Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-02-1977 City Council Minutes MINUTES. , SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, November 2, 1977 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale'Ave., Saratoga, Cali TYPE~ Regular Meeting I.. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Brigham, Kraus, Corr, Bridges Absent: Councilman Matteoni B. MINUTES It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham approval of the minutes of October 19, 1977. The motion was carried. II. CONSENT CALENDAR · A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham approval of the Consent Calendar Composition. The The motion was carried unanimously. B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Payment of Claims Itwas moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus approval of the items for Consent Calendar. The motion was carried unanimously. III. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A. AWARD OF CONTRACT - PARKS DIVISION ONE-HALF-TON TRUCK It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr acceptance of the bid from Paul Swanson Ford for $4,723.54 for the City's purchase of a 1978 Four Courier one-half-ton pick-up truck, and acceptance of the offer of $600 by an interested citizen to purchase the 1967 truck. The motion was carried unanimously. B. CHANGE ORDER NO. 7 - SARATOGA COMMUNITY LIBRARY Councilman Kraus indicated he would like to receive information as to the placement of the glu-lam beams in the library. Mr. Hendrickson, Acting City Manager, indicated he would make this available to the Council. It was then moved by Eouncilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham approval of Change Order No. 7 for the Saratoga Community Library, totaling $1,764.55. The motion was carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES, AND FORMAL RESOLUTIONS A. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO ABANDON WALKWAY - TRACT 5164 (Cont'd. - October 19, 1977) Mr. Hendrickson advised that~this matter was continued from the previous Council Meeting to.allow the Council. ~n opportunity to Walk the easement. He Outlined the items of correspondence on this issue, as follows: 1) Ms. Patricia Dunn, 18470 Sobey Road, re: trails and pathways.in Saratoga and the disputed easement on Sobey Meadows Court. 2) Ms. Jo Ann Chleboun, 14155 Sobey Meadows Court re: Safest Route to Marshall Lane School, including a letter from Bob Mannini, Principal, Marshall Lane School~ 3) Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Smith, 14081 Sobey Meadows Court, re: use of their property as a walkway. (Councilman Matteoni arrives 7:45 P.M.) Mr. HendriCkson advised that the Parks and Recreation-. Commission has recommended against abandonment of the easement. Mr.'Shook, Director of Public Works, indicated that in re- viewing the "Safest Route to School", the Traffic Engineer has noted that the students are utilizing an informal pathway which crosses between Arcadia Palms and Sobey Meadows Court, and this does provide a much shorter route between Arcadia Palms and the school than if it were closed off. Therefore,- the staff is recommending before any formal abandonment of this walkway, there be consideration given to this as a possible link between Arcadia Palms and the school. Further, if the easement should be abandoned, there be some alter- native established, such as' the informal pathway that is already in use. It was then moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Matteoni to consider this matter at a public hearing on December 7, 1977, at which time, the request by Mr. Hart would also be considered. The motion was carried unanimously. B. RESOLUTION NO. 834, AMENDING THE THIRD-YEAR PROGRAM UNDER THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr adoption of Resolution 834. The motion was carried unanimously. It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham approval to assist in the funding of_a_staff person.rat - 'Sa~t~ Clara"'County f~ pr0ce~i~g 312'JLoans as part of the City/ County cooperative housing rehabilitation effort, and contribution of $1,000 HCDA funds. The motion was carried unanimously. - 2 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ll-FOOT REARYARD SETBACK FOR AN ADDITION TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 12931 BRANDYWINE COURT, SARATOGA - PALLE NIMB Mr. Hendrickson explained that the applicant had requested this matter be continued to the next regular meeting of the Council on November 16th. The Mayor indicated he would first like to open the public hearing on this matter. The public hearing was opened at 8:02 P.M. There being no discussion from members in the audience on this matter, it was moved by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilman'Kraus the public hearing be continued to the meeting of November 16. The motion was carried unanimously B. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL.OF PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL DESIGN REVIEW DECISION RELATING TO PROHIBITION OF TENNIS COURT CONSTRUCTION, SPERRY LANE, TRACT 5995, LOT #3 - WAYNE 'LEPOSAVIC (A-589) Mr. Hendrickson explained that prior to opening the public hearing,. it must be determined whether. or not it is the desire to hold a hearing de novo on this matter. The City Attorney explained t'he concept of a hearing de novo and what process would be required if it is determined to proceed in this manner. Upon consulting the applicant concerning the hearing de novo, he indicated he would prefer to proceed with the hearing this evening, based on the evidence which had been presented a't the Planning COmmission Meeting. Mr. Van Duyn, Planning Director, presented background infor- mation concerning this appeal and how the Planning Commission had arrived at its decision in denying placement of the tennis court on this property. He explained that under the City's existing Subdivision Ordinance this'is considered a hillside. Subdivi§ion, inasmuch as.~he ~ye_rag9 ~p~ of the property exceeds ten percent. 'Denial of this tennis court construction was in ....... k~eping with Building Site Approval_conditions that: A.Design Review ApprOval is required of all lots prior to issuance of building permits; and B. All grading shall be contoured to match natural topography. Grading plan shall be subject to Design Review Approval prior to issuance of issuance of any grading permit. Design Review was approved for all improvements on the lot, with the exception of the tennis court. The Planning Commission based its decision for denial on three major areas of reasoning: 1. The application, specifically the tennis court portion, did not meet the intent of the subdivision and building site approval conditions; 2. The proximity of the tennis court to the abutting property owner and the potentially adverse impacts to the neighbor; and - 3 PUBLIC HEARING - LEPOSAVIC (A-589) ..... " 3. The site was in excess of a 58,000 square foot area with over 33 percent cove'rage on the prQperty. 'The Council discussed the alternative plan submitted by Mr..Leposavic. CounCilman Matteoni asked if the alternate plan was under active consideration by the Planning Commission. Mr. Van Duyn replied'that the alternate plan was also con- sidered by the Planning Commission and denied as a feasible site for the court, due to the fact that it would probably involve more cubic yard removal and impacting the site even more than that site demonstrated on the original pla ~ The Mayor opened the public hearing at 8:25 P.M. Wayrfe Leposavic addressed the Council. Mr. Leposavic commented that on October 12, 1977, the Saratoga Planning Commission approved plans for h'i~ home~ swimming pool and driveway, but denied his tennis court. tie indicated that the reasons for denying the plans were excessive and unsightly grading, as well as tennis noise to his neighbor by placing the court next to the property line. He stated that the. Commission already has approved cutting 400 cubic yards of the hill and'building the driveway with 550 cubic yards of dirt. Therefore, the issue is only 150 cubic yards of dirt needed to complete the driveway. Mr. Leposavic commented that if he does not get the 150 cubic yards from his tennis court pad, he will have to bring the dirt in from outside. He further indicated that the proposed 20 feet setback would not severly abuse his neighbors, since the tennis noise can be heard 500 feet away. He stated that the true reason for the tennis court setback is not the tennis noise, but rather, an attempt for the City Planning Coam~ission to ban tennis court construction in the hills, as very few lots will qualify for it. Mr. Leposavic stated that the reasons for denying his tennis court are completely groundless; %herefore, he is asking the City Council to reverse the decision of the Planning Commission, and grant him approval for his tennis court. Mr. Leposavic commented that the subject he wishes to discuss this evening directly relates to his problem -- this deals with the position of the Planning Commission in regard to some property owners in Saratoga, which he happens to be one of. He stated that Saratoga is an affluent community, and there is not. the classic division of people into the "haves" and "have nots" -- we only have the "haves". The "haves are, however, split into two groups -- the larger group representing affluence, and the smaller group representingwealth. The larger group, the majority, lives down in the lowlands -- the smaller group, the minority, lives up on the hills. The lowlanders have nice homes with reasonably large yards with swimming pools and tennis courts -- they already have the good life, but they want more. They want to enjoy the beauty of the surrounding hills without being obstructed by manmade objects, such as homes, swimming pools or tennis courts. Therefore, due to their '~voting power, they elect their councilmen, the councilmen appoint .the Planning CommissioneR, and the Planning Commissioners .do exactly want they want -- enabling the Planning Commissioner to enjoy every bit of the hills that are owned by somebody else who continues paying taxes on these hills to support our government. The people PUBLIC HEARING - LEPOSAVIC (A-589) 'who have put their sweat into buying the hills are denied the same rights the lowlanders have reserved for themselves -- meaning to build their houses, swimming pools and tennis courts. Mr. Leposavic commented that this is certainly not fair, and if the lowlanders want to stop further development of the hill- sides, they should buy. up the hills from the present property owners, pay the taxes on them and then watch them all. day long. In the meantime, the lowlanders should pay rent to the hill- side.owners for watching the hills they neither own nor pay taxes on. Mr. Leposavic indicated that to better illustrate how ahillside owner feels, he is going to reverse the situation -- he is going to empower himself tobuild a castle on the hills, and then bring in a bulldozer and clean up the lowlands, creating a beautiful park with sprawling paths, flowers, plants, monuments and water fountains. He cou~nented that he would enjoy this view better than the ugly rooftops, but would it be right for him to deny 16wland owners from owning their property and enjoying it? Mr. Leposavic stated that the majority has no right to impose its willonto the minority when the basic constitutional rights are involved. He indicated that the position of the lowlanders amounts to denial of rightful ownership guaranteed by our Constitution. He further commented that instead of manipulating with Constitutional processes, the lowlanders might consider hiring the Russians as consultants who make a business out of denying personal rights to people -- they have 60 years experience in this area and are perfectly suited for the job. Mr. Leposavic commented that the Planning Commission in re- flecting the position of the lowland majority, is utilizing every possibly device to stop or make very difficult develop- ment of the hillsides by people who own them. Therefore, he stated, he is charging the Planning Commission' with discrimination against the rich. Furthermore, he is requesting the present Planning Commission be dismissed f~om their powerful position, and more responsible commissioners be appointed who will treat equally all property owners in Saratoga, regardless of whether they live up in the hills or down in the lowlands. Mr. Leposavic indicated if this is not accomplished, he shall take this case into the Court of Law which is enpowered and charged to protect the Constitutional rights of every ·citizen in our nation, regardless of how much money he has. Councilman Matteoni requested clarification regarding Mr. Leposavic's argument in relation to 150 cubic yards as necessary for fill for the driveway. Mr. Leposavic explained that 550 cubic yards is necessary, and is grading 400 yards already from the swimming pool and the house pad, and he was going to take another 150 from the tennis court. Councilman Kraus asked if he was correct in understanding that Mr. Leposavic is attempting to move some 1,200 cubic yards of dirt. Mr. Leposavic replied that 550 yards have to be cut and filled -- and all together, this is 1,100. Mr. Kraus asked if the problem with either moving the tennis court or the house down was that he would be down below the knoll of the hill. 5 - PUBLIC HEARING - LEPOSAVIC (A-589) Mr. Leposavic replied that it would require much more cut to move the house down the hill. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Matteoni the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried unanimously; the public hearing' was closed at 8:30 P.M. Councilman 'Kraus indicated that Mr. Leposavic's comment in reference to the Planning Commission is completely uncalled for, and the Planning Commission of this city is one of reasons that makes this city desirable for people like Mr. Leposavic, as well as himself, 'to live in. Mr. Kraus further commented that he believes anyone proposing to move this amount of dirt is irresponsible. Councilman Brigham commented that the issue of the .tennis court abutting the next property has always presented a problem in the past, and this should be considered. Councilwoman Corr commented that she feels the applicant is trying to put a lot of home or "castle" on not a large enough piece of land, and if the applicant had wanted all these amemities he should have allowed himself a little more land. Councilman Matteoni commented that he understands what the applicant is speaking about in terms of what has become a natural tension between people who own property in the hills and those who are down below. However, whether there is a majority of people living down below or not, the issue is "care for the hills -- both for the general beauty of the conananity and for those who are going to reside on the hillsides". He further commented that it appears to him the Planning Commission took the ordinances of the City and fairly applied them, and until these ordinances are challenged and Set aside, he would have to find tha- the Planning Commission acted reasonably on the evidence presented. Mayor Bridges commented that he has looked at Mr. Leposavic's development in relation to the Subdivision Ordinance, and he believes the Planning Commission has judged fairly and effectively that what this applicant is proposing would be in violation of this ordinance. He further commented that the city ordinances know no economic scale in either direction in this community, and this is one of the reasons why they have been held to be valid on other occasions in the courts of law. He would, therefore, find no reason to overturn the Planning Commission's previous determination. It'was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham to support the Planning Commission in its decision regarding this matter, and to deny this appeal. The motion was carried unanimously. C. THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 - FOURTH YEAR PROGRAM (Cont'd. 10/19/77) Stan Carnekie, Administrative Assistant in the City Manager's Office, addressed the Council. He indicated that the current Community Development plan elaborates on 7 project areas that would be considered under the fourth year project funding. Mr. Carnekie advised that it is estimated the City will receive from $250,000 to $300,000 in the fourth year under the act. 6 - HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT Mr. Hendrickson pointed out'that this is the second of three public hearings, and also, the Council could continue this matter to the Committee of the Whole Meeting next Tuesday to discuss the two-sheet attachment outlining the tentative projects. He further indicated there are two items of correspondence on this matter, as follows: 1. Mrs. Mildred GordOn of the City's Social Needs Assessment Task Force, Re: Ordinance NS-3.37 and the proposed HCDA Project. 2. Mr. Walter B~mber, member of the Saratoga Social Needs Assessment Task Force, Re: Senior Citizen Housing in Saratoga. The Mayor then opened the public hearing on this matter at 8:47 P.M. Marg Bunyard, a resident of Miller Avenue, addressed the Council, stating that she would like to applaud the Council's interest in landbanking for senior citizen housing.. Also, she indicated she would like to comment on the Senior Neighbor- hood Center and Nutrition Site. She suggested the City look into using existing facilities within the community that are adjacent to bus lines, etc. It was her feeling that sometimes by putting youth and seniors together, this gives the sense of community. Therefore, she would like the staff to explore this. Mrs. Bunyard commented that she also had noticed in the staff memorandum mention of Day Care Centers; however, there is nothing mentioned about this in the list of tentative projects. She indicated that Saratoga High School is going into Day Care Programs under Child Development classes. -Therefore, she believes institutions, since Saratogans pay so much of their school support from their property taxes, should try to work out some mutually beneficial programs with adjacent institutions. Mildred Gordon of the Social Needs Assessment Task For~e addressed the Council. She indicated that she goes along with the proposal as presented by the staff; however, she does wonder why the large sum of money was allotted -- $175,000 -- for SHARP, and a lesser amount for landbanking. She commented that she believes landbanking is very important in the develop- ment of senior housing, and feels that a larger sum would be beneficial. Also, she commented that she is interested in a Senior Neighborhood Center, and that there are various vacant facilities around that haven't been investigated thoroughly. She mentioned that there are such buildings as the Firemen's Volunteer Hall that might be available and worthwhile to investi- gate. Mayor Bridges commented that it is the Council's concern that this is a housin development program, and there is even some question i~ity will be eligible for funds because of this concentration. Mrs. Gordon commented that she believes the curbs being pre- pared for the handicapped is an important issue also. Mayor Bridges pointed out this is covered under Community Development, and therefore, would be eligible. - 7 HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT Councilman Kraus pointed out that this landbanking money was additional to that which has already been set aside. Mr. Hendrickson clarified that the_ City is now in the third year of the HCDA Program, and money.is earmarked in the second year, as well as the third year, for some sort of Senior Citizen Housing -- primarily for the concept of landbanking. This is in the neighborhood of $384,000. It was then moved by Councilman Krausand seconded by Councilman Brigham the public hearing be continued to NoVember 16. The motion was carried unanimously. Mayor Bridges indicated the Council would be looking at these proposed projects in more detail at the Committee of the Whole Meeting on November 8. Recess and reconveyne VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Presentation of Village Task Force Report This matter was scheduled for discussion at the Committee of the Whole Meeting on November 8. C. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS 1. Planning Director - Attended the Cal-Trans Meeting'Re: Public Use Corridor, and will have a memorandum'for Council consideration at the November 8th Committee of the Who'le Meeting. D. CITY MANAGER 1. Claim for Damages - Mr. George Barati It Was nDved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham this claim be denied and referred to the City's insurance carrier for consideration. The motion was carried unanimously. VIII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN 1. Sister June CanoleS, Sacred Heart Convent, Re: Council's decision relevant to Sisters of Notre Dame property. - Noted and filed. 2. Sister Audrey McGreevy, Sacred Heart Convent, Re: Council's decision relevant to Sisters of Notre Dame property - Noted and filed. 3. Sister Cealia Wallace, Notre Dame Villa, Re: Council's decision relevant to Sisters of Notre Dame property. - Noted and filed. .-'MITTEN CO~NICATIONS 4. Mr. Steven C. Debrock, 20546 Reid Lane, requesting the study of the "No Parking" zone on Reid Lane be extended into the second semester of the high school year. Mr. Shook, Director of Public Works, advised that ~his request., would be agreeable to the Public Works Department. 5. Dr. and Mrs. Donald Hambe3~, 18600 Vessing Road, supporting enactment of the West Valley College Stadium Initiative. Noted and filed. 6. M~.s~.Gerry Steinberg, Supervisor, Fifth District, County of Santa Clara, extending a personal invitation to attend a meeting on County Housing. Noted and filed. 7. Mr/Ralph Pearson, 15129' E1 Quito Way, Re: Maude Lane improve- ments. Fotl'0wing discussion of this communication, it was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the City Attorney and City Staff be authorized to take whatever r'teg'~l ~Y- ~c~i~"i~'~&~ary to collect h~s share of the constrUcti6n 'CSsts for Ma~d~'~venue improvements. The motion was.carried unanimous ly. 8. Mr. Dale Fisher, General Manager, National Solar Corporation, requesting consideration as a supplier of solar components. Noted and filed. 9. Mr. Rosey Dorsey, Saratoga 4-H Club,a~y~'_s~i~f'-grant from ~ Chevron U.S.A. for a plan_to develop trails and pathways in the community, and enclosing a copy of this plan for reference. Mayor Bridges requested that the Parks and Recreation Commission meet with the 4-H Club for!additional detail of the plan. B. ORAL IX. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the meeting be adjourned. The;motion was carried. The motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 P.M. spectf submitted, R · k