Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-17-1974 City Council Minutes iMINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME:~J Wednesday, April 17, 1974 - 7:30 P.M.' PLACE: I Saratoga City' Council ChamberS, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, C~lifornia TYPE: Regular Meeting .~ I.- BRGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Bridges, Brigh~m, Diridon, Kraus and Smith Absent: None B. MINUTES March 20, 1974 -IPfa~f~g"P~l'ieY Ri~fside'~ubc°mmittee'reP~t~ti~es!~h~Uld~ b~n~d 'to refig~t -~ry'~.~Ky~u~ as representative; Rodney J. Diridon as alternate. [ April 2, 1974 - No corrections noted.' It-was moved by 'Mayor. Smith and seconded by Councilman Bridge~ the minutes A 7il 2, 1974'be approved, noting the correCtiOn. The ofMarch 20, 1974 and p motion was carried. II. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A. P & Z CO., INC. -· SLOPE STABILIZATION ON PIERCE ROAD The ~ity Manager advised that the work on the slope stabilization project on Pierce Road has been completed and it is recommended that the Council ~ iz Accept the work and author e filing of the Notice of Completion. oun 'lman Kraus 'and seconded By Councilman Bridges that It was moved by C c~ the work on this project[be accepted and th~ staff be authorized to file the Notice of Completion. The motion was carried~ III. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL RESOLUTIONS o of!the City of Saratoga Amending Resolution No. 677 Applying for Eligibility of~Said City t6 Qualify for Federal Flood · Insurance und'er the Nati6nal Flood Insurance Act of 1968. T~e City Manager explained that las[ fall the City passed~ a Resolution Applying for Eligibility of Said Ci[y 'to Qualify for Federal Flood Insurance under the National Flood ·I~Surance Act of 1968. The~Eeq~i~d data was sub- mitted to the appropriate'agency atjj~h~.ti~e; however, an additional ~esolution Mayor Smith raised ~ e quest'o' concerning avaiIability of insurance for · hf ~d z1 n people residing in loo one andsalso whether or not this would have an affect on obtainin~h'6~me'~o~tg~s.7~ -The City Manage~ advised this question would be investigated, and this matter could be re-agendized~fB '~"fhY~r~ ~i~'~u~Yl'M~ih~'7 B. RESOLUTION NO. 687 A Resolution of the Cit ~Council of~the City of Saratoga Commending Robert Dwyer for His Yea~s of Distinguished Service to' the Community Following areading of the resolUtiOn, it was moved by Mayor Smith and seconded by Councilman B d s rl ge Resolution 687 be adopted. The motion was carried. C. RESOLUTION NO. 689 A Resolution 0f the City COuncil ofkhe City of Saratoga Endorsing the Passage of the State Beadh, Park~ Recreational and Historical Facilities Bond Act of 1974 ' . ot Upon the recommendation f he Parks and Recreation Commission, it was moved by Councilman Krau~ and'seconded bY Councilman Brigham that Resolution 689 be adopted. The motion was carried. D. RESOLUTION NO. 691 Rue A Resolution Adopting I s and Regulations Re: Payment. Implementation and Relocation Assistancd under Chapter 16, Division 7, Title 1, of-the GoveTnment Code .. ' oun i an Diridon and seconded by Councilman Bridges that It was moved'by C c Res61ution 691 be adopted. The motion was carried. IV. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES AND ZONING.REQUESTS A. SDR-1096 THOMAS EZARSKY. MONTEWOOD DRIVE, 1 LOT It was moved b~ Councilm~n Diridon apd s~conded by Councilman Kraus that Resolution SDR-1096be adopted. The motion was carried. B. TRACT 50il OSTERLUND ENTERPRISES, SAN MARCOS ROAD & FRUITVALE AVE. C c m Diridon seconded by Councilman Kraus that It was moved by oun il an and Resolution SD-1052-1, App~oving the ~inal Map, be adopted, subject to the · . : · Ie°ndlt °ns, r t ! fc%t e ZZ C LZZsZTZ s 4 approval. ~ The motion was ca~ried.-~~ ' 7 " i N ON OF PLANNING COMMiSSION.RECOMMENDATIONS RE: SARATOGA GENERAL PLAN AND SPHERE OF I=NFLUENCE FIjAN' ~(qont'd~ from-4/2/74 & 4/9/74) v t r e r i the staff has prepared a summary of suggested modifications as a result of the previous public hearing o~ April 9, which w~uld be considered in ~o~junction with any additional comments from,t.~a~ienc~ItHis le~_~ngj After hearing~ all testimony, the Council can;decidewhether or not it is~possible to adopt the General Plan at this t me. Beginning with Community Planning Objectivess under Environmental Resource S · d Management, Mayor mlth ndlcate his recollection is there were no~icant problems in this section. - 2 - ara~oga General Plan (Con~ d.): , ' Community Development The City Manager xndl atedlthat it had been recommended to add item #12 ztect ral Design Eo "provide Arch u Re~iew for all commercial development xn Saratoga", and asked if tther was,any further comment regarding this recommendation. ~ . e omm ted he felttthis was an admiral objective, however, The City' Attorney c e he didn't;feel its place~was in the!General Plan. Councilman Dirid0n asked[if what is:intended by this' addition is toaccom- plish focus on_the, concern that,~h~re be special .contrOl of commercial property. Mayor Smith asked the City At[orney~if it would be his suggestion that the statement be mQre general' to get~.aw~y from the term "a~chitectural review". ~Mr0 Johnston stated t t[he is of the opinion that the General Plan should be'"genera~",',and fe~tsthis:'would be dictating that,'the Zoning,Ordinance 'shall provide the.r~uir~m~nt= of design re~ie~ fO~'7~ll commerdial development, ~nd he does not agree W~[h thi~. r a r o g a He fe t [ ' 1 the objective is intended ito enhance not only the character of the Village, but all commercial bh~ldings; therefore, he suggested modifying No. 3 to reflect "enh.anc~ng the character of all commercial development in S~ratoga". ~ The City Manager suggest~d.Objectiv~ No. 12 be added, to state:. "Provide for better r hitectural~a~d aesthetic conditions in community. development". This wording was agreeable-with the icouncil and with Mr. Ironside~ia~nin~i ~onsultant, representing~Williams and Mocine. -i Circulation " 1 The Mayor indicated it was noted that Objective No. 6 is contridicted by a statement on Page 5, ite~ 13, which suggests a pre-determination of the action by the'Parks and Recreation Commissfo~ to approve any new plans. It was the feeling of the Council that deletion of the second sentence of Item 13 would-reSolve th~s problem. ~ The discussion was ont'nued to CommUnity Planning Policies. Environmental Resource Management · he Mayor indicated it ha, been suggested No. 2 change "views of mountains" to "views of hills".. There were no ~dditional comments regarding this suggestion. ~ommdnity Development It is a suggested new Co x Development to a mmun'ty Policy provide statement to A question was raised as to whether or not this wording ,should be modified Saratoga G~neral Plan (Conrad.) Councilman Diridon suggested No. 14 be re-worded to state: "The existing ridgeline shall be,prqteCted 'and ne~ d~elopment, shall not impac~ the ridgeline and that-there ~hould be minimum cut' and'fill." · Councilman Kraus commented that we are trying to protect the view and thinking mostly in terms of hou~es;zhowever, he felt high extension wires should be equally as objectionable in this consideration. Mayor Smith suggested N0. i~' ~e'Wo~ed~as~ollo~s: ~"'The existing ridge~ines shall be protected and any n~'~eve~6p~ent shall not impact the beauty of the ri~geline With minimum cut and fill." This wording Was acceptable with the Council. CoUncilman Kraus commented with regard to item 5 under E~vironmental Resource Management and stated he f~lt this wording should be modified to indicate "n_p_o physical and visual damage to the existing environment". CirculatiOn Item 13,-page 5, should be modified,! deleting the second sentence in keeping wi~h recommendation under Circulation Objectives. The discussion then moved on to Action Areas. Area A - Mt. Eden Mayor Smith advi'sed that the first s~.~i~n raised pertinent to .this area was ~ith regard to point No. 1. He indicated it has been suggested that the Slope Conservation (SC-.10) area include guidelines for development in the Sphere of Influence. With regard to this same area, it wa~ suggested that the p~oposed high school site be clearly located in Area "A".' The M~yor indicated that it was pointed out at the meeting on April 9 that t~e high school site i__s~in Area "A" The third point is that the Slope Cohservation Formula be revised to allow development of property at a~density of not'less than one unit per two acres. The fourth point'is that No. 2 should be ~odified to reinstate the Wardell Road exten~io~ to Old Oak~Wj~' The fifth suggestion is that the SC-10. Zone is too strict and does not account for development of odd-sized parcels~ The final suggestion is~'~e~e~'~onsistencybe~een the guidelines used to regulate development in t~e'S~here o~ I~fluence-a~d~fn the City. The Mayor explained that part of this p~oblem is that we are dealing with two jurisdictions .the property outside of ~he City limits and that within the City limits. Going back to,the first suggestion, ~ayor S~ith indicated that it has been suggested that a slope conservation area be designated on the General Plan map. He explained that these/~a~c~.~'e cl~.el~ id~tifi~d'~w~h ,terrain. Ma~r Smith ~ic~ted~he~i_~s~ th~=i~~ pr~e~edt~d~here f~ th'~t ~ ~i~ r~ceived the "fl~w chart" originally~ wili~a~s ~d 'Mocin~7 ~he'Planning' Commission gave numerical values to the various factors 6n the flow chart.~ Recently some of the ,homeowners have ~e~d' ~p~~7~ 8y re-workingsome of the values w~thin th~ormul~.'~'~ ....... The Mayor felt that the first issue which should be decided is whether we are g~ing to include a general statement in the General Plan~rrel'ative to the Slope Conservation Formula or incorporate the formula within the General Plano Mayor Smith felt it, has tobe~onsidered whether, or{"no~ this flow chart could be implemented in an orHinance f0rm~t being unde~ attack because it ~s too arbitrary. He also pointed out i'f it gets into the drafting of an ordinance, Saratoga General Plan (Cont'd.) some problem may arise as certain areas of "commercial" may requlre substantial revision of the Zoning Ordinance. Councilman Bridges felt that when referring to a "flow chart" we are really! 'talking about certai~ factors which, might affect development, and he felt that the inclusion of these/~l_~nts(fir~, access, sewers, etc.) in a written state~ ment of the General Play. Mayor Smith felt thls would'be an'o~portunity tore-state th~ Ci~ty~position with regard to hillsideJ-~erva'tio~, and an ordinance 'would .~mphas!z~)th±s position. Councilman Diridon-commented that he doesn't have the fear of including the chart in the General Plan. He felt.that it shouldn't necessarily .be the device which wquld have to be followed verbatum, but as an example as a way of evaluating,J'He stated that the.General Plan in itself, is not a law, but a guide. The ordinance which would'follow the General Plan would'implement the provisions of the General Plan and that would be the combining law. He stated by referencing the chart in the General Plan would give guidance in the develop~d~t~ofY[~e~6~dinance. '~r,. T9~ Saw~., 20790 Mirada Court,icommented on the subject of the flow chart, ?~tidg~t~th~m[~w~d~sa~bSociation which he represents Qould favor the inclusion 6f"[he Si~pe.cur~e and ~l,~pe points in the General Plan. Mayor Smith pointed out to Mr. Sawyer that it is not going to be the General Plan which is going to control development in this area, rather it is going to be the Ordinance; therefore, he felt the implementation of the stated goals as outlined in the Arguello Homeowners Association'sprevious correspondence ,'dhoUld ~be in ordinance form. Mr. Sawyer stated [hat this involves a long-drawn process and their concern is that building in this area opens {the city up .to a lot!of legal problems. Councilman Bridges c~mmented that one thing which concerns him about the flow chart which'existsis that it leaves it all up to the developer; therefore, he doesn't feel it is rigid enough in some!areas. He felt another area of concern was the cost benefit 'tu t{ n, as sx a o he felt it would be]possible for someone to develop in this ar~a, and it would still cost the City as much money, even though-they can't meet the criteria. Mayor Smith felt the question of"additional technology" has to be considered. He indicated ~at if the Council agrees to go ahead with the ordinance, he felt it should include some of the p.oints mentioned this evening to avoid potential problems~in these areas. A question was raised as to'the meahing of item 2 under Area "A", pertaining to deletion of Wardell Road extension. Mayor Smith explained that "delete Wardell Road" really comes from a broken line which attempts to relieve the traffic flow in that a~ea,.and he inHicated this is more of a plan line, as opposed to a road. Mr. Guichard, 21130 Wardell R0ad,j'.stated he would like to ask that the Council not delete the Wardell'Road extensio~ and stated two basic reasons: 1) Blackwell Co. is planning a development in this area and he was with the understanding tha~ they are~]present~y~.~on~ide~ing whether the southern access would be through .Comer or Wardell, and it ~asjh~.Ifeeling~hat if Wardell were deleted at this time, this ~Duld reduce the possibility of conserving Warde. ll in theconsultant's survey. 2) There are presently five families who live on Wardell and 33 potential home sites which would come off Wardell Road, and this approximately 25% as large as the Blackwell development. He felt that orderly development of this area rather than "piece-meal" would benefit the community, and there ~ 5 - Saratoga General Plan Cont~d. should be serious consideration g~ven to fire aafety, sewerage, etc.; therefore, he felt' it would serve the community very poorly to delete Wardell Road. Mayor Sn~ith asked Mr. Guichard if the basic issue here<~a'~'~li~ving traf£i~,, not only in his immediate area, but relieving traffi~ in development and other .development w~ich would take pla6~e'! further to the west and to 'the south of Prospect and the Blackwell properties -- in other words, a ~oIe new distribution factor for za large number of residents in this area. Mr. Gu{chard. responded to' this stating that 'the whole community concept is to orient things to the sou~h, or to the Village, as he feels we want to increase the use of Saratoga Village as a cul~tural and marketing center. Mr. Guichard stated if this is the intent, there should be a major access road to the south which would drain the Blackwell property and also drain the property on Wardell Road. Mayor Smi[h felt that when everything is drained by one area, it can result in a t~emendous traffic problem. Mr. Guich'ard cohented {f a qullde-s'ac is formed here, there would be the problems of fire safety, and it .woul'd seem to him since there are no firm plans to service the Wardell Road ~r~a it would ~er~t[~c~ity':best to take the road out of ~he ~Plan. Mr. Jim Torre addressed' the Council ~on behalf of the Torre family, ~o owns approximately 30 to 40 acres of property on the top of Wardell Road. He was concerned specifically with the ~Wardell Road extensio~a:p~rt'icularly~;with regard to access ~o this property and the potential fire problems in this area. Mr. ToqUe ~ommented with 'regard to the slope density, stating he could go along with certain conceptS; however;, he felt in listening to the comments concerning the development of an ord~in~nce, etc., it would seem to him this is a "best guess" on how a slope chart should be developed and this is not ~at they as-landowners want. Mr..Torre felt there has been 'a little over-. concern about equitable use.of ~in~the hills. He stated they are interested -in orderly growth and beauty D~_~he hills. ' Mr. Torre stated that in looking into the future, they C~a~'f0resee'seVer~i 7~oble~s that migh[~ be~ encou~ere~ ~by ~p!~in~es~'in~rKbasin~ E~rs pr. 6perty: ~ ~) j~nJ.~al6e7 is - tooqhigh; 2). pu~ting a home ~on the property;73) '-'pot&ntial'-hazards, i.e., no access, fire, etc.; 4)high taxes' with the eliminati~'of the Williamson' ~t; and 5) no income from the prope.rty. Therefor~'Mr. Torre stated they are very .reluctant to go ahead wit~ ~the flow chart l<~ncept in the fear that it may prohibit their cause, and they have a very strong concern about an equitable result in the vaiuatfon o~ their.property. A resident of Wardell Road 'commented~ that he has two objections to statements made by the previous speaker: 1) There are more than 5 homes on Wardell Road; and 2) it was pointed out by Mr. Ironside the reason he was recommending deletion of the Wardell Road extension was because of physical impossibilities. With regard to ~ire danger, problem '~of access, etc., he directly points out the elements reco~ended for inclusi'on in the flow chart increase the fire danger and make the possibility for the City to manage these areas more and more difficult, and 'Ehi's is .~he reason they would want to minimize the number of~71people in this area/ ' ~ Mr. ~app of Wardell' Roa~ s~'a~' the~re-was. an object{v~%in the former ~neral Plan to connect Wardell Road to Old bak Way, and it his feeling if the City does not intend to carry Wardell to lPierce' Road, th.i.s statement should be left in the proposed Pl'~n.~' '. - ' ~' ~ . - 6 - Saratoga General Plan (Cont'd~) Mr. Weir, represdnting Greater Argue~lo Homeowners Association, addressed th~ Council and stated that perhaps ,the General Plan, Section 1, should formulate this chart by reference, and the Planning Commission should start on th~ slope density work, and the coh~ept plan be a guide for developing~the ordinance. Mr. Weir stated that it was previously indicated that the map shows Ell the slSpe conservation zone. However, it doesn't take into account a g6od deal of the slope areas, and he suggestedl the Council define undeveloped areas as being ~ithin the slope conservation zone, and account for ~hese areas in the ordinance. Mr. Ironside advised that the slope Tconservation area is now recommended to be larger than previously. ' Mr. Weir stated he felt this wh~le'a~ea should be treated as a slope conser- vation zone rather than. having two different sets of rules apply. The C£ty Manager ~xplained that the slope conservation zone i~cludesr other elements, such as slide, in terms of the evaluation, and that is why the particular boundaries have Been determined. He indicated that any area which has a slope greater'than 10% would be considered within the slope density formula. Mr. Weir stated that where you bisect the school property with the slope conservation line, you are saying t~at half of the school property would have to follow rules of slide areas and ~alf would not, and ~hefef0r~~P ~i~.Shpul~ ~_~p~ereyer.~yo~i~ve_~ slope. He stated that ~c~d~g'tb'~ the ordi~c~now, it says-th~t'any~fece of land has tO be considered ~s a whole. He indicated there is a different standard in the way one has to review that school property when it lcomes to the point where ~omebody decides how he wants to devalop the entire parcel -~ there a~e two d~fferent s~ts of guidelines on how he ha~ to develop the property. ! ncilman Diridon commented that~i~-MrT~Weir~i~~that ~i~e~~h~ty]~evelop.~ana0rdinanc~-it wil'i'i~ro~[~e~fs~~pl~ r~s~d~d~h~frf~e i~ v~a~"~th our ~neral Plan~ He stated that if the new ordinance which we are going to have the Planning.Commission ~ develop, it should logically include the provisions.of the dhart, etc. as applied across-the-board, not just the CSor hillside area. Then it will zone the school . site into a ceBain density by the ~ormula, .. one half of the zon~ ~n CS 1O and tEe~other half ~n another category. The City Manager commented that his]interpretation of the CS zone in termsof defining a zoning district and the new ~ning ordinance would b~ to define the SC zone, and if the C6uncit wants to modify the district, this can be done. However, he didn't think it'would be automatically assumed that the ~low chart would~e applied across-the-board. ~Rather, those~portions would be applied in the CS zone eo ~ich it is incorporated in the Zoning Ordinance, Therefore, the new ordinance would not be applied outside of the CS zone as it is not going to be developed for that purpose. Mr. Ironside commented that just as=the flow chart indicates the direction the ordinance will take, the map.would indicate the direction the zoning ordinance would take. He indicated he would not at this time be able to support inclusion of the entire school property in th~ slope conservation area because it didn't meet the c~iteria of all the property o~ers. On the other. hand, he ~elt by the time one would get around to putting Ta slope conservatio~ district on'the map, you have more supportative materialsand therefore, could go one way 'Or the- other without conflicting with the ~neral Plan. Mayor Smith. commented that the only~thin~. that lends support t~ the argument is the fact that th~s pertains 'to only one parcel, and it would seem to be good planning to consider that parc&t as on~ unit. Mr. Ironside ~eplied that' this is not necessarily true, ~inceas far as the General Plan is concerned - 7 - Saratoga General Plan (Cont'd.) this is a high school site. Miles.Rankin addre~sed~the Council ahd indidated it was his-understanding the slope conservation zone was. not ~efined merely because of steep slope, but because of other factors that ma~e this property unique, such as soil conditions, slides, earthquake faults, etc. Mayor Smith explained that Slope is the common d~nominator or b~sis of the issue; however, these other factors are included. Mayor Smith advised that the City has received a communication from Mr. Moerdyke, Attorney~ re~resenting the% Blackwell Homes (Painless Parker Ranch) application, setting out essentiall~ two questions with regard to this appli- cation. Mr. Johnston, City Att0rneyl, has responded to Mr. Moerdyke's requests, and he asked.Mr. Johnston to comment onethis issue: Mr. Johnston'stated that the Planning Commission in putting th'is off the calendar wasincorrect in doing so b~cause there are no prOviSions in the Code to put something off the calendar; 'rather, there is a provision which states there must be a public he iI within forty days and a decision made ar ng within fifteen days after'the public hearing. He indicated he had found one of the r~asons'for the delay in,having the public hearing.within fort~ days was at the request of the applicant; therefore, the first public hearing was on January 9th, which was beyond. the forty-day period, but atthe appli- cant's request. He stated that he found that at that public hearing itwas put'off the calendar for 'two reasons: 1) the E.I.R. was necessary and had not yet been prepared; 2) they wanted to wait until the General Plan R~view so see if. there. would be.any sugge~Eed changes in the area, which he stated was incorrect. Mr. Johnson advised that if the Council or 'the Commission wants to deny something they should thavethe bearing and make the decision to deny it ~r,app~ove itiL~uti'it's~uld not b~ delayed. Therefore, he felt the matter should be promptly re-agendized by the Planning Commission and 'acted on. .,. .... .. '- Mr. Johnston stated that"[he second phase of his letter related to whether or not the new slope density formula should be considered in the General Plan; however, he didn't feel this Was apropos to this specifid question2~ Mr. Moerdyke commented that he did request a copy o~ t_~e..~ity_~torney's letter and was told it would have tq be properly'~'~j_ons.i~'._by CounCil first. Mr. Moerdyke stated his applicant would have no objections to ~his matter being carried along for a reasonable matter such as the discussion of the E.I.R.; their concern is that there~n~'~e.'~des~a~y~ay and stated that somewhere along the line the rules ar~' ~ln~c~geH'o~'[he~. He indicated that the application w~s made in~its proper form under the laws in extistance at that time, and he felt it should be treated such that the application be considered unde~ those rules, and they shouldn't have to'wait until the City adopts some new rules. Therefore, all they would' be asking is the Council instruct the Planning Commission to proceed under the e~isting rules. Mr. Moerdyke stated they feel under 'the slope density formula now in affect adequately pf'btects the City, and.they have ascertained their buyer has fil~ the map for the e~_x~a'aA.~a~nm~r. of lots set Up, and h~ has informed them there are 'objections ~o p~ticular building sites or locations of roads; however, most of these cab be worked out. He indicated they have water and public-sewers, and they have spen~ a great deal of money over the' years 'to.make this property good fo~ development, ~d it is a hardshipon the owners to continhe~the'matter ihdefin~tely. Mayor Smith advised the Acting Planning Director~w0Uld communicate this letter to the CommiSsion and will report to the Commission regarding tonight~s meeting. - 8 - SaratoMa General Plan (Cont 'd. ) The.City ManagerSadvised that the p~ocess is moving along, as the E.I.R. has been received and evaluated, and ~his is being circulated to other agencies for consideration. The report will be coming back to the Planning Commission to set a date for,the public hearing onthe E.I.R. draft. The City Attorney pointed out that the E.I.R. is being processed on the basis of the existing ordinance and not on the basis of any anticipated or future ordinances. Councilman Diridon sugge.sted we'~es01ve the reference to the chart, not suggesting that it be used verb~tum ibut toreference the technique and encourage the Planning·Commiss~0n to~work quickly on ~ resolution. Mayor Smith indicated there Should be a statement~of Burpose adopting the slope conservation ~c0n~ept and ~actors under consideration, such as slope, fire hazards, e~.,.~nd Shard be independent Of the d~ective. Th~ City Attorney conmented that rather than being specific as to this particular part, inherent in the General Plan adoption is the directionto the' P~annidg Commission to make sure' all ordinances are updated to be consistent with the General Plan and~ not just limit it to this particular area. The City Manager suggested before taking any action in terms of a directive, the Council delay this· until after aI meeting which he has 'scheduled ~f~the/ C0~mitte~ of the Whole Meeting on TResday, May 7th, a zrecommendation on ~"Ho~ 'to ProCeed Relevant to Adopting~'~the General Plan." This was acceptable to the Council. Mayor Smit~ asked if·there was ady further discussion regarding Wardell R~ad. Councilman Kraus indicated he ~Duld like to go out and view. the. particular area-whichMf. Torre was talking abo.ut. The Mayor suggested this item be left as it is, and a votec0uld be taken at the next meeting. Mayor Smith indicated, however, he-would like to a~k on~ more question con- -cerning traffic circulation. in this 'area. If the Blackwell·Development and other ~arcels'are developed~ there will be another press to get access, and welare going to be faced with·the situation again. Therefore, he felt a committment is going to have to be m·ade somewhere along the line with regard~~ to majOr-traffic movement. Mr. Ironside con~nented he felt the w~y to solve this ~problem would be to make a statement relative to exploration, and he felt it would be'appropriate in this section tosay that this access problem should be the subject of a conditional study. The City Manager f~ndicated it might be appropriate to add No. 5 under Area "A" to "ExplOre the feasibility of a new'collector street to~serve the Western Hill area." This suggestion was acceptable to the Council. Recess ~and Reconveyne MayorsSmith indicated the next area to be discussed would be A~ea B, which is the Congress Springs - Pierce Road area. There were nocomments with regard to this *particularsarea, and therefore, no recommended changes. The ~ayor indicated there is a recommendation to eliminate Item No. 4, as this 'is covered in Item-No.·l. - 9 - Saratoga General Plan (Cont'd. Mr. Rankin ind~cat'ed when this was'~rought up before the Planning Commission, Item No. 1 was supposed to'take the~place of Item No. 4, and he did not know why it appeared in both places. Under this same section, it was indicated there 'was a question about the general nature of P.D. (Residential) designation in Item No. 5. ii~'~d'~[~j~'2L'~t-'.'~aS~d~hlearer definition be provided ~%r~'~hi~/~ ~i'~h~e.B~"~?atoga-S~e Road between the S6uthern Pacific tracks and Cox Avenue). Councilman Kraus stated that. he {s ~oncerned that this property would be wide open to any use, and this property-could 7end up as an Alpha Beta Market or Payless- Drug Store, etc.. Councilman Bridges indicated he w~uld share this apprehension of "PD" desig- nation in the Plan without some sort of definition. Mayor Smith agreed that somewhere along the line, we are gofng to have to give some substance to this zoning. Miles Rankin commented that he doesn't'know if "PD"(Residential) means "R-1 PD" or'R-M PD", and there is no indication what the Council and Planning Commission want. ~_ou~dilma~Dir~dond~g~ste~Ti~i~s~i_gp~i0~iT~'Tc~fa~ed 'by indicating "PD- Si~gI~=F~mfl~esiden?i~i"?' C~6~cilman BridgesSj~s~ed possibly ehis is just a matter of semantics and should be referred to in that light. Mr. Ironside commented that the foot~note on'page 13 elaborates somewhat on this designation. The Mayor then read the fqotnote, which states: "PD designation indicates areas for which a precise plan must belapproved prior to development. Said plan 'shall include density, architecture, site layout, landscaping, access, circulation and parking. The review pro- cedure for the pFeci~e plan should be the same aS for a rezoning, including public hearings by the Planning'Commission and City Council. Except where otherwise specified, PD shallbe limited to residential i Mr. Ironside stated that his understranding of the' Planning Commission's willing- ness to go along with this zoning wals that there was no conclusion reached with regard to retirement housing;.~herefore, the accepted approach was to use this "PD" as a retirement option. The basic underlying density would stay as it is, with no other plans were-submitted for the property. This would be an area where plans for~so~e density other than the one-third 'acre "12-500" would be welcomed if they satisfied some social purpose, such as retirement housing. Councilman Diridon commented that basic logic indicates that this is not a good retirement housing site and asked why we are talking "Multiple" in this · location. He indicated there were certain items the study team that looked at retirement'housingfelt necessary'--;-one being'a library facility. Mr. Rankin commented that wheh.'this ~ir st came up, t~e designation was "R~l PD", and then it was dec~ded to call' it "k~ide~tiai PD". This took place at one of the Planning Commission General Plan. bearings. He further commented he doesn't like anything that lisfeft up to.a p~r@~n~l decisions,and 'he also felt this was permissive and says you could have "Multiple"Lin'here."He didn't feel, however, this site should be left wide open. Mayor Smith indiCated. it would appeaF 'there are two issues: 1) Whether we want to-move. away from '~]R-i" into some special treatment of this property, such as "PD-Residential" or - "PD-R 1"~.2) Can' we give it any further definition, especially the parcels which are north of this one? Also, if you say "PD' for this area, how will you evern get mixed uses, and what is the incentive for a building to - 10 - Saratoga General Plan (Cont'd.) come in ~or a mixed use plan? The City Manager commented that 'several times applications have been turned down at this corner, and as a result, the Istaff developed concepts wh{ch ~ might be acceptable to the Council and Planning CommisSion for that area. He felt that generally the intent for all of these "PD" areas' that there might be some pre-planning on the part Of'the City. He .felt it should also be remembered that we are not talking about ~a zoning map, but a conceptual plan ' ' ' ' , Mr. Ironside explained that the ~!PD" concept is a wid'e-open concept· He stated, however, the maxn difference here is~ that "PD" applie~ generally to large areas, and this is a very small area. He reiterated tha't there will be an ordinance which will say a lot more than what ·it is saying now... Dr. Isaac Abrams c~mmented that he would welcome this type. of designation, and wh~t we-a~ '~afi~h'~t ~7~'~h-a~'e ra zo~h'i~h'fs'no~'~r~cr~s·ive .to ce~'t'~'in-t-y, pes of development. Dr. Abrams felt some consideration should be given to the _ develoRmen which goihg fact that property owners would ~try ~o pu~ together ~ ' is -. to be economically soundl~ a~'~..it~is looked at in this respect, ~hat we have xs p blzc service category~Hxch has to meet certain objective criteria of the City. Mr. R~nkin felt the C~uncil should be .looking at this point-by-point, and item 3 should be the one under discussion. He indicated this proper~y'is approximately 16 to 18 acres and than the Council ~and Planning Commission have been talRing about these parcels for the past 3 years· He stated there were various reasons why th~s property hasn't been developed. At ·the Planning Commission General· Plan hearings, it was felt that since "Commercial" did not work~ perhaps what was needed was flexability. Councilman Bridges felt, however, that we were not talking about two specific parcels, but a whole concept. He felt the Council and Planning.~uCom~nission has come to realize there are two ways ~o get'someone to develop this propertyi3 and that is to go into something like thi~, or to throw the thing wide' ~pen. Therefore, he felt we are going to have to be subjective. However, he indicated it bothers him that "PD" isn't better defined in this document. He suggested that in the footnote on page 13 it could be reiterated that the existing. zoning could continue ~such time an acceptable "PD" pl-an is brought into e£fect,~j'_~ or unless otherwise specified, "PD" 2shall be limited to single-family residential Mayor Smith indicated he would have ,some probl.em ,ith "PD" (Residential) in the area south of the railroad tracks. Mr. Bridges suggested No. 6 be desig- nated as "R-1-PD".. It was indicated some revision would be made to this item for consideration prior to final adoption.. The q'd_~i~a~'~i'~n'~n c6~'~i~ed 't~'Xr~a G,'~ui~v~l~R~.~ '7_~The Mayor advise~'~he'r~we'~ ~tems of corre~p~een~e'Tg~{~e~Y~ti~ to this area, from: Bruce P. Griswold, President,~ Board of Trustees, Odd Fellows'Hom.e, and Gerald H. Clark, Grand Secretary, G~and Lodge of C~lif. 1.0.O.F. Both of these letters request'that Consideration be given to,low-~ost reeirement housing on the I.O.O.F property. M~. R. Conklin, Superintendent, I.OiO.F.~ Home, ad~r. essed the Council and explained t~at the letter from' Bruce G~iswold~was wr~itten to 'indicate~pOssi- . · bilities for use on the 50 acres of 'land. He stated the Odd FellOws have not yet determined what they want to do with this land; however, they have indicated they do not want to sell it. He indicated that. the Saratoga Rebekah~s would - 11 - Saratoga G~neral Plan (Cont'd.) like to develop some independent living units to provide housing for low- income retirement age people. Mr. Conklin indicated 'the Odd Fellows would have in mind putting clustered housing on this land. Mr. Conklin indicated that their intention would be to open the housing up to not' only those people from the order, but people of the commpnity who need this type of living. He furtherindicated the type of housing which he is talking about is v~ry luch in demand:by people who are retiring, and the 'uniqueness of this facility isthat it would offeri~ji~ f6r ind'ivid~als ~'bf l~'income as'well as a health care facility for older people who cannot ~ke care of themselves. Mayor Smith felt the real issue here is whether or not this is the proper location for a retirement facility.I Mr. Conklin advised there is a libra~y,.~church,~reqr~at~op~a~.li[ies, a .doctor who comes out weekly, etc., a~d he felt [he~ feat~r~uld betakeni into consideration. The Mayor inquired if the Order is on the decline and there is.a designation of "retirement housing", then the Council would be giving sanction ~!~Eh~ ~d~r.. Councilman Dirid0n. adviS~d he w~uld be p~ohe to.supporting the idea if the Council kcould See~ some indication to the fact that' it ~would be open to the public in Saratoga and-that it would be open at the prices they can afford. Mr. Conklin stated ther~ are-indicat, ions that the home i's going to be open to the general community. Mayor Smith commented [ha~ there is lno way to assure this, however, and the 0rderlcould turn around in 20 years and sell it to a developer. He advised Mr. Conklin that if continued to operate this home'as it is now, there ,ould be no problem. Mr. Conklin felt in this way the City would be losing the opportunity to provide low-cost retirement houSing~to people'in the community who need~-it. /_A~citizen i~+he audience c~mmented that it would seem if the Council were ~n 'any way'-~o~ide~inf~ change in ~Area G, it 'sho~Id be through public hearings on this specific subject.and includ~ residents in this particular area. At these hearings the Council could coBsider the economic and social impact.this ~f~ili~y' wou~.~a~eTon the City. Mayor Smith .advised that the Council could go ahead and adopt the General Plan and ask the Planning Commission to take up this issue in their next review. Mr. Conklin indicated.that he would l!~k~.people who are buying property in this area to be alerted to the ~ppq~e~ _~ujure use'0f?[~f~.pr0perty,'and was his feeling .the General Plan would be the b~st place to do this. Councilman Bridges commented that h~ feelsit is difficult to judge the merits of this plan; however, he indiCatedhe would like to know'what portion of Item No. 1 would be so exclusive that the City could not consider this plan if it comes to fruition. Councilman Kraus commented he wouid~have no objection to the Planning Commission reviewing this proposal in one year. Mr. Kauffmann, 20700 Fourth Street, advised he had_,~tten~ed the meeting , some weeks ago when Mr. DeCrange had made application for. a retirement housing facility. At that time, .it was indicated the rental would be $3D0 per month. - 12 - Saratog~ General Plan Cont'~.) Mr. Kauffmann stated he has inquired~about the rates to be charged by the Odd Fellows, and these were quoted at $150 per couple. He further commented that in looking around SAratoga,. there isn't any way to put up housing for ~eople with limited incomes, and it ~as his feeling these people are trying to fill a void in Saratoga much needed by older citizens. Miles Rankin comm~n~ed that he didn't see why the merits o~ this project should be discussed at this time when the Council or Planning CommissiOn would be facing this problem during the next year. He felt this is a problem that should be considered not in a piece-meal way, but in a way it is going to affect the entire city. Mayor Smith advised, however, that the whole purpose of the hearings such as what is taking place this ~evening is~to hear all comments'reletive to the issue, and there are two letters concerning the Odd Fellows property that he feels should be noted. Mr. Conkli'n stated the I~O.O.F. is not asking the Council to consider this proposal tonight, but would like to be assured there is apossibility that it will not be precluded'in the future. Mayor Smith recemmended~ therefore',that the Planning CommiSsion give consideration to this property and this p~posed use during the next year. This was acceptable t~ ~he Co~ncil~ , Mr. Allen De' Grange then. ad~re'ssed the Council indicating his interest in approximately three acres of ~roperty on"Cox 'Avenue. Mr. De Grange stated th~at at the public hearing on April' ~, 1974, it was suggested that he work through the General Plan hearings in an attempt to acquire zoning for retire- ment housing (pertinent tol~r'e~ F, Q~ito-Kentfield). Mr. Ironside advised there is no chang~ proposed for this area. Mrs. Jean Woodward, Plan~ing CommissTioner, commented that one reason ~he Commission denied this application i's because it had undergone a zoning change shortly before. Councilman Diridon stated thatit doesn't seem t~ere is enough room in this spot to do much with any type of"residentiai~,. He qommented that the number .of units Mr. De Grange.is talking jaSout her~ would really require a high density, and he is not going to abl~ to get into the price range retirement housing has to have~ Mayor Smith commented that the difficulty with this parcel ~eems to be its size; however, lowering of the density might make it more positive. Mr. De Grange pointed out that one of the things~which makes this matter so difficult to drop now is that there,is an over-supply of cdmmercial develop- ment in the area. Dr. Abrams commented that he feels this is in an area where traffic should be limited on both sides of the street~ and it was his feeling, as far as the City is concerned, this is going'lto~be a very quiet area. .Mr. Rankin commented that this would be a down-grade in zoning from "Professional" to '~ultipie", and he would see not~ing wrong with 14 units o£.Z~u~tiple" in this location. It would be qlose to the.proposed library, a shopping center, and transportation, and it 'would seem td be a. dOwn-grading of zoning which would be beneficial,and acceptable for th~s use in his opinion. Mayor Smith was of t~e opinion this: luse would "consume" this property, and he felt the.units would have to be very small or the density decreased. Saratoga General Plan (Cont'd.) Councilman Kraus commented that this. would not be good retirement housing', but rather', another apartment house. It was, therefore, felt the Council should uphold their earlier d~cision~ regarding this application., and deny the request. Area C~ Blue Hills .. The City Manager outlined.the recommended changes for this area. Area D, Triangle North An'item for. consideration in this area was concerning .the City's current policy regarding the Transportation Corridor vis-a-vis the recommendationin item No. 2 re: linear parks. TEe City Manager explaihed that this is a matter of whether or not the existing policy in terms of observing the transportation corridor for a public us~ corridor should be clarified or keep!it the way ~t is. C6uncilman Kraus felt this wording could sufficekuntil such time that the City adopts a policy different thankthat ~dopted sometime ago regarding the multi- model policy.' Councilman Bridges commented that this brings us back to the point as to what our position was as far-as the freeway is concerned with regard to the General Plan. He felt the City has an agreement with the State of California which calls for us to maintain a certain posture as far as development might be concerned. It was his feeling the Cbuncil should try to clarify this position,' and ~lso, that the City has ~some responsibility to those people who might eventually buy homes or develop thi~"area.' The City Manager. advised that early in the General Plan'discussiops, he had asked the consultantto provide an alternative if. the. freeway were never built, in terms of the public transit corridor. ·Secondly, on the map, ~he corridor doesn't go all the way through, and problems may result later on with this open liHk. Mr. Ironside explained that on the map it is being proposed as a "public use" corridor.and advised this' could be extended all the way on the map. Area F, quito-Kentfield Councilman Di~i~on commented he fe~ls there are still problems With No. 5. and No. 8, especially as it pertains'to the formulation of 4-lane roads. Mr. Shook, Director of Public Works advised the widening on Quito would probably take place primarily within the City of San Jose; therefore, it wasn't felt' this item would have'an ~ffect on Saratoga. ~?'~h~'~ay_~_ri~giAt~dl~hl'=[~ ~cg~ended changes fo~ Item No. 3, to more clearly "~fne ~h~"~'8~{ ~f ~%~=I~e on parcels adjacent to Quito Shopping Center, and Item No. 5, to more~dlearly define what is meant by P.D. (Residential). These were noted and concurred with by the CQuncil. Area G~ Fruitvale-Sobey Road Councilman Kraus inquired if it had been agreed this does not refer to widening to four lanes~(Item No. 5). Councilman Bridges suggested the !~orHing in No. 5 be modified to reflect implementing the improvements on Fruitvale Avenue and Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, in conformance'with the recommendations of the City Engineer's report, dated JanUary, 1974. SaratoMa General Plan (Cont'd.) Area H~ Fruitvale West There were no recommended changes in' this area. Area I, Glen Una No recommended changes. Area J, The Village No recommended changes. Urban Service Area Mayor Smith indicated that comments Were heard earlier in the evening which would pertain to this area; therefore, he felt no need to discuss this any further. The Mayor indicated that the procedu're now would be that the sta_ff.t__ake the suggestions given this evening and .,p'~t/i. ntojlangU~.g~_ ~b_r'~final _adoption at the next regular meeting. It ,as moved by Councilman Bridges a'nd seconded by Councilman Kraus that the public hearing be continued to the next regular meeting of May 1st. The motion was carried. VI. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR B. FINANCE It was moved by Councilman Bridges and seconded by Councilman Iraus that disbursements 19112 thru~.~9~O5 be ap'proved and the Mayer be authorized to siBn the warrants. The motion=was carried. C. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS .. 1. Parks and Recreation CommissiOn- Recommendation Re: Propesal for State. Beach, Park, Recreation anh Historical Facilities Bond Act of 1974. This matter was continued to' the~ next regular meeting of the Council. 2. Parks and ReCreation Commission .- Recommendations Re: Congress Springs Site. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Bridges that the City obtain the architects analysis for 9.8; acres, and the expenditure of $1,500-$1,600 in ithe Capital Improvement Budget for. Congress Springs acquisition, .pe~'staff report, dated April 10, 1974. InclusiVe withid this motion wo~!ld'be.approval of the staff's recommen- datio~ t~df~t an agreemen6 between the City and Saratoga Senior Little League for the lease of ~he Congress Springs Park ~site. The motion was carried. ~ -, , D. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS 1. Directorof Public Works -..Recommendation that the Council authorize staff to g6 to bid oh the Via ko~ncole Walkway project. It was moved by Counc'ilman Bridg.es and seconded by Councilman Iraus that , the staff be authorized to advertise for bids on the Via Roncole Walkway proj. ect~ The m6tion was carried,. E. CITY MANAGER 1. Report Re: Fruitvale Ave. Speed Zoning Study It was moved by Mayor~Smith~and~Jseconded by Councilman Kraus that the Council approve the Staff Report, dated April 5, 1974,/recommending'the · speed limit rema{n ate35 M.P.H. !and proceeding with the other proposed recommendations for this street. The motion was carried. Crime Report - Months of Januar~ and February The City Manager reported the .ffgure~ compared ~to one year agog for Burglaries: january. ..-Increased 6% - PrOperty Value .... Increased 3% ~eb~uary . . . DeCreased 22% Property Value . . . Decreased 46% VII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN. .1. Allen DeCrange, Architect,' ~40 Bird Ave., requesting the Council_giye consideration to a change of zoning from "P.A." to "RM-4,000" on his property on Cox Avenue, for the ~purpose of retirement housing. - Council denied request~.(see comments - General Plan). 2. Cheriel M. Jensen, 3379oBenton; Santa Clara, requesting to appear before the COuncil again in an attempt ~to resolve the issue with the Santa Clara Valley Water District Re: Controll of the portion of Wildcat Creek which is on their property. ~ Staff to work'.with Mrs. Jensen and report to Council. 3. Jack D. McCready, 13840 Saratoga; Ave.,~xpressing oppositionto the portion of the General Plan pertaining t~o pathways. - City Manager to respond and advise comments regarding pathways committee. 4. William M. Henderson, Jr., Henderson Enterprises, 840 East E1 Camino Real, Sunnyvale, expression opposition~ regarding proposed elimination of Wardell Road extension to Old Oak Way ana the suggested slope conservation formula. - Noted and ~iled. 5. Bruce P. Griswold, President, Board of T~uetees, Odd Fellows Home, 14500 Fruitvale Ave., sdggesting .special status forthe 87 acres in "Area G", known as the Odd Fellows' Proper~y. - Noted and filed; City Manager to respond. 6. Gerald H. Clark, Grand Secretary', Grand Lodge of California, I.O.O.F., requesting a plan fordeveloping~ additional facilities for low cost independent retirement housing b~ considered in the new General Plan. - Noted and filed; City Manager to respoBd. VIII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilman Bridges and seconded by Councilman Dirid~n the m~eting be adjourned. The motion was carried. spectful bmitted,