Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-30-1969 City Council Minutes JOINT MEETING OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL, PLAlqNING COMMISSION, A~) PARKS COMMISSION Wednesday, July 30, 1969 TIME: WEDNESDAY, JULY 30, 1969 I. 7:30 P.M. PLACE: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE, SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA TYPE: JOINT STUDY SESSION TO DISCUSS PARKS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS I. ORGANIZATION Councilmen ~resent: Tyler, Robbins, Dwyer, Smith and Sanders Planning Commissioners present: Norton, BaconCrisp and Smith Park Commissioners present: Bridges, Adams, Aberle and Duffy II. PURPOSE AND DISCUSSION Mayor Tyler opened the meeting, noting that it was very informal, and that its sole purpose was the introduction of park proposals and presentation of plans prepared by consultant Eldon Beck. Mr. Beck stated the proposals contained in the draft copy distributed to officials present represented the findings based uponcareful research by his associates and himself. He recapitulated briefly the history of the study, and stated that it was basically an extension of General Plan recommendations for park sites and trails in Saratoga. All available sites had been inspected and categorized. Aesthetic considerations and conservation of the environment were primarily ~used in guiding the study. As population pressures increase, and people have more leisure time, the need for additional facilities will increase, although he doubted that the number of perle in Saratoga would increase at the some rate projected for Santa Clara Valley in overall numbers. In answer to a query from Dr. Norton, Mr..Beck stated that historically there was always a problem connected with use of local parks by nonresidents, as in the case of Los Gatos' Oak Meadow Park but that park locations indicated were for the most part, situated in Saratoga residential areas,.and were designed to meet local needs and use, being away from major traffic streets. Referring to the Draft Copy, he recapitulated the areas'and priorities recommended, and indicated that in general these were also acceptable to the Park Commission. Con~nenting on the gore between Saratoga and Fruitvale, Chairman Norton noted it would have to be acquired by the City at some future date, and the type of develop- ment would have to be considered. Mr. Norton added that speaking for himself, he would be reluctant to favor changes that might conflict'with guidelines set forth in the Saratoga General Plan of 1968. He also noted that the Planning Commission had conducted a lengthly series of hearings on the Plan, and that recommendations for revisions were being sent to the COuncil. There was also a question of balance between parks, open space and recreation allocation. Mr. Beck responded that he thought there would be no real conflict, that the City could possibly invest in p~rchase of seven or eight acres within the "gore", perhaps not on a first priority basis, but soon. Mr. Beck displayed a series of slides showing examples of landscape development, park uses and furnishings~available as .typical or similar parks in other California communities, including Palo Alto, Los Altos, Vallejo, Milpitas and Marin County. He also showed typical master plan layouts prepared for Las Positas Park, Santa Barbara, and Atherton. Such plans, plus three-dimensional models could be pre- pared as part of a "sales package" for voter study. -1~ J6int Study Session Minutes Page 2 In reference to a trails system as proposed in the General Plan and favored by the Park Commission, he noted that there might be some difficulty in ob- taining easements from private owners, especially along creeks, but that paths could be laid out for the pedestrians and/or cyclists along public streets and public utility easements. Chairman Norton addressed the Council on the subject of possible financing, stating that this would come up as a natural part of any public hearings on the proposals, and that although money was the business of the Council, he would appreciate receiving some guidelines in re dollars possible, and also about political considerations. Mayor Tyler said that one possibility that might open up relative to financing would be adoption of a new ordinance relative to dedication of common green area; that the ordinance was being prepared for Commission study; if it proved feasible, the City might obtain major help for initial financing of city parks. Mr. Norton responded that it was an extremely complex matter, and a preliminary evaluation from the Council would be appreciated. City A~tministrator Huff noted that Foothill School was requesting that an emergency road be run through the proposed park site, and Mr. Beck suggested a conference with school authorities. In answer to a question by Councilman Sanders, Conm~issioner Bridges said that the Parks Commission was not making Any specific recommendation at this time for possible financing, but it was their.hope that priority-listed lands could be held by the City until a bond issue could be properly prepared and presented to the voters. Commissioner Crisp said there was need for wide publicity on such an issue, and Mrs. Dully replied she had made~efforts to contact various homeowners associations. Mayor Tyler commented that there would automatically be voter interest on.either a bond issue or a tax rise. Mr. Sanders and Mr. Robbins commented briefly on conversation of potential park sites in the Cox and Prospect Road areas, and that perhaps the Council should take some action, within meanS. Mr. Nogle of Prides Crossing Homeowners Association stated a particular interest In Area 2, and Mr. Beck said he had no comparison figures on population versus acreage within designated areas. Mr. Robbins said the city zoning map and lot sizes were a d,~ ~ .for par~s needed. goo u ge ... · ~ In answer to Mr. Nogl~e, Mr. Beck said planning was such that each park would not duplicate another, and that courts, play areas and other uses were intended to serve residents of particular neighborhoods. Mr. Beck answered Mrs. Sitney's question on overall planning by saying that the report projected only "first phase"thinking-relative to land acquisition, and some development; the latter could take place over a long period of time, depend- ing upon needs and financing. The next step, he said, would be review of the proposals by the C~issions and Council, which could add, or delete, or revise priority sequences. As to economic benefit for the conKnunity, Mr. Beck said he had no hard data, but that the general pattern was a general upgrading and improvement of neigh- borhoods and shopping centers, when parks were built. Mr. Bridges stated that the most critical thing was land acquisition, no~t develop- ment; that first any amendments to the General Plan must be worked out before the Planning Commission, and 'found acceptable; that perhaps staff could work out fig- ures of land purchase costs. In answer to Mr. Tyler, he stated he considered development around the C~vic Center 7as of prime importance. Mr. Huff said there were possiblities of obtaining land dedication from cluster-type developments to aid park land purchase. Mr. Bridges said that possible golf course development if realized, cohld have a strong impact on civic center plans. -2- Joint Study Session Minutes Page 3 Mr. Huff stated that the Parks Commission recommendations should be forwarded to the Planning Conmission to conduct public hearings; that their findings on site locations aJd~priority could then be forwarded to the Council for possible incorporation into the revised General Plan; and that possibly a bond issue could be prepared for next Spring. Dr. Norton said that former projected plans for civic center development had been worked out qnly after extensive hearings and discussion; that in regard to possible amendment of the General Plan, he foresaw no complications, but he wished to avoid overlapping the functions of the Park Commission, especially regarding park site locations. Mr. Smith said costs were inseparable from sites, especially during public hearings. Mayor Tyler said the hearings should be confined to possible loca- tions, regardless of cost. Mr. Norton commented on possible General Plan changes, stating that since the Council would also hold public hearings on pro- posals for change, that possibly some problems would have been cleared up by then. The Mayor thanked Mr. Beck for his presentation, and members of the Council, Commissions and audience for their attendance, and adjourned the meeting at 10:28 P.M. Respectfully submitted, i~'C~EU~