HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-05-1989 City Council Minutes MINUTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Wednesday, April 5, 1989 - 7:30 P.M.
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. Roll Call: Councilmembers Clevenger, Moyles, Peterson, Stutzraan present at 7:35 P.M.
Mayor Anderson absent.
2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS:
A. Resolution 2558 commending Bob Mulford for service on Public Safety Commission
MOYLES/STUTZMAN MOVED APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2558 COMMENDING BOB
MULFORD FOR SERVICE ON PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION. Passed 4-0.
3. ROUTINE MATTERS:
A. Approval of Minutes: Meetings of March 15, 1989, and March 28, 1989
MOYLES/PETERSON MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 15, 1989, AND
MARCH 28, 1989, AS PRESEN'FED. Passed 4-0.
B. Approval of Warrant List:
PETERSON/MOYLES MOVED APPROVAL OF THE WARRANT LIST. Passed 4-0.
C. Report of City Clerk on hosting of Agenda
. Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on
March 31, 1989
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Planning Commission Actions, March 22, 1989 - Noted and filed
B. Heritage Preservation Commission Minutes, March 1, 1989 - Noted and filed.
C. Library Commission Minutes, March 22,1989 - Noted and filed.
D. Public Safety Commission Minutes, March 13, 1989 - Noted and filed.
E. Community Access Cable TV Foundation Board Minutes, March 21, 1989 - Noted and
filed.
F. Conslxuction Acceptance for SDR 87-014 and Release 50% of bond (Developer, D.
Heeter)
G. Resolution MV-180 making various Safety Improvements to Parker Ranch Area
H. Proclamation on Science Fair Week
I. Resolution 2559 Supporting Bay Trail
J. Resolution MV-181 establishing stop intersection - Oak St. at Komina Ave.
K Resolution MV- 182 establishing stop intersection - Sumner Dr. at Fred ~ ·
L. Special Events Permit for Montalvo Footrace on April 15, 1989, rather than April 22,
1989, as previously approved
M. Budget amendment Resolution 2492.8 adding Brookglen Park renovation to the capital
budget as approved March 15, 1989.
MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 2
April 5, 1989
CONSENT CALENDAR Continued
Vice Mayor Clevenger requested removal of Consent Calendar Item E.
· PETERSON/STUTZMAN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR WITH
REMOVAL OF ITEM E. Passed 4-0.
Vice Mayor Cievenger cited the Community Access Cable TV Foundation Board Minutes, A~oca-
tion of Funds to send a representative to Japan and suggested using a Japanese citizen to document
an upcoming event, rather than provide an individual with the necessary travel expenses;
Councilmember Moyles responded that there were technical production issues involved.
CLEVENGER/PETERSON MOVED APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALF~NDAR 1TEM E. Passed
4-0.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR II - CLAIMS:
A.' .Claim of D. Foster, who alleges erosion problem to his land caused by City drainage pipe
PETERSON/MOYLES MOVED TO DENY THE CLAIM OF D. FOSTER. Passed 4-0.
5. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC:
A. Oral CommUniCatiOnS from the Public and Commissions - None.
B. Written Communications from the Public
,.
1) Patricia H. Steinhardt, Arts Council, Music and Arts Foundation, 4 N. 2nd St. #505,
San Jose 95113, requesting support in obtaining grant.
PETERSON/STUTZMAN MOVED APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2560 IN SUPPORT OF
THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL. Passed 4-0.
2) John Burkart, Oak Creek Homeowners Association, P.O. Box 906, Campbell 95009, · requesting removal of tree.
MOYLES/PETERSON MOVED TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO SEND THE DRAFT REPLY.
Passed 4-0.
3) Klaus Pache, Phmed Horse, 14555 Big Basin Way, with concerns about access
granted to condominium through Village Parking Dislrict #1 .
-Consensus reached to place item on the April 19, 1989, agenda under New Business and direct
Staff to prepare report on condo access provisionS and notification process for subdivision hearing;
Mr. Pache to be invited to attend the meeting.
4) Phyllis Williams, AAUW, 15881 Ravine Rd., Los Gatos 95030 supporting ordinance
banning assault weapons
Consensus reached to reply regarding actions taken by the City Council on this issue, including the
· Council's considerations during the Policy Development Conference.
5) George W. Kreamer, Sarahills Improvement Association, 20794 Russel[Lane, with
concerns about poor visibility on portion of Thelma Ave.
Councilmember Moyles suggested the shrubbery interfering with the visibility be pruned;
Councilmember Peterson agreed with the correspondenfs assessment of the existing hazard.
Consensus reached to accommodate the request of Sarahills Improvement Association, directing
Staff to prune the shrubbery impairing the traffic sight line.
6) A.K. Bond, 15440 Via CoL~.na, ab3ectincr to vec~r conf_rol rn~a.~u:es.
Consensus reached to refer to County Health Deparhnent for reply; acknowledge and reply as to
disposition.
MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 3
April 5, 1989
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC Continued
7) Angela Green, 12191 Maxilla Dr., with questions about route for school children across
Highway 85.
Consendus reached to refer to Traffic Authority for reply; acknowledge and reply as to disposition.
8) Ben Martel, 14420 Fruitvale Ave, expressing negative view of Community services
Officers program.
Consensus reached by the Council to authorize staff to send draft reply.
9) Robert Karr and Fred Irany, 13951 Pierce Rd., with concerns about condition on Mt.
Eden Rd.
Consensus reached by the Council to authorize staff to send draft reply.
10) Forrest R. Pontenberg, 19000 Bonnet Way, with concerns about trucks during con-
struction of Route 85.
Consensus reached to refer to Traffic Authority for reply; acknowledge and reply as to disposition.
6. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Resolution 2561 upholding Planning Commission decision on Smith appeal of Rivoir
project heard March 15, 1989
PETERSONAVIOYLES MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2561 UPHOLDING A DECISION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Passed 4-0.
Vice Mayor Clevenger proceeded to Public Hearings.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGSi
A. Heritage Resource Designation for 20600 Lomita Avenue
Planner Young presented the Report Re: HP-16, dated April 5, 1989.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:15 P.M. There were no Speakers.
Vice Mayor Clevenger then closed the Public Hearing.
PETERSON, rMOYLES MOVED TO INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE HP-16 BY TITLE ONLY
WAIVING FURTHER READING, DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE
HANNAH McCARTY VINEYARD HOUSE AT 20600 LOM1TA AVENUE (~517-12-023).
Passed 4-0.
B. Appeal of denial of tentative map approval to create a two-lot subdivision of 1.5 and 1.35
acres of partially developed property at 19330 Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. in the R-I-40,000
zone. (Applicant/appellant, Maynard) (SD-88-018) (Continued from March 15)
Mr. Doug Adams, Attorney for the Applicant/appellant, requested a Continuance of this Item in the
absence of one Councilmemben upon clarification of procedures surrounding a possible split vote,
Mr. Adams agreed to have the Item heard at the time.
Planning Director Eroslie presented the Report Re: Appeal of SD-88-018, dated April 5, 1989, and
reviewed the proposed Tentative Map showing the recalculation of the site dimensions.
The Public Hearing was opeued at 8:30 P.M.
Mr. Adams, Attomey for the Applicant/appellant, commented as follows:
- The difference between the 1985 and the current applications was a conforming lot
Staff initially recommended approval to the Planning Commission in the latest application
- A comparison of density of adjoining lots, showed the similarity of lot sizes to the Applicant's
proposal; in effect, these surrounding lots were saying that the Applicant could not subdivide
- Concerns regarding building could be addressed through the imposition of restrictions
- Did not see any "established pattern" in the neighborhood as stated in the Staff Report, Analvsis
- Pictures were presented to demonstrate that the visual impacts cited by neighbors, did not exist
~ Hctures of two other bridges in the area were also presented
MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 4
April 5, 1989
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
In response to considerations on the dedication of land to the Santa. Clara Valley Water District,
Mr. Adam~ responded that this dedication was in accordance with the laws of the City of Saratoga.
The Cit~ Attorney reviewed the Planning Commission's concerns regarding this Application. He
added that under the Zoning Ordinance, dedications to the Santa Clara Valley Water District were
excluded from the site area-one of the few dedications that were excluded. By this dedication,
which he understood was more than the District required, the mid-point of the lot was relocated.
Mr. Fredrick Door, Bainter Ave., Property owner to the south, noted that conflicting site surveys
existed and asked that the property be re-surveyed. If it could be shown that Bainter Ave. would
be left intact from interference with the bridge, he would have no objection to this request.
Mr. Don Lucas, Bainter Ave., Saratoga, commented as follows: Reviewed the history of the property and the application
Contended the property was 'gen'ymandered' and questioned who would maintain the dedication
Property was only 83% of the minimum width required-90 ft. wide at Bainter Ave.
Expressed concerns regarding the proposed bridge; Bainter Ave. would have to be extended and
widened to accommodate a 32 ft. turning radius and wide enough to support 35,000 lbs.
Noted the erosion of the Creek during the past ten years
Suggested that if the lot were subdivided, access be taken from Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd.
Urged the request not be granted, increasing the value of the Applicant' s property, decreased his
Ms. Jakita Cymbal, Westfall Engineers, commented as follows: Reviewed the route the access fxom Bainter Ave. would take
Conslruction of the bridge would be in accord with all City requirements and would be designed
to support the same weight as other bridges in the area
Westfall Engineers had constructed one of the area brijdges which was wooden; a booklet on
bridge designs was presented for review
Noted the present terminus of Bitinter Ave. and the existing easement in this area; this easement
would be kept clear of any construction activity and would be preserved
Agreed that dedication to the Water District created a conforming log .it also preserved this open
space area; ff not dedicated, the property owner could buiklwithin the area
With respect to the statement that residences that fronted on Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. required a
buffer area, the present residence fronted on the Highway, not the proposed house
- The proposed lot complied with zoning requirements
Mr. Adams summarized the Application and stated that neighbor's concerns had been addressed.
Ms. Cymbal reviewed the access to the property in response to the City Manager's question; she
confirmed that such would not cross any adjacent property.
The Public Hearing was closed at 9:05 P.M.
Councilmember Moyles commented as follows:
- While this was now a conforming lot, his evaluation was unchanged from previous hearings
- Zoning did not entifle a property owner to subdivision approval; Subdivision Findings would
have to be made independent of any findings required for a variance application
Subdivision Finding 2 required the site to be physically suitable for a development of the density
proposed; even with a conforming lot, Otis Finding could not be made due to the lot width
At the proposed lot line for Parcel B, approximately 60% of its width would be contiguous to
Parcel A; such was incompatible with the surrounding area and was a radical departure from the
lots immediately adjacent to the subject property
- The pwposed dedication did not do away with concerns previously raised; in order for these
concerns to be addressed a wider lot was required, not a recalculadon of the measturements
- Development would not necessarily be ruled out because of the requirement for a bridge; how-
ever, the necessary Subdivision Findings had to b~ made fn'st
Vice Mayor Clevenger commented as follows:
- Stated she had not changed her mind on this Application since the initial 1981 hearing
- Initially, a variance was required; however, now the issue centered around the question whether
this was an appropriate lot for a subdivision ·
She did not feel the lot was appropriate for a subdivision; a recent example of a similar conclu-
sion on another application was noted
- Agreed with Councilmember Moyles that arithmetic did not change the physical attributes of a lot
- In addition, this was a rural area in the City; subdividing these large lots would set precedent
MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 5
April 5, 1989
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Councilmember StuUman commented as follows:
Parcel would not lose value since land would become increasingly valuable in the future, al-
though some immediate return would be realized from the sale of a portion of the property
Did not feel that manipulation of the figures achieved any benefit for the City of Saratoga
In addition, this was the riparian area; creation of an access would result in the loss of large trees
The Creek was subject to erosion; construction of a bridge would require considerable main-
tenance and repair--more so if a wooden bridge were built
For all the above reasons, this was not an appropriate lot for subdivision
Councilmember Peterson added that the Staff Recommendation did not favor subdivision of this
lot; in addition, he agreed with the Planning Commission's review of this Application. Dedication
of a portion of the property violated the spirit of the law; he would not approve the request
STUTZMAN/MOYLES MOVED TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COM-
MISSION, DISAPPROVING A TWO-LOT SUBDM SION AND TO DENY THE APPEAL.
Passed 4-0.
The Council then returned to New Business.
7. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Publicity on Upcoming Hearings - Kohler Appeal of Burke project; Kocir Appeal of
Shannon/Weiser Project.
Consensus reached to accept Staff Recommendation for Publicity on Upcoming Hearings and to
notice the Homeowners Association on Fred: eriCksh,~rcj Dr.
B. Muko-shi Montalvo Exhibit Reception
The City Manager presented the R. eport Re: Muko-shi Montalvo Exhibit Reception dated April 5th.
Vice Mayor Clevenger wished to cream greater public interest in the Exhibit.
Councilmember Peterson suggested the invitation to the reception be extended to other appropriate
officials; in addition, the Exhibit could be more widely advertised.
PETERSON/MOYLES MOVED TO HOST A RECEPTION TO CELEBRATE THE OPENING
OF THE EXItBIT AT TO EXPAND THE GUEST LIST. Passed 4-0.
C. Employee Recognition Program
PETERSONfMOYLES MOVED TO APPROVE RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE EM-
PLOYEE RECOGNrlION PROGRAM. Passed 4-0.
D. Draft Ordinance on Amendment to Fire Code to prohibit open burning
Councilmember Stutzman strongly urged that the orchards in the City bo allowed to buru tree
prunings once a year;, a prohibition on burning would help force the few remaining orchards out of
business. The burning was relatively clean, and smoke produced had mainly particulate matter.
Councilmember Moyles suggested the Fire District be more involved in this issue; he questioned
the need for a City Ordinance on this item.
The Chair recognized the following speaker.
Ms. Linda Davis, a fourth generation California rancher, concurred with comments of Council-
members Moyles and Stutzman. She stated she was making an emotional and economic appeal to
the Council not to support the proposed Ordinance. Alternative methods of removing brush were
absolutely prohibitive from an economic standpoint; her family had been burning this brush for the
last 120 years and to her knowledge, there had been no complaint. Only four functioning
orchards, in addition to the City's orchard, remained in the City.
Vice Mayor Clevenger stated that she did not wish to create a hardship for the orchards or ranchers;
however, she wished to reduce any inconvenience to the neighbors to the least possible impact.
She questioned how both objectives could be accomplished.
MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 6
April 5, 1989
NEW BUSINESS Continued
Councilmember Moyles suggested that considerations discussed be brought to the attention of the
appropriate Fire Chiefs, asking that they outline the methodology of issuing permits; the Council
could then review the standards applied and comment if necessary.
Councilmember Peterson noted that only two complaints had been received over the years; he
concurred with Councilmember Moyles' suggestion and added that reslrictions limiting the burning
to appropriate days and hours could be considered, ff necessary.
Consensus reached that the Council not adopt the Di'aft Ordinance prohibiting open burning and
refer the issue to the appropriate Fire Districts for review and comment.
E. Approval of contract for CIVCON to perform Additional Surveying to Halcone Gardens
for Entry Road in an amount not to exceed $6,900
The City Manager presented the Report Re: Hakone Gardens - Entry Road Survey, dated April 5th.
CLEVENGER/MOYLES MOVED TO APPROVE CONTRACT FOR CIVCON TO PERFORM
ADDITIONAL SURVEYING AT HAlCONE GARDENS FOR ENTRY ROAD IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $6,900.00 AND AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE. Passed 4-0.
F. Traffic Movement Study at Park Saratoga Shopping Center
The City Manager reviewed the Report Re: Traffic Movement Study, dated March 3 l, 1989.
'MOYLES/PETERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED MEDIAN DESIGN FOR
SARATOGA-SIJNNYVAI.~. RD. BETWEEN PROSPECT AND KIRKMONT, TO PROVIDE A
LEFT TURN INTO THE MID-BLOCK DRIVEWAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF SARATOGA-
SUNNYVALE lID. AS'SHOWN IN THE STAFF REPORT DATED MARCH 31, 1989. Passed
4-0.
9. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS:
A. R~ from Individual Councilmembers
Councilmember Moyles reported on recent events surrounding the Town of Los Gatos' decision
not to accept an interchange at Winchester Ave. and the implications for the adjacent cities.
He discussed the Utility User Tax Sunset Clause Repeal referenced in the March 28th Minutes.
Consensus reached by the council to appoint Ms. Rose to the Public Safety Commission and to
appoint Ms. Davis to the Heritage Preservation Commission.
B. Discussion of Agenda Items for Joint Meeting with Public Safety Commission April 1 l,
1989 - None.
The Meeting ofthe City Council was adjottmed at lO:35P.M. to/x. pril 11 at 8:00 p.m.
Re,spectfuliy submitted,
'Carol A. Probit-Ca/ug~ey~