Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-06-1976 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, October 6, 1976 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, Calif. TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Brigham, Corr, Kraus, Bridges Absent: Councilman MatteOni B. MINUTES Corrections: September 1,.1976 Page 8, Item E-2, indicate "Parks and Recreation Connnission" instead of !'Planning Commission". September 15, 1976 - Page 4, ~ndicate/'walnut" instead of "oak". It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the minutes of September 1st and September 15th. b~-.approved as corrected. The motion was carried unanimously. (Councilman Kraus declined to vote on the minutes of September 15th, due to his absence at this~meeting.) II.. CONSENT CALENDAR A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham approval of the Con~ent Calendar composition. The motion was 'carried. B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR ~ 1, Tract 4193, Peter Pavlos, Chester Avenue & Ten Acres Road Final Acceptance and Release of Bond (Adopt Resolution 36-B-162 2. Tract 5384, James Day, R~ncho Los Cimas Final Acceptance and Release of Bond (Adopt Resolution 36-B-163 3, Tract 5319, Saratoga Foothills Developmen~ Corp., Shadow Oaks Construction Acceptance 4. Payment of Claims 5. City Clerk's Financial Report III. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A, RENEWAL OF RECYCLE CENTER A~REEMENT~ It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by CouB~ilman Brigham approval of a one-year extension to the Agreement between the City of Saratoga and Earth Household Ecology Club, to October 1, 1977. The motion was carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 792 Resolution Approving Annexation of Certain Unfnhabitated Terrifory Designated as~"Bohlman 76-1" to the City of Saratoga (2.86 Acre Residential Property) It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the adoption of ResolUtion 792. The motion was carried unanimously. B.,. CONSIDERATION OF A PETITION BY THE SAINT ANDREW'S SCHOOL FOR THE STATIONING OF A CROSSING GUARD AT THE INTERSECTION OF SARATOGA AVENUE AND FRUITVALE AVENUE Upon the reconm~endation of the City Manager, this matter was referredto the Publ{c works staff to explore.any alternatives to this ~roblem fd~'~f~Tt~B'~ck to the Council~'i'~i~"30' ~a~-s. ~ councilwoman corr suggested the possibility of combining a crosswalk with Sacred Heart'. It was indicated this suggestion would be looked at in the staff's deliberations. C. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL BY TWIN OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION RE: PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING REMOVAL OF FOUR WALNUT TREES ADJACENT TO THE TOWNHOUSE COMPLEXAT 14613 OAK STREET Mayor Bridge~ indicated he personally viewed this property, per the Council's direction at the City Cduncil Meeting on September 15th, and it was his opinion the trees are extremely important to the viewshed of the condominium units. Therefore, he would be inclined to leave the trees for a period of time. Councilman Kr~us commented [hat he would hate to give up the 8 parking spaces because of~the need. He indicated that while he realizes the trees do provide some shield, the driveway is at a graage level, and he doesn't know what the trees do from the house level. ,~ ~ The,.Councilagreed to 'continue this item to the next regular meeting. - . . D, -ORDINANCE NO. NS-3-ZC-77 S~cond Reading) Ordinance Proposin 'Zoning Map Amendments'for Zone .20, in Conjunction with t~e 1974 General Plan. Proposed Amendments Call for Rezoning from"A" (Agricultural) to "P-A" (Professi6hal- Administrative) the Four Parcels Located West of Saratoga Avenue and South of Cox Avenue, Bounded on the West by Saratoga Creek and on the South by Tract 5343 (Known as the Vineyards of Saratoga) It was moved by COuncilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham adoptionof Ordinance No. NS-3-ZC-77, and the reading be waived. The motion was darried unanimously. V. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES AND ZONING REQUESTS None. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. SARATOGA FOOTHILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SARATOGA AVENUE 1) CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT RE: APPLICATION BY SARATOGA FOOTHILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONIN~ FROM "A" (AGRICULTURAL) TO "R-l-10,000" (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, MEDIUM DENSITY) FOR THE 4.456- ACRE PARCEL ON SARATOGA AVENUE (APN 386-14-15) (COMMONLY KNOWNAS THE SITE OF THE CAMPBELL CAGE CO.) Mr. Van Duyn, Planning Director, reported that this matter was certified as being complete by the City Planning Commission. He indicated that th~ E.I.~. ~poke to several alternative uses for the site~ ~He indicate~'ehe ~der oF tee document per- tained to the proposal of the applicant in subdividing the property for single-family residential use. ' M~. Van Dd~n advised that ~he Planning Cgmmi~si~n-~approVe~ not ..... only the environmental impact report, but also, the rezoning application for Rrl-10,000 isingle-family development, with several conditions~ ~ The Mayor then opened the plublic hearing at 8:14 P.Mo There being no further discussion by the C6uncil or members in the audience, it was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the phblic hearing be closed. The motion was carried.unanimously, and the public hearing was closed at 8:15 P.M. It was then moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Council- woman Corr the Environmental Impact Report be certified as being complete, and the determ{na'tion be made that the project will not have a significant environmental impact. The motion was carried unanimously. ,~.j'f~l~=~_~!ON OF APPLICATION BY SARATOGA FOOTHILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "A" (AGRICULTURAL) TO "R-i~10,000" (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, MEDIUM DENSITY) FOR THE 4.456-ACRE PARCEL ON SARATOGA AVENUE (Cont'd. September 1) The City Manager brought to'the Council's attention a letter from Mr. Lohr of Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, expressing an interest relevant to another type of housing than what is before the Council this evening. The City Manager indicated he didn't feel this proposal could not be considered in any depth this evening as it doesn't specifically relate to the issue of the rezoning as much as it does a possible land use alternative. Councilwoman Corr indicated she felt the Council should take note of this letter from Saratoga Foothills, as the Planning Commission had questioned whether they would go ahead with this kind of alternative proposal if the Council had not taken action on an ordinance which would permit senior citizen housing to_be permitted under a use permit in R-1 zoning. Further, she commented that the Senior Citizen Housing Task Force is working on the draft report, and atits last meeting there was unanimous agreement that one of the recommended actions would be that the City allow senior citizen housing under a use permit in R-1 zoning. Saratoga Foothills - Change of Zonin~ (Cont'd.) The Mayor opened the public hearing at 8:17 P.M. Jerry Lohr, representing Saratoga Foothills DevelSpment Corporation, addressed the Council. 'Mr. Lohr stated that ql) regardless what is done to~the. property,.the R-i=10,000 zoning which is before t~e CounCil this evening, needs to go forward. Heclari£ied the fact that'the letter which he submitted doesn't pertain to this particular zoning,.but what might be done on the property. He indicated that the Smith family has been very patient for the last 5 years, and'would like to go ahead with the sale of this property'to them. It was then moved by Counc{lman Kraus and seconded by Council- man Brigham the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried; the public hearing.was closed at 8:20 P.M. It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham tointroduce Ordinance NS-3-ZC-76 and waive the reading. The motion was carried unanimously. B. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NS=3.35, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING ORDINANCE NS-3, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING SECTION 7'.2 THEREOF RELATING. TO'PERMITTED USES WITHIN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS (DRIVE-UP SALES AND/OR SERVICE FACILITIES) (Second Reading) The City Manager brought to the Council's attention 3 items of correspondence relevant to this subject, as follows: A.E. Passovoy, Assistant Vice President, Security Pacific National Bank,, San Francisco, appealing the Planning Commission's continuance on re'consideration of 2 conditions of Tentative Site Approval. Margaret Reed, 13366 Ronnie Way, Saratoga, expressing opposition to the "driVe-up" banking. W. E. Schmidt, Owner, the Village Pharmacy, Big Basin.Way, expressing opposition to drive-up facilities. He explained that the ordinance-as it is now drafted provides for the exclusion of drive-up sales and/or service facilities for various tZ es of uses in vazious commercial zones. He ~her exp l~h'~Se"~iY~'P~'d'ff'i~i~l'i~'2~di~i~'~Y of Tentative Site Approval; however, this could not be accomplished at th'i~i~ since th~a~i~has not yet been comp'le~dy~h~ Plannin~ Commission. The ~ayor then opened the public hearing at 8:37 P,M~ Alexander Passavoy, representing Security Pacific Bank, commented that he noticed on the agen~a that this is the second reading of this ordinance, and asked if he was correct in assuming this was the last reading before the'30-day period takes place and this ordinance becomes effective. Mayor Bridges explained thai if the Council.adopts the ordinance this evening, then the 30-day period begins. Mr. Passavoy then inquired when the first reading took place. Mayor Bridges replied that this was on September 15th. - 4 - Drive-Up Sales/Service Facilities (Cont'd.) Mr. Passavoy asked why they were not notified for the first reading of the ordinance. Also, he would like to know if any action took place by vote ~t this first reading. The City Attorney explained that what happened in this case is the ordinance was introduced and a public hearing set for this evening. There was no vote one way or the other on the ordinance, but it merely became a par~ of the file by its introduction; and it was necessary to have the public hearing before the Council could vote on the ordinance itself. Mr. Passavoy indicated he would like to introduce into the record Security Pacific's letter of September 24th, with one amendment: On page 3, third paragraph, where is is stated that "Security Pacific Bank has tentatively agreed to contribute 11,700 square feet!', that should be modified to 12,000!square feet of property to the proposed parking district, which land has a net value of $47,000.~ He indicated this should be changed from $35,000. Mr. Passavoy stated that this ordinance directly affects Security Pacific Bank. He indicated that a similar ordinance was proposed to Cupertino, and the basis for that was a report prepared by Professor M~ronuk. He stated that the city. fathers' of Cupertino analyzed it, and felt that an.ordinance, in this particular instance, was ill advised.and the net result was that they passed a resolution which had the same affect, re- quiring a conditional us& p~ermit for a driVe-up window. He indicated he didn't intend to compare Saratoga with Cupertino, or any other community, as 'this community stands on its own. He felt that an fssue has b'een made in the City of Saratoga, where a drive-up window has* certain connotations of producing smog, carbon monoxide poisening,-and death. He stated that the report by Professor M~rSnu~,which has been introduced to the City Council as Exhibit "B"~, from the Planning Commission.is riddled with false assumptions, is lacking totally, and any scientific evaluation has no statistical basis. He commented it is more in keeping with ~"propagandizing". ~M~.~'_a'~oy'i~d'f~te~ ~a~"'~e '~i ty ~f'~'O~D~t~S'' '~ ~%'drive--up f~cfrft'ies-and'v2~ ~at'fSrf~l'b'fnkS,~one oY which iS .... ' v~7~Ob'~"~signed -- the other is of recent vintage. He stated that anyone who has used this unit can sympathize with the individuals who claim that drive-up wihdows do in fact create smog, conjestion, screeching of tires, honking horns, etc. He stated this is not what they are proposing. He stated that properly designed drive-up windows for financial institutions have their place -- they serve the elderly, the handicapped, the mother with 4 screaming kids in a station wagon with a howling dog, and they serve you ~nd me on a rainy day. He indicated that Security Pacific has a fond appreciation for those concerned citizens of Saratoga who are dedicated to pre- serving the uniqu& character of the Village, and they too want to preserve the unique char'acter of the Village. Mr. Passavoy stated that they do not come before the Council and say they wish to erect anything other than a low-key well-designed building that will serve thls community and will blend in w±th the Village. He stated the drive-Up facility is in the rear of the bank and is not visible from the street'; and it has no identity whatsoever with a Taco-Belt, a Jack-in-the-Box, or a Photo-Mat. - 5 - Drive-Up Sales/Service Facilities (Cont'd.) In terms of volume, Mr. Passavoy indicated that when they prepare a formal request to the control of the currency, they have to justify their existance -- they cannot come into a community if thist.will cause any detrimen[al affect to any other financial instiDu~io~. He stated that in the year1887, the peak low for this drive-up facility will be 13 transactions per hour, or a total of 26 transactions-per hour, utilizing the window.~and the kiosk. ~ He further commented that no one from the Planning Department or the Planning Commission 'has offered to sit down and discuss the mechanics of how financial drive-up windows function. Mr. Passavoy commented it is his feeling the Planning Staff and Planning Commission's ~osition was set, and they were not about to explore further alternatives. Mr. Passavoy stated that based on innumerable branches, statis- tically, 30 percent of the customers~ff~f~lize the drive-up window; however, 70 percent will park ~e'i~Icar, get out and come into the bank and transact their business. He commented that they anticipate roughly 600 transactions per day in the facility in Saratoga. Mr. Passavoy continued in stating that~b~'~t"f~a~fy~d~h their concern on this ordinance from th'~ oY'[~e' ~king " Distridt. He stated that they are contributing roughly 52 percent of the land for the parking district, and 26 p~rcent of the financing into that parking district. He stated that in order for them to maintain their competitive position in Saratoga or in any other community, they feel it is a necessary element in the design of their bank. He commented that there are'several alternatives available, the most unfavorable being for them to re-evaluate their plans to build in Saratoga. He stated if it became economically unfeas.able, there would be a total re-evaluation.. Councilman Kraus asked M~v. Passavoy if the controller of currency looks at the number of banks and the locations before allowing a new bank to comein. Mr. Passavoy responded to this stating that in Santa Clara County the average number of residents per bank is 6,600 individuals, and in Saratoga there are approximately 8,700 people per bank. He stated that in effect, as far as banks arezConcerned, Saratoga is under-represented. Councilman Kraus asked Mr.' Passavoy what he would anticipate the window transactions to be for the next 5 years. Passavoy replied that he would estimate-one-third to one-half of the 10~ear~projection of 13 transactions per window per hour. However, this was only an opinion, and it is not based on fact. Councilmah Kraus then a~ked.~r.'Passavoy if there is a differ- entiation between drive-up ~nd walk-up windows. Mr. Passavoy indicated that a walk-up Window generally serves the exterior of the builHing, and has extended hours -- where people will park and walk along the street and conduct their transaction. Itowever, a drive-up window is an operation from 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. or 4!30 P.M., and this requires an automobile. Drive-Up Sales/Service Facilities (Cont~d.) Fred Lustig, Saratoga Planning Commissioner, addressed the Council. He stated he would like to take Mr. Passavoy to task of a statement that is unjustified . . that the Planning Commission has its set position on the matter-, and that they had already made their decision against the bank. He stated he felt this was an uncalled for statement, and is similar to saying that an engineer has made up his' mind before he gathers all. the~factS. ~ . . Mr. Lustig commenced that Mr. Passavoy stated the bank is going 'to contribute 52 percent toward the ~arking AsSessment District, as far as lands, is concerned, and 26 percent of the finances. He indicated he has dealt with many bankers in his life, and he doesn't know of any~one Of!them who wou~d make a bum decision, and if that is the decision the bank is going to make, it must be a very good reason to make it. Regarding the statement about the 2 other drive-Up windows now existing in the City of Saratoga, Mr. Lustig indicated this is is a true statement; however, he would like to remind Mr. Passavoy and the Council t~at there are many other savings institutions that may not ~elconsidered as banks, but places~ where you can deposit your money and have cheqking account privileges, etc., that may not be considered~' in Mr. Passavoy's opinion, to be banks. But they are still savings institutions. He indicated that these insituti6ns~are not screaming for a drive-up window. He stated that as a Planning Commission, they have to consider the impact of not one bank allowing a drive-up facility, but the impact of a drive-in facility such as "fast- ~ood", "fast dry ~leaning",i etc. He stated'it has been their consensus that this is a nOn-warranted'type of facility; there- fore, the Planning Commission has made its position clear. Roger Haig~ 19481 Scotl~!d=~rjy~, addressed the Council Mr Haig commented that many people feel the concept of a drive-~p window, especially in the Village, is the antithesis of the con- cept of foot traffic or the pedestriansoriented atmosphere p~ople are trying to p~eserve in the Village. He felt the drive-up window concept is exactly the opposite of what we want in Saratoga. Mr. Hai~ ~s~ted ~ha6 we ar~tr~i~g very'ha~d to tr~ and preSerVe some of the unique features7 of the Village, and while he agrees that one institution is not going to-!'make us or break us", the' direction wego is critical. Therefore, he would ask the Council · and the staff to give all. c'onsidera'tion possible to the general direction we are going, rather than let the conversation pivot about the need or the fairness of ~ranting one group this'facility. Jane Dennis, a lo6al merchant and a resident of Saratoga, addressed the Council. She stated tha.t her business is very close to the site of the bank, and she goes by that corner many times a day.' She commented it is a very ~ad corner traffic-wise right now, and it is very difficult to get off of Fourth Street 6nto Big Basin. Secondly, she feels the children are starting to use the stair- way leading down from Oak Street School down into the Village, and she wouldn't think this wo~ld help the situation. Alsol,. if the City has any hgpe of getting Mr. Pasetta's property developed, she feels this would be detr±mental'to the development of a good commercial area. Drive-Up Sales/Service Facilities (Cont~d.) Robert Behar, Attorney representing Security Pacific National Bank, 333 S. Hope Street, Los Angeles, addressed the CoUncil. Mr. Behar stated he has been tracking along the Rrogress of the application for the bank structure since its inception, and he has also been tracking along the proposed formation of the Parking District. Mr. iBehar indicated that he has reviewed carefully some of the statements and contacts that have been made between staff and his client, and the delays that have occurred for one reason orZanother, and the sudden appearance of an ordinance which mostlcertainly would affect this proposed project. He stated he would ask the City Council, before it takes definitive action, tq carefully review the various repre- sentations that have been made by various representatives of the City to this client, in reliance upon which his ~ient has during the progress of the proposal expended substantial amounts of money, and now is faced.with an extinction of the project because of a coincidence in a delay at the Planning CommiSsion level of definitive action on the project. He indicated that he is stating there is a relationship among all these trans- actions, and would urge that the Council review these matters carefullyi~.esp~c_i_~_a_rly with 'regard to the kinds of objective, statistical~'Yactual data that must be presented in staff reports and in testimony, and any ~ther evidence used in forming a recommendation for an ordinance. Mr. Behar indicated that the courts have told us rather definitively what both administrative and legislative decisions must take into account, objectively and factually, before reaching a decision that affects the rights of persons. For that reason alone, Mr. Behar stated he would urge the Council to continue this hearing and review all the various things that have happened, and review the interplay between this §pecific application and this specific ordinance and how they have come together in a way that prejudices Security Pacific National Bank. Mr. Behar commented~/~'~'~I6perated 100 percent in an attempt to get the P~i'~g' Di~Y~ on board. He indicated that he drafted the initialldocumentation, re-drafted it, and re-drafted it, and compromised several points, at the request of the City Attorney and City Manager, and at the last contact he thought they had resolved the differences. He stated he would do everything within his power to help bring about a com- patible solution to this problem, so there is no threat intended -- however, they must protect their rights. Phil Strong, Owner of E1 Ma~ie's Fashions.and Things, which is almost directly across the street from the proposed site of the Security Pacific Bank, addressed the Counci{L He stated that after listening to some of the dialogue this evenidg, hefinds himself somewhat threatened from this standpoint~--j"not with what Security Pacific Bank is proposing. He stated the reason he and his family settled in Saratoga'is due to the fact they had looked at many other areas within the Santa Clara Valley. The'reason they didn't like these other sites was the fact that they were fairly muddled with facts and figures and the type of concreteness that is void of aesthetic values that make our struggles in life a little ~ore chearful. He indicated that they find a community that offers a little uniqueness, a little fun and pleasure, to be able to walk through the Village area, is a value he would like to help protect. He stated that a drive-up window is a dangerous move in setting a precident in allowing this type of thing to happen at this particular time. Drive-Up Sales/Service Facilities (Cont'd.) Mr. Lustig again addressed the Council and stated he would like to set the record straight on earlier statements about delays. He stated that the first reading of the matter of the design of Security Pacific~Bank came before the Desigh Review Committee, and a statement made to Mr. Passavoy that "irrespective of any ordinances that are now being proposed, the drive-up window design was not acceptable~" He commented this evening we are hearing that all of these delays were for various other reasons. He further commented that we have not seen a re-ddsign in design review of the drive-up facility that the CommissiOn wishes to pursue -- the first one was unacceptable. Mr. Lustig stated that he just wants to be on record as pointing out that the Planning Commission has exercised its appointed duties, and the delays as outlined ~e a normal procedure of desire from one party,Tand demands,of ~nother. Gene Zambetti~ Saratoga Planning Commissioner, 14575 Oak Street, addressed the Council. H~ ~stated that we 'seem to be talking only about one specific area of commercial property in the'City of Saratoga, but it is the~highest zoned piece of property within the General Plan or~the zoning map. He indicated. he would like to call attention to the 13 vacant acres that exist which are zoned. Visitor-C6mmercial on the northwest section of Saratoga, which is the gateway entry from San Jose, and also, the property opposite of that, which is broken up into several parcels, but adds up to a total of 10 to 12 acres. He commented that the development along lSaratoga-Sunnyvale Road and DeAnza Boulevard is approaching along the City's gateway, and he felt the City has to be concerned with its civicimage. Mr. Zambetti commented if Saratoga wants to be different from the City of San Jose and wants to preserve good circulation upon the site, i~ was his feeling adoption of this ordinance is in keeping with the direction of the City in the past and in the future. He further commented that it must be remembered that there is an agressive real estate program for not only fast food items, but also, .liquor franchises,~etc. He indicated that the Planning COmmissiOn looked at all the areas that are zoned commercial and how the future development was going to take place, and they were concerned with this when they wrote up this ordinance. Mr. Passavoy again addressed the Council, stating that they believe this ordinance isspecifically designed against Security Pacific Bank, and he does not know of any other application before the Planning Commission where a drive-up window is proposed. It was his feeling this appl ~ation wa~ hastily conceived with- out a significant amount of'thought. Sandi Cuenca, Saratoga Chamber of Commerce, ~ddressed the Council. She commented that she believes the position is being made clear this evening by the. merchants in the downtown area; however, the Board of Directors has not taken a position on this issue. There being no further comments from the audience on this matter, it was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the public hearing be closed. ~o~{i~'~"K~'~iOned ~whet~~'~t .t~Y~uu~l~7'7~i~h'~d ~o close the o~blic hea~ng at thl~'[i~e~--a~d~'Co~'f~'~tY~'6t~d'it~8~'f~'~ ~"~ed to continue the public hearing. Drive-Up Sales/Service Facilities (Cont!d.) Councilman Brigham'indicated he would like to move to adopt Ordinance NS-3.35 for the following reasons: 1) The drive-up windows will cause air pol!ut~on; 2) due to the energy crisis, he could not support putting in another facility to promote car,: use, rather than going to mass transit or some other kind of use. Councilman Kraus indicated he has no particular concerns in reference to this drive-upfacility; however, he has some con- cern in the discussions with the bank in reference to the fact that they came into the City and this provision was not a part of the City ordinance at that time. He indicated his position at this time would be that~he would liketo discuss this with the City Attorney Uefore proceeding further. Mr. Johnston, the City Attorney, cormnented in reference to Mr. Behar's earlier statement that certain representations had been made to his client, and he wanted the City Council to sit down with their counsel and discuss it. 'He indicated he has no idea what representations Mr. Behar might be referring to. He further commented that the staff and Planning Commission has put in a substantial amount of time and input intoLthe study of this problem. CQuncilwoman Corr then. seconded_Mr. Brigham's earlier motion; <~o~-B~gg~-,'~g~nented that he feels there could be a'case ~Sr~e~e~"i~"~h~ City where a drive-up window would be appropriate at a bank, on a use permit lbas=is. It was then moved by ~uncilman Brigham and seconded by Council- woman Corr to continue.the public hearing to the next regular meeting. The motion was carried unanimously. Recess and reconvene ? C. CONSIDERATION OF SARATOGA AVENUE PLAN LINE CORRECTIONS, IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN The City Manager indicated that some time ago, it was brought to the Council's attention 'the fact that some corrections needed to be made to the plan lines on Saratoga Avenue. At that time, the Council had accepted t~e report and referred it to the Planning CommisSion for public hearing and recormnendation to the Council. Mr. Shook, Director of Publ'ic Works, then presented a report which clarified what these corrections were. Mayor Bridges then opened the.public he~ring at 10:07 P.M. There being no comments on this matter, it was moved by Council- man Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried; the public hearing was closed at 10:08 P.M. It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham to approve the proposed alignment to bring it into con- formance with the General Plan. The motion was carried. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR 10 - B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Recommendation from Special Council Committee Re: Appointment of Two Persons to Parks and Recreation Commission This matter was set forward until Councilman Matteoni would be present to comment on the nominations. 2. Planning CommiSSion Rep6rt Re: Community Care Facilities in Residential Zones It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus to introduce Ordinance NS-3=26 and waive the reading, and to set the public hearing on this matter for November 3, 1976. The motion was carried. 3.' Councilwoman Corr indicated that she attended the P.P.C. Meeting last week, and at that time, P.P.Co had accepted the reportof the Social Concerns Committee, which they will. be sending to the citie~ for review and comment. 4. Councilman Brigham ~e~inded_the Council to complete their individual Attitudinal Survey for P.P.C. C. DEPARTMENT HE~DS AND OFFiCeRS =,.= D. CITY MANAGER 1. Report Outlining Recommendations for Implementation of Trails and Pathways Task Force Report It was moved.by Councilman Brigham and seconded by'Council- man Kraus the Council adopt the process as outlin&d in the Planning Director!.s staff report dated October 1, 1976. The motion was carried. 2. Report Re: Alternatives for Development of Village Parking District No. 2 Further meeting with 'prOperty owners to take place in an attempt to negotiate for this property acquisition. Status report to follow at future City Council Meeting. 3. Claim Against the City Of Saratoga Re: Complaint to Recover Ad VoloremProperty Taxes (Irvine A. Marler and Sharon E. Marler The City Manager reporte'd no action is necessary on this matter, as it has-already been filed. 4. Claim Against the City of Saratoga Re: Conditions of Tentative Building Site Approval (Mrs. Dolores F. Freeze - SDR-1241) It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham to reject this claim and refer it to the City's insurance carrier for consideration. The motion was carried. 5. Bids Received on Community Library PrOject The City Manager reported that bids were received today for the proposed construction of the community library facility. He further indicated that it is anticipated the Council would be asked to award this contract at its meeting on November 17th. 11 - VIII. CORRESPONDENCE A. WRITTEN 1. Dr. and Mrs. Neal L. Ross, 14053 Taos Drive, r~'~&~[i~ ~a~.~.~on to amend the~_ii'~.y_"'~-resolution ~"~ii~ special perm~sszon for parking in front of homes for attendance to charitable organization events. - Mayor B~idges advised Mr. and Mrs. Ross there wo~Id be two options available in this request: 1) Provide "No Parking" on specific days; or 2) remove "No Parking" signs. It was further indicated the staff would inquire with the Sheriff's Department for any suggestions concerning this request. 2. J. Jayet, Illumination Engineer, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Re: Minority Report -f the Committee on Lighting with relation to its effect on Lick Observatory. - Noted and filed. 3. Sandy Santoriello, 20802 Norada Court, expressing an opinion on the "Save Our Hills" measure, and the representation of this measure to the people of Saratoga. Noted and filed. 4. Jacquelyn M. Adams, Educator, Santa Clara County. Health Department, requesting the endorsement of National Family Sex Education Week. Noted; no action taken. 5. Jean Foss, President, An{erican Association of University Women, introducing Adrien Stang as an observer to the Saratoga City Councfl. - Noted~ 6. Santa Clara~J'iey Water District, James J. Lenihan, Chairman, Board of Directors, requesting changes or additions by the City on the North Central Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee. It was moved by Councilman .Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham to re-appoint Robert S. Shook as the City's represen- 'tative to the Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee. The motion was carried unanimously. 7. James E. Swenson, 12752 Rodoni Court,'commenting regarding the crime level in the C~ty of Saratoga. - Noted and filed; City Manager to respond. 8. Richard D. Hayden, Assemblyman, California Legislature, extending congratulations to the City of Saratoga upon winning an American Automobile Association Pedestrian. Safety Award. - Noted and filed. 9. Daniel Gallagher, Attorney at Law, Re: formal abandonment of previously dedicated land. Referred to Public Works staff for a report bahk to the. Council in30 days. 10. Paul E. Sagers, Assistant Executive Officer, LAFCO, Re: Annual Review of City Urban Services Areas. Noted and filed. 11. Jerome J. Lohr, President, Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Re: Retirement Housing on the Smith Family property (Campbell Cage Co.) - Noted and filed. B. ORAL 1. Councilman Kraus indicated he would like to commend Norm Matteoni for his representation at the Good Government Group Forum concerning the Initiative Measure on September 28th. 12 - Co ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PUBLIC GROUP REPRESENTATIVES The Mayor acknowl.edged the'presence of the following }ublic group representatives this'evening: Gene Zambetti, Saratoga Planning Commissioner Fred Lustig, Saratoga Planning Commissioner' Rudolph Kanne, Good Government Group Adrien Stang, American Association of University Women IX. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by CguncilwomanCorr and seconded by COuncilman Kraus to adjourn to an Adjourn Regular Meeting on Tuesday~ October 12th. The motion was carried unanimously; the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 P.M. Respec I ubmitted, Respec 13 -