Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-17-1991 City Council Minutes MIN'OTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, July ~7 1991 PLACE: Civic Theatre, 137~7 Fruit a e Avenue TYPE: Regular Meeting v 1 1. ROLL CALL The meetin was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Kohler. Councilmembers Present: Clevenger, Monia, Stutzman and Mayor Kohler resent at 7:30 p.m. Councilmember Anderson arrived at 9:05 as noted Below. 2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS - None 3. RODTIM MATTERS d 9 verbatim excerpts), an of July MONIA/STUTZMAN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, AS AMENDED INCLUDING VERBATIM EXCERPTS. PASSED 3-1-1. (Anderson was absent, Clevenger abstained). Councilmember Clevenger amended the Minutes of July 3 on Page 6z third paragraph to read: . . .Gene Zambetti, former "Plannin~ Commissmoner". STUTZMAN/CLEVENGER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF jULY 3, 1991 AS AMENDED. PASSED 4-0. B. Approval of Warrant List CLEVENGER/MONIA MOVED APPROVAL OF THE WARRANT LIST. PASSED 4-0. C. Report Of City Clerk Mr. Peacock announced that pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 12. 4. CONSENT C~LRNDAR Mayor Kohler removed Item B. from the Consent Calendar. CLEVENGER/MONIA MOVED APPROVAL OF T~. CONSENT C~I.ENDAR WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM B. PASSED 4-0. A. Planning Commission Actions, 6/10 - Noted and filed. B. Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes, 6/3 and 7/1 - Noted and filed. C. Award of 3991 Street Maintenance Program Contract to American Asohalt Repair & Resurfacin9 in the amount of $103,118.58. D. Authorization for staff to request proposals to develop a tit Irrigation System Master Plan for ParkS, Medians, ParkWays an~ Landscape Facilities E. Authorization for attendance of Planning Director at American Planning Association Conference, Sacramento, October 20-23, with reasonable and necessary expenses F. Authorize attendance of City Council, City Attorne , Cit Manager and Assistant to C~ty Mana er at Lea e o~ California Cities: lnFmual Conference, October 1~-16, San ~urancisco, with reasonable and necessary expenses G. Final Building Site Approval 3 lots , Ravenwood Drive Sn90-007) (Developer, Perry i Jonesl and authorization for ~ity Manager to execute Contract for Improvements H. Resolution 91-55 setting August 7 public hearing for Ordinance designating Saratoga Avenue asa Heritage Lane City Council Minutes 2 July 17, 1991 I. City Financial Reports for June 1) Treasurer's Report 2) Investment Report 3) Financial Report Regarding Item B, Mayor Kohler requested clarification re ardin a statement made at the Parks an~ Recreation Commission meeTin t~at "the Creeks belong to everyone'. City Attorney Riback state~ he is not sure how the comment was intended but that the Creek is a ublic waterway and under jurisdiction of the Water District or the Flood Control District. MONIA/CLEVENGERMOVEDAPPROVAL OF ITF~B. ON THE CONSENT CAL~mlDAR. PASSED 4-0. 5. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC A. ORAL COMMUNiCATiONS 1) On behalf of Col. E.T. Barco of Sarato a, Ms. Pe Corr read a letter recommendin that Council declare ~ugust 9, ~1 as Sherman Miller Da . Col. ~arco provided copies of the many testimonials made for Mr. SKerman. B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1)Therese Osborn., 13566 Myren Dr., regarding use of Gardiner Park Mr. Peacock reviewed the memorandum from Mr. Trinidad, included in the k meeting pacet relative to Ms. Osborn's concerns with improper activity causing problems in the park to nearb residents. Mrs. Osborn .will be notified this issue will be ta[en up by the Parks and Recreation Commission on August 5. 2) Ro er W. Ross, Florence Nelson Foundation, 120 Hontgome St. ~2~2 San Francisco 94104, concerning cancellation of Wir~liamson Act eontract. Mr. Peacock reported there are ap roximatel 9 years and 6 months left on the Williamson Act. In 1992 t~e time will go back to 10 ears because there has never been a request for cancellation of tKe existing contract and there has never been a formal notice of intention not to renew the contract. In 1987 there was a request for an early out but was not finalized because the conditions for early withdrawal were not met. In accordance with the most recent City Council decision on this issue to abide b the dictates of the City's General Plan CLEVENGER/ STUTZMAN M~VED THAT THE CITY UPHOLD ITS GENERAL P~ POLICY ANDNOT' CANCEL THIS WILLIANSON ACT CONTRACT. PASSED 4-0. 3) Marilyn A. Boyette, City of Huntin ton Park, requesting opposition to water company surcharges for reduced water consumptxon On recommendation by staff, MONIA/CLEVENGER MOVED TOP dECEivE AND FILE THE LETTER. PASSED 4-0. 4) Albert Augustine, Jr., County Grand Jury, requesting comments on Review of Cities' Procedures for Awarding Contracts for Services Mr. Peacock recommended that Council authorize the Mayor's signature to the letter prepared for submittal, outlining the Cxty's current 1 po icy, ordinance, training and how the City proceeds specifically with ~ssues of awarding contracts for services. STUTZMAN/CLEVENGER MOVED THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. PASSED 4-0. 5) Delora J.W. Sanfilippo, 1777 Bem~lton Ave., San Jose, regarding Pxerce Road Improvements. Mr. Peacock referred to the memorandum from the Cit Engineer enclosed in the meeting packet re arding concerns specifical{y w~th the height of the new retamning wall near 01d Oak Way and the aHdition of a bicycle lane along the creek side of the road in this vicinity. City Council Minutes 3 July 17, 1991 Mr. Peacock responded that the Pierce Road Improvement Project will enhance the safety of the road for motorists, bic clists and adjacent residents. A letter will be written to Mrs. San ~lippo based on the Memorandum. As suggested by Councilmember Monia, she will be invited to review the maps relative to the line of sight issue she raised. 6) Will Kempton, Traffic Authorit , requesting withdrawal City's letter to the Corps of ~lgineers regarding the of corridor-wide permit for creek restoration. (Clerk's note: Mr. Peacock reported Mr. Kempton a rised him he could not be present at 8:08. Mayor Kohler agreed to ho~ff the item until Mr. Kempton's arrival later in the meeting.) . Mr. Kempton re uested an o portunity to discuss the Cit's letter of July 5 to the ~rm Cors o~ Engineers requesting the de~ay of the 404 Permit on the Highway ff5/17 Interchange project. He referred to discussion in the Minutes of July 3rd, s eclfically the · allegation that the issue of habitat replacement had not been considered in the environmental process and that the City had no involvement. He corrects those aspects of the situation and states there is extensive covera e in the environmental document regarding the issues and very specific as to re uirement and what types of mitigation would be provided. In-kin~, on-site mitigation is su gested and was utilized in two locations. Because of the urban and suburban nature of much of the corridor, much of the mitigation has had to be rovided off-site in the vicinity of Coyote Creek by the Highway 10~/Bernal Area. Mr. Kempton stated that the Authority is hoping to get the Corps permit ~ssued as quickl as possible as this is the critical path roject for Route 85. ~he project is scheduled for advertisement for ~ids on Se tember 30. He stated his staff is willing to work with Council anM/or staff to explain the efforts made and he implores Council to reconsider its action of July 3 and, if possible rescind that action and withdraw the letter to the Corps with a foltowup letter indicating the City has no objection to the issuance of the permit. Ms. Cheriel Jensen Quito Road, stated she brought the issue before Council and that t~is issue was addressed in the EIR' although it was not in the draft EIR, it came up in the Final EIR. it had not been the subject of any ublic discussions, nor hearings. She points on several documents w~at the requirements for the environmental process are and what she believes was not done in compliance with those requirements. She stated many residents will be impacted and requested the Council write a letter to the California Water Qualit Control Board and oppose issuing a permit of this project until suc~ time as the City has had an opportunity to have proper review of the issues of loss of habitat, the channels, and the flooding. She pointed out that trucks are now allowed on Route 85 and there is potential for loss of water qualit in the percolation ponds and ' a-quifers because of potential spills. ' Mr. Kempton pointed out that flood control is not an issue related to issuance of a 404 Permit but stated he and his staff would be happ to discuss that issue. He stated his staff has worked closely' with t~e re ulatory agencies to ensure that requirements are being met and the efforts have been successful. Responding to Councilmember Monia, Mr. Kempton said that the City was notified and participated in the hearings. However, the Traffic Authority is not the responsible a enc for the process of the 404 Permit issued by the Corps. He c~ari~ied trucks over 9,000 lbs. will not be allowed on Route 85, thus it is not a toxic spill issue. ' Ms. Jensen disagreed with Mr. Kempton's statements regarding Route 85 not allowing trucks and stated she would provide copies of the Federal regulations regarding that issue. Mr. Peacock stated the City has no knowledge that the truck ban on 85 can be superseded because there is Federal financing of that route. He stated ~t would be appropriate to get assurance from Congressman Campbell. Mr. Peacock stated that from his review of the documents, it is clear there was discussion regarding the attempt to find habitat replacement in Saratoga for each creek but there was no success. City Council Minutes 4 July 17, 1991 Ma or Kohler s~ated he yes unhap y with the limited information found an~ said he ould be more comfor{able to wait a few find out weeks to further information and that if this kills Route 85, so be it. Mr. Bob Louden, Saratoga, Chairman of the Route 85 Task Force, commented that this freeray matter was brou ht before Saratoga voters twice and carried, representin the official, recorded rill of the Sarato a voters. Any delay viI1 cost very large sums of money. He urged [ouncil to consider this dela~ vet serious1 . He felt the comment made by Ma or Kohler, that 'if tKis kills ~oute 85 so be it" was an irres onsib~e statement for a public official to make. Mr.. Councilmember Stutzman stated he believes there has been an oversight here and because loss of ri arian habitat is becoming iDcreasingly important, preservation vil~ be vitally important in the~ future. He ai 'id ilk. to s.. a respons. from the Corps regarding STUTZNAN/NONIA NOVEl) TO WAIT TWO TO TBRME ~ FOR A RESPONSE FROM IlliS CORPS OF ENGINEERS, TO COUNCIL'$ JULY 5 L~ri'~K, BEFORE COUNCIL MAKES A FINAL DECISION. Councilmember Clewanger states she will vote no because she believes there has been an opportunit to try to get riparian habitat to replace what will be lost. ~he believes the amount of money it will cost outweighs the possible benefit. (Note: At the Council's request, a verbatim transcript follows.) Dowdy: M name is Karin Dowdy. I live on Brook Lane. Mr. Kohler-- Mayor Koh~er--and the Council, I would just like to make a couple of comments about this whole rooedure. In the last couple of months this Council has considsreM two different requests from eople who have been before this Sarato a Council, perhaps not constituted in the same way it is right now, bu~ at any rate have been before the Saratoga council on numerous, numerous numerous occasions, always fighting the freeway, alwa s fi htin9 ~hs roject, alwa s claimin9 that Mr. Kempton is presen~in Mad data, a~ways doing t~is stuff. '~nd given the track record that tMese people have had, and given the stron ro-freewa~ bias that this community has demonstrated rapsalaMi , I don t see how you can continue to give credence to these kinds of ~hin s and to take u the time of the public and yourselves in dealin9 wi~h these issues ~hat as Mrs. Clewanger has said, have already been dealt with. Now maybe ou don~t like the results of it. Maybe you don't agree with the way i~ was dealt with, but it has been dealt with, and as a matter of fact I as a member of the ublic am not willing.to countenance this kind of delay and s end this ~ind of money. The delas that these eople have already caused us are astronomical. TKe money they Eave cost with the delays. I would recommend stron ly that ou simply disre ard this and allow the Traffic Authority to continue On/ts patM. Thank you. Kohler: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Clevenger: Mayor Kohler, I do have to respond to one thing that Mrs. Dowdy said. Sarato a has not caused the Traffic Authority any delays. We have been--we haa our vote, we got our readin from the eople, we acted in a timely wa , and I would like to see t~at documented--how Saratoga in an wa ~as cost the Traffic Authcrit money b dela ing tactic. I don~t tKink we have, and I hope we don~t start ~onigh~. Kohler: Thank you,'Mrs. Clevenger. I also agree. I think Saratoga has been bending over backwards as far as the freeway. Monia: Mr. Kempton? Has Saratoga cost you financial delays? Kempton: To date Mr. Monia, you have not. If you take this action ton/ght, should i~ result in a delay in our ability to achieve the Corps permit and advertise the project, you will. But we have not. THE ABOVE MOTION AS STATED WAS VOTED UPON. FATI.R~ 2-2. (CleVenger and Monia voted no). Mr. Kempton expressed his disappointment with the action and said he viewed it as frivolous in nature. CLEVENGRE/MONIAMOVEDTOV1TIIDRAW It!is v-~-'rr~FROM itus CORPS OF ENGIN~.I~RS. CLEVENGER/MONIA MOVED TO TABLE 1'~- MOTION UNTIL COUNCILMEMBER ANDERSON ARRIVES. PASSED 4-0. 6. OLD BUSINESS A. Report from City ManaKer on Use of Improvement Agreements, Final Map Approvals ' Mr. Peacock referred to his Memorandum dated July 3, 1991. He. outlined staff's reasons for roposing that more flexibility be erasable under the ordinance ~o allow for certain improvements to be completed before a final map is accepted for certification by the Cit. Engineer. He explained the requirements for that procedure and ' recommended the City Attorney be asked to prepare amendments to the Subdivision 0rdinance. Mr. 3ohn Di Manto, 1210 Coleman Ave., Santa Clara, reviewed the chronology of .events which occur during a subdivision application rocess. He stated that "completion prior to the final map" is the ~egal problem here. He ave suggestions as to how the ordinance should read and re ueste~ an op oftunity to meet with the City Attorney and City ~anager regarMing the issues. City Council Minutes 5 July 17, 1991 CLEVENGEll/MONIA NOVED THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE REQUESTED TO PREPARE AHENDHENTS TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO TAKE SUGGESTIONS INTO CONSIDERATION AND THAT HR. DI HANTO BE REQUBSTED TO BE INCLUDED IN KEVIE~'iNG AND GIVING INPUT ON SUGGESTION. Councilmember Monia suggested the pro er rotocol would be to request that the City Attorney repare a draf~ ordinance which Mr. Di Manto could review and commen~ on and the motion should so reflect. Councilmember Clevenger explained her intent was to et in ut from the develo er so Council would know what would be possible. S~e felt time could ~e saved if there were input or review from the public. She agreed with Councilmember Monia to amend the motion. Councilmember Monia requested staff prepare a report on the futures of bondin , the value of a bond in protecting the C~ty's interest. Mr. Peacock agreed and added that another request coul~ be for the City Attorney to make revisions to the standard improvement agreements which are the base documents for which the bonds are secured. Another item staff could review is establishing standards on the rating of the bonding companies and only acce t bonds from certain companies which are known to have financia stability. 1 City Attorney Riback said a draft review (to the ordinance) could be reaHy for Council's August 7 meeting. THEABOVE NOTION ANDAHENDMENT IS VOTED UPON. PASSED 4-0. Mayor Kohler moved the agenda to Public Hearings. 8. PUBLIC !~E. ARINGS A. Solid Waste and Environmental Nanagement Rates and Fees for 1991-92 (continued from July 3), w~th informational report on rental chippers and shredders. Mr. Peacock referred to the Memorandum from Ms. Isabel Gloege, Environmental Program Manager, which presented additional information on rental chippers and shredders. At 8:45 p.m. Mayor Kohler continued the Public Hearing testimony. Mr. Marvin Becket, 12120 Mellowood Drive, suggested that a publication be put out explaining the Solid Waste Program Management proposal. Councilmember Cleven er re orted in detail the requirements of the State Legislature's ~olid ~aste Management Pro ram which mandates that each City must reduce its solid waste garbage ~low by 25% in five years. Mr. Jim Guthrie, Director of Enforcement for the Bay Area Ouality Management District, and resident of Saratoga, reports the Air District considers solid waste a significant air problem. He reports on what has been developed as an inte rated waste management pro ram provides co ies the Council.urged Council to reconsider as ing the soli~ waste company to be involved in a public education campaign at this time. Mr. Anthony Marsh, resident of Saratoga, stated he served on the Solid Waste Task Committee and su ports everything except metered cans. He suggested metered rates be ~el~ ed one year. He su gested Council consider whether there is a need to have a rate higher for two cans than unlimited once the yard waste is adopted. He does not believe there is a need. Mr. Sam Mitchell, Jerries Drive, a member of Task Force on Waste Management, stated the majority of the Task Force was in favor of metered cans. Mayor Kohler closed the Public Hearing at 9:04 p.m. CLEVENGER/STUTZMAN MOVED THAT COUNCIL ADOPT RESOLUTION 91-56 WHICH INCLUDES UNLIMITED GARBAGE PICKUP UNTIL NEXT APRIL W~E.N THE CITY WILL BEGIN USE OF METERED CANS AND YARD WASTE PICKUP WILL BE INSTITUTED. PASSED 4-0. City Council Minutes 6 July 17, 1991 Clerk's note: Because of substantial ublic interest in item 8C B. Civic Center Improvements - Capital Project No. 956 1) Continued public hearing on Negative Declaration for Civic Center Mr. Peacock reviewed his memorandum to Council summarizing that staff's recommended action after the Public Hearing is to ado t the Negative Declaration, a prove the plans and specifications an~ authorize the call for Bids. No comments were received on the Negative Declaration. Mayor Kohler opened the Public Hearing at 11:20 p.m. Mr. Barry Ford, Saratoga, expressed opposition to the skateboard arena because of the noise impact, rowdiness and police problems. He ointed out he was opposed to the first ro osal for the same reasons. fie said he sent numerous complaints to tee airy Manager. regardin the activity of the trucks in the early morning (4:00 a.m. He questions why Council would want to build a noise producing facility where one was~st shut down because of citizen complaints. His property is approximately 100 feet from the proposed site. Mrs. Pat Ford~ expressed concerns re arding the violation of agenda tonight as s~e was not notified by the City. She referred to letters written by the Creedys and O'Connors who strongly oppose the skateboard park. Mr. Bill Souza, a resident on Wildcat Creek, re orted he lives 100 yards from the site. He said' he has put up wit~ all the noises in the area for more than 20 years but believes enough is enough.' He opposed building of the skateboard park because if it is implemented it only create more problems. Councilmember Monia explained the various aspects of the proposed skateboard ark and why Council felt comfortable with that. He later suggested t~at Council.should review location of the site. Mrs. Pat Ford suggested the $125,000 would be better utilized on a teen center where all Saratoga's youth could benefit. Councilmember Monia requested the concerned citizens indicate on a map where they live so that notification can be given when the issue will next be aadressed. Mayor Kohler closed the Public Hearing at 11:35 p.m. Responding to Councilmembers Clevenger and Anderson, Mr. PeNin . aug ested that since the plans and specifications are due to go o b d on ~uesday that the skateboard park be left on as a bid item in t e thl ackage. it the time the bids are open there would be an option to aelete the skateboard park from the contrct. The 'ssue can be revisited at the August 7 meeting. CLEVENGER/ANDERSON MOVED TO ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. PASSED 5-0. 2) Approval of plans and s ecifications and authorization for staff to advertise for Rids CLEVENGER/ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS. Councilmember Monia re uested the motion include that COUNCILWILL REVISIT THE ISSUE ON ABGUST 7. Both Councilmembers Anderson and Clevenger agreed to the amendment. Mayor Kohler commented that he has been against this expensive expansion but will vote for authorization of the bid process. City Council Minutes 7 July 17, 1991 THEABOVE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS VOTED UPONAND PASSED 5-0. C. Draft Parks and Trails Master Plan ~ayor Kohler stated that although he owns pro erty adjacent to a trail in the hills, Mr. Riback informed him he woul~ not be in conflict of interest in participating in discussion of trails along the creek. Councilmember Anderson arrived at 9:10 p.m. Mr. Dan Trinidad referred to his Memorandum to Council dated July 17. He reviewed the events and reported on the status of the Draft Parks and Trails Master Plan. stated the Plan o time as.it is a visionary plan, not a plan for implementation at this time. Mr. Paul Rookwood, representing Wallace Roberts & Todd, explained the plans for improvement and methods of achieving 'these goals. The intent of the Plan is to rovide a policy framework for the City's actions over'the next dec~e or more, in implementing a regional system serving the population in Saratoga. He reiterated that public input was a major component in the planned development process and reviewed the surveys which were com leted. Surve s showed that residents expressed the highest leve~s of support ~or walking and hiking trails. Mr. Rookwood reviewed, in detail, the improvements of each area. He ointed out a wall map of the improved and unim roved existing ~edicated trails proposed by the Parks Master P[an. He felt the roposed system is feasible enough and should be cemented in the 8ity's ollcy documents as a secure concept for the long term. He revxewe~ the capital improvements including maintenance costs. The acquisition costs are not included in the capital improvements program except as pertains to the Ravenwood Park site and the Nelson Gardens park site. Regardin Councilmember Anderson's concern with the language at the bottom o[ Page 2.4-1 (Azule Park) and Page 2.4-6 (Kevin Moran Park) which stated "The site could be sold in conjunction with the adjacent site., and "The site was considered suitable for sale in order to generate funds for maintenance of all developed parks", Mr. Rookwood agreed to remove those two sentences. On Page 2.6-9, regarding the utility tax, Councilmember Anderson requested h t at the information explaining the requirement for passing a vote to increase utility tax should be more clear in the text. On Page 2.7-3, Councilmember Anderson said she thought sup ort was stronger than 22% for residence tax. Mr. Rookwood re orte~ the figures in the document were taken directly from the RIG study. She sug ested the figures be shown in the three levels of taxes. Mr. ' Roo~wood agreed to do that in the final plan. ' Mayor Kohler reported that two additional letters were received on the issue; one from Margaret Burmingham and Charles Dippie. . Mayor Kohler opened the Public Hearing at 9:40 p.m. Mr. Preston Burlingham expressed concern that no figure has been given for acquisition costs. He disputed the amount of land open and owned by the Water Com any/and/or Santa Clara Valley Water District as reported by the 8onsultant.. He stated that easements in his area enerally provide for the water company to "have rights above and ~elow ground", and does not include rights to the pro erty. He considered it disgraceful and a dereliction of duty ~y Parks gommissioners that only two Commissioners walked the Creek to see the ~mpacts a trail could cause. He expressed rear concern that properties on the Creeks would be worth muc~ less if trails were approved. He requested that Council either reject the plan outright or remove Wildcat and Saratoga Creeks from the plan. An attorney of Blase, Valentine and Klien was introduced as the group's legal counsel. Mr. Burlingham presented a letter from Co. E.T. Barco regarding the following: The new plan does'not address any loss of prxvacy. In 1976, in a similar s~tuation, the main concern pointed out was . . . City Council Minutes 8 July 17, 1991 "in selecting land for use as trails, invasion of privacy of citizens should be avoided." It does not preclude a suit from being filed and the landowner will have to invest time and resources in legal processes. Mr. Merlin McKenzie read his comments verbatim. He spoke to the issue of financial impacts and gave detailed figures he developed from his analysis of acquisition and other costs. He pointed out the trails woul~ provide easy access a~dlg~t-aw~y for home break-ins; property owners within the spehere o 'nfluence must file a disclosure statement regarding this pe d'ng lan and he believes that would decrease the value of pro e ty. Re stron 1~ recommended that Council either reject the proposa~ expa sion or s~rlke the Saratoga and Wilcat Creeks from consideration for i clus'on. Mr. Alan Abbott, Via Ranchero Drive, read a letter verbatim. he stated he purchased his home 15 years ago specifically fTr its creekside setting. The roposed trails sytem would radically change that setting and im act ~is ropert values. He and his neighbors believe the propose~ creeksi~e trai{ system poses a sign'ficant safety hazard, fire hazard, and liability exposure and should be removed from the Master Plan. He stated he nor his neighbor will grant easements for creekside trail development so seizure of the private property will be the only choice. Ms. Diane Ouisinger, Via Ranchero, discussed in detail the maintenance costs which have been borne by the residents, not the City, for the past 25 years. She referred to the erosion problems and loss of wildlife which would occur with removal of the trees (100-200 years old). She testified the residents wish to keep the creek in its present condition and ur es Council to reject, if not the entire plan, at least the two Creeks [rom the Trail Plan. Mr. Dick Dipple spoke to the security issues. He mported on burglary activity from access and exit via the creek. He recommended Council reject the Plan. Mr. Ed Flory, Via Ranchero, stated he bought his home in1968 for its beautiful settin and privac . He read ~art of the deed pertaining to the flood controT easement w~ich states 'the said easement area shall be clear of any and all t pes of im rovements whatsoever." He said if Council approves the trai{s proposa{ it will no longer eet t e requirements of a lot in Saratoga. ~e urged Council to Tejecththe Plan if possible, or at least the portions which refer to Saratoga and Qildcat Creeks. In res onse to Councilmember Cleven er, Mr. Flor and other members of of tKe Districts do the auMience voice their opinions t~at none maintenance of the creeks. Mr. Lee Gray, President of Saratoga Oaks Condominium Association, h reported the Flood Control District does come to clean the creek wen he specifically asks them to. Beatrice Schmidt, Merr brook Drive, a resident for 34 years, reported on the years between 1~55 and 1965 when many residents lost the land ~¥ a ra ing creek all the way to their doorstep. She stated the cost the ~rall Plan been under~stimate~ ~y several million dollars has and explains how she arrived at that opinion. She stated the Council must consider the right to privacy law. She mentioned all the acreage available in the City of Saratoga and believes 14 arks provide enough ublic space when there are only 29,000 eople in Maratoga. She felt 8ouncil should be more interested in ruMent financial saving rather than spendin additional taxpayer dollars.' She spoke to the environmentalimpact and urged Council to consider the rotest and to vote against the implementation of the Parks and Trail Raster Plan, regarding Saratoga and Wildcat Creeks', and follow the will of the con~tuents. - Mr. Marvin Becker, President of Brookview Homeowners Association stated he heard from numerous residents of Brookview a ainst the Plan. He disagreed with information in the document which indicates the average salary of Saratoga homeowners is $91,000 to $100,000. He felt the f~gure is very high. Ms. Cheriel Jensen stated her property is located on 750 feet of Wildcat Creek which is an all-year creek. She described the ' City CouncilMinutes 9 July 17, 1991 habitat which exists there because she has fought~ several times to keep it in existence. She described the many various problems s~e has encountered with different agencies and stated there is no reason to change the creek now. Mr. Lee Gray, a reed with the previous speakers that the plan would im act the cree~ residents. Invasion of privac is the main issue as we~l as eminent domain. He questioned why the ~it would consider a plan costin over ~6 million dollars considering t~e current financial situation o~ the City and State. Councilmember Anderson stated that in view of the fact there are so many peo le who have compellin reasons to not include Saratoga and WilHcat 8reeks in the trails p~an, she would make a motion to vote that down. Mayor Kohler pointed out the vote can only be taken after all who wish to speak have spoken and the Public Hearing is closed. Mr. Eric Grup reported he has done appraisal of properties and reported if the privacy of the Creek ~s taken to create an easement, the City will probably have to pay the owners on both sides of the creek. He disagreed with the figures in the document for acquisition COSTS- Mr. A1 Rigel, a 30-year resident of Wildcat Creek, stated both the creeks are unprotected above. He referred to the floods in 1962 where Wildcat Creeks overflowed its banks. Mr. Daryl Metzik, Wildcat Creek resident, stated the people in the hills have the same right of rivacy as those people along Saratoga and Wildcat Creeks. He state~ the motion by Councilmember Anderson excludes those people and it is out of order. Ms. Wendy Weisman, Squirrel Hollow Lane, reported there has been maintenance on her property because of a sanitary sewer. She reported on several instances w~th the backed u sewer line where semi-raw effluent flowed into her back yard. S~e reported on the cleanup restoration and restriction from use of the property for two weeks because of health reasons. Mr. Rich Willjams, Via Madrones Drive,' stated he urchased his home last year. He reported on the many impacts he will encounter if the plan xs approved. Ms. Jean Patsuras a 30-year resident of Saratoga questioned the amount of money t~e City spent for this study. S~e expressed concern in the way residents were ap roached by the consultant during the studies and stated she felt Meceived. She supported the protesters and stated the group is for saving the environment and for open spaces. Mr. Sal Liccardo, an Attorney and creek resident, stated his opinion that costs are not reflected in the report because the easement is restricted to flood control and therefore would cost the City a lot. Mr. Terry Wolfe Oak Hollow Lane referred to the consultant's comments that t~e surve was conducted among 400+ people. He uestiorL~ its accuracy ~ecause there are 29,000 peo le in Saratoga. ~e pointed out that earlier this evening Council di~ not make a decision on an issue of minimal wildlife concern regarding the area of the new freeway, yet wildlife was not even considered, nor addressed in this report. Mr. Michael Coleman, Squirrel Hollow Lane, stated that if trails plan remains an issue not immediately removed he will probably not be able to sell his home and, if sold~ ~t wo~ld ~e sold at a price far below his original urchase price. He requested Council get the issue off the agenda anM never revisit it again. MAYOR KOHLER CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:40 P.M. Councilmember Anderson stated the reasons presented by the public are clear. ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED TO EXCLUDE SARATOGA ANDWILDCAT CREEKS FROM THE PARKS AND TRAILS MASTER PLAN. City Council Minutes 10 July 17, 1991 Councilmember Anderson suggested Council may want to consider the h different aspects of t e report separately. Councilmember Monia reported that in 1978-90 a similar situation occurred and he felt it unfortunate it reoccurred. He stated it is heartening to see the community respond to the issue. He believes this is and will continue to be an issue of privacy, safety, liability and unless this Council makes a clear statement about that, this will robably be revisited a ain in the next 10 years. He stated he would Bring it up at another Time and get assistance from staff on how to proceed to close the issue. Councilmember Clevenger stated that because Saratoga is residential to have a trails system take away from the residential en'oyment an~ value, it is not as important as the homes along the cree~. She believes that althou h the trails will be egatxve for neighbors t at trails are ~till needed for walkers. She ~tated she would not be h willing to change the philosophy of hillside trails because it has been designated and buyers are aware of that. Councilmember Stutzman pointed out the reason for the survey was because for years the debate has been whether there is an a~equate ark system, how much is available, and what are the future needs. ~hus t~e special committee was set up to develop a lon term plan whic~ was needed and a consultant developed the plan. ~e supported the validity of the surveys completed by the consultant and pointed out the lan is only a long range plan with no implementation element to it. ~e explaine~ that any implementation will be done through publi~ earings, etc. Mayor Kohler said he believes the creek areas are ver fragile and it h horse is damaging to the creeks to ave trails and waYking trails and it takes away from the privacy. THE ABOVE MOTION IS VOTED UPON. PASSED 4-1. (Stutzman voted no). Mayor Kohler declared a recess at 10:45 p.m. Upon returning, the same Council Members and staff were present. Councilmember Clevenger discussed, on Page 3.5-1'of the Parks and Trails Master Plan documnent the proposed two trails in Central Park from the Library to City Halt. The two available options are I to support the existin road bride which has sidewalks or 2) an a~dition of a edestrian bridge set bac~ from the road which would provide a more Mirect connection between Cit Hall and the Library (would require removal of trees . She believes duplication of a trail and the removal of trees wou~d be a mistake. CLEVENGER/MONIA MOVED TO DELETE THE SECOND OPTION AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. Members express various concerns with whether sections of the Plan should be changed now or when the actual implementation procuedures' take place in the future. THE MOTION IS VOTED UPON AND IS NOT PASSED. THE VOTE WAS 1-4 (Clevenger voted yes). Councilmember Monia suggested Council prioritize the issues in the Plan. He requested an ~mplementation plan be prepared in three stages; for the next 30 years. Mr. Peacock reported the cost of information at the end of the document goes to 1995 and it is based upon the Capital Improvements t~e trail system, prioritizing could begin. MONIA/ANDERSON MOVED TO ACCEPT THE DRAFT PARKS AND TRAILS MASTER PLAN, ~flTM THE EXCEPTIONS DISCUSSED AND APPROVED AND THAT COUNCIL REVISIT THE PLAN AT THE NEXT JOINT MEETING WITH T~B~ PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION. Mr. Peacock su gested that there be a statement in the plan that creekside trai~s are not considered to be viable portions because of problems of environmental damage security liability, etc. and should not be considered seriously in t~e future. Councilmember ~onia City Council Minutes 11 July 17, 1991 accepted the suggestion as wording for an amendment to the above motion. Councilmember Anderson stated she would like to have the changes she brought up placed into the report. She agrees to speak with the City Manager regarding those areas. THE MOTION IS VOTED b'PONAND PASSED 5-0. family residence on a 13 000 sq. ft. 'arcel in the R-lr~,500 zone distr'ct at 20760 Wardetl Rd., ~arcel 2 t ~ .[m~mi) (DR90-065). :/applicant, (Appellan' Mr. Emslie reviewed his memorandum to the City Council dated 7/12/91. The Plannin Commission denied the plans for a two-structure on the front lot o~ this two lot subdivision recently approved b the City. The Commission found the proposed height incompatible wit~ the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommended Council modify the plans h h to reduce t e maximum heig t of the two-structure to 22 feet or return with a one-story alternative to be submitted to the Planning Commission for a public hearing process. Mayor Kohler reported he received a letter from Mr. Emami indicating a note is due on the property on August 4, 1991. Responding to Councilmember Anderson, Mr. Emslie clarified there is no ollcy mandating the roof height of a two-story has to be as low as 22 ~eet, so, a thi~ option would be to approve the original plans. Mayor Kohler opened the Public Hearing at 11:40 p.m. Mr. Kurt Anderson, Princi al of the architectural firm representing the applicant, supported the design as originally presented. Ms. Shirte Deemer Wardell Rd., Mr. Ed Bevis, Arroyo de Arguello and Mr. Andre ~o art, ~ardell Rd.~ supported the original lans for t~e home as the fiesign is in keeping w~th the changes in tee neighborhood and will add beauty and value to the neighborhood. They urged Council to approve the original design. Mr. Anderson presented letters in support and a etition for the record. He pointed out several areas in the staff report which meet the requirements for view and rivacy impacts, mass and bulk and compat~bilit . He stated his ~irm tried to reduce the height to 22 feet and still maintain the architectural integret of the home, but could not do it. He implored Council to approve t~e original desi n. He pointed out the pro'ect is in conformance with all conditions o~ the tentative and flna~ maps, zoning ordinances and does not exceed the 26 ft. height restriction. . Staff reviewed the maps with Council to clarify which set of drawings were under discussion. Mr. Bob Rockwood, Rockwood Design, supported the original design of the home reiterating Mr. Andersons comments. Mayor Kohler closed the Public Hearing at 11:55 p.m. As er Councilmember Monia's suggestion, the item was tabled so staff could clarify which drawin s completion were being discussed after the of discussion of Item 5) B~.. 5. WRITTEN COMI~CATIONS Cont. 6) Will Kempton, Traffic Authorit., requesting withdrawal of City's letter to the Corps of ~ngineers regarding the corridor-wide permit for creek restoration Mr. Will Kempton reiterated the issues discussed earlier. He'stated that it was the 'udgement of the representatives from the regulatory agencies who wal~ed the creek with consultants that miti ation was not possible. 0nly in a few places has the Authority been a~le to provide on-site, in-kind mitigation. City Council Minutes 12 July 17, 199g Discussion ensued wherein Councilmember Anderson asked various questions of Mr. Kempton. He stated the City did have an opportunity, and did extensively review the Environmental document and commented or a number of elements and com onents which were recorded. Mr. Kempton clarified that the Corps of Mngineers has a process for the noticing. Councilmember Anderson stated she is willin to look at the one particular site mentioned (Calabazas Creek ~eadwaters) for a possibility of mitigation. ANDERSON/MONIA MOVED TO HAVE STAFF WORK WITH THE TRAFFIC AUTHORITY STAFF TO DETERMINE WHETR~R TItE ~&DWATERS OF CALABAZAS CREEK ARE AN APPROPRIATE HITIGATION SITE FOR THE LOSS OF CREEK RIPARIAN HABITAT IN SARATOGA WITH A REPORT DUE BACK TO COUNCIL ON AUGUST 7. PASSED 5-0.. Mr. Peacock stated he would notify the Corps of this activity. Ms. Cheriel Jensen mentioned that the State De artment of Water Resources is still an issue, she believes the ~ity should speak with them because they are to issue a permit also. It is still not known how the impacts may be mitigated alon the percolation ponds the flooding patterns are not k~own and t~ose residents in the ftood lains are very concerned. She stated there are probably several ~undred residents affected by this who don't know it. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS D. Appeal of denial of design review approval (Wardell Rd) Continued from above. Mr. Anderson concurred with staff that the design before Council tonight is 23 ft. 6 inches. However, from an architect's point of view, he stated the 24 ft. 8 inch drawings are a much better design. He stated the original plans submitted to Council were 24 ft. 8 inche~ with brick across the entire facade and no dormer is a much more attractive project and encouraged Council to approve that plan. CLEVENGER/ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE ORIGINAL PLANS AS' SUENITTED, 24 FT. 8 INCHES, WITHOUT THE DORNER AND WITH THE BRICK FACING.. creek and this home would not be inappropriate in that n supported the project. In response to Councilmember Monia, Mr. Emslie stated that by a proving the 23 ft. 6 inch plans, Council would be supporting the P~anning Commission's findings that the height is the major contributing factor to the bulk and the Commission was trying to maintain the streetscape. Staff agreed a two-stor house does make sense, however the height could be lowered success{ull to at least 22 ft. 6 inches to maintain compatibility of the neighborKood. Councilmember Cleven er supported the applicant's lan at 24 ft. 8' inches pointin out ~e has neighborhood support ana the two-story is not objectionable. Councilmember Monia stated he could support either plan. Mayor Kohler stated he believes since it is close to the creek, it is better to have a two-story home in the area. He expressed the importance of having the neighbors come to the meetxng in support. H~ sa~d he would support the original plan. THE ABOVE MOTION WAS VOTED UPON AND PASSED 4-0,1 (Stutzman abstained). E. Appeal of denial of design_ review approval to construct a 1,53( s . ft of additional s~. ft. second story add~tlon and an 818. ~t. f~rst floor area to an exlsti_ng 3 450 sq. one-sto single family residence in the R-1-40,006 zone district at 14r~01 Andrew Ct. (Appellant/applicant, West) (DR91-013) · Councilmember Monia re orted a conflict of interest as he lives in th~ immediate area of notification. He stepped down and did not participate in discussion or voting. Mr. Emslie referred to his Memorandum'to Council dated 7/12/91 and reported the Planning Commission denied the request for second story City Council Minutes 13 July 17, 1991 expansion. The Commission offered the opportunity of pursuing expansion lans including one-story alternatives at an informal study session. ~he a licant indicated they wished to pursue only two-story alternatives. ~Ee Plannin Commission denied the application. Staff believes it would be fruitful to return to study session format to evaluate all alternatives with the Planning Commission. Staff is recommending Council return this application to the Planning Commission. Mayor Kohler opened the Public Hearing at 12:40 a.m. Mr. Tom Sloan, architect, stated it was believed that the Planning Commission was willing to enter a study session to review only one-story alternatives, therefore, that is why the applicant elected not to enter a stud session. He reported his client has support from some residents in t{e cul-de~sac. He distributed hoto raphs of the project and neighborhood to Council. He reviewed The p~ans in detail and reported what has been done to minimize the bulk including a hip roof and bay windows to lesson the impact. He reports how the privacy issue has been addressed and that the Wests have invited surrounding neighbors to discuss the plans. Mr. Howard Summers, anel hbor, expressed his concerns with the bulk which he believes will no[ be com atible with the existing neighborhood. He said he attendee the Plannin Commission meeting and believes the process they followed was thoroug~ and proper. He requested Council not to overturn the Commisslon's decision. Mrs. Marcia Summers stated a two-story home would set a precedent in the nei hborhood. She ob'ected to changing the front of the yard and objecte~ to the concrete ~riveway. Mr. Morris Jones~ Reslin Court, stated the house will be elevated above the tree line, he ~istributes photo ra hs showing the elevation oles. He said that although the home will Be 200 feet away from his Eome, 15,000 cubic feet of space will be above the treeline. He believes the structure would de rade the pro erty, invade his privacy and lower the enjoyment receive~ from their lot. He requested Council deny the request. Mr. Michael West the a plicant, reported that his famil~ is growing and he is in neea of adM~tional living space. He pointe~ out there are many two-story homes much larger than what he is proposing and invited Council to visit the site to review the issues in uestion. He stated he did not realize there would be such a level o~ opposition and that the report to the Planning Commission recommended a proval of the plan. He stated he believes he also has rights to be able to do things to his property which is not inconsistent with the codes in the ordinance. He read a letter of sup ort from a neighbor two homes down which also suports the process whic~ the Wests have taken to address neighbor's concerns.. Mayor Kohler closed the Public Hearing at 1:06 a.m. Councilmember Clevenger stated she could not support the pro'act with all the o position, and believes it should be sent back to t~e Planning Bommission for a study session. Councilmember Anderson stated Council would be happy to entertain another two-story plan but they must work with the neighbors and bring the vertical element down. CIaVgNGER/ANDERSON MOVED TO.REMAND THIS ITEM BACK TO TH]E PLA~NG COMMISSION TO SEE IF T~t~Y CAN COME UP WITH ANYTHING BETM. PASSED 4-0 (Monia did not vote). F) Ap eal of denial of design review approval to construct a new 7 ~54 sq. ft. two-sto residence on a 3-acre within the parcel ~ zone district at 2r{451 Continental Circle (Appellant/ applicant, lai)(DR89-~O) Mr. Peacock announced that the appeal was withdrawn. 6. OLD BUSINESS Cont. B. Amendment to City Code Concerning Informal Bidding Procedures CLEVENGER/MONIA MOVED TO INTRODUCE TH]E ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVING FURT~.R R~ING. PASSED 5-0. City Council Minutes 14 July 17, 1991 between 4th end 5th streets CLEVENGER/ANDERSON MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY gAII/IN6 FURTg~ READING. PASSED 5-0. 7. NBI/BUSINESS A. Memo Authorizing Publicity for Upcoming Hearings CLEVENGER/NONIA MOVED STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR PUBLICITY OF UPCOMING ~r~ARINGS. PASSED 5-0. B. Bud et Adjustment Resolution 91-46.1 for recalculation of cost of ~exation 1991-1 to Landscaping end Lighting District · Mayor Kohler continued the item to a future meeting. 9. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS A. Date end Agenda for meeting with Chamber of Commerce B. Reports from Individual Councilmembers Clevenger-Reported on information regardin current Sanitation District projects at Montpere and Paseo La~o. Mayor Kohler - Reported he received a few calls from citizens who wanted to know why the letter by Jef£rey A. Schwartz should be discussed in closed session since portions of the letter had already been read to the public. Mayor Kohler adjourned the meeting at 1:15 a.m. to 10. CLOSRD SESSION on pending liti ation on illegal grading, clearing and tree r_emoyal on Cocc~ardi/~hadwick development~ Tr. 77.70. 11. ADJOURNMENT to August 6 at 7:30 p.m. for joint meeting with Tr. 7770 Task Force Committee Respectfully submitted, Victoria R. Lindeman Minutes Clerk