Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-02-1981 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARAYOGA CITY' COIEqCIL TIME: Wednesday, September 2, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: City COuncil Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale AVenue, Saratoga, Calif. 'TYPE: Regular Meeting ~ fDFiMITi'EE OF THE WIDLE - 7:00 p.m. - Confe~en~ce Rocm #2, ~dministration Building Executive Session re:. Meet and Confer Procedures REGULAR EI'ING - 7:30 p.m. Council Chambers ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CAlL Present: Councilmembers .Clevenger~ Jensen, MallOry, Watson, M~yor Callon. B. MINUI]ES - 8/19 ' ; · I r · · JENS~q/MALIDRY MOVED APPRDVAL CDRRECTIONS AS NOi'ED BELOW. Passed 5- O- p. 4,~_D~ra. 6: "not a strong argument~f~r~".qch~n~edrto .!~an~;argument~agaidst." P. ~; Item ~, psra. 2: "15,000" changed to "15, housing. " p. 5, para 8: "Neale" changed to "Steele." p. ~ Addendum'on ~unding of 25th anniversary matters inserted. ix. ic io s ~. OP~L 1. 1 Introduction and welcome~ ~ecky Mor~an~ SuperviSor Fifth District Ms. Morgan noted that Saratoga was .to be changed ,frGn the fourth tO the fifth supervisorial district of ~he County, effective October 1.. She explained that the intent of the several changes made was to place all of each community in one district., and this had been accomplished. City Manager presen~d a brief progress report on the budget for the' fiscal year and the reorganization of. City 6ffices. B. NRI'i'I'Kr~ P~ferred to Staff. M~YOR'S SI(~URE SUPPORTING B01a~D OF SUPERVISORS OF STis~NISLAUS COIJlVI~M IN OPPOSITION TO pia~{)LE OF NILLIj~I ARCHIE Fia~IN. Passed 5-0. #S: CONSENSUS TO DIRECT CITY MP~GER TO PREPia~E REPORT FOR COUNCIL WITHE 30 DAYS,CN Sia~J~TOG~-SUNN~ l{)i~I) I~ED ACTION PLg~I~. " NOTE: Since the hoar of 8:00 p.m. had been reached, the Mayor proceeded to Public Hearings. · V. PUHLIC HEARINGS A~ G~qERAL PLAN AMENDMHI~T 81-2 (a) - BNOOE~OOD LANE (APN 503-23L38) and 81-2 Co) HINCKS ESTATE (APN 517~13-14 and 517713T15) ' City Manager reviewed history of amendments, noting~ tha~ the~ had' been initiated as City-proposed actions. Discussion began with Brookwood Lane area. Planning DireCtor gave further details, with particular. attention. to areas designated flood plain and flood ways~. 2-9/2/81 City Manager noted that the ownership of the property was not in question, but only removal of the parksite designation and possible alternative use of the property. In the pest the City hod not designated flood areas on the -General Plan which are not appropriate for development for safety reasons, he said, and that 'should be ~one. He then explained that after a General Plan designation is changed the zoning designation can be changed. Counci~ Jensen inquired as to flooding possibilities, and Planning Director and City Manager explained method of measuring flood height. She then inquired as to density permitted under "very low density residential~" and Plannin~ Director replied that it would ke six units per acre, noting that the easenent must be calculated 7inte the acreage for density purposes. Councilmemker Jensen stated that if ~vea one unit were built it would be in a flood area. She favored keeping as low density as possible to minimize impact on the neighbors. City Manager pointed out that if the ~Coancil changed the General Plan desig- nation, they could pet conditions on ~the zoning to reduce the density. He further explained the differen~ between .flood plain and flood way, and stated that the Federal Government suggests allowing development in flood plain areas t/iat 'are properly .protected. Discussion continued with Hincks Estate. Planning Direc~o~ explained slope and density factQrs, noting that lack of secondary access and wa~er were problems, as well as geology, which would be reviewed by the City Geologist~ ~e also. explained that the Council could. initiate rezoning. Councilmember Clevenger stated that the General Plan Citizens }~visory Cc~tmittee hod determined that the Co~cil should decide what the zoning shou d on the.~Brookwood p~operty and should consider applying Measure A Councilmember Clevenger inquired as to access problens, and Planning Director stated that property is accessed by 5DhlmarFl Road. C(m~unity Services Director explained that it had been claimed that an easement had been given in 1892, but it was not certain whether it still applied. Councilmember Mallory stated that he 'was most concerned about the aesthetics of Hakone and the impact of any development; he wanted no residential development. because of possible noise and visual Lipact. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:45 p.m., beginning with the Brookwood Lane property. Bob Peck, Douglass Lane, spoke as a representative of Dr. Johnston. He stated that Dr. Johnston had a deep ~neerest in the property and had planted most of the trees that were there, and he was not pressing for the maxinm~ number of subdivisions. He noted that the "C" zoning was a concern andi'tiiat the General Plan AdvisOry Cu~'~kLttee had been concerned about the crime p~.robl~n in Wildwood Park. The Parks and Recreation CommiSsiOn did not want the - - property because, he said, it could ~ot be properly petrolled. He also asserted that the house presently there hod not been damaged by heavy floods. In response to Mayor Callon, Mr. Peck stated that a "C" designation would increase problens at the tentative nk3p stage. Councilmember Watson noted that "C" designation did not mean trails would go in. City Manager added that City could require dedication of easenent, but that would be choice of Council. Use of property would be determined based on review of dgvelopment. The area indicated in green on the map cannot be developed under the City'S flood control agreenent, and that should be made ctear, he said. Dave Johnston, representing his father, Dr. Johnston, supported the General Plan Amendment. He presented a petition urging the City not to parchase the land adjacent to Wildwood Park. He stated that flooding was not currently a problem, and that pest probl~ns hod been caused by dumping from the County gravel pit. City Manager listed ye~s of worst flooding according to news- paper reports of damage. Mrs. Johnston,lth~n~}spoke in support of the Amendment, discussing several Ways to control flocding. She also stated that if the amendment were approved outbuildings would be cleared, the present house sold, and two additional hcmes built. Mike Johnston, another son.~of Dr. Johnston, spoke in support of the amend- ment. He considared develoDment a means of allowing other families to enjoy the same pleasures his family had enjoyed in their years there. Ccnlnunity Services DireCtor reitera.ted that the Parks and Recreation Conmission had not requested any additional property for trails or other purposes for reasons of safety and Surveillance. The City property line is fenced, she said, and there ha~e ibeen no ccmplaints from citizens for over one year. John Kahle, 20601 Brbokwood Lane, spoke as a friend of Dr. J~hnston, .saying he felt parks created problems, and ~the area should be developed. Councilmembers discussed their individual opinions as to width arid desig~ nation of a possible buffer area, d~nsity, probleats involved in the City's possible purchase of the area, and ~ffect on crime of the alternatives. The Public Hearing remained open, a~d discussion of the Hin~k~' property Cliff Beck, an owner of the ~roperty; stated that nine lots had been indicated on the preliminary tentative map, of, which one had been reserved for City use if needed. Mr. Beck and Planning D~ector discussed the amount of acreage involved, about 16 acres. Mr. Beck s~ated that he was having a soils report prepared and would deal with any problems that arese, altLhough a large portion of the property was on limestone. He a;lso stated that he ~ould defend his recorded right-of-way ~hro'ugh Hakone Gardens. The Public Hearing was'closed at 9:30 p.m. Councils discussed their individual opinionS, including the fact that? the General Plan Advisory Cu~BL~[ttee had suggested that the Hincks estate be subject to the criteria of the Northwestern Hillside Specific Plan. Mayer Callon asserted that R-1-40,000 deve~olment would be unacceptable~ but that HCRD or Hillside would be acceptable'. City Manager explained that property could be added to the Specific Plan area. He also explained how the General Plan Amendments are counted within the limit of three per year, noting that the Specific Plan is not counted as an amendment. Planning Director noted that Slope Conservation would allow HCRD zoning~ Mayo_r Gallon stated that ,,she thought the Slope Conservation_ designation was most appropriate and that the Planning Cc~taission should be directed to consider rezoning the property to Measure A standards. CouncilmembQr Jensen said that the Slope Conservation and Hillside d~signations still did not conform to the General Plan. City Attorney stated that there was not yet a General Plan designation for the Northwest Hillsides; Slope Conservat,ion would be the o~ly designation ~hat would fit. City Attorney pointed out that if the Northwest Hillside desig- nation were placed on the map, the matter woulld have to be returned to the Planning Calmfission. He. suggested that the resolution be araended to designate one portion of Brookwood Lane as Medium Density Residential and ~ha other as "C?,' most of the Hincks estate would .~e designated S19pe Conservation. WATSON/~,RVENGER FIDVED TO ADOPT RESOLLTION 1031 A9 AM~qDED. Passed 4-1 (Jeasen opposed). PaTSON/JENSEN MOVED THAT A 30' BUFFER BE INTENDED BEIINEEN WILDWOOD PARK AND THE DEVELOPMenT kk~) THE DEVELOPMEN~ CONDtTIONED TO PROVIDE ADEQLULTE SCRRRNING TO PRECLUDE VISUAL IMPACT ON THE PARK. Passed 5-0. JENSEN/CI,EVENGER MOVED TO DIRECT ;THE ',PLANNING CID~MISSION TO FOY~tLLY PRC~ :~:~'.,, WI~H THE ZONING PROCESS FOR THE HINCKS PROPERTY AND THE RtlMAIN]IIG HCRD DISTRIC~ LAr~)S Ft~0M R-1-40,000 TO THE APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION (HARD OR MEASLI~E A) IN CONFORMITY WITH THE NORTHWEST HILLSIDE IF THE LAND IS IN CONFOF~ITY WITH LAND' SIMILARLY SITL~a'Ev IN THE NOR~I~EST HILLSIDE AND TO MAKE THE D~r~4~dl~ATION OF SUITABILITY IN THE PROCESS. Passed 3-1-1 CWatson opposed; Mallory abstained). Councilmember Mallory explained that ..he was uncertain of the outcome of the process. Councilmember Watson stated that no more should be done at this point than encouraging. the start of the process. Councilmember Jensen moved to direct the Planning Cc~anission to :look at the Gl~_n Una area in the sane light. No second. Councilmember Clevenger asserted tha{ the Glen Una matter was not the same as:~ the present matter and should be left for another meeting. B. APPEAL OF PLANNING CCI~4ISSION D~NIAL OF AN ENCNDAC}}4ENT PERMIT FOR A FENCE AT 12499 SCULLY AVENIE (EP-16), Appe'llant/Applicant Lawrence Ree Planning Director reviewed apFeal. The Public Hearing was opemed at 10:10. Lawrence ROe spoke as the ~appellant, y g that the Planning Cermlission had not discussed this matter because of the lateness of the hour. At least 50 residents, he said, did not want the Ifence in question to be torn down so it could be noved beck four foot. He felt the fence did not bether anyone, and it }qas not likely the stroot would be widened near the fence. Mr. ROe stated' that the individual who was pressing ~the point was not sincerely concerned about the City' s welfare, and that h~' had received verbel permission frc~ the City staff to place the fence at its present location. Mayor Callon inquired as to whether Mr. Roe had asked if he could place the fence on city land, and Mr~ Roe replied that the land was his property. City Manager stated that the fence was actually on public right-of-way. Mr. Roe then asserted that he had been maintaining the area and intended to continue to do so. If the Council did not approve the encroa~t permit, however, h~ requested 90 days to reanove the fence. In response to CounciLmember.Mallory,. Mr. ROe said the fenoo's purepose was to koop people end cars out of his orchard. Mayor Callon r~ted that staff had . re~ded removal of the ste~l postS; Mr. Roe re_sponded that the posts would not harm anyone who was driving properl!;. Bill Sheridan, 19760 Lisa, sFo~e in Opposition to the fence, saying that it had been built, without a permit, in the sidewalk area. Mr. Sheridan further objected .to the fact that his original letter on the subject had not been included in the~hearing material. Ci~ty Manager pointed out that although the City dOes not own the 'land, i~ is the City' s responsibility to keep the right- of-way open and accessible. ' ' ~.lanning Director noted that requests~ for encroachnent permits are reutinely denied. Building permits for fences,' however, are not required. Mayor Callon asked about the visual effect of the steel posts if the fence were moved beck. Public Works Director replied that if. the fence were moved out of the enc,roach- ment onto private property, it would be out of City jurisdiction. Councilmember Watson noted that residents should resolve disputes between themselves rather than involving the City. JENSEN/WATSON MOVED TO DMqY THE ENCRO~Clt~EN~ PERMIT A~D REQUIRE THE FENCE TO BE MDVED WITHIN 30 DAYS. Passed 5-0., cLk~VENGER/MALLORY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ALIJDW 90 DAYS FOR THE FENCE TO BE MOVED. Passed 3-2 (Jensen, Watson opposed). Councilmember Jensen expressed her ~fear that the fence might be run into at any time and should be moved sooner than 90 days. Councilmember Mallory stated that be was opposed to encroachments. The Council recessed from 10:30 to 10~40 p.m. Mayor Callon then returned to Item ~i~7-~-~fth&' ag~nd~i~ ~'~. S.U~Dr~SIONs, BULLDrNG S~'~'~S: ~N~NG.R~O~ESTS IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES, AND' RESOLUTIONS A. ORDINANCE Ab~NDING AR~IC~E V OF CHAPTER 4 OF CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA BY ADDING DMSION 6, ENTITLRD "SECOND.HAND DEAI,ERS" ORDINANCE NO. 38. 102' ' ; ' MALLORY/WATSON ~DVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE. Passed 5'0. B. ORDINANCE APPRDVING REZONING FROM R-i-12,500 TO R-M-4000'AT 14239 SARATOGA- St~?/VALE ROAD (C-197)~Applicant' Clarence Neale. CLEVENGER/WATSON FOV[~ TO ACCEPT NEC=ATIVE DECLARATION. Passed 4-1 (JenseH opposed). MALLORY/WATSON MOVED TO ACCEPT RESOLbTION C-197. Passed 4-1 (Jensen opposed). WATSON/MALI/3RY MOVED TO WAIVE READING AND READ BY' TITLE ONLY. .Passed 5-0. MALLORY~qATSON MOVED TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE. Passed 4-1 (Jensen opposed). C. RESOLUTION CF~,F. BRATING CITY OF SARATOGA' S E-FIFTH AM~IVERSARY. MALLORY/CLEVE~GER MOVED TO ENTHUSIASTICALLY A~0. PT RESOLUTION. Passed 5-0. D. RESOLUTION SUPPOi{PING AN INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE INVESTM~qT POLICIES . OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEm4 IN AN EFFORT TO INCREASE RATE OF RETURN ~ MALLORY/CLEV}~e/R MOV[I) TO ADOPT RESOLUTION. Passed 5-0. VI. BIDS & GONTRACTS NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All items listed Under Item VII, Consent Calendar, are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one~ motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of these itens. If discussion is required, that item will be r~Dved frcm the Consent Calendar and will be considered separately. ' Vote may be by roll call. VII. CONSENT CALaNDAR ~GER/MALLORY MOVED TO ADOPT AB~ APPROVE. Passed 5-0. A. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS. B. FINAL ACCEPTANCE, SDR 1297, NON S~DEMAKE, ALOHA AVENUE~ C. APPROVAL OF PASEO LAED BLOCK SALE, SEPi'~MBER '12, 1981 APPROVt~). D. RESOLUTION SUPEReING RESOLUTION NO.! 804.1 OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PRDVIDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF Ft~ERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY APPROVED. E. DENY CLA/M OF RICHARD SIEVE FOR DAMAGF.q IN THE ANDUNT OF $165.92 ViII. ADMINISTRATIVE M~i'i'~jRS '~ A. MAYOR 1. PNOCLAMATION THAT THE '~ONTHS-OF AUGUST AND S~ER, 1981, BE KNOWN AS SLOW THE FLOW MONTHS IN THE SANTA CLARA VALI,EY Mayor ~igned Pr6clama[i6n. · B. COL~qCIL AND ~SSION REPORTS 1. PARKS AND RECREATION OCP~LISSION ~ RE: ACQUISITION OF EL QUITO PARK MALLORY/CLEVENGER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO INITIATE NEGOTIATIONS. Passed 5-0. 3. WATSON - AP 893' - TO ESTABLISH A ~STATE ODMMISSION WHICH WOLID OVERSEE DEVELOPMEN~ OF NST MORE THAN FIVE NEW "S~ff.~-SUSTAINING COM~ITIES" (ROOS) WATSON/CLEVENGER MOVSD TO OPPOSE ,AB 893. Passed 5-0. 4.CLEVENGER - PPLYL STRb~r ]iMPPOVMv~NTS (Added at Meeting) Reported that funding for ~mprovenenEs had been restored. 5. JENSEN - SB 899 (Added at Meeting) SB 899 has been made into two-year b~ll. - SAN JOSE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT (Added at Meeting) Plant improvements may not take place kecause of lack ~f grants~ critical period of year is approaching. - MEDFLY (Added at Meeting) Redommended that grand' jury investigate handling of Medfly pro]ec~ on several grour~s. - CLEAN AIR ~DMEN~ (Added at, Meeting) Recommended writing to Federal Government to endorse clean air amendment', with no erosion of standards.~ C, DEPARTMENT HEAD~ AND OFFICEKS 1. Director of Cc~m~ity Development a. REPOR~ ON RATE INCREASE REQt~STm BY SIGNAL MAINTENANCE CLEVENGER/MALTORY MOVED TO APPROVE INCREASE AND AUTFDRIZE MANAGER. PasSed 5-0. b. REPORT ON WESTMDNT AVENUE F~rklNSION MALLORY/WATSON MOVED TO ~ FNOM PARTICIPATING IN PROJECT. Passed 5-0. IX. ADJOUR~4ENT -l'l~.10~p~m.=a.;'iI~ ..... Respectfully suhnitted, Grace E. Gory Deputy City Clerk