Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-03-1978 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA ~ITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, May 3, .1978 - 7:30 P.M~ PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 FrUitvale Ave., Saratoga, Calif. TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Kalb, Callon, Corr Absent: .Councilmen Kraus~Matteoni (arrivedlater) B. MINUTES Councilman Kalb pointed out the following corrections'tO ~he minutes.of April 19: Page 3, third paragraph~ should read: "Part of this increase was the fault of.the contractor." Page 6, third ~aragra~h.from bottom, line 4, replace the word "also' with 'because"; line 5, insert a period after the word ~'way"~ drop the word "and", ~apitalize "if", remove."etc." and add: "eliminate this ;other problem too"i 'Page 7, PUBLIC HEARIN~S~ third paragraph, the motion was made by Coundilman Kalb, rather than by Councilman Kraus. Page 7, MAYOR, re: Grand Jury Transportation Committee Report, the motion should indicate the Council was recognizing the work overload associated with the County Supervisors handling the area of transportation.. Vice Mayor Corr further pointed out that Councilman Matteoni had also indicated the concept whi6h the Council had endorsed was that of a separate board, and this should be mentioned. Councilman Kalb noted a correction to page 8, paragraph 4, indicating he was the seconding party to this motion Mrs. Corr pointed out on page 9 that she had reported re: actions of the City Planning Commission, rather than Councilwoman Callon. It was then moved by Councilwoman Callon and seconded by Councilman Kalb 'to approve ~he minutes Of April 19, 1978, as corrected. The motion was carried unanimously~ II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Councilman Kalb and seconded by Councilwoman Callon approval of the composition of Consent' Calendar. The motion was carried unanimously. B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR' 1 Final Acceptances: a. Tract 5288 - MontalvoRoad/Markulin Adopt Resolution~36-B-180, A~cept~ng Dedication of Streets in Tract 5288 b. Tract 5583 - Douglass Lane at Black Walnut Court/ Saratoga Foothills Adopt Resolution 36-B-181, Accepting Dedication of Streets in Tract 5583 2. Construction Acceptance, Tract 5893 - Douglass Lane/ Saratoga Foothills 3. Ordinance NS-3.40.1, An Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Amending Ordinance No. NS-3.40, an Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Proposed by the Initiative Process by Adding Non- Context Provisions as Contained in Initial Petition (second reading) 4. Payment of Claims It was moved by Councilman Kalb and seconded by Councilwoman Callon approval of the items for the Consent Calendar. The motion was carried unanimously. III. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A. REPORT ON BID OPENING FOR DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTION SERVICES VEHICLE. The City Manager advised that one bid was received on this vehicl~,~within $174 of the City's estimate. Also received was a bid of $150 for trade~in of.the car to be sold. It ±s- the staff's recommendation to award the bid to West Valley Dodge,. Inc. for $6,025.92 and reject the proposal for trade-C~ in and sell the car through other means. It was moved to Councilwoma~ Callon and seconded by Councilman Kalb to award the bid to West Valley Dodge for the amount of $6,025.92, and sell the car.in some other manner than trade-in. The motio~ was, carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES' AND RESOLUTIONS A. A PETITION FROM RESIDENTS OF THE RAVINE ROAD, GLEN UNA, CANON DRIVE AND OVERLOOK UNINCORPORATED AREA OF SARATOGA REQUESTING A CORRECTION IN THE SARATOGA URBAN SERVICE AREA MAPS TO SHOW THAT URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES COINCIDE WITH INCORPORATED BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA IN THEIR AREA The City Manager indicated it is his recommendation this matter be referred to the staff to review the implications of this request, and a recommendation be forthcoming back to the CounCil within 3 to 4 months. This .would be in advance of the time LAFCO reviews city urban service area boundary modifications. It was moved by Councilman Kalb and seconded by Councilwoman Callon the petition be referred to refer this matter to the staff for a report back to the Council in 3 to 4 months. The motion was carried unanimously. V, SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES, ZONING REQUESTS A. REQUEST TO AMEND BUILDING SITE ENVELOPE, TRACT 5693, JAMES LOIU Mr. Robinson, Acting Planning Director, advised that the intent of placing the scenic easement on this traet was for cluster development, the~ebX minimizing th~e.imp~o~f~de_y~!~p~m~n__t. on thee__hillsides. ~=~n.-~o~f-sit~nsp~ction by. Tthe Pl~'~i-ng <Commi~sion, it was recornmen. ded~th~C~ty'CS~Ffl~6'd~fy~t~'''~ ~h~es as requested. It wa~ moved by CounCilwoman Callon and douncilman Kalbrto. grant the request to modify the building site envelope On Tract 5693, and grant the amended building site approval~ The motion was carried unanimously.. B. .REQUEST FOR 90-DAY EXTENSION TO IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CORRECTING IMPROVEMENTS - SDR-1275, SARATOGA HILLS ROAD/LAWRENCE GUY It was moved by Councilwoman Callon and seconded by Councilman Kalb to grant the 90-day extension to the Improvement Agreement. for the purpose of construction improvements. The motion was carried unanimously. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (taken oUt of order) A. MAYOR 1. Announced Executive Session to follow regular meeting this evening for discussion of Personnel Matters. B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Councilwoman Callon - Attended the P.P.C. Meeting, at which time they wanted to vote on the'Trails and Pathways County Plan. She had r~quested they not vote until they had looked' at the City's amendments. They agreed to give it to May 15th to sort out details, and then vote at the next P.P.C. Meeting. 2. Councilwoman Corr - Attended the Sanitation District 4 Meeting, at which the City's letter was received concerning extension of the district into the Ravine Road area, and action was delayed to t~e meeting next week. Co DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS 1. Report from Director of Public Works Re: Request to Install Additional Signs on Glen Brae Drive Mrl. Shook, Director of PUblic Works, indicated that several months ago, there was a request for a mid-block stop at the turn on Glen Brae, which was rejected by the Council, but directed staff to see if there was an alternat&mC~a~e'~"'~r~ ~a~e~ Fhi~ concern. It has been proposed to p~a~e'hTfd- on s~gns ~n both directions at the bend to better define the fact that the road does bend. (Councilman Matteoni arrives) It was moved b~ Councilm~n Kalb and seconded by Councilwoman Callon to~autHorize the~installation of ~igns as recommended by the staff. The motion was carried unanimously. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TO CONSIDER APPEAL OF LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE DECISION, RELEVANT TO CONDITIONS IMPOSED ON BUILDING SITE APPROVAL ON LOMITA AVENUE (SDR-1346, ANTHONY LAWRENCE) (Cont'd. 4/5/78) The City Manager advised that Mr. LawrenCe is appealing the following conditions of Tentative Building Site Approval: ~Conditions~I~B~P~'CT~I~-G~and~I-=H?~ He pointed out that ome=i-tem'd~S:cUsS~dZbyL~h~iCoumc-i-l~was~that if there is to be the improvement on Lomita, the improvement only go to' one property removed, rather than Aloha, as originally ~onditioned~ The Mayor pointed out one item of'correspondence received on this matter from Mr. and MrS. Tom Tisch, 14735 Aloha Avenue, supporting the Lawrence request for a 26-foot street and 40-foot right-of-way. ~' ~ Vice Mayor Corr then openedthe publichearihg at 8:01 P.M. Anthony La~rence,~20620 Lomifa Ave., addressed the Council, and read into the record a letter which appeared today in the Saratoga News: "On May 3rd, the Saratoga City Council will. consider ~n appeal on the site approval conditions SDR-1'346 for our property on Lomita Avenue. One major.issue in this~ appeal is the planned street width'for the old portion of Lomita, should it ever become a city~maintained' public street. Our appeal is important because it will set a precident for street width, which wilrbe followed.. on Camina Avenue and elsewhere in the older Village ar~a of SaratOga. The Public Works Department is attempting to forcemy family to give the City the right to build a 36-foot- wide street in front of my home at some future date. The City has already forced similar conditions on the Pronger family which owns the historic white cottage near the big oak tree a~ the corner of Aloha Avenue. Construction of a 36'fo6t-wide street would require the removal of every tree on the street, destroy every front yard, and bring the street within a few feet.of the majority of homes. The residents on Lomita are unanimously opposed to having a street of this width. A wide street would.. destroy the rural ambience of our neighborhood,~result in increased traffic and safety hazards tol. our. children, and serve no useful purpose to the citizens of Saratoga. The Public Works Department rational'~ for insisting on 36.~fe~t~of pavement for.the old portion of Lomita is that the new portion is paved to this width. While such con- sistency in street design is undoubtedly 'desirable,-it fails to account for the fact that the homes on the'two portions were built in different eras. The older homes are smaller, closer-to the street, and on much smaller lots. We are eager to cooperate with street impr~vementsif the pavement width is only 26 feet as it is'in many Saratoga hillside areas.' This is 8 feet wider than the - 4 - SDR-1346, ANTHONY LAWRENCE (Cont'd.) existing street, and provides parking on one side, which is more than adequate. Additional width would only make Lomita an overflow parking area for further commercial developments on Oak Street. We appeal to our neighbors and citizens of Saratoga to urge the City Council to preserve the small town charm and rural character of EKe Original Saratoga Village. The Council should consideS a polic~ similar to CarmeI's, which is designed to leave the streets alone, except for necessary maintenance of the pavement. In fact, the Carmel General Plan states that the streets will not be paved to full width, and green belts will be maintained beside them. It would certainly be a shame to destroy Saratoga Village by blindly adhering to an inadequate General Plan. Anthony and Terry Lawrence'? Mr. Lawrence then presented a petition signed by 10 of 16 households on Lomita Avenue. He stated that of the 16 people he contacted, 10 signed the'petition for a hillside local street; 5 are opposed to having a wide street but refused to sign the petition; 1 person refused to Sign it. for unspecified reasons. He asked that a copy of this petition be retained in the City Offices. Mr. Lawrence stated he would like to propose alternative site approval conditions: 1. We will immediately improve our frontage 100 feet to "hillside local street" standards (20 feet of right-pf-way, 13-foot ha. lf street, with a drive-over gutter,'no curb). 2. Offer of Dedication to the City for~the portion of street in front of the Lawrence home, with a 20-foot right-of-way~ 3. Do all the engineering work for the improvements above, and submit them to'the City for approval prior to construction. 4. Attempt to get our neighbors to voluntarily improve to the same standard, and offer the street to the City. With respect to the fourth issue, Mr. Lawrence indicated he has had discussions with several of their neighbors who would border on the improvements, 'and in general, they would consider improving the remaining portion of the street in front of their houses to aI 26-foot standard and giving it to the'city for further maintenance. These people are not prepared to enter into site approval or file parcel maps or go to-extensive legal costs to give this land to the City; however, if the. City is willing to take this street once it is brought up to standards, and maintain itin the future, he is sure these peopl'e will consider cooperating. ~ Councilman Matteoni asked Mr'.'Lawrence if he has on any of the documents mentioned the people who have.indicated willingness to improve and dedicate a portion of the street to 13-foot half- street improvements. 5 SDR-1346, ANTHONY LAWRENCE Cont'd.) Mr. Lawrence replied that no one has expressed a willingness to dedicate as this is a legal procedure. He stated that the City does maintain streets that are undedicated, and they would like to improve the street and have the City maintain it in the same manner. The City Manager pointed out that the City does not maintain streets that are not dedicated. Mr. Lawrence commented that the fact remains that these streets are maintained by the City and they are not up to city street standards. They are offering to bring the street up to city street standards, but he cannot go down the street and ask people to spend $1,000 in legal costs for the right to give their land away to the.City for the street, and then to bear the expense of improving that same street and maintaining it for a year. He indicated the. City had the opportunity with two-thirds federal funding to improve that streetin 1970, and through the inaction of the City Council it went down° He indicated that many people on this street who had lived there from 1967 to 1970 spent many hours~'6~n~h~"C~7~""~rying to develop improve- ment standards. ~h~Ci~yT,'~f~'~fa'~7,'~l~complete engineering for the street and developed cost estimates for each individual property -- these records should be inthe-Public Works Department, but are not. It was his feeling the Council is legally obli- gated to bring continued matters back on the agenda. Mr. Shook, Director of Public Works, advised that complete plans were not available to Mr. Lawrence because they were not drawn. The estimates were prepared on very sketchy information to determine if there was interest from the property owners, and it would have been foolish to prepare Complete drawings until such time as the assessment~ district was a fact. Mr. Lawrence stated he is not suggesting there were engineering plans; he is suggesting there were detailed enough drawings~ to make to-the-dollar cost estimates and give them to the individual owners. He indicated that what he would like to get into the record is the fact that at the time, proposed development of the street respected all property.on the street -- it did not go down the street and in aswath-like manner attempt to put a 36-foot-wide through. It was then moved by Councilman Kalb and seconded by Councilwoman Callon the public hearing b~ closed. The motion was carried unanimously. The public hearing was closed at 8:32 P.M. Councilman Kalb commented that in looking at this street and the present siting of homes, it doesn't seem to him that the City would ever wish, under these conditions, to construct a 36-foot-wide street ~own Lomita. He asked if the City were to request the 407foot dedication, with the intent to build a 2~-~.~ foot street for the conditions which exist tqday, and these homes were to be re-built, would the City at that time have the opportunity to place new conditions on the land? The City Manager replie~ that it is his understanding if those homes came in for site approval,_where the area was re-constructed at some time, the City would have the power to make modifications at that time. SDR-1346, ANTHONY LAWRENCE (Cont'd.) Councilman Kalb commented that perhaps what 'the City should do is request the 40-foot dedication, and that at such time any 'of these.homes are torn down, we require the full 2~half-foot dedication. It was moved by CoUncilman ~alb and seco.nded.~y Councilman 1,~tt~onito gr~nt the appeal ~o the extent'of modifying conditions II-B and II-C, such that II~B reads: " . from the Pronger property to the northwesterly edge'of the property." II-C be modified no the extent that it require a 20-foot half- street, as opposed to ~he'28-foot half-street O~igina. lly sPecified~~~%~S'IIl~ I'fi'-H~not be modified. The motion was harfi~d'~d~I~!~ ~' B. TO CONSIDER THE YACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF EQUESTRIAN AND WALKWAY EASEMENT OFFER OF DEDICATION IN TRACT 5164 1.Resolution 854, Ordering Vacation and Abandonment of a Walkway Easement The City Manager advised that on April 5,'1978, the City Council adopted Resolution 852, indicating its intent to vacate and abandon a walkway easement on Tracts5164. This evening has been set for hearing public testimony concerning the proposed intent to abandon. He pointed out that Section 5043 of the Government Code requires that any area covered under a Master Plan, particularly as it relates to vacation of an easement, it shall not be ordered within the area for which the Master Plan is adopted until the proposed v~cation is sub- mitted ~o and acted upon by the Planning Commission. He indicated it would be his recommendation after.hearing testimony, not to act on the resolution before the Council, but refer the matter to the Planning Commission for review at their next meening and submit their report back to the Council. The Mayor opened the public hearing at 8:44 P.M. Sue Miller of the Saratog~ 4-H Club .addressed the Council. She commented that part of the 4-H Community P~ide Projeqt has been to encourage youth involvement ~n community concerns. She pointed out that 7 months ago, this concern came before their club. 4-H would like to keep the City of Saratoga rural, ahd their feeling is by developing this particular section ~f trail, it would sen a precedent with other sections of trail. If all other sections of trail were developed, hopefully the entire loop that is proposed would be carried out, and it_~6uld make Saratoga enjoyable to all. Miss Miller stated that during the past 7 months, the club has contacted several individuals and groups, and'these p~ople h~ve promised to donate their time, energy and material. She further stated it is their feeling the City has had 'every opportunity possible to come to a decision, that being either a~r.~ town or another suburbia. John Pope, 14070 Arcadia Paims Drive, addressed the Council. He stated is an attorney and'also represents the six families which abut on the proposed easement on Sobey Meadows Court. SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) Mr. Pope referenced his letter to the City Council of March .15, addressing issuesof cost, alternatives to other developments, and lack of security. He indicated he would first of all like to address himself to the issue of volunteerlaBor, and The fact that well-meaning teenagers who are quite sincere in their commitment eventually grow out of that.status, and the City can- hot rely on volunteer labor in terms of future maintenance. He can't conceive how the City can rely on the daily, weekly, or monthly removal of manure, beer cans and other trash left not only 4-H members, but by peopl~ who use bikes, joggers, and strangers to the area. It should be borne in mind that that this trail system will link up with the County system, and we are therefore not confined to the responsible people who live in the Sobey Meadows Court area With regard to condemnation, M~. Pope stated he is unalterably opposed to condemnation of his property, and his homeowne~s policy of title insurance does not have any easement on it. He stated he will not consent to a voluntary condemnation with a law suit and perhaps a two~to~three-year delay. Mr. Pope stated he has a beautifu~ 18-year-old daughter who likes to wear a bikini, and he does not want her sitting up on his pool deck and having anyone on a ~'blank-check" basis parading thrOugh his back yard leaving horse manure, fl~es and all. that follows, He believes he shares the sentiments of his neighbors whose pools are much closer to the proposed easement than his property. Mr. Pope stated he would like to comment on the Task Force Report. He indicated that the report was received by theI City, but it was not adopted. On page 4 of the ~ask Force Report, five items were emphasized to be of the greatest importance: 1) rights of the property owners; 2) deterrants of vandalism; 3) safety of trail users and property owners; and 4) minimization of costs. ~Hg~h~'f'Mr?C~Y~son ~f~h~Par~Co'~io~l"k~bout "targets ofopportunity", and Mr. Pope indicated he does not like to think of his property as being a bombing pad. G. Carlson, Chairman of th~ Saratoga Parks and. Recreation ~hi~'a~i~l~I~-ea~e~d~e~ia'jo~asions, to his knowledge, Mr. Pop~'s residence is considerably higher than the proposed easement on the opposite side of the creek that is considerably Covered by brush. With regard to Mr. Pope's reference of Mr. Carlson's remark, Mr. Carlson this had been very clearly stated as being "target of opportunity for joint community development". Further, it has been the policy of the ParksL~d pe~creation Commission in all cases to try and encourage a~j~nt-'~>~of~n~l~ft~_.~velopment, and the reason for this is to r~t[e co~['~d~btain the maximum benefit to the community at the lowest possible cost to the City. Mr. Carlson'stated that the Parks Commission is still strongly in favor of the retention of the easement in question. Although there may be some differences in order of priority, the fact of retention of the easement is one that the Commission~~.~ ~5~%would urge that the Council vote favorably to accept th~ e~l~t, rather than to abandon or deny it. Councilman Matteoni asked if he had heard Mr. Carlson sayzsome- thing about a priority not existing on this trail in the Commission's mind,in comparison to other segments. SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) Mr. Carlson replied that what he had intended is the denial of this particular petition to abandon any interest by the City was not the Commission's first choice, but that given the alternatives which were presented, the Commission would. prefer to retain the easement for anything that might occur in the future. Vicki~r~ 14906 Sobey Road, addressed the CouncilS.stating that she is in full supportlof trails and pathways, and specifically in the Sobey Meadows Court area. She indicated she would like to make an addition to Mr. Pope's commehts. On page 4 of the Task Force Report, he had said there were five things things held in constant consideration; however, Miss Ristau stated there are six, the last one being the use of existing easements where possible. Ms. Ristau advised that she.has talked to a great majority of the residents along Sobey Road, as well as residents on Pierce Road and Mt. Eden Road, about the Sobey'-_Meadows Court easement. The general consensus is that'they wouldlike to retain the easement. Thereat basic p6int she has come up with is that there are a gr~t"~numb~r oflriders that'board and live aiong Sobey Road, and there is no place for them to go. In order to get out to the trails along. Highway 9, they have to go along Quito Road, and it is very treacherous between Austi~ Way and Highway 9, and it is the only way to get out to Highway 9. In going the other. way, there is Quito Road to Pollard.'. The question had come up as to Why this particular 900 feet of trail was so important, and she would like to resp6nd to thisj They do not have anywhere'to go except along the road and on the cement, or through property up to Odd Fellows which is private property. Another.problem that has been brought up in the past is that there are a number of children who ride after school, and loop trails are necessary. Also, she rides in the evenings and finds it very nice to'have a loop trail. As far as security and.policing, Ms. Ristau commented~ that she doesn't feel it is going to be any more of a problem than if the riders were riding on the street. Ms: Ristau commented that she has recently started work at a State Farm InsuraBce office in Saratoga. Her employer received a call about a horse and rider accident on the street around the Sobey Road area, whereby the horse was injured a~d the car was totaled. She comme~that Sobe~ Road is an equestrian tain~d for the ~t~n"'~nB'~i~'<f~'6i '¥~t Sobey Roadcriders need it. R. E. Kaufmann, 20700 Fourth Street, address&d the Council, stating that he does not own property, does not know anyone here personally, is not friends with anyone here, and is not running for public office.. He indicated he was a member of the Trails and Pathways Task Force and edited the report. Mr. Kaufmann stated that he is aware that the owners of the property which is now in'question addressed the CounCil in'1974, prior to the formation of the T~ails and Pathways Task Force, and still they have receive.d a complete answer to their question. Mr. Kaufmann stated the pazticular piece of trail under con- sideration is a link in what is called a "loop" trail -- a third-level trail, which is least important of all the trails in the system. There are three levels of trails: '1) arterial, - 9 - SOB~Y MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) 2) main trails, and 3) loop ~rails. In picking this particular section of trail, the Task Force had a very difficplt time, and Mr. Carlson who is now on the ~a~ks and Recreation Commission, was not a member of the Task Force at the time and was faced with an accomplished fact. Mr. Kaufmann indicated that.they walked the trail and!.get dozen to the end of [he easement and~ looked at what amounted to a 45 degree grade going up the hill toward Chester Avenue -- they _couldn't think of any reasonable way to ask the Council to provide them with a bridge or a~ything a horse could get up -- so they backed.up. until they found a place where. they couldjunfp~the stream a~d'found themselves in the street. Then one member of the Co.mmissiQn commented it was next to ---'s house and he is a difficult person to deal with, so they moved the trail across the street and went up Chester to Allendale. Mr. Kaufmann pointed out that there is more pavement to be travelled e~n with the trail as it now is~than 900.feet. He asked .~hat the Council consider pSint 6 in the report to "use easements.when you can". Mr. Kaufmann pointed out that for the last three years, the Council has provided capital funds to put a retaining wall in Wildwood.Park at the ~arge cut at the entrance, and for~three years nothing has been done. He stated that the City really does not have the funds to do it. He indicated that the City does not have funds with which to build a trails system, and they don't have funds to implement this particular 900 feet of trail. Further, he stated you can't take people's property and lay on it forever -- somewhere along the line, you have to make up your minds. Councilman Kalb commented that the trail~a~ it comes out onto Sobey Meadows' goes up a very steep enbankment. He asked if the Task Force proposed going up that hill as it is presently show~. Mr. Kaufmann replied that at the time the trail was designed, the Task Force members walked to the left of the triple oak, it was a rather gentle Slope leading down to the stream and around the curve to the pathway alongside the stream and eventually to the place where it jumped across. When they went back, after the appeal.was taken to the Council and made an issue, the tennis court appeared, with a very steep cut and retaining wall, and the entire grading of the property had changed its entire contour. Councilman Kalb commented that in reading some of t~e reports and comments in reading back through minutes, he had picked up on Mr. Kaufmann's commen~ of~~71977, where he had indicated he had not walked tht correc~'~rail, and there were references to the fact that he wanted to have.access into this trail for a maintenance vehicle along the sanitary or water conservation areas, and it seems to him the area he sees as now being the easement would not have been possible to consider those kinds of things given the slope as it is right now. He asked Mr. Kaufmann what was proposed where you cross the bridge. Mr. Kaufmann commented that as far as the contour of the ground on the way down to the easement along the stream, it is correct that they did not have the kind of grading that is there now. As far as crossing the stream is concerned, they simply moved back and forth along the stream bed until they found a place · that was level on both sides and envisioned a simple lumber bridge, si~feetlwide, which landed on a piece of property across the way. The Task Force felt because of the nature-of 10 - MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'dl) that particular piece of property, they could get the owne~ to dedicate that without any difficulty at all because it was worthless. Therefore, they had to jump into that piece of - private property,which did not appear toSe a p~ob_~ll~m~becau~ ' it was s~ch a poor piece' of propert~~~=~'''~ ~hadi~.t-~'e~i~ed~t~is_~Suld .be a walking, as well aF~questrian ea semen t.. Mr. Kaufmann replied there'had been a considerable amount of debate on this s~bject early in the deliberations, and it was agreed that what was being discussed throughout was a combination of walking and,.equestrian trails. Mr. Kalb commented that in the report,' the Task Force recommended that trails be limited to a-ten percent grad~, with a maximum of fifteen percent grade. He asked what was the rationale for this. Mr. Kaufmann replied that the basic rationale behind the standards set for construction of the trails was a report given to the committee~b~ Mr. Joseph Hootman, who .was a member .of the committee and was well ver~,ed in trail construction and trail management, and has a great deal to do with state and county activities. He had given the Task Force a copy of the State Trails Construction Manual. At one ti~e the task Force referenced this manual as the standard for trails construction. However, in costing out the trails, it became so painful that the Task Force "de~referenced" it. John CbI~is.~t~.~la~dr. es~ed~Et~e Co~.un~il, stating that he haS~lived ~e'~it~nTa~l~r.~er D~Y~f~e~Y~th'~s~ement until just recently. Mr. Christenson stated that he has been riding this trail s~nce he was six years old. He indicated that the trail goes over to Ten Acres and joins another easement. He pointed out that the City didn't say anything when the new homes went in on Ten Acres, an~ people~la~ped right~Qv~ the.p~m~nt. With regard to ........ trail maintenance, Mr. Christenson ~o~ented that trails for horses require zero maintenance. ~at he .ould,like. to see accomplished this evening _is the City agree to ~aintain the trails by merely keeping ~hem. He co~ented that the trail we are looking at used to be a road that. was part of Leonar~ Coat's Nursery. It was a natural trail and very easy for a horse to cross~ with a natural pathway over to Ten Acres. ~en. people started to build in this area, they built over the top of~the easement and nothing was-done about it until.recently Gary Hart, '14187 Sobey MeadOws Road, addressed [he Council, stating that he would like to clarify where the.asphalt road was. He indicated that it~is above the creek level, and not at the creek level. Betsy Morens0 addressed the Council.' She stated she is a resident of Saratoga, but does not board her ho~ses here, but on Stelling Road. She has friends who board in LOs Gatos and Saratoga, an~his one pathis how thex can ge~to each ~.~ ~~d~H~e~~=~f~"~~~d~~'~ng~ a~&~-'~0~tra~ a~'~ ~h~~ H=~hY~' ~I d~ 5~"~'fifl Highway 9 when the~e have been no trails available. She related such an experience when a car missed .the horse and rider by inches. Dan' Peters, resident of Craigen Circle~= indicated his concem is running on streets through that particular section of ~o~ as the streets a~e narrow and must..contend with automobiles. He indicated he would be faVorable. tO main't~ining the easement, and he is concerned about not only the safety of horseback riders, but also the safety~of joggers. 11 - SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEmeNT (Cont'd.) Pat Dunn, 18470 Sobey Road, addressed the Council and encouraged that they accept the dedication of this easement -- not Oply for the sake of the riders, but for the number of school children who go to Marshall Lane. If this walkwRy easement were open, these children would not have to go down ~obey Road and out onto Quito --lthey could go the Back Way through Arcadia Palms and avoid a lot of the traffic from construction on Sobey Road. Also, she indicated she would like to suggest to. Mr. Pope if he is conc&rned about the flies on his pool deck,_thatihe talk his two neighbors and ~lients that;have horses on the easement in their back yard. Vice Mayor Corr pointed out that the City ~as/rec~ived communi- cations from the.school, in w~ichthey indicate there should not be children walking through there as there is bus transportation for children to the schQol. Mrs. Dunn commented'that this may be the'school's impression; however, there are 20 to 30 children who go by her house every afternoon. Vern Solberg addressed the Council. He stated that he lives in County territory and has a horse loop which travels through his property. He commentedthatflies-have never been a problem. Further, he would r~ther.have the hor~es in his back yard than in his front yard walking across the street. He indicated that the horses make their own trails and maintain their own trails, and are quite ~ompatible w±th the surroundings. It Was his feeling leaving the trails open is important to the future, and it is a legacy that we mustlkeep them open. ~ince Garrod, 22600 ME. Eden Road addressed the Council. Mr. Garrod statedlthat personally, he would just.as. soon see the City shut this trail off of, because every trail. that is shut off is good for his business. Mr. Garrod stated that he has been a 4-H leader for over' 25 years, and he has a firm conviction that people should be inVOiCed in public policy and in public decisions. H~stated that it would be nice to confine th~s to 900 feet by Sobey Road, but if you thro~ out this 900 feet, when you get up into the Mt..Eden Road area and ask anyone,else to dedicate or to leave an easement on their property, they are going to say "forget i~". Mr. Garrod commented that he has to believe with Mr. Solberg that if the City gives the trail up now, they are never going to get it back. He stated that. the City gave up something in acquiring this right; therefore, if they give it back to the people, they are giving a whole piece of the City back to the people~ It was his feeling if the City is going to have trails, have trails, and if it is not going to have trails, don~t have trails. Mr. ~arrod stated that if they subdivide their land, which is 120 acres under the City's sphere of influence and 50 acres within the City, he will- fight any effort the City makes to put a trail easement across the park. He stated it is not fair to ask one person in the community to give, and not the rest of them. Donna Butcher, resident of Rancho Las Cimas Way, addressed the Council. She stated she and her husband moved to Saratoga in July, with a wide area to choose from. They chose Saratoga because she likes to ride, and within the next year or so she plans to have a horse. She mentioned that her neighbor does have a horse, and they have never been bothered by flies. They plan to put in a pool, and they are not in the least con- cerned about having flies on their deck. Mrs. Butche~ commented that tbey have many teena~ers vho babysit for them who like to 12 - SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) ride, and she thinks it is wonderful these kids have an activity they like, rather than alternate activities that might drive them to the streets. Jean Dougherty addressed the Council, indicated that she uses the trail~to.ride her bike ever~ day over to Sobey. Also,'she exercises her lamb every day in walking it along the trail. Miss Dougherty commented that she really appreciates the trail, and thinks it would be a great thing if it could be retained. Vice Mayor Corr indicated she would like to clarify the fact that this is not an official city trail --'it is merely an ~ffe'f~of~'de'di~io"K'fS~'an~e'~f'~tia't~i~i~ly notl'~to thepublic. Robert Magneson, 14471 Sobey Road, commented that he believes the Council is over-Simplifying the matter, in terms of separating this matter from the trails in general. He agrees with Mr. Garrod that this is important and should be considered in the overall aspect. The threats of. four property owners who have in some ways encroached on the easement already puts them in some jeopardy in terms of their earlier actions in building their homes. John Terry, member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, commented that the .Trails ahd Pathways Task Force on the actual crossing Considered both bridge and ford, and ultimately decided upon ford being satisfactory because of the low per- centage of time the creek actually had water in it. The consideration was for a ford that had stepping stones in it so that pedes.trians could walk across. All but 150 to 200 feet of the trail, including the'trail on Chester Avenue, is on soft dirt by the side of the ~oad. Mr. Terry pointed out the 19cation of the. original trail. He indicated that there was the original dirt road that dropped down and joined at the high bank creeklevel; there was a second road which came straight across. Later onwhi~e construction was taking palce, the actua~ trail shifted about 10 feet to the west of th~ trees. He pointed out that there is a Significant difference in grade at this location, and the original slope was considerablyless than it is now, and overthe trail section that grade slope would need'to be reduced to about what it was in the original grade before the construction of the tennis court and swimming pool. Mr. TerrX pointed out the section 0'f-.the~asement that is 20 feet wide, and stated the reason for this is that.it is also access for the Sanitary Sewer'District and Flood Control District for access. Councilman Matteoni asked that Mr. Kaufmann respond to Mr. Kaufmann's comment that this is a third level priority trail, and not a very important segment of trail. Mr. Terry commented that the Task Force recognized'three desig-. nations of trails 1) arterial trail, a trail that speci- fically went someplace; 2) feeder or loop trail, a wa~ to get to the main trail; and 3) trails associated with the sphere of influence that were not directly in the city. From his own standpoint, this was not necessarily a priority of what was important or what was not. Mr. Terry pointed out when the Task Force made the report, they stuck with.the trails that were in SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) the 1968 Master Plan; therefore, every trail on the Trails and Pathways Report was a trail on the 1968 Master Plan. As far as he is concerned all three types of trail are important. With regard to the construction and steepness of trail, Mr. Terry advised that the State Trail Pathways RepOrt indicated that these were average slopes; it is difficult. to. make a trail where every p!a~e is less than 10 or 12 percent. He pointed out that there are a couple of areas in the overall trail system,where ~hey knew they surpassed 15 percent g~ade. In the Parker Ranch area, there are a couple of trails that by necessity are going to haveto be about half a mile long of over 12 percent.~ .... Councilman Kalb asked Mr. T~rry if when he waiked the easement, he walked the area under the oak tree and down that hill. Mr. Terry~Ireplied that he hSs walked this trail approximately 35 to 40 times -- both on the easement and off the easement -- before the house was .there, during construction, and after that. The Trails and Pat'hways Task Force was not misinformed about the trail; however, there were times when various members chose not to walk on the easement. They took the assessor's maps and tract maps whenever they went out and walked an area~ Councilman Kalb asked Mr. Terry if the Hart home was built at that time. Mr. Terry replied that it was at the time they walked it. The two end homes were in final construction phases;f~c ~?~ Councilman Kalb inquired if,the grading then is the wayit is now. Mr. Terry replied t[at it was..not -- it was changed significantly later at the time of swimming pool construction. Mr. Kalb asked the Director of Public Works what is the drop from the base of the oak tree to the bottom of the creek bed. Mr. Shook replied that he would have to pull the plans to find this height differencial. Councilman Kalb commented that he has a grea~ deal of concern about the slope qf this area -- he does not.feel you can take horses safely.downthatenbankment.. Heindicated he did some measurements on this land, and it appeared to.him from the foot of the oak tree to the base of the hill we were talking about a drop of some 15 feet, over a horizontal distance of approxi- mately 65 f~et. This would leave a grade Of some 22 or 23 percent. Mr. Shook cormnented that during the time the city was looking at this, information was submitted by the engineer~and~p~evious information at the time of construction of the subdivision, and Mr. Kalb is correct in that there is existing slope in excess of 30 percent. It was determined that with some nominal filling at the bottom and moving it as far up .the slope as reasonable so as not to get involved with the oak tree, a slope of 14 to 15 percent would be achievable. Terrill Barco,'19101 Camino Barco, addressed the Council. Col. Barco stated that Mr. Terry is absolutely ~orrect in everything he said about this trail, as they both had maps as they walked the trail and checked each other all the way. He agreed that this is avery important trail because it is a loop, and a loop is quite important.. He indicated that with his instigation the Trails Task Force went backzto this trail three times. The Task Force~ii~s~t~i>~trip to look at this section'of trail found a compromise which it unanimously agreed upon. This agreement was that we would not have the trail backing all the houses dof~n - 14- SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) the line --'it would only go as far as Mr. Ch~ebo~n's property. Then it Would jump the creek. This would be done with the under- .standing that the City would fence and screen the trail wher~ it went around.Mr. Hart's property to insure that there was an absolute minimum invasion of his privacy. This is why they came to the. compromise solution that this one little piece ~ould go in, the other part. would be abandoned, but Mr. Hart would be protected with fencing and screening. Col.. Barco commented that he considers this entire thing tO be out of context and ~t the wrong time -- you do. not have a definition for a trail yet. It was his feeling the CoUncil ~houid look at the overallsplan first, set a policy,.a~d then haye the public hearing on the pverali plan and decide on the City's polic~ -- you are going to have a trail system or you are not going to have it. If we are going to have it,.decide what we are going to have, what we are going to.do, and where it is going to be. Councilman Kalb pointed out to Col. Barco that on February 6th, there was a meeting between Hank Kraus and some of the members of the Parks and Recreation Commission concerning some of the first estimates with regardto developing the trails. At that point in time, there were numbers -- including. screening -- in excess of $80,000. The Tra~ls and iPathways Task Force estimated cost of construction for the 12.2 miles tobe between $130,000 and $200,000. He commented that he is having difficulty re- conciling the first 900 fee~, 1~ percent, taking up half of the entire estimated cost of the trails, when we' still have the other 12 miles to go. Mr. Carlson, Chairman of th~ Parks and Recreation Commission, advised that the cost data that was prepared was on the basis of the request by the Commission to staff to prepare as quickly as possible a very straight-forward cost to'develop that segment of trail. They did not give the staff the necessary parameters at that timeto propely define what the Commission was requesting. The proposal that came back'was a complete channeliz~tion of the creek throughout that entire section. The Commission had not considered this concept, nor did they endorse it. It was ~or this reason the Commission went back and requested.an additional cost estimate, which did come.in considerably lower. This was approximately $30,000~ and of this it was estimated .the City would have to come up with approximately-S5,000 to $!0,000. The reason it was stAted~;that way wa~ because another part of their motion was to develop a plan that was acceptable by staff, by the Commission, an~ by the Council, and turn that over to 4-H to let them come back to the Task Force with a specific costz..~ that the City would incur. The City Manager pointed out that the $80,000'was a result~of the staff'developing some estimates based on the standards out- lined in the Trails and Pathways Task Force Report, and that if those standards were tobe met, that would be the cost for that length of trail system. Mr. Carlson pointed out that' this' was prior to the second survey of this. particular parcel which would also have significantly changed the contours. Also within that report'there is a spedific recommendation that the minimum disruption of th~ current land- scape be a major consideration of any trail development within the cit~. 15 - SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) Ed Gomersall, member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, pointed out that BillHe4ss's report of several weeks back showed that the error in the first sUrveXrese~t~d in an 18i foot shift...~j~:'~'~l~ia~d~i~~%Y~i~n buted to 'a great deal of misunderstanding on the cos~. There- fore, he recommended the Council keep this option open. Vic Moni~, resident of Granite Way, addressed the Council. He commented that Mr. Terryis eluding to the fact that.perhaps ther~ has been a l~rge amount of fill on the property that created this unusual slope, and if we go back and analyze ~hat Mr. Terry is saying, it can be found that originally there were trails that le~ to the lower portion, of the trail,' ~nd. the riders were riding to the right-hand side,of the oak tree until construction took place at the Hart's residencec~ After, coDstruction beganon the Hart's 'residence, he mentioned that the riders moved over and started riding down approximately 10 feet to the left of the qak tree, and he had aerial photo.- graphs sho~ing that this was a much lower grade .... Mr. Monia pointed out, however, that 10 feet to the left of the oak tree is not the Hart's property. Now when'you goout there you find that what used to be the low contour grade is where you find the nice tennis codrt, which pushes everything back up ontop of the Hart's property where the riders really never did ride. Tom Dashjell, 18908 Ten Acres Road,.~commented that he is Con- ce~ned about this~situation as it has developed a great deal of animosity among the various people in the neighborhood. Re.commented that he believes the Council must at this point make a dedisiOn, get one side mad, and.get the thing behind us. He s~ated that he personally believes the trails are not worth the problems that they are causing. Also, he believeS. if the Council thinks in the future we are going to have more money than we have now to build the trails, they are deluding them- selves. If anything, the trail costs are going to go up. Joe Chleboun, 14155 Sobey Meadows Court, indicated there are a couple of'things she would like to clarify. Width. regard to CouncilWoman Callon's earlier inquiry if there would stili be ihdica[;d' .... been no erosion in ~his area. She indicated the Parks and Recreation Commission would like to say this in order to justify doing something.to this section, but this is not one of the problems. Councilwoman Callon asked ifMrs. Chleboun is saying there is no pathway with the second survey. Mrs. Chleboun.replied that there has been no second survey. There was a correction in the way of a letter; however, they are not sa't£sfied that the first survey was wrong as ~ar as the.way the~maps were drawn at the time they bought their property. b~s. Chl~boun comme~'t~d that. one of the previ0usspeakerS mentioned the children. who are coming up Sobey Road and having to go out into the street because they can't use this section. She stated that t~ere would be no reason for anyone who is on Sobey Road to come and use the back yards there, as the school is right beside their home. Therefore, they are coming from the east or somewhere else. - 16- SOBEY ~ADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT (Cont'd.) i She stated that. Mr. Terry had mentioned something.about the Task Force being in the easement area when the first two houses were under construction. However, she does not believe'the Task· Force was even formed until ~s~' ~sid~'~w'e~e~heir homeS. She referred to the lette~ stating.that "in response to the petition, a new task force was being formed, and they would deal with the problems eluded to in the petition". Mrs. Chleboun commented that several people have eluded to setting some kind of precedent in the abandonment of this easement, and she indicated this wou~d not be ~o. She stated that on Douglass Lane there.was an easement abandoned at the reqUes~ of the homeowners, andc~also, at the last meeting in which Mayor Bridges was presiding, he stated that "earlier considerations of a trail in the Arroyo de Arguello area were abandoned due to the tremendous cost in both maintenance and p~licing". Therefore, it would hardly be setting a precedent to do this. Ron HillS, 18588 Woodbank Way, commented that there are really some basic questions here. He asked: Is a route necessary?. He stated that the Council'has received a lot of testimony that it is. He ret~ted some of his personal history .of trying to go d~wn Ten Acres Road with a horse, in which the easements on both sicles in .certain parts have been 'covered up by land- scaping of the homeowners, forcing the horses onto the street. ~urther, if you were to ever drive on that street and saw the hills and curves that you must contendl~with, you would find there is a 3 to 4-second reaction time to avoid a hor~e, on a street that is no more than 26-feet wide. You either have to walk on someone's property, or walk the horse down part of it. Therefore, this would be forcing people onto a dangerous street. As far as. it .being a safe and feas{ble route through this particular easement, Mr. Hills ppinted out that if went back to the original deed contour, it would be a safe an~ feasible route, as proven by the preyious people who used it. Mr. Hills commented t~at he has heard people say this creates a liability to the City, and he felt anything the City does is going to create a liability to the City. However, he stated he believes the City has a moral responsibility. With regard to gr~ding,'Mr. ~Hitls, documented history says that this trail is a feasible thing to do. With regard to liability to Mr. Hart's property, Mr. Hills stated that according to the deed of .t~e owner§ who owned the proper~ybefore, part of that easement right says: "That easement shall be kept'open and free from buildings,_ structures and landscape features of any kind which would impede the use of said easement for.access purposes". Mr Hzi1 · ' s commented that L~ArtOs Hills has 27 miles of trails, and it costs them $4,800 per year to maintain them. The County says thatit costs app.roximately $1,000 per mile of trail. The City of Yerba Linda in Southern California, and for 15 miles of trails, it cost them $3,000 a year. ~Mr ~ Hfl=ls~' sEa~dY~-t ~when ~-theymoV&~J~i~CB~-.~is~p~t~o f~ the C~ty f- t.hey~10oked fo~-a-p~ace Wfth ~a.~ve~=ru~al!'~a.tmo~ph~- ~nd where horses could go. He Went down to the City and asked where the equestrian zones are and if there were trails to connect and get you someplace to ride. The City said: "Yes, and here are the trails that are being planned." Therefore,.they went ahead and bought. The Harts also bought the land knowing that easement was there. What the Council is idoing tonight if it abandons this 17 - SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEP~NT (Cont ' d. ) easement, is to give up something that really belongs to all of the people who live and pay taxes in this town. !!That land really belongs to us." Mr. Hills requested that it'be recorded in the minutes there are a vast.majority present who are in favor of retaining this easement. Councilman Kalb indicated he would like to comment With r~ga~d to the quoted figures for the Los Altos city trails. The capital budget for Los Altos this year is $12,000, and he spoke to the City Manager there as to how they maintain their trails. He stated: "The labor is in the street maintenance budget." Councilwoman Callon commented that she had been told the Horsemen's Associations maintains trails. '. ~ Mr. Kalb commented that he believes there is some cooperative effort, but as far as the City expense for maintenance is concerned, 75 to 80 percent~of the trail~ are on the roadway. D. Dorsey, Saratoga 4-H Club, commented that ~e is in favor Of this trail because around her home there is Only one trail, and her mother does not believe it is safe. Further, she.dommented if the Council abandons this trail, it may give pe.ople the idea they can go ahea~ and try to take every other trail away, and she does not believe this is fair to people who have horses and like to jog. Ed Rom, P~esidentlof Region 6 of the California Safe Horsemen's AssoCiation addressed the Council. He stated that in this county, there are approximately 21,889 horses. Mr. Rom stated that he is currently working on several Senate and Assembly bills to create trails,~and the h~rsemennEin the County are lookingzupon SaratOga with very .eager eyes. Mr. Rom stated that years agO, Walnut Creek did exactly the same thing -- took away some trails from the horse people in the area. A year later they turned around and repaired this situation and made it back to the natural trails for the people to enjoy this recreation. Mr. Kaufmann again addressed the Council, indicating that he would like to clarify for the record that.if he were to look for someone who knew the most about trails in this city, he would look for John Terry. With regard to questions raised by Counciiman Kalb as to how we got so far apart on the original cost,estimate of $200,000.and the estimate of $89,000, Mr. Kaufmann stated he would like to explain this. The Task Force recognized thai they had no.money to play with; there{ore, they had to make the trails as non- costly as possible. Whe~ever there was to be a guideline, they put in a two-rail fence, and this was to keep people within the boundaries and not to'screen anything. Councilman Kalb. commented that the interpetation by the staff of the written r~pOrt was what they attempted to use in making their recommendations, and if you extrapolate the whole thing, we could have ended up with a five million dollar trail system.. Rosey Dorsey, member of the Saratoga 4-H Club, 19361 San Marcos Road, addressed the Council. She commented that much of our pride in Saratoga is based on its beauty and rural atmosphere; losing our trai.ls means losing this idea. Miss Do~sey referred to a letter in the newspaper.today stating the reason to move to Saratoga was to escape from a sterile city, and to please not to destroy the country, small-town atmosphere of Saratoga. - 18 SOBEY MEADOWS WAtKWAY EASEMENT (Cont!d.) M{ss Dqrsey stated that it i~ obvious much of our. trend today is toward conservation. and land preSeryation, a~d~She asked: "Why should the City give away land that was 'freely dedicated for this purpose." She commented that it has been said by many. this is not an important link, and ~sked if this is not. important, why are there so many'people here this evening wh'o feel so strongly about keeping this easement. With regard to invasion of privacy, MiSs Dors.ey asked if sinc~ most Of the trails and Bathways were there before the home-. owners, aren't the rights and privileges of the Saratoga citi'zens being infringed upon?. Also, weren't these trails..enjoyed by a majority of.people even before the homeowners Were. there? She stated that payed streets and sidewalks are not what our city's pride is based upon, but that is where all of our trails are going. She indicated that financially speaking, the question still ., remains: "Is there enough money?" She suggested it be con- sidered: "Are trails. worth this money?" Miss Doysey asked that if the concern shown tonight in favor of thfs easement isn't enough, is thislreally a democratic government?. She stated that if this easement is abandoned, this could be the beginning of the end; there is not a piece of land that can be spared. The loss of one tr~i'l is the loss of many,',and theI gain to a few is the, los~ O~ a m~jority. In December,.they took a mini-survey coDducted in the community, that said 85 . ~. percent~ of the residents surveyed are in favor of the trails',. and 5 percent with no response. Also she understands a.~ery recent petition with 10D signatures was .received,by the Council in favor o~ retaining the Sobe.yMeadows easement. The responses. alone in letters and signatures go way over the J~Q~!k=~ compared to the 12.signatures in opposition. ~he~dicated that although it is up to the Council to make the final d~isioB, she would strongly urge, on behalf of the majority of ciltizens, ~o. consider retaining'this most important easement. She stated that this may,not' seem like the.most important trail {n'Saratoga, but 25 years from now.when ~he younger generation are adults, they will look back and say: "Why didn't we save Saratoga's trails and pathways?" ~ ~ice Mayor Corr advised that there are several items o~ corres- pondence on this issue, as follows: George Schneer, 19938~Karn Ci'rcie Mr. and Mrs. Len Perrone, 14017 Sobey MeadoWs Court ~dy~a~l~Fo 7~70j~N~K~a~da~o~r.t T0~hf~Ri't~ 14091 ArCadia Palms Drive Victor Monia, 14665 Granite Way Robert BarriBger, Connie Barringer, 13485 Old Oak Way Mrs. Donald E. Dorsey,.19361 San Marcos Road Josephine Thompson, 14906 Sobey Road Miss Rosey Dorsey, 19361 'San Marcos Road Mr. and Mrs. David Nightengale,'15483 Bohlman Road Mr. and Mrs. S.N. ApariciO, 14897 Sobey Road Dr. Harold ttodges, 19875 Park 'Drive Dorothy L. McDowell,,_1430.0 Maclay Court Mr. and Mrs. E. J. Kelly, 14949 Sobey Road Edward J. Lackner,-M.D. Deanne M. Dorsey It was then moved by Councilman Kalb and seconded by Councilwoman Callon the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried; the public hearing was closed at 10:54 P.M. 19 - SOBEY MEADOWS WALKWAY EASEMENT Cont'd.) Councilman Matteoni suggested if this goes back to the Planning Commission, they be given some direction as to what concern or ipput they can give to the Council. C0unc_ilman Kal~ commented that it would seem to him the Council's char~er to the Planning Commission would be' to r.e~i~w any legal zgning, setback contingenc~es,..etc. or any ordinances they are aware of that might not have been pointed out dealing with legal standards. ~, I~ =~as-then~ moved- by-Counci-lman~Matteoni- ~ar~d~-se~ond'e'd b~~- ---\ ~ Councilwom~n Ca~llS~~ to refe~ ~hi~' to ~e Pi~ C~m~ss~n, ~ c~ ~ 1) Consistepcy~ of this offered easement with the General Plan; and 2) Implications on the ~aca~i'on of any easement, and any history concerning the creation of this easement. The motion was carried unanimously. Councilman Matteon~ further suggested the Parks and Recreation CoEission co~unicate to the City Coun~l its plan in implementing the Council's request to hoid a hearing and propose a demon- stration program, as well as what that timetable might be and how they perceive that going fo~ard. This matter will be re-agendized before the City Council at its next regular meeting on May 17, .1978. Recess a~d reco~ve~e C. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL OF P~NNING CO~ISSION DECISION ~LEVANT TO CONDITIONS IPOSED ON USE PETIT FOR TEMPO~RY SALES OFFICE AT 12503 BLUE ~ADOWS COURT, LOT 22, T~CT 5944 - DIVIDEND INDUSTRIES Mr. Robinson, Acting Planning Director, advised that item 1 o'f~ithe staff report to the Planning Co~ission reco~ends the sales office be not closer than 500 feet from the intersection of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Carniel Avenue, and this is the condition being appealed by the applicant.' Vice Mayor Corr opened the public hearing at 11:27 P.M. Dick Oliver representing Dividend Development Corporation, addressed the Council. He indicated that all of the homes presently ~der constr. uction have been sold except one, which is Lot 22, on the corner of SaratOga-Sunnyva!e Road at the entrance of the tract. This is where they wanted to have the sales office. Mr. 0liver pointed out that'their projects have never been the type that they advertise or the types that attract large n~bers of people. Therefore, their tracts have never generated the kind of traffic that would cause concern for the congestion on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. He asked that the Council consider a conditional use petit in the event the City finds there is any kind of problem. He pointed out that the model home is not going to be decorated -- it will simply be used as a meeting place for those who have already bought 'the home. Councilman Kalb inquired what advantage it has to have this model home, as opposed to a trailer. Mr. Oliver replied that the condition is that it be placed 500 feet away, and this would place i[ back at the edge of Clar~L Court, and thaq means. every :persOn who comes there has to go through the new construction, posing a real safety problem for the developer. - 20- APPEAL - DIVIDEND INDUSTRIES (Cont;d.) Mr. Oliver stated ~hey do not anticipate more than 4 to 5 cars at one time. Councilwoman Corr asked if the home w~uld bemarked in some way. Mr. Oliver replied, that they put one little A-frame sign by the front door which says "Model Home". He further commen~ed that the 500-foot marks bring them just past the edge of Sumner Drive. Councilwoman Callon asked when Sumner Drive is going to b~ paved. Mr. Oliver~e~l~i~r~'d~t~h~y~ntend to pave it after the major heavy traffi~ 'g0~g'~C~'~ ~v~d road doesn't end up getting cracked. Mr. Robinson advised that the expressed concern of the P~anning Commission was that. traffic might be generated on Saratoga- 'SUnnyvale Road, and they even added a condition that the appli- cant provide someone to direct traffic. Councilman Kalb indicated he has a problem between the discussion of traffic and traffic problems and the stated purpose, which is just to show to the people samples and to have a place to meet~h~the salesman can ~nly handle one person at a time. Mr. Robinson indicated that what was discussed at the Cormnission level was the fact that there are going to be other people who are interested in just coming in to look at the homes. Mr. Oliver replied this is not Chappel's developments where he advertises on a "first come-first serve" basis, as. this generates people coming out all at once, creating the problems the Planning Commission is concerned about. However, he indicated they have never done [his; they have been taking names for a year and have set specific dates to meet with them. Councilwoman Callon commente~ that what she is thinking about is protecting the subdivision where the neighbors are getting the dust from more traffic than is absolutely necessary. Mr. Oliver explained that they don't usually let any cars go back there. It was then moved by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilwoman Callon to close the public hearing. The motion was carried. The public hearing was closed at 11:40 P.M. It was moved by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilwoma~ Callon the appeal be granted, on the condition that there be no additional signing other than the designation sign on the walk which fronts Blue Meadows, indicating: "Sales Office" or "Open", but no additional sign along Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. ~he motion was carried 3 to 1, Councilman Kalb in opposition. Councilwoman Corr requested that the developer be reminded about speeding up the work on the bridge at Cox Avenue. Councilwoman Callon commented concerning the dust problem, and it was suggested to close off Sumner Drive. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (Cont'd.) D. CITY MANAGER ~ __ Advised of an additionalimpact of Proposition 13 pertaining to lighting district and various park maintenance districts, as well as Village Parkipg .District, whereby. dollars now being used would have to come out of the general tax. There- fore, it is likelythe Citywould be abandoning those specialdistricts. 2. Report Re: Senate Bill!l (Behr) The Council reRuested the discussion on°Senate Bill 1 be continued to tee Committee of the Whole Meeting on May 9th. 21 - CITY MANAGER REPORTS (Cont'd.) 2. Report Re: Consideration of Request frdm U.S. Postal Service on Proposed New Post Office Site It was moved by .Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilman Kalb to direct the City Manager to ~end a letter to the pO~tal officials.~equesting additional data as to why they want to vacate their existing building. The motion was carried unanimously. Th~ Council inldicated its intent to make arrangements with the Postmaster to visit the present operation. s. 'It&E: fore I.G.C. a) City of San Jose's participation b) Position re: (d~'{~i~l~jus~i~' ~tiBfi{n'i__~o~'-- being (i~'dB~Goffi"~Eo '~he-Board 8f ~upervfSb~s Councilman Matteoni suggested the City take the position that in the event of legislation such as AB-90 being passed, that the advisory board be the same, and another board not be created, and only in that capacity are we advisory. The Ot~r members of the Council concurred in this position. 4. ReqUested Executive Session scheduled for this evening be postponed. to Tuesday,-May 9th. This was agreeable to the Council. VIII. COMMUNICATIONS 1. William Avery, Los Gatos Town Manager, requesting the City Council ask Senator Smith tq withdraw SB-1874. - Council requested to review bill before taking position. 2. Orville Johns., 14531 HQrseshoe Drive, re: sale of part of his land to Dividend Industries. - Mr. Shook, Director of Public Works, to meet with Mr. Johns to discuss procedure for obtaining Tentative Approval to subdivide this land.'.' 3. Letter to the Saratoga News from Mr. William Robson, commending the City Council and the City Manager rei:L~cfid~s .c0n'c~_i-ning annexation of Ravine Road. - Noted and filed'."' .... !~ 4. Donald M. Rains, Clerk of the Board of SupervisOrs, re: recommendation for appointment to the Santa Clara.County Library Commission. - Continued for discussion at a future meeting. 5. Mr. and Mrs. Richard Valentine, 12980 Paramount Drive, re: upcoming Planning Commission' variance hearing on Ryan Corral. Advised that this is-still being heard at the Planning Commission level. "6hd'City~fde "a~ini~raGlve rec0~ds'~f"~h~ City 'CounEir' E"'~:9 public hearings. Councilman Kalb indicated he would contact Mr. Crowther and advise him of the City's position regarding this request. 7. Mr. and Mrs. Ward Ellis, re: Spring Clean Up Day on May 5th, and the fact they had not yet received notice. It was requested that the staff direct a letter to Green Valley asking them to standardize on an annual basis its spring and fall pickups, so they will be relieved of the burden of notifying the individual homeowners. - 22 - B. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PUBLIC GROUP REPRESENTATIVES ~i~g' May0r'h6~cknowledged the presence of public group rep~sentati~eS~ as follows: ~i~ginia.Laden, Saratoga Pl.anning Commission Lynn. Belanger, Chairman, Sayatoga Planning Commission Gene Zambetti, Saratoga Planning Commission G. Carlson, Chairman, Parks and Recreation Commission John Terry, Parks and Recreation Commission Louise Schaefer, Parks and Recreation Commission Ed Gomersall, Parks and Recreation Commission Gladys Armstrong, A.~A...U.W. IX. ADJOURnmENT It was moved by Councilman Matteoni and seconded by Councilwoman Callon the meeting be adjourned.to an Executive Session oh May 9, 1978. The motion was carried; the meeting was adjourned at 12:40 A.M. City Cle~ - 23 -