Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-17-1990 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, October 17, 1990 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Ave. TYPE: Regular Meeting 1. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:30p.m. by Mayor Stutzman. Councilmembers present: Anderson, Kohler, Monia, and Mayor Stutzman. Councilmembers absent: Clevenger (excused as she is out of the country.) 2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS A. Administration of Oath of Office to Youth Commissioners City Manager Harr~ Peacock administered the Oath of Office to the students appointed to the Youth Commission. 3. ROUTINE MATTERS A. Approval of Minutes - 9/29; 10/1; 10/9 MONIA/KOHLER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF 9/29/90. PASSED 4-0. ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF 10/1/90. PASSED 4-0. MONIA/ANDERSON MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF 10/9/90. PASSED 4-0. B. Approval of Warrant List ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED APPROVAL..PASSED 4-0. C. Report of City Clerk on Posting of Agenda City Manager Harry Peacock announced that pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on October 12. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Items A, B, H, K, and N were removed from the Consent Calendar and acted upon individually. A. Planning COmmiSSiOn Actions, 10/10 - Noted and filed. Item was removed from Consent Calendar. Later action taken: ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED TO APPROVE. PASSED 4-0. B. Parks and Recreation CommiSSiOn Minutes, 9/1 - Noted and filed. Item was removed from Consent Calendar. Later action taken: Councilmember Kohler stated he is still receiving mail regarding Beauchamps Park. He wanted to reassure citizens that the park is a priority project with the City. ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED TO APPROVE. PASSED 4-0. C. Tract 7770 Citizens Investlgative Committee Meeting Minutes, 9/20 and 9/22 - Noted and filed. D. Request for Approval of Employees' Bonus Holiday E. Approval of Special Events Permit for "Great Race" sponsored by Los Gatos Rotary Club on 2/3/91, waiving requirement that Saratoga be listed as primary insured City Council Agenda 2 OCtober 17, ~990 party F. Conditional approval of Special Events Permit for -Costume Walk" sponsored by Village Association on 10/27/90, subject to compliance with City ordinance G.Authorization for staff to file Notice of Completion for 1990 Street Maintenance Program H. Resolutio~ 2575.25 appropriating funds for Warner Hutton House and Skateboard Ramp as approved 10/3 Item was removed from Consent Calendar. Later action taken: Jerry Kocir, 12835 Saratoa-Sunnyvale Road, addressed the Council, stating. that the cost of modular office building is more economical than investing money into Warher Hutton House renovations for City office space.-Lengthy discussion ensued., ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED~TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2575.24. PASSED 4-0. I. Resolution appropriating funds for Conference for Councilmember Anderson as approved 10/3 J. Authorization for City Manager to settle claim of Martine Patrick in an amount not to exceed $882.59. K. Timetable for Recruitment for Upcoming Commission Vacancies Item was removed from Consent Calendar. Later action taken: Councilmember Monia stated he would like the opportunity to review allI new candidates for Commissions. MONIA/KOHLER MOVED TO MODIFY DOCUMENT TO INCLUDE VERBIAGE THAT ALL COMMISSION INCUMBENTS MUST RE-APPLY FOR COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS. PASSED 4-0. L. Treasurer~s Report.- September M. -Investment Report - September N. Financial Report - September J Item was removed from. Consent Calendar. Later action taken: After recefving clariffcation on maintenance line item, COUNCILMEMBER ANDERSON MOVED APPROVAL. MOTION SECONDED BY MR. MONIA. PASSED 4-0. MONIA/ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR WITH EXCEPTIONS OF ITEMS B, H, K, AND N. PASSED 4-0. MONIA/KOHLER MOVED TO ALSO REMOVE ITEM 4A FROM CONSENT CALENDAR. PASSED 4-0. 5. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications-. B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS '1) Planning Commission recommendation to form Village NoiSe Committee Walter Ballard, 1828.8 Swarthmore Drive, addressed the Council, and urged that the issue of dog barking be included in any Noise Abatement Ordinance. Councilmember Monia responded that this matter pertains to the noise problem inthe Village and that the Noise Ordinance issue is to be discussed later at a planning commission Public Hearing at which time the dog barking~issue can be addressed. MONIA/ANDERSON MOVED TO AUTHORIZE PLANNING COMMISSION TO FORM A VILLAGE NOISE COMMITTEE. PASSED 4-0. Having arrived at the hour of 8:00 p.m., Mayor Stutzman moved the City Council Agenda 3 October 17, ~990 agenda to Public Hearings, Item 8-A. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Appeal of tentative building site and design review approval to construct a new two-story, split level, 5,111 sq. ft. single family dwelling in the HC-RD zone district at 20052 Sunset Dr. (SD88-019; DR 90-050) (Appellant, Giberson; applicant, Birenbaum) Planning Director Steve Emslie presented the Staff Report dated October 17, 1990 to the Council. The public hearing began at 8:15 p.m. Allan Giberson, 15561 Glenwood Drive, addressed the Council, requesting that the Planning Commission's decision be overturned. He is asking that a full and complete independent geological and field study be done to determine if development is possible. He feels the presently available geotechnical reports are conflicting and do not rule out extensive landslides that are present on the site or that the Berrocal Fault does not run through the property. Mr. Giberson stated that neighborhood impact could be lessened by several measures, notably the site could be moved further north. He related that the site is in the Giberson line.of sight. He said that most of the houses in the area are about 3,000 square feet on relatively large lots. In consideration of the steep slopes and the compatibility with the neighborhood size, he feels a size of less than 4,000 square feet would be reasonable. Finally, he noted that the access going through the two private properties would violate the noise standards. He recommended that the site be moved further north. J. Walter Hoskins, 'President of Hoskins Engineers, 501 South Bascom Avenue, San Jose, spoke before the Council. Mr. Hoskins referred to the topo of Sunset through the creek and stated he has been studying the feasibility of a bridge. Displaying a model, Mr. Hoskins explained that his survey indicates that a bridge~ could be built for access to the site. He proposed a rural wood bridge which would cost under $100,000, including abutments, contingencies, etc. He signified that the house could be moved about 45' northeast without getting overslopes of 30%. Mr. Hoskins further stated that the ordinance for driveways is 42' inside radius, and the design's radiuses measure between 15' and 30'. Councilmember Anderson questioned whether or not the driveway meets City standards. Mr. Emslie responded that the inside radius of driveways should be 32' to comply with the turning radius of the Central Fire Department's (CFD) trucks. He noted that the CFDwas consulted and approved the design. Discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of the bridge, costs, and flood control. Virginia Fanelli, 1175 Saratoga Avenue, #17, San Jose, spoke on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Birenbaum. Ms. Fanelli stated that the project violates no City ordinances, meets all of the design review criteria and has received support of the majority of the neighbors as well as the Staff and Planning Commission. She related that the Birenbaums have made every attempt to work with all the neighbors from the beginning of the project. Special care has been given to the number and placement of windows facing the Giberson home. She conveyed that if the house were moved further downslope as proposed, it would not only invade the steeper unbuildable slopes of the lot, but it would move closer to at least five neighbors, including the Gibersons and would be more visible from the .Giberson site.. Ms. Fanelli reported the proposed driveway is favored by the Department of Fish and Game, by the City Engineer, the Planning Staff, and the Planning Commission. Additionally, the fire department has reviewed and approved it. She noted that since 1982, there have been five geological reports, of which three reviews were done by the City Geologist, and a review by the City Engineer, and none have found the site to be unbuildable. Jan Birenbaum, 21221 Sullivan Way, addressed the Council, stating that at her and Mr. Birenbaum's invitation, many neighbors have responded, visited the site of the proposed home and viewed the plan and model. She described the four immediate neighbors who have been supportive of the project. Mrs. Birenbaum asked the Council to consider the Staff City Council Age'nda 4 October 17, 1990 and Planning Commission findings and affirm their conclusion. Councilmember Kohler stated it is his impression that the house was actually moved from the original plan. Using a model, Mr. Birenbaum explained that the southernmost part ofthe house has been moved about 20'or so. Councilmember Monia asked about the easement or access on the Kennedy property. Ms. Fanetli illustrated where the easement follows-the-sewer road, and stated that Kennedy's property sprawls over two lots which are being served off Peach Hill. Discussion ensued. Meg Giberson deferred to Terrence M. Kelly, Law Firm of Blase, Valentine & Klein,.1717 Embarcadero, Palo Alto. Mr. Kelly addressed the Council as the Gibersons' lawyer. He spoke of the geology reports and referred to an earlier report by JCT which shows a large landslide on the property~ He mentioned that another submitted report from Holtenhoff. states there is evidence of a landslide based~on a Ireview of aerial photographs. He quoted from the Central Fire District's turn radius standard. Mr. Kelly alleged that the project does not comply with the~ResidentialtDesign Handbook standards as the siting impinges on the Gibersons' view, the noise impact violates the City ordinance and the house is double the size of houses in the surrounding neighbor- hood. -~ Discussion ensued. David Young, 15185 Pepper Lane, addressed the Council as a neighbor who resides'.about one mi}e from theproposed site. He and Mrs. Young have viewed the property and concluded that the architecture is .consistent to the. other homes and would be an asset to the neighborhood. Mr. Young does not feel the proposed driveway would have a negative impact.. He opposeS.the bridge because of its potentialI safety hazard, especially with children in the neighborhood. He feels the Birenbaums have done a significant job in limiting the impact in terms. of privacy tO the surrounding neighbors. Lester Sachs, 19941'Sunset Drive, a neighbor, has reviewed and approved theplan.. His concern is that a bridge would create traffic-problems. The proposed bridge would be in front. of. Dr. Kim's (anotherneighbor) house, and presents a problem to Dr. Kim, 'who was unable to attend tonight's meeting. ~Mr. Young conveyed that he and Dr. Kim would appreciate the Council allowing the Birenbaums to build the house. Barbara Tinsley, 15550 Glen Una Drive, spoke before the Council, stating that the area is very fragile and also a sound-sensitive area. It is her opinion that building the house in the canyon would create an environmental disaster. Ken Levy, 19800 Glen Una Drive, declared he resides about 600-700' from the site and is in ~upport of the project. Mr. Levy said the plan fits well within the neighborhood and urged the Council to approve the Planning' Commission's decision. Douglas Ralston, 19905 Sunset Drive, addressed the Council in support of the project. He ~mphasized the care and time that the Birenbaums took in explaining the project to the neighbors. He is against the bridge as it would be a place for loitering. Mr. Ralston mentioned that the size of homes in the area is between 4000-7000', and the project would be a reasonable one in the neighborhood. i Douglas Helmuth, 19831 Robin Way, stated that he and Mrs. Helmuth reside near the proposed site. He feels the project has taken great lengths to try to be sensitive to the neighborhood, and he asked the Council t0 approve the plan. Don Prolo, 19841 Glen Una, related he has nothing but admiration and respect for-the Birenbaums. He is not against the project, but is against the lack of a comprehensive plan. He expressed concern about the traffic. He staged he is in favor of the Birenbaum project, but requested that the CoUncil study the issue further and develop.a total concept for the utilization of the whole property which could have implications beyond the Birenbaum project. City Council Agenda 5 October 17, .1990 ~..~ - William Tinsley, 15550 Glen Una Drive, related that new traffic would be coming in once the house is built. His property is located at a corner lot and would suffer from the increased traffic. If a road must be put in, he would like to see it come up on Sunset. Meg Giberson, 15564 Glen Una Drive, stated that the proposed house sits right in the middle of the view from her major living area and would have a great impact visually and acoustically on her home. She expressed that if the proposed house were moved down a bit, no one in the canyon would be visually impacted by it. She stated that a bridge over Sunset' would be the best access. She does not feel that continuing the road 40-50' down past the Kim property would beas impactful as putting in a new road across two neighbors' properties. She claimed that the house does not satisfy the City ordinances and encouraged the Council to deny approval. In response to_Councilmember Kohler's inquiry, Mrs. Giberson stated she would like to see the Birenbaum house moved 45' northeast. Using an artist's drawing, she demonstrated her proposed move. Lucy Lofrumento, attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Birenbaum, addressed the Council. Ms. Lofrumento expressed that the project is replete with geological studies and that the proposal is a buildable site for development. Referring to the suitability of the access, she noted that the easement which cuts across the neighbors' property is a legally created easement which was purchased by the Birenbaums and goes across the back portion of the two neighbors' properties which have been fenced off'. She mentioned that approvals for the road access have been obtained from the official agencies and based on tonight's testimony, the majority of the neighbors also approve the road access. Speaking to the cumulative impact issue which was raised earlier regarding the potential Kennedy development, Ms. Lofrumento cited a recent legal ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court (Nolan vs. California Coastal Commission) Which states attempts to mitigate future developments cannot be considered when looking at the impacts of. this proposed development. Finally, Ms. Lofrumento spoke of the proposed application which meets all City codes, ordinances and regulations. Councilmember Kohler asked the Birenbaums for their comment regarding moving the house 40-45' Ms. Fanelli responded on behalf of the Birenbaums and indicated they have not been allowed to the Giberson site to view the impact from the Giberson property. The Birenbaums feel they are constrained by City codes which limit the grades under the house. Additionally, they are constrained by the large turnaround required by the fire department. Moving the house forward would.impact the neighboring properties and would be more visible to the Gibersons. Public hearing was closed at 9:32 p.m. Lengthy discussion ensued. Councilmember Anderson expressed she is very much opposed to the bridge for a variety of reasons, including lack of consensus of neighborhood support for the bridge, lack of flood control information, etc. She addressed the issue of access from Sunset and described it as extremely steep. She feels that more trees and shielding are necessary. She is concerned about moving the house down the hill because of the additional grading and high retaining walls which would be required. She remarked that there is not much that can be done about the noise situation during construction. She stated that as far as the site being on a ridge, it is probably less on a ridge than the houses surrounding it. Mrs. Anderson commended the Birenbaums for their sensitive hillside design, and is in favor of the application. Councilmember Monia said that the Birenbaums did a wonderful job in designing the house to reduce its impact. Mr. Monia mentioned that the canyon has an unusual acoustic nature to it, and he is not sure how to mitigate and control the noise in the area. He feels that the issues that need to be addressed are the pool location, the addition of retaining walls, and access. He would prefer a bridge if it was reasonably economical and not a total financial hardship or detrimental to the development of the property. He stated that he would prefer that the house location come off a little bit off the ridge or have a maximum elevation of 650' so that it would dramatically reduce the City Council Agenda 6 October 17, '1990 impact on all neighbors] Councilmember Kohler stated that the design is an improvement of other homes he has seen built in Saratoga. He expressed concern over the pool location. He feels it is too much excavation and grading. It is his. opinion that the.road should go over the bridge. Mayor Stutzman stated that there is no doubt that the site is a landslide area and referred to core borings in the vicinity. He describedl the soil in the proposed site as the type which. absorbs moisture, retains it and has a tendency to slide. Mr. Stutzman expounded'on his concern from a seismic point of view. He mentioned that Berrocal Fault goes somewhere either crossing part of the particular site or'within 200-300~ He stated there have not been any seismic studies since the Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989, and stressed therimportance of current'studies. He indicated that Willow Creek has not been very active in the last four years because of the drought, but prior. to that,-when the rains came the'creek became active, eroding the bank. Putting a driveway through there would not be adequately protected with a culvert. He pointed out the steepness of the site where it goes from ta 600' elevation to a 650" elevation. Mayor Stutzman would like to see the project referred back'to the Planning Commission for further seismic and geological studies. Discussion ensued regarding the City's legal liability when issuing a permit; minor vs. major ridge, conflicting bridge costs.' A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER KOHLER TO UPHOLD THE APPEAL FOR THE MOMENT UNTIL' MORE ACCURATE. ESTIMATES COULD BE OBTAINED FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.uLACKING A SECOND, MR. KOHLER WITHDREW HIS MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER MONIA MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM AND DIRECT STAFF TO RETURN TO'COUNCIL WITH AN COST ESTIMATE TO BUILD THE BRIDGE AND A RESOLUTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE HOME CAN BE BUILT WITH A MAXIMUM ELEVATION OF 650 FEET. MAYOR STUTZMANAMENDED THE MOTION'TO INCLUDE AN UPDATED GEOLOGICAL AND SEISMIC STUDY. ANEN~MENT WAS SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KOHLER. Discussion ensued r~garding the amendment. Councilmember Andersoh stated that after discussing the City's legal liability when issuing a p~rmit, she is notilonger concerned about the seismic study. PASSED 3-1 (ANDERSON OPPOSED.) Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Monia's motion. COUNCILMEMBER MONIAANENDED HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE A REVIEW OF THE POOL LOCATION AND ITS GRADING. COUNCILMEMBERANDERSON SECONDED MR. MONIA'S MOTION. PASSED 4-0. Councilmember Monia stressed that the intent of his motion is to continue the application to the first Council meeting in December for the Council to disCuSs ONLY those issues raised in his motion. Mayor Stutzman declared a recess at 10:55 p.m. Upon reconvening, the same Councilmembers were present. B. Review of County Transit Alternatives to improve current bus servi.ce, including direct bus service between Saratoga, Los Gato~ and Campbell high schools and senior centers Mr. Emslie summarized the Staff Report dated October 17, 1990 to the Council. Councilmember Anderson commented that it was not the City's objective to link the senior centers to each other; rather, the intent was to link the City residents of the West Valley cities to all of the senior centers. 1 Public hearing began]at 11:10 p.m. Mike Aro, Research Development Manager of the Transportation Agency, City Council Agenda 7 ~ October 17, ~990 clarified that the Agency will. most likely be moving forward with two proposals to the Transp6r~tion' ~ommisSion and Santa Clara County Transit District Board. M~i~""Aro '~s~ed that originally they were requested to look at the options of providing service on Cox and Pollard; however, the study has been expanded to consider a proposal prepared by the West Valley Managers Association. He related. they are_ interested in getting input from the public as to whether or not new service on Cox would be acceptable. He pointed out that the proposed route does impact four cities and additional work needs to be done. Marge Bunyard, 12625 Miller Avenue, stated she lives near Cox and supports a route on Cox. Public hearing closed at 11:14 p.m. Councilmember Anderson expressed interest in pursuing the issue and meeting with other West Valley cities to promote the route. ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE WEST VALLEY CIRCULATOR (AS THIS PROJECT IS KNOWN.) PASSED 4-0. C. Ordinance making Miscellaneous Amendments to Zoning Regulations, with the associated Negative Declaration: The proposed ordinance amends various sections of the zoning regulations concerning fences, design review, tree removal and setbacks (first reading and introduction) City Attorney Hal Toppel briefly presented the Staff Report dated October 17, 1990 to the Council. Public hearing began at 11:18 p.m. There being no testimony from the public, the public hearing was closed at 11:18 p.m. Discussion ensued. ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED TO APPROVE FIRST READING- AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 15-80~036(B) TO READ: " .... SWIMMING POOLS AND RELATED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WITHIN A REAR YARD, UP TO A DISTANCE OF TEN FEET OR THE SIZE OF THE SIDEYARDt WHICHEVER IS LESS." PASSED 4-0. Mayor Stutzman moved the agenda to unfinished business preceding the Public Hearings. 5. B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 2) Good Government Group, with objections to various Council actions. KOHLER/MONIA MOTIONED FOR MAYOR STUTZMAN TO PREPARE A REPLY. Councilmember Kohler objected to the accusation that Council was discourteous to the members of the public at meetings. He feels Council has given the public ample opportunities to address the Council. Councilmember Monia stated he would want to review the response letter prior to it being sent. Councilmember Anderson would feel more comfortable noting and filing the issue. MOTION PASSED 3-1 (ANDERSON OPPOSED.) Because of the lateness of the hour, Mr. Peacock suggested going through other agenda items before considering Item 6-A. 6. OLD BUSINESS B. Resolution ordering abatement of nuisance for Tr. 7770 and APN 503-12-024 (see attached letter from Phil and Debbie Williams) City Council Agenda 8 October ~7, '1990 ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2629.1. PASSED 4-0. C. Requests' from Saratoga Village Host Association Continued to next meeting. D... Procedures for Review of City Attorney Proposals Mr. Peacock reportedlthat 16 applications were received and suggested that a paper-screencommittee consider narrowing the field down to approximately five candidates. Mayor Stutzman appointed Councilmembers Monia and Kohler to the paper- screen committee. Mr. Peacock expressed concern that Council was split on this issue and it would be appropriate for one person from each side to participate in the initial screening. Councilmember Anderson asked for Mr. Toppel to beeincluded. Discussion ensued. MONIA/KOHLER MOVED THAT SUBCOMMITTEE BEGAN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO SCREEN THE APPLICATIONS DOWN TO APPROXIMATELY FIVE FINALISTS FOR PRESENTATION TO THE FULL COUNCIL WITHIN THE NEXT THIRTY DAYS. PASSED 3-1 (ANDERSON OPPOSED.) E. Report.on Quarry Creek from city Manager. Mr. Peacock summarized Staff Report dated. October 17', 1990 to Council. · Mr. Peacock further reported on his unsuccessful ~ttempts to obtain an appointment with the Corps of Engineers. ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED. TO RETAIN HARVEY AND ASSOCIATES TO REVISE THE REVEGETATION PLAN AND TO RETAIN SERVICES OF DAVID IVESTER TO REPRESENT CITY~S LEGAL POSITION. PASSED 3-1 (KOHLER OPPOSED.) F. Report on revised development standards for single family zoning districts Mr.. Peacock announced that Staff has prepared information on this item which is ~included in the agenda packet. Council is scheduled to meet, with the Planning Commission who will receive the same information as a basis for discussion. CONSENSUS' WAS TO CONTINUE ITEM TO OCTOBER 30, 1990 MEETING BETWEEN COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION. G. Senior.Housing Task Force - Report from Planning Director Mayor Stutzman announced he has modified the membership by appointing Councilmember Kohler,as his co-chairman of the task force. In response to Councilmember Anderson's question, Mr. Peacock explained how the neighborhoodsrepresentatives were selected. Discussion ensued regarding the make-up of the c6mmittee. MONIA/KOHLER MOVED TO APPROVE SENIOR TASK FORCE AND APPOINT VICE HAYOR KOHLER AS CO-CHAIRMAN. PASSED 4-0 Jeff Schwartz, Saratoga resident, addressed the Council regarding appointment-of members to task forces. H. Memorials Policy - Report from City Manager Continued to next CoUncil meeting. I. AcquisitiOn of Nelson Gardens ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED 'TO CONFIRM THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER TO OPEN NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE PURCHASE OF NELSON GARDENS. PASSED 4-0. Jerry Kocir, Saratoga resident, addressed the Council and suggested that any negotiation for the purchase of the Nelson property for open space should be put up to the voters of the CityJ City Councll Agenda 9 October 17, 1990 J. Wildwood Park Bridge - Capital Project 926= Design Approval and Bid Authority ANDERSON/KOHLER MOVED TO APPROVE PROJECT DESIGN AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS. PASSED 4-0. K. Fourth Street Sidewalk - Capital Project 958: Design Approval and Bid Authority ANDERSON/KOHLER MOVED TO APPROVE PROJECT DESIGN AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS. PASSED 4-0.' 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Agreement between Campbell, Monte Sereno, Los Gatos and Saratoga to provide solid waste management to West Valley Cities MONIA/ANDERSON MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. PASSED 4-0. The agenda was moved back to Item 6-A. 6. OLD BUSINESS n. Tenancy of VITA in former Library building (continued from 10/3) Charles Swan, 21300 La Paloma, addressed the Council as the Acting President of VITA. Mr. Swan stated that in the past VITA has received revenue-sharing grants from the City, and about the time the grants were terminated, VITA was in arrears in their rent. Mr. Swan pointed out some of the benefits VITA brings to the City such as attracting up to 10,000 people to Sanborn Park for their summer festival and bringing business. into the Village. He asked the city for relief as VITA has had a couple of trying years. .They would like the City to forgive the prior debt and negotiate a position similar to the Friends of the Library. Councilmember Monia questioned why VITA had not paid its debt as promised several months ago. Mr. Swan replied that they did not have the funds and he did not know the last time his predecessors appeared before the Council that they were going to have a disastrous season. Councilmember Anderson. inquired whether VITA is solvent now. Mr. Swan answered that VITA has paid their more critical obligations such as taxes and legal issues. Lengthy discussion ensued. Councilmember Anderson commented that while this is a difficult situation, she has no problem deciding that VITA is a resource to the community. However, she does not feel that space should be allocated to VITA unless Council has a level of confidence that VITA is going to continue to be an ongoing organization. She feels VITA gives Saratoga a good name throughout the County. Marge Bunyard, Saratoga resident, addressed the Council as a VITA Board member. She spoke of the organization's hard times during the past few months. She feels VITA is a great asset to the community and if given the chance, they could muster the support of the community. Wesley Goddard, 19140 Panorama Drive, spoke before the Council and conveyed that VITA is an asset and treasure to the City and should be cultured and encouraged by the City. He referred to media reports that the Friends of the Library bookshop rents space from the City at $1.00 a year, and it appears that the rental income for the building is not a primary concern. James Pizor, 20641 McClellan Road, Cupertino, addressed the Council as a member of the VITA Board of Trustees. He spoke of VITA's contributions to the arts community and the need for its viable City Council Agenda 10 October 17, 1990. presence. Kathy Kurz, 5152 Felter Road, San Jose, addressed the Council as a staffmember of VITA. She related that VITA is more than an entertainment organization; it is also an educational vehicle via their classes, conservatory~ theater-to~go which goes out to 40,000 children annually. Cindy Thomas stated she echoes the sentiments expresed earlier. She indicated that VITA is a natural cultural resource and needs to be protected and nurtured'so it can flourish. She encouraged the Council to forgive the back rent due. Mary JeanneFenn, 20102 Chateau Drive, spoke on behalf of Friends of the Library which operates the bookstore. Ms. Fenn indicated she is speaking tonight only because Friends of the Library has been mentioned several times tonight. She clarified that the Friends of. the Library are not receiving preferential treatment. Councilmember Monia commented that Friends of the Library is an all- volunteer group and all their profits are donated to the library, and that last year, they contributed approximately $26,000. Counailmember Anderon stated that VITA has experienced over the last couple of years many tragedies, including the loss of costumes in a fire. She sees the $1'0,000 delinquency due as a loss. Mrs. Anderson noted that VITA does promote Saratoga and she would not want to be responsible for its demise. She concluded that she is prepared to give VITA a trial period at $I1.00 per year, but trial period not to exceed six months. Mr. Monia expressedhe is wavering between turning away from VITA and concerned with confidende that VITA would live up to its Obligations based on their earlier promises, but he is willing to work toward a solution. He is not prepared to make~a gift of public funds of the $10,000. owed the City nor relieve them of their obligation~ Councilmember Kohler stated he is concerned with what happens after the probationary period, and if rent is going to be paid in the future~ Mayor Stutzman commentedthat as much as he appreicates the arts, VITA has to demonstrate itsviability. Since this is public money, he feels it is not right to arbitrarily forgive the debt. Discussion ensued. MONIA/KOHLBR MOVED THAT-IF VITA CAN BRING THEIR RENT CURRENT FROM JUNE' 1990 THAT THE CITY WOULD'CONTINUE THEIR LEASE; HOWEVER, IF VITA FAIL8 TO PAY BY NOVEMBER 1, :1990, THE LEASE WILL BE TERMINATED. PASSED 3-1. (ANDERSON OPPOSED.) 9. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS A.Agenda Items for Joint Meeting with Planning Commission on Oct. 30 - T~bled. B. Reports from Indlvidual Councilmembers Mr. Monia referred to the public hearing held earlier and asked if in the future, a study session could be held for complicated issues to help facilitate meetings. Mr. Toppel and Mr. Peacock explained the Brown Act provisions. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 12:35 a.m. to October 30 at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lynda Ramirez Jones Minutes Clerk