HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-21-1976 City Council Minutes NINUTES
SARATOGA]'C,ITY COUNCIL
TIME: Wednesday, April 21, 1976 - 7:30 P.M.
PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, California
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ORGANIZATION
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmen Brigham, Corr, Kraus, Matteoni, Bridges
Absent: None
B. MINUTES (March 30, April 3, April 7)
It was moved by Counciln~an Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the
minutes of March 30, April 3 and April 7, 1976, be approved, and the
reading be waived. The motion was carried.
C. APPOINTMENT TO PLANNING COHMISSION
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Virginia U. Laden to
serve on the Saratoga Planning Commission.
II. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus the
Consent Calendar composition be approved. The motion was carried.
B. ITEMS FOR CONSEN~ CALENDAR
1. Final Acceptance of Tract 4554, Pacific Shores Properties, Inc.
~3~nt,~of~Cf~i:~': , -:-~ ....... . ....... .
r 4T~"{i'~'~'Fe'r"s'~Port-~- ,
'--I-t~was mov d~b~-Counci.]man ~igham and.seconded by Councilman Kraus the
Co sen CaYend~ar be approveS. The
n t
mot on was carried.
III. BIDS AND CO~RACTS
A. AGREENENT BE~IEEN-THE CITY OF SARATOGA AND THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA FOR
BUS T~NSIT FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS (Cont'd. 4/7/Z6}
Councilman Matteoni suggested writing into this contract a paragraph con-
cerning the field' testing, to insure that the structure would be removed
within a certain timetable, and thereafter, when the site is cleared,
operations would be commenced.,
Mayor Bridges stated he felt it should be worded in such a wax that "if
it impacted federal funds, we,could'remove the clause that stipulates the
requirement regardi rig' fi el d testi rig."
Councilman Matteoni clarified that he was thinking of language that was
anticipatory, and not mandatory, that would give some quidance to the
scheme the City is going to operate under.
Jon Svilich, P~s'~dent, S~rato~a Chamber of Co~erce~ addressed the Council
and stated tha~ the Chamber is veFy s,atisfied with the plan as it is now
proposed, and it has their backing.
It was then moved by Codncilman Kr'aus and s~conded by Councilman Brigham the
Council ratify the Agreement for bus transit facility improvements, and the
MaXo~b~ aut~Rri~!L~n it~ o~h~pZpRrj.a~i~g~been obtained.
r~ e motion 'wa~"~rried"un~fiim~s~:::, ' :" ' · ",
B. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARATOGA AND DONALD E. STAMPER, EXECUTOR
OF THE ESTATE OF CLARA N. STAMPER, FOR TIlE PURCHASE OF CONGRESS SPRINGS PARK
The City Manager explained the first partial payment of $80,000 would come
out of the City's Capital Improvement Budget, and once the agreement is
executed, the City would send 'a copy, along with an application, to the
State to receive back approximately $80,000, which has been pre-allocated
under the State Bond Act to fund the second portion.
It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the
Mayor be authori'zed to execute this agreement. The motion was carried.
IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND,RESOLUTIONS
A. RESOLUTION NO. 771
Resolution Thanking Jean ~oodward :for HeL Contributions to the Community
CJ'~TjB;~'F~a~U~ff~rG6%~'[d"~TG~ion in full, and the Council individually
~mmen~ed '~e'gar~i~ '~'~'-Woodwa~'Fs accompl i shments during her years with
the City.
It was moved by Mayor Bridges andLseconded by Councilman Matteoni Resolution
No. 771 be adopted. The motion was carried unanimously.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 772
Resolution Requestin9 Permission for Temporary Closure of State Highwa~
{Big Basin t'lay) for Fireman's Muster, June.27, 1976
It was moved by Councilman Brigham'and seconded by Councilman K~aus
Resolution No. 772 be adopted. The motion was carried.
C. APPEAL OF BUILDING OFFICIAL'S DECISION PERTAINING TO SWIMMING POOL ORDINANCE
NO. 38.59 FROM
l) Alan Seales, 14141. Sobe~ Road:
Mr. Harris, City Building Official, explained that this appeal was
denied on the basis that he di,dn't feel he had the authority, under
the criteria outlined in Resolution 712, to grant. the variance.
Discussion followed on this matter by the Council, and it was moved
by Councilman~Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to grant a variance
for this pool fencing, subject to the following conditions:
owners take full liability for the unfenced pool;
owners obtain the same agreement with a new owner
should they sell the property;
a fence or barrier be installed between the neighboring
residences and the pool, should it, atany time, be
requested by either property owner or new owner of
either property.
The motion was carried unanimously.
2} Gar~ Nart, 14187 Sobey Meadows Court
Mr. tlarris explained the reason he did not grant this variance is that
the equipment being used to screen the pool wou.ld only be2 to 3 feet
in size, and is less than ]50 feet from the neighboring residential
structure. Therefore, it washis feeling this application did not meet
the criteria in the resolution:
Following discussion by the Council, and also, hearing comments by
F.~r. Hart concerning this matter, it was moved by Councilman Matteoni
and seconded by Councilman Brigham to grant the variance, subject to the
following conditions:
owners take full liability for the unfenced pool;
owners obtain the same agreement with a new owner
should they sell their property;
- 2 -
a fence or barrier be .in'stalled between the neighborinn
residences and the pool, should it, at any time, be
requested by either propert,v owner or new owner of
either property;
the landscane plans 'that were outlined for the existin~
berm and its extension in a semi-circle to the rear of
the ~ool be filed with the City, andthis be implemented
within 60 days.
The.motion was carried unanimously.
D. PETITION FRO~I RESIDENTS OF BOHL~AN ROAD CONCERNING ROADSIDE PARKIN~ P~OBLEMS
(Cont'd. 4/7/76)
The City Nanager advised that due to tb 'fact the staff has not been able to
obtain answers to theeuestions raised at the April 7th meeting, he would
recommend the matter be ~ontinued for 30 da~js. This was acceptable to the
Council.
E. APPEAL BY PAUL P. NC MULLEN RE: PLANNING DEPART~ENT'S DECISION TO DENY
REQUEST TO REMOVE SEVERAL MONTEREY PINES AT 20264 LJEPAVA DRIVE
Mr; Van Duvn, Planninq Director, o'utlined on a ma~ the site and the trees
~i~iT~t~ C6"B'~ed to make construction imhrovements to the swimming
~o~ '~6 ~6in~ed'6~'those trees that would not reauire permit removal, a~d
advised that the appli cant .is requesting a Palm/~Td~s~'Fal Monterev Pines
which are located on the perimeter of the pool ~e'~6~ed, for which the
applicant would be reauired to receive permits in accordance with the Tree
Removal Ordinance.
Nr. Van Duzn exnlained that the applicant feels the presence of the Pine
Trees and the dropping of the pines will create.a serious maintenance'prob-
lem associated with the pool, and therefore, would like to remove all the
Pines as the,y abut the partic!!lar pool, and additionally, the pines on the
other end of the property to suppl.ement the landscape plans.
Ne further explained the reason for denial of this renue~t is that it was
felt the trees were health.v, and also, the pool could be shifted in a-
southwesterly fashion to avoid removal of some of the primary Montere.~s_wbich
.~e located_on the perimeter of the property. The ap~licant~:h~'~r; did~
~_t_~f~l thi. s ~6d~d be in keeping with the total landscape plan, no~ ~i't~
the proposed swimming pool improvements desired bv the applicant.
The Council h~rd comments from the applicant, ptL~e~e~nt~in the audience, as
well as the landscape architect,'Paul Mc~Ql'len,l~ ~'9_t_ating reasons for their
opposition to relocatino the Dool,:.as wel'1 as retaining the indicated Pfne
Trees. ~ ~.
It was the feeling of the Council ,they would like to observe the property
in question,' and continue themat~r to the ne~t regular City Council
Meeting of May 5th.
F. ORDINANCE NO. NS-60.1'
Ordinance Amending Ordinance NS-60, the Subdivision Ordinance of the City
of Saratoga, Relating tO Power to Accept or Reject Dedications and Execute
Improvement Agreements on Site-Approval, Four or Less Lots, and Correctin~
Clerical Error in Section 7.1 Thereof (2nd Reading)
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham Ordinance
NS-60.1 be adopted, and the readinc waived. The motion was carried unanimously.
-3-
G. ORDINANCE NO. 38.66
Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Amending the City Code, Division 2,
Article III 6f Chapter 2 Thereof, Relatin9 to the Creation of the Office
of City Mana er, the Duties and-Powers Thereof, andCompensation Thereof
(2nd. Readin9~
It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr
Ordinance No. 38.66 be adopted, and the reading waived. The motion was
carried.
V. SUBDIyISIONS, BUILDING SITES AND ZONING REQUESTS
None.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ORDINANCE NO. NS-3.34
Consideration of an Amendment to the City of Saratoga's Zoning Ordinance
NS-3, Relating to Temporary. Uses i.n all Zoning Districts Other Than Residential
within the City of Saratog9 (2nd Reading)
Mr. ,Van Duyn, Planning Director, summarized the. ordinance, indicating the
ordinance is in response to the'Council's request of approximately one year
~go for some relief under the Zoning Ordinance which does not provide
temporary use provisions for activities such as street fairs, antique shows,
and the like. He explained that th~s. Ordinance would relieve the Planning
Commission in its~ publi~c.hearing~reedi'rements:-on t6mpgrary use applications,
and would allow for a process for'~ublic hearings such as that being used
under the "Two-Story Ordinance".
Mr. Van Duyn indicated that the~!b~aina6~e sets~a filing fee of $30.00. He_
asked that reference to Resolution'N~'7bO i~ the ordinance be:2~l~t~ ['and~
the ordinance be revised to delete this reference. He explained the amend-
ment to Resolution No. 700 will be considered separately by the Council at
a future time.
The Mayor then declared the public hearing open'at 8:55 P.M.
There being no conTnents from those present in.the audience, it was moved by
Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Hatteoni the public hearing be
closed. The motion was carried. The public hearing was closed at 8:56 P.M.
It was then moved by Councilman' Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr
to adopt Ordinance No. NS-3.34, and waive the reading. The motion was carried
unanimously.
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
A. MAYOR
B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS
1. Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation for Approval of Final
Designs of Foothill Park
Barbara Sampson, Director of Community Services,'review~d the plan
briefl~v The explained there have been several minor modifications
since the original conception of the plan, i.e.,
the pathways have a slight difference in curvature
in order to eliminate an automatic cut-through;
pathway moved further away from the private property
immediately to the left of the City-owned proDerty~
moved pathway'an additional 5 feet-from the private
home, and added additionaq la ~scapingin the area.
-4-
It was moved by CouE~i]man__~.Eighg_m_apd~seConded by Councilman Matteoni
to approve the~' aEdRec~r. eat-i6n~eommissjon'S recommendations for the
final designs of.Foothill'P~FE'~"Th~inGti6hwas carried unanimously.
2. Councilman Bri~ham - Announced. a P.P.C. Energy, Economics and Environment
Conference on Saturday, April 24th, for public information.
Also, advised that'at last P.P.C. Meeting, a "neighborhood task force"
was formed which the City might use in its plan for community development.
Further advised that at the ~ay 13th meeting of the Transportation Sub-
committee, they will be dealing with transportation stations in regards
to the light rail system for the County.
C. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS
1. Planning Director - Announced that base maps for the City have been
completed, and would be made available upon request.
D. CITY MANAGER
1. Report Re: Consideration'of Lo~al Agency Formation Commission's Report -
Re: Spheres of Influence for Resource Conservation Districts.
The City Manager advised that LAFCO will be holding a hearing on May 5th
on their report on this issue, and have asked that'ci'ties ~nterested in
the subject present eithe~ a letter or comments to them.~-Heoutlined
the recommendations ,~pt~T~'y'EAFCOT'~hi'Ch'a~']~a]'~¥ed'-in ~he memorandum
from the Assistant t~'~h~CitgT'~fa~ :~ty'F~n'i~ DireCtor, dated
April 8,1976. He further indgcated an additional item recommended to be
added to those of LAFCO, as follows: Each district or consolidated district
should levy a.tax for no more ~han its anticipated operating expenses for
the year, based on actual versus budget expenditures over the past 5 years,
and if the fund balance is =not. earmanked for any'specific project in the
near future, that no new tax be levied by the district until the balance
has diminished to a necessary minimum contingency level.
The Mayor acknowledged two items of correspondence-related to this matter
from:
Marlene Duffin, President, Wildwood Heights Homeowners Association,
requesting the Council support their efforts in withdrawing from
the Black Mountain Resource Conservation District,.if they arrive
at the same conclusion which they did after study.
Harry L. Mayfi eld, President, Good Government Group, recommending
the City Council go on record with LAFCO officially supporting
the recommendations 'as outlined in the LAFCO staff report, as well
as establishing tighter Dhy~ical controls by the Santa Clara County
Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Lorin Trubschenck, representative for the Black Mountain Conservation
District and Vice President of the State Association and Secretary of the
Santa Clara County Association: of Districts, addressed the Council. Mr.
Trubsc~enck indic~ted~'t~ei~Fil~'~b~i6~'s=to]'~C~FCO~eP~'~'Ti:~'that
they felt the i nveSti ~ibh~i~a~' ~o~'~o?~!l'~;;~a'~'~'~ th~ }ecO~m~'s
would deprive a lot of people of the servicesof the district. He out-
lined the services presently being perfor ned by the District and the
approximate rate of assessment for these services.
Following considerable discussion on this issue between the Council and
Mr. Trubschenck, and and aften hearing further comments from Mrs. Duffin
of Wildwood tleights Homeowners Association, it was moved by.Councilman
Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham to adopt the reportC~'~_d~v_~ped
by the Assistant to the City Manager and City Planninq Director, dated
- 5-
April 6, 1976, and forward this to LAFCO as the City's recommendation.
The motion was carried unanimously.
CounQilman Kraus further requested the staff obtain'any information
which might reflect similar type assessments'which taxpayers might not
be aware of. The-City ~lanager indicated he, felt such information was
developed in a report by the Good Government Group last year, and felt
this could be made available {o the Council.
2. Report 'Re: Authorization for City Manager to ~eet w.ith~West Valley.
Cities and County Re,garding~Joint Powers A,greement for West Valley
Fire Service
It was moved by Councilman Kraus and secondedby Councilman Briaham
the City Manager be" authorized to meet~~Ti~'~'£6~
"develop a~ Jo~=nt Powers ~g~eement between the Wes~ Val.ley-cities for the
.......... pla_ np~.;.gf._a~st_~9.~.l_~..]~r~Se~ce__~,moti_on_was~a~ried=manimn ~lv.
3. Adjourned Regular Heeting
The City Manager reduested an,Adjourned Regular Meeting next Tuesda.v,
April 27th, for consideration.of a proposed modification in the Agree-
ment with the Village Parking District. This was approved.
4. Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road.Median Landscaping
The City Manager explained~this is a request for. a change order to
authorize clearing of the transit pipe between~t~(~i~f~-h~'~ian
if it becomes necessary to proceed with the wash~O~ ~roce~u~."'PrH-
posed cost for implementing this procedure would be $523.00.
It was moved by Councilman Krausand seconded by Councilman Brigham to
approve Change Order No. 1, if it becomes necessary to implement the
wash-out procedure to clear this transit pipe. The motion was carried
unanimously.
5. Appeal by West Valle~Colle_ge Re: Stadium Cg.mp. lex
Mr. Beyer announced that'appeal by West Valley College of the Planning
Commission's decision regarding an amendment.to the College's use permit
has been ~et for public hearing on May 5th.
VIII. COMMUNICATIONS
A. WRITTEN
1. Franklin Gee, M.D. 19264 Monte Vista Drive, requesting release from a
Faithful Performance Bond~-'~
It was moved by CoUncilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to
approve release-from the FaitHful Performance Bond, in lieu of a
Deferred Improvement filed with the County. The motion was carried.
2. Jim Acker, 19580 Braemar Court, with thoughts' concerning the installation
of stop signs in the City of Saratoga. - Noted 'and filed.
3'~ Copy of letter to Iver'Skjeie, Assistant Attorney General, from
Charles P. Guichard, 21130 Wardell Road, expressing concerns over the
rezon.ing of his property. - Nqted and filed.
4. Copy of a letter to the City Attorney from Robert Van der Toorren,
Planning Consultant, 14555 Horseshoe Drive, regarding the City of Saratoga's
business license requirement.
City Attorney to review, and a report will 6e forthcoming at the next
regular meeting.
-6-
5. Brooks Walker, Jr., Californians for YES on Proposition 12, requesting
the Council's endorsement of this bi~l~ This to be agendized for the
next available Committee of the Whole Meeting.
6. Barbara Simner, 12791 Idlewood Lane, opposing the i.nstallation of lights
and loudspeakers, etc. at the West Valley C611ege stadium. - Noted; letter
to be added to correspondence for consideration at the public hearing on
May 5th.
7. Mike Cullen, Member, California Legislature, request.ing the Council's
support of AB ~438, authored by him, relating to the Coastal Co~ission
Plan. ~ Staff to review' and prepare co~ents on this bill.
B. ORAL
None
C. PUBLIC GROUP REPRESENTATION
The Nayor acknowledged the presence of public group representatives this
evening, as follows:
Marjorie Foote, A.A~U.W. John Svilich, President, Chamber of
Virginia Laden., Planning Commerce
Commissioner 'Gene Zambetti, Planning Commissioner
Ruth Owens, Good Gov!t. Group Marlene Duffin, Wildwood Heights
Ron Duffin, Good Gov't. Group Bomeowners Association
IX. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved ~ Councilman Brigham and Seconded ~ Councilwoman Corr the meeting
be adjour md to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on Tuesday, April 21, 1976. The
motion was carried. The m~eting was adjourned at 10:35 P.M.
tfu 11 n~bm!~ed,
- 7-