Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-07-1977 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA.CITY COUNCIL TIME: ~Wednesday, December 7, 1977 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE:i!~S~tB~{E~ ~uncil Chambers, 13777 Fruitv ale Avenue TYPE: '~R~l~'Me~tihg I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Brigham, Corr, Kraus, Matteoni Absent: Mayor Bridges (arrived later) B. MINUTES It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval of the minutes of November 16, 1977. The motion was carried unanimously. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR The City Manager requested items 4 and 6 be pulled from the Consent Calendar~'~_d' ~_=~r~y~'~a__r_,~Clely. This was acceptable to the Council. . It was then moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval of the Composition of Consent ~alendar, with the exception of items 4 and 6. The motion was carried unanimously. B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Ordinance No. 38.81, Amending Chapter 9 of the Saratoga City Code, Entitled "Motor Vehicles and Traffic", by Deleting a Certain Mail Deposit Zone Designation (second reading) 2. Final Acceptance a) SDR-1215 Roeloffs, Woodbank Way 3. Final Acceptance and ~iling Notice of Completion - Seal Coating and Overlaying Certain City Streets, 1976-77 * 4. Ordinance NS-3.38, Amending Ordinance NS-3, the Zoning Ordinance, by Providing for Recreational (Tennis) Courts in R-1 Zoning Districts as Permitted Use, Per Minimum Specifications, and Providing for Same in "A", "HC-RD" and "RM" Districts~]2Conditional Uses (second reading) 5. Resolution 835, Acknowledging Execution of Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement and Cooperation Agreement Pursuant to Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 * 6. Resolution 836, Requesting the County Superintendent of Schools to Provide for the. Consolidation of the 1978 General Municipal Election with the West Valley Joint Community College District Governing Board Election to be Held Ma~ch 7, 1978 7. Payment of Claims It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval of the Items for Consent Calendar, with the exception of items 4 and 6. The motion was carried unanimously. *C. ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE COUNCIL ACTION 4. Ordinance NS-3.38, Amending Ordinance NS-'3, the Zoning Ordinance, by Providing for Recreational (Tennis) Courts in-R-1 Zoning Districts as Permitted Use, Per Minimum Specifications, and Providing for Same in "A", "HC-RD" and "RM" Districts and Conditional Uses (second reading) The City Manager advised that the City Attorney has suggested adding a clarifying statement under Section I, dealing with recreational courts, to indicate the addition of the words: "other than swimming pools" in paragraph NN-1. This addition was acceptable to the Counc~lo It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded Councilwoman Corr to adopt'Ordinance NS-3.38, with the addition of "other thah swimming pools) in Section I, paragraph NN-1. The motion was carried unanimously. 6o Resolution 836, Requesting the County Superintendent of Schools to Provide for the Consolidation of the 1978 General Municipal Election with the West Valley Joint Community College District Governing Board Election to be Held March 7, 1978. The City Manager indicated this should be modified to reflect under Section 2, second paragraph: "The officer conducting the election is further requested . " A second modification is to Section 3, in which it should indicate: "The County!Registrar of Voters o....."~,.rather than "Said County Superintendent of Schools It was moved by Counciiman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr Resolution 836 be adopted, as amended. The motion was carried unanimously. III. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A. APPROVAL OF QUITO ROAD-WILDCAT CREEK BRIDGE CONSULTANT CONTRACT It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to approve the Quite Road-Wildcat Creek Bridge Consultant Contract and award of same~to Ruth, Going and Curtis for the total amount of $28,600. The motion was carried unanimously. B. AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE FINAL PHASE OF DEVELOP- MENT OF HISTORICAL PARK It was moved by Councilwoman Cerr and se~ondedby Councilman Brigham the staff be authorized to advertise for bids for ~ the final phase of development of the Historical Park. The motion was carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL'RESOLUTIONS A. ORDINANCE NS-3.40 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PROPOSED BY THE INITIATIVE PROCESS (ELECTIONS CODE SECTIONS 4000-4021) AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCES. BY PROHIBITING STADIUMS (second reading .- 2 - Vi-ce Mayor Kraus indicated that it has been requested con- sideration of this ordinance be postponed until later in the meeting to allow Mayor Brfdges to participate in the vote. This was acceptable to the Council. B. ORDINANCE NS-3.37 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING ORDINANCE NS-3, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REPEALING EXISTING ARTICLE 4 AND ADDING A NEW ARTICLE 4 RE:~ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICT.SAS CONDITIONAL USES IN AREAS GENERAL PLANNED "PD" (second reading) It was moved by ~ouncil~oman Corr and seconded by Councilman Brigham the adoption of Ordinance NS-3.37, with the inclusion of the following findings:~ 1) The proposed amendment does achieve and is con- sistant with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, as specified in Section 1.1, Article 1 thereof; 2) The proposed amendment is consistant with the latest adopted City' General Plan, specifically the land use and housing element thereof; 3) The proposed amendment is consist~'~nt with the Senior Citizen Hous.ing objectives bf the City's housing element and those recommended by the Mayor,s select Senior Citizen Housing Task Force, as contained*in their final report and analysis, dated January 19, 1977; and 4) The. proposed ordinance does protect and promote the public health, safety, peace, comfort, con- venience, prosperity and general welfare of the community. '~h~'~tlon was carried unanimouslyi~~ C. ORDINANCE 38.82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA MODIFYING THE PROCEDURE PRESCRIBING TIME AND METHOD OF PA~ENT OF PAYROHL AND REIM- BURSEMENT OF FUNDS (first reading) It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the introduction of Ordinance 38.82 and waiving of the reading. The motion was Carried unanimously. V. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES, ZONING REQUESTS A. REQUEST BY MR. PALLE NIMB TO APPEAL THE 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 (Cont'd. from November 2, 1977) The City Manager advised that there has been no additional correspondence received on' this appeal. Councilwoman Corr'indicated she had g~e~L~v~'~Ni~B'!'s and observed this proposed addition, and was would be a much better use of the land th~n i~8~lH'~e to bring ~he addition out to the side. '- 3 Palle Nimb, Brandywine Drive (Cont'd.) Councilman Matteoni commented that the creek in back of this home provides a substitute, in terms of a buffer~to the neighbor's property. It was his feeling the side yard alter- native would encroach into an area which is open and would further constrict the year yard, both in terms of the property owner and people looking from the other side~ into open space and the creek itself. Therefore, he would be inclined to grant the variance request. Councilman Kraus commented that in this particular case, he believes Mr. Nimb does have a hardship, and where he is proposing to place the addition is the best location. It was then moved by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to grant the appeal for this variance~on_~ the grounded'that there cutting through the middleTMof~'[he rear ya~d~nd that ~he~~' is no detriment to public health, welfare and safety of other neighbors, and the fact that he has the added buffer of the setback of the creek to the neighbor to the rear. The motion was carried unanimously. B. CONSIDE~TION OF APPEAL RE: PLANNING CO~ISSION DECISION CONCERNING DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL OF FENCING AND ~NDSCAPING OF PATHWAY LOCATED ON CARNIEL AND SA~TOGA-SUN~VALE ROAD '~,~ ~Th~-r-~pell~nt has requested re-scheduling this matter to DecemBer 21SET' Th'is was acceptable to the Council. VII. ADMINIST~TIVE ~TTERS (taken out of order) A. ~YOR B. COUNCIL AND CO~ISSION REPORTS 1. Report from Parks and Recreation Co~ission Re: Hakone Gardens Use Policy Barbara Sampson, D~ector of Co~unity Services, advised that the Pa~ks and Recreation Co~ission has reco~ended that the use policy of Hakone Gardens be continued and be ~p~ted permanently, with the minor modifications,~ti[ed~ ~'~nlthe report, dated December 1, 1977. It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Matteoni to adopt the Hakone Gardens Use Policy with the modifications as requested bY the Parks and Recreation Co~ission.i.-The motion was~ carried unanimously. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONSIDE~TION OF ~QUEST BY SEVE~L PROPERTY O~ERS FOR THE ABANDO~ENT OF PEDESTRIAN/EQUESTRIAN ~SEMENT AT REAR OF PROPERTIES ON SOBEY M~DOWS COURT - T~CT 5164 The City Manager explained that in August, 1974, the City Council received a petition from six o~ers of property affected by the crossing of this easement. The easement was required as part of a subdivision on Tract 5164. The Council had deferred action on this request until it had gone through the process of creating a Trails and Pathways Task Force, and then subsequently amending the City's General Plan in July.~,7~ 1977 to include an updated trails and pathways portion of the circulation element of the General Plan. Easement - Sobey Meadows Court (Cont'd.) The matter was then referred 'to'the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration as to whether or not the City should consider further the abandonment of this easement. The Parks and Recreation Commission held a public hearing on this matter, and as a result of that hearing, has recommended to the Council that the pedestrian/equestrian easement be maintained. The Council at the time of receiving this also received a re- quest for a temporary closure and a survey of the exact location of the easement, and at that time decided to schedule a public hearing for this evening concerning the request for abandonment. Miss Sampson, Director of COmmunity Services reviewed on the overhead lmap the ~l-~6{~f~h~'~ent in question. ~ice'~Mayor Kraus acknowledged items of correspondence relating to this issue, as follows: 1) Mr. Clarke Eikenbary, 14057 ~rcadia Palms Drive 2) Mr. and Mrs. Richard Tourino, 18860 Ten Acres Road 3) Mr. Stephen Dunn, 18470 .Sobey Road 4) Mr. and Mrs. Darwin Barrett, 14050 Marilyn Lane 5) Mr. Bill Birkhold, 14020 Arcadia Palms 6) Mr. Murray Brookman, 14715 Sobey Road7 7) Mr. Murray Brookman, 14715 Sobey Raod 8) Mrs. Donald E. Dorsey, 19361 San Marcos Road 9) ":M~'~{~'~. Antonioli, Attorney representing 'Mr.'!=a~d~M~b'~~ Steve Sherick, 14127 Sobey Meadows Court 10) Mrs. R. C. Boylan, 14670 Sobey Road 11) Ms. Mary Ann Lahann, 19516 Douglass Lane 12) Mr. John Terry, Chairman, Trails and Pathways Task Force 13) Mr. Robert Turk, Principal, Rolling Hills Jr. High School 14) Assemblyman Richard D. Hayden 15) Mrs. Jo Ann Chleboun, 14155 Sobey Meadows Court 16) Mrs. Jennifer~Taylor, no address indicated 17) Mrs. Charles A. Overland, 12901 Foothill.Lane 18) Mrs. Dorothy Miller, nozaddress indicated. 19) Ms. Julie Jameson, no address indicated. ' 20) Mr. and Mrs. David Nightengale, 15483 Bohlman Road 21) Dr. Jack J. Salsbury, Assistant Superintendent-Business, Campbell Union School District ~ice~Mayor Kraus opened the public hearing at 8:11 P.M. Rosie Dorsey, representing the Saratoga 4-H Club, addressed the Council. She asked: "What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you think of the City of Saratoga?" To this~she replied: "You think of a quiet rural residential area -- you can think of all the beauty, the hills, the trees and even the animals. ~d~t~i~~ ~TX~'~e'l~:~ 'Wh~t-a beaufiful place to live. "' Easement - Sobey Meadows Court (Cont'd.) She commented that recentl~ their 4-H Club was invited to attend a 4-H Community Pride Conference in Sacramento, sponsered by Chevron. As part of this c~nference, they had to submit a project plan of what they proposed to do in~the!upcoming year. The Community Pride Resource Team of the Saratoga 4-H Club noted that there was some concern about trails and pathways in the community at the time, and decided this would be a good project. She explained that this plan is to help both the City get started a~d help the citizens be aware of pathways in Saratoga. Ms. Dorsey referred to an aerial map of the easement and surrounding area. She explained that at the beginning of the trail a temporary ~ehicle barrier shall be put up until ~ development is complete. They will trim the oak tree at the beginning of the trail; the grading of an unnatural slope at the south side of Lot 12; sandbags approximately behind Lot 11; at the lower end of Lot 9.a for~'!shall be made at the crossing to Arcadia Palms, and possibly a bridge; the clearing of brush and shrubs along the trail. Also, they will paint a street line on Arcadia Palms designating exactly where the trail goes, and will provide screening plants to separate the trail from homes along Sobey Meadows Court. She'dindicated'that an exact definition of where the trail goes is marked either by railroad ties, telephone poles, or markers. Also, their 4-H Club will set up the necessary work days and all the labor needed to fulfill their proposal, and when the development is complete~ they will set up periodic check dates to see that minor maintenance is taken care of. As to major maintenance, they hope to set up an annual %pring clean up" for this section of trails, which would include weeding, sign repairs, etc. She indicated that the 4-H Club is also hoping that the City will participate in their project by: Taking a survey of the area so that the trail can be determined exactly; obtaining a small portion of the easement not owned by the City at this time; also, fencing is necessary at lots 10, 11 and 12. Ms. Dorsey indicated that the,=~Community Pride Project is being done in a local sense to help benefit this community, and is not using 4-H on any other level. She commented that it is hoped the City Council would approve the development of this pathway. Terrill Barco, 19101 Camino Barco, addressed the Council. Col. Barco indicated he was a member of the'Trails Task Force Committee and submitted the minority report. He commented that the Trails Committee did not go over any other portion of the trails more thoroughly than it did this one, and they did not take the decision lightiX. 'He pointed out that this is trail section D-l.~C~l~a~{~hated he had concurred in the recommendat{o~ 'of ~he con~n{ttee at that time, and he still concurs in the recommendation. Col. Barco commented that he supported the concept of trails at that time, and he still does, although it has been very difficult at times for him to do this. He also appreciates the concern of the private homeowner for his privacy and his property rights, although he has deplored some of the actions taken!~n~_tt~jregard. - 6 - Easement - Sobey Meadows Court (Cont'd.) Col. Barco commented that if he were sitting where the Council is, he would ask the following questions:of the City Attorney: '_?~i~"b'8"~[~r~g~Y~f~t to an easement on two 'l'~f!deslof-~a-homeownerls~ot for trails when we also have taken an easement for a sidewalk on another side? He commented that if the answer were "yes", he would ask himself: "Is it ethical? Is it right? Is it fair? Is it not the grossest invasion of his privacy and property rights; and most importantly, is it necessary for the public good? 2) Does the public ha~e'the right to walk or to ride a'horse on this easement when the City has not actually declared it a pedestrian or equestrian trail does~ not even have a definition in its ordinances as to what pedestrian and equestrian trails are? 3) If the City Attorney should say "Yes, the public can have acce~sU~ he would then ask him, "What is the City's liability for accidents on the easement, damage to and trespass on private property, and gross intrusion into the privacy-of adjacent homeowners due to the failure of the City to properly grade, identify and mark the easement, provide recommended streeting, etc." 4) What are some legal definitions or guidelines where actions are truly.necessary for the public good and justify a definite intrusion of individual privacy and intrusion on private property. Col. Barco stated that he would then ask the Mayor and members of the Council: "Why have;we failed after one year, 4 months, and 25 days to take decisive action on the Trails Task Force Report, and why do we continue to avoid a public hearing on that report? Why do we face these problems piecemeal ." He indicated he would have the following recommendations: 1) Ask the above questions, and then take a definite position on whether the public ispermitted on these easements now under the conditions that exist right now. 2) Take action on the Parks Commission's recommendation. 3) Have a public hearing on the Trails Task Force Report, and establish some definitions and some policies. 4) Make a final decision on the portion of the easement in question tonight. Col. Barco commented that he feels it is time to get back to basic definitiohs and make some decision and then go on to settle all the little ones, Vice Mayor Kraus commentedTthat the City Manager has advised him that the Council did adopt the General Plan amendments that were incorporated inthe Trails Task~Eo~ce Report, and this was during a public hearing process. - 7 - Easement Sobey Meadows Court (Cont'd.) Mr. Clark Eikenbary, 14057 Arcadia Palms Drive, addressed the Council. Mr. Eikenbary indicated he was very interested in the 4-H projects .throughoUt California. However, he felt they were over their h~ad in this project, and he is definitely against this trail system.entering onto A~cadia Palms Drive. Mr. Eikenbary indicated they have had a good number of problems with the horseback riders and foot traffic onto Arcadia Palms. He indicated he speaks~l'~"~6f~hf~s~{~b~rs .across the street, Mr. and Mrs. Birkhold a~!~r4020+~rc-adi~ Pa~rms Drive. He pointed out that the proposal of the 4-H Club is that the trail cross the storm easement, which is in the back yard of the Birkhold's, and onto Arcadia Palms. He commented that at various times, the creek in this area erodes this bank and erodes the~ri~- rap structure around the storm outlet, and in some instances it is fn a very bad condition, with a vertical drop, and at other times it is a very smooth condition, depending on the flow of the water at that point. Mr. Eikenbary related an incident whereby a little girl was thrown off of her horse at this location, and when he offerred assistance, she was very upset and wanted to leave the scene. He indicated that the Birkhold's have had problems with riders crossing -- not only the young people, but also the adults -- when they were only askingz the riders to stay off the shrubberies and trees. He pointed out that there is a great liability here, and indicated he would like to ask the Council: "Who stands the liability of a horse falling down on its rider in his front yard?" Mr. Eikenbary indicated that he does not wish to assume this liability. He further stated that if the trail is allowed to be continued onto Arcadia Palms, he would ask: "Who maintains it? Who polices it? Who handles the motorcyclists?" He commented that he guarantees the jeepster~, dune buggies and motorcycles will use this trail as it will be a short cut.for them. Mr. Eikenbary further asked: "Wl~en the horses come on the~ ....... residential street, who is, going to take care of the ma~U'~."~~ Mr. Eikenbary indicated he. has taken care of the manure for seven years and have said nothing, and the few times they have mentioned this to the, adult riders, they give_them the non- verbal shot of "in your ~ar". He commented that if this is allowed to happen, expect a lot of horses -- a lot of horse manure. Gary Hart, 14187 Sobey MeadOws, addressed the Council and commented that without attacking Col. Barco's remarks-, there is a small disagreement, evidenced by the letter of July llth from Mr. Kauffmann to Mr. Beyer, referencing the fact that the committee actually walked the path not on the line shown on the map. Referencing page 1~, SectiOn 5=2(d) of the T~ F~rce Report, it references a maximum grade permitting of 15 percent. Mr. Hart stated that ~his.is obviously exceeded grossly on his property on the south end~of the easement, which leads him to further believe that the easemen~ was not actually walked.at that point. Mr. Hart further~ointed out that there is no legal crossing point between the easements on the__easterly side of the creek and Arcadia Palms without~a~i~i~n'~f'~'~'~b~ - 8 - Easement - Sobey Meadows Court (Cont'd.) As a third point, Mr~ Hart pointed out that this is a loop and in no way affects the integrity of the arterial trail system. Also, the expense. items at the most conservative estimat~amount~jto at least $10,000, for 1,200 feet of trail. Subjective costs are: invasion of privacy, the security aspect, and ecological damage, mainly to the oak trees. ~'~vthe basis of the reasons stated, Mr. Hart indicated he would request abandonment, and direct the City Manager to deed the easements back to the property owners. G. Carlson, Chairman of the Saratoga Parks and Recreation CommisSion, addressed the Council. He stated he would like to mention a few things that were brought out at the public hearing before the Commission, and also that were observed by the Connnissionwhen they took a tour of this location. He commented that the proposed trail and the existing easement does not follow the precise location of the prior trail in that general area, but it was selected as a location that would be a practical alternative to a trail that existed in that general area prior to the overall development and subdivision of that location. He further indicated there is a substantial equestrian ihterest in this particular part of Saratoga. With regard to comments that have been made about the oak tree, Mr. Carlson indicated that the Commission did request the City's Parks to what affect might be anticipated from a futu~ velopment at this location. It was felt that between a combination of removal of ~ill and some minor trimming that this would not be detrimental to the particular tree in question. Mr. Carlson indicated there was excellent input on both sides at the Parks and Recreation Commission public hearing. Following the hearing, each member of the Commission was polled for individual viewpoints,~and it was unanimous that this easement not be abandoned at this time. With regard to the question of access onto Arcadia Palms Drive, Mr. Carlson indicated that the easements ar~t~n~=~i~l- ~at that point. He stated that what exact a~ount ~of'~p~rty'we would be talking about, in terms of additional acquisition, would appear to be exceptionally small. He indicated that from the standpoint of the Parks Commission., they felt this was an essehtial area in the ultimate design of an effective trail system within the City. Also, they felt it was not one which was being imposed u~on someone, but was a pre-existin~ one and they felt it~'~L~a~'~Y~'d~had very widespread public support. It was 71~r~fo~e Commission's recommendation that no portion of the existing easement be abandoned. Councilman Matteoni inquired of Mr. Carlson if the Parks Commission had heard the proposal as presented by the 4-H Club. Mr. Carlson replied that they had heard the proposal subsequent to their decision, and they were not aware of it at the time they made their recommendation. He commented that this was a very controversial issue and one iniwhich there were some exceedingly strong feelings by various groups and individuals, and it was recommended no action be taken until after the hearing this evening, and no attempt be made to utilize the \ .... -" __~ ~ ........ ~ 9 Easement - Sob~y Meadows Court (Cont!d.) easement until it was more clearly defined by the Council. John Hope, 14070 Arcadia Palm~ Drive, ad~ressed~he C~i'l. He indicated that their property is immediately adjacent on the same side ~f;~h~ stre'e~ as Mr. anHMrs'. Birkholdi~ Mr. HOpe indicated that he expects that the crossing would take place on his property. He furth&r commented that he and his wife's concern is not for the minimal cost for the strip of land; rather, he considers this a proposed inverse condemnation because of the loss of privacy they would suffer with a trail of horses parading behind ~heir property. Mr. Ho~e_indicated he would further like to support~ ~ ~i~r~"I§';~{on ~0ut residents should be considered. Mr. Duffy, 18866 Ravenwood Drive, addressed the Council, stating that his interest in keeping the easement open is because of the fact he has horses himself occasionally, and if the trail is ever developed, this would be his access to ride out onto the trails. Mr. Duffy indicated that this crossing has always been at this location, and the children who attend MarshalLane School all cross at this location, and it is a natural access. Mr. Duffy commented that he never has met Col-;. Barco who spoke earlier this evening, and the only person he has talked to on this _matter is ~Mr.. Terry~~ne~t~'~=~at"h~'7~ei{~V~s ~ry-~dilf~l~urt~E~'~put a trail through there,.re=Therefore, he indicated he would like to'keep the easement in its present location. Ron Hills, 18588 Woodbank Drive, commented similar to the one on the far side -- surrounded on three sides by streets, with a house in the back. He indicated that they have easements on all four sides,~nd this has not created any ~roblems for them. Mr. Hills commented that them the streets, it creates more of a hazard for both the kids and the drivers. Further, to get from certain places, such as Quito or Sobey, to MarshalLane School, this became somewhat of a problem. Mr. Hills indicated that he is speaking in favor of keeping equestrian zones, and if the City is planning to go ahead wfth their plan of equestrian trails, they should not give up the land. With regard to liability, Mr. Hills asked: "What is the difference between having a horse or a car come over your property, and are you going to barricade all the cars from the property?" ~mi~e~t~equestrian trails can be of real benefit to ~i~y'~'~ctually increase property values, and they really add to the enticement of ~the ci-ty. He commented that this city has a great ~r~ep~_f~[~'~on ~having .~ 'rUral-type atmos- phere, and he would like to ~k~t that way. JoAnne Chleboun, 14155 Sobey Meadows Court, addressed the Council. She commented that during recent months when this easement has - 10 - Easement - Sobey Meadows Court (Cont'do) been discussed with the Council, she has always felt confident the Council would consider their petition on the merits of whether this easement met certain criteria which is stated in the Trails and Pathways Task Force Report. She quoted from the preface of the report: "Constant consideration is given to: 1) rights of property owners; 2) deterfence of vandalism; 3) safety of both trail users and property owners." On page 8, Criteria for Route Selection - Factors of Major Significance, number 3 states: "Suitability of the section, the angle of the climb, availability of enough width for a full use trail, complexity of conversion for trail ~se." Number 5 states: "Privacy, proximity of route~to developed property." Mrs. Chleboun stated that as she read this entire report, she felt there was to be~primary consideration given~.'6~7~the property owners and perhaps secondary consideration given to the needs of trails and pathways. She further stated that when the Task Force Report was written pertaining to this particular easement, the part they saw is now covered by a tennis court. She pointed out that this is at the south end of the easement. She commented that when the original plat was drawn, there were no houses on Sobery Meadows Court, and certainly no one to protest, because the builder was requested to do this, and this was a part of getting his permit to build. Mrs. Chleboun commented that she_would hope the Council would now consider whether the original concept is compatible with the area as it has been allowed to develop, and she believes it is not. Further, she would hope that in the future, the Council would be first of all concerned about the families who will be impacted by their decision. In Section C of the Task Force Report, Mrs. Chleboun pointed out that the recommended width is 8 feet for the maintenance vehicles, and there are areas in which it is much less than 8 feet. The recommended grade in Section D is 10 percent, with a maximum 15 percent for any horse use. Mrs. Chleboun indicated that it is her understanding the grade on Mr. Hart's property is approximately 35 percent. Mrs. Chleboun commented that it is further her understanding that the Task Force did notinclude the two lots at the north end of the easement in the proposed trail for the very reason that the creek banks were too steep, and because they probably didn't walk exactly on the easement where the Council did, they did not know that the south end had a steep bank, rather than a genetle slope. She pointed out on page 18, Section 8, Public Safety - Trail Patrol and Surveillance, it states: "The primary solution to trail management was surveillance. Vandalism and petty criminals are not anxious to ply their trade when there is some chance of being observed and reported." 11 - Easement - Sobey Meadows Court (ContLd.) '. Mrs. Chleboun indicated that it has been stated that this section is the only one in.the Sobey Road area that has a proposed trail that goes through side and back yards. She commented that she feels very strongly that trails in built up areas need to be visible from back yards. In case a rider or someone walking has a problem and they are visible from the street, they can be helped; however, where a trail goes behind houses and is not visible from the street, a rider could have trouble, a child could encounter strangers, and unless someone was home on this property, no one would.be there to help. Therefore,'Mrs. Chleboun indicated she would urge the Council consider putting trails and pathways in very · visible areas. With regard to the Saratoga 4-H Club proposal, Mrs. Chleboun felt it was Very presumptive of them to have chosen this particular easement. She commented that none of these people live in the area, and at the Parks and Recreation Commission~ Meeting on November 7, it was'admitted that they had not visited the easement prior to drawing up their proposal. But they took their proposal tO a state conference in Sacramento and ~ere given a small grant by the Chevron Corporation to pursue this project, They had not contacted any of the property 'owners Whose property was involved, and they had not at that time even seen the' easement, Mrs. Chleboun indicated she would like to address the matter of public safety -- that is, using the easement as a pathway to the school. She stated'that she has been concerned about the safety'of children going to ~chool for a long time. She pointed out that in her letter to the Council, dated October 27, she pointed.out that bus service is now available to all children living north of A%lendale and in the Chester-Ten Acres area. Further, for the'elementary school children living on Arcadia Palms, the problem of their access to walk to school on Sobey Meadows Court has easily been settled between the neighbors. She commented that, since the School D'i~ict has purchased two new Buses, they are committed to providing transportation for school children. Referencing the letter from the-principal of Marshal Lane School, she quoted: "I do feel that since the SchoolDistrict is providing bussing for the students and their safety, I prefer and urge that students take the buses to and from school." Mrs. Chteboun indicated that she represents six families who are concer~ed for safety, privacy, security and their own rights as property owners. Further, they are not selfish people, as referred to in a flyer which was distributed in their neighborhood~ which asked~eopte to contact the principal at Marshal Lane, when in fact he did not even know about this flyer. Rather, they are s'ix families who have a right to the petition process, and ask only for a public hearing to express their concerns. R. E. Kaufmann, 20700 Fourth Street, addressed the Council. He indicated that. he live's nowhere near the easement in question,.and he was a member of the Trails and Pathways Task Force. Mr. Kaufmann commented that when he walked this path, he did not walk'the path which is subsequently being shown -- · they were, considerably to the'south of where the easement actually is. He further commented that where this particular - 12 Easement - Sobey Meadows Court (Cont'l.d.) easement is located, he, considers this a total rape of the property. Mr. Kaufmann stated that he can show the Council places near E1 Quito Park where the original trail ran along- side a six-foot fence which protected property, and they still moved the trail because it was objectionabl~ to property owners. He commented that the rest2 of the trail down to the revised point of crossing, the Commission did not find objectionable. The reason they chose the revised crossing point was because as they proceeded north along the trail, they got closer and closer to the backyards of homes and the slope of the ground changed. Therefore~ where the slope originally protected the occupants of the houses and hid the trail from direct encroach- ment on the backyard up toward Lots 8, 9 and 10, this became tQ~t_a. lly objectionable so they jumped the creek. ??L~_~=~ ~ 'Mr."Kaufmann indicated .that the part of the trail that is personally objectionable to him is the easement alongside Mr. Hart's hquse, not because it was mis~.represented, but they were not shown the right property. He would not have voted for it then, and he would not vote for it now. He stated that h~ .concurred that the rest of the trail he would not consider to be particularly damaging to property owners. He felt that the Council shou~l~ ialso bear in mind that the easement was not a walkway easement originally, but a flood control easement, and the walkway was an afterthought. In terms of property usage, he stated a flood control easement is entirely different from a public walkway or equestrian trail. The use by the Flood Control District is a couple of ~imes~a year, and at present, they don't even drive their trucks He stated that once this is made a public trail of any kind, it changes the entire nature, both with respect to the property owners and the users, and he felt .this should be considered. Mr. Kaufmann stated he would like to~'~nal~[~[~'~olloWin~.~%~'~-ii%~~ _The~r~!ailS_cDn~3ittee was activated in Jdh~'~"~Y~"~_~C~0~ too long to do their job, and now the City has taken too long to do its job, and he believes the citizens' should be allowed to know why. Mr. Kaufmann asked how many years the City thought it could delay or bank other people's land without using it. Therefore.,._~he felt part of the Council's consideration should in~lnd~ ~h~j~a~n =6Y'~'iZ'~'~.iI.:of time the Ciky could hbld ont6~'v'~iS~s~m~h=e~s'~it~ut7--doiHg' something about them. He felt the City has to do something about the rights of the indi- viduals who own prop'erty which is being lmpeached. There being no further comments from the audience at this time, It was moved by Councilman Brigham and sedonded by Couhcilwoman Corr the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried unanimously; the public hearing was closed at 9:15 P.M. Councilman Brigham commented that he walked this trail, and one thing that he was concerned about was the fact that the trail itself was not marked off; therefore, he felt one of the con- siderations the City should make in the future is to take a survey of the trail and marking it off so the property owners can start putting up trees, etc. to fence the trail off. Also, he co~nented that he is very much in favor of the pr6ject, and he is in favor of keeping this trail Mr. Brigham further commented that one of things that swayed him in these deliberations is the fact that children are going Easement - sobey Meadows Court .(Cont'd.) .from the Allendale area to'Marshal Lane, and he believes busing is' going to go, and this will be one of the trails people can use to Marshal Lane. He therefore moved denying the request for abandonment of the easement at the rear of properties on Sobey Meadow~ Court, Tract 5161. Councilwoman Corr inquired of the City Attorney if as an easement, this is really open to the public as a trail. Mr. Johnston, City Attorney, replied that' if it is a dedicated public easement, he cannot say if it is actually open to the public in that the City ha~ the power to prevent people from going on it. However, he would assume it is open to the public. He further pointed out that once it is a public easement, a governmental agency has the power to restrict its use or not. The City Manager indicated that he did ta~e steps administratively to t~mporarily close the trail until after the hearing this evening because of some conflicts which were existing on the easements. Councilman Kraus commented'that after walking the~trail in this area, reviewing the Parks and Recreation Commission minutes, as well as the Trails and Pathways Committee Report and listening [o the testimony this evening, it is his opinion the City~h'8~'~d~'.~b_~_~id~'~f~-~£1~'~ ~'i~n~i~e Y~t~it' was very impo~an'~"~ ~k& {~"'~6~si~ion neighbors. He recommended~the~matter be referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission for immediate review to d&termine the exact location of the trail, and then bring it back to the Council to determine what the best area would be for the easement. ~ou~cilman Kraus indicatedhe is particularly concerned with the south end of the trail, as well as the crossing. Upon the recommendation of ,the City Manager, it was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Matteoni to deny the request by property owners for the abandonment of the pedestrian/equestrian easement at the rear of properties on Sobey Meadows Court, Tract 5164, authorize the staff to proceed to hire a surveyor to stake out the exact trail location, after which time staff would meet with the Parks and RecreatioD Commission_to assess problem C'[~S~ s ~_~'7~'~ ~f~ ~in~i'~i~7~ f '-~~i~'7~ ~ s. ~e 1 i '~ ~o~7~~ '&nt e package ~ t~ 'the ~8~n~{~ "~? S~: ~ay~:~Incl~~~'~{~ -motT6~-was-J~ clbs~' oY~tHi~t~H~:YOP~'D~iSd of 30 days while deliberations are taking place on this property. The motion was carried unanimously. B. CONSIDE~TION OF APPEAL RE: P~NNING CO~ISSION DECISION CONCERNING DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL OF FENCING AND ~NDSCAPING OF PATHWAY LOCATED ON CARNIEL AND SA~TOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD (APPLICATION A-535) The City Manager indicated this applicant has requested post- poning this hearing. to January 4. This was acceptable to the Council. VII; ADMINIST~TIVE ~TTERS (Center.) C. DEPAR~NT H~DS AND OFFICERS (Mayor Bridges arrives) D. CITY MANAGER 1. Report Re: Library Commission Vacancy The Council authorized ~he City Manager to advertise for the vacancy of Commissioner Isaak. 2. Report Re: Northwest Saratoga Circulation Element The Council approved setting this matter for public hearing on January 4, 1978. 3. Request to Re-schedule Committee of the Whole Meeting The Council concurred in the City Manager's recommendation IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL RESOLUTIONS (Cont'd.) A. ORDINANCE NS-3.40 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PROPOSED BY THE INITIATI~Ei PROCESS (ELECTIONS CODE SECTIONS 4000-4021) AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY PROHIBITING STADIUMS (second reading) It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Mayor Bridges to adopt the Negative Declaration in connection with this project, and adopt Ordinance NS-3.40. The motion was carried 4 to r, Councilwoman Corr in opposition. VIII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN 1. Mr. Allen De Grange, Allen De Grange and Associates, re- questing that the Parks and Recreation fee for the senior citizen housing project on Saratoga Court be waived. It was moved by Mayor Bridges and seconded by Councilman 'o~-fee~,-~._a,~=~,- . ........ -,.~ ~ - o ~ e Councl%wo~an Corl_indicated she would be inclined to grant the request for ~90 percent waiver of fees, in that this is adjacent to a very large park area and the development is anticipated to be a low rental development. The motion to grant the 50 percent waiver of the Parks and Recreation fee was carried, 3 to 2, Councilwoman Corr and Councilman Matteoni in opposition. Mr. De Grange addressed the Council, explaining that FHA has accepted his figures; however, his figures are not realistic, and he is having to come up with additional money in order to proceed with'this project. Councilman Brigham indicated he would be willing to reconsider this request, it it wereCp~S~y[~sely known whether or not the project hinged on the $7,000~Pazks and Recreation fee. It was the consensus of the Council to carry this item over to.the Committee of the Whole Meeting fo':allow Mr. De Grange to bring back to the council any additional information con- cerning this financial situation. 2. Mr. Thomas A. Barnett, 13130 Ten Oak~ Way, requesting better screening of applicants for door-to-door solicitation. This matter was referred to the staff for consideration of possible modification of solicitation time limit, from 7:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M. 3..Mayor Donald Conley, California City, requesting the Council's help in the re-organization of the Criminal Justice System. - Noted and filed. 4. Mr ~ RiC~a~ "~'~e~'~ 'Z0~6~Gi~l~ Drive, indicating opp~i~i~'~to~'~°d~'i~n~t~' I~itia~ive Petition. Noted and filed. B. ORAL C. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PUBLIC GROUP REPRESENTATIVES The Mayor recognized the presence of public group representatives, as follows: ~ G. Carlson, Chairman, Parks and Recreation Corm~.~'i~:! Ed Gomersall, Parks and Recreation Cornmission 3ohn Terry, Parks and Recreation Commission Gladys Armstrong, Los Gatos-Saratoga A.A.U.W. Nick Frank, President, West Valley Environmental and Taxpayers Association Sally Price, League of Women Voters IX. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mayor Bridges and seconded by Councilman Brigham adjournment of the meeting to an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing matters of personnel. The motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Robert F. Beye~~'~ City Clerk - 16 -