Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-17-1975 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, DecembeF 17, 1975 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL -~P~ee~t.TT'~"~u~i~m_~H_.~]'eeF~;~;~ni, Bridges Absent: Non~ ........ ' ' " B. MINUTES It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the mimutes of November 19, 1975 and December 3, 1975 be aDproved. The motion was carried, with Councilman Kraus abstaining from the vote on the November 19th minutes due to his absence at that meetin~. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR' 1.Authorize Mayor to .Execute Deferred Improvement Agreement (SDR-1201', Clifford Dennee, Paul Ave.) 2.Notice of Completion for Seal Coating and Overlaying Certain City Streets - 1975 3. Payment of Claims 4. City Clerk's Financial Report 5. City Treasurer's Report It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded b.v Councilman Kraus approval ~f the Consent Calendar. The motion was carried. III. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A..:Rate'!'Mod~fication to C~llection, Transportation,,and Refuse C611ection II~raachise for Green Valley Dispo~'al Co: ................ The City Manager explained that this proposal calls for a 12.5% increase in the monthly rate for residential first-can service (from $2.00 tO $2.25 for the first can), and approximately 12% increase for each additional can (from $1.25 to-$1.4~). It is further proposed that the rate for bins be adjusted to $10.00. Ne further reported that the labor costs of Green Valley have increased 9.22% since April, 1972, and equipment costs have risen 15.93% W. R. Green, 13442 Argon Drive~ addressed the Council and "~m~t'~'the~ ~'u~' ~h~'~r~et'i~tT~'f~6'~'6~"~a~';~th(f~l!l~i'ng ~6~S-ide~atib~:= - ~ ...... ~ ............ .~- ....... . 1) the question of why San Jose can negotiate a new contract which includes 3 barrels minimum for approximately the cost 1 barrel costs Saratoga now. 2) With the handling of barrels per man, whether there shouldn't be some kind of zoning involved, where the hill' p~ople would be paying different price than the people in the condensed areas. He didn't feel the people with homes every 100 feet and homes on both sides of the street should not have to pay the same price as in those areas where there is one house per acre on one side of the street or a hillside. Rate Modification - Green Valley Disposal Mayor Bridges indicated these questions would be considered at the time the re-negotiation for this contract comes up. It Was then moved by Councilman Kraus and secoHded by Councilman Brigham that the proposed rate modification be approved, to become effective when the last of the West Valley cities approves same. The motion was carried. IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 753 Resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga Requesting the ./_~_~_~ Board of Supervisors of the Santa Clara County Transit District to Provide for the Consolidation of the 1976 General Municipal Election with the Santa Clara County Transit District Special Tax Authorization Election to be Held March 2, 1976 It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham Resolution 753 be adopted. The motion was carried. B. PetiTion from Residents of Pierce Road and Regan Lane Requesting the City of Saratoga Install a Landscaped Traffic Barrier Between the End of the Service Road, Behind the Argonaut-Safeway Shoppi.n~ Center, and the End of Pierce Road The City Manager explained that this item is continued from-the November 19th meeting of the Council, at which time this request was referred to the staff for review and comment. He indicated this report has been received, and the Planni.ng Department concurs inthe request and the need for such an improve- ment; however, it is recommended that a temporary barrier be installed for a period of 3~months, at which time the barrier Would be evaluated to see if it is doing the job which is anticipated. It is further recommended that the staff come back with a report at the end of this 3-month period, and if a permanent barrier is to be installed, it be appropriately designed and a decision be made concerning the landscaping and maintenance of this barricade. ~r. Beyer then referenced a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Elmer Lamb, 20397 Pierce Road, submitti!~g additional names on the petition that was submitted to the Council on November 19th. Mr. Van Duyn, Planning Director, commented that the staff has talked.to some of the representatives of the shopping center, who recognize that there is a potential problem here, and theyf~'~s~f~T'Tpeed bGmps or something of that nature to cut down the high 1~1 of sDeed~activity in that area. He commented that this alternativ~ would~o~(lu~Lthe access to the shopping center, which is the principal objectid~O'f ~ighbors who signed the petition. Mr. Marburg, addressed the Council on behalf of Safeway Stores, and asked if Pierce Road was ever going to be extended to Sanatoga-Sunnyvale Road. Nr. Van Ouyn replied that it is no~~~e'~8~"~ii~j~t~affic flow natterns, and it is not in any of the plans whi~ th~'IC~ty!'~O'e~l~ Pierce Ro~d. Nr. Marburg asked if this petition from residents of Pierce Road and Regan Lane means they don't want to have access to the shopping center, except by B]auer or Cox, and then through Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Nr. Van Duyn replied that the principal objection'is ~{hi~"'~?Pie~'~ad '~ eo ~e~j~~p~i~r {6~ ~e ~h~opi~ ~enter. ~ ...... ~"~. ...... ' ~ Mr. Marburg asked if this access is cut off, have any studies been made to indicate whether or not Blauer is going to be heavily travelled as.a result of this barricade. -Mr. Van Duyn replied that this is one of the reasons a temporary barrier is bein9 suggested to determine what the closure of this access would mean, in terms of traffic flow. - 2- Petition Re: Traffic Barrier, Argonaut-Safewa~ Mr. Marburg commented that Blauer has an access -- one through the access road and one directly into the Center, and the other is for Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Mayor Bridges explained that these roads are designed and curved in the right direction. He further explained that What the residents are saying is this is a blind corner, and this is what the staff has observed. Mr. Van Duyn then outlined ~he pattern in which trucks are presently using Pierce Road as a delivery access, and indicated the location of the delivery ramps in relation to the access. He further indicated the principal problem ~th installing this barrier~s designing what might be an acceptable permanent barrier, and establish who is going to incur the costs for puttin~ this in. Also, if it is'to be landscaped, it will have to be established who should be responsible for this. Paul Ross, 12851Regan Lane, addressed the Council, indicating that his residence is on the corner in question. Mr. Ross stated he bought his home in June of this year, and before he bought it, he came to the City's Planning Department and asked to see the plans, and he was told there would be no ingress or egress from the shopping center to Pierce Road. He indicated this street should only be a service road, and it has been a drag strip for youngsters before this improve- ment came about. Mr. Ross indicated that he comes down Highway 9 from Mountain View, and residents miss the turn-off where the Cox Avenue light is, and go right through the signal~to the new Argonaut Shopping Center 20 cars at a time. Mr. Lamb, 20397 Pierce Road, commented that if he were Mr. Marburg, he would be very displeased with the architect who designed a shopping center of this nature. Mr. Lamb stated that Pierce Road is approximately 1 block tong at the place where Regan Lane enters from Cox Avenue, and the shopping center-itself is on a line with the south portion of the roadI, T and in order for any automobile to enter the shopping center, it is necessary to make a jog of about 20 feet. He stated that at the present time, any car doing this has to go through a blind intersection by taking a 45 degree cut. He further stated that the architect and developer deliberately designed the exit so that traffic would take this direction to enter and exit the shopping center. Mr. Lamb commented with respect to the landscaping, stating that it is very minimal and does not conform with existing landscaping across the front of the property or existing landscaping along Blauer Drive. He commented with respect to the cyclone fencing, which he indicated does not shut off the view from the residential area, and also (ommented that there is very little patrol in that area. Mr. Lamb indicated he was hopeful the Council would see fit to take action to not only put up a temporary barrier, but to make the decision to put up a permanent barrier~in this area,~ Mr. Lamb commented on the matter of trucks, indicating that the thing most of the residents are complaining about is the large number of trucks on Pierce Road. Reese Griffith, who resides across the street from Mr. Lamb and Mr. Ross, indi- cated he would like to go on record as supporting this barrier. Mr. Worden, 12851 Regan Lane, commented that he used to live in the house Mr. Ross now lives in, and he sold his house, not knowing the shopping center was going in at this location. He commented that many times he had to call the sherriff's department for cars that would round that corner and end UP on his lawn. He felt the biggest problem is the traffic cutting through from Cox, coming across Regan and making it a.short stop, and then going across to the shopping center. It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr'the Council approve i~stallation of the temporary barrier at the end of the access road and Pierce Road for a period of 3 months. The motion was carried. - 3- V. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES AND ZONING REQUESTS A. SDR-1167 DENNIS BRYAN, BELLA VISTA AVE. (Cont'd. 11/5/75) Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Re~ardi ng Change of Conditions of Building Site Approval by Saratoga Swim Club The City Manager explained that this matter was first discussed at the City Council Meeting on November 5th, at which time it was pointed out by the staff that this was not an appealable matter. The City Council indicated, however, they would consider whether or not it was an appealable matter, if the appli- cant modified his initial request and submitted a letter to the Council. He indicated that the Council anticipated this would be coming back at the next regular meeting of November 19th, and this did not occur. He stated that Mr. Booth then submitted a letter, dated December lOth, outlining their basis for appeal. He indicated that the City Attorney has advised that there is no provision for appeal by a third party, either under State Law or by the City's Ordinance or where no lot split is involved. Mr. Johnston, City Attorn~v, commented that theS~tative'~!was approved June 25, 1975, and the Staff Report is deceiving because ~'infers that nothing has been approved yet, when in fact there already had been an approval of it -- they took an old staff report and repeated it, except for changing one of the conditions. Therefore, the Tentative Map was approved prior to the adopition of the City's new Subdivision Ordinance, and it is only in this ordinance where any third party would have a right' to appeal, and secondly, the right of appeal is not from the conditions or change of conditions. The right of appeal by a third person is only from the findings 'made by the Planning Commission as to consistency with the General Plan and the various items outlined in Section 66473.5 and 66474. He commented that when a condition is changed, those findings are not made -- only at the time of the ini~tial approval, and whether or not they are made becomes-somewhat irrelevant because that occurred back in June, which was prior to the time the Subdivision Ordinance was even adopted. He stated that the third and most compelling reason is the Map Act permits, but does require the appeal by a third person -- it only requires it when the authority to make these findings is delegated from the Council to the Planning Commission, and that authority was not delegated untiq the Subdivision Ordinance was adopted. He stated that~the Subdivision Ordinance was adopted after the Tentative Map was approved, and even then, it only applies where there is a lot split into two or more lots. ~ Mayor Bridges indicated the Council.would have to determine whether ot not it did want to hear the appeal. Councilman Matteoni indicated he would abstain from the discussion based on his comments at the NoVember 5th meeting. The Council was of the concensus that there is no appeal in this matter on'the General Plan basis. Mr. Booth, Attorney and member of the Saratoga Swim Club, commented that the Club does consist of 75 member families, almost all of whom reside in Saratoga and have an interest in this matter. He commented that what they are unhappy about is that the City's own 9rdinances haven't been followed here -- either the Planning Commissi.on or otherwise -- and Mr. Bryan has maneuvered himself from a position where the club was relatively satisfied with his one-lot sub- division to a position where he now has in affect amounts to a double frontage lot with an obligation! to. pave and open up as a streets and this is a severe impingement on the Club's parking lot and general access rights to that area. Mr. Booth commented that this was done without discussion by the Planning Commission, and-one. could almos.t conclude that it was actual3y an error in changi~ng the word "westerly" to "easterly". He further stated that the Sub- division Ordinance, Section 2~1,, requires that this type of single-lot development go to the Land Development Committee, and it did not do so; however, they would be willing to waive that kind of technicality if the Council would be willing to hear their appeal. -'4 - of the Commission on changes of conditions. In addition, he indicated that the City's Ordinance does not say ~hat~it'is the advisory agency which may modify conditions (Section 15.2), but it ~rovides that it is the Planning Commission itself that can modify conditions, and not the Land Development Committee. Blackwell Homes Councilman Kraus asked the question of Mr. Martinsquez if these homes were basically all wood on the outside, "and no stucco. Mr. Martinsk}~'~replied that stucco may be used, and if so, it would be used deflect colors which are warm and harmonious. color tones. Councilman Kraus then asked if it was planned to paint any of these, or were they all to be of the stained type. Mr. Martins~) replied they would be stained, provided they were not of stucco. Councilman Kraus commented that the houses shown tonight all appear to be two- story, and he asked the architect if'he knew how many of these were planned to be two-story,~versusTs'~gl~=s~Qry on this site. Mr. Martin~is~ replied they do not have a precise inventory on th~s; however~ he felt one-story houses would be predominately in the areas with less slope. Councilman Kraus commented that one' of his concerns with this, however, is the height ofthe house. Councilman Matteoni indicated he would lik~ to ask this question of staff: When looking at the various schematics presented, it is giving the Council some precise detail, and it is his understanding that this can only be taken, despite the precise detai"l, as some for instance or conceptual, because they have not received any fina~ recommended plan for particular locations of houses or styles from the Planning Commission. He further commented that if there is approval of the PC concept, there are still several steps to go through. He asked Mr. Van Duyn if he was expressing this correctly. Mr. Van Duyn, Planning Director, replied that the plan is basically a concept plan, an~ they do have a map which shows where the one-story and two-stor~ structures splits,and that may change because of some elimination of homes or topographic features. He further stated that none of the plans discussed this evening have been adopted or approved by the Planning Commission,'and those would have to go through Design Review-which is required for any PC development in the city. He indicated thatit is the recommendation of the Planning Commission that this be rezoned from R-1-40,O00 to Planned Community, and to be done in' the process is submittal of a tentative map, designating individual lots, for Subdivision and Design Review. Therefore, there is much detailed work to be done subsequent to the rezoning. Councilwoman Corr asked: "Under the PC zoning, how much leeway would there be for any customizing of these structures?" Mr. Van Duyn replied that the customizing is basically not provided for, as this is a planned development for which the developer will be constructing all homes. He commented that the Planning Con~nission did discuss variations to some of the floor plans, and there was discussed a general building envelop area.where they could work those expansions, and there is not a tremendous amount of deviation, but rather, allowance for a very minor extensions. Mr. Heiss interjected that a unit b~eakdown was made of this proposed develop- ment, and it was proposed '9 units would be one-story, single-level units; 8 units would be the traditional side split; and the bulk of the units would be what are called down-hill split units, which split going down the2~r~n~'away from the road, and there are 88 of these units. He commented that there are 3 building types shown by the legend on the drawing, which indicates what the level would be, where the side-split is proposed, and where the down-hill split is proposed, and there would eventually be assigned letters for these models. Mr. Santoriello, 20802 Norada Court, addressed the Counc~'l, commenting that he noticed a lot of shrubbery, trees and landscaping with the plans shown this evening, and asked if this would be~coming with the house or would it be left to the new owners. - 6- Blackwell Homes Mayor Bridges asked Mr. Van Duyn if. the City would have control to restrict landscaping requirements under the PC plans. Mr. Van Duyn replied that the Staff Report and the Commission approval obtain the condition that a landscaping plan be submitted at the time of Design Review. Mayor Bridges then explained this, stating that inherent in the approval of the PC plan will be a landscaping plan for each lot, and this wi.ll be mandatory. Mr. Santoriello then commented that he noticed some patios and areas included in some of the house plans, and indicated his concern that any additional patio areas might cause additiona~ run-off, and the 8 percent of. run~dff estimated will be increased. He asked if new owners would be allowed to put in additional walks, or would everything come with the house. Mr. Van Duyn indicated that initially with Design Review would come a review to cover any specific instances of this nature, which would be incorporated as part of the landscaping plan and the design review of the house. Mr. Santoriello indicated his concern is that if everybody decides to put in additional walks and additional patios, we would have additional run-off. Mr. Van Duyn commented t'hatthe pervious figures they were using were based on the high end relative to concrete or flat-top surfacing of the property. Mr. Santoriello commented that the E~calyptus grove is about 50 to 60 feet high, and we are talking about 30-foot high houses. He commented that it is going to be very obvious. these houses are going to be seen, in spite of trying to blend them into the hillside. He commented that he would like to reiterate that we are building on unstableland -- the run-off, widening of roads, the additional hundreds of cars that are going to be added into the area, the noise factor, and flood conditions ~- and he is stillopposed to any building on that hillside, unless it is curtailed moreso. Gary Brumbaugh, 20896 Morene Way, addressed the Council and asked'the question: "Regarding the window treatment, as far as the windows facing downhill, are we looking at windows that are perpendicular to the ground, or would they be a different angle than this?" He indicated he is concerned about the portion of the day when the sunlight hits those windows. Mr. Martins~is~answered this, commenting that some of these windows are recessed, however, there is no way to avoid glaring at some time. He further. commented that many of these windows appear beyond balcony railings, and they are reasonably small and reasonably controlled. Mr. Brumbaugh then asked what the depth of the peers anchored into the earth. Mr. Martinski'~ ~replied that the depth of peers will depend on soil conditions and geological findings~ In conclusion, Mr. Brumbaugh indicated he would like to urge the City Council to reject this plan. Lorrain McLaughlin, 20640 Ritanna Court, indicated she would like to thank Mr. Kraus for coming out last week and looking at their property. She commented that in case her last communication of December 3rd gave the impression that she and her husband approve of the development, she would like to go again on public record as saying they are totally opposed to this development. She commented she is a little surprised to see tonight the plans again for the reasons t~at flooding and other conditions that have already been mentioned have notreally been answered or discussed in depth as yet. She indicated it gives one the impression that it already has the ~stamp of approval,~ Mayor Bridges pointed out tha~ the project does have the "stamp of approval"'of the City's Planning Co~hission, and it has been transmitted to this body with the suggestS. on they approve i~. Mrs. McLaughlin commented there are so many basic questions which haven't been - 7 - Blackwell Homes answered that she is a little surprised it is b~ing shown here with house plans. Russell Crowther, 20788 Norada Court, addressed the Council, commenting that they had discussions with the Fire Marshall relative to this area because it is listed on the hazard maps as the highest fire hazard area, and they under- stood some of the information seems to contradict some of'the plans shown tonight. He stated that one of the questions asked, for example, was: "How about vegetation between the houses when they are located that close together in this area?" His response was that he strictly controls this, and there is the requirement for use fire retardant ve~etation, and that he might, in some cases, require removal of trees. ,~"~6~He~'~a(e~'th'~t ;~s~a' 6n'~ee ~'~ Marshall's comments, he would grea~l~ ~6~t~On' s'Om~'of='~He pl~'H~"~o~'H"here" tonight with regard to whether vegetation cou.ld be located adjacent to the houses, and he stated it was asked before:. "What types of vegetation are fire retardant and could be planted?" and he didn't feel that question was ever answered. Mr. Van Duyn advised that the Sarat'oga Fire District has submitted to .the'City a list of acceptable plans and non-acceptable plans, based'on'that criteria, and the Planning Commission has been using this. He stated ~h~is surprised the Fire District hasn't provided Mr. Crowther a copy of this criteria. Mr. Crowther stated ~h~ir concern was that in the list of 200 trees that J had been planned for r~mov81 in th~ 6Ffgfnal pla~ ~her~ mi~ have t6 b~ ...... additional trees that would have to be removed because they were fire hazards, and they felt this would contribute to further visual destruction on the hill. He further commented that the Fire Marshall had indicated some s6rt of compo- sition roof would be required., and the normal shake roof would not be permitted. Mayor Bridges commented that the Building Code is very specific, and there is a requirement that a one-hour covering be put underneath the shake, and this is spelled out in the ordinance. Mr. Crowther commented that he wonders if some of these houses are 3-story, as the way they step down the hill, they look like they might be. Councilman Matteoni stated that he ,feelsr~:i~age'i~'created as it appeared to him the garage was at one level with the d~(~, ~hi~H provides an entry that may be offset from the 2 stories of the house itself. However, the garage appeared in all cases to be detached and nearest the road at an elevation that could come into the house and then step up/down. Mr. Crowther stated they had severa'l other concerns, for example, flooding, and where there ismore data still comi!ng in from public agencies. He indicated he would like to summarize'some of their concerns relative.to cost, and they felt this is one area in which the Staff Report was weak in terms of protecting the citizens against costs related tothis development. He commented that it was mentioned at one time that the fire station would ultimately be required to serve this genera'l area back in the hills, and they would like to know what the potential plans areand what the costs will be, andis there some way that this development will pay its way for this. It was his understanding the water tank was required by the Fire Marshall to be a 250,O00-gallon tank, and they would like to see some documented statement that this will not show up in their water bills. Also, they would like to see something with regard to maintenance of some of these facilities. Mr. Crowther further ~tated that the Fire Marshall had also indicated that access roads over 15 percent grade were not permitted to those kind of areas, and it is their understanding the Road coming up from Comer, which would be the primary access, is planned to be over 18 percent, and they are wondering about this from a fire protection standpoint. With regard to other,c~oosts,.~lr. C~owther s~ated"the'~e is a potential for dredging and straightening cr~bks~" H~ ~Hd'iT~ted th'at-i~'~H~ E.I.R., it was mentioned that -8-- Blackwell Homes it was uncertain whether Prospect Creek was to be a local flood control area or a County Flood Control area, and he didn't feel this has been answered, and would like to know who is going to pay for this. Also, he stated there is still some discussion of siltation ponds which may require cleaning out, dredging, etc., and they wonder if this something .which could be included in the assessment district. Also, they wondered if there were a landsl'ide which took out a pipe line and had to be replaced, if this would be included in the assessment district. Mr. Crowther felt the development would affect property'values in the surrounding area, and many people who bought their homes in the area bought them because-of the beautiful view of the hills, and if'it contributes to increased flooding, it is going to cause increased'costs to all the residents in the area due to flooding insurance requirements. Mr. Crowther commented ~hat they recognize there would b e a large number of costs which ar~ outsi de the Scope of what could be practically covered by this developed, and for that reason~ he would continue to strongly oppose the development as it is now planned. Mayor Bridges advised that many of the auestions addressed by Mr. Crowther would be looked at by the Council fat the stud~ session-'6.~X~d~9~i~g With the Planning Commission. Bob Pimberton, 12782 Cann~.el Ave., addressed the Council and indicated the questions he has would apply to Mr. LMartinsquez and perhaps'the Planning Director. He stated that he is not clear as to whether or not the'houses will appear above the ridge. Mayor Bridges replied that in some cases they will, ~nd in some cases they won't. He indicated the Planning Com ~ssion did go through a scale model, and he would recommend Mr. Pimberton look at this. Mr. Pimberton then ~sked: "WBe~ we-talk about cluster houses, how close are these houses together?" Mr. Van Duyn replied the closest hQuse would be 40 feet from the nearest thing to it, however, he could not say what percentage.of the houses this would apply to at this time. Mr. Heiss explained in one clustering of houses, there may be 40 feet between homes, and in the next, you may find 40 feet minimum between houses and then 200 feet to the next house.' He indicated that in most cases, there would probably be one structure that is at'least 40 feet from another structure. Mr. Pimberton asked what the spacing was between houses in the flatlands. Mr. Van Duyn replied that the side yard requirement is 20 feet Pimbe~ton stated that he understand~ there will be 150,O00cubic yards of earth moved for this project, and he asked 'if this earthmoving was only required for garages and driveways and access roads. Mr. Heiss replied that primarily, that earthmoving represents constructing the basic public and private roads, plus the access to the units. He stated there are 88 units that are down-slope models, and in those units there is very minimal grading; the only requirement would be for the driveway itself. However, he stated there would probably be exceptiog~:_~o~hj.S,.and he p6inted out an area proposed for level units'and are/~'d'out,~nd~this takes up someof the differential in terrain. He commented that h~Wbuld ,say 'on the whole the bulk of the grading is related to construction of the main coll'ector road'that runs through the property, and the private roads and driveways. Mr. Pimberton commented that many people have opposed this rezoning for many reaons, and he feels the architect and planners have done a very good job of trying to meet all the requirements. However, being a resident of Saratoga and having a view of this hillside, he feels he has to add his name tothose people who are opposing this project, for the sake of trying to maintain the scenic beauty that is inherent in Saratoga. - 9- Blackwell Homes Nancy MacDonald, 20301 Kirkmont Drive, commented that for over 2 years, she has been.hearing about possible problems associated with this property, and at no time have the people complaining proposed a viable solution. She asked if these people who oppose this improvement have ever giv.en any consideration to presenting a bond issue in order. to achieve their end, inasmuch as the City of Saratoga is not in any financial'position to buy the property. Mayor Bridges stated this has never been seriously proposed, and' he doesn't know if the bonded indebtedness of the City in relationship to~its present tax rate would.accommodate this land. He stated that it would have to probably be a district, especially set up Vince Garrod addressed the Council, indicating that he is a neighbor of the Parker place, and he represents quite a few people who have not insulted the Council's intelligence by telling them all the things that might or might not go wrong. He stated that this propOSal is a valid, good proposal for the highest and best use of our hill land -- thereis no question about it. He stated that the cluster development will cause fewer problems in this city in the long run than any other development in our hill land, and until the City of Saratoga or some other public agency decides it is in the best interest of the public to purchase the land, we have no other alternative than to let people develop it. Mr. Garrod stated thatSthe General Plan has conceived this will be used for residential purposes, and he feels these plans as proposed -- there is very little grading as.150,O00 cubic yards spread out over this acreage is nothing.- He stated that a one-acre site was just developed recently where they excavated 54,000 yards to put a house on a flat pad. He felt the proposed Parker Ranch development woul~us~_th~_l~9~ to its capabilities and will cause probably less problems thanCc,~ld. be ~auSed_96W.'by the property i'n its present condition. He indicated that th'e~f~ ~6Ht~ol will be absolutely improved as there will be a water supply, whereas now you have no water supply -- there is nothing that could stop a fire in those hills now, other than pure manpower. Therefore, Mr. Garrod felt in all fairness to any of the property owners and to the people in general of Saratoga, the Council should look favorably on this request. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham to continue the public hearing to the next regular meeting on January 7th. The motion was carried. The Mayor pointed out that the Council wouldbe conductin~ a Study SeSsion on Monday evening designed to deal with~n.~'f~the ~uestions'asked in 'this matter -- the treatment of the land involved in this development that is now under the Williamson Act. They will also be looking at the specific conditions ~hat have come down from the Planning Commission with this referral. B. HOUSING AND CO~IMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974; SECOND-YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Cont'd. 12/3/75) The City Manager indicated this is basically a continuance of the first-year program, and builds upon that as originally approved by the Council one year ago. Heindicated it was the staff's recommendation the Council approve the plan as presented. The Mayor re-opened the pub'lic hearing at 10:55 P.M. The City Manager brought to the Council's attention a letter from Mrs. Bruce Black, 14170 Victor Place, discussing a proposal of a year ago When the Council reviewed the program application, which was under the beautification aspect, and the~ request is that the beautification element beextended down Saratoga-Sunnyv~le Road to the Village down to the Verde Vista location. He:indicated it is proposed the~C~.ty=w~o_U~.~be~go~g~to~b~d~-on this portion of the p~oject after the first of ~he 9ear, an~thesreason it was~includ~d initially is that i't is outside of the ~e~sdS'~t~d~£~a'a'~t of" the areas needing some attention. 10- Housin~ and Community Development Act Jim Isaak, 13685 Calle de Cuba, addressed the Council and indicated he has a question with respect to the use of the funds, and this is the use of funds for removal of the architectural' barriers in the Village area. He asked if this was possible under the funds allocated here, as he doesn't see it mentioned. (hand icap barriers ). The City Manager indicated this is 'not specifically contemplated, but he believes it would be an eligible activity under the program. Mr. Isaak commented that he would urge that the City consider the addition-of removal of architectural barriers in the Village area at least, as part of the development area, 'i. e. ~ "wheel chair ramps. The City Manager advised 'that if the Council is so inclined, this could be included into the plans that will be coming. back to them once this goes through the review process by HUD. It was the Council's feeling this should be looked at. It was further pointed out these ramps were required on new construction at corner locations. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried. The public hearing was closed at 11~05 P.M. It was moved by Councilwoman Corr and seconded by Councilman Brigham the Council approve in concept the second-year. development program, and the Mayor be authorized to execute the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to Undertake or Assist in the Undertaking of Essential Activities Pursuant to Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. The motion was carried. VI. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS ' A. MAYOR 1. Announced that the Inter-City council' p_~O~e~ ~' resolution relative to the Counci 1' s position regarding Di stri bu~'i6n of Urban Services and Sales Tax. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the Inter-City Council Resolution on Distribution of Urban Service and Sales Tax be adopted. The motion was carried. B. COUNCIL ANal COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Parks and Recreation Commission Report Re: AB 997, Z'berg and SB 174, Roberti, and Resolution 754 Endorsing these bills. The City Manager reported that it is the Park and Recreation Commission's recommendation that the Council adopt this resolution. It was moved by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilman Brigham the Council adopt Resolution 754, and the City Manager be authorized to submit a letter to accompany the resolution to the appropriate state tegisl~ators. The motion was carried. 2. Planning Commission Referral Re:.Hillside Conservation-Open Space District Classification Ordinance It was approved to set this ordinance for public hearing on January 21, 1976. C. DEPARTMENT HEADS AN~) OFFICERS 1. Director of Public Works Report Re: Request for Elimination of Bus Stop on Prospect Road East of Miller Avenue (Dec~ber 1, 1975) - y ¢_11o_ Request for Elimination of Bus Stop Mr. Trinidad, Assistant Director of Public Works, indicated he has no further co~nents than those outlined in Mr. Shook's memorandum to the City Manager. Audrey Hildebrand, 19519 Eric Avenue, indicated she is the person who has the bus stop in back of her house, and she feels enough time has been spent on this matter, and she really feels this bus stop should be eliminated. A discussion followed regarding possible alternative locations for'this bus stop, as well asestimated usage of the-bus from thi~ location. It was then moved by Mayor Bridges and seconded by Councilman Kraus to approve the concept to eliminate this bus stop, and communicate this position to.the County Transit District. The motion was carried. Lorraine McLaughlin, 20640 Ritanna Court, addressed the Council and commented that'~{i~ "~h~ (~(il~s'~discussing this subject, she would like to mention that'~6'~S~H~s'of~this' area would appreciate a bus down Prospect clear over to Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, as the Granada Hills section seems to be in a rather isolated area. , Mayor Bridges advised that under the expanded bus s,ystem, there is a bus that runs the length of Prospect Road. E. CITY ~NAGER VIII. .CO~IMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN 1. Charles Tucker, 19868 Bonnie Ri.dge Way, supporting the development of West Valley Stadium as a full-service facility. - Noted and filed. 2. Paul Gilovich, 18701 Kosich Orive, with questions concerning disbursement of tax monies. - The City Manager indicated he has replied to this letter. 3. J. A. Connolly, President, Congress Springs Place Homeowners Association, requesting a stop sign atthe west end of St. Charles Street. - Referred to the staff for report back. 4. T. M. Blaisdell, 19777 JuniperO Way, requesting the City gi~e immediate attention to the area of the City south of Cox Avenue. - Directed staff to communicate to Mr. Blaisdell that this entire area is being looked at, and the staff will be reporting at a future meeting. 5. Aletha M. Powers, Director, YoUth Science Institute, 16260 Alum Rock Ave., San Jose, requesting time for ~ brief presentation to the Council. 6. Mr. and Mrs. Woody Linn, 13240 Pierce Road, urging the City Council to pass a resolution adopting a stadium to be constructed on the West Valley Community College Campus. - City Manager to communicateCouncil's unwillingness to pass such a resolution. ~ 7. Mr. and Mrs. Elmer Lamb, 20397 !Pierce Road, submitting additional names to petition requesting favorable ~ction to install alandscaped traffic barrier behind Argonaut-SafewayShopp~ng Center. - Noted and filed. ...... 8. Ralph and Tina Pearson, 15129 E1 nuito Way, regarding discrepancies in ~he~ ...... reoUtr~m~nt~ '~o'w~'M~ 'A~n~.' ....... ' ........ The City Manager explained that there is a $1,500 bopd posted for imple- mentation of these conditions, and due to some lack of ~ommunica~ion between the City and Mr~ Pearson concerning the expectations of improvements to be made, there is a question concernin~ improvements to' Maude Avenue from Quito Road into Quito Way. Mr. Pearson is proposingto provide a check to'the City in the amount of $600 to cover the difference of what has alread.v been spent and the bonded amount, and the City be required to.do the work.". .--,1 - 12 - Pearson Communication Skip Pearson, 15290 Quito Way, commented that he is the son of"Ralph Pearson, stating that as he Understands it, Public Works does not necessarily require a bond when a road improvement is contemplated, and the other alternative would be to set aside one's own trust fund for that purpose. He inquired about the possibility of putting. the $600 in such a~trust account"that the City controlled, and when other property in the area is developed with the same road conditions, these people can use this money and their own money to further attempt to satisfy the City's requirements. It was the feeling of the Council this matter should be referred to the staff for additional information, and a report to the Council at the next regular meeting. Correspondence Re: Parker Ranch Rezonin~ 1. The Hunziker Family, 20787 St. Joan Court - opposition 2. Shirley Baitmess, 20711 Ashley Way - opposition 3. Edward and Barbara Wintergalen, 20831 Meadow Oak Way- opposition 4. David Terran, 20851 Hillmoor Dr~ve - opposition 5. Barney and Lorrainne McLaughlin, 20640 Ritanna Court - suggesting the City make building site approval contingent upon the developer providing the City with a bond or sufficient funds to cover potential future damages. 6. Sheri Ahlheim, 21396.iMaria Lane - opposition 7. Joyce Ahlheim - opposition 8. S. H. Berryman, 21299 Maria Lane - opposition 9. Russell L. Crowther,'John M. Wier, Arguello Homeowners Association - Re: flooding problems related to the proposed development of Parker Ranch. lO. Judy and Jack Vance, Athos Place, - opposition ll. Susy Vance, Athos Place - opposition 12. Paul and Anne Keat, 21178 Maria Lane, - opposition 13. Robert P. Mardal, 12472 Arroyo de Arguello - opposition 14. Brian Carleton, 20542 Wardell ROad - oppositi~on 15. Bernard Tougas, 20604 Wardell Road - opposition 16. Mrs. Caryn Symonds, 20753 Norada Court - opposition 17. Roger and Sharon Pilie, 12314 Arroyo de Arguello - opposition 18. Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Worrell, 13010 Pierce Road -opposition 19. Dan and Lilly Baty, 21350 Blue Hills Lane, Cupertino - opposition 20. Elden G. and Elizabeth L. Marquardt, 21200 Maria Lane - OPposition 21. Thomas Pochari, Jr., 12847 Jepsen Court ~ opposition 22. Mr. and Mrs. George L. Chamberlin, 12909 Foothill Lane - opposition 23. Charles E. Holmquist, 12720 Arroyo de Arguello - opposition 24. James E. Nevitt, 21465 Porspect~Road, Cupertino - opposition 25. Dennis and Peggy Paldi, 20685 Wardell Road - opposition 26. Gred Barsten, 12634 Arroyo de Arguello - opposition 27. Mr. and Mrs. David Porter, 20667 Ashley Way - opposition 28. John Weir, President, Arguello Homeowners Association - Re: alleged threats of lawsuit relevant to Parker Ranch development. B. ORAL 1. Paul Gilovich, 18701 Kosich Drive, indicated there is more than one signature on this letter previously mentioned, and it was his understanding it becomes a petition when there is more ~han one signature. He asked'how many sig- natures would be required for'an answer. The City Manager advised Mr. 6i~ovich that he has a letter'drafted which spells out where the-City's'tax dollar goes, and'commented that the point Mr..Gilovich missed in his letter is that the City~of Saratoga's tax rate only encompasses 2.1 percent of.the total tax bill -- the'rest is~f~' County Government,'-~_~9~j_~a_~'j~!']~S~i~ ~ 2. Marjorie Foote, 20910 Canyon View Drive, indicated she wants to take this opportunity to alert everyone that the Saratoga Bicentennial Calendar is "hot off the press", and they are available for purchase at Cit.y Hall. 3. Councilman Kraus commented that approximatly one year ago, the Council had a special meeting with the people who developed the Argonaut Shopping Center, and particularly Safewa~, and at that time,~!'one of the concerns was that people in the area were complaining because of.trash.littered around outside. He commented that it his observation this problem has not'been resolved, and he finds that trucks are loading and unloading out- side, and the trash bin, instead of being inside, is sitting outside. It was his feeling the City'should. take another look at this. Mayor Bridges asked that. this be investigated, and a report come back at the next regular meeting. 4. Councilwoman Corr indicated shedhad received a phone call from Mrs. Dunn concerning an article she read ~n the West Valley newspaper which upset her, regarding the discrepancy-between parking signs for people parking illegally on campus, or parking on the city streets. She commented that the author had indicated he had received 2 parking tickets the first week'of the school year -- one for parking on school property for a fine of $5.00, and one for illegally parking on a city street for a fine of $2.00. She wondered what the difference was between the fines. .- Mayor Bridges stated he felt the obvious answer that it is a different jurisdiction. 5. Barbara Sampson,. Director of Community Serv.ices, advised that tomorrow, December 18th, at Hakone Gardens, the Good Government Group is planting a tree in memory of former Planning Commissioner Charles Smith, and all members of the CoUncil are invfted to attend.. ~he Mayor recognized the presence of the following publ,ic.service representatives: Marjorie Foote, A.A.U.W.; Mr. Cann6 of the Good GoVernment Group; April Barrett, League of Women Voters; Mrs. Tyler, Good~over~ent Group; Nancy MacDonald, Republical Central Committee; Norm Martin, Planning Commission; John Weir, Arguello Homeowners Associ'ation; John Powers, Chamber of Commerce; and Bob Konrad, Parks and Recreation Commission. IX. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the meeting be adjourned. The motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 12:03 A.M.  "~spectfull~_~ubmitted, ity Cle k - 14-