HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-15-1986 City Council Minutes SARATOGA CITY OOL~CIL ~
TI~E: Wednesday, January 15, 1986 - 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ORGANIZATION
A. RDLL CAIL - Councilmembers Fanelli, Hlava, Moyles and Mayor Clevenger
present at 7:07; Councilmember Gallon present at 7:09 p.m.
B. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE TO PUBLIC SAFETY CO~L!SSIONERS
LEWIS AND S~NSON
Mayor Clevenger administered the Oath of Office, and the Council congratulated
the reappointed cullLdssioners.
C. MINUTES - 1/7
Councilmember Fanelli requested that the gender of the pronouns referring to
Marion Sellers be corrected; Councilmember Hlava requested that the spelling
of Jack Markle's name be corrected and that, on the Morrison item, Councilmember
Fanelli's reason for abstention be clarified to show that Mr. MOrrison is her
landlord.
HIA~/MDYLES MDVED TO APPt~OVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. Passed 5-0.
II. ORAL OO~jNICATIONS
E. T. Barco, Camino Barco, submitted newspapers containing notice of intent to. cir-
culate an anti-freew~y ~,~itiative ordinance and requested Council's cooperation.
III. 0DNSEIV~ C~I,RNDAR
A. Resolution Denying Haydon Appeal heard 1/7
RESOLUTION 2300
B. Final Map Approval, SDR 1586, LOs Gatos Jt. Union High School District/
Osterlund Enterprises (3 lots)
C. Construction Acceptance, Tr. 6632, Montalvo Heights, G. Butler
D. Acceptance and Acknowledgment of Donation to Hakone - los Gatos-Monte
Sereno-Saratoga Newcc~ers Club
E. Amendment to Map of Tr. 7798, C.W. Assoc., Quito Rd. (8 lots)
F. Report frcm City Attorney on Claim for Tripp Property Clean-Up Costs
Submitted by Safety Specialists
G. Approval of Warrant List
FANRT,T,I/HLAVA MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT CAT.RNDAR. Passed 5-0. ~
IV. SCHEDULRB MA%'i'~S
A. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
1. Preliminary Review of Landscaping on Medians of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd.
Maintenance Director explained project, and Peter Callander, the contractor,
showed slides of the current appearance of the area and charts of the proposed
plans. Councilmembers remarked on the unattractive appearance of the utility
lines and the costs for the project, which were higher than anticipated. There
was consensus to have the Parks and Recreation CuLutission review the project
at their Febxn~ary 3 meeting; agendize it for Council study session Febzn~ry
11; agendize it for Council regular meeting Feb~lsry 19. Staff was directed
to provide information about funds available fr~n PG&E for undergrounding,
end the contractor was directed to provide further information on cost breakdowns
and reasons for the high costs.
2. Review of Investment Policy
'' ! 2-1/].5/86
ltlon of Statement of Responsibility.
City Manager explained proposed dd' '
HIAVA/FAN~I,r~2.V~ TO APPROVE INVESTMENT POLICY AS A~ENDED. Passed 5-0.
3. Review of IsSues concerning June 1986 Election
HLAVA/FAN~.T.I MDVED TO CHARGE NO FILING ~'~:~:; ATXOW CANDIDATES 400 WORDS [DR
THEIR STATEMS~TS; REQUIRE ADVANCE PAYMENT OF $230 FOR CANDIDATE STATEMEb?I'
Passed 5-0.
4. Clazification of Council's Conditioning of SDR 1596, (Tr. 7798)
{deleted frcm agenda at request of City Attorney)
Mayor Clevenger proceeded to public hearings on the agenda, since the hoLur
of 8:00 p.m. had. arrived.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Projects for 1986-87 Housing end Oa'L~'Lunity DeveloFment Funds
Housing and Cfm~nity Development Coordinator explained purpose of hearing.
The public hearing w~s opened ate7: 58 p.m.
Sam Chriest, President of ~x]ults "Toward Independent Living, requested funds
for his agency, which provided housing for the hendicappod. He stated that
$300,000 was needed but did not request a specific amount frcm the Council.
In answer to Councilmember Fenelli, he stated that one Saratoga resident had
used their facilities but had moved out. In answer to Mayor Clevenger, Pe
stated that he ~Duld apply to other cities for funds as well as to Saratc~/a.
NO One further appearing to speak, the public hearing was continued at 8:03
p.m. to February 5. ~
In answer to MayDr Clevenger, HCD Coordinator stated that the Saratoga Ai!ea
Senior Coordinat/ng Council was b/bmitting en application for funds. When
she expressed the concern that people may not know about this funding so~ce,
he replied that non-profit agencies had good networking systems. In answer
to Councilmember Fanelli, he sta~ed that there were on-going programs that
would need funding for this year~ In enswer to Councilmember Callon, he stated
that there was no requirement that a group needed to be within Saratoga tD
be funded. In answer to Councilmember Hlava, he replied that HCD funds c~uld
be used to imprc~e Elva Avenue.
B. Ordinance Designating Nardie Hcme at 14650 6th St. as Heritage Re!SOurce
(first reading) (continued fr~n 12/4)
City Manager noted that he had r~uL=~ended continuing the public hearing until
February 19, whe~ the Planning CQm'~ssion had made a decision on the req~ired
parking veriance, end that a representative of the applicant, Miles Rank~/1,
had also requested a continuanceI to February 19.
There was consensus to continue the matter to February 19. Mayor Clevenger
then returned to unfinished items on the agenda preceding public hearings.
· A. ADMINI.c,TRATIVE REPORTS icontinued)
5. Fi~ml Deliberations !on Preferred Route 85 Alternative for Saratoga
Councilmember Moyles thanked the fmany groups and individual citizens who had
contributed to tile discussion oneRoute 85. He did not favor the no-build
alternative because that alternative would mean there was no traffic prcblen
in Saratoga, and[ that the City could live with the consequences of not hlilding
a f. reeway. If ,qaratoga did not build a freeway, end cities to the north or
south did, he believed that Saratoga would have all of the detriments of a
freeway with none of the benefits. He opposed light rail in the West Valley
because the conditions necessary for its feasibility were not present and
would not be present for the foreseeable future. Among those conditions was
high density, he said, and he opposed anything which would encourage high
density in Saratoga. He believed that we have a crisis in trensportation.
Arterial streets are clogged, he l said, and we must act now to relieve traffic
congestion. He favored a 6-1ene~ freeway and was inclined to reserve two of
those lanes for high occupancy vehicles. In order to mitigate the effects
of the freeway, he favored depressing the corridor; banning trues; no inter-
changes in Saratoga; a north-SOuth sequence of construction; a 22-foot n~.~lien
3-1/15/86
in order to maximize the peripheral margins so that they could be thoroughly
landscaped. He also wished to ask that the other cities of the Policy Advisory
Board CUL~L~t to On--gOing discussion of action in the Valley to deal with lend
use policies which have encouraged people to live far frcm their jobs. l~cog-
nizing that many honestly disagreed with his conclusions, he felt that
it was prudent to cu~rc~nise; change is constant, end the question is whether
the change should be carried out in deference to the manners, customs and
traditions of a people or in deference to abstract principles, and arbitrary
and general doctrines.
Councilmember Hlava also thanked those who had been involved in the discussions.
Noting that her neighborhood bordered on the corridor, and most of her
friends live on streets which would be affected by the corridor, she went
on to say that the other cities in the County would surely build a freew~y.
If Saratoga were obstructionist, she said, the freeway would perhaps be
delayed, but it would still be built, and Saratoga would have lost its
opportunity to negotiate and protect its neighborhoods. She believed most
Saratogans favored the cc~pletion of Route 85, both frcm various polls
which had been taken end fr~n talking to people in person during the last
election canpaign. She therefore endorsed a freeway under the following
conditions: no truck traffic on the corridor (she proposed that Saratoga
immediately pass a resolution banning truck traffic on the corridor, end
she hoped that all the affected cities ~Duld pass such a resolution before
eny designs were prepared for the road); depressed through Saratoga; less
than eight lanes (she believed four lanes plus two HOV lenes would be satis-
factory, with reduced medien to allow maxin~/n landscaping along the side);
pedestrian and bicycle ways on all Saratoga overpasses; all overpasses
should be at current grades; pedestrian and bike ways between Goleta end
Kevin Moren Park; no interchanges in Saratoga. She hoped that discussion
of interchanges might be delayed so that further information about the
best possible locations could be presented. She felt that the freeway
was not wonderful, but that it was now necessary to share sc~e of the
negative side effects of the area' s economic growth. Her intention, she
said, was to accc~plish the will of most Saratogans while protecting the
neighborhoods on the corridor.
Councilmember Fanelli noted that when she ren for office in 1982, she had
advocated that the full width of the corridor be retained for future trens-
portation uses. After the election, she said, the Council voted to establish
a General Plan policy to keep that width. She reviewed the Council' s extensive
efforts to obtain the best information on' use of the corridor, and
she thanked the staff and agencies who had provided information. She con-
sidered the corridor as basically a c~L'~uter route and felt the Council 's
decision should reflect that. She favored a maximum of six lanes, including
two bus or HOV lanes; no trucks along the full length of the corridor;
reserve space in the middle for a trensitway (she felt mass transit may
not now be viable but could be in the future, so she did not want to preclude
the possibility of providing mass transit in the future by building something
too narrow), leaving 31 feet of lendscaping on each side; depress the freeway;
keep City streets at grade where freeway crosses them; heavy and permanent
landscaping; no interchange at Prospect or Quite; interchange at Saratoga
Avenue to provide access to freeway for residents so traffic cen get off
streets as quickly as possible; guaranteed sufficient funding before construction
starts; phase construction conseoutively. She felt it necessary that Sara,toga
proceed with a united front rather than a split decision.
Councilmember Callon felt that there ~as no benefit to Saratogans in the
corridor, but only benefit to other cities. Further, she believed that
after it was built it would attract more people to out through Saratoga.
When co~'L'~lete, she felt it would be congested end people would still drive
on City streets. Because other cities will build a freeway, bowever, she
believed it would be a worse disaster if Saratoga opposed the corridor.
She therefore had no other option than to support a freeway. She favored
four car lanes plus two lanes devoted to HOV or buses a~d enough space left
for some future mass transit. She agreed with the other, Councils
on other design features, feeling that it was a no-build situation unless
the freeway is depressed and-has propar landscaping and sound walls. As
to interchanges, she opposed any in Saratoga with the possible exception
of one at Saratoga Avenue to provide access to Saratogans. She then acknowledged
that during her last election campaign she had opposed the freeway. She
felt t_hat times had changed, however, end she was now forced into the position
of supporting a freeway alternative because it would not benefit Saratoga
to stop our segment, end it would not be possible to sto~p the whole fray.
4-1/15/86
Mayor Clevenger noted that she ad organized a group! against th~ freeWay
in Saratoga several years ago. She still personally favored a no-build
alternative but felt it Was too igreat a risk to take.' If the Council
supported a no-build alternatives, she said, they could not Brticipats
in getting mitigating conditions. If Saratoga were forced to take
scsething totally unaceept~hle ~s to mitigating conditions, she felt-
the Council should review its d ion and perhaps return to the no-
.build alternative. For the present, she therefore favored a four-lane
freeway; depressed 20 feet; 114 feet in the middle, leaving 43 feet on
each side; 10-foot binn cm top which could be landscaped, ~x3uld be a
sound barrier, ~tnd would be a place to put excavated dirt; no interchanges
in Saratoga; 46-feet median to allc~ for light rail transit in the future;
no trucks. She sumned up her thoughts by saying the needs of cc~'m~uters
should be balanced with the needs of resident~ but the first concern
should be for ~e residents.
Councilmembers discussed issueS,! and individual Councilmsnk~rs made
c~romises in order that the gr~oup might reach the decision which was
most acceptable to the Council as a whole. In this way, the Council
reached agreemelt as follows: a. six-lane freeway, including two high-
occupancy vehicle lanes, with the intention that this freeway is to be
the final project for constructi6n on the corridor, with the following
conditions: Me<tian to be 22 feet wide; freeway to be depressed 20 feet;
Quito Rd., Sara~xx3a Avenue, Cc~ Avenue and Prospect Avenue are to remain
at grade level ~nere the freeway crosses them; combination of sound walL]
not to exceed eight feet in height and earth berms to be provided, with
a preference for earth berms, since they can be landscaped to further
reduce noise i~ktct; no truck traffic permitted; no provision for light
rail or transitway; no interchanges in Saratoga; as to pedestrian
overcrossings, sidewalk and bikeway across each street overcrossing and
a pedestrian overcrossing in the~ Kevin MOran ParksBlue Hills School area
between Cox and Prospect are to be provided; construction of Saratoga
section should k~ included in a single project extending frc~ Highway
17 to Highway 280; ~3sranteed full funding before project construction
is cc~mencedo
MOYLES/HLAVA FD~qED TO ADOPT THE PROJECT AS DESCRIBED. Passed 5-0.
Councilmenbern Fsnelli cu~ented that it Was inappropriate to build a
freeway without interchanges in Saratoga, but she felt it to be in the
best interests of Saratoga to work together, so she voted for the motion.
Councilmember Callon believed tha more critical issue was the lack of
allowance for future mass transie. Nevertheless, she felt it necessary
to vote. for the motion.
Mayor Clevenger then recessed the meeting frGn 9:25 to 9:46 p.m.
B. REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONS AND
1. Planning Conmissio~ Actions - 1/8 - Noted.
2. Letter frcra Library Cu~,~.~ssion dated 1/9/86 - Noted.
3. Oral Reports frun Cc~missioners - None.
C. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
·
1. Resolution Prohibiting Parking on Portions of Cox Avenue
FANRr.LI/CLEVENGER MDV~D TO ADOPT ,RESOLUTION MV-163 PROHIBITING PARKING
ON POEIONS OF ODX AV~qUE. Passed 4-0 (Moyles temporarily abet).
D. BIDS KND CONYRAgES
1. Village Library Lese
In answer to Co~cilmember Fanelli, Culu~unity Services Director stated
that sane costs for Village Library improvenents could be funded frGn.
Housing and Con~lnity DeveloEment Act monies. She requested a report
on what improve~=_nts needed to be made and when they should be done.
City Attorney e~.Dlained provisions for termination of the lease in the
event of non-pa!~nent of rent, and Councilmember Fanelli asked that the
Council be notified inme~iately i~ a tenant was behind in payments.
FAN~F.T.I/CLEVENGFjR ~DVED TO APPROVt LEASE AS PPZSEN','m. Passed 5-0.
5-1/15/86
Councilmember Hla%ra cc~mented that there had recently been a large payment
for repair of a furnace and suggested that funds be budgeted to replace
the furnace. City Manager explained that it was his intention to set up
a system for replacement of capital items in connection with the fixed-
asset records.
Mayor Clevenger then proceeded to items following public hearings on the
agenda.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion of Oral Cc~m,unications - None.
B. Writtan Cu~uunications frc~n the Public - No cu~,Lents.
#1 frcrn Albert Martel, 14420 Fruitvale Avenue, requesting changes to be
made in the record of his previous ea~!aints.
#2 from Margaret Dennis opposing freeway.
#3 from Mr. end Mrs. Ronald Knapp favoring freeway under certain conditions.
C. New Business from Staff, Aaministrative Reports not Scheduled
City Manager reported that the League 9f California Cities had requested
support for ACA 7. There was consensus to direct staff to send a telegram
to Rebecca Margan in the name of the Mayor saying that ACA 7 is critical
end urging a vote for it.
City Manager then reported on arrangenents he had made for a Council retreat
March 7-9. There was consensus to have rocms reserved for Friday and Saturday
nights, with the intent being to complete work on Saturday; Councilmembers
will have the option to spend Saturday night at the retreat are~if work
ends late that night.
D. New Business fr~n Councilmembers
Mayor Clevenger brought up a letter to be sent to current recipients of
Revenue Sharing funds. There was consensus to approve it substantially
as presented.
Mayor Clevenger' then noted that she had been misquoted in an article in
the Saratoga .News; it was she rather than the Council that wqas interested
in use of Paul Masson property for senior housing.
She also reported receiving a letter frc~ Assemblyman Konnyu supporting
the bottle bill.
Councilmember Callon reported that Supervisor McKenna had stated she was
watching issues on library funding.
Councilmember Hlava reported on her discussions with Senator Morgan on
various issues.
E. ~Etion Referral log - No cu~,lent.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m~ to a closed session on personnel
at 5:30 p.m. on January 28.
Respectfully suhnitted,
Grace E. Cory
Deputy City Clerk