Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-06-1985 City Council Minutes TIME: Wednesday, March 6, 1985 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Regular Meeting A..~ ROLL C~nL - Councilmembers Callon, Clevenger, Hlava, Moyles and Mayor Fanelli present at 7:07 p.m. B. ~ - 2/20, 2/26 CALLON/MOYLES MOVED APPROVAL OF 2/20 MINUTblg. Passed 4-0 (Hlava abstaining because she had been absent from the meeting). CLEVENGER/HLAVA MOV~ APPROVAL OF 2/26 MINUTES. Passed 5-0. C_ ADOPTIO~ ~ PR~N~TION OF RESOL~rI~ COMME~3ING ~ MOSS FOR HLAVA/CL~ENGER MOVED ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 2216. Passed 5-0. Mayor Fanelli presented Ms. Moss with the resolution, and the Council congratulated her. Ms. Moss e~pressed appreciation, and Andrew Beverett, representing the Library Cc~ission, presented her with a resolution of ccff~endation frc~ the cc~dssion. II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Pat Pope, a real estate broker, rose to clarify Written Communication #4, saying that the property in question had not been sold. She was informed that Written Communications would be taken up when reached on the agenda. Alan Lambert rose to request that the Council consider approving the final map for Tract 6781. Community Development Director reported that he now had all documentation necessary to proceed with such approval, although there had not been time to prepare a written report. Councilmember Callon suggested that Council consider the final map if staff could give a detailed oral report on the matter. There was consensus to do so under the New Business ~ortion of the agenda. III. CONS~2~T A. Consent c~]~a3aRr - 1. ~R] ~ CLEV[~GER/HLAVA MOVED ~0 DENY THE CLAIM. Passed 5-0. B. Other Consent c~]ena~ Itens 1. Fin~] Build/ng Site Approval, SDR 1558, D. Vukosa, Holiday Dr. 2. A~cu~h~nce and Acknowledgment of Donatic~ - McF~ ] ] 3. Acceptance and Acknowledgment of Dc~ation - Pa/x~ l ] 4. Fi-~] Acceptance, Tr. 5179, Stc~e Ridge Dr., Stonesc~ Development Corl~ 5. Re/ease of Bcea for Underground Utilities, SDR 1532, Saratoga- Sunnyvale Rd. ,. Unic~ Oil Co. 6. Resolution concern/rig deuial of Morse ap~o~] heard 2/20 (V-681) RESOLUi~ON 2217 7. Resolution concerning appeal of conditions on Teerlink Ranch heard 2/20 RESOI/3T/ON 2218 8. A~proval of W~rrant List Councilmember PLlava removed Items 5 and 8 frc~ Consent Calendar B. 2-3/6/85 CLEVENGER/CALLON MOVe]3 .TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR B EXCEPT ITF~ 5 AND 8. Passed In answer to Councilmember Hlava, Community Development Director stated that it would not be appropriate to continue to hold the bend on Item 5 until problems with shrubbery in the area had been resolved because the bend was for a different matter. City Manager responded to Councilmember Hlava's questions on the Warrant List concerning a payment to IBM, recognition plaques, and fees for David Jones. HLAVA/CLEVENGER MOVED TO APPROVE ITEMS 5 AND 8 ON CONSENT CAI.RNDAR B. Passed 5-0. 1. Report ,m~ Speed Zoning ~n R~utes 85 and 9 Mayor Fanelli noted that the report indicated that CalTrans had not resolved satisfactorily the issues about which the Council had been concerned, and that the ,Council would need to keep those issues before CalTrans. 2. Re~ort on Sarat~ga-Sunnyvale Road/Blauer Signal In answer to Counci3m~ember Fanelli, Community Development Director stated t/~at it was not yet known wh~m the signal would be installed, but construction might start in the spring. 3. Report ,m Parade Pexmtit Procedures Community Services Director explained changes which had been made in procedm:es at request of Council. There was consensus that the changes met Council's conce~s. HIAVA/CLEVEN~ER MOVED TO APPROVE PROCEDURES AS PROPOSED IN CONC~.'FT; CITY ATFORNEY DIRECI'~D TO DRAFT OED'(NANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROCEDURES. Passed 5-0. B. REPORTS FRC~4 ~SSIONS L Memo fn~n Parks and Recreatien Commi ssicm on Paul Massc~ Winery (infon~tien only) Councilmembers discussed procedures in connection with the use of the land after the departure of the winery. Councilmember Callon reported that on the previous night the Planning Commission had discussed whether the Environmental Impact Report should be done in conjunction with hearings on the General Plan Amendment. If they lind so directed, she said, consulting expertise would be available at that time; she expressed the hope that hearings could begin soon. Councilmember Hlava strongly urged that a General Plan category different from that of the Owens property k~~_ used for the Paul Masson property. Councilmember Clevenger suggested that soliciting creative uses of the ].and be emphasized. There was consensus to leave the timing of the Environmental Impact Report in the hands of Councilmember Callon, the Pl~Lnning Commission, and the City Attorney. Councilmember Callon suggested that the Mayor, staff, and chair of the Planning Commission meet to avoid misunderstandings. 2. Report frcm Parks and Recreatic~ C-...-l ssion en Median Haster Plan (infom~tien ~nly) Mayor Fanelli noted the omission of any work on Prospect Avenue. Maintenance Director explained that the Commission had not prioritized beyond the point they deemed reasonable; Fr~atvale Avenue had also been omitted. 3. Oral Re~rts frc~ CL~.~issie~ers - None. The hour of 8:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor Fanelli proceeded to public hearings. V. PUBnIC HEAR]3q~ A. Prc~ R~nue F~ures 3-3/6/85 i. ~Ordinance Imposing Transient Occupancy Tax (first r~ading) ~. OrH~nance Adjusting B~siness License Fees (first reading) 3. Ordinance Imposing Utility Users Tax (first reading) City ~3nager stated that additional information had been received from the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Finance Director presented information on exemptions from the utility users tax and updated information on County median income. Councilmem- ber Hlava remarked that she could find no justification for the City to tax churches, since other governmental bodies could not tax them. Mr. Toppel of the City Attorney's Office replied that he would need to research the issue, but in any case the ordinance enabled the Finance Director to exempt them without their having to apply for exemptiop. Mayor Fanelli reviewed the current package, which included an 8% transient occupancy tax; business license fee of $75 per year; a 3 1/2% utility users tax; and sale or lease of the property at Cox and Saratoga-Sunnyvale. The public hearing was opened at 7:55 p.m. Col. E.T. Barco, 19101 Camino Barco, urged that no more revenues be raised than necessary for street maintenance. He opposed the non-capped utility users tax as an inequitable, punitive tax. He favored a 3 1/2% utility users tax on gas and electric only, with an annual review; he opposed passage of any other fees or taxes until a year-end review of the utility users tax had been made. Andy Beverett, 19597 Via Monte, commended the Council for their approach to raising revenues. He favored the package outlined by Mayor Fanelli with no cap on the utility users tax. Len Sullivan, 20570 Canyon View, spoke as the owner of a Saratoga business. He favored raising taxes if there were a cap on the utility users ~ Klaus Pache also spoke as the owner of a Saratoga business. He stated that the business had over $18,000 in utility bills per year in spite of heavy investments in energy conservation, so that a 3 1/2% tax would be burdensome. Moreover, he said, anticipated changes in federal regulations on business meals would cut into his business in the near future. Jim Rosenfeld, 14219 Okanogan, spoke as the owner of a Saratoga commercial building with business tenants. He favored a cap of $200 on the utility users tax, with no increase in business license fees. He believed the tax could be based on square footage of a building. Mayor Fanelli pointed out that energy consumption did not necessarily depend on square footage alone. In answer to Mayor Fanelli, Mr. Rosenfeld stated that his tenants were metered separately except for the common grounds of the building. ~ Charlie McFall spoke as the owner of a saratoga business, saying that a non-capped utility users tax would Saratoga businesses at a competitive disadvantage with other businesses. Martin Gandel, 14000 Shadow Oaks, expressed disappointment at the lack of new ideas to raise revenues. He also felt that the stated need for $900,000 for street maintenance should be re-examined. He favored a cap and a sunset clause. Jack Christian, 20230 Bonnie Brae, stated that Saratoga was a low-service city and that if the administration were unable to provide necessary services with the small amount of property taxes allocated to the City, "belt-tightening" should be explored. He also favored a moratorium on building so that services would not need to be supplied to additional houses. Finally, he felt the pavement management program was a computer experiment with no track record in northern California and should not be attempted in Saratoga. Mayor Fanelli pointed out that the computer was simply a means of prioritizing work, and the work would be performed by conventional means. Bob Cancellieri spoke as the owner of a business in Saratoga; he asked that the cap on the utility users tax be reinstated. Eugene Zambetti stated that he did not favor the utility users tax because many residents, especially senior citizens, could not afford a sudden increase in utility bills. A1 Abshire, 19735 Solano, spoke representing the Good Government Group. He 4-3/6/85 reiterated th~ ~oints in the Group's letter and urged the Council to take action only after due delik~ration and public input. Otto Crawford, 12471 Green Valley Lane, spoke as the owner of a Saratoga business. · He stated that merchants in the Village favored a cap on ·the utility user tax. He believed tt{at the average Saratoga resident was more able to pay increased taxes than the ~verage Saratoga businessmar~ Mayor Fanelli noted that Don Eagleston had previously stated that the Village merchants supported the proposed 3 1,/2% tax package; they had later not supported the flat tax because they felt it was inequi- table. Mr. Crawford replied that he believed Mr. Eagleston had been misinfoz~ned. Jim Rosenfeld rose again to state that the Village Association did not suppDrt the flat tax because many members, although they work in Saratoga, are not residents. He also noted that none of his recent tenants had renewed their leases when they expired because doing business in Saratoga was difficult. Bert Toevs, 13120 Via Madronas, stated that he favored the 3 1/2% utility users tax with an annual review and sunset clause. He felt a cap would be regressive. He pointed out that businesses in San Jose pay a 5% utility user tax with no cap. Finally, he urged that the property at Cox and Saratoga-Sunnyvale be leased rather than sold. Jackie Welch, 20925 Jack's Road, stated that the City should encourage businesses so that sales tax revenue would be increased. Rather than a u. tility users tax, which would be a burden on retired people, she felt that the increased sales tax revenues should be used for pavement management. .'.'-. Jack Mallory, 12258 Kirkdale, urged the Council to take action soon so that the ~ . streets would not deteriorate further,· requiring more funds to repair. Len Sullivan rose again to state that his PG&E bill had doubled in the last five years; he feared the utility users tax would increase endlessly with the bill. '+.' .. No one further appearing to speak, the public hearing was continued at 8:47 p.m. to March 20. -.. Counciln~mbers discussed issues. MOYLES/CALLON MOVED ~D INTRODUCE THE UTILITY USERS TAX ORDINANCE WITH A $200 CAP FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIE~ AND A $100 CAP FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, WITH TBE FINANCE' · DIRECTOR TO PUBLISH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CAP WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE .:I DATE OF THE ORDINANCtL (Clerk's note: This motion not voted upon; see discussion ' below. ) Councilmember Cloverigor pointed out that the Saratoga News article about the · proposed taxes stated the cap would not be included; she felt people should have the chance to comaneat on it.. Other Councilmembers agreed, but Councilmember Moyles felt there should be no mcre delay, since the Council had been receiving input from the . same people for some time. Councilmember Callon withdrew her second to the motion, and Mr. Toppel of the City Attorney's Office noted that an unseconded motion could not be voted upon. Councilmember Moyles directed that the record reflect tb2~t the motion was being dropE~_od over the objections of the maker of the motion. There was consensus to direct the City Attorney to return two ordinances to the Council, one with no imp and one with separate caps for commercial and residential properties. Mayor Fanelli then called a recess fron 9:30 to 9:50 p.m. B, Ordinance/~nanding Article II and Repealing Article IV of CI~ 14 of the City Code ~-~jning to sales and ~se taxes (first re~aing) City Manager and City Attorney explained proposed ordinance. City Manager noted that he would have a report later in the meeting concerning County-Communications which related to this item.. FANF~.r.T/MOYLES b~DVED 9D INTRODUCE ORDINANCE. Passed 5-0. Mayor Fanelli remark6d that the public hearing had not been opened, She asked if anyone had appeared to speak on the item, and no one responded. The City Attorney noted that the item did not require a public hearing by law, in any case. 5-3/6/85 C, Amendment to the Z(ming Ordinance to a/low compact parking stalls in the C, P-A, M or R-M zoning districts and estzBlish standards for compact parking stalls (C-213) (first reading) 8 Community Development Director explai. ned proposed ordinance. In answer to Mayor Fanelli, he stated that the compact spaces would not create a greater density allowance for applicants. The public hearing was opened at 9:55 p.m. No one appearing to speak, it was closed at 9:56 p.m. HLAVA/CLEVENGER MOVED TO APPROVE THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Passed 5-0 MOYLES/HLAVA MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE ON COMPACT PARKING STALLS. Passed 5-0. Councilmember Hlava suggested that the Planning Commission be commended for preparing the ordinance. D. ~ of design review approval for new two~cory single family residence on parcel A (m Ashley Way 6~0ellant, D. Markley; applicant, J. and ~. Hi]l) (A-1041 - continued free 2/20) Mayor Fanelli noted that the appellant had withdrawn the appeal, so no public hearing was necessary. E. Appeal of den~a] of variance for sideyard setback and parking at 18645 Paseo Tie~£a (Appellant/applicant, C. and U. Beach) ~-675- ccetinued f~ 2/20) : Mayor Fanelli noted that the appellant had requested 6ontinuance, and the public hearing was duly continued to June 19. She then returned to unfinished items preceding public hearings on the agenda. C. O~INANoRq Ab~ RESOLUTIONS 1. Amename31t to the Zoning Ord/nance to allow a ~]]etin board not more than 20 square feet in size ce~ the site of a school to advertise school activities only (C-217) (second reading) CALLON/CLEVENGER MOVED TO READ ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVING FURTHER READING. Passed 5-0. CLEVENGER/CAT.ION MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NS3.65. Passed 5-0. D. B~I)S AND COMERACTS - None. Mayor Fanelli then proceeded to items following public hearings on the agenda. A. Discussion of Oral Oa,.,~-~icatic~s, if any. Mayor Fanelli inquired as to the final map which Alan Lambert had brought upl Community Development Director distributed an agenda bill on the matter which he had prepared stating that all requirements had been met. City Attorney distributed an amendment to the stipulation for settlement for the same property. MOYLES/CLEVENGER MOV[I) TO APPROVE THE FINAL MAP OF TR. 6781. Passed 5-0. HLAVA/MOYL~..q MOVED TO APPROVE THE STIPULATION FOR S~ITLEMENT. Passed 5-0. Mayor Fanelli invited Heber Teerlink to speak, as he had requested. Mr. Teerlink acknowledged that the final map had been approved. B. Written C~aL~uliCatiC~S frcm the Public ~1 frcFa C. Beirne ccr~Dlaining about exessive speed - referred to staff for reply. #2 from D. Persing expressing desire to annex parcel to Saratoga - referred to staff; Mayor Fanelli felt that the City should not "spot" annex. 6-3/6/85 #3 from K. Eshleman requesting resolution proclaiming AAUW Week. Councilmember Hlava sponsored the resolution. HLAVA/MOYLES MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2219 PPa3EIAIMING AAUW WKKK. PasSed 5-0. #4 from F. Meredit2[ requesting abandonment of building setback line ~ City Attorney requested to g~t the.documentation and work with Mrs. Pope and the 'Community Development Department. #5 from M. Hyde requesting information on second unit ordinance - staff requested to inform Mr. Hyde and all others who inquired about the dates when the Co~cil was to consider the secend unit ordinance, beginning with the March 26 study session. C~ .New Busine-~s from S~f[, Administrative l~a~DOrts not Schedu/ed City Manager reported that charges for County Communications services were expected to be $234,000 in ~1985-86. Council discussed possible alternatives and decided to discuss the issue at the next study session with Supervisor McKenna. Staff was directed to write a letter stating that the Council would not authorize paym(mt of a sum so far in excess of previous bills. City Manager announced that a grant of $235,000 had been received for use in improving Congress Springs Park. Council directed staff to write a letter of commendation to the Parks and Recreation Commission and Roy Swanson. D. New Business free Counc] ]m~bers Hlava - announced that she had received a legislative internship from the League of California Cities. - reported that she had received a communication from WeTip end asked whether any response were being prepared. Mayor Fanelli replied that she had given hers to the CcFmmanity Services Director for his reca~'endation. - reported t~t the Transportation Commission had voted to support the three corridors under cons2ideration for new rail starts as equal priorities. Moyles - report .ed that the Traffic Authority had adopted its budget. -asked whether Council wished to consider a letter he had prepared concerning the Hakone Foundation. ..There was consensus to consider the letter at a study session. Fanelli - commented that she had been asked to sign a letter from West Valley Mayors in response to a recent editorial conce.rrhing Route 17, but becaus~ she had not seen the editorial, she had declined to sign the letter. - reviewed next study session agendas, emphasizing that those interested in the second unit ordinance should be informed of the March 26 meeting. E. Action Refefra Log - NO ccn~nents. VII. The meeting was adjourned at 10: 43 p.m. Respectfrilly suk~itte], Grace E. Cory Deputy City Clerk