HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-20-1968 City Council Minutes SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
SL~IARY OF ~!INUTES
TItlE: l~eduesday, Iiarch 20s 1968 7130 1% ~!,
PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 F~ultvale Avenue, Saratoga,
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I O~ANIZATION
}fayor Glennon called the r~eetin~ to order at 7:35 P, N,
A, ROLL CALL
Present: Cotmeilmen Glennonm Ilartman, Tyler, Robbing, Burry
Absent: None
B, ~.ilNUTES
It was moved by Councilman Robbing, seconded by Councilman Burry,
and carried unanimously to dispense with the readin.~ of the minutes
of the ~farch 6, 1968 meeting and approve them as
II BIDS AND CO~Nv/RACTS
A, CONTRACT with Sxqeeney & Sons for construction of asphalt berm ou
Highray 85
~ir~ Ruff explained that this berm construction was required by the
Division of Highways as a provision of the encroachment permit issued
Highway 8~ to the City at the time the ~alkway on Highway 85 was constructed but
Berm that, due to unsatisfactory cost quotations, the work was not done
prior to this time. Several quotations were received, ~r.
reported, and the staff recounnends that the contract be az~arded to
S~eeney. & San who sub~itted the most reasonable price for the
It ~as meve. d by Councilm~i~ Tyler, seconded by Councilman Hartman,
and carried unanimously to authorize ex~cUtion of a contract with
S~eney ~n~. Sons for installation of 84~ LF of A.C. Berrn an ~t~hwaV
85 ~t a cost of $1,220.90.
B~ CONTRACT ~ith George l~olte for Engineering Services - Verde Vista
Lane
The; City Cl~rk reeo~..,~nded that a co~trdC~ ~e execute~ ~ith G~or~e
Nol~te Engineers for engin~ering services .fo~ ~he Verd~ Vista Lane
lEngi~eering imp~ovemen~ proJect~ He reported that the vetition requesting this
~et~rtees - improvements .~hieh was linted on the ag~da for this meeting, had.
Ver~e vista not materialized due to the complex _~roCedure xequlred ~here a
pet~tioner had filed a tentative subdivision map. ItO~ver, .'it. HUff
stated, the ~taff reco~tends that the contract for engineerin~
services be executed so that the engineers may proceed as soan as
the petition has been filed. ~r. ShOok ihdicated that he exveets
the petition to he filed within the ~ext t~o weeks.
It was moved by Councilman ltobbius, Seconded by Coueellmen Hartmaui
and carried unanimeus!y tO authorize the t~ayor to execute the ~ontract
with George Nolte Engineers for Verde Vista Lane engii~eerin$ services,
subject to the filing of a vatid petition for for~ation of the
assessment district.
TRACT 3900 - OVERSIZED STOI~ SE~R REI~BURSE~ENT AGREEmeNT
It was moved by Councilman Harman, seconded by Councilman Tyler, and
Tract 3900 uuanimeusly carried to authorize the Nayor to execute an oversized
Reimbursement storm sewer reimbursement a~reement between the City end the firm of
Agreement I.?ynn, I~s and Zukin.. ~r. Ruff explained that this was a standard
form of a~reement to enable the developer of Tract 3900 to be reimburs~.
by future developers ~ho will benefit from oversize storm se~?ers
installed by ~nn, Duma, and Zukin.
SUlkilY OF COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20, 1968
Ill PETITIONS, ORDINANCES ANDFO~.~L RESOLUTIONS
A, RESOLUTION NO, 414
Mr, Huff reported that the City periodically requests population
exttmates to be certified by the State Department of Finance in order
Population to establish eligibility to receive additional per capita State
Estimate subvention funds. He said that the cost for this service would be
$310. provided the city's population does not exceed 25,000. It was
moved by Councilman Robbins, seconded by Councilman Burry, and
mnanimously carried to adopt Resolution No. 414s authorizing the
Mayor to execute an agreement with the California Department of
Finance for a population estimate as of April 1, 1968.
B. VERDE VISTA IMPROVelENT PROJECT
Uith no objection, }~yor Glennon ordered this item, consisting of
Verde Vista filing of petition and accompanying resolutions, deferred to the
Improvement next regular meeting, in accordance with the previous report that
the petition could not be filed at this time.
IV SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDII~ SITES A~fl) ZONIt~ REOUESTS
A. SDR-736 - GEORGE AKERS
Akers The City Clerk reported that all conditions of tentative building
~DR-736 site approval had been met for three lots on E1 Camino Grande and it
was moved byCouncilman Burry, seconded by Councilman Robbins, and
carried unanimously to adopt Resolution No. SDR-736-1, granting
finai site approval.
B. SDR-648 - COLIN BEAT~I
Mr. Huff reported that all conditions had been met or bonds DoSted
Beaton in connection with building site approval for one lot on E1 Camind
5IIR-6~8 Crande and it was moved by Councilman Hartman~ seconded by CounCilman
Tyler, and unanlmously carried to:adopt ResolUtion Ho; SDR-6~8-1s
approving the lot as a buildin~ site.
V PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
VI ADMINISTRATIVEHATTERS
A. MAYOR
(1) }Iayor Glennon reported that on March 28 the Planning Policy
Committee' of the Inter-City Council will present its report
in the County Board of Supervisors chambers and that all
Planning Policy Councilmen and Planning Colnmlssioners in the County will be
Committee urged to attend. The Hayor said that, as Chairman of this
Public Meeting Committees he had felt that one County-wide meeting would be
more effective than xffitten progress reports ~.~ould have been
as a means of informing local officials of the importance and
scope of the Planning Policy Co~,ittee's studies during the
past year. The Mayor emphasized that, in his opinion,.the
efforts o~ the Planning Policy Committee was the sin~Ie most
important cooperative project to be undertaken in Santa Clara
County and that lack of interest by the 15 cities' officials
could well Jeopardize future development throughout the County.
(2) Mayor Glennon made several comments relative to the Planning
General Plan Commission report on the General Plan Review which is scheduled
for public hearing at the Apr£13, 1968 meeting. ~riefly,.these
comments included the following:
-2-
COUNCIL MIt.~TE~ - March 20, 1968
(a) The~fayor suggested that the Planuin~ Commission recommenda-
General Plan ticus relative to apartment develgpment, specifically the
Pace proparty and Kosich property, as well as the Quito
Shopping area, be changed to either retain present zoning
or designate the desired zoning instead of recommending
that present zoning be retained pendinR further study or
definite proposals for multiple or residential retirement
development. This wording, the Mayor felt, ~7ould be unfair
to property o~ners and would not serve as an adequate guide
for future planning.
(b) Collector Street right of way and improvement - Planning
Commission recommends further study and definition of
dimensions and in some cases, imp_rovement: The ~fayor
recommended that the Planning Commission determine what
changes should be made in right of way and improvement
standards in conjunction with the General Plan Review.
(c) Herriman Avenue extension - Planning Cormmisslon recommends
removin~ this extension from the General Plan and consider-
ing it along with alternative routes such as Allendale
Avenue extension and Douglas Lane extension at each subse-
quant General Plan Review. ~ayor Glennon indicated that. he
could see no reason for this recommendation unless the
Planning Commission disagreed .with Mr. Livingston's proposal
that Herriman Avenue be extended as a link be~.~een Saratoga
and Pruitvale Avenues. !te suggested that Livingston be
requested to provide additional information as required to
permit ~he Planning Commission to make a conclusive
recommendation on this matter.
~ayor Glennon stated that he disliked volelog general crit~ismof. the
Planning Commission report for he personally felt that the Saratoga
Planning Commission had always been and ~emains the most dedicated
and. capable of Commissions. ~.~ever, the Mayor continhed; ha felt
th~ before the Council could make ultimate decisions re~arding the
Planfling Comm~ssions's recomuendations, it would be necessary to
obtain concrete information relative to those items which he felt
were ambiguous. In the event the Planning Commission iS notorepa~ed
to report further on these items prior ~0 the SCheduled April~3
public hearing, the Mayor stated that the public hearing could be
continued on the agenda until the report can be submitted.
Councilman Robbins agreed that additional information relative to
the points raised by the Mayor would be needed and that a substantial
length of time might be involved but that he felt that if the informa--
tion is available to the Planning Commission the CounciI should have
the benefit of their advice within a relatively short time.I
With Council approval, ~ayor Glennon referred the report on the General
Plan Review back ~o the Planning Commission for clarification of the
items outlined by the Mayor.
(3) Mayor Glennon expressed concern about tb~ reports he has had from
citizens complaining of increased criminal activity in the city.
Police Study The Mayor reflected that he did not kn~ whether the apparent increase
was a result of increased population, actual crime rate increase, or
more emotional citizen reaction to law enforcement problems, but that
he did think that the City should contact the Sheriff's Department
for their opinion as to causes for the severity and volume of com-
plaints and whether or not, in their opinion, increased law enforece-
ment services would correct the situation.
Councilman Hartman said that he would be interested in ascertainin~
the type of criminal complaints that have been received~ as well as
the number of complaints and that he felt this information ~.muld
the Sheriff's Department in their analysis of the problem.
-3-
SU~tARY OF COdiCIL MI~.qJTES - }latch 20m 1968
Councilman Burry stated that, after studying the crime report
distributed to the Council at the last meeting, he was amazed
Police Study that a city tt~ size of Saratoga had fared as well at it had.
Without having the benefit of crime statistics from other cities
of comparable population, Councilman Burry indicated that it
Y~ould appears from local news coverage, that the rate in
Saratoga is lower than that of its neighbors. I~ questioned
whethat or not the increase in citizen complaints might be
unwarranted.
Councilman Tyler c~nmented that only ~raffic control services
are under contract and the Hayor stated that although it was
true that the Sheriff*s Department was obligated by law to
hmxdle criminal complaints they have frequently advocated
traffic patrol as a means of decreasin~ ciminal activity, It
was reported that the presence of patrol cars discourages
certain types of crtmess such as burglary,
The Council discussed the apparent discrepancy beU~een the 1967
crime report and the number of citizen complaints to the Counci!
and noted that although the crime rate had increased in the past
four years it did not appear to be a significant increase. ~ayor
Glennon said that he felt that the Council had a responsibility
not to respond to increased citizen reaction unless it can be
determined that the complaints are Justified.
With no objection, ~ayor Glennon referred the matter to the
~Ianagement Committee and requested Mr. Huff to obtain as much
factual data for comparison purposes as possible prior to the
~anagement Committee review.
(4) Mayor Glennon reported that the Cupertino Sanitary District will
consider the possible extension of sanitary se~rs in the Pierce
Pierce Rd,
Sewers Road a~ea at a meeting to be held March 28. I~ asked that Public
Works Director Shook attend.the meetinn as an observer but take
no position on behalf of the city at this time.
B. FINANCE
(i) Payment of Claims
Mr. Shook reportej t at progres on construction of the
Claims Village Parking DiStrict No. 1 had accelerated somewhat during
the past week and ~aS approximately 71% completed. Mr. ShOok
indicated that the retention of payment to date ~as, in his
opinion, more than adequate tb cover expected penalties.
Councilman Tyler questioned a claim from Commercial Building
Haintanance and was advised by the City Clerk that the charge
was for supplies furnished by the firm during the trial transi-
tion to force account maintenance service and would not be a
recurring charge.
It was mO~ed by Councilmen Burry, seconded by Councilman Robbins,
and unan~m?~ly carried to approve the list of claims, dated
March 20, 1968 and to authorize that warrants be drmrn in payment
for a total amount of $33,248.05.
(2) The February, 1968 Treasurer's report was accepted, with no
comments.
(3) Councilman Robbins questioned the status of the Hakone Gardens
~{emorial Fund and Mr. Huff reported that the ~arrant for payment
of that po~tlon of the fund donated in memory of Joseph Gresham
had been voided in accord with Council action at a previous meet-
ing but that this action had inadvertently been omitted when
the February City Clerk"s financial report had been prepared,
-4-
SU~t~RY OF COUNCIL MINUTES - ~4ereh 20, 1968
C. COUNCIL CO~flTTEES AND REPORTg
None
D. DEPAR~fENT I~ADS AND OFFICERS
Mr. Shook presented Change Order No. 1 for the Village Parking
District No. 1 for a total additional cost of $620. and explained
that it included the installation of a drain line around an exist-
Parking ing oak tree and concrete cap over the underground utility cov, du~t.
District No. I He stated that he concures xzith the engineer of workts recomendation
Change Order that the change order be approved. Councilman Hartman asked why
No. I these items had not been included in the original engineering alan,
and was told that it was an apparent oversight. Mro Shook indicated
that, in a project of this sizes the oversi~ht x~as considered
negligible and that it is usual to add from 5Z to IOZ to the cost
of a project for contingencies of this type,
~. Shook also reported that it had been decided to leave the switch
panel ~hich was scheduled to have been moved in its present location
until such time that the adjacent o~,mer~s plans have become concrete.
It was moved by Councilman Hartman, seconded by Councilman Tyler, and
carried unanimously to approve Chan~e Order ~o. I as presented.
E. CITY ADMINISTRATOR
(l) The City Administrator reported that the Chief Building Inspector
Wildwood Park recommends removal of two small sheds and an old privy in the
Cottages lower area of Wildwood Park as well as the two vacant ~ottages on
Wildwood I~y, but that the occupied cottage be retained until
park plans are Drepared and the city is in a position to proceed
With park development. ~. Huff stated that a proposal had been
~eceived from T~d Tressler, Contractor, to demoltsb the structures.
~t was moved by Council~n N~rtman, seconded by Councilman Robbins,
hnd ~nanimoUsly carried tO authorize the ~emolition~o~k as
recommended and at the cos~ ~ot to exceed S540.
(2) tTtth no Objection, Mayor Glennon referred to the Phblic I.~lfare
Street ~ommittee a proposal from Pacific Gas and Fleetrio Company that.an
Lighting agreement be executed authorizing conversion of all incandescent
street lights in the city to mercury vapor lights.
(3) Mr~ Huff reported that ~e had reviewed the Youth Center agreement
Youth Center in reference to the extent of the citrus financial obligation in
Maintenance Cost regard to janitorial maintenance and utilities in the Youth Center
Building. He said that no specific sum was included in the agree-
ment because of the difficulty in making an accurate 50 year
projection of the cost of the services covered but that the
}~nagement Committee and Council had been informed that the cost
had been estimated at $2500, Additionally, ~¶r. Huff stated,
there was apparently no review of the $2500 fi:~ure bet~een its
origin in 1964 in relation to a proposed 6500 sq. ft. building
and the. approval of the agreement on April 5, 1967, calling for
ccnstruction of a 11,500 sq, ft. building. lie added that
preliminary figures indicate a potential for expenditure of $2000
or more per year for utilities and $4000 on Janitorial maintenance
at the current level of service.
r~. Huff reco,muended that this matter be referred to the M~nage-
meat Committee for study and reDoft and, with no objection, the
r~yor so directed.
-5-
SUMMARY OF COU}~CIL MItru~YES - March 20, 1968
VI! CO}f~UNICAT~ONS
A. !~.ITTEN
(1) A letter from the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
A.BoA.G, relative to the Board*s position on membership in A.B.A.G. ~.ms
acknowledged.
Planning Policy (2) Minutes and announcements relative to the Plannin~ Policy
Coraltree . Committee were distributed.
Transportation (3) Announcement was made of a special meeting of the Transportation
Policy Co~anittee Policy Cormnittee scheduled for this eveninE.
(4) Councilman Burry reported ~hat since he had artended the General
Assembly of A.B.A.G. he had read in news reports that some of
the A.B,A.G. dues had been embezzled along with the ~!.U.D. funds
A.B.A.G. and that this news was a direct contradiction of the A.B,A.G.
Board of DIrectors~ statements that no association funds were
affected. If, in fact, the organization is run in such a
manner, it was Councilman Burry*s stated opinion that the Board
of Supervisors~ position ~ay be justified.
B. ORAL
(1) }~r. Pranc{s Smith, 12349 Obrad Drive, read a statement relative
to his p0~itfon concerning the revocation of an encroachment
permit for a sewer hook uo at 12764 Saratoga Avenue. f~e stated
that a permit bed been ~ranted by a city employee and that
Saratoga Ave. Derrick Construction Company had been hired to do the work at
Encroachment a cost based on the conditions of the permit. Subsequently,
he r~porteds the permit was revoked and the conditions for a
permit changed to a degree that the cost would be greatly
increased and the time required for the work extended beyond
the scheduled occupancy of~he property. ~r. Smith questioned
~Thether a right of revocatidn.exists and asked that the contractor
be granted permission to proceed with the work under the original
permit.
The Director of PUblic Works ~eported that, in an effort tO
accomod~te the applicant, a permit had been issued yesterday ~
on the basis of a hand carried request, unaccompanied by exhibits
Or full ~nformation, and that the permit had been issued in error.
~his error was discovered t~iS morning by the ASsistant Director
of Public Works w~o, being aware of the policy 9f Drohibitin~ open
t~ench work on. Saratoga Avenue, had revoked the permit and
advised the applicant of the tunneling procedure that would be
~equir~d for the x.mrk proposed. Mr. Shook stated that nonnally
sketches are required indicating location, ali.gnment, etc. but
that this request had been interpreted erroniously because of
the lack of proper exhibits.
}{r. Leonard Derrick, Contractor, said that he uas not sure that
the work could be accomplished by boring under the pavement
because of the depth involved, soil conditions', and other utility
installations which might be encountered in the area. For this
reason, as well as the cost involved, Mr, Derrick asked that an
open trench hook up be authorized.
Tfayor Glennon asked the City Attorney to co~ent regardinn the
city's legal position and ~r. Johnston stated that he did not
recall ~hether or not the Council was designated to. sit as a
Board of Appeals for the granting of encroachment permits.
IIo~eVer, the City Attorney said that the City did have the
right to revoke a permit that had been granted in error.
-6-
SUMMARY OF COLD]CIL MINUTES - Hatch 20, 1968
After considerable discussion of past policy regarding encroach-
ment on Saratoga Avenues ultimate development antlciDated, etc.
Mr, Detrlck was asked whether or not he had started any work in
the short time the permit was effective. Mr. Derrick replied
that he had made a 6' to 7' cut in the west side of the pavement
but that no base rock or pavement had been taken Out.
Saratoga Ave.
Encroachment Mr. John Smith stated that when he had spoken to Sanitation
District 4 representatives last Fall about his plans for remodel-
ing they had suggested procedures which did not involve drilling
except where it would involve cutting into the median strip.
~{ayor Glennon noted that, as a reDresentatlve on Sanitation
District #4s the District policy had been to sua~est that
property Owners connect to se~r laterals at the time of major
street construction whether or not they plan to use the connection
within .a relatively short time. ~. Smith, owner of the property
at 12764 Saratoga Avenue, stated that he had o~med the property
at the time Saratoga Avenue was reconstructed and that he had
been contacted with such a proposal but that it had been his
impression that it made little difference whether he connected
at that time or a later date so he had not bothered to do so,
The Hayor suggested that the matter be referred to the Public
l~lfare Committee and that the City Attorney be requested to
advise Mr. Huff whether it is a matter for Council decision or
if the staff can rule in this case.
Councilman Robbins asked if the Public I.~elfare Committee could be
authorized to act when it completes its review and the City Attorne~
advised that it could not as that ~ould be a deleSatlon of legisla-
tive power.
Councilman Burry commented that it was his feeling that if a permit
had been issued in error it was morally ~rong to subject the
applicant to unnecessary expense. ~ayor Glennon agreed but added
that, although an applicant would not be expected to bear the
expense of staff error, he re!t that the question of pol{cy would
be some~hat altered in cases where the expenses incurred prio[ to
discovery of the error were not wasted for the wo~ to be done~
Ufth no objection, ~ayor Glennon referred the matter to the Public
l~lfare Committee with the statement that if, uDan the advice of
the City Attorney, the question can be resolved at staff level the
staff will proceed and, if not, the matter will be considered at
the next Council meeting.
~. John Smith suggested that the engineering staff investigate
the possibility that dislodging large stones by borln~ might
ultimately cause the street to sink.
Mr. Derrick asked how much time would be involved before a
decision was made and the ~fayor said that if the Council must
make the decision it ~.~uld be April 3 and othem~ise would
probably be when the Committee has had an opportunity to review
the matter. r~r. Derrick was invited to remain after the meetin~
and check with the City Attorney when he has checked the city
code relative to this point.
(2) }[ayor Glennon acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Planning
Commission Chairman ~rton; }~s. Eunice Stark and ~J~r. Lewis,
representing the.~od Government Group; and Nr. Jerry Smith,
candidate for c~ty councilman.
-7-
SUMI4ARY OF COUMCIL MINUTES -,'{arch 20~ 1968
VIII ADJOURNMENT
It ~as moved by Councilman Robbins, seconded by Councilman Burrv, and
unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 P. M.
Respectfully submitted~
J. R. HUFF, CITY CLEPU(
-8-