Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-01-1968 City Council Minutes SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL SUMMARY OF MINUTES TIME: WedneSday, May 1, 1968 -- 7:30 P~ M. PLACE: . Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue~ Saratoga, Califorrj" TYPE: Regular Meeting I ORGANIZATION Mayor Glennon called the meeting to order at 7:35 P. M. A. ROLL CALL .'. ~ ~ Present: Councilmen Glennon, Hartman, Tyler, Robbins, Smith Absent: None B. .MINUTES Councilman Robbins moved to waive the reading and approve the minutes of both the April 16, 1968 special meeting and the April 17, 1968 regular Council 'I~nutes meeting, as written. CoUncilman Hartman seconded the motion, which carried. with Mayor CloDnon abstaining from voting with regard to the April 17 minutes. Councilman Robbins questioned the designation.of 1/2 acre zoning as low density and Mr..Huff explained that acre zoning is referred to as very low density Eer ~u~oses of distinction. n AND C TS O C A. RAY E. BIEBER - MINIMUM ACCESS ROAD RE-IMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT Mr. Huff said that Mr, Bieber had, several meetings ago, appealed' to the Council Bleber for modification of a conditiqn of building site approval Which would have Pike Rd, required approximately 2200" of minimum access road construction on Pike Road. Retmb, The Council approved modification to permit Mr. Bieber to limit the construction to the improvements which .could be provided for $4000 with the understanding that Mr, Bieber would enter into a reimbursement agreement in which he would agree to reimburse future applicants to the extent his pro rata share of the minimum access street construction exceeds $4000., and in which the City would agree to require future applicants to reimburse him to the extent the$4000. ~ .~ exceeds his pro rata share of construction. Mr~ Huff reported that the reimburse- ment agreement had been executed by Mr. Bieber and he recommended that the Mayor · be authorized to execute the agreement. It was moved by Councilman Hartman, seconded by Councilman Robbins, and carried unanimously to authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. B. R/W ACQUISITION AGREEMENTS - FRUITVALE-ALLENDALE PROJECT The City Clerk reported that agreements had been executed by the following R/W persons for the sale of right-of way for the construction of street improvements Fruttvaleon Fruitvale and Allendale Avenues: (1) Ralph C. Costelio, owner of Parcel No. 3, Alandale for a total amount of $3,300, (the appraised value) (2) Leland R. and Harriet W. Fry, owners of a parcel on the north side of Allendale, granted in consid- eration of the city: a) agreeing to construct Allendale Avenue street lm- ~-.~ provements adjacent to the property; b) bearing the cost of underground utility conversion from the new right-of-way to the house; and c) installing sanitary .' sewer lateral to property line, subject to reimbursement by o~raer upon con- nection to said lateral. Additionally, Mr. Huff reported that a right of entry to the West Valley Baptist Church property had been received and the City Attorney stated that it was a standard type of right of entry agreement. Council- man Hartman asked how far the city was from an agreement with the Church for the purchase of the right-of-way and Mr, Huff stated that, although agreement appeared iminent the point of construction was immediate and right of entry needed now. It was moved. by Councilman Robbins, seconded by Councilman Hartman, and carried unamiously to authorize the Mayor to execute the Right-of-Entry agreement with the West Valley Baptist Church, and to authorize the _.. -1- 8UMI~Y 0P COUNCIL MINUTgS - May 1, 1968 execution of agreements with Ralph C, Costello and'Leland' R. and Harriet W. Fry, as presented. C. AGREEMENT FOR R/14 APPRAISAL AND NEGOTIATION - Verde Vista Lane Mr. Huff reported that a proposal had been received from Walter J. D0yle Verde and Associates to appraise the parcels within the Verde Vista Assessment Vista District for $1000. and to complete the acquisition of the parcels for an A raisaladditional cost of $800. if the city wishes him to negotiate the acquisition. PP Doyle Mr. Huff recommended that Mr. Doyle be authorized to appraise the property but that no action be taken on the proposal for acquisition services at this time. It was moved by Councilman Tyler, seconded by Councilman Smith, and carried unanimously to authorize Walter J. Doyle & Associates to prepare an appraisal report on the Verde Vista Assessment District parcels at the prices quoted. Ill PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. MV-i4 The City Clerk reported tha~ the Division of Highways reconnnended that a stop Step Sig~sign be installed on Manor Drive at its intersection with llighway 85 and ManOr Dr.that the Chief of Police and Department of Public W,orks concur with the rec- Hwy 85 ommendatio~. It was moved by Councilman Hartman, seconded by Councilman Robbins, and carried unanimously to adopt Resolutidn No. MV-14, establishing stop intersection at Manor Drive and Highxqay 851 B~ RESOLUTION NO. SDX-1318-23 The Dirct0r of Public Works reported that a small portion of a retaining wall Abandon- had inadvertently been constructed within a slope easement on Lot 23 of Tract Slope . 1318. The property o~mer is unable to obtain clear title because of this Esmt. construction and has asked that the city abandon that portion of the easement. Mr. Shook stated that the retaining wall effectively protects the slope so that the easement becomes.unnecessary in this case and he recon~nended that the request be granted. It was moved by Councilman .Robbins, seconded by Councilman Smith~ and carried unanimously to adopt .Resolution No. SDX-1318-23, abandoning portion of slope easement in Tract 1318.. IV SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES AND ZONING REQUESTS A, SDR -721 - RAY E. BIEBER Mr. Huff explained that Mr. Bieber had entered into a reimbusement agreement SDR 72~ for the construction of Pi~e Road minimum access road improvements and B~ber requests final building site approval. Mr. Huff recommended that approval be granted subject to FLr.~Bieber's entering into an agreement to complete certain improvements, said agreement to be secured by a $2,000. bond. It was moved by Councilman Hartman, seconded by Councilman Tyler, and unanimously carried to adopt Resolution No. SDR-721-1, granting conditional final site approval for SDR-?21. B. SDR-745 .-JENS HUNDSEID SDR 745 It was reported that Mr. Hundseid ~qas granted tentative building site approval Hundseid at the last Planning Commission meeting, and that all conditions of tentative approval had been met. It was moved by Councilman Tyler, seconded by Council- men Hartman, and carried unaniamously to adopt Resolution No. SDR-745-1, grant- ing final building site approval to Jens Hundseid for one lot at the corner of E1 Camino Grande and Saratoga-Los Gatos Road. C. C-86 - NEIL K. CHASE The City Clerk stated that the new owner, Peck Metrick, had requested an Request extension of the conditional rezoning of property located on Saratoga Avenue for adjacent to the Saratogan and that the Planning Commission had recommended Extension approval of an extension subject to submission of site plans and ~levations Ord. within 60 days of the Planning Commissions' April 10, 1968 recommendation. NS3-ZC-29 SUltRY OF COUNCIL MINUTe3 - MAY 1, 1968 The City Attorney asked for clarification of the Planning Co~nission's intent and the Planning Director reported that the Commission felt that they would not normally recommend extension but that, because 'of the new o~mer's repu- tatlon as a local developer of good performance, they would recommend granting an extension if the new o~rner proved his sincerity by submitting plans and elevations acceptable ~o the Planning Commission prior to June 10, 1968. After considerable discussion, it was moved by Councilman Tyler to grant an extension of Ordinance NS-3-ZC-29 for one year fromApril 10, 1968, provided acceptable site plans and elevations are presented and approved by the Planning Connnission prior to June 10, 1968. Councilman Hartman seconded the motion which carried unanimously with the stated understanding that in the event the required plans are not filed prior to June 10 the request for extension would be considered denied. D. A-156 - SARATOGA UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH Mr. Huff reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval of a A-156 two year extension of the Design Review Agreement for the completion of Request parking construction for the Saratoga United Presbyterian Church. It was for moved by Councilman Tyler, seconded by Councilman Robbins, and carried Extensionunanimously to grant an extension of two years from the expiration date of ~rch Design Review Agreement No. A-156. Parking V PUBLIC ~HEARINGS A. GENERAL PLAN, 1968 Mr.iHuff stated that the Planning Commission had reported back to the Council General on two items referred to them at the last meeting and that Planning Consultant,' Plan Lawrence Livingston, was present to expand on and explain any part of the 1968 Hearings General Plan on which the COuncil might have a question. He stated that all correspondence received since the last meeting had been included in the Councilmen's files. Mayor Glennon declared the Public Heari~ re-opened at 8.10 P. M. and the City Clerk read the revised report from the Planning Commission dated 25 April 1968, in which the Planning Commission responded to theCouncil~s request for comments relative to park proposals and the Herriman Avenue Extension. Briefly, the Planning Commission recommended that the plan line designated as Sketch No. 2 be selected for Herriman Avenue extension. The plan line would connect Herriman Avenue at Allendale north of the school property rather than south, as raconmended byLivingston and Blayney. The Planning Commission report indicated that this selection would be compatible with the co~nunity park concept sho~rn on the revised General Plan submitted to the Planning Commission by the Planning Consultant and would not require the traffic signalization that the Commission felt would beneeded if the connection were to be made to the south of the school. Mayor Glennon then introduced Mr. Lawrence Livingston and explained that Mr. Livingston's firm of Planning Consultants had prepared the original 1960 General Plan for the city and that he had acted on a consultant basis for the city since shortly after incorporation and had been authorized to begin work on a complete revim~ and revision of the General Plan about 13 months ago. The Mayor asked Mr. Livingston to comment on the PlanningCommission rec- ommendation that Herriman Avenue be extended to connect with Fruitvale on the north side of Redwood School adjacent to the Civic Center. Mr. LivingSton indicated the location recommended by the Planning Con~uission and stated that this connection, if approved by the Council, would be all right except that it would preclude the possibility of using a portion of the creek bank as a possible park site or connection to an odd shaped park. In reply to a {uestion from Councilman Robbins regarding use of the alternate connection of intersecting Fruitvale south of the school, Mr. Livingston said that it was the opinion of the Planning Commission that the southerly intersection would create too many T-intersections in the area but that the Consultants had recommended the connection to the south and did not feel that OP COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY' 1, 1968 the volume of traffic on HerrimanAvenue extended would be suffi~ien~ to cause a problem. Councilman Hartman questioned the projected traffic situation if Herrim~n AveSue were extended to'the sduth of the school or to the north to connect wit.h a slightly realigued Allendale Avenue as a thorough intersection. Mr. Livingston'emphasiZed thst the 1990 traffic Dro~ectionS,do not indicate an intolerable traffic situation'because of the T-intersection and that no future traffic signalization could be wartshred by these projections. He stated that traffic would not be materially affected if Herriman AVenue connected at one or the other points because the destinations of traffic on HerrimanAvenue would not be significantly changed. The big generator, he said, would be the college and the direction of the traffic generated by the college would have little effect on the traffic generated on Herriman. Mayor GlennO~ than invited the public to speak on any phase of the General Plan and announced that three continued public hearings had been held be- fore the Planning Con~nission prior ~o the Commission's submission of a report and recommendation to the City Council and that this was the third continued public hearing before the City Council. Dr. Warren Sturla expressed concern, on behalf of the Youth Center, Inc. re- garding the HerrimRn Avenue extension recommended by the Planning Connnission. He asked consideration of the Council to approve the extension of Herriman Avenue to the south of'the school property in order to preserve the Civic Center, Youth Centers park complex proposed. Mr. Ronald Zaitz asked what traffic studies had been made of the HerrimanI Avenue traffic~ He said that he was concerned with the safety of children and that traffic was almost intolerable on H~rriman now. and he feared that a more serious problem would result from opening the street up to through, fast traffic. He was advised that both Wilbur Smith & Associates and the Planning Con- sultants had recommended that Herrima~ Avenue be extended to relieve an Othenqise impossible traffic load at the intersection of Fruitvale and Saratoga Avenues. Mr. B. T. Caleb, 20437 Seagull Way, appealed to the Council to designate his property in the Azule area adjacent to the railroad tracks as multiple family residential zoning. He reviewed the history of the area since he was granted approval by the County for construction of the Azule subdivision. Arthat time, he said, multiple zoning was considered to be the best use for the area but that he had left the area immediately adjacent to the tracks undeveloped at the request of the County planners. Since that time the area deteriorated Mr. Galeb indicated, and he wished to clean up but he asked that the city cooperate by placing the area on the General Plan for apartment use, with the details of development to be worked out later. Mayor Glennon advised Mr. Gateb that when this matter was brought to the Council's attention several weeks ago, Mr. Galeb's representatives were told that although the Council agreed that something must be done to further improve the area, the proposJl had been received so late that it would not be practicable to hold up the General Plan proceedings to study the proposal. Councilman Herman asked whether the matter had been presented to the Planning Commission at the time of their public hearing and Mr. Caleb stated that he had wished to discuss it with the Planning Commission but that the Con~nission had~ already sent its recommendation to the Council and felt that his proposal was too late for their consideration. He did, Fir. Galeb, added, discuss the proposal with a Planning Conmission sub=committee who felt that he should present it to the Council, who could in turn refer it back to the Planning Con~nission. Harold Beaudoin, Pierce Road, who stated that he was speaking as a private citizen with no business interest in Mr. Galeb's proposal, urged approval of Mr. Galeb's request. He said that he had discussed with Mr. Caleb the ~atogn C!ty Council Minutes - May 1,' 1968 possibility of development that would be compatible with the area and would be economically feasible and that it was his feeling that a high standard apartment development would be the best use for the property. He stated that he thought the situation warranted further study even if it delayed the General Plan adoption. ~{ayor Glennon pointed out that the city had been cooperative in trying to help improve the Azule area'which had been a problem since incorporation. He noted that the city had participated in the cost of street improvements~ had zoned part of the area for co?anercial usa and had encouraged any efforts on behalf of the residents to improve the area. However~ he reiterated, he did not feel that further delay of the General Plan was indicated. He reviewed, again, the work which the citizens committee, Planning Consultant, Staff, Planning Commission and City C~mcil had done to develop the present -plan and observed that the plan might never be adopted if the Council delayed the procadure every time someone presented a new proposal. Mr. Fryer, 14G41 Saratoga Hills Road, questioned the increase in density of a parcel in the Saratoga Hills Road areq and asked why the area had been left out of the zoning line which would have been consistent with p~esent zoning. Mr~ Livingston stated thai ~r. Fryer's letter in the fegar~ had been Sen~ to him alon~ ~ith other correspo~denc~ received r~iative to the General Plan and that the General Pla~ line did not necessarily follo~ the present line Of zoning in all ~ases because it was initially of a g~neral nature and did not attempt to draw as specific lines as does the zoning ordinance. Th~ line presently follows an exist- Ing street, Mr. Livingston said~ and was not intended to include or exclude any particular property. Streets, topcgraphy, and other ground conditions were used as a basis for determining how a line was drawn on the General Plan map, he added. He said that the line could easily be changed if the Council so desired but that if the matter had not been considered by the Planning Commission it would involve some time to refer it back for recommendation. Mr. Walker reported that the question had been brough~ to the Planning Commission's attention but they had apparently felt it was of insufficient import for comment in their report. Dr. Isaac Abrams, 13024 Saratoga Avenue, asked permission to submit a tentative plan for Quito Shopping Center expansion and ~evelopment which he had discussed briefly at a previous hearing. He stated that it was his understanding that the Planning Comn~ission had recommended that the proposal warranted further study and that he felt that some encouragement of the expansion would facilitate development which would benefit the city. Dr. Abrams displayed sketches which roughly showed an expansion of existing co_-anercial use to connect with the prof~s~onal-admiDistrative zoning On Saratoga Avenue. He explained that he visualized development of a garden mall effect for the 7 1/2 acres adjacent to the Quito shopping center. He emphasized that the present o~ners of the property have no interest in improving or expanding the shopping area and that he feels that upgrading the area would be economically feasible and of benefit to the area and to the entire city. He urged that the defiuite line designating P-A zoning to the limits of exiszing commercial zoning be broken to indicate future commercial zone extension in the direction of the P-A area. This,. he indicated, would be sufficient evidence of the city's interest to aid him in his efforts to convince the ownars that the project would be ~orthwhile. Sam Hernandez commented~ with respect to ~¢r. Ga!eb's request, that although he agreed that the plan should not be held up at this time he did feel that the city should do everything possible to aid Mr. Galeb in cleaning up the area~ especially as Mr. Galeb had proposed to upgrade the property at his o~n expense and not under governmental subsidy. ~r. %~ernandez questioned Mr. Gateb having been sent from committee to comnittee with his proposal and the Mayor stated that Mr. Galeb had stated only that he had presented his plan to a sub-committee after the Planning Commission had completed its public hearing and had acted on its recommendation to the Council for General Plan revision. -5- S~_RATOGA CITY COUNCIL ~'II~fES - May 1, 1968 Mrs. J, J. Sithey spoke in support of Dr. Abram's proposal and stated that she felt the Quite area upgrading would be of benefit to the entire city. Bill Hawkings objected to the !lerriman Avenue extension and stated that a number of persons had appeared at the Planning Commission hearings and had been assured that the proposed extension was a closedissue because of the pressure from the protestants, Subseqnently= he stated, the School Board pressured the Council who sent the matter back to the Planning Commission. At the Planning Commission meeting when the matter was discusse~,I Mr. Ha~ykings said, the Commission refused to recognize the people who wished to comment. Mr. Hawkings stated that he felt that the protestants had convinced the Planning Commission that there was no need for the extension and he asked what logical reason could be given for extending Herriman Avenue at all. Mayor Glennon advised Mr. Hawkings that the requirement exists because the city must t~{e the steps recommended by traffic experts to alleviate the intclerable projected traffic situation that would o~herwise exist at the Fruitvale-Saratoga Avenue intersection when the Junior college campus opens. He pointed out that the city had made every effort to prevent the campus from locating at the present site but that failing in t~qse efforts, itwas now necessary to Plan for the street improvements that would accommodate the traffic. Lawrence Livingston read a portion of his letter of March 2~ in which he had explained the necessity for prohibiting left hand turns f~om Fruitvale Avanue onto Saratoga Avenue so that a two phase signai could handle the peak hour traffic projected far this intersection. Extension of Herriman Avenue to Fruitvale Avenue would, he added, relieve the traffic at the Saratoga-Fruitvale intersection to the extent that a two-phase signal could be used, He pointed out that if ~er ima were .~ r n not exteaded a three phase signal would be naededto permit left turns onto Saratoga Av~nu~ and that if the traffic projections were even 10% off, even the three phase signal would not be sufficient to han~te the traffic at this inter- section, ~r, l!awkings objected that the cost of a three phase signal could not be compared to the cost of acquiring land and destroying trees for an exten- sion of Herriman Avenue and that the students for the Junior College campus would not be coming from his area an~.~ay so he did not see ~.yhy Herriman Avenue should be extended. Mr, Livingston repeated the traffic flow move- ments projected for 1990 for Saratoga and Fruitvale Avenues and explained again that the 170 movements projected for the peak volume on Herriman Avenue would provide just the relief which would b~ nece~sa~'y t~ m~ke th~ Saratoga-Fruitva!e intersection function. Mayor Glennon stated that a review of the Wilbur Smith study of traffic needs~ augmented by the.opinion of the best consultant the city coule find, had resulted in the plan having been proposed in accordance with the expert's studies. Mr~ Hawkin~s said that the objections he and his neighbors had presented were based on their desire to maintain a quiet Country atmosphere ~nd that he felt there must be some ulterior motive if the city goes ahead with no logical explanation on a plan that the residents protested. Charlotte Monroe stated that she disagreed with Mr. Hawkin~s and she asked why the extension of Herrim~n Avenue could not be planned to connect south of the school, away from the youth center. Mr. Livingston replied that it could and that had been his recon~nendation. Marge Carlsen asked why the lot o~,med by ~{r. Day on Portos Drive was needed if the Gardiner park area=was proposed for a playground. She also questioned what type development oVer the next !6 years could cost $16,000. and' stated that she had a petition signed by 51 persons asking that the lot be excluded from the General Plan. -6- SUi,~,t~RY O1~ COUNCIL MINUTES -. May 1, 1968 Mr. Livingston cxplained that the city presently has right of x~ay over property adjacent to the perk but that it was felt that in order to insure the best use and provide some street frontage for accessibility and security reasons the street frontage should be acquired. The $16~000j he stated, was the anticipated cost of play equipment~ landscaping and maintenance. Mrs. 3ane I(nrst, Old Tree I,layJ commented that she liked the Country atmosplm~e and abhorred any change. She said that although she knew the construction of the junior college cmnpus created problems she saw no reason for going further and planning a park behind the youth center. She asked how this t~}e of thing got proposed in the first place and who made the proposals~ Mayor Glennon expressed his amazement that any resident who had not recently moved to the a~'ea could have been una~,are of the General Plan studies. He explained in detail the entire procedure whereby the city had~ by using almost all the 8tate funds available to the city during the first year after incorporation~ hired the best Plannin~ Consultant it could find and be-~n the forn,al prooedure required by the S~ate for the development of a General Plane He stressed the ihnportance the cit~ attached to the adoption of a Genural Plan so that the people of the city would have security in planning their future. The Mayor explained the procedure~ step by step~ uhich ~es~lted in the 1960 adoption of a General Plan,' subsequene:revisions~ and the appointment of a large c{tizens coE~nittee in the spring of 1967 which studied various phases of the 1960 plan and recommended revisions. These revisions we~'e, for the mOSt part, he continued, refleeted by the presen~ plan and he, repeate~ that this wAS the sixth public hadring to be held on the proposed revision and that wide-spread publicit~ had acc~mpanied each step of the procedure. M~s. Kurst asked where sh~ migh~ obtain information relative to the General' Plan and Mr. Walker said that he could and wodld provide her with ba~k- ground material. Dale McIntyre, Woodside Dzive asked whether or not people would have the opportunity to complain in rebuttal to any phase of the general plan if it were to be adopted as recommended and was advised that they would, McIntyre explained that residents in the Brookview area were concerned about a proposal that Brookglen Drive be designated as a collector street and were also concerned that the improvement of Prospect Road had not been afforded greater priority. tie stated that Prospect Road was already a source of concern from a safety standpoint. Mr. McIntyre commented that he was deeply appreciative of the Council and the Plannin~ Commission and that he felt that the Sheriff's Department did an excellent job but that the traffic situation on Prospect Road was difficult to control at this point. Mayor Glennon assured ~Ir. ~IcIntyre that annual review of the Geueral Plan will continue and that if the plan should need updatin~ or revision in the future, it would be given careful consideration and chm~ged~ if necessary. Edward Vallerga voiced his concern that the property presently used by Lyngso I~rsery at the north-west comer of Saratoga-Sunnyyale Road and ~anor Drive had been designed on the 196~ General Plan as residential instead of the present zoning for nursery use. He asked that the area retain its existing use. Mr. Livingston commented that thib parcel, like the one mentioned by Mr. Fryer, had not been included ~ith the V-C designa- tion north of the railroad tracks as the tracks had been used as a logical boundary and the line had not been drawn to include s~ecific parcels. The Mayor assured Mr. Vallerga that there was no intention to change the zoning of his property and that it had been included in the residential zone only because of the convenience of showing a logical boundary on the ~k~ll scale general type of map. Mr. Hawklngs stated that he wished to clarify his statement that some ulterior motive existed with respect to Herriman Avenue extension and stated that he had meant that pressure had been brought to bear by the school hoard. }qayor Glennon ackho~-yledged the explanation and commented that although the city's relationship ~,~th the Saratoga School Board is better than it is with most school district boards, the city has never agreed with any school board proposal unless it reflected the city's policy. -~- SUMMARY OF COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 1, 1968 Mr. Livingston eXplained that the procedure when all present who wished to address the Council have done so would be for the Council to close the public hearing, act on the Planning Commission recommendation and adopt the resolution app~oving the 1968 General Plan, if it so wishes~ There being no one else present who responded to the Mayor's invitation to speak regarding the 1968 General Plan, it was mo'~ed by Councilman Robbins, seconded by Councilman Tyler, and un~.nimously carried to close the public hearing at 10.10 P. M. Recess: 10.10 P. ~. Reconvened: 10:30 P. M. Mayor Glennon stated that the Council must now decide whether to adopt the General Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission or whether to hold it in abeyance or adopt it with modifications. Councilman Robbins m~u~foned several items which he wished to verify as having been clarified and suggested that certain aspects of the plan be modified. He reviewed the items which the Council bad referred back to the Planning Commission and the revised report of the Commission to those items. He asked for further Council discussion with respect to the Planning Commission revised recommendation regarding the extension of Herriman Avenue. By way!of clarifying Councilman Robbins' question re- garding the proposed width of Russell Lane, FIr. Livingston stated that the General Plan would simply show the street as a collector street and the details of width would no~ 5e shown in the plano Councilman Robbins, after verifying the recommendation o~ the Planning Commission in the revised reports dated April 12 and April 25, 1968, said that he thought the Council would take the attitude that it opposes street ~idening or extensionu until they a~e actually needed bu~ that good planning neCesSitates that~ future improvemen~ be ~hown on the plan ~ow. It was his opinion that Substantial need had be~n demonstrated ~or the possible extension of Herriman Avenue and that it was his further opinion that the donnection would best be made to the south of the school property at such time that it becomes necessary to construct the extension. This a!igrm~ent, he indicated, would provide more flexibility for the Civic Center-Youth Center-Central Park planS. Councilman Hartman concurred and added that he felt les~ creek damage would result from the southerly connection and would be more compatible with the proposed park development. Councilman Smith commented that Mr. Livingston was the second expert who had recommended the south route of the connection and that he felt the council should go along with these two experts. Councilman Robbins stated that he was not personally satisfied with the priority of the capital improvement plan submitted by Livingston and Blayney and that he thought it should be studied further with r~gard to timing. Mr. Livingston said that he felt it his duty to point out that when the revision of the General Plan was originally proposed his firm had contracted to prepare a detailed improvement program as part and parcel of the plan~ primarily because they felt that the 1960 plan lacked a down to earth quality in terms of dollars and stagingproposed improvements in realistic terms which the city could afford. In this regard, he added~ he had worked cIosely with the city staff for some months to insure that the proposals Would be acceptable and he felt it wou~.d be unfortunate to weaken the plan by eliminating these items from it~ These elements, he said, are a valuable part of ~he p~an and can and should be changed periodically if review indicated the need for escalating or dimishing a priority, As an example of his viewpoint, Councilman Robbins cited his disagreement that park land and improvement be part of a Single bond issue or that street development not required immediately because of the college campus should be given the priority schedule the plan g~ves it. Mro Livingston state~ that the report di~ not preclude financing by more than one bond issue although it did use the cost of a bond issue as a means of Showing total cost. The street improvement priorities, ~. SUMMARY OF MINUTES - May 1, 1968 Mr. Livingston said~ were based on various factors indicating relatively priority, with tile exception of the junion college street construction and the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rcad which was given a high priority as a technique of up-grading that area. Projections may be changed when needed, he indicated, but if the Council disagrees with the technique of the schedule then he stated that it should be changed now. Councilman Robbfns said that the Prospect Road improvement and bridge was one of the items which should have a greater priority and that his primary point was that if sUfficientr reason should be advance for changing the time schedule then he wahted ~he ~oundil to be free to do so without acting con- trary to the Conoral Plan. Councilman Hartman did not agr~e ~ha~ ~he Schedule as listed ~as necessarily undersilable and it was his opinion that they were not listed so formally that the sequence could not be reviewed and changed periddically. He also expressed approval of the central park proposal which would include creek property and would, he felt, be pretty and ~ork in well with the youth center and school use° The Council reviewed the sketches for a central park and P~. Livingston agreed with them that the sketch drawn by Planning Director Stanley Walker would seem more usuable and would best serve the entire city. Councilman Hartman snggested that the recommendation that the city inmediately embark on an annexation program of lands to the south and west of the present city limits in order to gain adequate control over the de- velopment of these lands was a moot point in view of the protection which could be afforded through the Local Agency Form2uion Commission° The Mayor agreed that many more avenues of control are now open to the city for pre- planning undeveloped areas outside the city li~itso Councilalan Smith suggested that if the word "immediate"were eliminated frem tha Planning Commission recommendation the recommendation relative to pre-zoning com- patible wi~h Saratoga's go~!s would, be in line with the Council's thinking. Councilman Tyler stated that he did not agree that the city might ultimately wish to annex if hillside development could be controlled any c~her way. Mr. Livingston conmented that annexation of hill area is an extremely expensive alternative to pressuring the County to have it adequately developed and protected. If the city could not get adequete protection through County action, then Mr. Livingston recommended that a cost study of possible annexation be conducted but he warned that it would be a very expensive endeavor. Mayor Glennon explained to Councilman Smith the Council's past policy rela- tive to annexation and the reasons why the original General Plan did not encourage annexation. After discussion between the Co~n~cil and staff, the Council approved changing the wording of the Planning Com~nission recommendation relative to annexation policy to indicate that annexation would be considered only if efforts to have the areas pre-zoned compatibly were not successful. The Council then discussed .the Planning Conmission recommendation that the General Plan be modified to s how the inclusion of theWestbrook Area within the City Limits and there was some disagreement as to the exact intent of theCouncil at the time of action on the informal request of Westbrook resi- dents for annexation. Councilman Robbins stated that it was his under- standing that the Council had made a policy decision that it would include Westbrook on the General Plan but would take no action on the annexation request until the road problem was solved. Councilman Tyler recalled that the committee had recommended denial of the request, without prejudice, ~d that this wording h~d been chauged at the Council level, at the re- quest of Westbrook representatives, but that it was his understanding that it was not to be included in the General Plan because the Council did not wish to commit future councils. -9- ~YO~MI~D~ - ~y l, 1968 Hr. Livingston stated that any statement on this subject could be in- cluded in the General Plan report but that it would not be possible at th~ time to extend the map to include the gestbrook area if the Council wishes it. After further discussion of the Councilts intent and the inconclusive- hess of the minutes of Council action relating to the question, the Mayor suggested that any other remaining phases of the plan be discussed and the ~estbrook question considered separately~ if necessary, General Councilman Hartman said that he had only one other point and it was h~s..~. Plan opinion that the Galeb and Quito property would not be precluded from 1968 applying to the Planning Con~nission with proposals for development not indicated on the General Plan if they so desired and he therefore did not feel that the plan should be changed as requested. Councilman Smith concurred with this suggestion, and Councilman Hartman commented that he did not believe there were any other points of dis- agreement with the Plannin~ Commission recommendations. Councilman Hartman then moved that Item 7-B, of the General Plan Revision No. lreport~ dated April 12, 1968, be deleted from the General Plan. Councilman Tyler seconded the motion which carried by the' following votes: AYES: Councilman Tyler, Hartman~ Glennon: NOES: Councilmen Robbins and Smith. ~t was moved by Councilman Robbins, Seconded by Councilman Smith~ and carried unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 431 adopting the General Plan · 1968s for theCity of. Saratoga, with the modifications recommended by the Planning Commission in its reports dated April 8, 1968, and of April 1968~ subject to the following changes: (1) Relocation of Herriman Avenue extension to intersect Fruitvale Avenue south of Redwood School. (2) Modification of the Community park to consist of approximately 7 acres at the Saratoga-Avenue-Pruitvale Avenue intersection connected by a corrido~ along ~ildcat Creek with additional park area adjacent to Redwood School a~ the future K-6 school adjacent to Red~ood School which will provide a park development compatible with the adjoining school and Youth Center facilities. (3} Revision of the proposed statement of annexation to read as follows: "It is recommended that the city embark on an annex- ation program of lands to the south and west of the present city limits in Order to gain adequate control over the development of these lands un- less the city can enter into agreements with the county and adjoining jurisdictions to prezone these lands into a zonin~ compatible with the low density single family residential goals of Saratoga." (4) Deletion of reference to annexation of ~estbrook., B. SARATOGA UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT ~0. 1 The City Clerk reported that this was the time and place set for public hearing on the establishment of Saratoga Underground Utility District No. 1 on Allendale Avenue from Fruitvale Avenue to Portos Drive and the East Saratoga side of Fruitvale Avenue between Saratoga Avenue and San Marcos Road. Underground He stated that notices had been published and mailed according to lmg Utility and that no written communications had been received with respect to this District matter. Mayor Glennon declared the public hearing opened at 11:36 P. M. No.. I and asked if anyone present wished to address the Council regarding the pro- posed establishment of the underground utility district. No one responded and it was moved by Councilman Hartman, seconded by Councilman Robbins, and unanimously carried to close the public hearing at 11.37 p. M. It was moved by Councilman Tyler, seconded by Councilman Hartman, and carried unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 431, establishing Saratoga Underground Utility District No. 1. VX ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. PL~YO~ I.C.C. Mayor Glennon announced that the Inter-City' Council would meet tomorrow Meeting SlIMMARY OF MINUTES May i, 1968 evening at Vahl's restaurant in Alviso and that the program had been planned I.C.C. in honor of the City of Alviso. He stated that the renowned .California historian, Clyde Arbuckle, would speak regarding Alviso's history prior to its recent annexation to the city of San Jose. B. FINANCE, (1) Mr. Huff commented that the final payment for Hakone Cardens acquisition was Bills included on the list of disbursements submitted for approval. It was moved by Councilman Robbins, seconded by Councilman Smith, and carried unanimously to approve the list of disbursements dated May 1, 1968 and authorize that warrants ~e drm,~ in payment for a total amount of $59,561.69. (2) Mr. Huff reported that the third quarter budget report was bein~ modified Budget to reflect some distributions that had not been on the original report and Report that it would be delayed to another meeting. C. COUNCIL COMMITTEES AND REPORTS (1) Councilman Tyler reported that the Public Welfare Committee had intended to Traffic- report regarding Allendale Avenue traffic studies, but would like to delay Allendale the report at the request of the petitioners. With no objection, Mayor Avenue Glennon ordered the matter deferred as requested. (2) Councilman Tyler ~eported that the Policy Committee had several recommend- Parks ations to submit ~egarding the P~rks and Recreation Commission. Briefly, ~ Rec- the. Committee reco~mnended that t~e Commission be an advisory one, similar r~ation to the Planning Comm{ssion, ~nich would advise the City Council on all Conunissionmatter~ pertaining to parks and recreation, and that it be composed of seven members representing the professions of 1, Landscape Architect: 2, Recreation~ 3, Police: 4, Finance; 5, Engineering: 6, Horticulture; and 7, school recreatic!~!~ It was further recoxcmendedthat the Commission be appointed for two year overlapping terms with three initial appointees to serve one year a'nd four to serve t~.xo years and that the Commission be advisory only to render advice and recommendations on all parks and recreation matters and assist in the formulation and application of aesthetic standards applicable to private de- velopment and development by other public agencies in the city. Councilman Robbins asked what was needed to implement the establishment of the Commission and the City Attorney advised that the Council could either appoint a Comm~ssion as provided by the California Government. Code, with the powers created by that Code or the Council could create its own commission and de~gate whatever po~,xers and duties it wishes. Creation of it's o~n commission, Mac. Johnston stated, could be accom- plished by City Council resolution. With no objection, Mayor Glennon directed the City Attorney to draft a resolution creating a Saratoga Parks and Recreation Connnission on the basis recorc~ended by the Policy Committee for review and consideration of the Council. (3) Councilman Hartman commented briefly regarding an itsrim report, dated Wildwood May 1, 1968, relative to Wildwood Park Lake and asked that the Council Park La~e read the report at their leisured.pending submission of a final report from the Special Committee. (4) Councilmen Robbins reported that the Florence Crittenton Circle has re- quested modification of their contract to expand service to include the Habne serving of tea sandwiches and salads on a reservation basis for luncheons. Tea This request was submitted as a means of raising additional funds for the Garden charitable agency, he noted, and ~ould include the use of the main house expansion as well as the cook house or tea room. Councilman Robbins stated that of merchants in the village area had been contacted to sample the response service fo the serving of food at Hakone and that one of the persons contacted had no opposition to such service if it was restricted to the tea house and did not include the large house as a regular service. The only objection 11 "~ SUI~Y OF MINU~ES May 1, 1968 raised, he added, was'from a person who was opposed to competition from any source but who does not serve in groups by reservation. It was there- fore the recommendation of the'Management Committee that permission be granted for expansion of service to include advance reservation luncheons to he served in the form of light refreshments which would be catered and be served in the existing tea room. Mayor Glennon suggested that this type,request might best be held for consideration by the Parks and Recreatioh Commission when it has been appointed. Councilman Tyler questioned permitting reservation of the park by groups and Councilman Robbins replied that the luncheons would not prevent use of other parts of the park by other persons. During discussion Mr~ Huff stated that it was his recollection that the agreement permits the serving of tea and light refreshments. An unidentified woman from the audience stated that, as a housewife, she could see no competition to local merchants because of the contemplated service for, in her mind, a light luncheon to benefit a charitable organizatinn was in no way competing with the service of non-reservation lunches by local businessmen. Mayor I Glennon commented that he felt it had been established that the service requested weuld not be in competition with local food businesses. The City Attorney.suggested that, to avoid a precedent, should permission be granted, some reference'should be made to the effect that the serving of light refreshments would be allowed on a temporary basis only. It was moved by Councilman Robbins, seconded by Councilman Smith, md carried unanimously to approve the Florence Crittenton Circle's request temporarily to allow expansion of their current service throughout the summer months for the catering and ~serving of light food such as tea- sandwiches and small salads and that this permission be granted only with respect~to the tea house and not for the use of the main house, with the understanding that the Council's action is an expansion of the existing service permitted. D. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS (1).I. Mr. Shook reported that considerable dead wood had been discovered o 9 on the trees on Fruitvale Avenue in the process of clearing the area for the current improvement project and that Davey Tree Surgery has submitted a bid of $3,691. to trim these trees while the work is in progress.. This expense, he stated, would be for maintenance of the trees end would not therefore be a part of the assessment district cost. CouncilmanHartmsn asked if this area had not been included for tree trimming as part of the five year tree maintenance program and Mr. Huff advised that the program had not been actively pursued since Pied Piper, Inc. started a survey of trees on major thoroughfares end did not complete the survey. After brief discussion, Councilman Hartman suggested ahd the Mayor directed, with Council approval, that the matter be referred to Colin Jackson, the City'S Arborjar, for investigation and recommendation. E. CITY ADMINISTRATOR (I) The CounCil reviewed the 'Building site approval a~reement executed by the City and Pacific Gas &. Electric Company pertaining to the expansion of the P.G.& E. substation on Cox Lane. ~r. Huff exmleined that the agreement under which the City ~as presentin~ applicatiod to the Pubiic Utilities Commission for approval of a grade crossing, provided for the City to pay the cost of sienallzation. I The application was worded, to apply for a flashing light ~i~nal and ~ate unless the P.U.C. felt that the low volume of rail traffic did not ~ustify the ~ate. ~he ~ayor stated that he did not approve spendin~ city funds for signal- ization unless it was necessary from a'safet~ standpoint but that he SU~,RY OF CO~.!CIL ~INUTE$!- ~y 1, 1968 did not feel _that evidence sh~ed that the signal was warranted, Mr, Huff stated that it is expected that the crossing will be used by school children and Councilman Robbins sugRested that the,City.6_c~_inistratorbedirected to pursue the matter achieve a~qu~ee'safety at minimn cost,' The City Attome~ . ~ ed whether the P.G.& E. had requested ~ extension of the~.'' building site appr0val~.a~reemen~ which was dated T,lay 18~ 1966, with a~ expirati~ date of one yea[. Mr. Muff stated thathe did ho~ believe m~ extension had been requested but that he would check further and would also ask the railroad for an est~ate of si~alization cost. Mayor Glennon asked tha~'the City Administrator also research the'question of traffic and pedestri~ Vol~e~,exposure, etc. as a ~uide for Council determination Of the need for a sisal at that location, II~th no objection~ the Mayor directed T'[r. Huff to investi~ate the questions raised. (2) The City Ad~inistrator reported that the contractor for t~ Fruitvale-Allendale Avenue improvement project has quoted a cost of $2021. for the installation of a rustic handrail on the brid~e over lJtldcat Creek. ~r.' Huff Co~e~ted that the reck facing had been changed to match the city hall at no additional cost. ,It ~ms moved by Councilman Tyter~ seconded by Councilman Hartman ~nd carried, with Councilman Robbins dissenting, to approve Change Order ]~o, 1, o~i the FrUitvale Avenue project to authorize the additi~.al $2021. cost. A. I.~ITTEN (1) The CounCil received c~pies of a letter, dated April 29, 1968 from George S. Kocher~ requesting that the CounCil take what- ever action is neCeSSary to have the work on Viila~e Parking George DistriCt No. 1 c~!eted. councilman Tyler stated that he was Kocher re a partner with the kothers for the property referred to by Parki~ Dist, Kocher but that he wanted to observe that everyone in the district agrees that the district is on the basis of ~ certain n~ber of parklnS s~aces so it is a sizable pro~l'~hen you c~slder how many spaces are involved. The Parkin~ DistriCt assessment ~s based on providing these spaces. Co~imentS of property .o~mers ~d statements in bond prospectos were made on the basis of this aligneat which was originally received from Flood Control andit constitutes a problem. Mr. Huff suggested we' consult the bonding a=tomey regardin~ these spaces in relation to the district and assessment; or possibly await the settlement of the lake question. He stated his feelinE was that realignment of creek is like any other where Flood Control District requests right Of way from the first developer and then attests to get the rest of the right of way when the other develops. C~ty Attomey 3ohnston questi~ed if the realignment ~as based on any part of the lake ~d Councilman Tyler replied that he ghought that the Dlan had been developed about the s~e time the idea of a lake ~ up ~d at the s~e time Flood ContrOl c~e Up with the idea to use the lake as a debris basin. The lake was then referred to special ceittee for study and recom~ndation. ~[r. Kocher said that the October 27 letter to ~r. 7~uff that channel work was pemitted was in effect a Flood Control pemit, Mr. Huff replied "I-Ie Just go .t this letter today ~u~ the C~tttee met ~th Lloyd Fo~,~Ier on the lake business a week 6r so g Councilm~ Robbins' stated that it appeared that while the l~e I~as at one t~e ~ feesable and ~orkable idea and the parking district. was basedon this prem~se~ it am4 appears not to be -13- SUMMARY OF COUNCIL MIh"JTES - ~ay 1, 1968 feasible and it may be necessary to study the percolati0n:of the lake as suggested by flood control; also realiSrnnent of the creek mentioned no consideration for the city for shifting the creek boundaries from private property to city property~ Mr. Tyler said it was his feeling that there ~7as a legal question which would be the deciding factor. Mayor Glennon said that ~.fr0 Huff ~uld c]~ck with the bonding attorney regarding this point. It was agreed by Council and so ordered. Mr. Kocher stated that he was also interested in the legality of the condemnation of this land, The Mayor stated that the Council would do the follo~inS: Cheek out everyone's legal riyht in this~ the committee will continue to study the proposed lake and direct the staff to cdnfer with the bonding attorney. (2) The Council acknowledged a letter from Ben A. Ruf~ expressin~ Ben Ruf his appreciation of the Council's concern for the individual citizen's ~mnts and desires and esp~ciallyfor the consideration given the proposed Saratoga Avenue walkway. (3) Mrs. j. J. Sitnay, Presiden~ of the Saratoga Youth Center, Incl Mrs. Sithey appeared in support of her written,request dated April 30, 1968, re Saratoga for Council consideration of several matters pertainin~ to Youth Center pre~ant and future needs of t~e Youth Center. }Iayor Glennon co~Eaented that some of the questions would probably be within the scope of the Parks and Recreation Commtssion*s function. I~wever he subsisted that the Man'aSe- ment Committee discuss appropriate sections of the ~equ~st when they meet with Youth Center representatives next,Tuesday and he referred the balance of the letter to the Policy Committee. (4) Mr. ~uff reported that a letter from Ont~omery Hawks Offering Montgomery suggested street{nameS which he felt were suitable for Saratoga Hawks re had been referred to the S~reet Name Committee. Street names (5) The City Clerk read a letter from DaVid Bucholz, C~mander of l~est Valley Post 158 of the California American Le~ion~ request- ing support of Proposition 1 relative to a proposed $2,500,000~000 Veterans Bond Act to aid California Veterans in financing homes and farms on a small payment, lo%'-cost plan. Mr. Bucholz appeared personally and addressed the Council American briefly with respect to his request, Mayor Glennon advised Legion Mr. Bucholz that the Saratoga City Council, as a matter of re Prop. t long standin~ policy Zenerally takes no stand on any issues which are not directly related to City business. This policy, he explained, was based an the number of local issues in ~hich the Council has a vital interest and the lack of time to ad- equately, investi~ate outside matters. In this reRard, the mHyor a~des, the Council does not discriminate, but applies this policy to all matters which it determines to be outside its jurisdiction or sphere of influence, Keith Scullen, accompanying ~. Bucholz, also spoke in support of Proposition #1 but stated that he understood the Council's policy. Councilman Robbing expressed reFret that the American LeSion representatives had had to wait through such alone meeting for consideration of their request but concurred with the ~ayor in his adherence to the past Council policy in this regard. Mayor Glennon, with no objection, directed the record to indicate that it was the sense of the Council that no action be taken on Mr. Bucho!z'a request. The ~yor advised Mr. Bucholz that a letter explaining ~,~hy the Council to6k no action would be directed to him. -14- SU~IARY OF CO~CILMI, NUTES - May 1, 1968 B, ORAL (1) Idr. Don Feak who stated that he represented 140 citizens who Don Feak had signed a petition opposing the establishment of A.B.A.G. re ABAG as a regional governmental agency with taxing potmrs and as the agency authorized to receive and distribute Federal or regional funds, addressed the Councilo ~r. Feak stated t~t no action was expected at this meeting but that the petition had been submitted for Council review and action at a later meeting. (2) Councilman Smith c~muented that he had heard several comments throughout the evening that pertained to lack of comn~unication between the Counci.1 and the general public; a matter which had Publication also been brought to his .attention during his campaign for of Agenda office. He suggested that it would be helpful to the Council to encourage. more adequate news coverage and, perhaps, publica- tion of the Council agenda in local newspapers as a means of advising the general Dubllc of issues of general or localized interest. Mayor Glennon ~xplained that past Council. policy had always encouraged p~blic press coverage of issues in addition. to paid legal advertisements which are by law published Only in the once weekly Wednesday publication of the Saratoga News. A member of the audience suggested that some pressure might be exerted on the local publisher. The general council and staff reaction was to further try this avenue of con~munication. !~r. Dorothy Parker c~ented that it was her opiufon that t~e Los Gatos Times-Saratoga Observer had made an effective effort toward reporting Saratoga's newsworthy items. Mrs. Dorothy Parker volunteered to do all she could to publicize issues and stated, as a matter of interest, that Good Government Croup, Inc. membership had very nearly doubled during the past year, (3) At the request of the City Administrator the Mayor, with no Bohlman Rd. objection, referred the matter of Bohlman Rd. construction Project plans to the Public Welfare Committee. VIII ADJOURb~NT It was moved by Councilman Robbtns~ seconded by Councilman Smith and carried unanimously to adjourn at 1:08 A. ~I. after the Mayor acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Mrs. Dorothy Parker who served coffee provided by the Good Government Group. Respectfully submitted~ J, R. HUFf, CITY CLERK ~15-