HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-01-1975 City Council Minutes MINUTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
TIME: Wednesday, October l, 1975 - 7:30 P.M.
PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, Cali-.fornia
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ORGANIZATION
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Bridges, Brigham, Kraus, Corr, Matteoni
Absent: None
B. MINUTES
Councilwoman .~Cb~Y~g~(d"~h~na~t~' VI:E;~T ~e~,'~T~6~ ~/efi t
Study Re: City S~rv~ ceS'l F~F~'R~e~ ~i'R~ ,' ~o'~evi ~ ~o~d~g"~ fall ~s:
2) Provide comparative costs for street and storm drain maintenance in a
hill area .
Councilman Kraus noted a change under Item III-B, first paragranh, to indicate
<!ys i =of Arco site demolition for 1976-7 . .
Councilman Brigham suggested mentionbe made in this paragraph regarding his
suggestion to decrease funds for eutto Road bridge improvements from $100,000
to $50,000.
It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the
minutes of September 17~ 1975, be approved, subject to the noted modifications.
The motion was carried.
II. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus to approve
the composition of the.Consent Calendar: The motion was carried.
B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Agreement between the City of Saratoga and West Valley Community
College Ecology Club for Operation and Maintenance of Recycle Center
2. Construction Acceptance
a) SDR-1081 James Day, vessing Road
b) Tract 5150 George Day C6nstruction Co., Dbuglass Lane
3. Release of Monument Bond
a) SDR-1081 James Day, Vessing Road
4. Payment of Claims
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Matteoni ~he
consent calendar be approved. The motion was carried.
III. BIDS ANB CONTRACTS
A. Agreement with O.S.I. for Electronic Data Processing Services
This ~atter was continued to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on Tuesday, October
7th.
IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
A. Minute Resolution to Ap.prove Program.with Countyof Santa Clara for
$3,000 in Community Development Act Funds for Developmentof Neighbor-
hood Rehabilitation Program
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to
adopt a minute resolution~'~'~.r. 6~i~the program with the Countv for !~9"~
Development Act funds in th~ ~6~ ~f $3',000 for this program.' The m~6~"
was carried.
B. Minute Resolution Re: Authorization to Decla.re ~rtain. City Equipment Surplus
and Authorizing Disposal of Said .Equi~men~
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the Council
declare the 1944 Caterpillar motor grader as surplus equipment and authorize
disposal of same. The motion was carried.
C. Minute Resolution to Certify Environmental Impact Report Consultant List
for 12-Month Period
~. ]. I.R. c6~sul tant 1 i st be certi fi ed for ~ ~ 2-~o~h~p'~ri~d'.-* 'Th'~' mbtion-'wa's-'
carried.
Councilman Brigham~n'dicated he wou~d also,like too'ffer a resolution that
would require all environmental impact reports include a transit element.
This matter was set for preliminary ~discussion at the Committee of the Whole
Meeting on Tuesday, October7th.
D. Minute Resolution to Establish Separate Bank Account for Special Events
at Community Center
It was moved by .Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr a bank
account be established for special events at the Community Center. The
motion was carried.
(Not yet being 8:00 P.M., the Council proceeded to Item VI]:~9 th__~e~ggen~a) .... '~
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
A. MAYOR
1. Announced an Executive Session during the break this evening to
discuss potential litigation.
B. COUNCI'L AND COMMISSION REPORTS
1. Council Committee Report Re: S~atus of Library Negotiations.
The City Manager advised this ~eport would follow the discussion
at the break!~i~e'~ti:(e,~si~
2. Recommendation from Parks and Recreation Commission Re: Master Plan for
Co-development of Foothill Park.
Miss Barbara Sampson, Director of Community Servic'es, presented the pro-
posed Master Plan, and outlined the proposed uses on this property. She
futher indicated the City needs to get an approved plan in order to start
talking specifics with the School District.
It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus to
approve the Master Plan for co-development of Foothill Park. The motion
was carried.
-2-
VI. PUBLIC HEARIHGS
A. Consideration of Final Environmental Impact Report on Application to
Rezone from "R-1-40,O00" (Single-Family Residential) and "A" (A~riculture)
to "R-1-40,O00 PC" (Single-Family Residential, Planned Community) - Blackwell
Homes (Parker Ranch), Prospect and Stelling Roads (Cont'd. 8/6/75 & 8/26/75)
The Mayor re-opened the public hearing at 8:05 P.M.
Mr. Vince Garrod, 22600 Mt. Eden Road, addressed the Council, speaking as
an adjacent property owner to the proposed Parker Ranch. He indicated this
project has been studied and re-studied, and he feels it is time the Council
makes its decision. It was his opinion the highest and best use of this
property is Residential, and indicated he has heard or read anything that
would suggest any better method of development than some form of cluster
development. He urged that the Council approve the plan as proposed.
Russell R. Crowther, 20788 Norada Court, addressed the Council, commenting
that he would like the Council to look a little further into one area which
concerns him which he does.:not feel the E.I.R. adequately resolves, and this
relates to the scenic beauty~$~sp'~"i~'S~ratoga. He i'ndicated they have been
asking for approximately one g~7'~6F'i~ormation~-~d ~a~'6'~'~6'of(d~l~a'tions
· ~e'~_~i~ 't~ {~'t~f the ridge, an4_~b_i s has _no~' b.'~y~i~d ~"'R~'i ~d~ated
the~e ale ~ar~iC~lar constraints~6~Gpo~ed i~l'th~' S~a~g~-~rdinances which
would limit the distance at whic6'9~6d~d=b~i-l~d'relat-ive ~o the ridgeline,
and indicated he would like to see some statement of what that minimum would be
on this development. He felt it was very important in terms of determining the
environmental impact of this development. Also, he commented that he feels there
is bound to be some history related to the way ~hings were done in the past,
and he would like to see a specific statement in the E.I.R. regarding what this
impact would be.
Mr. Crowther asked if information was received from the previQus~b~g'~on
this matter with respect to seismic safety and a cost benefit study.
Mayor Bridges indicated the Council did receive certain information ~
from the staff related to these two questions,~a~d~T~is information was made
public at the last City Council meeting.
The City Manager summarized his report at the September 17th meeting relative
to a cost benefit study. He indicated at the last public hearing on this matter,
information was also requested from~the Transit District concerning transit
available to the proposed development, and since that time the Planning Director
has received a letter from the Transit District which indicates at the present
ti me there are two routes which would serve thi!s general ar~a, and there would
be additional coverage at the intersection of Prospect and Stelling, which would
come into effect in ~9~[ T~e~tter also mentioned the Vasona branch of the
S.P. was one being consid~ fo~ future use in this area. They also recommended
improvements, both on-site and off-site, to include pedestrian access.to this
~ntersection, particularly for Parker Ranch residents, and also to provide bicycle.
trails where the terrain is suitable. They further suggested the creation of a
bus stop in the quadrant occupied by the Parker Ranch, and mentioned
types of facilities which might be ~ncluded. ~
With regard to Mr. Crowther's comment regarding seismic safety, the City Manager
indicated he didn't recall ~h~'~t~re was a concensus on the part of the Council
as to whether or not they wanted further information. He indicated that Mr.
Van Duyn, Planning Director has met and discussed with Mr. McLaughlin, the
geologist referred to^in ?velr~l ~revious discU_s~s~_ons,::~the ~iffe~ence in the~-~
U.S.G.S. maps. and~those maps prepared by the State Division of Mines.
.......... MF.'~n'~~t~a~hatin his meetin~ with Mr. McLau~hl.in and his assoc~at~;'
Mr. Sword ,!:t_'~s i ndi cate'~'t~'{'~e~wou l a '~o~ ~ t~6'~i~i ga~i~n ~ocesses,
and there WaS no hard core information they could pin-point on either one of the
maps which they could challenge without: an~-8~i~' ~d~d~i~'d~,site investi-
gation. He indicated that both parti~' h~e ~ress~d,~n-i'nterest' to be on the
-3 -
E.I.R. - Parker Ranch (Cont'd.)
site at the time the soils and geologic investigation is conducted. He indicated
the discrepancy here is that the U.S.G.S. says the~e is no fault trace in the
area, and the California State Mines Division says there is.
Mayor Bridges indicated he would request formally that the 'communication
received from the Transit District be made a part of .the E.I.R.
Mr. Crowther indicated they have re'ceived most of their information from the
California Division of Mines and Geology in San Francisco, and this particular
area is under the direction of Dr~ John Williams. Therefore, he suggested
Dr. Williams be asked to be at the site at the time of this trenching. Mr.
Crowther further stated he is somewhat concerned about how this trenching work
would be done,~and it has been indi'cated that geophysical'measurements would be
used. He commented that he has been advi'sed by various geologists that on sites
of this type, this is not a reliable way to determine whether'the fault is
present or not, and that.trenching is the only reliable technique. Mr. Crowther
indicated that it seems much of this project hinges on the outcome of this survey.
He stated that information developed in May 1974,-relevant to soil.and geologic
conditions is available in a report from Applied Soils Mechanics, and this
report is not part of the E.I.R., and it wa§_~u~ers~andi~g ~hi.s?~epo~_t~has
not been made a part of the E.ILR. ~H~'i~icatedhe was ~onTerned as t~why~
~_~hiS~'data has not been. used.
Bill Heiss, Civil Engineer for this' project, addressed the Council, advising
that this report of Applied Soils Mechanics is'.included_in the E I.R , and
this was one of the items submitted early in the pro~cT.e~§~>of the E.I.R.
Mr. Heiss further commented that th'ere are various remedial devices for
removal of compaction, control of erosion, etc., and these will be considered
as the project progresses. He added that Mr. Greenley of Applied Soils Mechanics
is in the audience this evening, and he has indicated it is quite common for
representatives of the U.S.G.S. and the Division of Mines to be on the job site
when these studies are completed~ and they use very broad approaches in deter-
mining potential areas for faults, for which they really need the definitive
data that is evolved in these field investigations. {~
Relative to the scenic aspect and t'he ridgelines, Mr. Heiss indicated that ~
following the E.I.R. hearings, it w.as the feeling. of the Planning Commission >
that they would like to see a scale model prepare~ and this was used in their ~
evaluations of the scenic aspect. He commented it was during this time that -'~
the plan changed considerably from that originally proposed, and the connecting~
road across the ridgeline was eliminated. He felt this provided much in the ~
way'of information relevant to scenic impact. ~
Mr. Heiss pointed out on the viewgraph a plot plan of a project in the City of >
Belmont, which he indicated compare% in no way to the proposed Blackwell project.
He pointed out those differentiating factors in this prQject, such as the fact
it is a conventional subdivision wh~ich was mass-graded, with 7,000 square-foot
lots and 5-foot setbacks, located on 30 to 40 acres of development. Mr. Heiss
indicated he felt it should be clarified what kind of development Belmont is --
it is a hillside development, but one which was mass-graded. He indicated it
was developed under the PC concept, and the reason. for this is that the density
is 3.3~dwelling units per acre, and certain areas in this locale were deeded to
the City as part of an open space regime.
The City Manager presented an item of correspondence. he had'received in re-
sponse to an inquiry made at the pr'evious public hearing on this matter, from
N. Perry Moerdyke. Jr. Mr. Moerdyke advises that title to the Parker Ranch
property is vested in a corporation known as Parker Ranch Co., and the beneficial
ownership is held by a partnership known as Valle Vista Ranch Co.. He further
advises that no members of this partnership are involved in the government of the
City of Saratoga.
It was indicated this letter would be made a part of the official record.
It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the
public heaHng be closed. The motion was carried. The public hearing was
closed at 8:35 P.M.
-4-
E.I.R. ~ Parker Ranch (Cont'd.)
~l~r. Van Du~n advised that the Planning Commi ssi~~A.~.ta_~'a"~f~6T.ci l
tha-~l~6iT~'l~F6~t wOul~t~h~i~iYic~'i~ct on ~' e~i ron~n~ ~ ~
~he~ef6~'e~CoGnci ~" 's'~ r~{ ~cti on wou~d be'~ to~erti fy~t~e -E . I'~ R., and th'~
second acti.on would be to make a determination whether or not the Council feels
the project will have'a signif~.cant~impact on the environment. At'that time,
'the Council should instruct the City's Planning Director'to file a Notice of
Determination w~th the State of California.
Councilman Kraus indicated he has had several concerns regarding the certification
of the E.I.R., particularly with regard to: 1) cost revenue study a~ it is out-
lined in the E.I.R.; 2) need for test borings to determine if the land is suitable
for building; and 3) fllooding and the money this might cost the City.
With regard to the Cost Study, he indicated it should be realized this project is
going to cost the City money,,~'~'d~'£~es~'~osts should not be considered in the
E.I.R. unless they can be con~i~6~e~!'G~~'~oth sides of the ledger.
As far as test borings are concerned, he stated he would urge that a detailed
soils and geologic investigation be performed prior to the design of the project,
as per the recommendation of Applied Soils Mechanics in their preliminary
physiological feasibility study, and that the Council insist on accurate test
test borings when the project reaches this stage.
As to flooding, Councilman Kraus indicated it was his opinion this is a major
concern that should be addressed bythe developer, and there has been considerable
correspondence received on this subject from the City's Public Works Department,
Santa Clara Valley Water District, and the Center for Environmental Design. In
addition, many citizens have testified regarding problems'they have experienced,
and he felt these problems must be addressed and resolved if the development of
this subdivision is to continue. H~ indicated he would urge the developer to
meet with the City's Publ'ic Works. Department and certify to the Department's
satisfaction that the proposed solutions will cure the problems. Also, that the
Council be appraised of what is being proposed to alleviate the flooding con-
ditions, and these items be considered further along the line before final
approval is granted.
Following some additional discussion by the Council on this matter, it was moved-~
by Councilman Matteoni and,seconded by Councilwoman Corr to adopt Resolution 748,
certifying the final Environmenta~ Impact Report as complete, with the addition
of the Transit District information, as well as the update of economic data, and
including an amendment to state that the Environmental'Impact Report contains
information which speaks to certain impacts, such as flooding, traffic, scenic,
open space and geology, unless certain mitigating factors are taken. The motion
was carried unanimously.
B. Consideration of Chan~e of Zonin~ forBlackwellHomes (ParkerRanch), Prospect
and Stelling Roads, from "R-1-40,O00" (Sin~le-Famil~ Residential) and "A"
(Agriculture) to "R-1-40,O00 PC" (S~n~le-Family Residential, Planned Community)
The Mayor opened the pQblic hearing at 8:58 P.M.
Bill Heiss, Civil Engineer for the Blackwell Homes~project, addressed the
Council, and proceeded to ~v~e.a_slide presentation which related back and
forth ~h~ ~rojec~f~o~ ~a~les. He first outlined the~tatistics of
............ 157 acres o~op~n'space~ r s r lot
254 trees, ~% of which are 12 inches or larger,
scheduled for removal.
~'The mitigati~'plan proposes, 127 units, 1.72;acres per, unit,
~ ......... ' ~ ..... ~'~dction of tree removal from ~o 182 trees,
reduction in grading to 178,000 cubic yards.
It was further the recommendation of the mitigation plan ~hat the connection
to Prospect Road be made at the rear of the property, where tree removal was
left, and secondly, to reduce the liklihood of people using Prospect Road, and
offer the in-tract subdivision road as a means of getting to Saratoga Country
Club.
- 5 -
Rezonin~ - Blackwell Homes (Cont'd.)
The plan also introduced more split-level homes, reduction in some of the
grading, and recommended including the extension from this portionof the sub-
division out to Comer Drive to provide a continuous circulation link. The
latest plan proposes 105 units, and this plan also proposes the elimination of
the ridge top connection, since thfs seemed to be the most sensitive,'from a
visOal point of view, from any aspeCt of the project. This plan represents
2.8 acres per dwelling unit, and this plan introduces for the first time the
private street. He indicated there are approximately 12~ acres of private
street, and 8 acres of publ.ic street. There are 157 acres of open space, and
a reduction in tree removal to195,. and there is a reduction in grading. This
plan also tries to speak to some of the Planning Commission's concern relative
to slope conservation, and some of the features they have incorporated in their
present ordinance, such as setback criteria relative to public streets, and
~i~.~_ri~V~(T-~t~ets to provide access to the homes.
Mr. Heiss indicated there is a large increase in the amount of split level units,
and by moving the houses back from the public street; it did result in some the
homes being built on sloping terrain:. He indicated he has compiled a breakdown
of he number of units allocated to the various types: Le~l units - 9; side-
split units - 8; downhill split-level units - 88.
He stated that one of the other aspects of the mitigation plan was the creation
of a new street section for the hillside ar~as in two different categories --
publi~ streets and private streets. Mn. Heiss proceeded to outline the place-
ment of these various public and private roads throughout the project, indicating
that they are placed.wherever the topography allows the ability to construct
and develop, and with any substantial amount of grading.., He indicated those
areas where parking would be allowed (parking bays), and areas to remain in open
space.
Mr. Heiss further oUtli'ned the locations of the trail systems throughout the
project, and 'showed the connection ~f existing trails with those to be developed.
He commented ~('unti'l' ~h~ wate'r ~'s~6~t~olled,~ i~'~i'll-continue to cause this
erosion, and'he pointed out the area proposed for building the bridge, which he
indicated would control'the water run-off and direct this water to the creek,
thus eliminating this erosion.
He pointed out the locati"on of the major 4,000,000 gallon water tank, as well
as the 150,000 gallon tank to be supplied by San Jose Water Works to accommodate
the fire requirements in this area.'
Mr. Heiss indicated that prior to preparation of a final development plan and
final tentative map, the Planning Commission has instructed the engineers tO
field-stake the allignment of the road, field-stake the location of the buildings,
and then, each of those building sites would be subjectto individual field
inspections to ascertain if they are correct from the aspects of soils and
geology, the slope of the property, the view of the property, and all other
aspects. There is also the preparation of the CC&R's, preparation of the home-
owners association, a detailed landscape plan, detailed grading plan, Design
Review, and the architecture contemplated for the project.
He indicated public util'ities are available on the project,"- in sufficient
quantity and volume, and no extension of utilities is necessary.
In conclusion, Mr. Heiss indicated there have been numerous changes in this
project since its onset, all of which he feels have been in the right direction.
He indicated they feel this projectis of definite benefit to the developer and
to the City, and feel it is an appropriate rezoning proposal, which has received
unanimous approval of the Planning Commission; therefore, would urge the Council
to take similar affirmative action.'
Councilman Matteoni co~ented with regard to~ai~t~Han~e~6f:~th~ co~OD' area
of roads, suggesting that we explore the
ment district, as opposed to leaving this up to the homeowner's association.
-6-
Rezoning - Bla~kwell Homes (Cont'd.)
Mr. Heiss replied they could explore the possibility of formulating some
kind of tax maintenance district on something more complex, where each indi-
Vidual area, could have a specific tax rate for their particular section.
However, the Cityf' has the abilit~ to. lev. v the acquisition of the funds to
do the necessary work to~'~6Ti'~ ~i~m~i~'~:~'6~ ~aintenance.
Councilman Matteoni then asked if t~ere was a maximum number of al=lowable units
along ~rivate roa~s. Mr. Heiss indieated this would be 4 units.
Councilwoman Corr-inquired i f there would be any design concept to indicate these
as private roads.
Mr. Heiss explained that the entrance to these private drives would be treated
differently, in that the curbing that forms the public street will not be
interrupted as it passes in.front, and it will appear similar to a driveway
entrance.
Mr. Russell Crowther addressed the Council, indicating that they are concerned
about many aspects of this plan, although there has been major progress made.
He indicated he would like to point out the 135-unit plan did not conform to
the City Ordinances, and .the 127-unit plan did not conform to the General Plan
with regard to cluster zoning. He indicated there has been a good deal of con-
cern expressed by some of the homeowners in the hills about the features of the
new ordinance, particularly with respectto open space'dedication and tong-term
practicality of preserving this as open space, and also, he could see many
reasons, such as fires, landslides, etc. for this being taken to court.
Mr. Crowther further conmented they'are concerne~ about zoning of this project
to PC for two reasons: 1) the General Plan states this land shall be open space;
and 2) the PC Ordinance is being reViSed, and we really don't know what it means
to zone something '!PC". Furthermore, he indicated there is great concern about
the Williamson Act rezoning, on which there has been much research; however, this
property owner is not present this evening.
He indicated it is their feeling this density is too high for the land and
its character, and that the Subdivision Ordinance currently in effect, allows
a more reasonable density forthis property, and feel that a plan with a lower
density would result in a much smaller risk to the residents of Saratoga --
it would reduce potential costs due to litigation from various problems that
might occur on the site, it would reduce visual impacts and traffic, etc.
Frank Perdichizzi, 19804 Colby Court, addressedthe Council, indicating he
would like to support Councilman Matteoni's con~ent regarding a tax district
or some type of maintenance district controlled by the City, rather than by
the homeowners of the area, in that there is the ljklihood that the home-
owner!s association may or may not be able to obtain the money that is required
to maintain the open areas.
Mr. Perdichizzi further commented that he feels the present interim ordinance
is very suitable and allows a Very gopd density, and if it is decided this
area should be zoned PC, it was his feeling i t should be zoned according to the
ordinance as it is now written, rather than as "R~l-40,O00".
It was then moved by Councilman. Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the
public hearing be continued to the first regular City Council Meeting in November,
and this issue be re-noticed for that time. The motionnwas carried.
At the suggestion of Mr. Van Duyn, it was a~so agreed to set a joint meeting
with the Cauncil and the Planning Commission to look more in depth at some of
the suggested mitigating measures to this proposed development. It was
agreed to set this meeting on a date prior to next public hearing on this rezoning.
The City Manager will advise the Council of this date.
-7-
C. Rezoning from "R-1-12,500" and "R-1-'15,000" (Si ~le-Family Residential to
"R-1-20,O00 PC'l (Single-Family Residential, Planned Community) the 47.39
acres belon~in~ to the Fremont Union School District, bounded'on the north
by the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks and Prospect Road, on the east bv
Tracts #4508 and #4536 (known as "Pheasant Ridge"),.on the west by the p~operty
commonly known as the "Parker Ranch" site, and on the south by Tract #4886
(known as "Arroyo de Arguello") (Cont'd. 8/20/75)
The City Manager explained that this matter initially came to the City Council
from the Planning Conmission, and it was staff initiated prior to the Council's
policy statement concerning consistency in zoning districts with the General
Plan.
Mr. Van Duvn, Planning Director, indicated he felt the Planning Commission
~l]T~e~'~c.~Ta~ing .the PC OrdinanCe in the ~ery near future, as well as the
proposed Hillside Ordinance, and felt it was necessary to conclude these hearings
before considering any further action on this rezoning issue. He estimated
this to be in approximately 4 months.
The public hearing was opened at 10:25 P.M.
There being' no public comment at this time, it was moved by Councilman Matteoni
and seconded by Councilman Brigham to continue this hearing to the first regular
City Council Meeting in February, 1976, and recommend the Council receive pro-
gress reports on these ordinances prior the time this hearing is .~e-scheduled.
The motion was carried. The public hearing was closed at l~':.j~'~.'M~.
Recess' and Reconveyne
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS Cont'd.)
B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS
1. Council Committee Report Re: Status of Library Negotiations
Councilman Matteoni reported that in trying to bring the library' site
negotiations to a conclusion, the appointed Council. committee has held
several special meetings with the ~roperty owner in~anattemDt to work
out some of the details~_a~i~g~'~u~'lines, etc., as w~ll as the
legal framework of such an agreement. '
He indicated that the Counci l~T(6~t~6~s~O~'~'~n~~ n s
they felt they could accept, which is being referred to as '!Plan A",
dated Octobe~ ~1, 1975,-and which-plan describes the librar~ sit'e under
consideration as being located on the rear portion of propertv,
-: aligning with McFa~l.and Avenue off Saratoga Avenue. ~He indicated this
~ plan takes advantage of the natural creek setti'ng, w~th parking to be
in _f3m3nt of the ljbra[v buitdj_n~n.. He indicated this ~lan represents a
plot of 2.27 acreS, recognizing the fact that it has to be precisely
surveyed. He indicated the offer is within the budget limitations which
the Councilshas been working with, and those dollars would include both
the land and the necessary driveway and walkway approaches to.the library.
He further commented that the offe~ would be based'on legal considerations
discussed in terms of damage to~the remainin~ property, and also, with
the understanding that i f CS_~d~6~6~t'
place' in 5 to 10 years, that ~h~'li~'~y~Si~e c~o~(~d~'~'~Te~s~6"
for denying development.
Councilman Matteoni explained t~at there is concern on the property owner's
part with regard to acceptance of the offer, that concern being in terms
of condemnation, and he would suggest!asking that the City Attorney prepare
the necessary resolution of condemnation for consideration at an Adjourned
Regular Meeting of the Council next Tuesday, October 7th.
-8~
'Status Report Re: Library Negotiations (Cont'd.)
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham to
authorize the committee to make a formal offer to Dr. Abrams within
the previously agreed budget limitations, and to indicate the Council's
concurrence to proceed with "Plan A", and to work with Dr. Abrams and his
~attorney in defining details regarding boundaries~d'f~tdF~'~6~6~h~
~r'~vities, and direct the City Attorney to prepafe'~he~ResolutiOn of '
~Coh'demnation for consideration on October 7th. The motion was carried.
C. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS
1. Public Works - Report Re: Petition Requesting Pedestrian Way Along
Quito Road between Northerly City Limits and Bucknall Road.
Reported that the staff is working with the property owners~'~!~'~_.~'-
matter, and report back to the Council any progress.
D. CITY MANAGER
1. Report Re: Discussions with the County of Santa Clara Re: Hakone Gardens
~eported that at the meeting with County representatives regarding use
of County funds for reconstruction work at Hakone Hardens, it was learned
the foil'owing provisions would. be required 'in order to expend these funds:
l) park must be designated in the County General Plan; and 2) County must
have ownership of the park.
It was ~U~'j~ by Councilman Kraus the City Manager communicate again
with the Codht~, indicating that the City would not be interested in
deeding this park to the County~ but would still be interested in future
funds that might become available for this reconstruction. The City
Manager indicated he follow through on this suggestion.
2. Report Re: City Council and Planning Commission Agenda Mailings and
Packets
The City Manager requested this matter be agendized at the next regular
City Council Meeting.
3. Claim for Personal Injury - Lester G. Sachs, Claire C. Sachs, Leslie
E. Sachs, Lee M. Sachs, and Lisa C. Sachs
It was moved ~y Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the
claim be denied and referred to the City's insurance carrier for handling.
The motion was carried.
E. COUNCIL REPORTS
1. Councilwoman Corr voiced her concern with regard to the practice of
apartment conversions to condominiums, and requested the Council give
some immediate attention to this.problem.
It was indicated this matter would be agendized for the Adjourned Regular
Meeting on October 7th.
2. Councilman Brigham - Reported he has discussed status of revenue program
with Congressman Mineta, and it appears that the program is in deep trouble.
Requested that mayors send letters of support.
VIII. COMMUNICATIONS
1. Judith Moss, Mayor, City of Mountain View, urging the Council to discuss the
issue of procedures used by LAFCO in arriving at its decision to approve a
potential annexation. - Further discussion of this matter to be set for Conmni ttee
of the Whole Meeting on October 7th..
-9-
Written Communications (Cont'd.)
2. Amy Nelson, 19780 Via Escuela Ave., expressing concern over the increasing
amount of traffic on her street, and requesting a stop signat the, corner of
Ten Oaks and Via Escuela. - Referred to Public Works staff for-a report back
to the Council within 30 days.
3. Robert T. Sapp, Chai.rman, Board of Directors, Santa Clara Valley Water District,
advising of recent events of importance Re: the construction of the San Felipe
Division Central Valley Project. - Noted and filed.
4. Ralph Pearson, 15129 E1 Quito Way, ~equesting the road improvement conditions
set forth in building site approval agreements Re:. SDR-956 and SDR-IO07 ~e
deemed satisfied.
It was moved by Councilman Kraus an~ seconded by Councilwoman Corr the Council
deny this request. The motion was carried.
5. Residents of Kilbride and Miljevich Drives requesting a 4-way stop sign at
this intersection. - Referred to Public Works staff for a report back to the
Council within 30 days.
6. Marilyn White, President, Los Gatos-Sara~oga Symphony Society, requesting money
allocated for 1975-76 budget be placed in the Los Gatos-Saratoga Symphony account.-
This action previously approved by the counciq.
7. Mr. Paul W. Madsen, Secretary, Clara Mateo Garbage~en's~Association, 644 Stockton
Ave., San Jose, Re: Solid Waste Management Plan. - City Manager advised a meeting
has been scheduled with the West Valley cities to review this plan.
8. Mr. and Mrs. T. J. Keliher, 12765 Brookglen Court', -~e~.'~e~6~l~6~'~6~L~
the gates on one side of their property tobe r~i_~e~.~abov~ the'leg~l"limit of
6 feet to 8 feet. - It was the concensus of the Council this fee should not be
waived.
The Mayor recognized the presence of public group representatives present inthe
audience:
April Barrett, League of Women Voters; Mary Moss, Friends of the Library
and Good Government Group; John Powers, Chamben of Commerce;'
Harry Mayfield, Good Government Group; Jean Woodward and Lynn Belanger,
Saratoga Planning Commission; Russell Crowther, Arguello Homeowners
Association; Nancy McDonald, Republican Central Committee;
Isaak Abrams, Prides Crossing Homeowners Association;
Charles Early, Saratoga Library Commission.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilman Kraus an~ seconded by Councilman Brigham the meeting be
adjourned to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on October 7th. The motion was carried~
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 midnight.
ectf 'tted,
Ro
- 10-