt and Charles Lidster have been retained by the
City to act as right-of-way agents in this regard and would like
the Council to adopt a resolution authorizing and directing con-
demnation of these properties. He explained that this would be
used as a last resort and that they prefer to work with the
residents and negotiate with respect to the value of their property.
He then read portions of the resolution to the Council and on mo-
tion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote,
the following resolution was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 70-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL HAS DETERMINED
ARE 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.
The City Attorney commented that a resolution approving execution
of the agreement with Hensel-Phelps Construction Company and approv-
ing the bonds in the Railroad Assessment District also needs to be
adopted, and on motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by
unanimous vote the resolution was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 7l-74
RESOLUTION APPROVING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN HENSEL
PHELPS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, A CORPORATION AND THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, FOR WORK TO BE DONE, AND APPROVING BONDS IN THE
RAILROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVERMORE,
CM-28-124
May 6, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Traffic Signals at
Concannon & Holmes St.)
Cm Turner asked the Public Works Director the status of the traffic
signals at the corner of Concannon and Holmes Street and Mr. Lee
explained that matters are not progressing nearly as well as ex-
pected and briefly reported on this item.
Cm Turner wondered if the installation of the signals would be
complete this year and Mr. Lee indicated that they should be
in by October. He stated that this is a very substantial project
which is estimated at $85,000 at this time and the cost may amount
to even more but the state has been slow in approving the allocation
for the project.
em Miller stated that it was his understanding that Mr. Mehran was
going to pay for the cost of the signals and it was explained that
Mr. Mehran had offered to pay $40,000 towards the project.
Mr. Parness replied that Mr. Mehran was to be reimbursed as the
state participated and Cm Futch commented that he understood that
Mr. Mehran would pay for the installation so that we would not have
to wait for the state, and then be reimbursed, and now it appears
that we are again waiting for the state.
Mr. Lee explained that if the City went ahead with the project
without the state's approval they would not participate at all
which means, essentially, that the City is at the state's mercy.
Discussion followed regarding various things that might be done
to speed up installation of the lights, and the staff was asked
to present a copy of the agreement to the Council.
(re Hazardous Cross-
walk at Holmes Street
and Catalina)
Cm Turner stated that he has been approached by a group of older
residents living in the apartments on Catalina across from the
shopping center who are concerned with the only crosswalk available
to them at the corner of Holmes Street and Catalina Drive. He
explained that cars exit off of Holmes Street rather rapidly and
the older people are concerned about not being able to get out
of the way of these cars. He suggested that perhaps a crosswalk
could be provided at Barcelona and Catalina, one block down from
the present crosswalk, and the staff agreed to investigate that
possibility.
(Complaints re Noisy
Ice Cream Trucks)
Cm Miller stated that he is reCe1v1ng numerous complaints about the
noisy ice cream trucks and wondered if something can be done to get
rid of this type of noise.
(
Mr. Parness explained that the City has no ordinance to prohibit
the ice cream truck vendors and about the only thing the City can
do is ask their consideration and that the noise be made softer.
Cm Miller stated that these trucks are a public nuisance and suggest-
ed that the City Attorney be directed to look into the matter, and
Mr. Wharton noted that he would report back to the Council on it.
CM-28-l25
--'---.-,."--..-.,----..~---.___,__.,__.__.w.~,.._._
May 6, 1974
(re Greens Committee
Term)
Cm Futch stated that he has been asked by members of the Greens
Committee what length of term has been established for their
committee members and the City Manager explained that the Council
has not really established a procedure for electing members and
the term has not been established. He stated that the only re-
volving office is the president for the men's club and the women's
club and that people were selected with no term mentioned.
It was noted that there is an 8-year limit on all the other
committees and the Council asked for the names of the members.
Mayor Pritchard mentioned that the president of the men's club
is not a Livermore resident and it is his understanding that it
is the policy of the City that people other than Livermore resi-
dents are not allowed to serve on our committees.
Mr. Parness explained that this is true except in cases in which
outside residents are catered to, using the Library Board as an
example and the Council noted that this policy has been changed
so that it is consistent and it has been agreed upon by this
Council that no outside resident shall serve on any committee.
(re Filing of Dr.
Rocco's statement)
Cm Tirsell asked the City Attorney what the City's views are
regarding the filing of Dr. Rocco'S statement and the City
Attorney replied that the statement filed by Dr. Rocco was
referred to the District Attorney last Friday and he planned to
discuss the matter with him. There are three issues at hand, as
follows: l) lateness, 2) disclosure, and 3) excessive expenditures.
He stated that he will report to the Council on this item next week.
(re Bill re Pop Top Cans)
Cm Tirsell stated that there is a bill in legislature to ban
pop top cans and that she would like the Council to endorse
the bill.
On motion of em Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote the Council supports legislation banning pop top cans.
ADJOURNMENT
to an
APPROVE
ATTEST
CM-28-l26
Regular Meeting of May l3, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on May l4,
1974, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore
Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:02 p.m. with
Mayor Pritchard presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmembers Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT:
Councilmember Futch (Excused Business Trip)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of May 6, 1974, were approved,
as corrected.
OPEN FORUM
(Traffic - The Tower
on Holmes Street)
Ray Faltings, lOl8 Via Granada, stated that he has noticed cars
leaving from The Towers area and that the right turn only sign is
presenting a problem with traffic and would suggest red curbing
on both sides of the exit for safer turning onto Holmes Street.
(re Zone 7 Improvements)
Ray Faltings also commented on the improvements Zone 7 has made along
Holmes Street pointing out that they are definitely not improvements
to the road and would urge the City to request that Zone 7 return
the street to the condition it was in prior to the opening of the
street.
(re Kissell's Request
for Interest Earned
on Escrow Money)
Ray Faltings stated that Kissell company has requested that the City
return the interest earned on money held in escrow and suggested that
if the City intends to return this money to Kissell that the Council
consider keeping it until the bridge work is complete.
The Public Works Director indicated that he will report back to the
Council on this item.
~
(
DISCUSSION RE JOINT
POWERS AGREEMENT - ALA.
CTY. REG. CRIM. JUSTICE BD.
The report regarding the joint powers agreement for the Alameda
County Regional Criminal Justice Planning Board was removed from
the Consent Calendar for discussion.
It was reported that new regulations established by the Federal
Law Enforcement Assistance Administration requires a reconstruction
of the Regional Board membership so that the majority is comprised
of elected members.
CM-28-l27
May l3, 1974
(Alameda County Regional
Criminal Justice Board)
Cm Turner stated that he agrees with the joint powers agreement
but would like to make some suggestions for a change in repre-
sentation as follows:
1 m,~mber from the Oakland City Council - 2. (f)
1 ml~mber from each city's City Council - an elected rep.
1 ~~mber from the Board of Supervisors (County) - 2.(b)
The City Manager stated that he can appreciate these suggestions
but it should be taken into account that we are guided by cer-
tain dic'tates as passed along by the Law Enforcement Assistance
Administration from washington and through the California Commis-
sion of Criminal Justice and there are policy guidelines that must
be observed in the constitution of regional boards. He pointed out
that it is specifically set forth as to the number of elected offi-
cials to serve on this board and that there is to be a predominant
number of representatives from those cities with an excess of
lOO,OOO people. The reason is that those cities with the larger
population have the seat of criminal justice influence and difficul-
ties and therefore should have more representation than those with
the lesser population.
Cm Miller felt there was some merit in having every city that is
a member of the joint powers agreement be represented by an elec-
ted official and Mr. Parness explained that allowing representation
from each city would take away representation from the larger cities,
as 7 eleicted appointees will be allowed from the l3 cities.
Cm Tirse!ll pointed out that the valley has some unique problems
that the! Board should be aware of, even though we do not have the
density of population and wondered if we could petition to request
that OnE! spot be reserved for our valley with an elected official
representing it.
Mr. Parness felt this might be a reasonable suggestion as he has
been a ~~ember since the initiation and in addition, the valley has
been given one of the public member assignments.
The Council suggested that the City Manager specify that there be
representation from the valley and Mr. Parness felt it would be
best to ask that one of the 7 elected officials be selected from
the valley as outlined in 2.(g). He suggested that the City
council approve the adoption of the joint powers agreement with
the condition that it strongly recommends that one of the seven
public Inembers, by virtue of the geographical consideration, be
a valley resident, so moved by Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner
and pas;sed unanimously.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolutions re
Capital Imp. Projects
The following resolutions were adopted by the Council regarding
capital improvements projects:
RESOLUTION NO. 72-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR
OF PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE
1972-73 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - PHASE II
RESOLUTION NO. 73-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR
OF PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE
POLICE BUILDING - PROJECT 73-74
CM-28-JL28
May 13, 1974
RESOLUTION NO. 74-74
(Notice of Completion
Public Works - Enos and
Portola Avenue)
r
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR
OF PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE
ENOS AND PORTOLA AVENUE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT 73-40
Acceptance of Subdivision
Sunset Tract 3407
A resolution accepting Tract 3407 (Sunset Development) was adopted
by the Council. The tract consists of 210 lots, 136.97 acres lying
south of Lexington Avenue, from Holmes Street to Arroyo Road, and
all improvements have been installed to City standards and are
ready for acceptance for maintenance by the City of Livermore.
RESOLUTION NO. 75-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF TRACT 3407 (Sunset Development Company)
Re "P" Street Under-
ground District
It is required by law that a District must be established by
Council order so that abutting private properties must provide
underground lateral service connections related to "P" Street
undergrounding and the City will participate from sources provided
by P.G. & E. as mandated by PUC programs. It is recommended that
the Council adopt a resolution indicating intent to establish a
District and setting a public hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 76-74
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN UNDERGROUND
DISTRICT ON "P" STREET
Report re SB l786
The City Manager reported that SB 1786 would be negative to our
business license revenues in addition to its precedent establish-
ment and recommended that the Council adopt a motion recommending
that our legislative representatives oppose this measure.
Report re Street Easement
Property Acquisitions
The owners of three parcels of property necessary to complete the
widening of East Stanley Boulevard and the extension of Quezaltenango
Parkway projects declined to sell property to the City and the follow-
ing resolutions were adopted by the Council authorizing condemnation
proceedings:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-74
r
I
\
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE FOR PUBLIC PARKWAY AND RELATED PURPOSES
OF A STRIP OF LAND 20 FEET BY 75 FEET EASTERLY OF QUEZAL-
TENANGO PARKWAY AND SOUTHERLY OF ALMOND AVENUE PARK IN THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
CM-28-129
May 13, 1974
(Property Acquisition-
Condemnation Proceedings)
RESOLUTION NO. 78-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION
OF FEE SIMPLE ESTATE FOR PUBLIC STREET AND RELATED
PURPOSES OF TWO STRIPS OF LAND EACH 36 FEET WIDE LO-
CATED, RESPECTIVELY, BETWEEN POINTS 320 FEET EASTERLY
AND 440 FEET EASTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF ISABEL AVE-
NUE, AND 650 FEET EASTERLY AND 750 FEET EASTERLY OF
THE CENTERLINE OF ISABEL AVENUE, ON EAST STANLEY BOULE-
VARD IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
Appts. to Vari-
ous Committees
Appointments were made to various committees, as follows:
ACAP "B" Board - Christine Sherman
community Affairs Committee - Carol Brown and Richard L. wright
Industrial Advisory Board - Ted Jenkins
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Calendar was approved on motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded
by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote of the Council.
COMMUNICATIONS
A communication was received from VanVleck Real Estate with respect
to rezoning of property located on First Street and US 580 owned
by the Judsons, requesting reinitiation of the zoning application.
Notice of a public hearing regarding AB 2040 (Knox) relative to
Bay Area Regional Planning Agency was submitted to the City Council.
The Council's recommendation regarding this matter had been forwarded
to the League and our legislative representatives.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
these matters were noted and filed.
REPORT RE STREET UTILITY
SERVICES - HUTKA INDUS-
TRIAL DEVELOPMENT
The City Manager reported that a dispute has arisen between the City
engineering staff and Mr. Hutka (industrial developer) over an eastl
west access (North Mines Road-First Street area). Mr. Hutka wishes
to install a private drive with an easement of about 30 feet dedi-
cated to the City which would contain utility services and the engin-
eering staff feels that a standard City street should be used.
Mr. Lee, the Public Works Director, explained that he is concerned
about the number of openings along the median off Mines Road -
there is an opening just north of the proposed easement to serve
Intel and in his opinion the easement is not wide enough to serve
as an industrial street. He added that at the time Hutka's parcels
were approved (to the north of Mines Road) there was a condition
that an opening would not be allowed and the Planning Commission
and Council will ultimately determine what the layout should be.
He stated that at the time approval was given for the parcels Mr.
Hutka was informed of this requirement. He then presented illustrations of
what the City Engineering Department has in mind.
CM-28-l30
(
\
~\
May 13, 1974
(Hutka Industrial
Development)
Mr. Lee explained that the situation which brought up various
questions was the fact that the developer started the construction
of a l2-inch water main which he expected to be a public main that
would be maintained on an easement on his property which Mr. Lee
stated is planning by default and the City must know how the area
is really going to be served so that we are not building problems.
Mr. Lee stated that everyone has been interested in seeing the
area developed but at this point there must be some decision as to
what the street system is going to be. When asked what his recommenda-
tion would be he showed various illustrations of plans which could
be selected, followed by discussion regarding the alternatives.
Cm Miller stated that the issue before the Council is not whether
the street plan is going to be approved but rather if an easement
will be allowed and in his opinion such an easement should not be
a11owed~ A street plan should be selected with Mr. Hutka working
with the staff to determine which would be the best for his purposes.
He then moved that the Council deny Mr. Hutka's appeal for an ease-
ment, and the staff and Mr. Hutka select the most suitable plan.
Motion was seconded by Cm Tirse1l.
Mr. Lee noted that the objections of the staff were explained to
Mr. Hutka but the drawings are fairly recent and he has not had
the opportunity to review them.
Ed Hutka, 1019 Angelica Way, stated that prior to any development
of this land he was requested to submit a master plan to the City
which was an expense of nearly $3,000. This plan indicated where
all of the utilities would be located and they were discussed in detail.
He pointed out that at the time, the eastern portion of the land was
not in the City limits and therefore the copies regarding this portion
were not included with the original master plan. He then presented
copies of the eastern portion to be included in the original set of
plans. He pointed out that his people build according to this master
plan and noted that the master plan shows the water main referred to
by Mr. Lee.
Mr. Lee explained that the fire line would not have been interpreted
to be a public street, as it is on a rear line.
There was then discussion regarding the descrepancies on the map by
Mr. Hutka and the one retained by the City and Mr. Hutka explained
that the lot sizes could not be predetermined. This would have
to be determined by the customer and the use and that the ordinance
provides that lots do not have to front on streets but must have a
24-foot easement to them, such as the conditions for PG&E, PT&T and
other utilities. He stated that the whole project will not depend
on whether there is a cut in the median - if the traffic can get
around they do not care whether or not there is a cut. He stated
that the reason he is before the Council now is because the City
turned the building around and for some 250 ft. he cannot have an open-
ing even though he is going to build North Mines Road and deed it to
the City.
Mr. Lee stated that the City does not have the map being used for
illustrating the area tonight and that it shows a building on one
parcel and on the basis of the map would never have assumed that
there was to be an easement or easement street into the property.
He stated that at the time the permit was issued for the building
(warehouse) Mr. Hutka was warned that the City could not approve
a street back into the property and would not want to accept water
lines on that easement and Mr. Hutka stated that they could worry
about it when the time comes - the next thing the City knew, the
line was installed. Mr. Hutka was quite aware of the problem and
was given fair warning.
CM-28-131
---"---'-"--'.'-'<----..--.-..-.--.....,.---.-"...".~'-"'-"~---"---'-'--,-",~~,---",-_._-"---"""-",,---.
May 13, 1974
(Hutka Industrial Development)
Mr. Hutka stated that under some of these arrangements 30-40%
of the land would be taken away from him : or setbacks, streets
and easements, the developer would have to improve the streets
and get nothing out of it. He felt all the costs involved in
developing industrial property are excessive. If the problem
is that the City wants a detect or check valve and that they can
not have a meter, even though all other utilities will have meters,
this is not a major item. He stated that if the City wants to
retain the 40' of planter area, they would agree to let it remain,
and they would also agree to a detector check valve. He stated
that what the City is suggesting would reduce the industrial
park by 5-6 acres and give the City 2,000-3,000 feet of street
to maintain in addition to reducing the number of industrial
buildings that produce revenue to the City. He stated that
in many industrial parks there are guards and if there is a
public street they will not be able to close the street access
to the public.
The Mayor asked Mr. Hutka if it is true that Mr. Lee told Mr.
Hutka this could be a problem if he proceeded with the water
lines, and Mr. Hutka stated that Mr. Lee told him of many
things that could be a problem and in his opinion Mr. Lee
"asks for the world".
Cm Tirsell pointed out that Mr. Lee acts as representative to
the Council in the way of a staff member, tells developers
what our ordinances require and what the Council policies are
_ he does not invent rules as he goes along.
Mr. Hutka stated that this week is the first time there was
any indication that the lines could not go in and that there
could not be an easement to his property. He pointed out that
the ordinance definitely provides for easements to lots located
to the rear of the property.
Cm Miller asked, in what sense does this water line have to do
with the streets and Mr. Lee replied, not a lot. Adequate access
to the rear properties is really the big issue. The water line
is also an issue because it was done without authorization and
if it is accepted the City will be accepting an easement and a
substandard roadway into an industrial area which may end up
being 30 ft. wide and 900 ft. long.
Cm Miller wondered if the line could be a private line, independent
of the street, and Mr. Lee stated that it could if it had a meter
installed at the property line (on Mines Road) to indicate if water
is being used out of the fire system. He stated that he knows of
no utility that allows extension onto private property because
in time there would be no control over the amount of water being
used. He added that this is done routinely without casting asper-
sions on the integrity of anyone.
Cm Miller stated that he has served on the Planning Commission and
Council for eight years and is beginning to resent the consistent
attacks upon the City by Mr. Hutka and feels the time has corne
for him to abide by the City ordinances and regulations and to
stop trying for variances every step along the way. He pointed
out that those developers who abide by our ordinances get their
projects approved in a rather short period of time. Mr. Hutka has
the option to haggle over various issues and even to "badmouth"
the City but Cm Miller stated that he intends to protect the public
by maintaining our rules and regulations and standards.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
CM-28-l32
May 13, 1974
REPORT RE STRUCTURAL
INVESTIGATION OF
FORMER POLICE STATION
The City Manager reported that that the current fiscal budget
provides funds for building modifications to the former police
station to permit occupancy and use by the Fire Department. Prior
to any work being done a private structural engineering firm was
retained to inspect the building to determine its structural con-
dition and serviceability. It was the recommendation of Gop1en &
Yokoyama of Berkeley that the building's structural integrity is
questionable and dangerous to human health and safety in the
event a severe earthquake should occur. It is recommended that
the building not be occupied for Fire Department housing purposes
and that the City Manager be instructed to recommend an alternate
or substitute station facility.
The City Manager stated that he would like to clarify that the
Council is speaking about the Police building and not Fire Station 1,
because it was erroneously reported by the press that the structure
of Fire Station 1 is being considered. He stated that our Chief
Building Inspector conducted a very detailed investigation of
the former Police building as well as investigation by a private
firm with a report from both submitted to the Council. The private
firm investigated only the visual portion of the structure and in
their opinion nothing would be gained by a more intense investiga-
tion other than to substantiate their views and would be very costly
to the City. It appears that the only choice is to search for
alternate means of housing for the Fire Department. It is requested
that the matter be referred back to the City Manager for working
out alternates for Council review.
Mayor Pritchard wondered if a suggestion might be for a new fire
station, and the City Manager stated that he believes this will be
the case but that the current site will probably not be the recom-
mended site due to the size and location of the site.
Cm Miller moved to adopt the City Manager's recommendation, seconded
by Cm Tirsel1 which passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE PARK
SITE ACQUISITION
(Robert Livermore Park)
LARPD has expressed its desire to acquire 9 acres of land at the
Robert Livermore Park area which would benefit the park utilization;
however, the owner of the residential property has rejected an
offer of the appraised value of the property. Therefore, if the
City Council would like to acquire this property, a resolution
of condemnation should be adopted.
Cm Miller moved to undertake condemnation, and that the Council
adopt the appropriate resolution, seconded by Cm Turner and passed
unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 79-74
(
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE FOR PUBLIC PARK AND RELATED PURPOSES
OF A STRIP OF LAND 260 FEET BY l508 FEET FRONTING ON EAST
AVENUE AND ADJOINING ROBERT LIVERMORE PARK IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
CM-28-l33
May 13, 1974
REPORT RE BIKE
PATH AGREEMENT
(State & Local)
The Director of Public Works reported that the City of Livermore
has requested state participation in the proposed bike path con-
struction located along the Arroyo Mocho Parkway and the state
has agreed to participate. The estimated cost for the project
will be $20,725 for which the City will pay $12,751.74, to be
derived from the Park Fund.
Cm Miller stated that it was his understanding the money for bike
paths would come from the gas tax money and Mr. Parness stated
that he believes this is not the case wherein the bike paths
are situated on arroyos, not streets.
Cm. Tirsel1 moved to authorize execution of agreement with the state
for the bike path funds, seconded by Cm. Turner.
Cm. Miller wondered how this could be done if it was not provided
for in the budget and the City Manager explained that there is a
lump sum of money left over in the Park Fund which will be used to
satisfy the paper work, but the actual funds will be derived from
next year's budget and will be provided for.
Cm. Miller stated that this represents a substantial amount to be
expended and would move that the matter be postponed for one week,
seconded by Cm. Tirsell and passed unanimously.
REPORT RE HOLMES STREET
& CONCANNON BOULEVARD
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
Mr. Lee presented copies of correspondence which has taken place
with the state regarding traffic signals to be installed at the
intersection of Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard.
ern Miller otated that at the last meeting it was mentioned that
Mr. Mehran was to pay $40,000 towards the installation of the
signals and would be later reimbursed by the state. He pointed
out that there is no $40,000 limit but that Mr. Mehran was to
pay the total cost and to be reimbursed by the state for their
portion of the cost and that Mr. Mehran would pay no more than half.
Mr. Parness commented that he has made a personal appeal to one
of the high officials in the State Division of Transportation
and furnished him with all the recorded history compiled by Mr. Lee
and he has pledged to do all he can to expedite matters; however,
he indicated that it will probably be late fall before the signals
can be installed.
REPORT RE SCHOOL HOUSING
DISCLOSURE (Proposed Ordinance)
The City Attorney reported that the School District has requested
that the City Council adopt an ordinance that will make it manda-
tory for developers to issue an information sheet to homeowners
regarding school facilities approved by the School District.
Mr. Wharton explained that the state has preempted most of the
authority in this matter. The Business and Professions code re-
quires disclosure of this information to prospective home buyers
and one of the problems is that full disclosure may not be fully
distributed or given the kind of visability that it deserves in
order to make the message clear to the homebuyer and resident.
The School District may have some opportunity to communicate the
information in more detail and clear terms than what is being trans-
mitted to the homebuyer. Under state law there is very little
that the City could undertake, by way of legislative action, to
deal with the situation.
CM-28-134
May l3, 1974
(Proposed School Housing
Disclosure Ordinance)
~
Cm Miller asked if what the City Attorney is saying, essentially,
is that the City can do nothing as far as its own ordinances are
concerned but the School District could have more elaborate informa-
tion available for the City to encourage distribution of by the
developers, and the City Attorney replied that this is correct.
Mr. Wharton explained that part of the problem is that some of what
is transmitted as firm and positive is, in fact, tentative and sub-
ject to change. Subsequently, the person who buys a home in anticipa-
tion that there will be a school right around the corner is dismayed
to learn that the school will not be built there but will be quite
a few blocks away.
There was some discussion regarding the possibility of erecting signs
in proposed school sites indicating that such is a school site but
subject to change so that home buyers might be better informed and
the possibility of granting the School District an encroachment permit
for posting a sign in the public right-of-way.
The City Attorney stated that the developer is already required by
law to communicate detailed information to the home buyer and the
City should make sure that what they are providing is crystal clear
and should be the first area of concentration. There may be other
means for transmitting such information and signs, in addition to
the prospectus to the home buyer.
Cm. Miller moved that the memo from the City Attorney be forwarded
to the School District with the suggestion that their statement
to the Real Estate Commission be strengthened; that the City would
be willing to cooperate in requesting that developers distribute
appropriate information; that the City would also be willing to
discuss a cooperative agreement whereby appropriate information could
be posted as signs on school sites and strategic locations in the
public right-of-way. This motion was seconded by Mayor Pritchard,
and a suggestion was added by Cm. Tirsell indicating that the Dis-
trict be given every opportunity to communicate in any way possible
the information re school sites, with the City willing to cooperate.
This amendment was agreed to by the motion maker and second and was
approved unanimously.
REPORT RE DEMOLITION
OF UNSAFE BUILDING
The Chief Building Inspector, Mr. Street, reported that in accord-
ance with the provisions of our Building Code a residence structure
located at 1984 Railroad Avenue has been inspected and found to be
unsafe for human occupancy. The owner has been notified, the
structure posted, and no appeal or action has been taken. The Build-
ing Code provides for demolition of such a building and it is re-
quested that the Council adopt a resolution declaring the building
to be a public nuisance and to commence with abatement proceedings,
so moved by Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 80-74
('
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING COMMENCEMENT OF ABATE-
MENT PROCEDURE FOR BUILDING AT 1984 RAILROAD
AVENUE.
CM-28-135
May 13, 1974
REPORT RE NEED FOR
TAX RELIEF - GEN. PLAN
It has been recommended by the Planning Commission and Plan-
ning Director that the City Council adopt the Chino resolution
related to the need for tax relief to implement the Conservation
and Open Space Elements of the General Plan and on motion of
Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote a resolu-
tion was adopted based on the Chino resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 8l-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF HE CITY OF
LIVERMORE CONCERNING THE NEED FOR STATE TAX RE-
LIEF TO IMPLEMENT THE CONSERVATION AND OPEN
SPACE ELEMENTS OF GENERAL PLANS.
RE EXTENSION DATE RE
CERTAIN GEN. PLAN
ELEMENTS
Planning Director George Musso submitted a resolution and application
form proposed to be filed with the Office of Planning and Research
so as to obtain approval of the Council on Intergovernmental Relations
for an extension in due date of certain General Plan Elements,
until August of 1975.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the resolution was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-74
RESOLUTION REQUESTING EXTENSION OF DATE FOR
ADOPTING SEISMIC SAFETY, NOISE, SCENIC HIGH-
WAY, AND SAFETY ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF LIVERMORE.
PUBLIC HEARING DATE
SET FOR ZONING OF
RECENTLY ANNEXED
FIRST STREET AREA
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed rezon-
ing of properties located on the north and south sides of First
Street and in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance at least one
public hearing must be held by the City Council.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous
vote, a public hearing was scheduled for June 3, 1974.
REPORT RE CUP APP.
FOR DAY SCHOOL-
NURSERY SCHOOL
The Planning Commission approved a CUP application of Loris A.
Muat for a CUP to permit a Day Nursery School use at 359 Jensen
Street until June 1, 1976, with review of the permit at the end
of a six-months period, and consideration of an Environmental
Impact - Negative Declaration.
This item was noted for filing.
CM-28-l36
May l3, 1974
REPORT RE LARPD
LIAISON COMMITTEE
Cm Miller gave an oral report on the meeting between the City
Council representatives (Miller and Turner) and LARPD regarding
the possibility of the joint use of the Ravenwood villa. LARPD
is particularly interested in working out some type of agreement
so that they will be able to apply for a state grant to help pay
for the cost of reconstruction of the building and development of
the park. Cm Miller stated that the Council representatives felt
the proposal by LARPD was satisfactory, provided the money would
come from the state, and if the money does not come from the state
the City would no longer be interested and the question of how
Ravenswood will be handled (the villa itself) will have to be dis-
cussed. He pointed out that there has been comment about the possi-
bility of the City keeping the 5 acres on which the villa and its
buildings stand and turning the rest over to LARPD - it is a ques-
tion of whether or not the City will keep the villa and handle it
ourselves or to essentially turn all the property over to LARPD with
our usual lease arrangement.
Cm Miller stated that the question is whether or not the City should
agree to a policy to help with the restoration of the building in
hopes that money will be received from the state, and LARPD maintain-
ing it thereafter with the City receiving high priority on the use
of the building for its functions.
Cm Turner pointed out that this does not mean that this project
will become number 1 priority on our park program list but simply
is an opportunity to receive state funds to complete a project.
Mayor Pritchard stated that it is his understanding the Council would
not be held to this policy if the state funds do not come through,
and Cm Miller replied that he and Cm Turner said this is how it
would be presented to the Council; however, LARPD would like the
Council to agree to the policy anyway but it becomes a function of
who will put up the money for the restoration and who keeps what.
The City Manager stated that he would urge the Council to set the
matter aside for lengthy consideration and would like to have the
opportunity to present to the Council a contrary view which would
be for the City to reserve the Ravenswood structure and some of its
abutting properties for our management and working conjunctively with
LARPD on restoration attempts but reserving the managerial rights for
the City. At this point we have given to LARPD nearly all public
property that has been acquired by the City through purchase or
dedication to LARPD but this falls into a unique category in that
in time it could amount to something highly praiseworthy for the
community and would hope that the Council would allow the staff
to come back to the Council and that it might reserve consideration
a little longer.
Cm Miller felt there might be merit in the proposal for the state
to participate in the financing of the restoration with LARPD receiv-
ing first priority and the City being second with LARPD taking
responsibility for the maintenance thereafter. If there is no
money to come from the state it would mean that the City is not
committed.
('
,
,
The City Manager agreed that this is a valid argument and that
LARPD has always operated and maintained properties in accordance
with the City's best intents and feels this would be the case in
this situation also; however, this is a unique piece of property
and improvement that he feels the Council should be cautious.
CM-28-l37
May l3, 1974
(Report re LARPD Liaison
Committee - Ravenswood)
Cm Turner stated that the Council representatives agreed to
work jointly with LARPD in making the decisions and that it
is a wonderful opportunity for the City to have a piece of
property restored to a useable condition.
Cm Miller moved that the Council adopt the policy statement
provided that the restoration money comes from the passage
of th~~!~~on~~y em Turner and passed unanimously.
REPORT RE TV ~
TO LIVERMORE FROM
UC DAVIS
A report was presented to the Council regarding arrangements
for a UC Davis to Livermore television link for University
classes. It was noted that the estimated cost for capital
outlay would be $3,500, and the transmission would probably
be received at the LJUSD Administration Building.
Cm Miller stated that he would agree to having a link but
feels the City should not necessarily provide financial
support for it. If we cannot find a way to collect money
and give it to the School District for the purpose of construct-
ing schools he can see no way to justify providing money for
some other educational purpose.
Cm Miller moved that the City Council state its favor for hav-
ing the link be provided in due time, with the staff's assis-
tance and input, seconded by Cm Turner and passed unanimously.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re Tract 3407 Accept-
ance of Final Improv.)
Mr. Lee stated that relative to the Tract 3407 final improvements
acceptance, there are a few minor miscellaneous items that
have not been completed such as corrections to the paving
which cannot be taken care of at this time due to the con-
struction work being done at present and the developer has
provided a bond in the amount of $15,000 to take care of
the uncompleted items.
(re Dr. Rocco)
The City Attorney reported that regarding Dr. Rocco,s campaign
disclosure situation, the District Attorney has not yet arrived
at a decision as to whether criminal charges should be filed or
to hold a citation hearing in anticipation of filing criminal charges.
It is anticipated that a decision will be received from the D.A.
by tomorrow or the next day.
(Resignation Date
of City Attorney)
The City Attorney requested that his resignation as City Attorney
become effective at the adjournment of the next Monday night
Council meeting with the understanding that if it would serve the
City's convenience or interest he would be happy to sit with the
Council for two or three additional Monday evening Council meetings,
pending a more permanent arrangement.
CM-28-138
May 13, 1974
(Study Session re
General Plan)
The City Clerk commented that the Council has expressed desire to
hold a study session regarding the General Plan and would like to
.~ have the Council choose a date for the study session.
The Council concluded that they would adjourn the meeting to a
7:30 meeting next Monday night, hold a public hearing at 8:00 p.m.
which has already been scheduled, and then have a study session.
(re Park Development
Fees Collected)
Mr. Parness stated that about $90,000 has been collected in park
development fees and LARPD has asked whether or not they might
have the liberty of budgeting this money for expenditure on the
development of the Ravenswood and Crumb property site in addition
to the Los Altos Hills park site, since these sums were collected
from development in these areas.
The City Attorney has indicated that it is not mandatory that these
monies be spent in the neighborhoods collected but rather at the
Council's option as to where they should be spent; however they
must be used for park development purposes.
Mr. Parness asked if the Council would like him to inform LARPD,
as a policy nature, that it is the intention that the City will
spend the money based on development plans as formulated by them,
received and approved by the City, or to have the money spent by
them subject to the review of the improvement plans as transmitted
to the Council?
Cm Miller replied that as he recalls the City has an agreement with
LARPD which states how the money shall be transferred and that it
was, in essence, the latter description. It was generally the intent
of the Council to transfer the money to LARPD, subject to the Council's
agreement as to where it would go. He added that he would like to up-
hold the principle that the money should be spent, generally, where it
was collected.
The Council concurred that this has generally been the policy.
Mr. Parness commented that the funding resources situation is
rather desparate and despite the fact he is aware of the Council's
feelings regarding the reservation of the park fund money for costs
of median strips and parks, he would like to ask if the Council
would permit him to consider the use of $lO,OOO, from the park fund
money, in the composition of the budget, to purchase capital equipment
for the Park and Tree Department for next fiscal year.
Cm Miller stated that it has always been Council policy to use the
park fund money for the acquisition of park land and capital improve-
ments such as greenery. This money has never been used for capital
outlay and inasmuch as there is still park land that needs to be
purchased, this is the wrong time to start depleting this money for
other uses.
('
\
Mayor Pritchard stated that Mr. Parness is not asking to use this
money but only to use it as a revenue source and Mr. Parness replied
that this is true and the only reason he is making the request is
because this is a last recourse.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he is willing to listen, but tends to
agree with the position the Council has always held with regard to
the park funds.
CM-28-139
May l3, 1974
(re Park Funds - Budget)
Mayor Pritchard suggested that the City Manager not use the park
funds in the composition of the budget but at the budget session
the issue can again be raised.
(re Settling Land
Prices of school Sites)
Cm Turner stated that he has asked about looking into the possi-
bility of settling the land price of school sites at the time
the developer asks for approval of his tract map and wondered
if the staff has looked into the matter. He stated that he
would like the City to pursue it, if possible, and perhaps fold
it into our requirements.
The City Attorney stated that he does not have anything ready at
this time but will report back to the Council next week.
(re Park Land Dedi-
cated by H. C. Elliott)
Cm Turner stated that he has received complaints from citizens re-
garding park land that was dedicated by H. C. Elliott (7 acres
on the east side of the Hagemann property) which has been fenced
off and horses are grazing on it which means that their children
cannot play there.
The Mayor stated that it is his understanding someone was given per-
mission by LARPD to do this and Cm Miller commented that he cannot
understand this happening, as this land belongs to the City and felt
the staff should check this out.
(Transportation Committee)
Cm Turner stated that there was supposed to have been some type
of Transportation Committee that would study the possibility of
hopefully coming up with a self-supporting transportation system
in the City of Livermore and wondered how long the Committee has
before getting back to the City with a report. The City Manager
stated that he doesn't really know what might be a reasonable length
of time but perhaps something in the order of six months. He added
that he does have some material and has had discussions with some
of the transportation technicians. It seems to be a matter of keep-
ing the technicians informed and having them help the City Manager
in moving everything along. He stated that he is not sure six months
would be sufficient time but will try to keep the Council informed.
Cm Turner suggested that a monthly report be furnished to the
Council.
(re Joint Meetings)
Cm Turner suggested that the Planning Commission from Pleasanton
and Livermore meet with the County Planning Commission to discuss
joint situations - not problems, possibly 3-4 times a year.
Mr. Musso explained that such a meeting was scheduled and then Cm
Turner and Tirsel1 (former Planning Commissioners) were elected to
the Council and the Planning Commission had to wait until their vancies
were filled prior to scheduling a meeting. At present, a meeting
is scheduled for next month; however, the County has not been contacted
to see if they would be interested in meeting.
CM-28-l40
May 13, 1974
(re Sign Ordinance)
Cm Turner stated that he has spoken with people concerned with Mr.
Mehran's financial building (those leasing) who feel that there
is a problem with the signs allowed by the Sign Ordinance, in
directing people to various offices. He wondered if it would be
possible to look into the section of the ordinance that covers this
to see if it is creating a hardship without meaning to.
Mr. Musso stated that it was the owner's option to remove the direc-
tional sign and to put up a center sign - he can place a directional
sign on the building which is allowed in the ordinance.
(re Status of BART
Feeder System)
Cm Turner asked about the status of the BART feeder system and
the Mayor replied that a meeting is to take place tomorrow between
two members of the P1easanton Council and two representatives from
the Livermore City Council at noon. Inasmuch as Cm Turner has ex-
pressed particular interest in the subject, perhaps he would be
willing to meet with them along with another member of the Council.
Cm Tirsell and Miller stated that they would be able to meet also,
and that they would decide which one would attend.
(re VPC Meeting)
Cm Tirsell stated that she has been appointed, along with Ann Jolly,
and Bill Herlihy to draw up reorganization plans and minutes for next
month's meeting along the lines of the proposal submitted to the
Council but with additional input. If the Council has specific
things they want included a whole new plan is being written and
membership on the committee will be debated as will the issues.
It will be a complete reorganization of the VPC.
(re Concannon & Holmes
Street Commercial Area)
Cm Tirse11 wondered if the commercial property located at the corner
of Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard, if sold, would mean that
the traffic signals would be installed and that the park land would
be retained - as was a condition at the time the property was rezoned
for Mr. Mehran. She stated that it is her understanding that such is
not legal unless there is approval by both parties and the new develop-
er might not agree to this.
It was pointed out that the party purchasing the property will be
aware of the condition at the time he buys the land and therefore
it would not be illegal to require this.
(Location of Fire
Hydrants - Sidewalks)
~,
Mayor Pritchard stated that a girl ran into a fire hydrant which was
located in the sidewalk in front of Marylin Avenue School and was
badly hurt and wondered if there are many such hydrants in the City.
Mr. Lee explained that in one residential area there are a few loca-
ted in the sidewalk and cannot give the reason the hydrants are in
the sidewalk in front of Marylin Avenue School. It is not the general
practice to locate them in the sidewalk.
CM-28-l4l
May l3, 1974
(re Hydrants in
Sidewalks)
Mayor Pritchard felt it might be advisable to consider having
a policy to not allow them in the sidewalks in residential or
school areas.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at lO:15 p.m. to an
executive session to discuss legal and personnel matters as
well as appointments and then to a 7:30, Monday, May 20th
meeting.
APPROVE
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of May 20, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on May 20, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard
presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Counci1members Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirse11 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.
MINUTES
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner, the minutes for the
meeting of May 13 were approved as corrected by a 4-1 vote (Cm Futch
abstaining due to his absence at that meeting.)
OPEN FORUM
(re Springtown Pond)
Mr. Bill Loewe, l072 Xavier Way, stated that the pond in the Spring-
town area has fish that are dying and that the ducks from the pond
are leaving and wanted to know the reason.
Mr. Lee explained that the City is constructing a drain for the pond
which did not previously have a drain and in order to install the
drain the lake had to be drained. Prior to this action the lake
contained very bad water, as there was no way of changing the water.
CM-28-l42
Tl1ay 20, 1974
(Springtown Pond)
Most of the fish that were in the pond were moved to the other lake area
and the ducks are moving also. He stated that there is an excessive
number of ducks and if some are lost it would be alright.
CONSENT CALENDAR
r
Departmental Reports
Departmental reports were received, as follows:
Airport Activity - April
Building Inspection - April
Fire Department - Quarter - January/March
Mosquito Abatement District - March
Police Department - Tl1arch and April
Water Reclamation Plant - April
Res. Denying Claim
On recommendation of our insurance carrier, it is recommended that
the City Council adopt the following resolution denying a claim
filed against the City of Livermore.
RESOLUTION NO. 83-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAIM OF KENNETH L. STEFFAN
Report re Public Works
Office Building Lease
The City Manager reported that the new lease for the Public Works
office building has been negotiated for two years with two additional
one year options. The lease rate has been increased from $600 to
$700 per month and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted
authorizing exection of the lease.
RESOLUTION NO. 84-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Masonic Temple Association)
Report re Green
Fee Adjustment
The City Manager submitted a schedule indicating fee adjustment
recommendations by the Greens Committee for the Las positas Golf
Course for an increase of 50~ for a 9 hole round and $l.OO more
for an 18 hole round, for basic play. Other adjustments are as
listed in the schedule for various types of users. A similar
fee change is proposed for Springtown in accordance with the
schedule submitted to the Council and it is recommended that the
City Council adopt a motion authorizing use of the proposed fees
effective June 1, 1974.
.~
Report re City-State
Bike Lane Agreement
A report regarding the City-state bike lane agreement was submitted
by the Director of Public Works and it is recommended that the council
adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement.
CM-28-143
May 20, 1974
(Bike Lane Agreement)
Cm Miller asked about the status of the Queza1tenango Parkway
and the Almond Avenue Park connection and Mr. Parness reported
that it is in the mill.
RESOLUTION NO. 85-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREE-
MENT (State of California, through the Division
of Highways of the Department of Transportation)
Communication from
Christine A. Bell re
Lack of Shopping Facilities
A communication was received from Christina A. Bell who has written
to the Council to say that she is tired and disgusted with the
shopping conditions in Livermore and that her family will be
shopping elsewhere.
Cm Tirsel1 asked that the Planning Director respond to the
letter from Mrs. Bell and that he outline the policy of the City
with respect to efforts towards getting commercial development
for our City.
Invitation to Attend
the Fifth Street School
Needs Assessment Committee
meeting
A letter was received from Hal Vyverberg, Chairman of the Fifth
Street School Needs Assessment Steering Committee inviting the
City Council to attend their meeting scheduled for May 22, 1974,
to discuss future building and growth patterns for the already
overburdened and under financed Livermore School District.
Mayor Pritchard responded to the letter by indicating that he
would try to attend the meeting, also Cm Miller.
Payroll & Claims
There were 137 claims in the amount of $146,704.l0 and 271 payroll
warrants in the amount of $73,599.14 for a total of $220,303.24,
dated May 17, 1974, approved and ordered paid by the City Manager.
Report re Fourth
of July Celebration
It has been determined by the Police Department and the Fire Mar-
shall that the best location for the Fourth of July fireworks pro-
gram proposed by the Community Affairs Committee, would be at
Robertson Park. A contract has been received from the California
Fireworks Display Company for $1,500 which includes their staff
and insurance coverage indemnifying the City and District. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing execution
of the agreement as the Council has authorized this financial
participation.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote,
the Consent Calendar was approved.
CM-28-144
May 20, 1974
r1ATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Request for Completed
Gen. Plan Report)
Donald Bradley, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that some of
the members of the General Plan Committee have indicated that they
did not receive a copy of the completed General Plan report and that
only the Chairmen of the various groups received the complete copy.
It is requested that all members be allowed to have a copy. Fifty
copies were printed and about lO copies remain which means that addition-
al copies will have to be printed. It took about 35 hours of work
to compile and print 50 copies and it would take about three weeks
to receive the same type of paper. He asked if the Council desires
to have copies printed, adding that it has also been requested that
the Community Opinion Survey be available for anyone who worked on
the Citizens Committee and at present there are about 4 copies avail-
able. He explained that at present the primary problem is a lack of
manpower, as the full-time employee who worked on compiling the 50
copies has a broken leg and will not be back to work for some time.
It was suggested that the 10 copies available at City Hall be
circulated among those interested in receiving a copy until they
can receive a copy of their own, and that the Library be given
about 5 copies (of the lO) for checking out purposes.
(re Kissell Agreement)
The City Attorney reported that a signed Memorandum of Understanding
has been received from the Kissell Company regarding Greenville North,
as executed by the Council a week or so ago. Along with the Memoran-
dum of understanding they have included an addendum Memorandum of
Understanding making two small corrections which the City Attorney
feels are warranted. He recommended that the Council authorize
execution of the addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding. He
then explained the two corrections related to the litigation involv-
ing the Heather Lane bridge and acquisition of the park site or funds
in lieu of.
Cm ~1i11er pointed out that with respect to their request to receive
money not spent for the park site he pointed out that the park
dedication requires $9,000 per acre and if land is purchased with
the money which exceeds $9,000 per acre, the City is stuck with
paying the difference, and if it is less than $9,000 per acre there
is money left over for the next acquisition. Our policy is to collect
this amount, which averages out, and it would not appear reasonable to
consider a refund if $36,000 is not required for the acquisition of
the property.
Mr. Wharton, the City Attorney, explained that it would appear that
in reviewing the papers concerning the value of the park property
that with the most liberal, exaggerated estimates, the $36,000 would
be about twice the amount necessary to acquire the parcel and that
this would be a very comfortable margin, including condemnation pro-
ceedings, if necessary.
Cm Futch moved to approve the changes, as recommended by the City
Attorney, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
(
Cm Turner suggested that if the Council is uneasy about the possi-
bility of the City getting stuck that it specify "at the fair market
price at the time of settlement".
Cm Miller stated that he would like to see the City take the $36,000
and if it is less than $36,000, the City will return the difference,
~~ '-?;Jau/r-z~.!5~I}/J", ~u...di:-nt.~~?-Ie~(L-
t7 lft' ~i( tldj. @12~~
CM-28-145
May 20, 1974
(re Kissell Agreement)
The City Attorney explained that Kissell has agreed to dedicate
the specific four acres the City desires, on or befor Aug. 3, 1974,
or will pay $36,000 in lieu of said dedication and the addendum says
1) if the acquisition of the park costs the City less than $36,000
the City will refund the difference to Kissell, and 2) we have
filed suit to recover on the bond provided by the original developer
for construction of the bridge and if and when the City recovers
anything on the suit it will share the recovered funds with Kissell.
Cm Miller agreed that the portion regarding the bridge is a reason-
able request but that the addendum regarding the park site acquisition
could be altered to allow exactly as is with additional language to
say that if the parcel costs in excess of $36,000 Kissell Company
will pay the difference.
Cm Futch pointed out that the City has been allowed four times as
much as the appraisal price and feels this is ample safety margin.
Cm Miller moved to amend the motion to say that the addendum will
be approved, as it stands, but if the cost is more than $36,000
Kissell Company will provide the difference.
Cm Futch asked the City Attorney if he feels Kissell Company would
object to this additional wording and he responded by saying that
he feels it is not a matter of their objecting but a matter of who
has the last word and if it is a known fact that the $36,000 is
ample there may be a question of why we are asking for it; the
other side of this being why would they resist it? We have a
complete document, we have asked them to begin construction not
later than June 3rd (two weeks away) and if this tennis game con-
tinues we may be jeopardizing the more important central purposes
of the agreement. They would have to recall a Board of Directors
meeting to reconsider this additional wording and in his opinion
there is nothing for the City to be concerned about.
The amendment passed 4-1 (Cm Futch dissenting), Mayor Pritchard
called for the question and the motion passed unanimously.
(Request for
Executive Session)
The City Attorney requested that the Council have a brief execu-
tive meeting following the regular meeting for the purpose of
discussing legal matters.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Illegal Signs)
Cm Miller stated it would appear that H. C. Elliott has an illegal
billboard on property that is not his at the corner of 01ivina
and Murrieta and Mr. Musso explained that ~1r. Elliott was given a
variance for it.
A Zone 7 candidate, Mr. Nordyke, has signs posted on telephone poles
within the City limits which is illegal.
CM-28-14~
Hay 20, 1914
PUBLIC HEARING RE
AHENDMENT OF PD15
FORMER SCHOOL SITE
(Carlton Square Area)
At this time the Mayor opened the public hearing regarding the for-
mer school site in the Carlton Square area and Mr. Musso explained
the history of the commercial development proposed for the Carlton
area and the request made by the Carlton Group for an extension
of the completion date for one and a half years which would be
to January 1, 1976 and to change the land use designation of the
elementary school site to Townhouse Residential for the two parcels
located on the south side of Stanley Boulevard, east and west of
Murdel1 Lane, inasmuch as the School District has declined purchase
of the site for school purposes.
Mayor Pritchard asked about the zoning of the shopping center area
and Mr. Musso explained that it is zoned PD-15 with a CN overlay
for neighborhood shopping.
At this time Mayor Pritchard asked for public testimony.
Mr. Burtone, representative of the Carlton Group, stated that they
hope to have construction going on in the next 6-7 months and that
they have received a deposit from one of the major users of the
land. He pointed out that they have canvassed the area and received
very few objections to the proposal for a shopping center.
There being no further public testimony, on motion of Cm Tirse11
seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote the Planning Commission's recommendation was approved
to adopt the staff report and to amend the completion date
to May 1, 1975 and to provide that in the event development is
not completed by that date that the designated land use for the
site revert to RS-4.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the ordinance concerning the matter was introduced and
the title will be read at the time of its adoption.
SPECIAL ITEM - STATE
DEPT. OF TRANS. EIR
REPORT ON WIDENING
OF I-580
The City Manager reported that the State Department of Transportation
is interested in the City Council's position on the widening and
reconstruction proposed for I-580 and a spokesman for the state will
address the Council on the matter and will answer questions the
Council might wish to ask. A supplemental EIR has been prepared
and has been distributed to the Councilmembers.
Hayor Pritchard explained that he reviewed the EIR over the weekend
but Cm Tirsel1 and Turner were out of town and did not have an
opportunity to see the EIR nor did Cm Miller.
(
Burch Bachto1d from the California Department of Transportation
stated that the EIR has been submitted to the BAAPCD, the EPA
and Air Resources Board and that all have agreed it is technically
correct and have no quarrel with its findings. Their findings are
that if the freeway is expanded the air quality will be as good or
better than if no improvement is made. He explained that with the
expansion of the freeway there are also other benefits such as the
ability to get rapid transit (BART) to the valley, to have exclusive
treatment of busses and to improve traffic safety and convenience on
the freeway itself. An improved operation will decrease the amount
CM-28-147
May 20, 1974
(re Widening of I-580)
of air pollution which more than makes up for the increase in
the number of vehicles in the corridor. He stated that the
average daily total of cars at present is 60,000 and that the
practical capacity is 70,000. It is not known what the public
will tolerate but it is felt that 70,000 is about the maximum
number that can be pushed through the existing 4-1ane freeway.
He pointed out that the area is already served by two freeways
and for this reason it should not be assumed that an expanded
freeway will be an inducement for growth in the valley. The
growth is controlled by land value, land use policies and
availability of utilities and educational facilities.
Mayor Pritchard asked if Mr. Bachtold would like a response
from the Council this evening or if this is informational
and Mr. Bachto1d responded by saying that it is informational
but they would also like to know how the Council feels - it
has been agreed that the technical aspects of the report are
correct and if there is any question in anyone's mind it would
be the degree to which expansion of the freeway would induce
growth.
Cm Tirsell wondered if the supplement is in conjunction with
the original proposed freeway widening and Mr. Bachto1d explained
that the proposal has not changed but that this is a more detailed
evaluation of two things, those being traffic and air quality.
He then explained the proposal for the four lanes each way, a
median that would serve the BART facility.
Cm Miller commented that the Council's position on this is that
it does not disagree with widening the corridor but the Council's
proposal was not to increase the number of automobile lanes but
to increase the transit corridor to 80 ft. which would allow a
base for BART and in the meantime a provision for one or two
rapid transit lanes. 1) Widening of the freeway will induce growth
which is a viewpoint of the Council that is in conflict with
that of the Department of Transportation; 2) in view of an
obviously worsening energy crisis and a shor.tage of gasoline, ~/&)l I
not necessarily this year or next yea~~!3;~~m~JY unwise.~
to encourage automobile travel Whic~~n1n short suPPly and~~
very expensive and in view of this the money spent for the widen-
ing might better be spent in providing the mass transit lanes in
the middle and discourage the use of automobiles.
Mr. Bachtold stated that for BART to go into the median requires
complete reconstruction of the facilities and whether the freeway
is replaced with another 4-1ane freeway or widened another 24 ft.
more on each side, the cost will not be proportional - in fact, it
is a relatively minor increase. With respect to the energy problem,
it is not evident that people are not driving their cars and while
the Dept. of Transportation encourages other modes of transportation
such as the use of busses, it is felt that creating congestion and
all the disadvantages that go along with it is not an effective way
to accomplish this end. He then mentioned other freeways that have in-
creased from four lanes to six or eight and where the population
has leveled off.
Cm Miller pointed out that after Highway 50 was widened there
was a very sharp increase in the growth in the valley - this is
where the widening of a freeway can be correlated with growth,
adding that there may be other reasons as well but there certainly
is a connection in the widening and the growth.
Mr.Bachto1d noted that this particular route is nearly the last
segment of a route that connects the Los Angeles area with the Bay
Area and at present there are eight lanes through the valley. We
are really talking about eliminating a bottleneck.
CM-28-148
Hay 20, 1974
(re Widening of I-58D)
Cm Miller pointed out that the state has said 80% of the freeway
traffic is local and that the key issue to the widening is the
inducement of growth in the valley. The traffic is not clogged
except during the rush hours and is a very large expenditure of
money to ease traffic congestion that takes place for such a short
time period.
Cm Turner stated that he does not share the views expressed by
Cm Miller. About 48% of our population consists of commuters
and he feels they have the right to reasonable transportation.
He stated that he is in favor of the plan for three contiguous
lanes into the Bay Area. At present, the portion to be reconstruc-
ted is unsafe, is poorly lit, and has shoulders that are not adequate.
If use of the automobile is discontinued in the next 5-10 years as
has been predicted, the freeway can be converted to accommodate
rapid transit.
Cm Futch stated that it is somewhat difficult to ask questions
about an EIR he has not seen and that he has tried to obtain a
copy for the past year and ~1r. Bachtold stated that he would try
to get copies to the Council and apologized about their not having
copies, adding that he thought they had copies.
(re Concannon-Holmes St.
Intersection)
Cm Futch indicated that it is very hard to get a response from the
State Department of Transportation and brought up the problem of
the Concannon-Holmes Street intersection where lights have been
promised for some time.
Mr. Bachto1d responded by saying that the City Manager mentioned
that this subject might be brought up and wishes he could be more
encouraging but could only promise that everything will be done
to expedite the business concerned with getting the traffic light
installed. He then explained that there are various procedures
which must be followed prior to the installation and that they have
been doubling up on things so that this can be taken care of. At
present, one of the prime problems is getting control equipment.
Cm Tirse11 wondered which agencies were contacted with regard to
growth projections for the valley and whether or not a study was
done on the effect busses might have on the congestion problem
which Mr. Bachto1d explained. It is hoped that express busses
will be running very soon and it is not anticipated that this will
have a material affect on the congestion, noting the affect this
system has had on the Golden Gate bridge and Marin County area.
Cm Miller stated that he would prefer to reserve an opinion until
after he has read the EIR, which apparently is also the desire of
Cm Futch and suggested that the matter be postponed.
Cm Miller commented that the Council would like to thank the State
Department of Transportation for its help in getting the railroad
track relocation project question resolved and that the Council
really appreciates this help.
(
".
(Creation of Div. of
Bicycle Transportation)
Mayor Pritchard mentioned SB 1642 which would provide a creation of
a Division of Bicycle Transportation within the State Department and
asked what their opinion of this might be.
CH-28-149
May 20, 1974
(Division of Bicycle Transportation)
Mr. Bachto1d replied that they already have a bicycle function
within the Department and perhaps the Bill would emphasize the
bicycle load to a greater extent. They have a bicycle program
and coordinator at present which is plagued with inadequate fund-
ing.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a five minute recess, after which the
Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
DISCUSSION RE FINAL REPORT
FROM THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE
ON THE GENERAL PLAN GOALS
Mayor Pritchard explained that prior to the discussion regarding
the final report of the General Plan Goals as prepared by the
Citizens Committee, he and Cm Tirsell would like to present
certificates of appreciation to those who served on the Committees.
People who served on the following committees were given certifica-
tes and those who were not present at the Council meeting to receive
certificates will receive them by mail:
Steering Committee
Community Facilities Subcommittee
Commercial Subcommittee
Educational Facilities-Public Safety Subcommittee
Housing Subcommittee
Industrial Subcommittee
Open Space Subcommittee
Cm Miller stated that he feels everyone who worked on the subcommittees
as well as those responsible for preparing the reports should be men-
tioned in the final report and urged the Steering Committee to collect
the names so that the Council and community may be aware of those
people who worked so very hard to bring about a comprehensive and
valuable report.
E1mond Holbrook commented that the Commercial Subcommittee conducted
a survey of all the businesses within the City of Livermore for their
input and this was used as a basis for some of the conclusions they carne
to in their report, including how to create a better business climate
in Livermore.
There was brief discussion regarding the report prepared by the Com-
mercial SUbcommit~~
~~ ~om the Planning Commission asked various questions
about shopping centers and a regional shopping center which was follow-
ed by discussion regarding shopping centers and things related to
shopping centers.
Candy Simonen briefly commented on the community Facilities Sub-
committee input and noted that in contacting other cities they
received ideas as to how financing community facilities might
be accomplished.
Mayor Pritchard asked if this was studied in conjunction with the
Junior College, and Ms Simonen stated the study was done with the
assumption that the college would be developed, and some of the
suggestions were that there might be means of joint financing between
the City and the college district.
CM-28-150
May 20, 1974
(Final Report from the
Citizens Committee on
General Plan Goals)
~,
Cm Tirsell remarked that there is a lot of information regarding
methods of financing for the construction of facilities that was not
included in the final report, h.OW..,~~~this~~.~n:f~o~r~ a~.tion is available
and can be made available~ee7&- ~. ~~
The chairman of the Education and Public Safety Subcommittee was not
present, so Cm Tirsel1 read the summary from their report which in-
dicated that this committee was not asked to review hospital and
medical facilities but this was added at the Steering Committee level.
She added that their report was completed very early and very effi-
ciently.
Roger Everett,chairman of the Housing Subcommittee, which report was
the largest, stated the report consisted of four items: 1) a housing
inventory report, 2) interrelationships of housing growth to other
things - pointing out particularly the taxable sales per capita which
brings out the need for people to shop locally. 3) minority report
and 4) recommended goals. The recommended growth rate was mostly
dictated by the air pollution problem and was set between land 2%,
with the ultimate population in 2000 of 80,000, and perhaps 100,000
twenty years hence.
Milo Nordyke explained the minority report, stating that San Francisco
and Oakland were not used for the average growth rate as they felt
that size was the critical point for answering the key question of
the general plan which was, "What Kind of City Do We Want Livermore
To Be?"
Cm Turner questioned the projected growth for the year 2000 as he felt
that was excessive and Mr. Everett stated that was reached by using
the 1.9% growth rate, and when asked if the projected employment in-
crease at the lab was computed in the report, the answer was that
no increase was projected at the time the report was made.
Com. Dahlbacka questioned the recommendation regarding the percentage
of low income housing, and Mr. Everett explained that it was their
idea to spread various income levels throughout the community rather
than having neighborhoods defined as low cost or expensive thereby
attempting to prevent future ghettos.
Cm Miller remarked that the main distinction between the majority and
minority report is that the majority report was very concerned about
air pollution and the effect of rapid growth rate on the quality of
life in Livermore whereas the minority report seemed to be more con-
cerned about what the city would ultimately be like when it reached
the maximum possible population.
Ms. Joan Green, member of the Industrial Subcommittee, stated that
this report was very general and their point was that industry is
needed in Livermore as there is adequate industrial land. Some speci-
fics they did not study were the type that would be beneficial to the
City, but felt rather that "beggars can't be choosers". Their com-
mittee did not address itself to growth, however cumulative growth
is of value to industry.
r\
I
Com. John Staley asked if the committee had given any thought to the
type of industrial work force available in Livermore and not currently
employed here. He felt this was an important factor in considering
the type of industry we want, and Ms. Green stated this was discussed
generally in conjunction with the commuter segment of the City.
William Zagotta pointed out that the City should develop a quantitative
system of evaluation in determining benefits to the City for each
industry that is interested in locating here. It may be that an
industry might have good job opportunity, but would have low tax
valuation and bring in a lot of employees who would require homes.
CH-28-151
May 20, 1974
(General Plan Goals)
Mr. Zagotta continued that there are ways of encourag~~g industry
or discouraging industry and at this time there is no rational
basis for making this decision.
Cm Miller stated that the comment made by Commissioner Staley was
a good one - the maximum advantage to industrialization in the City
is to convert commuters to local workers and wondered if there was
some way to make a survey to determine the type of work that the
commuters do.
Mr. Musso stated that this question might be asked during the Novem-
ber census.
Mayor Pritchard stated they might also include the question of
place of employment.
Com. . Dah1backa questioned the statement regarding effect of growth on
financial, educational and environmental factors depending on indi-
vidual preference, and Mr. Zagotta explained the committee was divided
on this and the point is that it is a cost benefit question - a per-
son might be more interested in growth if his business depended on
growth or assuming air pollution is a problem, the cost would be
higher to a person who is sensitive to air pollution than to one who
is not. Their committee had been asked the question, and that was
the excuse that was given for not dealing with the question in depth.
Gary Drummond, chairman of the Open Space Subcommittee, stated that
in considering resources and amenities in our planning area, they
established a group of goals and came up with their recommended ways
of implementing these goals having to do with preservation of slope
lands, grazing, agricultural, vineyards, gravel pits and open space
in residential areas, and briefly means of acquisition.
Mayor Pritchard remarked that the report did not deal in specifics
with the amount of park space required for certain densities, and
Mr. Drummond stated the only place they talked about density was
in the residential open space area and they would recommend that
man made structures not occupy more than 25% of the space.
Ken Croswell, resident of Livermore, stated he had no background on
the events of this evening, but wondered if there had been any effort
made to formulate a valley commission.
Mayor Pritchard stated he would prefer to refer his question to Cm
Tirsell who could explain what had been discussed at the last meeting
and the City's plans in this regard, and Mr. Croswell stated he
would contact Cm Tirse11 after the meeting or at a later time.
Cm Miller remarked that that comment reminded him of a point in the
report which indicated that the people who were surveyed, by a sub-
stantial majority, wanted Livermore to be an independent City.
Mayor Pritchard at this time expressed his appreciation to former
Mayor Taylor for bringing the idea of a general plan review to the
Council, and invited Clyde to speak.
Clyde Taylor commented simply that he hoped the Council would take
some action on the report and not file it.
Mayor Pritchard also expressed his appreciation to all members of
the various subcommittees and Don Bradley and Cm Tirse11 who
chaired the steering committee.
CM-28-152
May 20, 1974
(Gen. Plan Goals)
The chair entertained a motion at this time accepting the General
Plan Review committee report, which was moved by Cm Futch, seconded
by Cm Miller and approved unanimously.
(-
I
\
REPORT RE GENERAL
PLAN CONSULTANT FIRM
In accordance with the approval of the previous City Council, the
staff has contacted a number of firms who engage in planning con-
sultant work in an effort to generate interest in composing all
or part of our forthcoming General Plan revision studies. Those
interested would be evaluated on their professional standing, ex-
perience, etc. and would be interviewed orally. A decision must be
made as to whether or not a consultant firm is to be retained or to
assume the entire General Plan composition task or only certain por-
tions with the balance being done by our City staff, working in
conjunction with various City advisory agencies. A report on this
matter has been prepared by the Planning Director.
Mr. Parness stated that there were responses from a number of firms
interested, which are included in the report and the Planning Direc-
tor has reviewed each of the submissions which consisted of the
usual company brochures listing their staff numbers, professional
creditials and work experience. This information along with Mr.
Musso's personal knowledge of their reputation and with some refer-
ence checking he has recommended three firms for oral interviews.
Mr. Musso has prepared a listing of all of the elements that would
be advisable to consider in a General Plan, many of which can be done
in house but several must be handled by outside technological services.
Mr. Parness commented that personally speaking he is not sure this is
the best course, due to the expense involved, but does not have an al-
ternate suggestion to present to the Council.
em Miller stated that he would like to examine the costs of the
three kinds of alternatives together with the scope of what could
be done in the various combinations that would help the Council
corne to a decision. He stated that he would prefer a combination
of 2 and 3 over hiring an outside consultant.
Cm Futch felt the Planning Commission is really handling quite a
load in doing this type of work - it has taken a great deal of time
and approval has not been given for any specific plans at present.
He suggested that the Council begin a process for selecting a con-
sultant to do this. He stated that in his opinion the Land Use
element is a very vital one in which we are looking for innovative
ideas to implement goals from the citizens and this, specifically,
is one he would like to see included. He then moved that the staff
be directed to set up interviews with at least four or five firms
of which one may be selected to do a significant part of the General
Plan review, and specifically, the Land Use planning. The motion was
seconded by Cm Tirsell.
('
\
"
Cm Tirse11 then explained the reasons she felt a consultant firm
should be hired and the type of things she would like to see
accomplished.
Mr. Parness stated that from the differences of opinions expressed
he feels it is important that the Council decide as to what the
scope of work is going to be, at least in a general direction.
There must be a decision made as to whether a consultant firm will
be hired to do a couple of elements or the entire task and such a
decision may even justify going to a different type of consultant
firm. He suggestion that the Council make a decision prior to
setting up interviews with prospective firms.
CM-28-153
May 20, 1974
(Consultant for
General Plan)
Cm Turner stated that he would be in favor of hiring a consul-
tant in charge of the total formulation of the plan and would
like to see the costs for something of this nature.
Cm Futch stated that he also would lean towards this suggestion
but there may be a few technical elements that could be omitted
if there is a significant cost difference. He felt those ele-
ments that are essential are the following:
Land Use
Circulation
Housing
Conservation
Social
ern Futch commented that there probably would not be substantial
savings in eliminating some of the minor categories and that
there should be a look at the overall planning process and
should include most of the elements.
ern Turner amended the motion to include the statement just
made by Cm Futch, and Cm Futch stated that he would agree to
include this in the main motion.
Mayor Pritchard asked if a consultant firm will be requested to
review the area that was removed from our Sphere of Influence
area, and Cm Miller felt it should be assumed that our Sphere of
Influence will be restored because as far as the City is concerned
it will be.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would agree with Cm Miller in that
local people should be used - those with technical and professional
ability in certain areas. He added that this would include the City
staff but would not want it to be limited to the staff. However, he
shares the concern of Cm Futch with respect to the time element and
getting the General Plan finished. He stated that he will vote for
the motion because interviewing will not preclude the City of the
opportunity to use the staff and community people and Mr. Parness
agreed that this would be appropriate adding that in his opinion
the Steering Committee would be a very appropriate body to become
the liaison between the community, City Council and staff in over-
seeing the consultants' work in this regard. He again urged the
Council to give direction as to what the consultants should be
asked to prepare for presentation.
Cm Miller stated that he does not agree with the unique concept
of forming a single choice as suggested by Cm Futch. He commented
that his experience in watching consultants is that they have the
responsibility for the whole thing and when it is finished the
City staff has done most of the work by providing them with the
information they need. In his opinion it is worth having the al-
ternative and the costs of the alternative available prior to
corning to a final decision and in his opinion there are certain
elements of the General Plan that the City staff is better suited
to do than an outside consultant and the staff can do some of these
things more quickly because they know what the situation is. He
then moved to amend the motion to ask the staff to draw up what
they feel would be the most efficient for them, what they could
do best and what they would like to see put out to consultants,
as a second alternative to the proposal of having consultants do
all of it, and to receive bids on both alternatives, seconded by
Cm Turner.
ern Futch stated that this may mean a delay and there are only 8
months left in which to complete the General Plan and is worried
about the timing.
CM-28-154
May 20, 1974
(re Consultant for
General Plan)
Cm Turner stated that he has seconded the motion because if the
Council rejects the bid it may mean three weeks lost on something
the staff can be doing and that this report from Mr. Musso should
be in conjunction with the bids that are going to be received but
if Mr. Musso cannot furnish this information in the same time period
it should be eliminated.
Cm Futch wondered if asking for bids on the individual elements is
reasonable or is this different than asking for an overall considera-
tion, and Mr. Parness responded by saying that there is a difference
but feels the City can get a response; however this may mean that
one or two of the firms may refuse to respond because of this type
of approach. He felt it might be better to ask for two alternates;
l) akin to the suggestion made by Cm Futch; and 2) another package,
such as suggested by Cm Miller.
These comments were followed by discussion of the proposals sug-
gested.
Cm Miller stated that he feels the staff is capable of carrying
out an innovative General Plan and would like to allow them to
do the portions they know they are capable of doing with the
other portions being contracted out and it would seem that it
cannot do any harm to be flexible enough to look at two options.
Cm Tirse1l stated that the motion was to interview as soon as
possible and is not prepared to wait until all the plans have been
formulated and then select the best plan and Cm Turner felt Cm Tirse11
is reading the motion wrong - the motion is to have an alternative
plan if the primary plan does not work.
Cm Futch suggested that his motion be voted on separately from
the suggestion made by Cm Miller and the Council voted on the
main motion which passed 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) .
em Miller then moved to offer an alternative which would permit
the staff to prepare an option of those things they would like to
do and those things they feel should be contracted out and prepared
as a scope of work (which does not need to come to the Council) go
out for bid, and when they come back a decision can be made. Motion
was seconded by Cm Turner and passed 3-2 (Cm Futch and Tirsell dissent-
ing) .
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Quezaltenango
Dignitaries)
Mayor Pritchard stated that dignitaries of Queza1tenango will be
arriving in Livermore on May 25th and suggested that the staff pre-
pare appropriate formalities for them for the Tuesday, May 28th meeting.
('
Cm Futch felt it might be appropriate to hold a reception in their
honor prior to the Council meeting and it was noted that the Sister
City Committee is planning to meet them on their arrival and it was
requested that the staff be the liaison between the Council and the
Sister City Committee and that cmftI meet with the staff and
Sister City Committee to determine wha.t would be appropriate in the
way of welcome and gifts for them.?td;....L
(Traffic Lights -
Concannon & Holmes St.)
Cm Futch stated that he was not present at the last meeting in
which there was some discussion regarding the traffic lights scheduled
CM-28-155
May 20, 1974
(Traffic Lights
at Concannon & Holmes St.)
for installation at Concannon Boulevard and Holmes Street and
stated that he can see no reason why the state cannot furnish
a flashing warning signal from now until the traffic signals
are installed.
Mr. Lee felt that Cm Futch's comments to the spokesman this
evening were probably as effective as any action the staff
might take. Cm Futch asked that this be followed up by a
letter to the Dept. of Transportation and Mr. Parness replied
that a letter has been sent and that Mr. Bachtold is the person
in charge of the entire matter and during the recess earlier he
had indicated that they are aware of what the concern is and will
do everything they can for the City.
(School District Policy
re Setbacks)
Cm Futch stated that in speaking with one of the representatives
from the School District he found that they have adopted the
policy of not adopting the City's standards on setbacks and he
feels they do not really understand and that the Council should
ask them to reconsider. He felt there is no need for a school
to have only a five foot setback (such as at Arroyo Mocho) and
suggested that the staff write to them asking that they reconsider
and to suggest that they consult with the City.
Mr. Musso explained that the School District would conform but
do not want to go through the procedure of submitting site plans
for approval and all the rest.
Cm Futch moved that the staff explain the matter to them, secon-
ded by Cm Miller and passed unanimously.
(Resolution Commending
Fire Chief Baird)
Mayor Pritchard stated that Fire Chief, Jack Baird, is the new
President of the California Fire Chiefs Association and would
entertain a motion to adopt a resolution of congratulations
upon his appointment so that it can be presented to himj so
moved by ern Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION 87-74
RESOLUTION COMMENDING CHIEF BAIRD ON HIS
APPOINTMENT AS PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
FIRE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION
(Resol~tion of
Appreciation -
Rev. Wyatt)
Mayor Pritchard stated that on appreciation day the members of
the True Light Apostolic Faith Church of Livermore plan to
honor Pastor Felix Wyatt and that he would like to be there
to present him with a resolution of appreciation from the
City Council.
CM-28-l56
May 20, 1974
(Res. of Appreciation)
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote the resolution of appreciation was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 85-74
(
".
RESOLUTION - DAY OF APPRECIATION
PASTOR FELIX WYATT
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at ll:50 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss legal and personnel matters.
~~or~
ATTEST oL~~
. . ermore, California
APPROVE
Regular Meeting of May 28, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on May 28, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:45 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Counci1members Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirse11 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.
INTRODUCTION OF SISTER
CITY DELEGATION
(
Mayor Pritchard introduced guests from Quezaltenango and explained
that a special dinner was held in their honor earlier this evening.
Those introduced by the Mayor are as follows:
Sr. Diego Lopez de Leon (Mayor) and his wife,
Flavio Periera (Vice Mayor)
Javier Hernandez (1st Council Member)
Roberto Barientos and wife
Senora Blanca de Sandoval
Miguel Rivera (Businessman)
Also introduced was a group of students from Quezaltenango and their
advisor, Pancho Maca1.
CM-28-157
May 28, 1974
(Quezaltenango Delegates)
Following the introduction of the delegation the Mayor of Quezal-
tenango addressed the members of the Council and presented gifts
to the Mayor.
Mayor Pritchard thanked the delegation for the kind words expressed
and stated that the bonds of love between the two cities and the
people are very strong and that the bonds will continue to grow
stronger.
The Mayor then invited the delegation to observe the Council meet-
ing for as long as they would like and explained that the meeting
might be very long and the Council would not be offended if they
did not stay until the end of the meeting.
COUNCIL MINUTES
On motion of ern Turner, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of May 20, 1974, were approved,
as corrected.
OPEN FORUM
(re Petition for
Installation of Catch Basin)
Lee Canaveri, 3181 East Avenue, stated that she is the adult cross-
ing guard at East Avenue and 7th Street and that she would like to
present a petition signed by 316 people requesting that a catch
basin be installed at the cross walk' to eliminate the river of
water the students must walk through in using the cross walk during
the rainy season.
Mr. Lee indicated that the problem has not been brought to the atten-
tion of the City during the past and that they will check out the
problem.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolutions re
Appointments
The fOllowing resolutions were adopted making appointments to the
Beautification Committee and the Community Affairs Committee:
RESOLUTION NO. 88-74
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE
(June Hamilton)
RESOLUTION NO. 89-74
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
(William Ormond)
Report re Bldg.
Permits Issued May 1
The Chief Building Inspector submitted a report indicating that two
building permits were issued on May 1, 1974 - one to Ed Hutka and
one to Evans Products Company.
CM-28-158
May 28, 1974
~
/
\
"
Report re Audit Contract
The contract for the City's audit expires as of June 30 and provision
for the continuation of this service must be made. It is recommended
that the City Council authorize the retention of the same firm (Bray &
Burke) for an additional three year period at the fee quoted.
Design Review Committee
Minutes for May l5th
The minutes for the meeting of May lSth were submitted by the Design
Review Committee.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by em Futch and by unanimous vote
the Consent Calendar was approved, with the deletion of the item
regarding Municipal Code printing services.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess at which time the Council-
members bid farewell to the Queza1tenango delegates. The Council
meeting then resumed with all members of the Council present.
COMMUNICATION FROM
VANVLECK REAL ESTATE
A letter was received from William R. Ortiz of VanVleck Real Estate,
which indicated that he was not informed about the public hearing
in which the Judson property was discussed and asked that the matter
again be placed on the agenda.
Mr. Ortiz spoke to the Council about the history of the property and
the manner in which the Judsons acquired it, as well as the proposal
for a restaurant on the property if the Council will rezone it to
Commercial. He presented a sketch of the proposal worked out with
union Oil and the Flood Control people for access through the southerly
portion of the Union station property which Mr. William Newton of
the Union Oil Company explained in detail to the Council.
Cm Tirsell stated that she is confused about the application for a
restaurant because it was her understanding that the application was
for rezoning to accommodate a motel and that the rest would be open
space.
Cm Miller then explained that the application for the rezoning has
been reviewed in detail and the reasons the Council took action to
deny the request for the rezoning.
r
Mr. Ortiz explained that they understood that the City Council would
be agreeable to rezoning, provided the access could be worked out
and is the reason they have spent many hours coordinating a plan with
the Union Oil people and the Alameda County Flood Control District.
The Mayor explained that his position has always been that there
is not enough room on the south side of the station for ingress and
egress and that it would be too hazardous to make provisions on the
north side of the station due to the increase in traffic.
CM-28-159
May 28, 1974
(re Judson Property)
Cm Turner stated that nothing can be decided at this meeting
and would suggest that if they feel strongly about the re-
zoning and that access has been worked out that they take
the appropriate steps back through the Planning Commission
and resubmit their application.
Cm Tirsell pointed out that access on the south side of the
station would require an encroachment permit for some l2 feet
of the Arroyo Seco and since this has been embodied in the
trailway plan for the City and accepted as part of the trailway
plan, it is doubtful that such a permit would be granted.
Mr. Lee commented that it was the Council's conclusion that
all of the property, up to the Union station property, would
be used for the trailway.
em Miller moved to table the matter, seconded by Mayor Pritchard
and passed 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting).
em Futch commented that at the time the application for the re-
zoning was before the Council he was not opposed to rezoning,
provided access could be worked out; however, the maps and
engineering material provided to the Council did not clearly
indicate a good access and was the reason he was compelled to
vote against the rezoning.
COMMUNICATION FROM LARPD
& COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMM.
RE BICENTENNIAL COMMITTEE
A letter was received from LARPD expressing interest in a bicen-
tennial celebration and a letter was also received from the Com-
munity Affairs Committee regarding the establishment of a Bicentenni-
al Committee with the following recommendations:
1. That a Bicentennial Committee be formed.
2. That membership on the committee be open to any and all
citizens who are interested.
3. That Don Bradley be appointed to serve as an interim chairman
and preside at a meeting on the 11th of June at 8:00 p.m. at
the public library.
4. That the Community Affairs Committee will provide publicity
for the first meeting.
em Miller moved that the City Council adopt the above mentioned
recommendations and that LARPD be invited to join with the Committee,
seconded by Cm Tirse11, who asked that the motion also include repre-
sentatives of the School District, which was included in the motion
and passed by unanimous vote.
COMMUNICATION RE
NOISY ICE CREAM TRUCKS
A letter of complaint was submitted by Carol Gerich objecting to
the noise of the ice cream trucks during the summer which she con-
siders to be noise pollution and should be included in the City's
noise ordinance.
em Miller stated that the problem of the ice cream trucks is a
nuisance to every mother of small children in Livermore and there
CM-28-l60
May 28, 1974
(re Noisy Ice
Cream Trucks)
have been complaints for years about them and that the time has come
to do something about them. He stated that he would like the staff
to be directed to prepare an ordinance that would ban the noise makers
on the ice cream trucks, seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Tirse11 felt that it should not be aimed at ice cream trucks alone
but should include any commercial vehicle, agreed to by the maker of
the motion and the second.
Cm Turner pointed out that the ice cream trucks create an element
of danger that should also be considered, as children rush into the
street when they hear the ice cream truck arriving in their area.
The attorney acting as counsel for the City commented that there
may be such an ordinance already in existance and would look into
the matter.
Cm Tirsell called for the question and the motion passed unanimously.
COMMUNICATION FROM LARPD
RE PARK SITE ACQUISITION
A letter was received from LARPD in which park acquisition priorities
were listed and on motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsel1 and
by unanimous vote the matter was referred to the staff for budget
consideration.
COMMUNICATION FROM EPA
RE WIDENING OF I-580
A letter was received from the united States Environmental Protection
Agency with respect to the widening of I-S80 and their concern for
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. A final environmental
impact statement is now being re-eva1uated by the California Depart-
ment of Transportation and FHWA and at such time a final statement
is submitted to the Council the EPA will again review and comment
on the environmental impact of the proposed project.
It was concluded that the matter would be discussed by the Council
in about two weeks.
COMMUNICATION FROM ZONE 7
RE MAINTENANCE OF CHANNELS
('
Zone 7 responded to a letter written to them by the City Manager with
regard to complaints from people in the Greenvil1e North area about
the maintenance of channels in this area. Zone 7 indicated that after
investigation of the channels they found that for the most part the
sections through the subdivided areas are improved channels in good
condition. They felt that some dissatisfaction may have been caused
over some erosion and local flooding which caused some ponds allowing
insect breeding to occur due to the past two wet winters. The unim-
proved channel areas are mainly in private ownership and the condition
of these areas are the responsibility of the owner. In general, the
channels are in good condition and they will investigate any complaint
made. They also offered any possible assistance they might be able to
give regarding the situation.
Cm Tirse1l moved to note and file the letter, seconded by Cm Miller.
CM-28-161
May 28, 1974
(re Altamont Creek)
Cm Miller stated that the letter indicated that they are not en-
tirely responsible for the maintenance of A1tamont Creek and asked
if the staff is in agreement with this statement.
Mr. Lee replied that as he recalls Zone 7 has accepted the responsi-
bility of the maintenance through the subdivision, but they do not
have an easement for the upstream and downstream portion and there-
fore would not be responsible. He added that he believes the portion
being complained about is on private property.
Cm Miller suggested that the motion include that the Greenvil1e North
I-5S0 Committee be sent a copy of the letter from Zone 7 for their
information which the maker of the motion included in the motion
and passed by unanimous vote.
COMMUNICATION FROM
ALAMEDA COUNTY RE
SPEED LIMIT ON EAST AVE.
A letter was received from Alameda County which indicated that they
would not be justified in recommending a lower speed limit than the
existing speed limit for East Avenue.
Cm Turner reemphasized reasons expressed in the past for wanting
the speed limit reduced and Mr. Lee responded by saying that the
methods used by the County in evaluation of speed limits are well
established methods and as a result of their analysis they feel a
lower speed limit is not warranted. He commented that even if the
speed limit were lowered to 25 or 30 mph, if a car went out of con-
trol and went over the curb someone would still be in trouble, in-
cluding bicyclists, pedestrians and the driver, and it is felt that
a speed reduction would not significantly change the hazards or ac-
tual speeds being traveled.
It was mentioned that perhaps people living in the area of East
Avenue or those concerned about the hazards could write to the
Supervisor of this district on the matter.
Cm Tirse1l stated that it is very frustrating to know of hazardous
areas in the City, point these things out to the County and then
have a computer say that precautions or suggestions are not warranted.
Mr. Lee pointed out that long range plans for East Avenue include
widening and that we should probably urge that this be done as
early as Dossible. He explained that the preliminary design is
supposed to be done by December and that there is not much that
can be done until it has been completed. As soon as possible,
thereafter, our Supervisor and the County staff should be contacted
and our concerns expressed at this time with regard to early construc-
tion.
Mr. Parness stated that the County is aware that the Council con-
siders the East Avenue project the City's primary priority and
they are conducting a very expensive engineering study which will
precede the actual construction work.
Cm Futch suggested that the results of the study be made available
to the Council and that the staff keep them informed.
REPORT RE JOINT POWERS
AGREEMENT MODIFICATION -
CONSOLIDATED BARGAINING
The City Manager reported that the current joint powers agreement
with regard to Fire Department organizations has been modified to
CM-28-l62
May 28, 1974
(Joint Powers Agreement -
Fire Department)
state that separate agreements as negotiated will be subject only
to the review and approval of the affected employing agency and that
such an agreement may be approved by a majority vote. It is recom-
mended that the Council adopt a resolution approving the amendment,
so moved by Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 90-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement Dated March 12, 1973.)
REPORT FROM BLDG. INSPEC-
TOR RE ENERGY INSULATION
STANDARDS
A report was presented to the City Council from the Building Inspec-
tor with regard to Energy Insulation Standards adopted by the State
of California to become effective February 22, 1975. It has been
recommended that any local requirements be delayed in order to achieve
un~~~~.
Cm "iller moved to adopt the recommendation, seconded by Mayor
Pritchard.
Cm Futch suggested that perhaps some committee such as the Design
Review Committee might look at the standards and Mr. Parness pointed
out that the City appointed a committee for such purposes and that
they have not been very active lately and perhaps the matter should
be referred to them. He stated that this committee is the Building
Code Enforcement Committee.
Mr. Street explained that the regulations are effective February 22,
1975, but the manual that is to accompany the regulations for the
purpose of uniform enforcement throughout the state is under prepara-
tion at this time and it is not known when it might be available, as
there has been a reorganization of the committee who developed the
regulations and are responsible for the manual.
Glen Dah1backa, 1138 Aberdeen, stated that there seems to be two
issues at hand - 1) the adoption of the standards already adopted
by the State of California for new construction; and 2) standards
for existing dwellings. He stated that he can see no reason for
not going ahead and adopting the standards and he has been assured
by people working in the State offices that there should be no objec-
tion to adoption of these standards for new construction prior to
February 22, 1975. With respect to standards for existing dwellings,
he felt this question should go to the Design Review Committee or
the Building Code Enforcement Committee. He added that the bill
related to existing dwellings will not be up for consideration for
another year because it did not get to the floor in time for earlier
consideration but expert testimony can be obtained and he would urge
that such be done.
('
Cm Futch wondered if there would be any problems encountered by the
City if the standards were adopted prior to February 22, 1975 and
Mr. Street explained the new process that would have to be followed
noting that all of this is new and the reason the state delayed the
effective date. He felt that there might be a problem with enforce-
ment if the City required the new standards earlier than the speci-
fied effective date.
Cm Futch felt there are probably only a few homes that might be built
prior to the effective date and it might not be wise to put the City
staff to all this extra work for a small number of homes.
CM-28-163
May 28, 1974
(Insulation Standards)
Cm Miller pointed out that there are 150 permits still available
and that approximately 100 homes will be constructed soon by the
Kissell Company (Greenville North area) which means that about
200 homes could be constructed prior to February 22, 1975 and that
these families will have to pay higher bills for heating their homes.
In his opinion there is no reason for not going ahead and adopting
the standards. He stated that the same type of problem existed in
trying to get utilities undergrounded for new development and conse-
quently, there are residential areas in the City which do not have
underground lines and there is no reason the higher standards cannot
be observed now.
Mr. Dah1backa stated that these standards will apply to all construc-
tion being done, not only to residential units.
em Tirse1l stated that she is not prepared to make a decision at
this time and the motion and second were withdrawn.
em Turner moved that the matter be continued and that the staff report
as to how the guidelines could be implemented, seconded by em Tirsell.
em Miller felt that there should be consideration of insulating hot
water pipes as well as hot air and air conditioning ducts.
At this time the motion to continue passed by unanimous vote.
Cm Miller moved to invite the Design Review Committee, the Board
of Appeals and the Planning Commission to a joint meeting with
the City Council at which time testimony can be presented by the
experts at the state level and other people with an interest in
the question of insulating existing structures, seconded by Mayor
Pritchard and which passed 3-2 (Cm Turner and Futch dissenting).
REPORT RE CONNECTION OF
VA HOSPITAL TO CITY
SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM
Mr. Lee explained that the VA Hospital has requested that they be
allowed to connect to the City sewage treatment system and since
this is a significant consumption of the small remaining sewer
capacity it is recommended that if this is to be allowed they be
assessed the usual connection fee and that an annual sewer service
charge be billed in accordance with the formula of the City. He
stated that it has been a policy to consolidate sewer plants in the
west end of the Valley into one - not to allow additional plants.
It has been anticipated that the VA Hospital would one day be
coming into our plant and it is also consistent with the Regional
Water Quality Control Board policy to abandon smaller plants.
em Miller wondered who would be responsible for the cost of the
line from the VA to the City and Mr. Lee stated that the VA Hospi-
tal would have to pay for the line; however, if there is a need
for added capacity in the line due to development along the Arroyo
del Valle there should be a formation of a benefit district with
the hospital being reimbursed for the cost of any oversized line.
Cm Miller felt there are two objections to be considered regarding
such a proposal: 1) we need the capacity of our sewer plant for
industry and commerce since we are close to capacity and do not
have money for expansion; and 2) somebody is going to build a line
that developers will be able to tap into and it would appear that
we are falling into the same trap as the Junior College situation.
It is unwise to extend utilities to an area prior to a decision as
to what development may occur, if any. He agrees that in time it
would be a good idea to have the VA Hospital effluent run into our
plant but at present the idea is premature by about 5 years.
)
CM-28-164
I
:. ,It: -J Ok May 28, 1974
~~~~ /V4&~---(!:1 I::
~: ~..-L~~' ~re VA Hosp. Sewage)
em Miller moved that the City councif4[ake the position that it
appreciates the problems of the VA Hospital, that ultimately the
VA Hospital should be connected into our sewer system, but respectfully
'decline the proposal for connection to our sewer plant at this time
. .. , seconded
by ern Futch and passed by unanimous vote.
It was suggested that the Regional Water Quality Control Board receive
a copy of the Council position exibiting ultimate interest in the
suggestion, and Cm Futch stated that he would like to see a copy of
the letter to be sent prior to its being sent.
REPORT FROM DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE RE
GUIDELINES
The City Council reviewed the guidelines drafted by the Design Re-
view Committee in accordance with Ordinance No. 775 and Cm Miller
stated that it would be reasonable to send the draft to the Planning
Commission for consideration. He commented that in reviewing the
draft it appeared to be permissive in that certain things should be
done but there is no guarantee that it will be done and he would
suggest that the word "shall" be inserted more often than "shouldll.
If it is desirable to have kiosks, drinking fountains, park benches
and shaded areas in shopping center parking lots then there should
be wording indicating such "shall" be required with the location
and layout left to the designer.
Mr. Musso explained that the Planning Commission did receive a copy
of the draft and discussed it at the last meeting. One of the things
discussed was the attempt to put the "shall" in ordinance form. He
then gave an example of this.
Cm Miller stated that he is disturbed with the imitation landscaping
that is often provided - nothing like the landscaping shown on the
rendering. It is possible to landscape with substantial sized plants
and it seems that the landscaping should look like landscaping in
the beginning. He suggested that there be wording included to require
that planting shall be of a size that will provide landscaping IInow"
and that we should not have to wait 10 years for a tree to produce
a visible leaf.
Cm Tirsell moved that the matter be referred to the Planning Commis-
sion and delineate those items which now stand in an ordinance in
some manner from those that do not; with a recommendation from the
Planning Commission as to those things they feel should be included in
ordinances and leaving permissive those things which are then negotiable
items; motion was seconded by Cm Turner.
\,--
Cm Turner asked if ern Tirsel1 would like to include in the motion
when they would expect this information back from the Planning Commis-
sion, and Cm Tirse11 stated she would like to see it by June 17.
Cm. Miller remarked that he would like to discuss this and propose a
possible amendment also. He felt that June l7 would be too fast, and
would like to make an amendment to ask the Design Review Committee
to make specific the items they think should be in ordinance form
in contrast to the ones they would like to be recommendations, as he
got the impression from the Committee they had not discussed the
question of whether some should be "shall" and some II should" . He
felt it should also go back to the Design Review Committee for their
recommendations also.
After some discussion regarding the motion, Cm Tirsell asked the
Planning Director how this could be expedited, and Mr. Musso explained
CM-28-l6S
I
May 28, 1974
(Design Review Guidelines)
the ordinance provides that the Design Review Committee shall de-
velop and the City Council shall approve design standards to serve
as guidelines and the Planning Department would administer the
procedures, and the Council could approve those standards as they
want and they could then begin administering them, and then refer
to the Planning Commission as many as they want, and whether it
is referred to the Design Review Committee is up to the Council.
He did not feel the Planning Commission was in a position to take
issue with the Design Review Committee, but they can implement
the guidelines.
-_//
Cm Tirse1l withdrew her prior motion at this time, and moved that
the Council adopt as a temporary measure the guidelines from the
Design Review Committee; ,refer them to the Planning Commission
for delineation of those items which now stand in an ordinance
in some manner from those that do not and return the guidelines
by the first week in July; motion was seconded by Cm Futch and
passed unanimously.
Cm Miller moved that they send a note to the Design Review Com-
mittee asking them to consider which, in their judgment, should be
"shall" and which should be "should"; in other words which items
should be in ordinance form and which should be recommendations;
motion was seconded by Mayor Pritchard, but failed 3-2 with ern
Futch, Tirse1l and Turner dissenting.
REPORT RE I-580
CITY DIRECTIONAL SIGN
In accordance with the Council's direction the staff has investigated
as an alternate to the reconstructed directional sign, one that
would be comparable to the style used in regional parks. A report
from the Design Review Committee stated that the committee concluded
that neither proposal would be appropriate for the use and reiterated
their previous recommendation.
Cm. Miller moved that the Council accept the national park type design,
however the motion failed for lack of a second.
Cm. Turner moved to accept the sign as recommended by the Beautifi-
cation Committee which was a modification of the existing sign; se-
conded by Mayor Pritchard.
Cm Miller stated that he and other people find the existing sign
objectio~~~~__~~~s~n~~d~~ a pole sign, at its worst, and felt that
the 1llf~~~s'igii would not have to be as high above the
ground as depicted, and felt that if it were lowered it might be
satisfactory to the Council. One of the major tenets of the sign
ordinance was to eliminate pole signs and replace them with other
types. ern Miller moved that the sign height be shortened so it
clears the fence line, however there was no second to the amendment.
~~
Cm Tirsell remarked that more than half of the town were in favor
of keeping the existing sign, and she preferred the superstructure
of the sign and called for the question, and the motion passed 3-2
with Cm Miller and Futch dissenting, but for different reasons, as
Cm Futch preferred to have the existing sign remain.
Cm Miller questioned how soon the sign could be changed and when he
was informed that it might be six months, moved that the present sign
be removed within 30 days; motion was seconded by Mayor Pritchard,
but failed 3-2 with Cm Futch, Tirsell and Turner dissenting.
CM-28-166
"*
I
Councilman Futch stated that the sign ordinance specifically allows
pole signs and the sign under discussion is a good example of where
a pole Sign serves a useful purpose in order to get height above the
fence. ~~~~cY~ tZdic~~ .
May 28, 1974
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
The City Manager explained that representatives of some property
owners in an unincorporated area wished to discuss with the City Council
the prospects of annexation; however, inadvertently the sender of
the letter was not notified, and Mr. Parness suggested that the matter
be continued for two weeks.
Motion was made by Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Tirse1l, and approved
unanimously to continue the matter for two weeks.
REPORT RE LAVWMA JOINT
POWERS AGREEMENT MODIFI-
CATION
Amendatory changes are proposed for the LAVWMA Joint Powers Agreement
which have been reviewed by the Board and recommended for the signa-
tory agencies acceptance. Cm Miller explained that the LAVWMA Board
had adopted the modifications unanimously and these contain the pro-
tectionsL~~at the Council wanted in the agreement. There were some
things ~ did not want~~5~~JP~evAgus1~L~i~~~~tL~UCh as one
electorate, but CD whicn-~~ed~~ 1 er explained
that LAVWMA, in order to clean up the existing water problem, can
commit the three agenc~es.to ~$Wfl~P~.wi~~~~~l.S million, exclusive
of grants (about $l2 m1l11oro? witbour-go1nifto the voters. If the
project is greater than $12 million it must go to the voters. All
expansions must go to the voters. He felt this was the best compromise
and he and Cm Futch recommend that the City agree to execute this
joint powers agreement amendment.
em. Futch further explained that none of the parties can withdraw
until the solution to the present population is taken care of, after
which time they can withdraw providing 5 years notice is given, but
the City would still be subject to the ongoing expenses that occur
during those five years. Cm. Miller added that if there is an expan-
sion program going on at the same time as a clean up, the City is only
committed to the cleanup.
em Tirsell moved to authorize the execution of the joint powers
agreement; motion was seconded by Cm Turner and approved unanimously.
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT -
THERMO-PLASTIC APPLICATOR
EQUIPMENT
Thermo-Plastic Applicator Equipment was proposed for acquisition
during the current fiscal year, but it has increased significantly in
price. However it constitutes a very highly needed equipment addition
since its use reduces labor costs in traffic striping needs and it
is recommended that a motion be adopted authorizing a budgetary
amendment by the addition of $2,194 for this capital acquisition.
Cm Tirsel1 moved to accept the staff recommendation, seconded by
em Turner, and the motion was approved unanimously.
('
\"
REPORTS FROM PLANNING
COMMISSION -
General Plan Preparation
Process
A report was presented to the Council regarding the General Plan
preparation process for informational purposes.
CM-28-l67
May 28, 1974
COUNTY REFERRAL - REZONING
PROPERTIES SO. LAS POSITAS RD.
NORTH OF FIRST STREET
The Planning Commission considered referral from the Alameda County
Planning Commission re initiated rezoning of properties zoned
RlBIO (Single Family, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size and R1B20
(Single Family, 20,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) to Districts pro-
vided by the Zoning Ordinance of properties located south of Las
positas Road and north of First Street. The Planning Commission
recommended that the subject area be rezoned to agriculture on the
basis that although the existing zoning is in conformance with the
General Plan, it is premature with respect to timing and the provi-
sion of public facilities and services.
Crn. Miller moved to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation,
seconded by Cm Tirse1l, and the motion was approved unanimously.
REZONING OF VARIOUS PARK SITES
The Planning Commission considered an initiated rezoning of various
park sites and did recommend rezoning to E (Educations-Institutions)
District. This matter should be set for public hearing by the Council.
Cm Futch moved that the matter be set for public hearing on June 17,
seconded by Cm Turner, and approved unanimously.
ORDINANCE RE COMPLETION DATE
HOFMANN PUD -(Carlton)
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Tirse11, and by unanimous
approval, the following ordinance was adopted, and title read
only.
ORDINANCE NO. 840
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO ZONING, BY AMENDING SECTION 19.15B, RE-
LATING TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS REGARDING
HOFMANN COMPANY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AND
REPEALING SECTION 19.15F, RELATING TO TIME LIMIT FOR
DEVELOPMENT, OF CHAPTER 19.00, RELATING TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.
MUNICIPAL CODE
PRINTING SERVICES
An item regarding the existing contract for the preparation and
printing of municipal code supplements was removed from the Con-
sent Calendar for discussion at this time. It had been recommended
that a motion be adopted authorizing execution of the agreement.
Cm Turner questioned the annual cost for this printing, and
suggested that in the future when a cost increase of this nature is
presented to the Council that they also be given the approximate
total cost per year and if there are any other alternatives for
these services.
Cm Futch moved authorization of the execution of the agreement,
seconded by Cm Miller, and the motion was approved unanimously.
CM-28-l68
May 28, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Abatement of Nuisance -
1984 Railroad Avenue)
Chief Building Inspector Herb Street reported that the owner of the
property located at 1984 Railroad Avenue had been notified that the
building should be demolished, and he has agreed to abate the nuisance.
MATTERS INITIATED BY
COUNCIL
(Mayor Pro Tempore)
Mayor Pritchard advised the Council that he would be absent for the
meeting of June 24 and that Vice Mayor Futch would preside. In this
regard Mayor Prichard stated that he never did care for the term "Vice
Mayor" and moved that the designation be changed to Mayor Pro Tempore,
seconded by Cm Turner.
A motion was made by Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner, and approved
unanimously to table the matter.
(Planning Unit No. l2)
Cm Turner asked the Planning Director about the status of Planning
Unit No. 12 and when it would come back to the Council, and Mr. Musso
advised that it would come back to the Council about the middle of
July.
(Suggestion to Redistrict
Supervisors District)
em Turner suggested that the necessary steps be taken to redistrict
our County Supervisors area because the Fremont area has different
problems than we do and it is difficult for a Supervisor to divide
his priorities between two distinct areas.
Mr. Engel, the attorney assisting the City in legal matters stated
that he would check into the matter for the City as this is a County
function.
(D. A. Not Prosecut-
ing Dr. Rocco)
Cm Miller stated that the District Attorney does not seem to be doing
much about prosecuting Dr. Rocco and it might seem useful to send a
letter to the District Attorney's office asking when prosecution may
begin and if they have no intention of prosecuting the City will begin
prosecution, and so moved. The motion was seconded by Cm Turner.
Mr. Engel explained the procedure involved and stated that he will
investigate and report back to the Council and the motion was withdrawn.
Cm Miller mentioned that in his opinion the District Attorney's
office is not acting expeditiously, deliberately, and that we should
put more pressure on him and that we might be more successful if we
apply pressure before the election.
("..
(
\
"
(Hearings by P.C. for
RS & CM Districts)
Cm Miller stated that according to the Planning Commission minutes
hearings are going to be held regarding the RS & CM Districts and
CM-28-169
May 28, 1974
that he would be interested in scheduling a public hearing to dis-
cuss setbacks in RS Districts, back yards particularly, seconded
by Cm Turner and passed by unanimous vote.
(re Pull Top Cans
& Non-returnables)
Cm Miller stated that the matter of banning pull top cans and
non-returnables was brought up in the past and it appeared that
legislature was going to do something about them and it looks as
if nothing is going to happen. He would therefore suggest that
the staff make inquiries as to what is happening with regard to
the legislative -bills on this matter and if nothing is going to
be done he would like the matter to be scheduled on an agenda for
Council discussion.
(re Establishment of
Noise Committee)
Cm Miller stated that during the time he was Mayor, a Noise Com-
mittee was discussed and proposed to be established. It is requested
that the Council briefly discuss the formation of such a committee
during an executive session.
(Complaint re Holmes
Street Paving)
Cm Tirsell stated that she is really unhappy with the paving that
was done by the County along Holmes Street from Catalina to the
Arroyo bridge and Mr. Lee explained that it is being inspected by
the State and the complaints have been referred to them but he
has not received a specific response as yet.
(Appointment to
Criminal Justice Board)
Mayor Pritchard stated that there is to be an appointment to the
Criminal Justice Board and it has been recommended that someone .
from the Valley be placed on the Board. Mr. Parness is presently
a Board member who has suggested that perhaps the Pleasanton City
Council should have the opportunity to serve on the Board and won-
dered if there would be any objection on the part of the Livermore
City Council.
The Council agreed that this would be a good suggestion.
(Proclamation -
Livermore Rodeo Week)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would entertain a motion proclaiming
June 2 thru 9, Livermore Rodeo Week, so moved by Cm Miller, seconded
by Cm Tirsell and passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the Council meeting at 12'p.m. to a brief
executive session to . uss an appointme t to the Community Affairs
Committee.
CM-28-l70
Regular Meeting of June 3, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on June 3, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:03 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Counci1members Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsel1 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.
MINUTES
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by em Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of May 28, 1974 were approved
as amended.
OPEN FORUM
(re Attendance of Jr.
Statesmen at Summer School)
Elizabeth Engle, 1024 Via Madrid, stated that she would like to speak
on behalf of Kevin Smith, one of the Junior Statesmen planning to
attend summer school in Sacramento for the training of budding politi-
cal leaders. The training consists of a four week seminar and 50 stu-
dents are selected throughout the state to attend this program which
costs $475. She stated that this is not only an honor for Kevin but
for the City of Livermore with respect to the service Kevin may be
able to give the City of Livermore and she felt it would be appropri-
ate for the City to sponsor Kevin, in part, requesting a small donation
of $25.
Sarah Kooshian, 415 Brighton Way, stated that she is a Granada High
School student who knows Kevin to be a responsible person willing
to assume responsibility and generally accomplishes what he sets
out to do, and felt that everyone would benefit from Kevin's being
sent to attend the seminar.
Kevin Smith 5262 Irene Way, explained that this program has been in
existance for 34 years with some of the state's senators and other
such people attending the six day a week, college level course. John
Struthers attended last year and was elected President of the Student
Body at Granada High School, who also felt that it was very worthwhile.
('
Mayor Pritchard stated that it pains and distresses him to announce
that the Council voted recently to make no further financial commit-
ments for student or other group activities until budget session at
which time the policy regarding contributions will be reviewed. He
stated that he feels this is probably one of the most worthwhile pro-
jects that the City could invest in and regrets that the Council will
probably not be able to give assistance.
Cm Turner agreed that this would be a worthwhile project to finance,
in part, and suggested that this be a consideration at the time of
budget consideration, with which Cm Futch concurred.
CM-28-171
June 3, 1974
(re Contributions)
Cm Miller stated that he also agrees that this particular request
is reasonable and would agree that a donation would be a worthwhile
contribution; however, he still agrees that the Council should be
cautious about making donations with taxpayer money and that their
recent vote not allowing further donations this year was justifiable.
He added that he would, in this case, be willing to make a personal
contribution.
em Tirse11 stated that she was opposed to the vote for this very rea-
son and that it is not fair to those who corne to the Council at this
time during the year and turned down, when contributions have already
been made to others earlier in the year. She added that she also would
like to see personal donations made and has written a letter on behalf
of Keven.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would be happy to add his name to
Cm Miller and Cm Tirsell's, offering a personal donation.
(re Water at
Crosswalk Area)
Mr. Giddings, 327l Leahy Square, stated that at the last meeting
a Mrs. Canaveri submitted a petition to the Council asking that
a catch basin be installed at the East Avenue crosswalk to eliminate
the pool of water that collects during the rainy season. He stated
that his two brothers use the crosswalk and that he has been called
from the classroom to take them dry shoes because they use the cross-
walk, and urged that something be done.
Mayor Pritchard explained that the Director of Public Works has been
asked to check into the matter and report back to the Council and
Mr. Lee stated that there will be a report next week.
(re Flashing Lights
on First Street)
Letta Moreland, 427 Lincoln Avenue, stated that the lights along
First Street go from automatic to flashing signals as early as
10:20 p.m. and urged that something be done to have automatic
signalization till later. She added that she received a report
which indicates there were 50 accidents on First Street last year
and that most of them occurred at First and lip" Street.
Mr. Lee was asked to check as to what hours the automatic signals
go off and to see what the City might be able to do to get them
to continue for a longer period of time.
PUBLIC HEARING RE ANNEX
NO. 2 - FIRST STREET
A public hearing has been set for the recently annexed area known
as First Street Annex No.2, also an expanded area of consideration
to include the property south of First Street from its intersection
with the Western Padific Railroad tracks to North Mines Road.
Mr. Musso explained the area recently annexed and the reasons for
expansion of the area and the recommendations of the Planning
Commission as follows:
1. That the area along the south side of First Street between the
Western Pacific Railroad right of way line and a line approxi-
mately at porto1a Avenue be rezoned from ID-H and CG to CS.
2. That no change be made in the zoning of the existing RM and RM-H
between the Western Pacific Railroad and Martin Avenue.
3. No change be made in the zoning of RS-S and RL-6 east of Martin
Avenue.
CM-28-l72
June 3, 1974
(First St. Annex #2)
4. That the CN Zoning at the corner of portola and First Street
be rezoned to RS-4.
s. The area along the south side of First Street between a line
approximately at Portola to the easterly City limits be rezoned
from ID-H to I-l.
Milo Nordyke, 2143 Chateau Place, Chairman of the Livermore Industrial
Advisory Committee, stated that the Committee considered the industrial
zoning involved and at that time gave consideration to industrial zon-
ing of all the land within and near the City in recognition of the
forthcoming rezoning of all the lands to I-1, I-2 or I-3. They agreed
with the recommendation of the Planning Comission that the propert~
north of North Mines Road be zoned I-1 and it was felt that a portion
of the land should be zoned to accommodate warehousing which could be
serviced by the railroad, leaving the larger portion as I-I as a buffer
between the railroad tracks and the I-3 zone. They would recommend
that there be a strip along the railroad tracks zoned I-3, and for
the most part the Planning Commission accepted this recommendation. He
noted that there was some question as to whether or not a road would
be situated between the railroad tracks and First Street. The Public
Works Director has recommended that there be a street in the area to
serve the undeveloped parcels and it is the general consensus of the
Committee that they would support his recommendation. They intend to
meet with the developer who has agreed to provide one and to resolve
the problem of where it should be located. They would suggest that
there be a postponement of the final judgment on the zoning for about
a month at which time the Committee would like to come back with
a final resolution as to where the street will be located.
em Tirsell quoted minutes of the Planning commiss~~~~~h Mr.
Hutka advised that there would be a street going , the North Mines
Road, easterly, parallel with First Street and the railroad tracks.
There being no further comments, on motion of Cm Turner, seconded
by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote the public hearing was closed.
Cm Futch moved to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendations,
seconded by Cm Tirse1l.
Cm Tirsell stated that there are residences to the south which over-
look the property, there are residence areas north, and it is less
than a mile to the central Livermore area, as well as one of the main
entrances to the City and would therefore concurr with the recommenda-
tions of the Planning Commission.
Cm Miller stated that the Planning Commission has made five recommenda-
tions and that he has a conflict of interest with two of them but he
would like to comment. He stated that he does not agree that the CS
line should extend as far as it does (Item 1.); (Items 2 and 3) he
owns property within 300 feet of both areas and therefore would have
to abstain from voting on these two areas due to a conflict of interest.
He agrees with Item 5; and with regard to Item 4 he would like to amend
the motion to say that this shall be zoned RS-3 rather than RS-4. He
then explained his reasoning for proposing amendment to RS-4, seconded
by Mayor Pritchard.
('
Cm Tirsell stated that she is not opposed to the amendment but does
disagree with the timing of it and would like to review the entire
area when the Housing Element is written and at that time perhaps
consider the entire area's zoning and the recommendations made at
that time.
Cm Turner stated that the area recommended for zoning to RS-4, is
the present zoning for a shopping center and feels that it might be
premature to change the zoning on it because we are not issuing build-
ing permits and it would not be beneficial to the property holder to
change the zoning; secondly, we will probably have a proposal in the
very near future for PUD #l2 and it may be that the shopping area
proposed in the triangle area will serve PUD #12.
CM-28-173
June 3, 1974
~\ (P.H. re First Street
~ .Annex No.2)
l~cm Futch felt that the reason for the concern for the timing of deve10p-
, ment of the shopping center in the triangle is because there is no
shopping center to service the Springtown area and there is not suffic-
~ ient population to serve two shopping centers for many years, and is
~~. the reason he feels CN Zone for the triangle is premature.
Cm Turner stated that for the record he would like to state that
he opposes the rezoning of the CN area to RS.
~
~cm Tirse11 stated that when she was on the Planning Commission
L!hey were making the zoning conform to the General Plan and when
\4B1 ~In!~~l Pla~ ~--~A.-~.~ P-A.~ lR, the Planning Commission voted
that they would not show it as commercial on the General Plan and
_~ therefore had to initiate the rezoning to RS.
f1...Pte. l' d h d' . .
. ca Musso exp a1ne t at the eC1S10n was not to show the tr1angle
specifically as commercial and that the floating shopping center
would still apply and that there would be no specific area indica-
ted as commercial.
Cm Miller felt that Springtown is not the major issue with regard
to the triangle, but rather that there is not, nor will there be
for many years, General Plan and zoning justification for CN as
there is not sufficient population to support a shopping center.
There are supposed to be lO,OOO people to insure that a shopping
center can be supported in the CN areas and there are other areas
a neighborhood shopping center could go and therefore would have
to agree with the Planning Commission. With respect to Cm Tirse11's
desire to wait until the rezoning is done for the entire Housing
Element, it is not sure when the Council may be able to get to the
rezonings and it is also conceivable that the moratorium will run
out before the overall rezonings take place. In that case he would
prefer to have something where it is generally assumed something
will go than RS-4 and if it turns out later than different zoning
is desired, this can be done all at one time. He prefers to have
a better density at present, even if the time period is from 6-l2
months and urged that the Council consider that this could be changed.
In the meantime, this would offer better protection.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels there is a proliferation of
neighborhood shopping centers now that have not done our downtown
area any good and the area across from the RS-4 area could handle
any kind of commercial activity that might normally go into a
neighborhood shopping center.
At this time the amendment was voted on which failed 2-3 (Cm Tirsel1,
Turner and Futch dissenting).
The main motion passed by unanimous vote. (Cm Miller abstained from
Items 2 and 3 due to his conflict of interest, as stated.)
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the ordinance zoning First Street Annex No. 2 was introduced
and the title will be read at the time of its adoption.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolution Appointing
Member to Commun. Affairs
A resolution appointing Ernest Adams to the Community Affairs
Committee was adopted.
CM-28-174
June 3, 1974
RESOLUTION NO. 9l-74
RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
COMMITTEE (Ernest F. Adams)
Report re Business
License Limitation
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works requesting
that the Council oppose AB 3745 limiting business license taxes
related to out of town business and would result in a $4,000 annual
loss to the City of Livermore.
Report re Abatement
of Aircraft Nuisance
The Assistant City Attorney reported that at the March 25th Council
meeting authorization was given to abate the Beechcraft B-lS N60V at
the airport. The owner has been given notice and no action has been
taken; therefore it is necessary to set a hearing at which time the
owner may testify. It is suggested that the hearing be set for June
10th.
Report re Sublease
of Court Chambers
The City Manager reported that a new lease has been proposed by the
County for our use of the municipal court chambers. The present
lease sum is $185 per month, including utilities. The new rate
is $225, including utilities and the termination date is 11-30-75.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing
execution of the lease.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(County of Alameda)
Housing Authority
Minutes of 4-16-74
Minutes were received from the Housing Authority for their meeting
of April l6, 1974.
Payroll & Claims
There were 90 warrants in the amount of $237,162.41 dated
May 31, 1974, approved and ordered paid by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the Consent Calendar was approved, with the deletion of items 2.2
and 2.5 which were removed for discussion later in the meeting.
COMMUNICATION FROM
CHP RE TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS
A communication was received from the California Highway Patrol which
indicated that Livermore had fewer fatal traffic accidents in 1973
than in 1972. The City was offered congratulations and best wishes
for continued success in traffic safety in 1974.
CM-28-17S
. ..--.-------.--.......--.....--..-.-....--.-..-->.-......"'--
June 3, 1974
REPORT RE REVISED
PERSONNEL RULES
AND REGULATIONS
The City Manager reported that several reV1S10ns are proposed
with respect to Personnel Rules and Regulations and it is recom-
mended that the Council adopt the modifications. He explained
that the drafting of the revisions has been in process for about
eight months and has been discussed at length with at least three
of the employee organizations and the fourth has chosen not to
participate.
Cm Miller stated that he has reviewed the modifications which
appear to be satisfactory but would like to ask a question about
Article XI., Sec. 8. Holidays. It is not clear what three hours
are being charged to if an employee is off on Good Friday from
12:00 noon to 3:00 p.m. to attend church services, and the city
Manager explained that this is free time allowed for an employee
who wishes to attend church services.
Cm Miller stated that this constitutes a mixing of church and
state and should not be allowed, as there are other religions
that do not receive time off to attend religious services. It
does not seem reasonable to allow people free time for religious
observance.
The City Manager stated that he believes this is a part of the
state statue and the legal counsel for the City remarked that
this matter was under consideration before the court of Alameda
County, regarding County employees, and as he recalls such time
off is not permitted and would appreciate the opportunity to
check into this particular item.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that this portion be deleted until
a report is received from Mr. Engel.
Cm Futch wondered if there were any other such holidays that
should be considered and Mr. Parness stated that there is only
one and that is a personal leave day agreed to by contractural
commitment.
Cm Tirse1l stated that Article XI., Section 11. Maternity Leave,
states that an employee must terminate not later than six (6)
weeks prior to the date of delivery and that this has been found
to be an arbitrary number under the Equal Employment Opportunity
Act. The School District and LLL recommend that the employee
and her physician arrive at an agreed upon date of termination
and file this with the employer. She stated that she is not
adamant about this item but feels this attitude should also
be reflected by the City of Livermore and suggested that the employ-
ee's termination date be selected by the employee and her physician.
Cm Miller moved that the amendments to the Personnel Rules and
Regulations be adopted with the amendment suggested by Cm Tirse11,
and that the section concerning time off for Good Friday be left
until a report has been received from counsel, seconded by Cm
Tirse1l.
The City Manager noted that with respect to Article XI., Sec. 9.,
compensatory Time, there has been an amendment to the Fair Labor
Standards Act whereby all public employees are brought under its
coverage and was effective May 1, 1974. This statute is extreme-
ly comprehensive and very difficult to define in writing but we
are mandated to observe its coverage. At present we are not sure
as to whom it may cover and in place of Section 9, the staff would
like the following inserted: "Overtime Compensation: Employees
other than those engaged in fire protection activities and those
classified as executive, administrative and professional personnel
shall recieve overtime pay at the rate of not less than time and
one half the regular rate of pay for hours worked in excess of 40
hours within a specified work week, as approved by the City Manager.
CM-28-176
June 3, 1974
(Personnel Rules and
Regulations Modifications)
Overtime compensation for fire protection personnel shall be paid
at a rate not less than time and one half for hours of duty in excess
of the established hours, as designated by the Fair Labor Standards
Act." He stated that this is as simple as the staff can compose to
insert something having to do with overtime. Many things must be
clarified and defined but the City is obligated to insert something
and observe the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Cm Miller asked what the reaction of the City Employees groups was
towards the wording proposed and the City Manager stated that this
has just come about as recently as the past day or two and is sure
the employees are cognizant of the new law but probably know as little
about it as does the staff.
Mayor Pritchard asked if this would mean that an employee does not
have the option of taking compensatory time off and the City Manager
explained that the employees will not be earning compensatory time
any longer - except for those hours that they may earn during their
regular work week shift. They can earn compensatory time then but
it must be taken off during that work week shift (or 7 days), except
for the fire protection personnel. This would mean that if an employ-
ee works a lO hour day he must take 3 hours off during that work shift
and it may not be accumulated; he also has the option of being paid
for it.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to include, in the motion, the
substitution quoted by the City Manager, inasmuch as the City must
abide by the Fair Labor Standards Act, agreed to by the second.
At this time the Council voted unanimously in favor of the motion
made by Cm Miller.
REPORT RE RECOGNITION
OF EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION
The City Manager reported that a request has been received for for-
mal recognition of the Municipal Employees Agency for Negotiation
formerly known as the Employees Relations Board and it is recommended
that a motion be adopted recognizing the subject organization as being
that responsible for labor relations matters for their enlisted
membership and authorize the proposed dues deduction as of June 1,
1974.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
a motion was adopted recognizing MEAN and approving payroll deduc-
tion of dues.
REPORT RE STATE DEPT.
OF TRANS. RE GRADE
SEPARATION PROJECT
The item regarding the State Department of Transportation and the
grade separation project was removed from the Consent Calendar for
discussion at this time.
('
The contract has been received for the state's financial participa-
tion in this project and the allocation is in the amount of $1,571,736.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing
execution of the agreement.
Mr. Robert Heath, 2988 Kennedy Street, asked about condemnation of
highway property at this time, for the grade separation project and
CM-28-177
~'------~._'--____'__~_'.__"_m____._.._..___,.,,>,__~..__"__,.".__.,, ."_.m__
June 3, 1974
(re Grade Separa-
tion project)
quoted an article which appeared in the Tri valley Herald in
which Dave Wharton was quoted as saying that the City had
received blanket authority from the City Council for condemna-
tion proceedings.
Mr. Engel, Counsel for the City explained that it is his under-
standing the purpose of the resolution is to pick up those
parcels not included in the original resolution and Mr. Heath
thanked him for this explanation.
Robert Allen, 223 Donner, stated that the railroad consolida-
tion project, as designed, will add possibly as much as $20
million, in todays dollars, to the cost of BART's future rail
line which will mean more than $1,000 for every Livermore home
as were Berkeley people for the BART subway. He added that,
figuratively, the City is in earthquake territory and that
the CPUC decision is but one of a number of major faults
threatening the project and this is an impossible case for
the new City Attorney. He urged that the project be consigned
back to the drawing board, and that the trainway be compatible
with BART for a $20 million saving.
Mr. Allen was reading from a four page analysis and the Mayor
asked if it would be possible to give a copy of this to each
Counci1mernber in order that each one might have the opportuni-
ty to digest it and to save time.
Mr. Allen stated that he would do this and briefly outlined
the points covered in the prepared statement - those being:
Traffic safety; traffic flow; emergency vehicles; the BART
trainway concept; BART - shallow cut trainway; and future
crossings and widening, briefly explaining each.
Geneva Heath, 2988 Kennedy Street, stated that SP has moved
their tracks as far as they care to and can begin development
of their commercial property without any cost to the residents;
therefore, why should the City pursue the downtown commercial
development and insistJupon spending approximately $4 million
of tax money and putting in two grade separations to qualify for
state funds?
The Mayor explained that the City Council and staff acts on be-
half of the citizens, as a whole, in pursuing the commercial
development of downtown.
Paul Tu1l, 2243 Linden Street, stated that Mr. Parness has been
quoted as saying that this is not a public project and Mr. Parness
was asked to respond and replied that such a statement is not
correct.
Cm Miller moved to adopt the resolutions on Items 2.2 and 2.5
of the Consent Calendar, seconded by Cm Turner.
Katy Richardson, 510 Junction Avenue, stated that she would like
to know why the people cannot be informed through the news media
the costs to the taxpayer and Mayor Pritchard stated that the City
has no control over what the news media chooses to disclose.
Richard Azevedo, 5161 Crocus Way, asked if the City qualifies for
matching funds and the City Manager explained that funding is
available and local amounts will be comprised of revenues derived
from an assessment district which has already been established
by the City Council and City Council contributions.
Mrs. Richardson asked if the whole City will be assessed and
the Mayor stated that it would not.
CM-28-l78
June 3, 1974
(re Grade Separa-
tion Project)
Mayor Pritchard called for the question and the motion to adopt the
resolutions regarding eminent domain proceedings and authorizing
execution of agreement passed by unanimous vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATES WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL HAS DETERMINED
ARE 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.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION)
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Ravenswood Property)
The City Manager stated that the City has recently acquired the Ravens-
wood property through dedication by the land developer to be developed
in time, for public parks and cultural activities; however, it is in
a state that does not permit this use. There have been times when
the property has been vandalized and to prevent further incidents
the City has allowed a family to reside in the building located on
the property. The family living there has asked that the City be
watchful of who is on the premises due to concern for vagrants in
the structures and because the structures are hazardous, until such
time they are reconstructed in a safe condition. Mr. Parness felt
it might be appropriate for the City Council to officially recognize
the status of Ravenswood in its present condition and to declare that
the public is discouraged from visiting the site until such time as
it is improved and the structures are made safe - the exception being
if a group or individual wishes to visit the site from the standpoint
of interest and that they telephone the Department of Public Works
so that such arrangements can be made for their visit. He then read
the notice he felt would be appropriate and would like the Council
tc adopt.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote,
the City Manager's recommendation was adopted.
(re Position on SB 2177
re Labor Negotiations)
r
The City Manager stated that SB 2177 is an important piece of legis-
lation which is pending and relates to the right of the City Council
to hold executive sessions and would limit the right for conduct of
discussions having to do with labor negotiations. He felt this is a
prohibition which would be an extreme intrusion into the legislative
and general administrative responsibility of the City Council. He
strongly urged that the City Council announce its opposition to the
passage of the measure.
On motion of em Tirsell, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote,
the City Council declared its opposition to SB 2177.
CM-28-179
June 3, 1974
(re Ord. re Historical
significance)
The City Manager stated that the staff and many other organizations
realize the importance of maintining structures and sites of histori-
cal significance (one being our train depot). The depot is being
restored for public use and our ordinance does not permit a structure
considered unsafe for habitation to be reconstructed and it has been
suggested by the Building Inspector that the City Council consider
an amendment to the Building Code drafted by him and which has direct
reference to this point. He then read the ordinance to the Council
which was introduced on motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller
and passed by unanimous vote.
The title was read by Mr. Engel.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Redistrict1ng of
supervisors)
Cm Turner stated that at the last meeting he expressed interest in
possible redistricting of County Supervisors and that Mr. Engel has
provided him with information concerning this; however he would
like to wait another week before reporting to the Council.
(New Fire Station
Location proposal)
Cm Turner stated that if the City is looking for a site for the
new Fire Station he would like to suggest the area on East Avenue
near McLeod because it would be near the high school and the down-
town area as well as the Valley East subdivision.
It was noted that this area has been considered and has been
appraised.
(re Insulation
Standards)
Cm Futch stated that he would like to see the new insulation
standards implemented with the least disruption and feels
it is a misuse of time and also disruptive to have four groups
meet to discuss this, as was made in the motion last week. He
stated that he would now like to move that there not be a joint
meeting with the Board of Appeals, the Design Review Committee,
the Planning Commission, and the City Council, and that the two
bills from Senator Alquist be sent to the Board of Appeals for
their comment and that this item be placed on the agenda in one
month for consideration of action on the bills by the Council.
Cm Turner seconded the motion.
Cm Miller stated that he feels the motion made at the last meeting
was perfectly reasonable and sees no reason to change.
Cm Turner and Futch felt that the Board of Appeals was formed for
review of this type of thing and it would be reasonable to send
it to them and Cm Miller pointed out that the Board was formed
to handle the appeals from the demolition of buildings that took
place in the City about 15 years ago that did not satisfy the Code
and was their original purpose. They have no special qualifications
about energy or anything other than a job for which they were formed.
They have never exhibited any interest in energy and he felt it would
be a mistake to send this to the Appeals Board alone.
The motion passed 3-2 (Cm Miller and Mayor Pritchard dissenting).
CM-28-180
June 3, 1974
(Gelderman Proposal)
It was mentioned that the Council should meet to discuss the Gelder-
man proposal and em Miller suggested that the Council adjourn to
an executive session next Monday night to discuss the matter and
Mayor Pritchard added that perhaps there could be a light agenda
and the Council could adjourn early.
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote
the Council agreed to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. next Monday
night, to an executive meeting ' for discussion of the City's legal
position on this matter.
(Housing for Elderly
with CN Shopping Centers)
Cm Futch felt the Planning Commission should be asked to consider
that provisions should be made for housing for the elderly in con-
junction with development of commercial neighborhood shopping centers,
and that there be some type of requirement to provide it, and so
moved, seconded by Cm Tirse11, which passed unanimously.
(re Addition of Staff
Member re Commercial-
Industrial Development)
Cm Tirsell moved that the staff report on the feasibility of adding
a staff member that would be in charge of commercial-industrial
promotion, seconded by Cm Miller and passed by unanimous vote.
. . ,.J,
The City Manager indicated he would report on this suggestion during
the budget discussions.
Cm Miller stated that along this line, the City Attorney has reported
that it is possible to reserve sewer capacity and perhaps there should
be a report regarding formalizing or implementing this intent.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at lO:OO p.m. to an executive
session for the purpose of discussing appointments.
4kJCZ~~
~~
L v ore, California
APPROVE
ATTEST
~
CM-28-lS1
--"'-,.~_._------_.,-_._..,-,._.,--_._.._"."-----~"---~.~-._~._._~---_.._.. .
Regular Meeting of June lO, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on June 10, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Councilmembers Turner, Miller, Tirse11 and Mayor Pritchard
Absent: Councilmember Futch (Seated after Pledge of Allegiance)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Counci1members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
On motion of ern Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of June 3, 1974, were approved
as corrected.
OPEN FORUM
Paul Tu11, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he was informed at the
last meeting that newspaper articles do not always contain correct
information and if this is the case would like to know where one
could read corrected copies of the minutes and the Mayor explained
that corrected minutes can be read at the City Clerk's office dur-
ing weekday working hours.
PUBLIC HEARING RE ABATE-
MENT OF AIRCRAFT B-18, N60V
Mr. Lee explained that the reason for this public hearing is to abate
the aircraft that has been abandoned at the airport and located in
the turf tie-down area, at the request of the Airport Advisory Com-
mittee. The aircraft has been vandalized and is an attractive nuis-
ance and a hazard. The owner has been notified to remove it from
the airport and has not complied with this request.
At this time the Mayor declared the public hearing open.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Cm Miller, seconded
by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Engel requested that the matter be postponed for a period of
one week so that the airport regulations might be reviewed, as
there may be a section which deals more specifically with the issue.
On motion of Cm Tirse11, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
the matter was continued for one week.
PUBLIC HEARING RE ABATE-
MENT OF NUISANCE - BLDG. ON
RAILROAD AVENUE
Mr. Lee explained that the demolition of the building located at
1984 Railroad Avenue has begun and suggested that the public
hearing to abate the nuisance be closed with no action taken until
next week at which time it can be determined if the building was
successfully removed by the owner.
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing for public testimony.
CM-28-182
June lO, 1974
(re P.H. - Abatement
of Building)
There was no public testimony and on motion of Cm Futch, seconded
by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote the public hearing was closed.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
the matter was continued for one week.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Investments
The City Manager reported that $300,000 was earned during the last
fiscal year in interest on City time deposits which is equivalent
to about 26~ on our total tax rate. It is recommended that the City
invest with the banking institution offering the highest rate of
interest and if the institution quotes a rate as being equivalent
to within l/8% then investments are to be made in accordance to
the policy already established by the City, having to do with a timed
revolution of qualification by the local banks. It is also recom-
mended that the City Council allow the receipt of investment pro-
posals from Wells Fargo and Security Pacific Bank, the only two local
banks accepting public deposits.
Cm Futch stated that he cannot understand why a bank would be reluc-
tant to accept public funds and Cm Turner explained that a bank has
to corne up with the collateral and until deposits mature a bank some-
times cannot accept additional public deposits because they are short
of collateral. Also, it would not be prudent for a bank to pay lO~%
interest when the prime rate is predicted to go as low as 9% and
~ can borrow money at 9% interest. t t ]1* ] .u~ .;(}Jr.
f;;J1.
Report re Bids for
Water Reclamation Plant
Mr. Parness explained that the bids have been received for Stage III
improvements for the Water Reclamation Plant, the low bid being from
C. Norman Peterson Company but there is a slight modification to
the recommendation from that listed in the agenda and that is that
the Council approve the awarded contract subject to the review and
approval of the state and the Federal EPA. He stated that there is
one other matter which must be resolved, affecting this contract
which has to do with the approval of the State Department of Trans-
portation on the utilization of the water from the reservoir site.
It is therefore recommended that the award of the contract be held
in abeyance until this has been resolved and the other agencies have
given their approval. It was noted that the amount of the bid is
$S,2l1,100.00 and will be guaranteed for a period of 60 days.
Minutes
Minutes were received, as follows:
Beautification Committee - May 1
Planning Commission - June 4
('"
Res. Appointing Member
to Community Affairs Comm.
The following resolution was adopted appointing Genevieve Fraser to
the Community Affairs Committee.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-74
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
(Genevieve Fraser)
CM-28-183
June lO, 1974
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and by unanimous
vote, the Consent Calendar was approved, noting the change sug-
gested by the City Manager for Item 2.2.
COMMUNICATION FROM
WM. ORTIZ THANKING
CITY COUNCIL
A letter was received from William Ortiz, thanking the City Council
for placing the matter of the Judson property on a previous Council
agenda at his request.
COMMUNICATION FROM LOREN ENOCH
RE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
Loren Enoch, County Administrator, wrote to the Council regarding
consolidating the Livermore and P1easanton Judicial Districts and
employment of a consultant to study the feasibility.
COMMUNICATION RE
LAFCO
A letter was submitted to the Council by Roland Mayne, Principle
Administrative Analyst for LAFCO which indicated that the letter
from the City to the Board of Supervisors requesting the retention
of outside professional land use consultant services was discussed
at the meeting of April 25, 1974. Comments from this meeting were
also attached to the letter and the Mayor stated that for the
record he would like to call attention to the paragraph in which
Commissioner Flegal noted that, "the City had been extremely dis-
respectful to the work of the Commission, contrary to the City's
statement in the letter referred to."
Mayor Pritchard stated he believes this is "hog wash" and noted that
Commissioner Flegal was unceremoniously "dumped" as representative
to ABAG at the Mayors Conference recently.
Cm Tirse11 asked who the replacement is and the Mayor replied that
Sue Holm from Berkeley was chosen as the replacement.
REPORT RE EAST AVE. -
7th STREET DRAINAGE
In response to the complaints about the drainage problem at the
crosswalk at East Avenue and 7th Street, Mr. Lee reported that
the problem can substantially be corrected by filling a low spot
in the street and that the long range solution would be the in-
stallation of a storm drain line which will be considered at the
time the next Capital Project budget is prepared.
Mrs. Canaveri, the crosswalk guard, asked if it would help to add
an asphalt mound from the curb to the street and Mr. Lee explained
that this would not be effective because it would block the water
running in the gutter and the Mayor stated that perhaps this same
type of mound could be provided with a pipe underneath to let the
water pass and Mr. Lee stated that paper and leaves would obstruct
the flow of water so this also would not be a solution.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and by unanimous
vote, the Director of Public Works' recommendation was adopted.
CM-28-l84
June 10, 1974
REPORT RE I-580
ANNEXATION PROPOSAL
~.
The City Manager explained that the applicants for the annexation
of property north of I-S80 have again requested that the matter
be postponed so that they may have the opportunity to be present.
There was another matter that came up this evening and meant that
they could not attend the meeting.
It was concluded that the City Manager should contact the owners
of the property and agree upon a date to again discuss the matter.
REPORT RE I-S80
Mayor Pritchard stated that the Industrial Advisory Board has
submitted a report regarding the freeway status (I-S80) widening
project.
Cm Tirse11 commented that she was concerned when she read the manner
in which the Industrial Advisory Committee had taken a stand and a
release to the press and would like to read a statement which reflects
her attitude on the matter, as follows:
"I want to state that I support any citizen making a statement
concerning issues that come before our Council. Our City is
responsive to such statements and I feel supportive of citizens'
wishes; however, I have serious reservations about our City
committees acting as a deliberative body on those same issues
that the Council faces, without benefit of public input or
staff reports. I feel the input of the Industrial Committee
has been very valuable to our City in the development of an
industrial ordinance and the pursuit of industry and I would
not like to see this committee become just another lobby group
with a bias. I would hope that in the future any committee of
our City that is commenting on the political issues before the
City would avail themselves of the same information as the elec-
ted officials have, before passing judgment."
Mayor Pritchard stated he would like to concur with the statement
made by Cm Tirse1l regarding officially established or commissioned
committees taking this type of action.
Mr. Parness explained that, perhaps, this may be our fault, partially,
but not intended, that the report which was released was a part of the
minutes of the committee and these minutes were to be presented to
the Council and somehow were released publicly and prematurely.
Cm Turner stated that he feels Cm Tirsell's statement is in order
and would like to see it passed on to the committee for reference
as a policy statement.
(".
\
em Tirse11 suggested that if her statement is to be made a policy
statement the staff should rewrite the specific recommendations and
bring them back to the Council for approval.
em Miller stated that his understanding of the body of Cm Tirsell's
statement is that statements should not be released to the press and
Cm Tirsell agreed stating that she read something in the paper prior
to receiving it in her agenda. Anyone can make a statement concern-
ing a private opinion; however, a statement as a collective body should
be done with more consideration and with the same amount of homework
and input as the Council in this case.
Cm Miller felt it is not unreasonable for the Industrial Advisory
Committee to make statements regarding the industrial aspects but
would agree that a statement should not be made to the press prior
to the Council's receiving their minutes.
CM-28-18S
---~"~-~'--"-'-~ -". ,_.." ".,._" '.-.....'..-_..____..__._......b..___._.._....._.......
June 10, 1974
(re I-S80 Widening)
Jerry O'Shea, Chief of Project Development, stated that he is
vitally concerned with the I-580 widening project because it
happens to be his project and is present to answer questions
the Council might have. He stated that a reevaluation of the
air pollution report indicates that the air quality will remain
about the same, whether or not the freeway is expanded, until 1990.
He stated that they have the concurrence of the EPA at this time.
Mayor Pritchard asked if it would really make any difference how
the City feels, with respect to wideining I-S80 and Mr. O'Shea stated
that the State Department of Transportation has always considered
Livermore a friend and explained that all the questions have been
answered with regard to the environmental impact of the project
and it has received the blessings of the EPA and would like Livermore's
approval. He added that they considered everything brought up by
the City of Livermore, such as consideration of mass rapid transit
and unless the State Department of Transportation goes into this
project they can see no other way to make such provisions.
Mayor Pritchard explained that the official position of the
Council at this time is that the majority of the Council is
in favor of a third lane for public transportation and pro-
visions for the right-of-way for BART.
Cm Futch mentioned that in the EPA report there was reference
on a number of occasions to Ca1 Tran and wondered what this
means and Mr. O'Shea stated that this stands for California
Department of Transportation.
Mr. O'Shea pointed out that if they do not proceed with the
project they may never get the opportunity again, as it is
being financed by the federal government by 92%, with the state
paying the balance. He stated that plans are for a freeway of
eight lanes from San Francisco to Interstate 5, and has eight
lanes corning into it from each direction at this time. In
addition to the eight lanes there will be an additional truck
lane for the uphill section as well as a median to provide for
any type of rail transit. This was followed by discussion re-
garding interchanges and frontage roads.
Cm Futch stated that all of the analysis that has been done
has been based on the statement that the difference between
widening and not widening is only 15%, and Mr. O'Shea stated
that by 1990 even the eight lanes will not be able to carry
the projected traffic which means that mass transportation
will have to be provided.
There was discussion regarding projected increases in traffic
and Mr. O'Shea stated that regardless of the population of
Livermore, if people cannot travel through the Dublin Canyon
area they will just use other routes. He stated that with
respect to population growth in the valley Ca1 Trans feels
this can be controlled by zoning and other means; their con-
cern is smog generated by slow moving traffic through the
valley, and they have addressed themselves only to the air
quality. They want to improve the freeway so that trucks
and cars can travel at cruising speeds where there is less
emission~ of pollutions.
CM-28-l86
June 10, 1974
(re Widening of 1-580)
Cm Miller noted that there was no data in the report about pollution
with respect to emmissions per mile as a function of highway speed
and Mr. O'Shea commented that it was felt this data was not really
necessary and that the compilation was done with studies requested
by the EPA. He added that they are in the third state of the art
and that the cruise mode is in the fourth state which they did not
need to report on to be used as a selling point.
Cm Tirsell commented that if the freeway is going to again be clogged
by 1990 it would appear that widening begats the widening and Cm
Miller agreed that if this is the case why isn't mass transit being
pushed at this time rather than waiting until eight lanes are full?
Mr. O'Shea stated that they would be happy to do this, except for
the fact that there are deficiencies with alignment and gradient
causing pollution and accidents - the highway is an unsafe facility,
and it is impossible to go to mass transit overnight. They are
suggesting that the ability to allow mass transit be provided.
Cm Miller stated that he feels one of the criticisms of freeway
systems during the past 15 years is that these are self fulfilling
prophesies - a freeway is built and the effect on land use planning
is that traffic is generated. If the freeway is not built there will
not be development providing traffic for that freeway. Reports indi-
cate that widening of a freeway generates traffic; however, the state's
figures show that almost all the traffic on the freeway will be local
traffic. Widening of the freeway causes pressure on land use which
then brings the traffic which then uses the freeway. This happens
to be a critical air basin and to generate more traffic in this
basin, as a result of ease of access and widened freeway, is going to
make it bad for us and by 1990 there will be eight lanes of clogged
freeway rather than four lanes.
Cm Futch pointed out that the Council is not against widening of
the freeway but at this time feel the proposal before them cannot
be justified (eight lanes). In addition to the air pollution there
are other considerations; for example, the scarring of the hills
in trying to provide for eight lanes through a very narrow canyon.
He stated that he has reservations about continuous expansion of
freeways with the reality of the oil situation in the future. He
then passed out copies of a report regarding oil use in the U.S.,
which was followed by discussion of this matter. **~.
Mr. O'Shea stated that he is not in a position to debate the future
oil reserves of the world but knows that an eight lane freeway is
needed through the Dublin Canyon.
Cm Miller stated that discussion regarding the oil shortage is not
really off the subject, as one can see what could happen as was
demonstrated during the last gasoline problem time. He stated that
in his opinion the gasoline crisis at that time was contrived but
this will not be the case in another five years - we will actually
be facing a gasoline crisis.
('
\
Cm Tirse1l commented that the Dublin Canyon area provides a barrier
for the valley from the smog on the other side of the hill and wonder-
ed if this had been taken into consideration and Mr. O'Shea replied
that the BAAPCD feels that the proposal being made by Ca1 Trans will
not affect air pollution up until the year 1990, and the EPA has indi-
cated they will be in favor of the proposal.
**Use of 011 at the continued rate would result in the
necessity to import 5 billion barrels of oil at $10 per
barrell and would mean an expenditure of CM-28-187
$50 billion dollars to import the oil needed to serve us.
4/!-,
June 10, 1974
(re Widening of I-S80)
Cm Turner wondered if the state would consider widening only to
six lanes rather than eight and Mr. O'Shea stated that they would
not because this would be building a bottleneck. Cm Turner con-
tinued to say that he feels the present four lanes are not suffi-
cient but in view of the fact eight lanes would be filled by 1990
he would propose that the City make a strong recommendation to state
that it would consider the unofficial BART proposal which would
allow reasonable travel through the Dublin Canyon with three lanes
each way and should eliminate the bottleneck. Possibly one lane
could be closed during certain hours, as is done in Seattle, and
allowing six lanes during peak hours would solve the problem. The
BART proposal also contains an 80 ft. median to be used for mass
transportation which, by all accounts, is 10 years away from the
valley. It would not appear reasonable to limit the highway to
the present four lanes but it also does not seem reasonable to
approve eight lanes and would move that the City Council state
its desire to have the unofficial BART route, or something close
to it with three lanes each way and an 80 ft. median. The motion
was seconded by Cm Tirse11 for discussion purposes.
Mr. O'Shea stated that he does not know where the unofficial BART
route came from but if it had not been for BART there would now
be a completed eight lane freeway. The project was designed and
financed with all of the right-of-way purchased but because of
BART,lnew legislation passed which permitted Ca1 Trans to consider
mass transportation corridors and the reason they are now in this
mess.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to comment that in his op1n10n
the original position taken by the Council was the rational de-
cision to have made and would like to reaffirm this position.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like the Council to be able to
offer suggestions regarding some of the concerns about the proposal;
however, if Cal Trans is adamant about the fact that eight lanes
is all that will be considered the Council's position is fairly
clear and regrets the attitude of Cal Trans because the proposal
does not speak to the problem of our commuters.
Milo Nordyke, Chairman of the Industrial Advisory Board, stated
that there was another accident on the freeway last night and would
like to comment that they feel the highway is congested and substan-
dard as well as unsafe. The Industrial Committee has been telling
people that they will have good access to the Bay Area, in time,
and is very important in a company's decision as to whether or not
they choose to build in Livermore. From this standpoint the Committee
would recommend that people be provided with good access to the
Bay Area.
Dennis Slaughter, 1348 Windsor Way, member of the Sierra Club in
Livermore stated that the Putnam report indicates there is a
strong relationship between transportation development and land
development and is concerned about this. In his opinion, no matter
how you look at it, widening will result in additional growth in
the valley.
Cm Turner stated that if widening of the freeway would result in
additional growth it would seem that mass transit lines would
also add growth, and Mr. Slaughter stated that perhaps this is
true.
CM-28-188
June lO, 1974
(re Widening I-S80)
(
I
\"
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, explained that he had seen the report,
and found a couple of things to take exception to wherein Mr. O'Shea
had used as an example a freeway down south as being a comparable
one to the one proposed here, and he would rather use the one between
here and Tracy , and he gave statistics for this exception, with respect
to carbon monoxide.
Cm Tirsell stated that she had a problem proposing a specific recom-
mendation as she did not feel that all elements have had a chance to
review this BART proposal the Council has termed Exhibit 3 and sug-
gested the following substitute motion: That this Cal Transit pro-
posal be reviewed in order to reduce the cut in the Dublin Canyon;
to reduce the number of automobile lanes to a more realistic number;
and to provide transit encouragement as an alternative mode of travel.
Cm Turner stated his motion is saying something along the lines of
an unofficial BART proposal (which is three lanes going each way)
and would like something along that line. He stated that what he
is looking for is the Council's concurrence for at least three lanes
going each way.
Cm Tirse11 stated that she does not feel prepared to recommend that,
but rather to support the things she has said:
Reduce the cuts in the Dublin Canyon;
Reduce the automobile lanes; and
Provide for encouragement of public transit as an alternative means.
Cm Turner stated that either the Council will have to agree to this
idea of at least three lanes going each way, or not agree with it,
and that at least three lanes going each way is necessary to guarantee
at least a reasonable transportation service (one of which could be
used for trucks) and felt they should be specific.
Cm Tirsell moved to amend the motion to say that the City Council
finds the Cal Transit proposal excessive for our needs and Cm
Turner stated that he would second that and Cm Tirse1l continued
to add to the amendment Cm Turners original motion and after that
her wording - in order to reduce the cuts in the Dublin Canyon, reduce
the automobile lanes, and provide for encouragement of public transit
as alternative means and that Cal Transit proposal be looked at in
that manner, seconded by Cm Turner.
em Tirsel1 commented that she feels Cm Turner probably didn't really
understand her motion and he emphasised that the amendment does not
change the original motion and was happy to second it.
Cm Miller stated that he would have to agree with the Council's
former position of agreeing to widening the corridor for transit
and not adding to the number of automobile lanes and that this is
still the most rational position both in the long run and the short
run and will reluctantly vote against the motion.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he too intends to vote against the motion
because it is very clear that this is not what Cal Trans wants _
merely voting on the motion is not going to change anything.
Cm Futch and Turner felt that the motion will really not change
anything but at least it says what the Council feels is reasonable.
Cm Futch stated that he agrees with em Miller but on the other hand
can sympathize with the problems of the commuter and would be willing
to look at an alternate proposal. (add) The intent was that we would
look at a proposal similar to the BART proposal. We were willing to
look but that there was no commitment and that the reason was as
Cm Tirsell stated - that we did not want to be in the position of pro-
posing the plan, plus the fact that I would n~~-28-189Vote until I
had seen the EIR on a modified version) ~.
June lO, 1974
(re I-S80 Widening)
Mayor Pritchard asked for a vote to the amendment and Cm Tirse11
explained that her amendment included the original motion and
the Council agreed that only one entire amended motion would
have to be voted upon.
At this time the motion passed 3-2 (Cm pritchard and Miller dis-
senting) .
Mayor Pritchard asked that the records show that his reason for
voting against the motion is because Cal Trans is asking for
either a recommendation or denial of their proposal for eight
lanes.
ORD. RE AREA SO. OF
FIRST ST., EAST &
WEST OF TREVARNO ROAD
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous
vote, the zoning ordinance amendment regarding the area south
of First Street, east and west of Trevarno Road was adopted,
and Cm Miller explained that his aye vote does not include the
portions he abstained from last week due to a conflict of inter-
est - Items 2 and 3. Cm Turner dissented on Item 4.
ORDINANCE NO. 841
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS AMENDED,
OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMENDING SECTION 3.00
THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING.
ORD. RE MUNI CODE AMEND.
RE HISTORICAL BUILDINGS
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
of the Council, the ordinance amending the Municipal Code, relating
to historical buildings was adopted and the title was read by Mr.
Engel, as it was not read at the last meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. 842
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6.2.4, RELATING TO SPECIAL
PERMITS, OF ARTICLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS, OF
CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY
CODE, 19S9, BY THE ADDITION THERETO OF SECTION 302.1(d),
RELATING TO HISTORICAL BUILDINGS, TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING
CODE, 1970 EDITION, AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 6.1 OF SAID CITY
CODE.
Prior to the vote Cm Turner asked about the statement that the Build-
ing Official may issue a special permit authorizing repairs, altera-
tions, etc., and wondered if this also gives him permission to authori-
ze expenditures without approval of the Council, and it was explained
that such repairs are done by private individuals - not the City.
MUNI. CODE AMEND.
RE PUBLIC DANCES
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
the item concerning amendment to the Municipal Code related to
public dances was postponed for one week.
CM-28-190
June 10, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re Flashing Lights
on First Street)
Mr. Lee stated that he included, in the agenda, a report regarding
flashing lights on First Street, and the time they go from automatic
signalization to flashing lights. He stated that at the time he
wrote the memorandum it was based only on the weekly traffic count
and since that time has received the weekend traffic count which
may change the conclusion of the report. There will be a subsequent
report concerning this item in the future.
(Abandoned Aircraft)
Mr. Lee stated that he has spoken with the owner of the abandoned
aircraft which has been left at the airport and the City is in the
process of abating and that the owner has asked for a delay and the
opportunity to remove the aircraft. He feels this can be done by
the end of June but not later than the end of July and Mr. Lee sta-
ted that this would be the preferable means rather than abatement
proceedings by the City.
("p" Street Detour)
Mr. Lee stated that the "P" Street detour, caused by the track
relocation project, has created a traffic problem at "L" Street
and Railroad Avenue. The City has been monitoring the traffic
situation since the closure and they are considering placement of
a 4-way stop at that intersection. It has been noted that the
traffic on "L" Street has reduced by more than 50% and people are
remaining on First Street. It appears that the majority of traffic
on Railroad Avenue is shoppers and it is anticipated that there will
be even less traffic on "L" Street and a 4-way stop may not be neces:-
sary. If it is determined a 4-way stop is necessary the Public Works
Department would like to have the approval of the Council ahead of
time, so moved by Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsel1 and passed unani-
mously.
Mayor Pritchard commented that he understands North Livermore Avenue
is also going to be closed and wondered when this it to take place
and Mr. Lee replied that they thought it would be done this week
but there has been a delay and it may take place next week; however,
the public will be notified through the newspaper when this happens.
He stated that the barricade will be put up just north of the rail-
road tracks and there will be access to the businesses.
Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding the streets being
closed will be closed for over a year and wondered if there is
any way access can be provided and if it is absolutely necessary
to close them for a year.
('
Mr. Parness explained that the streets will probably be opened at
intervals during the construction process and Mr. Lee explained that
the streets are closed at the tracks because once drilling is begun
at the signals there is a chance that the circuits controlling the
crossing gates may be disrupted and the PUC and railroads will not
allow use of a track which may have gates that do not work - this
is the reason for the permanent barricade and the City has no choice.
It is hoped that the barricades will not remain for as long as a year.
CM-28-191
June 10, 1974
(re Closing of Streets)
Cm Turner then asked about access to businesses and if the streets
are going to be torn up with high curbs, or if the road will be
good and one that is useab1e.
The appraiser and the consulting engineer have indicated that the
passage will be smooth and will be by way of circulation around
the block - the access should be reasonable.
Cm Turner wondered if the routes to the business area could be
surveyed by the City Manager on a regular basis and it was noted
that they are surveyed daily.
(Unsafe Walkway on
Arroyo Bridge)
Cm Turner stated that he has received a complaint from a young
lady who indicates that some of the boards are missing on the
walkway for pedestrians on the Arroyo bridge and the staff
indicated they will look into the matter.
(re Livermore, Maine)
The City Manager stated that a sixth grade teacher from Livermore,
Maine, visited our City last summer and subsequently has presented
a scrapbook made by her sixth grade class about Livermore, Maine.
The City Manager stated that he would hope a similar scrapbook can
be made by local sixth graders about Livermore, California.
(re Selection of
Firm for preparation
Qf General Plan)
Mayor Pritchard asked what the Council would like to do about
interviewing people to compile our General Plan, and Cm Turner
commented that he would recommend that the staff read the pro-
posals and report on them, in capsule form, as well as making
a recommendation as to the firm to be selected.
Cm Tirse1l stated that she would really prefer to have the
Council do the interviewing and would feel better if her ques-
tions could be answered ahead of time rather than reacting later.
She is aware of many concerns of the citizens who worked on the
General Plan Goals. She intends to ask questions, on behalf of
these people and would like to make points to the consultants
that they are concerned about.
Mayor Pritchard agreed with Cm Turner in that he feels a selec-
tion could be made by the City Manager; however, he feels it is
the majority feeling that the Council should conduct the inter-
views and make a selection.
Discussion followed regarding a selection of the time and date
for interviews and June 18th, Tuesday, at 5:30 p.m. at City
Hall was selected for interviews.
(Opposition to
Legislation)
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous
vote the Council expressed opposition to the following legisla-
tive bills:
SB 2446 - Mandatory Property Tax Rate Reduction
AB 4186 - Housing re LowlModerate Elderly
AB 4288 - Election of Council Members by District - Mandated
Rather than Permissive
CM-28-l92
June lO, 1974
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, Mayor Pritchard adjourned
the Council meeting at 10:25 p.m. to an executive session to discuss
legal matters.
APPROVE
Mayor
1 ~~
ATTEST od~.A/. ~.. ../'I
C1ty C erk
U'vermore, California
Regular Meeting of June l7, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on June l7,
1974, 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: Councilmembers 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 OF JUNE lOth
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of June lO, 1974, were approved
as amended.
BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE
AWARDS FOR SCENIC ROUTE
CONTEST
Ayn Weiskamp from the Beautification Committee, reported on the
Scenic Route Contest and certificates and awards were presented
by Mayor Pritchard.
First prize awards were given to Virgil Dahl and Linda Huggins, the
two class teachers, for cooperative effort for a party which has
been held and honorable mention went to Doug Lim; Lisa Root; Kari
Leal; Karen Stasko; Cindy Brown; Suzanne Moreland and Tarni Ward.
CM-28-l93
__.m.__.^,_"_,,,"_"~__,,_^,_,,______,_,_,_, _ ~.,_._._,,__.__..._,..."__. ''.___.._.._._.".._...,......
June 17, 1974
OPEN FORUM
(Questions re
Various Items)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, asked Cm Tirse11 about a comment
made at the June 3rd meeting with regard to low cost housing and
she noted that she did not recall making a statement about low
cost housing. Mr. Tu1l then asked a question about a statement
that appeared in the Southern Pacific bulletin regarding the track
relocation project and it was noted that he should contact SP about
this item. He then asked about the assessment district and if Cm
Miller owned certain property to which Cm Miller replied that the
property is owned by another Donald Miller.
(-~\I
/
PUBLIC HEARING RE
ZONING OF ANNEXED
PROPERTY TO E DISTRICTS
Mr. Musso explained that, normally, it is not necessary to zone
park and school sites until such time as it is convenient and the
zoning of the property is not required in order for them to be
parks and schools; however a parcel recently annexed (Max Baer Park)
had to be zoned and it was concluded that all of the schools and
miscellaneous parks should be included in the rezoning action. The
recommendation is to change the school and park zoning from residential
to E Districts (Education and Institution).
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Cm Tirse11, seconded
by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote the public hearing was closed.
It was noted that no written comments had been received and Mr.
Musso stated that a telephone call had been received from one
property owner who indicated that he had not received notice of
the public hearing and it was later found that the reason he
had not received a notice was because he has a Cal Vet loan which
means that the property owner is not listed in the public records.
This property owner's only concern was that he would like the property
zoned for park purposes, only, and it was explained to him that
this zoning would permit park development and that land dedicated
for park purposes can be used only for this purpose or there is
a risk of the property reverting back to the original property
owner which the City would not be inclined to allow to happen.
On motion of Cm Futch, seonded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the ordinance rezoning the following areas to "E" District was
introduced:
Max Baer Annex, Mocho Park, Sunset South School and Park,
Crurn Park, Rhonewood Park, and Neptune Park.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Departmental
Reports
Departmental reports were received, as follows:
Airport Activity - May
Building Department - May
Mosquito Abatement District - April
Municipal Court - April
police Department - May
Water Department - May
Water Reclamation Plant - May
~
( \
CM-28-194
June 17, 1974
(Reports)
It was noted that the crime rate in Livermore is up and that this
is the first time the Water Department has written a report.
Report re Street Closures
The City Manager reported that during the year requests are made to
temporarily close streets for the purpose of holding block parties
or temporary business enterprise. The staff has been allowing closures
by issuing encroachment permits, subject to conditions required by
the Police and Fire Department and where closure will not significantly
interfere with traffic. It is suggested that the staff be authorized
to process the permits and recommended that the Council adopt the
policy of allowing the staff to process these requests with the Council
reviewing applications which are questionable.
Report re Condition
of Railroad Crossings
A report regarding the condition of the railroad crossings (SP) at
the following intersections was submitted by the Public Works Direc-
tor: First Street, Livermore Avenue, ilL" Street, lip" Street and
Murrieta Boulevard.
Res. re Land & Water
Conservation Application
A resolution was adopted approving the application for funds (supple-
mental) for the Medeiros Parkway project.
RESOLUTION NO. 96-74
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR LAND
AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS (MEDEIROS PARKWAY PROJECT).
Payroll & Claims
There were 163 warrants in the amount of $176,667.ll dated June 14,
1974; 287 payroll warrants in the amount of $75,158.63, dated May 31,
1974; and 274 payroll warrants in the amount of $111,634.1l, dated
June l4, 1974, for a total of $366,459.85, approved and ordered paid
by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of em Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
the Consent Calendar was approved, with the deletion of Item 2.3
regarding the Holmes Street-Concannon Boulevard traffic signal which
will be discussed later in the meeting.
PROGRESS REPORT FROM PARC
The progress report from the Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee (PARC)
was noted.
COMMUNICATION FROM
FESTIVAL '74 COMMITTEE
A letter was received from the Festival '74 Committee requesting
that the City Council continue to support the Cultural Arts Festival
by contributing $300 for two purchase awards of $150 each.
em Turner moved that the City Council continue its support by con-
tributing the $300, as in the past, seconded by Cm Miller.
CM-28-195
June l7, 1974
(re Contributions)
Cm Tirsel1 stated that she, too, intends to vote in favor of the
motion but feels the Council should receive a list of those groups
the Council generally contributes to each year, as well as the
amount of money contributed because the Council has discussed
establishing a policy regarding financial contribution limits.
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE RECLASSIFICA-
TION STUDY & SALARY
ADJUSTMENTS
The City Manager submitted a written report regarding reclassifi-
cation study and employee organization salary adjustment and recom-
mended that the City Council adopt a resolution adopting the pro-
posed new job descriptions and that the staff be instructed to
prepare the salary resolution for the new fiscal year, incorporat-
ing the adjustments as reported and as are in accordance with the
subject memoranda of agreement.
Cm Turner stated that under Leaal Secretaries, he felt the word
"difficult" was unnecessary an Mr. Parness replied that the word
was extracted from other job descriptions and found to be appropri-
ate. He explained that this is commonly used in the description
of typical work duties and requirements.
Cm Tirsell moved to adopt the proposed job descriptions from the
reclassification study, seconded by em Miller and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 97-74
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING JOB RECLASSIFICA-
TION STUDY
REPORT FROM SISTER CITY
COMMITTEE RE ANNUAL VISIT
A report was received from the Sister City Committee indicating
that they are making plans for the annual delegation visit to
Quezaltenango and requested that the air fare again be paid for
one City delegate and one Sister City Committee delegate. This
year the round trip air fare is approximately $425. Also requested
is the purchase of a gift to present to City of Quezaltenango. The
Committee has offered to pay half the cost and requests participa-
tion by the City.
Cm Futch stated that Bob Selden, past Chairman of the Committee,
had intended to be present but was not able to corne and would
like to move that the air fare be paid for the two delegates,
as in the past, and that a suitable gift selected for a cost
of approximately $lOO with the Committee paying for half the
cost of the gift and that the Council not pay more than $50
for its share of the gift, and that $90 be expended to help
defray the cost of welcoming the delegates from Queza1tenango;
motion seconded by Cm Tirsell and passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
RESERVOIR SITE PURCHASE
The City Manager reported that upon instruction by the City Coun-
cil a second appraisal of the Nevin McCormick property needed for
the reservoir project, north of I-580, has been conducted. The
first appraisal was $ll,OOO for the 7 acre site and the second
appraisal was $l8,000. Mr. Parness reported that the practice
generally applied in such matters is to offer the average apprai-
sal price ($l4,950) for the 7 acre site.
(~
CM-28-196
June l7, 1974
(Reservoir Site Purchase)
em Miller moved to adopt the City Manager's recommendation to offer
the $l4,950 for the site, seconded by em Futch.
Mr. Nevin McCormick, owner of the property in question stated that
the basis for his contention is on the original appraisal of the
property which was much higher. He pointed out that the City in-
tends to purchase prime property and that land in the vicinity has
sold for $4,557 and $5,000 an acre in two instances and less desire-
able land was sold at $49,000 for 9~ acres and $l9,SOO for five acres.
He then explained how dissecting the prime portion of his land will
make the rest of his land unsuitable for farming and there will not
be access to these remaining portions.
Mr. Engel, legal counsel for the City, explained that the City is
authorized to make an offer at this time but does not foreclose
additional discussion prior to definitive action being taken, and
suggested that an offer be made. He stated that he will be very
happy to discuss this matter with the property owner and will use
comments made by the property owner in evaluating a report to the
Council.
Mayor Pritchard wondered if the City is obligated to pay an appraisal
price and Mr. Engel stated that the City is obligated to pay the fair
market value at the time of the appraisal and this is what the apprai-
ser feels the fair market value to be. However, we are not restricted
from listening to the property owner and evaluating information he
has and to determine whether or not the appraiser has considered all
the points the property owner has raised. He emphasized that authoriz-
ing the staff to make an offer does not terminate the matter and that
the appraisal report and comments made by the property owner will
be evaluated and if it is determined there should be reconsideration
of a price the Council will so be advised.
Mr. McCormick pointed out that the assessed value of the property
is $2,000 per acre - the amount he is paying taxes on and since
the City is taking the prime portion of the property this amount
should be worth much more and Cm Futch agreed this is a factor
which could be considered.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE ANNEXATION
PROPOSAL FOR PROPERTY
NORTH OF I-580
Jacob Levitan, counsel for J. Clayton Orr, David I. Wendel and
Eugene K. Lawlor, has written to the Council indicating that they
would like to proceed with annexation of property located between
Collier Canyon Road and Doolan Road, provided the City of Livermore
and the property owners are in agreement as to the future use of
the property, availability of necessary utilities, and that some-
thing can be worked out with LAFCO regarding the spheres of influence
area for Livermore.
The City Manager stated that the matter of annexation of this property
and the land use has been before the Council in the past and the pro-
posals were rejected. The land comprises approximately 112 acres
west of the Junior College site. He noted that the applicant would
like to know the Council's interest, if any, in annexation of the
property and Mr. Levitan is present this evening to answer any ques-
tions the Council might have.
Mr. Levitan stated that at the time the new spheres of influence
were adopted by LAFCO he was their counsel and in his opinion they
did not have the opportunity to show that they would honor input
for reasonable development and if the City is interested in annexation
he would suggest that they write to LAFCO regarding the proposal for
CM-28-197
--'-'__.__'_'_'__~'_'_m"__ _. _ _."._. "'~'__'~_"~"__"__
June 17, 1974
(re Land Use No. of I-580)
orderly development and annexation and make application to LAFCO
to amend the spheres of influence position and in his opinion
this would be a good opportunity for the City of Livermore in
having the spheres of influence reestablished.
Mayor pritchard asked if Mr. Levitan would expand on the comment
made in the letter about development being in agreement with the
City and Mr. Levitan replied that it would appear the only type
of reasonable development at this time would be commercial or
retail. Mr. Musso noted that the General Plan indicates the
land should be residential~ however, we are about to commence
with the Airport Land Use Study which might suggest another al-
ternative and in view of the fact this is in the airport influence
area it may be that we will have to consider industrial the best
use for this property, or something other than residential.
Mr. Musso explained that in the past the property owners have
proposed uses the City did not agree with - it was not a question
of whether or not the City would proceed with development. At
one time rather extensive commercial development was proposed
along the freeway and the City did not support this proposal.
To his knowledge LAFCO did not ask what the land use would be
before they made their decision.
Mayor Pritchard stated that it is rather difficult for the Coun-
cil to give any indication as to what type of development could
be considered since the General Plan Review is in process and
noted that the General Plan Review is being done using the old
spheres of influence area regardless of the LAFCO decision. He
then asked what type of agreement Mr. Levitan would like to re-
ceive from the Council and Mr. Levitan indicated that they would
like to know if the Council would be interested in sitting down
with them to see what might be worked out to the mutual interest
of all concerned.
ern Futch commented that the City Council has two policies: 1) That
pre zoning is not allowed whereby a certain zoning is promised - the
guide used is the General Plan; and 2) As far as development goes,
our policy has been that we will develop the area as the City ex-
pands and becomes contiguous, and it is timely and orderly for
that type of an area to develop. This is the policy that has been
stated before LAFCO and the Council has been consistent with this
policy. Other than the Junior College development, there is no
development north of the freeway, in that vicinity. He stated
that he does not know what commitment can be given other than the
General Plan and was mentioned by Mr. Musso, there is already a
great deal of industrial property available.
Mr. Levitan stated that he feels it would be sensible and gratify-
ing to discuss land use proposals with the staff to determine if
an agreeable proposal could be reached.
ern Tirsell asked Mr. Engel what annexation means and the obliga-
tions of the City as well as what the property owner can be told.
Mr. Engel replied that in his opinion the City cannot legally
make any promises or representations to the developer as to future
uses and the normal procedures must be followed~ however, there is
no objection to the staff's listening to input the developer might
have. It should be made clear, however, that the City is in no
position to trade and make representation to what he might get
in the future.
Cm Tirsel1 wondered if annexation stipulates a time limit for
development and Mr. Engel replied that it does not.
CM-28-198
(\i
, I
\------./
(\,
\
June 17, 1974
(Land Use Discussion)
em Tirse1l then asked if the development rights can be taken from
the property at the time of annexation in order to hold it for agri-
cultural property and Mr. Engel stated that he is not familiar enough
with this particular aspect to state.
Cm Miller stated that while he appreciates Mr. Levitan's effort in
helping the City deal with LAFCO he can see some difficulties with
the proposed annexation. He stated that in looking at the property
it would be another Springtown annexation, with problems for providing
the appropriate City services such as police and fire protection. He
stated that even though he agrees annexation should take place at some
time he feels that annexation at this time may be premature. He added
that he could see no problem in allowing Mr. Levitan the opportunity
to discuss proposals with the staff and, in fact, would encourage it.
Mayor Pritchard agreed that the staff is always willing to listen
to any proposal and will make themselves available to the property
owners.
Cm Turner stated that if the owners intend to speak to the staff
he would like to see a copy of the report indicating the results
of the meeting.
em Miller stated that it should be made clear the staff is not being
directed to work out a proposal with the property owners but merely
will be available to discuss proposals the property owners might
wish to present.
REPORT RE UNDERGROUNDING
UTILITIES - COST ASSESS.
Mr. Lee commented that the City Council directed the staff to look
into the possibility of a fee to spread the cost of underground
utilities on major streets. The total amount of the fees for resi-
dental property is $934, for multiple family dwelling units is $667
and the amount per square foot for industrial property (and miscellane-
ous property) would be 3.7~. He stated that if only underground
utilities were included, rather than the major street costs, the
amounts would be $272 for single family, $l74 for multiple dwelling,
and 1.8~/sq. ft. for industrial. He explained that the method for
arriving at the figures was based on a model major street established
from 27 different neighborhood areas encompassed by major streets or
future major streets in the City outside the core areas. He pointed
out that he feels properties which do not border on major streets
should share the cost of the major streets because they also use the
major streets; however, properties bordering the major streets will
have an extra burden because they must share the cost of the public
works improvements such as sidewalks. The Industrial Committee
considered this matter on numerous occasions, including a meeting
held with the Chamber of Commerce, and concluded that there should
be no fee to the industrial property nor should there be a require-
ment for undergrounding but rather that the overhead wires be allowed
using more streamlined construction for the lines.
em Futch stated that it is his understanding the proposed fees will
not add a burden to the developer, on the average, but simply a
different method of obtaining the funds he is presently obligated to
pay and an attempt to distribute the costs in a fair and equitable
manner.
CM-28-l99
. -"~-'-----'-----~"_'__'_"'__"'____''''Mm.,_,_..__.. "..._n. ... ~"M"'-"""'--'''''__''_"''__'''_'''''.''_'_'''''__m'._.'~'_'_'__
June l7, 1974
(Undergrounding Fees)
Mr. Lee stated that it is an attempt to fairly distribute the
costs among all property developing in the City - regardless
of whether or not they are adjacent to a major street. Whether
a developer would pay more or less under this system, would hinge
upon where his property is located but on the average it would re-
main the same.
c:
Cm Miller stated that it appears that this will lower the burden
on the person with the major street frontage and allows the people
on the back frontage to pick up their share of the cost so that
some of the people on East Avenue and Vasco Road, for example,
should benefit greatly from this type of fee structure.
Mr. Parness stated that at present, major City streets are
installed by property abutting them to a maximum of 36 feet and
any footage over this is the burden of the City - usually derived
from gas tax money. This proposal would recommend that all prop-
erties that develop pay a certain fee, regardless of their prox-
imity to the highway; the fee will be pooled and used as the City's
participation in the highway construction.
Cm Futch stated that he feels this whole thing came about because
there were several property owners along Vasco Road and East Ave-
nue who protested the very large assessment they would have to
bear because of their frontage along the two major streets. Be-
cause of this concern the staff was directed to devise a method
whereby the cost could be spread more equitably among all the
property owners.
Cm Miller pointed out that this has actually been done on resi-
dential properties in the subdivision off of portola Avenue -
there were small parcels bordering on ,ortola which could not
bear the cost of the brick wall installed by the subdivision
and all the houses in this tract are helping to pay for the
major street improvements.
It was mentioned that there are three areas concerned with this
matter; those being: SP development, OGO, and development at
Vasco and East Avenue.
Mr. Lee stated that the development at East Avenue and Vasco is
one with relatively small frontage and extremely high cost and
would recommend in such a situation that rather than placing
underground utilities immediately, the City should allow them
to remain overhead but with the requirement for the developer
to put in the duct work and the appropriate boxes so that this
would not have to be interrupted later on. He would also be
given credit for anything put in towards later undergrounding.
Cm Futch stated that he favors the philosophy of the fee because
it does what we are attempting to do - spread the cost in a more
equitable manner. He added that he can see some reason for adjust-
ing the fee in the industrial areas as this may be to our advantage
in attracting industry but until there is additional discussion
would not know how it could be adjusted or the amount. He then
moved to adopt the Public Works Director's philosophy on the single
family and multiple fees, as proposed, with the fees for the indus-
trial determined after further discussion.
Cm Miller asked if the fees Cm Futch has in mind is the $934 for
residential and $667 for multiples which Cm Futch replied is
correct and Cm Miller seconded the motion.
(\
Mr. Parness suggested that the matter be referred for further
staff research and particularly the legal aspect, since we are
presently between City counsels, which Cm Futch included in the
motion, agreed to by the second.
CM-28-200
June l7, 1974
(Undergrounding Fees)
Cm Turner stated that this is a lot to digest over the weekend
and would like to see the staff report as well as to have the
industrial people meet with Mr. Lee and Mr. Musso, Mr. Parness
and the Chamber Industrial Committee, to discuss fees, as
there seems to be a lot of complaint about fees. He stated
that after everyone comes to some type of agreement a recommendation
can be brought to the City Council.
The City Council discussed this suggestion and which people should
meet, and Mayor Pritchard asked if Cm Turner is suggesting that
the present motion be eliminated, in favor of these groups sitting
down with the staff. Cm Turner explained that while he was on the
Planning Commission and since he has been on the Council there seem
to be continual odds as to what a proper fee schedule should be. He
stated that he feels it is unnecessary to receive a report from Mr.
Lee, a report from someone else, and an additional one from someone
else, all recommending different fees. He felt everyone could meet
and get the matter settled once and for all.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that they first vote on the motion on the
floor and what Cm Turner is suggesting would be another motion and
could be voted on separately. He explained that while he agrees
with the philosophy of everyone sitting down and trying to work
something out he tends to believe that everyone will never agree
as to what is equitable.
Bill Manis, representative of the industrial areas, stated that
they are opposed to the City's requirement that utilities must
go underground in existing areas - not opposed to the requirement
for new development. This was followed by discussion regarding
fees or costs to the developer for the undergrounding.
Cm Miller stated that he cannot understand why it costs $SO/ft.
to underground existing utilitiy lines when it is only about $5 to
$lS/ft. to underground new lines, and Mr. Lee stated that he
does not know why this is either.
Cm Futch stated that he feels the costs have not been presented
in a clear manner and until it is down in writing and comparisons
that can be understood, the matter should be postponed.
Cm Turner moved to amend the motion that the City staff (Mr. Lee),
the City's Industrial Advisory Committee and the Chamber of Commerce
Industrial Committee meet jointly in an effort to reach a mutual
agreement as to what an equitable fee would be for the undergrounding
in industrial areas. Motion was seconded by Cm Miller.
v----
Earl Mason, representing the Chamber Industrial Committee, stated
that this is the first there has been mention of a major street
fee and that their committee studied only the problem of the under-
grounding of utilities. The major street fee is an additional burden
that Mr. Lee is asking to be included in the developers fees.
Mr. Lee stated that it is true that the portions previously paid
for out of the City's gas tax money are included in the fees pro-
posed to be paid by the developer, and as Mr. Mason said the center
portion of the major street burden is being shifted to the new fee
structure - but only partially so. The new fee structure also pro-
vides for the sharing of the cost of the planting, the sprinklers,
fences, bike paths, and right-of-way cost that the developer has
been responsible for and will now be paid for out of the street
fee fund.
I
\ .
~-~/
Mr. Mason continued to say that as far as the cost estimates he
feels Mr. Lee's report is correct - the issue is whether all this
cost should be borne by the developer or what portion they should
be required to pay and if they should have to pay for the major
street costs. They have already indicated that undergrounding
and the added expense should not be required for any industrial
property.
CM-28-20l
June l7, 1974
(Undergrounding Fees)
uHe pointed out that the cost of $78-$100/ft. to install the
undergrounding is not worth what is gained, which is merely
aesthetic improvement, and is a very large cost for the exist-
ing areas, and that in their opinion the added cost of $S/ft.
or more, is also an unnecessary expense for new development
when PG&E will install overhead lines at no cost.
Cm Turner asked about the advantages of underground lines and
Mr. Lee stated that this is for aesthetic purposes and that it
is City policy that all new development is required to install
underground lines.
Cm Turner stated that it is not clear in his mind that existing
areas should be required to go to the cost of undergrounding
lines that are already located overhead merely for aesthetics.
Cm Miller stated that there might be some merit in providing
a breakdown of the new portion vs. the sharing of the old por-
tion, for the Council which can be reviewed during the next
discussion.
Mr. Mason felt that street widening, without undergrounding
of utilities is a vast improvement in aesthetic terms.
Cm Miller stated that he does not know why the cost of moving
poles and overhead wiring could not be credited toward under-
grounding costs by PG&E and would like to know why there is
an enormous discrepancy where the existing facilities cost
five times as much for undergrounding around the boundaries
of a tract as within.
Dick Wright, of PG&E, explained that the reason the cost is so
great is because if there are overhead lines removed and re-
placed with underground lines, nothing can be done with the
lines that were overhead.
R. M. Callaghan, representing property at East Avenue and
Vasco Road, stated that they question the City's legal authority
to impose these obligations on private property and read a letter
from Fry Development, prospective buyers of the property, which
indicated that because of all the requirements imposed on poten-
tial development they are not interested in purchasing the property.
He stated that this is an example of people who wish to build in
Livermore and are being pushed out because of requirements. He
stated that he requests the legal authority by which the City of
Livermore can require these obligations n private property.
Cm Futch responded by saying that the Council is trying to corne
up with a policy that would make the cost for the
street widening and undergrounding utilities more equitable for
property owners that border major streets and Mr. Callaghan stated
that he is requesting that he be furnished with the legal authority
to envoke such a policy.
Ralph Laughlin, Real Estate Broker, stated that in his opinion aes-
thetics are fine but somewhere along the line someone has to pay
the price.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to adopt the amendment
to the motion which was followed by adoption of the original motion
by unanimous vote.
Mayor Pritchard apologized to Mr. Callaghan for the delay regarding
decision on the undergrounding and Mr. Parness explained all that
is involved and the reason the matter has been lengthy.
CM-28-202
June 17, 1974
(Undergrounding Fees)
Cm Miller stated that the point made by Cm Futch was good in that
the whole purpose of this was to find a mechanism for reducing
the load everyone was complaining about last March and such an
effort really should not be criticized.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE OBSOLETE
STREET LIGHTS
Mr. Lee reported that approximately lS street light poles were
removed from First Street and have been in storage for over 10
years. The people developing the Depot Restaurant have requested
the use of about 9 of the lights for their parking lot area since
they would be compatible with the theme of the building. It is
recommended that they be made available to the restaurant develop-
ment since they are of no value to the City.
Mr. Engel explained that in order to give them away the Council
must make a finding that the items are not useful for the origi-
nal purpose and if this finding is made they may be disposed of
with the City Council approval and without a public auction; how-
ever, if the finding is made that they have value other procedures
must be followed.
ern Futch felt the lights were of negligible value and should dis-
pose of them, as recommended.
Cm Miller felt the City should retain title on the lights and
Mr. Engel stated that the ordinance concerning them states that
they may be sold or otherwise disposed of but makes no mention
of retaining title. He felt that if title is to be retained it
would require going into Government Code sections dealing with
leasing or disposal otherwise.
Cm Turner moved that the Public Works Director's recommendation
be adopted, seconded by Cm Tirsel1 and passed 4-1 (Cm Miller
dissenting). It was noted that included in the motion is that
the lights are neither used or useful for the purpose for which
they were designed.
REPORT RE EAST AVENUE
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS
WITH ALAMEDA COUNTY
The cooperative agreement with Alameda County with respect to
East Avenue was submitted to the City Council by the City Mana-
ger for informational purposes.
REPORT FROM MAYOR RE
PROPOSED FEDERAL LITIGATIOI
Mayor Pritchard reported that at the Alameda County Mayors' con-
ference it was disclosed that several national organizations and
states feel the new fair labor standards amendment may be uncon-
stitutional and it is proposed that the matter be brought before
the Supreme Court. Such action can be instituted only by a state
and the State of Nevada is planning to do this. The estimated
national cost is $50,000 with California's share being $15,000
and each city's share $35.
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote,
the Council agreed to participate in the federal litigation in a
calculated amount not to exceed $50.
CM-28-203
June 17, 1974
REPORT RE TRAFFIC LIGHT
AT HOLMES STREET AND
CONCANNON BOULEVARD
A letter was received from B. C. Bachto1d, Deputy District Director,
Department of Transportation, indicating that the following tentative
schedule for installation of traffic signals at Holmes Street and
Concannon Boulevard is realistic, providing no complications arise:
(~,
I. )
\ I
""-//
Traffic Report
Controller Data to City
City Order Controller
Fully Executed Coop. Agmt.
CHC Vote Funds
Advertise
Approved May 24, 1974
June 21, 1974
July l, 1974
August l, 1974
September Meeting
Early October
It was noted that completion of the project can be advanced several
months if the City orders the controller as early as possible rather
than waiting for the State contractor to place the order after the
bid award.
Cm Futch moved to direct the staff to proceed, as soon as possible
with ordering the controller and poles, seconded by Cm Turner and
passed by unanimous vote.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Street Closures)
Cm Turner stated that he continues to receive complaints about the
streets that are closed because of the track relocation project
and wondered if there could be an additional sign at the North
Livermore Avenue detour clearly indicating which businesses are
open.
Mr. Lee reported that the business people have contacted the City
and have asked if they could provide a sign indicating that they
are open for business and were told that this would be permitted,
but if they haven't put one up maybe the City could and Cm Turner
felt this would be a nice gesture.
Cm Turner asked how the 4-way stop at Railroad Avenue and "L" Street
is working out and Mr. Lee stated that it appears to be taking care
of most of the problem but during the weekend there was a backup of
cars. It is anticipated that this will smooth out in time also.
Cm Tirse11 asked if there are peak hours when the cars seem to be
jammed and Mr. Lee stated that there is a problem between 5:00 and
6:00 and Cm Tirse1l asked Mr. Parness if it would be possible to
provide a police officer to direct traffic during this time.
Mr. Parness stated that he would assume it is possible but often
it is not possible to provide one consistently; however, if this
is the Council direction the staff will try to arrange it.
Cm Turner suggested that perhaps someone from the staff could meet
with the merchants in the shopping center off of "p" Street who
seem to be upset about closing the streets and indicate how long
they are to be closed and what the City might be able to do to help
them, and Mr. Parness stated they would be happy to do so.
CM-28-204
June l7, 1974
(Public Parking)
Cm Miller stated that he has received complaints from people who
are irritated because the people from the court are using most
of the parking spaces in the public parking area behind the stores
on First Street and that the merchants are paying for the parking
and the County is not paying for the portion used by the court.
Mr. Parness stated that it is not true that the County does not
contribute to this cost and Cm Miller pointed out that there is
more parking by people going to the court than there would be if
they were going to a business and therefore the County is receiv-
ing disproportionate benefits.
Mr. Parness stated that as a result of the same type of complaints
received in the past, the Police Department was asked to conduct
a check of the traffic generated by the court. The traffic count
and the number of parking spaces used by this type of demand were
calculated, converted to dollar terms, and a request made to the
County that they pay the costs for using the same ratio as the
merchants. They agreed to pay this cost and have been doing so
for over a year. He stated that this money goes into the merchants'
parking fund and when the last bills were mailed out it was made
clear that due to the County's financial participation the amount
normally paid by the merchants would be slightly reduced.
(Bushes at Kittyhawk
Road & Airport Boulevard)
Cm Miller stated that he has received complaints about bushes loca-
ted at the corner of Kittyhawk Road and Airport Boulevard which
obstruct the view of oncoming cars and suggested that these bushes
be trimmed.
(Removal of Top Soil
from City Property)
Cm Miller stated that he was told that Mr. Mehran removed top soil
from park property dedicated to the City and either sold it or got
rid of it and apparently LARPD was aware of this, contacted the Pub-
lic Works Department, who in turn, told Mr. Mehran to replace the
top soil. Cm Miller stated that if this is true he would like to
have a report of exactly what happened and wanted to know why the
City Council was not notified of someone taking City property. He
pointed out that if someone steals something and then replaces it
this does not make him immune to the penalties of the law for tak-
ing it.
(Bikes on Arroyo Bridge)
Cm Futch stated that he is concerned for the bicycles traveling
across the Arroyo bridge and noted that the foot bridge is not being
used, and it really is not feasible to use it. He suggested that a
sign be posted indicating that cars should not try to pass bicycles
using the bridge.
Mr. Lee stated that he would look into the matter and noted that as
a long range solution to the problem he would like to install a
bike path on the west side of Arroyo Road when the City acquires
the right-of-way.
(Housing for Horizons)
Cm Futch stated that he has heard rumors that the City is considering
placing HORIZONS, the youth services group, in the unsafe old Police
Building and would hope this is not true - if so, he has some other
suggestions for housing them.
CM-28-20S
June l7, 1974
(Report re Reorganiza-
tion of VPC)
Cm Tirsell reported that the Valley Planning committee has embarked
on reorganization and after motions and discussion concluded that
there would be a 9 person committee with 2 votes going to the 3
municipalities (even though Dublin is not an incorporated city), 1
vote to 3 single purpose agencies (one of which will be Zone 7).
She stated that the composition of the committee was the major hurdle
to overcome and that the other aspects will be considered at a later
time.
(/- )
--"
(Robertson Park Lake)
Cm Tirsell stated that she has received a number of pleas from young
people concerning the lake area going into Robertson Park where the
youngsters fish and swim. The area is on private property and the
owner wishes to sell but Cm Tirsel1 stated that it really is a
delightful area for the youngsters and that they intend to circulate
a petition concerning it. She wondered if the City had made any
attempts to acquire it and noted that her children refer to it as
"Lost Lake". She urged the Counci1members to take a look at the
area during the hot summer days to observe the number of children
enjoying the area around the clock.
(re Community Action
Agency Funds)
Cm Tirse11 stated that the Community Action Agency has received a
vast amount of money this year which exceeds $500,000 for the South
County consortium and would like service agencies to be notified
that this is the time to write proposals for innovative programs
for these funds. She felt the Board is very receptive as to how
funds should be spent and there is no reason programs in this valley
can't be funded. She stated that she would be happy to take calls
and direct people to the person who might be able to help them
write their proposals and give the necessary information.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, Mayor Pritchard adjourned
the meeting at 11:20 p.m. to an executive session.
ATTEST
a4#:&d/
Mayor
~
1
/-
L/
C1ty Clerk
. Livermore, California
APPROVE
CM-28-206
I
Special Meeting - June 20, 1974
A special meeting was called by Mayor pritchard to convene at
9:30 a.m. in the basement, Fire Station No.2, 951 Rincon Avenue,
on June 20, 1974.
PRESENT: Counci1members Futch, Miller, Tirse11, Turner and
Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT: None
The meeting was called for the purpose of Council consideration of
the following:
Clarification of the Council's position re
widening of I-SaO (proposed).
The Council did consider the draft of a letter prepared by the
City Manager to the Environmental Protection Agency regarding
the proposed reconstruction of I-S80 through the Dublin corridor.
It was decided that they would reaffirm their unanimous opposi-
tion to the proposed reconstruction of the subject highway.
The Council questioned the technical accuracy of the amended
environmental impact report prepared by the State Department
of Transportation feeling that it did not properly evaluate the
effects of this project on air quality in the Livermore Valley.
Specifically, the Council questioned the assumption that this
proposed project would not significantly increase the number
of daily vehicle trips through the Dublin Corridor, pointing
out that this conclusion was contrary to previous studies such
as the Putman Report.
The Council expressed a willingness to consider a reduced widening
of the corridor (such as 3 lanes), which would have a lesser
impact on air quality and permit a reduction in the necessary
excavation and topographical changes through the Dublin Canyon,
provided that there would be increasing encouragement and implemen-
tation of some means of public mass transit in an enlarged median
as an alternate means of travel.
On motion of Cm. Miller, seconded by Cm. Turner, the above listed
action was approved and authorized sent as stated.
The meeting then adjourned at 9:35 a.m.
APPROVE
4u~t f i!ud
Mayor
~'
~. .0~
Clerk
Live, California
ATTEST
CM-28-207
Regular Meeting of June 24, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on June 24, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore
Futch presiding.
,---
ROLL CALL
Present:
Counci1members Turner, Miller, Futch and Tirse11
Absent:
Mayor Pritchard (On Vacation)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor pro tempore Futch led the Counci1members as well as those
present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of June 17, 1974, were approved,
as amended.
OPEN FORUM
(Complaint re Drinks
During Dinner-Budget
Session)
Neva M. Heath, 2988 Kennedy Street, stated that Carry Nation was a
notorious campaigner against liquor in the state of Kansas. Mrs.
Heath added that as a native of Kansas she resurrected Carry Nation
on the evening of June 20, 1974, in the basement of #2 Fire Station,
at the City budget session. In the dining room she found City Coun-
cil members and several City staff members drinking alcoholic beverages
during the "happy hour" after dinner and that a bar had been set up
to serve them. She stated that the budget session is the most impor -
tant session of the year. It is serious enough in her estimation
that City funds probably provided the booze, but more tragic of all
is that members of the City Council and City staff attended to offi-
cial city budget matters after partaking of the spirits of alcohol.
The City Finance officer told Mrs. Heath that a kitty had been set up
when she inquired as to whether City funds financed the liquor and
he pointed out five or six $1 bills on the corner of the table. Later
it was observed that the water glass provided for the kitty, had an
amount in the neighborhood of $12 at the most - far below the price
of two cases of liquor, including Bourbon, vodka, gin, etc. Next
to the bar she observed three bottles of wine being made ready to serve;
the second case was held in reserve. In her opinion the establishment
of a liquor kitty only complicates the situation by making it an
illegal act to sell liquor without a license on the premises of a
public financed building. The drinking members were putting money in
the kitty. The Mayor, the City Engineer nor the City Attorney were
not in attendance during the "happy hour", and the Mayor and City
Attorney were not in attendance for the budget session after the
dinner hour. She presented a few questions for thought which she
stated the Council could answer if they wanted to. Why did two
firemen on duty scotchtape plain white paper over both glass doors
and tighten the automatic door closures so the doors could not be
opened during the "happy hour"? Why did the Council and the staff
CM-28-209
June 24, 1974
("Happy Hour"
Budget Session)
stand around the kitchen and dining room of the Fire Station without
turning on the lights after the close of the budget session close to
ll:OO p.m.? Could it be that you were waiting for the public to leave, /",",')
as there were bottles of spirits left that you wanted to kill before (
you returned home to your families? Of course there was the contents
of the kitty that perhaps would be reimbursed. Is this expense re-
ported in the budget and called "miscellaneous" every year? She
stated that the Council and staff did work very hard and long on the
budget and some would agree that they deserve a few "snorts" but
she asked if they thought it was right when attending to City busi-
ness. She asked the Council if they thought it was fair to see fit
to cut our City Little League Teams or City Soccer Team or the Police
request from the City Budget instead. She continued that the revela-
tion Thursday night is what makes her very curious as to how many times
the City Council and staff has entertained and served City funded li-
quor during the year. She remarked that she would like to leave the
Council with this food for thought - it is the children of drinking
parents who lose the most and have the most to lose, and asked if this
is what the "City Dads" and a "mama" are satisfied with for our City's
children.
Mayor Pro Tempore Futch stated that alcoholic beverages and wine are
frequently available at dinners in which public officials participate
and this was probably no exception. The exception, in this case,
was that the funds did not corne from the City of Livermore to pay
for the beverages. With respect to the doors being taped he stated
that he was unaware of this and anytime he observed the doors, they
were open.
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he is surprised Cm Futch
was not aware of the taped doors because they were in front of every-
one.
PUBLIC HEARING RE
FORMATION OF UNDER-
GROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
Mayor pro tempore Futch opened the public hearing to receive comments
from affected property owners regarding the formation of an underground
utility district. These districts require that the incorporated pri-
vate property owners convert their utility services to underground
to interconnect with the main line underground services installed by
PG&E, at their expense.
Mr. Beebe, Manager of PG&E, spoke to the Council regarding the legal
aspects of "Q" Street, which has been abandoned by the City and sug-
gested that since it is private property the boundaries be on the east-
erly line of "Q" Street rather than about the middle, which line was
illustrated on. the map and which Mr. Lee stated would cause no problem
with respect to the resolution.
There being no further testimony and no written response, on motion
of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote, the
public hearing was closed.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know what the conversion
would mean in the way of cost to the property owner and it was
noted that an amount has not been estimated - each property will
have a different cost. It was also noted that a good share of
the property already has underground service and the bulk of the
expense will not be to the adjacent property owners but will come
from Rule 20 money, and no residential homes will be involved.
~.
I )
/
CM-28-210
June 24, 1974
(P.H. re Formation of
Underground Utility Dist.)
Cm Tirse11 moved that the Council adopt a resolution establishing
an underground utility district, seconded by Cm Turner which passed
unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-74
/~.
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN UNDERGROUND DISTRICT
ON P STREET
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Auth. Transfer
of 1973-74 Funds
A resolution was adopted authorizing and directing transfer of
1973-74 fiscal budget funds.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING TRANSFER OF FUNDS
Minutes - Airport Advisory
Comm. and Design Review
Comm. (Street Lights)
Minutes were received, as follows:
Airport Advisory Committee - Meeting of - June 3
Design Review Committee - Meeting of - June l2
Cm Miller asked about the height of the street lights, as noted
in the minutes of the Design Review Committee and Mr. Lee stated
that this matter would be coming to the Council for a decision but
if the Council knows, at this time, what they would like they can
so state and the order can be made. The report indicated that plans
include 40-foot poles and Cm Miller stated that it has been Council
policy to try to maintain some uniformity in our business district
and to stay away from these giant poles. He suggested since we
have ordered 40-foot poles and are obligated to take them, perhaps
a report from the staff would be in order suggesting other locations
in which they might be used.
Cm Tirsell asked if these were the poles the staff was asked to
check on to see if they could be rescinded and Mr. Lee commented
as to how the 40-foot poles were ordered and stated that if the
Council would like more information he could provide them with
a report of the costs involved and other specifics.
(]~~~~- /-.~.
Cm Tirsell pointed out that this is just one small. 0 em concern-
ing the design and structure of the ~iJ. l1n~.rl?~.. and wondered
if the Planning Commission is very far along with their hearings on
this matter. She stated that if things are done piecemeal through
the Council, things get ordered and later it is determined that the
order should be rescinded.
Mr. Lee stated that the Planning Commission has had only one meet-
ing and has outlined the question they have about the whole area.
It was a very useful discussion but they have not made any decision
about specifics.
Mayor Pro Tempore Futch commented that the Council's direction is
that it would like an overall view on the poles.
Erna Barr, 1009 Murrieta Boulevard, asked about the cost of the
underground utilities with respect to the public hearing just held
and Mr. Lee explained it to her; he also answered questions posed
regarding the poles and fixtures planned for the P Street area.
CM-28-2ll
.___'~""__+H~~~__~'__'_'______",_~",___"",~,"",,___."."_ m. "_'_.___,._...__,.",...,~_
June 24, 1974
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of em Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the Consent Calendar was approved.
COMMUNICATION FROM LARPD
RE ARROYO MOCHO PARK SITE
o
A letter was received from LARPD with
ment of the Mocho Park area just west
noted that this particular site has a
will not take place for some time.
regard to financing develop-
of Holmes Street and it was
low priority and development
Cm Turner suggested that perhaps he and Cm Miller, the representa-
tives from the Council, might meet with LARPD to discuss the matter
and then report back to the Council.
Mr. Parness was asked to list this among the agenda items to be
discussed with the LARPD liaison during their next meeting.
REPORT RE AIRPORT MASTER
PLAN & LAND USE STUDY
The City Manager explained that a grant has been approved for
the Airport Master Plan and Land Use Study and purchase of the
west Clear Zone which will perpetually reserve this property
from the encroachment of other uses and the only action required
at this time is the approval of the execution of the grant agree-
ment by way of resolution.
Cm Tirse11 noted that the City's share of the cost will be $33,968
and wondered where this amount will corne from, and Mr. Parness ex-
plained that this is a part of the Capital Improvement Program
and that adequate funds have accumulated for both programs.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the following resolutions were adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. lOO-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Planning Grant - Livermore Municipal Airport)
RESOLUTION NO. 101-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Clear Zone Livermore Municipal Airport)
REPORT RE CUP APP.
- Henrietta Fankhauser
The Planning Commission reported that at its meeting of June 18th,
the application of Henrietta Fankhauser for a CUP to permit retail
sale of antiques in a CP District (331 North "L") was considered.
It was concluded that approval should be granted, subject to vari-
ous conditions, as outlined in the report from the Planning Commission,
dated June 18, 1974.
01
\
,,~-
em Turner moved to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation for
approval, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
CM-28-2l2
June 24, 1974
(CUp Application -
Retail Sales-Fankhauser)
Mrs. Fankhauser spoke to the Council regarding the application
for the CUP and the type of business to be conducted and the type
of things to be stored, and reference was made to the Chief Build-
ing Inspector's report.
em Miller stated that he appreciates the Fankhauser's willingness
to clean up their property and improve the buildings and knows
that it would be done in good taste; however, he sees a long view
issue with the CUP which bothers him and that is the precedent for
further retail commercial along "L" Street. The fact that this is
a rather restrained retail commercial does not really change the
principle and in his opinion a CUP which permits retail commercial
in the CP District does impair the Zoning Ordinance and does impair
the purpose of the CP District. He stated that he has watched this
kind of thing happen over the past 16 years where there is just a
minor allowance and ends up to be something widespread - such as
the CP on "L" Street which carne about in exactly the same way. He
felt it would be very unwise to approve retail commercial in the
CP District and to do so is asking for trouble, even if the trouble
is four or five years away.
Mayor Pro Tempore Futch asked if Mr. Musso would explain the reasons
the Planning Commission felt it would not be setting a precedent and
Mr. Musso replied that a lot of the reason behind the recommendation
was the problem of relocating the use from the present location. He
added that the Planning Commission was also very concerned with set-
ting a precedent and a lot of attention was given towards making
the findings which he then reviewed for the Council. He stated
that there is only one condition required by the Planning Commission
which is not covered by the ordinance and that is the condition
relative to the window display - they are not to use the window
to display signs.
Mayor Pro Tempore Futch noted that he feels the same reservations
expressed by Cm Miller and that there are a lot of areas in town
which could use the excuse that they are adjacent to a CB District,
and could meet this condition.
Cm Miller pointed out that the use does not conform to the General
Plan and Mr. Musso stated that this is something which has to be
worked out, as the whole strip along "L" Street does not conform
to the General Plan.
Cm Tirse11 felt the CUP is the right procedure in this case and
that the findings from the Planning Commission are adequate. She
stated that in driving around other cities of our size she has
noticed that they create an easy conversion from the CB areas to
the residential and that the two areas generally abut. She stated
that the small creative types of busineses really have no other
place in town and we really have no place for the beginning artists
and small shops and specialty home crafts. A lot of small towns
use these types of businsses as a buffer zone but does appreciate
the problem noted by Cm Miller and would hope that the zoning for
this area never becomes straight,~commercia1.
Cm Miller noted that there is an area presently zoned Commercial
District and consists of houses located south of First Street. There
are places which could be purchased in commercial areas that would not
present a problem or the necessity to create a transition area. He
stated that he is trying very hard to stop ilL" Street from becoming
commercial perhaps in another five years.
Mr. Fankhauser stated that he and his wife looked at houses to buy
in other areas and those in the commercial areas are about $35,000
and that about half of the house would have to be demolished to pro-
vide for parking. Rentals appear to be in the neighborhood of $300
a month and either of these alternatives would be too costly for a
CM-28-2l3
June 24, 1974
(CUP Application- Fankhauser)
business such as theirs which is open only a few days a week.
Mayor Pro Tempore Futch stated that he is having a very difficult
time trying to arrive at a decision as he feels a store of this
type is needed but also would not like to set a precedent. He
felt that possibly the ordinance could be modified to allow only
the artist and antique type of business and Cm Tirsell stated that
she would feel better if there was a definitive statement in the
ordinance for the transition area, and wondered if Mr. Musso could
comment on how other areas control the type of business allowed.
(~
U
Mr. Musso stated that he could offer no solution.
Cm Turner stated that in his opinion the CP already established
in the residential area has already done the damage and would
agree with Cm Miller if there was only residential; however a
change in the ordinance, as suggested by Cm Futch might make
sense and feels that this should be looked into. He then moved
that the Planning Commission recommendation be adopted which had
been seconded by em Tirsell and the motion passed 3-1 with Cm Miller
dissenting.
REPORT RE NOISE AD-
VISORY COMMITTEE
Mr. Musso explained that the Noise Ordinance was discussed about
a year ago and that at that time he proposed forming a Noise
Committee to be primarily technical in nature and which would review
the many ordinances available, including a Quiet City Ordinance
by the League of California Cities. He pointed out that the
most important aspect would be the determination of the noise
level allowed in each zoning district including noise for a
certain period of time or for a particular time of day. There
is also a problem of subdivisions located near the freeway or
major streets and an ambient noise level would be established
for these areas and could be exceeded by a certain level. Once
the numbers are established (expressed in decibels assigned for
the zones) there will be a Noise Ordinance and this will also
be part of the General Plan Noise Element. He stated that he
suggested primarily technical people and has received the names
of four people who might be willing to serve. Two of these
people have been contacted and have agreed to serve on the com-
mittee and the other two have not been contacted. The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers have offered their assistance to
the City and at the suggestion of Mr. Parness they have been con-
tacted and also have agreed to assist.
Cm Turner wondered how long it would take to complete this task
and Mr. Musso stated that other cities have developed this type
of ordinance, for the most part, and we should have one completed
fairly soon - probably in less than six months.
em Miller moved that the City Council authorize a City Noise
Study Committee, or some other appropriate title, seconded by
Cm Tirse11.
Mr. Parness asked if the staff is to be relied upon for making
a selection of committee members or if a more formal procedure
is desired and Cm Miller stated that he would be willing to leave
the selection of appropriate members, to the staff, with the Coun-
cil being informed as to who the members are, which he included
in the motion and which was agreed to by the second.
/\
( .
\'--. '
Paul Tul1, 2243 Linden Street, commented that when the committee
is formed he would request that they pay particular attention to
the noise which comes from the railroad tracks whteh can be heard
corning from the Altamont Pass area.
CM-28-2l4
June 24, 1974
(re Noise Committee)
Mr. Musso explained that in the case of the noise from trains, some-
thing such as a noise barrier might be helpful and can be looked
into and garbage trucks were also mentioned as a source of noise
which is disturbing.
Robert Heath, 2988 Kennedy Street, also commented about noise
levels from the trains.
Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding the Council would
appoint members to committees established by the Council and Cm
Futch felt that perhaps the staff could submit suggestions and
formal approval could be given by the Council and Cm Turner felt
this would be acceptable, as long as the staff understands that
the Council will make the final approval.
It was noted that this would be included as the intent of the
motion which passed by unanimous vote.
ADOPTION OF ZOo ORD.
VAR. PARKISCHOOL SITES
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the ordinance amending Ordinance No. 442, Section 3.00
changing the zoning of Max Baer Park, Mocho Park, Sunset South
School and Park, Crum Park, Rhonewood Park and Neptune Park to
E District was adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 843
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS
AMENDED, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMENDING
SECTION 3.00 THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING.
The title of the ordinance was read by Mr. Engel.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Downtown Theme)
Mr. Musso reported that other aspects for a theme for the downtown
area are being considered other than architectural, such as street
lights, street furniture, landscaping and various other things that
might be used.
(Council Approval
of Budget)
The City Manager noted that approval of the budget needs to be
discussed and suggested that this matter be decided at the next
meeting and after some discussion it was concluded that the matter
will be discussed at the meeting of July 15th.
(re Consultant Firm
General Plan Study)
The City Manager commented that perhaps there is a need for a
special meeting to review the references of the consultant firm
for the planning study to take place. The staff is nearly finished
with their work and from this it is anticipated that a choice can
be made.
Cm Futch felt there is a large difference in the cost estimates
for the three consultants and suggested that the staff prepare
a thorough analysis as to what the three firms might provide and
Mr. Parness indicated that this is almost impossible unless there
is detailed personal discussion with each firm.
CM-28-215
June 24, 1974
(Gen. Plan Consultant Firm)
Cm Turner felt that with all the information available on the con-
sultants, the Council should be able to sit down and choose the
consultant they would like from reading the resume and talking to
them and then ask for a price and suggested that the Counci1members
have a meeting to decide what it is they want and who should do it.
It was concluded that the Counci1members would meet at 5:00 on June
25th, and Cm Miller suggested that in the first part of the meeting
the Council take into consideration the Planning Commissioners and
staff members' input (those who were present during interviews),
and the Council agreed that this might be useful.
n
The City Manager felt that Cm Turner's comment about price being
a secondary consideration is very important and that the prime
consideration should be the selection of the firm felt to be most
qualified and can do the job, and Cm Futch explained that he did
not mean to imply that the price was the main consideration but
rather that the consultants are offering different things and it
has not been determined which things will be required of a firm.
(re Chamber of Commerce
Plans for Livermore Day
at the Fair)
Mr. Parness stated that the Chamber of Commerce has planned a
community barbeque dinner for July 8th, Livermore Day at the
Fair, and that the dinner will be paid for by those who enjoy
the proceeds. Mr. Parness stated that he would encourage
participation by Counci1members as well as any interested
community members that may wish to attend. He felt the $6
fee is a very attractive offer in that it includes entrance
to the fair, a box seat for the races and the dinner.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Truck Routes)
Cm Turner stated that he has received a comment from an indi-
vidual who would suggest that heavy trucks be restricted to
a certain route because the trucks deteriorate City streets
and Mr. Lee explained that there is a truck route designated
in the City and which the trucks should use. Cm Turner stated
that the person who spoke to him about this matter felt there
is excessive use of Fourth Street by heavy trucks.
Cm Miller noted that this matter has corne up in the past and
that it was necessary to repave E1 Caminito because of the
use of that street by heavy trucks, and possibly fees should
be paid by developers whose trucks consistently use certain
streets so that this money can be used for repaving.
(Support of
AB 3924 - Tippler Tax)
Cm Turner suggested that the Council support AB 3924 known as
the Tippler Tax which would mean a sales tax per drink on liquor
and so moved, seconded by Cm Miller which passed unanimously.
n
/
Cm Miller also urged that a letter be sent to the governor, as
he vetoed this bill.
CM-28-216
June 24, 1974
(Removal of Top Soil)
Cm Miller stated that he has received a memorandum from the staff
as to his remark made last week about possible removal of top soil
from a City park site in Tract 3321 and that the memorandum is most
unsatisfactory, and the actions of the developer more unsatisfactory.
He stated that the developer unilaterally anticipated a shortage of
earth materials and that the contours of the park could be improved
by removal of these earth materials from the park site. The park
was stripped of the materials used for the developer's own private
purposes and profit and later the top soil was redistributed at the
insistance of LARPD and the City. The developer is presently stock-
piling material and using City property without paying any rental for
the use of it and that lastly, the comment made in the memorandum
which really makes him angry is that, "considerable staff time would
have been saved had the developer cleared his park grading plan
with the City prior to commencing work". Cm Miller pointed out
that the developer does not own that parcel and cannot have a park
grading plan. He has taken our property without permission, without
notification or anything. He trespassed on City property and took
it and Cm Miller stated that he feels this to be unilaterally without
notice and when it came to the attention of the City the staff did
not bring it to the attention of the Council which he also finds
very irritating. In his opinion, trespass and taking of public
property should require further attention and that there should
be prosecution for such action. To argue, now, that everything
is o.k. with LARPD, has nothing to do with the fundamental principle
involved which is that the developer unilaterally trespassed on
our property and took part of it for his own private purposes and
added that if he sounds irritated and angry it is because he is
and urged that the Council direct the staff to pursue a trespass
prosecution for this and so moved.
Cm Tirsell stated that prosecution will not put the earth back and
payment is really not what the City needs - he took property.
Cm Turner raised a point of order at this time noting that there can
be no discussion of the matter without a second to the motion and
asked that it be restated.
Cm Miller moved that the City Council pursue a prosecution for trespass
and the taking of public property, without authorization or notice, and
that the storage fee be charged for the material which he is presently
stockpiling on our property without the Council's permission, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tempore Futch for discussion purposes.
Mr. Lee stated that he did not notify the City Council of this matter
because the Tract is not up for final acceptance and the subdivider
resolved the matter in such a way that is satisfactory to the Park
District who has taken the responsibility to develop the site, and,
in fact, they are happier with the present countours than what had
been originally presented. With respect to the materials being on
the site, the improvements to the tract have to be approved at the
end and after all the work has been completed. If, at that time,
the matter has not been resolved to the satisfaction of LARPD and
the City, the matter would be brought to the attention of the City
Council. He pointed out that many things happen during the course
of subdivision construction and the developer and his contractor
are required to make the necessary corrections.
CM-28-2l7
June 24, 1974
(re Removal of Top Soil)
Mayor Pro Tempore Futch commented that the developer is required to
dedicate a site including the streets and frontage and wondered if
this frequently requires grading and Mr. Lee stated that this is
true and sometimes if a park site is not adequately graded the City
might require grading by the developer and it might also be required
for the street frontage.
c
Cm Miller stated that this is true, but not grading for the whole
parcel and not taking away the dirt without notification and that
the fundamental issue is being lost.
Mayor pro tempore Futch commented that he does not want to establish
a policy of something that would be in conflict with the overall
drainage that has to be considered.
Mr. Lee felt the end results are what the staff are concerned with
and the City Council can be sure that they would be made very much
aware of unresolved matters if the subdivision was ready for accept-
ance.
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that in this particular instance he
shares the concern expressed by Cm Miller in that it would appear
the top soil would be used for the developer's benefit but before
there is further discussion perhaps the interim City Attorney would
have advice.
Mr. Engel replied that it depends on whether the Council would be
interested in criminal prosecution or civil action and that criminal
prosecution would be very difficult and that civil action might be
very expensive from the standpoint of City staff time. To weigh
the time of the staff and time spent in court and court fees against
what might be recovered, litigation would probably not be worthwhile.
Cm Miller pointed out that it is particularly disturbing to him for
people to flaut our ordinances, take our property and get away with
it with impunity. Somewhere and somehow the public should receive
protection from people who take their property. This was a trespass
and a taking of public property and if criminal prosecution is diffi-
cult it is immaterial. In his opinion, taking public property without
notice to the City requires some kind of response from the City Coun-
cil.
Cm Turner stated that Cm Miller's point is well taken and would cer-
tainly agree; however, what type of response might be appropriate
seems to be somewhat difficult.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to have an answer about why
criminal prosecution should be so difficult, as in other circum-
stances there are blunt and ugly words for people who take property,
and Mr. Engel explained that the primary reason is because, in the
final analysis, the matter would probably be viewed as a diminimus
matter by the prosecuting attorney with no real loss to the City.
Cm Miller felt the arithmetic should be done with respect to value
of material taken from the City without its knowledge and even if
it is a difficult case it should at least be taken to the District
Attorney. If he decides not to prosecute because he feels it is
a diminimus problem this is his choice but the Council's responsi-
bility, on behalf of the public, should be to place the matter
into the hands of the District Attorney. He emphasized that the
incident cannot go without notice and the Council simply cannot
ignore the incident. It was the developer's decision and without
r
CM-28-218
June 24, 1974
(Removal of Top Soil)
~
notice to the City and the fact that the contours are better in the
end result, are only because LARPD insisted that they be provided by
the developer and were not the contours left by the developer after
removal of the top soil. The whole point is that whether or not any-
thing was taken and put back, such was done without the permission of
the City and is the major issue. A second point is that if the City
had been approached with the suggestion of trading top soil for better
contours, it may have been agreeable and an appropriate deal worked
out; however, this is not what happened.
Cm Turner asked if this is property the developer dedicated and Mr.
Lee replied that it is the property dedicated along with the Tract.
Cm Turner felt the City Attorney should investigate the matter and
suggest a course of action and pointed out that the Council is only
reading an inner-office memorandum from which they are basing a de-
cision and wondered if Mr. Mehran had been contacted; Mr. Lee replied
that Mr. Mehran had not been contacted.
Mr. Lee felt there are remedies to any problem which might exist and
that Mr. Mehran's contractor may be the person involved, but the City
has every right to expect any necessary correction to satisfy LARPD.
Cm Turner felt it would be best to ask the City Attorney to investigate
the matter such as was done with the incident involving Dr. Rocco.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to see positive results from
whatever action the Council decides to take. She feels that this
is an arrogant attitude demonstrated against our ordinances and that
Mr. Mehran is the owner of the property regardless of who graded
it, and must answer to the wrongdoing. In her opinion, compensation
should be made in some way but most importantly the point should
be emphasized that the City has a dim view of Mr. Mehran's creating
his own grading plan to suit his needs after the City has received
an approved site plan and such action should not be repeated.
Mr. Engel commented that he would look into the matter and there is
a possibility that it could be handled through Small Claims Court.
Mayor Pro Tempore Futch pointed out that the Council should use some
discretion in running to the District Attorney over every little matter
and that when something really important comes up their office might
not pay any attention to Livermore's complaint. He suggested that
the Council adopt a policy of requiring developers to obtain permission
from the staff prior to removal of soil from park sites with the
staff being under instruction from the Council that the City should
be compensated for any soil removed which is of value, and Mr. Lee
pointed out that after the grading plan has been received, this
requirement goes without saying and that without permission such
would not be allowed, and Cm Futch felt something should be stated
to the developer.
Cm Miller felt the Council should not have to say anything to the
developer - it should be understood.
Mr. Lee explained that there is a standard requirement in the engineer-
ing consideration, relative to grading.
c)
Cm Miller stated that he would like his motion to state that the
trespass prosecution be given to the District Attorney and emphasized
that a public jurisdiction should not be concerned about whether or
not people feel Livermore is crying "wolf". This is a public morality
issue which the City cannot ignore and should be brought before the
District Attorney. This was a flagrant and arrogant performance.
CM-28-2l9
June 24, 1974
(Removal of Top Soil)
Cm Turner wondered if the motion could be tempered to ask that
the City Attorney investigate and make an appropriate recommenda-
tion to the City Council by the next meeting day, and offered this
as an amendment, seconded by Cm Tirse11, after the purpose of the
investigation was explained.
Cm Miller stated he was not sure how the amendment would fit in with
the motion, but felt that the amendment was to investigate the possi-
bility of doing as the motion states and reporting back to the Coun-
cil with the recommendation.
Cm Tirse11 questioned if they would consider other alternatives, and
Cm Miller stated he would consider other options, but his concern
is that flagrant taking of public property should have some kind of
public prosecution.
Mayor pro tempore Futch asked if the motion should be considered as
a substitute motion, and Mr. Engel stated that the amendment was
contrary to the motion.
Cm Miller stated he would agree with Cm Turner's amendment although
he would rather go directly to the DA, and would make the motion
state that the City Attorney investigate the aspects of a prosecu-
tion for trespass and for charging for storage and to consider other
options and to come back with a report and recommendation. The motion
was seconded by Cm Tirsel1.
Due to the confusion of the motion, Cm Miller withdrew his original
motion, and the motion as stated was made by Cm Turner, seconded by
Cm Tirsell, and passed unanimously.
Cm. Miller, as one last comment, stated he did not like the attitude
that occurred in the last paragraph of the memorandum which indicated
that the grading would have been in order if the developer had cleared
it with the City, as the park is the property of the City and not
the developer.
Mr. Lee stated it may have been a poor choice of words, but what he
was saying is the fact that if the developer wanted to grade it he
should have come and presented it to the staff who would have followed
the regular channels - it would have been presented to the Recreation
District and to the Council for approval. It was not meant to
indicate that approval would have been automatic. His grading
plans for the subdivision were processed and approved. The point
is Mr. Lee had presented all the facts to the Council and it was
up to the Council what attitude they would take regarding the matter.
Cm Miller remarked that he was willing to concede it would be possible
to read the words different ways, and following through what he had
read perhaps the feelings of increasing anger as he read, puts a
wrong construction on the choice of words, and it may be that he has
mistaken the intent of the words and he apologized.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. until Tuesday at 5:00 p.m.
in the City Hall.
APPROVE
~ /i?k:d
Mayor
'-'-
ATTEST
CM-28-220
Adjourned Meeting of June 25, 1974
The adjourned meeting was called to order by Mayor pro tempore
Futch, at 5:00 p.m. in the City Hall, 2250 First Street, on June
2S,l974.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Futch, Miller, Tirsell and Turner
ABSENT: Mayor Pritchard (On Vacation)
The meeting was called to discuss the firms proposed for the
conduct of the General Plan Study.
No action was taken.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m.
APPROVE
ddt //, zu
Oct. ~. 'M.YOr
tZl. ~
C t. Ie k
Li rm e, California
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of July 1, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on July 1, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore
Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Turner, Miller, Futch and Tirsell
ABSENT: Mayor Pritchard (On Vacation)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor pro tempore Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those
present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
(
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner, and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the meeting of June 24, 1974, were approved,
as amended.
CM-28-221
July 1, 1974
OPEN FORUM
(Bus Service to BART Stations)
Mrs. Evelyn Prudhon, 3891 Santa Clara Way, asked what plans are being
made in the near future to provide transportation to the BART stations
in Hayward and Oakland. She commented that she has served on jury
duty the past four weeks and it came to her attention that many people
from the Livermore and P1easanton areas cannot serve because there is
no method of transportation. She felt that after living here for the
past 19 years and paying for BART on her tax rolls all this time, that
certainly there should be some transportation furnished, and she had
been told that such a service was up to the city.
Mayor pro tem Futch stated he wished that the City had more influence
with the BART Board as the City recognizes the great need for public
transportation, and we have been promised by the Board that we will
have buses to the BART stations at the same time that the trans-bay
tube goes into operation.
Mr. Parness stated that at the insistence of a member of the BART
Board, Mr. DeWitt Wilson, a P1easanton resident, a meeting was arranged
last week with the principal staff members of BART and with AC Transit
to discuss this same question. The City has been working toward this
service for a long time and the promise has always been that it would
be done with the opening of the trans-bay service which has been set
for September 9. However there has been a great deal of difficulty for
the BART agency and AC Transit with regard to getting necessary capital
funds from the federal government for the purchase of buses that will
satisfy our needs. Thirty-six buses are required to take care of the
Livermore Valley and eastern Contra Costa County. Mr. Parness went on
to explain that it was revealed at the meeting that the difficulty in
acquiring the federal grant has to do with the AC Transit being bur-
dened by a statute in the Urban Mass Transit Act and the Federal High-
ways Act which specifies that if federal monies are used for capital
acquisition, no charter operations would be allowed by the recipient
agency outside of their area of jurisdiction, and so they had seen fit
not to execute the grant application. However they are trying to get
the law amended and they have composed another grant application for
federal funds that will involve some 110 buses. We have no assurances
that the trans-bay is going to commence as of September 9 as there
are all kinds of difficulties they still face, but we have demanded
that we receive express services no later than November 1974, and in-
sisted that this stipulation be made a part of the contract being
negotiated between BART and AC Transit. This has been taken under
advisement we can only hope~it will be done.
Cm Miller remarked that Mrs. prudhon's comment that "it isn't right
we don't have bus service" is absolutely correct as this Council has
been trying for more than three years to get this service. Contrary
to what she has been told, we do not have the authority to provide
bus service and it is not our responsibility, but rather BART's re-
sponsibility and they have not delivered on their promises to provide
this service.
(Re Intersection Holmes & Concannon)
Celia Baker, S4l Bell Avenue, advised the Council that there had been
a bad accident at the corner of Holmes Street and Concannon Blvd. and
although the Council has been working on obtaining signals for this
intersection, she felt it was dangerous and asked that something be
at least temporarily done.
Mayor pro tem Futch stated that the Council has been pushing for these
signals very strongly, and in fact, was the first item of business he
initiated when he came on the Council two years ago, and explained it
will be October before we can expect to have the signals installed.
CM-28-222
July 1, 1974
(Re Holmes and Concannon
Intersection-Signal Lights)
The staff has been instructed to order the signals and have them ready
for installation, hoping that will save some time.
/..--
(Re Payroll and Claims)
Carolyn Oddon, 5846 East Avenue, stated her interest in Item 2.7 on the
Consent Calendar and asked the total amount of claims to be expended,
from what source the funds will come and if these sums have been
approved by the voters?
Mayor pro tern Futch stated this was a detailed list of items requested
and would prefer to refer her questions to the Finance Director.
Mrs. Oddon when asked the reason for the question, replied that it
was just a taxpayer's curiousity, but would like to know the source
of the funds, and wanted to know if this information was available.
When asked if there was a code number which described where each
number came from, Mr. Nolan stated it would be very difficult to
make a complete itemization of all the various funds on a summary
statement such as is provided as some of the warrants may come from
ten or fifteen different funds.
Paul Tu11, 2242 Linden Street, referred also to the warrant register,
stating that ten of the items add up to better than one-third of
$1 million and he felt this was a substantial sum to be passed off,
and he, too, would like to find out the source of these funds.
Mayor pro tem Futch stated that any figure adding up to that amount
has previously been considered by the Council in great detail.
Paul Tul1 countered that it had not been considered in such a manner
that the public could know about it, and would like to see it published.
Mayor pro tem Futch suggested to Mr. Tu11 that he write a letter to
the City, requesting which items he would like additional information
on, as it was not possible to go through the register item by item
at this meeting, and Mr. Tull suggested that none of these be approved
tonight.
Mr. Parness explained that the monies being referred to in the
way of claims are the amounts that represent the appraised value on
properties that must be obtained by the City for our grade separation
project. They are transferrable to the County of Alameda as required
in litigation for eminent domain proceedings. They are made a trust
account of the County until the full value of the property is de-
termined.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolution Congratulating
First Presbyterian Church
Centennial - First Location
Mayor pro tem Futch explained that the building located at Fourth
and K Streets was built 100 years ago for $3,000 on three lots, and
this is the centennial of their location at that site.
RESOLUTION NO. l02-74
RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN
CHURCH OF LIVERMORE IN OBSERVANCE OF CENTENNIAL
OF LOCATION AT FOURTH AND "K" STREETS.
CM-28-223
July 1, 1974
Resolutions Denying Claims
RESOLUTION NO. 103-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAIM OF GERTRUDE PROFFITT
RESOLUTION NO. 104-74
~\
( .
\ /
A RESOLUTION DENY.ING~.THE =:r.r.ATM OF
JOSE A. AND GIZELA DESOUSA.
Establishing Salary Schedule
1974-75 Fiscal Budget
RESOLUTION NO. 105-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ESTABLISHING A SALARY
SCHEDULE FOR THE CLASSIFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF
THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AND ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE,
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 11-74.
This resolution is in accordance with the salary rates established.
City Council review and approval are yet to be determined for the
adjustment of Fire Department salaries.
Resolutions re Proceedings re
Railroad Assessment District
RESOLUTION NO. l06-74
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING PAID AND UNPAID LIST AND REQUESTING
THAT THE AUDITOR OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIF-
ORNIA, SHALL MAKE EXTENSION OF INSTALLMENTS THEREOF ON THE
TAX ROLLS, RAILROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVERMORE.
RESOLUTION NO. 107-74
RESOLUTION FIXING DATE OF BONDS AND DIRECTING PUBLICATION
OF OFFICIAL NOTICE INVITING BIDS FOR PURCHASE OF BONDS,
RAILROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVERMORE.
RESOLUTION NO. lOS-74
RESOLUTION APPOINTING A PAYING AGENT FOR THE
PAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON BONDS TO
BE ISSUED IN RAILROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT,
CITY OF LIVERMORE, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Capital Improvements - Phase II
The Public Works Director explained that one of the capital improve-
ment projects - K Street Beautification - has not been reviewed in
its final form by the Beautification Committee as yet. No substan-
tial changes are anticipated.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to have the traffic island pro-
posed for Maple Street deleted until he can review the design and
find a better justification.
,!~
Mayor pro tern Futch suggested that this item be removed from the
Consent Calendar for later discussion.
CM-28-224
July 1, 1974
MINUTES - Various
Minutes of the Design Review Committee for their meeting of June 26
and the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 18 were
noted for filing.
Payroll and Claims
One hundred fifty-eight claims in the amount of $549,082.21 and
three hundred twelve payroll warrants in the amount of $84,585.08
dated June 28, 1974; fifteen claims in the amount of $6,370.80 and
two claims in the amount of $35,924.80 dated July 1, 1974 were ordered
paid as approved by the City Manager.
Approval of Consent
Calendar
A motion was made by Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner, and approved
unanimously, that the items on the Consent Calender be approved.
Cm Turner referred to the salary schedule and the Fire Department
salaries and asked if the City considers retroactive pay.
Mr. Parness explained that the policy which only came into play last
year was to observe partial retroactivity by way of a final settle-
ment. The negotiator for the City has informed the representative
of the Firemen's Association that retroactivity would not be observed
this year, but it may be the subject of negotiation.
REPORT RE FUEL STORAGE TANK
Mr. Parness had reported that gasoline storage facilities for the
City are now limited to one 1,000 gal. and one 4,000 gal. tank, and if
another fuel shortage should occur he felt it was vital to obtain
immediately a 10,000 gal. tank to replace the existing 1,000 gal one.
The cost of this fixture, plus installation, will amount to about
$4,000, and recommended that a motion be adopted authorizing this
acquisition. Mr. Parness apologized for the fact that this was not
inclusive within the budget considerations, but at that time the
availability was not feasible as there was a one year waiting period.
Cm Turner moved to adopt the City Manager's recommendation, seconded
by Cm Miller, and the motion passed unanimously.
REPORT RE EMPLOYEE
BARGAINING UNIT DESIGNATION
Fire Department
Mr. Parness explained that an application has been received from the
qualified employees of the Livermore Fire Department (excepting
officer rank) for formal recognition of their bargaining unit for
purposes of labor relations. This is to be Livermore Fire Fighters
Local 2318 of the International Association of Fire Fighters. It
is recommended that the City Council officially recognize this new
unit subject to the condition that dues deduction cards be filed.
Cm Tirsel1 moved to approve the recognition of the labor relations
bargaining unit, subject to the conditions of individually executed
dues deduction cards and designation of the fiscal agent. Motion was
seconded by Cm Turner and approved unanimously.
CM-28-22S
July 1, 1974
LIVERMORE DISPOSAL SERVICE
CORPORATION YARD
For several years the Livermore Disposal Service Company has
leased an unused portion of our City's corporation yard for park-
ing their vehicles, some minor storage and temporary repair work.
A permanent location has been acquired by the Company on South front
Road but for final occupancy it will require a substantial capital
expenditure. The Company has been reluctant to do so because of
the uncertainty of our City's collection contract which expires
December 31, 1974.
~)
Mr. Parness explained that the City must obtain an additional width
of property all along the Western Pacific right-of-way to accommodate
the new track placement, which means about 10 feet from the corpora-
tion yard. This would cause a temporary structure that is located
by the Disposal Service Company to have to be relocated, and due
to their twice a week service during the summer which causes an
additional number of vehicles to be parked there, there would not
be enough room. Therefore, they have suggested the possibility of
using the property they have already acquired on South front Road
and they would have to apply to the County for a temporary permit.
A motion was made by Cm Miller to support the Livermore Disposal
Service Company's application for temporary use permit for storage
of their vehicles, seconded by Cm Turner and approved unanimously.
REPORT RE LOCAL PUBLIC
TRANSIT STUDY
The City Manager. reported that efforts have been made by our staff,
with some input from the BART staff, to update the DeLeuw Cather Co.
transit study as it pertains to local systems as too many changes
have occurred in population projections, capital and maintenance and
operation costs, potential patronage and the effects of the design
for the BART express services to be able to use this transit study.
One hundred percent funding is available from the MTC, using federal
monies, for the purpose of conducting a revisionary consultant study.
It is expected that this work will take no longer than four months
and if DeLeuw Cather Co. is retained it might be done considerable
sooner. Our newly formed Transit Advisory Committee concurs with
this recommendation. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted
approving conduct of a transit study for local bus services and re-
questing that MTC extend funding for this purpose.
The Council generally concurred that the study should be updated as
there have been many changes both in projected population and the
fuel shortage and Cm Miller moved that a resolution be adopted
approving the conduct of a transit study as recommended. Cm Tirsel1
seconded the motion and it was approved unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 109-74
RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDUCT OF A TRANSIT STUDY
FOR LOCAL BUS SERVICES AND REQUESTING THAT MTC
EXTEND FUNDING FOR THIS PURPOSE.
REPORT FROM BICENTENNIAL COM~.
Don Bradley, interim chairman for the Bicentennial Committee, stated
that he wanted to alert the Council that there is a possibility that
there will be a request for funds from this committee. There have '
been some ideas discussed but they are still in the organizational
CM-28-226
July 1, 1974
(Bicentennial Committee)
stage and they have yet to discuss the types of programs or projects
that might take place or over what period of time they might take place
Until some decisions are made there can be no specific amount set
at this time.
-
/
\
Cm Miller asked what the City's relationship to the Bicentennial
Committee was to be, and if it was a City sponsored committee because
if so, whoever is in charge should be appointed by the City Council.
Mr. Bradley stated that the Council had asked the Community Affairs
Committee to review the possibility of a Bicentennial Committee,
which they reviewed with the Cultural Arts Council and Heritage Guild,
and the Council then asked them to convene the first meeting to get
something started which has been done, and the organization is open
to anyone who cares to participate - any organization or individual.
They are now going through the process of electing officers and
organizing themselves into work committees.
Cm Miller remarked that it is his feeling the City should not auto-
matically be viewed as a source of money by the Bicentennial Committee.
He felt there should be fund raising associated with it.
Cm Tirsell stated that on the other hand if you are looking for the
most representative thing that our City can do, other than some things
they have supported in the past, this might be the place they would
want to place an amount. Some cities have allocated as much as
$50,000. for this celebration in their budget.
Mr. Bradley explained that the reason for such a large allocation is
the fact that these cities are also celebrating their own centennial
as well as the bicentennial.
REPORT re 1973-74 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE II
This item had been removed from the Consent Calendar for further
discussion at this time, regarding the island proposed at East Avenue
and Maple Street, and the Public Works Director displayed a map of
the vicinity of the intersection and another showing the specific
detailed layout of the triangle. Mr. Lee explained the reason for the
proposed construction of the island indicating that the main purpose
would be for channelization to channel the traffic to specific loca-
tions so there would be good visibility of traffic coming from both
directions and also a good view of pedestrians coming from both direc-
tions and the pedestrians can anticipate the direction from which the
cars will be coming.
Cm Miller commented that he saw no need for this triangle as he didn't
recall there had been any accidents at that corner and the channeliza-
tion as proposed would make it very awkward for the people wishing to
continue on into Seventh Street.
Mr. Lee stated that the same traffic has a much more difficult time
and creates greater hazard problems by crossing at the angle it does
now, however Cm Miller stated he is one who uses that intersection a
lot and felt that the channelization as proposed would be more painful.
~.
(
Cm Turner asked what the cost would be for the proposed island and
was informed that it would be about $3,500. Cm Turner stated that he
too used that intersection a great deal and agreed that it was a diffi-
cult intersection, but was not sure whether the proposed island would
help to resolve anything, but it would at least channel the traffic
into designated places on the street which it doesn't do now.
~
CM-28-227
July 1, 1974
(Island at Maple & East Ave.)
Mayor pro tem Futch asked if it might be feasible to install barricades
to tryout the particular traffic pattern prior to the time the is-
land is permanently installed.
Mr. Lee explained there are some examples already in operation such
as the one by the library which would be similar which he felt has
been very successful. As far as a temporary barricadehe did not feel
that would be necessary.
Cm Turner questioned the purpose of a temporary barricade, and Mayor
pro tempore Futch stated that once it is set in concrete you have spent
the $3,500; if temporary barricades are set up, if they don't like it, it
can be changed.
Cm Tirse1l asked what would happen if the traffic was not allowed to
turn onto Seventh Street, and Mr. Lee stated that since it is the
first access from East Avenue to the south it probably would not be
desirable to close that access.
Cm Turner reiterated that it was a bad intersection and he felt that
something should be done and thought the design presented by Mr. Lee
was acceptable and would recommend that the Council follow his sug-
gestion, and would make that as a motion and authorize the expenditure
of the funds to improve the intersection; however the motion died for
lack of a second.
Cm Miller again stated he did not feel it was necessary and felt this
money could be better spent resurfacing some of the streets that are
in bad shape.
Mayor pro tem Futch felt there does need to be a change at that inter-
section and wondered if they might try something on a temporary basis
until school starts and then they would have the flexibility of ad-
justing it and perhaps get comments from the crossing guards, and it
was suggested that perhaps sandbags could be used.
Mr. Lee stated that perhaps they could use jiggle bars to form an
island rather than the sandbags because you could sweep inside them
and the cost for these would be $700 or $800, however the Council
concurred that this would be too expensive and would prefer the
sandbags on a temporary basis.
Cm Turner moved that the Council direct the City Engineer on a temporary
basis to form an island out of sandbags at a cost not to exceed $150,
and direct the crossing guards to observe and report to the Chief of
Police, who in turn will convey that information to the City Engineer,
and at the end of October a report would be brought back to the Council.
The motion was seconded by Cm Tirse11
Paul Tu11 remarked that the island at the library had been mentioned
which he felt was truly a fiasco, and he also recommended that they
do not repeat the same thing as at the end of Enos Street because it
is even worse.
Don Brown, 813 Mayview Way, asked if a report had been made concern-
ing bad accidents at that intersection, and Mr. Lee stated there had
been a report made, and although it is not an extreme hazard situation
it has a high potential as there is considerable exposure to many
pedestrians crossing there.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time and it passed unanimously.
Mr. Parness asked ~ this action meant that the balance of the projects
were authorized fo~Jbidding, and Mayor pro tempore Futch, asked that
the motion include the fact that the other three items are authorized
for bidding, and the Council concurred.
CM-28-228
July 1, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Letter from D.A. re Rocco)
The City Attorney advised the Council that he had a letter from the
District Attorney relative to Donald Rocco, and Mayor pro tern Futch
stated he would like to discuss this matter in an executive session.
(Re Dance Ordinance)
The City Attorney stated that he had a copy of a complete revision
of an old dance ordinance which the Police Chief felt should be
updated and it incorporates his ideas in it, and at the time it is
formally introduced, he would like to appear before the Council to
give his reasons for the ordinance being cast in this particular form.
RECESS
AFTER A BRIEF RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT
AS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.
(Letter re Removal of
Dirt - Tract 3321))
~
(
The City Attorney stated that with regard to the removal of some
2,000 cubic yards of dirt, more or less, from the park site in Tract
3321, he had set forth the facts as ascertained by him after discussion
with the representative of the developer, the City Manager and Direc-
tor of Public Works. He had also set forth the present situation
whereby the developer, through his representative, stated if his
actions were in violation of the City's rights, they were due to the
misunderstanding of city processes, in that it has been the practice
in the past to make use of city property and stockpile dirt during
the course of the grading of a tract, and he further stated he was
aware of his obligation to obey the city ordinances and not to tres-
pass on city property. He proposes to show his good faith and recog-
nition of his obligations by making the following proposal to the City:
1) he would restore the property to its original grade, which Mr.
Engel suggested would not be beneficial to the City since the property
is now at a grade acceptable to the Park District and to the City;
2) would regrade the site to any contour the Park District might re-
quest (it is now graded to the Park District's request); or 3) he
would pay for the estimated 2,000 cu. yds. of dirt which he has re-
moved. Mr. Engel further stated he did not view the matter as one
amenable to the criminal process, and suggested that the City accept
one of the three proposals which has been made - the one that would be
most beneficial to the City. Mr. Engel again pointed out that the
practice of using park sites that have been dedicated for purposes of
storage of dirt as a practical necessity and convenience and has not
been detrimental to the City, further permission has been given to do
so at the level of the inspectors in the field. In interviewing Mr.
Stan Phillips, superintendent in the Mehran organization of this par-
ticular tract, he was aware of this practice in the past and felt that
he was only following this practice. Two of the City's inspectors and
four representatives from the Park District went out to the site and
agreed on the grading, and it was graded according to their instructions.
With this background, Mr. Engel felt, in his view of the matter, he
this did not lend itself to a criminal prosecution.
Cm Miller stated there are two reasons here - one the stockpiling
of the dirt; the other taking of the dirt. As far as the stockpiling,
if that is the City's practice, that is okay providing permission
CM-28-229
July 1, 1974
(Removal of Dirt - Tr. 3321)
has been requested in advance, but we should probably charge for the
storage and this should be done in the future. The thing that bothers
him is the taking of our ground for private purposes with the excuse
that it will be a better contour, without asking permission, and he
felt this deserved something more than requesting paYment for the dirt
that was taken, and he would agree that we should ask for the $300
value of the dirt taken, but in fact that dirt was taken from the City
without our permission by trespassing on our property for the private
purposes of the developer and apparently this was done without Mr.
Mehran's knowledge, and Mr. Phillips is at fault and then we should
take Mr. Phillips to the District Attorney.
Cm Turner asked if the City was aware of the fact that the dirt had
been taken, and Mr. Engel stated that the City became aware of the
matter when it was in progress - not in advance, and onc~ they became
aware of it, a meeting was called to discuss the matter and they
arrived at the solution of the problem. Cm Turner stated he was not
convinced that it was not done on purpose as charged by Cm Miller.
Cm Miller offered his understanding of the story. Mr. Phillips and
his crew entered City property and began removing the dirt for his
purposes and someone from LARPD recognized the dirt was being taken
and called it to the attention of the City staff, whereupon the
meeting was held.
Cm Turner stated that in reading the memo from the City Attorney and
listening to Mr. Lee it seems that this has been a general practice
of storing and removing dirt from park sites in the past, during the
construction of tracts.
Cm Miller asked about the taking of dirt and if that was a common
practice, and Mr. Lee stated no, it was not, only in special situa-
tions, but in the case of storing dirt during the course of construc-
tion of the tract a lot of dirt is moved, and the top soil is stripped
and stockpiled and in this instance it was stockpiled on the park
site which was perfectly logical. In this instance Mr. Phillips felt
he could improve on the park site and when the City became aware of
it there was a meeting between them and the members of the park dis-
trict and the solution as presented was arrived at.
em Tirsell stated thi~~:~~i~~'h~~ happened in the
past and maybe this i aft 11'P111.11Jl1l1 r;Y~11M.'J7.PL-.J..~11+- .ft. ~-'t ~.'r"l~r~Y.
~~~~ hAd lAth~l fr~~ r~iqn e~~r eur IftftS, whiCh 8h~ had ~obj~c~io~
~ but what bothered her is that a deve1oper'would think he was
improving our land or would think he could take the dirt without
our knowing it. She felt that the City would want them to pay for
the dirt, but it does not clear up the problem that a developer
has the feeling that at their leisure they can go on the land.
Cm Tirsell asked if there were any restrictions regarding the grading
that were put on site plan approval as it seems we have not made
clear what is expected.
Mr. Lee explained that we do require a grading plan from the developer
as it is the end result the City is concerned with. In this parti-
cular case the park site was City property and there was no discussion
about how the park site was to be graded in the plan.
Cm Tirsell stated she did not think there should be either criminal
or civil processing of this case as the DA would probably not even
look at it since the City Attorney has explained that he reviewed the
case. Au.l ; I ~I; 11 be~h.~rf!d her ~ha~ r~8tit\:lidaB af $JQQ Eleee Bet,
cl~:lr l1p ~Rr. 'MA~+-:Pt'" ,,~ '''''y 1lIl"'- "'J'tl"" t^ ....._-.- -M ~; Y.J I:ynrA1 ty ""4
t..k. ~i4l Al tll..ix lei.'lxe, "{she did object that a developer would
~\come onto City property and remove dirt
CM-28-230
July 1, 1974
(Removal of Dirt -
Tr 3321)
<de saea a tRiR~ and felt there should be a more stringent form of
agreement.
Cm Miller agreed with Cm Tirsell that there is a basic problem here
that developers can take from our property as if it were theirs.
What bothers him about this and the consistent violation of our
ordinances by developers and other people in the community, is that
they can do it with impunity as the DA does not like to handle these
cases, so for all practical purposes our ordinances are as if they
were written on a piece of paper - they have no effect in law. He
felt that this was such a flagrant violation that if the DA does no~
choose to prosecute, he would be the one who looks bad. This matter
should have come to the attention of the Council as soon as it took
place, and he felt that we should take the $300 and also take the
case to the District Attorney. ~~ . . ~
Mayor pro tern Futch stated he ~hared t~~~lt t~at what
the Council should do is adopt a policy that would prevent this type
of thing from happening in the future. It is not clear, inasmuch as
the staff has allowed an undefined policy to continue because there
has been some benefit to the City in addition to some benefit to the
developer, where the boundarytis. Mayor pro tern Futch suggested
that the Public Works Director might formulate a policy and report
back to the Council. In this case because of the previously undecided
policy and because of the action taken by the staff and Park District,
it would be very unlikely the City could win this case, as there
is really a question as to whether this was done maliciously or not.
Statements were made to indicate that our ordinances were being cir-
cumvented and also that ordinances have been adopted after the fact,
however Mr. Engel stated he did not feel ordinances are being ignored
in that sense and there are several ways in which you can approach
an ordinance of a municipality: one is certainly by a straight crim-
inal prosecution and the second is by a citation hearing as has been
done, and that is not letting a person off scot-free but rather making
use of the process of law to teach the person a lesson. A citation
hearing itself is a vindication of the ordinance - someone has been
called to task and has been made to satisfy the demands of the law
in this particular manner. Another way to prosecute the ordinance
is in a civil action by imposing some dollar penalty for breach of
the ordinance. Then there is a certain dynamic that takes place out
in the field where the inspectors after awhile have a pattern of what
they feel is right and wrong and that requires the Council to make
known to the staff what the policy is and it should be told to the
person in the field so there will be fewer repetitions of this sort
of thing.
Cm Miller wanted it to be made clear that stockpiling is something
that the City practices and he felt it should be tightened up, but
the issue is the taking of the dirt. The fact that people were not
prosecuted for violation of certain other ordinances does not mean
that they shouldn't have been, or that there wasn't an attempt to do
so. He felt what was being proposed is a different situation as,
hopefully, by having a criminal prosecution, it would serve as a
warning to those so they would not continue to violate in the hope
of getting away with it.
Mayor pro tern Futch remarked that not all people in the examples given
got off without compensation as significant compensation was required
in most instances. Mayor pro tern Futch called for a motion at this
time.
CM-28-231
July 1, 1974
(Removal of Dirt - Tr. 3321)
Cm Turner moved that the Council assess the developer the cost of the
2,000 cu. yds. of dirt originally removed in the amount of $300; motion
was seconded by Mayor pro tern Futch, and passed unanimously.
Paul Tu11 remarked that mention had been made of other instances in
which ordinances had been violated, but one was not mentioned and
that was the 15 additional feet of City property on porto1a Avenue
in excess of what should have been used and was done by the same
developer. He would ask to have the City Attorney prosecute.
em Miller moved to direct the staff to bring all cases of taking of
City property of any kind to the Council for any meetings or arrange-
ments to be made: motion was seconded by Cm Turner, and with the
clarification that this meant any property of significant value,
the motion passed unanimously.
Cm Miller stated he realized what the City Attorney had suggested,
but felt that morally he had to make the motion that Mr. Phillips
be taken to the District Attorney for prosecution of taking of City
property; motion was seconded by Cm Tirse11 who asked the City
Attorney to explain the process for such an action, which he did.
em Turner stated that Cm Miller is suggesting that Mr. Phillips is
responsible for any criminal action that may have taken place by
Sunset employees, and Mr. Phillips is only taking responsibility be-
cause he is the supervisor, and he could not vote for such a motion.
Mayor pro tern Futch commented he could not vote for the motion be-
cause of the previously unclear and undefined policy that the City
had of allowing storage and shifting of dirt from one site to another;
also because of the fact that the staff and members of the Park Dis-
trict met with the superintendent of the developer and reached an
agreement and he felt this would undercut any position the City might
have with the court, and he called for the question.
A roll called vote was taken on the motion and failed 3-1 with Cm
Futch, Tirsel1 and Turner dissenting.
Cm Tirsell moved that the Council direct a letter to be sent to Mr.
Mehran telling him the Council had considered very seriously refer-
ring this matter to the courts but did not because the staff had met
and an agreement was worked out. Also the City Attorney has made
an assessment and the majority vote has supported that assessment.
In the past similar incidents have come before the Council and while
they may be oversights on the part of his crew, nevertheless he is
the president of his company and responsible for them. In the future
the Council will review any removal of earth and similar circumstances,
and the City Attorney will assess each one, and the Council would
hope that such an attitude will not prevail and such an action would
not happen again. Motion was seconded by Cm Miller.
Cm Turner commented that Cm Tirsell's motion was very well worded,
however he would not vote for it inasmuch as he felt the point had
been well made with theA~and that shoulq be sufficient notice.
'1 f*-~r~cI.id:~kIf-'
Mayor pro tern Futch called for the question and the motion passed
3-1 with Cm Turner dissenting.
em Miller suggested that in view of the problems the City has had
with the District Attorney about prosecution of zoning cases, that
the City Attorney be directed to report to the Council the mechanism
of the City handling its own prosecution on zoning cases so we would
not be dependent on the District Attorney. Cm Turner seconded this
motion which passed unanimously.
/~
( :
CM-28-232
July 1, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Garbage Receptacles and
Benches - springtown Area)
Cm Turner stated it had come to his attention that one of the residents
of the springtown area gathers up bags and cleans up and thought it
might be a nice place to have some benches, and he promised to bring
this to the City Engineer's attention.
(Bicycle Rack-City Hall)
Cm Turner asked if it would be possible to have a bicycle rack around
the City Hall as he has ridden his bicycle down and there is no place
to put it.
Mr. Lee stated there are plans for installation of bicycles at the
southeast corner of First Street and Livermore Avenue, and also some
bike racks (a hitching post affair) in various locations around the
downtown area.
(Lowering of Speed Limit
on East Avenue)
Cm Turner again brought up the excessive speed limit on East Avenue and
recalled an accident where a motorist jumped the berm and hit the
telephone pole, and pointed out that if children were going to school
it could have been disasterous, and again asked that the speed limit
be lowered to 25 mph.
The staff was instructed to direct a letter to the County once again
asking that the speed limit be lowered.
(Loud Mufflers)
Cm Miller stated that people have mentioned that loud mufflers were
much more of a nuisance than the ice cream trucks and felt that the
Police Department should be more aggressive concerning these.
(Illegal Sign)
em Miller stated that Mr. Gillice has a sign that appears to be in
the public right-of-way at 4th and Murrieta Blvd. There is also a
sign further down on Holmes Street advertising liThe Towers", and this
sign is not permitted because he does not have a subdivision map.
He felt that this should be brought to the attention of the DA.
The Council concurred that the sign advertising the Towers should be
investigated by the Planning Department and City Attorney.
(4th of July Parade)
Cm. Tirsell suggested that the Council be represented at the 4th of
July Parade, however she would be out of town.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
10:15 p.m. to~.. ecutive S~SSi to discuss pending legal matters.
APPROVE ~ _~
;!~1 ~. .ayor
ATTEST ~~ ~
~ er
ivermore, California
CM-28-233
Regular Meeting of July 15, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on July 15, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: em 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.
DONATION
Mayor Pritchard commented that the check which was just presented
to him was in the amount of $373.88 from the members of the Chamber
of Commerce to help defray part of the cost of the fireworks display
this year which is hoped to be an annual event in Livermore. He
then presented the check to the City Director of Finance.
The Counci1members thanked the Chamber of Commerce and the Community
Affairs Committee for their efforts.
MINUTES
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller and by 4-1 vote (Mayor
Pritchard abstaining) the minutes for the meeting of July 1, 1974,
were approved as corrected.
OPEN FORUM
(re EIR Reports)
Paul Tu11, 2243 Linden Street, stated that a copy of the Gelderville
EIR Report from the County Planning Department is available in the
City Library but a copy of the EIR for the railroad track relocation
project for Livermore is not available to the public at the library
and wondered why there is not a copy available.
Mayor Pritchard replied that there are three copies of the EIR located
in City Hall and that anyone of them is available for review by the
public.
Mr. Tull then stated that he feels the closure of "P" Street and "L"
Street prior to the time of construction work is unnecessary and
that Hensel-Phelps has indicated they will not start work until all
the land has been obtained which Mr. Tu1l stated will be a long time.
Mr. Tu11 suggested that if shallow cuts were made for passage of trains,
the citizens would not be bothered by the noise they make as they pass
through Livermore.
Cm Turner asked Mr. Lee if it would be possible to move the barricades ~
at "P" Street closer to the railroad tracks to allow access to McDonalds( I
as well as ingress and egress from the shopping center, and Mr. Lee
replied that it would be physial1y possible but probably not advisable
from a traffic standpoint which he explained.
CM-28-234
July 15, 1974
(Track Relocation)
~~
Mr. Lee then responded to Mr. Tu11's question regarding opening up
the streets until there is construction and Mr. Lee stated that
the crossing would not be acceptable and would involve a lot of work
for a short period of time adding that he feels the reason the work
has stopped is due to strikes which may be affecting construction.
Western Pacific Railroad Company has required the City to close down
the crossings and place barricades at the crossings because drilling
which has been done in the area of the control wires for the gates
may have damaged the control wires which are not anticipated to ever
be used again. In general, it would be unwise to open the streets
again.
(Invitation from
American Taxpayers Union)
Mr. Tull presented the Council with invitations from the American
Taxpayers Union and Mayor Pritchard stated that the Council will
read the invitations and did not wish to take Council meeting time
to read the invitations to the public noting that the newspapers have
the option to print the wording of the invitations.
(Traffic Accidents on
East Avenue)
Pat O'Keefe, 1013 Florence Road, stated that he has seen several
accidents in the area of East Avenue at Charlotte Way and it is
really a hazard to try to turn left onto Charlotte Way or onto a
street in the Valley East tract and wondered what the plans might
be for future action concerning the area.
Mr. Lee explained that the streets in this area are in the County
and that the City has a cooperative agreement with the Alameda
County people to design a roadway on East Avenue to extend from the
City limits all the way to Greenvil1e Road. It is scheduled to be
completed by December and along with the road widening the traffic
signals will be designed for Vasco Road and there should be room for
provision of a median for turning at Charlotte Way.
P. H. RE 1974-75 BUDGET
The City Manager gave an oral report regarding the analysis of the
1974-75 fiscal year budget. The total budget inclusive of the City
Council changes, stands at $12,751,645 and the operating budget at
$5,861,293. He explained that the City is severely limited, by
virtue of state statutes, on the amount of money that can be raised
by a tax increase but it might suffice to say that the City government
is entitled to raise taxes by the equivalent percentage of the differ-
ence between an increase (percentage wise) of the consumers price index
and population, over what the percentage increase and assessed valua-
tion was for the preceding year. A 7.5 increase was anticipated for
next year in assessed value whereas the aggregate percentage of popula-
tion and consumers price index was about 11.5; however, the assessed
valuation increases for the City as announced by the County Assessor
may be higher than anticipated and will effect a City tax rate change.
~,
~--_..-'/
Mayor Pritchard commented that it appears that the City is always
putting the cart before the horse and wondered if there could be
an explanation of why the budget must be adopted and then wait for
the tax rate to be set rather than coordinating the two.
Mr. Parness stated that, theoretically, the way the law anticipated
this was that the amount of mon4y necessary to be raised by taxation
should be set first and the tax rate was to be set later to accommodate
this need; however, this has not always been the case.
CM-28-235
July l5, 1974
(re 1974-75 Budget)
em Miller commented that he thought a law was passed to require the
assessor to give the City final results in May and Mr. Parness
explained that he is required only to give an estimate and the
estimate was used in the budget preparation.
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing.
Gerard DeBruin, Chairman of the Sister City Committee stated that
he has received a letter from Mr. Parness which indicates that
funds for the Sister City delegation will not be forthcoming.
He then explained the purpose of the Sister City Committee in addit-
ion to the services which it provides, including the Student Exchange
Program. He pointed out that 50 students have come to Livermore
through this program at a cost of $800-$1,000 per year per student,
and that the Committee collects approximately $300 a year which
is raised in dues and fund raising events. The City support has
been a blessing they could not have done without. The delegation
from Queza1tenango this year was an official City to City delegation
and the Sister City Committee accepted a major part of the expense
by providing homes, transportation and entertainment for the delegates.
He stated that he has pointed this out only to emphasize the important
role they play in officially representing the City in Livermore
and abroad.
em Futch responded by saying that during the past year the City has
been faced with increasing numbers of requests from organizations
for financial support. A large fraction of these organizations had
no connection at all with the City, such as the Soccer Team, Little
League, bands and choirs. It was felt necessary to draw ailine between
organizations which the City might be expected to fund and the other
organizations which have no official connection with the City. It
was tentatively agreed that the organizations with no official
relationship to the City would have to be eliminated. He stated
that, personally, he feels the Sister City should be recognized
as an official committee of the City of Livermore and that it should
continue with the modest funding allowed in the past, inasmuch
as it was initiated by the CitYJ the City still pays the dues and
in view of the relationship that exists between the City government
and the Sister City Committee, and so moved. The motion was seconded
by Cm Turner.
em Turner commented that it was his understanding this was one of the
organizations that were to continue receiving City support and does
not recall eliminating the Sister City.
em Miller stated that it was his understanding the dues would be paid
and the City would pay its share of costs involved when delegates come
here from Quezaltenango and that the only cost which will no longer be
paid by the City would be the cost of sending a delegate to Quezalte-
nango.
em Futch stated that this point was brought up during the budget session
and he failed to comment at that time; however, he was not aware of the
difficulty they have in raising funds for activities they sponsor. He
pointed out that the City pays for the Chairman of the Sister City Com-
mittee, as a delegate, and this is not exactly the same as sending a
private citizen to Quezaltenango.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to speak in favor of the
motion, as he was under the same impression at the budget session
during which he understood that since the Sister City Committee is ~
an official City committee the City would continue funding those
things felt to be official functions.
em Miller stated that the staff indicated the Sister City Committee
is not an official City Committee and if it is the appointments to the
committee should be made by the City Council and this is definate1y
not the case. He pointed out that the Sister City performs a very
useful service but he is very uneasy about using money collected by
taxation to provide a visit to Queza1tenango.
CM-28-236
July 15, 1974
(re 1974-75 Budget)
Cm Turner felt the Council should decide whether or not they want
to support the Sister City Committee and all its functions, including
the trip,or not, adding that this is a part of its functions.
em Tirsell commented that in the case of people who do volunteer
work, there are a lot of "out of pocket" expenses and would estimate
that these expenses far exceed the cost of an air fare to Quezaltenan-
go. She added that she can understand the concern of em Miller and
has a few mixed emotions concerning this item; however, having been
in a volunteer position for the City, she can appreciate the expense
for people who serve on a committee and who house foreign students and
entertain delegates and that this is a significant difference with
this committee compared to other committees. Other committees are
not required to entertain, host families and provide a lot of trans-
portation. To honor their chairman is one way of showing support of
the City and recognition of their time and efforts.
The motion passed 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting).
Mr. Tu11 commented that the Alameda County Code stipulates that
not more than $5,000 can be spent on a project without the consent
of the public and that much more than this is being spent for the
railroad project.
Mr. Tull stated it is his understanding the County is giving $1,000
to the Livermore Cultural Arts Council and wondered what the County
has to do with our local arts committee and Cm Miller explained that
the Cultural Arts Council made a request to the County which has
nothing to do with the City budget. The City budget allows for $300
to go towards two purchase awards of $150 apiece ~~e pro-
perty of the City. . , .iQ"v~
It was suggested that Mr. Tull contact the County Board of Supervisors
regarding the expenditure of $1,000 from County money.
Milo Nordyke, 2143 Chateau Place, spoke to the Councilmembers regard-
ing the suggestion by the Industrial Advisory Committee for the City
to hire an Assistant to the City Manager for Community Development for
the purpose of undertaking and being responsible for industrial develop-
ment, with the understanding that it would not really be a full-time
position. Their concern is trying to develop a positive approach to
getting development within the City in the direction the City wants
to move, not only in industrial areas, but commercial, housing and
public enterprises. They feel that this position would overlap some
of the positions which exist and perhaps a reorganization, as sug-
gested by the City Manager, might have some merit, and urged that
this item seriously be considered.
Mayor Pritchard commented that there are so many unknowns related
to the budget that the Council is not prepared at this time to add
this item to it: however, if he reads the Council correctly this
is an item em Tirsel1 brought up and which the Council will actively
pursue.
('
"
em Futch stated that he would like to publicly state something pre-
viously said in a telephone conversation which is that he feels it
is not appropriate for Mr. Nordyke to write a guest editorial or a
guest opinion, as the Chairman of a City committee. If he wishes
to address the Council on any matter this is perfectly alright as
the Council has the opportunity at that time to respond. Cm Futch
continued to say that in his opinion the comments made in the article
did not recognize the efforts made by the Council in trying to solve
some of the problems related to industrial growth, particularly the
undergrounding of utilities and noted various meetings that have
taken place in an attempt to solve various problems.
CM-28-237
July 15, 1974
(P.H. re Budget)
Mr. Nordyke responded by saying that in writing the article he
tried to be as objective as possible in trying to inform people
of the issues and the recommendation of the Industrial Advisory
Committee. He stated that it was not his intention to render any
judgment as to what the City had or had not done and with respect
to the interpretation of the statement related to new development,
unfortunately, most of the City Council actions are limited to say-
ing yes or no which is a true statement.
em Miller felt the point which is being overlooked is that a repre-
sentative of a City committee is writing guest editorials for one
of the local newspapers.
Mr. Nordyke replied that he did not write an editorial - it was a
guest opinion which adhered to the facts and expressed no opinion
about the action of the City and was a statement of the issues in-
volved.
Mayor Pritchard commented that the remarks are getting away from the
agenda item which is related to the budget and asked that further
discussion on this matter be postponed and that the discussion re-
turn to the matter of the budget.
em Tirsel1 stated that the City is already nearing a 50% commuter
population and if industrial development is not brought to Liver-
more it will mean that there will be more commuting in the future.
The children of Livermore cannot work here if we have a commuter
town and we also do not want the problems that come with living
in a commuter town. While there is no guarantee that the position
suggested will bring a great deal of industry to Livermore, we
have a very unbalanced community and we must do something. She
added that she feels the argument that industry will make taxes
lower should not be used because it would take a vast amount of
industry to make a difference on our taxes. She urged that some-
thing be done before Livermore consists of a group of disinterested
citizens and that even though the recommendation means a large
expense she would urge that the Council seriously consider it.
em Miller stated that he would agree with some of the comments
made by em Tirse11 in that he feels all of the Council feels some-
thing must be done and are willing to try something. It is obvi-
ous that the money will have to come from the surplus but he feels
everyone is willing to consider the proposal. He would declare
his intent to seriously consider the proposal and would suggest
that it be set for discussion on a specific date. He added that
he, for one, appreciates em Tirsell's efforts in keeping this alive
contrary to a somewhat unfounded editorial in one of our local
newspapers.
Gene Morgan, 4276 Emory Way, President of the Livermore Chamber
of Commerce, stated that they choose to support em Tirse11's position
and would urge that the matter be pursued and would hope that it
is successful, and noted that they have presented their position
to the Council and would be happy to answer questions about it.
em Tirse11 stated that she would like to have other positions
to look at or information such as the position of San Leandro
aad how these things work for informational purposes. She then
moved to place the matter of the staff input and information
from other cities regarding this position, on the July 29th
agenda, seconded by Cm Turner.
em Turner stated that he agrees with the comments made by em Tir-
sell and would like to suggest consideration of the impact of
the Council hiring the industrial position vs the staff member
position within the City.
CM-28-238
July 15, 1974
(P.H. re Budget)
em Miller stated that he would like to commend Cm Tirsel1 for
her persevering interest in industrial development as well as
the Chamber of Commerce and Industrial Advisory Committee who have
all been active in different ways in trying to smooth the path for
industrial and commercial development within the City of Livermore.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
Pat O'Keefe, l013 Florence Road, State Director of the Livermore
Jaycees stated that they also received a letter from the City indi-
cating that funds would be reduced and he has been asked to approach
the Council to ask their intentions might be concerning the rodeo
parade.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to respond to this inquiry as
he was the one who brought up the suggestion to cut funds in this
area and explained that he has had reservations about the use of
taxpayer money for the purpose of a parade and has always felt these
funds should be raised by the Rodeo Association as they make a sub-
stantial return from the rodeo. He stated that he feels the type
of parade the City should support would be the parade held on the
4th of July which was done by the citizens of Livermore for themselves.
The rodeo, on the other hand, has outside entries and very commercial-
ized and professionalized and for this reason felt it should not be
supported by the City. Since the Rodeo Association makes a profit on
the rodeo, they should be willing to support the parade associated with
it.
Mr. O'Keefe stated that he feels the rodeo parade is one of the few
events held in Livermore that bring people into the downtown area
and reaquaint them with downtown Livermore and that the City Council
should be willing to support the event, to some extent.
em Miller stated that he wholeheartedly agrees that the rodeo parade
is a very worthwhile event but is concerned about the City spending
money, when there is a source of money, on an event which makes a profit
for an organization, in this case it is the Rodeo Association, and the
parade is an advertisement synonymous with the rodeo which brings the
profit.
Mr. O'Keefe replied that this is true but the rodeo would be successful
and make a profit with or without the parade and if the parade is dis-
continued it will mean that people will go straight through town to
the rodeo and straight out again. The parade gives people the oppor-
tunity to stop in the town and look at it which he feels is of value.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to explain that the opinion ex-
pressed by him is his own opinion and not that of his colleagues,
necessarily.
Cm Tirse11 stated that while she is a fan of the rodeo parade we now
have a fledgling parade - the 4th of July parade, which will be grow-
ing each year up until the Bicentennial and feels that this parade
would be a good parade to foster over a long term period because it
is a Livermore parade. If it is a choice between the two parades she
would have to choose the 4th of July parade and ask the Rodeo Associa-
tion to sponsor the rodeo parade.
c
em Futch stated that he would agree with the comments made by Cm
Tirsell and inasmuch as the line must be drawn somewhere feels that
the organizations the City is not associated with should not receive
funds from the City.
Mayor Pritchard stated that it appears the decision is whether or
not the rodeo parade is worthy of the official sanction of the City.
CM-28-239
July l5, 1974
(P.H. re Budget)
em Turner stated that he really does not remember agreeing that
the Jaycees would not receive funds to support the rodeo parade
and would suggest that they be given the funds for one more year.
Mr. O'Keefe stated that it has been his understanding that the Rodeo
Association put on the rodeo but that the parade was a Livermore rodeo
parade held in conjunction with the rodeo - not a part of the rodeo,
and used the opportunity to have a good parade.
Mayor Pritchard stated that in his opinion there is nothing wrong
with two parades, but of all the things the City of Livermore is
known for, the annual rodeo and the parade are the most famous,
along with LLL and the wineries. He feels this is part of the culture
of Livermore and if this item were to be put on the ballot for a vote
by the people he feels they would vote overwhelmingly in favor of the
City's continued financial support. Nearly everyone enjoys the parade
and it is not supported solely by the City of Livermore - we match the
funds provided by the Rodeo Association. This is a worthy and nominal
cost for the City to provide for something that is enjoyed by the greatest
number of people in Livermore. He would urge that the City continue to
match the funds as has been the practice in the past, and so moved,
seconded by Cm Turner.
em Futch stated that he would prefer to have the opportunity to
think about this item and not vote on it tonight.
em Tirsell stated that the Council has been working on a clear cut
policy of supporting only those organizations associated with the
City and if the Council wishes to support the parade there had better
be a revision of the policy or adopt it as an official City function.
Cm Miller stated that the rodeo brings a profit to the Rodeo Associa-
tion and there is no reason the rodeo must come to a halt if the City
does not participate, financially.
Cm Turner withdrew the second to the motion which then failed for lack
of a second.
em Futch moved to continue this item for consideration until July 29th,
seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Tirse11 moved to amend the motion to contact the Rodeo Association
to inform them of the discussion to take place on the 29th and that
the Council would appreciate their sending a representative to the
meeting, if possible, seconded by Mayor Pritchard.
Cm Futch agreed to include the amendment in the motion, also agreed
to by the second which then passed unanimously.
Paul Tul1 asked why the merchants who benefit from people coming to
see the parade can't take care of the cost of the parade and Mayor
Pritchard stated that in his opinion the entire City of Livermore
benefits from the parade.
Discussion followed regarding funds to the Chamber of Commerce for
holiday decorations and Cm Tirsell stated that as she recalls the
Council agreed to continue support this year and to cut this ex-
pense in subsequent years which em Miller ~greed was the decision
and em Turner stated that this was not the decision but rather funds
would be continued for this purpose this year and a discussion
held over whether or not there would be continuation.
em Miller moved that the Christmas decorations be funded this
year but that the Chamber of Commerce be notified that in sub-
sequent years the allocation will not be forthcoming and the
money from the business license fee will be refunded at the end
of the fiscal year on a prorated basis to all the business license
payees, seconded by Cm Tirse1l.
CM-28-240
July 15, 1974
(P.H. re Budget)
Cm Tirsel1 stated that when she made the motion at the budget session
she was assuming that the City would no longer give funds to any
organization not officially sanctioned by the City and the basis of
her motion as well as the reason for her vote on all these items. If
the Council intends to change this policy she will vote against the
motion since she has no objection to holiday decorations. She is vot-
ing in support of a philosophy and policy she understood was estab-
lished. She stated that while on the subject of holiday decorations
she would like to point out that very soon the City will not be able
to afford the energy costs of decorations. Last year there were
no lights on the decorations and while people felt it was less festive
there should be some realization that this will probably be the future
trend - we will not be able to afford the energy costs for lighting
our homes outside and downtown during the holidays and she would
suggest that there be unlighted decorations or individually sponsored
decorations in front of each store.
em Turner stated that he understands the decorations are provided by
a tax override and not really supported by the City of Livermore but
really paid for by the merchants through the business license tax and
perhaps the p~i10sc;>ph~ ~ 1. It.itfh. ~~g-l;'r,c --Dcln~. ~aac wou~d not
really apply 1n th1s 1nstance. 1- / ./ ~.a..-ta./~ _ ..:!~ Mr:
. L.'- (/ .
. ..
.
em Miller explained that the business license tax is merely a method
by which taxes are derived and once they have been collected this
revenue goes into the general fund and is among all the other sources
of taxes and is still taxpayer money. He raised the point that in
addition to the things mentioned by Cm Tirsell, tax money is being
used for religious celebration which is contrary both to the State
Constitution and Federal Constitution and feels the suggestion that
each store provide decorations, at their option and discretion, is
perfectly reasonable.
Mayor Pritchard stated that there have been times when the City has
entered into a contractura1 relationship with private organizations
and private individuals and would like the City Attorney to render
an opinion as to the legality of doing this and if there is some
process other than the tax gathering process that could be institu-
ted. If this is tax money that we are gathering and it is illegal
to use for religious celebration purposes, is there another method
by which such arrangements can be made legally?
em Futch stated that he has always wanted the holiday decorations
and something the majority of citizens enjoy and appreciate and
are part of childhood memories and that he would like to support
continuation.
Gene Morgan explained that when the business license was increased
10% it was with the understanding that this was for the provision
of holiday decorations and if they are to be eliminated it would
seem reasonable that the business license tax should be 10% less
in succeeding years and wondered if this is what the motion said.
em Miller explained that the motion did not say 10% because this
amount would be more than what the decorations cost but rather
the merchants would receive money back for the cost of the decora-
tions.
('
,~-
Mr. Morgan then commented that the design of the decorations for
this next year are such that lights will not be used and appreciates
the fact the Council is willing to support the decorations for one
more year as well as returning this cost to the merchants in subse-
quent years.
CM-28-241
July 15, 1974
(P.H. re Budget)
em Futch stated that he would like to amend the motion to say that
the Council will consider decorations in future years rather than
to cut off any further consideration.
Mayor Pritchard explained that the suggested amendment would reverse
the intent of the motion and could not be allowed as an amendment.
Mr. Morgan asked that the Council take into consideration the fact
urged that arbitration be left for future consideration.
em Miller at this time restated his motion that holiday decoration
expenditure be retained this year, but it is Council policy that it
will not be given in future years and that $7,750, which is the
approximate cost of the Christmas decorations, be rebated pro rata
to each business licensee beginning June 30, 1976. He explained that
in 1975 it will be used, but in 1976 it will not, so that the rebate
comes at the end of the fiscal year 1976.
Cm Futch asked if this could be broken up into two motions as he would
want to vote for the Christmas decorations this year. and Mayor
Pritchard stated this might be best as he intended to vote against
the Christmas decorations this year. However, Cm Miller stated his
reason for making the motion in this form is that it is a compromise
motion, and em Tirsell would recognize this. Cm Miller agreed to
split the motion if the second would agree, then decided to have the
second make the motion for the Christmas decorations.
Cm Tirse11 moved to continue funding for the Christmas decorations
this year, seconded by em Futch. Motion passed 3-2 with em Miller
and Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
Cm Miller moved that funding for Christmas decorations not be allowed in
future years and that $7750 be rebated pro rata to each business
licensee at the end of the fiscal year beginning in 1976. Seconded
by em Tirse11.
Mr. Engel advised the Council that regardless of the ultimate legality
of what is intended by the motion, he suggested that they can not pro-
rate a rebate on a proration basis and that the motion should be
amended.
Cm Miller asked if it would be proper to give each licensee a
credit toward next years license fee, and Mr. Engel stated this
could not be done either, and the only thing that could be done is
to make a contribution to the organization that funded the project.
Cm. Miller reworded his motion that the amount of $7750 be returned
to the licensee in pro rata share in whatever appropriate legal matter
is possible, indicating that an appropriate manner could be to revise
the business license fee to lower the rate to make this possible.
The second agreed to the motion, which passed 3-2 with em Turner and
Futch dissenting.
Mr. Tull remarked that the Council was still considering paying for
decorations for a religious holiday out of the City budget, and
brought up the fact that the City also paid for the Easter holiday
out of the City budget, and Mayor Pritchard stated that the the
Good Friday holiday is under consideration by the courts and Mr.
Engel added that we are still awaiting a court decision. In any
case, our City does not close its offices for services on this day.
RECESS
AFTER A BRIEF RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE
COUNCIL PRESENT.
CM-28-242
July 15, 1974
(P.H. re Budget)
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller, and by unanimous
approval, the public hearing was closed.
em Miller moved to approve the budget as amended and as shown on the
amendments presented to the Council by the City Manager, which reflects
the Council's decisions and any additions made at this meeting; motion
was seconded by em Futch, and passed unanimously, and the fOllowing
resolution was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 111-74
RESOLUTION APPROVING 1974-75 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET
CONSENT CALENDAR
Communications
(Regional Water Quality
Control Board re LAVWMA)
A summary report and resolution concerning LAVWMA was received from
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
eRe Support of Transbay
Bus Service - Hayward)
A resolution was received from Hayward which supports the proposed
transbay bus service between Hayward and West Bay, being a part of
an application by ServiCar of Northern California to the PUC.
(Dept of Transportation re
City's Position on I-580)
A communication was received from the Department of Transportation
regarding the City's position on Interstate Rte 580.
em Miller asked that this be removed from the Consent Calendar for
later discussion if there is time.
(Richard Irby, Jr. re
Beautification Comm.)
A letter was received from Richard Irby, Jr. requesting that he not
be considered for reappointment to the Beautification Committee.
em Miller suggested that Mr. Irby be sent a letter of commendation
for his services on this committee.
(Re Industrial Lands to be
Rezoned -Chamber of Commerc
c
A communication was received from the Chamber of Commerce requesting
that they be given the opportunity to review each industrial parcel
that is to be studied or rezoned to meet the new industrial ordinance
in order that they may make a recommendation.
CM-28-243
------~ -.------~- I
July 15, 1974
(Payroll and Claims)
There were fifty-six claims in the amount of $113,105.42, dated
July 12, 1974 ordered paid as approved by the City Manager.
(Progress Report - PARC)
A progress report for the month of July was received from the
Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Cm Miller moved that the Consent Calendar be approved, seconded by
em Tirsel1, who added that a letter be sent supporting the transbay
bus service, as outlined in the resolution from Hayward, and the
motion passed unanimously.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE
FOOD VENDING VEHICLES-
An ordinance has been drafted which would regulate food vending
vehicles in the City.
Mayor Pritchard indicated a request had been received from an
attorney representing one of the vendors that the item be continued~
however since there were a number of people in the audience, he
asked what the Council would like to do.
em Miller felt that the item should not be continued wi~hout a
discussion and perhaps not continued at all. em Miller stated that
the ordinance had been introduced at his request as he had received
numerous complaints from the mothers of young children who felt
there was excessive noise and a lot of economic pressure. In addi-
tion, he has learned that the police department is also interested in
this ordinance, which has not been published in the newspapers, be-
cause there have been problems of drug peddling from ice cream trucks.
He pointed out that the ordinance does not prohibit ice cream trucks,
but does prohibit them from having amplified sound.
em Tirse11 stated that in paragraph 9A.4l mechanical should be changed,
and it was decided that the wording should be "mechanica1 or electron-
ic". em Tirse11 stated she had done some research and found that
certain areas in town suffered more than others regarding the ice
cream truck$ which seemed to have relationship to their proximity to
a shopping center. She did not realize that there was such a prob-
~em but found that in areas isolated from shopping centers, the
neighborhoods were deluged with these vendors, and she felt some
limitation was required as there was abuse of a privilege.
em Miller moved to introduce the ordinance regulating food vending
vehicles with the amended paragraph; motion was seconded by em Tirsel1.
Cm Tirse1l stated she had a question from the audience regarding the
regulation for cleanliness of the trucks and its contents and asked
the City Attorney if that was included elsewhere in the ordinance,
and was advised this would be a County Health Department matter and
any complaints in this regard should be referred to them under our
contract with them.
Joe Devane, attorney from Dublin, 7994 Amador Valley Blvd., represent-
ing Mrs. patricia Salisbury, the owner and operator of Lone Star
Ice Cream, stated he had originally asked for the continuance as he
had not had much of an opportunity to discuss the matter with his
CM-28-244
July 15, 1974
(re Noise Ordinance)
client and to do any research. Generally, his client goes along with
most of what is in the ordinance and has no objection to the ordinance,
but regarding the requirement for the trash container, the experience
has been that if they are hung on the truck, they are either stolen
or the children grab hold of them and want to ride on the truck.
The driver of her truck does not have to get out to service the custo-
mer and if he had to place a container on the side of his truck,
it would cut down on his time and lessen his income. Another require-
ment is the limitation on hours of solicitation to one hour before
sunset which he did not feel was reasonable as he felt sunset was
a very reasonable time.
Mr. Engel explained that the time was set on the basis of the Police
Department recommendation, but it could be a subject for discussion,
and Capt. Blalock added that dusk is a very dangerous time for chil-
dren to be out in the street.
Mr. Devane agreed that if this was a problem it should be a matter
of concern. With regard to the noise and regulating noise there is
no question, but there have been many sound studies made and the
sound can be regulated in such a decibel level to be in a residential
area; however the ordinance is saying no noise whatsoever.
em Miller remarked that the ordinance states you cannot amplify the
sound by mechanical or electronic means, but they could ring the
bell they use.
Mr. Devane stated whether it is amplified mechanically or electroni-
cally or done manually would not solve the problem as the problem is
the decibel value of what is eminating from the truck, and felt this
is where the ordinance should be directed, as a lot of the catering
trucks use a loud horn. Mr. Devane stated this is the reason he
was asking for a continuance for a couple of weeks to enable him to
discuss the matter with the City Attorney and the Police Department.
Mayor Pritchard reiterated what em Miller had said that the ordinance
did not prohibit sound, but rather the intensification of amplification
of the sound.
r
Sue Koopman, 5135 Kathy Way, stated she had written a letter to the
newspapers, a copy of which she passed to the Counci1members, and
read to the audience. The letter expressed her disapproval of the
noise eminating from the trucks eight times a day, and was looking
forward to more peace of mind by the passage of the ordinance.
Carol Gerich, 723 Hazel Street, stated she had started this whole
ordeal last summer and continued it this summe~as nothing had been
done. She added her support of the proposed ordinance especially
the section banning noise making as a means of advertising, which
was very annoying to her as a housewife, and urged the Council to
adopt the ordinance.
Lois Bourinskie, 5337 Charlotte Way, stated that she is in agreement
with the comments just made and the one comment she would like to
make is that it is very difficult to see children dashing across
the street to the truck during the time of day the sun is in a driver's
eyes and would suggest that the time of day the trucks are allowed
to make rounds should cease about an hour before sunset to make it
safer for the children and drivers.
\,,~
Joyce Brown, 731 Wimb1edon Lane, stated that she knows of many people
who are concerned with this matter and would really like to see the
ordinance instituted immediately.
CM-28-245
-''''-''''-_'__.~_._..._m__.____,_____~.,~____..,~._.._
July 15, 1974
(re Noise Ordinance)
Paul Tull commented that during the time he was a child the ice
was brought to the homes on a wagon which was pulled by a horse and
accompanied to some tune or a bell and this is a part of pleasant
childhood memories that he still recalls with joy.
em Tirse1l stated that if Mr. Tull had read the ordinance carefully
he would have noticed that the music is not being eliminated but
the amplification of it and is sure that the bell on the ice wagon
was not amplified.
Sarah Rupp, 708 Swallow Drive, stated that she lives in an area
which has a heavy traffic of ice cream trucks and greatly supports
the new ordinance.
J. D. Lee, 622 Bentley Place, stated that he is against the ice
cream trucks and can see no reason for commercializing the resi-
dential areas. There are numerous places in which people can buy
ice cream, etc., and if it is necessary that they are allowed to
continue he would suggest that they be subject to health inspections
as well as eliminating amplification of the music.
Mrs. Hagen, 4669 Almond Circle, stated that she too objects to the
nursery rhYme music and would rather have a bell on the trucks.
Mr. Devane stated that they are required to be inspected by the
police Department and they have no objection to being inspected
by the Health Department. Their concern is for the way the noise
is to be controlled and are willing to assist in this; however, it
is ecconomical1y unrealistic to be prohibited from making rounds
one hour before sunset and also they feel it would be difficult
to get out of the truck, place garbage cans where children can
throw the wrappers and try to see that wrappers are put in the cans.
He asked that he have a chance to speak with the staff over some of
their concerns prior to adoption of the ordinance.
em Turner stated that he agrees with the comments made by Mr. Lee
and that neighborhoods should not be commercialized by the ice
cream vendors and that the sound from the trucks is almost unbear-
able.
em Miller stated that he would like to try the suggested method
first and if it does not work we can try the decibel level method.
He felt that the safety problem at sunset time is very important
and perhaps an hour before sunset is too long and possibly un-
reasonable; however 20 minutes or 30 minutes before sunset would
not be unreasonable and would be willing to amend the motion to
read 30 minutes before sunset, agreed to by the second.
Mr. Tull remarked that cars are not required to have headlights
on until 30 minutes after sunset and in his opinion the ice cream
trucks should therefore be allowed to continue operation until sun-
set.
em Turner stated that he would like to amend the motion to state
that no sound be allowed on the ice cream trucks and that scheduled
routes be established, seconded by em Miller.
Mr. Engel asked for a reason as to why the amendment constitutes
a reasonable regulation related to the public health, welfare, and
safety, and em Turner felt it is a matter of safety hazards in that
when children hear the ice cream truck they automatically run to-
wards the street and has observed children darting into the street
between cars and have nearly been hit.
CM-28-246
July 15, 1974
(re Noise Ordinance)
Cm Futch stated that it is probably just as dangerous if a child
sees the ice cream truck and it is difficult to determine where to
draw the line.
At this time the Council voted on the amendment which failed 2-3 with
em Pritchard, Futch and Tirse11 dissenting.
Prior to the vote to the amendment Cm Tirsell explained that she is
willing to vote against the amendment at this time but if there is
continuation of problem with noise she would vote to eliminate the
noise entirely.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to introduce the ordi-
nance prohibiting operation of the ice cream trucks 30 minutes
before sunset and to prohibit mechanical or electronic instrument
or devices being amplified, and the title was read by Mr. Engel.
COMMUNICATION FROM
SCHOOL DIST. BOARD RE
COMPLIANCE WITH ORD.
The letter from the School District Board indicated that in accord-
ance with Section 5094 of the Education Code, they voted to make
Zoning Ordinance 442 inapplicable to school projects not under the
State Contracts Act from which the School District has officially
withdrawn and was noted for filing on motion of em Tirsell, seconded
by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote.
AGENDA SCHEDULE CHANGE
It should be noted that due to the late hour and the number of
important items that must be covered in addition to the request
for an executive session regarding personnel matters the Council
concluded that they would not follow the agenda schedule but would
take care of items first that would require the least amount of time.
COMMUNICATION RE FORMAL
ESTABLISHMENT OF GREENS
COMMITTEE
A letter was received from Robert E. Johnsen suggesting that the
Greens Committee be composed of five permanent members serving no
more than two consecutive terms of four years each and that the
committee meet at least every other month and preferably every month.
em Miller felt the proposal for formalizing the Greens Committee
and setting terms of office is a good idea which should be discussed
and suggested that it be scheduled as an agenda item at a later
date.
Mr. Parness noted that the staff is working on a full report on the
subject for scheduling on the agenda in the near future.
ADJOURNMENT TO SPECIAL
EXECUTIVE SESSION
On motion of em Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote
the Council adjourned to an executive session to discuss a personnel
matter, as requested by a City employee. After the executive session
the meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM-28-247
July 15, 1974
APPEAL RE VARIANCE APP.
DENIED BY P. C. (Mr.
Rasmussen re Parking)
Mr. Musso explained the reasons for the Planning Commission's hav-
ing denied the variance of Earl G. Rasmussen for reduction of off-
street parking at the northeast corner of North ilK" and Railroad
Avenue in conjunction with construction of a commercial building
for occupancy by a cocktail lounge, restaurant and other retail and
service uses.
n
" '
Discussion followed regarding the size of the building proposed
and uses proposed.
Earl Rasmussen, 19485 W. Grantline Road, Tracy, stated that he
owns property between North Livermore Avenue and "K" Street along
the railroads consisting of 15,000 sq. ft. of land which is being
taken by the City for the railroad project. He has purchased the
same number of sq. ft. at the corner of Railroad Avenue and ilK"
Street which is comparable to the property the City has taken and
on which he would like to build.
Further discussion followed which included discussion of parking
requirements and it was noted that the uses in the area are exist-
ing nonconforming uses as a result of the new ordinance.
Mr. Rasmussen stated that his concern is how many of his tenants
can be moved to the building he intends to build and that time
is of the essence. The City took the property and is forcing his
tenants to relocate and he felt the City should be willing to allow
the variance he requests, pointing out that other businesses in
the area do not have the parking he is required to provide and that
three of the stores in the area have provided no parking at all and
the people must park on the public street. He felt the suggestion
presented to the Planning Commission from the Planning Director for
2-1 in the restaurant area and 1-1 in the retail area would be a
desirable suggestion.
Ebert Lounsbury, 1787 So. Vasco Road, friend of the applicant, sta-
ted that he supports Mr. Rasmussen's petition for the 6,000 sq. ft.
building because this is the required amount of footage to rehouse
the tenants that must relocate.
Cm Tirsel1 wondered if it would be possible to provide a second
story on his building and he explained that the majority of his
tenants could not be located upstairs due to the type of business
they are engaged in and it was pointed out by the Council that if
there could be a second story to the building he would gain on the
parking requirements as well as the land.
Cm Turner felt it would be nice to have not only the minimum amount
of parking but more than the minimum required and feels that the
ordinance has some inequities in it such as the parking allowed
for the furniture store owned by Kamps through a variance. He
stated that at the bank at least three days out of the week there
is not sufficient parking and the only thing that can be done is
to put up with it or relocate and this is a result of the City
allowing less parking and would agree with the Planning Commission
in requiring that adequate parking be provided and moved that the
recommendation of the Planning Commission be adopted and denial of
the variance application, seconded by Cm Tirse11.He added that
there must be a way as suggested by Cm Tirse11, such as a two-story
building, and he felt the applicant could get together with the
City staff and work out some solution, but both sides would have
to be agreeable to some compromise.
(~
CM-28-248
July 15, 1974
(Re Variance Appeal
re Parking-Rasmussen)
em Futch agreed with Cm Turner's reasoning and with the Planning
Commission, as the nature of the businesses will require more parking
space, and felt that the applicant had two options - a second story
or purchase a larger piece of property.
em Miller agreed that more parking is necessary and did not feel the
variance could be justified in this instance.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that the businesses are the same ones that
have been located on North Livermore Avenue, and he felt they would be
located in a more disadvantageous location than before, and there had
never been any difficulty finding parking. Also while it is true that
Mr. Rasmussen has been compensated for the property which has been
taken, he felt the City had an obligation to relocate him in the same
manner, and should not be penalized, and by granting the variance he
will not be enjoying a privilege that is not granted other like pro-
perties in the area.
Mr. Rasmussen stated that he and the City have not yet arrived at a
price, as he would be spending at least twice as much to replace the
buildings, and has already purchased the land, but these requirements
would bankrupt a person, and he brought up the fact that a variance
had been given Mr. Kamp.
Cm Miller advised him that it is his intent to appeal the variance that
was granted to Mr. Kamp, but Mr. Rasmussen indicated that would do
him no good, and was not the reason he mentioned it.
Mr. Lounsbury stated he respected the concern for the people who may,
in the future, wish to have more parking, but Mr. Rasmussen's clients
have renewed their leases based on the amount of parking that has been
available in the past and are awaiting approval of the variance. If
a tenant wants more parking, he will not locate in this building, but
elsewhere where more parking is available. His clients want to locate
in this area even though they know they will be assessed a higher rent.
em Tirse11 stated that one of the renters has already bought another
piece of property, and Mr. Rasmussen stated he knew of this but it
was dependent on his obtaining the necessary capital to build.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time and passed 4-1 with Mayor
Pritchard dissenting.
REPORT FROM BOARD OF
APPEALS RE BUILDING IN-
SULATION
The City Council had referred to the Board of Appeals the matter of
adopting the energy insulation requirements in advance of the effective
date of the State Standards, and the Board has submitted a copy of
the minutes of their meeting in this regard.
Cm Futch stated there are three things in this regard: l) the earlier
date to require the insulation, which he did not favor as he felt
there was nothing to be gained; 2) the requirement of an attic fan
at the time air conditioning is installed, which he felt would be a
reasonable requirement since the cost of a fan would be minimal; and
3) to require insulation in the attic whenever a home is sold which
he felt to be reasonable.
em Miller agreed with the last two points, but felt that attic fans
should be included when the houses change hands as well as when air
conditioning is installed as the cost is minor. He felt if the Council
concurred all three items should be included in the ordinance.
CM-28-249
July 15, 1974
(Re Building Insulation
Ordinance)
em Futch pointed out that if people are required to install a fan
it would be contrary to the intent as there would be no energy con-
servation if they were not bothered by the heat. Cm Futch moved to
instruct the City Attorney to have the ordinance drawn up to include
the two items, seconded by em Miller.
Cm Tirse11 pointed out that OGO has permits to build and felt this
was one housing which should probably be required to have the in-
sulation and asked if they were subject to FHA requirements.
Cm Miller also brought up the fact that permits had been issued to
the developer in the Bevilacqua area which homes could also be
covered by the insulation requirements, and even though the Board
of Appeals objected to the earlier date, he felt the Council should
adopt the earlier date.
Cm Futch suggested that perhaps the FHA requirements may include
this insulation and so they should continue this point.
The staff was instructed to check into this point, and a vote was
not taken on the motion, and the item was continued to next week.
REPORT RE UTILITY
UNDERGROUNDING FEE
Recently a report was received from our Industrial Advisory Board
regarding a utility undergrounding fee, and the matter was postponed
for additional staff research. In addition, em Turner requested that
the issue be referred for a joint discussion between the City Council
and Chamber of Commerce.
Cm Futch explained that a meeting had been held after which time he
had prepared a proposal which would meet some of the objections the
City Council had and would also be acceptable to the other parties
involved, and suggested that the Council adopt Alt. 4 which would
discontinue the undergrounding policy presently in effect and instead
adopt an interim policy requiring development along major streets to
install ducts and pull boxes along their frontages. Existing overhead
lines would be allowed to relocate overhead in a streamlined configu-
ration and the Council should then push for a change in PUC policy
that would reduce future development costs for undergrounding and
situations such as this along major streets. This would avoid the
high cost of general undergrounding in industrial areas and reduce
the cost to these developments which happen to be adjacent to con-
siderable overhead utilities. He pointed out that the cost would
be comparable to the in-tract development costs. Thi~0~ldIAP~~
the City to defer installation of underground utilities^~ac- AV~
tion of the cost as if they had to start from scratch. em. Futch .
recommended that the Council adopt Alt. 4 as a policy for underground-
ing of utilities in industrial areas only; motion was seconded by
em Turner.
Cm Miller stated he would like to have utilities undergrounded and
felt that the program as set out by the Public Works Director was a
good one and would essentially make the cost near to what was in-
tract, and he asked what the disadvantages to that would be since
everyone would pay and ultimately the first ones who had to put it
in would be reimbursed.
Cm Futch stated that the estimate given was too low as the cost
would be approximately $25.00 per linear foot. After some discus-
sion regarding the cost spread, Cm Futch stated the question is
whether it is really worth it to add that much additional cost for
industrial users, and felt his proposal was one way of reducing the
cost, as an interim measure, and they should pressure PUC to come
up with a more equitable way of financing.
CM-28-250
July 15, 1974
(re Undergrounding Fee)
Mr. Engel asked that Cm Futch give the committee justification for
Alt. 4, i.e. the manner in which it would serve the public safety
and welfare.
Cm Futch stated the intent is that at a future time undergrounding be
required and there are some funds now that could be used for this
purpose; however, he was not sure what the justification was at the
present time.
Cm Miller commented that it has been deemed by PUC to be in the public
interest to have undergrounding on new construction, in fact it is re-
quired by their orders, and that is the justification that the City
uses.
Mr. Engel felt that the PUC requirements should be checked, and Mr.
Parness suggested that it would be appropriate for the Council to
waive any action until they have a legal report on the supportability
of the whole matter.
Gene Morgan indicated he had discussed the formula with em Miller
and although it sounded logical, he did not think the end result was
quite that way. The Chamber feels they would like to see no fee
charged, but felt the solution Cm Futch presented was a compromise,
and they felt a decision should be reached as soon as practicable
as industry is needed, and Southern Pacific is waiting, and they would
support the suggestion of Cm Futch.
Milo Nordyke felt it was important to get a tentative motion as far
as the fee is concerned. The question is whether or not the City
would have the legal basis to require the conduit undergrounding that
is suggested in Alt. 4. It is important to get the issues to SP,
because if they understand their liability is limited to putting the
conduit and pull boxes underground, it would be enough to allow them
to proceed, and if the Council could adopt the motion in such a
fashion to set that as an upper limit and await the outcome of the
legal fee as to whether or not that is possible, it would be a forward
step.
em Futch felt that was a good suggestion, so what the Council would
be approving is that they adopt Alt. 4 in principal, presuming that
the findings can be made, which was agreeable to the second, and the
motion passed unananimous1y.
REPORT RE FIRST STREET
GRADE SEPARATION STRUCTURE
The Public Works Director reported that after the relocation of the
Southern Pacific RR, the City has planned to relocate First Street
along the vacated RR right-of-way to a future overpass near Scott
Street where First Street will rejoin the existing First Street
alignment. Mr. Lee has recommended that the City Council formalize
its intention to ultimately relocate that section of First Street
and authorize the following:
a) Appraisals of the required rights-of-way.
b) Staff investigation of the acquisition of the abandoned SP right-
of-way for First Street.
c) Commence negotiations with the California Transportation Agency
about a future cooperative project.
d) Discontinue requiring future width right-of-way dedications and
street widening on the sections of First St. to be relocated.
em Miller moved to approve the recommendation as far as items a, b
and c, but to delete discontinuing requirement of future width right
of way, and perhaps discuss this item further at a later time. Motion
was seconded by Cm Futch and passed unanimously.
CM-28-25l
July l5, 1974
Summary of Action
Planning Commission
Meeting of July 9, 1974
The summary of action taken at the Planning Commission meeting of
July 9, 1974 was presented to the Council, and Cm Miller appealed
the variance granted to Mr. Kamp and asked that this be placed on
the agenda for the next meeting.
I
I
\
,
Communication re Interstate Rte 580
A communication from the Department of Transportation regarding the
City's position on Interstate Rte. 580 was removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion at this time; however, Cm Miller asked that
this item be placed on the agenda for the next meeting.
REPORT FROM CITY MANAGER RE
PROPERTY ACQUISITION SETTLEMENTS
(Grade Separation Constr. Proj.)
Mr. Parness reported that several parcels have been tentatively
acquired through negotiation by our property acquisition agents.
These settlements have been based upon property appraisal and reloca-
tion costs as follows: Parcel No. 26, $96,500; Parcel No. 27-28,
$30,650 and Parcel No. 12-13, $28,000. It is recommended that the
City Council formally authorize acquisition of these properties.
Cm Miller moved to authorize acquisition of the property, seconded
by Cm Tirse1l, and the motion passed unanimously.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
RE DANCES
An ordinance had been drafted with the police Department's recom-
mendations relating to dances; however the Council wished to discuss
the ordinance, and a motion was made by Cm Miller, seconded by
Cm Turner, and approved unanimously to continue this item for one
week.
em Futch asked that the significant changes be listed, together
with any justification for the changes, as he was concerned about
undue restrictions.
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Grant Agreement-Treatment Plant)
Mr. Parness asked the Council for approval to execute the Grant
Agreement for the EPA on the Water Reclamation Plant.
A motion was made by em Tirsell, seconded by Cm Miller, that the
City Manager be authorized to execute the Grant Agreement with EPA,
passed unanimously.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Guatemala Trip)
em Turner advised the Council he was unable to make the trip to
our sister city although he had volunteered and the flight is only
three weeks away.
No decision was made regarding a replacement at this time.
CM-28-252
July 15, 1974
(Assembly Bill 1723)
Cm Turner asked that discussion regarding AB 1723 be placed on
the Council agenda for the next meeting.
(Planning Unit No. 12)
Cm Turner commented that the Council was to have a report regarding
Planning Unit No. 12 for this meeting and asked the Planning Direc-
tor if a report had been prepared.
Mr. Musso advised that the Planning Unit had been redrafted and
should be ready for Council review next month.
(Ord. re Automatic
Variance)
f.
~\
em Miller stated that there is an automatic variance procedure if
someone in City Hall makes a mistake and since this is very eemM6~
he asked that the City Attorney check into the matter and either
repeal or modify the ordinance and the Council concurred.
(Speaking to Agenda Items)
em Futch moved that the Council set a pOlicy of limiting the amount
of time anyone person may talk, to five minutes for the first item
and five minutes for an additional item - not to exceed a total of
10 minutes during one Council meeting unless the majority of the
Council agrees to extend the length of time.
Cm Miller felt the restriction to a total of lO minutes per person
through the entire meeting is sufficient and would suggest that
anyone having a presentation which would take longer than five
minutes should submit it in writing prior to the meeting so that the
Councilmembers can review it over the weekend with the other agenda
packet material.
It was suggested that the matter be postponed for one week to allow
the Counci1members time to think of additional suggestions for
keeping the meeting moving and directed that the matter be scheduled
as an agenda item.
(Request for Unused
City Flagpole)
em Futch commented that he has received a request from a Boy Scout
who would like to do a project to earn his eagle by constructing
a flag pole at his church and if the City could furnish an old flag
pole that is not in use by the City. It was discovered that there
is such a pole in storage at the Corporation Yard which is of negligi-
ble value and em Futch wondered if the Council would give its per-
mission to give it to the boy.
~'.
I
(
"'.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the Council agreed to give the pole to the Boy Scout, as requested.
(Bicentennial Committee)
em Futch felt there should be discussion regarding appointments to
the Bicentennial Committee and would suggest that the officers be
selected by the Council and that something should be decided as
soon as possible.
CM-28-253
July 15, 1974
(re Bicentennial Committee)
Cm Miller commented that he would consider having the Bicentennial
Committee a private committee rather than an official City Committee
because he would anticipate that they will be asking for a great deal
of money from the City.
Cm Turner felt that it would be in keeping with the spirit of patrio-
tism if the City would try to raise the money for donation to the Bi-
centennial Committee and feels that the nominating committee if it is
other than the Council should have some idea of how they will be funded
or to what extent.
It was concluded that the evening is too late to try to come to a de-
cision as to whether the committee should be a City committee or pri-
vate committee and the discussion was postponed.
(Early Adjournment
Next Week)
Mayor Pritchard asked that the Council consider adjourning early
enough next week to hold an executive session for the purpose of
discussing a personnel matter.
(Support of SB-2286)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has spoken with Judge Lewis regard-
ing SB-2286 which establishes a new Livermore-Pleasanton judicial
district with two judges and that Judge Lewis is in favor of the
hill and would be most haDPY if the Council would express its support.
On motion of Mayor Pritchard, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous
vote the Council expressed support of the bill.
ADJOURNMENT
ATTEST
no further Council business, Mayor Pritchard
at~0 41~
(\/~
C1ty Clerk
Livermore, California
adjourned
There being
the meeting
APPROVE
Regular Meeting of July 22, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on July 22, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Liv€rmore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard
presiding.
Present:
Absent:
ROLL CALL
Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsel1 and Mayor Pritchard
None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Council members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 7/15/74
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
the minutes for the meeting of July 15, 1974, were adopted, as
amended.
OPEN FORUM
(Discussion re Limiting
Time to Speak to Council)
Mayor Pritchard commented that prior to anyone speaking during the
open forum he would like to bring up the last item on the agenda
related to limiting time for speaking to the Council during the open
forum or on any other item.
Cm Tirsell stated that most of the comments made to the Council from
the public are helpful and good suggestions but due to the length
of the Council meetings it is necessary to ask that the remarks be
concise and to the point. She noted that it is very difficult for
the Mayor to keep track of the length of time a person has been speaking
when he must keep the meeting in order, remember motions, get seconds
to motions and ask for votes to amendments and main motions. In
view of this she would recommend that the other Counci1members re-
mind the Mayor of the amount of time expended by members of the audi-
ence and suggested that the Assistant City Manager use a stop watch
to indicate to the Council when five minutes have passed. She felt
that each person should be allowed five minutes of discussion during
the open forum and then another five minutes accrued during the rest
of the meeting for a total of 10 minutes per person and no more than
the 10 minutes per meeting per person.
Cm Miller commented that he suggested at the last meeting that any
presentation which may last longer than five minutes should be sub-
mitted in writing to the Council, and that presentations longer than
five minutes will not be accepted.
('
Cm Tirse1l moved that public input be limited to a five minute presen-
tation on any subject, including the open forum and an. additional
five minutes an any related subject during the evening for a total of
10 minutes per person and that longer presentations should be pre-
sented in writing and there will be an allowance for a short summary
and that this will be added to the instructions at the top of the
agenda and that the Mayor will be advised of the time which has accrued
by one of the staff members, seconded by Cm Futch.
em Turner stated that he would not vote for the motion as he feels
the intent might be misconstrued and that it is the responsibility
of the Chair to control the length of time the public speaks.
Mayor Pritchard noted that there may be an occassion where a speaker
will find favor with some of the Counci1members and would not wish
to say that he could not speak any longer if the Council wanted him
to be allowed to speak longer.
CM-28-253
July 22, 1974
(Limitation of Speaking Time)
Cm Tirsell commented that in many other cities people are not allowed
to speak until the end of the meeting and in some cases not allowed
to speak until after a vote has been taken and there are meetings
at which the public is not allowed input at all. She felt that on
the whole the Livermore City Council has been very generous in
their allowance of public input.
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he objects to the limita-
tion of time because one individual may be representating a number
of people when speaking and felt the 10 minute total is too restric-
tive.
The motion passed 4-1 with Cm Turner dissenting.
It was noted that the motion is to be effective immediately.
PUBLIC HEARING RE
WEED ABATEMENT COSTS
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing for the purpose of hearing
testimony regarding costs for weeds abated by the City of Livermore,
and it was noted that there was no written testimony regarding this
item prior to the hearing.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Cm Miller, seconded
by em Futch and by unanimous vote, the public hearing was closed.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote a resolution was adopted confirming the assessment for weed
abatement costs.
RESOLUTION NO. 112-74
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS
WEED ABATEMENT
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Bid Award -
Water Reclamation Plant
The City Manager reported that it would appear that all of the necessary
review and approval has been obtained from the State and EPA for the award
of the construction bids for the water reclamation plant project. The one re-
maining item is the contractual commitment from the State Department of Trans-
portation on the use of effluent water for freeway landscape irrigation and
it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution awarding the contract
to C. Norman Peterson Company.
Cm Miller stated that it would appear if anything happens with the contract
the City might be $300,000 in the hole and would like an explanation as to
what our liabilities would be in this circumstance.
Mr. Parness explained that he and the City Attorney also share this concern;
however, it is a fact of the situation and there is little else that can be
done about it. The way things transpired it was necessary to proceed to
this extent to try to resolve the differences between our City, EPA and
CAL-TRANS in regard to the project for our reservoir system. A
series of meetings has taken place with them and all are in agree-
ment. We do not have a formally signed agreement but we do have
an oral agreement. A letter is expected from CAL-TRANS saying
that they will execute the agreement with one contingency, and
that is the monetary obligation of CAL-TRANS set at $20,000 is sub;ect
to the approval of the State Highway Commission. The agreement
will be instituted by the Transportation officials but they cannot
obligate the Highway Commission to the funding; however, they have
never refused funding and it is unlikely they will refuse in this case.
CM-28-254
July 22, 1974
(re Water Reclamation
Plant Bid)
(
It is a satisfactory and beneficial addition to the plant for the
City and the only concern at this time is the budgeting of the $20,000
obligation of CAL-TRANS to this project and the Highway Commission
has never failed to obligate funds and would suggest the Council
allow award of the bid, contingent upon our receiving the letter
announcing the proposed obligation of the Department of Transportation
to this agreement.
em Miller then stated that he is not really satisfied until he sees
the letter and asked the City Attorney about the City's legal commit-
ments if something does not come through.
Mr. Engel explained that anytime the City awards a contract which
binds it to perform a certain task, such as pay money, where it does
not have one of the essentials tied down such as right-of-way or a
subsidiary agreement, etc., and one of these collateral points are
not completed the City faces a potential breech of contract suit with
the contractor. The City is making representation to the contractor
that the City is all set to proceed and that all the conditions have
been met.
Cm Miller asked if there were any other problems with the project
other than the state grant and Mr. Parness explained that the other
problem is with the location of the reservoir which remains a legal
procedure we are still proceeding with. We have had many weeks of
meetings with the owner, to no avail, and we are going to have to
condemn the property unless he finally agrees to a settlement and
a final appeal has been made to him in writing. We do have a right
of occupancy and have the right to condemn and it is a matter of
establishing the value.
Cm Turner wondered what the consequences of waiting would be and
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the award of the bid must be
no later than August 3, 1974.
Mayor Pritchard wondered if the letter expected from CAL-TRANS
would have legal substance and Mr. Engel commented that it would
be considered a letter of intent but would not be final and binding.
Mr. Lee noted that the reservoir will be a great advantage to the
state and they will be able to use this water at about half the cost
of treated domestic water and indicated that they are very interested
in having the water. The state representative indicated that even
if they would not wish to use the water for another five years they
would still enter into a contract and Mr. Lee felt the $20,000 is
minor when compared to the total cost of the facilities.
em Turner questioned the amount of the obligation to the City if
everything does not go as planned and Mr. Parness stated it would
be in the neighborhood of $300,000.
r
em Miller stated that he is concerned about not yet owning the property
on which the reservoir is to be located and that we are getting ready
to commence with the project. He pointed out that acquisition of the
property may be delayed and if work is held up we may have to pay a
penalty and noted that the same problem has arisen with the underpass
project and work has been delayed, in part, because the preliminary
contracts were not completely resolved prior to awarding the contract.
Mr. Parness commented that it is perhaps true that all of the matters
should have been resolved but there have been many problems related
to acquisition of the property and meny meetings have transpired
because of this as well as the necessity for various appraisals of
the property. It is not exactly the same as the problem with the
CM-28-255
--,._._--'"---,....._-_._-'_..._._--_._.--.".~._---_...'....,...-~,_.,.-
July 22, 1974
(Water Rec. Plant Bid)
relocation project because there is no relocation obligation on the
part of the City but rather a matter of settling on the value of the
property and also we have the right of immediate possession within the
issuance of such an order by the courts, within three days. This means
that we can give the contractor the right of access almost immediately,
unlike the railroad project.
Cm Miller stated that he realizes that it is difficult to get every-
thing ready for one single package but feels the matter, at this
point, is a little untidy. When there is a contract that commits
the City to over a million dollars and everything is not resolved
he tends to be very concerned about the City's obligation. It
would seem that before a contract is approved for execution it
would be better to start the procedure a month earlier and if there
is trouble in negotiations there will be time for condemnation
and that everything can be ready. He added that he does not like
to have $300,000 at risk and the possibility of things being held up
because of condemnation action problems.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff does not want to take a risk or see
a delay either; however, this is the way the machinery works in this
instance and not asking that the reservoir be installed for the benefit
of CAL-TRANS and this is a secondary consideration. The primary benefit
will be to the City and we are not altruistic enough to review and de~
sign a facility to satisfy the State Department of Transportation. It
is a big advantage to the City and it happens that this is the way the
system works. The only contingency the Council would be allowing, which
is extremely remote, would be that the money will not be allowed by the
Highway Commission ($20,000) for their participation in this system.
Mr. Engel commented that with regard to the right of immediate posses-
sion we do have the right to obtain an order of immediate possession
in connection with the acquisition of the reservoir site; however, a
normal period of time is 20 days of lead time and we would need an
affidavit from the Director of Public Works indicating that there is
an emergency situation at hand justifying the shortening of time to
three days. On this basis he could go before the judge and ask for
a three day order.
Cm Miller asked if the judge would automatically give the three day
order and Mr. Engel stated, not necessarily, that it would depend
upon the strength of the affidavit.
em Futch felt the question the Council has to face at this point in
time is whether it would be more to our advantage to continue with
the project or to stop and go through another bid process and feels
that the increase costs and liabilities would be much greater.
Cm Turner moved to delay the matter for one week in order that the
Council might have the time to review this information, seconded
by Cm Miller.
Mr. Parness emphasized that everyone is very regretful that things
have happened the way they did but there was nothing that could have
been done to prevent them from happening.
Mayor Pritchard felt that if the Council will agree, it should be
understood that the City Manager has every right to proceed with
all diligence in acquiring the property and is sure that everything
has been done to come to agreement with the owner, Mr. McCormick.
At this time the Council voted unanimously in favor of the motion.
Mr. Lee stated that the vice president of the company doing the
work for the project has indicated that they would send a letter
to the City stating that a delay in obtaining the site for as much
as four weeks would not cause an additional obligation to the City.
Another matter is the EPA's questioning our ordinance relative to
our revenue program particularly with respect to repaying, from indus-
CM-28-256
July 22, 1974
(re Water Rec. Plant Bid)
trial connections to the sewer, recompense to the Federal Government
for the grant we will be receiving. All cities receiving grants
must have this provision in their ordinance and we do not have this
provision; however, we feel that it will be of little significance
because we do not have the type of industries in our community that
this refers to, but we must adopt such an ordinance within the next
coming months. One of the conditions of the grant agreement will
be that the ordinance will be enforced. He explained that essentially
this means that industrial development will have to pay for sewer
service, some of which will be returned to the Federal Government.
Mr. Parness remarked that he has received oral confirmation that
EPA has approved our grant application and Cm Miller asked when
this will be received in writing and Mr. Parness stated that this
cannot be done until we receive the official forms and Cm Miller
wondered why the City would commit itself to a $5 million project
without having $4 million of it and Mr. Parness stated that we are
commiting ourselves to awarding a bid upon the oral promise of the
officials of the EPA and that all is in order - it is a matter of
receiving the grant allocation by mail and it is anticipated that
this will be received by next week.
Departmental
Reports
Departmental reports were received, as follows:
Airport Activity - June
Building Inspection June
Emergency Services - quarterly report - April/June
Horizons - Youth Outreach Program - quarterly progress
Library - Fiscal Year 1973
Mosquito Abatement District - May
Municipal Court - May and June
Livermore Police Department - June
Water Department - Revised April and May
Water Reclamation Plant - June
Report re County
Emergency 911 Phone
System
(
\.
A comprehensive study has been under way encompasing all of Alameda
County for the purpose of analyzing the technical, financial and
jurisdictional feasibility of installing a "9l1" emergency telephone
alert system which is a pilot program for the entire United States and
calls for the installation of a complex telecommunication facilities
which will permit a caller to dial "911" from any telephone and the
call will automatically be routed to the jurisdictional emergency
center. There will be visual and supplementary data displayed such
as hydrant locations, volatile storage of materials, police beat and
telephone and address of telephone being used. The steering committee,
of which we are a part, has concluded that the system needs to be
tested with phased additions over a period of three years and the capi-
tal cost is estimated at $2,900,000. The monthly servicing charge is
$34,000 or about 6~ per phone number per month. The capital funding
for the project is required to be made by the Law Enforcement Assist-
ance Administration (LEAA) with 10% from the County. The system will
be used to serve the people of our county and it is recommended that
the City Council adopt a resolution announcing its support of
the "911" Emergency System.
RESOLUTION NO. 113-74
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE ENDORSING THE 911 PROJECT.
CM-28-257
July 22, 1974
Resolution re
Historical Sites
In accordance with our recently adopted ordinance related to histori-
cal site declaration a resolution is necessary for the official
designation of qualified sites - the subject one being the Southern
Pacific Railroad Depot.
RESOLUTION NO. 114-74
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC DEPOT
A HISTORICAL SITE
Resolution Condemn-
ing Underground Easement
A resolution is required to obtain a small parcel of property located
at North lip" Street and Railroad Avenue for use as an underground ease-
ment and also a parcel for the grade separation.
RESOLUTION NO. 115-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
A PERPETUAL UNDERGROUND EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY 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 WITHIN GHE SAID CITY.
RESOLUTION NO. 116-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL HAS DETERMINED
IS REQUIRED BY THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR
PUBLIC USE, SAID REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LY-
ING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT/
RAILROAD TRACK RELOCATION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT WITHIN SAID CITY.
Resolutions
Denying Claims
RESOLUTION NO. 117-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAIM OF TERRY M. HOFER
RESOLUTION NO. 118-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAIM OF RICKY MOSSBARGER
The above resolutions were adopted by the Council as recommended by
the City's insurance carrier.
Beautification Committee
Minutes - 7/5/74
Minutes were received from the Beautification Committee for their
meeting of July 5, 1974.
Claims Dated 7/19/74
There were 55 claims in the amount of $69,767.74 approved and ordered
paid by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Tirsel1, seconded by em Turner and by unanimous
vote, the Consent Calendar was approved with the exception of the
CM-28-258
July 22, 1974
(Consent Calendar Appr.)
item concerning the reservoir project which was removed from the
Consent Calendar and postponed until next week, and with the addition
of the Resolution No. 116-74 condemning the Trujillo property.
COMMUNICATION FROM S.F.
RE PARKING SURCHARGE
PROHIBITION
A letter was received from the City Manager of South San Francisco
with respect to assistance in having the Senate adopt the House of
Representative's language prohibiting imposition of parking surcharge
regulations by the EPA Administrator, which was noted and filed.
APPEAL RE GRANT FOR
VARIANCE (H.L. KAMP)
The City Council had appealed the action of the Planning Commission on
July 9, 1974, granting a variance to H. L. Kamp for reduction of the
parking requirement at 2893 First Street.
Mr. Musso explained that there were two variances before the Planning
Commission, one for Mr. Rasmussen and the other for Mr. Kamp, for a
similar variance-use of property on the south side of First Street,
directly opposite Junction Avenue. The variances, on the surface,
appear to be very similar; however, there is one difference and that
is that Mr. Kamp was agreeable to limiting the use of the property to
a rather low intensity use for primarily a furniture store. Variances
have been granted in other instances on the basis that the use would
be limite~to such that the parking of the 1-1 ratio would be sufficient.
The 2-~/parking was a result of the development of the Alpha Beta,
Thrifty and Value Giant shopping areas, which had a deficiency in park-
ing, and the decision of the Council at that time was that the off-
street parking requirements should be increased. Because of the par-
ticular nature of the property ownership in the CB Zone, it was left
at l-l. It was felt that the CG land, which is the area between the
railroad tracks, was in large enough parcels that the 2-1 parking
ratio was not unreasonable and the ordinance was amended accordingly.
After this, Red Carpet, Hutka (Railroad Avenue) and other businesses
applied for a variance to reduce the parking provided that there were
no retail uses. In this case the Planning Commission felt that the
restrainton the use of the warehouse was an action for which a prece-
dent had been set, primarily by the City Council, that if you limited
the use you could not deny Mr. Kamp the variance because he agrees to
limit the use for which a variance had been granted to others. In
the case of the Rasmussen application it was felt the uses required
heavy parking, which was for a restaurant, butcher shop and dress
shop, and was denied. This is primarily the difference between these
two applications on different uses. As a result of the discussion
on the two variances the Planning Commission felt they should review
the off-street parking requirements and whether the 2-1 ratio was a
reasonable application and a proposal by the Planning Commission to
prohibit the development of private off-street parking lots in the
downtown area or to establish a fee instead. They directed Mr. Musso
to ask the City Attorney whether or not such a fee could be collected
and if it would be a reasonable restriction.
Cm Miller commented that the appeal has been made at his request
and though he can sympathize with Mr. Kamp's problem is concerned
about the long term effect of not having adequate parking. This
would allow nibbling away at an ordinance the Council unanimously
adopted to try to improve the parking conditions in our commercial
area and he has never agreed that conditioning to use is a good idea.
There is no way to guarantee that the use permitted can be maintained.
The argument that there are some earlier variances, having created a
precedent, does not apply because everyone has always said that allow-
ing just one does not mean that more have to be allowed and he felt
that the 2-l ratio should be maintained. In his opinion a variance
should not be granted in hopes that something will happen in the
future for working out an overall parking district.
cr~-28-259
July 22, 1974
(Request for
Variance - H. Kamp)
Mr. Kamp stated that the track relocation project is forcing him
to move to another location and that both stores owned by him will
have to go together in time At present, he really has no parking
available at either store and the 32 parking spaces he would pro-
vide is 32 more than presently provided. He is endeavoring to put
a business location in Livermore that the citizens can be proud of
and his particular type of business is different than others in that
it entails a good deal of storage which must be displayed. He em-
ploys generally not more than five people at one time and there are
seldom more than four or five customers in his store at one time
and it is not probable that 10 parking spaces would be used by his
people at one time. He added that he would like to have a place
that looks nice and within his means, financially.
Mayor Pritchard stated that if no action is taken by the Council
reversing the decision of the Planning Commission it would mean
that the Planning Commission decision stands and asked if there
is a motion to deny the variance.
(\
f \
Randy Sch1ientz, stated that the planning Commission did make the
findings for granting the variance and they recognized the fact that
a furniture store's requirements for parking and use of space is
somewhat different than other retail commercial uses, in addition
to the fact that Mr. Kamp has agreed to the limitation of the use:
of the store for furniture sales and restriction of the floor area
specifically for this use. Previous variances have been granted and
it has been noted that the total number of spaces to be used by
staff people and customers would be 10 during the peak times, which
is far less than what they are willing to provide. He felt it un-
reasonable to require parking which will not be used. The 2-1
requirement is an arbitrary method of determining parking space
and in this case it is an unfair burden to the property owner.
John Regan, realtor representing Mr. Kamp, stated that Mr. Kamp
started looking for property on which to locate approximately a
year ago and that he desires to remain in the central business
district. He asked the developers of the S.P. shopping center
about building a store for his use and was told, essentially,
that he could not afford to locate in one of their buildings.
This has been found to be true in the CB-l Zone which would allow
1-1 parking. The next best choice was to choose a site as close
to the CB District or to the center of town, as possible, and the
site on First Street fills the need, is feasible, and is as close
to the center of town as possible.
em Miller stated that his concern is with the use and what will
happen if the use changes. He is not satisfied that the supposed
non-precedent examples set previously are effective with respect
to the conditions imposed and as to how effective they will be in
the future. Consequently, he is unhappy because he would like to
see Mr. Kamp relocate and work everything out to his satisfaction
but because of concern for future parking, moved that the City Coun-
cil deny the variance granted by the Planning Commission.
The motion died for lack of a second and the variance, as granted
by the Planning Commission, will remain effective.
Paul Tull suggested that if the variance is to be granted that
something be stipulated in the contract that the variance is allow-
ed only for a furniture store use.
COMMUNICATION FROM
DEPT. OF TRANS. RE
COUNCIL'S POSITION
RE WIDENING OF I-580
A letter was received from the Department of Transportation rela-
tive to the Council's position on the widening of I-580 and commented
CM-28-260
July 22, 1974
(re Council Position
re Widening of I-580)
on the desire of the Council to eliminate two of the lanes proposed
and to allow only six lanes. The Department of Transportation feels
that six lanes would be inadequate and that congestion resulting from
a restricted system will only serve to hamper the air quality in the
valley.
Cm Miller stated that he feels the comments received from the Depart-
ment require another response from the City Council and would like
another letter sent speaking to what the issues are and that a copy
of the letter be sent to the Air Resources Board, particularly. He
then asked that he be allowed to prepare a letter of response which
would be circulated among the Counci1members prior to its being sent.
Cm Miller felt something could be written that is more direct and
concise about what the City's objections are to the massive environ-
mental disaster, which he added is his opinion of the proposal. He
pointed that regardless of what the Department of Transportation
says about the proposal the City views it as l) a spurring of growth
based on the Putnam Report; 2) Energy wasted as a result of encourag-
ing commuters; and 3) Massive damage that will be done to the canyon.
He would like to write a letter pointing out these things and if the
Council is not satisfied with the letter it can be rewritten and re-
vised.
Cm Futch commented that when the California Department of Transporta-
tion submitted its Environmental Impact Report it was determined that
widening of the freeway is growth inducing.
Cm Turner suggested that Pleasanton again be asked to support our
position of favoring only six lanes and Cm Miller suggested that VCSD
also be asked to support this position. Cm Turner added that in his
opinion the six lanes would offer adequate safety and ease of travel.
Rapid transit is planned, as well as a big shopping center in the
valley and hopefully within about 10 years our valley will be se1f-
supporting and there will not be a need for more than the six lanes.
Cm Turner moved that the Council write to the City of Pleasanton
and the VCSD asking that they support the Council's position, seconded
by Cm Tirsel1 and which passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE RECEIPT OF
BIDS FOR RAILROAD
RELOCATION PROJECT
Mr. Parness explained that with regard to the railroad relocation
project, in accordance with the process of the formulation of an
assessment district, once the amount of the debt has been established
on the district that has been formed and the project is to proceed,
the next step is the placement of the debt against all of the proper-
ties subject to the assessment. The principal amount is $1,401,697
which Mr. Parness indicated is a small sum and are traditionally
attractive buys for the bond buyers because they are tax exempt. The
bonds are levied under the 1915 Assessment District Bond Act in the
State of California and an attractive type of purchase for financial
firms because one major advantage is the faith and credit of the
local agency behind the indebtedness to the extent that the law gives
the right of the City Council to assess a tax over and above all other
tax purposes, to collect funds to satisfy the indebtedness in the event
of default. The amount of tax levied that the Council is entitled to
impose is 10~ per $100 of assessed valuation. The catch is that it
should be ensured that the assessed valuation applicable provides 100%
coverage for the annual bond debt or the servicing amount so as to
give absolute assurances to the bond purchaser that there will be
absolutely no possibility of any default in the annual collection.
In this instance, unfortunately, this is not the case. The annual
bond servicing amount approximates $120,000 and the net assessed
valuation of our City to which this amount can be used is $95 million;
therefore we are a bit short of providing 100% coverage for a 10~ tax
levy to guarantee full protection to the bond holder. Efforts have
CM-28-261
July 22, 1974
(Reloc. Project Bid)
been made by the bond counsel to arouse some interest in the purchase
of these indebtedness issues. Mr. Parness noted that the financial
circle has had a very bleak history and has been told just today that
if the City had solicited bids as recently as two months ago, none
would have been received. The City was very apprehensive up until
today when bids were to have been received, that it would receive none
and in such an event we would have had to negotiate a sale; however
we did receive one bid at the last minute which he read to the Council.
(\
\" .
The bid was from Stone & Youngberg for 93.083% of the principal amount
thereof, plus accrued interest to the date of delivery, for all such
bonds to bear interest at the rate of 7% per annum, estimated net
interest rate 7.3954%. He added that Stone & Youngberg is a highly
reputable local financial institution and the essence is that they
are mandated to submit a bid no higher than the 7% by state law and
they have presented a proposal which discounts these to 93.083%.
The matter has been discussed today with our bond counsel and his
earnest advise to the City Council would be to warmly accept the bid
as there is little alternative to the City. Even though the bid is
a bit high it is a very good offer and we would likely receive no
bids if we were to advertise again, and recommended that the City
Council adopt a resolution accepting the bid.
Mayor Pritchard asked what this would add to the contract price and
Mr. Parness stated that it would be a $28,000 addition and that
the bonds are for 24 years. If it were not for the fact that we
do not have 100% coverage, more than likely our discount rate would
be closer to 95% and we budgeted 95% or 5. discount rate at 7% but
we did not foresee this condition of the bond market and that we
would not have 100% coverage on the surity for the annual bond
amortization.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by em Futch and by unanimous vote
the bid from Stone and Youngberg was accepted and authorizing the
sale of the bonds.
Paul Tul1 stated that he would question the legality of the motion
without further legal information and suggested that Mr. Engel res-
pond, and Mr. Engel stated that he has been assured by the bond
attorney that everything is in order.
RESOLUTION NO. 119-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF BONDS, RAILROAD
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVERMORE, ALAMEDA
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
REPORT RE FIRST
STREET OVERPASS STRUCTURE
Mr. Lee reported that plans must be completed for the provision
of a First Street overpass separation structure and that the recom-
mendation will be to refer this matter back to the Planning Commission
for consideration because it will involve a possible change in the
setback line because it will be necessary to relocate Highway 84 to
the area of the existing Southern Pacific right-of-way.
Cm Miller stated that he brought up this matter because of his con- (~,
cern for abandoning future width lines and would move to send the
matter back to the Planning Commission with the request that they
examine possibilities of what would happen if some~hing were to go
wrong with the railroad overpass proposal that the state is apparently
in favor of. Nothing has been assured and he feels concern about the
possibility that nothing comes to pass. Possibly we could require the
setbacks but not require the paving of them or that the land be left
for later widening - the point is that they consider other alternatives
to abandonment, seconded by Cm Tirsell and passed unanimously.
CM-28-262
July 22, 1974
REPORT RE REZONING OF
COUNTY PROPERTY
A staff report was received from the County of Alameda indicating
that they would like to rezone property located on both sides of
Arroyo Road, Marina Avenue, Lomitas Avenue, Pleasant View Lane,
Burr Lane, Bess Avenue, Rodeo Lane, Edwards Lane, Reed Avenue,
"B" and "D" Streets. ~
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by em Futch and by unanimous vote
the staff report was adopted recommending rezoning from R-1 to
rezone all properties within an agricultural preserve to A, and
to rezone the remaining properties R-1 with a 5 acre minimum lot size.
PUBLIC HEARING SET
RE ZO. ORD. AMEND. RE
CN AND RS DISTRICTS
Cm Miller moved that a public hearing be set for August 26th regard-
ing zoning ordinance amendments to the CN and RS Districts, seconded
by Cm Futch.
Cm Futch commented that when the Council receives the ordinance it
would be advisable to also attach a copy of the old ordinance or
that the changes in the new ordinance be underlined so that they
are easily discernible.
em Turner noted that he saw nothing related to bicycle parking, etc.,
and Mr. Musso explained that this is included in the parking ordinance
and Cm Miller felt it might be effective to add words related to bicycle
references.
At this time the motion passed unanimously.
P. C. MINUTES - 7/9/74
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 1974, were
submitted to the Council and were noted for filing.
REPORT RE SHARED
RECRUITMENT & TESTING
(City and County)
Mr. Parness reported that a county wide project has been under way
for the past year which is financed by a federal Inter-governmental
Personnel Act grant to study methods of conSOlidating efforts belng
practiced individually by each of the separate 13 public jurisdictions
in Alameda County on recruiting, testing and selection of governmental
employees. A consolidated plan has been devised which provides for
the sharing of recruiting and testing costs among each of the partici-
pating agencies at a cost of approximately $1,000 estimated cost to
our City per year. It is recommended that the City Council adopt
a resolution authorizing execution of the agreement.
Cm Tirsell commented that she would like the process explained and
Mr. Parness stated that the consortium that will be formed by virtue
of the agreeement will have the County serve as the mechanical agency
to perform the recruitment, the acceptance of applications and the
testing as well as the establishment of eligibility lists. Due to
the Affirmative Action laws we must have valid tests available and
we will be able to call the County and ask for an eligibility list
for the classifications that will be covered under this program and
they will try to arrange the people by preference, geographically,
and we can be assurred that the people on the eligibility list have
been processed properly and are qualified. There will be a continuous
eligibility list for all classifications, as follows:
CM-28- 263
July 22, 1974
(EmploYment Procedures)
Airport Service Attendant
Animal Control Officer
Engineering Technician I
Groundsman-Gardner I
Greenskeeper
Maintenance Worker I
WPR Operator Trainee
Mechanic I
Cm Tirse11 asked if this will be a continuous list that anyone may
be added to by taking the test and Mr. Parness explained that there
will be regular intervals of testing and that there will be a con-
tinuous list.
Mr. Parness indicated that he is a little hesitant and is not entirely
sold on the program as yet but feels that it is something new that we
will have to be getting into more and more and particularly with respect
to pOlice and fire personnel which will be added in time. He pointed
out that the Affirmative Action aspect is very important and the assur-
ance of the validity of the testing will be done which is something the
City would have had to do.
Cm Futch asked about the cost compared with present costs for test-
ing and Mr. Parness replied that the City's cost, presently, is
about $1,200, comparatively, and does not include the time of the
personnel conducting the testing.
Cm Miller wondered how local people will know when there is a local
position available if this is to be done by the County and will the
local people be unable to apply for jobs with the City, and also
what assurance will there be that local people will receive local
jobs.
Mr. Parness stated that we will still inform people as to the time
and place for testing. It really will not be a procedure which is
much different than the present one being used but will allow the
City a broader area of recruitment and a more exacting examination
procedure.
It was noted that it has not been determined as to whether or not
the County would advertise openings locally and Cm Miller felt
this should be a condition of the agreement.
Mr. Parness also mentioned that if the City is not satisfied with
the eligibility list it can be rejected and be done by the City;
however, he feels that experience will prove that it will be a
very satisfactory arrangement with higher quality of personnel.
Cm Turner wondered if the agreement couldn't be delayed until
some of these things are worked out and also if it would be possi-
ble to read a draft of the agreement.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that the contract be conditioned upon
requiring that there be local advertising.
Ebert Lounsbury, 1787 South Vasco Road, felt that in most cases
there are city residency requirements for fire fighters and police
officers and that also the agreement would take the hiring of its
own people out of the jurisdiction of the City. He felt it would
not be very difficult to administer a test that would be acceptable
to the federal government or any other governmental agency and in
the final analysis, a test that would comply with federal regula-
tions should not cost $1,000 a year. He felt it would be hard to
depend upon a person's regular attendance at work if he must drive
from another city to Livermore and that also it is already very
difficult for young people to find work locally and this will be
adding a handicap to their finding work because they will have to
be screened through County people.
(~
I \
\
CM-28- 264
July 22, 1974
(Employment Procedures)
Cm. Tirse11 asked where the testing would be done and Mr. Parness
advised that it would be done throughout the county. Cm Tirse11 asked
if we could request that the testing be done locally, and he felt
that testing could be done locally. Cm Tirse11 moved that the Council
adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement with the con-
sortium, contingent on assurance of local advertising and local test-
ing. Motion was seconded by Cm Miller and approved unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 120-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT (COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, ET AL)
RECESS
AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE r4EETING RESUMED WITH ALL COUNCILMEMBERS
PRESENT.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMEND-
MENT RE DANCES
An amendment to the dance ordinance section of the City Code was
was drafted by the Police Chief, and at the request of Cm Futch that
significant changes be listed, together with any justification for
the changes, a report was prepared by Captain Essex. Mayor Pritchard
asked the Counci1members if they were satisfied with the report.
Cm Turner remarked that there seemed to be no mention of loitering
outside the danceha11, and Mr. Parness replied that there is an exist-
ing loitering ordinance which he felt to be quite adequate. Mr.
Engel added that the Police Department had sufficient authority to
prevent that without spelling it out in the ordinance.
Cm Miller questioned why it was necessary to regulate the size of
the dance floor, and Mr. Engel stated it was a requirement suggested
by the Police Chief, and he could not explain the reason. Cm Miller
felt this would be an over-regulation. Cm Miller felt the regulation
which would allow the Police Chief to revoke the permit or stop any
dance in progress could be open to abuse. Mr. Engel explained that
the argument for that is in the event a public dance is being conducted
in violation of the ordinance or any laws, those standards are built
into the ordinance. Mr. Parness added that perhaps the Council should
allow some discretionary rights to the police authority, however Cm
Miller felt that the Police Department already had that kind of author-
ity. Mr. Engel stated the ordinance goes beyond that because it is
talking in terms of any public dance conducted in violation of this
ordinance, and this would broaden his authority to stop a dance in
progress based on this ordinance as well.
Cm Futch stated he was not sure what public dance means and wondered
if this meant dances a church might have, private clubs or in homes,
or where the dividing line was. Mr. Engel replied that it is subject
to some interpretation, but a home would not be a place where the
public would be in admission, but it could be applicable to a church
dance. Cm. Futch felt this would be too much of a burden for a church
if they must apply for a permit. Mr. Engel stated they apply for a
permit now, but there is an exception clause which provides that no
permit be required for a dance authorized by public education or
recreational officials, and this could be broadened to include churches.
Cm. Futch also questioned the regulation on hours as he felt it a
dance was being held out somewhere and was disturbing anyone, it should
make no difference. Mr. Engel referred to a clause regarding special
permission which would cover that situation.
CM-28-265
July 22, 1974
(re Dance Ordinance)
Cm Tirsell pointed out 7A.9 referred to immoral dancing and commented
that a minuet might have appeared to be immoral in 1750 and thought
that section to be a bit restrictive and felt disorderly conduct
covered this.
Cm. Miller suggested that since there have been a series of objec-
tions by the various Councilmembers, that these be submitted to the
Police Chief and perhaps he might revise some of the sections or
give more concrete justification.
/~
Cm Futch moved that the ordinance as proposed be referred back to the
Police Chief with the Council's concern; motion seconded by Cm Miller.
Paul Tull pointed out that the regulation concerning the hours would
coincide with the hours for serving liquor, which he felt to be
proper.
Cm Turner asked why the need for a dance ordinance other than for
regulating places of business that normally derive a profit from this
such as a tavern, and would like a comment from the Police Chief on
this point.
Cm Tirse1l felt this was very pertinent to know if there was a need
to regulate places other than commercial uses. Cm Tirse11 asked if
other disturbances that occur, not in commercial places, would not
come under the category of disorderly conduct.
URGENCY ORDINANCE RE
SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
The City Manager reported that because of our affiliation with LAVWMA,
it will be necessary to provide proportionately supporting funds for
this regional program. An analysis has been made of our funding re-
quirements for the new fiscal year and estimates for the 1975-76 fiscal
year as well. Next year there will be substantial increases in our
budgetary requirements due to our new plant installation being acti-
vated by that time. The proposed new minimum rate increases for
this year and the next are $3.00 and $12.00 per year respectively.
Cm Futch moved to adopt the urgency ordinance, to be read by title
only, to establish the new rate for the fiscal year of a $3.00 in-
crease in sewer service charge, seconded by Cm Turner, and approved
unanimously.
ORDINANCE NO. 844
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.80, RELATING TO RATE,
OF ARTICLE III, RELATING TO SEWER SERVICE AND USE CHARGE,
OF CHAPTER 18, RELATING TO SEWERS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY
CODE, 1959.
ORDINANCE RE INSULATION
Cm. Miller moved to introduce the ordinance to reflect the require-
ments for attic insulation and exhaust fans by the following amend-
ments. Cm Miller added that the Council should be more specific
about this particular City, and would add the words, "this particu-
lar" instead of just "City", and Mr. Engel asked if "City of Liver-
more" would be better and Cm Miller agreed it would be, after "summer
temperatures", in the third paragraph. In item (c) page 2, the
$12,000 assessed valuation means that the full cash value of the
house is $48,000 and that this should be lithe market full cash
value as determined by the assessor" rather than the assessed
valuation.
CM-28-266
July 22, 1974
(Insulation Ordinance)
em Pritchard explained that if the full market value is increased
by a factor of four it would be best to reduce (c) to $3,000.
em Miller stated that it also should be, "as determined by the County
Assessor of Alameda County. ", because this ordinance was obviously
written for a general case.
The second stated that the amendments would be acceptable.
Cm Futch pointed out that the standards are not included and it was
explained by Mr. Engel that the standards would be forthcoming. Cm
Futch then commented about the enforcement of the ordinance and noted
that at one time it had been mentioned that on changing ownership, the
insulation standards would be required to complete the transfer of
ownership and it is his understanding that something different is
being proposed and asked for an explanation.
Mr. Engel explained that the Building Department will know that this
is in effect and will incorporate it in their inspection during the
time of ownership change.
Mr. Parness added that this will impose a tremendous inspection
burden on the Building Department because he understands that
there were 800 residential building reports already this year for
houses changing ownership already this year.
There was discussion regarding enforcement of the standards and
Cm Futch suggested that perhaps an inspection would not have to
be required for homes changing ownership if they have been approved
by F.H.A. standards and are financed by F.H.A.
Cm Miller stated that if there are 1,600 homes changing ownership a
year it means that lO% of the homes in Livermore will have changed
hands this year if the projection is carried out and in not too long
a time a large fraction of the homes will have been inspected and
once they are inspected there is a notation that goes down on the
record for that structure.
It was suggested that perhaps if the fee for inspection was increased
from $5 to $10 it would allow another man for the Building Department,
if the inspection load is expected to be greatly increased.
em Turner stated that he is concerned about the attic fan require-
ment as he feels it is requiring more than what should be required
in regulation standards although he would agree that it probably is
the most effective thing that can be done to conserve energy and in
cutting the cost of air conditioning. He suggested that perhaps this
should be the option of the owner of a home.
Cm Tirsell commented that the owner will never take it upon himself
unless it is required, and Cm Miller pointed out that there are all
kinds of requirements, each one of which one could say it could be
left up to the owner - if he wants an unsafe building, let him have
it. This is the reason for all of our regulations.
Cm Turner commented that he feels this is not really the same thing.
/---
Mayor Pritchard stated that this is really an amendment to the Build-
ing Code and that there are a lot of things in the Code that are
arbitrary but generally decisions are made on the basis of the health
safety and welfare of individuals and the reason they are required.
Glen Dahlbacka, 1138 Aberdeen, asked what types of things residential
building records are given for and Mr. Musso explained that this is
given for the sale of residential property two years after the issu-
ance of a building permit and also for property that changes ownership.
CM-28-267
July 22, 1974
(Insulation Ord.)
Mr. Dahlbacka noted that the new performance standards are higher than
those previously required by F.H.A. so on that basis, to what level are
existing structures going to be insulated in their attics? He stated
that he would propose they should be insulated to the performance stan-
dards the state is going to require as of February 22, 1975.
Cm Futch stated that he would agree with this suggestion if one is
referring to a home that has no insulation; however, if you are speak-
ing of a home with four inches of insulation and the new standards
require five inches of insulation it might not be reasonable to re-
quire the five inches.
Mr. Dah1backa felt the ordinance is a little ambiguous because it
is possible to interpret it to mean that existing residences must
meet all the standards but specifically only the attic standards
must be met. Also, he felt it would not be unreasonable to require a
$10-$15 inspection fee. He felt there were various ways a short-term
effort could be attained in inspecting the homes and suggested that
students taking vocational courses be allowed to help with the inspec-
tion.
Henry Bettencourt, realtor from Castro Valley, asked that the Council
specify as to who pays the inspection fee and the insulation and it
was explained that these types of items are negotiable between the
buyer and seller.
Mr. Engel reviewed with the Council the changes outlined by them
previously and suggested that it might be necessary to submit a
change to establish some standard for the attic fans and that per-
haps something should be said about a fan that would have to be of
such a nature as to make possible the minimum use of the air cool-
ing system - it is a standard but may not be enough of a standard.
Since there is no minimum standard maybe there should be a further
amendment to the effect that sUbject to standards to be adopted for
attic fans and amend the earlier part to require standards for attic
fans.
At this time the Council voted unanimously to introduce the ordinance,
as amended, which was read by title only.
Cm Futch stated that he intended to make a motion relative to an
increase in the building inspection fee; however, he would rather
get a recommendation from the staff as to what the fee should be
increased to.
ORD. RE FOOD VENDING
VEHICLES - ICE CREAM
TRUCKS
Cm Miller moved to adopt the ordinance related to the Municipal Code
amendment on food vending vehicles, seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Turner stated that he has received more calls relative to the
ice cream trucks and that is that people have been told the ice
cream trucks may no longer have any music at all and suggested
that the City Manager draft a letter to the owners of ice cream
trucks in the City of Livermore with respect to the intent of the
ordinance, and the staff was so directed.
At this time the motion to adopt the ordinance passed by unanimous
vote.
CM-28-268
July 22, 1974
(Food Vending Vehicles)
ORDINANCE NO. 845
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 9A, RELATING TO FOOD
PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF FOOD, BY THE ADDITION
OF A NEW ARTICLE, ARTICLE VII, RELATING TO FOOD VEND-
ING VEHICLES.
~mTTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
( re AB 172 3 )
Mr. Nolan, the Finance Director, reported that at the Finance Officers
Department of the League of California Cities recent convention, the
matter of authorizing cities to invest in commercial paper which ,qas
voted against by the finance officers; however, this was reversed
by a vote of the Resolutions Committee. r1r. Nolan stated that he
feels cities have adequate investment opportunity at present and
there would be some risk involved in this proposal adding that this
City would probably not be affected by this legislation because it
really is designed for larger cities having about $8 million in their
treasury at the end of the year. Also, the matter is optional - a
city will not be forced to invest.
Cm Turner stated that the real reason he wanted to discuss this bill
was to point out the risk factor and would like to go on record as
not supporting the measure and so moved, seconded by Cm Futch which
passed 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting).
Cm Miller explained that he would vote against the motion because
the investment would be optional and not mandatory and feels as
many options as possible should be left open.
(Resolution Condem-
ning McCormick Property)
Mr. Engel asked that the City Council pass a resolution of convenience
and necessity authorizing condemnation of the ~cCormick property for
our reservoir purposes, so moved by Cm Hiller, seconded by Futch
and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 121-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE AND A NON-EXCLUSIVE PERPETUAL EASE-
MENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAH WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL HAS DETER-
MINED ARE REQUIRED BY THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY
FOR RESERVOIR AND RELATED PURPOSES INCLUDING APPURTENANT
UTILITIES, SAID REAL PROPERTY LOCATED 3,700+ FEET NORTH
OF I-SaO AND 1,000+ FEET EAST OF DOOLAN ROAD, IN THE
COUNTY OF ALA~EDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
(Housirq for Census Takers)
Mr. Parness reminded the Council that there is a census to be taken
soon and it will be necessary to provide some office space, and asked
for some direction from the Council for possibly housing them in the
old police building.
Cm Futch asked if the City is required to furnish space for them and
the staff indicated that we are responsible for housing (office space)
for the period of time it takes them to complete the census.
There was discussion regarding the City's liability for these people
and Mayor Pritchard felt they are probably covered under Workmans
Compensation.
CM-28-269
July 22, 1974
(Census - Office Space)
Mayor pritchard moved to allow the City Manager to house the census
takers in the old Police Building, seconded by Cm Futch which passed
3-2 (Cm Miller and Turner dissenting).
(LARPD Discussion re Gelderville)
Cm Futch stated that LARPD plans to have a discussion at their
meeting regarding their position on Ge1dervi11e and would suggest
that someone from the Council be present to state the Council's
case.
Mr. Engel replied that the EIR has been submitted on Ge1dervi11e
and feels that from our standpoint it is perhaps a favorable EIR
and that perhaps the City should make a response in writing.
Cm Futch stated that the first meeting has been set for August 12th
and suggested that perhaps it would be desirable for the City Mana-
ger to make a presentation such as was done for LAFCO.
Cm Tirse11 stated that she has heard that the County staff has
recommended denial but nobody from the City staff could substan-
tiate the rumor.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, ~ayor Pritchard adjourned
the meeting at 11:20 p.m. to an e~ecutive session for the discussion
of an employment situation as well as various appointments to com-
mittees and boards.
/fkA~r/9~~
APPROVE
ATTEST
~~" ~-L/~
Deputy CJ.ty C1er
Livermore, California
~,
( \
i
CM-28-270
Special Meeting of July 29, 1974
A special meeting called by Mayor Pritchard was convened at
7:10 p.m., Monday, July 29, 1974, in the Municipal Court Cham-
bers, 39 South Livermore Avenue.
PRESENT
Those present were Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor
Pritchard; no members were absent.
The purpose of the meeting was a special executive session for
discussion of the following items:
1. Employment of a municipal officer - City Attorney
2. Labor relations
The executive session was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. to be resumed
immediately following the regular meeting.
Regular Meeting of July 29, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on July 29, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:02 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirse11 and Mayor Pritchard
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Counci1members as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - July 22, 1974
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote,
the minutes for the meeting of July 22, 1974, were approved, as
amended.
Prior to the vote Paul Tu11 stated that he made comments at that
meeting which were not included in the minutes.
OPEN FORUM
(re Holm Well Park
Flea Market)
Ray Walters, Co-chairman of the Holm Well Park Committee, stated that
they would like to obtain approval for a variance from a restriction
on zoning use permits they have tried to obtain from the Planning
Department for conducting a flea market. He explained that last year
they held a flea market and were within 20 feet of residential units
but that the ordinance requires that they not be closer than 200 feet
to residential dwellings. If they cannot be closer than 200 feet, it
means that they could only use half of the land. He then illustrated
the site on a map indicating the area they would like to use and stated
that a petition was circulated among the neighboring residents who voicec
no objection to the suggestion of a flea market being held on August 4th
and that only a few could not be contacted. He requested that they be
allowed the variance on the 200 ft. limitation. He added that they al-
ready have approximately $300 into the project and if they cannot use
all the area they may not be able to hold the flea market.
CM-28-27l
gu1y 29, 1974
(re Flea Market)
Mayor Pritchard commented that it should be understood that the
proceeds from the flea market will be going towards the develop-
ment of the Holm Well Park and asked Mr. Musso if this requires
a zoning use permit.
Mr. Musso stated that he granted the zoning use permit and in the
permit is the condition that they must remain 200 ft. from the
residential property.
Mr. Walters had mentioned that they received the notice just
last Thursday and it is a little late for them to change their
plans at this time and Cm Futch wondered when the permit was
applied for and Mr. Musso stated that as he recalls it was about
a week ago Friday and that no action was taken on the application
for about three days.
Cm Futch then asked Mr. Walters to point out the location of the
homes for which a signature was not obtained and it was noted
that all of the homes which back up to the proposed flea market
area have agreed to it with the exception of one homeowner who
was not contacted.
Cm Miller felt the condition probably applies to commercial flea
markets and,Mr. Musso indicated that this is not true, as it does
not speak to flea markets, specifically, but deals with assemblages
of a large number of people and vehicles which was interpreted
to mean that a flea market would be acceptable with the specified
conditions.
Cm Turner moved that the variance be approved based on the follow-
ing findings:
1. That the results of the flea market would clearly be a
benefit to the City.
2. The flea market will not be held for personal gain.
3. It would not be a group enjoying special privileges.
em Miller suggesting adding another finding which is that it would
not have adverse effects on the neighboring properties within 200
ft. since they all signed the petition, which em Turner accepted
as a fourth finding.
At this time the motion was seconded by em Miller who asked about
the mechanics for doing this and Mr. Engel explained that this
matter is taking a Council instituted appeal from the action of
the zoning administrator in designing the minor infraction of
variance and this is the next regular meeting following the fil-
ing of that appeal and the basis on which the Council is acting.
The motion passed unanimously.
(re Expanded Agendas)
Paul Tull, representing the American Taxpayers Union, stated that
there are 29 expanded agendas going out and knows of where nine
copies are going and wondered about the other 20, and was told
by the Mayor that Mr. Tull should check with the City Clerk re-
garding the matter.
Mr. Tu1l stated that as an interested party regarding taxes and
the conduct of the City Council in spending these taxes, the American
Taxpayers Union would like a copy of the expanded agenda.
CM-28-272
July 29, 1974
(re Expanded Agendas)
Cm Miller stated that he would also like to know the people who are
receiving copies of the expanded agenda and the Deputy City Clerk
explained that there are 18 copies; 5 of which go to the Council,
7 to Department Heads, 4 to newspapers, 1 to the library and 1 at
the podium.
Cm Miller noted that the library receives its copy on Friday night,
along with delivery of other copies and that at present there are
no organizations which receive copies. He then explained that due
to the expense of supplying expanded agendas and as to which organiza-
tion should receive a copy, he suggested that organizations and private
individuals not be allowed to receive copies, and the Council, some
time ago, agreed that these agendas be restricted.
Mr. Tu11 stated that he is sure there are many organizations that
would be willing to pay the cost of printing copies for their agenda
and could be billed annually for the cost of a weekly expanded agenda
and Cm Miller stated that this would be a decision that would have
to be left to the staff and the cost determined by them.
Mr. Tu11 stated that it costs ~~ a copy and for 40 sheets of
paper the agenda would be a cost of 20~.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolution Denying
Claim for Damage
The following resolution was adopted denying a claim:
RESOLUTION NO. 122-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING A CLAIM (Marsha Kelly)
Resolutions (6) Auth.
Levies Placed on Tax Rolls
The following resolutions were adopted authorizing special Assessment
District levies to be placed on tax roll to be collected by County of
Alameda as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 123-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Northern Sanitary Sewer Assessment District No. 1962-1)
RESOLUTION NO. 124-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
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. 125-74
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)
CM-28-273
July 29, 1974
RESOLUTION NO. 126-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Lincoln Shopping Center Assessment District No. 1963-1)
RESOLUTION NO. 127-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Portola Avenue Assessment District No. 1966-2)
RESOLUTION NO. 128-74
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. 1967-1)
Resolution re Appts.
to Beautification Comm.
The following resolution for appointments to the Beautification Com-
mittee was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 129-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING TIM CODY AND WES
NELSON TO THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE
Annual Training Report
(Police Department)
A report was submitted by Chief of Police, Lindgren, regarding the
1973-74 training given to the Livermore Police Department which in-
dicated that of the $30,000 spent for training, only $5,000 of this
came from tax money and that the rest was paid through the Peace
Officers Standards and Training fund of the State of California.
Minutes of Housing
Authority - 6/25/74
Minutes were received for the Housing Authority's meeting of
June 25, 1974 and were noted for filing.
Payroll & Claims
Dated 7/26/74
There were 157 claims in the amount of $467,672.53 and 304 payroll
warrants in the amount of $547,430.56, dated July 26, 1974
for a total of $547,430.56, approved and ordered paid by the Director
of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of em Futch, seconded by em Turner and by unanimous
vote, the Consent Calendar was approved with the deletion of Item
2.5 concerning the Bicentennial Committee which was removed for
later discussion at the request of Cm Miller.
Prior to the vote Paul Tu11 stated that he would like to make comments
regarding the Consent Calendar and was told that his time allowance
had nearly expired which was followed by discussion of the new time
restriction for sneakina rule.
CM-28-274
July 29, 1974
COMMUNICATION FROM JAYCEES
RE CITY FINANCIAL SUPPORT
OF ANNUAL RODEO PARADE
Discussion of whether or not the City will continue to match the funds
provided by the Rodeo Association for the annual rodeo parade was
postponed from the meeting of July 15th in order that the members
of the Livermore Stockmen's Rodeo Association might have the oppor-
tunity to address the City Council on the matter. Over the past
several years the Rodeo Association has made an annual contribution
of $1,200 for this event and the City has matched this sum.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to explain that contrary
to an article written in one of the local newspapers and contrary
to what some people may have said, the Livermore City Council is
not planning to discuss disbanding the Livermore Rodeo or any part
of it and that the Council, without exception, is very happy that the
Livermore Rodeo is here and part of our community. The only discus-
sion scheduled at this time is whether or not the City will continue
to provide funds for the rodeo parade put on by the Livermore Jaycees.
The tight money situation has necessitated discussion regarding spend-
ing of City money in various areas and which organizations would be
allowed to receive City funds. Last year there were no guidelines
set for funding organizations and the City ended up handing out money
to various organizations, nearly weekly, towards the end of the fiscal
year due to the fact there were no guidelines as to who should receive
funds. The Council discussed, during the budget session, whether or
not monies should be given to committees or organizations not offi-
cially recognized by the Council. The Council will probably come to
a decision as to whether or not the Livermore rodeo parade is an
officially recognized function to be funded.
Kenneth JOhnson, President of the Livermore Jaycees stated that he
noticed on the agenda that the Council is expecting a report from
them and they weren't aware of this so there is no report; however,
they are present to speak to the Council and noted that they are
definitely interested in continuing with the rodeo parade.
em Tirsel1 asked if Mr. Johnson could give some "ball park" figures
of how the $1,200 generally donated by the City, is spent.
Mr. Johnson replied that most of the money donated by the City goes
towards cash prizes and trophies.
em Miller stated that he would like to summarize the discussion which
took place during the budget session, explaining that the Council
concluded money would not be provided for private groups which are
not official City committees or commissions and this is a clear cut.
case, in his opinion, of where the line should be drawn with respect
to use of tax money for the support of group activities. As discussed
last time this matter was brought up, it was felt that if we are going
to spend money for parades, it would be a far better expenditure to
support a parade which consists wholly of Livermore citizens, such
as the 4th of July parade was, than one which is relatively commer-
cialized and has a lot of out of town entries. He went on to say
that the rodeo parade is not a community affair where all entries
are local, and furthermore, the Jaycees and Rodeo Association are
not official City commissioned groups and it would seem unwise to
provide money for their functions. There is money available through
the Rodeo Association since they make a profit on the rodeo, so it
would seem reasonable that they support the parade. The City has
not always funded a portion of the rodeo parade; this is fairly recent.
For many years it was supported by the Rodeo Association or by the
Chamber of Commerce, or both, and it would appear that we have gotten
into something we should never have gotten into and would suggest that
we not continue City financing, even though he would like to encourage
CM-28-275
July 29, 1974
(re Funds for Rodeo
Parade)
continuance of the rodeo parade. He then moved that the City no
longer subsidize the rodeo parade because it is not put on by a
City sponsored or commissioned committee, seconded by Cm Tirse1l
for discussion purposes.
Cm Tirse11 stated that she, too, is a fan of the rodeo parade
but looking over the expenses that are involved, i~ appears that
the City does, and always has, supported it not only for trophies
and prizes but there are costs that have never been mentioned and
that the City has borne every year, that we do not show as a bud-
get item, but we do because we support the rodeo parade in this
amount of money. Our Police Chief has given her a figure of $372
of personnel expenses for the parade, it costs Public Works $336
for cleanup, special preparation comes to $400 and special cleanup
after the parade amounts to $300. The total amount is a very
real sum in our budget and yet it is not budgeted for, specifically,
in our budget. This in every way indicates the Council's support
of the rodeo since these legitimate charges could be charged to
the parade itself; however, the Council did not wish to budget
it and charge it to the parade and for this reason would support
Cm Miller's motion and would hope that the Rodeo Association will
realize that this City is facing some severe financial situations
and perhaps the Rodeo Association can find funds amongst the profits
they derive from the rodeo for the parade.
Cm Turner stated that in his opinion the wording Livermore Rodeo
implies~that it is a City sponsored rodeo and that the total bene-
fit comes to the City of Livermore - to the merchants and the
people. He would like to see the City fund the event this year
but also because of the tight money situation would like to have
the opportunity to talk to the Jaycees about the possibility of a
fund raising program that might offset the costs of the parade.
He stated that he will not vote for the motion as it stands be-
cause he would prefer to support it for one more year.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he also intends to vote against the
motion for several reasons but the most significant reason being
that he feels this Council can say that this is a City sanctioned
activity - not only by saying so but by actions of the Council in
the past. The annual rodeo parade is something people look forward
to all year long and it is City wide and he feels it is something
everyone in town benefits from as much as the fireworks display
held on the 4th of July. He feels this would be the time for
the Council to say that it is an officially sanctioned civic
activity and will therefore vote against the motion.
em Futch stated that he also, certainly, supports the idea of the
rodeo parade but feels that the Council adopted a policy which was
considered sensible: to try to cut costs to various organizations
not officially a part of the City. The real costs that have been
brought up for the cleanup, pOlice, etc., is a contribution that the
City is making. He felt he could not support the cost for the
trophies; however, as this is something that could be provided by
businesses and Rodeo Association. He would encourage continued
support of the cleanup and police services.
Ron Gillette, 844 Cherokee Drive, asked about various costs and
Mr. Lee commented that he does not have an itemized list but there
are costs such as directional signs, barricades and the cost of
placing them and removing them.
Cm Miller commented that as Cm Tirsel1 pointed out the City already
contributes a substantial amount of money towards the rodeo and City
services provided and is a part of the budget for the Police
CM-28-276
July 29, 1974
(re Funding Rodeo
Parade)
Department and Public Works Department and others involved and that
this is a reasonable expenditure of money for the support of the rodeo.
It was noted that the motion speaks only to the cash subsidy of the
rodeo.
Joe Serpa stated that the merchants receive money from people who
come to the rodeo parade and the rodeo and that the City, in turn,
receives money back in taxes and Cm Miller explained that the mer-
chants doing the most business are those who operate bars and that
the City receives no revenue from bars.
At this time the motion passed 3-2 with Cm Turner and Mayor Pritchard
dissenting.
Mayor Pritchard explained that passage of the motion means that the
City will not give direct funding in the way of cash to the Jaycees
for sponsoring the parade and suggested that members of the Jaycee
meet with members of the Council to determine if there is a way fund-
ing of the parade can be worked out so that the parade can continue.
APPEAL RE DENIAL OF
VARIANCE - FRANK W. JUDGE
A variance for reduction of street frontage from 30 ft. to 5 ft. was
submitted to the Planning Commission by Frank W. Judge and was denied.
Mr. Judge has appealed the matter to the City Council and explained
that he would like to review the letter he has recently received from
the Planning Commission as well as advice from his attorney and request-
ed a continuance of the item, if possible, to August 12th.
Mayor Pritchard explained that the Council normally does not allow
last minute cancellation of items but inasmuch as there appears to
be no inconvenience to anyone he would entertain a motion to continue.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote
the matter was continued, as requested.
REPORT RE WATER RECLAMA-
TION PLANT BID AWARD
The City Manager reported that the matter of the water reclamation
plant bid was postponed from the meeting of July 22, to allow CAL-TRANS
the opportunity to make a statement regarding its intentions for a con-
tractual commitment on the use of our effluent waters. Their statement
has been received and the City Council has received a copy of it. Writ~
ten notice has also been received from the State Water Resources Board
of their approval of the federal offer and acceptance on our project
in the aggregate sum of $5,295,893. This constitutes the amount eligi-
ble for federal-state reimbursement. The one remaining contingency was
with the availability of the reservoir site. Condemnation proceedings
have been started and our City Attorney's office believes that a court
order can be obtained for a right of immediate possession upon three
days following a hearing. The contractor has agreed to a delay, in
this event, until August 23, pending our acquisiton of the property
either by negotiated sale or court order. It is recommended that the
City Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement and
award of the bid.
Mr. Parness stated that late this afternoon we have had, handcarried
from Sacramento, the final grant agreement from the state which has
been signed. The dollar amount that is inclusive, therein, does not
CM-28-277
July 29, 1974
(Water Reclamation Plant
Bid Award)
include the water reservoir; however, there is an attachment to the
agreement which says that the grantee will consumate a formal
contract with the Division of Highways for the use of water from
the reclaimed water reservoir prior to completion of the construction
of the project or the grantee will bear the entire cost of the
reclaimed water reservoir. Upon consumation of said agreement
the eligible cost shall be increased in the amount of the reservoir
and appurtenances as shown in Schedule A. This provides for us
to have the eligible grant amount increased by such a sum. There
is a formal statement attached to the agenda from CAL-TRANS which
I think clearly specifies that they will execute the agreement
whenever it can be cranked out by their legal office. As to the
acquisition of the reservoir site, it is in process. The City
Attorney met just today with the property owner - we are proceed-
ing with eminent domain and he is preparing to file those papers,
soon, with the property owner, upon their issuance by the court,
which will give us the right of immediate possession, upon the
requisite time having expired. The contractor has stated, by
formal letter, that an extension of one month will not cause any
liability, financial, or otherwise to be assumed by the City in
the acquisition of that site and I'm assured that a one month
term is adequate enough for us to obtain legal title to the property.
All of the contingencies, I think that were announced to you last
week, have been met.
.'
em Turner stated that it is his understanding we still have to award
the contract by August 3 which Mr. Parness stated is correct and
em Turner commented that the contractor really hasn't given us any-
thing. The way he understood it is that the contractor would give
us a 30-day extension before we had to award the contract and make a
decision.
Mr. Parness stated, no, it is absolutely critical to the contractor
that the contract be awarded, as it is with the EPA and the Water
Resources Board.
Cm Miller asked if~.we have total confirmation from the EPA as to their
approval, in writing, and Mr. Parness stated that we do, and Cm
Miller asked that he be allowed to review the written confirmation.
Mr. Engel explained that the original title search which we received
apparently described the wrong parcel. We ordered a new search with
the right description. As to Obtaining the right to use the pro-
perty,you must first file the action and obtain an order of immediate
possession. There is a time lag between the time it is filed and
the time possession is actually obtained - it is not a three day
lag, but three days after the papers are served on the owner. Mr.
Engel stated that he had talked with Mr. McCormick today and he says
he is cooperative. Mr. Engel stated he would arrange to mail the
papers to him in Santa Cruz and he will accept service. It is his
understanding that the sisters here in town will also cooperate and
will provide no difficulty in serving. Based on this, the City should
acquire possession and use three days after service is completed in
this manner. That is not tying it down and is not very conservative
but under the circumstances, it is a reasonable position.
Cm Miller asked if Mr. Engel is satisfied that we are no longer at
risk and Mr. Engel replied that he cannot say we are no longer at
risk until we have title in hand and all conditions have been met.
Cm Miller stated his concern about the $300,000 and would presume
that the letter from the contractor, plus the condemnation will
ultimately resolve the reservoir property, but there is no mention
in the letter about the $300,000 and Mr. Parness explained that it
is mentioned on the last page of conditions set out by the state.
CM-28-278
July 29, 1974
(Water Reclamation Plant
Bid Award)
em Miller remarked that the condition states if the agreement is
consummated then the eligible cost will be increased. If the High-
way Department decides at the last minute they are not going to go
then the City is stuck for $300,000.
Mr. Parness explained that Cm Miller's statement was correct and
we will have to rely upon the commitment from the second in charge
of the San Francisco office that they will execute the agreement.
They have been working with our staff now for about six months on
this and finally all of its conditions have been resolved, orally.
It is just a matter of getting the document prepared. The only
alternatives would be to not award the contract or deleting from it
the reservoir part, which he felt would be a terrible error.
Cm Futch asked why the reservoir part was $300,000 and if that was
the construction cost of the reservoir itself, and Mr. Lee explained
that it may be in excess of $300,000 and what they were talking about
was the cost of the reservoir and the pipelines leading to it, and
the grant portion is a percentage of that, so the cost is over
$300,000. Mr. Lee further stated that everything is covered in
the agreement with EPA and there does not appear to be any question
about getting an agreement with the state as they have given us a
letter of intent. We can reach an agreement with the state as it
is certainly to their advantage as they can get this water at a
great deal less cost.
Cm Futch asked when we expected to get the formal document and
Mr. Parness replied it should be within a month of two.
Mr. Lee added that the City Manager mentioned the options however
there is not an option to break out the reservoir and that part.
According to the consulting engineer, they are entwined in the plans
and specifications and we could not make that decision tonight to
breqk that out. There are parts of the plant that support the
reservoir and the pumping system and it just would not be practical
to break it out.
Cm Turner stated it made him very nervous to know that it took two
years to get a formal agreement; what if it takes two years to get
a formal agreement from the state.
Mr. Parness replied that we already have an Q~al agreement which
has taken something like six months to obtain on a very stringent
set of conditions.
Mr. Lee added that we have until the end of the project to get the
agreement with the state. We could take three or four months, if
necessary and we wouldn't lose a thing.
Cm Miller commented that he, too, felt uneasy as he did not like
the loose ends aspect of the matter. On the other hand he would
vote to award the bid, but very reluctantly, and this would probably
be the last time he would vote for anything without having everything
locked up first.
Mr. Parness explained that there was no alternative but to do it
by using the process we did and there wa nothing the staff could
have done aifferent1y than had been done.
em Miller felt that the project went out to bid too soon, and Mr.
Parness stated that authorization was gained by the State Water
Resources Board at the earliest possible time because we lost IS
months on their part in design and review and we have had to suffer
a significant amount of enginel!~ing costs we are going to have to..
buy and that state is not going to reimburse us for it. However it
is a temporary loss until such time as those designed features can
be installed to the incineration process and high lime process.
CM-2S-279
July 29, 1974
(Water Reclamation
Plant Bid Award)
em Miller stated he was not objecting to that because he knows
what happened to us with the state review and the rejection of
the high lime process and all the rest of that. But there were
these other things that should have gone along in advance and until
they are ready, he was concerned about not having everything locked
up.
Mr. Parness agreed that it was a very real concern, but would have
to argue that there was nothing that could have been done other
than what had been done.
Cm Turner asked if there would be any way in the future if something
like this is going to happen again, that they could have some ad-
vance warning - perhaps a progress report.
Mr. Parness stated he would like nothing better than to put every-
thing in its proper form, formally signed, sealed and delivered
before coming to the Council and every effort is made to do that.
However, in this instance, it could not be done. Mr. Parness asked
the Council to keep in mind that the designed feature being added is
to the primary benefit of the City, not the state, and that is why
the hesitancy on their part to allow it because it is a questionable
additive they just don't particularly like and having it qualify for
a matching grant. We are getting 87~% paid for by them and we had
to do a lot of arguing and talking to convince them of the need for
it and the only way they would do that is to see another state agency
get some benefit from it. Two months ago we didn't know we were
going to get a grant or in what amount. We didn't know they would
allow this feature.
Mayor Pritchard asked for a motion at this time, and Cm Futch moved
to adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the agreement and
award of bid. Motion was seconded by Cm Tirse1l.
Mr. Nevin McCormick stated he had talked to Mr. Engel today
concerning his property and the amount involved, and wanted to
emphasize that the amount being offered, they are not pleased with.
If there is the possibility of not putting the reservoir on their
property, that would be the finest thing that could happen to Doolan
Canyon. They would prefer that it be placed elsewhere. Three months
ago, when there was discussion about the acquisition of this south
property, they thought they would be caught on the short end of the
final paYment on this. Now he read in the paper where they are talk-
ing about a sum of $5~ million for this particular project, and the
amount the City has offered them for their land is absolutely ridi-
culous. The first offer was $11,000 for 8~ acres of prime property
in a 120 acre parcel; the second offer was in the neighborhood of
$14,500 and there was a possibility of an additional offer. Mr.
McCormick stated they realize the power of the eminent domain pro-
cedure, but he still thinks the property is being taken without con-
sideration for their feelings if it is taken for the price that has
been indicated, and that is the thought he would like to leave with
the Council.
Arnold Schindler General Manager for C. Norman Peterson Company,
the low bidder on the contract, asked if the motion that has been
proposed means the award of the contract in the full amount of their
bid of $5,211,000, and was told that it did.
Mr. Engel asked about the proposed ordinance amendment regarding
sewer service fees and Mr. Lee was asked to respond.
Mr. Lee explained that he was not positive just what form the
ordinance amendments have to take as there is a new requirement by
EPA. There has to be a cost recovery and some reimbursement to the
federal government from industries and some of the funds collected
CM-28-280
July 29, 1974
(Water Reclamation Plant
Bid Award)
would be retained for future or present expansions and some would
not be earmarked. He stated he does not know precisely how our
revenue program, both sewer service charge and sewer connection fee,
is going to fit into the final requirement. The Council will be
faced with some modifications which he will review, make a report on,
send to the EPA and explain what he can do, adding that he does not
anticipate there will be a severe change in our fee structure, but
we will be faced with that in a couple of months. He felt this
is what the City Attorney is concerned about.
Mr. Parness stated there is really no alternative to having that
ordinance modified. Being a grant recipient we.must institute
this revenue recovery program and at the last meeting he had re-
ported a 40-40-10 division of the monies, however this figure should
have been 50-40-10, which means that 50% of the amounts received
must be reimbursed to the federal government over a 30 year span.
There is no alternative to the City Council in doing this - it's a
matter of what revenue accrual might be used and how much must be cal-
culated, and the matter is being presently reviewed. This is a
brand new federal EPA revenue program and our City will be one of
the first cities or agencies to initiate the revenue return program.
Cm Tirse11 wondered if the property to be affected is to be the
industrial property surrounding the airport and Mr. Parness ex-
plained that it would affect any industrial user of our sewer plant.
Cm Futch felt that at the rate we are getting new industry it may not
be very practical and Mr. Parness replied that the law does not say
we have to return all the money - just 50% of the amount we collect
must be reimbursed to the federal government over a 30 year span
and it is not mandated that we return 100% of it.
Cm Futch asked if we would return 50% regardless of what the fee
might be and Mr. Parness stated this would be a reasonable amount.
Cm Tirsel1 commented that, in other words, this is like the sewer
assessment fee for residents which Mr. Parness stated is correct,
but we are not sure of whether or not it can be in the form of a
sewer service charge.
em Miller felt it would have been nice to know what ordinance
changes were necessary prior to gming into the grant and Mr. Parness
explained that seminars are still being held regarding this aspect
and this is something that could not be answered by the state.
Cm Futch remarked that we always seem to come up short when it comes
to expansion of the sewer plant.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time and it passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 130-74
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(C. Norman Peterson Co. Contractors)
REPORT RE TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 3607 - ARBOR
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
The Planning Director explained that several preliminary study
sessions and meetingawere held by the Planning Commission concern-
ing Tract 3607, property located south of Murdell Lane and Pearl
Drive. The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council
approval of the subject map subject to conditions outlined in their
staff report. Approval of the subdivision map was made possible
by the amendment to the moratorium ordinance of last April, whereby
CM-28-28l
July 29, 1974
(Tentative Tract 3607)
any block reserved for public use that the public leaders decided
they did not want could be subdivided which pertains to this par-
ticular property and some property owned by H.C. Elliott. After
it was determined by the School District that there would be no
school in this area the Planning Commission undertook studies to
try to work out the problem of the subdivision, particularly with
respect to working out a decent park for the area. The original
park site was laid out with the assumption that there would be a
school and park which would be integrated. There were several
alternatives reviewed and the plan favored was Plan No.2, which
provided for a street with lots backing Amber Way and Pearl. LARPD
did not like this plan because of the amount of street frontage and
the neighborhood ob;ected to it because the DeoD1e who bought
homes on Pearl and Amber would be deprived of the park they thought
they would have, as was their understanding at the time they pur-
chased their homes. The Fire Department also expressed concern
for proper access. The plan selected was a combination of a couple
of plans that would satisfy the developer, which he illustrated.
He also illustrated where the park would be located and what had
been done to resolve the park problem. It was noted that no public
hearing is involved in approving a subdivision map but there was
a hearing, in effect, regarding the design.
Cm Futch felt the illustration represents an awkward looking park
and there must be something, other than that recommended, which
could be provided as a park, and Mr. Musso stated that this plan
was the only plan felt to be acceptable by LARPD. This was followed
by discussion of why the other plans were felt to be unacceptable
for one reason or another.
Earl Mason of Associated Professions, representing the applicant,
Arbor Development Company, reminded the Council that the piece of
property was irregularly shaped and the park was already there in
a narrow configuration and the property was acquired by the developer
in this manner. The Planning Commission recommended that the de-
veloper work with the people, and they had meetings with the staff,
Fire Department, reviewed the different alternates and then out-
lined to the public what was best from a technical standpoint in
making the park more usable. This was all done even though the
developer had no requirement to go beyond his property line and
he could have left the park the way it was and give no access.
There is an existing tot lot in the northerly part that is already
developed and the people in the Park District made the point they
want to keep the ball fields as far from the tot lot as possible.
He felt the plan they finally decided upon satisfied 90-95% of the
people who attended the meeting.
,em. Turner asked if the developer would sell some of the land for
additional park, and Mr. Mason replied he would be willing to sell
one or two more lots at the same rate that they would pay park fees.
em Turner asked if he would sell at original cost, plus tax, and
Mr. Mason stated he felt it to be about the same thing, and they
have made an offer to the Park District. The Park District has
reviewed the recommended plan and felt it to be adequate.
Cm Futch moved to adopt the plan recommended by the Planning Com-
mission and suggested it might be appropriate to ask the Park
District to consider adding one or two lots; motion was seconded
by em Turner.
Cm Miller asked if we had a letter from the School District, and
was advised that this would be a condition of the final map. em
Miller asked about the top soil as he felt it would not be unreason-
able to ask that the top soil be replaced on the lots it was taken
from.
CM-28-282
July 29, 1974
(re Tentative Tract 3607)
em Miller moved to amend the motion by making, as a condition of the
final map, return of the top soil to the lots; motion was seconded
by Cm Tirsell.
em Tirsell at this time commended the Planning Commission for the
manner in which the planning was done for this tract.
Cm Miller added that the developer himself had been very helpful
and should also be commended, however he had made the statement he
would not vote for any tract map in the City of Livermore until we
reach the federal air quality standards. Ultimately every subdi-
vision that is added causes more automobile and increases the smog
conditions in this valley and ultimately increases our air pollution.
Although all the other circumstances of this tract map are as good
as any that have come before the Council, he cannot vote for any
more tract maps until our air quality reaches federal standards.
Cm Turner stated his concern about the fire safety and referred to
the letter from Fire Chief Baird which mentioned that consideration
should be given to a two-entrance concept.
Mr. Musso remarked that if this was done there would be four-way
intersections which would make a more hazardous situation.
Cm Turner commented that when a letter is included in a matter such
as this from the Fire Department, he would like to have a representa-
tive from the Department attend the Council meeting.
Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Parness to take this remark as a direction
and take whatever action necessary.
A vote was taken on the amendment to require return of the top soil
to the site, and passed unanimously. A vote was taken on the main
motion to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation, and the
motion passed 4-1 with Cm Miller dissenting.
RECESS
AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL COUNCILMEMBERS
PRESENT.
SUMMARY OF ACTION
PL. COMM. MEETING
A summary of action taken at the Planning Commission meeting of
July 23, 1974 was noted for filing.
REPORT RE BIKEWAYS
BROCHURE
Over a year ago representatives of the Livermore Bikeways Association
discussed, with the City Council, their hopes of having prepared a
bicycle brochure which would include a map of existing and planned
bike routes, laws, maintenance and safety procedures and other re-
lated topics. A draft has been prepared of the brochure which they
intend to distribute to all bicyclists, particularly school children.
The printing cost would not exceed $2,000. The proposed brochure
is considered to be definitely public service in nature and the City
Manager stated that it seems justified that the printing expense be
borne by the City.
em Tirsell felt that we should lobby for proper testing procedures
to make automobile operators alert to the increased bicycle traffic
CM-28-283
July 29, 1974
(re Bicycle Brochures)
and alert them to right and left turns across bicycle lanes. She
felt every test should contain a question alerting them to bicycle
safety in some way and the manual should include a whole section on
bicycle operation and th~ rules of the road, and she would like for
the Bikeways Association~initiate this lobbying procedure if possible.
Cm Tirsell also mentioned that Palo Alto paints their bicycle lanes
a violent green so that it cannot be confused with a traffic lane,
and it is working very well.
Mr. Lee was directed to write a letter to the City of Palo Alto in
this regard.
Bob Freis, 1322 Balboa, stated he was a bike rider and called the
Council's attention to a dangerous situation that occurs whenever
there is a bike lane that goes contrary to the usual traffic pattern
such as on East Avenue or Stanley Blvd. Cars coming into the main
street and making a right turn do not look to the right, but rather
to the left and there is no warning that bicycles are coming in
this contrary fashion. He stated there should be more of a warning
to motorists approaching the highway from the side streets.
Mr. Lee stated there is basic safety problems with putting two-way
bicycle traffic on one side of the street that will not be resolved
by signing. Bicycles are treated like cars from a legal standpoint
and from an operational standpoint function much as cars. The two-
way bicycle lanes should be avoided in the future as there is no
way to make it really safe.
Cm Turner referred to the intersection at Buena Vista and East Ave-
nue, stating that you cannot see the traffic unless you pull up into
the bike lane, and again suggested that the speed might be lowered
to 25 mph.
Gib Marguth, 1152 Farmington Way, stated the employees in his build-
ing have been concerned about the danger on East Avenue and the
bicyclists have learned to fear the intersection on Research Drive.
He remarked it is scary for a motorist to have to make a right hand
turn from a left hand lane, as people are driving 40-50 mph and cars
are right behind and a decision has to be made whether to run into
a bicyclist on one hand or have someone climb up on the back end
on the other hand. Also coming onto East Avenue, people have to
get out into the intersection to see past the trees and on the right
there are mailboxes and you cannot see bicyclists sometimes, and he
felt it was an extremely dangerous situation. He felt that perhaps
there should be stop signs or yield signs for bicycles for their own
protection.
Chuck Hartwig, 4319 Findlay Way, stated that the Bikeways Association
has formulated an opinion to delineate this problem, particularly
on westward flow, they have recommended to the County that they pur-
chase the additional land on the north side of East Avenue so there
could be a bike path to parallel East Avenue on the north side.
They also feel it might be advisable to put up warning signs for bi-
cyclists, or yield signs, as they travel on the south side of East
Avenue as they proceed west. Bicyclists should learn to yield as
cars turn south onto Vasco Avenue as well as Research Drive.
flue...sr. ~.
em Tirsell suggested that until such time as(there are two-way bike
trails on Stanley Blvd., that at El Caminit~ and Santa Maria Street
there be a yield sign placed on a temporary basis, and Mr. Lee
stated he would look into the situation and see what can be done
about it.
Cm Miller moved that the Council authorize the printing of the
brochure by the City, stating he felt it to be similar to the maps
which the City purchases from the Chamber. Motion was seconded by
Cm Tirsell and passed unanimously.
CM-28-284
July 29, 1974
REPORT RE DEPART-
MENTAL REORGANIZATION
~~.~
In response to the Industrial Advisory Board's concern for additional
administrative staff for the City of Livermore, the City Manager
prepared a written report in which he stated that at present he
feels the work effort related to industrial and commercial promotion
does not constitute a manpower demand singularly but that in time
hiring a person for this purpose may become necessary. Included
in the report was a list of the l4 department heads and their
responsibility for that particular department.
Cm Tirse1l wondered if Mr. Parness had received information regarding
a similar position for the City of San Jose and Mr. Parness stated
that information has been received but he has not had the opportunity
to review it, in depth, but noted that the position is not within a
community development department but rather a subdivision of the
City Manager's office, with several categories and personnel. He
noted that he has contacted the City of San Leandro and was told
that they do not have an industrial promotion position but rely solely
on the Chamber of Commerce and subsidize them quite heavily for this
advantage. He has contacted other cities but has not, as yet, received
a response.
Cm Tirse11 wondered if it would be a good idea to establish a tem-
porary position with the understanding that it would develop into a
full-time staff position in time, for promotion, and processing of
industrial and commercial client applications. Cm Tirse11 stated
that she is not familiar with how these people function but it would
not be reasonable for the Council to hire someone to for a staff
position, at a large expense, and not make them accountable. However,
it is entirely possible that the City might hire an industrial recruit-
er who is not able to get certain industry to come to Livermore, for
one reason or another, in some six months time. She felt it might
be reasonable for a person in this position to review with the City
Manager appointments and meetings taking place. She stated that she
is unexperienced in management and is not familiar with how such a
position would be evaluated. In other words, if this person doesn't
bring in $20 million of industry would he be fired? What would be
considered reasonable performance?
The City Manager stated that he feels the temporary position is
probably the way to go and that industrial and commercial promotion
would be the first priority and as progress is made the Council could
determine what additional administrative responsibility could be
assumed.
Cm Miller felt the idea of hiring someone for industrial promotion
is a good idea but would like to reflect upon some of the concerns
that have come to mind in considering this proposal: Such a person
could push for the desires of the developer by getting around our
zoning ordinances, the building inspector and our fees, rather than
being concerned about commercial businesses. He stated that he
is a little disillusioned with what has happened with our Industrial
Advisory Committee which started out with good intentions and ended
up by pushing the program of one of our local land developers and
being spokesmen for downgrading our ordinances. He added that he
does not mean to imply this is done by the majority of the committee.
He commented that he is concerned about what might happen in this
circumstance unless the ground rules for the operation are laid out
very clearly because everyone sees things differently. He is con-
cerned about a jOb that may find ways around things considered desira-
ble and which protect existing industry.
CM-28-285
July 29, 1974
(re Departmental
Reorganization)
Mayor Pritchard felt one of the main reasons this is being con-
sidered is because people have misunderstood what the staff has
attempted to do in carrying out council policy. He stated that
he feels the staff has never done anything to discourage anyone
but there is a certain misunderstanding among people and if some-
one is hired for this position it would be to help inform people
and help them in every way possible and explain Council policy
to applicants.
Cm Futch asked if this position is considered something which would
require full-time effort and the City Manager explained that in
his opinion it would not require full-time application of work
efforts and is not sure that it ever would for a city of our
size. Even cities which are much larger and conducting very ac-
tive commercial and industrial expansion programs do not have
full-time people assigned to it.
Cm Futch asked where the funds for this position would come from
and Mr. Parness stated that we would have to dig further into
our reserve but noted that he is somewhat concerned about the
position because if someone is hired with industrial and commercial
recruitment he may have nothing else to offer as far as input for
other allied types of City services and if someone is hired who
is schooled and experienced in public administration he may know
nothing about industrial recruitment or expansion.
Mr. Parness stated that with the salary offered he would hope
the City could retain someone with some experience and the
person most suited would be one with an affinity for public
relations and administration but may now be engaged in some
type of Chamber of Commerce work. The type of person to be
selected for the position is a very important decision.
Cm Tirse1l moved that the Council approve, in concept, a temporary
position of Industrial, Commerica1 and Community Development.
~J-. ~ 4J.t/.J..
Cm Mi~~~s~ated that he would be happy ifAcommercial and industrial
were~' em Tirsell stated that she would like industrial,
commercial, spelled out somehow - Community Development for Industrial
and Commercial purposes, and that advertisement for the position not
be done until about October 1, at which time a report is expected
regarding funds.
Cm Futch stated that he is reluctant to adopt the motion before
it is known that there will be funds available and that it is a
kind of commitment to vote for the motion. There has not been
much consideration of the financial situation and he would sug-
gest that this be laid out, in detail, before a vote is taken.
em Tirsell stated that the money will have to come f~~~
reserve and that there is not money in the budget for the purpose.
CUr. re'~l .11__..:1. em Futch wondered what the implication is for this
~ coming out of the reserve and Cm Miller pointed out that the Council
would be voting to adopt only in concept. The adoption of the motion
would allow the staff to look at a job description and see what the
market is.
Mayor Pritchard also agreed that adoption of the motion would not
be a commitment.
At this time the motion passed unanimously.
CM-28-286
July 29, 1974
REPORT RE AIRPORT MASTER
PLAN AND LAND USE STUDY
CONSULTANT CONTRACT
The City Manager reported that the City Council has authorized a
contractual agreement regarding the airport master plan and land
use study consultant; however, the contract was prepared by the
City and the FAA has now informud us that the contract form to be
used must be theirs. There would be no change, our City Attorney
has reviewed and approved the contract and it is recommended that
the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the
agreement.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse1l and by a 4-1 vote
(Mayor Pritchard dis~enting), the resolution was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 133-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(August W. Compton & Associates)
REPORT RE AB 2040
The City Manager submitted a statement from ABAG related to AB 2040,
which is a pending legislative matter and recommended that the City
Council adopt a motion in support of the present draft of the bill.
Cm Miller stated that things have been happening related to AB 2040,
and is not so sure the City Council would want to support it. One
of the things he is concerned about is the elimination of veto
power, taking over the Air Pollution Control District which would
destroy the indirect source regulations which should be based on
the air quality factor.
em Futch stated that it appears they are putting the environmental
agencies in with no authority.
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote,
the discussion was continued for one month.
MUNI. CODE AMEND.
RE INSULATION STANDARDS
Cm Futch stated that it is his understanding that if insulation
standards are not followed within six months of the sale of a
house or recording of a building it is considered a misdemeanor
and wondered if there could be a way for this to be taken care of
at the time of ownership transfer.
Cm Miller stated that he would agree in that there should be a
better way of enforcing the standards before property changes owner-
ship. If there are to be changes and the ordinance goes back to
the first reading he would like to suggest other changes. In the
attic fan requirements there are some standards and in the standards
it says that it shall be set to activate at 120 degrees and shut off
at 90 degrees and noted that different people recommend different
things, so he would suggest that the wording be that it be set to
activate at "not more than 120 degrees" and to shut off at "not less
than 90 degrees" and that the fan shall have a capability of a
complete air change "at least every five minutes" so if a larger
fan is provided this would be acceptable and not be so specific as
to a fan of exactly the right size.
em Futch had moved to introduce the ordinance but inasmuch as it
must go back to first reading he withdrew the motion.
CM-28-287
July 29, 1974
(re Insulation Standards)
Discussion took place between the City Attorney and the Council
regarding possible wording for the insulation standards with
respect to change of ownership and the amount of the fee for
the inspection.
The Council moved to the next agenda item to allow the City
Attorney time to work on the wording.
REPORT RE BICENTENNIAL
COMMITTEE (Removed from
Consent Calendar)
Cm Miller stated that he asked that the matter of the BiCentennial
Committee be removed for discussion because it is suggested that
the organizational structure and elected officers be submitted to
the City Council for confirmation. He stated that the City Council
is not appointing members to the committee, it is a self appointed
group and not an official City commissioned committee and that he
is not willing to approve those selected. He stated that he would
like to see the committee continue but feels it should not be
sponsored by the City.
Cm Turner stated that as he recalls the Council asked Don Bradley
to formulate the committee and that the Council would like the
opportunity to confirm the appointments.
Cm Tirse11 stated that she thought the Council gave direction to
the Community Affairs Committee to convene the meeting so it would
get started and then the staff would lend support to get it going
but it was her understanding the Council specifically did not want
it to be a City committee so that it would had broader appeal and
which Mayor Pritchard stated was his understanding.
Cm Miller commented that there are many civic groups in the community
not sponsored by the City but which have City affairs, such as the
Jaycees raft race and Cm Tirse11 stated that by the same token they
are not expected to keep minutes and make staff reports such as the
City commissioned committees.
Gib Marguth, 1152 Farmington, stated that, first of all, he and his
wife are not self appointed but were contacted and asked to serve as
chairmen of the committee. This is a community celebration, a family
celebration, and a national celebration, and the only way he would
participate would be to have his family act as chairmen of the BiCen-
tennial Committee. They discussed the matter and reviewed the types
of things considered to be fun and educational as well as inspirational
for the community and the people of the community. They talked with
others who had been asked to serve in this capacity and they seemed
to share the same kind of interest and outlook as to what this will
be. They would hope that they can proceed in broadening the scope
of the committee and getting more of the community and families in-
volved in it. What they now need from the City Council in confirming
the committee is not so much official sanctioning but rather to lend
its legislative credence and support in that it is an official committee
in communicating with the state and national committees. There is a
lot of merit in trying to do things for the community that do not
cost money but rather involve time and personal involvement and this
is also the type of thing they would like to pursue. There will be
costs in the way of staff time but at present it is not known what
will be needed in the way of funding, if any, and it is not known
what the program will be. At this time the only thing they request
is that they be allowed to proceed with the committee and getting
all of the newspapers involved and would hope that it touches the
lives of everyone in the community and would like the Council to
proceed in this way.
CM-28-288
July 29, 1974
(BiCentennial Committee)
Cm Tirsell moved that the City Council recognize an official BiCenten-
nial Committee for the purpose of communicating and receiving instruc-
tions from the national organizations for the BiCentennial, which died
for lack of a second.
Cm Miller moved that the City Council support the National BiCenten-
nial Commission and the volunteer activities of our local BiCentennial
Committee, seconded by Cm Tirsel1.
Cm Miller noted that this would be an offer for moral support and
would give official standing with the national organization.
Mr. Marguth stated that he feels the motion is very appropriate be-
cause this reflects what was said in the cover letter and Cm Miller
explained that the City does not want to be in the position of
approving or disapproving organization of the committee.
Cm. Tirsel1 remarked that there was no liaison with the
which she felt would be a very vital link. Mr. Marguth
but pointed out that the committee had not met as yet.
membership will be forthcoming.
schools
agreed
Such
Mayor Pritchard asked about the status of the City's representa-
tion on the committee, Don Bradley. Cm. Turner remarked that he
would prefer to discuss this later.
Barry Schrader, 811 Mohawk, indicated that the committee had the
understanding that City staff and time would be available and
that if Mr. Bradley continues there is no doubt but that the committee
will be part of the City of Livermore. Every other city in the
area has made the committee an official city committee although
it may be manned by a group of volunteers. He feels that the
help of the City staff is needed.
Cm Miller agreed that the issue is such help is not clear at
this time. Cm Turner said that he felt it should be an official
City committee. Mayor Pritchard remarked that the lack of
clarity is due to the fact that they are not sure of the extent
of city participation.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
WORDING IN ORDINANCE
RE INSULATION STANDARDS
At this time the Council returned to the item concerning introduction
of the ordinance related to insulation standards and Mr. Engel stated
that the length of time allowed to meet the insulation standards after
change of ownership could be reduced which was followed by discussion
regarding the residential building record made at the time of the
sale or change of ownership, and whether it would be possible to
include this insulation standards inspection in some type of certifi-
cation during the time of escrow.
After a brief discussion it was concluded that it would be best to
postpone the matter for later discussion and on motion of Cm Futch,
seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote the matter was put over
to the next Council meeting.
CM-28-289
July 29, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Quezaltenango Res.)
Mr. Musso asked if the Council would adopt a resolution of felici-
tation that could be presented to the City of Queza1tenango and
on motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote
the following resolution was adopted and will be presented by the
City's official Sister city Committee delegation during their next
visit in a couple of weeks.
RESOLUTION NO. 132-74
RESOLUTION OF GREETINGS TO QUEZALTENANGO, GUATEMALA
(re STEP Agreement)
The City Manager reported that he has received a copy of the STEP
agreement which specifies the governing agent and which employees
will be paid for under the grant and that there is a lot of techni-
cal information included with the agreement, as is generally the
case when a federal grant is involved.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote
the item was continued to August 12th at which time it will be on
the agenda.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(City Volunteer
Service Center)
Cm Turner stated that someone has suggested to him that the City
provide a service center to be conducted by a group of volunteers
that would give information such as how to contact the dog catcher,
how to contact the Welfare Department and various other agencies
that a person does not know how to contact. If the Council would
agree to this type of service there could be an advertisement in
the local papers asking for volunteer help.
Cm Tirsell felt there are organizations that might be interested
in taking this as a project if the Council could offer specific
direction.
Cm Turner indicated that he would like to gather more information
and present it to the Council and members of the Council requested
that this also be scheduled on the agenda in the future.
(Legal Contracts)
Cm Turner stated that he has recently heard that sometimes a con-
tract is prepared by someone other than the legal staff of the
City of Livermore and stated that he feels all legal contracts
should be prepared by the City's legal staff.
Mr. Parness indicated that sometimes in the process of discussing
a project a contract is prepared by someone else but is something
that must be approved by the City and the City Council.
(Condition of
Holmes street)
em Miller stated that he has received numerous complaints about the
rotten condition of Holmes Street and asked when Zone 7 plans to do
something about it.
CM-28-290
July 29, 1974
(re Holmes Street Paving)
Mr. Lee explained that a letter has been sent to the contractor
indicating that the condition of Holmes Street is not acceptable
and that further corrections would have to be made. There will be
additional work done and a meeting is scheduled between the City
/~ and Zone 7 to see what needs to be done.
(Stop Signs at
Murrieta & Portola)
Cm Miller stated that with the closing of two major streets and the
funneling of traffic to Murrieta Boulevard, there might be some merit
in adopting the suggestion presented by Mr. Faltings to provide stop
signs at Murrieta and portola Boulevard.
Mr. Parness stated that he would have to discuss this matter with
the County because Portola Boulevard is in the County at that
intersection and is not sure they would give consent to stop signs
on Portola Avenue.
(re Litigation)
Cm Miller noted that there will be an executive session after the
regular meeting this evening and asked that it also include dis-
cussion regarding possible litigation in addition to the scheduled
discussion on personnel matters.
(re Smog Alerts)
Cm Tirse11 stated that she has received a phone call from someone
who is concerned for people with lung problems who may not be
aware of the days on which a smog alert has been given and wondered
if there is any way warnings could be announced or publicized so
that more people are aware of days considered critical. She stated
that the person who phoned indicated that her child should not play
tennis, for example, on days there is a smog alert and unless one
happens to hear the noon news on a smog alert day you may not be
aware that there is a high oxident level on that particular day.
Mayor Pritchard stated that possibly the use of the Emergency
Services warning system could be used to alert people and that
this would be a good opportunity to note their effectiveness.
It was concluded that the staff would report back to the Council
regarding suggestions for an alert.
(re Abandonment of First
Street Right-of-Way)
Mayor Pritchard asked if action has been taken with regard to the
S.P. right-of-way on First Street and it was explained that this
matter has been postponed because it is not clear that First Street
will actually end up on the S.P. right-of-way.
Mr. Parness indicated that the matter has been referred to the Planning
Commission for review.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he brings the matter before the Council
because there is some property in that area for sale and the owner
is not able to give a definitive answer as to where the property
lines will be located.
CM-28-29l
July 29, 1974
(re First Street
Right-of-Way Area)
Cm Miller stated that when this was discussed in the past he offered
the suggestion that perhaps the staff could work out some kind of
mechanism for public works improvements or bonding, etc., which
would not hamper the development of the property owners but would
still preserve the building setback lines because the City does not
know whether or not First Street will end up on the S.P. right-of-way.
If it turns out that it is not on the S.P. right-of-way, we will need
the width of the setback lines. However, until the matter is completely
resolved which may be some three or four years, we don't dare abandon
something we can't get back.
Mr. Lee stated that we have reasonable expectation that First Street
will be located and there will be increasing pressure to make a de-
cision regarding the right-of-way for the abandoned portion of First
Street. Perhaps a bond could be provided for the improvements in
case it doesn't go and the other suggestion would be to say, yes,
that is the City's intention and not require the improvements.
Cm Futch suggested that the staff prepare a report regarding the
difference in width will be and Mayor Pritchard replied that it
is 15 ft. now and the City is requiring 38 ft.
Cm Miller agreed that there should be some type of report regarding
the significance of the setbacks as well as options to guarantee
that the City will get the amount needed.
(Corrections of
Council Minutes)
Mayor Pritchard stated that the correction of the minutes for the
Council meetings appears before the Open Forum on the agenda
and asked the City Manager if other people are allowed to par-
ticipate in the amendments and corrections to the minutes.
Mr. Parness stated that the City Council may comment on the
minutes. The Mayor asked if the Council should entertain the
idea of public discussion of the minutes and Mr. Parness felt
this is really a policy decision by the Council but it is con-
ceivable that there is citizenry input in the meeting that would
be recited in the minutes, perhaps recited incorrectly in the
minutes, and perhaps an individual should be allowed to make
corrections pertaining to his comments.
Cm Miller stated it should be made clear that the minutes are
not verbatim transcriptions and everything said in the meeting
is not included in the minutes even though they are fairly detailed.
(re Support of
Ridge1ands Bill)
Mayor Pritchard stated he has received a letter from Congressman
Stark asking that the City support his bill on ridge1ands and on
motion of Mayor Pritchard, seconded by em Turner and by unanimous
vote, the Council expressed support of the bill.
(re Police and
Fire Services)
Mayor Pritchard asked that the matter of citizen safety related to
police and fire protection be scheduled as Item 3.1 on the next
agenda, noting that Cm Turner has been trying to get this item on
the agenda.
Mr. Parness indicated that he didn't realize there was any rush on
this matter but it has been scheduled to appear either on the
August 12th or August 19th agenda.
CM-28-292
July 29, 1974
ADJOURNMENT
The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 11:30 p.m. to an adjourned
executive session to discuss personnel matters and possible
litigation.
ATTEST
APPROVE
Special Meeting of August 2, 1974
A special meeting was called to order in the conference room at City
Hall, 2250 First Street, at 12:06 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding.
PRESENT
Those present were Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor
Pritchard.
PURPOSE OF MEETING
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the amendments to the
resolution presented by the City Attorney and Mr. Musso with regard
to review of the amendments of the Alameda County General Plan re-
lated to Las Positas, New Town.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by em Miller and by unanimous
vote the resolution was adopted, as amended.
RESOLUTION NO. 131-74
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING A REVIEW OF THE PRO-
POSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY GENERAL
PLAN (LAS POSITAS, NEW TOWN).
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(re Tax Rate)
Cm Tirse1l stated she would like the matter of the tax rate prepared
by the City Attorney, to be discussed at the meeting of August 19th
seconded by Cm Turner which passed unanimously.
(re Knox Bill)
There was brief discussion regarding the Knox Bill and other material
received in the agenda packet.
(Relocation Project)
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse1l and by unanimous vote,
the staff was directed to compile a written report concerning the
track relocation project status, including reports from the department
heads, the City Manager, the City Attorney, the bond counsel and Burt
and Charles Lidster, for presentation at the meeting of August 12th.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
r 12:14 p.m. to an adjourned executive session.
CM-28-293
Regular Meeting of August 12, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on August 12, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:16 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Tirse11 and Mayor Pritchard
Absent:
Cm Miller and Futch (Excused for vacation)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Council members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL ITEM - PROJECT 4
Neil Miller, representative of the Tri-Va11ey Project 4 gave a
presentation on the project. The program is composed of a group'
of civic minded men and women who are interested in the development
and implementation of a specialized communication link between the
various institutions. The purpose of the program is to provide the
residents of institutions additional resources to aid in development
of their personal goals and to the combination of human problems which
compose the total life of the individual in the institution. It is
hoped that this can be accomplished with the use of state, federal
and local agencies and to upgrade the staff structures within the
institution by supplying these support services. He then reported
on the various activities such support would cover and methods by
which this can be accomplished, noting that various groups have
offered assistance such as the Merle Norman Cosmetic Company which
has offered cosmetics to the women residents and assistance in demon-
strations of how to style hair from people at the local Beauty College.
He also noted that one individual has offered to help in the way
of letting a resident use a spare room in her home so that this
person may have exposure with the outside world. Mr. Miller ex- .
p1ained that the name "Project 4" was selected because the Tri-Valley
communities are involved as well as the Santa Rita and Detoxification
Center and the name was chosen to indicate that they are a part
of the community. He then asked if the City of Livermore would
be willing to actively participate along with the Cities of Pleasanton
and Dublin. .-.-1.
~ ~
Cm Tisel1 stated that she would like t commend Mr. Miller and all
those involved, for their efforts, because she is very much in favor
of volunteer work and has been involved in this type of work in
Livermore for many years. She stated that she would like to point
out that volunteers can do a better job, 1n many ways, particularly
with respect to human relationship and for this reason finds the
project very appealing. There is a need for efforts in this area
and for lack of coordination the City of Livermore might not do
something for the new fourth community and for this reason appreciates
organization of efforts and would be interested in knowing more
about the plans as they are developed. She added that there is
a spirit in the efforts of the volunteer that come through when
people know you are not there because you are paid to be there but
rather because you want to be there. This is evident in hospitals
and many other places where the spirit of volunteers helps in eliminat-
ing differences and would move that the City Council endorse the
project, seconded by em Turner.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to emphasize that this is
a pilot project and all eyes of the penal system will be on this val-
ley to see how it works. Not only will the system be highly scru-
tinized but also the attitude of the people in the valley. We have an
CM-28-294
August 12, 1974
(Project 4)
opportunity to show people across the nation what type of citizens
we have in the valley and would wholeheartedly support what the
project 4 people are trying to do and would hope they would find
someone in this part of the valley who could help coordinate the
project.
At this time the motion passed unanimously.
OPEN FORm1
(re Speaking Time)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he objects to the limited
time allowed an individual to speak during the open forum and
the remainder of the meeting and asked that the Council rescind the
motion limi}:ing speakin9 t. i~e ,. -yl___-. - ..c.-<-~. ~. ~z->--( -tt--~-._j A-.'~ 141-.,. /~ 6i
~7>o~--.A_/ N(~ -*:.- l6- -, '-'" ',_4714 t~ '-':>-7' ~ t:4..J~.
There was no response in the way of rescinding the motion.
(Condition of Oak St.)
Paul Tull stated that he was riding a bicycle along Oak Street and
noticed that it is in need of repair and suggested that regardless
of the future plans for the street, it should be maintained in the
meantime.
(Newspaper Article re
Street Closures)
Mr. Tu1l read an .article which had appeared in the Independent, writ-
ten by A. Brewer, protesting the street closures and the streets which
have been left in a state of disrepair because of the track reloca-
tion project.
(Suggestion for
Routing Traffic)
Andrew Jorgensen, 509 Rincon, stated that he would like to make
a few suggestions relative to the street closures for alleviating
the traffic congestion problem at major intersections and suggested
that the lights located at lip" and Chestnut be moved to Murrieta
and 01ivina and that stop signs be installed at "P" Street at
Railroad Avenue giving the east-west traffic the right-of-way for
the Railroad Avenue traffic as well as the east-west traffic on
Chestnut at "P". He stated that he has spoken with engineers and
contractors who do road work and has been told that with a small
crew the North Livermore railroad crossing could be opened in a
few hours and suggested that this be looked at but not on a super-
ficial basis.
Mr. Jorgensen then briefly mentioned there is a heavy concentration
of police patrol at stop signs located at Chestnut and North ilL" and
pointed out the routes people are using to eliminate stopping and that
this is where the police should be patrolling.
(Trains Blocking
Intersections)
Mr. Jorgensen stated he has not been able to get a definitive ruling
on the length of time trains may block an intersection but believes
CM-28-295
August 12, 1974
they are not allowed to block an intersection for more than five
minutes. He stated that since the streets have been closed at
"P" and North Livermore Avenue, he has been stopped by the trains
on North Livermore Avenue at least half a dozen times and that
on four occassions it exceeded 15 minutes and on another occasion:_
he waited in excess of 25 minutes. He felt it is unreasonable
that cars must wait for 15-20 minutes when there is only one
intersection at the railroads.
Mayor Pritchard commented that he has observed people making
"Hollywood stops" at "L" Street where the 4-way stop has been
installed and that this should receive closer observance. He
also agreed that there is no reason the east-west traffic should
have to stop on Chestnut and asked the staff to look into this
suggestion.
(Request for Use of
Part of "J" Street)
John Boring, 5645 Crestmont Avenue, asked that a group of people
be allowed to use a block on "J" Street from 8:30 until about
10:00 p.m. on August 30, to hold a Christian rally with music and
gospel messages and that a letter pertaining to this matter has
been given to the Council.
Mayor Pritchard asked about the usual procedure in a case such
as this and Mr. Parness replied that he has asked the applicant
to submit a letter to the staff for review by the Fire Department
and Police Department as well as the Engineering Department and
would suggest that the letter be referred back to the staff for
their comments. It was noted that no problems with the request
are anticipated.
Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Boring when he must know if the street
can be closed, as requested, and Mr. Boring indicated that it
would best, in the interest of publicity, if an answer could be
given tonight; however, they could change the date for the activity.
It was moved by Cm Turner, seconded by em Tirsel1 and voted upon
unanimously to place the matter on the agenda of August 19th.
(Protest re Police
Dept. Disciplinary
Action - Officer Davies)
Robert Heath, 2988 Kennedy Street, stated that he and his wife
would like to protest the disciplinary action taken by the Police
Department towards Officer Richard Davies with a 30 day suspension
and demotion in rank. He requested that the Council take the
necessary action to impose a less severe penalty on behalf of
Officer Davies.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the matter has been taken under advise-
ment and that personnel matters of this nature are discussed in
executive session with the staff and the matter will be discussed.
(re Relocation Costs-
Grage Separation project)
Shirley Paradiso, owner of the El Pepe Restaurant, 191 No. Livermore,
stated that the City has found a building in which she can relocate
but the cost for the relocation would be about $20,000. She stated
that she cannot see putting $20,000 into someone else's building and
cm-28-296
August 12, 1974
(Relocation Costs -
Grade Separation Proj.)
that she would like to know what she can do because she must be out
of her present building by October 13th.
~
Mayor Pritchard asked if this information has been conveyed to Mr.
Lidster the Relocation Assistance Agent, and she indicated that she
has just given him all the bids. She explained that the building
selected was an office building and plumbing is necessary as well
as carpets and other items that will be necessary for use as a
restaurant. She also indicated that she agreed to take the building
because she had no other choice but that she does not like it be-
cause it is too small for this business. She stated that the bid
for plumbing, carpets and sprinkler system came to $10,740 and that
this amount of money will be going into someone else's building. New
regulations require updated refrigeration equipment, etc., which
means that she cannot move present equipment but will have to buy
new appliances.
Mr. Parness indicated that Mr. Lidster has been in contact wi~h
Mrs. Paradiso and that he is maintaining a constant attempt to
try to assist her to relocate at the lowest possible cost. It is
true that to try to relocate and to observe the new building code
requirements will be very costly, unfortunately, and there is only
a certain amount of money the City can assist her with.
Mrs. Paradiso stated that the City is willing to pay for the instal-
lation of carpets, sprinklers and plumbing and wondered why the City
can't just give her the money to use as a downpayment on her own
building elsewhere.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he is well aware that Mr. Lidster is
doing everything possible to help Mrs. Paradiso but would be interes-
ted in the details.
The City Manager was instructed to report back to the Council with
respect to what can and cannot be done in helping people to relocate.
PUBLIC HEARING RE
COLLECTION METHOD
FOR SEWER SERVICE CHARGE
Mr. Parness explained that the state statute requires the City to
hold a public hearing as to the method of collection for the sewer
service charge and that the charge or its amount is not pertinent.
The proposed method of collection is to have the residential charge
only placed on the property tax bill as prepared and collected by
the County. Industrial and commercial property will be billed
separately by the City.
At this time r1ayor Pritchard opened the public hearing.
There being no public testimony or written testimony, on motion of
Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote the public
hearing was closed.
(
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the proposed method of collection for sewer service charges was,
adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 134-74
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REPORT OF CITY FINANCE
DIRECTOR RE SEWER SERVICE AND USE CHARGES.
CM-28-297
August 12, 1974
PUBLIC HEARING RE PROPOSED
LOCAL BUS SERVICE TO LABS
A bus service is proposed for transportation to the laboratory
area and the municipal code requires the conduct of a public
hearing to allow public testimony from any local competing ser-
vice. Following the conduct of the public hearing it is recom-
mended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing the issu-
ance of a local license.
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing.
Terry Rosso, 786 Catalina Drive, stated that he has no connection
with Pioneer Lines or its sponsors and anyone who has studied
transit systems realizes that one of the advantages of a bus
system is its great flexibility. He stated that the proposed system will
not be composed of a super corporation with questionable motives
but rather by individuals who see the manifold needs for public
transportation in this valley and urged that the Council vote
favorably for the proposed bus system and that the matter be expe-
dited for the benefit of everyone.
On motion of em Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and by unanimous vote
the public hearing was closed.
Cm Tirsell noted that the PUC has given its permission for a route
to the laboratories and wondered if daytime use is planned and Mr. Gig-
liati replied that other plans will be made on the basis of input
from the residents of the City. They are available to run the buses
during the day and would be more than happy to provide this service
if it is warranted. At such time it will require only an amendment
from the PUC, and this is possible.
em Tirse11 then asked if the streets are constructed so that buses
can travel on them and Mr. Parness stated that they are; however,
it might be important to note that any fixtures or appurtenances
that the company may wish to place on the sidewalks, etc., be care-
fully monitored by the City. It has been a condition adopted by
the Council in the past that these types of things be subject to
the approval of the Public Works Director.
The public convenience and necessity justify the issuance of an
owner's permit pursuant to section 22.31 et seq. of the Livermore
City Code, 1959, to Robert H. Anderson and Louis J. Gig1iata dba
Pioneer Lines for operation of a local public bus service on the
terms and conditions set forth in their application.
~m Turne: stated he would appreciate a report of non-confidential
1nformat1on as to the effectiveness and perhaps how the company
feels the system is being accepted and Mr. Gig1iati stated he would
be happy to furnish the information.
C~ Turner moved th~t the Council adopt a motion authorizing a local
l:cense for operat1on of a transportation system in the City of
L1vermore, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and which passed by unanimous vote.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Contract
Amend.Amend. re Water
Conservation Funds
(Medeiros Parkway)
The City Manager reported that a minor amendment is required in the
contract with the state for acquisition of property to add to the
M7deiros Parkway project because the program was changed for acquisi-
t10n of two parcels rather than five and for 24.96 acres rather than
28.6 with respect to the State Land and Water Conservation Fund
Program.
CM-28-298
August l2, 1974
(Medeiros Parkway -
Contract Amendment)
RESOLUTION NO. 135-74
~.
I
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Department of Parks and Recreation - State of California)
\
'.
Report from Library
Board re Sunday Opening
A report was received from the Library Board in response to the City
Council's suggestion that the library be open on Sundays and noted
that they have concluded that such a change is not warranted at
this time. Their conclusion is based on reasons such as insufficient
interest among the public for Sunday hours, the necessity to hire
five additional part-time employees and a significant amount of cost
to the library annually for staff, utility and janitorial services.
Time for Signals
Flashing on First St.
A report was received from the Public Works Department relative
to traffic signal flashing operations on First Street in which it
was noted that a traffic count was taken at First Street and "L"
Street for weekend traffic between 10:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. and
the amount of traffic warrants that automatic signalization should
continue until 1:00 a.m. The Police Department concurs with the
recommendation for automatic signals until this time and the State
Department of Transportation has been notified and will be res-
ponsible for the change. It is recommended that the Council adopt
a motion approving the recommended change.
Beautification Committee
Minutes for 8/10/74
Minutes for the Beautification Committee's meeting of July 10, 1974
were noted for filing.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Tirse11, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote the Consent Calendar was approved with the deletion of Items
2.2 (Holmes Street Paving) and 2.4 (Utility Easement - Railroad Ave.).
These items will be placed on the agenda for August 19.
COMMUNICATION FROM
BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE
RE I-580 GROUP SUGGESTIONS
A eommunication was received from the Beautification Committee list-
ing suggestions submitted to them by the I-580 Group for improvements
in the Springtown-Greenvi11e North area. The Beautification Committee
feels the City Council should give consideration to these suggestions.
(
Mayor Pritchard commented that if it would meet with the approval
of the other members of the Council he would like the matter re-
ferred to the Public Works Department for response.
COMMUNICATION FROM
VCSD RE I-580 WIDENING
A letter was received from Lila Euler, Vice President of the Board
of Directors for the Valley Community Services District in which
CM-28-299
August 12, 1974
(re I-58D Widening)
support for only modified widening of I-580 was expressed. The
Board of Directors favors not more than six lanes with two bus-
carpool lanes and possible BART tracks as opposed to the eight
lanes plus two truck lanes and frontage roads as is being pro-
posed by the state.
Mayor Pritchard asked the City Manager to respond to Mrs. Euler
of-the Valley Community Services District.
COMMUNICATION RE GEN-
ERAL PLAN GUIDELINES
A letter from the governor's office was submitted to the City
Council concerning the California Council on Intergovernmental
Relations' adoption of General Plan guidelines. It was noted
that this matter will be referred to the Planning Commission
and staff for response.
REPORT RE P. C. DENIAL
OF VARIANCE FOR APP.
OF FRANK W. JUDGE
The matter of the appeal from the Planning Commission's denial of
an application by Frank W. Judge for a variance to allow reduction
of frontage was postponed from July 29th and Mr. Parness explained
that due to a family emergency Mr. Judge was called out of town
and has requested that the matter again be postponed for one week.
On motion of Cm Tirsel1, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote the matter was postponed until August 19th.
REPORT RE STRATEGIC
TEAM ENFORCEMENT PROG.CONTRACT
The matter of the Strategic Team Enforcement Program (STEP) agree-
ment was introduced at the meeting of July 29th but postponed so
that personal review of the agreement could be made and the City
Manager recommends adoption of a resolution authorizing execution
of the agreement.
em Tirse11 asked if the project director has been named and Mr.
Parness explained that, essentially, he will be the project
director with two staff members from our Police Department and
one from P1easanton and that evaluation will be done by the
Alameda County Criminal Justice Planning Board.
On motion of Cm Tirse1l, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote a resolution authorizing execution of the agreement to
establish the Strategic Team Enforcement Program, was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 136-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREE-
MENT (City of Pleasanton - STEP)
REPORT RE PLANNING
CONSULTANT CONTRACT
A draft copy of the proposed Planning Consultant contract has been
submitted to the Council and Mayor Pritchard stated that inasmuch
as this is an item that would be of interest to the entire Council
he would like the matter postponed until a full Council is present.
CM-28-300
August 12, 1974
(Planning Consultant
Contract)
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
approvel, the matter of the Planning Consultant contract was
-~ postponed until August 19th.
Mr. Parness wondered if it would be presumptive on his part to ask
the City Attorney's assistance in preparing a revised draft of the
consultant's agreement that would be in accordance with the Plan-
ning Commission's concerns as well as the staff concerns because
the consultant is worried about the time delay and this would
allow the council to have something in front of them at the next
meeting.
The Council concurred with the suggestion and it was noted that
both agreements will be available to the Council.
Cm Tirsell stated that she attended the Planning Commission meeting
when there was discussion of the item and would agree that the tim-
ing is extremely critical.
REPORT RE BUILDING
INSPECTOR VACANCY
The City Manager reported that the matter of the Building Inspector
vacancy was discussed during the budget session and at that time
he felt the work load did not warrant filling the vacancy and denied
the request. However, the Chief Building Inspector has reiterated
his concern for the need of staff assistance and Mr. Parness added
that he would have to agree that assistance is needed and would
recommend that the Council adopt a motion authorizing the filling of
the vacancy created by the resignation of an employee.
Mr. Herbert Street, Chief Building Inspector, reported that the
Southern Pacific shopping center will soon begin construction as
will other companies, and it will be absolutely essential to have
additional help within the next couple of months; also it will be
necessary to train the person hired for the job and he would suggest
that the Council not wait until the work load is too heavy before
hiring someone.
Cm Tirsell thanked Mr. Street for a very convincing and informative
report as to what an inspector's responsibilities are and stated
that even though Livermore is not growing in the way of tract develop-
ment, the industrial and commercial growth is increasing. She en-
dorsed the concept of upgrading construction and moved that the
staff position be filled immediately.
The motion was seconded by Cm Turner with the comment that perhaps
the position could be filled by someone working in another depart-
ment within the City. He stated that this suggestion is based on
the fact that there has been a slowdown in the building trades within
the City but emphasized that he is acutely aware of the fact that
a certain staff level must be maintained to provide the normal mainten-
ance within the City. He stated that, normally, when there is addition-
al work more people are hired to take care of the work load but since
work has been slack it would appear that we could rely upon the staff
~. now existing to take the extra load, either from the Building Department
or the Public Works Department and would like the motion to read
that efforts first be made to fill the vacancy from the existing
staff.
Mayor Pritchard commented that it may be possible that there
is no one available from the existing staff that would be
qualified in the necessary areas or with the proper experience.
CM-28-30l
August l2, 1974
(re Need for Addit-
ional Staff)
Mr. Parness replied that the suggestion made by Cm Turner is a
reasonable one and that he had considered it himself; however,
this is a highly technological type of job and there are no pros-
pects within the existing City staff with the exception of some
of the senior engineers that would be allowed to perform this type
of job. Mr. Parness added that he would have to, respectfully,
state that the staff is composed of the bare minimum number of
employees and the only department that might possibly be looked
at would be the Street Department who, during the budget session,
requested four more people and were allowed none. Their personnel
level is abnormally low, which means that there just is not anyone
available that could be used for this job.
Mayor Pritchard asked Cm Turner if he wanted the conditions men-
tioned by him a condition to the second to the motion and Cm
Turner stated that he would certainly have to accept the state-
ment made by the City Manager.
The City Manager emphasized that if there were any way possible
that the vacancy could be filled by existing staff, this would
be the first priority of selection.
Mayor Pritchard commented that even though there has been some
slack in building inspection of homes, commercial and industrial
development is even more critical and seems to be increasing consider-
ably. He also noted that a tract map was just approved last week
and homes will be built there also.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE BART SERVICE
ROUTES AND STOP LOCATIONS
The City Manager reported that the Council has received a copy
of a statement from the BART staff on the proposed basic peak
service routes and stop locations for BART and that the most
important aspect of the report deals with the routing and
prospective rates as well as station stops. He stated that
the City staff has discussed the proposal with the BART staff
and there is very little that can be suggested in the way of
modification to the proposal, unless the Council has suggestions.
He explained that the Pleasanton City Council had some sug-
gestions that they reported and the Council has received copies.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like an explanation of the
basic route and the peak route and Mr. Parness stated that
the Stanley Boulevard is known as the basic route and will
be used during the off-commute hours and the peak route would
be northerly on Livermore Avenue to the freeway during the
commute hours and would continue westerly.
em Tirsell noted that the peak service route does not have a
stop at the junior college area and Mr. Parness explained that
he feels this would not be practical because this would detract
from the express type of service, but the Council felt it might
be worthwhile to ask the BART people to consider a stop at Portola
and Murrieta as well as downtowa.
Cm Tirse11 moved that the City Council approve the routes pro-
posed by the BART staff with possible consideration of a stop
at Porto1a and Murrieta Boulevard, seconded by Cm Turner.
CM-28-302
August 12, 1974
(re BART Route)
(
Cm Turner asked when transportation to BART is anticipated for
the valley and Mr. Parness stated that we have been told that
service would be initiated on or about November 1st but this will
depend upon whether or not the trans-bay service will be open by
then. We have argued that regardless of whether or not the trans-
bay service is available we should receive service in the valley
and the BART people indicated that they would consider this and
the last action taken was BART people negotiating with the AC bus
people and then everything came to a hault because of the transit
strike. Mr. Parness stated that we have received indication that
the AC buses could be provided but not in the number the valley
would like but at least this would be something.
Mayor Pritchard asked if we will get new buses when the UMTA funds
are received and Mr. Parness replied that this is correct.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to have the staff monitor the
program after it gets underway in November and report back to the
Council in about six months after this time so that it can be de-
termined if the stops are in the proper locations.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE BIDS FOR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT - PHASE III
The City Manager reported that bids for the Capital Improvements
Project - Phase II were received on August 9th but only one bid
was submitted for the project and the Engineering Department has
reviewed it and has some questions regarding unit prices and at
this time the staff is not prepared to make a recommendation and
requested that the matter be postponed for one week.
On motion of Cm Tirse11, seconded by em Turner and by unanimous
vote the matter was postponed for one week.
Prior to the vote Cm Turner noted that with respect to the construc-
tion of the mini-park planned for the corner of First Street and
South Livermore Avenue, he would like the Council to again take into
consideration some type of parking for automobiles and bicycles in
that area.
PUBLIC HEARING SET RE
REZONING AREA BOUNDED BY
I-580; ADOPT. OF 14th
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
On motion of em Tirse11, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the Council set public hearings for rezoning of property bounded
by 1-580 and the proposed adoption of the 14th General Plan Amend-
ment for September 9, 1974.
P. C. MINUTES - 7/23/74
(
The Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of July 23, 1974
were noted for filing and Cm Tirse11 stated that she was very interes-
ted to see that the Planning Commission has established a subcommittee
to work on the zoning area, criteria and goals for relocating the
tracks and would be very interested in reading what their conclusion
might be.
CM-28-303
August l2, 1974
REPORT RE TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 1331 -
HUTKA INDUSTRIAL
Leon Horst explained that the Planning Commission voted to approve
the Parcel Map 1331, subject to conditions. One change the Planning
Commission d~d propose was the extension of the east-west street, as
yet unnamed, to the easterly property. They also recommended access
to service parcels Band C from the east-west street, as they were
concerned about the continuous development of the street and wan-
ted to be sure that if development occurred on Parcel J or any of
the easterly properties that adequate improvement would be constructed,
and they recommended approval subject to conditions imposed as listed
on the Planning staff report, dated July 23rd, and the engineering
considerations dated July 16, 1974.
Cm Turner asked if the land that had been rezoned along First Street
could possibly be turned into a semi-commercial development where
there would be many entrances and exits on and off First Street.
Mr. Horst explained that there are four parcels that could have
access from First Street.
Cm Tirsell asked if there was any way the Council could restrict
the access to the property and Mr. Horst stated it would require
redrawing of the tract map to provide it.
Cm Turner stated he could foresee two problems - one, a traffic
problem and two, it might encourage strip commercial zoning.
Cm Tirsell asked if the tract map, itself, in fact, prevents
egress off of First Street and was told that it did not but rather
it allows access off of First Street.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the zoning allows certain uses and in-
gress and egress from First Street would be desirable but felt no
use would be so intense as to cause a traffic hazard.
Cm Turner wondered if the map could be turned around so that there
was no frontage on First Street and if it would cause any problem,
as he felt this was a concern and something that should be explored.
He was also concerned about the exits and entrances onto First Street
and the number that would be allowed.
Mr. Horst stated that the Planning Commission had initiated a
study session relative to this subject. It was not discussed in
relation to this particular tract but it is a concern and is one
of the items on the study session for August 13.
Cm Tirsell questioned if the overpass considered for First Street
would affect this property and was told that it would not. She
did agree that there was a concern regarding strip commercial.
Cm Turner stated that if the Planning Commission is intending to
discuss this matter, even though not for this particular parcel,
he would move the matter be referred back to the Planning Commis-
sion for consideration. Motion was seconded by em Tirsell who asked
that it be referred back with the specific note that they look at
access to First Street from these properties.
Mr. Engel reminded the Council that they must act on the recommenda-
tion of the Planning Commission within 10 days unless they receive
permission from the applicant to refer it back to the Planning Com-
mission.
Ed Hutka stated he could understand the Council's concern; however,
he was amazed at how things can turn completely around. The Public
Works Department wanted him to provide many accesses to First Street
and did not want him to use anything except First Street and North-
mines Road for every parcel. Zoning is controlled and there are no
CM-28-304
August 12, 1974
(Hutka Parcel Map 1331)
uses that are not permitted; it is not a commercial area. The expense
of widening First Street was enormous and felt this property should
have some consideration. He felt if they are not allowed to use First
Street the obligations related to First Street should be given to
someone else. He felt that the concern was unfounded as it is control-
led by zoning and the concern of the Public Works was in the other
direction. Mr. Hutka added that their first approach to the City
for annexation was more than a year ago and the matter has dragged
on so that they are reluctant to delay it any longer, as they have
lost customers because they could not develop any further on the prop-
erty.
Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Hutka for permission to extend the decision
on the tract map for another week and Mr. Hutka reluctantly granted
permission; however he remarked that it was his understanding that it
was not a tract map and did not come under the tract map requirements.
The only reason it was before the Planning Commission and the City
Council was for consideration of basic streets and routes and he
understood that the east-west street was the basic consideration.
Cm Turner stated that although the matter had been under consideration
since January, this was the first opportunity the Council has had to
look at the tract map and would appreciate a one week delay.
A vote was taken on the motion which passed unanimously to refer the
matter back to the Planning Cornmmission for discussion and comment
which will take place tomorrow evening and the matter would be placed
on the agenda again August 19th.
REPORT RE SPECIAL TAX
OVERRIDE FOR POLICE
PERSONNEL ADDITIONS
A report was prepared by Cm Turner related to a tax override for
Fire and Police personnel additions and Cm Turner stated that it
would probably be best to delay discussion until such time as a
full Council is present; however he would like to state that other
cities have been contacted who have been successful in this endeavor
but we have not received information from them, as yet and the Chief
of Police has asked for information which he has not received. He
added that part of the proposal was to discuss this matter with
the Police and Fire Department to determine manning needs keeping
in mind that the budget does not allow hiring as many men as the
City would like to have and would like these departments to submit
an actual manpower requirement report to the Councilor the City
Manager with predictions for future needs so that this can be
put to the vote of the people in the way of a tax override.
Mayor Pritchard explained that what Cm Turner is suggesting is that
the Chief of Police and Chief of the Fire Department determine if
there is a need for additional personnel and then report to the
Council as to the number needed if budgetary restrictions were
eliminated.
Cm Turner explained that he was not trying to circumvent the City
Manager's authority in any way but in his opinion of all the City
staff, public safety manpower is the key issue in every City and
~ mention has been made with respect to the fact that sometimes the
amount of money available interferes with hiring the people necessary.
The reports should certainly go to the City Manager with him making
a recommendation to the Council as to the advisability of a tax
override proposal, and so moved.
r1ayor Pritchard stated that the motion states that the City Manager
should be directed to report to the Council regarding personnel needs
in public safety areas, possibly procuring personnel without the budge-
tary restrictions, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and passed unanimously.
CM-28-305
Cm Tirsell stated that she has no objection to having the police
and fire department make a report on the adequacy of their numbers..
However, she feels the report should contain more than statistical
support for increasing or decreasing staff. Further, she was re-
luctant to see the Council begin to determine staffing need; that
is the role of the City Manager. The police and fire departments
work for him. She would not be in favor of addint to those depart-
ments without his recommendation and justification.
August 12, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re Grade Separation
Project Status)
The City Manager stated that it has come to his attention that at
the meeting held by the Council last week the question of the status
of our grade separation project was raised and some inquiries were
made by the Council as to progress, or lack of progress. The Council
instructed the staff to look into the matter and report back. He
indicated that a report has been distributed to the Council and
would apologize that it did not appear on the agenda but the rea-
son for this is because the report has just been completed. He
felt the report is complete and accurate and asked that the Council
read the cover letter accompanying the report rather than for him
to take the Council time to read it hp.cause it is lengthy. He briefly
summarized the contents of the report and stated that people have
asked why various transactions could not have been concluded prior
to this time and he stated that if the City had received the formal
legal authorization to proceed with acquisition of property neces-
sary for the project, this could have been taken care of or begun
in the later part of 1973. It was not possible for the City to
engage in any part of the project until all the various aspects
of it were formally completed and authorization obtained, and author-
ization was not given until mid April 1974. He explained that recently
the Relocation Assistance Program has been enacted which allows cer-
tain benefits to those being dislocated as a result of public works
improvements and that the entanglement involved with this assistance
program has affected the progress of the construction work. He
explained that 41 parcels of property were involved in the relocation
and that each person had to be contacted and given an explanation
as to the details of the program, preparation of agreements, drafting
rights of occupancy permits, getting appraisals done, etc., which
took from the middle of April until the middle of June, and during
this time it was found that some mistakes had been made causing
delays. The streets were closed on June 5th and the contractor
started work shortly thereafter with notice to proceed. When the
contractor came to the point of doing major excavation work he mention-
ed the fact that the City had not acquired all the property necessary
for the work, which was true. Some of the condemnation notices
were not filed until June 14th and in addition to the time it takes
the court in reviewing the application and the hearing, the process
is lengthy. Usually the order for immediate possession is not receiv-
ed until 20 days thereafter and prior to July 1, 1972, we could occupy
the property 20 days after receiving the order for immediate possession;
but such is no longer the case. Property Owners or occupants now have
90 days thereafter to maintain residency. Taking all of this into
account we have striven, since April 16th, to obtain the rights-
of-way, but have just not been able to do so in their entirety and
many of the parcels must be obtained by condemnation proceedings
and we will not have the right of occupancy until October 14th for
these parcels. He felt the City has been very successful in performing
a great deal of relocation work and assisting many people who are
inconvenienced by the project. He has been told just late this
afternoon that of the three categories of ownerships or occupancies
involved, so far we have relocated two businesses out of seven and
that two of these have good prospects. There were six ownerships,
of which all but two have been relocated and out of 16 renters,
12 have been relocated. The other problem encountered was the utility
(intersection), the primary utilities being water and telephone.
These utilities serve primarily Taco Bell and Value Giant but Value
Giant can be relocated on Chestnut Street. The Taco Bell has to
be moved to intersect or have the lateral intersect the Chestnut
Street line as well and is being processed now. The water relocation
necessary on Livermore Avenue can take place as soon as all the
residents have been relocated. The main issue on the utility
CM-28-306
August 12, 1974
(Track Relocation Status)
relocation is the telephone line and unfortunately for the City
there is a major transcontinental telephone cable situated along
Livermore Avenue that must be moved. This is a very expensive and
delicate proposition. Fortunately, the utility companies did not
await the successful completion of all of the City's contractual
relationships - the utility companies proceeded with the necessary
engineering work and this has been going on for the past several
months. We have been in dispute with them over the financial respon-
sibility for the work; however. The telephone line relocation work
amounts to $117,000, estimated work, and the City has contested this
cost. Just recently the telephone company has agreed to assume the
final responsibility due to the efforts of our City Attorney in work-
ing with their legal department. They have done the engineering work
and have called for bids and we are told that the bids will be re-
ceived on August 27th. Work will proceed immediately thereafter. Due
to the special type of material necessary for this type of work the
material cannot be stored and will therefore not be received until
about the third week in September and it is estimated that it will
take 2,000 man hours to complete the work. This work is not anticipated
to be finished until the later part of October, and full construction
progress should be under way at this time. He then read from the
report submitted to the Council as to the delay in which it was
pointed out that the major problem was in the relocation of property
owners and tenants and mistakes made in observing the provisions and
statues concerning the Brathwaite law. The alternative would have
been to go to bid after all the purchases were made and after the
City had received acquisition of the necessary right-of-way and
after the utility lines had been relocated. The staff and consultant
sources argued against this alternative, however, due to the fact that
a new bid would have been several hundred thousand dollars higher than
the one at hand and even doubtful that a bid would have been received
because of the shortage of major construction items and supplies and
in addition to the fact it would have been the third time the City
solicited bid proposals for that subject program. Progress will be
under way on or around November l, and until this date everything
will be done to get the project moving and to ease the inconveniences
and relocation difficulties of the affected parties. As to the grade
separation work on "P" Street, he has been informed that this can
commence as soon as one remaining property ownership can be obtained,
which will be done by condemnation proceedings and occupancy by the
City can be made as of the first week in September, as there are
no relocation entitlements involved. Reopening of North Livermore
Avenue can be done with little cost and permit the reactivation of
the crossing signals and closure of construction holes which would
allow north-south traffic until such time as the grade separation
construction can commence. He then asked that the Council review
all the information submitted to them regarding the delays to the
project and urged that North Livermore Avenue be reopened.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse11 and by unanimous vote
permission was given the staff for the reopening of North Livermore
Avenue.
It was noted that the reopening of North Livermore Avenue would allow
north-south traffic flow for at least six weeks.
('
Cm Turner stated that the report is a very complete report and really
appreciates receiving the information provided in the report.
I1r. Heath thanked the Council for the motion noting that a lot of
motorists are using the sidewalk on North Livermore Avenue because
the street is closed.
CM-28-307
August l2, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Redistricting of
Supervisors)
Cm Turner wondered if a letter had been sent to the County regarding
this City's interest in giving input on the redistricting of super-
visors, and it was noted that there had been some discussion regard-
ing the matter. The staff was then directed to prepare such a letter.
Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding hearings and discussions
are to take place about November 1975 and would like to get on their
mailing list.
(Office Space for
Councilmembers)
Cm Turner stated that he would like the Councilmembers to have
office space in City Hall and the justification for this being that,
essentially, the Council is invisible to the public and often the
public does not know how to contact them. He also feels that as
an elected official he is a part of the City and would like to have
office space in the City Hall, and perhaps there could be a telephone
number listed for City Hall that people can call.
Mayor Pritchard stated that, perhaps, the Councilmembers could work
out some kind of schedule so that the various members can make a
point of being in the office during certain hours.
Cm Turner moved that the City Manager be directed to obtain space,
within the City Hall, for the Councilmembers, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Turner stated that he would suggest that the Council be allowed
to use the conference room in City Hall.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote, and Mayor Pritchard
stated that this includes possible input from Cm Miller and Futch.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels very strongly about establishing
an "open door" policy and scheduling regular hours for the Councilmem-
bers as he feels this would alleviate some of the problems he is exper-
iencing.
(Alameda County
P. C. Meeting)
Cm Tirsel1 stated that she had attended the Alameda County Planning
Commission's meeting regarding the Las positas proposal. Mr. Engel
presented a written position of the City and copies will be made
available. No action was taken and the hearing was continued to
August 29th at Granada High School multi-purpose room at 7:30 p.m.
(Valley Planning Comm.)
Cm Tirsell reported that she had attended a meeting of the regional
Valley Planning Committee and with reference to the reorganization
she~~ll_submit a report for an agenda item.. . /
/71l1L1Lff.z- / ~ _ +- ~. ~ ' .,~ I. /l . -+;---
'v -- /I .,t.L''-'~ C'JC...,L.- ~ ~ ~V ,<-"'-~;;K:.-"'-/ ,,~<..L('
~ /11. 1AA4-e, ,-," -
_ ./., ) -..I- ,~ -f- --/J,,' ~/J .
_7" ~ .~X/ Y..J-";...LP ~ '~ ~'..<:.... ~ /~ ~'/C a;.,. 7CJL,,~~/
28 308 .' ~ (j .~/.~ /)- -I /7.,. /
CM- - ---<.,;:. ?:{,~ '-V'~ 0/.lCt.{t-~...::u.4.- i\'-ur~ .cK~~~
~(...u-"-p~-x- .J,' . _.~.. t-/" 'l,/ f i~, ,J~J
~ _' .".._ ../.'_t:t:~r~. ~~__
( iV U . , ..
-;(/~_,.,.<-~ . ~Tn~d-~ "
r
August l2, 1974
(Status of City Sign)
Cm Tirsell asked about the status of the City sign at the golf course
and Mr. Parness reported that of the bids received for reconstruction
work of the golf course club house, the bids were much higher than
the estimated amount and the bid for the sign reconstruction was
$l,600 and only $200 less than this amount if the same materials
are used.
(re Status of Kissell
Horne s )
Cm Tirsell asked the status of the Kissell homes to be completed in
the Bevilacqua tract north of I-580 and Mr. Parness stated that they
are under construction and all the contractual requirements have been
met with the exception of the bridge. They intend to appeal to the
Council with respect to this item at the next Council meeting.
(re Specimen Tree at
College and Arroyo Rd)
Cm Tirsell stated that Tim Cody of the Beautification Committee had
contacted her regarding a tree on the First Baptist Church Property
which was moved there by Mr. Mehran about five years ago and is
apparently very valuable. The church is now planning to put in a
parking lot and Mr. Cody wondered if the Council would contact Mr.
Mehran and instead of requiring the cash for the top soil which had
been removed, have him move the tree. If this cannot be negotiated
they will place a planter box around the tree, but they would rather
not do that.
Mr. Engel advised that payment has already been received for the
top soil.
Cm Tirsell asked the staff to contact the Park and Tree Department
and determine how much it would cost to move the tree as the Beauti-
fication Committee would like to have the tree preserved and notify
Mr. Cody.
(Scheduling of Rodeo
Parade on Agenda)
Mayor Pritchard asked that the matter of the rodeo parade again be
scheduled for discussion for August 19th because he would like to
present another proposal to the council that might be acceptable to
them.
(Institute on Human
Resources Development)
Mayor Pritchard noted that the League of Californi Cities is announc-
ing an institute on Human Resources Development on September II thru
13th and stated that the Council might be interested in receiving
material related to it.
ATTEST
ADJOURNMENT
meeting was adjourned
ersonne1 matters.
~
There being no further Council business,
at 10:45 p.m. to executive sessio to
APPROVE
CM-28-309
Special Meeting of August l6, 1974
A special meeting was called by Mayor Pritchard and convened at
1:00 p.m. on Friday, August l6, 1974, in the Conference Room, City
Hall, 2250 First Street. The purpose of the meeting was as follows:
Discussion of legal matters, in particular pending
litigation by the Associated Building Industry of
Northern California.
PRESENT: Councilmembers Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT: Councilmembers Futch and Miller
It was the Council's decision to afford additional legal help for
our City Attorney and instructed him to approach an appropriate
firm and to provide a recommendation to the Council in this regard
at their meeting of August 19.
ADJOURNMENT
:::R::ting adjourned ~O_h ~
~ ~ ,ll!1yor i
ATTEST ('j~\~~L,'
. City Clerk
Regular Meeting of August 19, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on August 19, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:11 p.m., with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Cm Futch, Miller, Tirse11, Turner and Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Council members and those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
RECOGNITION OF SPECIAL GUESTS
Mayor Pritchard acknowledged the presence of a Patrol from Troop 900,
Boy Scouts of America, who were in attendance to work on their commu-
nication merit badge.
MINUTES
On motion of em Turner, seconded by Cm Tirse11, the minutes for the
meetings of July 29 and August 12, 1974, were approved as corrected.
em Futch and Miller abstained from voting on the minutes of August
12, as they were on vacation for that meeting.
Paul Tu11 also corrected a statement he had made at the meeting
of August 12, pertaining to his objection of time limitation for
speaking, which the Council accepted before approval of the minutes.
CM-28-310
August 19, 1974
OPEN FORUM
Paul Tu11, 2243 Linden Street, read a prepared statement concerning
what he felt to be discrimination against him and his dog, since
cats are not required to be licensed and dogs are.
em Miller agreed that Mr. Tu11 had a point about licensing cats, as
that is a good portion of our animal control expense, and suggested
that licensing of cats should perhaps be scheduled as an agenda item.
em Tirse11 agreed, however she stated that it would be very expensive
to catch cats, and hoped that some other City might come up with a
solution.
Cm Miller suggested that the staff attempt to obtain a report from
Fremont or any other City that does license cats.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Abatement of Abandoned
Vehicle Program)
The City Manager reported that under a new State program, financial
assistance will be awarded to our City for the 1974-75 fiscal year
for paYment in removing abandoned vehicles from the public streets.
The State will pay $17.50 for tow charges and has allocated a maximum
of $700.
RESOLUTION NO. 139-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(State of California)
(Resolutions Authorizing
and Directing Condemnation
re Two Parcels-Grade
Separation Project.)
It is necessary that the Council adopt two resolutions which are
required in condemnation proceedings so as to obtain the properties
without negotiation delays.
RESOLUTION NO. 137-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
A PERPETUAL UNDERGROUND EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY 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 WITHIN THE SAID CITY.
RESOLUTION NO. 138-74
('
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL HAS DETERMINED
IS REQUIRED BY THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR
PUBLIC USE, SAID REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LY-
ING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE GRADE SEPARATION
PROJECT/RAILROAD TRACK RELOCATION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
WITHIN THE SAID CITY.
CM-28-31l
August 19, 1974
(Minutes-Design Review Comm.)
Minutes of the study session of the Design Review Committee for
August 14, were noted for filing.
(Departmental Reports)
Departmental Reports were received as follows:
Airport Activity - July
Building Inspection Department - July
Fire Department - quarterly, April-June
Mosquito Abatement District - June
Municipal Court - July
Police and Pound Departments - July
Water Reclamation Plant - July
(payroll and Claims)
Two hundred twenty-one claims in the amount of $389,235.61 dated
August 15, 1974 and payroll warrants in the amount of $82,514.69,
dated July 24 and payroll warrants in the amount of $82,050.94,
dated August 9, 1974 were ordered paid as approved by the City
Manager.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of em Futch, seconded by em Turner, and by unanimous
approval the items on the Consent Calendar were approved.
COMMUNICATION FROM ABAG
RE PUBLIC MEETING
(Las Positas New Town)
A communication was received from ABAG advising that there would be
a public meeting on September 4, 1974 at 7:30 p.m. at Granada High
School Multi-Purpose Center regarding the Las Positas New Town.
Cm Miller remarked that ABAG has asked for various public officials
and interested citizens to indicate whether they would like to
testify with a maximum of ten minutes each, and added that he felt
some of the: ~ounci1 members should testify. em Miller suggested
that in view of the planning aspects and the legal aspects, Mr.
Musso, Mr. Engel and Miss Whittaker prepare a joint statement, repre-
senting the City's position for the Council's review, and he would
like to testify as an individual as well.
em Tirsell stated that at this meeting they would be making a deter-
mination of whether or not it is of regional significance and the
staff should respond on the basis of the planning aspects.
COMMUNICATION FROM ASSEMBLYMAN
BEE RE I-580 WIDENING
A communication was received from AssemblYman Carlos Bee advising
that he understands the position Livermore has taken regarding
the widening of Highway I-580, and could support the majority of
the opinion for the Valley when he speaks with Ca1 Trans in this
regard.
Mayor Pritchard stated there has also been received a letter from
Alan Cranston and one from the u.s. Dept of Transportation, and
one from the Washington office of the Dept. of Transportation in
this regard.
CM-28-3l2
August 19, 1974
(re I-580 Widening)
~,
\,
Cm Tirsel1 stated that when Highway 1 was proposed to be widened,
Sen. Cranston was the one that led the investigation which killed
that project and she felt he made a different determination now
when he said the State Transportation Committee should set forth the
standards.
RE RODEO PARADE
Mayor Pritchard had requested that the matter of the Rodeo Parade
be placed on the agenda for further consideration, and suggested
at this time that the Council fund the parade for this year as
he felt the majority of the people in Livermore wanted the parade
and that the City should continue to participate as they have in the
past.
Cm Futch moved that the matter be continued for one week; motion was
seconded by em Turner, and approved unanimously.
RECESS
A SHORT RECESS WAS CALLED AT THIS TIME TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO RE-
VIEW A LETTER FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH REGARD TO THE NEXT
AGENDA ITEM. MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT.
REPORT RE PM l33l
(Hutka)
Discussion of the PM 1331 submitted by Mr. Hutka was postponed from
the meeting of August 12 and referred to the Planning Commission for
consideration at their study session regarding lot and building orien-
tation on major highways.
The planning Director explained that this map was filed as a parcel
map because there was indication on the part of the City Council
that there should be some streets or subdivision, and he explained
the various street plans which were considered by the Planning
Commission prior to their recommendation for approval.
em Tirsell questioned where the overpass would be located, and Mr.
Lee explained the location of the overpass in conjunction with this
parcel map.
em Miller stated that although the ordinance does not specify front-
age on the street, a parcel map is like a subdivision, and the City
does control the design and improvement within. If it does, the
Council can require a street as part of control over design and
improvement.
Mr. Musso stated that if the Council is requiring any street, then
it becomes a matter of subdivision.
('
\,
Cm Miller stated that the Council has the same right to control de-
sign and improvement in a parcel map as in a subdivision, and in
that circumstance the Council can require a street to provide appro-
priate access. He wanted it made clear that the Council does have
the option of requiring a street, or easement.
Mr. Lee explained that with regard to access to Parcel "C", the Plan-
ning Commission considered the provision in the subdivision ordinance
that does allow accesses by easement to a site in industrial areas.
However, he felt this was an optional matter and should be considered
in cases where there is some special use, such as on the west side of
CM-28-313
-'~...,._.,.,---_._..._."'._-_.._---:-.__. ...._.._...~,~,~-_..........._.
August 19, 1974
(PM l331 - Hutka)
Mines Road where there is a public warehouse, and this would perhaps
lend itself very well to a private easement for access. But in an
industrial area where there may be very heavy type industry with
large trucks because the parcels are on the rail line, it would
seem inappropriate to have access not knowing the kinds of uses
that will be located there, where the turning around of trucks could
be a prOblem. There would also be the problem of signing. This
was the reason for the Public Works Department's recommendation
that there be a street extended to the parcels to the south. One
of the engineering considerations that should be noted is that the
median plan, as previously discussed, was required as a condition
of approval of the map. He added that in the engineering considera-
tions there was also mention of the extension of a street to the
east property line and a provision for a street extending northerly
to First street to form a loop and explained the reason for this.
Cm Futch wondered why the Planning Commission is recommending de-
letion of the requirements for 2/3 of the ultimate paved portions
of the north/south street to be improved which Mr. Musso explained.
Mr. Lee further explained that this recommendation went along with
another recommendation that this street be looped back into First
Street and the connection to First Street would require 2/3 of the
traveled width, constructed along the property line. Then as the
property adjacent to the east develops, the other third would
be improved by that developer. The Planning Commission is recom-
mending deleting this connection to First Street and if they do this
it will delete the 2/3 requirement and Mr. Musso explained that
it is not really deleting it but rather moving it further east and
deleting it on a certain parcel.
em ~urner stated that his concern is that there are too many accesses
onto First Street proposed which would create a traffic problem and
also foster strip commercial zoning.
Mayor Pritchard explained to the Councilmembers who were not present
at the last meeting that this was a primary concern brought up by
Cm Turner at the last meeting and the reason the Planning Commission
was again asked to discuss this point.
Ed Hutka, 1019 Angelica, stated that the parcel map indicates some-
thing the developer should hope to do and it is quite possible that
the parcels will not develop but as a courtesy and safety measure
the property was divided into some type of parcels. If a customer
comes in and asks for five acres then the map is completely changed;
however, the major streets for circulation do not change. He pointed
out that industrial maps are merely maps and not parcel maps and
this may have some bearing on the subject.
Mr. Musso explained that, normally, on the industrial parcel maps
the Planning Department has written them up so that the parcel
boundaries are not fixed like they are on a residential lot which
will allow them to move a lot line.
Cm Tirsel1 wondered how the streets could be planned if one doesn't
know what the size of the parcel might be and Mr. Musso stated that
the lot lines are set up so that they can be juggled with no problem.
em Turner stated that it would appear that each application for
design of the street layout would have to be approved by the City
Council and Mr. Hutka explained that the street layout would be in
the master plan with respect to the general circulation pattern and
generally the area is served rather than an individual building.
CM-28-3l4
August 19, 1974
(PM 1331 - Hutka)
c
Mayor Pritchard asked about the amount of acreage on the north side
of the supposed interior street and Mr. Hutka stated about 10 acres
and the Mayor wondered if the concern is that one industrial client
might possibly come in and want 10 acres taking all the frontage on
the street which Mr. Hutka stated is correct.
Mr. Hutka stated that he is beginning to wonder if lots of streets
will create a lot of little customers with small buildings rather
than the overall picture expected. The best area will be the most
expensive and a small business, overall, pays more because per square
footage of lot you get a greater return out of the small building.
em Miller stated that he would move that: a) the Council adopt the
Planning Commission's recommendation for extending the streets to
the property line and whenever one of the properties is developed
the street must be extended all the way through with no odd pieces;
and (b) that the Planning Commission's recommendation be amended to
provide for a street cul-de-sac instead of an easement, between par-
cels G and F. , _
j\I.I-" .
~fr !w L:r "f
em Futch ~1"A ':Yo~ P:t'ilalu3c"rd asked if he meant between ~ and ~ and
Cm Miller stated that the street goes between G and F so it provides
access to Parcels Band C.
He explained that the Planning Commission had recommended an ease-
ment in this area but would move that this be a street.
em Tirsell seconded the motion for discussion purposes.
em Tirsell asked Mr. Musso the difference between the provision of
an easement and a street which was explained.
Discussion followed with regard to access for parcels Band C and
Cm Futch wondered why a developer would come in at this time and
request all smaller lots if at a later time he would like to have
the flexibility of the large lots and it would appear that a better
planning procedure would be to come in with the larger lots at this
time and the City would not require as many streets and then, later,
if the developer or client would like to divide the parcels into
smaller lots the streets would be required to serve the smaller
lots.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he is not convinced of the necessity for
drawing the other street with a cul-de-sac because they already have
access and Cm Miller stated this is true but if Parcel C develops
separately, there needs to be some kind of plausible access.
Mr. Hutka stated that it would be economically impossible to pro-
vide streets on three sides, as it also affects the finishing of
North Mines Road because the area between there would become so
expensive that no one could afford it and it would just lie there.
em Miller asked if all three sides of the street will be charged to
one parcel which Mr. Hutka stated is true and Cm Miller wondered why
the public works improvements couldn't be amortized over the entire
property and Mr. Hutka stated that the people on the major street
pay more because they have better frontage.
~-
CM-28-3l5
~'-----~--..._...,_.~..----_.-
August 19, 1974
(PM 1331 - Hutka)
There was further discussion regarding access and em Miller stated
that the difference between his motion and the recommendation of
the Planning Commission is that he is asking that there be provision
for a street rather than an easement down to parcels Band C, and
is the only difference.
em Futch commented that this is not an ideal place for an easement
or a street and Mr. Lee explained that the easement as shown on
Mr. Hutka's map (the east/west) should definitely not be allowed;
the alternate access would be the north and south proposal and
stated that there would be more than one place it could be put in.
em Futch wondered if all the streets will go in immediately if just
parts of the parcel develop and Mr. Lee stated that Mr. Hutka would
have to commit himself to put in the streets, immediately, but in
the process of development, if, in fact, everything to the south
developed as one parcel he feels the staff and Council would be will-
ing to eliminate that requirement, and em Futch stated that this
is what he is looking for because Mr. Hutka wants flexibility in
case a developer comes in and wants a large parcel.
Mr. Lee stated that, on the other hand, requ1r1ng any of the streets
eliminates some of the flexibility. In some ways he is committing
himself once development begins.
em Turner wondered why all of this was not discussed prior to its
coming to the Council because there is a problem in the nature
of the design and Mr. Lee replied that it was discussed. Cm Turner
stated that it is the responsibility of the Council to insure that
the access is correct and a good one and that Mr. Hutka would either
have to accept it or redesign his development area and can't see
doing it half way.
em Futch stated that he agrees - if the Council approves this map
there must be adequate access and on the other hand if a customer
requests all of the property the road will not be necessary. Cm
Futch felt it would be best to show the larger parcels and if
it becomes necessary to develop smaller parcels the streets can be
put in at this time to serve the small parcels.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the reason the matter was brought up
is because there is already development in the south-westerly corner
and the easement the developer was proposing would be disruptive to
the proposed underpass of Northmines Road and if he reads Cm Futch
and Turner correctly they are saying that the Council should not
have to actually approve a subdivision of industrial property this
evening; however, we still have the problem of access to the parcel
that is not developed.
Cm Futch stated that this is not what he is saying but if the City
is faced with this he thinks it would have to require that the road
be put in (north and south).
em Miller stated that he would like to clarify what he thinks is
being said: If bigger parcels were proposed the City wouldn't
have to do anything, but on the other hand if the smaller parcels
are proposed the City would have to require proper access and his
motion is based on that which is before the Council - the smaller
parcels, and the Council should require the proper access. If there
is a future change the Council can always reconsider.
em Tirse11 wondered how one can justify a street on the east-west
line to serve Parcels H, I and J and not provide the same street
access for Parcel C.
CM-28-3l6
August 19, 1974
(PM 1331 - Hutka)
em Futch stated that if Mr. Hutka wants the map that is
before the Council approved, then the street access must be re-
quired to serve the small parcels and he can come in at a later
time for a modification showing larger lots and the Council can
~ reconsider the streets.
Mayor Pritchard asked why the map is before the Council, in that
case, and Mr. Musso stated that Mr. Hutka filed a subdivision map
because he wants to subdivide his property and the Mayor asked Mr.
Hutka why a subdivision map was filed.
Mr. Hutka stated that at one time there was a master plan and the
west side of North Mines Road was approved and the other map was
looked at by another Council and was a lot like this one. There
was some master planning done at that time and the reason that
portion was not considered was becaause it was in the County. He
suggested that perhaps the problem could be solved by taking the
three lots (one that doesn't have access) and making them long
lots and if the lots are to be divided later he can come back to
the Council.
em Turner felt Mr. Hutka is asking for a change and would be will-
ing to consider it if he could see the change but would not want
to make a decision without seeing the change.
Cm Futch pointed out that it is relatively a minor change being
suggested by Mr. Hutka.
em Miller stated that the Planning Commission recommendation is
that the east-west street go in, no matter what, and requires that
as soon as any development occurs that the street be contiguous so
that there will be no odd-parcels. The motion he has made can
read that an access south of the east-west street be required
and the map the Council has shows that it should go between
Parcels G and F but the Council does not have to require that
it be constructed right away, so if there is a change it can
be reconsidered.
Cm Futch stated that this is one way to do it but the other way
would be as the suggestion posed by Mr. Hutka by eliminating
Parcel C and make F and E'extend all the way back to the property
line.
em Miller stated it is quite possible to do this but somehow it
should be said in the subdivision map that any splits in the
properties will require street access because he is unwilling
to go through the process in one year of having an easement
appear and property split without having the proper street.
Cm Tirse1l stated that she would prefer to have the tract map,
as seen 5tonight, approved, with Cm Miller's motion and leave
it for amendment and not to require the north-south street at
this time which will allow for flexibility for the developer.
If Mr. Hutka chooses to redesign she would further amend the
motion that any different subdivision of the property would be
subject to the Council's approval, amendment seconded by Cm
Miller.
~
Mayor Pritchard asked if this could be a valid condition and Mr.
Lee stated that he believes so because there could be bonding for
the improvements and the street would show on the parcel map and
there could be an extension for the improvements for two years
and further extended if there is no change or the properties have
not developed.
CM-28-317
August 19, 1974
(PM 1331 - Hutka)
em Tirsel1 stated that she would like to add another amendment to
state that the Council accept or reject the map tonight and refer
it to the City Attorney for comment as to enforcement, or condi-
tioned upon approval of the legalities by the City Attorney.
Cm Futch felt it would still be better to adopt the suggestion made
by Mr. Hutka and wondered if the Council could have the flexibility
of looking at this also and em Miller stated that there is a certain
time in which the Council must act and thinks they must make a de-
cision tonight.
em Miller stated that he would secone the third part of Cm Tirse11's
amendment also.
Cm Turner stated that he feels the Council is making a big thing
out of the matter and feels that it should either be approved or
turned dowu. If it is turned down Mr. Hutka can simply redesign it;
however, at this point there are so many motions being made that he
feels it is confusing. He stated that he also feels the matter
should not have come to the Council in this manner and that there
should have been more emphasis put on the problems of access before
it came to the Council.
The City Attorney was asked about the legalities involved in this
matter and advised that the map should either be approved or dis-
approved and not to condition it. He stated that he too is confused
as to what the Council is requiring. Essentially, the jOb of the
Council is to determine whether or not it is acceptable.
em Tirse1l stated that in view of the comment made by the City Attorney
she would like to withdraw her amendment.
Mayor Pritchard restated the motion made by em Miller to approve the
map, as recommended by the Planning Commission with the condition
that the north-south easement be a fully constructed street rather
than an easement, with a turn around.
It was noted that if this is adopted Mr. Hutka can come back to
the Council with a redesign and ask that it be reviewed, if there
is to be a different arrangement of the properties.
Mr. Hutka stated that the Planning Commission went over and over
this very point and asked that the Council take into consideration
the time and recommendation of the planning Commission.
Richard Ryen, representative of the Livermore unitarian Fellowship,
located across the street from the industrial area, stated that
they are concerned with the development of the neighborhood and
read a petition of concern to the Council. They are concerned
for strip commercial and numerous driveways onto First Street and
urged that the Council require a major street frontage to eliminate
access and provide for an attractive entrance to the City.
At this time the motion passed 4-1 with Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
REPORT RE P. C. DENIAL
OF APPEAL FOR REDUCTION
OF FRONTAGE - F. W. Judge
Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Musso to explain the reasons for the
denial of the application of F. W. Judge for reduction of frontage
at 851 Las Flores Road and Mr. Musso explained that the issue is
a structure allowed to be built as a temporary structure in con-
junction with a tract sales and display operation and was actually
the tract sales office. Behind the office were four single family
dwellings on display for the Weisel-Reefier development. All of the
CM-28-3l8
August 19, 1974
(Appeal for Reduction
of Street Frontage - Judge)
~
(
,
facilities were to be temporary; however, at a later date the
developer succeeded in obtaining a variance to allow the four dwell-
ings to remain as part of the multiple residential complex and were
designed to be integrated into the apartment complex. Conditioned
to approval of the variance to allow the four houses was to remove
the office. Over a long period of time the City has been attempting
to abate the use since it was not removed in accordance with the vari-
ance and the property owner is now requesting a variance to allow the
office to remain as a structure as part of the apartment house develop-
ment. The main issue is that of setback - the structure does not meet
the setback requirement. If it were located elsewhere and the setback
satisfied, it would be permitted. The Planning Commission denied the
variance and the applicant has appealed the matter.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the original variance was a temporary variance
and Mr. Musso stated that the staff approved it during the time the
City was more lenient about sales and display operations, but it was
approved as a temporary use for one year at a time.
Frank Judge, 1223 Martin Street, Palo Alto, stated that he represents
KFJ who now owns the units and at the time the variance was granted
Reeder owned them. The office is not in front of the homes but rather
beside them. He stated that he would like to know why this matter
did not come up at the time the apartments were allowed to be built
because it would have been much easier to move it at that time, when
Reeder put them in behind the office. He stated that the building is
located across from HOliday Inn and they would prefer that the build-
ing remain because it is an attractive building and there would
be an empty space if it were removed. He then spoke to the staff
findings and in Item 1. he noted that it relates to privileges
enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical
zone classifications and asked what the other properties this refers
to because there are no other properties there. He stated that
finding No. 2 also relates to other properties and that No. 3 is
not founded because the Holiday Inn has been very emphatic in their
desire for the building to remain. He stated that if he has to
remove the building he is allowed to build a shack with the proper
setback and is exactly what he will do.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the building has not been used as a
sales office for some length of time and wondered why it was not
abated when the sales from the office ceased and Mr. Musso explained
that the original variance was granted in 1970 which stipulated
that they were to tear the building down after they received the
variance to keep the four houses and there have been a succession
of letters to try to abate it and there were other things involved
such as the sign which he believes Mr. Judge was responsible for
moving.
Mayor Pritchard stated that measures to abate the building have
been going on for almost four years and wondered why the matter
has never been taken to the District Attorney and Mr. Musso
stated that at one time a complaint was filed with the District
Attorney after which Mr. Judge came in and asked for a variance
which is his right in an attempt to make it conform.
r
Mr. Judge stated that he has no record of any correspondence to
the District Attorney or anything else and the only letter of rec-
ord is that related to purchase of the property by KFJ, adding
that at the time of purchase it was with the realization that the
variance was temporary and did receive a letter from the City Attor-
ney which indicated that the matter would have to be resolved,
one way or another, about the middle of June. He stated that he
has tried to get any correspondence which took place with Reeder
from them, to no avail and has no record of any of these letters.
Mr. Musso pointed out that the first letter that went to Mr. Judge
CM-28-319
August 19, 1974
(Appeal for Reduction of
Street Frontage - Judge)
was in March of 1973, when he became the owner of the property,
to the knowledge of the city.
The Mayor asked about the nature of this letter and Mr. Musso replied
that it was a letter indicating that KFJ is responsible for the
structure and asked that it be abated.
em Futch stated that at the time this matter came up before the ~
Planning Commission he was a Planning commissioner and recall~ .~
that the Plann~co~i~.took a very firm stand that.the ~*
was not to be ~ ~~ n a permanent basis, and was contl.nuously
the tone of the comments made related to this item by the Planning
Commission and also the City Council at that time, and can see
no justification for allowing the variance. The question is not
so much whether there are property owners adjacent to it that would
suffer but rather the fact that it would undermine the ordinance
because if a variance is granted to one property owner, everybody
has to be treated equally - and moved that the Planning Commission's
recommendation be upheld, seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Miller suggested that the words "of reasons used by the Planning
Commission" and the effect of this upholding the Planning Commission's
recommendation in the denial of the appeal, based on their findings.
Agreed to by the motion and second.
At this time the motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Judge stated that there is no way the building can be removed
prior to 9 months.
Cm Miller stated that he feels 9 months is unacceptable and would
suggest that the City Attorney be directed to investigate as to
what action would be appropriate in abating the building, seconded
by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Turner asked why 9 months would be considered too long a time
to be allowed to abate the building and it was noted that the variance
has been denied, it is illegal and 9 months is a very long time
to get rid of an illegal structure.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the meeting
resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE BIDS FOR
PHASE II PROJECTS
Mr. Lee reported that only one bid was received for the Phase II
Capital Improvements Project for the "K" Street Mall and the mini-
park to be located at the corner of First Street and South Livermore
Avenue. However, the bid was about 20% higher than the engineering
estimate and even though costs are increasing it has been determined
that the bid is excessive, there is no urgency for the project and
there is another mini-park scheduled for development at the west
corner of First Street which perhaps could be included with the
other work and would recommend that the bid not be awarded but
rather go out for bids again during the next construction season
so that these things can be included in other work. Mr. Lee then
explained the design proposed for development of the mini-park and
Cm Turner again stated that he would like to see parking for cars
provided in this area as he feels it is a large amount of money to
CM-28-320
August 19, 1974
(Cap. Imp. Projects-Ph. II)
expend merely for the purpose of beautification of an area, that
it could be pretty as well as functional. He felt the best use of
the land would be to provide bike parking, automobile parking and
beautification.
~'
~,
Discussion followed regarding possible parking and Cm Miller
pointed out that during the time this was discussed in the past
there was a discussion about the problems of access, and the
majority of the Council were opposed to the idea of providing park-
ing because it would take so much of the property leaving little
for beautification purposes. As he recalls, everyone agreed that
plenty of bike parking should be provided because this does not take
a huge amount of space.
Cm Turner stated that he feels this would be a better use of the
land and of the money and would move that the Council reconsider
the design since the City is going to wait for more bids, anyway.
Cm Tirse11 stated that she would like to second the motion because
in her opinion it should be possible to combine the utility of the
area and still screen the parking area, giving it a look of open
green from the street and if there are access problems it would
seem that they would not be too great because the cars were going
in and out of the gasoline station at the time it was located on
that corner and that probably the access problem was much worse
at that time. There is probably no way the parking in this part
of town can be increased unless provisions are made at the time
bits and pieces are reviewed and in her opinion beauty and utility
are possible.
Cm Futch stated that he is opposed to spending funds for a park on
that particular site but is also opposed to spending park funds for
an automobile parking lot and will therefore oppose the motion.
Paul Tull stated that no matter what the proposal might be for
that corner he feels that Captain Essex might be worried about
muggings that might take place in that area and that he might
like to comment about this aspect.
Captain Essex xstated that he has nothing to say unless the Council
would like to ask a specific question of him.
One member of the audience stated that it seems quite a few streets
in the City of Livermore are being made into parks and personally
avoids this particular intersection during rush hours because it
is already narrow and would suggest that more room be made for cars
by reducing the size of the proposed park and rounding off the cor-
ner for a right hand turn.
Mr. Lee explained that the corner has been moved back to provide
for the additional lane and that originally the sidewalk was out
another 12 ft. Moving back an additional amount would probably
not solve the problem because the problem is created further to
the south because there is not enough room to get into the right
hand turning lane, and there will probably have to be some parking
eliminated on South Livermore Avenue to help solve this problem.
('
At this time the motion failed 3-2 with Cm Futch, Miller and Mayor
Pritchard dissenting.
em Turner moved that the bids for the mini park on the southeast
corner of First Street and South Livermore Avenue and the South "K"
Street mall be rejected, seconded by Cm Miller and passed unanimously.
Mr. Lee stated that advertisement for bids was done in the normal
manner but this is specialized because of the sidewalk surfacing
CM-28-32l
_.---_._--~. ".- -~_._----"-"^._....,..
I
August 19, 1974
(Ph II-Cap. Imp. Projects)
and perhaps more bids were not received because of the season and
because construction workers are already involved with other jobs.
Perhaps a good time to call for bids once again would be at the
end of the calendar year or around October, November or December
and this might be included in some of the work done at the same
time First Street is being worked on.
~. em Miller stated that if the
.~gO out for bid in October or
/ other proj ect is not ready.
wait and advertise the major
Council would agree he would like to
November on these two alone, if the
If the responses come back poorly, we
project.
(Clubhouse Enlargement -
I-580 Sign Reconstruction)
Mr. Lee explained that bids were received on two other small projects -
enlargement of the clubhouse to supply additional space for the pro
golf shop, and for the modification of the I-580 sign. Only two
bids were received - low bid of $13,489 for the clubhouse, which is
an acceptable bid even though higher than anticipated. He did feel
it would be a good investment. The low bid for the sign modifica-
tion is $1,370, and he recommended that the bids be accepted.
Cm Futch stated he would like to make two motions and moved that
the bid on the clubhouse enlargement be accepted, seconded by Cm
Turner, and the motion passed unanimously to accept the bid from
Miller Enterprises in the amount of $13,489 for improvements to the
clubhouse at the golf course.
Cm Tirse11 pointed out that the Planning Department had presented a
sign design, indicating an estimate of $370. The Council had concurr-
ed that not more than $500 should be spent to replace the sign.
The Council had been informed that it was not the final design
and suggestions were offered by the Council and they were told
they would have a chance to review it again, and she was very surprised
that it went out to bid, and she is opposed to the amount of the
bid.
Mr. Parness replied that the final design was posted for the Council's
review and it was adopted.
Cm Miller remarked that the Council had never agreed that it should
go out to bid due to the amount of money they agreed should be spent,
and the fact that City forces were to do the work was their decision.
em Miller suggested that City forces should get to work on adapting
the sign, and as far as he was concerned the bids were unacceptable,
and moved that the bid be rejected, seconded by Cm Tirse1l. The
motion passed unanimously.
em Turner moved that they go back to the original figure they talked
about - $370, with a ceiling of $500 to reconstruct the sign, and
that City forces use the razed sign as much as possible to recon-
struct the sign, and this should be done within the next 60 days,
and the motion was seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Futch asked what the cost will be if the work is done by the City,
and Mr. Lee stated that the bid is a pretty good indication, as the
contractor is equipped to do the work and that is one reason it
became a job outside the expertise of City forces. In reply to
em Futch's question as to the cost, Mr. Lee stated it would cost
the same amount regardless of who does the work, and the City is
not equipped to do the work.
Cm Miller.offered again his suggestion for a cheaper modification
that could be done for a lot less than $500. For two and a half
years the question of legality of the sign has been raised as it
violates the sign ordinance, and it is time to get it changed now.
CM-28-322
August 19, 1974
(I-580 Sign Reconstruction)
Cm Turner remarked that the staff had informed the Council that the
sign could be reconstructed for $370 and the figure was not broken
down into materials only and labor only. If it cannot be done for
that amount, the staff should so advise them.
(
"
Mr. Musso explained that the figure was for materials only if the
work was done by the City staff.
Cm Tirsel1 indicated that she was ashamed of the existing sign in
its present condition, but was opposed to spending the amount that
has been bid. The staff has advised that the sign cannot be recon-
structed for $500, and she would support Cm Turner's motion, but if
it cannot be reconstructed for this amount, she would favor repair-
ing the existing sign.
Cm Miller stated that if the staff comes back with an amount similar
to the one proposed, he would suggest that the Council ask the Beau-
tification Committee to solicit bids.
Cm Turner was asked if his motion intended that the amount be for
material only or total of labor and material, and he replied that he
intended the $300/$500 to include both and it had been his under-
standing that it could be reconstructed for that amount. If the
staff advises that it cannot be done for this amount, the Council
will have to take that under consideration and make their decision
at that time.
Cm Miller stated he was asking specifically if a new sign can be built
for $300 to $500 or not and that the present sign be abated at the end
of 60 days regardless of whether or not a new sign is built.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time which failed with Cm
Miller, Futch and Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
Cm Miller moved the same motion, but that the sign be taken down
within 60 days; motion was seconded by Mayor Pritchard, but also
failed with Cm Futch, Tirsell and Turner dissenting.
em Turner moved the same motion, adding that the $300/$500 is the
figure given to the Council previously, and if the staff does not
feel the sign can be reconstructed at that price, they should pre-
sent a report to the Council in writing stating why it cannot be done
for that amount. Cm Miller suggested they say not more than $500
out of pocket cash. Motion was seconded by Mayor Pritchard, and
passed 4-1 with Cm Futch dissenting.
REPORT RE HOLMES STREET
PAVING
('
\
A report recommending acceptance of the trench paving along Holmes
street had been received from the Public Works Director at the
meeting of August l2, and continued to this meeting.
Cm Miller stated he was glad that the matter had been continued
because the statement made in the report that the job is not per-
fect, the appearance is patchy but the result is reasonably satis-
factory, is not satisfactory to him. If the Zone 7 contractor does
not return the street to its original condition, it is not satis-
factory to him or to the people who use Holmes Street, and he felt
some pressure should be put on Zone 7 and their contractor.
Mr. Lee stated he would have to agree that the results are not per-
fectly satisfactory, but whenever a street is cut into, there is a
problem to reconstruct it to its original condition. The staff will
again take the matter up with Zone 7 and the State Highway Department
in an endeavor to have the work done to the Council's satisfaction.
CM-28-323
August 19, 1974
(Holmes Street Paving)
The Council further discussed the condition of the street, and Cm
Turner moved that the Public Works Director be directed to recontact
Zone 7 to contact the contractor to advise them that the reconstruction
of Holmes Street is not satisfactory, and also to inform the State
Division of Highways; motion was seconded by Cm Miller.
Mr. Engel advised Mr. Lee to advise them specifically that it was in
violation of the encroachment permit granted to them as outlined that
it be maintained according to standards.
Franklin Halasz, 229 Garnet Drive, stated he was a bicyclist and
appreciated the Council's concern of the condition of the street.
A vote was taken on the motion which passed unanimously.
REPORTS RE STREET CLOSURES
The Festival '74 committee has requested several street closures for
the festival to be held September 28 and 29, and a report from the
Police Department indicated there was no objection to approval of the
request.
Cm Miller moved that the requested closure be granted as recommended
by the Police Department, seconded by em Tirse11, and the motion
passed unanimously. The streets to be closed are 5th Street between
Land K Streets; 4th Street between Land J Streets and K Street
between 3rd add 5th Streets.
(Salt Shaker Request)
A request had been received from the Salt Shaker that J Street be
closed between First and Second Streets on August 30, between 8:30
p.m. and 10:00 p.m. for a Christian street rally. A recommendation
was received from the Police Chief to deny the request.
Capt. Essex stated the Police Department was concerned on a couple
of points regarding this particular street closure - the street is
adjacent to three taverns and the time requested would be in conflict
with normal parking and use of the street, and they were also con-
cerned with the type of crowd that might attend the affair.
Mayor Pritchard commented that this was the same street that was
closed for the rodeo dance, and he did not feel that it should be
any more of a problem for a group of young people to hold a religious
meeting, and he asked Capt. Essex if he felt there would be more of
a police problem.
Capt. Essex replied that he did not feel there would be more of a
police problem, but he felt the area of conflict would be between
the participants of the rally and those attending the businesses,
whereas the street dance attendees are doing the same thing the
people in the bars are doing.
Cm Tirse11 moved the Council adopt the recommendation denying the
request, seconded by Cm Futch who stated he was sYmpathetic and
hoped the group would be able to find a place that would be more
acceptable and not have the potential problem of this location.
Mayor Pritchard stated he would have to oppose the motion as he did
not feel that this would be near the problem as a street dance and
not as much of a police problem, and did not feel they would be
giving the people equal protection under the law if they permitted
a street dance and denied this application.
em Miller remarked that this was a hard decision for him as he could
see the point made by the Police Department, but there is no differ-
ence between this situation and the one they just approved for street
closure, and he would vote against the motion.
CM-28-324
August 19, 1974
(Request for Street Closure
-Salt Shaker)
Cm Tirsell remarked she felt the Police Department was seeking to
prevent any conflict since the group would consist of young people
and there is the influence of the area.
r
\
A vote was taken on the motion which failed 4-1 with Cm Tirsell
in favor of the motion.
Cm Miller moved approval of the street closure, seconded by em Turner,
and the motion passed 4-1 with em Tirsell dissenting.
REPORT FROM PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR RE HEATHER LANE
BRIDGE - Tr. 2619
The Public Works Director explained that this matter pertained to the
Bevilacqua Tract 2619 wherein the City has a Memorandum of Understand-
ing with the Kissell Company for development, and one of the condi-
tions is that the Heather Lane bridge and appurtenant improvements be
undertaken. Mr. Lee presented a map indicating the extent of the
improvements which he explained in more detail. Apparently, the repre-
sentative for the Kissell Company did not understand the extent of
the required improvements, although the bond referred to in the Memoran-
dum of Understanding is very specific as to what improvements were
being bonded for.
Mayor Pritchard asked if Kissel Company had a copy of the bond, and
Mr. Lee replied that the matter was discussed this afternoon, and
the representative stated he did not recall having seen the bond,
however, it was part of the whole package agreement, bonds, etc.
in connection with the subdivision. The bond is in the amount of
$60,300 and was the subject of discussion at many Council meetings,
and ME. Lee felt that in discussing the bridge, assumed the appurte-
nant improvements were included, and since Kissell Company assumed
the obligations of the subdivision and should have had knowledge of
the extent of the obligations as specified in the bond - the com-
pletion of the streets, sewer, curbs, gutters, sidewalk, construc-
tion on Heather and Scenic Avenue between tracts 2440 and 2459 to
the requirements of the City, and to maintain said street the time
of acceptance by the City, and to construct the drainage structures
on Heather Way in conjunction with Tr. 2459.
Mayor Pritchard remarked that the agreement makes reference to the
City instigating procedures to call the bond and wondered what
happens to the money when the City obtains it from the bond.
Mr. Lee stated it would not be necessary for the City to proceed
with litigation against the bond if Kissell Company does the work
as outlined.
em Miller stated as he recalled the discussion Kissell Company would
do the work, and the City would institute the action to recover some
of the expense which was supposed to be paid by Bevilacqua, or their
successors.
Mr. Lee stated that the action has been instigated and is still
pending and can be reactivated.
r
Cm Miller felt that we had the obligation to pursue the bond as we
had promised Kissell Company that we would.
Dewey Watson, representing Kissell Company, stated there is some con-
fusion as it was their understanding they would not be responsible
for improvements other than the bridge as all references are to the
Heather Lane bridge and all discussions were regarding the bridge and
he had asked for plans and specifications a number of times for the
CM-28-325
August 19, 1974
(Heather Lane Bridge)
bridge and was told there were old ones but that Zone 7 has changed
the drainage plans and the bridge would be smaller. So a contract was
entered into and the company hired Earl Mason and had him contact
Zone 7, and that was when they first found out the additional require-
ments of the roadway. He does not recall seeing a copy of the
bond, but he may have, however he did not feel it is that controlling.
He felt there was a misunderstanding between Kissell Company and
the City, and suggested that it be left to litigation or arbitration,
but that they not let stand in the way of the building of the bridge,
of litigating the bond, completing the subdivision and selling
the lots. Mr. Watson felt they had reached an impasse that could be
resolved, which he had discussed with Mr. Lee and Mr. Engel, but
nothing definite had been worked out. He stated that the amount
involved was a matter of $30,000 and felt that this money should
come from the bonding compay. By way of a settlement they might
reach an agreement whereby the City would approve the subdivision
so the sales can begin without waiving any of its rights against
Kissell.
Cm Miller stated that Mr. Watson had mentioned that the City might
assign its rights to the bond to the Kissell Company, and wondered
if there was anything wrong with that proposal. He felt it would
solve the construction matter plus taking care of Kissell's problem
and satisfy the City's agreement.
Mr. Engel stated that this had been discussed, however he did not
think that Kissell was proposing they would proceed to construct
the roadway at their own cost and then pursue the bond. First,
they would want to be sure they will recover on the bond before
they construct the roadway.
Mr. Watson stated he had received a copy of the bond today and
he would like to talk to the attorney for the bonding company who
was previously sued on the bond and examine some of their records
as the bond was executed in 1964 and reactivated by letter agreement
from the bonding company in 1971, but they are running close to
the possibility of the statute of limitations bar, and there is
also the bar that they have a prior law suit. There are all kinds
of possible defenses to the law suit that would solve all the problems,
and he would want to investigate the matter thoroughly before commit-
ting Kissell to building the bridge and roadway. He did admit
that they were committed to building the bridge.
Cm Futch questioned if the Council could make the requirement of
future development the completion of the road, and Mr. Lee stated
it was possible, but it was a condition of the Bevilacqua Develop-
ment that the bridge and the approaches to it - the connection
between the old Springtown and the Bevilacqua area - be connected.
The responsibility was put over to the second unit, and Kissell
Company is now the developer of that second unit, and if it was put
over, it would be relieving them of the responsibility.
Cm Futch asked the City Attorney for his interpretation of the con-
tract, and Mr. Engel replied that interpretation of Sec. F is the
fundamental issue - whether Heather Lane bridge also means the con-
struction of the roadway. He has been given the facts of both sides.
Mr. Lee feels the roadway was in contemplation of the parties at the
time the agreement was entered into; Mr. Watson feels it was not
within contemplation of the parties, and when you reach that point,
you have an impasse which is resolved either by declaratory suit
or by sending it to arbitration, hoping to get a quicker determination
at less cost. If the City is right the ruling will be in our favor
and Kissell will agree to be bound and will then construct the
roadway.
Cm Miller suggested that the matter be referred back to the City
Attorney for a report as to a specific recommendation out of the
impasse.
CM-28-326
August 19, 1974
(Heather Lane Bridge)
/~
Mr. Engel stated it would be best if Mr. Watson received a favor-
able report from the bonding company, but the staff will make a
recommendation to the Council in any case.
The Council concurred they want to get out of this impasse, and Mr.
Engel added that the Council is legally obligated to get out of the
impasse one way or the other otherwise there could be exposure to
suit by Kissell.
\
em Miller moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney to
report back with a recommendation as to a resolution after consulta-
tion with counsel for the Kissell Company; motion was seconded by
Cm Tirsell and approved unanimously.
REPORT RE FIRE STATIONS
1 and 4
A report was submitted by the City Manager regarding the site loca-
tion for Fire Stations 1 and 4. It had been the intent of the City,
following the vacation of the old Police Building, to renovate the
building to permit its occupancy by the Fire Department, however it
was determined by a qualified structural engineering firm that the
builaing was of questionable structural integrity because of its age
and lack of wall reinforcing. The chosen site for relocation of Sta-
tion 1 is at the Robert Livermore Park with frontage access on East
Avenue. Following a study of several sites in the southwestern sec-
tor of the City, it has been concluded that one should be selected
at the intersection of Evans Avenue and Concannon Blvd. This pro-
perty is privately owned and tentative negotiations have been started
with the property owner in the hopes of resolving a recommended ac-
quisition price. Mr. Parness reported that in reviewing the avail-
ability of funding from current sources, the only possibility is to
apply the balance of our city's receipts from the current five-year
revenue sharing program. Supplementing this amount would be the sum
already included within the 74-75 fiscal budget intended to be applied
for the mobile facility to satisfy the housing requirements for Sta-
tion 4, in the amount of $58,000. The cost for Station 1 would be
$332,500, and for Station 4, $87,500. It is recommended that the
staff adopt a motion which would embody the following points:
1. Authorize the formal negotiations and recommend for purchase the
site for Fire Station 4 located at the corner of Concannon Blvd. and
Evans Street.
2. Approve of the site location for Fire Station 1 at the Robert
Livermore Park site either along the westerly extreme or the easterly
extreme.
3. Approve the financing program as recommended in the report for
the construction of permanent facilities for Stations 1 and 4.
4. Authorize the City Manager to solicit for and recommend the re-
tention of an architect for station design purposes.
r~
"
em Miller commented that he had not been furnished with a map of the
service area and he was unable to understand the report without the
appropriate supporting document, and suggested that perhaps the matter
should be continued until next week.
Cm Tirsell indicated that she was concerned about the traffic on East
Avenue if there were an emergency call during the rush hour and
also with regard to the children crossing who attend Almond Avenue
School.
em Futch stated he was concerned that the City would be committing
all the revenue sharing funds, plus an additional amount for fire
CM-28-327
August 19, 1974
(Fire Stations 1 and 4)
stations and felt the City should consider alternate means of finan-
cing, and suggested that a bond issue for financing public facilities
would be more desirable. He did not have any objection to acquiring
the site for the two stations.
Mr. Engel pointed out that with regard to the Pestana property on
East Avenue, it is under eminent domain proceedings for purposes
of a park site, and it would be his opinion that the property should
not be diverted to a fire station site. There has been an answer
filed to the City's condemnation ascerting as an affirmative defense
on intentions of uses for purposes other than those stated in the
lawsuit. He would advise the Council that the lawsuit would come
to naught unless the property is used for the purpose authorized.
em Miller stated he had no objection to Fire Station 4, but he was
concerned about the location of Fire Station 1 which would leave
the downtown area to higher exposure, and felt a downtown station
is required to protect the area. It would also leave the northwest
side at more risk than it is at present. He thought that to have
a fire station on East Avenue at the suggested location essentially
wastes the agreement made with the Laboratory to avoid having to
build a new fire station for the time being. With the Lab being
able to cover the Wagoner Farms area, he felt it would be better
to have Fire Station 1 somewhere downtown, and that since the
police building will have to be demolished, that area plus the
existing fire station and the parking lot would provide a reasonable
area for expansion and improvement of Fire Station 1, suggesting
that the parking lot be left and a floor built above it.
Cm Turner stated he agreed somewhat with Cm Miller as he did not
think the station should be located at the suggested area, but on
the other hand he feels that there is too much congestion in the
downtown area, and felt the area of 7th Street and McLeod would
be an ideal location. He was concerned that Station 4 would be
located in a residential area and did not feel they were compatible.
He felt Concannon Blvd. and Holmes Street would be a better site.
Mayor Pritchard remarked the location for Station 4 as proposed
was a good one, but felt if Station 1 were located on East Avenue
it would negate the contract the City has with the Laboratory, however
there are now legal concerns about acquiring the property.
Mr. Parness explained that the matter of locating a fire station
is one of technological concern and he fully respected the points
raised about the East Avenue site, some of which he raised when
it was first introduced by the Fire Chief. The site has been well
researched and appraised by the Fire Chief, discussed with other
authorities in the fire fighting business, particularly the insurance
service bureau who will have a lot to say about the insurance rates
and the fire rating of the City as to station strategic location.
It will not negate the Rad Lab's protection because it is complimentary
to what the City offers. All matters have been carefully weighed
and considered by our technicians and these are their conclusions.
Mr. Parness stated that the City owns the park site which was purchased
with municipal funds, and he assumed that the westerly end of the
parksite can be occupied, subject to the Council's wishes for this
purpose.
Cm Miller moved to continue the matter until next week asking the
staff, including the Fire Chief, to respond to the questions raised
by the various councilmembers, i.e. why downtown is a bad location,
what other financing means, what advantage is there to having the
lab contract, also regarding the statute concerning the use of park
property, plus the appropriate maps for the existing system includ-
ing the respons from the laboratory. Motion was seconded by Cm
Tirsell and approved unanimously.
CM-28-328
c
('
August 19, 1974
REPORT RE ISABEL AVENUE
HIGHWAY ROUTE REVOCATION
The City Manager reported that notice has been received that the
State Highway Commission will consider revoking any State inten-
tions for the location of a freeway or lesser standard highway along
the Isabel Avenue route. The major reason is based upon financial
constraints although CALTRANS staff favors a highway standard. Por-
tions of this proposed routing already have been acquired by the
State and a major segment has been reserved in our City by subdivi-
sion agreements. It is of significant importance that a highway
alignment be planned and eventually installed along this route. It
is recommended that the City Council authorize an official appeal
be filed with the State Highway Commission seeking reconsideration
of this matter and, secondly, that a request be submitted to Ala-
meda County to increase their pledge to share in the financial
contribution for this right-of-way acquisition from their existing
share of $45% of 10% of the total cost up to 45% of 25%, which
would be a total of $52,400, of which $23,580 would be requested
of the County and the City would provide $28,820. It is thought
to be that such a financial addition may impress the State enough to
cause them to supply the financial balance for acquisition of the
locally reserved property.
Cm Miller asked if in discussions with the state the staff had indi-
cated that the freeway is not necessary, but at least in the Liver-
more area there should be a bypass to get the traffic off of Holmes
Street along this routing.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff has urged this and so has the
state CalTrans staff, but to no avail.
em Miller asked if we could get AssemblYman Bee and Senator Holmdahl
to help with this, and Mr. Parness replied that perhaps we could.
In a sense the state staff has urged the City staff to follow this
course, and he was not sure whether the increased pledge would do
any good or that the County would agree to it. Mr. Parness added
that in all fairness his sYmpathy was with Mr. Elliott for ware-
housing property on behalf of the state for three years without
any recourse.
A motion was made by Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell authorizing
the filing of an appeal for reconsideration of the Highway Commission
to establishing Isabel Avenue in the Valley at least fo~ highway
purposes, also including the appeal to the County for financial
participation of up to 45% of 25%. The motion passed unanimously.
REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY
RE UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING
Recently the City Council adopted in principle a proposed policy
drafted by a special City Council committee, working in conjunction
with the Industrial Advisory Board, staff and Chamber, on utility
undergroundil'lg. This was subject to a report from the City Attorney
as to its legal implications.
Mr. Engel explained that the City Council had stated that if it
could make pOlice power findings, it would be possible to require
the undergrounding of the laterals for individual parcels. After
a study of PUC orders and a discussion with PUC officials it has
been determined that subject to the making of police power findings
the City can require developments along specified streets to install
ducts and pull boxes along their frontages and to relocate wires in
a streamlined overhead configuration. It is not believed that it
should be stated in the form of City policy, but it should be in
the form of an ordinance.
CM-28-329
August 19, 1974
(Utility Undergrounding)
Cm Miller moved that the Council ask the City staff to prepare the
appropriate ordinance regarding the undergounding of utilities along
the lines previously discussed; motion was seconded by em Futch and
passed unanimously.
REPORT RE PROPERTY
ACQUISITION - GRADE
SEPARATION PROJECT
The City Manager explained that it is necessary for us to obtain a
10-foot parcel of property from Alameda County, their corporation
yard, abutting the Western Pacific railroad tracks. The County
staff has indicated that due to their severe property shortage at
the yard, they would be willing to recommend an equal property ex-
change with the City. Therefore an exchange has been worked out
and it is recommended that a resolution authorizing execution of
the deed be adopted contingent upon a similar action for exchange of
property by the Board of Supervisors.
em Futch moved that a resolution be adopted authorizing execution
of the deed; seconded by Cm Miller and approved unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 140-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXCHANGE OF REAL PROPERTY
(County of Alameda and City of Livermore)
REPORT RE PLANNING
CONSULTANT CONTRACT DRAFT
A draft contract had been submitted by the Planning Consultant,
and also a draft contract prepared by the staff, following dis-
cussions with the consultant. The Planning Commission and City
Manager had also submitted a statement in this regard.
Mr. Parness stated that he hoped the Council could come to some reso-
lution very soon as the consultant has been proceeding at his insis-
tance for a month without the benefit of a contract.
em Futch pointed out that the Planning Commission's recommendations
were not specifically spelled out and Mr. Parness stated that the
recommendations are more procedural than anything else, and the
consultant stated he would follow this if that is the wish of the
Council. Cm Futch asked if the Council should get specific as to
the numbers tonight.
Mr. Engel stated as he understands it the Council should come to a
conclusion as to which of the alternatives is wanted before execution
of the contract, then adjust accordingly.
Cm Miller suggested that since this was such an important contract
and there was a lot of money involved, they should put over a more
extensive discussion and perhaps the final decision until next week.
Mr. Parness agreed that perhpas more time should be given for dis-
cussion, and suggested that the Council make a statement that they
agree in principle with the essence of the agreement as to the elements
as defined and the dollar amounts except those wherein alternates
may be considered.
CM-28-330
August 19, 1974
(Consultant Contract Draft)
Cm Miller stated he was concerned with Task VIII which he did not
feel was adequately spoken to and is very vague and needs to be more
specific, particularly interaction with the City Attorney's office.
(~ em Futch moved that the Council adopt contract in principle, speci-
fically the General Plan elements included, and agrees with the
basic extent of the contract, but would like to review the wording,
specifically Task VIII. Motion was seconded by Cm Turner and passed
unanimously.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT
RE DANCE ORDINANCE
The Council discussed the proposed Municipal Code amendment re dances
particularly the section pertaining to dance regulations, and con-
curred that Sec. 7A.9 (b) should read "No disorderly conduct or be-
havior shall be permitted." Also, at Cm Futch suggestion paragraph
(c) pertaining to permitted hours was deleted.
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller, the ordinance was in-
troduced as now stated, and passed 4-l with Cm Tirsell dissenting,
indicating that she was not opposed to the intent of the ordinance
but rather the wording of a specific item.
The ordinance title only was read by the City Attorney.
REPORT RE CONGRESS OF
VALLEY AGENCIES (COVA)
em Tirsell presented a report concerning the formation of the Congress
of Valley Agencies - its structure and duties. She explained that the
votes taken were unanimous and a motion was made to invite the County
to participate, but if they do not, it will be formed without them
along the lines as outlined in the report. She stated the other
agencies were all undermanned and could not provide staff and it is
intended that our City Manager be asked to provide staff, if not
other arrangements will have to be made. Cm Tirsell stated there is
no one organization that will fit the myriad of agencies there are in
the Valley, and there is no way to make everything work smoothly and
she could forsee some problems, but everyone was very enthusiastic.
em Miller stated as far as he was concerned he could see no reason
why Zone 7 should be a permanent member and would like Zone 7
to be deleted as permanent, and that when water is discussed, it be
like the other agencies.
Cm Tirsell stated that motion was made, but defeated 6-l, and the
motion was rephrased that they would be reduced from two members to
one.
em Miller pointed out that they are a single use agency, and the per-
manent members are the multi-use agencies.
(
Cm Tirsell stated she understood the argument, and that was the same
discussion that was held. Cm Futch added that the discussion occu-
pied about two and a half hours, and this was the compromise that
was reached - that the three land planning agencies would have two
votes, and they would allow three special agencies (single purpose
agencies) one vote apiece and that one of the agencies should be
Zone 7. He felt it would be a mistake to attempt to change this
decision.
Cm Miller spoke to the duty of the Steering Committee to appoint
citizen participants to the standing committee and activate the
CM-28-331
August 19, 1974
(Congress of Valley Agencies)
committee, and suggested that each multi-use jurisdiction may also
appoint members to each standing committee, and em Tirsell explained
that each agency will present the people they would like appointed,
and agreed that the wording should be changed.
Cm Futch felt that the Council should be asked for permission to
commit staff assistance, and we would be reimbursed for one-half
of a person up to $12,000.
The Council discussed the possibility of hiring someone to handle
this work if staff was not able to do so, and the staff was directed
to check into this.
em Tirsell moved that the Council endorse the new Congress of Valley
Agencies, subject to clarification of the appointment procedure,
seconded by Cm Futch and motion passed unanimously.
Cm Tirsell advised they would be meeting the third Thursday of
September and the issue to be discussed is solid waste disposal in
the valley.
REPORT RE ASSIGNMENT OF
ZONING CATEGORIES -
(North Front Road Annex 1)
A report was received from the Planning Commission recommending re
assignment of zoning categories to the recently annexed area - North
Front Road Annex No.1, which is to be set for public hearing.
Cm Futch moved that the hearing be set for September 23, seconded
by Cm Tirsell, and passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMM. MINUTES
Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Commission meeting of August
6 were noted for filing.
REPORT RE RELOCATION
ASSISTANCE - Paradiso
Mrs. S. Paradiso, operator of El pepe's Restaurant had appealed for
help with relocation assistance at the meeting of August l2. A
detailed report was submitted by our relocation agent in this matter
with the staff recommendation that the report be filed.
Cm Futch moved that the report be filed, seconded by Cm Tirsell,
and the motion passed unanimously.
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Staff Assistance)
The City Attorney requested that the Council engage the assistance
of Robert Anderson, who had represented the City of Petaluma, in
connection with the pending federal court litigation brought against
the City by the Homebuilders' Association. He is ready to undertake
the representation, and he should be ratained at the hourly rate
pertaining to the East Bay of $70.00 per hour.
A motion was made by Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller, and passed
unanimously to accept the City Attorney's recommendation and engage
the services of Robert Anderson.
CM-28-332
I
August 19, !974
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Insulation Ordinance)
em Miller asked what the status was of the insulation ordinance and
was advised by the City Attorney that the Chief Building Inspector
had made some comments regarding the ordinance inasmuch as he was
on vacation at the time it was discussed by the Council, and he
wished to discuss this further. A copy of his comments will be pre-
sented to the Council.
(Tax Rate)
em Miller referred to a memorandum from the Finance Director con-
cerning the overall tax rate, and stated he was under the impression
it was to be discussed by the Council.
Mr. Parness stated the League's position, and Mr. Engel further
indicated that the point of the memo was to assure that administra-
tively that if it has been Council policy to allocate a certain
amount to the library and the park that this would continue in
the like amount.
(Air Pollution)
Some discussion from the City of Pleasanton indicates that the smog
is better than it once was, and Cm Miller stated he could not under-
stand that position, when the air pollution is worse than it was in
1972 and probably just as bad as 1973. He felt that the people of
the City of Pleasanton should be reminded that the air is not as
clean as developers have been telling them.
(re I-580 Widening)
Mayor Pritchard reminded the Council that it was two members of the
Pleasanton City Council that first approached the Livermore City
Council with what is now the Council's compromise position regarding
the widening of I-580, and we are now considered bad neighbors.
(Park Acquisition-
Greenville North)
em Futch moved that the staff be directed to begin immediately con-
demnation proceedings to acquire the park in the Greenville North
area; motion was seconded by Cm Turner.
Mr. Engel asked that they be furnished a property description of
what is desired from the Engineering Department, and then present
to the Council, as an agenda item, a completed resolution to be
adopted next week.
Motion was passed unanimously at this time.
(Heritage Tree-Baptist
Church Site)
Cm Tirsell had asked about a tree located at the Baptist Church
site and wondered if anything had transpired concerning it.
~
Mr. Parness explained that the Park and Tree Superintendent has
physically inspected the tree, and reported that the condition of the
tree under present circumstances is fair, and to transplant it
would require special equipment at a substantial cost and the chance
of survival if removed is 50/50. He has reported this to the owner,
and provided them with information for its care. He has recommended
against removal.
CM-28-333
I
August 19, 1974
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at l2:20 p.m.
:::::xecutlve seSSi~7-~:g~ personnel
ATTEST ~~. '- ~I:..- .
City Clerk
Livermore, California
Special Meeting of August 22, 1974
A special meeting was called by Mayor Pritchard to convene at 5:00
p.m., Thursday, August 22, 1974, in the City Hall Conference Room,
2250 First Street. The meeting was called for the purpose of
Council consideration of the following:
1. To discuss site location and financing of
Fire Stations 1 and 4.
The meeting was called to order at 5:05 p.m., on the above stated
date and those present were: em Futch, Miller, Tirsell and Turner,
with Mayor Pritchard presiding.
Cm Turner requested that discussion be held to the subject of finan-
cing only.
Mr. William Parness explained that the urgency in this discussion
is because the deadline for requesting the County to place a local
issue on the November ballot is August 23, therefore, should any
action be taken by the Council, it must be before that date. Mr.
Parness then explained the alternates for financing the projects
as follows:
Lease Purchase - Joint Powers Agreement - develop facilities
which have mutual interest and usage. This method qualifies
for state tax exemption, not available with revenue bonds.
The bonds are marketable, do not require Internal Revenue
review.
Non-profit Corporation - A board acts as the financing
agent, the City as the leasing agent.
General obligation bonds - must be voted upon, two-thirds
majority to pass.
The lease purchase method could be used only for a civic center
complex, not fire stations at another site. Concern was expressed
for the chance of a general obligation bond passing when it is
known that revenue sharing monies are available; also of concern
was the marketability of the bonds if they were authorized.
Finance Director George Nolan spoke to the possibility of market-
ing the bonds and indicated his doubt that they would be unless
the City had an A rating, which was doubtful.
The Council generally discussed the alternates available with em
Miller indicating no objection to use of revenue sharing funds,
and his feeling that lease-purchase also should be submitted to
the voters for a major facility.
Cm Futch stated that the fire stations are most important, and
he would like to see the acquisition of property for both sites
and the building of Station 4.
CM-28-334
with Revenue sharing funds~ but would
like to see other funding methods attempted for constructlon of sta-
tion 1 before committing all our revenue sharing funds to public safety.
He pointed out the need to maintain funding flexibility in order that
. other worthwhile projects such as public transportation, youth facil-
ities, etc. would not be completely cut off from revenue sharing funds.
August 22, 1974
/
(Special Meeting -
Fire Station Financing)
em Tirsell expressed concern that the bond issue would not pass.
Mayor Pritchard stated his feeling that revenue sharing funds had
been used for one aspect of public safety, saw no problem with
using these funds for fire protection.
Also discussed was the pres~nt facilities at Station 1 and the need
for remodeling. At the close of the discussion a motion was made
by Cm Futch, seconded by em Turner, to acquire the property for
Stations 1 and 4 (if so decided at East Avenue), proceed with con-
struction of Station 4 with revenue sharing funds, also to hire an
architect and support his fees with revenue sharing funds. This
motion passed as follows:
Ayes: Cm Futch, Tirsell and Turner
Noes: Cm Miller and Mayor Pritchard
A second motion was made by Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner, to
finance Station 1 construction (wherever it may be located)with
revenue sharing funds and passed by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes;
Cm Miller, Tirsell and Turner and Mayor Pritchard
Cm Futch
adj~ 6:00 P.~ ~
c ,~ ':-I-
-" ~..... ! r-. '...../-\L.. ~
j /'.' ~/ "
./~"'i--- .... .
i ..'CJ.ty C erk.
TIivermore, California
The meeting
APPROVE. .
ATTEST
Special Meeting of August 26, 1974
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Pritchard
to convene at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, August 26, 1974. The purpose of
the meeting was consideration of labor matters.
Present: Cm Futch, ~irsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard
Cm Miller (seated during the discussion)
The meeting was adjourned to an executive session wherein the con-
sultant firm conducting negotiations with the City's firemen
submitted a brief report regarding status of the negotiations and
related matters.
The meeting
a~~~p-t~
\.. ~(~f ~ 1'1 .~ t.. \( 'c!eJ ~1k'
i CJ.ty C er
Livermore, California
APPROVE
ATTEST
('
\
CM-28-335
Regular Meeting of August 26, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on August 26, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:12 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Futch, Miller, Tirsell, Turner 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.
OPEN FORUM
(Protest re Cats)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, reminded the Council that he had
talked about cats the previous week, and while he was doing so a
black, pregnant female, Persian cat laid this right underneath his
window which he wished to have removed, and laid a plastic bag on
the podium, which contained cat feces.
Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Tull to remove the bag from the podium
which he refused to do and because of his refusal was later evicted
from the Council Chambers~
(Complaint re No. P & Chestnut Sts)
Mr. Jorgenson, 509 Madison Avenue, expressed his appreciation for
the dispatch in which North Livermore Avenue was open to traffic.
He also spoke of a letter he had received from the City which took
in all the points which he has brought up. Mr. Jorgenson has pre-
viously suggested that the signal lights at the intersection of P
and Chestnut Streets be changed during the construction period to
allow through traffic east and west on Chestnut Street, and enum-
erated statistics of his observations at that intersection.
Mayor Pritchard asked the Public Works Director if this intersec-
tion had been checked out, and Mr. Lee advised they had observed
the intersection, taken traffic counts and found that there was
heavy P Street traffic, entering on the "T" intersection as well
as substantial cross traffic, and considering the temporary nature
of the situation, it was their conclusion that the traffic signal
setup should not be changed.
Mr. Jorgenson had suggested that the traffic signal be moved to
the intersection of Olivina Avenue and Murrieta Blvd. during the
interim period, and Mr. Lee replied that for the length of time
involved the expense would be out of the question.
em Futch suggested that the signal light be made to operate with
blinking amber light for the Olivina-Chestnut Street traffic and
monitor it for a few days, and if a real traffic problem occurs,
it should be changed immediately, but would leave it to the dis-
cretion of the Public Works Director.
CM-28-336
August 26, 1974
(Complaint re' Telephone
Courtesy-Police Dept.)
Earl Ford, Sr. 765 Cardinal Drive stated he had attempted to contact
the Police Chief and wanted to leave word for him to return the call
but was told that if he wanted to talk to him he should come to the
Police Station. He asked the Council just what he would have to do
to be able to talk to the Chief.
Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Bradley, Assistant City Manager, to check
into the matter.
PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RE
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DIS~
The Planning Director explained that the public hearing was for
consideration of amendment to the complete Neighborhood Commercial
zoning district regulations, which he briefly covered. He pointed
out that they had attempted to eliminate some of the uses permitted
in neighborhood shopping centers, hoping they would locate downtown.
One of the main uses discussed by the Planning Commission was the
eating and/or drinking places in these shopping centers and the
use would be determined by the square footage. Those in excess of
fifteen hundred square feet and/or serving alcoholic beverages could
only be allowed by a Conditional Use Permit. The only use that could
not be prohibited would be a franchise type of operation. They have
increased the maximum size of the shopping center to eight acres,
however the floor area is not to exceed 50,000 square feet, but an
addtional lO,OOO sq. ft. of floor area may be allowed provided it is
utilized to increase the space to be used for a food market, in
excess of 20,000 sq. ft. He explained the allowable footage in more
detail. The Planning Commission after long discussions did revise
the amount of setback and it was increased from 64 to BO feet to
provide additional landscaping. The landscaping provision has been
modified to allow a vegetative screen of lO feet between an "R" or
"E" District and a shopping center. There is also a provision in
the ordinance for customer service facilities, which shall include
benches, toilet facilities controlled by a business and a rest area
and drinking fountains. Lighting is to be extinguished during periods
when the businesses within the center are closed. Mr. Musso also
briefly touched on the requirements having to do with the site plan
approval, conditional use permits and location of eating and/or
drinking places, so there would be no detrimental effect on adjacent
residential area.
Cm Tirsell commented that she had difficulty determining exactly
what changes had been made, and Mr. Musso explained that the whole
ordinance section had been changed. Cm Tirsell also asked if the
amendment had been referred to the City Attorney, and was told that
it had been, but normally it isn't until after the amendment is
decided upon.
Mayor Pritchard stated this was a public hearing and invited anyone
in the audience to speak at this time, however no comments were
voiced, and on motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Futch, and by
unanimous approval the public hearing was closed.
(
Cm Futch moved that the hearing be continued and the Planning Director
asked to highlight the changes that have been made as he too felt
that it was hard to understand the changes that had been made; motion
was seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Miller remarked that before they continue the matter, he would
like to point out a few items for Council consideration, and em Futch
suggested that perhaps he should list these in writing and present
them to the Council next week also. However, Cm Miller suggested
that they just all briefly mention what they would like considered.
CM-2B-337
August 26, 1974
(P.H. re CN Zoning Ordinance Amendment)
Cm Miller stated he had in mind possible deletions in uses -
Paint, Glass and Wallpaper; Apparel and Accessories and Photo-
~raphic service; also deletion of retail uses which are not
day-to-day uses such as apparel sales. He also questioned the
size as it appears they are trying to discourage large amounts of
retail in neighborhood shopping centers, and perhaps smaller sizes
would be better and should be considered. Stores should sell predom-
inantly new merchandise and he wondered why this had been deleted.
To have toilet facilities which exist should be open during working
hours. em Miller was also concerned about gas stations as there
had been a policy that service stations would not be approved until
50% of the site is completely developed, and felt this should be
included. These are the points he would like considered at the
next meeting.
The vote was taken on the motion to continue the discussion of
this item until September 3, and passed unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING RE ZO AMENDMENTS
TO RS DISTRICT
The Planning Director explained that the revision was done in the
RS ordinance in order to allow the City to zone somewhere between
the I-acre in RS and the agricultural zone and what is proposed
is an addition of RS-.25/acre and RS-.50/acre lots. The uses per-
mitted are essentially the same, a major change had to do with
the rear yard. The Planning Commission recommended that the rear
yard be 25 feet and lots of record as of July 1, 1974 a minimum of
ten feet, average 25 feet.
em Miller commented that there is a general plan category which is
1.5/acre and there may be some merit in having a lot size corres-
pond to that in the RS standards, and felt this should be included.
Cm Tirsell asked how many lots were left in the RS-5 district, and
and Mr. Musso replied that most of the RS-5 lots were those where
they felt there might be a development problem and which might be
solved by a higher density - one area at Hosker Lane, the property
which the City purchased on Mocho Street and that is all. Cm
Tirsell asked if those few parcels justified the RS-5 designation
in the ordinance.
Mr. Musso added that there were a few more parcels in the Wagoner
Farms area; there is also some RS-4 left.
Cm Futch stated that the RS-5 parcels that remained might be used
as a density transfer and he would hate to have the flexibility
removed, and Mr. Musso stated that the density transfer in the
Wagoner Farms area turned out to be RS-5.
Cm Tirsell stated she could not imagine using the RS-5 standard
again, and Mr. Musso stated that one of the reasons it was left in
as that there has always been a problem in the gap between the RS-5
and the RG-10, and if the RS-5 were eliminated, it would increase
the RG-10.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that the RS-5 designation might be useful
for multiple residential, and Cm Miller agreed it would be good
and that figure had been suggested many years ago, and that it not
be exceeded, and Mayor Pritchard added that he would like the RS-5
left in at present.
Mayor Pritchard stated that this was a public hearing and invited
anyone in the audience to address the Council, however no comments
were voiced, and on motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner,
and by unanimous approval the public hearing was closed.
CM-28-338
August 26, 1974
(P.H. re Proposed Ord.
Amendment - RS District)
(
"
em Miller stated that a portion of this chapter was designed to
close the gap in the larger lot sizes, but a portion of the Planning
Commission's recommendations came from the request by Cm Turner and
himself for review of the backyard setbacks, and althouth the recom-
mendation was better than before, he was not completely satisfied,
and he wanted to discuss some of the backyard setback options. Cm
Miller explained the lot coverage by drawings on the blackboard which
led to the compromise that was finally reached, however the 60XlOO ft.
lot size did not allow much flexibility even though the 25% coverage,
floor area requirement was met. He stated that on an 80Xl25 ft. lot,
10,000 sq. ft., a 50 ft. setback, it is not hard to get a house and
still have space to move around and there is more flexibility in the
shape of the house. The whole purpose of the argument is that the
houses were too close, and the idea was to have some open space plus
some separation between the houses. Cm Miller drew a diagram of
various small lot sizes, showing the possible maximum rear yard setbacks
which would still allow a 25% floor area coverage for a l-story, and
the setbacks could be even larger with a 2-story house. A 60XlOO ft.
lot would allow 38.3 ft. setback for a l-story and 46.2 for a 2-story;
a 65XlOO ft. lot, 40.3 ft. and 48.8 and for a 70X100 ft. lot, 4l.9
and 50.l. Whatever regulations there might be, tend to set a pattern
for a developer to maximize _ a return from their investment and mini-
mize their expenses.
Cm Futch stated that Cm Miller stressed flexibility but whenever
there are more backyard setback requirements, then flexibility is de-
creased, and he asked the Planning Director if the Planning Commission
had considered other alternatives.
Mr. Musso stated that they had considered other alternatives - every-
thing from the minimum of 10 ft. up to a 50 ft. setback.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the Planning Commission had considered the
formula as indicated by Cm Miller, (2 x floor area - garage) and
Cm Miller stated he had offered the Planning Commission essentially
the same kind of ideas he had offered the Council now, without
indicating his preference. When questioned as to his preference
he stated he liked the 40 ft. average, 25 ft. minimum.
em Futch asked the Planning Director if he would be prepared to comment
on the problems that might occur with unusual shaped lots if these
formulas were used, and Cm. Tirsel1 also added what effect it would
have on cluster housing, however Mr. Musso stated it was not appli-
calbe to cluster housing.
Cm Futch moved to continue the item for one week, seconded by Cm
Tirsell, and the motion was approved unanimously.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Cooperative Agreement re
Traffic Signal at Holmes
St.and Concannon Blvd.)
/'
An agreement had been presented for authorization of its execution
regarding the traffic signal at Holmes Street and Concannon Blvd.
Cm Tirse11 asked the Public Works Director if he had reviewed the
specific terms regarding the conditions to rezoning as related to
the traffic signal and if there was a specific sum of money indicated.
i
\
Mr. Lee stated it specified the type of signal required, and the agree-
ment was to provide the signal, and in the event there was state
CM-28-339
August 26i' 1974
(Signal Light - Holmes & Concannon)
participation the developer would be given credit for that, which
is the case. There is state participation and all excess costs
will be borne by the developer.
em Tirsell questioned why the City was entering into an agreement
for $lO,OOO, and Mr. Lee explained that this agreement was for the
medians on the approaches to the intersection. The medians could
be painted and perhaps the Council might want to consider this as
part of the traffic signal.
Cm. Tirsell stated she could not justify City participation for that
amount when the rezoning caused the need for the signal light.
Mr. Lee stated he could outline precisely the layout for the inter-
section and the Council could consider this at the next meeting.
Mr. Lee remarked that this did not affect the agreement with the
state, however, as the City had to make the agreement with the state,
and agree to provide the money at the time they call fo~ bids; there
is also the agreement with the contractor to put up the funds. The
agreement with the state would in no way commit the City as far as
an agreement with the developer.
The City Attorney stated he would be concerned with the interpreta-
tion of the agreement with the developer as to how much of the funds
the City would be able to recoup, and the agreement should be re-
viewed to determine the amount of reimbursement.
Cm Futch moved to continue this item for one week, seconded by Cm
Tirsell, and the motion passed unanimously, for review by the City
Attorney and Public Works Director.
Cm Turner asked .if a continuance might delay the work, and was told
that it would not.
(Report re Limited Parking
2815 East Avenue)
It is recommended that the Council approve a resolution establishing
a l10 line ft., 2-hour parking zone at 2815 East Avenue, along the
frontage on 7th Street at the new medical offices.
RESOLUTION NO. 141-74
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. l29-72 BY THE
INCLUSION OF llO FT. OF FRONTAGE AT 2815 EAST AVE.
AS LIMITED PARKING AREAS.
(Option Agreement re
Grade Separation project,
Parcels 9 and 10)
The City Manager had reported that negotiations have been completed
by our property acquisition agent for two parcels in the grade sepa-
ration project with the respective owners with only the allowance of
fourteen days for execution, and it was recommended that a motion
ratifying this execution be adopted.
(Report re Airport
Limousine Services)
six months ago a license was issued by the City Council for a limou-
sine service with instructions that a report be made at the expira-
tion of a six month trial period. A report has been received from
the Police Chief indicating there is no reason why the license should
not be renewed and issued on an annual basis.
CM-28-340
August 26, 1974
(Park Site Acquisition -
Greenvi11e North)
It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing condemna-
tion of a park site in the Greenville North area.
RESOLUTION NO. 142-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE FOR PUBLIC PARK AND RELATED PURPOSES
OF 6.75 ACRES OF LAND FRONTING ON BRIDGEPORT CIRCLE
AND ADJOINING A. N. CHRISTENSEN SCHOOL IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
(Payroll and Claims)
There were twenty-two claims in the amount of $78,816.99 dated
August 22, 1974, ordered paid as approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT
CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by em Tirsell, and by unanimous
approval, the items on the consent calendar were adopted with the
removal of Item 2.3.
COMMUNICATIONS
(Attic Fans)
A communication was received from H. Bruce McFarlane in opposition
of a proposed ordinance which would require attic fans to be in-
stalled.
ern Futch remarked that in conjunction with the energy crJ.sJ.s an
ordinance having to do with insulation standards has been drafted
and is awaiting comments by the Chief Building Inspector regarding
the wording and procedures; also the City Attorney should render the
legal opinions in regard to the ordinance in view of the fact that
the City Council has established their policy.
The City Attorney advised that the Chief Building Inspector was on
vacation and that is the reason for the delay in presenting the ordi-
nance to the Council as he is in disagreement with the Council's policy.
Mr. Engel stated he was satisfied with the final draft of the ordi-
nance, but wanted to discuss it with Mr. Street.
r
\..
Cm Futch commented that as far as insulation standards for older homes,
he felt these should be discussed and there have been some suggestions
furnished them by Glen Dahlbacka, and suggested that they should have
something prepared in writing. Cm Futch moved that the City Attorney
be instructed to discuss with the Building Inspector the terms and
to prepare an ordinance appropriately modified as discussed by the
City Council for the insulation for homes at the time of resale, and
to also have prepared the suggested standards. em Futch stated that
the newspaper article regarding the attic fans was completely in error
and was not surprised that a citizen might be confused with these in-
correct facts.
The communication was noted and filed.
CM-28-34l
----_..._"...."-_._--~_."-~_.._."'."
August 26, 1974
COMMUNICATION TO MR. MEHRAN
FROM CLARENCE L. HOENIG
A copy of an open letter to the editor addressed to Mr. Masud Mehran
from Clarence L. Hoenig was presented to the Council regarding the
law suit by the Associated Building Industry of Northern California
in which he asked Mr. Mehran to cast his lot with the people of
Livermore.
ern Miller remarked that the letter was very clearly and directly
to the point and was an excellent letter.
In conjunction with the letter, Mayor Pritchard asked the City Attorney
if it would be normal to do business with the Associated Building
Industry of Northern California since we are apparently in an adversary
position with that firm.
Mr. Engel replied that he should like to set it on a day-by-day
basis as to whether or not it would be appropriate to do business
with them.
Mayor Pritchard stated that it might be appropriate for the manager
to write letters to those people currently building in Livermore
and elicit a response from them as to their feelings on the law-
suit and of their membership. Mayor Pritchard felt that if people
belong to an organization that is suing the City, the City has
an obligation to determine if their feelings are the same as those
of the Associated Building Industry.
Mr. Engel suggested that if the developer has otherwise complied
with all the requirements of the City's ordinances and is otherwise
entitled to the City's affirmative action, that should not be denied
because an association to which he belongs has brought suit.
em Turner asked what the benefit would be if we did determine this,
and Mr. Engel stated that so long as they were in compliance with
the City's ordinances, we do not have any alternative other than
provide them whatever relief they sought based upon our ordinances
and our discretion to act under those ordinances independent of the
fact that there is test litigation outstanding.
Cm Turner did not feel that a letter at this time would be appropriate
and Cm Futch agreed, as it would place them in an awkward position
as they may not want to publicly state their position.
em Tirsell commented that in response to the publicity stunt that
the Associated Homebuilding Industry regarding the windfall she
had prepared a statement and asked the Council's support: "An
obvious state of concern to Livermore, the City Council took note
of a recent news release from representatives of the Associated Home-
building Industry, stating that a class action lawsuit may be in-
troduced against the City of Livermore, seeking reimbursement to
residential homebuyers in the City for fees and charges allegedly
unconstitutionally or expectedly paid by homebuilders. The implica-
tion is there if such a suit is successful, homebuyers would be sub-
ject to significant monetary returns. The City Council wishes to
make it very clear that this threatened class action appears to be
a harrassment technique and based upon the advice of legal counsel,
the suit is not supportable. The City Council declares that all the
fees and assessment charges that are imposed for construction purposes
in the City are based upon charges that the City Council has stated
have been carefully calculated so as to reflect the costs of pro-
viding respective services for which they are paid." Cm Tirsell
concluded by saying it seemed a shame that the City is forced to
support the legal defense of an ill founded claim of the building
industry.
em Miller moved to support the statement made by em Tirsell regard-
ing the so-called windfall, seconded by Cm Turner, and the motion
passed unanimously.
CM-28-342
August 26, 1974
COMMUNICATION RE CURBSIDE
MAIL DELIVERY FROM
CITY OF NEWARK
A communication has been received from the City of Newark asking for
support in objecting to the Post Office's policy of having only curb-
side mailboxes in new subdivisions.
i-
I
\
"
Cm Miller felt that the Council should support the City of Newark
and send the City's objections to the Post Office and to the Congress-
men and Senators as well and so moved, seconded by Cm Turner, and
the motion passed unanimously.
RODEO PARADE SUPPORT
A discussion concerning the rodeo parade was continued to this
meeting. Cm Futch stated he had spent a good deal of time talking
with a cross section of the community regarding the rodeo parade
and felt that the large number of people would like to see the parade
continued, however many did not want it funded with tax funds.
The majority felt the Council should make the decision and did not
feel the amount of money involved warranted that the item be placed
on a ballot, with which he agreed. The members of the Rodeo Associa-
tion consider the rodeo as part of their heritage and feel strongly
that it should be continued, and he shares these feelings and concerns
for preserving something from our past history that is unique.
Cm Futch moved to appropriate $1,200 for the rodeo parade for the
coming year, seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Turner stated that a person from Salinas stated that their rodeo
had been funded by their Junior Chamber of Commerce and they had
a 3year phase out program in which they funded them the first year,
then the following year just a portion to give the rodeo association
an opportunity to work out a fund raising program, and he felt this
was a good idea and was his original suggestion.
Cm Tirsell commented that she regrets the emotionalism that surrounds
this item, and was the reason she supported the Council's original
policy because if you have a policy that you will not give City funds
to non-city committees, then when someone approaches the Council for
funds, the emotionalism is gone. Cm Tirsell referred to something
else that added to the emotionalism i.e. an item in the paper by
former Mayor Marguth which she quoted from, which indicated there
was a lack of communication between Councilmen and voters. She
pointed out that this sort of article is undermining local government
and is one of the sources of trouble. The other members of the
Council agreed that the statements in the article were uncalled
for.
(
\
Cm Miller stated that emotionalism has been raised by two of the three
valley newspapers by a series of falsehoods and distortions, a few
of which he mentioned, and the statements were also made by a few
members of the Rodeo Association and expanded upon, which he personally
resented. He felt the issue was relatively straightforward - should
the City provide a cash subsidy of the rodeo parade above and beyond
the indirect subsidies such as extra police and public works, which
the Council agrees should be provided. em Miller suggested two ways
to raise money for continuance of the parade - raise the entry fee,
or the Rodeo Association, even though they are a non-profitable organ-
ization, since they have made a fair amount of money on the rodeo,
could pay this money for the support of the rodeo parade. He would
oppose the motion since he believed these other sources are possible,
and he did not feel the City should support a private organization
in opposition of the policy suggested by em Tirsell.
Bill Thompson, 463 South I Street, stated it is a common practice
for cities to spend a certain amount of money on advertising for the
City, and he felt the rodeo parade, which represents the City's
heritage, would do more to advertise the City of Livermore than a
sign on the freeway, and he would like to see the parade continue.
A vote was taken on the motion at this time and passed 3-2 with
Cm Miller and Tirsell dissenting.
CM-28-343
August 26, 1974
RECESS
AFTER A SHORT RECESS, THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS OF
THE COUNCIL PRESENT.
DISCUSSION RE PLANNING
CONSULTANT CONTRACT
The discussion concerning the General Plan Consultant Contract was
continued from the meeting of August 19.
Mr. Donald Crawford, of Grunwald Crawford Associates summarized
what has been going on: On July 24 they submitted a proposed con-
tract; August 16 they received letter from the City Manager, out-
lining the suggested amendments to that contract, and he and Mr.
Parness met and resolved all the questions with two major excep-
tions having to do with the scope of the program, and that was
resolved because it was a clerical error. The other item they
discussed was in regard to the penalty. They realize that time
is of the essence, and have never heard of a penalty clause being
included and they would question this provision as it would be
very hard to enforce. They would prefer that there not be a penalty
clause, but would agree to wording in the contract that states
that the contractor does fully recognize that time is of the essence.
Beyond that there were no major areas of concern with the contract.
Subsequently they received a summary of the comments or suggestions
made by Cm Miller which he reviewed. Rather than the review and
adoption process suggested, he stated they would present to the
Council an activity plan which relates to the various tasks much
more detailed than what would be in the contract. Mr. Crawford
stated it would be the Council's prerogative throughout the program
to include things or exclude things as it sees fit as it relates
to policy, and he did not quite understand Cm Miller's point.
Cm Miller explained that if there is a goal to be rejected, it
should be presented to the Council in writing, and the Council
would reject it in writing, stating that the object is that it
is possible for a general plan to go off in directions having nothing
to do with the work of the citizen's committee, and the Council
has accepted the report of the citizen's committee and they should
not overlook some of these goals, and he did not feel this would
restrict the consultant.
Mr. Crawford stated he understood the intent but it is simply a
case of going through the various tasks and as the tasks are developed
there will be a section probably called major issues and policy
consideration and under those, they will identify, taking right
out of the committee's report those policies relative to that par-
ticular task study and in addition, they will identify how, if
at all they conflict with other policy considerations or recommendation
they would have. It is a complete analysis of that report as it
relates to each of the various tasks that would even go beyond
the report, and in one sense this would protect them, because the
City has to give them a statement that the City wants to change
the policy report. Mr. Crawford explained that the initial report
and summary report of the individual basic studies will all set
forth policies and they will be identified as those included in
the committee's report. They simply do not want to be constrained
from doing a totally professional job initially.
em Miller suggested that perhaps the initial reports would resolve
the question and simplify the task because the initial reports will
come to the Council and can be discussed with the consultant.
The Council, City Attorney and Mr. Crawford discussed, at length,
the contract draft and came to agreeable conclusions. The document
will be written in final draft form for presentation at the Council
meeting of September 3, 1974.
Cm Miller moved that the City Attorney be directed to draw up a
final draft of the contract, as amended, seconded by Cm Tirsell
and the motion was adopted unanimously.
CM-28-344
August 26, 1974
(re Consultant Contract
for General Plan)
i-
\
'-,
Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian Court, stated that he worked with the
General Plan for over a year with the Citizens Committee and has
met with all of the potential consultants and would like to say that
his only concern is that we get through Task VIII on time. Three
things have come to mind during the discussion and one is that a
project plan should indicate how Task VIII will be delivered on time,
and if we wait until January 1 to find out that Task VIII isn't going
to make it on time we have lost the whole ball game. Secondly, there
was discussion regarding whether or not material submitted would
be in a form to permit adoption of a General Plan amendment and presum-
ably what this means is that if Task VIII came on January lst the
current General Plan would be amended to incorporate it because the
new General Plan will probably not be adopted, in total, until late
1975. When one looks at the list submitted by Cm Miller it is obvious
that there can be no delays or the time schedule cannot be met.
It would seem that what is submitted on January 1, 1975, must be
in a form that can be adopted, without change, or at least very close
to it. Thirdly, he felt one thing has been left unsaid and that
is that it was agreed that notification would be provided of any
deviations from the goals in the Citizens Committee report and there
was some discussion as to whether it should be in the initial report
or the final report and would hope that something would be said about
the time of the notification.
Cm Miller commented that it was concluded that it would appear in
the initial reports.
Mr. Crawford stated that in his opJ.nJ.on the City does not have a
panic situation, even if all of Task VIII is not in the City's hands
by April l, and Cm Miller commented that every ordinance the City
has with respect to regulating growth is being litigated.
At this time the motion passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE TRACT 3615
The City Attorney stated that it is not necessary to act on the
matter of the Tentative Tract Map for Tract 3615 and on motion of
Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote the matter
was postponed until the meeting of September 3, 1974.
Cm Miller stated that all the details of the park dedication and
a recommendation from the City Attorney's office about how to collect
the park dedication fees should be in the City's hands before a
decision is made. The recommendations from the Planning Commission
were unclear and the actual properties are still unclear and there
are all kinds of things that are not clear, and all of the options
should be available in writing.
Cm Tirsell added that she was not on the Planning Commission or the
Council during the time the Gillice property was discussed and would
need background information before discussing the matter next week.
('.
COUNTY REFERRAL RE
BUENA VISTA/ALMOND
AVENUE AREA
A report was received from the Planning Commission regarding its
consideration of a referral from Alameda County for rezoning the
Buena Vista/Almond Avenue area and for which a recommendation was
made for rezoning reflecting a minimum of 2~ acre lot sizes.
Valerie Raymond reported that the County Planning Commission, today,
did vote to rezone the area to five acre lots.
CM-28-345
August 26, 1974
(re Rezoning of
Almond Avenue Area)
She stated that generally speaking she cannot understand the City's
concern for the deep narrow lots in the rural areas because people
usually use the property for horses. She commented that her main
bone of contention with the report from the Planning Commission
is that it makes the assumption that the people on the street are
willing to allow development and sewers, and she stated this is
not true. She has been circulating a petition in favor of 5 acre
lots and illustrated properties desiring 5 acre lots, color coded,
and the reason the people want rezoning to 5 acre lots is because
they do not want development. She stated that she knows of no one
who is in favor of annexation and sewage because this will bring
the very kind of development the people in the area oppose.
It was noted that this matter must still go before the Board of
Supervisors and the Council should take action on it.
The Planning Commission's recommendation was for 2~ acre lot sizes,
annexation to the City, and connection to the City sewer prior to
allowing development and em Tirsell wondered if 5 acre lot sizes
had been considered and Mr. Musso explained that all of this had
been taken into consideration.
Cm Futch moved to continue the matter until September 16th, seconded
by Cm Tirsell which passed 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting).
REPORT RE PROPERTY
TAX RATE FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1974-75
A report regarding the property tax rate for the 1974-75 fiscal year
was prepared by the City Manager which indicated that the assessed
valuation has increased l3%.
In order to alleviate the effect on the General Fund it is suggested
that the tax rate for the bond fund and retirement fund be reduced Ie
each and the General Fund increased le which results in a total City
tax rate reduction of le. It is recommended that the Council adopt
a resolution establishing the tax rate at $1.45, as suggested.
Cm Miller wondered why the City shouldn't keep the extra le which
would bring in an additional $ll,OOO and would mean an additional
65e per family, and Mr. Nolan explained that SB 90 limits the
amount of tax rate that can be levied with respect to bonds.
em Futch moved to adopt a resolution establishing the 1974-75
fiscal year tax rate, seconded by Cm Miller and passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 143-75
RESOLUTION FIXING TAX RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1974-75
REPORT RE STREET
LIGHT POLE DESIGN
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote
the matter of the street light pole design was postponed for one
week.
CM-28-346
August 26, 1974
DESIGNATION OF
DELEGATE RE MEETING
FOR REVISED BY-LAWS
On motion of em Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote,
Cm Tirsell was selected as delegate to attend the League of Califor-
nia Cities meeting for the proposed revised by-laws for the East
Bay Division to take place in Hayward on August 27th at 7:00 p.m.
ADOPTION OF DANCE ORD.
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Turner and by a 4-1 vote
(Cm Tirsell dissenting) the ordinance relating to dances was adopted
with' the second reading waived and title read at the last meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. 846
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7A, RELATING TO
DANCES, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
One member of the audience asked why there was no discussion on the
dance ordinance and the Mayor explained that it was discussed at
length a few months ago and the first reading took place last week.
The gentleman wondered the reasoning behind the ordinance and indica-
ted that he has not seen a copy of it but read about it in the news-
paper. He was told that he could receive a copy of the ordinance
as well as comments made by the Chief of Police and if, after reading
these, he still wishes to make a comment the Council would be happy
to listen.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Trash Containers)
Cm Turner stated that he has been informed by the Beautification
Committee that trash containers have been placed in the Springtown
area by the duck pond and that they are being used by the public.
(East Avenue Speed Limit)
Cm Turner stated that he continues to bring up the matter of the speed
limit on East Avenue and wondered if there would be any way the City
could annex that area so that the speed could be controlled by the
City, and also that perhaps then the street could be improved.
Mr. Lee indicated that portions could be annexed - up to Wagoner
Farms, and will report back to the Council on this suggestion.
(Rebuttal to State-
ment by Floyd Mori)
(
\"
Cm Turner stated that he would like to read to the Council a statement
about Floyd Mori because of an article written by him which appeared
in the newspaper. "Recently Mayor Mori, of Pleasanton, elected to
reprimand our Council for our bad neighbor policy concerning I-580
and he did this with the full knowledge that just a few short weeks
ago two of his Councilmembers, LeClair and Herlihy, had indicated to
Livermore Councilmbmers Tirsell and myself, that a six lane treatment
plus lanes for rapid transit was a solution to the transportation prob-
lem." He stated that he and Cm Tirsell carried this message to the bal-
ance of the Livermore City Council and the Council adopted this concept.
"Now, Mayor Mori and Councilmember Herlihy, without advising the Liver-
more City Council of the new position, have come to cast us as an unwan-
ted stepchild. Our Mayor defended our position with a recent press
CM-28-347
August 26, 1974
(re Statement Pre-
pared by Cm Turner)
release that was published in the three local papers." He stated that
his stand on the widening of I-580 has not changed and with the know-
ledge that the VCSD also supports the six lane concept and with the
recent statement of the EPA that they will not stand in the way of
the full treatment will try to place his words in such a tone that
they will be fully understood. .. The six lanes are sufficient to re-
lieve the commuter problem and allow the rapid transit system suffi-
cient ground surface to serve the valley. It will allow the minimum
disturbance of the natural terrain and provide a safe surface to
travel on. To continue expanding freeways is not the final answer
to the transportation dilemma. The Department of Transportation rep-
resentative freely says that by 1990 the expanded freeway will not be
sufficient to meet our future transportation needs of the valley. In
view of this it seems clear to me that we are being shortshighted and
to lay endless ribbons of cement is only a method of using up our avail-
able land resources and a visible method of spending tax dollars. These
dollars could be used in research and development of long range trans-
portation problem solvers. In the total analysis, though, it is appar-
ant to me that the commuter congestion has to be relieved quickly."
He explained that he is saying this because there has been so much
comment that the Livermore Council is opposed to it and the Livermore
Council is not opposed to it. He stated that if it comes to a point
in time where his stand, speaking as an individual, would jeopardize
any relief for the commuter then the needs of the commuter become the
overpowering factor and he would be forced to support the majority
position.
Cm Futch asked what majority position Cm Turner is referring to and
Cm Turner replied the majority position on what is to be done with
the freeway. If it ever comes to the point that the City of Liver-
more somehow becomes the instrument that stops any widening of the
freeway (I-580) he would certainly be opposed to that. The point
he wanted to make is that he, as a Councilman or a resident of
Livermore, will not jeopardize the safe travel of commuters in and
out of the valley. If people believe our position is against any
widening of the freeway, they are wrong, and that is the point that
has to be clarified; Livermore is not opposed to the expansion of
the freeway.
(Abatement of Illegal Structure)
Cm Miller referred to the direction given to the City Attorney to
investigate what action would be appropriate in abating the build-
ing at 851 Las Flores Road (F. W. Judge), stating that the Council
had two options - to refer the matter to the District Attorney or
institute a civil action. em Miller suggested they should wait only
a::certain finite time before they decide what course of action to
follow - perhaps a month to abate the building, and notify Mr. Judge
immediately that the Council intends to institute some action within
the finite time period. He asked the City Attorney if it would be
possible to have the District Attorney handle the matter.
Mr. Engel stated this was a classic example of a flagrant violation
of our laws if the structure is not abated.
Cm Miller asked Mr. Engel if he would contact the District Attorney
and ask if he will pursue the matter, and Mr. Engel agreed he would
contact him and report back to the Council next week.
CM-28-348
August 26, 1974
(Minimum Water Pressure)
Mayor Pritchard asked the Public Works Director if there was a minimum
water pressure that should be maintained by a private water company
and was told there was not. He stated that he has had many complaints
from those people who are serviced by California Water regarding the
low water pressure.
Mr. Lee stated he would check into the matter and report back.
(Landscaping as Buffer
Between Sunrise Mobile
Home Park and Freeway)
Mayor Pritchard questioned the conditions for approval of the Sunrise
Mobile Home Park regarding landscaping along the freeway, and asked
the Planning Director to review the conditions to insure they are
carried out.
(Appointment to Community
Affairs Committee -
Wm. Archer, Jr.)
Mayor Pritchard announced the appointment of Bill Archer, Jr. to
the Community Affairs Committee.
(Proclamations)
Mayor Pritchard proclaimed the following:
September 1 and 2 as Jerry Lewis Muscular Distrophy Telethon Day.
November 4 to II as Veterans' Week, and November II as Veterans' Day
Parade Observance Day in the City of Livermore.
September 17 to 23 as Constitution Week.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
adjourned at l2:35 a.m. 0 an executive session to discuss personnel
matters.
APPROVE
Mayor ,
-- ;;,) 6 tl-,,('
C1erk
California
ATTEST
I .
. L4-. t' J-1~ /0.j
City
Li vermor'e ,
CM-28-349
Regular Meeting of September 3, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on September 3, 1974, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 So.
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:12 p.m.,
with Mayor Pritchard presiding.
ROLL CALL
(~
PRESENT:
Cm Futch, Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT:
None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Council members and those present in the
audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch, the minutes of the special
meeting of August l6 were approved as submitted, the minutes of the
meeting of August 19, approved as amended, the minutes of the special
meeting of August 22 approved as amended, and of the special meeting
of August 26, approved as submitted. Corrections were as follows:
Page 3l5, 4th paragraph, lst line corrected to read, "Cm Futch asked
if he meant between G and F and"
Page 320, 2nd complete paragraph, end of 3rd line, ".....stand that
the building was not to be allowed on a permanent basis, and that..."
Page 322, 2nd paragraph, 1st line, "...would agree he would like to
see us go out for bid..."
Page 334, add to last paragraph, "...with Revenue Sharing funds, but
would like to see other funding methods attempted for construction of
Station 1 before committing all our revenue sharing funds to public
safety. He pointed out the need to maintain funding flexibility in
order that other worthwhile projects such as public transportation,
youth facilities, etc. would not be completely cut off from revenue
sharing funds."
OPEN FORUM
Sarah Thomas, l274 Lomitas Avenue, spoke about health care and hoped
that the Council might lend their aid to its improvement as she was
concerned that there are only three general practitioners in the
City since one would soon be leaving. She wondered if the Council
could advertise or back some advertising for doctors.
ern Turner stated that there was a group of doctors in the Chamber
of Commerce who desired to work on some project within the City
and he wondered if perhaps if they were still interested, the Coun-
cil could refer the matter to them and ask for a report.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that the City staff be asked to check
with the hospital staff and board to see what steps they have taken
to recruit doctors and ask for an appraisal of the problem, if one
does exist, and the staff was so directed. Cm Tirsell was asked
to check with the Chamber also.
/\.
em Tirsell remarked that the problem seemed to be nationwide perhaps
because the trend towards specialization is so strong, and the medi-
cal schools recognize this. California does allow paramedical train-
ing, but there are no paramedics in Livermore, and Mrs. Thomas stated
she did not think they would be acceptable in this community.
CM-28-350
September 3, 1974
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Resignation From Beauti-
fication Committee -
Walt Davies)
A letter of resignation was received from Walt Davies from the Beau-
tification Committee, and the Council accepted his resignation and
asked the staff to send him a letter of appreciation for his service
on the committee.
(Payroll and Claims)
There were ninety-seven claims in the amount of $l86,429.96 dated
August 29, 1974 and payroll warrants in the amount of $83,162.06,
dated August 23, 1974, ordered paid as approved by the Finance
Director.
APPROVAL CONSENT CALENDAR
Cm Miller moved that the items on the Consent Calendar be approved,
including the suggestion that the letter of appreciation be sent to
Mr. Davies; motion seconded by Cm Turner and approved unanimously.
RESOLUTION RE SOLID WASTE
LANDFILL OPERATION FROM
CITY OF PLEASANTON
A resolution was received from the City of Pleasanton reiterating
opposition to solid waste landfill operation on Kaiser site adjacent
to Pleasanton.
ern Miller suggested the City send a supporting letter to the State
Water Resources Control Board.
~Y Cm,kJrsell remarked that in a spirit of valleywide cooperation, she
~ ~f~P~v~d that the City notify Pleasanton that the City of Livermore
does concur with their position and will notify the agencies respon-
sible of the Council's opposition~ motion was seconded by ern Miller
and approved unanimously.
TENTATIVE TR. 3615 -
CASTILLEJA DEL ARROYO
PHASE III - Gillice
The Planning Director explained that the main issue still has to do
with a park dedication for the subject tract (Tract 36l5) of
3.08 acres. The previous park dedication requirements were based
on a ratio of one acre per one hundred dwelling units while a sub-
sequent ordinance amendment specified two acres per one hundred
dwelling units for subdivision. In lieu of the acreage would be
fees of $3,000 or $4,000 - the main difference is the number
of units per acre, so he felt it would be to the City's advantage to
accept the fees. Mr. Musso referred to his letter which indicated
the Planning Commission's considerations.
ern Futch asked why the Planning Commission had not included the
Zone 7 requirement, and Mr. Musso stated that it was an agreement
between Zone 7 and the City. Cm Futch commented that Pacific Tele-
phone has also asked the Council to make some requirements, and he
wanted to know if it would be reasonable.
The Public Works Director explained the Zone 7 requirement with
regard to storm drainage, stating it was a condition which the City
was imposing for occupancy of the apartments. During the construction
of the parking lot there was a problem with high water backing up
CM-28-35l
September 3, 1974
(Tentative Tr. 3615
Castelleja del Arroyo)
into the parking area. The developer was notified and that has been
a requirement outstanding for some time, which is to construct a
storm line paralleling the arroyo until there is sufficient drop for the
parking area to drain out. The reason for the discrepancy is
that their elevations in the parking lot were not the same as
they indicated on their original plans. Mr. Lee stated another .~
requirement is the upgrading of the fence. The PT&T requirement
is simply that they be allowed access to the condominium in the
common areas where their equipment will be located since they
will be serving each of the units. Their requirements would have
to conform to accepted standards and if they are asking for something
out of the ordinary, something should be worked out and it could
be made a condition of acceptance, and if there are any problems,
it could be worked out before that time.
ern Miller stated there were three issues raised by the Planning
Commission in their recommendation for approval: that the condi-
tions imposed by the City Engineer be applied, that there be a
school letter and that the park dedication be resolved. If we do
not have the school letter they should turn down the map; also
with regard to the park dedication, Mr. Gillice and Mr. Madis are
1.731 acres short according to the Planning Director's summary.
em Miller continued that if we do not get land by the park dedica-
tion ordinance, the park dedication fees for the 216 units is
$87,048. The other alternative, if we get the land is if they
drop the law suit with prejudice, they still owe us $34,879.65.
ern Futch questioned whether or not the developer had provided
the school letter and was told that he had not.
Don Bissell of Bissell & Karn, Civil Engineers who prepared the
tentative map, suggested that the Council postpone action on this
item since the attorney for the developer was not present, however
Cm Miller remarked that if the Council postpone without taking
action, it would be automatic approval. An extension beyond the
time requires permission of the applicant so the Council's choice
is either to deny or pass some type of motion. Mr. Bissell stated
that in that connection he would speak on behalf of the developer
and asked that the item be postponed until the next regular meet-
ing.
em Turner suggested that perhaps they continue the matter until
later in the evening and perhaps Mr. Madis might be contacted to
appear before them.
The Council concurred with the suggestion and the matter was post-
poned until the end of the agenda, and Mayor Pritchard stated that
if Mr. Madis could not be reached, he would accept Mr. Bissell's
representation for the applicant.
DISCUSSION RE GEN.
PLAN CONSULTANT CONTRACT
The discussion regarding the General Plan consultant contract was
postponed from the meeting last week and Mr. Engel stated that he
spoke with Mr. Crawford late this afternoon and that Mr. Crawford
commented on three items of the revised copy. On Page A8, commenc- ~\"
ing with the fifth line down: "this task would begin at the conclusion \ ,
of Task VI, Exhibit "A" 2." and Mr. Crawford suggested that "begin
at the conclusion of Task VI, Exhibit "A" 2." should be deleted be-
cause the time schedule is set forth in the body of the contract
itself. He stated that it would then read "this task would pro
vide the City with a comprehensive report covering the following".
He stated that Mr. Crawford also gave him hours to be filled in
on Exhibit "E" under Hourly Rates and Expenses, on Exhibits "A"
and "B".
CM-28-352
September 3, 1974
(General Plan Con-
sultant Contract)
With respect to III. D., the contract states! "The City designa.t.es
or his representative...II, and Mr. Crawford would
like to know who " " is in this section. em Turner
felt the City Manager should be designated, but could delegate some
of the responsibilities if he so chooses.
Mr. Parness stated that he would be happy to assume the delegation,
and that this would be proper. He also felt that the same person
should be named where the two blanks appear and Cm Miller pointed
out that the reason there were two blanks was because this would
eliminate overloading of one individual.
Mayor Pritchard noted that it says II " or his representa-
tive, which would give the City Manager the option to relegate res-
ponsibility and that the Council can look to Mr. Parness for answers.
There was discussion regarding pros and cons of having one person
named in charge and Cm Futch moved that the City Council adopt a
resolution authorizing execution of the contract with the adoption
of the suggestions made by the contractor and with the City Manager
designated as the liaison, to be filled in the blanks on Page 3.,
seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Tirsell mentioned that she felt one person should be in charge,
as Donald Bradley was during the General Plan Citizens Committee
review and suggested that the City Manager rely on his knowledge
of the matter, as related to goals.
Cm Miller stated that as he recalls, on Page 2., Item C., it was
mentioned that IIshalls" and "wills" are restrictive and that with
respect to the progress review it was to state that, "This progress
review shall take place generally along the lines..." rather than
"according to Exhibit "F"."
Cm Miller stated that on Page 4., there is a deadline date of
January 21, and he feels this is too late to make the time sequence
and that it would have to start on January l4th in order to have
sufficient time. He suggested that it read "on or before January l411,
or whatever the right time is.
Cm Miller stated that on Page A2, there is reference to the task
and final report production, including graphics and printings and
nowhere is there a number of the copies of task reports to be re-
ceived. He felt the number should be specified - shall there be 1,
10, or 50, or what? It was felt that 30 copies of the task report
should be sufficient for those who get agendas, the Planning Com-
mission, and library circulation. It was noted that there are to
be 30 task reports provided and lOO final copies.
Cm Futch stated that he would include these last amendments in his
motion, agreed to by the second, which passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. l44-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Grunwald, Crawford Associates)
CM-28-353
September 3, 1974
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE TENTATIVE TR. 3615 -
CASTILLEJA DEL ARROYO
PHASE III - GILLICE
Mr. Bissell stated that he did not have the opportunity to speak
with the developer but spoke with his attorney, David Madis, and
on behalf of the developer would like to request a continuance
until the next regular meeting.
.1)
Mr. Engel asked if this includes without prejudice to the rights of
the City of Livermore and Mr. Bissell indicated that would be satis-
factory.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to move that the matter be
continued to September 9th with the notation that this is upon
the request of the engineer for the developer, acting on behalf
of the developer and upon the advice given by the attorney, David
Madis, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
em Miller commented that as he recalls there is a general rule that
stipulates if a discussion is to take place for more than five min-
utes is should be in writing, before the meeting begins and that
Mr. Madis should be informed of this pOlicy.
At this time the motion to continue passed by unanimous vote.
DISCUSSION RE TRAFFIC
SIGNALS FOR HOLMES
STREET & CONCANNON BLVD.
Mr. Lee reported that the discussion of the cooperative agreement
between the City and the state was postponed from the last meet-
ing because there was some question regarding the extent of the
developer's responsibility and the City's responsibility regarding
installation costs for traffic signals at Concannon Boulevard and
Holmes Street. He stated that he has prepared a memorandum for
the City Council as well as a copy of Ordinance 828 which outlines
the developer's responsibility. The developer has the responsibility
for the entire cost of the signal installation with the provision
that he be given credit for any reinbursement by the state (as out-
lined in the last paragraph of Section 2B). He stated that the
developer is also responsible for the medians and that he has
been informed of his obligations in connection with the installa-
tion. There is a matter of judgment as to how far the developer's
obligations should be extended with respect to medians and it was
felt by the staff that the medians to the west are perhaps beyond
his area of responsibility because they are not adjacent to his
site; however, this is a decision that should be made by the Council.
It was felt that a median should be provided on Concannon Blvd.
however, because there is a driveway from the shopping center
and traffic would cross the median if it was only painted and
entering at a very bad location into the eastbound traffic could
be hazardous. The cost of this is estimated at $5,000 for the
median and the staff inadvertently included the landscaping and
irrigation of this which will not be a part of the contract and
was previously estimated at $lO,OOO because it included the landscaping
and irrigation. The installation will be a first-class installa-"
tion with provision for left turn lanes at every leg of the inter~
section and provides the best electronic system with a warning
beacon to the south. He would recommend that the agreement be
approved by the Council and a decision on whether or not to accept
the cost of the median to the west.
(~
em Tirsell asked if the medians located further down along Concannon
Boulevard were paid for out of public works funds by the City, and
Mr. Lee indicated that they were.
CH-28-354
September 3, 1974
(Traffic Signals for
Holmes Street and
Concannon Boulevard)
Cm Miller stated that the ordinance indicates that the developer is
responsible for the installation of signals at the intersection of
Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard and he went on to describe the
responsiblilites which includes concrete medians. He stated that
it does not provide for planting and irrigation but since it says
for the intersection of Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard it
implies the whole intersection and it would seem that it is straight-
forward and that the City has no obligation. This was part of the
condition for the rezoning obtained by the developer and in his opin-
ion there is no reason the whole amount should not be charged to the
developer.
Mr. Lee indicated that he feels the ordinance was written broad enough
to be read both ways and the staff proceeded with the recommendation
that Mr. Mehran should not be responsible for the west side of Con-
cannon Boulevard because at the time medians were mentioned there
was primary consideration of the area adjacent to Mr. Mehran's un-
developed property because of conflicting entrances to Catalina
to the west and Evans Street to the south. There was concern for
controlling accesses and there would not be a problem later on with
driveways to the property when it is developed.
Cm Futch wondered if the blinking warning signal south of the inter-
section was anticipated or if this type of warning generally
accompanies traffic signal installation.
Mr. Lee stated that it was anticipated but is one of the things
required when there is a special condition on one of the legs
to the intersection.
em Futch wondered if Mr. Mehran was aware of the fact that the warn-
ing signal would be a part of the signal installation.
Mr. Lee stated that it is doubtful that Mr. Mehran had personal
knowledge of what the signalization plan would include. He added
that quite an elaborate description was given so that the developer
would be forewarned that it would not be a bare bones type of system
but rather would be quite a sophisticated system.
Cm Miller stated that he has noticed that on the island adjacent
to Mr. Mehran's property the ordinance says "painted island - future
raised concrete island", and it would seem that it should be a raised
concrete island median and should be put in now and wondered why it
wasn't included.
Mr. Lee stated that the staff felt the islands to the north and east
were not really called for until the improvements on the site were
commenced and when there are driveways on the property.
Cm Miller asked where the contract is that says Mr. Mehran will
put this in at his expense and Mr. Lee stated that this would be
a condition of his site plan approval but Cm Miller felt that somehow
this matter is not really locked up.
Cm Miller moved that the Council authorize execution of the agree-
ment with the state, that the entire intersection cost be incurred
by the developer, including the west median, with reimbursement by
the state, in accordance with the City's agreement, and that he be
notified that the north median island will be at his expense at
the time of development of his property, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
CM-28-355
September 3, 1974
(Traffic Signals
Holmes and Concannon)
Cm Turner stated that perhaps it would be best to state two motions;
one for the agreement and then one for the other condition and Cm
Miller stated that he would be aggreable to this suggestion and
would remove the condition portion and move only that the Council
authorize execution of the agreement, agreed to by the second.
Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding the developer has
been informed as to the cost and Mr. Lee emphasized that the staff
very specifically left out the amount of the installation because
even at the time there was escalation of costs and the figure was
avoided.
(--- J
_/
At this time, by unanimous vote, the resolution authorizing execu-
tion of agreement was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. l45-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Business and Transportation Agency)
Cm Miller moved that in accordance with the ordinance and the City's
agreements with Mr. Mehran that the total cost of the intersection,
including the west median at $5,000, be at Mr. Mehran's expense with
reimbursement of costs for this intersection by the state going to
Mr. Mehran and that the north and east island-medians will be at
his expense according to the ordinance, whenever his property
develops, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Turner suggested that rather than get into the amount for the
medians it might be better to bill Mr. Mehran for the entire cost
of the development, as we understand the ordinance.
Cm Miller amended the motion to read the entire cost of the con-
struction will be presented to Mr. Mehran with a notice about the
north and east island, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Cm Turner stated that if a condition of development includes pro-
vision of a concrete island, as in the ordinance, it is not neces-
sary to repeat it but Cm Miller replied that his experience has led
him to believe that it pays to be redundant.
At this time the motion passed unanimously.
DISCUSSION RE PROPOSED
ZOo ORD. AMEND. -RS DIST.
The City Council discussed amendments to be made to the Zoning
Ordinance related to the RS District and in reviewing this par-
ticular District, page by page, the following changes were made:
5.l0 - last line - between RS-l and RS-2, addition of RS-l.5
5.31 - after c) (RS-I), addition of d) RS-l.5 which changes
d), e), f) and g) to e), f), g), and h).
Cm Turner stated that he would like to note that in his opinion
RS-4 and RS-5 with 6,000 and 7,500 feet, respectively, are too
small for single family lots. Due to the energy problem people
will be staying home more and need more room for recreational
facilities, and em Tirsell stated that she shares the same view.
(\
Mr. Musso explained that 5.3l does not apply to subdivisions
and the Council felt this should be so stated because it is
confusing.
CM-28-356
September 3, 1974
(Proposed z.o. Amendment
re RS District)
/
(
",
Cm Futch stated that he feels there are some people who do not wish
to take care of a large yard and there are others who would like a
large lot and for that reason feels the flexibility is desirable.
em Miller pointed out that at the time the ordinance was passed there
was a great deal of opposition from the developers and the argument
made by the developers was that the minimum lot size does not allow
the developer to offer the buyer the flexibility they desire and
this was the reason large lots can be balanced off by the small lots
in a subdivision and felt the RS Ordinance is advantageous. He
stated that the City must leave RS-4 in the ordinance because there
are existing lots covered by it; however he would suggest that all
vacant land presently RS-4 in the General Plan be amended to RS-3
as the minimum lot size which would still allow flexibility.
Cm Turner suggested that RS-4 and RS-S be sent back to the Planning
Commission and consulting firm when the General Plan is being written.
Cm Futch felt that perhaps this would delay the ordinance and he would
prefer to adopt the ordinance and Cm Turner stated that he did not
mean to imply that the ordinance should not be adopted or that this
portion should be changed but that the RS-4 and RS-5 should be con-
sidered in a study session.
Cm Tirsell wondered how this would affect density transfer if there
is no more RS-4 and RS-5, in the future which Mr. Musso explained.
Cm Tirsell stated that she saw nothing about maximum site coverage
and it was noted that this was not included because it is not being
changed. This is covered in the ordinance and is 25% for RS-4 and
above and 30% for RS-5.
The Council moved on to discuss .42 c) Side Yard, and Cm Turner
stated that the minimum at present is 10 feet and he would like to
see a minimum of 12 feet, because of the problem people are having
in getting their recreational vehicles into the side yards. He
stated that his side yard is lO feet but the overhang of the house
does not permit full use of the lO feet and a motor vehicle wouldn't
fit into the area because of it. In his opinion this defeats the
purpose of the wide side yard but an extra two feet should give
additional room sufficient for a recreational vehicle.
Mr. Musso explained that on one side of the house the minimum is
l4 feet and Cm Turner felt the 12 or l4 feet should be on the garage
side of the house and wondered if the width on the other side is to
insure more privacy which Mr. Musso indicated is correct. Developers
have argued that the garage side already has the least exposure to
the neighbors and the reason the larger side yard is generally not
on the garage side.
(
\
Cm Futch stated that he agrees vehicles should be allowed to go
through the side yards to the rear but the question is, how much
width is sufficient and he is not sure 14 feet are really necessary.
If 14 feet is provided on one side this will take away from the width
on the other side of the house and people may wish to use the side
yard which is away from the garage side for a patio area or some such
use. He felt that houses are generally designed so as to allow more
room on one side of the house or the other to be most functional for
the owners.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would be in favor of a 12 foot side
yard, leaving the side yard requirement at 24 ft. and there could
be l2 feet on each side of the house, with which the Council agreed
and .42 c) was changed to read a minimum of l2 feet for lots 6,000
to and including lO,OOO square feet.
CM-28-357
September 3, 1974
RECESS
A brief recess was called, after which the Council meeting resumed
with all members of the Council present.
(Z.O. Amendment re RS District)
The discussion of the proposed amendments to the RS District con-
tinued with .42 b) Rear Yard.
Cm Futch stated that he feels the 25 ft. setback is sufficient
and indicated that he would like to see more flexibility in the
front yard setback so that everything doesn't look alike. At
present, all houses are set back 20 ft. from the street.
Discussion followed and Cm Miller pointed out that the smaller the
lot, the less flexibility, regardless of the amount of setback or
back yard setback required. Unless some type of setback regula-
tion is imposed, the smaller lots do not have any back yard. Cm
Miller also pointed out that as was stated in the discussion, it
is cheaper for all the yards to have a 20 ft. setback for the devel-
opers and no matter what flexibility is allowed, the developer
is still going to choose the least expensive setback and will put
the houses as close to the front as possible so that the driveways
will not have to be longer and the utilities will not have to be
extended additional lengths. Cm Miller stated that the setback
for the back yard is more or less determined by the amount available
after the 25% coverage has been taken care of and the side and
front yard setbacks. On some of the house plans, if you let the
yard control, it will cut down on the 25% coverage, or in other
words, you would have to have a bigger lot to make it fit in the
zoning category.
Cm Futch stated that the back yards are continuing to get larger
and larger by continuously modifying the RS Ordinance, and the
question is, where do you stop? In his opinion, anything larger
than the 25 ft. back yard setback, as recommended by the Planning
Commission, is not necessary.
em Turner stated that he would like to see a minimum requirement
in the back yard of 25 ft.
Cm Miller stated that there was intense public interest and public
testimony for the larger yards and he is in favor of the larger yards
for this reason and moved that .42 b) read that the lots of record
information be retained and that the rear yard setback be a choice
from either: a) an average of 35 feet, with a minimum of 25 feet;
or b) a back yard open space equal to l.75 times the floor area
of the house minus the garage. The motion was seconded by Cm Turner
and passed 4-1 (Cm Futch dissenting).
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the amendments, as made by the City Council, were referred back to
the Planning Commission for review.
Cm Turner asked if the Council should have discussed the side yards
and was told that this was not before them.
Cm Miller remarked that he had missed one thing - in .42 (d) in the
last sentence the draft refers to 35 feet of a lot may be deducted
from the total site area, and this was the figure applicable when
the minimum rear yard was 15 feet, but with the minimum requirement
now being 25 ft., this figure should also be changed.
Cm Turner moved that in conjunction with this ordinance, the Planning
Commission be asked to set for public hearing the question of the side
yard minimum.
CM-28-358
September 3, 1974
(P.H. re RS District)
c
Cm Miller added if they are going to discuss side yards, they might
as well talk about the possibility of decreasing the percentage of
coverage on the lot also as that would be the only method of bring-
ing the price of the home down - to build a smaller house, in the
RS-5. This suggestion to have the Planning Commission also consider
the reduction of coverage in the RS-5 District from 30% to 25% was
included in the motion made by Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsell,
and the motion passed unanimously.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE
Ch. lO.OO - CN (Neighbor-
hood Commercial) Dist.
The continued discussion regarding Chapter 10.00 - CN (Neighborhood
Commercial) District was continued at this time on motion of Cm
Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsell, by unanimous approval, to the
meeting of September 23.
STREET LIGHT POLE DESIGN -
RAILROAD UNDERPASSES
Some time ago the City Council expressed their preference that
the underpass street light poles should be as short as the Second St.
fixtures rather than the medium height poles being considered by
the Design Review Committee. The Council directed the staff to
consider alternate uses for the 40 ft. poles and to ascertain the
cost of the short replacement poles (22 ft.) The Public Works
Director reported that the cost of replacement will be approximately
$l4,300, and Mr. Lee suggested that perhaps we could inquire for
a possible credit for what we have and the alternatives for sale.
A motion was made by Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner, to obtain
the short poles, and to have the staff negotiate the best deal
for the higher poles, and the motion passed unanimously.
REPORT RE TRAFFIC SIGNAL
MURRIETA BLVD-PORTOLA AVE
In response to a Council inquiry as to the status of the traffic
signal at the intersection of Murrieta Blvd. and Portola Ave.,
Mr. Lee reported that this intersection does need a traffic signal
and this has been discussed with the County staff as the intersection
is in the County. He suggested that we should continue to press
the County to install this signal at an early time and in his report
he had recommended that we: 1) obtain further traffic counts,
2) investigate channelization additions to reduce conflict areas,
and 3) request the County to approve their share of the signal
project after new traffic counts have been taken.
Cm Futch moved that the Council adopt the recommendations of the
Public Works Director, seconded by Cm Miller.
'''',,- ./
Cm Turner did not feel that we should wait as the count taken in
February 1973 indicated that the signal was warranted then; also
he did not feel it should be postponed until North Livermore Avenue
is opened again and he would vote against the motion as he felt
we should proceed with the signal now.
r
A vote was taken on the motion and passed 4-l with Cm Turner
dissenting.
CM-28-359
September 3, 1974
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August 20, 1974
were noted and filed.
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(RR Assessment District Bonds)
The Finance Director reported that he wished to confirm that the
assessment district bonds issued under the Improvement Bond Act of
1915, secured by the assessments against the property in the Rail-
road Assessment District, were delivered by the staff to the Bank
of America; cash was received for the proceeds which were duly de-
posted in local banks at interest rates of ll-l/8% and investment
earnings will be accrued to the credit of the assessment district
funds to help offset some of the discount.
(Landscaping at Sunset
Mobilehome Park)
In reply to direction from the Council, the Planning Director re-
ported concerning the buffer between the mobilehome park and I-580,
which indicated that landscaping only had been a condition of the
park, and the Planning Director was asked to dicuss the matter with
the park owner.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Meeting with "P" Street Merchants)
Cm Turner stated that he and Mr. Lee had a meeting with the lip"
Street merchants and Mr. Lee explained the whole Railroad Avenue
project and answered their questions. They asked if one of their
merchants could be appointed to a committee concerning Railroad
Avenue, and he had given this information to Mr. Selden who is
in charge of the committee. Cm Turner stated they were very pleased
with the information furnished by Mr. Lee.
(Relocation of Pepe's Restaurant)
Cm Turner stated that Mrs. Paradiso, owner of the El Pepe Restaurant
had contacted him, and he questioned if there was some way that a
meeting could be arranged for her with some members of the Council,
and members of the staff.
Mr. Engel advised that Mrs. Paradiso has retained an attorney and
they have filed an answer in connection with the relocation project,
and the staff should deal with her attorney rather than Mrs. Para-
diso directly.
(City Council Office Hours)
Cm Turner stated that he felt the Councilmembers should set up a
time schedule, or perhaps check in at City Hall to see if there
are any messages. The Council discussed the office space that has
been set aside for their use, and means of checking with City
Hall for messages.
CM-28-360
September 3, 1974
(Zoning Ordinance Amend.
Deletion Sec. 27.80)
Cm Miller asked the Council's permission to direct the staff to
prepare the amending ordinance to delete Sec. 27.80 from the Zoning
Ordinance which is in reference to the automatic variance.
r-
\.
(Retraction of
Accusations - CRVP)
Cm Miller stated that he felt the Council should ask for a retraction
from the Valley Times or Gib Marguth, concerning the accusations
printed in the papers regarding supposed violation of the Brown Act.
Cm Tirsell suggested that they should also consider sending a copy
of the article and the intent of the remarks to the owner of the
newspaper, Dean Lesher.
(Energy Conservation
Ordinance)
The ordinance concerning insulation is scheduled for the meeting
of September 9, and Cm Tirsell stated there is much misinformation
in the community regarding the proposed ordinance, and she suggested
that Cm Futch be asked to prepare a press release, carefully spelling
out what the adoption of the ordinance would entail, and Cm Futch
agreed to do this.
(Greens Committee)
Cm Futch stated he has had letters concerning appointments to the
Greens Committee, and suggested that the matter be placed on the
agenda for discussion.
Mr. Parness explained that the proposed by-laws and rules and
regulations and organizational structure statements have been
drafted, and it was agreed that this would be placed on the
Council agenda for September 16.
ADJOURNMENT
The Council meeting adjourned to an executive session at 10:45 p.m.
to discuss three matters 1) personnel matters regarding the City
Attorney's office, 2) personnel matters regarding labor negotiations,
and 3) appointments to the Airport Advisory Committee, and the
Library Board.
~~
~J/W/
... ty Clerk
. or ,--'California
APPROVE
ATTEST
(
\
CM-28-36l
Regular Meeting of September 9, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council was held on September 9, 1974,
in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The
meeting was called to order at 8:l0 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard pre-
siding.
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.
SPECIAL ITEM
(re CROP)
Sally Bystroff, 330 Scott Street, stated that she represents the
Valley Covenant Ministry and thanked Mayor Pritchard for signing
a proclamation declaring the week of September 29th through October
25th a week of community concern for the hungry and urging that all
citizens contribute in some way to the alleviation of hunger and
starvation. She stated that people are increasingly aware and con-
cerned with the problem of hunger and today there was a conference
in Berkeley that directly dealt with the problem of population which
is a major factor in alleviating the problem of hunger. She stated
that there will be an education fair next week; Sept. l6th at Shannon
Park in Dublin, Sept. l7th at Granada High School in the multipurpose
room and Sept. l8th at Amador High. She stated that the reason for
the education fair and the concern for the hungry is because it is
recognized that it is not a simple one factor problem, and listed
the various organizations that will be represented and those who
will be speaking. She stated that there will also be a CROP march
on October 6th and gave the Councilmembers buttons advertising the
march.
Cm Futch stated that he appreciates the fact that she and the ministry
realize the broad nature of the problem with providing sufficient
food and a large part of the problem stems from lack of adequate
fertilizer and; directly related to the problem ': [r 1 W. of energy
and that energy conservation is a major factor that should be con-
sidered in providJ.ng food for the world.
~
ij.
MINUTES
em Futch commented that the Council relies on the notes of the City
Clerk and the notes they take for corrections to the minutes but
these are not available to other people who receive the agendas,
such as at the library and feels that corrections should be made
and added to the next set of minutes before the open forum. He
stated that on page 343, the week of August 26th, regarding the
article with statements from former Mayor Marguth (p. 3), essen-
tially accusing the Council of violation of the Brown Act and of
meeting prior to ~he regular meeting, regularly, to make decisions
prior to the official meeting were false statements and it is ab-
solutely essential that this Council go on record as denying those
statements. He stated he believes the Council did deny them that
night and they do not appear in the minutes. He stated that they
were false, dishonest statements and he thinks the Council has to
go on record as saying this and would like a verbatim translation
CM-28-362
September 9, 1974
(Minutes Approval)
of the Council's comments the first time it was brought up, to be
placed in the agenda for the next week. He stated that if the Coun-
cil agrees to this suggestion, the corrections can be placed in
a new section just under the Pledge of Allegiance, in the agenda.
He then moved that the Council formally begin the process of adding
the corrections that are made, at the beginning of the agenda,
after the Pledge of Allegiance, seconded by Cm Miller, and passed
unanimously.
em Tirsell stated that on page 342, the next to the last paragraph
and the lOth line down, the third word should be "that" rather than
"there" .
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
the minutes for the meeting of August 26, 1974, were approved as
corrected with the request for a verbatim transcription as noted
above.
VERBATIM TRANSCRIP-
TION RE STATEMENT
OF FORMER MAYOR MARGUTH
August 26, 1974, page 343, paragraph 3:
Cm Tirsell: I really much regret the emotionalism that surrounds
this item and that's the reason why I supported our original policy,
becuase if you have a policy that you will not give City funds to
non-city committees where you do not appoint committees and so forth,
then when someone appears in front of you the emotionalism is gone
from it. I can appreciate your responding to your constituency - I
happen to have a very big constituency among soccer players and I
have probably had more soccer players on the street walking for me
and their parents, and what not, and I can envision a time when they
might come back for funds. I don't want to have to sit up here and
determine whether soccer is better for the town or the rodeo parade
is for the town. I think that's an impossible decision for anyone
to make. I further think that the kind of statement made by former
Mayor, Gib Marguth, in the paper, concerning this Council are another
sort of thing that add to the emotionalism of this and I quote, "an
example of such a violation he cited a pre-meeting huddle last Monday
of Councilmen Don Miller, Helen Tirsell and Archer Futch" he refers
constantly to this trio - that we run the Council and I defy him to
find a consistant vote to the motion where we wound up the same. I
further would like to quote "They were in violation of the Brown Act".
"There is a lack of communication between councilman and voter in
Livermore which is depressing". Amongst this, how many phone calls,
and how much searching have you done on this item? Former Mayor
Marguth believes "Livermore is currently being governed, at least
in part, not by constituency representating a majority of Livermore
voters, but by one consisting of 10 to 12 intellectuals who feel they
know what is best for the voters". I would like to match my total
votes against his total votes anytime.
Cm Turner: I was in my garage yesterday on vacation and did a total
on that and you got 67% of the people.
Cm Tirsell: Alright, I'll match that constituency against his any
day. And the final shot which I would like to point out is "Distrust
of the government did not start with the people. It is the result of
the government's distrust of the people. They think their constit-
uents don't know what's good for them". I would like to point out
that this sort of article is undermining local government and is
one of the sources of our trouble.
CM-28-363
September 9, 1974
(Minute Correction
Verbatim Transcript)
Cm Miller: I would love to go on with comments about that article,
but I guess this is really not the place. I would like to comment
about this issue;! h0Weve:r p:;wheILMayor Pritchard is finished.
(\
Mayor Pritchard: I was quite surprised to see the article, in one
way, and I was as much distressed probably as you were, Helen. I
would presume, in that I have not heard any differently, that these
remarks were made by Mr. Marguth, I have not seen him denying it in
the press and it very sorely distressed me. I can only assume that
the CRVP is in such dire straights and of such little political base
any longer that this is what they have to resort to.
Cm Tirsell: That's nothing but a cheap shot.
Cm Miller: I would like to speak to the question of the rodeo parade.
Cm Futch: Before we leave this, I just can't miss an opportunity.
I don't want to take a lot of time on this but you know, you can
just go through here and pick out statements that are just completely
false. That we acted in advance and made a decision on that item,
on the rodeo, is absolutely false. The charge that we continuously
meet prior to our meeting to make decisions on items and then only
come in and vote is absolutely false. I think that the general in-
tent of the article is really dishonest.
Mayor Pritchard: Would you like a couple of shots, Don?
Cm Miller: Oh, I'd love to but I know I would say all the wrong
things. I would say all the right things about how I feel and what
it means but all the:wrongthings about what one should say.
Cm Tirsell: I have some specific examples for Mr. Mayor Marguth to
chew on when I see him.
OPEN FORUM
(50th Anniv. of
Liv. Lions Club)
Dr. Donald Rocco, ll30 Batavia, stated that September 19, 1974, repre-
sents the 50th anniversary of the Livermore Lions Club and he would
like to know what must be undertaken to have that date officially
proclaimed Livermore Lions Day.
Mayor Pritchard stated that they need only ask for the proclamation.
Dr. Rocco stated that there are four living charter members of the
organization and they would like this day proclaimed for the gala
event planned at Castlewood Country Club that night.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would contact Dr. Rocco and will see
that appropriate action is taken.
P.H. RE AMEND. TO GEN.
PLAN - LAND USE & CIR-
CULATION ELEMENTS & INDUS.
LAND USE ELEMENT
(\
The area being discussed is north of I-580 between Vasco Road and
Altamont Road and south of I-580 between Vasco Roade, Greenville
Road and Tesla Road as well as amendment of the Industrial Land
Use Element text.
CM-28-364
September 9, 1974
(P.H. re Amend to General
Plan - Land Use &
Circulation Elements)
Mr. Musso indicated the area being discussed and explained that
the reason we embarked on a General Plan amendment was because we
annexed the Northfront Road area which was zoned by the County as
commercial and it was noted that this zoning is in conflict with
the General Plan. This was the primary reason the amendment was
initiated. Also, the state law requires conformance of zoning to
the General Plan and also because the I-I, I-2, I-3 zoning adopted
by the City is not workable in the present General Plan. At present
the plan indicates all the light area as light industrial and the
dark for heavy industrial and the zoning using the I-l, I-2, I-3.
He illustrated the areas recommended for change from light to heavy
industrial, etc.
Cm Tirsell asked why the strip down Vasco Rd had been zoned residential
all the way to East Avenue and Mr. Musso explained that at one time
it was felt that there was sufficient industrial zoning and the plan-
ning took into consideration that Vasco Rd is a limited access express-
way and would be a better divider than to have industrial backing
up to residences.
Cm Turner noted that in the Planning Commission minutes Commissioner
Selden abstained because he owned property in the area and this is
a conflict of interest and yet he moved to adopt the resolution and
wondered if this would create a legal problem and the City Attorney
indicated that as she recalls each issue was discussed and voted
upon separately and that the resolution was a consolidation of their
previous votes - he did not vote on the portion related to his property.
Mr. Musso stated that with the exception of the two properties (on
Vasco Rd and East Avenue) the General Plan remained the same with some
properties receiving higher intensity industrial use.
Cm Turner stated that he would like the resolution to be referred
back to the Planning Commission for revote, as the motion made by
Commissioner Selden may cause a problem in another six months.
The City Attorney commented that there was a question as to whether
or not there was even a conflict of interest since his property might
be too far away from the affected property; however, if there is a
conflict one is not supposed to influence the other members of the
Planning Commission, which would include making a motion. At the
time, it was felt that the motion was in order since he had not
voted on the portion related to his property; however, if the Council
feels uneasy about the procedure it could be referred back to the
Planning Commission.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that the Council uses the same procedure
of discussing something in parts if one part relates to a conflict
of interest for one Councilmember. This person abstains from the
vote and discussion but the motion is wrapped up into one total
motion of the whole discussion and everyone votes on it. The record
clearly shows that the individual did not take part in that par-
ticular portion.
(~
\
Cm Miller stated that he would like to mention that he is part owner
of land adjacent to Area 27 and would like to abstain from discussion
related to this portion.
At this time Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing for public
testimony and it was noted that a letter of testimony was received
from Mr. Leonard Cain, attorney for Virginia Busick, relative to the
estate of William Busick, re property north of I-580, and also from
the Chamber of Commerce, both approving the recommendation submitted
by the Planning Commission.
eM 28-365
September 9, 1974
(P.H. re General Plan
Amendment )
Cm Tirsell stated that in paragraph 2, relative to the air quality,
the statement should receive consideration for inclusion in the
draft of the Environmental Impact Report.
Cm Miller also pointed out that references are made to 1971 and
1972 but there are now results available from 1973 and there is
a change in the direction of the amount of smog which should be
considered.
Carolyn Oddon, 5846 East Avenue, stated that although the Council
courteously listens to each speaker she feels they do not really
listen to what the people say, but hoped they would. She listed
the following reasons she feels her property should remain light
industrial: l) their location is unique in that it is close to
LLL and Sandia, 2) It is directly across from Research Drive where
there are five major industrial buildings currently housing thir-
teen businesses, 3) On the left side of their property the City has
committed ten acres to OGO, a low cost housing development. For
these reasons she felt additional apartments were unwarranted as
they would increase the need for additional schools; also residential
requires more police and fire protection than industrial. To date
they have contributed over $l,OOO cash and have given easement for
a sewer line of 20 feet across the entire width of their property
and the length of their neighbors, and this line gave the chance
of growth to the industries which she had cited.
John Regan, 672 North "N" Street, stated that he is not quite sure
why the area was changed, but according to Mr. Musso it is his un-
derstanding that the property he is concerned about (NW corner of
Vasco Road and East Avenue) has been recommended for change so
that it would conform to a previous General Plan that was established
in 1965. He asked why the change is being made at this particular
time and Mr. Musso replied that there are various reasons. Mr.
Regan stated that he is speaking, specifically, about the property
at the corner of Vasco Road and can see nothing but problems if
the area goes residential, as was pointed out by Mrs. Oddon.
Mayor Pritchard stated that maybe it would be best if Mr. Musso
would summarize the feeling of the Planning Commission regarding
the two pieces of property even though the explanation appeared
in the Planning Commission minutes, which Mr. Musso did.
Mayor Pritchard noted that Mrs. Oddon had mentioned that public
works improvements had been installed and that because of this
some 20 feet of land was given to the City and wondered why these
public works were installed.
Mr. Lee explained that when the tract on Research Drive was orJ.gJ.n-
ally developed they were required to provide water and sewage to
the tract and the line for sewage was to the north across East
Avenue along the east line of the Oddon property and then parallel-
ling the creek to connect to a line in Wagoner Farms development,
generally in a westerly and northerly direction paralleling the
creek and the developer received an easement for the line through
the Oddon property and they will have the use of the line when
they develop.
Mayor Pritchard asked how long it has been shown as industrial on
the General Plan, and Mr. Musso stated that it does not show it as
industrial and that it is indicated as residential and this was
the reason the matter was brought up; therefore, we must either
change the zoning or the General Plan.
Mr. Regan stated that he has written a letter to Mr. Callaghan
regarding residential development and that there is a possiblity
that multiple residential might result in as much financial gain
CM-2S-366
September 9, 1974
(Public Hearing reo
General Plan Amendment)
~'
l
as would industrial, per acre, for that there are considerations
to be made, such as the demand for multiples in the coming years,
the current economic state of money, traffic congestion that could
result from residential development and that the development fees
would be substantially higher for residential development. He
recommended that, if at all possible, the current zoning should be
retained and that they should make a strong pitch to have it remain
light industrial. He stated that he would like to know if the Planning
Commission is aware of the fact that there is a CUP on the 8.5 acres
that applies until July 1975 - a permit for storage, which is an
industrial use. This is the first offer for development of the property
that has come along. There has been a tremendous effort expended
to develop the property so that the property owner can pay four to
five years back taxes on it and strongly feels that the best chances
for disposing of the property and getting it developed is to leave
it in its present zoning and sees no reason for changing it with
the natural barriers located there - Vasco Road, the Arroyo Seco, and
East Avenue.
Mr. Callaghan, attorney, representing Connor, stated that what Mr.
Regan said about the property is true and there is an outstanding
permit on it at present which the Council killed when it came before
them by making it so expensive that the buyer refused to consider it.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would have to disagree with this
comment to some extent because he knows the person who decided not
to develop on the property and one of the reasons was because there
was already mini-storage development taking place.
Mr. Callaghan stated that what he was told by the prospective develop-
er and what Mayor Pritchard was told appear to be two different
stories. He continued to say that he agrees with what Mr. Regan has
said about there being natural barriers and that industrial development
would be better for this area. There already exists multiple develop-
ment along East Avenue and also one must consider the fact that there
is a residential building moratorium going on and it would be ridicul-
ous to zone something for a use which wouldn't be permitted.
Ebert Lounsbury, 1787 South Vasco Road, stated that his property
is immediately north of the Arroyo Seco and noted that there is an
industrial sewer line going through his property which services the
Sunshine Card Company. The reason for the sewer was a continuation
of the Oddon property sewer and to help develop industrial property
in proximity to the laboratories. He stated that the property owners
have no hopes of residential development ever taking place in this
area. There is water, sewage, and PG&E lines to service industrial
and he feels commercial or industrial development should take place
there.
Bob Tieke, 860 William Drive, asked about the I-l, I-2, and I-3, and
Mr. Musso replied that for the purpose of this discussion these cate-
gories should be ignored and explained the areas suggested for change
from light industrial to heavy industrial in the two areas he illus-
trated.
There being no further testimony, on motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded
by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote, the public hearing was closed.
~....
(
\
""
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Futch and by 4-0 vote (Cm
Miller abstaining due to conflict of interest) area 27 was approved,
as shown on the map which is no change in the General Plan.
It was noted that the only conflict seems to be the Oddon and Conner
property and the Council decided to discuss this portion.
Cm Miller stated that the Oddon and Conner properties were wrongly
zoned originally, in his o?inion, and it was also supposed to have
been low density residential. The parcels were zoned industrial
CM-28-367
September 9, 1974
(re P. H. General
Plan Amendment)
and afterwards the property to the west was zoned multiple in viola-
tion of the then General Plan and in fact the current General Plan
and the property owners were persuasive and managed to get higher
density by a factor of two, over what it should have been. As a
result of the development of industrial across the street a~d the ~ .
existing industrial zoning on these parcels; and ~l yl...ll,PI lf~~~~
~ve to the comments made by Mrs. Oddon about the demands on schools,
sewers, water, and other City services which are higher for residen-
tial than for industria~and the fact the density is alreag~ higher
than it should be in that area, based on the general plan;~ould~
recommend that we retain the industrial zoning for the Oddon and
Conner property.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that in his opJ.n1on this area would
develop as industrial faster than some of the other industrial
property in the City of Livermore.
Cm Turner stated that to move things along he would like to say
that he agrees with the comments made by Cm Miller.
Cm Tirsell asked how many properties are located north of the Arroyo
Seco and Mr. Musso indicated there are three - one large one and two
smaller pieces.
Cm Tirsell stated that in her opinion she feels that the area should
be considered as a whole and not just the corner piece but Cm Miller
felt this is not necessarily so because the Arroyo Seco does represent
a substantial boundary.
Cm Futch stated that with respect to traffic, it was mentioned that
there would be less traffic if it were zoned light industrial, but
one of the biggest traffic generators at the peak hours is the
Research Drive development and feels that traffic is not a valid
reason for zoning it as light industrial.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that if, however, a warehouse were to
go in, it would result in very little traffic.
Cm Futch continued to say that we are significantly increasing the
amount of industrial property and that we probably have more than
we will ever use which is another factor to be considered. He stat-
ed that he tends to agree with the Planning Commission and would
like to keep everything on that side of Vasco Road, residential.
Discussion followed regarding density for the area if it were to
become residential.
Cm Futch moved to uphold the Planning Commission's recommendations
on the remaining parcels, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
Mayor Pritchard stated that if the Oddon and Conner properties
are to be different than what was recommended by the Planning
Commission it would be necessary to amend the motion.
em Turner moved that the area in PU #l3 referred to as the Oddon
and Conner property be indicated as light industrial zoning on
the General Plan, seconded by Cm Miller.
Cm Tirsell pointed out that in her opinion you cannot separate
the two pieces of property and that the area should be considered,
as a whole, and if the Council wants ~ strip along
there should be the consideration. . ~.
Cm Turner stated that normally he would agree and this is usually
the policy applied in planning; however, this particular location
is different, being located near the labs and contiguous to Research
Drive and that residential living would not be proper.
CH-28-368
September 9, 1974
(re P. H. - General
Plan .1\mendment)
(
\.
Cm Futch asked if the Council isn't concerned about the rest of Vasco
Road becoming industrial because the rest of it will be adjacent
to industrial if the corner is zoned light industrial.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the same argument could be made for
residential at l6 to the acre. If it is zoned residential the
rest of Vasco could be high density residential.
Cm Miller stated that the area is already too dense in residential
zoning.
At this time the amendment passed 3-2 (em Tirsell and Futch dissenting) .
It was noted that area 27 was voted upon and that the remainder has
nothing to do with it and Cm Miller may vote on the rest.
At this time the Council voted on the main motion which passed by
unanimous vote.
PUBLIC HEARING RE PRO-
POSED REZONING OF
PROPERTY EAST & WEST
OF KITTYHAWK ROAD
Mr. Musso explained that it has been recommended that the Area 1,
(airport property and two other properties) be zoned I-l, area
east and west of Kittyhawk Road, for low intensity industrial zoning.
Cm ~1iller stated as he understands it the General Plan will show
that the property east of the airport will be indicated as agricul-
tural because it would be premature to consider any other type of
zoning, and Mr. Musso indicated that this is correct and the recom-
mendation from the Planning Commission was to leave it this way.
Mayor Pritchard stated that there was a letter written asking that
after the public hearing is opened the matter be postponed so that
the owners of property in the area, Haley, Schenone, Tucker,
Birchfield and Smith, may more intelligently review this matter.
At this time ~1ayor Pritchard opened the public hearing.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Cm Miller, seconded
by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote the matter was continued to
Tuesday, October l5th.
DISCUSSION RE TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 3615 - GILLICE
CASTILLEJA DEL ARROYO
r
\
\
The matter of the tentative map of tract 3615 was postponed from the
meeting of August 26th and September 3rd at the request of the
applicant and Mayor Pritchard asked if there was anyone in the
audience interested in knowing the history of this item and there
were no comments. He stated that the Council knows the history of
the matter and discussion could continue.
Cm Miller asked if the letter from the school exists, and Mr. Madis
stated that he has a copy of the letter from the school which he
presented to the Council after havinq read it to the audience.
Mayor Pritchard explained that a letter had been requested from
the School District ascertaining the availability of services but
the letter does not mention, specifically, this property.
CM-28-369
September 9, 1974
(Tentative Map 3615 -
Castilleja Del Arroyo)
Mr. Madis stated that the letter had been written for him, at his
request and specifically for this project and assumed that refer-
ence would be made to it in the letter; however, upon receiving
the letter it was discovered that reference was not made but he
was not able to contact the School District due to the Monday
(today) holiday.
Mayor Pritchard stated that it would appear that the letter would
apply to this property as well as all other and asked the City
Attorney if it meets the requirements of the ordinance, and she
stated that she would have to check but believes the ordinance
requires a statement that there are adequate school facilities
to serve the particular subdivision but this may not be exactly
right.
Cm Miller stated that: a) the letter does not say this and b)
what it does say is that there are not adequate facilities.
The City Attorney stated that the ordinance states, "that the
Livermore School District has stated, in writing, that adequate
school facilities are present or will be present within a reason-
able time to serve the subdivision".
Mayor Pritchard stated that the letter does not say this - it does
not say that adequate facilities will be available.
Mr. Madis argued that they plan to extend the school days and
they are meeting the requirement but Cm Miller pointed out that
this is not considered adequate facilities.
Cm Turner felt the letter could be taken either way and Mr. Madis
stated that the letter says it is the policy of the School District
to serve all children within its boundaries. The building has been
erected and it is the responsibility of the School District to see
that the children are served.
Mayor Pritchard asked if Mr. Madis would like the Council to take
action on the matter from the letter received or if Mr. Madis would
like to obtain another letter from the School District and Mr. Madis
stated that in his opinion another letter would say the same thing -
the only point is that reference was not made to this particular
project.
Cm Miller stated that the ordinance says "adequate school capacity".
The School District sent the Council a resolution passed by it
several months ago saying that double sessions do not reflect ade-
quate capacity and the fact is that the letter from the School
District says that they are "beyond capacity". The fact that
there is a school that holds 1,500 and you have 5,000 students in
it does not mean that it is adequate even though they may be bulg-
ing out the windows and the whole point of the ordinance and the
School District's concerns in the past were that there be adequate
school facilities available and it is clear that there are not ade-
quate school facilities available. In these circumstances it would
appear that in terms of our ordinance there is no choice but to deny
this subdivision map.
Cm Turner stated that he does not want to argue the point of whether
or not the tract map should be approved but would like to say that
a decision should not be based on the letter received from the
School District because in his opinion is very misleading and
vague and really doesn't say anything. He felt it was wrong to
indicate all schools are on double session, however.
CM-28-370
September 9, 1974
(Tentative Map 3615
Castilleja Del Arroyo)
('
\
Cm Miller stated that Granada High School is on double sessions
because their classes have been cut back: Livermore High School has
been on double sessions in a hidden form for three or four years
when they went from five class hours a week to four - a 20% cut.
Cm Futch stated his agreement with Cm Turner in that he, too, felt
the letter to be vague, but he also agreed with Cm Miller because the
letter does not state they can provide the schools as required by
the ordinance and he did not feel they should argue whether or not
the letter was vague.
Mayor Pritchard indicated that it was the consensus of the Council
that the letter did not address itself to this particular subdivision
which is what the Council expected, and he asked Mr. Madis what he
wished to do as this was the Council's position.
Mr. Madis stated if that is the Council's position he would request
a continuance to next week, but he was sure the contents of any letter
from the School District is going to say the same thing. It may say
specifically that these students will be serviced by Granada High
School.
Cm Miller remarked that Mr. Madis missed the point which is that the
School District must say there is adequate school space, and if the
wording of the letter does not contain that statement the Council
cannot approve the subdivision.
Mr. Musso added that in the past the letters have been more specific,
and they have indicated which schools the children would attend;
this is the first time a letter from the School District has been
vague.
Cm Futch stated his willingness to continue the item, but there are
other items that should also be discussed, as the Council would
probably include the Planning Commission's comments as conditions
and if the developer would agree to all those comments and received
an appropriate letter, it would be to their benefit.
Cm Miller moved that the tract map be approved subject to an
affirmative school letter in the form required by our ordinance;
that the subdivision be in conformance with the City Engineer's
report and the park dedication for all l54 units be taken in cash
as a prior condition of approval. The motion was seconded by Cm
Futch.
Cm Turner stated he would like to have included the requirement that
the money would be spent to purchase land within that area for park
purposes, and Cm Miller assured him that money raised by park dedi-
cation must be spent in the planning unit, or closely adjacent, for
park purposes. He continued that if the City wins the law suit, or
the applicants drop the suit with prejudice, it would be reasonable
for the City to refund the money and take the appropriate land, which
he would be willing to do. The amount of cash would be $62,062.
\'-.
Mr. Madis stated that there seems to be some misunderstanding regarding
the litigation and explained it was only concerned with 23.3 acres,
which was the land used in the computation of the density transfer,
and he referred to the agreement concerning arroyo park lands. He
mentioned there are 18 acres involved in the channel, which the
City has; there is park dedication which was calculated out of the
42 acres on which there is no question, so the only issue in the liti-
gation is the validity of the density transfer issue.
('
Cm Futch asked the City Attorney if the conditions made in the motion
are legal and valid and if they are criteria that can be placed on
a map such as this.
CM-28-37l
September 9, 1974
(Tentative Map 3615
Castilleja Del Arroyo)
Miss Whittaker stated that was correct and that she wished to make a
few comments regarding Mr. Madis' statement. He is correct that
currently the land under litigation is the 23.33 acres dedicated
for the density transfer purposes. He amended his suit to withdraw
his claim for return of the l7.lS acres that were dedicated for
channel purposes. There has been some confusion as to whether or
not the City has received any park land. The Planning Director has
presented a survey which showed that the City has received a total
of 44.479 acres and the City is willing to accept that. Apparently
in it was included l.48 acres for park dedication, which Mr. Madis
is not asking to be returned. That represented a park dedication
requirement for the 70 additional units he got for the density trans-
fer in Castelleja III. When that building was constructed_~he City
did not charge the developer any park dedication for the~~nits
because it was an apartment complex at that time. It is the opinion
Of the City Attorney that you can impose the full park dedication
requirement this time of 3.04 acres, based on l54 units, but the
Council should give credit for what has already been received since
it is the same development, so there would be 3.04 acres which re-
quirement would be imposed, and l.40 acres has been received.
The remainder would be owing and it would be up to the Council to
accept it either in land or in fees.
Cm Futch remarked that it would be simpler if the Council would
treat this parcel map as a separate item from all the confusing
actions that have been taken in the past and all the litigation.
Miss Whittaker stated it would be easier and she would certainly
would want Castelleja III separated from Castelleja I and II because
the City has no basis to impose on Castelleja III what they would
wish to see resolved in connection with I and III, however they
cannot completely forget about the litigation and the agreement,
because the same building is involved, and there has been some park
land dedicated in connection with this building.
em Futch questioned if the City Attorney was suggesting an amendment
to the motion or a different motion than that made by Cm Miller.
Miss Whittaker stated that the Council could state that credit
would be given for park land already dedicated and received by the
City or fees paid for Castelleja III, for clarification. The Coun-
cil would impose the full requirement but credit would be given for
everything paid to date for Castelleja III park land.
Cm Futch asked if that was acceptable to the maker of the motion,
and Cm Miller stated that it was not for the following reason:
It is not true that the 44.479 acres cover all the dedications
transformed into land, because according to the Planning Director's
calculations in his memo, it indicates that with all the land that
is expected to be sold, the total acreage is short by l.73l acres.
The litigation is against the agreement and the agreement talks about
the land, and it would seem to him that the City needs to win the
suit before there is anything resolved about trades in land, and
even if everything goes as it should the City would still be owed
$35,000 by Mr. Madis even if we took all the land we are entitled
to. It seems quite unreasonable to be in a position of not knowing
what we will get, and we will still have to go through a law suit
to obtain the money owed to us on the extra acreage, and he felt
it would be wiser to take cash.
Mr. Madis directed the City Attorney's and Council's attention to
the case of the Associated Homebuilders vs. City of Walnut Creek,
the only state authority on the issue of park dedication, and to the
language in that case which states that the City is required by that
decision to account for open space generated by any development as
a credit toward any park fees or park dedication required by the city,
CM-28-372
September 9, 1974
(
\
"
(Tentative Map 3615
Castilleja Del Arroyo)
and which he did not feel was being done here. Mr. Madis stated that
under this agreement there is enough land, in fact about l~ acres
more than was originally contemplated. They are willing to work out
with the staff the total amount of land that the City is to receive
for park dedication and he assured the Council that the City will
get the land as contemplated by this agreement. If the City wants
two more acres, it can have two more acres and the Council can be
assured they have picked a park area any place within that 42 acres.
Mayor Pritchard asked how we could be assured of that while the
acreage is in litigation, and Mr. ~1adis stated the issue of how much
goes to the City for park is not in litigation, and they would be
willing to work up a compromise agreement with the City Attorney
tomorrow in which that portion or any claim for that is fully settled,
compromised and released.
Cm Futch stated he felt this issue would not be resolved this evening,
and if it was still Mr. Madis' suggestion that the matter be continued
for one week, it might be wise to continue the matter.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would really want the land and felt
that is what we should have, and if it could be worked out between
the attorney and the attorney for the City, where we are definitely
assured of getting the land, he would rather it be done that way.
Cm Miller repeated there was not enough land to satisfy all the park
dedications, plus the property which is to be sold, outside the
23.3 acres in the channel.
Mayor Pritchard stated he understood what Cm Miller is saying, but
what Mr. Madis is saying is that he will work out something even if
he has to amend his complaint against the City to be sure that land
is correctly given to the City, and he asked Mr. ~1adis if this indeed
his intention, and Mr. Madis stated that it was correct, and they
would work it out this week.
Cm Hiller stated he wanted his say as to what the "work out" has
to be - what would be unacceptable to the Council, and he again re-
ferred to the Planning Director's memo.
Miss Whittaker, however, interrupted Cm Miller to say that the cal-
culations to which he referred also included the calculations for
Castilleja I and II, and there is no way that the City can use those
requirements in the tentative map for Castilleja III.
Cm Miller stated this is exactly the point he is making. Agreed,
we cannot do that.>.tMt .tLGre ia RO iRteRt.ioR of doih9 t.hat buL LLe
..<.Q#=poiat. ~o::> Llld.t. unIt::::>:::> the City tilkQIii thO'i<i tb.itl'J~ itlto ilC'C'Ql1Flt \J'nel\
~lWu<i:rytb.iR9' io ove~, there are obligations on Castilleja I and II
that have to be treated separately and this is the point Miss Whittaker
has made. However, in figuring out how the City is going to do it
on Castilleja III21l .1. .....~ have to take into account what is proposed
for Castilleja I,and II and what has happened to them because the~~'
ei~y~y need -t:o~ake tJU- ~ jlC! ~,~ift.1OU.IilL.Of al:til'.xf. -r
.. . ~d.o~. ,U?, ,
Mayor Pritchard asked if Cm Miller is saying that because of the land
that is under litigation at this time, if the litigation wins there
is a possibility that there will not be land available for park dedi-
cation?
(
Cm Miller stated that win, or lose, there is not enough land available
for park dedication. A portion is going to have to be paid in cash.
If it is really true that the litigation has only to do with the 23.33
-.if.. ..~
, _I A.' , ...
. ,;". ,-, . ,. .,' . I
.:.c.. -C'. <1-'" /';::7:. "-" '...1t:.>/ z_ >~"i. 1.-4."'.' "L~ .
, .,. _/ I //
~1;;'../ .-~';;~. ... ,.'- /I '
" ~ ,<.-U.(" 4. ~l.L .
?/' , .
, 7~ ~"".4f.:I/.L_
~.~ -i. ~ 1-
fjld':
CM-28-373
September 9, 1974
(Tentative Map 3615
Castilleja Del Arroyo)
acres then there is inadequate land in the 44.79 acres to get all the
dedications that are due the City, in land, and this is an impor-
tant point.
Cm Turner felt the matter should be continued and referred back to
the staff and if what Cm Miller says is true he is disappointed that
this has not been pointed out by the staff.
Cm Miller stated that the staff has pointed this out. The staff has
said that the City cannot condition Castilleja I and II on the tract
map for Castilleja III. It has also been pointed out that park dedi-
cations have been paid for Castilleja II and due the City on Castilleja
I. The argument is, by Mr. Madis, that there is plenty of land availa-
ble and no matter what happens to the 23.33 acres, whether we win or lose,
.lrt there is plenty of land. The fact is, there is not plenty of land and
~-JWhat the staff calculations have very clearly indicated.~~e City
~. has to be careful how Castilleja III is handled so the City.is not
cheated by things that are due on Castilleja II. Part of Castilleja
I and II were paid in cash. On Page 2 is says "less the l.l2 acres
that was done in cash". If you take the l.l2 acres that was owed
and cash was paid for it you can subtract the l.l2 acres acres and
remain with 43.l5. The 43.l5 are the dedications owed to the City,
of which 23.33 are under litigation having to do with the density
transfer. Assuming the 23.33 belong to the City, the total actual
area, according to the survey, is 44.479 acres and the required
dedication is 43.l5 and is the acreage left over from the building
permits for Castilleja III which does not include the 84 units yet.
Summary II corresponds to the acres that are proposed to be sold
off and in the report it says l.30 and Mr. Madis is speaking of l.4l -
he stated he doesn't know what the corrected value is but it can be
adjusted and must be adjusted somewhere before the final decision is
made. Subtracting the 43.15 and the l.30 that is to be sold off from
the 44.479, leaves the City in the hole, and the park dedication due
the City for the 84 units has not been taken off yet which is another
1.68 acres. Subtracting all of this leaves the City in the hole by
l.73l acres. This land cannot support all the park dedicationsAand
this is the point. ~~
&/f':
Cm Futch stated that Miss Whittaker has said this might be true but
the City cannot require that this be a condition of the map and Cm
Miller stated this is correct; however, he is not talking about the
map. All he is saying is that the ordinance indicates the City has
the choice of taking cash or land and in this case, when there is not
enough land to take care of the whole thing the City should take cash.
The other members of the Council agreed that it would be allright to
take cash and asked the City Attorney if she would disagree with this
and she stated there is no disagreement.
Mr. Madis stated that he does not understand the calculations and
asked what the Council has done about the l.24 which the City Attor-
ney has indicated cannot be figured into the calculations.
Cm Miller stated that the 1.24 is included in the overall considera-
tion.
Mr. Madis stated that the Council has dragged it back in, then, when
the City Attorney said they couldn't use it.
Cm Miller explained that in the discussion above, it was pointed out
that in all Mr. Gillice's obligations to the City, he does not own
enough land to pay the City in land - he is short l.73l acres, so
for him to say that all the obligations can be paid off in land is
not a true statement.
CM-28-374
September 9, 1974
(Tentative Map 3615
Castilleja Del Arroyo)
rlr. Madis stated that if the City Attorney is correct you have to
add the 1.24 acres back into the negative figure of 1.731 which
would leave a balance of .49 acres.
(
Mayor Pritchard stated that the matter is to be continued and asked
that further discussion be delayed. He suggested that in the interim,
Mr. ~1adis, Miss Whittaker and Mr. Musso meet to resolve the differences
on the amount available. He added that the City will probably require
a cash payment rather than land but even in order to do this the num-
bers will have to be resolved. Hayor Pritchard stated that if the
attorney would agree, Cm Miller will not be present at the next Council
meeting and would request that the matter be continued for a period
of two weeks.
!\lr. Husso commented that the 1.24 is not really pertinent to this
tract because the 1.24 was a credit given two years ago. Two years
ago the building permits were given for Castilleja III on the basis
of the park dedication and at that time everything was agreed upon.
Mr. Madis stated that he and his client have no objection to a two
week continuance. He asked if the City would like some type of legal
document drawn up which would indicate that certain land is to be
dedicated to the City and can never be touched, which the City could
approve stating that x number of acres is wherever the City desig-
nates.
Mayor Pritchard stated that this would be agreeable to him provided
there is sufficient land available and the City engineers would have
to tell the Council whether or not there is enough land there to do
this.
Mr. Madis stated that if all of the figures are true the issue is
about a little over half an acre.
Miss Whittaker asked if she is correct in assuming that the Council
is asking that everyone involved meet to decide how many acres of
park land Castilleja III owes the City and, secondly, to ascertain if
Mr. Gillice has land, at this moment, that could be used to satisfy
the requirement, and Mayor Pritchard indicated this is correct.
It was noted that if property is located with the proper acreage,
this could be presented to the Council but the Council still has
the option of whether to accept land or cash.
Miss Whittaker pointed out that Mr. Madis made reference to making
a settlement that would designate a portion of the land to the City
and that this land is presently being contested with the City saying
it already owns the property and advised that the City not accept
a grant of any of the 23.33 in fulfillment of the park dedication
because the City claims that it is entitled to it anyway.
~vi th the approval of the applicant, on motion of Cm Hiller, seconded
by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote the matter was continued for two
weeks.
~
(
COMMUNICATION RE LOMITAS
SE\VER SERVICES - COUNTY
An inquiry has been made by Alameda County regarding annexation and
utility services adjacent to Lomitas Avenue. At present the property
is inhabited and destined to become part of our incorporated City.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion agreeing to annexa-
tion and provision of sewage treatment services, subject to all asso-
ciated costs being borne by the benefitted properties.
CM-28-375
September 9, 1974
(Re Lomitas Ave. Sewer
Service)
Cm Futch stated that for discussion purposes he would like to move
that the Council adopt a resolution agreeing to the annexation of
the subject area with the provision that sewage treatment services
be subject to all associated costs be borne by those benefitting,
seconded by Cm Tirsell who added that prior to annexation appli-
cation, all property owners be provided with copies of our Hous-
ing Element that spell out residential development, accepted as
part of the motion by Cm Futch.
Cm Miller asked what the General Plan indicates as density for this
area and Mr. Musso indicated that it is l.5 dwelling units per acre.
He then illustrated the area where the school will probably be loca-
ted and where there are currently a couple of churches. At present,
there are 8 units and a nursery school located in the area.
Cm Miller stated that there are about 250 dwelling units that could
go in that area if it is annexed to the City and zoned according to
our General Plan and at best there is a capacity of 500-1,000 d.u.
left in our sewer plant. It is the desire of the Council to reserve
some of this capacity for commerce and industrial use and the exten-
sion of sewer connections becomes a question of priority. If con-
nections are allowed, it would mean taking a substantial amount of
sewer capacity and committing it, unless the density is reduced or
unless something else is done.
em Turner stated that the motion sounds as if the City is going to
start annexation proceedings and the other Councilmembers explained
that the motion only indicates that if application is made for annex-
ation the City would be willing to allow them to annex, as stated.
Cm Miller stated that he would be willing to allow annexation of
the 8 units existing in the area but would hesitate to allow units
to develop at random. He continued to say that if the City says
it will allow annexation then the County can allow development
of subdivisions of 5,000 sq. ft. lots because the City will provide
sewage.
Mayor Pritchard stated that perhaps it would be better to allow
annexation and sewer service to the existing parcels - about 35
parcels would be affected. He stated that he would be willing to
allow these to annex but feels the property owners are not really
interested in this but would like the City to be able to serve
them with sewer service.
Cm Miller stated that for 35 parcels there are advantages to getting
them off septic tanks and allowing them sewer service, but he would
be concerned about allowing this for the whole area. He would
agree that the existing parcels be allowed to annex if they desire
and would like the motion amended to read this way.
Hayor Pritchard suggested that since there are so many amendments
to the motion, perhaps it would be better to have Cm Futch restate
the motion including these things.
Mr. Musso stated that with respect to sewer connections, when a
sewer connection agreement is signed by the property owners, they
agree to annex to the City at such time as the City chooses to
annex.
Cm Miller stated this is true but it would have to read that the
parcels would not further be subdivided and Mr. Musso stated that
this would require a second agreement, in addition to the sewer
connection agreement.
~1r. Parness stated that the County has asked if the City would be
willing to annex the Lomitas area - not if it would be willing to
consider it; therefore, the Council is not really responding to
its question.
CM-28-376
September 9, 1974
(re Lomitas Avenue
Sewer Service)
em Futch stated that his motion was to allow annexation and would
not want people to have the opportunity to use our sewer service
if they were under the jurisdiction of the County.
Mayor Pritchard indicated that people in the County have been allowed
sewer service, in the past, and Mr. Parness noted that this is general-
ly done only if some obstacle prevented them from annexing to the City
and where they would have annexed, if possible.
Cm Futch stated that the agreement to annex does not spell out how
many homes will be serviced and Cm Miller stated that it can and
em Futch felt there is no reason to spell it out but Cm Miller
stated that he could not go for the motion without knowing how many
homes this would be limited to.
em Miller explained that he is not willing to provide more sewer
connections other than for those parcels existing - 32-35 or what-
ever the number happens to be.
em Futch stated that in five years from now the situation may be
different and Mayor Pritchard stated that at that time the policy
could be amended.
Cm Miller felt if it is not specified, the City may be allowing 250
units and Cm Futch felt this is not so and the Mayor agreed with
Cm Miller.
Mr. Parness was asked his opJ.nJ.on on the matter and he stated that
he would assume any property incorporated in the City would be
entitled to connect to the sewer, at the density it is zoned.
Cm Futch stated that if this is true, the City will have control
over the planned use and Cm Miller pointed out that the General
Plan allows l.5 units per acre)~:unless this is changed.
em Tirsell asked why the zoning would be l.5 d.u./acre and em
Miller pointed out that it is because this is what the General Plan
says and em Tirsell commented that Buena Vista is not zoned 1.5
and that this area is comparable to the Buena Vista area. She
added that the General Plan is currently undergoing revision.
em Turner stated that first of all he would like the motion to
say that we would consider annexation which could be considered
as an escape clause, in essence, and secondly, the Council may
be discussing a moot point when the people may have no desire
to annex anyway and would suggest that the motion be voted on.
em Futch pointed out that the County is asking if we are willing
to annex which requires a yes, or no answer - not that we will
consider it.
('
"-.
Cm Miller moved to amend the motion to including the wording not
to exceed the number of sewer connections equal to the number of
existing parcels, as of today. He stated that he would like to
justify this by saying, once again, that the General Plan indicates
1.5 d.u./acre which means 250 dwelling units and is a major portion
of the plant that can't be expanded because of lack of funds.
The amendment was seconded by Mayor Pritchard.
Dr. Schwartz, property owner in the area, explained the problem
the property owners are encountering with septic tanks noting
that some of the wells are polluted and because of some of the
problems the County has adopted a septic tank ban. It would
appear that the County is using this ban to preclude use of the
land and the County certainly does not want the land broken up into
CM-28-377
September 9, 1974
(Re Lomitas Avenue
Sewer Service)
small parcels with septic tanks. If the land is annexed in five
acre lots and only 32 five acre lots are allowed he doesn't know
how the taxes can be paid. It would seem that the taxes will rise
sharply if the property is annexed, and yet, if the owners cannot
develop, it would be impossible to be able to afford to live there.
Dr. Schwartz felt such a condition placed on the owners by the City
and County not allowing septic tanks really puts the owners
in a bind. The owners cannot develop if they annex to the City
and unless they can develop they can't afford to annex but if they
remain in the County they can't have septic tanks.
em Miller stated that if the zoning through the annexation agreem-
ent is, effectively, that the owner has five acre parcels, this
should be reflected in the Assessor's valuation of the property.
Dr. Schwartz stated that this may be, but he certainly does not want
to live on five acres of land in the City and does not know anyone
that does. In his opinion, there is nothing to gain by having
five acres.
em Tirsell stated that in her opinion, she would prefer to take
care of the sewer assessment district portion in the second part
of the motion because in her opinion it is prejudicial to say which
area, left in the sphere of influence, that would get the remaining
capacity in the sewer treatment plant but the area the City would
like to annex may not choose to annex first. It is unfair to say,
no, we are going to reserve it and we won't give it to you and to
another area say, yes, you may have the remaining capacity because
we want you to annex.
Dr. Rocco stated that he agrees with what Dr. Schwartz has said
and in the first place it is not sewer connections the property
owners want but rather water connections and it is his understand-
ing this would be provided through Cal Water, not the City. They
did talk with the County about treating the water exactly the same
way the City treats it - by aeration.
Cm Miller pointed out that the County asked if the City would be
willing to annex, or not, on the basis of sewer connections; there-
fore the Council has not been informed as to what the issue was.
He stated that his amendment was that there not be more sewer
connections than the number of parcels that exist, today.
em Futch stated that he would disagree with the way Cm Miller
has phrased the amendment and it would not be a part of the orig-
inal motion.
At this time the amendment failed 2-3 (Cm Futch, Tirsell and Turner
dissenting).
The Council then voted on the main motion which says that the City
is willing to annex this area.
Cm Turner stated that he does not plan to vote for the motion be-
cause he feels the word "consider" should be included and secondly,
if the people wish annexation they will come to the City.
em Futch pointed out that this is not giving any guidance to the
County - not stating density or anything. They have asked a ques-
tion and this requires a yes or a no answer.
Cm Miller stated that as he recalls every member of the Council
was in favor of reserving sewer capacity for industrial use and
indicated that this is the implication of the discussion even
though this is not the discussion.
em Futch and Tirsell felt this is not the point and Cm Miller is
reading additional information into the matter that is not a part
CM-28-378
September 9, 1974
(Re Lomitas Avenue
Sewer Service)
(
\
of the motion and Cm Miller asked if the Council is proposing to
reduce the density and it was noted that the General Plan is
under review at present and it may very well happen, but this is
not the point.
em Miller stated he learned a long time ago to pay attention to what
could happen if you're not careful what you do at one point.
Bruce McFarlane stated he would like to speak to Cm Turner's comment
about property owners coming in. In December 1972 he did come to
the City and ask about annexation of his 5-acre parcel and he was
given a list of requirements at that time that made it obvious to
him that the cost would be prohibitive. The permits alone came to
something like $30,000 and that didn't get anything in the ground
and it didn't include walls around the property and a number of things
like that which he felt were germane when he only asked if the City
would consider extending sewer service to him and have him remain in
the county. He did not get an answer to his question, but he hoped
the Council would answer the County's question tonight.
em Tirsell and Cm Turner could not understand the permit amount
quoted by Mr. McFarlane, and Mr. Musso explained that when he came
in just for a sewer connection agreement, the requirements that are
set as a condition to granting the agreement were paying the City
fees which were about $3,000 at that time, but there were require-
ments for putting in the public works improvements, but they could
not have been $30,000.
Mr. McFarlane pointed out that this was not only for his parcel, but
also for two adjacent parcels which carne to a total of 12 acres,
and the City also suggested 9 du/acre which was not according to the
General Plan, but he had this suggestion in writing and in doing some
simple arithrnatic he had come up with that figure.
The Council advised Mr. McFarlane that the City did not have a
density of 9 du/acre and never had, and felt that there had to be
a mistake in the calculations.
em Turner stated he wished the people would use annexation as a
consideration.
Cm Miller asked if the Council was willing to tell the County that
subject to capacity in our sewer plant, and Cm Tirsell reminded him
that this was in the Housing Element - whether or not the City can
serve the area.
Mayor Pritchard called for a vote on the main motion which passed
3-2 with Cm Miller and the chair dissenting. Mayor Pritchard then
asked for a motion on Item 2, and Cm Tirsell moved that the City
communicate to the County it would be willing to enter into an
agreement subject to capacity within our sewer treatment plant.
C'
The Council discussed what the meaning of the second item might be
and whether they meant to ask if the City would grant sewer connection
if the properties annexed to the City or remained in the County, and
Mr. Parness felt that annexation was implied and perhaps it would
be well to add that to the motion. Cm Futch stated he was not in
favor of what was being asked as he felt they were asking the City
to provide sewers for a county service area.
em Turner stated in that case perhaps em Miller's motion would
be appropriate concerning the 32 parcels in this case on our boundaries.
em Miller stated he would agree with Cm Futch - if the City is going
to provide sewer service to anyone, they will have to be annexed to
the City.
Cm Tirsell stated she would not be willing to provide sewer service
if they are not annexed, so her motion was withdrawn.
CM-28-379
September 9, 1974
(Re Lomitas Avenue
Sewer Service)
Cm Turner moved that the City advise the County that the City would be
willing to service the 32 existing parcels in the present configura-
tion by sewer connection agreement; Mayor Pritchard seconded the
motion, and asked if there was any more discussion.
em Futch stated the motion had some appealing parts, but he did
not think it feasible, because there is a high cost of providing
32 parcels and only 32 with service, and ern Turner stated it might
be an inducement for the parcels to annex.
Mayor Pritchard asked the City Manager what the requirements were
for a sewer connection agreement and Mr. Parness stated the City
asked mainly for an annual service charge equivalent to the City
tax rate, plus.a nominal surcharge added to it. There are also the
usual fees for connection to the system and that the subject proper-
ty owners consent to annexation if it is ever called upon in a
given area, and eventually the provision of public works improvements.
Cm Tirsell asked what control the City had over the subdivision of
the property if a certain size line is installed for the 32 units,
and Mr. Parness stated that if it were to be done under a County
assessment district, he would assume there would be some interrela-
tionship with the City as to the design of the system and the staff
would specify the size of the line to satisfy the needs of the area
not only the 32 units.
Mayor Pritchard at this time withdrew his second to the motion, and
a motion was then made by em Futch that the Council would not favor
servicing the area unless it was annexed to the City; motion was
seconded by Cm Miller and passed 4-1 with Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
LETTER OF COMPLAINT
RE GARBAGE PICKUPS
A letter of complaint was received from Mrs. Joan A. Holm, 1704
College Avenue, regarding the noise made by the men collecting
garbage and the early hour of the pickup especially on Saturday.
Mr. Parness advised that he had talked with the Disposal Company
concerning the complaint and the suggestion for varying the route,
and Cm Tirsell asked if the staff would communicate with them and
ask them to vary their routes, so the same people would not be
subject to the early hour year after year.
COMMUNICATION RE GOLF COURSE SIGN,
RODEO PARADE AND TRACK RELOCATION
A communication was received from Elizabeth Mondon, 5873 Singing
Hills, commending the City Council for the new City sign. She
also thanked the Council for the deletion and subsequent rebudget-
ing of the rodeo parade and asked that the Council heed the wishes
of the majority regarding the track relocation.
The communication was noted and filed.
RE I-580 WIDENING
Communications were received concerning the I-580 widening from
the Livermore Chamber of Commerce and Francis B. Headley. They
were noted and filed.
CM-28-380
('
\
c
September 9, 1974
REPORT RE HEATHER LANE
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION -
Kissell Co.
The City Attorney Miss Whittaker explained that apparently this was
a case of mutual misunderstanding. The Kissell Company claims that
whenever the word "bridge" was spoken it was never mentioned that
the bridge included the road. There are two options available to
the Council: the Council can decide to hold Kissell to the agreement
they have with the City, in which they could go to court and she
felt they would have a good chance of being successful in getting
out of the contract on the basis of mutual misunderstanding; the
other option would be to rewrite the contract at this point. The
staff has no objections to Kissell's proposed compromise. Miss
Whittaker stated that she had spoken with Mr. Watson, who indicated
he would modify the language about Kissell agreeing to any settle-
ment between the City and the bonding company. Mr. Watson stated
they would be agreeable if the agreement was worded so that any
settlement agreement communicated to the Council would be communi-
cated to them and they would have a chance to present a counter proposal
which she thought would be fair and still not tie the City to doing
what Kissell wanted. The City Attorney's office had no particular
recommendation, but the agreement would be up to the Council's dis-
cretion.
Mr. Parness stated that what is suggested by the City Attorney's
office is that the Kissell Company be allowed to install Heather
Lane bridge in accordance with their definition of the contractual
requirement for bridge installation sans the appurtenances which
the Public Works Director feels were included, and the actual cost
for the appurtenances would be about $30,000 additional. Kissell
Company would like to install the bridge and then have the City
proceed against the bonding company for satisfaction of the additional
works for which there is a $60,000 bond posted, and in the event
there is paYment from the bonding company for that, any amount in
excess of the City's cost may be used as a credit for Kissell towards
the work they would have to install.
Dewey Watson, representing Kissell Company, stated there is one
point he would add: it is his understanding under the present agree~'
ment, if the City were to recover any money Kissell would be entitled
to receive first before the City could apply any monies to the build-
ing of the road. They are willing to compromise by subrogating
any right they have to recover the cost from the City if the
law suit is successful on the bond, to the right of the City's
recovery first.
Cm Futch asked if the City agreed to the proposal by the Kissell
Company, would it be reasonable to expect that the properties that
would develop should bear the cost of the additional expense in the
event we did not collect from the bonding company, and Mr. Parness
replied that would be correct in that event. Cm Futch stated we
would not be completely out of the money if we did not collect from
the bonding company because we could then require future development
to pay this. He added that it seemed the Kissell Company had pursued
the issue in good faith and there is a need to have those homes com-
pleted and to come to some agreement on this, and he moved that the
Council adopt the recommendation proposed by Kissell Company; motion
seconded by em Miller.
Mr. Lee suggested that the Council not accept that interpretation of
the agreement that the improvements aren't included; perhaps the
Council if it wishes could allow them to only build the bridge.
There was some discussion regarding the interpretation of the agree-
ment, and Mr. Lee stated that the agreement says the Kissell Company
has the responsibility for the bridge, and it also refers to the bond
and the bond spells out very definitely these other improvements.
If the Council relieves Kissell Company of this responsibility, the
CM-28-38l
September 9, 1974
(Re Heather Lane Bridge
- Kissell Co.)
bonding company will say the City has given up its hold on the success-
or to the developer, and so they no longer have the responsibility.
What the motion would imply is that the Council would allow occupancy
of the homes when the tract is completed.
em Futch asked the City Attorney to respond to this legal question,
and Miss Whittaker stated there is some confusion regarding Kissell's
status with Reliance because Reliance is still a separate company
and is still in business. Kissell did not take over Reliance
Company, but in this particular instance acquired property that
Reliance had owned by foreclosure. The bond started with Windsor
Land Company and has run to our benefit for the performance of
windsor and its various successors of which Reliance is the latest.
We can go after the bonding company because the person who was
to put in the bridge, did not. Kissell is not a successor in
interest to Reliance, but merely obtained some property they
owned.
em Futch stated his motion would then stand if it is seconded, and
em Miller agreed to the second, to adopt the recommendation of com-
promise by Kissell Company.
Mr. Parness suggested that the agreement with the City Council be put
in whatever form the City Attorney believed to be appropriate, and
the Council agreed that it be conditioned that way. The motion
passed unanimously.
em Miller moved that the City now pursue the bond suit with diligence,
seconded by Cm Turner.
Miss Whittaker advised the Council that the suit is on file and all
the parties have had an open stipulation to answer for some time.
They were all notified today that the City would like answers on
file within 30 days, so the City Attorney's office has started to
pursue the matter.
em Miller indicated that the motion was not necessary if that is
the case. He also commented that there is a problem that put the
City $30,000 at risk which had to do with communication and not
getting everything locked up in writing of contracts which happens
too often and something should be done about it.
REPORT RE SEWER CONNECTION
AGREEMENT WITH CALVARY TEMPLE
The City Manager reported that an application has been received from
the Calvary Temple, located on Arroyo Road opposite the intersec-
tion of Lomitas Avenue, for a sewer connection agreement. In the
past the City recommended that the County require connection to the
City sewer because of the use of the building for a nursery school
and its expansion, and that the City would grant such connection
if all public works and other City requirements were met. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing the City
Attorney to prepare a sewer connection agreement, subject to the
usual contract provisions.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by em Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the staff was directed to prepare such agreement.
John Warren, Pastor of the Calvary Temple asked what public works
improvements would be required of them for connection to the City
sewer and it was explained that unless Mr. Warren is satisfied
with the requirements he does not have to sign the agreement and
suggested that he meet with Mr. Lee to discuss the terms of the
contract requirements.
CM-28-382
September 9, 1974
REPORT RE GOLF PRO
CONTRACT AMENDMENT
~...
The City Manager reported that in view of the pro shop enlargement
at the golf course it is felt that financial assurance should be
obtained that the interior building appointments will be made by the
golf pro. This agreement certifies that such will be done. For mu-
tual consideration and in order to have some additional assurance
that the personal investment may be amortized, the term of the club-
house lease would be extended from July l, 1975 to July 1, 1976. It
is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing exe-
cution of an agreement.
Cm Miller stated he would like to know how much the City is going
to put up and how much the golf pro will put up for this project
and Mr. Parness stated that the City is paying only for the cost
of the construction of the exterior walls which amounts to about
$15,000. He stated that he does not have a figure for the internal
work that the golf pro will have to spend but it isn't significant.
It does include new carpeting, fixtures, painting and other interior
work.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to know, to the nearest $1,000,
how much this will amount to and Mr. Parness stated that he would
guess somewhere in the neighborhood of $3,000. Mr. Parness added
that everything is all done and the contract is underway and Cm
Tirsell stated that as she recalls the bid was much higher than
estimated and Mr. Parness stated that it was but the Council did
authorize its execution.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to say at this time that he has
gone to the snack bar area for a sandwich and really would hate to
take anyone else in there because of the deplorable condition with
respect to the filth. He stated that the tables are dirty, there
are dirty ashtrays and ashes around and it is really a mess and
feels the City should see that it is maintained in a clean condition.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff would concur with the comments
made by Cm Turner regarding the condition of the snack bar and that
the City is in constant contact with the people who operate it to
complain about the operation and condition of the business and with
respect to the finances of the operation. He stated that inspec-
tions are made by the County and there is no sanitary defect; however,
they are often untidy and the City realizes this.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote,
the resolution authorizing exection of agreement was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 146-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Daniel Lippstreu, Las positas Golf Pro Shop)
REPORT RE CROSSWINDS
LEASE AMENDMENT
C'
The City Manager stated that a minor amendment to the Crosswinds
lease is required, related to the above item which permits a minor
relinquishment of the snack bar area under lease to the Crosswinds
so that it can be incorporated within the expanded pro shop.
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Tirsell, and by unanimous
approval a resolution authorizing execution of the amendment to
the lease was adopted.
CM-28-383
September 9, 1974
(Crosswinds Lease Amendment)
RESOLUTION NO. 147-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Crosswinds Restaurant Corporation)
REPORT RE PROPOSED
STAFF ADDITION
The Council instructed that a job description be prepared for a
Director of Community Development; and such has been presented to the
Council. It should be noted that the main emphasis is directed
toward industry and commercial promotion but it is important that
other prospective allied functions be listed, as well. This is
not only to be candid in the recruitment process but also to alert
possible candidates that may have pertinent work experience. It
is recommended that the Council adopt a motion as follows:
a) Approving a modification in the current year's budget by the
establishment of a department of Community Development and
appropriating the funds necessary for its functioning in
accordance with a report dated June 19, 1974, in the approxi-
mate amount of $30,000.
b) Authorizing recruitment and selection of a person to fill this
new position.
It was noted that the individual's retention would be subject to
the final approval of the City Council.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to see the information from
the City of San Jose before working on this and Mr. Parness stated
that this can be done but the information is very voluminous and
bulky and Cm Tirsell wondered if there is just one part related
to recruitment of industry, and Mr. Parness stated that one of
the divisions of the report was devoted to this particular item.
Cm Futch pointed out that Mr. Parness had advised against hiring
someone for such a position at this time and Mr. Parness explained
that the reason for the recommendation was in accordance with what
he sensed to be the desire of the Council.
em Futch stated that the City's reserves are being depleted and
would like to know exactly how much money the City has. He stated
that he doesn't really know what reserves the City has and what
level they have been at in the past and asked that this be pro-
vided in a graph form. Mr. Parness indicated that it was diffi-
cult to determine the amount as a good safety factor noting that
cities allover the Bay Area and state operate all the way from
zero to 30-40% reserve funds. In his opinion it would probably
be prudent to operate at somewhere between 20-25% and currently
we are probably around 14-15%.
em Tirsell stated that she is also concerned about the amount of
legal fees that may have to be paid from this money and Cm Futch
felt the net available after all these costs are paid should be
reported on.
Cm Miller stated that he would be interested to know just how
effective this type of program has been in other cities. How
much industry has actually been received from something like this?
CM-28-384
September 9, 1974
(Proposed Staff AdditionO
(-
....
Cm Miller stated that it would be great if a city could obtain indus-
try from someone working like this; however, he has a lingering doubt
that this might be throwing money away on something that cannot suc-
ceed. He stated that he isn't sure but just feels some doubt and
would like to know how effective it really is.
em Tirsell stated that she had mentioned before that the Council would
have to evaluate whether the program would be successful because it
would take a substantial amount of industry to make a dent in real
property tax returns.
em Turner stated that he would like to move that in view of the City's
legal situation at present and the uncertainty facing it within the
next two or three months, perhaps the matter could be tabled until
the City can see in which direction it is going, financially.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the motion is, essentially, to table
the matter for approximately 90 days, seconded by em Tirsell,
which passed unanimously.
REPORT RE ACQUISITION
OF PROPERTY FOR RELOCA-
TION PROJECT (Track)
The City Manager reported that at a recent meeting the Council auth-
orized application to Alameda County for the exchange of an equal
amount of property between the City and County for the needed right-
of-way from the corporation yards for our subject project, the grade
separation. Unfortunately, the property that would have to be offered
by the City would detract considerably from our corporation yard and
one office structure would have to be relocated. The area necessary
to be obtained from the County is approximately 2,000 sq. ft. apprai-
sed at $4,000 and it is recommended that the Council adopt a motion
authorizing that a purchase request be made to the County for this
property at this amount.
Cm Futch moved that the City Manager be authorized to submit the
purchase offer, and that the former offer for exchange be rescinded,
seconded by em Miller which passed by unanimous vote.
REPORT RE TEMPORARY
PUBLIC WORKS INSPEC-
TION SERVICES
The City Manager reported that the grade separation construction
projects will require the full time service of a Public Works
inspector. This item was included within the budget prepared for
this project and the estimated cost for this personnel addition
for the term of the contract is $10,000. It is recommended that
the Council adopt a motion authorizing retention of this employee.
Cm Miller moved that the Council authorize retention of an employee,
seconded by Cm Futch which passed by unanimous vote.
r
~._~/
Cm Turner stated that he would be voting for the motion, reluctantly,
because in his opinion someone from within the department could handle
the inspections required for the project.
CM-28-385
September 9, 1974
REPORT RE CONDEMNATION
OF PROPERTY FOR FIRE
STATION t4
The City Manager reported that relative to property located at the
corner of Evans Avenue and Concannon Boulevard, it has been con-
cluded that it should be selected as the site for Station 4. It
is located outside of our incorporated bounds but adjacent to City
property and it would be necessary to acquire only half an acre of
land for this purpose. The property is privately owned and tentative
negotiations have begun in hopes of resolving a recommended acquisi-
tion price. The owner ownes five acres of land and does not wish
to sell the half acre lot for the City's needs. He explained that
the City Attorney has informed him that the City cannot condemn
property for this use when it is not a part of the incorporated
City, as can be done for park sites and other purposes. In order
to obtain the property it will be necessary to first annex it to
the City or negotiate a purchase with the owner. He stated that
he would like to recommend to the City Council that they approve
conduct of a qualified appraisal and when this has been received
to begin negotiations with the owner.
em Miller commented that if plans for obtaining this property
fail there is a parcel located on Concannon Boulevard that
belongs to Mr. Mehran which is undeveloped, zoned for single
family residential, located within the City and could be con-
demned.
Mr. Parness stated that they did look at a piece of property in
this area, possibly not the same one Cm Miller is speaking of,
but was zoned for professional offices and is used as a corpora-
tion yard.
em Miller pointed out that using the property as a corporation
yard could not possibly be within our City ordinances and Mr.
Musso spoke to this point. It was noted that this parcel is one
of consideration for the purpose of housing Station 4.
em Miller moved that the City Manager be authorized to conduct an
appraisal for the property, seconded by em Turner.
Cm Turner amended the motion to state that the appraisal be done
by someone within the valley, which died for lack of a second.
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
INTRODUCTION OF
ENERGY CONSERVATION ORn.
em Futch stated that he has spoken to Mr. Street with respect to
the Energy Conservation Ordinance and that Mr. Street has made
some worthwhile suggestions Cm Futch has incorporated in the
wording of the ordinance, which he read to the Council in mak-
ing amendments to the ordinance. He stated that 6.5 (c) should
read as follows: "The minimum standards of energy conservation
shall be the standards adopted by the State Commission of Hous-
ing and Community Development." The other suggestion had to do
with the fact that it is required that an attic fan should be
on a separate 15 ampere circuit. It is suggested that 6.51
be amended to say that "attic fan installation shall conform to
the National Electrical Code" in substitution of "shall be in-
stalled on a 15 ampere circuit". He stated that in addition,
6.51 requires attic fans with all new dwelling units equipped
CM-28-386
September 9, 1974
(Introduction of Energy
Conservation Ordinance)
:-
\
with central air conditioning systems and any existing units in which
a central air cooling system is installed. This should be changed
to state that attic fans would be required only where air condition-
ing is installed - central air conditioning - not air conditioning in
one room or something such as this. He felt there has been a lot of
confusion on this point and would hope this will clarify it.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he does not know whether it should be
written in or not, but zone air conditioning is not considered
centrail air conditioning and wondered if this is correct and Cm
Futch stated that zone air conditioning is not considered central
air conditioning.
There was then discussion regarding the inspection fee which Cm Futch
stated is mentioned in 6.53 and was left blank and wondered if Mr.
Street would like to comment on this item.
Mr. Street stated that there is a $5 filing fee for the report of
residential building records plus the $25 inspection fee and then
the cost of reinspection, if it is required that an attic fan and
insulation be provided, is the reason for the blank. He stated that
in his opinion a reasonable fee for this service would be $lO which
would mean a total of $35.
Cm Futch stated that he would like to provide some incentive for
not needing a second inspection and wondered if the intial fee could
be less and wondered if this would be considered reasonable - perhaps
$15 initially and $15 the second time.
Mr. Street stated that in his opinion there seems to be a little
inequity in the way this is to be handled because, for instance,
if a person applies for an inspection and says yes, he has the
air conditioning, an attic fan and the required insulation, the
inspection is only needed once. However, if a person comes in to
apply and says, no, he has no attic fan, etc., the initial inspection
has to be made with the knowledge that a subsequent inspection will
have to be made. Somehow, the subject of the fees is somewhat in-
determinate.
Cm Futch felt that perhaps the City should take the person at his
word when he says he does not have the attic fan or insulation and
not make two inspections but rather make an inspection after they
have been installed.
Mr. Lee felt perhaps a resolution would be to charge one fee which
would cover application and one inspection and the second inspection
could be omitted - inspection could be made after installation.
em Miller stated that he believes what the staff is saying is that
they could draw up a policy that the Council could review and takes
into account the suggestions made by Mr. Lee and Mr. Street.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that the way the ordinance is written
does not preclude Mr. Street from only making one inspection.
(
Cm Miller agreed that to introduce the ordinance tonight and let
the staff work out a policy would be a good idea, then, if it is
necessary that changes be made in the ordinance it can go back to
the first reading.
Cm Futch stated that the fees could be stated just as they are, in
that case, and perhaps a second inspection would not be necessary.
CM-28-387
September 9, 1974
(Energy Conservation Ordinance)
Mr. Lee stated that he would like to offer wording, as such: "An
application fee of $20 is payable to the City of Livermore at the
time of application for the residential building record which allows
an inspection to determine compliance with Section 6.52 above, and
shall be payable on application. The fee for any reinspections
shall be $10 each."
em Futch stated that he would agree with this wording unless, in the
meantime, the City Attorney finds a problem with such wording. He
added that while this may not be the optimum type of ordinance it
was the best that he and Mr. Street could come up with at this time
and has a number of features they feel should be implemented, and
on motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote
the Council introduced the ordinance related to the amendment of
the Building Code related to energy conservation, as amended, to
be read by title only.
Prior to the vote Cm Turner asked if the attic fan requirement is
included in the requirement of the State of California and Mr. Street
replied that it is not. Cm Turner added that he is really not in
favor of the attic fan requirement because in his opinion it is
discriminatory because it does not include the flat-top, the home
that does not have central air conditioning and the home that is
not going to be sold. Somehow it seems wrong to add this to the
list of fees associated in the sale of a home. Another point he
brought out was that the use of the attic fan may cause the cooling
system to use less energy, but this savings could be absorbed in the
attic fan, because the attic fan will use energy, and he questioned
whether or not the attic fan is actually of value in conserving
energy.
em Miller explained that the main air conditioner uses a lot of
power, and if there is an attic fan it cools off the space above
the hot ceiling so that the heat input from the ceiling is less
and the air conditioner can be off more of the time, and the attic
fan uses less power, and that is the reason it is advantageous.
em Turner stated he was also concerned about the additional cost
and whether the savings in energy, if in fact there is any savings,
would offset the $200.00 cost it will cost the homebuyer each time
he buys and sells the house.
em Miller stated the cost would only be at the time the air condi-
tioner is installed and the cost would be much less than the
$200.
Cm Futch stated that if the fan is installed in conjunction with
an air conditioner, it lowers the amount of air conditioning ne-
cessary, and it would reduce the cost of the size of air conditioner
and the power requirement also, so you would gain in both the cap-
ital expenditure for the size of the refrigeration unit and the
amount of electricity that would be consumed.
Cm Turner asked about the zone air conditioner which would not re-
quire the attic fan and might be on all day and wondered if the
Council would consider requiring that any new home built that zone
air conditioning would not be allowed, however the other members
of the Council did not feel this could be enforced.
Cm Turner stated his concern was whether it would really save
energy and the cost, and Cm Futch replied that it is one item that
will payoff.
Paul Tull remarked in answer to Cm Turner's question, that is has
been one of the rules of physics that the dead air space is an in-
sulator and putting an attic fan in during 90 to 100 degree air
temperatures through the attic, will actually increase the need for
the air conditioner in the lower portion of the house.
CM-28-388
September 9, 1974
(Energy Conservation
Ordinance re Insulation)
('
\
\
"'..
Glen Dahlbacka, 1138 Aberdeen, stated that the ordinance does not
address the degree of reinsulation, or to what form of specification
should it be insulated. Also it does not address which homes should
be insulated - whether the homes that are insulated to old FHA
standards (R-ll) should be insulated to the R-l9 standard. A
lot of homes are insulated to the R-ll standard and could be con-
sidered to be reinsu1ated up to higher resistance value under this
ordinance. Another thing, the acceleration of the state standards
to the date sooner than it is to be adopted by the state has been
given up, and he was concerned about that and hoped the Council
would reconsider any delaying or enactment of the standards on the
22nd of February rather than immediately. He also had a question
if the air change specifications in the attic fan requirement are
with respect to time, and wondered if these are the same as the
recommended performance standards for attic fans.
Cm Futch stated that the standards adopted by the state to go into
effect February 22, will be enacted at the time this ordinance goes
into effect, since the standards already exist.
Mr. Street stated that in relation to the standards for the insula-
tion requirements, even though the ordinance does not speak to it,
he would assume we would use the same standards for new houses that
are in the state standards.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE
REPEAL OF SEC. 27.80 OF
THE ZONING ORDINANCE
A motion was made by Cm miller, seconded by Cm Turner, to introduce
the ordinance repealing Sec. 27.80 relating to the Zoning Ordinance,
to be read by title only.
Mr. Musso commented in opposition of the proposed ordinance, stating
that when the staff makes an error it is not too likely that the
filing of a variance would result in the granting of the variance.
He could not imagine what the courts would do if the City ended up
in court on a variance which had been approved and someone built
something and the City said it had to be removed.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the citations quoted did exactly that
and were upheld.
Mr. Musso suggested that the section not be appealed, but if it is,
maybe just where the person has exercised his right under the permit
and if he has a permit and not built anything, not validate the
permit; the other alternative would be to not allow an automatic
variance if the approval is granted based on inaccurate information
or witholding of facts. He felt this would would cause more problems
than it will solve by repealing this section.
/
\
Cm Miller stated that with the repeal of this ordinance, the Council
can require the ripping up of foundations which have been laid down
erroneously. The argument made in the legal discussion is that
even the officers of the City do not have the right to permit viola-
tions of the ordinances to occur, and an automatic variance allows
those violations to occur and be legalized. Another aspect is that
if the Cit~akes a mistake and it is approved, it is an open
invitation '. bribery, and any such opportunity should be deleted
from our or inance. He did not mean this as a reflection on our
existing members of the City staff.
CM-28-389
September 9, 1974
(Energy Conservation Ordinance)
A vote was taken on the motion to introduce the ordinance, which
passed unanimously.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Moratorium Ordinance Review)
Cm Turner stated that the Council had agreed to review the Specific
Planned area six months prior to the expiration of the moratorium
ordinance in March 1975, and asked that this be placed on the
agenda in the near future.
It was suggested that the Planning Director set up a schedule for
review of each unit and especially Planning Unit No. 12.
(Fact Sheet re City Functions)
Cm Turner stated he had heard statements regarding the money that
is being spent for the General Plan, and felt that it was because
people did not have all the facts. He suggested that the City
Manager or the Mayor could on a quarterly basis give a "Report to
the Citizens" on the main issues - the how and the why of them.
Mr. Parness stated that something of this nature had been done
before - a City Hall Reporter column - to try to entice questions,
but it did not work out. He felt the incidental type news release
was best such as the retention of a Planning Consultant.
Cm Tirsell stated she would like to have a statement for the press
regarding the planning conultant.
em Turner stated that the Council should reaffirm their position
concerning New Town, and also send a letter asking Pleasanton to
state their position.
(Times Article by Mr. Marguth)
Cm Miller stated that all members of the City Council have been
accused of commiting misdemaanors and felonies by Mr. Marguth and/or
Mr. Hecox. He stated that the Council can expect to be criticized,
but to be accused of crimes is something else, and he suggested that
the Council ask the City Attorney to direct a letter to Mr. Mar-
guth and Mr. Hecox, formally asking for a retraction of the accu-
sations they have made. em Tirsell seconded the motion and read
the following statement: "The City Council of Livermore recognizes
the importance of public opinion on issues that face our City.
We are fortunately the only City in California to have three home-
based newspapers and every action of this Council is news, subject
to the scrutiny and interpretation of three different staffs of re-
porters and editors. Our Council takes note of inaccuracies and
misstatements of the press and we shall make every effort to correct
their errors and to keep the public informed of the facts. To
illustrate this point, we refer to an article written by Mr. Walt
Hecox in the Valley Times of August 8, 1974, in which he quoted
Mr. Gib Marguth of charging this Council with overt violations of
the Brown Act. These actions, if they were true, are misdemeanors
and felonies under the law. After this Council denied the viola-
tions at the meeting of August 19, three of us received phone calls
from Mr. Marguth saying that he had not made the statements that
appeared in print. To date the Valley Times has not corrected the
article, nor cleared the record in any way. Therefore, we will
direct our City Attorney to notify Mr. Hecox, Mr. Marguth and Mr.
Dean Lesher of this incidence of libel with the expectation that
every effort will be made by them to present the truth to the
public."
CM-28-390
September 9, 1974
(Valley Times Article)
Mayor Pritchard pointed out another inaccuracy in the article by
Miss Java, that an inadvertent violation of the Brown Act is a
misdemeanor whenever three members of a five member governing body
are present at the same time anywhere at any time during their term
of office they are in technical violation of the Brown Act. He
pointed out that the Brown Act specifically excludes social gatherings.
A vote was taken on the motion, including the statement and directing
the City Attorney to write letters aSking for retractions, and passed
unanimously.
(Environmental Impact
Hearing re VCSD Plant
Expansion)
Cm Miller referred to the hearing on the VCSD Plant expansion in
view of the testimony presented by the chairman of the Livermore-
Pleasanton Smog Study Committee, that population growth in the
valley is a serious health matter for all of us, and wondered if
the City of Livermore should take a position, and if so that the
City oppose a full expansion to eight million gallons per day.
Mayor Pritchard stated that since Livermore has not been allowed to
expand on the grounds of air quality, he did not feel they should be
allowed to expand, and Cm Futch was in agreement, and moved that
Cm Miller be designated to attend the meeting, but Cm Miller stated
that it was his intention to attend, and it the Council agreed that
he should represent the Council.
(Grade Separation Project
Response)
em Miller stated that in line with answering questions that are dis-
torted by people who write letters, he felt there should be some
response by the Mayor with respect to the grade separation project,
and the situation as it actually is.
(County Planning Com-
mission Hearing re
New Town)
The County Planning Commission Hearing re New Town was continued
to Friday, September 13, the the City Attorney was asked by the
Council to attend the meeting. Cm Miller felt that the members of
the Council should attend in order to respond to anything that might
be brought up, and possibly ask for another continuance as they have
not had enough time to respond.
Miss Whittaker asked if the Council desired to have a court reporter
present also, and was told that they would.
(I-580 Widening)
'\'---- ..--
Mayor Pritchard asked if the staff would check to determine whether
MTC actually approves the widening of I-580 to eight lanes as indi-
cated by CALTRANS.
~
(
CM-28-39l
September 9, 1974
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at l:OO a.
APPROVE
J.ty Clerk
.vermore, California
ATTEST
Special Meeting - September 12, 1974
A special meeting of the City Council was called to convene at 12:00
noon, Thursday, September l2, 1974, in the City Hall conference
room, 2250 First Street. Purpose of the meeting was to interview
City Attorney applicants and to have Council consideration of
action on the recent Appelate Court decision regarding SAVE.
Mayor pro tempore Futch called the meeting to order at 12:10 p.m.
Present: Councilmembers Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor
pro tempore Futch
Absent: Mayor Pritchard
The meeting then adjourned to an e
items for which it was called,
the
APPROVE
ATTEST
Special Meeting - September 14, 1974
A special meeting of the City Council was called to convene at
10:00 a.m., Saturday, September 14, 1974, in the City Hall confer-
ence room for the purpose of interviewing City Attorney applicants.
The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by Mayor pro tempore
Futch.
Present: Councilmembers Turner, Miller, Futch and Tirsell
Absent: Mayor Pritchard
The meeting then adjourned to an executive session to interview
City Attorney applicants and fina y adjourned a 5:00 p.m.
ATTEST
'-----'
APPROVE
CM-28-392
Regular Meeting of September 16, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on September l6, 1974, in the Municipal Court Chambers,
39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:06 p.m. with Maypr pro tempore Futch presiding.
~.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Cm Turner, Futch, and Tirsell
Absent: Cm Miller and Mayor Pritchard (both excused absence)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor pro tempore Futch led the Council members as well as those
present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL ITEM
(Report re Bicentennial
Committee Flag Plans)
Ralph Condit, 4602 Almond Circle, spokesman on behalf of the Bi-
centennial Organization stated that they would like to propose
a plan to be adopted for officially displaying the united States
flag during the Bicentennial celebration. During the celebration,
the flag to be adopted would be an official united States flag, a
historical flag and not necessarily the current flag. It would be
respected, just the same as the present flag and used on government
buildings and schools as well as private residences and parades. At
this time they would request only Council endorsement of the plan for
use of a historical flag. Selection would not be made for a couple
of weeks which would give the public the opportunity to express opin-
ions and to vote on a selection. The vote will be held during the
Livermore Arts Festival on September 28th and 29th. City Council
endorsement would lend meaning to the voting at that time. If the
Council endorses the plan the Livermore Bicentennial Organization
would handle the sale of the flags to help raise funds for the purpose
of carrying through a plan in Livermore for appropriately celebrating
the nation's 200th birthday. He exhibited the flags from which a
selection will be made and indicated that the Bicentennial Organization
is about evenly divided as to which flag would be preferred - the two
flags being the Betsy Ross flag and the Bennington flag. The Betsy
Ross flag was designed to illustrate that the stars represent heaven;
the red stripe, the mother conntry; separated by the white stripe
which is an indication that we have separated from the mother country.
The white stripe shall go down in posterity as representing liberty.
The Bennington flag is supposed to have been the first stars and
stripes ever flown - in l776 at the battle of Bennington, and the
first flag to ever fly over an American victory.
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that he would like to thank Mr. Condit
for the presentation and that it would be in order to ask for a motion
endorsing the idea of selecting a special flag for the Bicentennial
observation celebration, so moved by Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner
and passed by unanimous vote.
CM-28-393
September 16, 1974
CORRECTIONS TO
MINUTES OF 9/3/74
Corrections to the minutes were as follows:
Page 351 - 6th paragraph: Cm Tirsell moved that in a spirit---
("',
On motion of em Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous
vote the minutes for the meeting of September 3, 1974, were
approved, as corrected.
OPEN FORUM
(Complaint re
Double Taxation)
Alfred Santomassimo, 866 Holmes Street, stated that he has been
a resident of Livermore for the past 12 years and feels there
is a lot of inequity going on in the City of Livermore and a
waste of the taxpayers money because there are City employees
on the City payroll who are receiving $lOO a month from the
Board of Education and feels this is double taxation which
should be stopped. He then indicated that he knows of an item
purchased by the City which it can't use and when he asked why
it was purchased was told that the City can buy anything it wants
in an emergency which he feels should not be tolerated.
Mayor pro tempore stated that if Mr. Santomassimo has information
or evidence that there is wrong doing within the City of Livermore
that this information should be given to the proper authorities.
Mr. Parness was asked if he would like to respond and Mr. Parness
stated that these are direct inditements of some City employees
on the part of a former City employee that has retired from City
service. Mr. Parness added that such statements are accusatory
and unless they can be well documented and proven such a state-
ment may be libel according to the legal authorities.
Mr. Lee explained that the generator purchased by the City which
Mr. Santomassimo indicated can't be used is to be used only in
times of an emergency and therefore it does sit idle at the recla-
mation plant for long periods. It was used just the other day when
there was an outage at the golf course and airport. It is needed
and a very essential part of the reclamation plant.
em Tirsell asked if the generator was an item that went out for
bid and Mr. Lee replied that it was and was approved by the City
Council both in the budget and at the time of purchase.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Grade
Separation Project
Mr. Parness reported that with respect to the grade separation
project a parcel of land has been negotiated for purchase at
a cost of $2,600, in accordance with the appraised property
value assigned by our agents. It is recommended that the City
Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement.
~,
RESOLUTION NO. l48-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(Phillips Petroleum Company)
CM-28-394
September 16, 1974
Res. re Curbside
Mail Delivery
A letter was received from the Mayors' Conference suggesting that
all cities take action in opposition to the Postal Service administra-
tive regulation prohibiting door delivery of mail to new subdivisions.
Letters concerning this topic, announcing the opposition of the City
Council, have thus far been sent to the City of Newark and our con-
gressional representatives.
RESOLUTION NO. 149-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE
OPPOSING THE UNITED STATES POST OFFICE
POLICY OF CURBSIDE MAIL DELIVERY.
Report re Various
Council Inquiries
A written report was submitted to the Council by Mr. Lee in response
to a request for information on various subjects: 1) Low pressure
in the domestic water system along East Avenue; 2) The possibility
of annexing East Avenue; and 3) Disposal of railroad ties.
Departmental Reports
Departmental reports were received from the following:
Airport Activity - August
Building Inspection Department - August
Financial Statement - Year Ending June 30, 1974
Airport
Golf Course (2)
Revenue and Expenditures
Mosquito Abatement District - July
police Department - August
Water Reclamation Plant - August
Cm Turner stated the he is very happy to see that the Golf Course
reports a profit of $2,000 compared to the reported $42,000 loss
in June of 1973, and it was also noted that the Airport report
shows a $14,000 profit vs. a $5,200 loss last year.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by ern Turner and by unanimous
vote, the Consent Calendar was approved.
REPORT RE CONTRACT
ADDENDUM TO KISSELL
AGREEMENT
~,
The City Attorney reported that the addendum to the Kissell agreement
reflects the changes accepted by the Council at the meeting of
September 9, and it is recommended that a resolution authorizing
execution of the agreement addendum be adopted.
Cm Turner stated that on the second page of the addendum in the
second paragraph it states "The City will expeditiously make and
fully litigate, if necessary,---". He commented that in his opinion
it would be necessary and suggested "if necessary" be omitted from
the wording.
L/
CM-28-395
September 16, 1974
(re Kissell Agreement)
Mr. Parness indicated that change of wording might pose a problem
as it is very difficult to have legal offices both in Minneapolis
and Livermore review these matters. The Council has already deter-
mined that it is necessary to litigate the matter.
Cm Turner stated that in the same paragraph it says that the City
shall be entitled to retain the bond paYment legal fees, etc. if
there is a recovery and then it says, "Any remaining recovery shall
be paid to Kissell.". He stated that this would be for money they
expend for the bridge and wondered if the City would want to add
the sentence, "any remaining recovery shall be paid to Kissell but
not to exceed their actual cost".
Mr. Parness indicated this is something that really goes without
saying and em Tirsell commented that this is implied.
Cm Futch felt it would be unlikely to get more than what we are
justified in getting, from the bonding company.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, a resolution authorizing execution of the agreement addendum
was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. l50-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
(The Kissell Company)
REPORT RE RELOCATION
ASSISTANCE - HERNANDEZ
FAMILY
A request has been received that relocation assistance be granted
to the Hernandez family, who are renters, so as to assist them
in their moving out of the City. Mr. and Mrs. Hernandez are
Spanish speaking emigrants from the island of Puerto Rico, whose
only income is from Social Security and SSI benefits and with the
escalation of rentals, costs are prohibitive. If a speedy solution
is not found it may become necessary for the City to provide low
cost housing for this couple as prescribed by law. It has been
requested that they be given a lump sum of $4,000 plus the in lieu
moving expense of $360, in order that the Hernandez' may use the
money to fly back to Puerto Rico to live. This amount represents
the maximum allowable prescribed by law, except that it would be
in a lump sum rather than in paYments over a four year period.
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a motion authorizing
the staff to work in conjunction with our relocation assistance
agents to offer the maximum legal allowance to the applicant family
as a lump sum paYment so that their move can be accomplished.
Mayor pro tempore Futch asked if there is any assurance that the
family can obtain housing in Puerto Rico and Mr. Parness replied
that there was not and this would have to be at their option -
this is a chance they would have to take.
Carmen Garrett, representing the Hernandez family, stated that
the Hernandez' only daughter has written to them indicating that
they could purchase a home in Puerto Rico for $2,000-$3,000 which
they could live in for the rest of their lives.
'-- .-
CM-28-396
September l6, 1974
(-
(re Relocation Assistance
- Hernandez Family)
Cm Tirsell noted that a legal opinion has not been presented on this
by the City Attorney and wondered how this action might affect
others, and Mr. Parness replied that there are other cases that
have been difficult but they are being worked out. The only question
is whether or not the City government has the right to pay the lump
sum amount and our attorneys have investigated and indicated that
they feel the City does have this right. There is nothing in the
law that specifies otherwise.
Cm Tirsell moved that the Council adopt the recommendation of the
staff, seconded by Cm Turner.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to comment that it would appear
there are no special privileges being allowed in this case and it
is clear that this is necessary.
The motion passed unanimously.
SREPORT RE GREENS COM-
MITTEE - CHARGES, DUTIES
The City Manager reported that in accordance with the Council's in-
structions of several months ago a revised statement of Charges,
.Duties and Responsiblities for our Greens Committee has been pre-
pared, reviewed and approved by the present Greens Committee member-
ship. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution approv-
ing the format for the revised Charges, Duties and Responsiblities.
Cm Tirsell wondered if the two members from the Club Board of Direc-
tors would mean one from Las positas and one from Springtown, and
Mr. Parness reported that the membership would be comprised of five
people: Three directly appointed by the City Council, one a regular
player of the Springtown golf course or a member of the Springtown
Men's or Women's Club and the other two could be from the Las positas
Men's Club and Women's Club.
Discussion followed regarding the proposed suggestions, and Cm Turner
stated that he would like to talk to the Board members to determine
if they would be interested in extending their term of office or
continuing for another term rather than automatically appointing
them for another term.
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that the intent of the Council appears
to be to approve the Charges, Duties and Responsibilities as set out
by the City Manager and leave the membership open for discussion at
a later meeting at which time a full Council is present.
Cm Turner moved that the Council accept the Charges, Duties and
Responsibilities of the Livermore Golf Course Greens Committee
holding, in abeyance, the actual appointment for term of office
until the full Council has had the opportunity to speak with the
prospective members, seconded by Cm Tirsell.
c"
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like it to be made clear that this
action is in no way a reflection that the Council feels the present
members have not done a good job and Cm Turner stated that by all
means this is not the case. This is the same as when someone is
asked if he would like to serve again on the Planning Commission.
Motion passed unanimously.
CM-28-397
September 16, 1974
RESOLUTION NO. l5l-74
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING CHARGES, DUTIES
& RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY OF LIVER-
MORE GOLF COURSE GREENS COMMITTEE
INQUIRY RE DISPOSITION
OF STATE PROPERTY TAX
EXEMPTION RETURN PROCEEDS
An inquiry was received from the Library Board of Trustees as to
the disposition of state property tax exemption return proceeds
and a report was submitted by the Finance Director in response
to the inquiry with the recommendation that the City Council
allow the distribution of replacement revenue to the Capital
Improvement Fund as per the 1974-75 Adopted Budget. The monies
cannot be expended without City Council approval and the Council
will have greater flexibility in determining priorities of expen-
ditures if the monies are placed in the Capital Improvement Fund,
adding that such action would not preclude expenditures for library
purposes.
Arthur Henry, Chairman for the Library Board stated that he would
like to make comments relative to the report from the Finance
Director who has indicated that this amount of money is additional
surplus to the Library budget and Mr. Henry stated that this is
not necessarily so. If they had known the revenue was available
to them at the time of the preparation of their budget they may
have been able to include it in their expenditures for the year.
He stated that the staff makes a judgment which they feel is
more of a policy decision and would like to have had the oppor-
tunity to participate. He stated that had the surplus increased
significantly during the year there would have been a move to re-
duce the Library tax rate and they don't feel this is necessarily
so. It is felt that the public supports the Library quite well
and if they had had the opportunity to tell the public of plans
for the additional funds, they aren't convinced that such a thing
would have happened. He indicated that they are disappointed they
weren't aware of the surplus and wish it had been raised before the
budget was prepared.
Mayor pro tempore Futch commented that he was surprised also by
this action and that it should have been pointed out. Also, the
same thing happened to the Park Fund.
Mr. Parness commented that this discussion would imply that there
was something surreptitious going on, on the part of the staff and
this certainly wasn't the case. He then explained the matter of
the state returns and application of the SB 90 formula.
Mayor pro tempore Futch explained that he did not mean to imply
that the funds are being used improperly or illegally; he would
only suggest that in the future the Council be informed of the
flow of funds from one area to another, and Mr. Parness indicated
that this program is something new and the issue of what can and
cannot be done is still cloudy.
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that the budget has been completed
and approved and in his opinion it would not be proper to make
any changes at this time but would suggest that the Library note
needs in the way of capital expenditures to be put on the agenda
for the following year and that this be reviewed at the appro-
priate time along with other needs.
Mr. Parness added that the City would welcome the Library input
as to what they feel their capital needs are, for composition
of the Capital Budget.
CM-28-398
September 16, 1974
(
\
(re City Tax Returns)
Cliff Marcussen stated that on behalf of the Library Board he would
like to express the fine cooperation there has been between the Board
and City Council and staff. He stated that he would like to say the
Library has operated on the 22C budget and there has not been a need
for an increase but with the increase of costs for books, periodicals
and Library staff and supplies it is anticipated that there could be
problems ahead if some of the revenue sharing is not reallocated to
the Library fund. As the City grows there will be a need for expan-
sion and the funds will be needed. If these funds are used in
current operations and not prudently saved for future expansion and
needs, the Library will be in trouble in a few short years.
It was noted that no action is required of the Council regarding this
item.
REPORT RE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE PLANNING BOARD
The City Manager reported that the Alameda Regional Criminal Justice
Planning Board has announced two vacancies to be filled by citizens-
at-large and is looking for representatives from Southern Alameda
County. It is hoped that some member of our valley community can
be selected, especially those with Spanish surnames, for representa-
tion on this Board. Mr. Parness stated that the appointment to the
Board is rather important and appreciates the importance of it, hav-
ing served on the Board since its inception. The Public Membership
Committee would like to have names submitted and are trying to distrib-
ute membership selection on the basis of geography and on the basis
of nationality and sex.
em Tirsell stated that she has one name in mind but this individual
is interested in the time commitment and Mr. Parness replied that
there is one meeting per month and in addition, several committees
on which to serve and would estimate that it would entail two after-
noons a month, and that travel expenses would not be reimbursed.
REPORT RE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING UNIT STUDIES
l~.'-
---//
Mr. Musso explained that with regard to first priority for specific
plans for Planning units Sand 9, are still before the Council and
no changes have been proposed but last week the Council requested
that the Air Quality Element be updated. Planning unit l2 (Portola
Hills area) went back to the Planning Commission and has been bogged
down because of changes by the Planning Commission. The question
of land use next to the freeway has to be discussed once again and
there are some diverse views on what should be allowed. The Planning
Commission is now considering recommendation of a General Plan Amend-
ment to take care of possible density changes and this will be an
item discussed tomorrow night. It is conceivable that this will
be back to the Council within a month or two, ready for adoption.
Planning Units 3 and 13 (north of East Avenue) are not necessarily
complex but some General Plan amendments appear to be in the offering.
Planning Unit lS is nearing completion and could be set for a hearing
before the Planning Commission within a month and is for the Spring-
town, Greenville North area. Planning Unit 7 was listed as a high
priority but was primarily to establish the future width lines on
the Arroyo Mocho Channel and can be handled by possibly adopting a
plan for the channels, which can be done through our Public Works
Department and Zone 7. Planning Unit II (Las positas area) is the
most difficult which the staff feels cannot have a different plan
CM-28-399
September 16, 1974
(re Planning Units)
other than what has already been envisioned and it is felt that
perhaps there should first be a General Plan recommendation by
the consultant - none of this area is in the City and there is
no real pressure to make a decision regarding it. He stated that
the momentum present during the earlier part of the year dissipated
when Planning units 8, 9, and 12 were not adopted. The closer the
City gets to the General Plan program, the more difficult it is to
make decisions.
Mayor pro tempore Futch commented that it is very important that
the specific plans be presented so that SB 1301 can be used and
Mr. Musso agreed indicating that Planning Units 12 and lS are
probably the two most important areas for which the specific
plans should be done.
Cm Turner stated that it is critical the specific plans are done
within the six months allowed for this purpose and would like to
charge Commissioner Seldon to supply the City Council with a work-
able schedule on the Planning Units, with the aid of the staff,
so that the Council can be informed of the progress of the Planning
Units - lead time for public hearing preparation, etc.
The suggestion was concluded to be reasonable and the staff was so
directed.
P. C. MINUTES 9/10/74
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the minutes for the planning Commission meeting of September
10, 1974, were noted for filing.
ORD. REPEALING SEC. 27.S0
RE VARIANCE PROCEDURE
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote the ordinance repealing Section 27.80 relating to variance
procedure was adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 847
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS AMENDED,
OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, RELATING TO ZONING, BY THE
REPEAL OF SECTION 27.80, RELATING TO VIOLATION DUE
TO STAFF ERROR, OF CHAPTER 27.00, RELATING TO VARI-
ANCE PROCEDURE.
INTRODUCTION OF
ORD. RE INSULATION
STANDARDS
On motion of em Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote,
the amended ordinance relative to insulation standards was intro-
duced and read by title only.
Sec. 6.50 (d) was changed to read: "Existing Residential Building
shall mean any dwelling, hotel, apartment house, motel, lodging
house or other residential building which has an assessed valuation
of more than three thousand dollars ($3,000) as determined by the
County Assessor of the County of Alameda.".
CM-28-400
September 16, 1974
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Various Items)
/~
em Turner commented that the staff was going to prepare a report
on the railroad project for the newspapers and Mr. Parness indica-
ted that a report will soon be ready.
em Turner suggested that special meetings of the Council be held
on Mondays since special meetings take up another evening even
though they are short meetings and Cm Futch stated that if time
allows, the Council trys to plan special meetings the same evening.
em Turner asked about the report regarding staffing of the Police
and Fire Departments and Mr. Parness replied that this has been
received and is currently in the Finance Department for evaluation.
(re I-580)
Cm Turner stated that he would like to have the letters that were
sent to the press entered into the Council minutes for public infor-
mation at the next meeting and that he be allowed to make some
additional comments and perhaps the Council would like to take
another vote on the matter.
Mayor pro tempore Futch commented that the Council has already
stated its position on I-580 and since the meeting will probably
be lengthy would suggest that this matter not be discussed again.
(Smog Alert)
Cm Tirsell stated that she has been concerned with the problem of
alerting people when the oxidant level is high and there is a smog
problem in Livermore. During the past month there were quite a
few smog alert days and unless you see T.V. at the end of the
day you are not always aware that there has been a smog alert.
There are people with various lung problems who should not be
outside during the smog alert days and wondered what is being done
aSA~solution to the problem of alerting people.
'!:f:t> ~.
Mr. Parness indicated that there could be a report for the next
meeting on this matter.
(Complaints re Motor
Bikes in the Arroyo)
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that he has been receiving complaints
about motor bikes in the arroyo and the policy of the Police Depart-
ment is to give a warning the first time and that they rarely catch
anyone a second time; therefore, the only thing being done is warn-
ings. A couple of years ago the Police Department went out to the
area on a Saturday and started giving tickets and this helped the
situation significantly.
f"
~-
(Comments re Elimina-
tion of RS-4 and RS-5
from the Ordinance)
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that there has been discussion regard-
ing possible elimination of RS-4 and RS-5 from the Zoning Ordinance
and since it is a matter that is going back to the Planning Commission
and something he feels strongly about, he would like to make some
comments relative to it. He stated that, basically, it boils down
to the fact that if RS-4 and RS-5 are eliminated the highest den-
CM-28-40l
September 16, 1974
(re RS Zoning Ord.)
sity that will remain will be three to the acre unless the City
goes to higher density multiples. The majority of the Council
has expressed the opinion that RS-4 and RS-5 do not provide for
adequate back yards, etc. and would agree that it would not pro-
vide adequate back yards; however, he would like to know what
you tell the person who may be able to afford something less
costly than 1/3 acre that they cannot purchase anything in their
price range. In his opinion, this would be eliminating all resi-
dential dwelling units and would force development of multiples
for anything larger than l/3 acre. He stated that he would like
to see the Council reconsider this position.
Cm Tirsell commented that the Council did not really make a
decision but asked the Planning Commission to look at it.
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that this is true but the minutes
reflect this opinion as the majority opinion and the Planning
Commission might take this as a directive.
Mr. Musso replied that most of the discussion was relative to the
RS-5 and in his opinion the RS-4 cannot be eliminated because there
are vast areas that are so zoned and developed so they cannot
really be eliminated.
Mayor pro tempore Futch stated that this would be another case
where regional agencies could review the policy in Livermore and
say that this action is excluding the person who cannot afford
l/3 acre.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would be interested in Planning Commis-
sion discussion of this item and that she and Cm Turner really
didn't express an opinion but rather indicated that they would
like to think about it. She stated that she would tend to agree
that if a full range of housing is to be provided this should be
reflected in the ordinance.
(Shifting Agenda Items)
Cm Turner commented that he feels the Councilmembers bring up
rather important items at the end of the meeting in Matters
Initiated by the Council and would like to suggest that this be
done in the early part of the meeting so that people in the
audience could be aware of some of the things that are mentioned
at this time and also the press is often not present at the end
of the meeting. He stated that perhaps the Council could meet
at 7:30 rather than 8:00 p.m. so that this could be accomplished.
Mayor pro tempore Futch indicated that this has been discussed,
in the past, and he was in favor of it at that time but as he
recalls the majority of the Council then was opposed to the idea.
Cm Turner asked that this subject be an agenda item at the time
a full Council is present.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor pro tempore Futch adjourned the meeting at 9:35 to a brief
executive session to discuss an plication for the office of
City Attorney.
APPROVE
"--/-
ATTEST
CM-28-402
Regular Meeting of September 23, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on September 23, 1974, in the Municipal Court Chambers,
39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:l5 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding.
~
ROLL CALL
Present:
Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Absent:
Cm Futch (Seated prior to correction of minutes)
SPECIAL ITEM -
PROCLAIMING SONG WEEK
Mayor Pritchard read a proclamation declaring the week of October 1
thru 6, 1974, Share a Song Week, and presented the document to the
Sweet Adelines representatives. After presentation of the document
the Sweet Adelines sang to the Council and members of the audience.
CORRECTION OF MINUTES
September 9th
Page 368, paragraph 1, line 6, should read as follows:
existing industrial zoning on these parcels; in response to the
comments made by Mrs. Odden about the damands on schools, sewers,
water, and other City services which are higher for residential
than for industrial; and the fact the density is already higher
than it should be in that area, based on the general plan; he
would recommend that we retain the industrial zoning for the Oddon
and Conner property.
Page 370, paragraph l, line 14, should indicate 84 units rather
than 4 units.
Page 373, paragraph 9, should read as follows: Cm Miller stated
this is exactly the point he is making. Agreed, we cannot do that;
there are obligations on Castilleja I and II that have to be treated
separately and this is the point Miss Whittaker has made. However,
in figuring out how the City is going to do it on Castilleja III
we do have to take into account what is proposed for Castilleja I and
II and what has happened to them because there is not enough land
for Castilleja I, II, III, and the sale of property by the applicant.
Page 374, paragraph 3, line 7, should read: there is plenty of land.
The fact is, there is not plenty of land and that is what the staff
calculations have very clearly indicated. The City has to be care-
ful......................(on down to last line in paragraph) l.73l
acres. This land cannot support all the park dedications in land and
this is the point.
Page 377, paragraph 8, last line should read: Plan allows 1.5 units
per acre, unless this is changed.
Page 389, last paragraph, 3rd line from bottom, should read:
invitation to bribery...................
(".-
Page 362, second paragraph of Special Item, 3rd line from bottom:
fertilizer and that is directly related to the problem of energy
and that energy conservation is a major factor that should be
considered in providing food for the world.
CM-28-403
September 23, 1974
(Corrections)
Page 368, second paragraph from the bottom, third line should read:
as a whole, and if the Council wants an industrial strip along there
should be the consideration.
September l6, 1974
Page 40l, under Smog Alert, the last line should read: as to a solu-
tion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
em Futch moved that the Council approve the minutes for the meetings
of September 9, and September l6, as amended and the special meetings
of September l2, and September l4, 1974, seconded by Cm Tirsell. The
motion passed unanimously with Cm Miller and Mayor Pritchard abstain-
ing from the vote on the minutes of September 16, 1974, due to absence
at that meeting.
OPEN FORUM
(Police Dept. Policy)
Ron McNicoll, resident of Dagnino Road, stated that he would like
the City Council to change a Police Department policy of stopping
people without probable cause, called a field investigation. After
a person is stopped their name is recorded on a card and filed in
the Police Department which remains for 30-60 days. He explained
that he had been asked to show his identification to police offiers
when they saw him in the Granada High School parking lot speaking
with another person about l:OO a.m. He was told that the officers
made a check because they are concerned about kids in the parking
lot late at night and also that his name would go on file. He
stated that he spoke with Chief Lindgren the next day and that the
Chief sees such investigation as an anti-burglery system. He has
contacted the American Civil Liberties union in San Francisco and
their representative feels, as does Mr. McNicoll, that this is a
violation of the fourth amendment which states that the police must
show probable cause in order to take action and that this "field
investigation" also limits freedom to travel.
em Futch stated that he would like to have a report as to the reasons
a card is made up for a person simply because he has been stopped by
the pOlice and obviously hasn't committed a crime. Cm Futch added
that he was also stopped when he was leaving from a late meetinq.
He stopped to look in his briefcase and this was the reason he
appeared to be suspicious, in the opinion of the police officer.
Mayor Pritchard commented that he would also like to know what
constitutes probable cause to stop someone and ask for identifica-
tion.
REPORT RE SISTER
CITY DELEGATE VISIT
Dr. DeBruin, representative of the Sister City Committee and one of
the delegates who recently visited Quezaltenango, reported on the
visit, and discussion which took place during the visit with respect
to the Student Exchange program and the Pen Pal program, as well
as the prospect of radio communications for amateurs between
Livermore and Quezaltenango. A reception was held in honor of
the Livermore delegates and felicitations were sent to the Livermore
City Council from Mayor Munoz who asked that Dr. DeBruin express
their gratitude for the gift from Livermore to the Sister City.
He then presented a gift of gratitude to Livermore which is a cos-
tume native to Quezaltenango, shown to the Council by Maria Mendoza,
one of the visiting students.
CM-28-404
September 23, 1974
PUBLIC HEARING RE
ASSIGNMENT OF CATEGORIES
TO NORTH FRONT ROAD
ANNEX NO. 1
r
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing for testimony regarding the
assignment of zoning categories to the recently annexed area known
as North Front Road Annex No. l, which the Planning Commission has
recommended for CS Zoning.
A letter was received from Leonard T. Cain, attorney, representing
Virginia Busick, property owner in the area, which indicated that
the owner is interested in having the property rezoned in accordance
with the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
There being no public testimony, on motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded
by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Musso explained that the CS Zoning is for commercial services
and was designed to permit the motel and restaurant type of use,
primarily, but there are many uses which can be permitted in this
zone with a CUP.
Cm Miller moved that the Council adopt the recommendation of the
Planning Commission for rezoning from OS-A to CS Zoning in addition
to certifying the environmental impact report, and directing an
ordinance to be prepared. The motion was seconded by Cm Futch.
The Council voted unanimously to adopt the motion.
P. H. RE APPLICATION OF
TRI-VALLEY CAB TO ADD
ADDITIONAL VEHICLE
The City Manager explained that an application has been received from
Tri-Valley Cab to add an additional vehicle and that the Municipal
Code requires that a public hearing be held when such a request
is made. It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion approving
vehicular addition to Tri-Valley Cab.
The Mayor opened the public hearing and no public testimony was
given.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Miller and by unanimous vote
the public hearing was closed.
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Mayor Pritchard and by unanimous
vote the staff recommendation to add one vehicle was adopted.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Communication from
H. D. Stein re
Home Builders Suit
r
~
~-
A letter and a $5 contribution was received from H. D. Stein in
support of appeal to the Supreme Court regarding the Home Builders
suit against the City regarding growth. A letter expressing our
appreciation will be sent to Mr. Stein.
Communication from
Valley Memorial Hospital
Thomas J. Andrews, administrator of Valley Memorial Hospital, has
submitted a letter to the Council thanking them for their interest
in the health care problems of Livermore and a list of the active
and associate staff members.
CM-28-405
September 23, 1974
Communication from
Federal Energy Admin.
A letter from the Federal Energy Administration related to plans for
a new energy conservation-oriented campaign was submitted to the City
Council.
Cm Miller suggested that a letter be sent to the Federal Energy
Administration to indicate that some of the recommendations are
already being implemented by the City of Livermore.
Communication from
City Recreation
Corporation Board
Notice of the resignation of James Nordahl from the Board of Directors
for the City of Livermore Recreation Corporation was submitted to
the City Council and the names of Robert B. Rumberger, Anthony
Peters and Alan Anderson were suggested from which a selection
can be made to fill the vacancy.
The staff reported that this Board represents the non-profit cor-
poration for the Las positas Golf Course construction financing
and the only requirement is an annual meeting. The three names
proposed are active participants in golfing at the City's course
and it is hoped that the Council may choose one of the three per-
sons suggested.
Report re Census
The State Department of Finance will be conducting a census
count on November 6th estimated at $16,475 which the Council
previously authorized and it is recommended that a resolution
be adopted authorizing execution of agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. l52-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREE-
MENT (Department of Finance of the State of
California) .
Proposed Memo of
Understanding re
Soil Conservation
The Alameda County Soil Conservation District has been providing
soil data and advice and recommendations to the City of Livermore,
upon referral of subdivisions and other matters. The information
is provided by the professional staff and the need for this infor-
mation has become more acute since the advent of the Environmental
Impact Report and with respect to our General Plan review. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution of understandinq
with the Alameda County Soil Conservation District.
RESOLUTION NO. 153-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREE-
MENT - Memorandum of Understanding (Alameda
County Soil Conservation District).
Committee Minutes
The minutes for the Beautification Committee meeting of August 7th
and Design Review Committee meeting of September llth were noted
for filing.
CM-28-406
September 23, 1974
Payroll & Claims
There were 194 claims in the amount of $567,283.4l and 307 payroll
warrants in the amount of $80,592.97, dated September 23, 1974,
approved and ordered paid by the City Manager.
('
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by unanimous vote
the Consent Calendar was approved with the deletion of Item 2.4
related to the bids for the parking lot lights in the area of the
Police Administration Building and for 2.1 (d) related to selection
of a new Board member to be discussed in an executive session.
DISCUSSION RE COUNTY
REFERAL RE DEVELOPMENT
IN THE BUENA VISTA AREA
The matter of the development for the Buena Vista area was discussed
at the meeting of August 26th in which it was noted that the resid-
ents are in favor of maintaining a rural atmosphere with five acre
lots and are not interested in development taking place in the area.
The Council directed that it be discussed again this week so that
some response could be conveyed to the County Board of Supervisors.
Valerie Raymond, 2368 Buena Vista, stated that she would like the
City Council to support the recommendation of the County Planning
Commission to rezone the area back to five acre lots with the under-
standing that further development will not be allowed on septic tanks
adding that, essentially, this means no more subdivisions. She stated
that in talking with some of the Planning Commissioners it is her
understanding that their recommendation for 2~ acre lots was based
on putting in a sewer and the residents do not want a sewer put in
because it would create the type of development they are against.
Mr. Musso stated that when the matter was discussed several years
ago the Planning Commission felt the 1 acre lots would allow the
possibility of justifying expenditure for sewer and water and does
not recall that they felt the 2~ acres would bring sewers. The
1 acre lots did not bring the sewer so they felt they may as well
go back to the 2~ acre lots.
ern Miller moved to adopt the recommendation of the County Planning
Commission for rezoning back to 5 acres, that there be no more
development on septic tanks, in accordance with the wishes of the
majority of the property owners on Buena Vista, seconded by Cm
Turner.
r
Cm Tirse1l stated that she would like to point out that some of the
considerations of the Planning Commission were that should development
on smaller lots occur they should be on a sewer system and would like
the minutes and discussion to reflect this to the County Planning
Commission - if they were to allow smaller lots that they should be
required to hook up to a sewer and that proliferation of septic tanks
in that area are not at all acceptable. The motion and second agreed
to include this in the motion which passed unanimously.
DISCUSSION RE TENTATIVE
TRACT 3615 - CASTILLEJA
DEL ARROYO, PHASE III
The matter of Tentative Tract 3615 (Castilleja Del Arroyo Phase III)
was postponed from the meetings of September 3 and 9, 1974 in order
CM-28-407
September 23, 1974
(Castilleja III)
that the park dedication requirements might be reviewed and to obtain
clarification of the School District letter with respect to housing
additional students.
Mayor Pritchard read the letter from the School District sent to
Mr. David Madis which stated that adequate housing is not available
for school children in the west part of the City. Children are
being transported to other parts of the City where limited space
is available. As new homes become occupied it is anticipated that
schools will experience some double sessions as the limited available
space is used up. The two high schools are presently beyond capacity
which has resulted in double sessions with extended school days
and program changes. The letter indicated that additional children
in the western section of the City would create an added hardship
on the needs to house the children which the School District, by
law, is obligated to provide.
David Madis, attorney representing Mr. Gillice and the Castilleja
Del Arroyo, Phase III project, commented that the letter from the
School District does not directly address this project and would
like the records to indicate that the agenda states "reportedly
the School District will not embellish upon its letter already
sent on this housing complex" and would like clarification of
this sentence. He stated that it is his understanding there has
been discussion between the City staff and the School District and
would like to be informed as to the nature of such discussions.
em Miller stated he would presume the letter was for Mr. Madis since
it was addressed to him and Mr. Madis stated that the only thing he
would like to identify in the Council's mind is if there is any
doubt that the letter is referring specifically to this project.
The Council concurred that the letter applies to the project.
Mr. Musso stated that he spoke with Mr. D'Ambra from the School
District who indicated that his only alternative would be no
letter in responding to the request to provide a letter stating
that there is adequate school housing. He stated that he could
not write that kind of letter; therefore, no letter would be the
alternative. The two letterS which have been received indicate a
negative school situation.
ern Miller stated that the requirements of our ordinance presently
demand that such a letter from the School District indicating that
there is adequate school space be provided before approval is given
for a tentative map. In the absence of such a letter and with the
presence of a letter which indicates there is not adequate space
moved that the City Council deny the subdivision map, seconded by
em Turner.
Mayor Pritchard restated the motion to deny the subdivision map
for Tract 3615 on the basis of the letter from the School District
stating that the required school facilities are not available.
At this time the motion passed unanimously.
REPORT RE OCCUPANCY
PERMIT RE CASTILLEJA
III APART~mNTS
The Public Works Director, Mr. Lee, explained that Mr. Madis,
attorney representing the owner of the Castilleja III Apartments
has applied for occupancy permits for use as apartment units, as
originally planned. There are two public works items which have
CM-28-408
September 23, 1974
(re Castilleja III)
('
\"
not been completed and the owner will put up a bond for the completion
of these improvements within 60 days. These are the same items discus-
sed in reference to the condominiums which are the off-site storm
drainage and the chain link fence. The City has the Arroyo Lands
agreement and it appears that such is in compliance with the provision~
the Council wishes completed in the agreement.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the City generally accepts bonds for such
improvements and Mr. Lee explained that there have been times when
something has not been completed and if the Council is satisfied
with the amount and type of bond and that reasonable progress has
been made, developments have been accepted with provision of a reason-
able bond.
Cm Miller stated that, on the other hand, the City is not obligated
to do this and can make the requirement that the provisions be accom-
plished before occupancy permits are allowed.
Mr. Lee agreed that this is an option, and another option would be
a cash bond with a right-of-entry to do the work that the bond covers.
Mr. Madis stated that at the request of Public Works all of the
requirements have been met and the improvements to be completed
have been estimated at $3,000-$3,SOO and Mr. Lee has requested
that a bond be provided at double this amount to be on the safe
side and such has been done. They now feel that occupancy should be
granted.
em Miller stated that in view of the problems the City has encountered
with respect to the Castilleja projects he feels uneasy about the
question of bonds and would move that occupancy be permitted subject
to the satisfaction of all of the requirements first and that the City
not accept bonds - that the City expects the work to be done before
the occupancy permits are granted. Once the work is done occupancy
permits will be granted for apartments. The motion was seconded by
Cm Tirsell.
Mr. Madis stated that a lot has been said about the integrity of
the City of Livermore and a lot of it has been without reason and
without cause but believes that someone dealing with the City of
Livermore should be entitled to rely upon the City staff. The staff
has set out requirements and these have been met. It looks very bad
for the Council to overrule its own staff which is operating in
their normal routine way.
Mayor Pritchard remarked that in his opJ.nJ.on Mr. Madis has misread
the situation in that the staff hasn't said everything has been
accomplished and occupancy permits would be given.
l
Mr. Lee commented that if the Council will notice, he did not make
a firm recommendation in his letter to the Council and Cm Turner
suggested that a firm recommendation be made by Mr. Lee. Mr. Lee
replied that he would be comfortable with recommending that if the
Council wants to allow occupancy permits that the bond be adequate _
the present bond is not - and that there be a time limit. The bond
should be in the amount of $7,000. He stated that he was not sure
how the Council would feel about allowing the permits if the work
was not done and a bond provided instead, and was the reason he did
not recommend that the Council do this. Also, there were other items
such as inspection by the Fire Department and Building Department
that need to be completed and any approval would be subject to meeting
all these requirements.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know if Mr. Lee would be
satisfied that the City could collect on the bond, if the bond is
sufficient and with a time limit if the developer defaults and Mr.
Lee replied, yes, in time; however, it is very difficult to collect
on a bond and necessitates a long drawn out procedure.
CM-28-409
September 23, 1974
(re Castilleja III)
Mr. Lee stated that, frankly, he would be more comfortable with
the provision of a cash bond and that as long as the City is
assured they can get on the site there should be no problem.
The City's only concern is that the improvements are done.
Mr. Madis protested by saying that he has letters from the City
saying that if a $7,000 bond is posted and that such and such
is done, occupancy permits will be granted; now Mr. Lee is saying
that he has never promised this. He continued to say that normally
occupancy is granted by the staff and it is not a matter that comes
before the Council and the only reason this is before the Council
is because of the fact that it concerns Castilleja.
Mayor Pritchard commented that there have been problems with Cas-
tilleja and for this reason the matter is being handled in a
manner other than normal procedure.
Mr. Lee was asked if such a letter was written and Mr. Lee indi-
cated that he does not recall the exact wording but did try to
convey the fact that the staff would be satisfied if there were
proper assurances that the work would be done and as he recalls
he did tell Mr. Madis that this would be a matter that would have
to be reviewed by the Council because of the Arroyo Lands Agreement
and the condominium proposal paralleling this request and because
of the mixups which have transpired related to Castilleja, and
that he would not consider taking care of it at the staff level.
Mr. Madis was also told that the bond would have to have a com-
pletion date and the bond does not have such a date. He apologized
if Mr. Madis misunderstood but he does not recall indicating that
the matter would be taken care of at the staff level.
Mr. Madis stated that the bond does have a completion date; it
incorporates the terms and conditions of the City's requirement
directly into the bond. It says, "in accordance with the require-
ments of the City Engineer".
Mayor Pritchard stated that based on the information the Council
has, he would vote for the motion; however, an accusation has
been made that a staff member has written one thing and denied
by the staff member and he would like to have the opportunity to
see the letters sent to Mr. Madis and to get to the bottom of the
matter. Mr. Madis has accused the Council of taking action that
makes it look bad because the staff is saying one thing and the
Council is saying another and finds it disturbing when an attor-
ney accuses the Council of something that mayor may not be true
and the Council has no way of knowing. He stated that he is not
prepared to vote on the motion until he has seen the letters.
Mr. Madis stated that if the Council wishes, the matter may be
continued until later in the meeting at which time he will pro-
duce the letters from the staff.
ern Miller stated that if Mayor Pritchard wishes to review the
letters first, this is fine; however, it makes no difference to
him and he is ready to vote on the motion at this time. He
added that he agrees this matter has been complex.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he is not questioning that it hasn't
been complex or difficult but if the staff has made a statement
in a letter to an applicant he would like to see it.
em Futch stated that he also would like to see the letter but it
will not influence his vote on the motion. He stated that his
reason for favoring the motion is because $3,000 worth of improve-
ments are at stake; he does not want to risk the complications
of a law suit with everything involved and the matter is already
too complex.
CM-28-4l0
September 23, 1974
(Castilleja III)
ern Turner stated that he is not going to vote for the motion because
in his opinion a bond with a completion date is sufficient and feels
this is what Mr. Lee is suggesting and is adequate.
('
\,
Cm Futch moved the question and the motion passed 3-2 with Cm Turner
and Mayor Pritchard dissenting.
em Miller asked if the occupancy permits are for an apartment project
and Mr. Madis stated that the City and he have been to court over
Project I and there is no doubt in his mind but that they will go
"right back" for Project II.
Cm Miller stated that occupancy permits are for an apartment project
because a condominium subdivision map has not been approved and it
seems that the City should provide some surveillance over what
happens at Castilleja III, in case there is some attempt at sales
because such is a violation of the Subdivision Map Act.
Mr. Musso indicated that the developer has received a white paper
from the state authorizing selling of the units. Lots have been
recorded, and the developer has a real estate report from the State
Division of Real Estate and there is nothing stopping him from legally
selling the lots.
Mr. Parness stated that with the Council's permission he will inform
all the title companies of the City's official position and that the
property is not to be sold because there is no subdivision map.
Miss Whittaker explained that there is a notice on file with the
County Recorder, that he has not complied with the Subdivision Map
Act on this condominium subdivision and it is her understanding that
this was the reason he came in with any kind of map at all; however
she stated that she does not know this to be a fact.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
ZOo ORD. AMEND. RE
CN DISTRICT
A continued discussion of the proposed zoning ordinance amendments
related to the CN District was scheduled for discussion and postponed
from a public hearing held on August 26th.
Mayor Pritchard commented that the matter is not urgent and would
entertain a motion to continue.
Cm Futch suggested that the matter be continued to the end of the
meeting with which the Council concurred.
APPEAL FROM LIVERMORE
GARDEN APARTMENTS RE
SCHOOL DISTRICT SPACE
CERTIFICATION
(
\
The City Manager reported that the Livermore Garden Apartments are
planned for development under a federal mortgage subsidy program
for moderate income housing and the City Council has authorized
reservation of building permits for the project. The new develop-
ment firm contends that the project will exceed economic feasibility
if school fees are paid in addition to all the other fees in order
to receive a certification statement from the School District.
Robert HirsCh, 15233 Ventura Boulevard, Sherman Oaks; and 450 San
Antonio Road, Palo Alto (office addresses), commented that their
firm has built and operated quite a number of projects in the Bay Area
CM-28-4ll
September 23, 1974
(re Garden Apartments -
HUD - School Dist. Fees)
of the apartment development nature. The proposed HUD-236 project
has been funded and the commitment should be out in two weeks. The
time period, beyond that, to get it to the point of construction is
only a matter of preparing a final closing document, securing a build-
ing permit from the City and arranging the date with the legal office
in San Francisco for the initial closing of the project loan. He
noted that the fee to the School District is a requirement of $800
per unit and would mean a $76,800 fee for their 96 unit project and
that various City fees for the project amount to over $200,000 which
is required to be paid before they can obtain a building permit.
They are willing and able to pay the fees and they have met with
the staff and plan to obtain their building permit within the next
few weeks. They would request a waiver of the requirement to receive
a clearance from the School District. He met with Mr. Croce who
explained that if the fee to the School District is not paid they
will not receive a clearance letter and if the fee is paid they
will receive the letter. Mr. Hirsch has received a negative letter
which indicates that facilities cannot be provided for students
unless the fee is paid. Mr. Hirsch explained that he has contacted
the State Superintendent of Schools and was told that providing
for students is the obligation of the School District and that
if the housing project necessitates housing additional students,
the School District will provide for them. Mr. Hirsch stated that
the only instances in which a clearance letter is required is when
a map is recorded and there is a condominium or single family homes;
they are doing neither. Never in the history of their development
have they been required to obtain a clearance letter from a School
District. The former City Attorney and the present acting City
Attorney have both expressed the validity of the City's present
ordinance and the developers do not wish to pay legal fees to go
to court on the issue but plan to do so if the fee is imposed.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would assume Mr. Hirsch is referring
to the project, specifically, and not challenging the validity of
the ordinance with respect to fees for the School District and Mr.
Hirsch indicated that this is correct - never in their history have
they ever been required to pay School District fees in the case of
an apartment.
Mr. Hirsch stated that theis type of project normally receives a 90%
government loan and the sponsors put in the other 10% equity capital.
In this particular case they are getting an 83% loan because of the
various City fees. He explained that they were required to do the
complete design of the arroyo channel from Vasco Road to Charlotte
Way for which they paid a local engineering firm over $lO,OOO. They
were also required to improve the adjacent neighbor's property to
Charlotte Way, with Susan Lane. He has to put in a street, and pay
for it, across someone else's property. He was required to purchase
over l~ acres of another person's property across the channel and
improve their property, which is part of the arroyo channel, to
Zone 7 standards. None of these costs just mentioned are part of
the $200,000 in fees to the City. This type of housing is badly
needed in the City of Livermore and they would urge that the City
allow a waiver of the School District fees and if they can not
receive the waiver and subsequently would have to pay the fees
they will be forced to abandon the project despite the fact it
is extremely needed.
Mayor Pritchard asked Miss Whittaker what the school letter ordi-
nance refers to and she explained that this is a portion of the
Subdivision Map Ordinance and is one of the requirements imposed
on subdivision maps. This project, of course, is not a subdivision
project and the City does not impose the fee - the School District
imposes the fee. All the City requires is the letter from the
School District and further explained that it is her understanding
that when this firm came to the City asking that they be allowed
CM-28-4l2
September 23, 1974
(re Garden Apartments -
Request School Fee Waiver)
(
building permits and exemption from the building freeze at that time,
the City imposed the requirement of the letter from the School District.
She stated that she has seen nothing in writing with respect to such
an agreement and since the City now has, in the wording of the ordi-
nance, an exemption from it for these people, it may be difficult to
contend that this was in the ordinance in return for a promise that
they would get a letter from the School District.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to point out that the City
in no way imposes any type of school connection fee on any developer
in the City and does not mean to imply that Mr. Hirsch said it does.
The City's requirement is a letter from the School District stating
that the school housing facilities are available.
Mr. Hirsch stated that he has a letter from the City staff which
includes the school fee in the total compilation of fees and it
says, "as per agreement". He stated that he has no agreement to
pay the School District anything but was told by the staff that he
would need a clearance letter.
Cm Miller stated that when Mr. Hirsch's predecessor came to the City
he was on the City Council and there was discussion regarding reserv-
ing building permits for construction of anything over four units,
and the moratorium which was adopted because of water and the General
Plan, did not allow apartment projects larger than four units. At
that time there was a request that the City reserve 97 building permits
because this was a low income housing project. Those on the Council
at that time obtained an agreement from the predecessors of the firm
that they would get the school letter and that it would be a low
income housing project and that satisfaction to the City Attorney
and City Council would be provided that it would be, in fact, a low
income housing project prior to the issuance of any building permits.
Consequently, in the initial stages of the project and before anything
was begun, it was agreed by the predecessors that they would get
the school clearance letter. He stated that he is sure the Council
would not have voted for exemption from the moratorium, in view of
the shortage of facilities and the necessity for such a letter from
the school, if they had known that the successors would come back
and say that they do not want to provide the school letter. The
School District imposes a fee and provides space for the children
from the project by taking the fee to purchase portables in which
these children can be housed. This was one of the City's concerns _
there were crowded conditions at that time and it could be predicted
that schools would be crowded thereafter. This was the reason the
predecessors were asked to provide the school clearance letter and
was clearly understood by everyone at the time. He stated that he
can understand the problems the firm is having and that there are
many expenses but the City's agreement with those to whom Mr. Hirsch
is the successor, was that the school clearance letter would be pro-
vided and that the documents would demonstrate, to the satisfaction
of the City, that this is, in fact, a low income project and would
remain so and would be presented prior to issuance of building permits.
Those were the requirements, and on those conditions only, an exemption
was made and the 97 permits reserved for the project.
(
\
\,
Mr. Hirsch stated that Cm Miller is absolutely correct. In research-
ing the matter the firm did find that such an incident did occur,
just as described by Cm Miller, about two years ago; however when
Mr. Hirsch took over he was not informed as to this agreement. He
stated that he is not sure he would be before the Council appealing
it if all the other numbers hadn't increased SUbstantially. He can
not increase his loan and yet the construction costs have reached
an all time record high. Even the City fees have gone up rather
dramatically since March of this year by some $40,000-$50,000.
CM-28-4l3
..-----..------.--- .. -- ..--- ... ...u.'____._...n.______..._.__.___._.._...._,_
September 23, 1974
(re Garden Apartments -
Request School Fee Waiver)
unfortunately, Mr. Lee recently indicated that he thought something
of the nature described by Cm Miller did occur and in checking back
through the minutes it was discovered that Mr. Kline had made a
comment about paying the school fees at the time he requested an
exemption from the building moratorium. Mr. Hirsch stated that Mr.
Kline was not a developer but rather a representative of the company.
On the other hand he (Mr. Hirsch) is a partner and developer and can 0
only appeal on the basis that this is not a subdivision, it is
not being developed for condominium or single family purposes for
which a letter would be required and explained that they, frankly,
cannot absorb the School District fees. He has a certain amount
of money invested in the project and would certainly like to see
it go ahead. It is the last F.H.A. commitment that has not been
started in the San Francisco office and the program is dead; therefore,
there is a great deal of SYmpathy in seeing it get started. He
pointed out that this is a private organization and they were profit
motivated at one point but is not sure this is still the case but
at least he would like to be able to recover, and urged that the
Council grant the requested waiver.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to explain that because of
their unique position of providing subsidized housing she feels
that the City would indeed be remiss if it didn't insure that there
would be school facilities for these children. An exception was
made because it was to be for low income residences and in her
opinion this makes it even more important that the schools are
adequate for those children. The City would do them a great disservice
to provide them housing but no schooling. She stated that she
can very much appreciate the problem Mr. Hirsch has but could point
to anyone trying to develop at this time and observe that it is
very difficult because of the financial constraints for Mr. Hirsch
as well as the City. She stated that with the escalation of costs
it is very difficult to go out to bid and receive one before costs
have escalated during the interim, and can SYmpathize with Mr.
Hirsch's position. However, from her point of view, particularly
because of the type of project HUD-236 is, it would be very necessary
to see that there are school facilities for these children prior
to granting the building permits even though she does recognize
the constraints involved.
Cm Turner stated that he lives in the area in which the proposed
housing may take place and that his children attend the school in
the area and wondered if this constitutes a conflict of interest
and if he should abstain from discussion and vote. It was noted
that he lives at least 1/4 mile away and therefore would not have
a conflict of interest.
Mr. Hirsch stated that he would like to make one last comment and
that is that he met with the Livermore valley Joint Unified School
District on June 18, 1974 and since this meeting has been informed
that they can accommodate the school children. They have generation
factors for the average apartment unit children which are less than
some of the Council may think, and they can accommodate the children
right now if the development was on schedule. However, they will not
give the clearance letter unless the fees are paid and somehow the
logic of this whole matter is disturbing. If he doesn't pay the
fees he will not get a clearance letter, even though they can accom-
modate the children, and he added that he is sorry but he finds this
very hard to accept. It would seem that this is an unfair burden for
them.
~
Cm Miller stated that he cannot speak for the School District but
the comment made about what the School District has said regarding
taking care of the children, because they are required to do so by
law, is true; however they do not do it adequately and the adequacy
is the key condition of the clearance letter. For every child that
goes to school, from the unit, there is one on double session. This
means that everyone is hurt - there is not adequate space.
CM-28-4l4
September 23, 1974
~
(re Garden Apartments -
Request School Fee Waiver)
Cm Miller stated that although he cannot speak for the School District
he is sure that this is the sense in which the School District or Mr.
Croce said that the children would be served. There has been a sub-
stantial public insistance on adequacy of school space and the reason
the Council requires the letter from the School District.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels the point that has to be made is
that there was agreement by the previous owner and an oral commitment
in exchange for the release from the building permit moratorium.
Mr. Hirsch stated that he is aware of this and perhaps his appeal
should be a release of this condition, and Mayor Pritchard stated
that this is true everyone agrees that this is the point.
Cm Miller moved that the City Council deny the request for the waiver
of the clearance letter from the Livermore Valley Unified School Dis-
trict. He stated that he does sympathize with the problem Mr. Hirsch
faces but the issue of the amount of school space is very important
and was one of the key conditions for reservation of the building per-
mits for this project.
Cm Tirsell seconded the motion and added that she would like to point
out to Mr. Hirsch that any discussion regarding the money the School
District is requesting should rightfully take place with the School
District Board.
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that he was at the School
Board meeting at the time Mr. Hirsch appeared before them and would
suggest that the Council carefully read their minutes which indi-
cate that Mr. Hirsch's predecessor came before them earlier and it
was for that reason that they would ask for the $800/unit donation
rather than the current $850/unit donation which reflects part of
the inflationary increase that has taken place since 1972.
At this time the motion passed unanimously.
Cm Tirsell suggested that the City Attorney be directed to contact
the School District with respect to the action which has taken place
tonight in case they are contacted by Mr. Hirsch, with which the
Council concurred.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the meeting
resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE SO. PACIFIC
INDUSTRIAL PARK PUBLIC
WORKS IMPROVEMENTS
~
Mr. Parness explained that Southern Development Company has come
with a special appeal for the formation of an assessment district
for the installation of a major industrial park in our City which
has been in the planning stage for at least two years. The area
is comprised of about l58 acres with frontage on Vasco Road, located
south of I-580. There is not enough capital flow to finance these
types of installations and other means of financing are being sought.
Several cities have allowed these types of improvements to be instal-
led by virtue of an assessment district and our City has done this
on previous occassions; however, not with respect to industrial proper-
ties. The condition to the formation of an assessment district would
be that ,Southern Pacific Development would be the singular property
ownership subject to assessment although the Sears Roebuck Company
CM-28-4l5
.'. . -'--~----_'_--.._--._-.,._-,._._-......_--_..,..-,._",- -' ..-.. "--"-.. -"'--~~--""--".'-""'--"'-' ... "-~....' ~'"--" -..~., ,,,.
September 23, 1974
(So. Pacific Co.
Pub. Works Improve.)
property would be incorporated because they would benefit and has
agreed, previously, to share the improvements of the abutting roadway.
There would be no other private properties incorporated within
the bounds of the district and S. P. Company would agree to a cornrnit-
tment that any time in the future there is a default in assessment
district payments, because the land will be sold to industrial
owners, contractually would sustain those losses to the City.
Also, the City would expect to have an administration fee attached
to the assessment district proceedings for a cost the City would
have to bear for the term of it. He added that the City vitally
needs a marketable type of industrial property and this is the
way we are going to get it and would urge the City Council to indi-
cate its favor of allowing an assessment district for these improve-
ments.
Cm Miller asked how the money will be raised for the assessment
district and Mr. Parness replied that it will be raised by the
levy of bonds as an obligation against the company. The company
would not pay the debt, as property owners are entitled to do
once the assessment is established, but rather bonds would be
levied and sold by competitive bidding. When asked by Cm Miller
as to what kind of bonds would be sold Mr. Parness explained that
he does not know what the official title might be but it would be
an assessment district bond - an indebtedness of the property for
fulfillment of the loan for the improvements.
ern Miller stated that what he is getting at is that there are at
least three kinds of assessment districts, all of which have
differing kinds of bonds. One of the kinds of bonds requires
backup by the City - if there is default the City taxpayers be-
come liable and wondered if this is the kind being proposed.
Mr. Parness stated that this is one of the bonding acts that is
highly favored by both the bond counsel and the bond market,
just because they are marketable now and the others are probably
not. This is a 19l5 Improvement Act bond that we have used for
the downtown district. The point the Council should keep in mind
is the likelihood of default in the satisfaction of the annual
debt and in this case it is highly likely that the value of the
land, following improvements, will probably be three times or
more, what the debt will be amassed by the land; therefore it is
very unlikely that there would ever be a default. In addition,
the Southern Pacific Development Company is willing to commit
itself, contractually to the City, to stand by the initial assess-
ment district bond obligation through its life.
Cm Miller stated that the reason he raises the question is because
he is willing to have the City's taxing power stand behind assess-
ment districts which are public projects but is becoming increas-
ingly concerned about using the City's taxing power for any other
kinds of essentially private assessment districts, of which this
is one. He stated that he would agree that it is important to try
to get a marketable industrial property but is concerned about the
principle of the City providing its powers for the benefit of private
parties. particularly, when it involves a backup by the taxpayers.
That point has been raised in connection with the railroad project
and he doesn't agree in that case because it is a public project and
he is willing to back a public project. He stated that this is a
purely private project and he feels this is really not the City's
business. The fact the City is protected by an agreement with
Southern Pacific Development Company, assuming Southern Pacific
CM-28-4l6
September 23, 1974
(So. Pacific Co. Pub.
Works Improvements)
survives the vicissitudes of the bond's life, helps make it easier
but still he stated that he feels concern about the matter.
-',
Cm Futch stated that up until tonight he really wasn't aware of
what the liabilities were or all of the aspects of the financing
and would be reluctant to vote for it under those conditions and
isn't sure he would change his mind even if he knew all the details.
He stated that he knows they have been explained but would really
like to look at them in writing and review them. He would be inter-
ested in the liabilities of the City, the cost to the City, etc.
~-
(
Mr. Parness replied that this can certainly be done and the appre-
hension expressed by Cm Futch and Miller is well-founded, but he
would disagree with the philosophical point of this being a private
venture. He stated that in a sense it is private but would like to
consider it quasi-public in nature. Many feel that there is a vital
need for the community to expand industrial bases - we just do not
have anything marketable now and for this reason if there is anything
the City government can do to aid and abet in that enterprise, cer-
tainly is of a public nature. However, the point is well taken _
that the faith and credit of the City is extended through this kind
of financing by pledging that an amount up to 10~ can be imposed,
by City Council action, in the event of a debt default. In talking
with bond attorneys it has been noted that there are very few instan-
ces in which there is ever default and this type of assessment district
bond has been used since 1915. More importantly, with a contractual
obligation of such a reputible firm behind it which would guarantee
that no default would be shared by the City, this apprehension can be
waived. If the Council wishes, however, he will try to get more
of an explanation from a bond attorney as to what the obligation
is, past what has been explained.
Cm Futch stated that he would like to know how the Southern Pacific
Development Company could guarantee that no default would be shared
by the City and Mr. Parness replied that these details have not been
worked out but would assume that there would be an agreement. He
commented that possibly he is putting words in their mouth but they
did readily accept the prospects of executing an agreement with the
City which, in essence, would say that at any time, through the matur-
ing life of the bond, if there is default in payment of principal
and interest by a segregated ownership, then it would become the
obligation of Southern Pacific Development Company to pay this to
the City. Mr. Parness stated that he asked our bond attorney about
this and he indicated that there is no reason this should not be
a proper contractual arrangement with the assessment district formula-
tor.
Cm Tirsell asked, in the event there is a default and the Council
has to rely on the taxing power of the City, does the City take over
property ownership rights? Is there any collateral on the property?
('
\
The Assistant City Attorney commented that as she understands the
1915 Act, in the event of a delinquinuency there is a sale of property
and under the law the City is required to purchase the property.
If it has insufficient funds to do so then it can levy an additional
tax up to lO~ on the dollar for this purpose. The City then becomes
the owner of the property and until such time as it can find another
buyer or until the original owner regains it from the sale, the City
has to come up with each year's annual amount. Under the 1915 Act
a delinquency does not accelerate all the remaining payments; there-
fore, if the City could find another buyer, which presumably would
not be difficult in the case of industrial property, then that buyer
CM-28-4l7
-'--'---_._-"-"~-_....~._.._"_.~..,'"--,,.,.._..-.,.,.~ -'--.. -"" -~.."_._~'-'-'"_.._--"..,'-,--_...,-_...._..._~.,--_..
September 23, 1974
(So. Pacific Co. Pub.
Works Improvements)
would have the responsibility of making each subsequent year's
paYment. until the City did find a buyer, however, it would be
responsible for each year's paYment as it came due.
Mr. Parness added that the probable value of the land following
the improvements approximates ten times, in value, what the asses-
ment rate would be, per acre.
Cm Turner stated that he is not uncomfortable with the proposal,
because of the value of the land, but would like to see the agree-
ment and have the City Attorney review it before taking action.
Mr. Parness stated that all that is being asked is whether or not
the City Council is favorably inclined to the use of assessment
districts for the installation of public works improvements. If
it is, the details can be prepared by use of the 19l5 Act or the
1911 Act, wherein the faith and credit of the City is not pledged.
Cm Tirsell stated that she really can understand Cm Miller's concern
but would like to see a way the tax base of the community could
be balanced and can see some major advantages in having this property
developed. She stated that she would like to see the City Attorney's
office comment on any contracts or anything of this nature prior
to approving a specific agreement.
The District Manager of Southern Pacific Development Company, ,Mr.
D. S. Gibson, stated that the estimated improvements increased
from $750,000 to over a million dollars and they feel it is not
unreasonable to ask for an assessment district. This type of
procedure is used in Sacramento and San Jose and he has seen in
their papers that they have taken a new attitude to industrial
tracts. He stated that their company has never seen one default
and the property is worth many times more than the assessment and
without the aid of the assessment district they can not spend this
amount of money because of the economy. With the assessment district
they would probably start with the improvements next week. He
stated that they feel they are a member of the City by making property
available for industry, such as Sears Roebuck Company and two prospec-
tive buyers who are anxious to buy lO and 20 acres of land on Vasco
Road. They cannot sell their property to these people; however,
until the public works have been put in and conditions of the map
act have been met. In his opinion there is no chance of loss by
the City.
Cm Futch moved that this item be continued for two weeks and to
request that the City Manager give the details in writing describ-
ing the assessment district and for the City Attorney to look at
this proposal from the standpoint of the City's liability and requir-
ed contracts that would protect the City, seconded by Cm Turner
which passed unanimously.
Cm Futch commented that the Council has worked very hard to get
industry in Livermore and development of this land and that the
Council will review the matter very carefully.
Mayor Pritchard remarked that he was willing to go along with the
concept and felt the details could have been worked out.
REPORT RE PROPOSED LAND
LEASE - AIRPORT INDUS-
TRIAL PROPERTY
The City Manager reported that a local developer firm has been seeking
CM-2S-41S
September 23, 1974
(Report re Proposed
Land Lease - Airport
Industrial Property)
~
(
a lease tenant to occupy the property owned by the City at the inter-
section of Kittyhawk Road and Airway Boulevard (airport industrial
property) and that a tenant is quite interested in occupying approxi-
mately two acres of property for use as a bowling alley and appur-
tenant facilities. The applicant would like to display plans and
renderings of the proposed development and to obtain an indication
as to whether or not the Council would approve this type of land
use. If the Council has no objection to the proposed land use the
matter should be referred to the staff for preparation of lease docu-
ments.
It was noted that the matter did not go to the Planning Commission
and Mr. Parness explained that this matter came before the Council
many months ago and that at that time the Council was not in favor
of the proposed use at the intersection suggested but would con-
sider the use in some other area and asked that the applicant prepare
something more in the way of site plans and renderings and come back
to the Council with the proposal for discussion at a later date.
They have done this and in the interim have spent many hours trying
to locate a lessee, which Mr. Parness added is no simple task. They
have located one and the firm they have obtained is very substantial,
and extremely anxious to occupy the property located at the corner
of Airway Boulevard and Kittyhawk Road. Mr. Parness stated that
this is the corner located right at the turn going toward the Water
Reclamation plant.
Mayor Pritchard stated that it is his understanding that this use
is a permitted use in that zone and Mr. Parness stated that it is
permitted with a conditional use permit issuance and that the land
is currently zoned ID.
Mr. Parness explained that the applicant cannot proceed further
because of the amount of cost involved unless he knows whether or
not the City Council would express favor or disfavor of the proposal.
Cm Turner stated that in his opinion this land will probably remain
vacant and as far as the use proposed he feels it is a good use and
will provide an income for the City and emploYment for valley residents
and will give some additional, badly needed, recreational facilities.
On the surface, he would be very much in favor of it.
Cm Futch stated that he was on the Council at the time the matter
was first brought up and was opposed to the location previously
suggested but this location does not seem to be detrimental as far
as he is concerned. Possibly there would be hopes for some light
industrial use but there is so much of this type of land available
that he feels this would be a reasonable use in this particular loca-
tion.
r'
MCm Miller stated that he would agree the City could use another
bowling alley and we certainly need more recreation but is not sure
this is the right location for it. He felt a bowling alley should
be closer to the population center rather than out in that area,
and would like to have an opinion from the Planning Commission as
to whether this would be the right place for this use.
Mayor Pritchard stated that this use is going to require a CUP so
it will begin with the Planning Commission anyway, so there is no
question there. The applicant wants to know if the Council would
be in favor of allowing the use but comments from the Council should
not be misconstrued as giving approval.
CM-28-419
September 23, 1974
(re proposed Land Lease -
Airport Industrial property)
Mayor Pritchard added that he would agree with the comments made
by Cm Futch and Tirsell about being in favor of allowing the use.
Cm Tirsell stated that the airport area has central valley service
to it and there have been letters to the editor about service and
this area has good access from the freeway. It would seem that
there should be something said about the public works that would
be required on Kittyhawk Road.
Mr. Lee explained that this would require widening of Kittyhawk
Road, essentially, and that there is another matter which has to
be considered which is the relationship of this site and the pro-
posed use, to the runway clear zone.
Cm Tirsell wondered if the matter could be referred to the Planning
Commission with specific questions as far as populated use, etc.
She then moved to refer the matter to the Planning Commission to
consider the use of the property as far as adjacent to an airport
runway.
Mr. Parness explained that the matter would have to be referred
to the Airport Land Use Commission but they could not rule it out;
this is an option left to the City Council. They could recommend
against it, depending on whether or not it encroaches on the airport
usage. The applicant really would like to know whether or not the
Council is opposed, just on the surface. If it is opposed in the
vicinity of the airport they will drop the project.
Cm Miller stated that it would appear that four of the Councilmem-
bers are willing to consider the project, in principle, sending it
to the Planning Commission with the understanding that on the sur-
face it appears to be acceptable.
Cm Tirsell's motion was amended by her to add that it also be refer-
red to the Airport Land Use Commission, seconded by Cm Turner and
passed unanimously.
Gerald Eschen stated that they have been working on the project
for 18 months and it has been with the Planning Department for
about three weeks and he would like to have comments if they have
comments, at this time, and also would like to know more about
the widening of Kittyhawk Road that would be required as a con-
dition of obtaining a CUP. He explained that there is a huge
outlay of money for equipment for such a project and he would like
to know how everyone feels about it as soon as possible.
REPORT RE ACTIVITIES
AT EAST AVENUE SHOP-
PING CENTER RESTAURANT/BAR
The staff reported that at the time the restaurant/bar facility
was installed in the Louis Shopping Center there was a complaint
from one of the neighbors regarding liquor being served in the
bar without food and the staff was asked to monitor the situation
and report back to the City Council in six months. A written report
from the staff indicated that there was no sign indicating that
food service was available in the cocktail lounge, there was access
from the bar to the restauruant and a sign above the access between
the lounge and restaurant indicating that alcoholic beverages
could not be taken into the restaurant area. There was no waitress
on duty in the cocktail lounge area and the bartender commented
that a waitress is on duty only during the lunch hour.
CM-28-420
September 23, 1974
(Shopping Center Bar)
Mayor Pritchard stated that the City appears to have a common ordi-
nary bar in the middle of a neighborhood shopping center, which the
ordinance does not allow and personally feels it should be abated.
r
Cm Miller stated that he agrees with the Mayor in that it is a viola-
tion of the condition by which it was approved and perhaps it would
be worthwhile to ask the Planning Director and the City Attorney to
meet with the owner pointing out the things which need to be done in
order to comply with the ordinance and Mayor Pritchard commented that
this is exactly what took place the last time there was a complaint
and the City is right back where it started. ~The owners know what
is required - they have seen it in writing and have discussed it
with the staff and further discussion will be to no avail. They
may cooperate for two or three weeks and then return to their noncon-
forming manner of conducting business.
Cm Miller felt it might be a good idea to ask the City Attorney what
mechanism is required for abatement of the use and Miss Whittaker
stated that this would probably similar to other violations of the
City ordinances in that the Planning Department would prepare the
necessary information for the District Attorney.
Cm Tirsell stated she would like to know the difference between this
bar and that allowed in the Granada Shopping Center called the Twi-
light Zone and Mr. Musso explained that the Twilight Zone was allowed
because of a staff error in issuing a business license allowing conduct
of business and was allowed without approval by virtue of a business
license and not a use permit.
Mayor Pritchard explained that at one time there had been an applica-
tion for a bar in the Louis Shopping Center and the whole neighborhood
turned out in protest against it and it was turned down and Mr. Musso
commented that it originally went in under the guise of a restaurant
and it wasn't until the building was completed that it was discovered
it was a separate operation from the restaurant.
Cm Tirsell stated that she has trouble coming to a decision when
there are two other shopping centers that have a bar and Cm Miller
stated that one was allowed by staff error and the other was built
with plans other than those approved and the City didn't require
them to tear the building down. This does not mean that a third
bar should be allowed because of two mistakes.
em Miller moved to direct the Planning Department and City Attorney
to work together in putting something together for presentation to
the District Attorney, seconded by Cm Futch.
em Turner stated that he was not on the Council at the time this
matter came before it, does not know all the facts concerning the
issue and is not prepared to vote on it at this time.
Cm Miller pointed out that, at best, the District Attorney would
issue a citation and what we want is compliance with our ordinance.
Cm Miller moved that the matter be continued for two weeks, seconded
by Cm Futch, which passed unanimously.
(\
\
REPORT RE PUBLIC
SAFETY PERSONNEL NEEDS
Cm Turner requested a staff report indicating the present and fore-
casted personnel additions for our public safety services in order
to consider the feasibility of a tax override for public approval
for financial support. A written report was submitted to the Coun-
cil regarding a study conducted by the Police and Fire Chiefs and
the City's Finance Director.
CM-28-42l
September 23, 1974
(re Safety Personnel)
The report indicated that the Police Department needs 2l uniformed
officers and 6 additional staff people and that the Fire Department
needs 27 uniformed people and 1 clerical person, which would neces-
sitate a 23~9 tax override increase for 1975-76 and increasing even
higher in the five subsequent years. This would mean an additional
budgeted cost requirement of $329,300 for 1975-76 and $1,145,500
increase in 1980-81 - total cost increase over a five year period
would be $4,391,300.
Cm Turner stated that he realizes there is a lot of money involved
in providing adequate personnel but Livermore may be facing a poten-
tial problem and it has been pointed out by the two Chiefs that the
departments are operating without sufficient personnel. He stated
that he is aware of the fact that there is not money available within
the General fund of the City and that the report probably reflects
the maximum manpower desired but in his opinion the people of Liver-
more should have the opportunity to indicate whether or not they
want the manpower for these services increased.
Cm Tirse1l stated that she appreciated receiving the report but would
hate to go to the people at this time, with the economy the way it is,
and say that we are in desperate need of tax money for police and
fire personnel and would have to feel that the City is in a state
of emergency before she would approve using this as a tax override.
Cm Miller stated that he hasn't concluded as to whether or not this
should be used as a tax override because there are other jurisdictions
that are going to come to the public for money also, such as the pro-
posed school bond. It is difficult to determine where the priorities
are when money is being squeezed and he hasn't yet decided which
comes first. If there is going to be an override it has to be decided
in the near future if it is going to appear on the March ballot and
he would like to have time to think about it in relationship to other
items that are going to appear on the ballot and would like to know
also what increase the Council would suggest - 309, 589, or what?
Cm Turner commented that he feels, in reading the report, that there
is a real need but also would like the opportunity to again review
the report and reflect upon it prior to coming to a decision.
Cm Tirsell commented that before putting it on the ballot as a
tax override she would like to make sure it has been justified
in every way because people do not always judge an override or
request for more money in terms of whether or not it is necessary
but rather that more money will be taken from their pockets. She
would like to be able to say there is no other way that the City can
provide adequate protection for you other than this and even then
the voter must make a priority decision. She stated that she, her-
self, is a mother with children in crowded schools which is a con-
cern to her and for her own family there are other concerns that
appear to be greater.
Cm Miller stated that if the Council intends to put something such
as this on the ballot it should discuss it at least two weeks prior
to the deadline date, that the staff check to see what the other
jurisdictions have in mind in the way of bond issues for the March
ballot and that all members in favor of placing something on the
ballot, submit suggestions for the ballot for review by the entire
Council prior to making a decision.
Cm Tirsell pointed out that there are other departments in the
City that are of service to the community as well as the emergency
service departments and Mr. Parness replied that this is a very
good point. He would subscribe to everything reported by the Fire
and Police Chief but if the Council would like to have an appeal
for needs there would be similar reports from every other depart-
ment within the City of Livermore.
CM-28-422
September 23, 1974
(re Safety Personnel)
Cm Miller stated that there are about 50 types of taxes that the
City can impose and wondered if there is a special type that can
be imposed for fire and police so that the City does not have to
borrow against the dollar on the General fund rate and Mr. Parness
indicated that there is none that he knows of.
The staff was directed to find out the appropriate date for discussion
of this item and for the staff to assemble information that might be
helpful in discussing and deciding as to whether the tax override for
this item will go on the March ballot.
REPORT RE SMOG ALERTS
em Tirsell requested that an investigation be conducted on the feasi-
bility of using our emergency services electronic siren system to
declare smog alert days. Unfortunately, our siren system coverage
is completely inadequate for this purpose and the technicians feel
there would be confusion over its use for other than emergency needs.
One alternate method of indicating a smog alert day could be to
require that a small distinguishable flag or banner be posted on the
flag staff of all public buildings and flag poles during such days.
Cm Tirsell stated that she has spoken with Dick Piepenberg of PT&T
who has indicated that there could be a line to City Hall with a
recording giving meteorological information that people could obtain
by dialing a certain number and could be provided for a very reason-
able amount of money.
It was mentioned that there is a toll free number available at
present that people could use.
Cm Miller suggested that at the beginning of the next smog season
the garbage man could distribute the telephone number along with
the garbage notice and the City Clerk noted that the Water Company
will also do something of this nature as a public service.
Cm Tirsell stated that if the toll free number is to be used she
would like to see that it is in our local directory.
Mr. Parness stated that he would be happy to contact the garbage
company and the water service people to see what they would be
willing to do as a public service.
Cm Futch stated that he would be interested in knowing if the smog
information would be specific enough for our particular area by
using the toll free number and if not, a special line and tape
recorder would not be very expensive to provide up-to-date informa-
tion regarding Livermore, for our citizens.
Cm Tirsell also suggested enlisting the aid of our local radio
stations in alerting people and that the School District and LARPD
also help alert people on smog days, as well as the local newspapers,
and she stated that she would like to see the City reserve a special
block in the newspaper for this information.
/
Cm Miller stated that those critics of City policy should keep in
mind that the reason there are smog alerts and people are concerned
about it is because smog makes people sick and we have lots of smog
here and the reasons for it are very well known. The object of
public agencies and newspapers which are supposed to be public
spirited, hopefully, would take into account the actions taken in
preventing that smog from getting worse.
~
CM-28-423
September 23, 1974
REPORT RE DELEGATE
APPOINTMENT TO LEAGUE
The eity Manager reported that the by-laws established an execu-
tive committee composed of one member from each of the 27 cities
located within the jurisdiction and recommended adoption of a mo-
tion appointing one Councilmember as delegate and one eouncilmember
as alternate delegate to the East Bay Division of the League of
California Cities.
em Tirsell stated that she feels Councilmember Turner would be an
excellent member of the committee and already knows some of the
representatives and also has offered to be the delegate with
enthusiasm and would like move that he be selected for the job,
seconded by em Miller which passed unanimously.
Cm Tirsell volunteered to be the alternate delegate to the East
Bay Division of the League of California Cities with which the
Council concurred.
REPORT RE TRAFFIC SIGNAL
BIDS FOR SIGNALS AT
CONeANNON BLVD. & HOLMES ST.
A report regarding the bids received for the installation of
traffic signal poles for the corner of Holmes Street and Con-
cannon Boulevard was submitted to the Council with the recom-
mendation that the Council adopt a motion authorizing bid award
to the Singer Company for the controller unit and the Econolite
Company for the poles due to low bid on these items.
Cm Miller stated that at the risk of being offensive he would like
to see what the traffic signals look like and Mr. Lee stated that
he is sorry, he should have anticipated this request but the de-
sign is being done to the Division of Highways specifications and
is being done by them.
Cm Miller stated that he does not wish to authorize any bids until
he sees the design and Mr. Lee stated that he could give the Council
a report if they wish but this will mean a two week delay and the
majority of the Council expressed opposition to further delay.
Mr. Lee stated that he believes they are the Cobra type units
and not the downtown variety.
Cm Turner asked if a performance bond is involved and Mr. Lee
stated that there is not but the City will not pay the companies
until delivery has been made. There is not a performance contract
involved but rather a materials contract and they will not be paid
until they deliver the materials.
Cm Futch moved to adopt the recommendation to authorize the bids,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and passed unanimously. (Cm Miller's vote
was with great reluctance).
REPORT RE PROGRESS REPORT
RE SPECIFIC PLANS FOR
GENERAL PLAN
The Director of Planning submitted a progress report of the prepara-
tion of specific plans for the General Plan and no discussion or
action took place regarding this item.
CM-28-424
I
September 23, 1974
DISCUSSION RE
AGENDA FORMAT
~
Cm Turner stated that the reason he would like to suggest that the
Matters Initiated by the Staff and Councilmembers be discussed at
the big inning of the meeting and that the Council meeting start
at 7:30 is because everyone is tired at the end of the meeting,
but more importantly, because many of the items that are brought
up are very important and are discussed during a time people from
the community have left the meeting. There are times that the people
from the press leave before the meeting ends because of deadlines to
meet and that they and other people might be interested in many of
these items. He then moved that the Council meeting begin at 7:30
p.m. with the first items on the agenda being the approval of the
minutes and then the matters initiated by Council and staff, seconded
by Mayor Pritchard.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to withdraw the motion until there
has been discussion.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he wanted to do this five years ago but
the Council at that time did not wish to change the meeting time
and would like to vote for the motion with the amendment that the
meeting begin at 7:30 and adjourn at ll:OO p.m. He stated that
the meeting begins to deteriorate after this hour and will be glad
to start meeting at 7:30; however, there is no reason to begin at
this time if the meeting is going to run until 1:00 a.m.
Mr. Musso stated that the reason this type of thing has worked with
the Planning Commission is because there is no additional discussion
when they get to the point of adjournment - they begin earlier and
end earlier than in the past.
Cm Miller stated that he does not arrive home until 6:00 p.m. and
there is not enough time to eat and have some time before a lengthy
meeting if he is required to be at a 7:30 meeting.
Cm Futch agreed that he would like to have the opportunity to discuss
some of the important things brought up at the end of the meeting
earlier in the agenda but also would agree that 7:30 would be too
early for his schedule.
em Tirsell stated that often she is still on the telephone at 7:30
and feels that it would be very difficult to get to the meeting by
7:30 p.m.
Cm Miller suggested that possibly the agenda could be changed to
allow these items earlier in the meeting.
Mayor Pritchard felt it would a good idea to show Matters Initiated
by the Council and staff directly after the Consent Calendar and
the Councilmembers concluded that they would like to try this
arrangement and so directed the staff.
ORD. RE ENERGY
CONSERVATION
',------- '
'&I! Turner stated that with respect to the energy conserva.t. ion ordi-
na~ he is not~ sure that it'~'W.iJ..l accomplish conservation of energy
and a~oes not ~'l~~. the id~a ~'''J.m:eosing addit"ional ~ees..<iuring
~he tiIn~ ~~nge 7n ~f.~~h1.p and fot"t:hese reasons '11.11 not. vote
1.n favor of the "'GXd1.nance ." --- /-~
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Futch and by 4-l vote (Cm
Turner dissenting) the ordinance related to energy conservation
and insulation of homes was adopted.
CM-28-425
em. Turner stated that with respect to the energy conservation ordi-
nance relative to the attic fan portion, testimony submitted to date
does not convince him that it will accomplish significant conservation
of energy and is opposed to additional fees during the time of change
of ownership for real property and for those reasons will not vote in
favor of the ordinance. ,1/. fA L,.
(;,f~" ~ ./G{ji': (it' jC ,
'~ v: ~
r . .1 II
It I'~rl !\,iUI74-
v ( "
I
September 23, 1974
ORDINANCE NO. 848
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO
BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVEID10RE CITY CODE, 1959,
BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW ARTICLE, ARTICLE X,
RELATING TO ENERGY CONSERVATION.
ORD. RE TRAINS
BLOeKING INTERSECTIONS
Cm Miller asked for an explanation as to why there is to be an intro-
duction of an ordinance relative to trains blocking intersections and
the Assistant City Attorney explained that the PUC has handed down a
decision which goes into effect November lst. It states that it
is a statewide concern regulating the length of time trains can
stop at crossings and as a general rule, no more than 10 minutes,
giving District Attorneys power to enforce this and what public
officers can do to get the train to move before the 10 minutes is
up, if necessary. She added that the District Attorney would not
enforce our ordinance in light of the PUC decision.
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the ordinance related to trains blocking intersections was introduced
and read by title only.
URGENCY ORD. RE
VETERAN'S DAY
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by a 4-l vote (Mayor
Pritchard dissenting) the ordinance reflecting a change in observance
of Veteran's Day was adopted, to conform to statewide practice.
ORDINANCE NO. 849
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.3.1,
RELATING TO OFFICIAL CITY HOLIDAYS, OF ARTI-
CLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS, OF
CHAPTER 2, RELATING TO ADMINSTRATION, OF THE
LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
URGENCY ORD. RE
MOTOR VEHICLES
& HOLIDAY TRAFFIC
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by a 4-1 vote
(Mayor Pritchard dissenting) an urgency ordinance related to
motor vehicles and traffic reflecting the Veteran's Day change
was adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 850
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13.1
RELATING TO DEFINITIONS, OF ARTICLE I, RELAT-
ING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS, OF CHAPTER 13, RE-
LATING TO MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, OF THE
LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, BY THE AMENDMENT
OF THE DEFINITION OF HOLIDAYS.
Report re Bids for Police
Admn. Bldg. Parking Lot
Lights (Consent Calendar)
The Director of Public Works recommended that the Council authorize
solicitation of bids for lights for the northerly parking lot of
the Police Administration building and Cm Miller suggested that
the matter be referred to the Design Review Committee for a report
~
CM-28-426
September 23, 1974
(Parking Lot Lights)
~',
prior to authorizing the staff to ask for bids for lights, and Cm
Turner suggested that rather than spending an estimated $6,000 for
parking lot lights perhaps lights could be mounted on the police
building which could shine into the parking lot and would be a cost
of about $300.
\
Mr. Lee explained that this simply would not light the area adequately
enough and what they are asking is a continuation of lights already
chosen by the architect of the building and will be compatible with
the building.
Cm Miller moved that the matter be referred to the Design Review
Committee with the notation that they consider the possibility
of lights on the building or on the ground, seconded by Cm Turner
and passed unanimously.
CONTINUATION OF DISCUS-
SION RE CN DIST. AMEND.
On motion of Cm Futch, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the discussion regarding the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
related to eN District was postponed until the meeting of October 7th.
REMARKS CONCERNING
SCHOOL FEE - LIVERMORE
GARDENS (HUD DEVELOP.)
Mr. Hirsch, representative of the builders of the HUD-236 project
stated that there are two different issues at hand and read the only
motion that appeared in the minutes on March 5th which indicated
that approval of the project would be given if there would be suffi-
cient water available. He stated there was discussion regarding
the school fee but there was no motion made relative to this discussion.
He then read portions of the minutes dealing with the matter and
urged the Council to furnish the building permits without his having
to produce a writ of mandate for the permits.
Cm Miller stated that prior to doing anything all the background
discussion from all the minutes would have to be reviewed and Mr.
Hirsch stated that this is all he would ask - for the Council to
weigh the issue, as it was presented, and as to what the motion
actually was. He stated that his understanding would be that if
there is no longer a moratorium with respect to availability of
water that they wouldn't come under the applicable action of March 5,
1973, and Cm Miller stated that this may be the case after March 1975,
when the moratorium expires.
/1~e staff was asked to place the matter on the agenda and to furnish
the eouncilmembers with all previous eouncil minutes pertaining to
the item.
~'
Mr. Hirsch indicated that the official City form showing all applica-
ble fees shows a school fee of $800/unit and Cm Miller stated that
this also includes Zone 7 fees and other fees which are non-City
organizations but are defined so as to inform a builder what fees
WOU~d b=- impose,~' _ '..J1 -.I- . . ~--ud '-?!d ~A.--'
~~. /-<.-L-'rP:t/ ~lv,{.,~~~~- .-u Z.e ~.MATTERS INITIATED
~-~ IL-t-LLc- t:..:A'...,~--I!-~ ~ ,:. _, -rr<~.~ /'"'' -r- BY THE STAFF
.~Lt/.Z/ ~J_ ~~-d:." ~. ~ W-<~~
~ Le-"'--<P'<-V-~~' ,z,...;::t:;!"'-"".~.:~ (ilighway Sign at
/I, ~/ J..:.., 'a.L"- ''Yr/7~. r/ Golf Course)
~~ ~-~. L';r
Mr. Lee stated that'he has a copy of the highway sign to be located
at the golf course and would like some direction as to the legend
CM-28-427
September 23, 1974
(Golf Course Sign)
to be put on it and Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like this
item to appear as an agenda item for discussion and consideration.
Cm Tirsell moved to select the sign illustrating a golfer and an
airplane, seconded by Cm Turner, which was defeated 2-3 (Cm Futch,
Miller and Mayor Pritchard dissenting) .
Cm Futch stated that he ha~en in favor of removing the previous
sign at the golf cours~~~ ~~ ~ selection has to be made he would
vote for the sign illustrating the golfer and airplane and asked
that he be allowed to reverse his previous vote and the previous
motion carried 3-2 (Cm Miller and Mayor Pritchard dissenting).
*Jr.4:#~~hak/p/- ~~j
(Requ~f;~; ~ ~~ /~
Agreements vs. Verbal) -~~--~ /
The Assistant City Attorney stated that she would like to ask that
the Council obtain things in writing rather than conducting busi-
ness orally because it is becoming very difficult to handle many
problems because of the traditional verbal communication with
people. She stated that the matter of the Livermore Gardens is
a perfect example of not getting things in writing and because
one cannot remember conversations that have taken place two years
ago.
(Removal of Houses
on North Livermore Ave.)
Mr. Parness stated there are five houses located on North Livermore
Avenue that must be cleared and in order to do this there must be
a notice for the bidding, the award date, a hearing on the house
moving by the Planning Commission and then the move must be com-
pleted. The earliest possible time appears to be about the 21st
of November and this might be too late because the subcontractor
can come in at any time and remove the houses. There are two
local people who are interested in doing the job and the staff
would like to receive some direction as to whether the City should
go through the process mentioned and allow these people to bid on
the job or whether the subcontractor should be allowed to remove
them as he is required to do by contract. Mr. Parness stated that
the staff would recommend that the subcontractor be allowed to take
care of the matter with some arrangement with the two local parties,
if possible, rather than to go through the formal procedure. He
pointed out that if the City goes through the process it would
probably realize only a few hundred dollars but if the subcontract-
or handles it the money would go to him (the value of the homes).
em Miller stated that the value probably isn't very much and the
hassle appears to be quite a lot and would suggest letting the
subcontractor handle the relocation.
The Assistant City Attorney, Miss Whittaker, stated that it is
true the subcontractor has to take care of removing the houses
and clearing the loti however, in her opinion any money the con-
tractor might receive from the profit of the sale of the homes
would constitute a gift of our public property.
Cm Miller stated he is not willing to give away public money so it
would appear the City must go through the hassle.
Mr. Parness stated that in his opinion it is illogical to assume
that there may be nominal worth in the properties that the subcon-
tractor is obligated to tear down and even though the subcontractor
might be able to sell them to someone it might be construed as a
gift of public moneys so for this reason they are required to be
torn down.
CM-28-428
September 23, 1974
(Removal of Houses)
Mr. Lee stated that if the City goes through the procedure of adver-
tising the homes for sale it can get into bad public relations be-
cause they can be awarded to someone and the subcontractor can come
in to tear them down and the eity will have no control over this.
~, ~Vhat if he takes the plumbing fixtures out of the house and sells
them? Is this a gift of public funds? He has every right to do this.
The Assistant City Attorney stated that she would agree with the
comment made by ~lr. Lee and is sure that every contractor who bid
on it did so with the realization that certain things could be removed
and sold and that the rest could be carted off in a demolished statei
however, it is not standard procedure for a contractor to assume that
someone would want to come along and buy the house. This means that
this particular contractor is going to be getting extra money because
the City is going to allow him to sell the houses to someone else and
if there is money to be made from such a sale, the eity is entitled
to the house and this money should come to the eity.
em Turner stated that he would have to disagree with the opinion of
Miss Whittaker, in this case, because once someone agrees to remove
the homes and the City agrees to this, he then assumes ownership of
the homes and they become personal property rather than real property,
and he can do what he chooses to do with his personal property.
The Council concluded that the terms of the contract should be
followed and that the eity would not become involved in the bidding
procedure for the sale of the homes.
(Air Pollution
Control Study)
Mr. Parness noted that the Air Pollution Control study has been
completed and will be presented to the Council at the next meeting.
(Portola Crosswalk)
Cm Turner stated that he has been contacted by Mrs. Hartley regarding
the Portola School crosswalk and has gone to the school to see what
the problems are and moved that the crosswalk be established directly
across the street from the main entrance to the school and pointed
out the area in which he would like to see a crosswalk established.
It was noted that the matter is not pressing and Cm Futch stated
that he does not recall the discussion which took place approximately
a year ago and would like it to go on the agenda for discussion.
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by em Miller and by a 4-1 vote,
(Cm Pritchard dissenting because he would like to vote tonight) the
matter was postponed until October l5th.
(Apartments at Enos
Way & portola Avenue)
(~
em Turner stated that he observed that the apartments located at Enos
Way and Portola Avenue are vacant looking with many weeds and that
children were playing around them and felt this may be dangerous.
Mr. Lee stated that he has been contacted by the o~~er of the
apartments who is trying to get them cleared and noted that they
owe the City about $8,000 for the improvements and he is trying to
get this taken care of so that he can get occupancy. He indicated
that he will follow this up and report back to the Council.
CM-28-429
September 23, 1974
(Cars Parked on
Lillian St. near Apartments)
em Turner stated that there are apartments near Lillian Street
and that the cars are parked on both sides of the street which
creates a very narrow path for moving traffic in the area of a
curve on Lillian Street. He pointed out that supposedly there
is sufficient parking inside the apartment parking area and that
most of the time it is empty and would like the City to consider
"no parking" in that area to help alleviate the situation.
Mr. Lee indicated that a study has just been completed as the re-
sult of other complaints about the parking but there have been
no accidents even though the traffic is rather heavy in that area.
Cm Turner stated that one day a child is going to be hit or
there is going to be an accident because it is in a blind area
and motorists cannot see very well and Mr. Lee stated that he
would look into it and report back to the Council.
(Traffic on East Ave.)
em Turner stated that he keeps receiving calls from people who
are very angry that something can't be done about the speed
limit on East Avenue. He stated there is no other place in
town where a 45 mph speed limit is allowed in an area where
school children are walking.
Cm Miller suggested that the people calling should be asked
to harrass the County Supervisors so that something will be
done. The City has done everything possible to get the speed
limit reduced and to no avail.
Cm Tirsell stated that there was a similar problem on Arroyo
Road and that Bill Millard wrote and wrote to the County and
finally got the speed limit reduced to 35 mph.
(Castilleja Funds)
Cm Miller stated that in the memorandum received earlier it
was pointed out that on one portion of Castilleja I the dedi-
cation was contributed in cash in the amount of $6,634 but
found its way into the Storm Drain Fund and should have been
transferred to the Park Fund. This money belongs to the Park
Fund and should be transferred and after some discussion it
was concluded that a report should be submitted by the Finance
Director relative to transfer of the funds.
(Castilleja Projects)
Cm Miller stated that in the memorandum received from the City
Attorney relative to Castilleja I, II, and III, it appears that
there are 1.24 acres due to the eity which Gillice claims they
do not have to put in the 44.479 acres. If this is their claim,
they have not paid their park dedication fees and the City needs
to institute a law suit to recover the cash value of 1.24 acres.
Miss Whittaker stated that this is another example of where not
writing things down gets everyone into trouble. The City got 44.479
acres from Castilleja III and no one knows for sure what the 44.479
acres represents. This amount might include 1.24 acres of park
dedication for Castilleja I, and again, it might not. She stated
that this did not come up earlier because the subdivision map was
rejected on another ground, and it is up to the Council to decide
as to whether or not the 1.24 acres is included. If the Council
does want it in there, it can, and then Castilleja III will owe the
City something like 1.76l acres for park dedication. If the 1.24
CM-28-430
September 23, 1974
(re Castilleja Projects)
is not included the City should make a demand on them for it, and
Castilleja III will only owe .521 acres.
Cm Miller suggested that this be discussed as an agenda item and
it was concluded that this could be discussed on October 15th.
(Reappointment of
Planning Commissioner)
Mayor Pritchard stated that Glen Dahlbacka has been reappointed to
the Planning Commission by the City Council for a full term and
on motion of em Miller, seconded by em Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the resolution appointing Dr. Dahlbacka was adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. l54-74
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO
THE PLANNING eOMMISSION
(re Investigation
Form)
Mayor Pritchard stated that there is a complaint form being used
by the Police Department which indicates that the person making
the complaint agrees that the complaint will be investigated but
if the investigation proves the allegations to be false that this
person may be libel to criminal and civil prosecution and in some
cases may be asked to submit to a polygraph examination, as part
of the investigation. He stated that if this is the case there
will never be anything said about any policeman at any time, if
this is being used, and asked that Mr. Parness look into the matter.
(Response to I-580
eouncil Position)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he received a telephone call from
Michael Kane in response to the letters written about the Council
position regarding widening of I-580, who works in the office of
Counsel on Environmental Quality and has written a letter to
Benjamen Davis with the Department of Transportation, which Mayor
Pritchard read to the eouncil. The letter from the City of Liver-
more regarding its position was also included in his letter sent
to the Department of Transportation with the suggestion made by
Mr. Kane to consider the proposal for six lanes.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at 12:20 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss the appointment of a City Attorney and pending
appointments to committees, commissions and boards.
~~~
yor
~ C~
APPROVE
~"
ATTEST
L
t elerk
e, California
CM-28-43l
Special Meeting - October 7, 1974
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Pritchard
and convened at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, October 7, 1974, in the Muni-
cipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The purpose of
the meeting was:
Executive session to consider appointments to various
boards, commissions and committees.
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Absent: None
Adjournment
The meeting
ATTEST
adjOU~~
Mayor
-~-
APPROVE
'''~----
CM28-432
Regular Meeting of October 7, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on October 7, 1974, 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 eALL
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.
PROCLAM~TION - NATIONAL
FIRE PREVENTION WEEK
Mayor Pritchard read a proclamation in recognition of National Fire
Prevention Week and honoring those who have made sacrifices in fight-
ing fires and in honor of Livermore's 100 years of service.
CORRECTION OF ~INUTES
September 23, 1974
Page 428, paragraph 3, should read as follows:
Cm Futch stated that he had not been in favor of removing the previ-
ous sign at the golf course but that the Council majority had decided
otherwise; therefore, since a selection has to be made he would vote
for the sign illustrating the golfer........etc.
Page 425, first paragraph under Ord. re Energy Conservation, should
read: Cm Turner stated that with respect to the energy conservation
ordinance, relative to the attic fan portion, testimony submitted
to date does not convince him that it will accomplish significant
conservation of energy and is opposed to additional fees during the
time of change of ownership for real property and for these reasons
will not vote in favor of the ordinance.
Page 427, under the item relative to the school fee, Cm Turner stated
that he would like to insert the comment made by him during the meet-
ing: That we should not offer any additional testimony until such
time as the Council has had opportunity to review previous testimony
on this item.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote
the minutes for the meeting of September 23, 1974, were approved as
corrected.
~
OPEN FORUM
(Presentation of
Art Festival Purchases)
Gloria Taylor, representative of the Livermore Cultural Arts Council
presented the City Council with the two purchase awards from Festi-
val '74. She also thanked the eouncilmembers, Police Department and
LARPD for their cooperation and help in making Festival '74 a success.
CM-29-l
October 7, 1974
(Art Festival Purchases)
em Miller stated that he would like to thank the Cultural Arts people
for having put on such a wonderful 2~ day festival and party that is
not possible to surpass and stated that he, for one, really appreciat-
ed attending the festival.
Mayor Pritchard agreed that he feels everyone had a lot of fun this
year at the festival.
(Petition re Cruising)
Nancy Rohn, student, presented a petition signed by l27 people which
was related to cruising as a type of entertainment for young people.
The petition was read by Nancy which indicated that the LPD gives
tickets to teenagers driving cars and ignores violations made by
adult drivers. There is little recreation available in the City
of Livermore for young people and there is little dragging and
no destruction of property and they feel it is unfair for the
police to clear downtown Livermore.
Mayor Pritchard advised that there may be discussion on this item
later in the meeting.
(Concannon Blvd. & Holmes St.)
Jan Brown, ll5l Farmington Way, stated that the corner of Holmes
Street and Concannon Boulevard is a very dangerous intersection and
that she and her neighbors are particularly concerned because their
children cross Holmes Street at this intersection to go to school
and return home via this route. She stated that the fact the inter-
section is particularly dangerous was brought to light when her son
was hit by an automobile and fortunately her child was not seriously
hurt. She asked if they must take the chance that a child will be
hurt before the lights are installed? She suggested that due to
the circumstances concerning this intersection the people of the
area would like to request that there be a crossing guard posted
there until the lights are installed.
Cm Futch stated that despite repeated efforts on the part of the
City of Livermore to get lights installed at that intersection,
for the past 2~ years, the state has just recently given permis-
sion to install the lights and the last he has heard the lights
will not be installed until sometime next year. He stated that
he feels this is much too long to wait and it will be at the end
of another school year before the lights will be operating, and
MOVED THAT THE CITY APPROVE A eROSSING GUARD AT THE LOCATION UN-
TIL SUCH TIME AS TRAFFIC LIGHTS ARE INSTALLED, SECONDED BY CM.
MILLER.
Cm Turner indicated that he was very surprised to hear that the
installation will be delayed and understood that they were to
begin this month and Cm Tirsell stated that she thought they
would be starting by November 1st.
Mr. Lee reported that Cm Futch is correct, there has been one
delay after the other, relative to this intersection and the staff
is very upset about the delay. He stated that just recently the
staff has been notified of another delay because the state does
not want to go for bid until the eity has the poles and control-
lers in hand. The City maintains that this is not what was
agreed to and a letter has been prepared expressing this view,
and urging the state to go out to bid this month or next month.
CM-29-2
October 7, 1974
(Concannon Blvd. & Holmes)
Cm Futch suggested that the City also point out that a boy was hit
by an automobile while trying to cross the intersection and that
this information be conveyed by telephone conversation.
Mr. Lee stated that with the type of appeal the staff is going to
make they usually follow it up with a telephone call and this will
be done. He added that the staff is very disheartened by the delays
that have occurred relative to this intersection and that construc-
tion of the lights will take place as soon as possible.
The City Manager explained that there may be some limitations with
respect to placing a crossing guard at this intersection because
it is a state highway and the staff will check into this.
Cm Turner noted that there should be a sign or flashing light or
something to indicate to motorists traveling north on Holmes Street
that there will be children crossing ahead, around the bend in the
road because cars travel very fast on Holmes Street.
Mr. Lee stated that the only sign present indicates that there is
an intersection ahead but further signing has not been provided
because the lights were to be installed and a flashing signal
in conjunction with such construction. He stated that if it is
observed that additional devices are needed he is sure it could
be installed.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION APPROVING A CROSSING GUARD AT THE INTERSEC-
TION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Deficiency
List - Castilleja III
A report was submitted by the Public Works Director relative to
eastilleja III with the recommendation that the City Council approve
the list of deficiencies.
Cm Miller stated that in his opinion it should be the regular policy
of the City not to allow occupancy permits until all the work has
been done and MOVED THA.T THE eITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE PUBLIC WORKS
DEFICIENCY LIST AND THAT TIlE WORDING OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND
FIRE DEPARTMENT LIST BE CHANGED TO READ THAT OCCUPANCY PERMITS WILL
NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE WORK IS ABSOLUTELY COMPLETE.
Mr. Lee stated that there are occasions for which exceptions have
been made and if this is to be the policy it will eliminate some
of the latitude the staff now has.
Cm Miller stated that in his opinion there should be no exceptions
and there have been cases in which the work was not properly donei
the staff has the option of bringing a special matter to the attention
of the Council if they feel an exception should be made.
AFTER BRIEF DISCUSSION THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY C~ TIRSELL AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
('
\
'-
REPORT RE PERSONNEL
RULE MODIFICATION
A report regarding modification of Article IX, Section 4, of the
Personnel Rules and Regulations was presented to the eouncil infor-
ming the Council of a sentence to be added related to a Department
Head or Division Head notifying an employee who has been by-passed
for a promotion and a recommendation made that the eouncil authorize
the addition was adopted.
CM-29-3
----.-....--- ."- _._~._"------_._.._._~,..--,.,',...,_....,-
October 7, 1974
Exotic Animal Permits
The Director of Finance submitted a written report to the Council
relative to a license fee for exotic animals, recommending that
the Council adopt a resolution approving a fee of $lO.OO for permits
valid up to and including six months and $20 for permits valid for
7 to 12 months with a $5 penalty for delinquent permit renewals.
Cm Turner stated that he would rather see a fee of $4 imposed
because most animals are owned by children and often they must
pay the license fee for the animal but Mr. Parness stated that
children, most likely, would not own exotic animals.
Paul Tull asked the definition of an exotic animal and it was ex-
plained that the description is spelled out in the ordinance which
was adopted over a year ago and that he would have to refer to the
ordinance.
RESOLUTION NO. l55-74
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL FEE
FOR KEEPING EXOTIC ANIMALS, PLUS AN ADDI-
TIONAL FEE FOR DELINQUENT PERMIT RENEWALS.
Report re Personnel
Job Description Change -
Library Clerk
The City Personnel Officer reported that he is in the process of
reviewing all clerical classifications for the City of Livermore
and would suggest that there be a change in the requirements for
Library Clerk classification. At present this job requires a min-
imum typing speed of 30 w.p.m. in addition to two years of college
and six months of library experience in a related position. It is
recommended that the typing requirement and college requirement
be eliminated from the description.
em Futch wondered how someone can get started in a position if
six months experience is required and Mr. Parness explained that
there are a myriad of tasks that can be counted as experience
for the job.
Cm Tirsell wondered if one has to have been paid for library exper-
ience, noting that many women staff the school libraries as volun-
teers and Mr. Parness indicated that this type of experience would
suffice.
Cm Turner suggested that the wording state six months of library
experience or related experience rather than in a related posi-
tion because in his opinion this would mean the same type of
position would have had to be done by someone and this would close
the door to anyone with no experience at all.
It was concluded that the recommendation would be approved.
Report re Public Employee
Program 1974-75 Fiscal Year
The City Manager reported that the Public Employee Program ex-
tends federal financing from July l, 1974 to March 3l, 1975
and financing from March 3l to June 30, 1975, will be done by
means of another program - Comprehensive Employee Training Act.
This program has allowed us to employ eight persons who supple-
ment our maintnenace forces and are valuable additions to our
staff. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authoriz-
ing execution of the agreement.
/-~,
eM-29-4
October 7, 1974
(Public Employee Program)
RESOLUTION NO. 156-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AN AGREE~1ENT (County of Alameda)
~
Report re Grade
Separation Status
A status report regarding the Southern Pacific railroad relocation
project was submitted by the City Manager for informational purposes
with no action by the Council required.
Paul Tull stated that he has heard various estimates of land involved
in the railroad relocation project and wanted to know how much acre-
age is involved and to whom it belongs and was advised to check with
Mr. Lee for this information.
The eity ~anager reoorted that he has provided a memorandum related
to the industrial lease, requested by the lending institution, which
certifies that a lease is in effect on property owned by the eity and
on which is being built an industrial structure. This is the leased
acreage on Airway Boulevard, and the Hayor was authorized to sign
the certification.
Report re City
Industrial Lease (Eschen)
The City's insurance carrier has recommended that a resolution be
adopted denying the claim of Michael Sprague.
Resolution Denying Claim
RESOLUTION NO. 157-74
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAP1 OF ,l'1ICHAEL SPRAGUE
Status Report - Airport
Master Plan & Land Use
The Council received a copy of the status report for the Airport
Master Plan and Land Use Study and Mayor Pritchard asked if the
eouncil could receive a copy of the minutes of September 17th.
Mr. Lee explained that the report summarizes the action taken at
this meeting and that there were no minutes recorded for the meeting.
Resignation/Beautifica-
tion eommittee - Cody
Notice of the resignation of Timothy J. Cody from the Beautification
Committee was presented to the City Council. A letter of apprecia-
tion will be sent to Mr. Cody.
r:
.. ./
Request for Use of
Old Police Building
A representative of the eivil Air Patrol has requested use of the
old Police building for meetings and the City Manager reported that
a recent inspection by a federal O.S.H.A. inspector reveals that
the structure should not be occupied for any public use and recom-
mended that the City Council deny the request for use of the building.
eH-29-5
---~- - - --"-._-'--~_..__...,^_.._----_.._"--
october 7, 1974
Committee Minutes
Minutes were received from the following:
Housing Authority - July 16th and August 20th
Design Review Committee - October 2nd
Airport Advisory Committee - September 9th
Industrial Advisory Board - September 25th
payroll & elaims
There were 85 claims in the amount of $l06,724.84 and 295 payroll
warrants in the amount of $85,585.99 for a total of $192,310.83,
dated 9/27/74 approved and ordered paid by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF C~1 MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. ITEM 2.6 RELATIVE TO DE-
FICIENCY LIST AND OCCUPANCY PERMITS WAS DISCUSSED AND VOTED ON FIRST.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Crosswinds Restaurant Fire Exit)
Cm Turner stated that he believes he saw dead-bolt locks on the
emergency exit at the Crosswinds Restaurant and would assume that
such would be in violation of the fire code and asked that there
be a staff report on this matter.
(Pioneer Lines)
Cm Turner stated that he had been contacted by a Mrs. Wagner in
the springtown area who is concerned about the fact that the
pioneer Lines commuter service to the labs is not receiving
much response in the way of people wanting rides to work, and
in the letter to the editor asked what happened to the 500 enthu-
siastic people who indicated they would be willing to support the
service. He stated that he would hope people will start using
the service.
(Increasing Bike Fee)
Cm Turner suggested that perhaps there could be an increase of
the bicycle registration fee to help pay for the cost of expand-
ing the bicycle trail and maybe a fee of $5 would be better.
em Tirsell commented that some families have 4-5 children and
this would be very expensive for them and the City is trying
to encourage people to ride their bicycles and to make it ex-
pensive to license bicycles might not be helpful in the way
of encouragement.
(Los Altos Park)
Cm Miller stated it is his understanding the plans for Los Altos
park have been in City Hall for some time. According to the agree-
ment worked out with LARPD, the City Council is supposed to review
CM-29-6
October 7, 1974
(Los Altos Park)
the park sites and proposals for development. He stated tha~ he has
received a call from LARPD because they are awaiting word from the
City Council and Cm Miller suggested that this be scheduled for dis-
cussion on the next agenda.
(Newspaper Article)
Cm Miller read an article which appeared in a newspaper indicating
that developers are developing in areas void of municipal services
for which the land is cheaper and that there is an unsatiable demand
for more and more tax dollars to cope with growth and the services
growth demands.
(Support of Prop. l7)
Mayor Pritchard commented that he would like the City Council to join
him in support of Proposition l7 with a "yes" vote, concerning the
Stanislaus River Melones Dam.
i1AYOR PRITCHARD MOVED TO SUPPORT PROPOSITION 17, SECONDED BY CM
FUTCH WHICH PASSED 4-0 (Cm Turner abstaining).
~mTTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Complaints re Traffic
Regulation at "P" Street
and Chestnut Street)
Mr. Parness stated that there have been a number of complaints about
the traffic regulations at the intersection of Chestnut Street and
North "P" Street. Presently, the east-west bound traffic is governed
by a blinking amber light and the south bound traffic has a blinking
red light and concern is for pedestrians trying to cross ehestnut
Street since the automobiles do not stop or go slow enough to permit
safe crossing. The staff would like to have the permission of the
eouncil to put the signals back into full ordinary operation or to
have blinking red lights for both directions so that cars will come
to a stop.
Cm Futch and Mayor Pritchard commented that they would prefer to see
blinking red lights at the intersection with which the other members
of the Council concurred.
(Next Week's Agenda)
Mayor Pritchard asked if the report on the field investigation con-
ducted by the Police Department could be on the agenda next week, in
addition to the reasons for the report and also the matter of the
complaint form being used by the Police Department.
r
Mr. Parness commented that this could be done but would like to say
that he has spoken with the Police ehief regarding the complaint
form and that the wording is being changed and he would hope that the
Council will agree with the wording to be used and feels that the
Council's concern will be satisfied with the new verbiage.
(re Assembly Res. 181)
Mayor Pritchard stated that there is an Assembly concurrent Resolu-
tion No. l8l regarding proliferation of retail petroleum products
eM-29-7
October 7, 1974
(re Assembly Res. 181)
outlets and it should be a eouncil policy that these will be looked
at in Livermorei however there are CUP's governing these uses.
PERMIT REVIEW RE BURNING
EMBERS & PIZZA ARCADE -
LOUIS SHOPPING CENTER
Mayor Pritchard stated that the matter of the permit review for
the Burning Embers and pizza Arcade located in the Louis Shopping
Center was postponed from the last meeting so that the members of
the Council could review the past minutes concerning the item.
Cm Tirsell stated that the Planning Commission has submitted a
revision of the CN Zoning Ordinance in which they recommend
inclusion of bar facilities in neighborhood shopping centers.
If, later on, the eouncil agrees with this recommendation it
would seem that perhaps the philosophy of whether or not bars
should be allowed in shopping centers should be discussed prior
to making a decision regarding this particular bar.
Cm Miller stated that in this case he can't agree because every-
one knew what the conditions were at the time they went into it
and they simply have not abided by the conditions imposed by the
City and to which they agreed. The fact that there may be a
change, which isn't sure, should make no difference. They can
be in general satisfaction of conditions if they put up a sign
saying that food service is available and would satisfy the
conditions that were agreed to before. He stated that he sees
no reason for putting this item aside.
Cm Tirsell stated that in her opinion the infractions are very
slight in comparison to the other bars which are operating in a
neighborhood shopping center.
Cm Miller stated that the only thing they have to do is put up
their sign.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the point of the matter is that this
was supposed to have been a restaurant and there is no way one
can construe that it is a restaurant - it is a bar, purely, and
simply.
Cm Tirsell stated that the Planning Commission is proposing that
the sign be put up, immediately, to make food accessibility
available. She stated that the infraction is so minor that she
really cannot understand why they continue to be in violation.
Mayor Pritchard commented that they will not serve liquor in the
pizza parlor but you can take the pizza into the bar and there is
no way one can call the bar a restaurant.
Cm Tirsell stated that she can understand what Mayor Pritchard
is saying but this policy is about to be reviewed and Cm Futch
stated that in the interim, while this policy is being reviewed,
there should be a motion stating that the City expects them to
conform to the conditions that were stated, previously, and to
which they agreed.
Cm Miller felt that something stronger should be done and they
should be notified that the City will go to the District Attorney
for a citation hearing on the matter because they have not con-
formed with the things they had agreed to do. This doesn't mean
CM-29-8
October 7, 1974
(Permit Review - Burning
Embers & Pizza Arcade)
that they will be cited but the fact the City is willing to go to
the District Attorney may encourage them to move in complying with
conditions agreed to. They may choose to ignore any letter sent
to them by the eity asking that they comply, just as they ignored
the conditions.
Cm Futch wondered if they had been notified of their violations
before and Cm Miller pointed out that this was discussed with them
in personi just six months ago they were in Dave Wharton's office.
At this time they agreed to comply with the conditions and did so
for approximately two weeks.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE DIRECTED TO TALK WITH THE
OvVNERS AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH A RECO~MENDATION AS TO
WHAT COURSE OF ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN, SEeONDED BY eM MILLER WHIeH
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT FROM AIR
POLLUTION STUDY eo~~.
Gary Higgins, Chairman of the Air Pollution Study Committee
stated that the Council has been presented with copies of the air
pollution report prepared by a citizens advisory committee and
that he has only two comments to make relative to the report:
1) While they have tried to qualify, throughout the report, the
uncertainties inherent in such a study he would like to point
out that they have had to take a legalistic view of the air
quali ty requirements. As everyone knm\Ts the EPA has allm'led
each community some latitude in choice of standards for their
community and since there is no real indication of what the
Livermore community, as a whole, wanted, the only recourse was
to take the EPA's primary and secondary standards and base their
analysis and conclusion on those numbers.
2) The committee has been criticized for favoring "no growth" and
this is clearly not the viewpoint of the majority or even, perhaps,
the minority of the committee. The hope of the committee was to do
the best job possible with a very difficult problem of technical
analysis of air quality in the valley in the past and what might
be expected in future years. The fact that the committee concluded
that some alternative to growth, with the present per capita vehicle
use, had to be found if there is to be better air quality, does not
really represent a viewpoint of the committee because they feel
they are not qualified to jUdge, other than as individual citizens.
They feel that their effort has been misconstrued as being either
pro or con regarding growth in the community and they feel unhappy
about this. They may be associated with viewpoints that have noth-
ing to do with air quality, according to others.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels what Dr. Higgins has said is
very im90rtant and perhaps this statement could be drafted and re-
ceive the concurrence of the committee for inclusion as an addendum
to the report.
~
Dr. Higgins stated that he would be happy to do this because there
are members of the committee who feel very strongly that the conclu-
sions of the committee have been misconstrued, or rather that the
objectives have been misunderstood.
Cm Miller stated that there are members of the committee who were
appointed from the Pleasanton City Council and would suggest that
the report be made available to Pleasanton's councilmembers and
staff and perhaps it might be of some value to appear before them
to describe the conclusions of the committee and the nature of the
CM-29-9
--------_._"---~-,---,--_.......,-
,-- '---'--"'.,-.---- .,..-......--.-.--__~._..,_w_...,___.__.,._.__
October 7, 1974
(Report From Air Pollution
Study Committee)
report and possibly copies should also go to the VCSD people because
we are all involved in the concerns of air pollution.
Dr. Higgins stated that he believes a copy has been sent to the
VCSD board membersi Mr. Lee has been working on a distribution
list and as he recalls the VCSD people were included.
Cm Futch wondered if an analysis of the data could be made far
enough to put additional points on the graph and Dr. Higgins
indicated that this could be done rather quickly.
Cm Tirsell stated that the past month was very bad with respect
to air quality and this should be reflected some way.
em Miller pointed out that the month prior to that was not very
good either, and the whole season has been rather bad. All the
predictions made by the developers' spokesmen didn't come to
pass as they expected.
Cm Turner commented that he was extremely disappointed that the
report was given to the press prior to the Council's having the
opportunity to review the report. He stated that he received
the report one evening and read about it in the newspaper the
next morning. He was asked questions about the report and
hadn't had the opportunity to read it and pointed out that this
was not the fault of the committee.
Mr. Lee explained that on Friday one of the newspaper reporters
telephoned and asked for a copy of the report. Mr. Lee told him
that the press could not receive a copy because it had not been
distributed to the Council and this is when the reporter indicated
that the Hayor said the press could have a copy. The reporter
took a copy, Mr. Lee contacted the Mayor who indicated that there
should not be a press release, Mr. Lee called the reporter and
told him of this and the release was made in spite of the request
that it not be done. When Mr. Lee was told there would be a press
release he telephoned the Mayor to inform him of this and the Mayor
stated that since this is the case the report would have to be
distributed to all Councilmembers and each newspaper.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to publicly announce
that he did not give permission for anyone to take a copy of
the report.
em Turner stated that in reading the report he felt it was
taking a "no growth" position but since there will be an
addendum to the report he will not mention all the things he
had planned to bring up relative to growth. He stated that
it brings some concern to mind relative to applications being
made for "New Town" projects based on the fact that Livermore
has prepared a "no growth" report with respect to air pollution
- until 1990.
Cm Futch stated that he would like to respond to this comment by
saying that in his opinion the committee has analyzed the data
and facts and made conclusions. He cannot understand what Cm
Turner is saying because the conclusions say that if the number
of cars in the valley are doubled the number of emissions will
be doubled, essentially, and based on the best scientific judg-
ment they have come up with what they think the answer will be
and it is not a "no growth" position but rather is a judgment
based on facts, data and analysis.
Cm Turner stated that, first of all, em Futch is a scientist
and Cm Turner is not. To a laYman reading the report, it says
that a solution to the problem would be no growth in the valley
should be allowed until 1990.
C!<1-29-l0
October 7, 1974
(Air Pollution Study)
Cm Futch stated this is true because this is what the analysis of
the data would indicate. The opinion does not come from a philosophy
but rather comes from analysis of the data which should be pointed
out.
~
;'
I em Turner continued to say that the reason he felt disappointed in
the report was because the only suggested solution was to maintain
no growth and the reason he is concerned is because anyone who is
considering development in Livermore (industry) may decide to bypass
it if there isn't to be any growth until 1990. He then brought up
the point that widening I-580 would allow cars to travel through
the valley at 50-55 mph which would help smog conditions because
they presently sit with motors idling in the Dublin eanyon area because
of the congestion and create more and more air pollution. He also
felt that if the report is accepted at face value there may be diffi-
culty in convincing anyone that we need a BART route and that BART
should come to an area in which no growth will take place until 1990.
Cm Miller stated that if a justification for a BART corridor is
to fill the valley so that we are like Los Angeles, it would,
in fact, be better not to have a BART corridor.
Cm Turner stated that in his opinion the destiny of the valley
can be controlled by careful planning and by attacking the prob-
lem head on with employment opportunities, in-valley transit sys-
tem and by insuring that there is mass transportation available
out of the valley, in addition to providing improved road surface
to allow maximum efficiency of automobile anti-pollution systems.
He concluded by saying "let's not be no-growthers and let's not
be no control growthers but prudent planners - let's not be nega-
tive but rather progressive".
Dr. Higgins explained that the committee did have a very difficult
time writing the report to avoid over emphasis or under emphasis
of the problem but the committee does feel, essentially unanimously,
that we cannot view the growth issue as an independent issue. The
point they were really trying to make was that if viewed independently,
then zero growth is somewhat the only alternative if we have the EPA
standards for air quality. The alternatives involve simultaneous
actions such as the BART corridor to replace some of the vehicular
use and to reduce emissions per capita, or through bus service per-
haps a reasonable level of growth could be permitted and still meet
the EPA standards, adding that he was very unhappy to hear that the
commuter bus service is not being used because this was one of the
hopes for allowing development. He stated that if the wording of
the report has been misunderstood then it is an editorial problemi
the intent was that if we take the growth as a separate issue and
let everything else alone, then we have a problem and zero is the
only answer. If we can somehow face our community problems as total
planning, this is what the committee hopes to see achieved.
Cm Miller stated that it is true one doesn't want to take a "no
growth" or an "uncontrolled growth" position but on the other hand
one doesn't want to allow growth until these other questions have
been resolved because if you go ahead in the hopes that they will
be resolved and they aren't then we will never meet federal standards.
The point is, in his opinion, all the other changes in the community,
such as bus transportation, have to take place before you take the
chance of having growth continue and with everyone still living in
a smog area in 1990. We are nowhere near instituting a bus system
and people are not riding that many bicycles and the car is still
essential. If gasoline rationing, for example, should come about
and people don't use their cars and the number of vehicle miles
are reduced then one can talk about something else and it would
make more sense at that time. On page 32 of the report there were
three things listed in which the sources could be reduced and gaso-
line rationing might be one way of doing this. He pointed out that
CM-29-ll
October 7, 1974
(re Air Pollution)
the eity shouldn't take chances with the public's health. We are
in the worst smog area in the Bay Area, even if we stop growing
tomorrow and would barely make the standards by 1990. Not only
does the city of Livermore have an obligation here but so do the
other jurisdictions in the valley, to see that it is not made worse
~i. for everybody, becaus~ only do the people here get sick because
~ of the smog but ~~ the new people who come here not realizing
~~~that they will be subjected to it. The committee has pointed out that
this is what is going to happen if we continue the way we are and we
have to stop growth. There are other alternatives, some of which have
not been explored, but unless these things happen we are not going to
be able to meet the standards by 1990 and federal law says we are
supposed to make it by 1977. Therefore, even with l/3 in buses,
there could only be a 1% growth rate. He felt that the report indi-
cates that the growth and development which has taken place here in
the past is something which cannot continue without affecting people's
health and feels it is the job of the Council to protect the health of
their constituents.
./)
em Turner stated that he agrees but wanted to point out his feelings
and also would hope that this is not a "no growth" pamphlet saying
that the City does not want more industry, commercial, or anything
in this valley.
Cm Miller pointed out that commercial and industrial development in
the City of Livermore would be advantageous because such would help
reduce emissions because people would not go out of the valley to
shop.
Mayor Pritchard thanked Dr. Higgins for speaking to the eouncil and
asked that the Council's thanks be conveyed to the other members of
the committee and would appreciate continuance of the committee's
fine work.
DISCUSSION RE LIVERMORE
GARDENS APARTMENT - RE
SCHOOL FEE WAIVER REQUEST
At the City Council meeting of September 23rd an appeal was filed
by the proposed developer of the Livermore Gardens apartments
(Hirsch/Stern) for a waiver of the requirement that a School District
confirmation be transmitted certifying that schoolroom space would be
available to serve these units. In the absence of such a certifica-
tion from the school the Council denied the appeal and Mr. Hirsch
has asked that the matter be reconsidered so that testimony from
previous minutes and the predecessor of the project could be reviewed
by the Council.
Mr. Robert Hirsch, l5233 Ventura Boulevard, Sherman Oaks, California,
stated that he was before the Council two weeks ago and there was
a unanimous vote against relieving him of the condition of waiver
of the school letter and later in the meeting he had the opportun-
ity to review a motion made at the meeting of March 5, 1973, during
which Mr. Klein spoke to the Council with respect to the project
which was to have been developed by OGO Associates. He stated that
prior to going into the matter of the discussion of the project with
Mr. Klein he would like the Council to be informed of something else
.~----..
that has come up and asked if Mr. Parness would like to explain. (
Mr. Parness stated that in his opinion it deserves reporting to the
Council and commented that Mr. Hirsch, aside from the subject matter
that is before the Council and was the subject of his initial appeal,
has questioned the propriety of an insert in the requirements the
staff had forwarded prior to the issuance of building permits for
this projecti relative to the utility line undergrounding along
East Avenue.
CM-29-l2
October 7, 1974
.~
The Council was not aware that there is a major power line that
runs along East Avenue serving LLL and upon finding that this was
a potential requirement, unbeknownst to him and probably even
his predecessor, it is felt that the cost would be quite high _
something in the neighborhood of $50,000 and would request that
the policy position of the Council be rechecked. Mr. Parness
noted that there is no question about the responsibility with
respect to internal subdivisions; however, the policy with res-
pect to residential properties that abut major streets has
not been determined. The City Attorney has been asked to voice
his view on one critical part of the issue and that is the legal
or statutory right of the City to require this as a condition of
the issuance of building permits.
Mr. Engel replied that at the present time there is neither a statu-
tory nor ordinance authority which would permit the Council to re-
quire such undergrounding.
em Miller stated that he thought an ordinance was being prepared
for this and Mr. Engel replied that an ordinance is in the process
of being prepared under Alternate IV, related to industrial develop-
ment but not with respect to residential development.
It was noted that such has been required in the past and Mr. Engel
stated that he would appreciate being allowed to review the situa-
tions in which this has been required to determine if there was
a specific reason that would differentiate those requirements from
the instant situation.
Mr. Parness commented that previous requirements were done in con-
nection with a subdivision and as far as he can recall it was
always with respect to a subdivision.
Mr. Hirsch stated that his firm was informed that this require-
ment would not apply to them, as recently as two weeks ago, by
Mr. Lee and Mr. Lee stated that he did not make the statement
that it would not apply to this firm. He does recall a discus-
sion where he said that he would have to make a study of the
matter to determine what the situation might be but wouldn't
tell Mr. Hirsch anything because the Council had not reviewed
the matter of undergrounding.
Mr. Hirsch stated that he stands to be corrected and that he was
present during a meeting in which the matter of major street fees
was discussed and the undergrounding was brought up. He was told
that the undergrounding policy was adopted and only for conduit
to be installed in the case of industrial and there was no further
adoption of residential requirements and therefore assumed that
his firm was clear of this issue. When it did surface again, a
week ago, and Associated Professions did inform his firm of this
he naturally was quite concerned because of the cost involved.
C~
It was noted that it has been a policy that new development will
be required to place lines underground and in this particular case
it is one of the conditions listed in the Engineering considerations.
em Tirsell wondered what type of site plan approval the former appli-
cant had received and if a new owner must assume everything that was
agreed upon by the previous developer, if he doesn't agree with some
of these conditions, and the City Attorney commented that this is
something rather hard to deal with inasmuch as there is no statu-
tory or ordinance authority to require it. Apparently, two years
CM-29-l3
October 7, 1974
(Livermore Gardens)
ago, someone felt there was such authority and it was placed in the
condition of approval.
Cm Futch wondered about the time constraint and if it is necessary
to take action tonight and Mr. Hirsch stated that he needs to know
his development agreement, get it set and pick up a building permit.
He stated that he attended a March 4th meeting during which the
undergrounding of utilities was discussed and there was no policy
regarding undergrounding and Mr. Hirsch's property. He made an
appeal that they not have to absorb the share of the undergrounding
or of the major street fee.
Cm Futch asked if the City Attorney, legally, has sufficient time
to look into this and Mr. Engel replied that legally his position
is not going to change. This has been discussed over a matter of
several months and it is his feeling that there is no statutory or
ordinance authority which would permit this Council to impose under-
grounding as a condition on this development.
The eouncil concluded that it would appear they would have to abandon
the idea of requiring undergrounding in this case.
Cm Miller stated that the thing that is lacking in this instance is
the ordinance that should have imposed this requirement, and the
City should provide an ordinance which imposes this condition on
residential property on the same grounds it is imposed on industrial
property. An 9rdinance should be prepared which would layout
the findings the eouncil needs to make and that such an ordinance
should be adopted immediately.
Cm Tirsell stated that this means the City has been working on
the industrial property underground fees and this will be a large
development that will not have the pull boxes or conduits underground
and to do it the City will have to "pick up the tabs".
Mr. Engel explained that the Council needs some sort of authority
to pass an ordinance of this nature and the legal staff will do
its best to come up with a defensible ordinance. if this is the
direction to them, which affects individual residential parcels.
Cm Miller stated that there is an easy argument on public safety
when you have high power lines above the area in which people are
passing and especially a high density apartment project and the
matter is pretty obvious even on the face of it.
Mr. Hirsch asked if his understanding is correct in that the City
staff can present the development agreement to him without this
requirement included so that his firm may agree to it, sign it,
post the fees required and pick up their building permit?
Mayor Pritchard stated that as he understands it, Mr. Hirsch is
saying that the City staff has delayed Mr. Hirsch's firm from obtain-
ing the development agreement and Mr. Lee interjected that the
development agreement is not in its final formi there are other
matters unresolved and they are before the Council this evening.
Mr. Parness stated that the matter was not held up by the staff;
it was held in abeyance for at least a couple of months due to
the inactivity on the part of the applicant.
Mr. Hirsch stated that he has been delayed because he is waiting
for the development agreement so that he will know the final dollar
amount and all the conditions relative to the property.
The eouncil indicated that undergrounding will not be a part of
the requirements.
eM-29-l4
October 7, 1974
(Livermore Gardens)
em Miller pointed out that this does not mean there will not be
a statutory authority next week or within 30 days or whatever.
Mr. Lee stated that Mr. Hirsch will be presented with an agree-
~ ment without the undergrounding requirements.
,
\ Mr. Hirsch asked the City Attorney that if, later, an ordinance
is passed, will his development agreement be affected and would
such an ordinance be retroactive and the City Attorney stated
that if Mr. Hirsch has an agreement he will be able to rely on
the agreement and the ordinance would not be retroactive.
Cm Miller asked if the conditions of the agreement can state that
whatever fees are in effect at the time the building permit is
taken out will apply and the City Attorney replied that if such
is phrased in these terms it would be acceptable. Cm Miller
stated that many of our agreements have this wording and would
presume that this agreement would have this type of wording.
The City Attorney stated that as a matter of legal policy he
would like to caveat - that this is an open type of thing that
has a certain element of unfairness to an application as it
comes before the Council because any number of additional fees
could be passed and not really within the contemplation of the
applicant when signing the agreement.
Mr. Musso indicated that, normally, the fees are established at
the time the building permit is taken out and that the develop-
ment agreement deals with major public works facilities involved
in the project and the fees do not necessarily have to be a part
of the agreement.
Mr. Lee explained that in the agreement all the fees are spelled
out but not necessarily the amount of the fees - each year in
January or February these fees are adjusted and if there is an
agreement now but a building permit is not taken out until next
March, the fees effective in March would apply.
Mr. Hirsch stated that as a matter of public record he would
have to say that he really doesn't want to find any surprises
because as stated at the last meeting, they are already faced
with very large eity fees, possibly a very substantial school
fee and this amount was a complete surprise. He added that he
absolutely cannot face another $50,000. He would like to point
out that if they are faced with $50,000 for one reason or another
which they have not anticipated, this would create a great hardship
and he feels that it is not the intent of the eity eouncil to give
his firm this type of treatment. Somewhere there has to be a
cut-off point and it should be right now when the development
agreement is prepared.
Mayor Pritchard commented that the records will show that Mr.
Lee has said the undergrounding will not appear in the agreementi
however, there should be some assurance from the applicant at
this time that the fees will be paid soon because if the appli-
cant waits until next March there will be an increase of fees.
~\
(
~/
Mr. Hirsch indicated that they intend to pick up their building
permit within the next 30 days and would anticipate that there
will not be any additional fees that he is not aware of.
em Miller stated that he does not like to hear the statement
that undergrounding for residential was mentioned because it
was mentioned that the City should not amend the residential
policy because the situation was different for industrial than
residential, without saying that this is what the final situa-
tion would be.
CM-29-l5
October 7, 1974
(Livermore Gardens)
Mr. Hirsch stated that the action speaks for itself. It was referred
to a committee, the vote of the Council was relating to industrial and
there was not vote a vote on the residential.
em Miller stated that the policy in the past was to require underground-
ing and was so stated, for residential, and that nothing was done about
it was no proof that it would be repeated and the point is that the
City does not like surprises either and one of the surprises he is
beginning to resent very much is the promise of Mr. Hirsch's predeces-
sor with respect to paying a school fee and now Mr. Hirsch and his
partners do'!not want to pay the fee.
AT THIS TIME IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THE MATTER OF THE UNDERGROUNDING
HAS BEEN CONeLUDED AND THERE WILL BE DISeUSSION REGARDING THE APPEAL
THAT THE CITY eOUNCIL WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT OF THE LETTER FROM
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT CERTIFYING THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE HOUSING AVAILABLE.
em Turner stated that it is his understanding that the City Council
does not have the authority to waive a school certification letter
or the fees to the School District1 this is decided by the eleced
body of the School District - the Boardi therefore he feels the
Council was never in a position to offer Mr. Hirsch relief in this
respect.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that the City does not require school
fees - this comes from the School District and the only thing re-
quired by the eity is the letter of certification.
Mr. Hirsch explained that he has retained an attorney who has done
considerable research on the matter and who had wanted to attend
this meeting. Mr. Hirsch stated that he did not want his attorney
to come to the meeting because he does not want to have to sue
the eity. He is going to be a permanent part of the community
for many years because they retain ownership in their apartments
and manage them. He then explained the history of their taking
over the proposal for the OGO development noting that they were
never partners with OGO but that OGO will receive money back for
fees they have already paid towards the project. One of the vari-
ous things they were not informed about when taking over the project-
was the school fee promise made on March 5, 1973. He stated that
the ordinance adopted November 8, 1971, requires a statement from
the School District relative to school facility availability but
pointed out that it stipulates "relating to subdivisions" and that
this project is not a subdivision and they are not required to
comply with it. The City is requiring that they comply by insist-
ing that a clearance letter be obtained from the School District
and is using this as a condition for releasing the building permit.
The ordinance does not apply to their development and he has been
advised of this by the City Attorney-and Mr. Engel has discussed
this with them and also with the Assistant City Attorney, Miss
Whittaker, and feels the Council is aware of their position on
the subject. He stated that he would rather not have to sue the
City, the City will not derive any money from the issue, and it
is trying to enforce a requirement which is not applicable to their
particular piece of property. He pointed out that if he were to
build on the piece of property adjacent to his the City would not
enforce the requirement and the only reason he is being asked to pay
a fee is because someone else promised to pay a fee.
.--~
Mayor Pritchard read portions of a memorandum written by the City
Attorney on July 9, 1973, which indicates that a representative
of HUD stated there was an application pending with them as jointly
filed by OGO Associates and another firm (Goldrich/Kest/Kirsch & Stern)
and asked Mr. Hirsch if the latter is his firm and Mr. Hirsch stated
it is but they did not file a joint application. They later took
over OGO's interests but the process with HUD is the requirement of
25-30 clearance for any new sponsor and which they had to receive
before OGO could withdraw, and the July date may have been the date
upon which his firm came into the project.
CM-29-l6
October 7, 1974
(Livermore Gardens)
em Miller stated that Mr. Hirsch mentioned that if he had bought the
adjacent property this condition would not apply and Cm Miller
pointed out that if Mr. Hirsch had purchased the adjacent prop-
erty he would not have been allowed development at all because
of the City's existing moratorium ordinance which went into
effect at essentially the same time - nothing larger than a
4-plex would have been allowed. With the exception of the OGO
development there has not been allowed any type of mass develop-
ment. One of the major problems facing the City at the time OGO
applied, was the overcrowded schools and Mr. Klein told the City
that the school problem would be taken care of and would be will-
ing to pay $800/unit for 96 units. They were willing to pay the
fee for the schools so that the students created by the project
would receive housing and not crowd anybody else. If one reads
the minutes the assumption is quite clear - that the school prob-
lem would be accepted and somewhere in the discussion Mayor Taylor
pointed out that this situation of the 96 or 97 apartments would
be different because it is the first apartment complex in the City
which has reached an agreement with the School District and intends
to pay all City fees. Because of these promises by Mr. Klein
this particular unit was exempted from the other multiple pro-
visions of the moratorium because they could pay fees nobody
else could pay and also because it was a low income housing
project proposal. Cm Miller stated that in his opinion the City
is not imposing a subdivision ordinance upon Mr. Hirsch's firm
and this is not the issue. The issue is that Mr. Hirsch's predeces-
sor, Mr. Klein, agreed to pay a school fee and feels they are now
"welching" on it.
Mr. Hirsch indicated that he doesn't feel he is "welching" because
it was something he wasn't aware of and if he had been aware of
it he would not be before the Council because they would not have
taken over the project.
em Miller stated that if OGO failed to disclose the conditions
they agreed to, perhaps Mr. Hirsch has a cause of action against
OGO but this is not the problem of the School District or the City.
He added that he feel's the attitude of their firm is "never mind
the school children by the project and never mind the other school
children in the area and never mind the promises made before".
Mr. Hirsch stated that no matter what he says, the Council will
vote as they see fit and would suggest that the eity Attorney be
consulted as to whether or not the City can legally impose the
fees against this particular project.
Cm Miller stated that nobody likes to get involved in a law suit
but the City and School District cannot take an increase in the
number of children lightly either, and would suggest that a member
of the City Council go to the School District with Mr. Hirsch to
ask consideration of a reduction of the $76,800 fee to be based
on the estimated number of children coming from an apartment complex
because this, indeed, is not the same a single family dwelling units
with the same number of children estimated per unit. This should
reduce the fee, considerably, and may be a workable compromise.
(......
~--
Mr. Hirsch stated that he has already been to the School District
with this very suggestion and got nowhere, and subsequently re-
ceived a letter from the School District indicating that they
would not change their policy. He stated that he will discuss
this issue with his attorney and report back to Mr. Parness
within the next few days as to the maximum amount they would be
willing to pay as a donation to the School District and if the
amount is considered acceptable he would then like Mr. Engel to
advise whether or not this would release him, legally, from the
requirement.
CM-29-l7
October 7, 1974
(Livermore Gardens)
Mr. Hirsch asked if the Council will hold him to the requirement
if the donation amount proposed by his firm is not resolved.
Mayor Pritchard explained that, again, this is getting back to the
letter required from the School District.
Cm Miller stated that he believes what Mr. Hirsch is saying is if
it would be alright to go ahead with his development agreement if
he is not here next week and the School District fee has not been
worked out and em Miller added that he feels the problem should be
resolved prior to agreeing on a development permit, and hopefully
this whole thing can be resolved within a week.
ON MOTION OF eM MILLER, SEeONDED BY eM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MATTER WAS CONTINUED TO NEXT WEEK.
REPORT RE FIRE
STATION 1 LOCATION
The City Manager reported that the City Attorney has indicated
that park property could be used for the purpose of housing a
fire station upon the affirmative vote of at least 4 members
of the City Council and would urge that a resolution be adopted
approving the use of a parcel of the Robert Livermore park site
for this purpose.
Cm Turner commented that to his knowledge the LARPD Board has never
been contacted about this proposal and have not had the opportunity
to express their feelings.
The City Attorney advised that the matter must be set for public
hearing prior to discussion.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MATTER WAS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 12th.
REPORT RE FIRE
STATION ARCHITECT
The City Manager reported that the American Institute of Architects
was asked to submit a listing of qualified firms from several Bay
Area jurisdictions for design for the new fire station. Fifteen
firms submitted written information, six of which received oral
interviews. FOllowing careful consideration and reference checks
it is the unanimous opinion of the panel who conducted the interview
(em Turner, the Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Chief, and the City Manager)
that the best design service could be obtained by using two firms
joined in contractual association. These firms are Associated Pro-
fessions of Livermore and WID. W. Headley, Jr., of Campbell. It is
recommended that the City eouncil endorse this association and in-
struct that the necessary contract documents be perpared.
Cm Turner commented that he was present during the interviews and
feels that Randy Schlientz was also a highly qualified applicant.
He stated that there was discussion regarding retaining firms to
work jointly and that he indicated he would think about it. He
has given the matter thought and feels that one firm can do the
job adequately and that those interviewed were equally qualified.
He stated that he feels the job should be given to someone in the
valley and would recommend that Randy Schlientz's services be
retained with the full knowledge that he will do an outstanding job.
He did the work for Fire Station .2 and has done other projects and
that all of these seem to be quite satisfactory.
CM-29-l8
October 7, 1974
(Fire Station Design)
Mayor Pritchard stated that on large projects it would appear to
be logical to ask for two firms to join together but wondered if
these firms came to the City as a joint venture and Mr. Parness
replied that they did not. Those interviewed were asked if they
would object to working jointly with another firm if this would
be considered in the best interest of the City and there were
no adamant objections to this suggestion.
Cm Futch asked which firm was considered to be most qualified,
from a technical standpoint, singularly, and Mr. Parness stated
that it was his understanding that Cm Turner concurred with the
suggestion to retain associated firms. It was concluded that
either one of the firms selected could do an adequate job. He
stated that from a technical standpoint, Mr. Headley has a
vast background in this particular type of structure and his
clients have been very complimentary.
em Futch stated that he feels the Council has heard that the
magnitude of the project is not sufficient to warrant a joint
effort of two firms. He was not sure if that opinion would stand
if one was awarded the project with the suggestion that it would
be in consultation with the other firm. He asked Mr. Schlientz
to respond to this suggestion.
Randy Schlientz thanked Cm Futch for being concerned and stated
that his firm was willing to work under whatever conditions the
Council chooses. He felt personally that with the size of the
project, a joint venture is a little difficult to manage in that
you have to divide the responsibilities between two firms. He felt
it would be advisable to have one architect who is responsible to
the Council, and they would be willing to work in consultation with
any firm the Council would choose.
CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE CITY HIRE ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS TO BE THE
ARCHITECT FOR THE FIRE STATION, USING THE OTHER FIRM AS A CONSULT-
ANT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
('
I
Cm Miller stated that he would oppose the motion with vigor because
Associated Professions has been active in the City of Livermore for
many years and there have been a number of curious mistakes made by
this firm, recalling the pouring of concrete pads in violation of
the plans and maps and the uprooting of oak trees in violation of
a permit. Cm Miller stated that mistakes like this can only be a
result of either incompetency or deliberate intent and he has been
asked many times after having observed mistakes of this sort why
the City continues to deal with a firm that makes mistakes, which
is very hard to answer. Whether a firm is local or not, one should
not deal with a firm that makes this kind of mistake, and whether
they be local or not should have no relevance whatsoever. What
one should look for is a firm that does not make these kind of mis-
takes, and in his view, of the firms recommended, it is clear that
Mr. Headley has had experience in building fire stations and is
obviously the best qualified, and the Council should go with Mr.
Headley's firm and the City should not be involved in any way, form,
shape or size with Associated Professions. He felt that the
motion would better read to deal with Mr. Wm Headly as the single
architectural firm as it is not necessary to have somebody local.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he, too, would oppose the motion, but
not for the same reason, but because he feels if you are going to
hire an architectural firm, then that firm would best be in a position
to decide when and where they might need consultation and not the
Council, and he would not impose that upon the contract.
CM-29-l9
October 7, 1974
(Fire Station Design)
em Tirsell was asked to state her op1.n1.on, and she pointed out that
all things being equal after an interview system, the Associated Pro-
fessions had as many recommendations as any of the other firms. This
city does not have many architectural firms, and all things being equal,
she felt it a good thing to grant the contract to a local firm, how-
ever the City would be limiting itself to one architect for all future
City buildings. This is the primary reason for interviews, and she
would, therefore, vote for the motion because she felt it to be a
very qualified firm, and her second consideration is the fact that it
is local.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED 3-2 WITH eM MILLER AND
MAYOR PRITCHARD DISSENTING.
RECESS
After a short recess, the meeting resumed with all members of the
Council present.
REPORT RE HOLIDAY
DECORATIONS FUNDING
Mayor Pritchard stated that the Council agreed to funding the holiday
decorations for the coming season for the last time, and a question
was recently posed as to the legality of the eity paying the cost of
these decorations if some form of financial collection could be made,
so that any discussion would have to be for anything beyond this year
Mayor Pritchard suggested that Cm Tirsell start the discussion because
she had made the motion to continue funding for one more year and then
discontinue the funding.
Cm Tirsell stated that when she made the motion, it did not have to
do with a problem of holiday decorations but rather she voted for a
Council position not to give funds to organizations which were not
officially committees of the City, but she felt that policy had been
rescinded by Council action, and did not feel it was the best policy
for the City or the right way to be doing in the future. As for in-
stance, the decorations cannot be lighted due to energy conservation;
uniform decorations are not to her liking, and she would prefer that
the businesses take on this obligation as they do for the rodeo parade.
Because it is a three-year contract that the Chamber of Commerce wants
to have signed at this time, she would vote favorably for that, but
she has advised the Chamber that at the end of three years she would
expect that the obligation be removed from the City and assumed by
them and that their members would have a volunteer system.
Gene Morgan, President of the Chamber of Commerce was asked if the
contract being proposed included the current year, and he stated that
it did, and the reason for the three year contract was the fact that
the present decorations are at the end of the term and the only way to
secure new decorations is to sign a three-year contract, and the cost
would be pro-rated over the three year term.
Cm Futch stated he has always felt that the holiday season is one
that everyone benefited from, and he had no reason for not wanting to
continue his support as he felt it was a worthwhile use of public funds.
Cm Miller asked the City Attorney if was legal for the City to expend
public funds to promote a commercial day on say the 3rd of March, and
and Mr. Engel advised that it would be permissible under the "promo-
tion section" to use up to 5% of the general fund for promotion, and
eM-29-20
October 7, 1974
(Holiday Decorations)
if the eouncil determined that the 3rd of March was an appropriate day
to hold such a promotion, it would be fine.
em Miller questioned further if it would be permissible for solely
commercial purposes - to advertise for local merchants, and Mr. Engel
stated that if the purpose is also to promote the City, he would say
that it would be permissible, but if it were only for the promotion
of business in the downtown area without any related benefits to the
City, he would possibly have to say no, but if it were a promotion for
the City of Livermore, and incidentally, in that process you are pro-
moting downtown business, he would then say yes.
Cm Miller went on to say that em Futch and Cm Tirsell have indicated
that Christmas is a secular holiday because any of the cases listed
in the considerations anything tied to a religious aspect, which might
otherwise be permitted, is now prohibited because of the religious tie.
He felt most ehristians would be horrified to have someone state that
one of the two most important days of their church calendar year is a
secular holiday in order to justify the expenditure of public funds.
The fact that there is a heavy commercial emphasis that goes on at this
time period does not seem to him to justify the expenditure of public
funds. He felt that Santa Claus is definitely a religious tie, and
he would prefer the concept proposed by Cm Tirsell of having individual-
ized decorations which could be done for much less money. He felt it
is a constitutional issue and is the expenditure of money for a religioul
purpose, and he could not understand how this could possibly be called
a secular holiday. em Miller also indicated his disappointment in
the Council's position to deviate from the policy of funding other than
official City committees.
em Turner stated he felt very comfortable with voting to continue the
funding for perhaps a different reason, but it was his understanding
that the businessmen imposed a lO% tax upon themselves for the sole
purpose of providing holiday decorations which benefits the entire
City.
Mayor Pritchard stated he agreed with the City Attorney's op1.n1.on,
and the Council can say that it is secular and vote the funds for that
use, but he would be violating his conscience, so either way he votes
he would be violating his conscience on these two matters: 1) as a
Christian he would have to find, contrary to his conscience, that
Christmas was a secular holiday and had no significance to him as a
Christian, and his conscience would not allow him to do that as he
feels that this holiday has for too long a time gotten away from the
Christian spirit; 2) If he did call it a religious holiday he would have
to abide by the City Attorney's opinion once again and say he could not
vote public funds for that because it would be a violation of the
separation of church and state doctrine. He could only vote against
providing the funds for Christmas decorations for these two reasons.
CM FUTCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE FUNDING FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD.
em Miller stated that as a point of order the Council must determine
that the decorations are secular in nature before the motion is made,
and Mr. Engel stated that the point is well taken.
r~'
em Futch stated he would have to disagree with the eity Attorney as
it would be unrealistic to say there is not some aspect of all the
factors involved.
Mr. Engel stated he did not wish to debate the philosophy, but the
cases are clear that ehristmas is essentially a religious holiday,
and if the Council wished to put up religious decorations as such,
then, in his opinion it would be a violation of the doctrine of sepa-
ration of church and state, because in addition it is a holiday
CM-29-2l
October 7, 1974
(Holiday Decorations)
shared by all Americans. It is secular in nature and if the eouncil
wishes to recognize that aspect of it and put up decorations that are
not offensive to others, it is a permissible expenditure.
Mr. Morgan stated that since the decorations have not yet been man-
ufactured, they would not be religious in nature, he assured them.
CM FUTCH WAS ASKED TO RESTATE THE MOTION WHICH WAS TO APPROVE FUNDING
OF THE HOLIDAY DECORATIONS FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD; MOTION WAS SEeONDED
BY CM TURNER. Cm Futch pointed out that he had specified holiday de-
corations and not religious decorations.
Cm Miller stated that the point raised was not that the holiday has
to be declared secular, it is the decorations that have to be declared
secular.
em Turner again asked the City Attorney to say something about the
motion, and Mr. Engel stated that he did not want to debate the issue
of religiousity of the holiday - there is a holiday season and the
decorations will be appropriate to the season and non-religious in
nature in order to avoid the constitutional prohibition.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED 3-2, CM MILLER AND MAYOR
PRITCHARD DISSENTING.
MAYOR PRITCHARD WAS EXCUSED FROM THE MEETING AT THIS TIME AND THE
CHAIR WAS ASSUMED BY MAYOR PRO TEMPORE FUTCH.
REPORT RE SO. PACIFIe
INDUSTRIAL PARK ASSESS-
MENT DISTRICT
This matter was continued from the meeting of September 23 so that more
information could be provided on some of the technical aspects of the
assessment district law. A report was submitted by the Bond Counsel,
Sturgis, Den-Dulk, Douglass & Anderson, explaining the reasons for
using the 19l5 Act bonds.
Mr. Engel remarked that the explanation as submitted by the Bond Coun-
sel was completei the use of the 19l5 Act bonds is perfectly legal
and permissible, and it is simply a policy of whether or not the Coun-
cil wishes to establish the assessment district in this manner. -
Mr. Parness commented that the Bond Counsel has suggested that one
additional surety be used which he had not heard of prior to this time,
which is that a special default fund be established which would
contain approximately 30% of the annual bond servicing needs per year
and could be used by the City in the event of any default. This
is a relatively new item, and he could not see how any additional
protection could be afforded over those two major items in addition
to the fact that there is a singular type of assessee who is very
reputable.
em Miller asked if it is possible two have both items involved in the
contract, i.e. that there be the surety of $lOO,OOO, plus the promise
of SP to pay, by contract.
Mr. Parness stated that the special bond will be a part of the dis~
trict proceedings.
\
\
I
Mr. Engel was asked if both could be included, and he replied that
he saw no objection to that. As a part of the assessment district
proceeding, the City can pick up the sinking fund to protect it and
at the same time enter into a contractual arrangement with SP whereby
they will indemnify the City.
CM-29-22
October 7, 1974
(re Assess. Dist. - SP)
em Miller stated he was concerned about this as he felt it was wrong
in principle for the eity to provide assessment districts for private
purposesi it is pushing to a borderline case because of the industrial
aspects involved which we need, so he should vote no, but will vote
,-- for it with reluctance.
CM TIRSELL MOVED TO AUTHORIZE FILING OF THE NECESSARY PAPERS FOR THE
USE OF AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT UNDER THE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 19l5, TO-
GETHER WITH AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE AND A SEPARATE CONTRACTUAL RELATION-
SHIP WITH SP, INDEMNIFYING THE CITY: MOTION WAS SECONDED BY eM TURNER
AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
REPORT RE SMOG
ALERT INFORMATION
The City Manager prepared a report regarding dissemination of smog
alert information and Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to con-
tinue the matter so that another proposal might be discussed later.
One of the suggestions mentioned was a recording device to be in-
stalled, possibly in City Hall, to give daily meteorological in-
formantion upon dialing a certain telephone number and the cost
would be $35 for a line installation and $55 for the device giving
the information and a monthly charge of $l5.40 for the line and
$16.25 for the device.
Cm Futch commented that it appears the monthly cost is very ex-
cessive. He stated that it costs about $100-$125 a year to have
such a device connected to your home phone and wondered why thd
cost is so high for the City to do something like this.
Mr. Parness stated that he isn't sure but possibly he was given
a wrong figure for the monthly charges. He stated that if the
figures are correct it would be less expensive to have the device
removed during the non-smog season.
Cm Miller stated that one can purchase a device for the $l25 men-
tioned by em Futch and a jack can be put in by the telephone company
and there would be a monthly charge for using the line.
CM TIRSELL MOVED TO TABLE THE MATTER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL
OF PARCEL MAPS 1132,
ll33 & ll34 (Gillice)
Mr. Lee reported that Mr. Gillice has dedicated the arroyo lands with
a provision that allows him to sell parcels to the adjacent lot own-
ers and the Council has already established a policy as to how they
should be transferred. For each one of the parcel maps all Mr. Gillice
needs to show the City is evidence of agreements with the adjacent
lot owners that he has an agreement to sell to them. It is recom-
mended that the City Council approve the maps, conditionally, and
that they be placed in escrow. At such time as the title company
has the agreements for sale and the deeds ready for filing that both
be filed simultaneously. In addition he would recommend that the
Council approve the execution of the deeds for the parcels and place
them in escrow also through the title company for proper transfer.
em Futch asked if all the lots conform and Mr. Lee indicated
that they do.
CM-29-23
October 7, 1974
(re Gillice Tract Maps)
em Miller stated that the report from Mr. Lee indicates that there
has been an understanding reached with Mr. Madis and in view of the
City's experience with Mr. Madis recently, there is no such thing
as an understanding with him unless it is locked up in writing.
It seems that absolutely nothing should be done with respect to
approving these parcel maps until everything is down on a piece of
paper and signed by him and that the City Attorney's office could
guarantee that this is locked up.
Mr. Lee stated that he would suggest the City Attorney prepare a
letter of transmittal and approval to the title company giving
instructions as to what conditions a transfer can be made.
Cm Miller stated that he feels there should be something signed by
Mr. Madis also - there should be a document that spells out exactly
what everyone is supposed to do.
Mr. Engel felt it would be possible to take the conditions and place
them in escrow instructions and have the escrow instructions executed
by Mr. Madis and by the City. In this case the City would require
instructions executed by both parties and the title company would
operate only on the basis of those instructions.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE eITY eOUNCIL TRANSFER THE PARCELS ACCORDING
TO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE NEeESSARY DOCUMENTS TO PROTECT THE CITY,
SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Lee stated that he would like to mention there is a property
owner adjacent to the arroyo lands to the east of the entry off of
College Avenue. They have a very narrow side yard and have been
caring for the property adjacent to their house and have asked that
the City sell them a small portion of land so that they will have
an acceptable lot. He stated that he would suggest referring this
matter to LARPD since they will be maintaining the area to see if
it would adversly constrict access to the arroyo lands area from
College Avenue and ask that a report from them be submitted to the
Council for consideration.
em Miller stated that in his opinion it would be very unwise to sell
any portion of this land at this time because most of the property
is presently in dispute and the City may not have it to sell.
REPORT RE RS DIST.
REGULATIONS
The Planning Director reported that the Planning Commission did
consider the referral from the Council regarding the RS Zoning
District and reaffirmed its original recommendation for 25 ft.
rear yards.
Cm Futch mentioned that the Planning Commission pointed out that
in the RS-5 Zoning District a greater than 25 ft. rear yard would
mean the maximum square footage would be less than that allowed
in accordance with the minimum allowable coverage. If the Council
adoptes a greater setback this will determine the coverage of the
building.
em Miller stated that this is a good point but the original Council
motion was that RS-5 would be 30 ft. and the others would be average
25 ft. and minimum 25 ft. and mentioned the formula which would be
applied and em Futch stated that he feels the formula is too complex.
He pointed out that a simple setback results in variations and if a
complex formula is used there will really be confusion in setbacks.
CM-29-24
October 7, 1974
(RS Dist. Regulations)
em Tirsell stated that she feels the formula application is not
going to work and that using the coverage, setback and side yards
is satisfactory for RS-5 without applying a formula.
/- em Miller stated that nobody has to use the formula if they don't
want to - they can use a direct setback.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE eOUNCIL DIREeT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE
AMENDMENTS TO THE RS ORDINANCE AS PER ORIGINAL COUNCIL APPROVAL,
SECONDED BY eM TURNER.
Mr. Musso stated that in his op1.n1.on the m1n1.mum lO ft., lS ft.,
or whatever it is for sideyards is satisfactory for sideyards and
is adequate for rear yards and the other issue is whether or not
the formula of this type is easy to administer and certainly it
can be done but this would be difficult. Even now, using the
averaging, each one has to be looked at separately and studied
in depth.
Cm Tirsell stated that she wouldn't object as long as there is
clearly a choice between using the formula or the specified setback.
Cm Futch stated that he feels the recommendation from the Planning
Commission is agreeable. Their recommendation would be simple to
apply, easy to enforce, and would not be too restrictive.
em Turner stated that he doesn't like the lO ft. minimum because
this is not very far apart and that a 10 ft. rear yard really
isn't adequate and em Futch pointed out that those are already
lots of record and this wouldn't apply. It will be 25 ft. minimum,
except for those lots of record.
em Tirsell stated that she feels the Council should be mainly
concerned with the RS-5 lots because the developer will not be
willing to put in one more inch of utility lines or driveway
or sidewalks than necessary and these are the remaining lots.
One advantage of what the eouncil has proposed is that it almost
assures that on those small parcels which are l/5 of an acre, there
will be smaller homes built because you cannot put big two-story
houses on these lots. The problem has been in many areas that there
are small lots with the maximum size house which result in small
lots grouped together with big imposing houses on them and living
too close together. She stated that if the City guarantees a 25
ft. backyard or 30 ft. with a 25 ft. average in the RS-5, there
will be a generous back yard and this would guarantee the size
of house.
em Futch stated he agrees with the philosophy but still feels it
should be handled under coverage rather than setback and em Tirsell
remarked that experience shows that developers build the maximum
floor coverage allowed and if a certain back yard amount is required
it will determine the size of house allowed.
Cm Futch felt it would be better to determine size of the house
by coverage and em Tirsell stated this may be true but such a
mechanism is not available in the RS-5 District yet, and Cm
Miller agreed that this would be a good way of doing it and
suggested that this be brought up for the Planning Commission's
pUblic hearing.
em Tirsell stated that she would be interested in what the Planning
Commission recommends for coverage. In her opinion the coverage,
plus the setback, guarantees a moderate priced, smaller sized house
and would be comfortable with this for the RS-5 area.
Cm Miller stated that everyone is concerned about the formula and
that it is not that difficult and illustrated it on the blackboard.
CM-29-25
October 7, 1974
(RS Dist. Regulations)
Cm Futch stated that he also works with numbers and this isn't some-
thing he can't understandi however, in trying to explain it to other
people who come in and trying to get things straightened out if mis-
takes are made in setbacks in applying the formula he feels it is
too complex to use.
(\
I
CM MILLER REPEATED THAT THE MOTION IS TO DIREeT THE STAFF TO PREPARE
THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PER THE COUNCIL'S ORIGINAL VOTE WHICH WAS
FOR RS-4 AND ABOVE, AN AVERAGE OF 35 FT., MINIMUM 25 FT: OR AT THE
OPTION OF THE DEVELOPER 7/4 x LIVING SPACE OF THE HOUSE WITH A MINI-
MUM OF 25 FT: AND FOR RS-5 A MINIMUM BACKYARD SETBACK OF 30 FT.
AVERAGE, MINIMUM 25 FT.
eM TURNER AMENDED THE MOTION THAT THE FORMULA NOT BE CONSIDERED BUT
RATHER TO CONTINUE USING THE STANDARD PROCEDURE PRESENTLY BEING USED
BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED 3-l
(Cm Miller dissenting) .
THE MAIN MOTION NOW READS: FOR RS-5, AVERAGE 30 FT., MINIMUM 25 FT.i
FOR RS-4 AND OTHERS, AVERAGE 35 FT., MINIMUM 25 FT.
CM Futch stated that he will oppose the motion because he agrees
with the Planning Commission recommendations.
THE MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Futch dissenting).
COUNCIL REFERRAL RE
l4th GEN. PLAN AMEND.
Mr. Musso explained that the General Plan amendment (l4th) was
referred back to the Planning Commission because the Council
previously changed the proposed land use at the corner of East
Avenue and Vasco Road from multiple residential to industrial.
The Planning eommission reaffirmed its original position to designate
the land use from Urban Low to Multiple Low (8 d.u./ac.), listing
specific findings having to do with the separation of this area
from the other industrial area by streets, inconsistency with adjaw
cent land use, the incompatibility of this use in a residential
area and setting a precedent for industrial next to the OGO property
who might later wish to develop industrial. Also, if it is kept
residential the channel development could be consistent.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DESIGNATE THE LAND TO INDUSTRIAL USE BASED ON
PREVIOUS COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEETING DISCUSSION, SECONDED BY
CM MILLER.
em Futch stated that, again, he would have to disagree because the
Council is continuously overriding the Planning Commission recom-
mendations.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would disagree also but would vote i~/ ~
favor of the motionA~acilitate Council business~~~~
.~ ~ ~. M-/o/,~
em Turner stated that he would like to go on record as saying that
it is not true the Council always opposes what the Planning Commis-
sion recommends and em Futch indicated that it has on the last
two items this evening.
Mr. Musso explained that in conjunction with the amendment there is
an EIR report that should be certified and in it is a resolution
including adoption of the General Plan and certification to the EIR.
AT THIS TIME THE COUNeIL VOTED 3-l IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WITH CM.
FUTCH DISSENTING. (Mayor Pritchard absent)
CM-29-26
October 7, 1974
CM MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION REGARDING THE ENVIRON-
MENTAL IMPACT REPORT, SEeONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
.---
RESOLUTION NO. l58-74
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE INDUSTRIAL ELEMENTS
AND LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS OF THE
GENERAL PLAN OF THE eITY OF LIVERMORE.
DISCUSSION RE
SPECIFIC PLAN PROGRAM
There was brief discussion regarding the schedule of Specific Plans
with respect to the General Plan and Cm Miller mentioned that there
should be a change on the map to indicate that an area on East Avenue
should be industrial rather than residential, and Mr. Musso explained
that the wording would be changed in the text.
Cm Turner stated that he would like the records to show that the
scheduling for the Specific Plans are very important and if there
is to be any deviation from the schedule the Council would appreciate
an explanation as to why there is a change.
PLANNING eOMMISSION
MINUTES OF 9/24
The minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting of September 24th
were noted for filing.
REPORT RE POLICE-LIBRARY
LIGHTS FOR PARKING LOT
The Public Works Director reported that the matter of the parking
lot lights for the Police Department and Library were referred to
the Design Review Committee who recommended that the lighting as
proposed by the Director of Public Works be approved with a color
on the poles to compliment the color of the fixturesi that the
height above the parking lot grade not exceed 25 feeti and that
the color of the light be uniform and white.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE LIGHT STRUCTURES BE APPROVED BUT WITH
THE HEIGHT THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
FOR NOT TO ExeEED 25 FT.
Cm Turner stated that he would oppose the motion because he feels
lights mounted on the police building would light the parking lot.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting and Mayor Pritchard absent).
REPORT RE ZOo ORD. FEES
Mr. Musso reported that over the past years we have had occasion
to refund fees for various reasons. There have also been times
people have applied for permits they did not need or withdrew appli-
cations.
CM-29-27
October 7, 1974
(re ZOo ORD. FEES)
He stated that the Planning Department has been giving refunds for
these types of things and would like to put into the ordinance what
procedure is followed. He added that there is also the matter of
a variance required due to staff error which should be discussed.
The fee is $40 for a variance application and is a rather large
fee.
~,
. )
./
em Turner stated that he has spoken with Mr. Musso relative to this
matter and was informed that there are only two or three errors made
during a calendar year - when it is busy. He would suggest submitting
a report on any automatic variance with reasons why a variance is
given, when staff error is involved, and if there are many then a
different suggestion can be considered.
em Miller stated that a mistake by the staff does not justify a
violation of the ordinance in his opinion. If the ordinance is
violated, the fact that the staff approved something by error is
not a justification for granting a variance. He pointed out that
there has been a court case, essentially to this point, which said
that the project could not go through automatically and he stated
that he does not believe the City should grant variances when our
ordinances are violated and the point is, everyone must be more
careful.
Cm Tirsell stated that she doesn't know the magnitude of variances
that may be required and certainly does not want to be confronted
by people wanting a variance over different issues.
em Miller stated there are only four grounds by which a variance
can be granted and none of them are satisfied by a staff error.
He stated that allowance of variances due to staff error is an
invitation to bribery, and would be absolutely wrong.
eM MILLER MOVED THAT THE ITEM BE TABLED, SEeONDED BY CM FUTCH
WHIeH FAILED 2-2 (em Turner and Tirsell dissenting, Mayor Pritchard
absent) .
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE FEE FOR A VARIANCE APPLICATION BE WAIVED
WHEN A MAJOR MISTAKE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE STAFF, SECONDED BY CM
TURNER WHICH PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting>.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PROPOSE SOME PORTION TO
BE REFUNDED IN THE EVENT AN APPLICATION IS WITHDRAWN PRIOR TO
PROCESSING AND THAT REIMBURSEMENT OF FEE BE DONE IN THE EVENT AN
APPLICATION IS FOUND NOT TO HAVE BEEN REQUIRED BUT WAS INSISTED
UPON BY THE eITY, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
REPORT RE
SPECIAL CENSUS
Mr. Parness reported that the questions to be asked during a
proposed special census are very important to the City of Livermore
not only for what information will be obtained for planning purposes
but also for foundation material for a new federal program that the
City is going to try to qualify for which is the eommunity Develop-
ment Act. This requires a great deal of information about such items
as housing provisions and general poverty levels including incomes
and employment status. We are entitled to four questions and those
listed by the Planning Director are very important.
em Miller asked if the City is entitled, legally, to ask the race
ethnics question and em Tirsell commented that this is the way an
ethnic spread is determined.
CM-29-28
October 7, 1974
(re Special Census)
Mr. Musso stated that some of the questions may not be asked
and the state will have to answer some questions as to what
can be asked.
/~ Mr. Musso stated that he went down a list of the state's ques-
tions and came up with those submitted to the eouncil for review
to be used for planning, industrial promotion and other purposes.
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BE APPROVED FOR
USE IN TAKING A CENSUS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Musso stated that the Council will have another chance to re-
view the census questions and Mr. Parness reported that LARPD has
agreed to let these people use one of their buildings for the length
of time this will take.
REPORT RE TRANSFER
OF STORM DRAIN FUNDS
RE TRACT 3285
The City Manager reported that at the last meeting the question
was raised as to the disposition of fees for Tract 3285 which
were used for public works improvements, as approved by the City
Council and whether or not the City Council wishes to reimburse
the park fund (to which the funds were to have been credited) in
the amount of $6,527.
CM MILLER MOVED TO TRANSFER $6,527 PLUS THE INTEREST SINCE 1971,
FROM THE STORM DRAIN FUND TO THE PARK FUND, SECONDED BY CM TURNER
AND WHIeH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
DESIGNATION OF VOTING
MEMBER - LEAGUE OF CALIF-
ORNIA CITIES
A motion is in order designating a voting delegate for the annual
conference of the League of California Cities.
It was noted that the Mayor plans to attend this conference and
that there should be an alternate delegate.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT MAYOR PRITCHARD BE THE OFFICIAL DELEGATE
FROM THE CITY OF LIVERMORE TO VOTE AT THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES CONFERENCE WITH CM TURNER AS THE ALTERNATE, SECONDED BY
CM TIRSELL WHIeH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT FROM PUB. WORKS
DIR. RE MISC. ITEMS
A report was submitted from the Director of Public Works as to
the status of l) the First Street traffic signalsi 2) the complaint
regarding the Enos-Portola Avenue apartmentsi and 3) the complaint
regarding hitching posts in the downtown area.
It was noted that no action is required.
ORD . RE TRAINS
BLOCKING STREETS
ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO TRAINS BLOCKING STREETS WAS ADOPTED.
CM-29-29
.. --,... _",--~.-.'" ._.".,.._._--_.._-._-_._-".~.._.._---_.~_....-...~-_.-,._---,--_.__._._._.,"-~""~....._~..... .,-~ ..............----..'-
October 7, 1974
ORDINANCE NO. 851
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL
PROVISIONS, OF CHAPTER l3, RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLES
AND TRAFFIC, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY eODE, 1959, BY THE
REPEAL OF SECTION l3.20, RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION
OF RAILWAY TRAINS BLOCKING STREETS.
('
"'-
INTRODUCTION OF ORD.
RE NORTH FRONT ROAD
ANNEX NO. 1
ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ORDINANeE RELATIVE TO ZONING OF NORTH FRONT ROAD, ANNEX NO.1,
WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 30 a.m.
ATTEST
~
Cl.ty Cler
Livermore, California
APPROVE
Special Meeting - October lO, 1974
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Pritchard
and convened at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 10, 1974, in the City
Hall Conference room, 2250 First Street. The purpose of the meeting
was:
Executive session to consider labor negotiations.
Present: em Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Absent: None
No action p.m.
APPROVE
ATTEST
~--"",
CM-29-30
Regular Meeting of October 15, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on October l5, 1974, 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 ALLEGIANeE
Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
OPEN FORUM
(Performance Dedicated
to Governing Officials)
Russell Graff, representative of the Cask and Mask and the Granada
Players stated that they intend to dedicate a performance of "The
Skin of Our Teeth" to all the governing bodies in the valley and
designate Saturday, November 9, 1974, as "big shot" night and in-
vited the Council and City Staff to attend this performance.
(re Situation re
Mike Pompileo)
Terry Hogan, 1157 Lucille, teacher at Junction Avenue School, stated
that he is present this evening with Karen Hampel of Livermore High
School with concern for Mike Pompileo and would like to see if some-
thing could be done to obtain his release from Napa State Hospital.
He would like to see Mr. pompileo be allowed to return to Livermore
without interruption related to his habits and life-style, but within
the law. He mentioned that he has received a number of telephone
calls from interested people in the Bay Area who are wondering how
the people of Livermore will react to this matter. He asked that
there be some type of endorsement from the City Council to support
community efforts on behalf of Mr. Pompileo.
Karen Hampel explained that she intends to distribute containers
around Livermore so that people can make donations to help pay
lawyer fees and other fees that might be involved in this case.
Mayor Pritchard explained that the problems Mr. Pompileo is having
are being handled by other agencies and the court and in his opinion
everyone is sYmpathetic with what is happening and would like to
see him return to Livermore.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ENDORSE SUPPORT FOR ACTIVITIES ON BEHALF OF
MIKE POMPILEO, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Request for Use of
Vacant Lot at So.
Livermore & First St.)
Keith Miser, 269 Junction Avenue, on behalf of the Salt Shaker, the
drop- in center for youths asked if they could have permission to use
the vacant lot on the southeast corner of South Livermore and First
Street on October 26th for l~ hours for a street rally.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out that this is public property and asked
the City's legal position and Mr. Engel stated that the Council is
neither obligated to permit or deny use of the property.
CM-29-3l
October 15, 1974
(Request for Use of Lot)
Captain Essex commented that during the time "J" Street was closed
for the purpose of a street rally for the Salt Shakers it was very
orderly and there were no problems.
em Miller mentioned possible insurance liability and the eity Attor-
ney commented that this should be looked into.
CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE USE OF THE PARCEL,
SUBJECT TO ADEQUATE INSURANCE COVERAGE WITH THESE DETAILS BEING
LEFT TO THE STAFF, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONTINUED P.H. RE PRO-
POSED REZONING OF
KITTYHAWK ROAD
A hearing has been scheduled for possible rezoning of east and
west sides of Kittyhawk Road to I District. The owners have
requested that the public hearing be continued to October 28th.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY eM TIRSELL AND BY A 4-1 VOTE
(Cm Miller dissenting because the owners asked for a continuance
to watch the World Series) THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS eONTINUED TO
NOVEMBER 4TH.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Payroll & Claims
There were l25 claims in the amount of $580,688.13, and 273 pay-
roll checks in the amount of $83,3l0.98, for a total of $663,999.ll,
dated October lO, 1974, approved and ordered paid by the City Manager.
Resolutions of
Appointments
The following resolutions were adopted appointing members to various
committees:
RESOLUTION NO. l59-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO AIRPORT
ADVISORY eOMMITTEE (William Zagotta and
Darryl H. Mailander)
RESOLUTION NO. 160-74
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE LIBRARY BOARD
(James Dimmick and Clifford Marcussen)
RESOLUTION N0. 161-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO GOLF eOURSE
GREENS COMMITTEE (Robert B. Shroyer and Leo Meisner)
RESOLUTION NO. l62-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE NOISE
ABATEMENT COMMITTEE (Burt Gasten, LaVerne Cave,
Richard Marsh, Franklin Halasz, Bob Anderson)
RESOLUTION NO. 163-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO LIVERMORE
RECREATION CORPORATION BOARD (Robert A. Rumberger)
CM-29-32
October l5, 1974
Report re Architec-
tural Services
(Fire Stations #1 and #4
The City Manager reported that an agreement has been prepared with
the necessary modifications to include consultant arrangement with
a second architectural firm for services related to the design for
the new fire stations. The fee is based upon an hourly fixed rate
with a fixed maximum and is approximately 8~% of the construction
cost, which is in accord with the standard AIA approved rate curves.
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authoriz-
ing execution of the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 164-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECTUION OF AN
AGREEMENT (Associated Professions).
It should be noted that Cm Miller dissented from the vote on this
resolution due to reasons stated at the previous meeting.
Report re Untreated
Water Supply Agreement -
Zone 7, Golf eourse
A report regarding the new five year contract with Zone 7 for untreat-
ed water service to the Springtown Golf Course was submitted to the
Council which included the rate schedule until December 3l, 1974.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing
execution of the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 165-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
Report re Personnel
Rule Modification
The eity Manager reported that because of the City's participation
in the new "shared recruitment and testing" with the County of
Alameda, it is necessary to modify our personnel rules accordingly
and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing
such change.
RESOLUTION NO. 166-74
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PERSONNEL RULES AND
REGULATIONS OF THE eITY OF LIVERMORE, RELATING
TO PERSONNEL RECRUITMENT
Report re Vehicle Bids
The City Manager reported that bids for motor vehicle equipment
were solicited and six vendors were asked to participatei however
only two responded and there were no bids for police vehicles.
. An appeal has been made to the State Purchasing Department to
allow purchase of police vehicles under the State bid, which will
be received on October l8th. After the bid date three vendors
indicated that they would like to submit bids for the police
vehicles which will be received this week and a report will be
made to the Council at the next meeting. It is recommended that
bids be awarded to low bidder, as indicated:
eM-29-33
October l5, 1974
(Report re Vehicle Bids)
Codiroli Ford
Goe Sales
3/4 ton truck with utility body
No Bid
$5,849.97
1 ton truck with utility body
(alternate)
$6,254.18
$6,470.55
3/4 ton crew cab truck
3/4 ton flatbed truck with
dual rear tires
$5,9l0.43*
$5,855.96
$6,689.89
$6,l8l.68*
1975 model four door compact sedan
$3,899.32
No Bid
3/4 ton truck with styleside bed
$4,651.76
$5,ll2.35
* One ton truck offered
Those underscored are recommended to receive award of bid and
the 1975 model four-door sedan will not be purchased.
Report re Burning
Embers/Pizza Arcade
The eity Attorney reported that he visited the Embers Cocktail
Lounge located at 4094 East Avenue to ascertain whether the opera-
tors of the restaurant/bar were complying with the agreement to
post a sign indicating that food is available in the lounge. A
sign was posted but the lighting was so poor that it was hard to
read. Mr. Engel spoke with the operator of the bar regarding the
sign and he has promised to make the sign more prominent and would
also add a sign at the other entrance to the bar. The Planning
Director has indicated that the sign regulation is the only viola-
tion of which he is aware and the staff will await further instruc-
tions relative to this matter, from the Council.
APPROVAL OF
eON SENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE eONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE DELETION OF ITEM 2.7 RE-
LATIVE TO AN EASEMENT FOR THE WATER COMPANY, AND 2.8 RELATED TO
BONDING IMPROVEMENTS FOR NAYLOR AVENUE, AND WITH CM MILLER DISSENT-
ING FROM THE VOTE OF APPROVAL ON ITEM 2.3 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT WITH ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS.
REPORT RE LIVERMORE
GARDENS APARTMENTS -
RE SCHOOL FEE
The matter of the Livermore Gardens Apartments was continued from
the meeting of October 7th to permit the staff to negotiate with
the applicant on certain fee paYment requirements.
The Mayor stated that the developers and the City have come to
an agreement. The developer has agreed to supply school fees
in the amount of $27,500.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNeIL AeCEPT THIS AGREEMENT, SUBJECT
TO BEING PUT IN WRITING, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Bud Steers, 5172 Theresa Way, with the Rhonewood Park Homeowners
Association, asked how the Council and developer would justify,
to the other home owners in Livermore, the reduction in the amount
of money they will supply to the School District for classroom
facilities. He indicated that he has circulated a petition with
eM-29-34
October 15, 1974
(Garden Apartments re
School Fee)
signatures of 339 home owners who object to a reduction of school
fees, per unit, for this apartment complex.
Mayor Pritchard commented that Mr. Steer's points are very well
taken but the City has been involved in legalities concerning
this development, as the way the ordinance is written, apartment
houses are excluded from a school fee and this was done by agree-
ment in the first place by the first developer. He then asked the
City Attorney to explain the process and what occurred up to this
point.
Mr. Engel explained the matter and the reasons the Council feels
the $27,500 is an acceptable compromise, if the motion passes.
Mr. Steers suggested that something be done to close loopholes such
as this.
em Futch commented that this will not be setting a precedent because
the Council intends to adopt regulations that would close loopholes.
Cm Miller also added that this type of thing will not be allowed
in subsequent development.
Jim Saddler, also with the Rhonewood Homeowners Association asked
how the figure was arrived at and expressed concern for overcrowded
conditions in this area presently.
It was explained that the figure was agreed upon through difficult
negotiations and that someone would explain this to him during a
break, in detail.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE NEGOTIATED FEE PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
There was then discussion regarding the development agreement and
condemnations, and em Miller stated that he has always felt it is
wrong to use public power of condemnation for private purposes.
Mr. Engel explained that he does not view the clause related to
this as permitting the lending of the City's power of condemnation
to the developer. The only condemnation permissible would be for
a public purpose, determined by the Council after passing a resolu-
tion of convenience and necessity.
Cm Futch stated that the channel is being acquired for both flood
control and recreational purposes and this would appear to be a
public purpose.
Cm Miller asked if the City Attorney feels it would be preferable
to delete the last clause, and Mr. Engel replied that he was being
asked a policy drafting question and his inclination would be to say
yes.
Cm Futch stated that seemed reasonable and it included the intent
he had in mind, concerning deletion of the last sentence. em Futch
stated it has been agreed they would not require undergrounding or
any cost associated with that, but assumed in order that this pro-
perty not have the pull boxes, perhaps they could consider adding
that at this time at City expense, and Cm Tirsell stated she had
the same question.
Mr. Lee stated it would be desirable to have the pull boxes placed
at this time as it would be more expensive if it is done at a later
time. He would recommend that the street lights and pulls be
installed.
efJt-29-35
October l5, 1974
(Gardens Apartments)
em Futch stated that the Council should consider installing the pull
boxes and conduit at eity expense, assuming it would be agreeable
with the applicant. Cm Futch also suggested that on page 3, p. C
the last sentence should read: "The final design shall be subject
to City eouncil approval." eM FUTCH MOVED THAT WITH THOSE ADDITIONS
AND DELETIONS, THE eOUNCIL ADOPT THE AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER.
Mr. Lee stated he would like the eouncil to consider the bikeways
that are presently in the plans along the north side of the roadway,
and em Futch asked if that could be discussed at another time, in-
dicating that if they should wish to delete that, it could be done
at a later time, as he had some questions in that regard.
Cm Turner spoke of the school fee, stating that he lived in that
area and if there was any way of imposing the $800 fee, it would
have been imposed as every avenue was pursued before coming to an
agreement.
Mr. Robert Hirsch asked for one privilege regarding the agreement, i.e.
em Futch's suggestion to have the channel design subject to the Council
final review, remarking that a plan had been presented to the Council
earlier in the year detailing the design at 225 feet of right-of-way,
and he asked if the eouncil would leave this to the staff. He com-
mented that he would have a problem getting this done in nine months
as it is.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the agreement followed the plans that had
been adopted by the Council, and Mr. Lee stated that it did and there
are very definite guidelines to follow. Mayor Pritchard asked if
it wasn't their intention to follow the City's adopted trailway plan,
and Mr. Hirsch stated they would follow that lOO%, however they would
not be able to proceed, after it is completely reviewed by staff and
all pickup done on the plans, until it was formally presented and
accepted by the City in a motion because that is what would be attach-
ed to the condition. He was not concerned informally with having it
presented to the City at any point along the way, but was only con-
cerned about even a few weeks being critical as far as their time
schedule.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
PETITION RE STREET CRUISING
A petition was signed by a group of teenagers who feel that the
local police are using double standards with regard to cruising
on First Street and that the teenagers are being penalized and
adults are not. The Police ehief has submitted a reply, listing
typical incidents of the activities occurring.
Mayor Pritchard commented that the Council has no intention of
depriving any of the citizens, and especially the younger citizens,
of rights enjoyed by anyone and everyone else, stating that he, too,
had cruised when he was a kid on l4th Street in Oakland, however,
he was not sure it was a wise thing to do now in this day of gas
economy. He felt the problem was that a small minority of those
indulging in this pastime were making it difficult for the majority.
He asked ehief Lindgren to expand upon his report at this time, and
then he would call upon those in the audience who wished to speak.
Chief Lindgren stated that rather than read the memo, he just
wished to emphasize the position of the Police Department, which
is that they are not opposed at all to cruising, but they are
opposed to violations of the law. The police have the right to
protect the young people, but equally they have a right to protect
CM-29-36
October l5, 1974
(Street Cruising)
property owners and the other people using the state highway for
other purposes.
Mayor Pritchard mentioned that the Chief's points had been covered in
the newspaperi also that he had been contacted by businessmen, stat-
ing they have been harrassed and he mentioned several specific
incidents.
Denise Houser stated there is nothing to do in Livermore except to
cruise, but she admitted there are some of the youths who do not obey
the laws. She is upset because the police look for things that are
unimportant such as use of turn signals and cited an incident wherein
a police officer had not used a signal.
The Mayor pointed out that there is a complaint form which can be
used in such instances as this, and the complaint will be pursued.
Nancy Rohn stated her purpose in circulating the petition was not
to condone illegal and unsafe practices on First Street, nor to claim
First Street as a playground for teenagers. She understood that a
few people spoil things for the majority. Her point is that if her
mother drove down First Street on a cruising night she would not be
stopped and questioned. She stated she knew of four alcoholics in
the vicinity of her home who have driven frequently under the in-
fluence of alcohol and never lost their driver's license even though
one was arrested twice in a six month period. With regard to the
street being a highway, she did not think teenage drivers should be
faulted for their use of an arterial highway because of inept planning
of adults who would have a highway running through the middle of town.
She also spoke to the needless driving issue, and felt adults should
set an example, that cruising brought business to some of the res-
taurants, and she stated there were a lot of ways that littering
could be eliminated.
Rene Brigsby stated that at the place she works, kids party in the
parking lot, and there are beer cans stacked up after a Friday or
Saturday night because they take in the garbage cans at night, but
she feels that her boss understands. Another point she brought up
was the fact that there is nothing for the kids to do, and it is not
their intention to make everyone mad at them, they just want something
to do and to meet with their friends, and felt it was the attitude
of the adults in general regarding cruising rather than the action
of the police department.
Mayor Pritchard felt that the young people in the audience and the
members of the police department for the most part got along well,
and it is not the idea of stopping the cruising, but when the laws
are being broken the police have to do something about it. He advised
the youngsters that if they felt they were being harrassed unnecessar-
ily, there are ways the situation can be investigated and taken care
of, but to date there have been no specific charges of harrassment,
and if there are such instances, the Police ehief and eouncil would
like to be informed. The Mayor suggested that the youngsters contact
the LARPD and ask them to provide means of recreation for the teen-
agers of the community.
Terry Alexander remarked that it had been stated by Nancy that if
her mother were cruising she would not be stopped and questioned,
however, she was stopped in Kinney's parking lot, where she had
parked to check if she had her checkbook, probably because she was
driving a 12 year old VW and had long straight hair, and the officer
apologized when he realized she was an adult. She felt that the
teenagers do have a point and that perhaps they are checked more.
Steve Baldwin stated he was with a friend whose car had stalled, and
they were asked to move it although they were unable to do so, and
eM-29-37
October l5, 1974
(Street Cruising)
felt they were being unduly harrassed because the police are issuing
tickets for loitering. He stated there are more cars parked than
cruising, and felt there wouldn't be as much cruising if they were
allowed to park and talk, and not get ticketed.
Anita Wing felt that the problem was a communication gap between the
teenagers and the adults until last week when a group she was with
were contacted for blocking a sidewalk and being halfway on private
property by an officer who was very rude because he thought they were
being "smart", when actually they agreed they were in the wrong, in-
dicating there is a communication gap which she felt could be correct-
ed, if the teenagers and police department could get together.
Mayor Pritchard felt that a liaison could be set up from the "cruisers"
with the Police Department, and he was sure that most of the problems
could be worked out with Chief Lindgren.
Al Davis stated that he worked at Jack-in-the-Box and last Saturday
night there were a lot of out of town cars parked in their lot with
teenagers in them and because of this many elderly people did not
want to go in there. The teenagers were asked to move out of the
lot and many of them exhibit a negative attitude towards the Police
Department.
Kerri Norvill, stated that she and her boyfriend were cru1s1ng on
First Street, were stopped because a tail light was out, and were
told to find something else to do and to stop cruising on First
Street which she felt was unfair because they have nothing else to
do and were doing nothing wrong by driving around.
Nancy Rohn stated that it is true a number of cruisers are from
out of town and would like the Police Department to meet with the
local teenagers to see what can be done.
Mayor Pritchard thanked the teenagers for appearing and g1v1ng their
views and for the suggestion to meet with the Police Department and
added that the Council would be interested in hearing from teenagers
on other subjects such as school problems and other problems in the
City of Livermore.
em Miller stated that he doesn't object to cruisers and feels that
others share this view but he does object to vandalism and tomatoes
being thrown at people minding their own business and that these
types of incidents are the reasons the Police Department are stop-
ping the teenagers and this is because of the minority of people
who do these things and ruin everything for everybody else. He
suggested that the kids try to get the vandals to stop doing these
types of things because if they are local kids, the teenagers know
who they are and who the trouble makers are and then the Police
Department will not have to be out trying to protect innocent
people against this kind of thing.
Cm Turner stated that he spoke to 14 merchants along First Street
who indicated that they have had no trouble with cruisers and the
biggest concern of the merchants and teenagers as well is the fact
that there is nothing else for them to do. He suggested that some-
thing be done for them such as a center located in Carnegie Park,
for example, that they could operate.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would agree there should be something
for the teenagers to dOi however, in her opinion if there were
l52 activities for them they would still cruise because this is
what they want to do and the teenagers in the audience agreed.
She stated that she has been interested in seeing what is happen-
ing in downtown Livermore in the evenings on First Street and
CM-29-38
October 15, 1974
~
(Street Cruising)
went out with the Police Department to observe. She indicated that
the reasons the police are patrolling and stopping the teenagers is
because of the amount of vandalism and other things previously men-
tioned.
Cm Futch stated that it is apparent everyone agrees the laws should
be enforced, uniformly, and regardless of age and would hope that
the teenagers would believe this is the intent of the Police Dept.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the eouncil
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE POLICE DEPT.
FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
The Chief of Police submitted a report regarding the Police Depart-
ment Field Investigation procedures with an explanation that the
goal of the investigation is to protect the community.
Cm Miller stated that he agrees it is reasonable to question people
if circumstances appear to be unusual and it is his understanding
that persons questioned have been questioned in a polite manner by
the policei however, the part that he is concerned about is the
records that are being kept. He pointed out that the Constitution
is aimed at individual rights and if this is our priority then taking
down names at random and keeping them on file somehow doesn't seem
right. He stated that sometimes one can find ones self so far down
the road that you don't like the direction you have taken but it is
too late to go back and we could end up by having the most repressive
restrictions to individual rights, each of which was done in a piece-
meal way and sounded reasonable at the time. We could end up in a
totalitarian society in a certain number of years without having
recognized that such is happening and until it is too late.
Chief Lindgren explained that it is important to realize that this
is not a new procedure nor is it unique for Livermore. It is a
universally accepted, court sanctioned, constitutionally acceptable,
police procedure and at no time does anyone acquire a police record
by having such a card filled out when he is questioned. This is
simply a method of allowing the detectives to have information as to
what the policemen are doing, and many times this has been used to
obtain witnesses to crimes. At the end of thirty days these cards
are destroyed and all information is destroyed.
Mayor Pritchard asked that two members of the Council meet with
Chief Lindgren to discuss this in more detail and possibly talk
about some alternatives or at least that this procedure be done
in such a way that everyone can be assured their rights are being
protected.
Cm Turner and Miller agreed to meet with Chief Lindgren to discuss
the matter further, with no action required on the part of the
eouncil.
em Tirsell remarked that in trying to curb crime it appears the
individual rights of the majority of those who are innocent are
being impinged ~pon and as an individual one is losing some freedom
to come and go. She stated that she would like to see individual
rights and freedoms preserved, regardless of the threat of rising
crime.
CM-29-39
October l5, 1974
REPORT RE POLICE
DEPT. COMPLAINT FORM
A question had been reaised as to the necessity of various questions
asked of an individual making a complaint about the police Department
on the complaint form, and a revised form was submitted to the eity
Council for review.
Mayor Pritchard felt the new suggested wording is good but em Turner
felt people would be hesitant to fill out a complaint form with this
wording used.
Cm Futch felt the portion related to possibly being subjected to a
lie detector test should be deleted and that, personally, he could
not be in favor of polygraph examination of citizens.
Chief Lindgren commented that this form is following a state statute
requirement that each city in the state have a written complaint pro-
cedure form by January 1, 1975.
Cm Futch pointed out that anyone is subject to criticism, those on
the Council, as public servants, are subject to criticism and the
police Department should be no exception - a certain amount is ex-
pected and he feels it is not right to require a polygraph examina-
tion because someone wants to make a complaint.
Chief Lindgren stated that the person making the complaint would
not be subject to a polygraph test automatically. He would be asked
if he would agree to one only after the police officer involved
had first taken such a test.
Cm Futch felt if this is the case it shouldn't be mentioned and
if one declines to take the test he is sure this would be noted
and would give the impression that he might not be telling the
truth.
Ghief Lindgren explained that this is simply a method used to help
the Chief of police determine the truth of the matter related to
the complaint incident.
It was noted that the Council delegates will be meeting with
Chief Lindgren to discuss this item in addition to the field
investigation matter.
REPORT RE BONDING IMPROVE-
MENTS FOR NAYLOR AVENUE
em Miller stated that he asked that the item concerning bonding of
improvements for Naylor Avenue be removed from the Consent ealendar
because he does not like bonding. He stated that we have had
a lot of trouble with bonds and in his opinion improvements
should either be done or not required. If a bond is going to
last for some length of time there had better be a good estimate
of what the work will cost because a bond often doesn't do any
good at the end of five years with half the money necessary to
complete a project.
Mr. Lee explained that in most cases there is no problem with
bonding but there have been occasions for which the work has
not been done by the time the completion date has expired.
Mayor Pritchard stated that if the Council feels certain work
does not need to be done immediately, what alternative would
the Council have other than requiring a bond and Mr. Lee stated
that there could be a cash performance bond.
Cm Turner remarked that bonding companies generally do not pro-
vide bonds for people they feel will not perform.
CM-29-40
October 15, 1974
(Bonding Improvements
for Naylor Avenue)
Cm Tirsell felt if the Council intends to abandon the practice of
bonding it will eliminate a lot of industrial construction and ex-
pansion of commercial facilities the City wants.
eM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE DRAFT OF THE
AGREEMENT, INCORPORATING THE ITEMS MR. LEE HAS PRESENTED IN WRITTEN
FORM, SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL
AND PASSED 4-1 (em Miller dissenting) .
Prior to the vote Mayor Pritchard stated that the points made by
em Miller are well taken but inasmuch as there is no alternative
there isn't much choice other than to allow bonding for improvements
not required immediately and also that most of the problems the City
has had with respect to bonding for improvements has been with resi-
dential development.
REPORT RE EASEMENT
TO CALIF. WATER SERVICE
em Miller stated that he asked that the matter related to an easement
to California Water Service Company, inside a park, be removed from
the Consent Calendar because he feels it should be referred to LARPD
to see what affect this will have on their plans, and also the matter
of the token consideration. He stated if California Water wants an
easement, let them pay for it.
Mr. Tieke, from California Water Service, stated that they are
anxious to get the matter of the easement resolved and they have
been in touch with LARPD regarding the easement and that they have
no objections to the easement to California Water Service. He stated
that if the Council wishes they can refer the matter to LARPD but
would prefer that a fee be set this evening for the easement so they
could proceed.
em Turner stated that Mr. Lee had mentioned a "token fee" in his
report and wondered what the normal procedure generally is and Mr.
Lee stated that a token fee is $l - a token fee can be $l, $5 or $lO
or whatever. He pointed out that if the eity requires payment for
the value of it, it will still end up a token amount because it is
only about l,200 sq. ft., which would calculate to approximately
$60.
Mr. Tieke explained that the City will receive a construction fee
in addition to any fee they might pay for the easement and em Miller
felt this would be satisfactory.
Mayor Pritchard pointed out the City would probably have to spend
considerably more than $60 to find out if it's worth $60.
CM MILLER MOVED TO GRANT THE EASEMENT SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF
LARPD AND TO eHARGE $60 FOR THE EASEMENT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER,
AND FAILED 2-3 (Cm Tirsell, Futch and Pritchard dissenting).
CM FUTeH MOVED TO GRANT THE EASEMENT, SUBJECT TO CONSIDERATION OF
LARPD AND WITH A CHARGE OF A TOKEN FEE, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL
AND PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Turner dissenting).
(
Mayor Pritchard stated that he voted for this motion only to
expedite business.
RESOLUTION NO. l67-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EASEMENT TO
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY.
CM-29-4l
October l5, 1974
REPORT RE CROSSWALK AT
PORTOLA AVENUE
Mayor Pritchard stated that there has been a request for a cross-
walk in front of portola School which Mr. Lee explained.
There is presently a crosswalk located on portola Avenue east of
Enos Way at Royal Road with an adult crossing guard. There have
been complaints because it is felt it is inconvenient for children
to cross at this area because they then have to cross again at Enos
Way where there is no crossing guard. Also there is a problem of
vehicular speed at that particular point with the westbound traffic
on portola Avenue. He stated that he would recommend not allowing
the crossing in the middle of the block, as requested, because
motorists are not expecting children to cross in the middle of
the block and the hazards would be even more probable during the
off school hours. This crosswalk would also be too close to a
controlled intersection at North Livermore Avenue and Portola
Avenue. It is therefore recommended that the crosswalk be moved
to the Enos and Portola intersection on the west side of Enos Way.
CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR, SEeONDED BY eM TIRSELL.
Cm Turner stated that he has been out to the area and there is
a problem with the children crossing at Royal Road and then hav-
ing to cross at Enos where there is a very wide intersection which
is not controlled, and would be in favor of the crosswalk across
from portola Avenue School.
A spokesman for the property owners in favor of the crosswalk
in front of the school explained that they feel this would be
the best choice for a crosswalk and would suggest that there
be red curbing in front of the school so that there is less con-
gestion at that area and the children could safely be escorted
across the street.
em Turner explained that he did not realize Mr. Lee was recom-
mending a change from Royal Road to Enos Avenue and this is the
reason he was presenting an argument for a crosswalk across from
the school.
Cm Tirsell stated that the mid-block crosswalk on East Avenue is
a hazardous crosswalk and would suggest that this not be done in
this case if something else could be effective.
em Miller stated that the majority of parents whose children use
the crosswalk want a mid-block crosswalk and these are the people
who see what the problem is and go with their children to school
and he is willing to support their position and would vote against
the motion.
em Futch stated he has also talked to the parents and it is his
feeling that it is not the majority that want the mid-block
crosswalk.
Mayor Pritchard stated that from talking with the people he
would have to agree with em Miller.
Mr. Lee stated that the important aspect of this matter is the
fact of whether or not a mid-block would be safe and this should
be the determining factor.
CM FUTCH CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION PASSED 4-l (Cm
Miller dissenting).
eM-29-42
October l5, 1974
COMMUNICATION FROM
AERIE OF EAGLES
A letter was received from the Livermore Aerie of Eagles inviting
the Council and public to attend a presentation of the annual civic
award to Mrs. Philomena Medeiros, on Tuesday, October 22, 1974.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A RESOLUTION COMMENDING MRS. MEDEIROS WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. l68-74
A RESOLUTION COMMENDING MRS. PHILOMENA
MEDEIROS OUTSTANDING CITIZEN OF THE
YEAR - 1974
COMMUNICATION FROM
PLEASANTON RE KAISER
DUMP PROPOSAL
A letter was received from the Pleasanton City Attorney asking that
the City of Livermore help share the financial costs of obtaining
an engineer to make a study of the Kaiser dump proposal so that
this information can be presented at the next County hearing.
Cm Miller stated that he would consider giving money to help Pleasan-
ton when they help pay for SAVE court costs but em Futch felt the
matter should be considered on the merit of whether or not it is
of valley-wide importance.
Mayor Pritchard felt the City doesn't have funds available because
of the SAVE suit costs and Cm Turner suggested that the City give
moral support but not financial support.
Cm Tirsell stated that she feels it probably is a worthwhile study
but it is true that any city could call in one more consultant on
something and then ask everyone to help pay for the cost of it.
DISCUSSION RE ELLIOTT
TRACT 3333, LOT 98
The Public Works Director reported that Lot 98 in Tract 3333 was reserved
by the eouncil from permanent occupancy so as to permit internal
street access if the property to the rear would not be used for high-
way purposes. Mistakenly a permit was issued for a residence on the
lot, however it has never been occupied. A request has been received
to permit the use of this lot, on a temporary basis, until a final
decision is made by the State of California for this portion of the
subject right-of-way for the Isabel freeway.
Mr. Lee explained that Mr. Elliott has asked that he be allowed to
lease out or rent out this house and Mr. Lee feels this could
be allowed as long as the City has the assurance that it has the
right of access in the event the Isabel freeway is developed and
that sufficient bonds are provided to assure that the house would
be removed, in the event it is ever needed for a street.
Mayor Pritchard stated that a house has been built there and it
was very clear that there was to be no house built and that they
should be refused occupancy.
CM MILLER MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE STAFF TO REFUSE OCCUPANCY - the
developers know what the situation is. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM-29-43
October 15, 1974
DISCUSSION RE
LOS ALTOS PARK
The City Manager reported that LARPD has transmitted the design
of the Los Altos park area, in accordance with the policy between
the Park District and the City. The City Council is asked to
approve the final improvement plan as to general design concept.
Mr. Musso explained the City agreed that LARPD should do the site
plan approval permit procedure for the park and a site plan approval
permit was submitted. It is necessary that the Council give approval
if the park development money is to be used.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY LARPD, SECONDED
BY MAYOR PRITeHARD AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
DESIGN REVIEW COM-
MITTEE GUIDELINES
The matter of the Design Review Committee guidelines has been
pending for several weeks and has been referred to the Planning
Commission who has submitted their comments.
With respect
an addition:
vide visible
there should
will be of a
to landscaping, Cm Miller suggested that there be
II. B. lO. Landscaping shall be of a size to pro-
and protected landscaping immediately. He felt
be some such provision insuring that landscaping
modest size.
It was mentioned that perhaps there could be different require-
ments for sizes according to how fast a tree or shrub grows
and that the Planning Commission should take this into con-
sideration and that this suggestion should be referred to them.
Cm Miller mentioned that in C. 2. of the same page it mentions
that appurtenances should be neat and orderly, etc. "or" be
appropriately screened and he felt this should be changed to
"and" be appropriately screened.
There was discussion regarding screening relative to prevailing
winds and this was to be referred to the Planning Commission as
well.
CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE GUIDELINES WITH THE TWO ITEMS MEN-
TIONED FOR REFERRAL BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, FOR FURTHER
REVIEW, AND TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE, SECONDED BY CM MILLER
AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
REPORT RE FUTURE WIDTH
LINES, ETC., FIRST ST.
The Planning Commission reported that the referral regarding
the proposed reestablishment of Future Width Lines and Special
Building Setback Lines for a contemplated change for the align-
ment of First Street between Railroad Avenue and Scott Street
was considered and that it does concur with the proposed realign-
ment.
CM-29-44
October 15, 1974
(re Future Width Lines
Along First Street)
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
BE ADOPTED, APPROVING THE REESTABLISHMENT OF FUTURE WIDTH AND SPEeIAL
BUILDING SETBAeK LINES, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
SUMMARY OF P. C. ACTION
A summary of Planning Commission action taken at their meeting of
October 8, 1974, was noted for filing.
INTRODUCTION OF ORD.
RE BLDG. & FIRE CODE
Both the 1973 Uniform Building eode and the Uniform Fire eodes are
to be adopted and a hearing must be set in the interim between the
introduction and adoption of the ordinance, as required by statute.
November llth has been suggested as the hearing date and the Board
of Appeals has reviewed both codes.
Cm Tirsell pointed out that the Building ordinance refers to IM and
ID Districts and wondered if they should be changed to I-l, I-2,
or r I-3, and the eity Attorney explained that he would like the
Building Code ordinance to be removed from the calendar because there
are some errors and omissions and it needs to be redrafted.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO AN UNSPECIFIED DATE AND
SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE BUILDING CODE ORDINANCE ON
NOVEMBER 12TH, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Cm Miller pointed out that the ordinance with respect to the Build-
ing Code, gives the Building Inspector the option of waiving the
requirement that boundary lines should be marked and in his opinion
since there is a survey in the beginning, there should be markers
to indicate to property owners, where their boundaries are located
and that this should be specifically stated in the ordinance, and
this suggestion was followed by discussion.
Mr. Street suggested that since this is not part of the Building
Code, if the Council wants this included in routine procedures
that it be discussed separately from the adoption of the ordinance.
It was concluded that the majority of the Council would like time
to think about this and Mr. Engel stated that this would allow the
City Attorney's office to come back to the Council with an updated
Code, and repealing the old Section 6.1 of the local ordinance and
adopt a new Section 6.1.
Mr. Lee stated that in all cases the boundary lines are clear
and the marker wouldn't be needed~ however, it is a decision the
eouncil would have to make as a policy if they want it required.
There are many times a property owner would like to know where his
lot boundaries arei however, if the developer has to provide the
survey at the end of the job which is what he would have to do, he
is going to charge the buyer for this cost. It would have to be
determined whether the benefit outweighs the cost, or not.
~ Cm Miller stated that if there is a vacant lot in an already crea-
ted subdivision perhaps it would not be advisable to require lot
line markers but to require them in all new subdivisions.
AT THIS TIME THE COUNCIL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO SET THE MATTER FOR
DISeUSSION AT AN UNSPECIFIED DATE AND TO SET THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR
NOVEMBER l2TH.
Mayor Pritchard commented that discussion has been related to the
Building Code and that the Council will be discussing the Fire Code
at this time.
CM-29-45
October l5, 1974
(re Bldg. & Fire Codes)
Cm Tirsell mentioned that there is mention of the IM Zoning in the
Fire ordinance and wondered if this should be changed.
There was discussion regarding I-l, 2, and 3 Zones and it was noted
that if an area is marked heavy industrial on the General Plan the
wording should be changed in the ordinance to state "heavy industrial
as shown on the General Plan", with reference to storage of flammable
liquids on Page 3.
Assistant Chief Brown indicated that the concern of the Fire Depart-
ment is to keep the storage of flammable liquids away from the commer-
cial and industrial areas and Mr. Musso wondered if it would be accept-
able to allow storage in any I zone at least 500 ft. from a residen-
tial area.
It was concluded that the staff should look at the wording and re-
port back to the Council with their recommendations, and no action
was taken at this time.
ORD. RE NORTHFRONT RD.
ANNEX NO. 1
On motion of em Miller, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the ordinance amendment assigning zoning classifications to the
recently annexed area known as Northfront Road Annex No. 1 was
adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 852
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS
AMENDED, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMENDING
SECTION 3.00 THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING.
(North front Road Annex No.1)
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE CN DISTRICT
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous
vote, the continued discussion on the CN zoning was postponed
until November l8th by unanimous vote.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Micronesia Visitors)
Assistant City Manager, Don Bradley, explained that the Twin
Valley Fire Training Academy, of which we are a part, will be
participating in a program that will allow the visitation of
members of fire fighters from Micronesia. The program will
receive partial federal financing and Livermore fire fighters
would like the concurrence of the City Council to allow hous-
ing of 2-3 people from Micronesis for a period of up to four
weeks at Station No.2, with very little cost involved. He com-
mented that the staff will be looking into the insurance liability
question of housing these people also.
Assistant Chief Brown mentioned that these people are not
citizens of the united States but rather are citizens of
a territory set up by the United Nations and administered
for the United Nations by the United States, and he gave
some of the background on these people.
CM-29-46
October 15, 1974
(re Micronesia Visitors)
_o_CM TIRSELL MOVED TO AUTHORIZE USE OF FACILITIES TO HOUSE THE
VISITORS FROM MIeRONESIA, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
(Re Recent Case -
Vaughn's Grocery vs.
Supperior Court)
The City Attorney stated that there has been a recent court case
in which Vaughn's Grocery Company vs. Superior Court which has held
on a 2-1 split decision: That a cause of action in inverse condemna-
tion may be adequately raised by allegations that the mere rezoning
of property amount to a taking or damaging of the property in ques-
tion, when the value of that property has been reduced in value to
a substantial degree as a result of that rezoning. He stated that
the case petitioned for hearing will be filed in the Supreme Court
of the State of California and city attorneys are upset over this
and have asked if Livermore's name could be used in opposition to
this and if Livermore could help financially to support the appeal.
He stated that Livermore probably is already committed to
enough contributions that we cannot offer financial assistance.
em Miller stated that this is a very important matter and should
deserve support because it could be disastrous.
The City Attorney stated that several disastrous cases have come
down lately, one of which is the one which made the finding that
loss of business may well be compensable in a condemnation action.
(Complaint re Murrieta-
Olivina Crossing)
Cm Turner stated that he received a complaint from George Wills who
lives in the Murrieta-Olivina area and is concerned about there not
being signalization at the intersection of Murrieta Boulevard and
Olivina Street, and Mr. Lee was asked to comment on the status of
a signal at this intersection.
Mr. Lee explained that this was high on the City's priority list
and then there was another intersection that came before it and
would go back to the budget to check it and agreed to furnish a
report on this intersection as well as the area between Stanley
Boulevard and Olivina, as requested by the Council.
(Beautification
Committee Direction)
em Turner stated that in talking with members of the Beautification
Committee it is felt that they could use direction, and em Turner
stated that he doesn't know if they even have goals. He stated that
he feels the people's assets could better be put to use on this
committee if they had more direction and authority and requested
that this be scheduled on the agenda for discussion.
~'.
(re Work Equipment
Blocking Businesses)
Cm Miller stated that people who are working on the track relocation
project are leaving equipment in front of businesses when they are
finished with their work and sometimes it is left in front of a
place for the weekend and it just doesn't make sense for equipment
to be left to block entrances and asked that the City make sure the
contractor takes care of this problem.
CM-29-47
- - - _._"-~-'--'--_._--".-.,. --.--...-.--.'.----------..
October l5, 1974
(Re Meeting Held with
Greenville North Residents)
Cm Futch stated that he and Cm Turner met with the people from the
Greenville North area last night and they expressed concern over
whether or not the City is proceeding as rapidly as possible in
acquiring the park site for them, and asked if the papers have
been filed.
The City Attorney explained that the description was finalized on
Friday, October llth, and the papers were filed this afternoon.
Cm Futch suggested that this matter be scheduled on the agenda
periodically, to inform the Council of the status of events tak-
ing place in that area and suggested that the matter be scheduled
for discussion in two weeks which will be after Mr. Parness has
met with the land owner to negotiate the price for the land.
Cm Futch pointed out that the park area was their main concern
but feels the staff should be prepared to give some type of re-
port on the following items: l) status of the community parki
2) bike pathi 3) Vasco Road problemsi 4) speeding garbage trucksi
and 5) police not available in the area and not patrolling the area.
Mr. Musso was asked to give a status report on the park for the
people in the Proud Country area and Mr. Musso reported that we
have more land than we are entitled to and should give some type
of reimbursement. The one change is that the planning Commission
has proposed a different site for the location of the park and
Mr. Musso was then asked to furnish a written report on this item.
(County Staff Report
re New Town proposal)
Cm Tirsell wondered if the County staff report has been received
regarding the New Town proposal and Mr. Musso indicated that it
has not been received, as yet, but would telephone the County
tomorrow.
Mr. Engel explained that he has spoken with Mr. Fraley who has
indicated that the report will be available to the commissioners
on the l7th but will not be available to the public until the l8th.
It is his intention to obtain a copy for the Council on the morning
of the lath.
(re Support of Letter - VCSD
re Restriction of Trucks)
Lila Euler, Chairman of the Board of Directors for VCSD, sent the City
Council a copy of her letter to the Department of Transporta-
tion suggesting that truck traffic through the Dublin Canyon
area be restricted during certain hours to help alleviate some
of the present congestion.
CM TIRSELL FELT THIS SUGGESTION IS VERY GOOD AND MOVED TO SUPPORT
THIS STAND, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED 3-2 (em Turner dis-
senting and Mayor Pritchard abstaining).
em Turner stated that he is not satisfied with the amount of infor-
mation the Council has received to support the suggestion and would
oppose the motion for this reason.
CM-29-48
October 15, 1974
(re Trucks on I-580)
It was noted that a letter would be sent to Mr. Lammers of CAL-
TRANS relative to support of VCSD's position on restricting trucks
through the canyon during certain hours.
(re Hazards at the
Intersection of Holmes
Street and Vancouver)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has been receiving telephone calls
from people over the hazards at the intersection of Holmes Street
and Vancouver and noted that he did go out there to check out the
situation and there is a definite problem because there is a grade
prior to the intersection and is sure people are violating the speed
limit. There are a number of small children who cross this intersec-
tion and he has told people who have been calling that the City has
done everything possible to get something done for that intersection.
Children are really taking a chance by crossing there and even when
they are in the cross-walk motorists do not stop for them and there
are children crossing after the adult crossing guard is gone.
Mr. Lee stated that he has contacted the State Traffic Engineer
from San Franci~co and they are supposed to visit the site and
from this can determine what is necessary at the intersection and
will be be reporting back to the Council.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at l2:05 a.m. to a brief
executive session to discuss an appointment to the Beautification
::::ee. /ftZ~f2:~
ATTEST ~
('
CM-29-49
Regular Meeting of October 28, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on October 28, 1974, 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 Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Absent: Cm Futch (Excused - Business)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
CORRECTIONS
TO MINUTES
Oct. 7, 1974: Page 26, fourth paragraph from the bottom should read:
Cm Tirsell stated that she would disagree also but would vote in favor
of the motion to facilitate Council business, since Mayor Pritchard
was absent.
.~ r.Y-
Page~, seventh line down should read: of the smog but so do the
new people who come here not realizing---etc.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 1974, WERE APPROVED AS
CORRECTED AND THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 15th WERE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.
PROCLAMATION
Prior to the open forum, Mayor Pritchard read a proclamation celebrat-
ing friendship between the united States and Mexico and proclaiming
the week of October 27 through November 2, 1974, Mexico-United
States Friendship Week in Livermore, to be presented to the Kiwanis
Club which will be sponsoring celebration events.
OPEN FORUM
(re Catch Basin Petition)
Randy Giddings, 327l Leahy, stated that last year a petition was pre-
sented to the Council by Mrs. Canniveri requesting some type of catch
basin at the 6th street, East Avenue, crosswalk. Some pavement has
been placed there and this has made the situation even worse. He
stated that he went to the area during the recent rain and the water
was about la-inches high and everybody's shoes and trousers were wet
to the knees. He stated that he had to take dry pants to his brothers
at Fifth Street School and that he also had to change clothes because
of this crosswalk situation and asked if there isn't something that
can be done.
Mr. Lee explained that there is a sag in the street at that area
and it was felt the added asphalt would solve the problem but it is
true that the water has to travel too great a distance down East
Avenue before reaching a storm drain. He explained that during
heavy rains there is generally a backup of water in all areas of
town.
Cm Miller stated that there must be something that could be done
to improve the situation at that spot and maybe it would be worth-
while to look at this area during the next rain storm because it
isn't very good to have children at school in wet clothes.
eM-29-50
October 28, 1974
(East Ave. erosswalk)
Mr. Lee stated that he will observe the area during the next rain
and will report back to the Council if they would like.
(Funds & Donations)
Mrs. Lee eannaveri, 3l8l East Avenue, on behalf of the Society
of American Indians, stated that some months ago the eouncil had
voted against using tax dollars to support the rodeo parade and
then reversed this decision because of pressure put on the eouncil
by the public at a cost of $2,608. She stated that this was done
to preserve the heritage of Livermore but reminded everyone that
the Indians were here before the cowboys and that the American
Indians will be holding an annual festival to celebrate the real
heritage of the original inhabitants of our valley as well as to
inform people about the arts, crafts, dances and food of
the Indian people. She invited the people of the valley to attend
the May festival, ,proceeds of which will be used to establish Indian
scholarship funds. She asked that the Council allocate $500 towards
the rental fees and other fees that accompany the costs for holding
the festival since "heritage" seems to be the key word for receiving
taxpayers funds.
em Turner stated that he would have to think about whether or not
the organization should receive the $500 and Cm Tirsell stated that
the eouncil ha~established a policy which Should~apPlied - the
policy is to be applied as each request is made. ullJJ. cMd:-
"0.9 / '//:411-
Mrs. Cannaveri was asked to present the item, in writing, to the
City Clerk for scheduling on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING RE
ADDITION OF VEHIeLE
TO TAXI CAB SERVICE
There has been a request to add a fourth vehicle to the fleet of
cabs for Tri-Valley Cab Company, and the Municipal Code requires
that a public hearing be held for the purpose of hearing public testi-
mony. The Chief of Police has reviewed the application and is agree-
able to the addition of a vehicle and it is recommended that the
eouncil adopt a motion approving addition of the vehicle.
At this time Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing for 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 eLOSED.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, APPROVAL WAS GIVEN FOR THE ADDITION OF A FOURTH VEHICLE FOR TRI-
VALLEY CAB.
CONSENT CALENDAR
~.
Report re Job
Classification Addition
(Fire Department)
The City Manager reported that at the last budget hearing the Fire
Department added a new classification of Fire Inspector and it is
recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing this new
classification and change in title for the new employee.
CM-29-5l
.'-T------. .
october 28, 1974
Report re Grade Separa-
tion Project - Option
Agreement (Marcella Rhew)
The City Manager reported that an option agreement with respect
to the grade separation project has been negotiated for the
estate of Marcella Rhew and is in accordance with the appraisal
and the relocation agents recommend its acceptance. It is recom-
mended that the eouncil adopt a motion authorizing execution of
an agreement, subject to review by the City Attorney.
Report re Bids for
police Vehicles
The following bids were received for police vehicles and it is
recommended that bids be awarded to those underscored:
FREMONT
DODGE
DIABLO
CHRYSLER
VALLEY
CHRYSLER
CODIROLI
FORD
Eight 4-door sedans,
Ford Torino $31,095.73
$3l,408.80
$32,583.19
$30,3l6.74
Three 4-door sedans,
Plymouth Fury $l3,386.ll
$l2,806.73
$14,353.89
$l3,204.59
One 4-door station
wagon, Plymouth Fury No Bid
$ 3,273.60
$ 4,l23.8l
$ 4,357.45
Departmental Reports
The following Departmental reports were received:
Airport Activity - September
Airport - Financial - Quarter Ending September
Building Inspection Department - September
Emergency Services - Quarter Ending September
Finance Department - Revenues and Expenditures, Quarter Ending Sept.
Golf Course - Las positas and Springtown - Quarter Ending September
Library - Quarter Ending September
Mosquito Abatement District - August
Municipal Court - August and September
police Department and Pound Department - September
Water Reclamation Plant - September
Notice of Completion
Springtown Boulevard
The Director of Public Works reported that the Springtown Boulevard
extension project has been completed in accordance with the agreement
between the City and S. E. Corporation, for Tract 2725 and it is
recommended that the Council adopt a motion accepting the project
and authorize filing of Notice of Completion.
Res. of Appt.
to Beautification eomm.
The following resolution was adopted appointing Linda Galas to
the Beautification Committee:
RESOUTION NO. 169-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING LINDA GALAS TO
THE eITY BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE
CM-29-52
October 28, 1974
Minutes
Minutes were received from the fOllowing and noted for filing:
Beautification Committee - September 4, 1974
Planning Commission - October 8, 1974
Payroll & Claims
There were l23 claims in the amount of $242,149.99 and 281 payroll
checks in the amount of $83,735.18, for a total of $325,885.l7,
dated October 23, 1974, and approved by the City Manager.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Census Questions)
Mr. Musso stated that he has a list of the questions to be asked
in the census and would like to review them with the eouncil later.
(Homebuilders Suit)
The eity Attorney read a letter received from the eity Attorney's
Office of Glendale, California, with respect to the Homebuilders
Suit decision offering assistance financially or in the form of
research in appealing the decision.
Mr. Engel stated that he would like to receive permission from
the City Council to contact Richard W. Marsten, City Attorney,
to request financial assistance, if possible, and an amicus brief
on our petition for hearing in the Supreme Court.
CM MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S REQUEST, SECONDED
BY eM TIRSELL, WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY COUNCILMEMBERS
(Resolution of Com-
mendation City Attorney
and Assistant)
ON MOTION OF eM TURNER, SECONDED BY eM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS OF COMMENDATION WERE ADOPTED:
RESOLUTION NO. l70-74
RESOLUTION COMMENDING THE SERVICES OF
CITY ATTORNEY, MAURICE ENGEL
RESOLUTION NO. 171-74
r
,
RESOLUTION COMMENDING THE SERVICES OF
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, MARTHA WHITTAKER
It was noted that Mr. Engel has done an outstanding jOb as Attorney
for the City of Livermore and has been of great assistance to the
Councilmembers and Mr. Engel commented that out of the six cases Ms.
Whittaker has handled for the City of Livermore, in court, there have
been six victories.
CM-29-53
October 28, 1974
(re Benches Around
springtown Duck Pond)
Cm Turner asked that the staff look into the possibility of
placing benches around the duck pond in the springtown area and
Mr. Lee stated that it is his understanding money has been set
aside for these benches, in the budget, and that they have been
ordered.
There was then discussion regarding the fountain and mention of
the fact that it should be run occasionally so that it will con-
tinue to work.
(Concannon & Holmes
street Intersection)
em Turner stated that people have been telling him that the
lights at the Concannon/Holmes Street intersection are too dim
to light the crosswalk adequately and Mr. Lee explained that the
new signal system will include area lighting and we have received
notice that the State Department of Transportation will advertise
for bids immediately and installation will begin as soon as the
City receives delivery of the equipment - approximately January
l5th.
(Attorney Fees)
Cm Turner stated that he would like a report as to the amount
of money the City has spent on attorney fees during the past
4-5 years for outside consultant attorneys to determine what
type of fees we should be considering for the industrial pro-
motion position.
Mr. Parness explained that such fees fluctuate, depending on
~th:r~~~~~~u;J_~:;,e~ceive consultant legal assistance,
/71~ -- r-~N~~#~f)-'~_ 'i#.
(Appointment to ~----
MTe Committee)
Cm Miller stated that in his opl.nl.on the person recently selected
to serve on the MTC committee is not an environmentalist and would
like to see someone else have the appointment, and would suggest
that the Mayor press for someone out here, if possible.
(Blocking Entrance
to Mrs. Paradiso's Restaurant)
Cm Miller stated that over the weekend he observed that the entrance
to Mrs. Paradiso's restaurant was completely blocked and it appeared
that such had been done deliberately and noted that this was brought
up at the last meeting and the staff was asked to speak to the con-
tractor about blocking business entrances.
Mr. Lee explained that he did, personally, check into the problem
of blocking entrances by equipment and that this had been done
purposely because the equipment was covering open trenches, and
was placed there to protect the public from falling into the
trenches; however, he does not know why the equipment may have been
left there this past weekend and will check into the matter again.
(Widening I-580)
Cm Miller stated that the I-580 widening is at the Council for
Environmental Quality and it is his understanding the State Dept.
of Transportation has received a copy of our smog report and would
CM-29-54
October 28, 1974
(Widening I-580)
suggest that VCSD's air impact report also be sent to them so that
they understand the full background of implications of smog in the
valley. Even though the smog season is about over there have been
93 adverse days this year in the valley.
AT THIS TIME CM MILLER MOVED TO NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA-
TION OF THE PROBLEM, AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, SECONDED BY eM TIRSELL
AND PASSED 3-1 (em Turner dissenting - em Futch absent).
(Status of Greenville
North Park Acquisition)
Cm Tirsell asked the status of the acquisition of the Greenville North
park property and Mr. Parness reported that the condemnation papers
were finished by the City Attorney's office, the papers have been
filed with the County Marshall for serving upon the owner and the
owner has not been locatedi however, it is his understanding that
they have finally been served. He is now waiting for a telephone
call from the owner regarding negotiation of settlement and the
other ownership of a small parcel (Kissell) has been contacted asking
that they sell, separately. Mr. Watson, attorney representing Kissell,
has contacted Mr. Parness to say that the owners of the larger parcel
have asked Kissell to again negotiate with them for Kissell's acquisi-
tion of the park site which in turn could be dedicated to the City.
Mr. Watson has assured Mr. Parness that if they acquire the property
it will be dedicated to the City.
Mr. Parness then explained that because of the length of time it
has taken to obtain the property the City of Livermore has begun
condemnation processing.
The Council will be informed of any developments relative to this
matter.
~.~' lei; *~7f
Mayor Pritc rd s ted that he would like
for being President of the City
the League of California Cities.
(Congratulations to
Mr. Parness - President
of the eity Managers' Div.
League of Calif. Cities)
to congratulate Mr. Parness
Managers' Division of
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION COMMENDING MR.
PARNESS ON HIS APPOINTMENT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 172-74
A RESOLUTION COMMENDING WILLIAM H. PARNESS ON
HIS ELEeTION OF PRESIDENT OF THE CITY MANAGERS'
DEPARTMENT OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES.
(Water Pressure
Problems)
(
Mayor Pritchard complained about the water pressure for East Avenue
being very low and that many people in that area have complained
about this problem and are very disgusted about it. He stated that
he would like to suggest two things, with the Council's permission:
l) see what can be done, locally, to require certain water pressure,
with the help of our City AttorneYi and 2) to ask Mr. Lee for a more
accurate reading of water pressures at various times and places along
East Avenue.
Mr. Lee indicated that the PUC does establish minimum pressures for
private companies and will look into the matter.
CM-29-55
October 28, 1974
(Ambulance Service
Location)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has heard that the ambulance company
may have moved back to its old Elm Street location and wondered
if this is true and Mr. Musso stated that the staff is checking
into it.
Mayor Pritchard wondered if the CUP that had been issued when they
were located on Elm Street expired when they moved from Elm to another
location and Mr. Musso explained that it has expired and the area
is not zoned so as to allow an ambulance service office at that
address.
(Hospital Moving
to Pleasanton)
Mayor Pritchard wondered why the local hospital is moving to
Pleasanton when all the beds are not full here in Livermore and
stated that he has received a number of calls from people who
are distressed. He asked that the staff report back to the
Council after contacting the hospital staff to see what is
happening.
(People on Medical
Not Receiving Treatment)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has friends who are are on Medical
who are unable to get to and from the County facilities and no
local physician will treat them and asked that this be communica-
ted to the Valley Memorial Hospital staff. The Mayor stated that
he has tried, personally, to get a physician to take these people
as patiesnts and they have refused to take anYmore Medical patients.
COMMUNICATION FROM
H. L. MEYER RE SMOG
A letter was received from Mr. H. L. Meyer suggesting that L.L.L.
and Sandia ask their people not to drive into town during the lunch
hour to help eliminate smog problems and that they use the local
banks after work, as they are open until 6:00 p.m. for this purpose.
The Council asked that the staff refer the letter to L.L.L. and
Sandia Laboratory.
COMMUNICATION
RE LIMITING TRUeKS ON I-580
A letter was received from Mrs. Keith Switzer regarding the eouncil's
support of the proposal to limit trucks on I-580 during the peak
hours and she pointed out that this could mean a delay of mer-
chandise and could result in the consumer having to pay higher
prices for items. The letter was noted for filing.
NOTICE FROM LEAGUE OF
CALIF. CITIES RE GEN.
REVENUE SHARING
A letter was received from Don Benninghoven, Executive Director,
for the League of California Cities with respect to the reenact-
ment of general revenue sharing and Mayor Pritchard suggested that
the staff respond to the letter indicating what the City has done
with revenue sharing funds and that they are greatly needed.
CM-29-56
October 28, 1974
REPORT RE CAT
LICENSING
The Assistant City Manager reported that at the Council's direction
he has prepared a written report on cat licensing and has found
in researching the matter that only two public agencies in California
have a mandatory ordinance for cat licensing (Fremont and Lodi) and
that enforcement of the ordinance in these cities is relatively non-
existent. Statistics were also given to support the fact that
twice as many dogs as cats are impounded and that of the stray
animals impounded only 25% are cats and 75% are dogs. The report
indicated that there is little justification for a mandatory cat
licensing or vaccination program and rabies have been essentially
non-existent in cats. It would appear that vaccination and control
of dogs is the answer to the problem of rabies. It is also felt
that a cat licensing program would create more problems that those
which would be solved by it.
The report was noted for filing.
REPORT RE eURBSIDE
MAIL DELIVERY SERVICE
The City Manager reported that despite our appeals to Congress,
joined by many cities nationally, curbisdemail delivery by the
United States Post Office order was commenced June 1, 1974, for
all newly occupied residential units. It would be appropriate
for the City to consider design and installment standards for
curbside mailboxes and the Engineering Department has prepared a
report regarding this aspect. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a motion approving the engineering design and standards and
secondly, to instruct the staff to transmit a renewed appeal to
our congressional delegate urging that this order be countermanded.
Mr. Parness stated that just about an hour ago he spoke with
Congressman Stark's Administrative Assistant who reports that
congressional action would be necessary to countermand the order
of the Postmaster General and that such legislation has been sub-
mitted but no action will take place until after the first of the
year. It is anticipated that something will be done but not until
after the first of the year. In response to people's questions about
what to do until this time Mr. Parness has suggested getting a post
office box and people are saying that there are none available.
Our local postmaster is forming a list of those to receive post office
boxes as they apply. There are about 600 residential units in our
City that will be subject to this order and for which curbside boxes
will have to be installed.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to adopt an ordinance
prohibiting curbside mail delivery in the City limits and Mr.
Parness stated that this will put the homeowner in a bind and
must sympathize with them; this is a federal order and it
appears that there is little the eity can do.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would hate to have 600 posts placed
along the curbs and then have the order rescinded and Mr. Parness
stated that the rescinding may take from 6-8 months.
Cm Turner suggested that possibly since there are no post office
boxes available, the post office personnel could be asked to set
up a special line or system to help these people who are receiving
mail by general delivery.
Cm Miller suggested that the City do two things: l) contact the
League of ealifornia eities and other cities who have this problem
andi 2) join together in a legal combine to get an injunction to
prevent the order from going into effect.
CM-29-57
October 28, 1974
(re Curbside
Mail Delivery)
Cm Miller added that there is no reason the League of California
Cities cannot contact the Arizona group and the Washington group,
etc. to join in a nation-wide law suit against the Post Office Dept.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING THINGS BE DONE, WHICH WAS SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE:
1. Request the League of California Cities to institute a law suit
against the Post Office Department to prevent further application
of this order.
2. That the California League be asked to contact the National League
of Cities and the other nearby state-wide leagues to have them join
in such a law suit.
3. Contact any other city that we know is already involved in a law suit
related to this matter, offering them our aid and the same ideas
about contacting the various organizations to institute a state
or nation-wide law suit, and that such aid will be in the way of
money or amicus briefs.
It was noted that the matter of curbside service will be held in
abeyance for a couple of weeks.
The staff was asked to contact the people at the post office to see
if a special line can be provided until something is done about
getting delivery to the new residents.
REPORT RE LEAA GRANT -
MICROFILM JACKET FILING SYSTEM
The City Manager reported that the City of Livermore may receive a
grant of $8,667 which would permit the installation of a microfilm
jacket filing system for our police Department which will provide
significant storage space and eliminate search time. This will require
a $325 cash contribution from our City and it is recommended that the
Council adopt a motion approving a resolution accepting the grant.
ON MOTION OF eM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT WAS
ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 173-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR GRANT
FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PRUPOSES TO CCCJ
REPORT RE TEMPORARY
TRAFFIe ISLAND AT
MAPLE AND EAST AVE.
The Director of Public Works reported that a temporary traffic
island was installed at East Avenue and Maple Street some months
ago and the findings have been that there have been no accidents
at that intersection, the visibility is improved, the added cross-
walk is beneficial and the police Department is satisfied with the
results. It is recommended that the island be permanently installed
for positive protection.
There was then discussion regarding landscaping for the island
area.
Cm Miller stated that he disagrees, totally, with the report and
that it is even more difficult to cross from Maple Street to
Seventh Street and really feels this type of intersection is a
waste of the City's time and money.
CM-29-58
October 28, 1974
(re Island at Maple St.
& East Avenue Intersec.)
Cm Turner, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard felt the intersection is more
convenient than it was in the past.
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE DESIGN OF THE ISLAND BE APPROVED FOR
PERMANENT INSTALLATION AT MAPLE STREET AND EAST AVENUE, SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting).
INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THAT THE LANDSCAPE PLANS WOULD HAVE
TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL PRIOR TO GOING OUT FOR BID.
REPORT RE STATE
BALLOT MEASURES
A report was received from the League of ealifornia eities with
respect to propositions on the November ballot which are of interest
to cities and the Council briefly discussed Proposition No. lS,
which is a referendum on low income housing.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE COUNCIL ENDORSED PROPOSITION NO. l5.
INTRODueTION OF
AMEND. TO CODE ADOPTING
FIRE AND BLDG. CODE
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote
amendments to the Municipal Code to adopt, by reference, the Uniform
Building Code, Volume I, 1973 Edition and the Uniform Building Code
Standards, 1973 Edition and the Fire Prevention Code, were introduced
and the titles only were read.
ADJOURNMENT
ATTEST
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at 9:25 to a brief executive
::::::: to d~an a:~m~~ ~re;;s Committee.
~~
(( uwtl ~~L
~ City Clerk
Livermore, California
~
,
CM-29-59
-_....__.~._---"---_.__.-,.,..,._-_.._---._------,-"---.---.-....--.-.....----.--
Special Meeting - November 8, 1974
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Pritchard
and convened at 12:15 p.m. on Friday, November 8, 1974, in the City
Hall Conference Room, 2250 First Street. The purpose of the meet-
ing was to discuss the following:
l. Resolution in support of a proposed County Commission on
the Status of Women for Alameda County.
2. Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with
Danat re Naylor Avenue Improvements
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Futch, Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard
Absent: None
RESOLUTION NO. l74-74
A RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A
STATUS OF WOMEN COMMISSION FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY
The above resolution was introduced by Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm
Turner and passed by unanimous approval.
NAYLOR AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
(Danat Agreement)
Cm Miller expressed his objection to using the City's power of
condemnation for private properties as indicated in Section 10
of the proposed agreement since private owners can use the con-
demnation procedure if it is for a public purpose.
Keith Fraser, representing Danat, indicated they had no objection
to a change in this provision but would feel it was a time advan-
tage to city attorneys.
This matter was discussed at some length and on motion of Cm Miller,
seconded by Cm Turner, a resolution authorizing execution of agree-
ment was unanimously adopted provided Item lO be altered to state
that Danat will obtain the subject right-of-way at Danat's sole
cost provided that private condemnation statute is still in effect.
RESOLUTION NO. l75-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT (Danat Investment company)
Also discussed was the urgency for obtaining a building permit at
the earliest possible time so that the work on the building may
proceed. It was concluded that Mr. Fraser would initial the change
and will file his power of attorney with the city.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no fu~ther b iness, the meeting was adjourned at
12 :45 p.m. , ~/
APPROVE 0f k~4".~
7 ~~'r-aYor
ATTES~~ ~ j --
Cl.ty Clerk
. Livermore, California
CM-29-60
Regular Meeting of November l2, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on Tuesday, November l2, 1974, 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 Futch, Miller, Tirsell, Turner 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.
RECOGNITION OF CIVICS CLASS
INTRODUCTION OF NEW
CITY ATTORNEY
Mayor Pritchard welcomed Mr. Campbell and the Civics Class from
Livermore High School, and he introduced Mr. Robert Logan, the new
City Attorney.
MINUTES APPROVAL
Page 54, Cm Turner stated that the minutes did not reflect that a
report will be forthcoming with regard to his request for a report
regarding attorney fees, add "report will be forthcoming".
Page 55, middle of the page should read: Mayor Pritchard stated that
he would like to congratulate Mr. Parness for being "elected"
President.
Page 51, 3rd paragraph in part should read: That Cm Tirsell stated
that the Council had established a policy which should have applied _
ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY eM TURNER, BY A 4-1
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1974, WERE APPROVED
AS CORRECTED. CM FUTCH ABSTAINED FROM VOTING AS HE WAS NOT PRESENT
AT THAT MEETING.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Pritchard invited members of the audience to address the eity
Council on any subject not on the agenda, however no comments were
voiced.
PUBLIC HEARING RE USE OF
PARK AP~A FOR LOCATION
OF FIRE STATION NO. 1
(
Mr. Parness explained that the proposal as advanced by the staff
is that permission be granted by the eity Council for the use of one
acre of the Robert Livermore Park area, twenty acres of which has
been acquired for park purposes, for a fire station site. Such a
use can be allowed, but the decision requires the conduct of a
public hearing. If it is determined that it can be used for a
civic use, such as the fire station, an affirmative vote of four
fifths of the Council is necessary. Mr. Parness explained the
exact location of the site which is proposed for the use, stating
CM-29-6l
November 12, 1974
(P.H. re Use of Park Area
for Location of Fire Sta. 1)
that the site is larger because it is required as substitution
for the existing main fire station. The area has been researched
in detail by the Fire Department principals and they have processed
it through the necessary agencies that would in time be called upon
for final approval. Mr. Parness asked Fire Chief Baird to further
explain the justification for the use of this particular site.
Chief Baird stated that the matter of fire stations is of utmost
importance to the fire protection of our City in that it is the key
to the implementation of our fire protection forces. When it
was determined that the downtown fire station was to be relocated,
a study was made throughout the community as to the most appropriate
area to meet the need and to minimize any future duplication which
might occur and be an added burden on the taxpayers. They also met
with the insurance office people who evaluate and judge fire protec-
tion defenses that result in the insurance rating and the resultant
premium rates that the taxpayers do pay. It was necessary in making
the study to consider fire flows, residential areas, high value areas,
and so on and with the configuration proposed, it was determined
that nearly every area within the community can be reached in approxi-
mately three minutes, and they can get all fire flows relative to
the standards found in the grading schedule. Chief Baird referred
to a report submitted to the Council which further detailed these
points. Another point brought out by Chief Baird in favor of the
proposed site was the fact that future legislation might cause a
reduction in work week of fire departments and negate the use of
certain segments of the fire station facility which could be put to
use in the area of a park, plus the fact there would be first aid
capability and watchfulness of children playing in the park. Chief
Baird stated that this location was of vital importance to him due
to the fact that we have an agreement for automatic aid with the
Lawrence Livermore Lab and should this agreement at some future
time be terminated a station in this proposed location would allow
the fire department to adequately cover that area without having to
construct a new fire station at a later date. Without the automatic
aid agreement, it would be necessary to respond from two stations
from various parts of the community, thus voiding two areas. Chief
Baird stated that they have studied the effect of fire stations in
various neighborhoods as they realize that wherever a fire station is
located the residents have a concern, however, with regard to the
station located in Springtown and on Rincon, there have been no
complaints. He stressed that the distribution of the fire stations
is very important in considering the fire protection of the community
and the proposed site represents the best conceivable distribution
and the least amount of duplication in excessive cost in future years
to the citizens of Livermore.
Cm Turner asked what residents had been contacted inasmuch as a com-
plaint had been received, and Chief Baird explained that residents
had been contacted approximately 70 ft. from the station apparatus
room to the north, and approximately 80 to lOO feet to the west, and
the proposed station would be approximately llO feet from site of
residential occupancy. He added that the fire department's policy
on the use of sirens is to use them commensurate to the safety need,
and many times they are not even used during the night.
Cm Futch asked if the southeast corner of the park site had been con-
sidered or the portion shown as future park annexation and what the
difference was between those two possibilities and the proposed site.
Mr. Parness explained that the parcel he had asked about was under
condemnation proceedings by the City now and state law does not per-
mit right of immediate possession of properties that are being ac-
quired for either park or city structures and it would have to under-
go the usual proceedings required in such matters even though it
does have court precedence. If the fire station were shifted, it
would require modification to the condemnation proceedings because
CM-29-62
November l2, 1974
(P.H. re Use of Park Area for
Location of Fire Sta. 1)
the suit that has been filed is for park purposes only and it would
have to be modified to include city structures, and he further ex-
plained what might happen. In reply to a question posed by Mayor
Pritchard with regard to another site, Mr. Parness stated that LARPD
is opposed to that particular site.
Cm Futch asked if we had acquired the park site by condemnation and
wanted to locate the fire station as proposed, would we be allowed to do
so, and City Attorney Bob Logan replied that if it had been acquired
by condemnation, one of the factors to be considered would be where
the funds were obtained. If acquired by condemnation and special
assessment district was used to pay for it, then it would be a park
in perpetuity and they could do nothing with iti if on the other hand
only city funds were used to take fee title, then it could possibly
be converted, but it would still require an ordinance change of 4/5
vote.
em Tirsell asked what the time schedule is if the station is built
on the proposed site and Mr. Parness stated it is expected that the
station should be ready for bid in about three months, and under con-
struction in early spring and occupancy in late fall. If the other
site were used, the process could be delayed as much as a year or much
longer. Mr. Logan further explained the process which would have to
be followed if the site is changed.
The eouncil discussed the two sites with reference to the proximity
of the residences.
Cm Tirsell asked if any thought had been given to the traffic pattern
on East Avenue, and Chief Baird stated that he had looked at it re-
lative to the effect it would have on fire protection and response
and concluded that the traffic was quite heavy for about an hour in
the morning and again in the evening, but not so heavy that the depart-
ment could not get right-of-way. The fire department has had to con-
tend with East Avenue during peak hours on response to fires in the
Valley East and East Avenue area, First Street, No. and So. Liver-
more Ave.
Cm Turner expressed his concern for the school children attending
Almond Avenue School, and asked if this had been considered, and ehief
Baird replied that it had been and no safety problem is expected,
pointing out areas surrounding the other fire stations where there
are children in the vicinity.
em Miller stated that he was under the impression that the Council
would be provided with a report of the pros and cons of the other
locations as he particularly wanted to see the reasons why the other
sites that seemed plausible to him had been rejected. He stated fur-
ther that he was adamantly opposed to any other use in the park, how-
ever the possibility of the condemnation of the other nine acres has
been before the Council for some time, and objections to using the
park site for a fire station were discussed. It was his feeling that
the staff should have provided that city purposes be included in pre-
paring the condemnation of the nine acres. Since this was not done,
he saw no reason to use that as an excuse of using park property for
non-park purposes.
Mayor Pritchard remarked that there were two parcels on the northwest
and southwest corner of Hillcrest and East Avenue and asked if these
parcels had been considered. Chief Baird stated that in discussing
this with the insurance office it was concluded that the proposed site
was the best from fire protection standpoint, and further that with
reference to Cm Miller's remarks, he felt that his report explained
the reasons the other sites had been rejected, especially if the
station remained in the downtown area, and he again stressed some of
the points he had mentioned previously.
eM-29-63
November 12, 1974
(P.H. re Use~of Park Area
for Location of Fire Sta. l)
Cm Turned asked if the site at 7th Street and East Avenue had been
considered as he would hate to see park land used for other uses,
and again Chief Baird referred to the effect that location would
have on the downtown area and that it would be an overlap and gross
duplication of fire service responses, and it was felt best to move
the location further out where it would be better utilized.
Mayor Pritchard stated there were communications received from Mrs.
Ruth Hitchcock, 4277 East Avenue; J. R. Morton, 4384 East Avenuei
and Mrs. Barbara W. Good, 1048 Auburn Street all in opposition to
the proposed fire station location. Mayor Pritchard opened the
public hearing at this time and asked the people in the audience to
limit their remarks.
Ruth Hitchcock, 4277 East Avenue and Mrs. J. R. Morton, 4384 East
Avenue, both opposed use of park land for other purposes, and voiced
concern regarding the traffic and safety of the children.
Bill Wilson, l032 Auburn, spoke to Chief Baird's comments with re-
gard to high property value and questioned also why it was felt
that LLL would withdraw from agreement with City for fire protection.
He also commented that sirens would be necessary and questioned
rejection of other sites.
Alec Willis, 4336 East Avenue, voiced his opposition to the location
because he did not feel it was proper use of park land, too much
congestion, possible decrease in property value now, and change
in residential character. If it is to be located in that vicinity,
he would recommend that it be located adjacent to the southeast side
of the park land which would provide less impact on the current home-
owners in the area.
C. Herb Turnbull, 4364 Claremont Way, concurred that the present
location would be too close to the residential area, and suggested
that it be located even further east and if a new condemnation is
necessary this should be considered.
Gerald Russell, l064 Auburn Street, agreed that the fire station
should be located further east, and was concerned that more of the
park land would be used for other purposes if the fire station is
approved for that location.
Bruce Nevin, l072 Auburn Street, stated they purchased their proper-
ty with the thought in mind that there were two parks in that area,
and in checking with appraisers and realtors he has been advised
that property values would probably go down if a fire station is
located there, and it would lead to future industrialization.
Adele Pence, 886 Adams Avenue, concurred with the statements made
by Mr. Willis and Mr. Turnbull.
Mrs. C. A. De Puy, 4387 Claremont Way, was not opposed to a fire
station, but was concerned about the noise and traffic on East Ave-
nue and also about the valuation of her property.
Marlin pound, representing LARPD, referred to a letter addressed to
the Council by the General Manager, stated that the park should be
a certain size and that 25 acres is a minimum size for a community
park, and the Board feels the proposed location would be appropriate
only if the nine acres referred to by the eity Manager are acquired.
A master plan has been designed for the park, and it is intended that
the District's buildings would be located on one or the other side
of the parki they would be opposed to having the fire station located
in the center of the park.
CM-29-64
November l2, 1974
(P.H. re Use of Park Area for
Location of Fire Sta. l)
On motion of Cm Tirsell, seconded by Cm Futch, and by unanimous appro-
val the public hearing was closed.
Mayor Pritchard informed those present that any action taken by the
Council this evening regarding the property, if it is favorable,
would be only an action of intent as an ordinance would have to be
adopted.
em Tirsell remarked that citizens have reasonable right to expect
uses in a neighborhood to remain stable, and she felt that the
Planning Commission and Council have been responsive to input from
neighborhoods whenever there is a zoning hearing. She also felt that
the Fire ehief has expertise as far as the needs for a fire station
and the ability to serve the town, to meet emergencies and to fulfill
his obligation to keep fire rates low. She felt that perhaps the
best compromise for this particular fire station is to use the pro-
perty that is currently under condemnation, and MOVED TO RESCIND THE
eONDEMNATION IN ORDER TO REWORD IT TO INCLUDE A PUBLIC USE: MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM FUTCH.
Cm Miller again expressed his disappointment in not having received
a listing of the pros and cons as requested and the fact that he was
adamantly opposed to the use of park property for other than park
uses, and wished to elaborate the motion as follows: That the Council
reject the proposal to put a fire station on Robert Livermore Park
property; proceed to amend the condemnation to provide for other
civic purposes but without commitment to use that parcel; and make
the decision about using the parcel after the eouncil is provided
with all the information about the pros and cons of the other possible
sites.
em Tirsell stated that she was not amenable to that amendment as it
changes her motion.
Cm Miller stated that the purpose of his motion was to leave open
the question of putting a fire station on the other site, but to
change the condemnation so that it could be included, however he
still wanted to have the pros and cons on the other sites for Council
consideration of the other sites. He asked Cm Tirsell if she still
felt this would not be acceptable, and em Tirsell replied that she
did as she felt it was the best location of all the fire station
sites that had been considered.
Cm Futch suggested that the Council discuss the pros and cons of the
other sites at this time as he felt the primary criteria would be
the overlapping and where it is located geographically.
Cm Tirsell was asked to restate her motion, and Mayor Pritchard
ruled that the motion to amend was in order, however Crn Tirsell ob-
jected to the rUling.
(
\
"
C~'l HILLER RESTATED HIS N1ENDr,mNT WHICH WAS TO SPECIFIeALLY REJECT
THE USE OF ANY PARK PROPERTY FOR A FIRE STATION AND THAT THE FINAL
DECISION BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE COUNCIL HAS THE PROS AND CONS OF
OTHER FIRE SITES CONSIDERED IN WRITING: MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR
PRITCHARD, who stated that his reason is that it will be a year
before the City will have the property in hand to proceed with the
building of the site.
Cm Turner agreed with Cm Tirsell that the motion was out of order,
but also before any decision is made, he would like the Council to
review the alternate sites for many reasons.
Jcm Tirsell reminded the Council that it is the circle that determines
the fire safety and fire capability referred to by the Fire Chief
CM-29-65
November l2, 1974
(P.H. re Use of Park Area for
Location of Fire Station l)
and it must be concluded that it should be located on a major street
such as East Avenue, Livermore Avenue or even Vasco Road. If it is
located too far east, the downtown area is less covered, and she
felt that Chief Baird's choice has been proved.
Cm Turner agreed that perhaps the circles dictate the exact loca-
tion and it may be the ideal location, but he is not convinced that
this location would adequately cover the downtown area and believed
a location nearer the high school affords better fire protection, and
he would like to discuss other sites before a final decision is made.
Mayor Pritchard did not feel that em Tirsell's motion precluded the
Council from considering the other sites, however Cm Tirsell and
the other Councilmembers felt that it did.
em Futch commented that the major issue is whether they are picking
essentially the location of the site, and Cm Tirsell's motion does
that and em Miller's motion is contrary to the motion and should be
a separate motion.
City Attorney Bob Logan asked that the motions be segregated as
two motions are required: l) a motion to dismiss an action which
was adopted by a motion - the condemnation proceedingi 2) any
other motion to pick a site, or to designate the purpose for con-
demning the site for Fire Station 1 would have to be an entirely
new motion, or resolution in order to support a condemnation hearing.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME WHICH FAILED 3-2
WITH eM FUTCH, TIRSELL AND TURNER OPPOSED.
Mr. Logan stated that he understood Cm Tirsell's motion, it was a
motion to specifically set up a resolution to dismiss the condemna-
tion casei Cm Miller's motion was virtually a motion to continue
for further analysis and review, and he again asked that these two
motions be separated inasmuch as one combined with the other could
be confusing as far as a court hearing is concerned.
Cm Miller after an analysis of the motions, withdrew his amendment
if the second was agreeable, and Mayor Pritchard agreed to withdraw
his second.
Cm Tirsell asked the City Attorney if the City condemns the property
for both park purposes and the use of a portion for municipal pur-
poses and does not use that site for the fire station if the City
is in jeopardy, and Mr. Logan stated that the resolution could be
phrased so that the purpose and intent would reflect general muni-
cipal purpose, it could be used for any municipal purpose.
CM TIRSELL MOVED TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE CASE PRESENTLY
BEFORE THE COURT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, WHICH WAS APPROVED UNANI-
MOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. l78-74
RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 79-74
AND DIRECTING THE eITY ATTORNEY TO DISMISS
THE CONDEMNATION APPROVED THEREIN.
eM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO BEGIN NEW CONDEMNATION
PROCEEDINGS WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE USE FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES:
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM-29-66
November 12, 1974
(P.H. re Use of Park Area for
Location of Fire Station 1)
The City Attorney stated that he would prefer that the resolution
be brought back before the Council so that the resolution would reflect
the exact properties that are being taken so that the Council is
aware of what is being adopted by the resolution and which will include
a property description.
eM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE eOUNeIL DESIGNATE THE PROPERTY UPON COM-
PLETION OF CONDEMNATION AS THE SITE FOR FIRE STATION #li MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. em Futch commented that the circle indicates
there is only one section of empty land that does not overlap and
that is between the Robert Livermore Park and Valley East, and he
felt that the proposed location is the most optimum and the Council
would only be postponing a decision to consider other sites.
Cm Miller stated he would not make any decision until he had the
pros and cons as he sees other reasons why other locations might be
considered, including the need for a downtown station, and the fact
that Valley East is covered by the agreement with LLL. Also he
felt the downtown location does provide an overlap for the major
areas of the city, not only the commercial area.
Cm Futch remarked that em Miller implies there was no additional in-
formation provided, however Chief Baird has furnished information,
and drew the circles, and it is clear to him the reason this location
was chosen. As far as the agreement with LLL there is no assurance
that it will be maintained in perpetuity. He felt a careful study
had been made and he accepted the jUdgment of Chief Baird and the
insurance company.
em Miller however maintained that he had asked for more detail on
the sites that had been considered and this is the information he
still wanted. As far as the circles, they overlap in different
places and the question is where the best place is to overlap, and
he wanted an opportunity for more discussion with the Fire ehief's
reasons before them in writing.
Cm Turner commented there was no guarantee that LLL would continue
to offer their services, but even if they did the circle would still
include the Valley East area, and he felt there were other options
to be considered and did not want to make a decision at this time.
A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME WHICH PASSED
3-2 WITH CM TURNER AND MILLER DISSENTING.
Mayor Pritchard summarized the Council's action to mean that the
fire station will be located on property that is currently under
condemnation to be added to the City's park system, and the resolution
of intent is to include uses for municipal purposes in the condemna-
tion which action will delay the construction of the fire station
for a year.
(
I
\
PUBLIC HEARING RE ADOPTION
OF MUNIC eODE AMENDMENTS RE
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE and
UNIFORM BUILDING eODE STANDARDS
1973 Edition and UNIFORM FIRE
CODE, 1973 Edition
Statute requires conduct of a public hearing following introduction
of the required ordinances. This matter has received the detailed
review and approval of the staff and our Board of Appeals.
Mayor Pritchard asked if there were any questions of the staff before
he opened the public hearing.
CM-29-67
November l2, 1974
(P.H. re Uniform Bldg Codes
and Uniform Fire Code)
Cm Futch asked if the ordinance adopting insulation standards
might be in conflict with the proposed ordinance, and the Chief
Building Inspector advised him there would be no conflict. Mayor
Pritchard added that local standards which exceed the code are
valid and not preempted by the code.
Cm Miller stated he was under the impression that the question of
the survey markers was to have been discussed in conjunction with
the uniform building code.
Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing at this time and invited
anyone in the audience to address the Council, however no comments
were voiced and on MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND
BY UNANIMOUS APPROVAL THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
The adoption of the ordinances was continued to the end of the
agenda.
LEASE RE "THE BARN"
The current lease on the Barn structure located on our community
park-civic center property will expire on October 27. Although
the structure does serve as a cultural-recreational facility and
is heavily used, the structure is dilapidated and unattractive to
the neighborhood and it is recommended that LARPD be notified that
the building will be razed at the end of a six month term.
CM MILLER MOVED TO EXTEND THE LEASE ON THE BARN FOR FIVE YEARS,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RECESS
AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL COUNCILMEMBERS
PRESENT.
ANNEXATION REQUEST
SPRINGTOWN SECTOR
(The Peoples Church)
An inquiry has been received seeking the view of the City as to
annexation of a parcel of property north of I-580 and west of
Springtown Blvd., about five acres in size. The applicant wishes
to erect a church and is willing to annex, or if desired execute
a sewer connection agreement, and the staff has recommended that
it be referred to the staff for consideration as it is felt that
a sewer connection agreement may be the best.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE STAFF FOR RE-
COMMENDATION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND THE MOTION PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Steve Riggle, pastor of the Peoples Church, commented their only
concern is the time limitation since their present facilities
have had to be vacated and they have moved into a school building
until they are able to construct the building.
NORMA WAY-MITRA WAY TRAFFIC STUDY
A study was made and report submitted by the Public Works Director
regarding the complaints of traffic problems in the area of Norma
Way and Mitra Street, and the Mayor suggested that this item be
CM-29-68
November 12, 1974
(Traffic Study - Norma
Way & Mitra Way)
be continued to another meeting. inasmuch as the interested parties
had to leave and asked that it be put over.
em Tirsell suggested that if it is continued that the owners of the
apartments in the area be contacted to advise them that the matter will
be discussed as the people in the area feel the apartments contribute
to the traffic problems.
The Public Works Director commented that there are recommendations
included in the report which might be helpful, and if they are followed
it might during the interim give them a chance to see how it is func-
tioning, and if there is still a serious problem, it can be referred
to the Council again.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK, SEeONDED
BY eM FUTCH, WITH THE SUGGESTION THAT IT COME UNDER UNFINISHED BUSINESS,
AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
em Turner stated that in line with the traffic, along East Avenue
the whole apartment complex is creating a traffic hazard and there
are also large trucks parked there, and Mr. Lee stated it was his
intention to recommend prohibition of parking on East Avenue and
also placement of crosswalks at Mitra and Norma Way and paint the
curbs red back from the intersection. He felt these things would
make an improvementi also parking could be limited along one side
of Norma Way around the curve and these things could perhaps be
done in stages. Mr. Lee stated these improvements could be made, with
Council approval, and have the matter continued for two weeks to
evaluate the situation.
THE MOTION WAS AMENDED THAT THE ITEM BE CONTINUED FOR TWO WEEKS,
AT MR. LEE'S SUGGESTION.
REFUSE COLLECTION SERVICES
The City Manager explained that the present rubbish collection contract
expired December 31, 1973, and prior to that time the city joined in
a joint powers agreement effort with ten or eleven other public juris-
dictions in Alameda County served by the Oakland Scavenger Company
in trying to arrive at a uniform type of accounting system that would
not only be valid and reliable from the standpoint of the financial
input but would also be uniform for use throughout the company's
enterprise. A consultant firm was retained by the joint powers agency,
to investigate the matter and they spent six months in their study and
came up with a recommended plan which was referred to a steering com-
mittee made up of financial technicians from each of the public juris-
dictions involved. Our City Council did concur with the recommended
plan as outlined by the consultants and the steering committee, and
from that point on it has been a matter of trying to get the machinery
in effect to implement the system which required the concurrence in
participation of the company. Since it was expected that the new
plan would assist in trying to arrive at a fair rate of return to the
company and since the company had applied for an extension of its
contract, he had recommended that the contract be extended for six
months and every effort was made to have the process effectuated,
however it was not done and an additional six month extension was
agreed upon which will expire December 31, 1974. Mr. Parness stated
a letter from the Oakland Director of Finance indicates that the new
system is just about ready for use and a new uniform contract has been
devised and under review by the Oakland City Attorney's office, but
in the meantime we are approaching the second deadline. Mr. Parness
stated it necessary to have Council direction on one of two alternatives:
1) to utilize the new system which is ready for application although
CM-29-69
November l2, 1974
(re Refuse Collection)
not formally established by virtue of the new ordinance not being uni-
formally adopted by all jurisdictions. This city would be the first
jurisdiction to use the process which would require the cooperation
of the company in the way of full and public disclosure of expendi-
ture and revenue experience for our city over the term of their con-
tract history. That is necessary in order to analyze what their
financial experience has been in order to determine what a fair rate
of return would be to them under a given set of rate circumstances.
The Council has the discretion of accepting it or modifying it based
upon what level of service is desired. That alternative has to be
adhered to in order to establish a new rate and to allow the exten-
sion of time remaining on the contract which would be four years.
2) Decline that method and merely instruct the staff to prepare spe-
cifications and bidding forms for the receipt of new competitive bids
for a new rubbish collection contract for whatever number of years
the Council decides upon prior to the official solicitation of bids.
Mr. Parness stressed that one or the other of the alternatives should
be used but not both in all fairness to the company.
Cm Futch commented that the present company is cooperating with the
recycling center and asked if this service could be a requirement
regardless of which alternative is decided upon, and Mr. Parness
stated it could be specified; however, all amenities required are
included in the rates. Cm Futch added that the recycling program
has a tremendous benefit to numerous community organizations.
Cm Miller asked if there was not disclosure of finances approximately
five years ago when there was a rate discussion, and Mr. Parness
stated that at that time there was no bidding process.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPLY TO THE RUBBISH FRANCHISE STEERING COMMITTEE
FOR AN ANALYSIS OF THE REVENUE EXPENDITURE EXPERIENeE AND FORMULA-
TION OF A PROPOSED BASIC RATE TO BE USED IN CONTRACT EXTENSION~
CM FUTCH SECONDED THE MOTION.
Cm Miller stated he would have to oppose the motion, not because he
was dissatisfied with the company, as it has been doing a good job
and he does appreciate their efforts with the recyclying center,
but he felt the motion as it stands sets up a monopoly of a public
utility and he thought there should be open bidding.
MOTION WAS VOTED ON AT THIS TIME AND PASSED 4-l WITH CM MILLER
DISSENTING.
COMMUNICATION RE FUNDS FOR
SOCIETY OF AMERICAN INDIANS
A communication had been received from the Society of American
Indians requesting funds in the amount of $500 for the May Festival
of Indian Arts and Crafts. This matter had been postponed from the
previous meeting for consideration at this time.
Mrs. Maria E. Butts stated she did not have m~ch to add after what
they had expressed in their letter to the Council as their financial
records are open to review, and she asked that the Council speak.
em Miller stated he was sorry but he would have to oppose the re-
quest as he has opposed all such requests consistently as he feels
it is wrong for the eouncil to provide money for private organizations
and their policy should be upheld even though they have made two
exceptions.
Cm Tirsell stated her regret that she must also oppose the request
for funds, and remarked that inherent in the motion to fund the
rodeo parade was instruction to the Jaycees to find some
CM-29-70
November l2, 1974
(Request for Funds)
alternative means of funding to work toward deleting that subsidy and
in the motion to use the taxing ability of the city to provide holiday
decorations, there were specific directions to the Chamber of eommerce
that they would be on their own in three years in providing decorations.
Cm Tirsell commented that as an organization you are stronger being
independent, pointing out that many of the organizations she belonged
to do benevolent work and it is a constant struggle, but you also
maintain your independence. She mentioned she had a lot of suggestions
she would be glad to discuss with the society and could refer them
to people who might be willing to help with a very worthwhile project.
Cm Futch stated that the City has been trying to phase out this type
of grant which has been difficult, and he felt the Council had to
draw the line somewhere.
em Turner agreed in the statement voiced by Cm Tirsell in that the
society should remain independent, and if they wish to continue their
project, it would be necessary for them to do the fund raising.
Mayor Pritchard stated he had debated a long time, and he is familiar
with what the local Society of American Indians does with their money
and he has personally been involved with the Indians in other locations
having driven to Holbrook, Arizona with truckloads of needed materials
which had been collected, and in comparing the causes for which the
funds they have allocated have been used, he felt that the sum re-
quested by the society was more important than tinsel on our poles
at ehristmas time and he would oppose any motion to not fund.
CM TIRSELL MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR FUNDS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER,
WHICH PASSED 4-l WITH THE CHAIR 'DISSENTING.
Cm Miller added that he, too, felt this was a more worthy cause than
the others which had been granted, but nevertheless felt they should
deny the request.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Option Agreement -
Rhew Property)
The option agreement was presented to the Council at the last meeting,
with respect to the grade separation project which was negotiated
for the estate of Marcella Rhew and was referred to the staff for
review. The City Attorney's report indicates that the right-of-way
agent recommends the settlement to be equitable.
RESOLUTION NO. l76-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACeEPTANCE OF OPTION AGREEMENT
(Rhew Property: Grade Separation Project Parcel No. 20)
(Report re Right-of-Entry
Permit, Standard Oil Co.)
This right-of-entry permit has been executed by Standard Oil Co.
so that the City may enter upon the property in connection with our
~ track relocation project. This is so as not to cause any delays
( prior to our actual acquisition of the subject area. The permit has
been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's Office.
RESOLUTION NO. 177-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
Right-of-Entry: Standard Oil eompany of California.
CM-29-7l
November l2, 1974
Report re Express Bus Trail Program
A report from BART was submitted for informational purposes now,
but to be referred to at the conclusion of the six month trial
period. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for
more information.
Progress Report - Planning Program
Grunwald-Crawford Associates
A progress report was submitted from Grunwald-Crawford Accociates
regarding the City of Livermore Planning Program.
Appointment of Member to Greens Comm.
An appointment had been tentatively made to the Greens Committee,
however Cm Futch was not present at the time the decision was
made and he asked that this be removed from the Consent Calendar
until a later date.
Report from em Tirsell re COVA
An informational report from Cm Tirsell
Agencies was submitted to the Council.
posed bylaws and budget of the agency.
suggested revisions of the bylaws.
re Congress of Valley
The report included the pro-
Cm Miller offered a few
Minutes - Various
Committees
Minutes were received as follows:
Airport Advisory Committee - October 7, 1974
Design Review Committee - October 23
Housing Authority - September l7
Noise Abatement Committee - November 6
Payroll and Claims
There were one-hundred thirteen claims in the amount of $204,783.77
and two hundred eight payroll warrants in the amount of $86,268.l2
ordered paid as approved by the Director of Finance, dated ll-l2-74.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE CONSENT CALENDAR BE APPROVED WITH THE
REMOVAL OF ITEM 2.3 FOR DISCUSSION LATER IN THE MEETING, AND DELE-
TION OF 2.5. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD AND APPROVED
UNANIMOUSLY.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(re MTC Staff Meeting)
Mr. Parness reported that he has submitted notes from the MTC staff
meeting regarding the widening of I-580 which he and Cm Miller attended.
He has been told that MTC has the final say with respect to widening
I-580 and that they will be holding a hearing at which time the Council's
input may be presented.
Cm Miller suggested a subcommittee appointment to prepare something
for the public hearing.
CM-29-72
November 12, 1974
(MTC Hearing Scheduled)
Mayor Pritchard suggested that Cm Tirsell and Cm Miller prepare some-
thing, Cm Futch commented that he would like to attend the meeting,
and Cm Turner stated that since he has a different view with respect
to the widening of I-580 than the other members of the Council he
should be allowed some type of input.
It was noted that any comments em Turner might have would not reflect
the majority opinion of the Council and would have to be made as per-
sonal opinion comments, and the Council concluded that they would like
em Miller and em Futch to prepare something to submit to MTC at the
hearing next Monday night, November lSth.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE eOUNCIL
(Status Reports re
Railroad Project)
Cm Turner stated that he would like to start receiving weekly reports
as to the status of the railroad project and the funding vs the work
being done.
em Miller asked if progress payments have been made and Mr. Parness
indicated there have been payments and Cm Miller wondered what per-
centage of progress payments have been made, of the total funding
and Mr. Parness replied that it depends on the amount of work done
and that thus far it has been very little because little work has
been done.
(Housing for Mr. Pompileo)
em Turner stated that the LARPD Board will be meeting to discuss hous-
ing for Mike Pompileo and moved that the Council support that
EVERY EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO FIND ADEQUATE HOUSING FOR HIM AND
THAT THIS BE TRANSMITTED BY LETTER OR VERBALLY, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL
AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Intersection of Charlotte
Way and East Avenue)
em Turner stated that the intersection of Charlotte Way and East Avenue
is particularly hazardous during the time the lab traffic is stacked
up on the way to work and wondered if something couldn't be done by
the policemen at the lab to control Charlotte Way during this time.
Mr. Lee explained that studies are being conducted for East Avenue
and that in time there will be a median and merging lane at Charlotte
Way and in the future there will probably a traffic light at that
intersection.
(Final Environmental Impact
Report re I-580 Widening)
Cm Miller stated that the Council did not receive a copy of the environ-
mental impact report (final draft) for the widening of I-580 until two
~ days after Cal-Trans' advertised deadline date, which is not in con-
formance with the Council's environmental quality guidelines and con-
sequently the Federal Highway Administration and the DOT have violated
the CEQ guidelines they are supposed to be Observing. The 30 days
should begin the day the interested parties receive a copy of the
final environmental impact statement and everyone has not received
a copy. CM MILLER THEN MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SEND A TELEGRAM TO
THE DOT AND FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION NOTING THAT THEY ARE IN
VIOLATION OF THE GUIDELINES; THE REVIEW PERIOD CANNOT END ANY SOONER
THAN 30 DAYS AND UNTIL THE 30 DAY TIME PERIOD HAS EXPIRED THEY CANNOT
COMMENCE WORK ON THE PROJECT, seconded by Cm Futch and passed by a
unanimous vote.
CM-29-73
_._..___._'_.__m._..."'.____..,_,~__.____~~__ .
November l2, 1974
(Agenda Items)
Cm Miller stated that he would like to schedule a couple of items
on the agenda for discussion: l} Council policy regarding condemna-
tion for private purposesi 2} policy regarding benefit districtsi
3) policy regarding prohibition of construction of any type without
a building permiti and 4) policy with respect to amount of grading
that can be done without a building permit.
(Underground Ordinance)
em Miller commented that there is a draft of an Underground Ordinance
which should be scheduled for council consideration as soon as possible.
(BART Planning)
Cm Futch commented that he would be interested to know if the City is
adequately considering and planning for BART as our downtown development
and railroad track relocation project proceeds. He stated that he reali-
zes that BART coming to Livermore is in the distant future but possibly
it would be worthwhile to ask the BART people to consider purchasing loca-
tions for their station and obtaining right-of-way locations prior to
development taking place.
(Special Item)
em Futch stated that Lois Hill has compiled slides and music regarding
the decline of our natural resources and suggested that this appear
as a Special Item on the agenda.
The council agreed that they would be interested in asking Mrs. Hill
to make such a presentation and that this be scheduled at some time
the agenda is short.
(Greenville North)
em Futch stated that before he left for vacation an appraisal had
been made for the Greenville North park site, condemnation proceedings
were to have begun and Mr. Parness was to meet with Bevilacqua regard-
ing the price of the land and wondered about the status during his
absence.
Mr. Parness indicated that he was very sorry to report that little
else has been done and that the land owners simply refuse to respond
to efforts made by Mr. Parness to meet and discuss the matter.
em Futch suggested that thi~ information be transmitted to Francis
Harper and Elizabeth Mondon, representatives of the Greenville North
citizens and is sure they can stir up some action.
(Grading Ordinance)
Cm Futch noted that about a year ago the grading ordinance was sent
to the Planning Commission with the changes the Council felt to be
desirable.
Mr. Musso explained that the Planning eommission has acted on the
ordinance, a technical committee has been formed regarding hillside
development and the matter will be coming back to the Council.
eM-29-74
November 12, 1974
(Trailer Ordinance)
em Futch asked if Mr. Musso would prepare a report regarding the
enforcement of the Trailer Ordinance including the number of enforce-
ment actions taken. He stated that he is hearing complaints that
the eity has an ordinance that is not being enforced.
Mr. Musso indicated that he will report back to the eouncil.
(Mail Delivery Problems)
em Tirsell stated that she has recevied telephone calls from citizens
who have to receive their mail at the post office because they are
not getting it at their home and it is virtually impossible to pick
up mail at the post office for someone who works and wondered if some-
one has talked to the postmaster about this problem and if so, per-
haps someone could speak with him again about the problem because
the Christmas season is coming and this will really be a problem for
these people.
Cm Futch stated that in his opl.nl.on the service at the post office
is going downhill very rapidly and doesn't know what can be done
to receive action but something definitely must be done.
The Council felt it would be especially helpful if there would be
a line specifically for mail pickup for those residents having
problems and not getting mail at their homes and the staff will
speak to the postmaster again about a special line for these people.
(Firearms Business in
Residential Area)
Cm Tirsell stated that she read in the paper where items were stolen
from a home whe~e a firearms business was being conducted and felt
it was unusual to hear of such a business in a residential area and
asked that the staff check into the matter of such a business in a
residential area.
(Hearing re Emission
Standards )
Mayor Pritchard stated that the Senate eommittee and Local Government
is holding a hearing in Livermore on November 25th at 9:30 a.m. in
the Library multipurpose room to discuss SB 1543 regarding the alloca-
tion of emissions standards and would encourage each member of the
Council to attend the hearing to present personal opinions on the bill.
(East Avenue Crosswalk)
Mayor Pritchard wondered if anything has been done to solve the problem
of water at the crosswalk on East Avenue in front of the High School
and suggested that perhaps a wooden bridge would help and Mr. Lee
commented that the ultimate solution is an extension of the storm
drain. Perhaps this will be done next fiscal year and he suggested
that it be considered during the next budget session. Mr. Lee stated
that he would certainly look into the suggestion of the wooden bridge
as a temporary solution to the problem.
eM-29-75
November l2, 1974
eOMMUNIeATION FROM
ALA. CTY. RE VAS eo RD.
A letter was received from the Sheriff of Alameda County indicating
that with respect to letters received from the Council as to speed
on Vasco Road, enforcement of the speed limit will begin immediately.
No action was taken on this matter.
COMMUNICATION FROM BD.
OF DIRECTORS OF ALAMEDA
COUNTY RE ALAMEDA CREEK
A letter was received from the Board of Directors of Alameda County
Water District regarding the flow of Alameda Creek noting that the
solution to the problem of pollution is elimination, not dilution.
No action was taken on this item.
COMMUNICATION RE USE OF
ARROYO DEL VALLE PROPERTY
A letter was received from the office of the County Administrator
indicating that all bids for the sale or utilization of the Arroyo
del Valle property have been rejected and the County Administrator
has been directed to work with the recreation district and school
district in developing further proposals for the utilization of the
property.
LARPD will be discussing this item tomorrow night and the County
is awaiting input from LARPD.
Cm Miller suggested that a letter be sent to the County asking
that the property be leased to LARPD, with which the Council con-
curred.
COpy OF LETTER SENT
TO MRS. EULER RE 1-580
The Department of Transportation responded to Mrs. Euler's letter
suggesting that trucks be prohibited from using I-580 during cer-
tain hours by saying that they could not favorably consider this
suggestion because the only other route available would be Route 24
and the suggestion would add to the congestion during commute hours
for Route 24.
Cm Miller noted that a representative of MTC feels the concept of
prohibiting trucks for a short period in the morning and afternoon
would be effective.
eOMMUNICATION FROM CURA
ASKING FOR COUNCIL
REPRESENTATIVE ON BOARD
A letter was received from Richard A. Bailey, ehairman of the Board
of Directors for C.U.R.A., Inc. (Carnales Unidos Reformando Adictos
Brothers United in Reforming Addicts) stating that the Board has
four vacancies and would like a Council member to serve on the Board.
Mayor Pritchard stated that the eouncilmembers are presently serving
as representatives to many organizations and that perhaps the matter
should be referred to the HORIZONS counselors who might be interested
in serving on the Board.
CM-29-76
November l2, 1974
COpy OF ALBANY RESOLUTION
REGARDING PT&T RATE HIKE
A letter was received from the City of Albany with the attachment
of a resolution uriging that the California Public Utilities Commission
deny the requested rate increases of Pacific Telephone and Telegraph
Company.
Cm Miller stated that he has spoken with Mr. Piepenburg of Pacific
Telephone regarding the requested rate increase and that the reasons
for the increase appear to be justifiedi however there is one item
that bothers em Miller which is that in recent years the PUC has
increased the rate of return allowed the Telephone Company by sub-
stantial amounts. Although the reason for the rates may be reasonable
if they are not approved it is equivalent to a decrease in the rate
of return and he feels the rate of return should be decreased and
MOVED TO SUPPORT DENIAL OF THE RATE INeREASE, which died for lack of
a second.
eM TURNER MOVED THAT THE LETTER FROM THE CITY OF ALBANY BE NOTED FOR
FILING, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting).
Mr. Piepenburg, Manager of Pacific Telephone, stated that they are
not aSking for an increase in the rate of return but rather slightly
increased rates to allow them the rate of return they have been allowed.
REPORT AND COMMUNICATION
RE BIKE PATHS
The report from the Public Works Director and the communication from
Judge John A. Lewis was postponed to November 25th to allow review
of the matter by the Livermore Bikeways Association.
REPORT RE AREA LIGHT-
ING FOR HOLMES STREET
& CONCANNON BOULEVARD
Cm Turner stated that with respect to the report regarding the light-
ing at the intersection of Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard, the
report did not really answer his question about lighting for the
intersection.
Mr. Lee explained that the staff concluded that though there may
not be an excess amount of light at the intersection it is adequate
and the new traffic signal installation will commence in about 90
days which will include additional lighting and it would not be
practical to go ahead with additional lighting at this time.
REPORT RE EAST COUNTY
GOVT. CENTER SITE LOCATION
The City Manager reported that the County has retained a consultant
firm (Ratcliff, Slama & Cadwalader) to recommend a site for locating
several County administrative, health and judicial structures within
the valley. The proposed site is on Sunol Boulevard, adjacent to
the new City of Pleasanton civic center.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has received suggestions from other
people and personally feels that consideration should first be given
to the Santa Rita site because it it centrally located, AND SO MOVED,
BY CM TURNER AND SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
em Turner noted that this land is already owned by the County and
the jail also is already located there.
CM-29-77
November l2, 1974
REPORT RE PROUD
COUNTRY PARK SITE
The report from the Planning Director regarding the Proud Country
park site was submitted to the eouncil for information and no
action was required.
DISCUSSION RE EIR FOR
OVERPASS STRueTURE FOR
REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER
em Miller stated that the City of Pleasanton intends to prepare
and file a negative declaration on the overpass for the proposed
regional shopping center. He stated that the City of Pleasanton
expects people to come from out of town and use the overpass when
coming to the shopping centeri consequently, it is not just a trivial
matter that they can forget. There are growth inducing aspects of it
for the area for which the overpass provides access and would suggest
that the eity of Livermore suggest to the City of Pleasanton that they
have hearings on the matter and that a negative declaration is not
reasonable.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DIREeT THE STAFF TO SEND A LETTER TO THE CITY OF
PLEASANTON SAYING THAT THE eITY OF LIVERMORE FEELS A NEGATIVE DE CLARA-
TON IS NOT SUFFICIENT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Turner stated that prior to voting for the motion he would like
to know, in writing, what prompted them to file a negative declara-
tion.
Cm Miller replied that their reason for filing a negative declara-
tion was because they felt it had no impact on anything. When it
was suggested that perhaps the matter could be postponed for a week,
em Miller was concerned about the time element.
It was the Council's decision to continue this item to the meeting
scheduled to be held at 5:00 p.m., Wednesday, November l3, in the
City Hall Conference Room.
ORDINANCE ADOPTING
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
ORDINANCE NO. 853
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL
PROVISIONS, OF CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO BUILDINGS, BY
THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 6.l THEREOF, RELATING TO
ADOPTION OF UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, VOLUME I, 1970
EDITIONi THE UNIFORM BUILDING eo DE STANDARDSi 1971
SUPPLEMENT TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, OF ARTICLE
I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS, OF THE LIVERMORE
CITY eODE, 1959.
ON MOTION OF eM MILLER, SEeONDED BY CM TURNER, THE ABOVE ORDINANeE
WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.
ORDINANCE ADOPTING
UNIFORM FIRE CODE
ORDINANCE NO. 854
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE II, RELATING TO FIRE
PREVENTION eODE, OF CHAPTER 9, RELATING TO FIRE
PROTECTION, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
CM-29-78
November 12, 1974
(Fire Code Ordinance)
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
APPROVAL THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE
RS ZONING DISTRICT
A public hearing had been held and an ordinance prepared regarding
the RS Zoning District for adoption at this timei ~owever, em Miller
questioned why RS-l.5 had not been included in the ordinance and
was advised by the Planning Director that it could not be included
inasmuch as it was not advertised, and the item is now before the
Planning Commission.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that perhaps they should postpone adoption
of the ordinance at this time until the RS-l.5 could be included,
and the eity Attorney indicated that it would save an extra publi-
cation of the ordinance. After some discussion the majority of the
Council concurred that there was no urgency to adopt the ordinance.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE eONTINUED FOR ONE MONTH, SEeONDED
BY CM FUTCH AND THE MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH CM MILLER DISSENTING
REPORT RE EXPRESS BUS
TRIAL PROGRAM
The report from BART regarding the express bus trial program had been
removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion at this time.
Mayor Pritchard asked why there were only three stops scheduled in
Livermore, and why some of the suggested stops had been deleted,
especially the hospital stop.
The Public Works Director explained that it had been originally
intended to have the hospital stop and also a stop at Murdell Lane
which is just outside the city limits, and the County felt that was
an improper location as there were problems on the north side of
Stanley Blvd which forced them back to the intersection of Murrieta
Blvd. and Stanley Blvd. which was so close to the hospital stop that
they combined the two stops.
Cm Miller offered that use of the BART bus is for people traveling
between Livermore and Pleasanton which would include those needing
to use the hospital, and he felt the hospital stop should be put back
in. em Miller also suggested that there be stops at Portola and
North Livermore Avenue, and if the busses go up "L" Street there could
also be one 'in that vicinity. Also the bus should go to the laboratory,
to the Louis Shopping area for the low income and elderly housing pro-
jects and the Granada Shopping Center or El Caminito as the City should
make an effort to encourage the system especially since there are so
many stops in Pleasanton.
Mr. Lee explained there is also another side - if there are too many
stops, everyone boarding a bus in Livermore would have to make all
the stops which slows down the trip. He felt that Pleasanton should
attempt to have fewer stops and Livermore should only have a few.
He further explained that there had been discussion concerning the
run to the laboratories, but they have not been authorized to make
the run out there as yet.
em Turner agreed that there should be as few stops as possible because
the whole idea was to have express bus service.
CM-29-79
November l2, 1974
(Express Bus Service)
Cm Miller felt strongly that a bus to the laboratory should have
priority in order to make efficient use of the system.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ASK BART TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
STOP AT THE HOSPITAL, POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF SERVICE TO THE LAB WITH
A STOP AT APPROXIMATELY LOUIS SHOPPING eENTERi eONSIDER A STOP IN
THE AREA OF PORTOLA AND NORTH LIVERMORE OR L STREET TO SERVE NORTH
LIVERMORE AND THE POSSIBILITY OF A FEEDER LINE FROM GRANADA VILLAGE;
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Tirsell commented that there will probably be problems with park-
ing of cars wherever there are bus stops and part of the ability
to ride a bus is not to drive your car and clog the streets - the
people should have someone drive them to the bus stop or ride a
bicycle and she felt that they should investigate the possibility of
bicycle stands at Murrieta with bicycle locking.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION'WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at ll:50 p.m. to an adjourned
meeting at 5:00 p.m., Wednesday, November 13, 1974, at City Hall
eonference Rooom for the EIR report of Pleasanton on the Stoneridge
Shopping Centeri immediately following that there will be an execu-
tive session to discuss labor negotiations and the appointment to
the Greens Committee. On Thursday at 5:00 p.m., November l4, 1974,
they will adjourn to a her executive session to discuss three
items: current liti t' n, pending l' tion nd personnel matters.
ATTEST
) Cl.ty Clerk
Livermore, California
APPROVE
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - November l3, 1974
An adjourned regular meeting was held in the conference room, City
Hall, 2250 First Street, on Wednesday, November l3, 1974. The meet-
ing was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Pritchard.
Present: em Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Discussion: EIR - Overpass Structures, Stoneridge Shopping Center
A brief discussion was held on the possibility of the City commenting
on the proposed overpass structures planned for the shopping center
by the City of Pleasanton and it was decided that the matter was not
to be pursued.
ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
THE MATTER WAS TABLED.
The meeting then adjourned to an executive session in the Court
ehambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue, to meet with the Fire Department,
staff and negotiating team for discussion of pending labor relations
matters. Meeting adj ned 6:30 p . to hursday, ll-l4-74 at 3070 East
Avenue.
ATTEST
Cl.ty Clerk
LiVermore, ealifornia
APPROVE
CM-29-80
Adjourned Regular Meeting - November 14, 1974
An adjourned regular meeting was held on Thursday, November 14,
1974, at the Livermore Mortuary, 3070 East Avenue. The meeting
was called to order at 5:l5 p.m. by Mayor Pritchard.
PRESENT: Cm Turner, Miller Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
The Council adjourned to an executive meeting to discuss current
and pending litigation, appointments to the Greens Committee and
Noise Abatement Committee.
The meeting
APPROVE
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of November 18, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on November 18, 1974, 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 Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard
ABSENT: Cm Futch and Miller (Excused to attend MTC Hearing)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL ITEM
Presentation of Beauti-
fication Committee Awards
Certificates were presented to two retiring Beautification Committee
Chairman - Rick Irby and Tim Cody.
(
Awards were presented for landscaping or other outstanding features
concerning their homes to the following:
Teofilo Aglibut, 245 Junction Avenue
Gaspar Tejada, 257 Junction Avenue
Jim Kucala, 5423 Evelyn Way
Mr. and Mrs. Robert BeaSley, 5409 Betty Circle
David Waters, 5412 Charlotte Way
Henry Femons, 4172 Drake Way
Verba Auten, 2287 Palm Avenue
Herman Rhinehart, l023 Sherry Way
Henry & ehristine Andreski, 1463 Heidelberg
William and Marge Martin, l420 Naples Way
Ronald E. Smith, 1598 Helsinki Way
David M. Butler, 405 Cedar
Neal and Juanita Russell, 155 El Caminito
Milton and Marilyn Moebus, 434 Encino Drive
Decals were also awarded to Walt Davies and Lynn Watson in recog-
nition of their former service on the committee.
CM-29-8l
November l8, 1974
OPEN FORUM
Re Shopping Center and
Assessment District
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, referred to a newspaper article regard-
ing the shopping center already built and was told the article was
erroneOUSi also he questioned the make up of the assessment district.
PUBLIe HEARING RE REZONING
FROM ID TO OPEN SPAeE-AGRICULTURAL
DISTRICT TO OTHER DISTRICTS -
East and West Sides of Kitty Hawk Blvd
The public hearing regarding the possible rezoning from ID to Open
Space and Agricultural Districts or to Other Districts provided by the
zoning Ordinance, property bounded by I-580 on the east and west sides
of Kittyhawk Blvd., south of Las positas Blvd. was reopened by the
Mayor.
Mr. Musso briefly explained that the reason the zoning action was
initiated was due to the adoption of the I-I, II, and III zones to
replace replace the ID and IM Districts, applicable to the airport-
golf course area. The zoning recommended for this area by the
Planning Commission was I-I which allows 50% coverage. He also
talked about land on the east side of Kittyhawk Road which had
once been agricultural land.
Written testimony was received from Joseph A. Schenone of Haley,
Schenone, Tucker, Birchfield & Smith, who indicated that he had
no further testimony other than to request that the Council leave
the zoning agricultural until a more practical solution for zoning
can be accomplished.
CM MILLER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SINCE THERE WAS NO
FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The Planning Commission recommended that both Area land 2 be
zoned I-l with approval to be based on the following findings:
l. That the proposed rezoning is in conformance with the
General Plan.
2. That the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare
requires the adoption of the proposed rezoning.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, SECONDED BY eM TIRSELL.
em Tirsell suggested tha~ perhaps the motion should include
direction to the staff to prepare an ordinance WHICH CM TURNER
ACCEPTED AS PART OF THE MOTION.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Committee Minutes
Minutes were received from the following committees:
Beautification eommittee - October 2, 1974
Design Review Committee - November 6, 1974
Planning Commission - October 29, 1974
Cm Turner remarked that he is very impressed with the amount of
work being done by the Beautification Committee and would like
to express appreciation of their effort.
CM-29-82
November 18, 1974
Report re Bicycle
Licensing Program
The City Manager reported on new legislation concerning licensing
of bicycles and that the Department of Motor Vehicles will obtain
and sell a standard statewide bicycle "plate".
/~
Appointments
The following resolutions appointing members to the following
committees were adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. l79-74
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO GREENS COMMITTEE
(Mrs. Terry Burnsed)
RESOLUTION NO. l80-74
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A NOISE ABATE-
MENT COMMITTEE AND APPOINTING MEMEMBERS THERETO.
Payroll & Claims
There were 143 warrants in the amount of $73,789.60, dated
November l8, 1974, approved and ordered paid by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY eM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY COUNCILMEMBERS
(Wooden Pedestrian Bridge
So. L Street & Arroyo Rd)
em Turner stated that he has received complaints from bike riders
with respect to the wooden portion of the Arroyo bridge. Nails
are protruding so that bikes cannot cross and Cm Turner asked that
the staff check the bridge.
(Letters to Candidates
re Campaign Signs)
Cm Turner asked that the Beautification Committee be directed to send
letters to people who were candidates during the recent election and
ask that they remove campaign signs that are still posted around the
City.
(Resolution Commending
Mr. Parness)
~
(
Mayor Pritchard read the resolution commending Mr. Parness which
was adopted by the Council during a previous meeting. The reso-
lution commended Mr. Parness on his election of President of the
City Managers' Department of the League of California Cities, and
was presented to Mr. Parness at this time.
COMMUNICATION FROM
ROBERT ALLEN RE GOALS
A letter was received from Robert S. Allen regarding his goals as
the director of BART.
em Tirsell stated that perhaps Mr. Allen is confused as to what his
jurisdiction is and it might be helpful to have such outlined for
the Council and MOVED THAT THE BART BOARD BE CONTACTED WITH RESPEeT
CM-29-83
November 18, 1974
(Robert Allen re Goals-BART)
TO THE OUTLINE OF DUTIES OF A BART DIRECTOR AND TO SEND THEM A COpy
OF MR. ALLEN'S LETTER TO THE COUNCIL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Cm Turner read a statement prepared by him which indicated that it
would appear from statements made by Mr. Allen that he intends to
have BART bypass Livermore unless the City capitulates to his wishes.
REPORT RE S. P. SHOPPING
CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Mayor Pritchard explained that Mr. HaResworth is present this even-
ing to discuss the Southern Pacific Shopping Center Development and
is pressed for time and with the Council's concurrence moved to Item
5.8 on the agenda at this time.
Mr. Lee explained that the agreement is related to the S. P. Shopping
Center development and provides for the dedication of street right-
of-way on Railroad Avenue, adjacent to the developmenti it provides
for the City's acceptance of the improvements and bonding for the
improvements and also provides for the delay of certain improvements
as a result of the City's not having accepted a specific design for
Railroad Avenue and provides for bonding for those delayed improve-
ments. The agreement is also intended to reflect the decisions the
Council has made in previous meetings during which this matter has
been discussed. There is a supplemental agreement the company pro-
poses that provides for the dedication of some small parts of the
right-of-way westerly of the development, that will tie Railroad
Avenue into Stanley Boulevard, explaining that the S. P. Development
Company is the parent company and not the same company as the rail-
road development company and this is the reason for the supplemental
agreement providing for the dedication at a later time. The main
agreement is in order which the staff would like the eouncil to approve
and would like the supplemental agreement to be considered in conjunc-
tion with the main agreement because it is the same subject.
It was noted that prior to signing of the agreement the City Attorney
would like the matter of the easement dedication to be clarified and
would like to review this before it is signed. It is recommended
that approval of the agreement be given subject to this condition.
Mr. Logan, the City Attorney explained that there is no problem
with the Council agreeing to enter into a contract to convey but
would sugqest that it be subject to the City's seeing the standard
form of easement and approving it before the Council signs the
contract. Unfortunately, there was an exchange of letters earlier
in the proceedings on this with a letter sent by the So. Pacific
Development Company to the City which involved a misunderstanding
and some of the letters may tend to reflect, at some later date,
understandings that may be somewhat different than what the agree-
ment reflects. For purposes of this record and for what the Coun-
cil is now doing it should be clearly understood that the agreement
the Council has encompasses the entire understanding in the written
agreement and any letters or oral agreements outside of this written
agreement are not binding upon the City.
Mayor Pritchard asked if the supplemental agreement should be in-
cluded and Mr. Logan stated that he has no objection with the Council
approving the supplemental agreementi however, it should be approved
on a separate basis and not in the same resolution as the main agree-
ment. one motion could be made for two resolutions.
Mr. Hanessworth stated that the motion and resolutions as discussed
would be satisfactory but his main concern at this point is the
issuance of building permits and wondered if the issuance of build-
ing permits would be included in the resolutions.
Mr. Lee explained that the building permits would be issued immedi-
CM-29-84
November 18, 1974
(S.P. Shopping Center)
ately after the form of the standard agreement is approved by the
City Attorney.
Mr. Hanessworth indicated that they would like to start construction
tomorrow and Mr. Logan pointed out that all he needs to see is the
standard form of agreement and ~ doe~ p~tneed to see an executed
agreement . ~ Pt(:'J~k-~__<J
~A'::..
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESOLUTION RATIFYING
THE AGREEMENT SHOWN IN THE AGENDA WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE
ENTIRE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT IS EMBODIED IN THAT AGREEMENT, SEeONDED
BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 184-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
FOR DEDICATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF STREETS
(Southern Pacific Development Company)
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUPPLEMENTAL
AGREEMENT, eONDITIONED UPON REVIEW OF THE LEGAL MATERIAL BY THE
CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. l86-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT TO CONVEY EASE-
MENT (Southern Pacific Development Company).
A letter was received from the Public Works Agency of the County of
Alameda noting that the resurfacing of Vasco Road has been completed
and in accordance with the request of the City a speed zone survey
was conducted to determine whether or not the speed limit should be
lowered.
COMMUNICATION RE RESURFAC-
ING AND SPEED RE VASCO RD
Cm Tirsell asked that Mrs. Francis Harper of the Greenville North area
receive a copy of the letter from the County.
COMMUNIeATION EXPRESSING
APPRECIATION FOR USE
OF THE BARN
A letter expressing appreciation for use of The Barn was received
from the Livermore Valley Lithophiles, noted for filing.
eOMMUNICATION FROM
OAKLAND SCAVENGER CO.
r
A letter was received from Oakland Scavenger Company announcing
the location of their newly acquired property to be used as a
regional sanitary landfill for Alameda County which is in the
Altamont Hills approximately eight miles east of the City of Livermore.
The Council indicated that there were questions they would like
to ask about this matter and asked that the matter be scheduled on the
agenda for discussion at such time as a full Council is present.
COMMUNICATION FROM ALAMEDA
eOUNTY FLOOD eONTROL RE
BOARD POLICY
A copy of the policy for the protection of the ground water resources
in the Livermore Amador Valley which was adopted by the Zone 7 Board
of Directors was submitted to the City Council for information.
CM-29-85
November la, 1974
REPORT RE LIVERMORE VALLEY
RUNNING CLUB MARATHON
The City Manager reported that the Livermore Valley Running Club
has requested services of three police officers on December 7,
1974, during which time Valley Running Club will sponsor a Mara-
thon road race. Mr. Parness noted that it is not possible for
the eity of Livermore to afford regular police officers during
the times they have requested and it is recommended that the appli-
cant be required to retain the services of three reserve police
officers and pay the requisite fee.
Dan Moore, Secretary of the Livermore valley Running Club explained
the race that is scheduled to take place on December 7th which will
take place between the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton. They
feel there are four dangerous intersections through which the par-
ticipants will be running and they would like police officer assis-
tance in controlling traffic at these intersections.
It was noted that the group has received the necessary permits for
using the public streets for such a purpose and there was brief
discussion regarding the proposed race and events police officers
generally help with and it was noted that the organization generally
pays the cost of police assistance.
Mayor Pritchard wondered if there would be any objection on the part
of the staff if officers offered to donate their time and no objec-
tion was voiced.
Mr. Logan explained that if an officer would be acting in an offi-
cial capacity on a volunteer basis, he would be liable for anything
he would normally be liable for with respect to public liability.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE REQUEST FOR POLICE OFFICER ASSISTANCE WAS DENIED AND
THE POSSIBILITY THAT THERE WILL BE DONATED TIME WITH THE KNOW-
LEDGE THAT THEY WILL BE LIABLE, AS DURING OFFICIAL DUTY.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that Mr. Moore discuss the matter with
the eity Manager before approaching the police Department.
EMERGENey AMBULANCE
CONTRACT AMENDMENT
The City Manager explained that the terms of the agreement executed
between our City, Pleasanton and the County for provision of emer-
gency ambulance services generally specified that the qualifiable
types of expense items would be tallied at the end of the fiscal
year and these were spelled out. There was a percentage return
available for the company to approve amounting to lOt of the gross
expense. In the event there was a deficit, it was required that
the three subsidizing agencies make up the deficit. Based upon a
careful examination and filing of an account report by an outside
CPA, together with a very careful analysis of the entire books by
the controller of the hospital that the increase in the subsidy
rate being requested is justified, which is as follows:
a) An increase in the monthly subsidy from $10l2.50 to $1173.33,
effective July l, 1974i b) ambulance rates be increased from $45
to $50 per pickup and an emergency run fee of $5 be grantedi and
c) a fourth ambulance unit be added for location in Livermore area.
em Turner indicated that he had some questions concerning the fin-
ancial statement which he would like answered before he made a
decision, and Mr. Parness suggested that Cm Turner contact Mrs.
Gurney, the controller at the hospital, if he wished to have the
matter postponed.
CM-29-86
November 18, 1974
(Emergency Ambulance
Contract Amendment)
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED
BY CM TIRSELL AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ARCHITECTURAL CONTRACT
AMENDMENT - FIRE STATION
The City Manager explained that when the agreement with the architec-
tural firm was filed with the City Council it was based on a cost
estimate composed by the staff using $35 per square foot, and the
architect was retained based on that estimate. In the basic form
agreement that is now being used, there is a provision regarding
excessive bidding costs and if they exceed 10% of the amount speci-
fied as a budget, the architect is responsible for redesign without
cost to the client. After going into some of the details of the
structure requirements and checking with professional estimators,
the architect has concluded that the figure should be $48 per square
foot. Mr. Parness stated there has been a lot done already in
cutting some of the fringes, to the extent that the staff is asking
for a slight addition to the budget estimate of $30,000 which would
be an amendment to the agreement - $530,000 rather than $500,000.
Mr. Parness stated that the second request to the amendment is one
that would offer a waiver to the architect for any structural defects
that may be caused by improper design, which is a form type of appeal
made by the insurance companies and invariably the clients always
deny this amendment.
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
CONTRACT AMENDMENT FOR THE INSERTION OF A NEW ESTIMATED CONSTRueTION
PRIeE FIGURE OF $530,000i MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mayor Pritchard questioned the cost increase of $30,000 which he did
not think was correct in figuring the square foot increase for the
square footage of the building, and Mr. Parness agreed that it did
not, but the architect is of the belief that it can be done for the
$530,000. Mayor Pritchard stated he did not wish to make a decision
without having a resolution before him and would favor postponing
the matter until there is a signed contract.
VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED 2-l WITH MAYOR PRITCHARD
DISSENTING.
RESOLUTION NO. lSl-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF CONTRACT
(Associated Professions, Incorporated)
The City Manager had reported that the Exxon Service station at the
corner of Chestnut and No. P Streets has been acquired by our City
for the grade separation project. This bill of sale transfers title
to the agreed upon physical improvements to the City, including the
station structure, storage tanks and appurtenances. Mr. Parness
further explained this was more or less routine and was a part of
the sale price on the property and merely transfers title to the
improvements, which the City wants. The storage tanks will be stored
~ for a time but will eventually be used at the airport.
Mayor Pritchard questioned whether there would be any liability and
the City Attorney explained the only thing might be potential lia-
bility created by the fact there are some structural problems on
the improvements if someone was hurt playing around there. The
other might be in removal of the tanks, and the City employess will
be advised they will have to be careful in removing these and
REPORT FROM CITY MANAGER
RE BILL OF SALE - EXXON CO.
CM-29-S7
November l8, 1974
(Bill of Sale - Exxon Co.)
liability lies with Workmans' Compensation. He further stated it
is a standard Bill of Sale and would recommend it be adopted.
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
EXEeUTION OF THE BILL OF SALE: SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND APPROVED
UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. l83-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF BILL OF SALE
(Exxon corporation)
eORPORATION YARD
STORAGE BUILDING
The City Manager reported that the current budget allocates
$2,900 for the purchase of a small 375 sq. ft. metal storage build-
ing for our Park and Tree Department. The former Exxon building
at Chestnut and No. P Streets, now owned by us and almost three
times as large, can be moved and set up for about the same price,
and it is requested that moving and setup be authorized.
em Turner asked if a ceiling of lO% more than the amount authorized
of $2900 could be set for this, and was assured it could be done
for this amount.
CM TURNED MOVED TO ADOPT A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE MOVING AND SET
UP OF THE SERVIeE STATION STRUCTURE, and THAT THE COST NOT EXCEED
MORE THAN 10% OF THE $2,900 BUDGETED FIGURE: MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM TIRSELL AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 182-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF BUILDING
(Storage Building Acquired from Exxon Corporation)
REPORT RE GRADE SEPARATION
PROJECT STATUS
Mayor Pritchard suggested that the discussion regarding this report
be postponed for later together with the report on the materials pay-
ment, awaiting the arrival of Cm Futch and Miller.
REPORT RE JOINT MEETING
WITH LARPD
Mayor Pritchard commented that at the last Council-LARPD liaison
committee meeting it was concluded that another meeting should take
place sometime in January and the eouncil selected January 22nd to
meet with LARPD.
REPORT RE TAX OVERRIDE FOR
ADDITIONAL POLIeE AND
FIRE PERSONNEL
The City Manager reported that the eouncil discussed placing the
matter of a tax override for police and fire personnel on the
ballot and if the Council decides that such should be done the
request must be made formally to the Board of Supervisors no
later than December 16th. If further discussion and considera-
tion is needed there are only two remaining Council meetings
during which this subject can be discussed.
em Turner commented that the suggestion of a tax override was
made by him, fostered by other people, and he is concerned about
CM-29_88
November 18, 1974
(Tax Override for Addition-
al Police and Fire Personna
the number of police officers being used to cover the entire City
of Livermore on patrol during the night - that number being three.
He stated that he is concerned to the extent that if the City cannot
afford to hire more policemen or firemen that the tax override should
be considered. He stated that we are not in a panic situation yet
but non-emergency calls are being delayed because there just are not
enough patrolmen.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has no objection to placing the matter
on the ballot but at the same time would like to see the matter of
election of mayor placed on the ballot so the people can vote on
whether or not they wish to have an elected mayor. He stated that
hif the matter of the tax override is placed on the ballot he would
like it to state how much money will be spent and how many additional
people would be hired for the two departments if it does appear on
the ballot.
Mr. Parness stated that as he recalls the report done on this item
indicated that the tax rate for the first year would be something
in the order of 23~~ with an increase up to 58~~ by the fifth year.
He stated that possibly the measure could ask the people for per-
mission to increase taxes up to 50~, 60~, or whatever they feel will
be needed and for the Council to be allowed to set the tax rate, per
year, in accordance with the need. He pointed out that this amount
would suffice for only five years.
em Tirsell pointed out that there are other areas that will be
requesting additional funds also, such as the School District, which
has already asked that a tax override measure be placed on the next
ballot, and feels it is imperative that this measure passes. She
added that with the economy the way it is, at present, it would be
extremely likely that a tax override for additional police and
fire protection would fail.
Mr. Parness was asked his opinion and he indicated that he feels
the need, at this time, is really not that critical. He commented
that he would agree personnel levels are not what they should be
but being the type of community Livermore is, fortunately, it is
not critical for the additional personnel.
Cm Turner stated that he does agree that it is very important that
the tax override for the School District passes and even though he
is very concerned over the need for additional personnel for the
Police Department and Fire Department agreed that possibly the
timing isn't right for asking for the additional tax increase for
this purpose. He stated that he doesn't seem to be receiving much
support for the suggestion and would like to table the matter and
speak with Cm Miller and Futch about it.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a 15 minute recess at this time in order
to allow Cm Miller and Futch the opportunity to attend the remainder
of the meeting and prior to discussing Items 4.6, 5.2 and 5.7.
/~
After the recess the Council meeting resumed with Mayor Prithard,
em Tirsell and Turner present.
COUNCIL MEETING RESUMED
CM-29-89
November 18, 1974
DISCUSSION RE CN-
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DIST.
ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
DISCUSSION REGARDING CN-COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS WAS CON-
TINUED TO THE NEXT MEETING.
REPORT RE MATERIALS PAYMENT
RE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT
Mayor Pritchard stated that he is extremely sorry Cm Miller and
Futch are not present to discuss the matter of the materials pay-
ment for the grade separation project and Mr. Parness suggested
that if the Council would prefer, perhaps they could meet tomorrow
for about an hour with all members of the Council present. He
stated that the only reason he suggests this is because it is a
matter of deep concern to the contractor and it has been delayed
for something like three weeks by Mr. Parness and the City Attor-
ney because they were not satisfied with some of the papers given
to the City and the contractor has been assured that there would
be some action taken tonight.
The Councilmembers agreed to meet at 9:00 a.m. Tuesday, November
19th, and if the other members of the Council cannot be present
they promised the contractor that they would take action in any
case.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor pritchard adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m. to an adjour-
ned regular meeting Tuesday, November 19, 1974, at 9:30 a.m. at
City Hall, Conference Room, 2250 First Street, and also to an
executive session at 5:00 p.m., Thursday, November 21, 1974, at
3070 East Avenue, L~re Mortuary~~~_, ,~
APPROVE 4F~~~
J ' dil~
C1ty C erk
Livermore, California
ATTEST
Adjourned Regular Meeting - November 19, 1974
An adjourned regular meeting was called to order by Mayor Pritchard
at 9:30 a.m., November 19, 1974 in the conference room of City Hall,
2250 First Street.
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
purpose: Discussion of Payment (Hensel-Phelps) re Grade
Separation Project
This matter had been continued from the meeting of November 18, 1974,
since two Councilmembers had not been present and had expressed a
desire to be able to participate in the discussion.
City Manager, william Parness, explained briefly the problem,
which is that the girders for the grade separation project have
been completed, are in Arizona, and the company does wish to be
paid. When the contract was signed the usual schedule was not
followed. The girders were ordered, fabricated, are ready, and
have been inspected by a certified private engineering firm.
Concern has been expressed regarding payment for materials because
CM-29-90
November 19, 1974
(Grade Separation Project)
the contract calls for delivery on-site before any advance payments
are made. The bonding company was contacted and has agreed to remain
liable on the bond to guarantee performance, even though the agreement
calls for delivery on site and the pre-stress girders will be paid
for before delivery on site. In view of the guarantee by the surety
company, expressed in a letter on file, the City Council can agree
to waive the provision requiring material to be on site before
payment. Obtaining the additional guarantee from surety was to
protect the City in the remote possibility that Hensel-Phelps defaults
in completion of the project.
Cm Turner expressed concern regarding payment for supplies not yet
delivered, and Brian Robinson, Hensel-Phelps representative, ex-
plained that due to the shortage of stress-strain materials the
girders were ordered and fabricated all at once rather than waiting
for two shipments. The manufacturer has stored them; however, he
does want to be paid. Discussion was held regarding payment of
interest; storing in Livermore if shipped prior to the time they
will be used; payment by Hensel-Phelps with reimbursement to them
when installed; payment by the City to the sub-contractor or jointly
with Hensel-Phelps. It was the final decision, on motion of Cm Futch,
seconded by Cm Tirsell and by a 3-2 vote (Cm Miller and Turner dissent-
ing) the following resolution was adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 185-74
A RESOLUTION WAIVING SPECIFICATION IN
CONSOLIDATED RAILROAD PROJECT MATERIALS
DELIVERY.
Also discussed was the report from Hensel-Phelps that the rail
is ready for delivery; however, it would seem that some confusion
exists regarding the payment for the rail: welding and loading
on cars for delivery, sometime near December 15th, when it has
been welded and is ready, then payment to be made 30 days thereafter.
Southern Pacific indicates the rail will not be used anywhere else.
Payment for the rail will again be discussed at the next regular
meeting.
The meeting
ornia
APPROVE
ATTEST
CM-29-9l
Regular Meeting of November 25, 1974
A regular meeting of the City council of the City of Livermore
was held on Monday, November 25, 1974, 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: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Absen't: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Council members as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Pritchard read proclamations regarding the following days:
November 29th "D" Day - Don't Smoke Day
December 7th & 9th - Days of Hope and Unification
Mayor Pritchard explained that November 29th will be the beginning
of the five day plan for no smoking in Livermore and meetings will
take place at Rincon Avenue School during this time.
Mr. Sutherland explained that there will be a $5 registration fee
to attend the meetings which will cover the cost of the materials
used.
MINUTES
On motion of em Futch, seconded by Cm Turner and by unanimous vote
the minutes for the meeting of November 12th were approved, as
submitted.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes
(Committees)
Minutes were received, as follows:
Industrial Advisory Board - November 19
Housing Authority - October 22
Planning Commission - November 5
Departmental Reports
The following Departmental reports were submitted :
Airport Activity - October
Building Inspection Department - October
Mosquito Abatement District - September
police and pound Departments - October
Water Reclamation Plant - October
Water Department - July/September
Report re Holmes
Street Paving
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works which indicated
that Holmes Street has been paved by Zone 7 and is recommended for
acceptance.
CM- 29-92
November 25, 1974
(Holmes Street Paving)
Cm Turner and Tirsell commented that they have traveled over the
newly paved portions of Holmes Street and it would appear that
the work done is satisfactory.
Payroll & Claims
There were 83 claims in the amount of $816,630.31 and 350 payroll
warrants in the amount of $87,940.88, for a total of $904,571.19,
dated November 25, 1974, approved and ordered paid by the Director
of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by em Tirsell and by unanimous
vote, the Consent Calendar was approved.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
~nefects re Cal-trans
Environmental Impact
Statement)
Cm Miller stated that he would like the staff to send letters to
the Department of Environmental Affairs of the Department of
Transportation and the Council of Environmental Quality, with
respect to the defects in the Environmental Impact Statement
prepared by Cal-Trans. He noted that there are technical as
well as procedural errors in the report and new information
that was not available at the time the report was reviewed in
:::h::::::t:~n C~as ~~::; ~:SSiOn as to who should pre-
pare the letter and)Cm Tirsell stated that she would prefer
to see that the stAff prepare the letter rather than the Smog
Committee because the City is the agency responsible for the
petition.
C M MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL FORMALLY REQUEST RECONSIDERATION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, AND THAT SUCH A LETTER BE
DRAFTED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH.
Cm Turner stated that he would assume the Council is speaking
about the widening of I-580 and feels that it is tiresome that
something new comes up almost weekly with respect to the widen-
ing and would like to see that some definite approach is taken.
He stated that he feels the people who use the freeway are being
overlooked and that is really is a dangerous freeway in its present
state.
/~
I
\
Cm Miller pointed out that the Council has taken the stand of
recommending widening of the freeway; however, not to the extent
the state would like and with as many lanes as they have suggested.
He agreed with Cm Turner in that the Council would like to have
the matter resolved soon and there is no reason this could not be
reflected in the letter.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
(Holiday Decorations)
Cm Futch commented that it was his understanding that the holiday
decorations would not be put up until after Thanksgiving and asked
for a response from Mr. Lee.
CM-29-93
November 25, 1974
(Holiday Decorations)
Mr. Lee stated that he did not have any information as to when the
decorations were to be put up by the Chamber of Commerce.
Cm Tirsell stated that if it is the general consensus of the council
that the decorations should not go up prior to Thanksgiving, she
would be happy to relay such information to the Chamber people.
'D
Q)
S
:;..,
o
G--i
C
'M
....
?,
<:)
c
Q)
bO
cD
(Urban Planning &
Sewer Disposal in Valley)
Cm Futch stated that the Corps of Engineers plans to use $1 to $2 million
dollars to study urban planning and sewage disposal within the valley
and he is disturbed by this proposal because it would seem there are
sufficient agencies at present who are involved in this issue and
feels it is not necessary for another agency to become involved in
sewage disposal and urban planning with^~helli~~o~ federal money.
LAVWMA has already been designated as Q~/~I the~08 planning agencies
and they intend to do a complete study on this item as well as other
matters ~Iui il~ ~k. ~i.R1. LJ_~){'JlIA uaa =h=.I!I.I. UA .f.!UfA l~lci lhAl ~.~ J.id
not have problems sufficient to warrant such a study and now it appears
that another agency wants to do the same type of study, with 10-20
times the funding LAVWMA is receiving and over which the City has
no control. CM Futch suggested that the Council go on record as
opposing another agency and particularly the Corps of Engineers and
that the City will not agree to a 25% contribution. He stated that
he believes this originated with Pete Stark's office and with the
Board of Supervisors and that the Council's position should be sent
to them.
?,
rl
+'
C
Q)
;:)
d
Q)
w
.D
;:)
w
UJ
cD
;s:
~
~
<r:
H
00 Cm Miller stated that he agrees with this recommendation and to
~ note that the City has never been asked to participate and has not
cD 'D been involved in any way.
.r!
UJ'D
cD ?,Mr. Lee stated that he met with BASSA and the Corps of Engineers
C Q) and they have indicated that the study will not be concerned with
~~ land use and explained that it is called an urban plan study but
~ ~ deals with planning of water quality but not land use. The 25%
c contribution would also be in-kind services and would not neces-
.~~ sarily be a contribution of cash. He noted that they intend to do
w+' a study of the complete watershed area, including the Alameda Creek
~+' watershed area, and that this might be preferable to pressure on us
W 1l through BASSA for such a study.
- +'
~
S
Mr. Lee added that it is his understanding they have conducted such
a study in the Salinas area and have worked very closely with the
jurisdictions in that area and are providing a very useful study
and suggestions that the Council check into the work that has been
done in other areas.
bO
C
.r!
;s:
o
rl
rl
o
f:y
Mr. Parness stated that he shares the concern of the Council, and
particularly that mentioned by Cm Futch but would like to be allowed
the opportunity to check to see what it is about and that someone
from the Corps of Engineers be asked to explain this to the Council,
~ with which the Council concurred.
Cm Tirsell asked that there be preparation of a paragraph related
to the 208 Planning so that the Council may have a comparison.
CM-29-94
November 25, 1974
(re Greenville North)
em Futch brought up the matter of GreenVil~~th and Mr. Parness
stated that he has been informed recently . he owners of the
land that is to be used for park purposeCs aref.not i..nterested in nego-
tiating sale of the property and that it would have to be obtained
by condemnation. ~~~~~.
Cm Turner asked about the timing involved in conde~ation proceedings
and Mr. Logan, the City Attorney, explained that the process takes
about a year to get to court and that there is no alternative method
which would allow earlier acquisition.
Mr. Parness noted that he has sent numerous letters to the Bevilacqua
family and has made many telephone calls to them regarding acquisition
of the property but they have refused to respond to any attempts to
negotiate and doesn't know what else can be done.
Cm Futch stated that he would be willing to try to contact the family,
personally, and will try to see them.
(Commendation -
Chief Lindgren)
Cm Futch stated that the Chief of Police has recently received a state
commendation and would like to know the details of it and would like
the City Manager to report the details and that the Council should
recognize the commendation.
Mr. Parness explained that this was a follow-up on behalf of Assembly-
man Carlos Bee to several other notable entries that the Chief of
Police received from various other civic organizations, praising him
for his effort in regard to law enforcement on the local scene, and
Assemblyman Bee introduced a resolution that was passed by the
state Assembly and presented at the meeting of the Police Associa-
tion.
(COVA Executive Dir.)
Cm Tirsell stated that interviews are planned for the COVA executive
director for some time in December and it is anticipated that a selec-
tion will be made by January for presentation, and also the first
congress is being planned to which all valley agencies will be
invited. She also intends to invite Mr. Dutia, the Executive Direc-
tor of ACAP, to meet the Council in the near future.
(Recognition of Visitor)
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to recognize the presence
of a guest in the audience, Hugh David Wharton, III, General Counsel
for the western area of the Federal Energy Office.
(Mayors Conference)
~
\,
Mayor Pritchard commented that due to a resignation, the Mayor's City
Selection Committee will be filling a vacancy for the Airport Land
Committee and if anyone has a nomination it should be presented so
that a selection can be made at the next Mayors Conference.
CM-29-95
November 25, 1974
(P. C. Joint Study
Session)
Mayor Pritchard stated that a joint Planning Commission study session
is scheduled for tomorrow evening with the staff at 7:30 p.m.
in the Court Chamber for discussion of downtown development and
that there will be a movie on flood hazards control as well as a
presentation by Gary Higgins with respect to the Air Quality report.
HEARING RE GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT - COUNTY
(New Town proposal)
The Council received notice of a public hearing to be held regarding
the General Plan Amendment for Alameda County on December 12, 1974,
at 2:30 p.m. in the regular meeting room of the Board of Supervisors,
at 1221 Oak Street, Oakland, California.
ADOPTION OF BENNINGTON
FLAG FOR BICENTENNIAL
A copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors for
Alameda County was submitted to the City Council, in which they
adopted the Bennington Flag as an official bicentennial symbol
for the County of Alameda to be displayed during the bicentennial
observation - to be displayed on the same pole as the national flag
and to fly below the national flag.
It was noted that the Bennington Flag was also selected by the
City of Livermore as the official flag.
COMMUNICATION RE BART
AND RE BIKE FACILITIES
A letter was received from J. Lyons stating that it appears unless
one can ride a bike to catch the BART bus, they can't ride BART.
He suggested that there be a BART Facilities Study Group to study
the problems of all the taxpayers and urged that something be done
to get the BART train into Livermore.
COMMUNICATION RE
RES. OF COMMENDATION
A letter expressing appreciation for the resolution adopted by the
City Council commending Mrs. philamena Medeiros as outstanding
Citizen of the Year 1974, was received from Mrs. Medeiros.
COMMUNICATION RE
SOCIETY OF AMERICAN INDIANS
A letter was received from John H. Emerson, Pastor of the Asbury
United Methodist Church regarding the denial of financial support
to the Society of American Indians.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he has been meeting with the Society
of American Indians concerning this item and they have requested
that the matter be tabled at this time.
ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ITEM WAS TABLED, AS REQUESTED.
CM-29-96
November 25, 1974
COMMUNICATION OF COMPLAINT
RE STREET SWEEPING POLICY
A letter of complaint was submitted to the City Council from Mrs.
Harry RObinson, with respect to street sweeping in their area.
She stated that she had to telephone and ask for the street sweeper
to sweep up leaves in the street and that the leaves were swept
only in front of her house.
Mr. Lee explained that if a car is parked near the curb the street
sweeper must go around the car and leaves remain in the area where
the car was parked so that it sometimes appears that the street
sweeper did not clean the area.
COMMUNICATION FROM MEMBER
OF COUNCIL ON ENV. QUALITY
RE I-580
A letter was received from Beatrice E. Willard, from the Execu-
tive office of the President Council on Environmental Quality,
with respect to the widening of I-5aO. Mrs. Willard stated that
they have received the report on air pollution in Livermore and
that the various facts brought to their attention are under full
consideration by both the Department of Transportation and the
Environmental Protection Agency and that they will keep the City
apprised of further things which would be of value to Livermore
in regard to the widening. She thanked the Council for their
interest and communication.
Mayor Pritchard commented that apparently Mrs. Willard received
the City's communications after action had been taken with
respect to the widening but the City should keep her in mind
when communicating to Washington D.C.
Cm Futch stated that it is his understanding the Council on
Environmental Quality has not taken action, as yet, and Cm Miller
stated that apparently it is still in the state of some type of
review but they did essentially accept the Environmental Impact
Statement for the widening.
TRAFFIC STUDY FOR
NORMA WAY & MITRA ST.
The City Council continued discussion of the traffic study for
Norma Way and Mitra Street from the meeting of November 12th so
that the property owners adjacent to the apartment houses in the
area could be notified.
(~
Mr. Lee explained that at the time of the last discussion the Council
authorized painting of crosswalks at the intersection of Norma Way
and Mitra Street and also painting of curb returns in addition to
some red curbing on East Avenue, west of Mitra Street. Not all of
this has been painted and there has not been time to evaluate the
effect of what has been done and what will be done. He suggested
that the matter be put over for at least a couple of weeks at which
time a report can be made as to the effect of the improvements.
Cm Tirsell stated that the people who live in the apartments are
using the street to park in rather than the parking area provided by
the apartment owner, according to the residents in the area, so that
if the people on Norma Way have an extra car there is no place to
park it and this is part of the reason the area is so congested.
Mr. Lee stated that the street is very wide and at this time would
not recommend that there be no parking on the street. If, however,
after the new measures are evaluated and it appears that such is
warranted, then perhaps this would be a suggestion to help the
situation.
CM-29-97
-_..--_._..,_.~-"-~~--...~._---_.._,_.._--^
November 25, 1974
(Traffic Study -
Norma Way &Mitra St.)
em Turner stated that there is a very definite problem during the
busy hours of the day when people are going to and from work and
when children are going to school. He stated that the children
have to go out into the traffic area to go around the cars that
are parked on the street and it really is a dangerous situation.
The only way to get to the bike path is to go through this area
so the children are forced to go through there.
Stan Cohen, 5120 Norma Way, stated that it is extremely difficult
to go from East Avenue to Mitra during heavy traffic and the cars
parked on Norma Way make it more difficult to have room to turn
onto Mitra.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE
ABMULANCE CONTRACT AMEND.
The matter of the amendment to the ambulance contract was postponed
at the request of Cm Turner so that he might review the accounting
practice of the ambulance company. He is now confident that they
have retained a CPA to set up an accounting practice that can be
reviewed by anyone, and is satisfied with the information he received
regarding the operations.
It has been recommended bu Valley Memorial Hospital that the f61low-
ing revisions in the contract terms be made:
a} an increase in the monthly subsidy from $1,012.50 to
$1,173.33, effective July 1, 1974;
b} ambulance rates increased from $45 to $50 per pickup and
an emergency run fee of $5 be granted;
c} a fourth ambulance unit be added for location in the
Livermore area.
Cm Miller stated that he would question the accounting practices and
if various questions have been resolved there should be some type of
report indicating how everything is going to be satisfactory. He
stated that he would not want to approve the contract until it is
a fact there are no accounting deficiencies.
Mr. Parness stated that he feels there are no accounting deficiencies
but the format used in reporting the expenditures and revenue accruals
are not strictly to the liking of the controller of the hospital. In
looking over the books the controller has indicated that she would like
things listed differently but has assured everyone that in looking over
the books and accounting tabulation, everything is in order. The
ambulance company has now gone to a fiscal year operation and next
year their recording will be even better. The administration and
controller of the hospital have indicated that the accounting is
proper, valid and accurate and would recommend that the contract
be accepted.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENTS
TO THE CONTRACT, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 187-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INCREASE IN SUBSIDY, INCREASED
PICK UP RATES AND ADDITION OF EMERGENCY RATE FOR AMBULANCE
SERVICE IN MURRAY AND PLEASANTON TOWNSHIPS BY DAVID PARKER
AND EARL RIGGS DBA FREMONT AMBULANCE AND ADDITION OF A
FOURTH AMBULANCE TO BE LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE.
CM-29-98
November 25, 1974
DISCUSSION RE OAKLAND
SCAVENGER COMPANY PROPOSED
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE
~..
Cm Tirsell wondered if Alameda County has filed a solid waste manage-
ment plan and Lou Alberti, representative of Oakland Scavenger Company
stated that they would like to give a brief presentation of their
program which is a complete recourse-recovery and solid waste pro-
ject, in the Altamont hills, and would like Tom Mitri, the project
engineer to be allowed to explain.
Mr. Parness interjected that the County has not filed its plan.
Mr. Mitri explained that the company intends to build and operate
a $13 million (plus) resource recovery program for Alameda
County, primarily designed to serve the east bay cities that are
running out of plant and disposal sites that are located on the bay.
The site will be located in the Altamont hills area on the 16 acres
of land they have acquired for this purpose and will be built in
stages over several decades. The major portion of the project
was indicated on an illustration which he explained will be loca-
ted in two places - one in Hayward and the other in San Leandro.
These facilities will process the solid waste and recover metal
and glass in the nature of 40,000 tons a year which represents
about 20% of residential waste that will be handled by these
facilities. The remainder of the waste will be hauled to the
landfill site. He explained that presently about 40,000 tons
of newspaper are being recovered and 10,000 tons of metal. He
explained that the market, at present, for the paper is zero
and the reason is because most of it had been exported to Japan who
is no longer purchasing the paper because their economy is in very
poor shape. He stated that the paper can be reused for various types
of paper products and the ink is removed by a special chemical designed
to remove the ink. There is a world-wide paper shortage so he feels
the zero market is only temporary. He stated that he hasn't really
explained the program in great detail but could do a slide presentation
if the Council would like at some prearranged time that would take
about 25 minutes.
Cm Tirsell asked about plans for the property with respect to
land use, once it has been filled, and Mr. Mitri stated that
it will be primarily agricultural grazing land and it will be
upgraded from the standpoint of making it level. ,During the
filling of the area, only a small portion will be disturbed at
one time with the rest remaining agricultural in use.
Cm Miller asked who the property was purchased from and was
told that it had been owned by Jackson and Scullion. Cm Miller
felt perhaps this move was premature in view of the fact a solid
waste study has not been completed.
Mr. Mitri stated that basically all the area around the bay has
been used up and that solid waste will be transported to the
Altamont site by rail and truck.
('
Mr. Parness explained that for their own operations they must
find a disposal site of their own and this would appear to be
the only alternative. Presently they are using the Livermore
dump site.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he would really be interested in
having the slide presentation and perhaps this could be given
with more detailed explanation at the beginning of one of the
Council meetings.
CM-29-99
November 25, 1974
DISCUSSION RE CN DISTRICT
& PROPOSED CHANGES
Mr. Musso reported that with respect to the fifth draft of the eN -
Neighborhood Commercial District portion of the zoning ordinance,
the underlined portions represent areas where no changes were recom-
mended. Essentially, it is now a new ordinance draft. Mr. Musso
stated that he would explain the major sections that were changed,
such as Section 10.20 in which there was a complete review of the
uses permitted. He noted that the section concerning site size
was difficult to write and to understand but the idea is to allow
a larger Shopping center area but to limit the square footage to
what is normally a neighborhood shopping center which is still around
50,000 sq. ft., except that there has been an increase in the size of
the food market: such markets are approaching 30,000 sq. ft. It was
felt that the square footage of the food market should be larger than
that allowed in a 50,000 sq. ft. shopping center area. He then com-
mented on street frontage setback, landscaping, performance standards
having to do mainly with light and a more liberal allowance for ex-
terior activities, such as outdoor eating areas. He stated that
almost without exception the biggest problem is not allowing storage
of materials in a neighborhood shopping center. Time limit for
granting a shopping center zoning was mentioned and he explained
that it is intended that if the shopping center is not developed the
zoning will be taken away. There will also be a requirement for
approval of expansion as well as site plan approval for the entire
shopping center which the present ordinance does not require. Under
CUP, findings will have to be made prior to allowing uses serving
customers within the motor vehicle, including the service station
type of use. Eating and drinking places are to be located so as
not to be detrimental to the adjacent property and with respect to
the definition of eating and drinking he explained that drinking
generally refers to alcoholic beverages and a CUP will be required
for an eating place at a customer service and/or seating area in
excess of 1,500 sq. ft. or the requirement for a CUP for a drinking
place serving alcoholic beverages. He noted that McDonalds is less
than 1,500 sq. ft. The Planning Commission felt that if the establish-
ment was less than 1,500 sq. ft. the business would not be of a magni-
tude that would be a problem and would probably be a cafe or hot dog
stand and should be allowed; however, something such as The Rancher
should require a CUP. The 1,500 sq. ft. also is the dividing line
as to what constitutes a public assembly and what does not constitute
a public assembly and would seem to be a logical dividing line.
Cm Futch mentioned the increase from six acres to eight acres and
Mr. Musso explained that the amount of landscaping goes up in the
ratio of the site but the allowable amount of floor area remains
the same.
Cm Tirsell wondered why there is no minimum parcel size and Mr. Musso
explained that this had been considered with respect to subdivisions
and shopping center condominiums and Cm Tirsell noted that without
the minimum parcel size there can be pressure for commercial uses
on the area remaining in the parcels, which was followed by discus-
sion of this aspect.
Cm Miller pointed out that the neighborhood shopping center is de-
signed to house stores that supply day to day needs such as groceries,
drugs, laundry services, bakery goods and barber shops or beauty
shops and suggested that in Sections 10.21, 10.22, 10.23 and 10.24,
that paint, glass, wallpaper, apparel and accessories, banking and
photographic services be eliminated, respectively, and that 10.23
should be more specific by adding which certain other retail trades
should be allowed such as drug, liquor, cigar and newspaper, and
garden supplies.
CM-29-l00
November 25, 1974
(Discussion re CN District)
;-
!
Cm Turner stated that he would disagree that glass, paint and wall-
paper are not used on a daily basis. He added that there is not
such a convenience in his area and he would, personally, be very
happy to see something like that located there and many other people
have stated that they would like such a service also. He pointed out
that people could also bike to such a place of business to obtain
supplys needed for various types of maintenance needed in the home.
Cm Miller felt that the smaller jobs that would be done could be
taken care of through supplies carried in the hardware or variety
store and feels a specific paint, glass and wallpaper store is not
necessary and Cm Turner agreed that if these items are allowed to be
sold in these types of stores this would be sufficient but would have
no objection to a store that sells glass, paint and wallpaper.
Cm Tirsell stated that in her opinion people would appreciate having
the variety to choose from which would be allowed in a specific type
of store that handles paint, glass and wallpaper.
em Miller stated that he feels it really is more convenient for some-
one shopping for glass, paint and wallpaper, to have the stores all
located within the same area so that one can go to this area and
make comparisons with respect to style, price, etc. without having
to get into the car and go around to every shopping center in town.
He added that people are more apt to get into the car and drive to
Hayward rather than run allover town making comparisons in Livermore.
He urged that retail not used on a daily basis be located in one area.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT IN SECTION 10.21, PAINT, GLASS AND WALLPAPER (523)
BE DELETED, WHICH DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT APPAREL AND ACCESSORIES (56) BE DELETED FROM
NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTERS, SECTION 10.22, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH.
Cm Tirsell wondered if this would mean elimination of specialty
shops such as apparel for children and it was noted that this would
include every type of apparel.
Cm Futch commented that it would appear the shops carrying apparel
for children have a difficult time with respect to selling their
merchandise and would agree that business of this nature in a
neighborhood shopping center is not very good.
Cm Turner stated that he feels it should be up to the owner of a
shop as to whether he feels he can do good business in a neighborhood
shopping center and that the idea of the amount of variety is appealing
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION TO DELETE APPAREL AND ACCESSORIES PASSED 4-1
WITH CM TURNER DISSENTING.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT IN SECTION 10.23, AFTER (581) THE FOLLOWING WORD-
ING BE USED: "AND CERTAIN OTHER RETAIL TRADE - DRUG (591), LIQUOR
(592), CIGARETTES AND NEWSPAPERS (5992 and 5993) AND GARDEN
SUPPLIES (5969); MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD.
THE MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH CM TURNER DISSENTING.
(\
\
\,
There was discussion regarding banks and banking services in a neigh-
borhood shopping center and it was noted that often a branch of a
bank is placed in the neighborhood shopping center for the conven-
ience of the residents and Cm Tirsell stated that many people use
the bank located in the Granada shopping center because it is a
convenience to them.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT BANKS BE DELETED FROM SECTION 10.24, WHICH
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM-29-l0l
November 25, 1974
(Discussion re CN District)
CM MILLER MOVED THAT PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICE (622) BE DELETED FROM
SECTION 10.24, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL.
Cm Turner stated that , again, it is difficult to determine which
uses would draw people on a daily or weekly basis and to decide
which uses would better be located downtown rather than in the
shopping centers.
The comment was made that even though various uses are being omitted,
any use may be allowed with a CUP, and Cm Turner stated that this
is a good point.
THE MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH CM TURNER DISSENTING.
Cm Miller stated that if banking is not going to be removed from
Section 10.24 he would like this CHANGED TO DEPOSIT BANKING AND
SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED 4-0 WITH CM TURNER
ABSTAINING.
The Council moved on to Section 10.30 Site Requirements and Cm
Miller stated that he is concerned about the size of the shopping
centers because it seems that they are generally built to capacity
and then have difficulty finding tenants and the tenants move in
and out and perhaps a solution to this problem would be to have
smaller shopping centers.
Cm Futch stated that he has also wrestled with this question and
perhaps if smaller shopping centers are developed they would be
more accessible to the neighborhood; simultaneously, there is a
trend towards larger super markets with more variety offered
than in the past and this naturally draws more people and therefore
he has mixed emotions about the size.
em Turner pointed out that if shopping centers are too small this
hampers growth of the business and pointed out that the Granada
Hardware store was forced to move into two stores because of the
increased amount of business, and the bank which is located in the
same shopping center is already pressed for space and will need to
expand very soon. If expansion is not possible it will mean that
they will have to move elsewhere. If the shopping center is too
small it will die.
CM FUTCH MOVED THAT ALL OF PAGE 2 BE APPROVED, AS DRAFTED (10.27,
10.30,10.31,10.32,10.33,10.40,10.41 and 10.42), SECONDED BY
CM TURNER.
Cm Miller felt that two feet of landscaping for every 80 ft. of
setback is not sufficient landscaping which was discussed.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT PAGE 3 OF THE DRAFT, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH.
Prior to the vote there was discussion regarding fencing and land-
scaping, and Cm Turner wondered if there is anything in the ordinance
that requires that the sprinkling system, etc., be sufficient for
watering the landscaped area and Mr. Musso explained that there is
reference made to landscaping being watered by sprinkler but nothing
relative to adequacy and would depend upon design.
em Turner stated that with respect to Section 10.49, he feels the
design of the storage of solid waste should be in keeping with the
design of the shopping center and it was mentioned that this may
be subject to design review, and Mr. Musso noted that it is, and
this was followed by discussion as to where storage should be
located.
It was concluded that the Planning Commission would be asked to
determine where the storage should be and how such requirement
should be worded.
CM-29-l02
November 25, 1974
(Discussion re CN District)
THE MOTION TO APPROVE PAGE 3 PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
r
!
CM MILLER MOVED THAT 10.54 (Page 4) HAVE ADDITIONAL WORDING SO
THAT LINE 4 SHALL READ AS FOLLOWS: "..... TOILET FACILITIES OPEN
DURING ALL HOURS THAT ANY BUSINESSES ARE OPEN WHICH MAY BE ADJACENT
TO,...etc...", SECONDED BY eM PRITCHARD.
Cm Turner stated that this may be a problem since some bars are
open until 2:00 a.m. and Cm Miller pointed out that the wording
is vague and could be interpreted to read that the restroom could
be totally public or an open restroom located in the bar. It was
mentioned that children would not be allowed to go into the bar to
use the restroom and there may be the problem of another store be-
ing open at the same time the bar is open and it was concluded that
this is another item that should be reviewed by the Planning Com-
mission.
Cm Turner stated that perhaps the restrooms should be open during the
normal business hours during the day and that children shouldn't be
in the Shopping centers at 10:00 p.m. anyway, and the suggestion was
made that the normal hours could be considered the hours the grocery
store is open (9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.). It was agreed that these
hours would be reasonable and that the Planning Commission could
comment on this suggestion.
THE MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN UNTIL THE PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT IN SECTION 10.54 "A SHADE STRUCTURE" BE OMITTED,
AND "SHADE STRUCTURES" BE STATED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT PAGES 5 & 6 OF THE DRAFT BE ADOPTED, SECONDED
BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM MILLER STATED THAT AT THE END OF THE TEXT HE WOULD LIKE THE FOLLOW-
ING WORDING INSERTED: "IN NO CASE WILL AN AUTO SERVICE STATION BE
APPROVED UNTIL 50% OF THE SITE IS COMPLETELY DEVELOPED.", SECONDED
BY MAYOR PRITCHARD, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE DRAFT BE REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION WITH THE NOTATION OF THE REMARKS MADE BY THE COUNCIL,
SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
em Turner mentioned that nothing was said with respect to cuts
in the sidewalk or ramps for the handicapped and Mr. Musso stated
that this is covered in the parking ordinance and Mayor Pritchard
noted that this is also a state law.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE OLIVINA AVENUE
MURRIETA BLVD. INTERSECTION
('
\
Cm Futch stated that if the City intends to acquire additional
land in the area of Olivina Avenue and Murrieta Boulevard, some
consideration should be given towards acquiring right-of-way
for students going to Granada High School with the provision
of a bike path through that area and noted that an alternate
route has been proposed by the staff.
Mr. Lee replied that this is really not the case - the cost of
the traffic signal will be approximately $87,000 and the alternate
CM-29-l03
November 25, 1974
(Olivina Ave.-Murrieta Blvd
Intersection)
route at $27,000. There should be a comparison of the signals vs.
the alternate route for Olivina Avenue.
Mr. Lee commented that it is felt if the alternate route is
selected there should be no need for traffic signals and that
the $27,000 estimate includes acquisition of additional land
required for this purpose.
CM FUTCH MOVED TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
SIMULTANEOUSLY ASK THE STAFF FOR A BREAKDOWN OF THE COSTS INVOLVED,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mr. Jorgensen, 509 Rincon, stated that he feels it is inconceivable
that the Council would even consider such a route as proposed for
Olivina Avenue and asked that the Council think in terms of the
people who use Olivina Avenue and Murrieta Boulevard.
Mr. Lee responded by saying that the two lanes of Murrieta between
Olivina and Stanley Boulevard are not causing the bottleneck that
is present on Murrieta Boulevard, but rather because there is a
four-way intersection at Murrieta Boulevard and Olivina Avenue.
This is an intersection of a collector street and a major street
and the City would not want to encourage continuous traffic flow
on Olivina Street through that intersection. Having cars come
onto Murrieta Boulevard from various intersections is consistent
with the General Plan and he pointed out that a collector street com-
ing into a major street automatically means installation of traffic
signals.
Mayor Pritchard commented that the motion is to refer the matter
to the Planning Commission and would suggest that Mr. Jorgensen
speak to the Planning Commission at the time this is scheduled on
their agenda.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RES. AWARDING BID
TO GOOLD ELECTRIC
(police Adm. Bldg
Parking Lot)
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY 4-1 VOTE
THE RESOLUTION AWARDING BID TO GOOLD ELECTRIC, LOW BIDD.ER FOR]
THE POLICE ADMINISTRATION PARKING LOT LIGHTS, WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 188-74 C'/l?- ~/pA-/,
-d-~~(ftJJ:
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(Goold Electric)
REPORT RE EAST AVENUE
WATER PRESSURE
A report regarding the water pressure for East Avenue was submitted
by Mr. Lee, the Public Works Director, in which he reported that
modifications have been made in the vicinity so that the minimum
pressure is now 60 p.s.i. rather than the previous 40 p.s.i..
Mayor Pritchard stated that is pleased to report that the water
pressure for East Avenue is satisfactory since the change to the
larger lines.
The report was informational in nature and required no action on
the part of the Council.
CM-29-l04
November 25, 1974
REPORT RE CORPUS ORD.
A new electronic criminal reporting system (CORPUS) has been acti-
vated in our county, in use by all police agencies and the County
Counsel requests that each agency adopt a security ordinance regard-
ing this system.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY
ORDINANCE.
Prior to the motion there was discussion regarding willful and
malicious intent and the City Attorney stated that he would have
to agree with Cm Miller in that it would be extremely difficult
to prove willful and malicious intent with respect to this ordi-
nance, but this cannot be taken out. He explained that he has
never seen a criminal law that doesn't have some intent involved
to violate a law and believes one cannot be passed.
Cm Miller felt there must be a better way of writing the ordi-
nance and will not be able to vote for the ordinance unless it
is changed.
Cm Futch wondered what would happen if the ordinance is not
adopted and Mr. Parness replied that probably nothing; however,
the County Counsel's office, who are the central agency in this
entire program, are very concerned about this and he is not sure
that any such act has been committed, as yet, but they fear
that there might be. We are a participant in the program, are
benefiting tremendously from it and have been asked to participate
to this extent.
RE FINANCIAL SUPPORT
FOR LAVWMA
The City Manager explained that LAVWMA has requested an extension
of financial support to meet financial needs. The apportioned
amount (44.55% - $33,495 for Livermore) is in accordance with
the joint powers agreement and will be repaid as funds become
available to LAVWMA from other sources.
CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZE CONTINUED FINANCIAL
SUPPORT FOR LAVWMA AND THAT THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED AND
ACCEPTED AS PART OF THE MOTION THE RECOMMENDATION MADE BY CM
MILLER THAT THERE BE THREE INSTALLMENTS AND THAT THE CITY RE-
CE~VE INTEREST, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 189-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO LAVWMA
REPORT RE CBD AD HOC
SUBCOMMITTEE REDEVELOP.
IN AREA OF RELOCATED TRACKS
\.
The Planning Commission reported that the final report of the
CBD Ad Hoc Subcommittee regarding "Criteria for Development of
Area between First Street, the Relocated Railroad Tracks, Murrieta
Boulevard, and the Intersection of First Street and Railroad
Tracks (Railroad Avenue Area)" was considered and the discussion
from their meeting concerning this topic was submitted to the
Council for review. The Planning Commission did adopt the Goals
statement, as amended, and does recommend adoption by the City
Council.
(
The report was filed and no action was taken by the Council.
CM-29-105
._".._.,.-._~,.>-_...,.,-~-_._.._----.-.._~,-_._._--_.-._.......
......,..-...-.. '--~~--~-,......_..,_.~,-----,._..__.__.
November 25, 1974
CENSUS FIGURES
The following census figures were submitted for information
by the Planning Department:
population
Total Dwelling Units
Vacancy Factor
48,359 (presently 47,650)
15,785
. 5.2%
AIlJOURNMENT
APPROVE
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of December 2, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on December 2, 1974, 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: 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.
MINUTES
November 18th, Page 85, 5th line from the top should read:
"standard form of agreement and he does not need to see an executed
agreement II .
On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by em Miller and by unanimous vote
the minutes for the meeting of November 18th were approved as corrected.
SPECIAL ITEM
Mayor Pritchard announced that Lois Hill will give a special presen-
tation consisting of slides and tapes on Resources and Cultures at
this time and noted that Mrs. Hill has been an active member at the
recycling center in Livermore and in fact has been the driving force
behind its operation.
CM-29-l06
December 2, 1974
(Slide Presentation -
Preservation of Resources)
The presentation was made by Mrs. Lois Hill who narrated and explained
the purpose of the slides, which was to dramatize the waste of our
natural resources and the use of resources by our own population.
~ After the presentation Cm Futch stated that in 1855 Chief Dwamise
made the following statement with respect to purchase of land owned
by the Indians:
liThe great Chief in Washington sends word that he wishes to buy
our land. How can you buy or sell the sky, the warmth of the land?
The idea is strange to us. We do not own the freshness of the air
or the sparkle of the water. How can you buy them from us? Every
part of the earth is sacred to my people. We know that white man
does not understand our ways; one portion of the land is the same
to him as the next for he is a stranger who comes in the night and
takes from the land whatever he needs. The earth is not his brother
but his enemy and when he has conquered it he moves on. He leaves
his father's grave and his children's birthright is forgotten. There
is no quiet in the white mans cities - no place to hear the leaves
of spring or the rustle of insect wings but perhaps, because I am
a savage and do not understand, the clatter only seems to insult the
ears and what is there to life if a man cannot hear the lovely cry
of the whippoorwill or the arguments of the frogs around the pond
at night. The whites, too, shall pass, perhaps sooner than other
tribes. Continue to contaminate your bed and you will one night
suffocate in your waste. The buffalo will all be slaughtered, the
wild horses all tamed, the secret corner of the forest heavy with
the scent of many men, and the view of the ripe hills blotted by
talking wires. Where is the thicket? Gone. Where is the eagle?
Gone. And what is it to say goodbye to the swift and the hunt? The
end of living and the beginning of survival.1I
Cm Futch stated that these words were spoken 120 years ago at which
time there were 88 million buffalos roaming the country, the tele-
graph had just been invented and that he can understand in some small
way the meaning of the words and also shares the feeling behind them
and is one reason he is serving on the Livermore City Council.
OPEN FORUH
(Complaint re Police
Officer Procedure)
Steve Santos, 1209 Aberdeen stated that he has been complaining to
the Police Department with respect to his being stopped by a police
officer while riding a bicycle during which incident his bicycle
was damaged and wondered if the Chief of Police is receiving the
complaints.
Mayor Pritchard asked that the City Manager arrange a meeting between
Mr. Santos and Chief Lindgren.
(re Livermore Gardens)
(\
Robert Hirsch, 15233 Ventura Blvd., Sherman Oaks, California, stated
that tomorrow he will obtain the commitment for the Livermore Gardens
Apartments project on East Avenue and they intend to begin construc-
tion immediately after the loan has been recorded which should be
December 12th. They have encountered one problem, however, which is
that they are required to pay a fee to Zone 7 at the time they obtain
a building permit which happens to be $7,680, in this case. They
are entitled to reimbursement by Zone 7 for channel work and other
work which has been done with respect to development for this project
but Zone 7's ordinance states that unless the work is accomplished
with the construction done and accepted by Zone 7 prior to issuance
of the building permit, they are not entitled to the reimbursement.
The cost for the channel work is $21,700 and the right-of-way access
is $6,000. Mr. Hirsch stated that because of this problem his
CM-29-l07
December 2, 1974
(Livermore Gardens Apts)
company would like to obtain a grading permit, only, which he
is prepared to pay for tomorrow morning and will give his company
the time to present the deed for the right-of-way to the Zone 7
Board on December 18th for approval by the Board of Supervisors
on approximately December 28th and by January his company should
be able to purchase the building permit and receive the reimbursement
they are entitled to.
It was noted that they will receive a $5,500 credit towards the
$7,680 Zone 7 fee which means that they will have to pay only
$2,180 to Zone 7 at the time they obtain the building permit which
he explained to the Council.
Mr. Lee stated that there are prov1s10ns in our code for allowing
a grading permit ahead of the building permit, their plans have
been checked and they are in order and there are grading plans
in the regular set of plans.
Mr. Parness stated that there has been some question as to the
proprieties of issuing grading permits prior to issuance of a formal
building permit and is a policy matter the Council has instructed
the staff to present very soon, and the Council has allowed suc~
in the past, to expedite business.
The Council wondered why reimbursement could not be made at a later
date if the land is dedicated to Zone 7 later and Mr. Hirsch explain-
ed that it doesn't seem to be a fair policy but is the way Zone
7's ordinance reads, unfortunately, and they are considering revising
it because of this situation.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO DRAW AND ISSUE THE GRAD-
ING PERMIT, AS REQUESTED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER.
Cm Miller mentioned that the matter of a grading policy had been
brought up because a foundation was poured on industrial property
before a building permit had been obtained.
In this case the Council is aware of what is going on with respect
to the Livermore Garden Apartments and it would appear to be per-
fectly reasonable to issue the grading permit.
Cm Tirsell stated that she really objects to having to make a
decision without having information prior to the Council meet-
ing when a large amount of money is involved and felt it should
have been scheduled as an agenda item, with which Mayor Pritchard
concurred.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Specific Plans)
Cm Turner asked about the status of the specific plans for the
General plan which Mr. Musso reported on, and noted that there
have been changes made in the policy with respect to density
transfers.
There was discussion regarding density and Cm Miller felt there
should be scheduling of the General Plan amendments for Planning
Unit 12 at the same time there are changes in density for the
specific plans to eliminate approving density not desired for
specific areas.
,/------."
CM-29-l08
December 2, 1974
(Specific Plans)
Mayor Pritchard asked that in order to expedite Council business,
there be a motion on the floor.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO
SCHEDULE A HEARING ON GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CONSIDERING DENSITY CHANGES FOR AREA 12, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD.
Mr. Musso commented that Planning Units 12 and 18 are the critical
areas and em Tirsell suggested that the Planning Commission discuss
and make any recommendations with respect to density changes for
PU #12, prior to the end of the moratorium and to make sure that
the Council sees the other areas prior to reviewing PU #12.
Mr. Musso explained that the delay with Planning Unit 12 has been
udue to problems with the Ensign-Bickford property.
AT THIS TIME A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH FAILED 2-3
(em Futch, Turner and Tirsell dissenting).
Cm Miller stated that in his opinion, defeat of this motion means
that Cm Futch, Turner and Tirsell have decided in advance, prior
to any public hearing, that there will not be a density change in
this area.
Cm Futch commented that Mr. Musso felt area 18 was critical and
wondered which area this might be and Mr. Musso replied that this
is the Springtown-Greenville North area.
Cm Miller explained his statement with respect to the vote on the
last motion by saying that it will not be possible to make any
density changes for Planning Unit 12 prior to the conclusion of
the moratorium (March 23rd) and since zoning must be consistent
with the General Plan it means the zoning which will apply to PU #12
will be 3.3 d.u./acre in the hilly area of our City and which will
mean that there will have to be some type of development by the
freeway.
Cm Turner pointed out that some time ago Cm Futch asked that this
area be considered and Cm Miller asked for a delay and Mr. Musso
has said that the time schedule can be met and that changes can
still be made.
Cm Miller explained that the reason he requested a delay was to
allow the Planning Commission the opportunity to consider the
possibility of density transfers before expiration of the moratorium.
(Arroyo Bridge)
('
Cm Futch stated that he has brought up the matter of the pedestrian
portion of Arroyo bridge needing repair and the Cm Turner has also
mentioned it. He stated that his motivation for bringing the
matter to the attention of the staff was because of the hazard
of riding bikes across the bridge where automobiles travel and
that people are forced to ride bikes in the automobile lanes because
nails are protruding on the wooden pedestrian walkway and bikes
cannot cross there safely. The bridge is narrow and it is extremely
dangerous for a car to pass a bicycle rider, and someone is going
to be hurt. About six months ago the staff was asked to post a
sign indicating "do not pass bicycles on bridge" and asked for a
response as to when such a sign might be posted.
Mr. Lee replied that he is sorry a sign has not been posted but
did not recall that this had been requested and indicated that a
sign would be posted within a matter of days if the Council so
wishes. He added that there are plans to place a bicycle path
inside the channel so that bicycle riders would not have to use
the bridge and would ride outside of it on a paved pathway.
CM-28-l09
. . --1----
December 2, 1974
(Arroyo Bridge)
Mayor Pritchard stated that the matter was discussed some months
ago and also doesn't recall that specific direction was given
with respect to correcting the situation and agreed that something
should be done as soon as possible, with which the Council concurred.
COMMUNICATION RE POSTAL
REGULATIONS FOR CURBSIDE
MAIL SERVICE
A letter was received from the League of California Cities indicat-
ing that a resolution opposing postal regulations requiring newly
occupied residential units to receive mail delivery service only
from curbside mail boxes has been adopted, litigation has been filed
and the League intends to discuss the matter at the California Dele-
gation breakfast in Houston on Wednesday, December 4th to determine
what further action might be taken on a national level.
Mr. Parness suggested that the City Attorney be directed to look
into the prospects of joining in the suit.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE DIRECTED TO LOOK INTO
THE POSSIBILITY OF FILING AN AMICUS CURIAE WITH GROVER CITY VS.
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION RE
TRAFFIC PROBLEMS
Cm Turner reported that Mr. Tilles has advised him that motorists
are using residential streets, on weekdays during commute hours,
to gain access to Arroyo Road from Vallecitos Road and suggested
that the County be asked to redesign Wetmore Road where it intersects
with Vallecitos Road in such a way that it would encourage a traffic
pattern that is readily accessible to Arroyo Road.
Mr. Lee indicated that he would contact the County and also inform
Mr. Tilles that the matter is being investigated.
COMMUNICATION RE
I-580 - DAVID ELLER
A letter was received from David Eller urging that something be done
to stop the "I-580 monster" and that many of the commuters who want
I-580 widened are transients and will not be here by the time the
widening is accomplished. He stated there is a choice of widening
the freeway and ruining the valley or to stop the widening and save
the valley and that these are the only choices. He indicated that
people will continue to use their cars as long as it is convenient
and that they will not use other means of transportation unless
they are forced to do so.
Mayor Pritchard commented that Mr. Eller has echoed the sentiments
of many of the Councilmembers.
REPORT RE WALL STREET
LIGHTING REQUEST
The residents on Wall Street requesed that improved street
lighting be provided as a deterrent to burglary in that area, in
the way of a petition circulated among the residents.
CM-29-ll0
December 2, 1974
(Report re Wall Street
Lighting Request)
Chief Lindgren reported that the Granada area has experienced a
higher than normal burglary rate but that 75% of the burglaries
occurred during the day when there would be no affect from addit-
ional lighting, and access to residences generally was from the rear.
Mr. Lee reported that the lighting for Wall Street is consistent
with the surrounding area, is generally adequate, and would recom-
mend that the request for additional lighting be denied.
Cm Tirsell suggested that perhaps this could be a subject for the
STEP team to investigate and Mr. Parness noted that they are aware
of the problem and are reviewing the matter.
Cm Turner suggested that: 1) the Police Department increase the
patrol of the area; and 2) a monthly report be submitted to the
Council with respect to the number of burglaries taking place in
the area, and that this be done for approximately six months. He
stated that in speaking with one of the residents there has also
been a suggestion for a crossing guard at the Sonoma Avenue School
because some of the children are bothering some of the neighbors
by the chain link fence and that perhaps the crossing guard could
help observe while assisting the children in crossing the street.
Sharon Heinz, 761 Wall Street, stated that her main concern with
respect to Wall Street is crime and that better lighting was merely
an idea. She stated that the standard of living for the people on
Wall Street is deteriorating at an alarming rate with 44% of all
the burglaries occuring in their area out of the entire City of
Livermore. Cars speed on their street and the crosswalk where small
children cross to school is particularly hazardous. She stated that
street lights may not. be the answer but would urge that the City and
her neighbors demonstrate to the criminal offenders that they stand
together as a town and the reason they are appealing to the City
Council and urged that the residents receive its support and help
them resolve the problem.
Mayor Pritchard commented that, on behalf of the other Councilmem-
bers, there is great concern for the neighborhood and its problems
and from the staff reports it would appear that additional lighting
is not the answer. The Council and Police Department will continue
to take steps felt necessary to improve the situation.
Carl Paoni, 820 Wall Street, stated that he would disagree that
additional lighting would not be helpful and added that he has
seen youths damaging his property and even chased people but it
was too dark to recognize or identify anyone doing the damage.
Jim Lyle, 827 Wall Street, stated that just yesterday two tires
were slashed on an automobile parked in front of his home and that
this occurred in the dark. He cited numerous other incidents that
have occurred and agreed that the situation in the neighborhood is
extremely bad.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT AN OFFICER FROM THE LIVEID10RE POLICE DEPARTMENT
MEET WITH THE RESIDENTS TO DISCUSS PROBLEMS AND THEN COME BACK TO
THE COUNCIL WITH A FIRM RECOMMENDATION AS TO HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN
BEST BE HANDLED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH.
r
,
Cm Futch stated that when Mrs. Heinz spoke she implied that the
Council would be unwilling to cooperate and he assured her that
this is certainly not the attitude of the City Council and that
they are very concerned about the problems mentioned previously.
CM-29-1ll
December 2, 1974
(Report re Wall Street
Lighting Request)
Mrs. Heinz explained that she did not mean to imply such with
respect to the Councilmembers personally but felt as if she
was entering a lions den asking for cooperation and agreed that
she was mistaken in assuming this and that the Council was being
cooperative.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION MADE BY CM TURNER PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
em Miller commented that it is true it is difficult for the police
Department to handle problems such as this and noted that the num-
ber of policemen, per capita, is about the same as it was 20 years
ago; however, at that time the community was small and if anyone
broke into someone's house he would likely be apprehended because
everyone knew everyone else in town. Today, people move from one
place to another and the type of community pattern that once exis-
ted is no longer possible. People looking out for one another in
neighborhoods is, in fact, one of the best ways to resolve this
problem and neighborhood solidarity should be one of the best
protections against vandals and burglary. He stated that in
speaking with Mr. paoni he has suggested forming "stake-out" groups
to take turns looking out for the neighborhood and hopefully this
would result in rapid response in getting the policemen to the
area during the times incidents occur. He suggested that the
police Department report as to what can be done to reduce the
speeding in this area.
A police officer from the audience commented that in July the
police Department issued 24 speeding tickets in a two week
period and this did help.
REPORT RE CHURCH PROPERTY
ANNEXATION REQUEST
The City Manager reported that an application has been received
from the People's Church to allow annexation of the property or
to authorize a sewer connection agreement. There is some acreage
in the vicinity that will be interested in annexation in the near
future and it would seem advisable to incorporate both properties
at the same time. The proposal can be investigated by the staff
and in the meantime it is recommended that the Council authorize
a sewer connection agreement provided that the applicant abides
by all City zoning laws and public works improvement standards
and fee payments.
Cm Futch asked if this would include an agreement to annex and
Mr. Parness indicated that it would.
CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUCIL ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE
CITY MANAGER AND DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE SEWER CONNECTION
AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE MERCHANTS'
PARKING LOT TIME LIMIT
The City Manager reported that with the advent of the BART bus
service, parking space will be consumed by bus patrons. The
parking lot is provided by the merchants and they have agreed
that a 2-hour parking limit would be favored. It is recommended
that the Council adopt a resolution establishing a 2-hour time
limit in the merchants' parking lot.
It was noted that some of the merchants were in favor of a I-hour
parking limit, others a 2-hour limit and there were some who
wanted no parking limit; however, the majority favored the 2-hour
limit.
/ '
CM-29-ll2
December 2, 19741
(Merchants' Parking Lot
Time Limit)
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A
2-HOUR PARKING LIMIT FOR THE MERCHANTS' PARKING LOT LOCATED NORTH
OF FIRST STREET, ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
PROPERTY AND THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ENFORCE THE PARKING LIMIT
REGULATIONS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER.
The City Attorney asked that at this time the Council state their
intent, rather than adopting a resolution, because there is some
question as to whether this should be done by resolution or ordinance
and he will report next week as to whether a resolution should be
adopted or to introduce an ordinance.
CM TURNER WITHDREW THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND MOVED TO DIRECT THE
STAFF TO PREPARE THE PROPER FOID1S FOR ESTABLISHING A 2-HOUR
PARKING LIMIT FOR THE MERCHANTS' PARKING LOT LOCATED NORTH OF
FIRST STREET, ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPERTY
AND THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ENFORCE THE PARKING LIMIT REGULATIONS,
SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE SCHEMATIC
DESIGN PHASE FOR FIRE
STATIONS 1 AND 4
Mr. Parness reported that Randy Schlientz has progressed through
the schematic design phase for Fire Stations 1 and 4 and before
proceeding he would like to present the designs to the Council.
Mr. Schlientz presented designs prepared through consultation
with the Fire Chief and Fire Station #1 will be 8,480 sq. ft.
at a cost of $407,040. He then explained the areas where various
facilities will be housed, and its location on the property of Robert
Livermore Park site. Construction will be of stucco and wood exteriors
with concrete tile rOOfing. He then explained the design selected
for Fire Station #4 with 2,226 sq. ft. budgeted at $122,430, and
noted that the exteriors for the stations are primarily the same
and the reason for this is that it is possible that one contract
can be awarded for construction of the exteriors.
Cm Futch noted that there has been talk of the firemen going to
a 40-hour week and also it may be a year before the property can
be acquired and would suggest that perhaps funds should not be
invested in sleeping quarters as they may not be needed.
Mr. Parness indicated that it is very difficult to forecast the
outcome of the proposed 40-hour week but would predict that such
will not happen within the next 5 years.
Mr. Schlientz noted that the beds can be folded up and put inside a
cupboard area and this dormitory space can be used as a meeting room.
('
~-'
Mr. Parness explained that the area in the vicinity of Holmes Street
and Concannon Blvd. was being considered as a possible location for
Fire Station #4; however, Dr. Volponi, the owner refuses to sell
a portion of his property and purchase would have to consist of
the entire five acres. Since the property is outside of the City
limits the City has no authority to condemn the property for use
for the fire station. Mr. Parness stated that other lots have been
considered along Concannon Blvd., but they are also very expensive
and would be about $15,000. per lot, and in view of the fact of the
high value of property and since it was not critical to locate the
station there, other property is now being considered. He is meeting
with the property owner this week for possible acquisition of a
site located at the northeast corner of Holmes and Concannon before
CM-29-ll3
December 2, 1974
(Report re Schematic Design
Phase for Fire Stations 1 and 4)
bringing back to the Council the prospects for purchase. Mr.
Parness stated that one of the parcels is nearer to utilities than
the other and would be preferable.
PLANNING CO~iISSION REPORTS
(County Referral Appl. of Richard Doty
for Rezoning M-l-X to M-2 East Side
Greenville Rd, NW Western Pac RR)
The Planning Commission considered the County referral of the appli-
cation by Richard Doty for rezoning (1188th Zoning unit) from M-l-X
(Light Industrial) to M-2 (Heavy Industrial) District, property lo-
cated on the east side of Greenville Road, northwest of Western
Pacific Railroad tracks. The Planning Commission did adopt the staff
report recommending: I} approval of the requested rezoning; 2} that
setbacks be required in accordance with City of Livermore I-I zoning
District regulations; and 3} that coverage be required in accordance
with City of Livermore I-2 zoning District regulations. The Planning
Commission further desired to point out that the setback and coverage
regulations of the City's Industrial District differ from the County's.
The use proposed is a conditional use and it is the planning commis-
sion's intent that the recommended setbacks and coverage be imposed
at time of cup approval as it would be required by City Ordinance
upon annexation of said property.
Cm Miller remarked that the change from light industrial to heavy in-
dustrial use does not bother him, but the change in zoning does not
restrict it in any way to the use being proposed, and he felt it is
creating heavy industrial in a light industrial zoned area and the
City Council should recommend that this be allowed as a CUP rather
than rezoning.
Mr. MussO explained that if the property were in the City the use as
I-I, 2, or 3 would not matter as the main issue is zoning regulations
and specifically the setback.
Cm Miller stated that we should deny the rezoning and MOVED TO RE-
COMMEND APPROVAL CONDITIONED UNDER A CUP RATHER THAN REZONING;
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mayor Pritchard felt that the Planning Commission's recommendation
takes into consideration the concerns voiced by Cm Miller, and Cm
Miller agreed, however his motion was that the conditions be imposed
under a cUP rather than a rezoning.
em Turner stated he would rather go along with the Planning Commis-
sion's recommendation. The important thing is that there should be
flexibility in industrial areas as to the use allowed and they should
not condition each and every parcel to insure the use. Cm Turner
called for the question.
THE MOTION FAILED 3-2 WITH CM FUTCH, TURNER AND MAYOR PRITCHARD
DISSENTING.
CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER, WHICH PASSED 4-1 WITH CM MILLER DISSENTING.
(Council Referral and Request
for Comment re proposed Use
Property at Kittyhawk Rd & Airway Blvd)
The Planning Commission considered the City Council referral requesting
CM-29-ll4
December 2, 1974
(Proposed Use re Property
at Kittyhawk & Airway)
/
review and comment re use for bowling alley and appurtenant facilities
of approximately two acres of City owned property at the southwest
corner of Airway Blvd and Kittyhawk Rd. The Planning Commission
recommended that the proposed use not be allowed, primarily because
of the hazardous situation created as a result of this site's
nearness to the airport runway.
(County Referral-Applica-
tion re Rezoning A to C-l
Portola Ave site, Anderson)
The Planning Commission considered referral from Alameda County
Planning Commission of application of Chester and Cleo Anderson for
rezoning (1182nd Zoning Unit) from A (Agricultural) to C-l (Retail
Business) District of a 4.6 acre site located on Portola Avenue,
north side, opposite the intersection of "P" Street. The Planning
Commission did adopt the staff report recommending denial of the
proposed rezoning based on the following findings: 1) the proposed
rezoning does not conform to the Alameda County nor the City of
Livermore General Plans; 2) the proposed rezoning is premature in
the face of pending Specific and General Plan considerations.
(County Referral-Rezoning
M-I-X to A, East Side
Vasco Rd Between LLL and
Western Pac RR R/W-Duarte)
The Planning Commission considered a referral from the Alameda Cty
Planning Commission of an application from Sarah and Joseph Duarte for
rezoning (119lst Zoning Unit) from M-l-X (Light Industrial) to A
(Agricultural) District of property located on the east side of
Vasco Road between Livermore Lawrence Lab and the Western Pacific
Railroad right-of-way. The Planning Commission did adopt the staff
report for transmittal to Alameda County via the Council, recommending
approval of the requested rezoning, with the rezoning being justified
on the basis that the zoning of the property to industrial as indi-
cated in the General Plan is premature. In addition the Planning
Commission wished to point out that it is possible the subject pro-
perty will not develop in its ultimate planned use within a ten-year
period, therefore its use for agricultural purposes does appear
reasonable and could be considered appropriate land for inclusion
in an agricultural preserve.
COUNCILMAN TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOM-
MENDATION ON THE COUNTY REFERRALS OF THE APPLICATIONS OF CHESTER
AND CLEO ANDERSON AND OF JOSEPH DUARTE, AND THE RECOMMENDATION FOR
DENIAL FOR THE USE AS A BOWLING ALLEY OF THE CITY OWNED PROPERTY
AT KITTYHAWK RD AND AIRWAY BLVD: MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM FUTCH.
Cm Turner questioned if any other sites had been considered for
a bowling alley, and was advised by Mr. Musso that other sites had
been considered previously, however not in connection with this
particular action, and these had been discussed with this applicant.
r
VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM-29-ll5
^ ~'-....-.,.~.._,.._.....,~.-----_._---~-_.-
December 2, 1974
REPORT RE PROPOSED CORPS
OF ENGINEERS URBAN RESOURCE
PROGRAM STUDY
The City Manager explained that on behalf of the Mayor, he had con-
tacted several sources trying to determine who is the initiating
agent for the proposed Corps of Engineers urban resource program
study, what is intended by the study and what the City's part might
be. He was told that the origin dates back to mid-fifties when upon
the direction of Congress, a study was conducted for the Alameda
Creek watershed, and similar studies were done throughout the nation,
of major storm drainage areas and the report was filed with Alameda
County in 1962. It was the foundation for major flood control in-
stallations and qualification for federal participation. Alameda
Creek was not considered to be critical and was not studied in de-
tail at that time. The current study was undertaken upon the request
of the County Government and Congressman Don Edwards, and he and
Congressman Stark jointly sponsored a congressional resolution
which was introduced to the congressional committee on Public Works
in April 1974, requesting that the Corps of Engineers review the
studies previously made on flood control works in our area. The
Corps of Engineers is obligated to take such a process since it is
a review without formal congressional approval, however approval is
required for the appropriation of funding. The study is a 3-part
type of approach: I} flood control purposes (major effort); 2) study
as to the provision for and distribution of domestic water supplies;
and 3} waste water management" The area to be studied is all of the
watershed area above Niles Cone, which covers a boundary in excess
of study now underway under LAVWMA. The cost has been initially
funded in the amount of $100,000.00, and the cost of the final report
may run from $500,000.00 to $1 million. The federal requirements
are that the localities would provide 25% of the capital cost of
the project which would be in-kind services and not cash. Mr. Parness
explained that the Corps of Engineers will not intrude into any area
the local governments feel is inviolate. They will not do any type
of study effort that is not the will of the local agencies, however
they will undertake those aspects of the 3-pronged affair that the
local agencies contend is not within their purview. The scope of
work will be under formulation soon and all the local agencies, in-
cluding Regional Water Quality Control, BAS SA , State Water Resources,
LAVWMA and the individual local entities will be asked to actively
participate in the formulation of the scope of work.
Cm Futch stated he felt they have already intruded by coming in
without the knowledge of local agencies who are involved in this
matter as they should have met with LAVWMA. He pointed out that
the three areas to be studied are all items that could possibly
be considered by LAVWMA under the 208 Planning Act, and LAVWMA now
has a budget of $100,000 to study waste water disposal. There was a
long list of agencies that have been involved so far and there
has been difficulty involved in reaching an agreement, and he listed
the State Water Resources, Regional Board, BASSA, EPA, the three
communities and LAVWMA. Cm Futch stated he could see no use in
spending ten times the money of the taxpayers as he did not believe
these studies are needed for water supply or waste water disposal
or flood control. He felt that the Corps of Engineers is looking
for a job and want to get into urban planning because there is a
lot of money available from congress and they should not get into
land use planning. Although they say they will respect the local
wishes, the same comment has been made by other federal agencies,
then when it comes to signing the contract and the funding, it
has to be done their way or not at all, and so he is opposed to it.
Cm Miller commented that Cm Futch had given a very precise analysis
of exactly what is wrong with the whole proposal. He added it was
not only the Corps of Engineers interested in spending money and
keeping their jobs, but he would have to ask why Alameda County
wants the Corps of Engineers to do a job when Zone 7 has one of the
CM-29-1l6
December 2, 1974
(Proposed Corps of
Engineers Urban Resource
Program Study)
--
(
responsibilities and has had for fifteen years and felt the County
had other reasons for doing this as no local agencies have asked
for the study. He agreed we should oppose the study, and any money
to be spent should be spent through local agencies like LAVWMA.
Mayor Pritchard asked what action the City could take at this point
and Mr. Parness explained the Corps has done very little, but they are
about to begin meeting in joint sessions with the local agencies.
He suggested before the Council considers any action either of
opposition or one that would be noncommital, that they invite the
District Director of the Corps of Engineers and the BASSA staff
to personally present their views to the Council as to what effect
it might have on Livermore and on LAVWMA.
Cm Futch felt it would be a waste of time as they appeared before
Zone 7 and we have those the minutes of that meeting.
Mr. Parness stated that he spoke with the Zone 7 staff today with
respect to the flood control aspects and Cm Futch indicated
that this mayor may not reflect the opinion of the Board.
Mr. Parness stated that he feels there would be no problem with
delaying a decision until the Council has received more information
and On Futch stated that he would disagree because the longer an
agency is involved, the more difficult it is to eliminate them.
He stated that in his opinion the Council should go on record with
its position but Mr. Parness felt all the facts and background are
not known and that there is not sufficient information to go on
record.
Cm Turner stated that he would agree with Mr. Parness in that he
doesn't really have any more information than he had a week ago and
that Cm Futch hasn't really presented any facts but seems to be
against the Army I brps of Engineers making the study.
ern Futch felt he had stated facts and that LA~~, the 208 Planning
Agency can do the very same study and is a process by which the
local jurisdictions can get involved in the study.
Mayor Pritchard stated that he does not want this Council to have
the reputation of not being willing to listen to anyone and that
it would only be fair to listen to their side of the story and, in
fact, he has some specific questions he would like to ask of them.
Cm Miller stated that he agrees with Cm Futch and also would agree
with his suggestion that this be settled as soon as possible; however,
he felt there would be no harm in allowing them to present their side.
He suggested that a letter be sent to the Corps, to BASSA, to the
Regional Board, the other members of LAVW~fA, the County, Zone 7, and
anyone else that might be involved in this in any way, indicating that
it is not clear why money is not going to local agencies and may be
spent for the Corps, and ask someone from the Corps to speak next
week.
(~\
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO SEND A LETTER POINTING
OUT THE CONCERNS RAISED BY CM FUTCH, TO ALL THE APPROPRIATE AGENCIES,
AND THAT THE STAFF REQUEST THE CORPS TO SEND SOMEONE TO DESCRIBE
THEIR PROGRAM IN MORE DETAIL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COUNTY REFERRAL RE
REZONING REQUEST FROM
A TO C-l DIST. - VASCO RD.
(Porter)
Cm Miller commented that the County has referred the rezoning request
to the City Council for Vasco Road from A to C-l to allow a nursery.
CH-29-ll7
December 2, 1974
(County Referral-Rezoning
A to C-l Dist. - Porter)
Cm Miller continued to state that his concern for allowing the
change from agricultural to commercial is the fact that it will
not allow only a nursery but will open the door to all kinds of
other commercial development, including gasoline stations. To
approve a rezoning to commercial, in his opinion, is just asking
for trouble. The Council should keep in mind that the person
who now wishes to build a nursery may sell the property in six
months and that person could put in a gas station. He would
suggest that the ~uncil recommend to the County that the
request for commercial zoning be denied.
Mr. Musso explained that in discussing Planning Unit #18, the
Planning Commission decided to allow commercial development on
Vasco Road up to the creek and on the basis of the application
concluded that the plan he illustrated to the Council would be
appropriate.
CM FUTCH LEFT THE MEETING AT THIS TIME.
Cm Turner stated that he feels a nursery is compatible with the
residential but would also agree with Cm Miller that he would
not want to do something to allow commercial development to
start up in that area.
Mr. Madis, on behalf on the applicant, Frank and Sarah Porter,
stated that they would like a C-l or C-2 zoning because these
two zonings are the only two in which a nursery can operate
and also with a CUP.
Originally his client wanted the entire parcel rezoned, which
is about 7 acres, but he stated that they plan to ammend the
request with the County for only the portion that will be
used for the nursery, and in accordance with the Planning
Commission recommendation. Mr. Madis pointed out that the
property across from this area and on one side will be com-
mercial zoning and they feel it is not unreasonable to ask
that this portion become commercial also. The alternative
would be the small portion residential surrounded by com-
mercial which they feel would not be as logical as allowing
them commercial.
Mr. Musso indicated that the interchange is shown as commer-
cial on the General Plan, and then it is just a matter of
where the line is drawn for ending the commercial and it
was originally at the channel on the east side and at the
roadway on the west, and the Planning Commission brought
the line up to the channel on both sides.
The Planning Commission recommendation was that the subject
rezoning be denied based on the findings that the proposed
rezoning is not in conformance with the City's General Plan
and the Alameda County General Plan.
CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOM-
MENDATION TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR REZONING, FOR TRANSMIT-
TAL TO THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, SECONDED BY CM
MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Futch absent) .
REPORT RE RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT AND WATER RECLAMATION
PLANT PROJECT CHANGE ORDERS
Mr. Lee submitted a written report with respect to change
orders recommended for approval in connection with the
Water Reclamation Plant construction and the Railroad
Relocation Project, as specified in the reports.
CM-29-ll8
December 2, 1974
(Change Orders re Railroad
Constructid1 and Water
Reclamation Plant Projects)
Cm Miller stated that Change Order #2, with respect to the Water
Reclamation Plant Project (Filter Media) was initiated by the
City's consultant to comply with EPA's latest standards and if
EPA isn't going to pay for it then it cannot be their latest
standards. If the state and EPA are not going to share in the
cost of the $2,539 required for this, as they generally do, he
would like to know why not.
Mr. Lee explained that they will continue to appeal this item adding
that the City really has no option if a proper filter is desired.
Cm Miller felt the Council should be provided with more information
regarding this particular Change Order, prior to approving it.
Mr. Parness stated that it is very difficult to contact the state
and EPA but they have indicated that they feel this requirement
will not qualify for matching funds and they seem to be very firm
as to what will or will not qualify.
Mr. Lee explained that the EPA has indicated the original design
will satisfy their standards but it is the consultant who feels
the change should be allowed to meet the latest requirements of
the EPA.
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ALL THE CHANGE
ORDERS SUBMITTED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CHANGE ORDER #2, FOR THE
WATER RECLAMATION PLANT PROJECT, PENDING FURTHER INFORMATION ON
THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Miller asked why the connection for the Junior College was
not included in the first place (Change Order #3) and Mr. Lee
explained that the City designed the sewer line for the Junior
College and brought it down to the plant and the consultant made
the interconnection between our sewer line and the lift station
and there was a discrepancy in his plans and a correction was
necessary for the lines to join properly, and that the $982 would
have been the cost if it had been added originally.
Cm Miller stated that he feels the City should not have to pay
for a mistake that someone else made and Mr. Lee commented that
it could be called an omission.
Mr. Parness explained that it wasn't really a design omission but
rather an installation that needs to be added and irrelevant as to
who designed it or whether or not it was designed originally or now.
Mr. Lee explained that it is his understanding if the consultant were
to design it over again he would make it mesh; however, if it had
been included originally the cost would have been about the same
though there may be a slight increase for the change order.
Cm Miller stated that he would like the records to indicate that
he is opposed to approving Change Order #3 required due to error
on the part of the consultant.
Mr. Logan noted that the changes can be approved in the form of a
~ motion or resolution but advised that resolutions are easily accessible
documents and this type of record may be preferable.
Mr. Lee stated that he would suggest this not be done by resolution
because the change orders are essentially the same as progress pay-
ments and in most jurisdictions matters of this magnitude do not
even go to the council.
Cm Turner moved the question. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Cm Futch absent).
CM-29-ll9
December 2, 1974
(Change Orders re Railroad
Construction Project)
em Miller stated that with respect to the Railroad Project change
orders, the words, "That item was not anticipated in the consulting
engineer's original plans.", bothers him and also #5 and #6. He
stated that the report indicates the plans were prepared before Taco
Bell was constructed so the consulting engineer did not show the
underground utility service to it and wondered why the plans were
not updated since we are paying for all of it and also it is noted
that some chain link fencing at the underpass was omitted from the
plan and he would like an answer to these things.
Cm Turner stated that regardless of the type of development, there
are various changes that arise due to things which were not antici-
pated or unexpected or determined advantageous to the project and
generally agreed upon by all parties involved. He would hesitate
to say this person is to blame or that person is to blame and that
the project is a joint effort and everyone wants the best results.
Cm Miller agreed that changes are necessary but his concern is for
those items that apparently should have been taken care of as a
part of the responsibility of the consultant and if they are not
doing their job then why are we paying them?
Cm Turner indicated that in his opinion some mistakes are to be
expected.
Cm Miller agreed but noted that the things he has mentioned seem
to be mistakes made by lack of attention,of not making final
checks as they should and simply a case of not doing their job.
Mr. Parness stated that Change Orders #3 and #5 are being challenged
by the City with the consulting engineer and they will be meeting
this week to discuss them; however, these items must be paid for.
The resolution as to who is responsible for recompense is yet to
be made between the City and the consulting engineer but the con-
tractor who did the work must be paid.
CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE REPORT RECOMMENDING
CHANGE ORDERS FOR THE RAILROAD RELOCATION PROJECT, SECONDED BY
CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
STATUS REPORT RE GRADE
SEPARATION PROJECT
Mayor pritchard commented that the status report for the grade
separation project was very informative and complete and noted
that the flow chart was legible.
The Council concluded that they would appreciate receiving weekly
reports on the status of the project but a monthly flow chart
would be sufficient.
Cm Miller commented that he is not quite as happy as the rest
of the Council with respect to the consulting engineer and that
they have failed to provide things when they are supposed to and
feel they need to be spoken to a little more severely.
REPORT RE LEGAL FEE
PAYMENT HISTORY
The City Manager reported that in accordance with Council direction
a report of outside attorney consultant fees during the past five
years have been submitted to the Council which total $115,398.25.
He explained that the largest expenditure was for one item, an
assessment district matter, and the remainder is rather negligible.
CM-29-l20
December 2, 1974
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
RE REPORTS
(
Cm Turner stated that he has requested a weekly report on the traffic
situation in the construction area and would suggest that someone
check to make sure reasonable access is provided to businesses and
any complaints the merchants have should be included in the report.
Cm Turner added that he would like to request that the Chief of
Police monitor the traffic situation, perhaps at different times
during the day and report back to the Council. In addition, he
requested that a monthly report on the railroad project be included
in the regular monthly reports submitted to the Council and a pro-
gress report that could be submitted to the newspapers, written
by Hr. Parness, and for Hr. Lidster to provide a detailed report
as to the progress of the relocation to be available for the news-
papers.
Mr. Parness noted that the relocation has been accomplished and
Cm Turner stated that he would appreciate a final report on this
item, in detail.
DISCUSSION RE ORD.
RE MUNI. CODE. AMEND.
- Criminal Oriented
Records Production
Unified System (CORPUS)
Mr. Logan stated that the Council might note that the ordinance re-
garding the Municipal Code amendment related to Criminal Oriented
Records Production Unified Systems (CORPUS) is the same as what
was presented last week. He has contacted the County Counsel and
received material from him but has not had the opportunity to
review it because he has been in court. He noted that brochures
have been sent to him explaining some of it and the decision to
use the word "malicious and willfulll came about by meeting with
the District Attorney and the County Counsel and the District
Attorney desired that this wording be included. He stated that
the District Attorney will be the prosecuting agency and acceded
to their wishes because we will not be prosecuting this particular
ordinance and if the County wishes to have an ordinance that is
consistent county-wide, he has no objection; however, the Council
may oppose it or postpone it for another week during which time he
will review the material received regarding the ordinance.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT MEETING,
SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECU-
TIVE SESSION
Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at 11:35 p.m. to a brief execu-
tive session to discuss labor negotiations and announced that the
Council would reconvene immediately after the executive session to
formally take action regarding the results of the executive session.
MEETING RECONVENED
Mayor Pritchard reconvened the meeting with all Councilmembers
~ present except Cm Futch at 12:05 a.m., December 3, 1974
to announce that agreement has been reached with the firemen
represented by the I.A.F.F. Local 2318, a memorandum of agreement
has been signed and asked for a motion from the Council ratifying
the agreement.
CM-29-l2l
December 2, 1974
(Labor Negotiations -
Firemen Contract)
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE CONTRACT,
SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Cm Futch absent)
RESOLUTION NO. 190-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF MEMORAN-
DUM OF UNDERSTANDING (Livermore Firefighters
I.A.F.F. Local 2318)
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pritchard
a~6?~.
'" Mayor
/!
APPROVE
ATTEST
C\/
California
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on December 9, 1974, 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: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard
Absen't: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
tvlINUTES
November 25th:
Page 93, under Matters Initiated, Paragraph 2, should read:
"to see that the Council prepare the letter etc..."
Page 104, motion prior to Resolution 188-74 should indicate
that em Turner dissented.
Page 94, under Urban Planning, first paragraph, line 7 should begin
to read as follows: "LAVWMA has already been designated as the 208
planning agencies and they intended to do a complete study on this
CM-29-l22
December 9, 1974
(Minute Corrections)
item as well as other matters. Following LAVWMA's designation as
a 208 agency LA~~~~ was subsequently informed that the valley did
not have problems sufficient to warrant such a study and now it
appears...etc...".
~'..
I
Page 95, second and third line should read: "stated that he has been
informed by the owners of the land that is to be used for park pur-
poses and that they are not interested in...etc...".
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CH TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 25th WERE CORRECTED, AS
AMENDED AND THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 2, WERE APPROVED
AS SUBMITTED.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Design Review
Committee Minutes
The minutes for the Design Review Committee meeting of December 4,
1974, were submitted to the Council for review.
Payroll & Claims
There were 147 claims in the amount of $575,593.48 and 355 payroll
warrants in the amount of $91,475.76, for a total of $667,069.24,
dated November 30, 1974, approved and ordered paid by the City
Manager.
ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS ADOPTED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Bike Licensing)
Cm Turner stated that he would like the matter of bike licensing and
theft pertaining to bikes, placed on the agenda.
(re Widening of I-580)
Cm Turner stated that in November em Hiller noted that he had re-
ceived new information with respect to the widening of I-580 and
with the Council's permission wrote to General Benjamin Davis of
the DOT to inform him of this new information. Cm Turner stated
that because this was supposedly new information he also agreed
that the letter be sent. In reading the letter, dated December 6,
Cm Turner noted that he is opposed to it because in his opinion it
does not contain new information and appears to be just another
letter pointing out that Livermore does not favor the proposed 8
lane freeway concept. He stated that it would appear from reading
the letter that he has changed his position and that this is not
true - he still favors the nroposed 8 lane concept, and emphasized
that he is opposed to the letter that was sent which had been signed
by the Mayor.
Mayor Pritchard explained that the letter contained information that
has not yet been brought to the attention of anyone and the informa-
tion was based on the final draft of the Environmental Impact State-
ment which was not received until November 25th, and the Council
feels this is new information.
CM-29-l23
December 9, 1974
(Re Widening of I-S8D)
Cm Turner stated that he objects to the implication that there is
solidarity between the Council and the views of the people of
Livermore with respect to the widening and Mayor Pritchard replied
that the majority vote of the Council represents the position of
the City.
Cm Miller pointed out that the minutes of November 2Sth indicate
that the motion stated the City would like the DOT to reconsider
for reasons listed in the letter prepared by Cm Miller, and that
the new information is not new information to the Council but is
new information to present to the DOT and other agencies and was
not considered by CAL-TRANS in their Environmental Impact Statement.
The things which were new information to CAL-TRANS were: The City's
Smog report, the A. D. Little report, the Putnam report and the
MTC report.
Cm Turner felt there was more in the letter than the motion indi-
cated and that he certainly does not support the majority of the
Council's opinion regarding I-580 widening.
(Trailer Ordinance)
Cm Miller stated that he is starting to get complaints from people
about trailers and that a new ordinance was supposed to have been
adopted and wanted to know what has happened to it and Mr. Musso
explained that it has been with the Planning Commission for their
study session and that there have been a few problems they wish to
resolve.
Cm Miller stated that an ordinance should be adopted and a Council
policy established so that there can be enforcement of the ordi-
nance.
(Billboard Variances)
Cm Miller stated that there are a series of billboard variances
before the County Board of Supervisors which will be heard this
week and he feels the City should ask that the County not allow the
variances because of our position on signs, and suggested tha t
the staff send a letter asking that they conform to ~ordin~pce,
AND SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. tte~~~
AI/~
(League Bulletin re
Legislative Matters)
Cm Miller stated that there was mention of SB 977 regarding revis-
ion of the Subdivision Map Act and SB 1974 regarding a change of
statutes on variances, and would like a copy of these bills.
Mr. Musso replied that the revision of the Subdivision Map Act
suggests that the City adopt its own subdivision ordinance by
January or March and this will be coming to the Council.
(Complaints re Vasco
Road Repair Job)
Cm Miller stated that he has been rece1v1ng complaints regarding
what is considered a poor job of repairing Vasco Road, in the
City limits, and Mr. Lee commented that this portion has recently
been annexed and ultimately will have to be reconstructed.
CM-29-l24
December 9, 1974
(Undergrounding Ord.)
Cm Miller asked about the whereabouts of the Undergrounding Ordinance
and Mr. Logan indicated that it will be coming to the Council within
the next two weeks.
~,
~
(Holiday Decorations)
Cm Futch stated that Gene Morgan, the Chamber of Commerce President,
contacted him to say that they did not realize the Council had re-
quested that the holiday decorations not be put up until after
Thanksgiving, apologized because they were put up prior to Thanks-
giving this year and he assured him that they would not put them
up until after Thanksgiving in the future. Cm Futch felt perhaps
this had not been made clear and MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL GO ON RECORD
AS STATING THAT IT DESIRES THAT THE mCORATIONS NOT BE PUT UP UNTIL
AFTER THANKSGIVING AND THAT PAYMENT FOR THE DECORATIONS (CITY PORTION)
~HLL BE PAID IF THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PUT UP PRIOR TO THANKSGIVING,
SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND PASSED 4-0 (Cm Miller abstaining as he
is opposed to the whole concept.)
(Arroyo Bridge Sign)
Cm Futch asked about the status of the sign to be posted at the Arroyo
bridge indicating that motorists should not pass bicycle riders while
bikes are crossing bridge and r1r. Lee reported that the Street Depart-
ment has been instructed to post the signs as soon as they have been
made.
(re Bridge for East
Avenue Crosswalk)
Cm Tirsell asked when the small wooden portable bridge for the East
Avenue crosswalk will be ready and Mr. Lee replied that instructions
have been given to prepare such a bridge and that such will be
available during the rains.
Cm Tirsell stated that it was raining last week and there was no
bridge and Mr. Lee stated that he would do some checking.
REPORT RE U. S. ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS STUDY
RE URBAN PLANNING
Mr. Parness explained that in an effort to help the Council gain
more information relative to the proposed Urban Planning study to
be conducted by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, he has invited
Mr. Charles Elmore, from the Corps, to speak to the Council.
Mr. Elmore explained that the Urban Studies program is a departure
from the traditional role of the Corps of Engineers and that for
years river basins have been used as the basic planning unit in
river and harbor development and the Corps is turning its planning
capabilities towards helping metropolitan areas solve their urban
water and related land resource problems. In conducting this new
program the Corps will be looking at some or all of the following:
Flood control, flood plain management, water supply, waste water
management, bank channel stabilization, and water related recreation.
He stated that one of the local agencies has been charged with creat-
ing studies and plans for handling waste water management and noted
that LA~iA is to handle this particular component of the Urban Study
but the total program looks at everything involved with water, includ-
ing urban runoff into citie~which had not previously been reviewed.
CM-29-l25
December 9, 1974
(re Corps of Engineers
Study re Urban Planning)
In 1970 the Corps was authorized by Congress to conduct a series of
studies and from the studies the Corps has gained valuable experience
in waste water management. The primary objective of this program
is to use the Corps of Engineers, working in partnership with state
and local government, to develop an integrated and a feasible plan-
ning alternative for state and local consideration. Inherent in the
program is maximum public exposure and involvement and the City's
needs and desires will be incorporated into the alternative solution.
Approximately one month ago they received funds to initiate the study
but the funds are limited to the preparation of a plan of study that
can be completed with local entities showing interest and the desire
to cooperate. The scope of work and priority of objectives will be
outlined in the plan of study and will be determined by the discus-
sions with the local interests, which will be done to determine the
needs and desires with respect to water resources. They would hope
to complete the study within a year and will not duplicate any other
federal, state, or local government agency's planning effort. The
program will be basically funded by the federal government and the
local costs will be limited to 25% of the waste water management
component and can be in the form of manpower services rather than
a cash contribution. He then explained the Alameda Creek Watershed
area that will be subjected to the study proposed by the Corps and
purpose as related to development with increas~~AP~~~tion as ex-~
pected in the coming years. The rapid populat~~~~ady experi- ~~~~.
enced, affects the capabilities of existing facilities and brings ~-
problems to the environment and the local inhabitants should be
very concerned about the social and environmental effects of this
growing population. This rapid urbanization has necessitated addi-
tional water import from the State water project, also initiation
of local action to address water quality and waste water management.
Continued development of the upper basin combined with the very
limited natural water resources will require an integrated approach
to the problems - a coordinated plan is needed to develop land use,
waste water use reclamation, flood control, flood plain management
in order to meet the long range projections. Hopefully, the study
will generate wide range of solutions which will encompass human
resources development, environmental enhancement, wise use of the
flood plains, waste water control and flood control improvements.
The Corps efforts would be directed toward providing input to local
planning in the form of alternative plans for helping solve the
problems. The Corps will not engage in land use planning, as that is
totally a local responsibility. Waste water management is an area
where there are already several of the local agencies at work. In
1972 the Federal Water Pollution Control Act was passed which sets
forth stringent demands on the entire United States, so that by 1985
there will be no discharge of pollutants into the waters of the U.S.
It is imperative that adequate determination be made now on how
waste water can be reclaimed, for what purpose and at which locations
for water resources planning for this area. Potential water resources
components must be viewed as being inter-related, not as separate
entities. They are interested in the City's views regarding prior-
ities of problems and desirability of solutions.
Cm Futch asked Mr. Elmore what his profession was so that he could
direct his questions and Mr. Elmore stated he was a Certified Water
Resources Planner, and he has 25 years of experience. Cm Futch
stated that Mr. Elmore had outlined the scope of the proposed study
to be made by the Corps of Engineers. There are many agencies in
the Valley who are engaged in water management, supply and waste
water use and reclamation and since it is a principle of the Corps
not to engage in duplication, he sees a conflict and does not know
the explanation. He listed the agencies involved - the three com-
munities in the Valley, the joint water agency LAVWMA formed for
the disposal of waste water management, Zone 7 who is responsible for
flood control, ~~ater supply; in addition there regional agencies
such as BASSA, state agencies like Regional Water Quality Control Bd.,
CM-29-l26
December 9, 1974
(re Corps of Engineers
Study re Urban Planning)
r
State Water Resources Board, in fact, it is hard to determine whose
responsibility a particular thing is. He wanted to know why the
Corps should get involved in something that has already created such
a difficult problem because of the number of agencies involved, and
is something that is a local or regional problem.
Mr. Elmore stated that the Corps of Engineers did not, on its own
initiative, barge in but came in by invitation from the Congress-
man who is a representative of the local area. All the agencies
mentioned are engaged in some form of water resources development
but none look at the total spectrum of water resources development;
hence, when federal funds are involved and the Congress of the United
States has passed upon the appropriation of funds for the construction
of these projects, they have experienced programs that have been
piecemeal, and today they are hoping that they can receive a program
that addresses all of the work components in one package.
Cm Futch commented that the guidelines state that invitation must
be by the local agencies and wondered who the local agencies
were that requested participation of the Corps.
Mr. Elmore stated that the Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District was primarily instrumental in getting the
resolution and the request of the Congressman, however Cm Futch
stated that from talking to their Board members his understanding
was that they did not request the study. Mr. Elmore stated that
he had met with members of the Board in this same chamber, and in
further questioning it was determined that Mr. Elmore had met with
Mr. Mun Mar. Cm Futch felt the point was that it was not known what
local agency had asked the Corps of Engineers and Mr. Elmore stated
no agency had asked them but the Congress of the United States had
directed the Corp to come here. Again Cm Futch stressed that the
guidelines state that the Corps only comes if they are invited by
a local agency.
Cm Futch pointed out that LAVWMA has been appointed as the 208
Planning Agency and if the study is done by LAVWMA the planning
would be 100% funded by the federal government under the 208 Plan,
whereas if is done by the Corps of Engineers the local agencies
would have to contribute 25% of the water management amount. Cm
Futch referred to a letter from Marvin Rees to Congressman Stark
which in part stated that local planning agencies and residents are
aware that major urban development in the upper basin will require
flood control measures of some type to avoid present and future
flood damages and questioned what we were aware of.
Mr. Elmore explained that when the Del Valle Reservoir and Dam
were under construction the channel works in the lower reaches
were built to protect the urbanized areas west of Niles Canyon
and there are flood problems in the area today as the result of
urbanization of areas that were in agricultural use 15 to 20 years
ago and are now in the middle of flood plains and subject to damage.
Cm Futch stated that we are not aware of the flood problems and
was merely asking what the problems are in the Valley. He also
asked what was meant by structures along the creek and if it might
mean the banks, digging out and concrete lining, and Mr. Elmore
replied that it could mean that. Cm Futch also referred to a letter
from Lester Tinkham of the South Pacific Division which, in part,
stated there are two major factions predominant in the study area -
one seeking more development, the other opposing additional develop-
ment and asked Mr. Elmore if he knew what agencies were referred to.
CM-29-l27
. ._---~------_.__.-
December 9, 1974
(re Corps of Engineers
Study re urban Planning)
Mr. Elmore stated that he did not know what agencies Mr. Tinkham had
reference to.
Cm Futch stated there was a meeting of Mr. Tinkham with the staff
of the City of Livermore, LAVW~~ and BASSA, and according to the
letter Mr. Tinkham concludes from the meeting that the Corps would
be a valuable supplement to the current efforts. Cm Futch stated
that if this is the conclusion it would seem to be a policy decision
and is sure that Mr. Lee and other members of the staff would not state
that they think this is a good thing and given as the reason for pro-
ceeding.
Mr. Lee remarked that he might have said that he felt the study
would have some value and the Council should consider the Corps
effort as it might serve the purpose. Mr. Lee stated that Mr. El-
more attended the meeting with Mr. Tinkham and outlined the scope
of the study.
Cm Futch again asked if that could be taken to be the desire of the
local agencies, and Mr. Lee assured him it was not, but was the very
first contact the Corps had made with the BASSA staff and City staff.
As a member of LAVWMA, the problem is that once the study is made,
the argument comes back and without the local people really having
a decision in these studies to any significant extent, it was found
that in dealing with some of the federal agencies it predetermines
what can be done, and once the study is made our alternatives are
cut off and we no longer have control of our local destinies. Cm
Futch stated there still remains the unanswered question as to who
asked for the study, and why.
Mr. Elmore stated he could appreciate Cm Futch's concern, and there
is some merit in what he did state, but the facts are not the same
today. There was a time when a study was introduced and requested
by Congress and no member of the Corps of Engineers would have
appeared before them; there was a time when a project could have
been authorized and funded and construction would have been started,
but today projects that have been on the boards for years that
have been funded, construction started and if the local people
did not like it and so indicated, construction was stopped. Today
the local governments do have a hand in their destiny.
Mayor Pritchard invited the other Councilmembers to speak, but asked
them to be brief.
Cm Turner commented that Mr. Elmore had stated that a local agency
was charged with a water management study and asked Mr. Elmore if
he meant that they had not completed the study they were charged
with.
~r. Elmore stated he did not mean that but actually LA~~ and BASSA
are in the process now of conducting that study.
Cm Turner asked if there were any local funds involved in his urban
study, and Mr. Elmore replied there were not.
Cm Futch asked for clarification of that as there would be local
funds involved - 25% if waste water management is involved, and Mr.
Elmore stated that was correct, but if there is a 208 grant, those
will be federal funds and will be considered as contributing its
part to that non-federal function. In essence, with a 208 grant,
the study will not require a 25%. Cm Futch continued that in that
case the study would not be done by the Corps, and Mr. Elmore agreed,
adding that in that case it would be a duplication of effort.
CM-29-l28
December 9, 1974
(re Corps of Engineers
Study re Urban Planning)
(
~
Mr. Elmore explained that if there is a 208 grant and LAm~1A or
BASSA does not have the capability or the facilities to conduct the
study, they can contract with the Corps of Engineers to do the study,
and in that case they would have to reimburse the Corps for the work
they would do, but they would be contracting with federal funds.
Cm Futch stated that he had not heard of that process where LAVM1A
could be designated as a 208 agency and could contract out. Cm
Futch pointed out that the federal agencies had advised that the 208
planning was not needed in the Valley.
Mr. Elmore suggested that Cm Miller direct the last question to
his Congressman rather than to him as he had asked for the study.
Cm Tirsell stated that the Corps was proposing to spend a massive
amount of money for a study which, in effect, will duplicate the
efforts of valley a gencies. She felt any agency in the valley could
put $100,000 to use in a very effective manner to clean up the very
pollution we know exists, and we don't need to study to get at it and
clean it up. Also the implication that $100 million of federal,
CH-29-l29
December 9, 1974
(re Corps of Engineers
re Study - Urban Planning)
state and local funds were spent on related projects on the study
that was began in 1962 is appalling. With that sum of money being
spent it should be made clear that it is a duplication of efforts.
Mr. Elmore again stressed the fact that the Corps does not intend to
duplicate the work that is being done by BASSA and LA~m.
Mayor Pritchard thanked Mr. Elmore for his presentation, and asked
for a motion from the Council.
Cm Futch felt what they wanted to do was to write a letter to Con-
gressman Stark, stating that the Council is not aware of any local
agency that has requested the Corps of Engineers to come in and do an
urban study in the Livermore-Amador Valley, and Mr. Elmore asked if
a copy could be sent to the district engineers. Cm Futch continued
that it is the consensus of the Council that the studies being un-
dertaken by the local agencies are adequate. If additional studies
should be done they should be under the 208 Planning Act with local
agencies participating. THIS WAS STATED AS THE MOTION WHICH WAS
SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND LATER WITHDRA~iN. ~
Cm Turner stated that before we go on record as being opposed,~ ~
should ask why Congressman Stark had called for the study, and if
there was any local agency who authorized the study. He felt there
were two many unanswered questions in his mind to go on record as
being opposed to the Corps of Engineers.
Mayor Pritchard stated he agreed with the concerns of Cm Futch;
however, they should do first things first, and he would support a
letter to Congressman Stark, with copies to the Corps of Engineers,
and also 'iith that letter instruction to the staff to find out who
initiated the action, and why, and he would vote against the motion
unless it is amended.
CM MILLER MOVED TO STATE THAT A LETTER SHOULD BE SENT TO CONGRESSMAN
STARK POINTING OUT THAT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE NONE OF THE LOCAL AGENCIES
HAVE REQUESTED THE CORPS TO CONDUCT THIS STUDY AND THAT THE CITY
IS OPPOSED TO HAVING THE CORPS DUPLICATE THE EFFORTS OF LOCAL AGEN~
CIES AND IF THERE ARE TO BE ANY ADDITIONAL STUDIES CONDUCTED, THEY
SHOULD BE FUNDED THROUGH LOCAL AGENCIES, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH WHO
WITHDREW THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
Cm Turner stated that he would be opposed to the portion of the
motion which states that the Corps is duplicating efforts because
Mr. Elmore has assured the Council there will be no duplication;
however, in the interest of expediting business he will vote in
favor of the motion if it is clearly understood that he feels
there is no duplication of services involved.
CM MILLER INDICATED THAT THE INTENT OF HIS l'10TION IS THAT STUDIES
SHOULD BE FUNDED AND CARRIED OUT THROUGH LOCAL AGENCIES, which
had not been mentioned specifically in the motion and Cm Turner
stated that in this case he would not be able to vote in favor
of the motion.
Cm Turner moved the question and the MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Turner
and Mayor Pritchard dissenting) .
Cm Turner and Mayor Pritchard clearly indicated that they would
like a letter to be sent to Congressman Stark asking who requested
the study and that they did not vote in favor of the motion because
of the latter portion of it.
C~.1-29-130
December 9, 1974
RECESS
A brief recess was called after which the Council meeting resumed
with all members of the Council present.
~
( .
'..
CITY AGREEMENT WITH
LIVERHORE GARDENS APTS.
The City Attorney reported that an agreement has been drafted with
respect to the Livermore Gardens Apartments, taking into account
all Council directives and City public works standards and fees.
The agreement is a standard development agreement between the City
and Livermore Gardens and a setting down, in writing, terms that
have been agreed to. He explained that at the time terms were
ageed upon he was not the attorney for the City of Livermore and
could not offer any specific background information.
Cm Tirsell stated that with respect to fees, there is no mention
in the agreement of donations for the School District and Mr. Lee
explained that the City Attorney felt this should not be included
in the agreement but that the City would expect to have a letter from
the School District indicating that the Livermore Gardens people have
complied with the ordinance with respect to fees for the School Dis-
trict - that they have made the donation and there will be adequate
facilities - prior to signing the agreement.
Cm Turner suggested that the matter be continued to the next meeting
because the City has not received a letter from the School District,
the agreement was received late Friday and he has not had the oppor-
tunity to review it, and also it is his understanding that the home-
owners in the Rhonewood area have facts that may tend to cause the
Council to reconsider the entire issue. He would also like the build-
ing and grading permits to be held in abeyance until the next Council
meeting.
Mr. Hirsch, representative of the Livermore Gardens Apartments, sta-
ted that he was not aware of the fact a letter was required from the
School District and was of the opinion that a deposit of his check
with the City would be adequate evidence that they had complied with
the requirements. He indicated that a check had been made out to the
City of Livermore and was advised that it should be made out in the
name of the Livermore Unified School District. He has made a check
out to the School District and he is in possession of it at this
time and would be happy to give the check either to the City or the
School District.
Mayor Pritchard agreed that he would not want to approve the agree-
ment until a letter is received from the School District.
Mr. Hirsch stated that he understands there are a number of people
in the audience who are opposed to the proposed development and that
this is not the first time this matter has been before the Council
at which time there was no public testimony in opposition to the
development. He stated that he has met all the requirements, has
invested a considerable amount in the project and has no intention
of losing it. Everything is scheduled to be finalized this coming
Thursday and the project will begin. He then reviewed the background
concerning the development, costs involved and problems encountered
which have all been resolved and indicated that if the loan is not
recorded by December 12th HUD cannot fund the project and it will fail.
Cm Turner stated that there was nothing in the minutes indicating that
if everything wasn't finalized by December 12th that the project would
fail or be cancelled and that he does not recall ever having seen the
agreement and Mr. Lee replied that the agreement was included in the
agenda packet in October when Mr. Hirsch was last before the Council
concerning the agreement.
CM-29-l3l
December 9, 1974
(Livermore Gardens Apts.)
Gene Grant, 5447 Arlene Way, President of the Rhonewood Homeowners
Association, stated that as a representative of the homeowners in
the Valley East area, they feel grave concern over the proposal to
develop the Livermore Gardens Apartments. The Association has con-
tacted the School District, outside attorneys, and people from the
City during the past three days and have circulated a petition signed
by 401 registered voters and/or property owners requesting that the
matter be continued for one week so that they may develop their case.
He stated that they do agree there is a need for low income housing
that is properly planned for development but would like to have time
to consider the proposal in depth. He then presented the petition
to the City Clerk.
Myrna Ward, 968 Hazel Street, stated that the Council might wonder
why people did not speak in opposition to the proposed development
sooner but explained that they have been trying to get more informa-
tion about the project and the impact it would have on the surround-
ing area, such as additional traffic and more children in overcrowded
schools. She stated that she requested that they receive an agenda
whenever the Livermore Gardens item is scheduled and was told that
this is not done - agendas are available to the public on Friday
prior to the Monday meeting but are not sent out unless paid for.
She stated that they asked to receive agendas on a weekly basis
and would pay for them, as is the usual procedure, and when they
received their agenda last week the Livermore Gardens item was
not mentioned but Mr. Hirsch did attend that meeting. She stated
that she spoke with the Planning Department about the project and
asked if there would be access onto Charlotte from Susan Lane and
was told that such would probably not happen and later learned
from the newspaper that the project would have access from Susan
Lane onto Charlotte Way and they are very concerned about the inter-
section of Charlotte Way and East Avenue in the morning and evening
which is already a hazard. When she asked the Building Department
about the deadline date for obtaining the permits she was told
it would be February 1st and when she asked if this date could
be extended by the staff or if it would have to go to the Council
she was told that they did not know. The Association asked to
receive a copy of the agreement and was told that a complete agen-
da is located in the City Library and the Council Chambers and
she stated that upon investigation of these folders, no such agree-
ment was included. In her opinion the public should have the right
to speak to the Council about agreements and they are not given
adequate opportunity. She stated that at the time the Council
waived the amount of money per unit, to the School District, in
accordance with the ordinance, was the time they began investigation
of the matter.
Terry Rosso, 786 Catalina Drive, stated that he is an electrical
engineer and does not corne before the Council to oppose or support
the proposed project but rather to impartially question one aspect
of it, which is the electrical power and communications utilities.
It is his understanding that there will be overhead lines used for
these utilities and asked if someone would respond as to whether or
not this is correct, and Mr. Lee replied that it is true there will
be overhead lines and this was allowed because of the Council's
limitations, legally, with respect to requiring undergrounding.
Mr. Rosso commented that overhead lines have a negative impact
on neighborhoods and considers this a step backward, and asked
that the Council reconsider this aspect of the plans.
Jim Ward, 968 Hazel Street, member of the Rhonewood Homeowners
Association, asked if it is true that the City will have to pay
for the pull boxes and ducts for the utilities and Mr. Lee stated
this is correct because it is a non-tract development on a major
street, and there is no state requirement for undergrounding of
lines.
CM-29-l32
December 9, 1974
(Livermore Gardens Apts.)
~'
Mr. Ward continued to say that on October 15th two of their board
members addressed the Council with respect to overcrowded schools
in their area and at that time the Council indicated there was a
loophole in the ordinance and would have to approve the project
with an agreement for $27,500 to be paid to the School District
rather than $81,000. Mr. Croce, the School District Superintendent,
has indicated that the project will have an adverse affect on the
schools in the area and will possibly result in double sessions.
The Association has found out just recently that the schools in
their area are at or above capacity and there are no schools avail-
able for the children who will reside in the Livermore Gardens Apart-
ments. The School District has stated that they have informed the
City of the overcrowded conditions and inability to house these stu-
dents and in speaking with a HUD official, he stated that they rely
on the local municipalities to see to it that the local fees are
paid and if there are not school facilities available the City
should not grant a permit. Mr. Ward questioned why a project should
be approved if it will have adverse affects on their area and if
the reasons raised by the Association are not sufficient to deny
the permits they would like to know why. They realize that a tentative
agreement has been reached but Cm Miller has indicated that the
Council can always change its mind.
Cm Futch commented that the questions raised were basically legal
questions and the Council acted on the advice of the City Attorney
and even though Mr. Logan was not the City Attorney at the time
decisions were made, perhaps he could explain some of the legalities
which were involved at that time.
Mr. Logan explained that he would be happy to speak to the issues
he is familiar with and one point is that there is concern about
a subdivision requirement for a letter from the School District.
The subdivision requirement does not apply to this project because
it is not a subdivision, by definition, and therefore the letter
from the District is not a requirement. The payment, if any, to
be paid by Mr. Hirsch and his development is an agreed upon payment
by him which he is is not obligated, by law, to do; therefore, it is
in effect, gratis on his part. He stated that he would not want
to give an opinion related to prior facts concerning the project
because he has not been completely informed of the matter but would
say that if there has been a prior agreement between ~1r. Hirsch and
the Council and in reliance upon such agreement he has expended large
sums of money and loses the project because of action or inaction
on the part of the Council tonight, the Council subjects itself to
potential liability for the cost Mr. Hirsch has thus far expended.
He added that he does not know all the facts involved and therefore
cannot render an opinion as to whether or not the Council is in a
position of liability. It would appear that the major issue is the
school issue and the fact is the City cannot require a school payment
and if the payment is forthcoming at an agreed level it is solely at
the agreement of Mr. Hirsch to make the payment and he is not obliga-
ted to do so.
Mr. Musso commented that the decision to put apartments in this
area was done many years ago through the zoning process and all
property owners were notified of the proposed zoning at that time.
There were many hearings on the zoning and at that time there were
not as many people in the area so there were no problems with respect
to overcrowded schools and the School District did not take a stand
against zoning of multiples for the area.
Cm Futch explained that the $27,600 is a negotiated amount Mr. Hirsch
has agreed to pay to the School District and the City had no author-
ity to require the $81,000 that would have come from a subdivision
with the same number of dwellings.
CM-29-133
December 9, 1974
(Livermore Gardens Apts.)
Cm Futch stated that with respect to undergrounding of utilities,
there was also a legal problem in that because it is not a sub-
division the same rule applies and the City could not legally
require some of the things that would ordinarily be required
for a normal subdivision and would hope that the concerned resi-
dents of the area would understand the Council's position.
Mr. Ward stated that in speaking with an outside attorney he was
told that the rule of thumb with respect to civil law is the in-
tent of the law and not the wording and is designed to protect
the citizen and should be considered in the intent. He then
read portions of the Environmental Impact Report relative to
the project which would tend to indicate that the facts were
not presented and that they intend to write to HUD concerning
various portions of the report.
Fred K. Spaeth, 5484 Cleo Court, member of the Rhonewood Home-
owners Association, stated that it is his understanding Mr.
Lee indicated that undergrounding could not be required of
them because it was located along a major street and Mr.
Spaeth stated that it is not on a major street and even
the access to it is off a very small street and asked for some
type of explanation as to why undergrounding was not required.
Mr. Lee replied that there is direct access to East Avenue and
also to Susan Lane. Also, it does have frontage on a major
street.
Mr. Spaeth stated that from what information he has been able
to gather it would appear that HUD will not be developing anymore
236 housing developments (apartments) as of January 1975 and that
individual housing will be provided because according to the HUD
people the 236 housing "doesn't work". He stated that also, accord-
ing to newspaper accounts, the total fees were to be paid and then
within the past 30 days they have decided that they will not be paid.
He indicated that in his opinion the people who may have been con-
cerned with this matter were really never informed of the develop-
ment and that any newspaper accounts concerning it were back on
page 9 or in some insignificant spot and agreed that the agendas
available to the public were not complete.
Pat Goard, 876 Geraldine Street, member of the Rhonewood Homeowners
Association and the Almond Avenue Parent Teachers Group including
one of the board members, stated that the EIR regarding this project
has not been made available to the public and many people in the
area are concerned about the affects of the development upon the
schools which are already overcrowded and where bussing is taking
place. She stated that the Parent Teachers Group has been asked to
furnish books, lumber, playground equipment, projectors and other
items of expense because the schools cannot afford to provide the
number of items needed for the children already attending the schools
and they are concerned about another 200 children coming into these
schools.
Cm Tirsell commented that it should be pointed out that 200 children
are not expected to come from these units and that the School Dis-
trict computes the number of children expected to attend at 1.1
child per dwelling unit for Livermore and that this ratio is de-
creasing because of the decrease in the birth rate.
One member of the audience stated that she has been in areas where
children are eating from the floor because they have no table and
would suggest that the City take care of the people who are here
before we worry about others coming to Livermore.
CM-29-l34
December 9, 1974
(Livermore Gardens Apts.)
~
~ .~
Jim Saddler, 5430 Betty Circle, member of the Rhonewood Homeowners
Association stated that he would like to know why 1.1 child per
dwelling unit is being used to compute the number of children from
the project since the housing is averaging 3 and 4 bedroom units.
Al Fees, 5476 Cleo Court, stated that in his opinion Mr. Hirsch is
using scare tactics in trying to get the City to act on this matter
and that a week's delay for such a project should not make any differ-
ence. He stated that the matter has too much significance in light
of the new evidence, to be quickly resolved for the convenience of
one man.
Floyd Hibbitts, past President of the Rhonewood Homeowners Association,
pointed out that when Mr. Hanesworth spoke to the Council about under-
grounding requirements for Southern Pacific Development, Mr. Hirsch
was also present, and the City stated that there would be no waiving
of the City's undergrounding requirements. He added that this was
a statement made by the previous and not the current City Council
and perhaps the legal ramifications have changed this opinion to
some extent but this was the reason the Association did not state
objection to the project. They understood that undergrounding
would be required and that the fees to the School District would
be paid and if they had realized that these things were not going
to be done they would have taken a stand at that point in time, in
opposition to the project. He stated that he is also involved with
land development and would like to state that it is extremely foolish
to tie large sums of money into a major project without knowing that
full approval and permits will be given. He stated that he has found
out that the reason HUD is considering dropping the 236 housing in
1975 is because it is not successful in meeting the needs and housing
for the people for whom it is being built and that the person who
stands to make money and succeed from the program is the developer.
He stated that the issue seems to be an investment versus the life
style of the 336 homeowners of the Association and all the other
people who are affected because their children attend the schools
that will be receiving additional children from the project. With
respect to the draft agreement sent from the City Council, dated
October 14th that Mr. Hirsch mentioned, he would question if this
was a signed agreement or the draft of an agreement that was agreed
to be entered into by both parties; if it was a draft there was no
agreement until it was finally signed and agreed to by both parties.
He felt that if this project is going to have the negative impact it
appears to have, it should not receive approval for building permits.
Mr. Hirsh stated that there was a very big lead article in the Tri-
Valley Herald, dated October 16th, entitled "Livermore Okays Low
Cost Housing" and in the article the statement is made that a $27,500
donation to the School District is a condition of approval. He added
that he respects the comments and concerns raised by the people who
have spoken and that he also has children in school and has spoken
against a particular development in his community; however the comments
made would relate to a planning matter and that this is not a planning
issue. He pointed out that he is advancing a very substantial amount
of money to the School District because of an issue made by a prior
developer; OGO. He stated that his development is in no way related
to OGO and has nothing to do with OGO nor does OGO have any interest
in this development. He then listed the various costs involved in
requirements for the project, including $227,000 in fees to the City
and the School District and that he has been told by the area office
of HUD, located in San Francisco, that if the deal is not closed by
December 13th the project will be scrapped. He pointed out that HUD
has very little staff left and it is anticipated that half of the
staff will be gone after December 13th.
Mr. Hibbitts stated that HUD has a guideline that states if the
School District feels there is not adequate school facilities,
the project should not be allowed and on this basis the City Council
should deny approval of the project and permits.
CH-29-l35
December 9, 1974
(Livermore Gardens AptS.)
Mr. Hirsch stated that it should be recognized he has been put in
a bind and really didn't anticipate the barrage of people in opposi-
tion to his project at this meeting and that he happens to be a human
being in trouble. He has been confronted with many problems that he
has tried to work out, including the $27,500 to the School District
and with this money they should be able to provide facilities for
the additional children.
One member of the audience asked if the letter from the School Dis-
trict has been sent to the Council and Mayor Pritchard commented
that the staff has indicated a letter has not been received; however,
the letter is not a condition of the requirement because the project
is not a subdivision.
Mr. Grant stated that the people who have spoken this evening appre-
ciate the courtesy the Council has extended and that it is known and
respected for making rational decisions and should not be swayed by
the fact that Mr. Hirsh may have invested money unwisely or made
commitments. He urged that the Council consider the testimony that
has been given and to review the HUD Environmental Impact Report which
the Association feels is very important and to give them one more week
to diagnose the contents of the report and to allow further research.
He stated that they have appeared before the Council this evening
with 401 signatures which were obtained last night at 8:00 p.m.
which is indicative of how strongly they feel about the matter.
Cm Turner commented that the agreement indicates that Mr. Hirsch
is responsible for all earlier agreements and that originally OGO
promised to pay the School District $800/unit but on advice of our
City Attorney and Mr. Hirsch's City Attorney everyone agreed to a
donation of $27,500. He would also question the deadline date of
December 13th because of the fact that when Mr. Hirsch appeared be-
fore the Council in October he said he would have to pick up the
building permit the next morning also, and Mr. Hirsch replied that
he had not received the HUD commitment and that the delay was be-
cause of HUD; he got the commitment just last week and is required
to close at the earliest possible date.
Cm Miller stated that Council policy with respect to requ1r1ng
undergrounding has not changed; however, it was discovered that in
this case the Council does not have the statutory authority to re-
quire the undergrounding. He added that this entire issue is very
depressing to him, personally, and records will show that he has
never been willing to give anything away to a developer if anything
can possibly be done to prevent it, and everything that was brought
up tonight has been argued for, by him, every step of the way. The
most depressing aspect is that he will have to vote for the agree-
ment, after having voted against every step that led up to it. He
voted against the rezoning for multiples, against the exclusion of
this prower~J.t.he morato~ium~ and in favor ~~~~Ull school
fee or-i ~ ~ fee wh1ch 1S m~~n the ~, for a
long time. The circumstances leadingU~-the approval of the zoning
and the project and exclusion from the moratorium leave the Council
no choice,~ Mayor Pritchard and he pointed out at the time this
property was excluded from the moratorium, that things which have
happened tonight could happen; unfortunately, Mayor Pritchard and
Cm Miller's wishes did not prevail. The compromises he has voted
in favor of, reluctantly, were because of legal advice,~ ~ the
property had not been rezoned the City would not be in this mess'
~f the property had not been excluded from the moratorium the City
would not be in this mess~~ if the SAVE Initiative were in effect
we wouldn't be in this fix. unfortunately, all these things which
have taken place in the distant past, have brought the council to
the place where there is no legal choice. Sometimes it is necessary
M~e4~.
CM-29-l36
December 9, 1974
(Livermore Gardens Apts.)
n
to project what will happen five years in the future because of some
action taken at this time, and it isn't always easy to know how things
will really be when you reach that point. The City now has no choice,
legally, but to approve the agreement and even though he is opposed to
signing the agreement and did not want to settle for $27,500 for the
School District, it was the best the City could do in the circumstances
according to legal advice on both sides and otherwise it would mean
litigation and was the reason for the negotiated compromise. None of
this would have happened if the property had not been rezoned or ex-
cluded from the moratorium but this is something nobody can do anything
about now and everything is locked into the point where nothing can be
done other than to sign the agreement. If there were any way the City
could get out of this, legally, the City would have done it at the time
the contract was discussed. The residents who are concerned still have
the option of going to HUD and this should be done very soon if action
is to be taken to stop the project.
Cm Tirsell stated that she also regrets that she must vote to approve
the agreement and had she been on the Council when this matter came
up she would have not have voted for the original proposal because
she is aware that school facilities are not sufficient. She stated
that she was not on the Council at the time this was suggested but
did go to the Rhonewood Homeowners Association with her concerns and
assumed that as alert citizens there would be follow through in doing
something to get it stopped. She stated that this has been a painful
lesson of what can happen and that citizens must be alert. This is a
last minute, last ditch attempt to halt a project and our City does
not deal in bad faith. She stated that she has attended meetings
when this proposal, which was approved by a prior Council, was dis-
cussed and informed that the letter from the School District could
not be required and that the $81,000 could not be requested, accord-
ing to legal advice. The Council has met and seen this item on many
agendas and the benefit of concerned residents was not available
during the planning process of this project. Tonight, when our City
is faced with possible legal action for dealing in bad faith, suddenly
the Council is asked by the citizens to consider all of the concerns
brought up this evening. She added that she cannot now vote in bad
faith against things which have previously received unanimous approval,
has signed and approved previous agreements and regretfully must ap-
prove this agreement tonight.
Cm Turner stated that he really does not know what he may have done
four years ago but it appears that the Council is required to approve
the agreement because of the legalities, whether they like it or not.
Cm Futch stated that everything the Council could say about this
matter has been said and he regrets that it cannot be delayed for
another week, as requested, but there is no way there can be another
delay without suffering the loss of thousands of dollars, and agreed
that the Council has no choice.
11r. Hibbitts stnted that it is true Mrs. Tirsell spoke to the Associa-
tion regarding her concerns for allowing the project some months
ago; however, they were told that all the fees would be paid, in-
cluding the $81,000 to the School District, and that everything
would be provided. They were dealing with one set of information
that had been given to them and all of a sudden none of these things
are being done and he questioned as to who is really dealing in bad
faith.
Mrs. Ward stated that they have contacted the Housing Authority,
HUD, and people living in the vicinity of 236 housing projects
and it has been concluded that the success is questionable, at best,
and in some cases the effects have been disastrous and wanted an
answer as to why the Council cannot take these things into considera-
tion at this point.
Cm Tirsell stated that she went to the Association over a year ago
with these very concerns and that these are planning considerations
and problems that should have concerned the residents a year ago.
CM-29-l37
December 9, 1974
(Livermore Gardens Apts.)
Cm Miller stated that he would also like to respond to Mrs. Ward's
question by saying that the depressing fact of why the City can't
do something, in view of all this, is that cities do not have un-
limited authority and we can't do all the things that are right be-
cause we are limited by statutes. He added that even if the people
had come to the Council a year ago the City probably would not have
had the right to disapprove the project because it was excluded from
the moratorium and allowed to be a 236 project.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE
CITY ATTORNEY, SECONDED BY CM. TIRSELL.
CM MILLER MOVED TO N1END ITEM 9 TO ADD LANGUAGE, TO BE LEFT UP TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY, THAT ALL COSTS AND ATTORNEY FEES FOR COLLECTION
OF ANY SURETY BONDS SHALL BE AT THE EXPENSE OF THE DEVELOPER AND
TO DELETE ITEM 15 ON CONDEMNATION BECAUSE PRIVATE CONDEMNATION EX-
ISTS, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Cm Miller stated that before the vote is taken to the main motion
he would like to say that he would appreciate an invitation from
the Rhonewood Homeowners Association to speak to them about what
happened in this case and to give them more detailed information
and that he would be happy to give answers to the most difficult
questions and also that he was the person who negotiated for the
$27,500 to the School District and can shed some light on some
of the legalities the City was faced with.
AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 191-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(Livermore Gardens Apartments)
RECESS
A brief recess was called, after which the council meeting resumed
with all members of the Council present.
COMMUNICATION RE BART
BUS SERVICE PARKING
A letter was received from Mr. Harshbarger regarding BART bus
service parking facilities and noted that the service is for
the convenience of the commuter and if he does not have a place
to park he will not use the service and urged that adequate park-
ing at the designated stops be provided by the City.
Mr. Parness commented that there has been very littlp. impact on
parking facilities in the downtown area and for that reason
would request permission not to post limited parking for the
lot and continuous checks will be made.
co~rnUNICATION FROM VMH
RE PLANS FOR HOSP. IN
PLEASANTON & MEDI-CAL
A letter was received from Thomas Andrews, administrator of
Valley Memorial Hospital, relative to plans for a hospital
in pleasanton, which indicates that the existing facility
shall provide all of the services considered necessary to serve
the Livermore community and that as far as the problems brought
out concerning the MediCal patients not being able to receive care,
CM-29-l38
December 9, 1974
(re MediCal Patients)
he indicated that no patient is denied emergency medical care by
any physician in the area but physicians decline a long term arrange-
ment with HediCal patients because of the problems they are confronted
with in trying to receive payment for services. He assured the Council
that the Hospital and the medical community are aware of the problems
confronting the MediCal patient and efforts are being made to find
a satisfactory solution.
Mayor Pritchard suggested that the City contact teaching hospitals
where there may be intern physicians who would like to go into pri-
vate practice at the completion of their internship and to obtain
their names. )!i/kT1rJ!A~~
Cm Miller s~~n~d .t~at he would like a copy of the Gorsline
report and~~~~ He stated it was the citizens of Livermore
that provided the major financial support for the construction of
the hospital and its addition. We recognize there are needs in the
Pleasanton-Dublin area requiring service, but not at the expense of
Livermore.
Cm Tirsell stated that she has read the report at the Library, and
noted that the population projections which the hospital growth seems
to be based on are absent from the report, and she would like to
have this information. Her concern is that there is nothing to indi-
cate what sort of hospital will remain in Livermore. There is discus-
sion of a mental facility being established at VM. Since intensive
care is such an expensive service, she wonders if Livermore will
lose intensive care and if we will have the same surgical facilities
that we have come to depend upon. She did not wish to critisize
the Board as she feels they are planning for health needs, but is
concerned as a Councilwoman of Livermore that we may be losing facil-
ities our citizens have come to depend upon and have paid for. She
would like more information as to what exact facilities will be left
in Livermore and on what population basis they have projected the
new hospital. Cm Tirsell also stated there was nothing to indicate
how the new hospital facilities will be financed, and she felt this
is something our citizens need to know. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE
STAFF OBTAIN INFOill1ATION ON THE POPULATION PREDICTION, HOW IT WILL
BE FINANCED, AND WHAT FACILITIES WILL BE LEFT IN LIVEID10RE: MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER.
MAYOR PRITCHARD &~ENDED THE MOTION TO ASK THE STAFF ALSO TO OBTAIN
LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL REQUIRE~~ENTS FOR FOR~ING A CO~!MUNITY HOSPITAL
DISTRICT. THIS ~vAS INCLUDED IN THE MOTION.
Mayor Pritchard explained that he receives calls from irate citizens
who think the City has some control over the hospital or that it
is a publicly controlled hospital, both of which are not the case.
If and when it becomes necessary to have a community hospital district
where it is tax supported and taxpayer controlled, he would like
to know what to tell the people if they wish to do that.
VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CO~~lUNICATION FROM BD
OF SUPERVISORS RE COUNTY'S
SPACE & SERVICE REQUIRE-
~1ENTS IN VALLEY
A communication was received from Joseph P. Bort, chairman of the
Alameda County Board of Supervisors, regarding a recent report
CTvI-29-l39
~
December 9, 1974
~
(Space & Service Req.)
by a consultant on the county's service and space requirements in
the Livermore-Amador Valley Area in which he asked for reactions
and comments regarding the recommendations of the consultant.
C Miller suggested that a letter of appreciation be
~ and the opportun.ity to provide some input and
~rchitect discuss the plans.
REPORT RE MINI-PARKS
FIRST ST. AND SO. LIVEro~ORE
FROM BEAUTIFICATION COM}1.
sent for the
hear the
A report was submitted by the Beautification Committee indicating
they had reviewed the plans for both mini-parks at First Street and
Livermore Avenue and wished to reaffirm their previous position
that the two corners be developed strictly as mini-parks.
Cm Miller would like the Council to ask if there can be some re-
design to reduce the estimated cost of the two parks.
The Public Works Director stated he knew the Council was interested
in reducing the costs and he has done a lot of work and found there
are ways to minimize the cost, and he would be happy to explain this
to the Councilor present it at the time they request approval to
call for bids and hopefully they will be able to include the inter-
section of L Street and No. Livermore Ave, the two parks at the
intersection plus K Street which should be ready in January.
COMMUNICATION TO HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT STUDY COM}lITTEE
BY PLANNING COMMISSION
A copy of a communication from the Planning Commission to the Hill-
side Development Study Committee indicating that the Committee
should attempt to spell out general goals for the hillside areas in
the City.
Mayor Pritchard noted the communication for filing and suggested
that any member of the council who might have some interest in the
hillside development should contact the committee for input in the
matter.
EXPIRATION OF TEB1~ - ALN4EDA
COUNTY MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DIST
Notification was received from the Alameda County Mosquito Abate-
ment District that the term of the City's representative will
expire January 2, 1975. This matter will be discussed during the
executive session.
REPORT RE ARCHITECTURAL
CONTRACT MODIFICATION
FIRE STATIONS
The City Manager had reported that at the meeting of November 18, a
new budget figure for the two fire stations capital cost had been
approved inasmuch as the unit price had been estimated at $35
per sq. ft. and the architect's research set the rate at $48. He
explained that the misunderstanding as to the dollar figure has to
do with Article 3.5 of the A.I.A. standard contract. This requires
a 10% bid contingency to be added to the estimated capital cost.
CM-29-l40
December 9, 1974
(Architectural Contract
MOdification-Fire Station)
/
Thereafter, if the bids exceed this figure, architectural redesign
is required without cost to the client. Thus the figure inserted
in the contract should be $583,000 which still retains the $530,000
maximum bid, plus a 10% or $53,000 bidding contingency. It is re-
commended that a resolution be adopted authorizing the contract
change.
CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CONTRACT
CHANGE, SECONDED BY C1'1 TURNER, AND THE NOTION PASSED 3-2 WITH
CM MILLER AND MAYOR PRITCHARD DISSENTING.
RESOLUTION NO. 192-74
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMEND~ffiNT OF CONTRACT
AGREEMENT (Associated Professions)
REPORT RE ZONE 7
RATE ADJUSTHENTS
Notice has been received of the impending rate adjustments for
Zone 7, and it is recommended that this matter be referred to the
staff as to its effects on retail costs and resultant adjustments
that may be needed in the City's water rate schedule.
Cm Tirsell commented that she had some questions she would like to
have answered by the staff: whether the bulk water rate has been
increased from the California Water Project; why untreated water for
agricultural purposes is more expensive than treated water for dom-
estic use.
Mr. Parness asked if it was the wish of the Council to have the
cost raise reflected in the city water rate schedule.
Cm Miller stated he would like to have the staff analyze what the
real breakdo~m is in the existing plant expense increases due to
inflation vs. the water rate increases expected from Project 2.
REPORT RE TRAILWAY
TR. 3333, H.C. ELLIOTT
A report was received from the Planning Director re trailway in
Tract 3333, H. C. Elliott.
CM MILLER HOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 16; SECONDED
BY CM TURNER, AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
REPORTS FROM PLANNING
COHMISSION
(Proposed Z.O. Amendment
re RS District)
The Planning Commission has considered a Zoning Ordinance Amendment
re the RS District to add RS 1.5 and 2.5 Zones; minimum lot size;
minimum yards, developable floor area; I Districts, various amend-
~ ments re minimum non-street frontage yard, and other setbacks. This
matter is to be set for public hearing.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE ~mTTER BE SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY
6, 1975; MOTION SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CH-29-l4l
December 9, 1974
(planning Commission Minutes)
The minutes of the planning Commission's meeting of November 19
were noted for filing.
REPORT RE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIRECTOR FROM CM TURNER
A report had been submitted by Cm Turner regarding a Community
Affairs Director, which outlined what this position might entail.
Mayor Pritchard stated he had also considered a Council represent-
ative, and felt that the one position could be combined.
Cm Turner suggested that Mayor Pritchard put his ideas in writing.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT A SUBCOr{MITTE OF CM TURNER AND TIRSELL BE
APPOINTED TO STUDY THE REPORT AND ITS RAMIFICATIONS; MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
REPORT RE COUNCIL POLICY
BY CITY MANAGER
A study draft was prepared by the City Manager which when adopted
would formally establish Rules and Procedures for the Council agenda
preparation and conduct of meetings which he recommended to be set
for a study session.
After some discussion on the matter CM TIRSELL MOVED TO TENTATIVELY
ADOPT THE AGENDA SCHEDULE AS IT IS SET FORTH FOR THE FIRST MEETING
IN JANUARY TO BE EFFECTIVE AFTER THE DECEMBER 16, ~mETING: MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE MUNI CODE
&~ENDMENT - Sec. 14.25 CORPUS
C!.1 TURNER MOVED THE FIRST READING AND INTRODUCTION OF THE HUNICIPAL
CODE AMENDMENT ADDING SECTION 14.25 RE SECURITY OF CERTAIN POLICE
RECORDS; SECONDED BY CM FUTCH.
Cm Miller stated he would vote "no" on the ordinance because of
the wording "with wilfull and malicious intent" because it makes
it a fraud because no one will ever be prosecuted under the terms
of the ordinance.
Mayor Pritchard asked what would happen if the ordinance is not
adopted by the City, and Mr. Logan replied that the County cannot
force the city to adopt the ordinance, but if they feel it is of
substantial import, they will pass a state law and put it in the
penal code. Mr. Logan commented that he had been informed that the
way the system operates, it would be easy for someone unknowingly
to disseminate information which without the requirement of wilfull-
ness or knowledge could result in a prosecution of someone who had
no criminal intent whatsoever.
Ci1. FUTCH WITHDREW HIS SECOND TO THE MOTION AT THIS TIME.
Mr. Logan stated he did not feel the County was in a big hurry and
perhaps he could obtain more specifics in this regard.
C~1 MILLER MOVED TO TABLE THE MATTER; SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND THE
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM-29-l42
December 9, 1974
CM MILLER MOVED THE FIRST READING AND INTRODUCTION OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REFLECTING COUNCIL ACTION TO DESIGNATE CITY
OWNED PROPERTY (AIRPORT, GOLF COURSE AREA) AS I-I DISTRICT.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Title
only was read by the City Attorney.
PROPOSED Z.O. AMENDMENT
TO DESIGNATE CITY OWNED
PROPERTY AS I-I DISTRICT
(Airport, Golf Course)
ADJOUfu~r1ENT
APPROVE
ATTEST
Regular Heeting of December 16, 1974
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on December 16, 1974, in the Municipal Court Chambers,
39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:10 with Mayor pro tempore Hiller opening the meeting.
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, and Tirsell
ROLL CALL
Absent: Cm Futch and Mayor Pritchard (Seated Later)
Mayor pro tempore Miller led the Council members as well as those
present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
MINUTES
December 9, 1974
p. 134, it was noted that the last paragraph does not identify the
speaker by name and there was a question as to whether or not it
should be omitted and it was concluded that it should remain a part
of the minutes.
p. 130, 5th oaragraph should read: Cm Turner stated that before
we go on record as being opposed, we should ask Congressman Stark...
p. 124, under Billboard Variances, the next to last line should read:
the staff send a letter asking that they conform to the County's or-
dinance,.......etc.
p. 126, 24th line down should read: expected in the coming years.
The rapid population growth, already experienced,....etc.
CM-29-l43
December 16, 1974
(Minute Corrections)
p. 129, large paragraph, 5th line should read: are connected to
the subject being discussed. The connection is based on the impli-
cations....etc.
p. 136, last paragraph, 13th line should read: fee or supported by
a fair fee which is more than the $81,000, for a long time. The
circumstances leading from the approval of the zoning and the project
and exclusion from the moratorium leave the Council no choice. Mayor
pritchard and he pointed out at the time this property was excluded
from the moratorium, that things which have happened tonight could
happen; unfortunately, Mayor Pritchard and Cm Miller's wishes did not
prevail. The compromises he has voted in favor of, reluctantly, were
because of legal advice. If the property had not been rezoned the
City would not be in this mess; if the property had not been excluded
from the moratorium the City would not be in this mess; and if the
SAVE Initiative were in effect we wouldn't be in this fix. Un-
fortunately, all these things which have taken place in the distant
past, have brought the Council to the place where there is no legal
choice. Sometimes ...etc.
p. 139, 3rd paragraph, 2nd line should read: report and amendment.
He stated it was the citizens of Livermore.......
p. 140, 2nd paragraph, 2nd line should read: Supervisor Bort's
letter and the opportunity to provide some input and hear the...
ON r10TION OF CH TIRSELL, SECONDED BY cr'll TURNER AND BY UNANIHOUS
VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 9, 1974, \VERE APPROVED
F...S CORRECTED.
OPEN FORm,l
(re New Smog Law)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he feels an EIR should
be made up for North Livermore Avenue because it is carrying
35,000 trips and the new smog law affects anything on an old
street over 10,000 trips.
Cm niller stated that he cannot believe No. Livermore is scheduled
for 35,000 trips and Mr. Lee stated that ultimately this could be
true but as to whether or not there has been an impact report. As
he recalls there was one for North Livermore Avenue prior to com-
mencement of construction.
Cm Miller stated that he feels the point is well worth consider-
ing and asked that Mr. Lee furnish a report regarding the history
of traffic counts on North Livermore Avenue and the traffic that
is expected.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolutions of
Appointments - Various
The following resolutions were adopted approving appointments
to various committees:
RESOLUTION NO. 193-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ~mMBERS TO AIRPORT ADVISORY CO~1ITTEE
(William Bennett and John Kerekes)
CM-29-l44
December 16, 1974
(Committee Appointments)
RESOLUTION NO. 194-74
--..-----
(
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING HE!1BERS TO DESIGN REVIEN Cm,1l'UTTEE
(Barbara Baird and Gloria Taylor)
RESOLUTION NO. 195-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT
(William Jenkins)
RESOLUTION NO. 196-74
A reSOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD
(Herbert Newkirk)
Minutes for the Beautification Committee's meeting of November 6th
were submitted to the Council.
Beautification
Committee Minutes
Reports were received from the following departments, as follows:
Departmental Reports
Airport Activity - November, 1974
Building Department - November
Mosquito Abatement District - October and Biennial Report
1973 and 1974
Municipal Court - October
Police and Pound Departments - November
Water Department - October
Payroll & Claims
There were 108 claims in the amount of $192,562.60 dated Decem-
ber 16, 1974, approved and ordered paid 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.
I''IAYOR PRITCHARD WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
~~TTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Greenville North
Park Site)
('\,
Cm Turner asked about the status of the acquisition of property
for the Greenville North park and Mr. Parness replied that one
of the Ovffiers had indicated that he is willing to discuss the
value of the property with the staff.
Cm Turner commented that this is a concern of many people and he
would like to try to get the owners to talk with the staff as
soon as possible and perhaps they have decided to cooperate.
C?'1-2 9-145
December 16, 1974
(Mail Service)
Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the people who are in
new homes and are not receiving mail at their homes because they
are supposed to receive curbside delivery in the future and would
suggest that they be allowed to install the curbside mail boxes.
He indicated that it appears obvious, at this point, that the Post
Office is not going to rescind the order regarding delivery to the
house. Some families have only one car, and others have problems
which prevent them from getting to the post office to pick up their
mail and people are starting to complain about the situation. They
have a real problem and it would seem that something could be done.
Cm Miller pointed out that
the Post Office will never
homeowners are in a bind.
tors and congressmen about
if people put up the curbside mail boxes
deliver to the door and agreed that the
The homeowners need to write to our sena-
the situation to get the order rescinded.
Mr. Parness stated that this was started at one time in the past and
there was such an uproar, nationally, that the ruling was reversed;
however, it is not being done nationwide but left to the discretion
of the regional postal directors. In our case it is the decision of
the person in Oakland as to whether or not there will be curbside
delivery for the new homes. In other areas of California this is
not being imposed and there is not a unified effort that will go
screaming to Congress. He stated that recently the League of Cities
in Houston adopted a resolution directed to Congress that this matter
be countermanded and in his opinion this will help. We have con-
tacted our congressional delegation and have met with sympathetic
response from all of the delegates as to this problem.
Cm Tirsell stated that she, too, has received a number of telephone
calls regarding this matter but if given the choice of having tem-
porary boxes or permanent delivery to the home later she feels the
homeowners would be willing to wait for permanent home delivery.
She suggested that there be a time limit set and that beyond this
time the Council might look for an interim ordinance and suggested
that someone write to Congressman Stark to see what can be done
through legislation and then the Council can review this again
February 1st. The Council concurred with this suggestion.
(VCSD Lawsuit)
Cm Turner stated that last week he was in City Hall and that the
Air Pollution Study recently submitted for consideration, by Dr.
Higgins, was being prepared for evidence in the VCSD-Pleasanton
lawsuit. The City Attorney has submitted a letter to the Council
stating that it has not given any direction to forward the report
and is only forwarding it as a professional courtesy. Cm Turner
stated that he does not object to this but that earlier in the week,
prior to the Council meeting, he was told that the Council would be
discussing the Air poPollution Study with the possibility of sending
it to the VCSD for use in their legal battle against Pleasanton.
He stated that he objected to the report, for various reasons, and
it was not scheduled on the agenda so there was no discussion of it.
He felt that perhaps certain Councilmembers had conducted business
outside of the Council Chambers but the letter from Mr. Logan ex-
plains what happened and he would like to apologize for thinking
that anyone from the Council had met with Mr. Logan to discuss
business. He stated that from reading the minutes the report has
never been officially adopted as an official report of the Council
and is somewhat distressed that it was sent before adopting it. Dr.
Higgins has prepared an addendum to the report which he intends to
send to VCSD and Cm Turner suggested that there be a public hearing
regarding the report and its adoption noting that he has some ques-
tions about the report that he would like answers to.
CM-29-l46
December 16, 1974
(Air Pollution Report)
(
\
Cm Tirsell stated that she can understand Cm Turner's concern if
he is not in agreement with the report; however, she was chairman
of a y~ar long report that came berore the Council which it did
not adopt but did accept. She stated that when a committee has
been authorized to to a study it is not right to say that the City
disagrees with it. She felt if the Council wishes to invalidate
a report and would like it to be done over this could be discussed;
however, ~1r. Higgins came before the Council to discuss it and to
answer any questions the Council might have and there typically is
no vote on this type of thing. She pointed out that the General
Plan Review was a very explosive item but the Council did not vote
on it or have a public hearing - the people doing the study are the
public. There may be disagreements with various reports but it is
doubtful that five people on the Council would all agree with a re-
port, of any type, done by citizens.
Cm Turner agreed that perhaps a public hearing would not be necessary
but that he does have questions he would like to ask Dr. Higgins about
the report that were not answered at the time he presented the report
to the Council. He noted that he has questions relative to the eco-
nomic impact and that reference should be made to more than one ve-
hicle to be used to solve our problems in the valley.
Cm Miller stated that what Cm Turner is asking for was not in their
charge (the economic impact) and that they were asked to study the
air pollution problems in the valley and the implications of air
pollution in the valley. It would be unreasonable to ask that they
include an economic study if this was not included in their charge.
Also it should be mentioned that not every person working on a re-
port checks every piece of arithmetic done and he is sure that this
works the same way in busin~ss practice. There is always some kind
of cross-checking and he knows, personally, that this was done. Also,
the committee did not say that "no gro'Vlth" ",as the only answer. They
did say that without other things that can chang~ the number of ve-
hicle miles traveled, or the emissions, then no growth is the conse-
quence. They specifically mentioned that if 1/3 of all the valley
trips were on public transportation, then there could be as much as
a 1% growth rate.
(Indirect Source
Regulations)
Cm Miller stated that Senator Tunney wishes to postpone the Indirect
Source Regulations, for another 30 days, and feels that the Council
should oppose delay as strongly as possible.
CM ~1ILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A LETTER
ASKING SENATORS TUNNEY AND CRANSTON AND CONGRESSMAN STARK NOT TO RE-
QUEST THAT INDIRECT SOURCE REGULATIONS BE POSTPONED, SECONDED BY
CM TIRSELL.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know why Congress has suddenly
decided to become involved in this matter. We are less than a month
away from implementation and now Congress is becoming involved and
wondered what they have been doing in the meantime. HE SUGGESTED
THAT THIS BE INCLUDED IN THE LETTER AND ASKED THAT THE MOTION BE
k~ENDED TO INCLUDE THIS, AGREED TO BY THE MOTION AND SECOND.
(~
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
',-
CM-29-l47
December 16, 1974
(KGO Editorial Favor-
ing New Town Development)
Cm Miller stated that KGO has had an editorial in favor of the develop-
ment of New Town and that they allow the same amount of time for a
rebuttal. Cm Miller feels that the City should provide a response
as soon as possible and insist that it run before the County makes
a decision on the matter.
There was discussion regarding the editorial and Mr. Parness was
asked to check with KGO to see when we can go on the air, and
~1ayor Pritchard will make a statement at that time.
(MTC Hearing re
Widening of I-580)
Cm Miller stated that MTC has scheduled a hearing regarding widen-
ing of I-580 on Wednesday, December 18th, and that the Council
should attend the hearing. We were told that there would be no
public testimony allowed at the grant review committee but they
opened it up for public testimony and in case such a thing should
happen someone should be there to speak about the principes of
the decision and he would be willing to appear if the Council
agrees.
(Illegal Signs)
Cm Miller stated that he continues to see illegal signs in the
public right-of-way and that the Police Department has been in-
structed to remove such signs. He suggested that the staff speak
with Chief Lindgren about the matter and that it be a policy to
remove the signs which appear primarily on weekends.
(Re No Deposit
Bottles)
Cm ~iiller stated that in the past the Council has commented on
eliminating no deposit bottles and that there is a desire to
get rid of this type of container to help eliminate litter.
The matter was postponed because some type of legislative action
was supposed to take place. The legislature, in the meantime,
has done nothing. The state of Oregon has adopted an anti-litter,
anti-disposable bottle state law that has been very effective in
eliminating litter and is an energy conservation measure because
the bottle can be reused at less cost than making a new bottle.
He asked that the matter be set as an agenda item and discussed
again.
(Re Widening I-580)
Cm Miller stated that Cm Turner has provided the Council with
a letter he intends to send to General Benjamin Davis with res-
pect to his views regarding widening of I-580. Cm Miller stated
that Cm Turner is concerned with relief for the commuters and
em Miller would suggest at this point that the way to accomplish
relief would be to spend $3.5 million to build a truck lane on
both sides of the hill - the major factor in the traffic problem.
The argument that commuters are going to be relieved by the CAL-
TRANS proposal is just not true and many of the commuters who are
now hampered by the congested traffic situation will not even be
CM-29-l48
December 16, 1974
(I - 58 0 ~\Tidening)
(
I
\
here by the time widening of the freeway has been completed. lIe
stated that he would urge Cm Turner to request truck lanes and
if he IJ'lould ask for this Cm ~1iller would be willing to support
his request.
Cm Turner stated that em Miller has implied that nothing will
be done from 7-10 years and Cm Turner wants to see some type
of immediate relief and it was explained that CAL-TRANS has esti-
mated that the work could not be completed until 7-10 years.
Cm Hiller stated that because he has said there will be no relief
for 7-10 years does not mean that he is opposed to doing anything.
What he is saying is that anyone who promises there will be relief
immediately, if the project is started right away, is simply not
telling the truth. There is not going to be immediate relief.
(Invitation to First
Meeting of CaVA)
Cm Tirsell invited the Councilmembers and anyone who might be interes-
ted in attending the first meeting of the Con9ress of Valley Agencies
(CaVA) and suggested that a letter be drafted to the Planning Com-
mission inviting them to the meeting which will be held on January 23,
at the Shannon Community Center in Dublin at 5:30 p.m.
Cm1J'v1UNICATION RE
COUNTY HEALTH CARE
SERVICES & MOBILE
INTENSIVE CARE UNIT
Alameda County has notified the Council of a meeting to be held on
December 18th at 7:30 p.m. in the Fairmont Hospital auditorium,
15400 Foothill Boulevard, San Leandro, for discussion of establish-
ing a county-wide mobile intensive care, paramedic service with the
assistance of federal funds.
~1r. Parness explained that the County has received a $666,000 grant
from the federal government which will allow establishment of the
mobile service which will ultimately have a centralized emergency
response and dispatch system. The program will allow implementation
of a new highly trained type of paramedic which is considered to be
needed and is a major undertaking this City has the option of joining
or rejecting. The service will have a lot to offer but will be
expensive; the cost could amount to something in the nature of $7
million per year.
Cm Tirsell asked if consideration has been given towards combining
this type of service with the 911 Emergency System and Mr. Parness
indicated that there has been talk of doing this.
CO~1UNICATION RE GEN.
PLAN STUDY & SB 1543
C~:
A copy of a letter sent to Donald Crawford of Grunwold, Crawford,
Associates, was received from t1illiam E. Loewe with respect to
concern that little progress is being made on the General Plan
and that there has been slipping of preliminary plan schedules
for enactment by the City Council on April 1st that would stave
off a rush on tract maps. He felt that policies should be es-
tablished as a result of input from the Citizens Committee and
would hope that he misunderstands that there is a posibility
funds may be spent to invistigate the implication of growth to
a level of 163,000 in Livermore when the Citizens Committee has
reported a ceiling of 80,000.
CH-29-149
December 16, 1974
(re General Plan)
em Miller stated that he feels the points mentioned by Mr. Loewe
should be discussed with Mr. Crawford and it was noted that a
meeting is scheduled for Thursday evening for the Planning Com-
mission, Council and Mr. Crawford.
r1r. Parness stated that it is his understanding that the Thursday
meeting is more of a study session between the Planning Commission
and the consultant through he is sure the Council is welcome and
encouraged to attend; however, perhaps the Council would like to
schedule a date upon which it would like to meet with the consul-
tant.
Mr. Musso commented that it was Mr. Crawford who asked that the
Planning Commission and Council attend the Thursday meeting with
him to discuss the General Plan, and Cm Tirsell suggested that
r1r. Crawford be reminded that any such scheduling should take
place through the City Manager because he is supposed to be the
coordinator.
I''lr. Loewe also voiced snpport of SB 1543 Air Pollution and Land
Use Planning and that in discussing the bill with em Miller he
finds that he is in full agreement with the views expressed by
Cm Miller on this subject.
REPORT RE PETITION
ON UNFAIR TAXATION
The City Attorney explained that a Memorandum of Law was written
to the City Clerk with respect to whether or not the lIinitiative"
submitted by Paul Tull should be certified to the City Council.
He briefly explained that there are two possible considerations
involved in the petition since the petition did not state whether
or not it was a referendum or an initiative. If the petition is
a referendum it would require a challenge within 30 days of the
ordinance it challenges and in this instance there was no ordi-
nance. Assuming an ordinance was being challenged the referendum
vlTOuld be void because it was presented to the City Clerk '.!ell
after the 30 day period. This does not foreclose a petition, and
a petition can be assumed to be an initiative which also must
follow certain areas of the law specifically set out in the
Election Code. This particular petition was signed by parties
on the day there was publication of the Notice of Intent and
the law requires that there be a 21 day interim period before
any signatures be affixed and, therefore, at the outset, it is
in violation of that portion of the law. Also, when the petition
was circulated it was to have affixed to it that item which was
published in the newspaper - the facts setting forth what the
initiative was for. In at least two areas the law was not follow-
ed and the City Clerk has been instructed to return the petition
to Mr. Tull and not certify it to the City Council.
The Mayor asked if the City Clerk is certifying the petition to
the City Council and she replied that she is not certifying the
petition either as a referendum or an initiative.
The City Attorney explained that the law requires the Council be
informed when a petition is submitted to the City Clerk, within
10 days of its submittal and no action is required on the part
of the City Council.
Mr. Tull stated that a Mr. Riggs informed him that he could law-
fully obtain signatures on the day the legal notice was published
and that the City Clerk has 30 days to certify the petition. He
then stated that the Constitution declares that government is
CM-29-l50
December 16, 1974
(re Petition)
(
\
'-.
instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the
people and they have the right to alter or reform the same ,whenever
public good may require it. He added that he proceeded with his
petition on this basis. He then read other portions of the Consti-
tution and the state law which he feels justifys his contention that
the petition circulated was done so properly. He stated that with
respect to the assessment for the railroad project, he knew exactly
what he was doing and what had been published and that the notice
covering this was delivered to the City Clerk on August 22, 1974.
That was the evidence of the intent to pass and circulate the
petition which he now exnects to have certified.
Katie Richardson, 510 Junction Avenue, stated that she is present
on behalf of Elba Leonard who has sent an open letter to the ~ayor,
concerning the legality of the petition to vote on the relocation
project, N'hich she read to the Council.
REPORT RE GARBAGE-
RUBBISH CONTRACT EXT.
The City Manager reported that the current contract for the garbage-
rubbish service with Oakland Scavenger Company will expire on Decem-
ber 31, 1974. This will conclude the second six month contract ex-
tension term. Oakland Scavenger has agreed to an additional exten-
sion since the rate establishment proposal of the County Solid \~aste
Technical Committee, of which our City is a member, has not yet com-
pleted its work. Oakland Scavenger has agreed to the extension
under the same terms and conditions as at present and for an indeter-
minate term, pending the outcome of our rate review process. It is
recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the
garbage-rubbish collection contract extension for an indefinite term
under the same terms and conditions as present, with Oakland Scavenger
Company.
Cm r1iller wondered if it is reasonable to extend a contract for
an undetermined length of time and whether or not it would be
best to define a length of time.
Mr. Parness stated that Oakland Scavenger Company suggested that
the contract be indeterminate and that it may be reviewed at any
time, at the option of the Council, and that this might be preferable,
rather than fixing a date as has been done on two occasions. It was
noted that either the Councilor Oakland Scavenger can review the
status of the contract at any time under these circumstances.
~1r. Parness commented that if the Council is concerned about not
specifying a time period, perhaps included in the motion to adopt
the resolution could be the statement that the status of the rate
review process be reported to the Council in four months.
The City Attorney felt terms could be agreed upon for a mutual
cancellation clause for both Oakland Scavenger and the City of
Livermore with respect to the extension and that a letter sent
back and forth and signed by both parties would be tanamount to a
contract amendment.
c\
Crt TURNERrmVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXTENSION OF THE
CONTRACT \vITH THE SAME TEre~S AND CONDITIONS, AS AT PRESENT, FOR AN
UNDETERrUNED PERIOD OF TIME AND THAT THE STATUS OF THE RATE REVIEt'l
PROCESS MAY BE REVIEWED AT THE OPTION OF THE COUNCIL. THE~'lOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL.
Cl'1-29-15l
December 16, 1974
(Garbage Contract)
Keith Fraser, attorney representing Oakland Scavenger Company,
explained that Oakland Scavenger would like to assure the City
and the Council that garbage service will be provided until the
time the Rate Review Committee comes in with a recommendation
and really does not want to have to appear before the Council
every 30 days or 6 months. Oakland Scavenger Co. would agree to
providing the service from now to the end of four years at the
present rate. He indicated that Oakland Scavenger does not want
to do this at the same rate and as soon as possible they will
come back to the Council to discuss a different rate after the
Committee has made a recommendation.
Cm Hiller stated that, in other words, a statement to the effect
that Oakland Scavenger would be willing to go along with an ex-
tended period up to but not exceeding the end of the contract,
or until such time as the Rate Committee comes back with a
recommendation, and would protect both parties, and Mr. Fraser
indicated that this would be acceptable. THIS WAS INCLUDED AS
PART OF THE ~1OTION MADE BY CM TURNER WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 197-74
A RESOLUTION APPROVING EXTENSION OF CONTRACT
(Oakland Scavenger Co.)
REPORT RE PRELIMINARY
SUBDIVISION STAFF RE-
VIEW (WAGONER FARMS)
The City Hanager reported that Kay Building Company has obtained
two parcels of property proposed for development in the Wagoner
Farms area (47 lots) and the applicant wishes to have Council
permission for the Planning staff to review the subdivision
plans to determine if everything is in conformance with City
requirements and to prepare an EIR on the subdivisions, which
will be paid for by the applicant. The City Manager reported
that this will be done on an informal basis and would suggest
that the Council adopt a motion authorizing approval of the
request by the applicant.
Mayor Pritchard explained that if the Council takes action
on this matter it will mean that rather than being done in-
formally, as indicated by the City ~1anager, that it will be-
come a formal matter.
Mr. Parness explained that what he meant by informal was that
there would be no submittal of the EIR for hearing by the
Planning Commission or for review by that body or the Council -
it would only be drafted for the information of the applicant.
Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to see the Council deny
the request on the basis that this land may be included in
another moratorium or it may have a recommendation on it to
raise or lower density; besides which, all properties that
are not subject to the moratorium are under review by the
General Plan process.
Cm ~1iller added that the staff is already busy with work
involved with the General Plan and special plan work that
is involved with the moratorium and have enough to do without
having to do extra work because of a special request.
CM MILLER MOVED TO TABLE THE MATTER UNTIL THE MORATORIm1
ENDS, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM-29-l52
December 16, 1974
RE PROPOSED PARK LAND
ACQUISITION - WALL &
STANLEY BOULEVARD
~.1ayor Pritchard stated that LARPD has requested that the matter of
the acquisition of property at Wall Street and Stanley Boulevard
for park purposes be postponed until after the Council meets with
LARPD at the January 22nd joint meeting.
ON ]'.lOTION OF CH TURNER, SECONDED BY Ci'1 TIRSELL AND BY UNANIHOUS
VOTE THE ~1ATTER WAS CONTINUED UNTIL AFTER JANUARY 22nd.
r1ayor Pritchard commented that he spoke with the property owner
who wishes to sell this property and indicated that the Council
would probably continue the matter and the owner voiced no objection
to that possibility.
RECESS
Mayor Pritchard called for a short recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present - (Cm Futch
absent) .
REPORT RE FEDERAL HOUS-
ING & CO~ll1UNITY DEVELOP-
MENT PROGRAH
The City I1anager reported that a great deal of staff effort is being
expended in seeking an understanding of the very complex new federal
program (Federal Housing and Community Development Program). Data
is being gathered and will be presented to the Council at the meeting
of January 6th. It is necessary, however, to declare our intentions
now as to participating with the County and the six other cities of
less than 50,000 population so that our City may qualify for a
federal apportionment. The only other alternative is to proceed
alone to seek funding from the so called "discretionary funds" but
this would require an extraordinarily comprehensive planning appli-
cation. Then, too, discretionary funds, reportedly, will not be
available for this federal region. Therefore, our only logical
alternative is to join in a consortium with the County which must
enlist the agreement of other incorporated areas of less than 50,000
population so as to achieve an aggregate population number of 200,000
in order to qualify as an "Urban County" grant applicant. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution which declares that
our City, in the required language of the federal directive, "forms
a cooperative agreement 11 . !1r. Parness stated that he regrets that
more information is not available to the Council before this initial
step is taken; however, this is noncommital and nothing more than
a declaration of intent.
(
em Tirsell asked if there would be some type of discussion at the
January 6th meeting, as to how monies will be appropriated back
to the cities that join, and Mr. Parness replied yes, the formula
has been prepared and the staff has reviewed the formula with a
great deal of debate among the staff and the County and the formula
that will be recommended for acceptance by the Council T;Jill be the
sane formula as that v.rhich the federal government uses in allocating
the monies to qualifiable cities and governmental agencies. He added
that the formula is based upon poverty and housing status.
CT"l TIRSELL 110VED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE COUNCIL'S
INTENT, SECONDED BY en TURnER A:m PASSED UNANPlOUSLY.
RESOLUTIO~ NO. 198-74
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO EXECUTE A JOINT AGREE~ENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LIVER'mRE AND THE COUNTY OF ALNlED2\
REGARDING HOUSING l'.,.ND cmrr.1UNITY DEVELOPi1ENT ACT OF 1974.
C!v1- 2 9 -15 3
December 16, 1974
REPORT RE CO~t~UNITY
DEVELOPHENT DEPARTMENT
The City Manager reported that in mid September when the matter
of the Community Development Department was discussed it was de-
ferred until this time so that additional data pertaining to the
status of our reserve funds could be obtained. A report concern-
ing the status of the reserve funds has been submitted to the
Council.
The Council concluded that the matter would be discussed at the
meeting of January 13, 1975 at which time Cm Futch may be in
attendance.
REPORT RE CONTRACT EXTENSION
FOR E. STANLEY BOULEVARD
The City Manager reported that work was to have proceeded during
the current fiscal year on the widening of E. Stanley Blvd. from
Isabel Avenue, easterly, to Murdell Lane. Due to interference
of other projects this work will not be accomplished and the
contract extends the time for approximately one year. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing
execution of the modification.
Mayor Pritchard asked if this is a simple extension of the old
contract and Mr. Parness indicated that it is.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 199-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(With Alameda County - E. Stanley Blvd.)
REPORT RE WATER RECLAJ~TION
PLANT CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
(Filter ~.'iedia)
Mayor Pritchard explained that the City Council had asked to
receive additional material with respect to the requested
approval of Change Order No. 2 for the filter media for the
water reclamation plant as there was some question as to
why the state and EPA are not going to share in the cost re-
quired to update the system if EPA is going to require the
new standards.
Cm Miller indicated that there is nothing in the agenda to
add to what prior information the Council received on the
matter.
Mr. Lee indicated that the new specification that has been pre-
pared is considered to be good and has come from a study that
the EPA has done. Apparently this carne out after our consul-
tant prepared the specifications and Mr. Lee feels that even
though EPA has rejected our request that they participate,
financially, they will not fail to help pay the cost, in the
final analysis, because we will be changing to meet the EFA's
recommendation.
em Turner stated that the EPA has indicated the new system is
not necessary at present but eventually it will have to be
installed. It was also pointed out that the modification would
result in a better, more functional, system and based on this
information perhaps it would best to approve the change at this
point rather than to necessitate change in the future.
crI-- 2 9 -15 4
December 16, 1974
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO.2,
SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting).
RESOLUTION NO. 200-74
(,--
\
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER
(Water Reclamation Plan~ Stage 3 Improvements)
REPORT RE GRADE SEP ARA-
TION PROJECT & WATER
REC. PLANT STATUS
A written, weekly progress, report was submitted to the City Council
by Mr. Lee with respect to Railroad Consolidation Project and the
Water Reclamation Plant. Also included was a report as to the
property relocation program related to the track relocation project.
Mr. Parness reported that as a good public relations gesture the
City will be distributing, to all the property owners directly
affected by the project, a status report of where we are and what
is happening with the progress of the work with respect to the
Christmas holidays and traffic regulation, etc. and the Council
concurred that this was an excellent idea.
No action was required of the Council on this matter.
P. C. REPORT RE WALL
STREET LIGHTING PETITION
The Planning Commission reported that in considering the petition for
additional lighting on Wall Street it was felt that the issues pre-
sented were not Planning matters but that design of the area might
be considered to be a Planning concern. The Planning Commission
noted that lighting of Wall Street may be sufficient for normal
residential streets but may not be suitable in an area where there
is a large amount of bicycle and pedestrian traffic and by unanimous
vote recommends that the Council consider increasing the street light-
ing along Wall Street so as to help reduce the amount of crime and
other problems noted by the residents of the area.
em Tirsell mentioned that the Police Department will be meeting
with the residents in the near future to help decide what might
be done in the way of solutions to the problems.
P. C. REPORT RE PU #12
A report was submitted by the Planning Commission with respect to
discussion regarding Planning Unit t12 (Portola Hills area) and
the proposed changes in density and land use. A public hearing
has been scheduled for January 14, 1975 and presumed that the
General Plan amendment would be before the City Council on January 20,
1975, so that a hearing could be set in February 1975.
I~
REPORT FROM CM TURNER
RE BIKE LICENSING
Cm Turner submitted a written report to the City Council with respect
to bicycle licensing which indicated that the percentage of unlicensed
bicycles stolen is 55.3%, that 49% of the bicycles in the City are
not licensed, and that 15% of the bikes stolen are recovered. His
recommendation was that the City attempt to license all bikes by
methods suggested in the report and that the matter be referred
CM-29-l55
~-"...'._., .-------...,'..--'..-'-----.-.....-----..-.,."..,-----.._......-.~....."-.~,.,.._-",-_._."-----_.,._.~"_._.
December 16, 1974
(Bike Licensing)
to the City Manager for review and comment and that the City
Manager consider an increase in the bicycle license fee, in
keeping with inflation, with implementation of this effort to
begin no later than January 15, 1975.
The Council concurred that the recommendations were good and
noted that it has been suggested the matter be referred to the
staff.
Cm Tirsell suggested that the letter be sent to Mr. Croce and
she would strongly recommend that students be required to lock
the bikes with a chain to the bike stands because if they are
locked they are not stolen.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE STAFF AND
THE LETTER SENT TO MR. CROCE, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, AS
SUGGESTED BY CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ORD. REZONING PROPERTIES
TO I-I DISTRICT (Airport Area)
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO REZONE
PROPERTIES TO I-I DISTRICT (Airport Area) WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 855
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS
AMENDED, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMEND-
ING SECTION 3.00 THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING.
STATUS REPORT RE
VARIOUS PROJECTS
The City Manager reported that as the Corporation Board of
Directors the Council should be informed of the status of
various matters and intends to submit weekly reports. At
this time he presented a lengthy report relative to the status
of the following items:
Public Works: 1. Water Reclamation Plant project
2. Reservoir project in Conjunction with Water
Reclamation Plant Project
Golf Course: New Watering Schedule (possible through the
Reservoir project)
Airport: Airport Land Use Study and Airport Study
College Site: Utility Lines
Engineering:
1. East Avenue project (City & County)
(a) sewers
(b) water lines
(c) traffic signals
2. First Street-North Livermore Avenue project
3. ilK" Street Beautification
4. Bike Path Designs
CM-29-l56
December 16, 1974
(Status Report)
Transportation: Interviews for Consultant to do Transportation
Study to take place on Wednesday, December 18th.
Cm Miller stated that this matter of public transportation has been
a concern and something we have been working on for a long time and
asked exactly how long it would be before Livermore would have public
transportation, provided there are good results from the study, and
Mr. Parness indicated that a report should be available within six
months and following the report it is a matter of what the results
of the study might be and realizes that it will involve financing
as the major issue. It will have to be determined as to how funds
may be obtained and if the public feels they are willing to try to
raise the money.
General Plan: 1. Noise Element - Under Preparation by Committee
2. Scenic Highway Element (with Alameda County)
3. Zoning Ordinance re General Plan
4. Subdivision Ordinance
5. Specific Plans - #8 & #9 Ready for Action by Council
#12 will be before the Council in February
#11 set for hearing by P.D. in January
#18 out of the P.C. in January
#3 pending
#13 pending
Downtown Plan: Recommendations to come from Study Committee on
Suggested Design
Police Dept:
1. "Cop on Campus" Program
2. Bike Safety - Citation Forms & Policy
(a) new state licensing program
(b) fees
3. Criminal Justice Planning Agency Grant
for Microfilming Received
4. STEP Program Progressing Very Well
(a) arrests for burglary
(b) recently appraised - good report
5. HORIZONS - Glowing Reports from Appraisal
Finance: Computer input initiated for all financial records
and possible program budgeting.
Fire Dept:
1. Fire Stations
(a) status of design for #1
(b) problem obtaining property for #4
(c) company inspections being done
REPORT RE USE OF COUNTY
SHERIFF'S RIFLE RANGE
Mr. Parness stated that he would like to report that the Police
Department has worked out an agreement with Alameda County for use
of the rifle range at Santa Rita. Chief Lindgren has requested that
the agreement be formally authorized by the City Council and it would
be appreciated if such action would take place this evening so that
they may begin using the range right after the first of the year.
Mr. Parness reported that the agreement states only that the Livermore
Police Department will be allowed to use the Sheriff's sub-station
CM-29-l57
December 16, 1974
(re Use of Rifle Range)
pistol range at the convenience of Alameda County and that all the
County rules and regulations will be observed while in use by the
Livermore police officers, under the direction of the range director
afforded by the Sheriff. Mr. Parness recommended that the agreement
be approved, at no cost to the City of Livermore.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH THE
COUNTY FOR USE OF THE RIFLE RANGE WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 201-74
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
COMMUNITY SERVICES
COMMITTEE
em Turner stated that with respect to the Community Services
Committee he would like to suggest that anyone interested in
serving on the Committee be allowed to serve by contacting
the City. The Committee will be formulated to write a proposal.
RUMORS RE MAYOR
- CHRISTMAS
Mayor Pritchard stated that rumors have been circulating to the
effect that the Mayor is against Christmas and that he might not
even be a Christian. He assured everyone that he is not against
Christmas decorations downtown but feels public funds should not
be spent for this purpose. He stated that he is a Christian and
would like to wish the citizens and staff a very merry Christmas
and happy new year.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m. to a brief executive session
and then to a public meeting, Thursday, December 19th.
APPROVE
~~~
,
ATTEST
at ~
C1ty C er
Livermore, California
CM-29-l58