HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-07-1975 City Council Minutes MINUTES
SARAT, QGA'. CITY COUNCIL
TIME: Wednesday, May 7, 1975 - 7:30 P.M.
PLACE: Saratoga City Council Ghambers, 13777 Fruitvale Aver, Saratoga, california
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ORGANIZATION
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmen Bridges, Brigham, Corr, Matteoni, Kraus
Absent: 'None
B. MINUTES
It was moved by Councilman Brigham~ and seconded by Councilman Kraus the
minutes of April 16~~ 1975i, b~ approved, and the reading be waived.. The motion
was carried.
II. BIDS AND CONTRACTS
A. CHANGE ORDER~ TO SARATOGA'/LOS GATOS ROAD HALKWAY'. CONTRACT
1. Extension of time (45days)
2. Additional materials~ ($1,566)
3. Bicycle ~peed reducing barriers. ($350)
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham Change
Orders l, 2 and 3 in connection with the Saratoga/Los Gatos Road Walkway
Contract be approved. The motion was carried.
B. CHANGE ORDERS TO BIKEWAY IMPLEMENTATION CONTRACT'
1~ Additional ehain link barrier ($1,370)
2. Deletion of one bikeway ramp ($175'~'_~redit)
3. Extension of time (130 working ~days after Notice to Proceed)
4. Deletion of portion of work ($2,133~credit)
It was moved by Councilman Brigham~. and seconded by Councilman Kraus Change
Orders 1, 2, 3 and 4, in connection with the~B'i~,'~S~cl~".~'~~ation
Project, be approved. The motion was carried.
C. AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT BIKEWAY
ACROSS SOUTHERN PACIFIC CROSSING O.F COX AVENUE.
It was moved by CoGncilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Matteoni the
Mayor be authorized to execute this agreement. The motion was carried.
III. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL RESOL!JTIONS
A. RESOLUTION NO. 732
Resolution of the City C6uncil of the City of Saratoga Commending
Sarah Jane Rose for Her Service on: the Parks and Recreation Co~ission
Itwas moved by Mayor Bridges and seconde~ by CoUnCilwoman Corr Res61ution
No. 732 be adopted. The motion was carried.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 733
Resolution of the City Council of the Cit~ of. Saratoga Co~endin~
Frank Clawson for His Service on the Parks and Recreation Commission
It was moved by Mayor Bridges a~d seconded by ~Councilman Kraus Resolution
No. 733 be adopted. The motion was carried.
C. ORDINANCE NO. 38.51.1
Ordi~ah~ of ~h~ City of Saratoga Amending Article V of'Chapter 4 of
the Saratoga City Code, Relating to BuSiness Licenses
Tbe_C~Manage~re~_i.ewed_the p~oposed_amendments_as_ou.tl~.ned~n the-o~d~-nance,
-and_~ecommended~the~int~oduct~on_of~the ordinance-and sett~.ng-a-Dub~4c hear-i.ng
for June 4, 1975 to consider final adoption.
Mayor Bridges suggested Section l, Paragraph 2 be re-worded to clarify the re-
cation wa~ accepta61e to the ~th~i'l memb~TsT "~
It was then moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr
Ordinance No. 38.51.1 in its amended form be i~ntroduced and set for'public
hearing on June 4. The motion was carried.
D. ORDINANCE NO. 38.64
Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Amending Chapter 9 of the Saratoga City
Code and Establishing and/or Re-establishing Certain Public Streets and
Portions of Public Streets
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr Ordinance
No. 38.64 be introduced. The motion was carried.
E. ORDINANCE NO. 52
Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Controlling Smoking in Public Pla~es
in Saratoga
(be introduced this evenine. -'~-~"'
Councilman Brigham stated it would be his suggestion the City Attorney review
and redraft the ordinance as presented, and the City staff make an analysis of
the smoking control ordinances adopted by the Cities of Polo Alto and Santa
Clara prior to the time Saratoga considers this ordinance for adoption.
Councilman Natteoni suggested the City obtain a copy of Santa Clara's proposed
ordinance prior to the time it is again considered. Councilman Matteoni further
expressed a concern with regard to.enforcement of this type of ordinance, par-
ficularly in public restaurants.
It was then moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus
Ordinance No. 5Z be introduced and.scheduled for public hearing on June 4, 1975.
The motion was carried.
F. ORDINANCE NO. 38.54.1
Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Repealing Ordinance 38.54, Granting Franchise
to Com~unicati ons S/ste~s Corporation (Cont'd. 4/16/75)
The City Manager reported that the Council-appointed committee consisting of
Councilwoman Corr and Councilman Kraus met with Mr. Nishimura, Rresident of
Communications Systems CorporationG~d,NF:;:~F~on, Attorney representing
the franchise~'~_N.~:~b'~a had i:~diCat~d'~r~Bs meeting he was ~xperiencing
some problems, particularly with regard to undergrounding and sparse areas of
the City. He had further indicated he would like to see the formula outlined
NP. Beyer ~eported that the Council co~ittee had indicated it felt
NishimuPa should be allowed an oppo'~tun~ty ~o try andz:~'roh ou~ these p~oblems;
however, he should still' be required to post the pe~fo~ance bond as previously
set forth.
- 2-
ORDINANCE 38.54.1 RE: CoA.T.V. (Cont'd.)
Following some additional discussion of this matter, it was moved by
Councilman KraUs and seconded by Councilwoman Corr this ordinance be ca~ied
off the agenda and tabled for thirty days. The motion was carried. ~
IV. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SI.TES AND ZONING REQUESTS
A. SDR-1037 R. J. HUNTER & ASSOCIATES (Cont'd. 4/16/75)
It was moved'by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilman Kraus the
City Attorney's Opinion regarding ~h~s appea~ (dateaT/~'~l'~Z3",T971~)~'e
accepted, advising that the tentative!map previously approved had not been
altered, but that the Planning Con~nission had requested some modifications in
the site development plan, upon which there is no pro'vision'for, appeal. There
being no item to appeal, the Council-approved the City Attorney-~s report.
" B. CONSIDERATION"OF'R'E~h'~C~ ~RO~'~LANNING COMMiSS~ (CO~si~e~atio~ of ~ha~ge ....
of zoning to Bring Zoning Ordinance in Conformance with General Plan)
The City Manager indicated the recommended acti'on this evehing concernin
this matter,~-b~d~-6~t~.~-c~.u.~i.~-~Tdi~s~-~-g~i~n~at-th~m~i~ttee~j~the~n.W~°le
'~'~'L"~prii 22Gd, would .be to:~ 1) reaffirm the i~terpre~t~ o'f de~Sities
~s ina'~ea~ed on~ ~1~4 Gen~l'Pl~ an~.2) eS~ab]lS~'~'~;~Y ~ int~r~e-
~n.'the residentiai'~ss~ s6 the Planning Comissi'on'~uqd-~'mw~h6~'t~'prot~ed
~ga~i.ng~he_i.ssue_of~consi.sten~ ~. ~ , -.
C6uncilman MatteOni indicated he has difficulty with the term "Medium Density",
· and he suggested this definition be more specifically clarified to indicate
1/4 or 1/3-acre sites.
Mayor Bridges'further suggested wording be added to this definition indicating
"low density to the highest density permitted within a single-family develop-
ment;"He also .felt wording. should be included to state that "these definitions
are only for the purpose of clarifying consistency between the General Plan
and residential zoning,. and are in .no way intended as an amendment to the
zoning districts."
The City Manager. advised if'these policies are adopted thi~evening, the
intent would be to bring back at the next regular City COuncil Meeting those
items wh i ch rema i n~n~i~~ '~Ci~~ ~
under consideration ~y~~ (~i~" '~'~ ....
It was moved by Councilman Matteonf and s'econded by Councilman Bfigham the
City Manager's memorandum, dated May 2, 1975, be adopted, with the amended
definition of "Medium Density". Also, a policy statement be drafted{~t~,
· th~z~h~i~tions, and adding the statement indi.cating the i nten~O~~
defi~i~n~'fication. The motipn was carried.
C. SDR-1171 ROBERT THURSTON, CORDWOODCOURT, 1 LOT
It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus Resolution
SDR-1171, granting Final Building S~te ApproVal, be adopted. The motion was
carried.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. APPEAL BY NORMAN J. ~RTIN,~2524 MILLER, P, VE., ON PLANNIN~ DIRECTOR'S
DEOISION RE: CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCEAT 12545 NORTHAMPTON COURT
(Cont'd. 4/16/75)'
Mayor Bridges declared the: publ'ic h~aring re-opened at 8:30 P.M.
Mr. No~an Martin, 12524 Miller Avegue, addressed ~he'Council, commenting that
three of the five council members visited his home and observed this situation.
It was his feeling these council members were impressed as to the impact this
h then outlined ~ome
two-story conversion would have On this neig borhood=.' He
of his reasons for~fe~ling this((on(i~i~i~S~i~3TT~2~f~
Ordinance' NS-3.31, as follows: l~)~ prbp6s~d s~'{~6Ver~-i's-25;8~i-ns~ead
of the allowable 20%; 2) The measur~'g~%tT~existi~g structure is 31
APPEAL RE: TWO-STORY CONVERSION (Cont'd.)
feet instead of the required 35 feet; 3) Section of the ordinance which states
that "no new multi-story residential structure shall be allowed opposite or
contiguous to the same."
Mr. Martin then outlined those requirements under Section 17.6 of Ordinance
NS-3 by which the Planning Commission may grant a variance to regulations of
the Ordinance, as follows: 1) That strict or literal interpretation and en-
forcement of the specified'regulation would result in practica~ difficulty
or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent wity the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance; 2) that there are exceptional orextraordinary circum~
stances or conditions applicable go the property involved' or to the in-
intended use of the property which do not apply generally to other properties
classified in the same zoning distr!ct; 3)"that strict or literal inter-
pretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the appli-
cant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of'other properties classified. in
the same zoning district; 4) that the granting of the variance will not
constitute a grant of specialprivilege inconsistent with the limitations
on other properties classified in the same zoning district; and 5) that the
granting of the variahces will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or wel fare, or materially injurious to properties or-improvements in
the vicinity. It was'his opinion this application did not meet all these
~equirements, and therefore, urged that the Council deny issuance of this
use permit.
Mr. Warren Heid, architect representing Mr. and'Mrs. Rohn~r, addressed the
Council, commenting' that it was his understanding we are dealing with a con-
version permit, which may be issued,-~j~'~a~'6'f_T~Planninb Director,
per section 16.15 of Ordinance NS-3i31-. 'Wi,th~r6s~Ct~GMr. Martin's comment
relativ~ to 20% allowable coverage,.Mr. Held indicated that'the existin~
coverage of the structure is greater thah 20% to begin with.. Also, the addition
would be 35 feet from the rear property line, which conforms to the Ordinance.
Mr. Held further commented with respect to Mr. Martin's comments pertaining
to granting of a variance, indicating that he ~t consider this to be a
a second-story addition'. It was his impression this application met with the
requirements of the Ordinance.
Councilman Matteoni commented he was in agreement'with 'the architect~S' point
regarding the "variance procedure",'indicating that this variance language as
read by Mr. Martin was not included in the Two-Story Ordinance. He stated'
the language in the middle of the first paragraph (Section 16.15) represents
something which he advocated at the Planning Commission level when they first
proposed this ordinance, and that is that the guidelines not consist of rigid
c~i~teria, but that tonsideration begiven on a site-by-site application basis.
Councilman Matteoni further pointed out that the City Council provided an
exercise of discretion, whereby in ~onsidering the architectural design and
version Permit. He stated that i~Tdiscussed at one time whether or not
the Planning Commission wanted to hear these Conversion Permit applications,
and the responsibility was delegated to the Planning Director with the language
stated in Section 16.5 of~sOrdinance NS-3.31.
Councilman 'Kraus co~ented he had a~problem with the paragraph in Ordinance
NS-3.31, which states: "Where a multi-story residential structure already
exists on a lot or ~itte, a new mu]ti-residential structure may be erected
Qpposite or contiguous to the same; where a single-~tory residential structure
already exists on a lot op ·site, no newmuqti-story. residential stru6ture shall
be allowed opposite to or contiguous to the same." He felt this paragraph should
be modified.
Councilman '~tteoni 'indicated he woOld be willing to delegate %his ordinance
back to the Planning Co~ission for,further'review.
-4-
APPEAL RE: TWO-STORY CONVERSION (Cont'd.)
It was then moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus
the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried; the public hearing
was closed at 8:45 P.M.
Councilman Matteoni commented he observed this situation~Mr.'T~.Martin's
Eucaly~tr'~'F~'fFo"~"~is>l'o~'ti6~,"a'6~"h~'~ue~ti~'~i~ the two-story addition.
would be an unreasonable interference of the view. Furthermore, he didn't feel
the design of the structure would in any way be an invasion of privacy, as
the frosted-type windows which would face to the north are located in the
bedroom; therefore, it wouldn't seem likely they would ever be'reDlaced with
clear glass. He further commented,the architectural design~6~'f~_.~n-keeping
with the Pride's Crossing area, and'it was his understandi n_~'~hi~'~h~s appli-
cation did go through ArchitecturalSControl with the Pride's'Crossing Home-
owners Association. Councilman Matteoni, therefore, moved that this appeal by
Mr. Martin be denied and a Conversign Permit be issued.
Councilwoman Corr commented she also visited this site, and it was her feeling
with proper landscaping, the gap which allows view of.the structure could be
corrected.
Mr. Kraus stated in his observation from Mr. Martin's site, it was his opinion
this additioniwould have a severe impact, and it ~as his feeling the intent
of the TwosStory Ordinance was to prevent this kind of situation.
It was then moved by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilman Brigham
the Council deny Mr. Martin's.appeal regarding this two-story conversion. The
motion was carried, 4 to 1, Councilman Kraus in opposition.
~~g~ on this propos e~d~i~:~' ~h~(~el'(~a~t-to~t~.se~6aek
requi~ement.
Mayor Bridgas'clarified this misint~rpretation to Mr. Martin's satisfaction.
B. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS - SARATOGA VILLAGE
PARKING DISTRICT NO. 2 (Cont'd.' 4/16/75)
The City Manager explained the purpgse of the hearing this evening is to con-
sider adoption of a resolution which would modify the boundaries of this pro-
posed project from those originally considered by the City Council approximatel9
one year ago,
The Mayor re-opened the public hearing at 8:55 P.M.
~CAl~i~'t~ represent~g ;~r;:.D~mps~y'~i~dd~d~ncil,
F~= ~'~6~h~i~l'~k~o~6~t'i~i~f~iTh~
~ based on the new figures that will be coming out on this project. He stated '
they would have to give a lot of thought and analysis as to'whether or not,
based on these revised figures, they would want to be included in this assess-
ment district, as this migh~ make development of this property unfeasib~l~:.
He indicated th~D~e~'~.?~(~¥~gainst this parcel has been increased
from approximateT~O~'~53'~OOOT'~ounting to an assessment of $3.50 per
square foot. Therefore, it was his feeling every land 5wner should be given
the opportunity to revi~:these figures with their tenants, and urged that the
matter be continued to the next regular meeting of the Council.
Mr. La~y Tyler, 13611 Saratoga Vista Ave., co~ented that it' was his hope the
Council~ould proceed in the passage of this resolution tonight~ although he
concurred with Mr. Rubnitz's co~ents relative to the increased prices.
It was then moved by Councilman Krads and secondedby Councilman Brigham the
public hearing be closed.
- 5 -
VILLAGE PARKING DIST. NO. 2 (Cont'd.)
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Mayor Bridges Resolution
No. 696-E be adopted. The motion was carried, 3 to 2 in favor, Councilmen
Matteoni and Brigham in opposition.
VI. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
A. MAYOR
1. Announced an Executive Session following this meeting,to discuss
pendinglitigation.
B. FINANCE
1. Payment of Claims
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilmen Brigham the
list of disbursements, 21212 through 21318, be approved, and the Mayor
be authorized to sign the warrants. The motion was carried.
C. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS
1. Parks & Recreation Commission - Recommendation for Master Plan and
Improvements at Hakone Gardens ~
jt w~s the r__ecgm~m.~n_,d~at~ion_~o.f__t~,~.Ma,~r_~r'th~ ~:fic ~mp~'~'~ve~_~
,p~ojects be delayed for~d of~ to 4 mO~hs for'~gfisia~ra~i'OTd6~in~
h-~-t~;fi.s~al_y~T~ -- ~ .... - . ~
The Council indicated its concern regarding the exten{ of termite damage,
~Tt~i~t~l~ $2,000 for repair of the entire project. It
was {h~v~bT~(F'~pidges and seconded b~ Councilman kraus_this
matter be scheduled for~u~~u's~'~~~e W~eti ,,
~i~~d~ea~~i6n o~ ~'~9 ~"'~ 9~5r-- ~n~ ~6~;i~':~k~ '
2. Bicentennial Committee - Progress~ Report on Activities
Council acknowledged report, dat6d May 2, 1975..
D. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS
1. Director of Public Works - Report~ Re: Relocation of Bus S.top on Prospect and Miller.
Mr. Shook reported he had received a reply from the County Transportation
Agency regarding the City's r~uest concef~ing relocation of the bus stop
adjacent to 19519 Eric Drive and proposed"re-routing. He indicated the
County is reluctant to comply with this request unless the City of San Jose
supported this plan.
It was the opinion of the Council the City should pursue this matter with
the City of San Jose, and if necessary, ta~e~ it to the County Planning
Co~ittee for possible action.
E. CITY MANAGER
1. County Board of Supervisors' Board Meeting to consider granting of contract
for modification to portion of Lawrence Expressway between Northlawn and
Fre~ay 280 - It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by CounCilman
Kraus the City of Saratoga go on record in opposition to the proposed expansion
between Northlawn and Freeway 280due to the impact this would have on Saratoga,
particularly to Quito Road. The motion was carried.
~ 6-
2. Complaint Re: The Burl (Cont'd. 4/16 Meeting) - The City Manage~ ~eported
the City's Code Enforcement Officer had investigated this complaint and
found no violation. He i~dica~ed he would advise Mr. Croft, who submitted
this complaint, of the City's findings.
3. Reco~T~endation Re: SB-189, Re: Penalty Procedure - It was moved byCouncil-
man Kraus and seconded by CounCilwoman Corr the City indicate its opposition
to this proposed bill to Senator Smith. The motion was carried.
VII. COMMUNICATIONS
A. WRITTEN
1. Henry J. Kraus,~Jr., Chairman, Committee for the Library Bond Issue,
indicating total funds collected for library building.
It was moved by Councilman Bribham and seconded by Councilman Matteoni
the Council approve acceptance of the check for $181.95, and the creation
of a trust fund for receivi'hg this ~money. The motion was ~arried.
2. Mr. and Mrs. Virgil Campbell, 14482 Oak Place, urging the Council's
consideration in the relocatioh of the Swanee's building. - City Manager
to communicate with Mr. and Mrs. Campbell and advise plans for this
building.
3. J.F.B. Johnston, Captain, U.S.'Navy (ret.), 14210 Douglas Lane, informing
of the closing to motorized traffic a portion of~Douglas Lane. - NOted
and filed.
4. Supervisor Diridon thanking City Council and staff for alloting time on
April 8 to meet with him. - Noted and filed.
5. A. L. Hanson, 13761 Dolphin Drive, requesting a change of density on
their property. - Referred to Planning Commission for considerati on.
6. Mr. and Mrs. William E. Foster, 19922 Scotland Drive, requesting a
three-way stop sign be installed at the intersection of Scotland and
Cumberland Drives. - Referred to Department of Public Works.
7. Historical Heritage Commission of Santa Clara County, enclosing a list
of alternatives to 1974 Bond Act priority list. - Noted add filed.
8. I.C.C. letter Re: Breakfast Meeting on May 28, 1975 with Congressman
McCloskey. ~ Noted and filed.
B.
1. John Weir, 12343 Arroyo de Arguello, submitting a petition for future
Council consideration requesting that the undeveloped Fremont Union
High School property be.rezoned from R-1-12,500/15,000 to R-1-40,O00),
and requesting the General Plan be modified to reflect same. - It was
(i~t~'~h'~s~i~ ~'a~d~'~edfo"~h~ re~l~r meeting on
Ma~21~ T~75.~'~ ................
2~'Mayor Bridges recognized the presence of members in the audience, as
follows:
Marjorie Foote - A.A.U.W.; John Powers - Saratoga Chamber of Commerce;
John Weir - President, Greater Arguello Homeowners Association;
Norman Martin and Linda Callon.,- members, Saratoga Planning Commission;
Dorothy Parker - Good Government Group; and Starr Hannaford - Information
and Referral Service.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Mayor'Bridges and seconded ~ CoUncilman Kraus the meeting be
a~journ~d to an Executive Session. The motion was carried. The meeting was
adjourned at lO:lO P.M.
espectfully submitted,
: City Cler
- 8-