Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-03-1996 City Council Minutes MINUTE8 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, January 3, 1996 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Ave. TYPE: Regular Meeting The following matters considered in the Administration Conference Room, after which the Council proceeded to the Civic Theater. 6230 p.m. - Interviews for Planning Commission Vacancy Councilmembers Burger, Moran, Wolfe and Mayor Jacobs were present; Councilmember Tucker arrived at 6:42 p.m. The Council interviewed Mark Pierce and noted that Commissioner Abshire had exercised his option not to be interviewed because he was well known to the Council. BURGER/MORAN MOVED TO REAPPOINT ALFRED ABSMIRE ~ TO APPOINT MARK PIERCE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Passed 5-0. The Council then briefly discussed the Youth Services Action Plan. There was consensus to have staff assigned to assist Vice Mayor Moran in developing a Youth Services Steering Committee. Churches are to be contacted, since none had attended the Town Hall Meeting on Youth Services in October. At 7:00 p.m. the Council recessed to a closed session on possible initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 in one case. At 7:30 p.m. the meeting was reconvened into open session, and the Mayor announced that no action had been taken. Pledge of Allegiance 1. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. Councilmembers Burger, Moran, Tucker, Wolfe, and Mayor Jacobs were present. Staff Present: City Manager Peacock, City Attorney Riback, Planner Walgren, Finance Director Fil. 2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS A. Proclamation commending Mike van Dalen as Recipient of the W. W. Worden Memorial Award Mayor Jacobs said no one was present to receive the proclamation. He stated this award is a great honor. MORAN/BURGER TO APPROVE THE PROCLAMATION. Passed 5-0. Mayor Jacobs announced that at the Council meeting held earlier in the evening, A1 Abshire had been re-appointed to the Planning Commission and Mark Pierce had been appointed to fill the vacancy on the Commission. 3. REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTINQ OF AGENDA city Manager Peacock reported that pursuant to Government Code 5495412, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on December 28. 4. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS - None. C. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Previously-Discussed Items - None. City Council Minutes 2 January 3, 1996 B. New Items 1) Planning CommisSion Actions - None~ no meeting held 12/27. 2) Library commlssi'on Minutes, 10/25 Note and file. 3) Approval of Check Register - None. BURGER/TUCKER TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS B.1, 2 AND 3. Passed 4) Selection of Technolog~ Master Plan Consultant - Removed from Consent Calendar at the request of Councilmember Moran who stated that she was concerned because there was not guidance as to the amount that would be spent. Mayor Jacobs said that he had talked to the Finance Director and had learned that for the $10,000 fee, the consultant would tell Council what would be spent and set up a plan as to how it would be spent over five years. Without the consultant he said he couldn't give the Council an estimate. Councilmember Moran stated she was not concerned with the $11,500 maximum but she didn't know if the consultant has a feel for what the City can spend. Councilmember Burger said Council had made no policy decision regarding priorities and the amount they felt could be spent on this project. Mayor Jacobs said he felt Council was not in a position to say what could be spent without a plan. Councilmember Burger said that' if they have the figures, their job is to set priorities, not find where the money will come from. Councilmember Tucker asked if the consultant could present the proposal in three phases or levels. Mr. Fil said this is being done as a result of budget discussions. A plan was set forth that staff would come back with an idea of what it would take to update the MIS system over the next five years. With respect to maintaining or controlling'costs, there has been no needs analysis which would determine' what costs are. He said he had a rough idea of what he thinks is reasonable - within the $100,000-250,000 range based on preliminary discussions with candidates for consultant. He said they won't know until the process is complete. He said he thinks this is an opportunity ~to determine how big an issue is being dealt with. With respect to financial application, the Citys system is ten years old and cannot meet demands. It is managed through PCs which .is incredibly inefficient. A~ a result of failing to take action in the past, the City suffered a hard disk crash in November which is one of the consequences of not keeping current with technology. It is particularly critical because of the increased demand for information and no additional staff to provide it. Mr. Fil said he understood Councilmember Moran's concerns. and that was why he would be involved throughout the process. He said the City needs a working system that gets the job done. Mr. Fil said the very first item of business he had asked the consultant to do is to analyze the current system to maximize utility. Mayor Jacobs said he is convinced that Mr. Fil will do his best to convince the consultant to come up with a system the City can afford because he believes City needs to upgrade the system and he will want to bring something to Council that the City can afford. Councilmember Burger stated that one of Council's highest priorities is to carefully watch the finance-~ of the community and they cannot do it with the current technology. She said they need to approve this proposal and consider it a very high priority to get the mechanics of the City's financial house in order. City Council Minutes 3 Januaz7 3, 1996 BURGER/WOLFE TO APPROVE THE SELECTION OF WISE CONSULTING SERVICES TO PREPARE A TECHNOLOGY MASTER PLAN AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT. Passed C. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY - None. 7. OLD BUSINESS A. Interim Urgency Ordinance Temporarily Restricting the Acceptance or ZProcessing of Applications for cellular Telephone Facilities at Sites in the City (from 12/20 meeting) City Manager Peacock stated!that Council had received a staff report on this item at their last ~eeting. The ordinance would institute a 45-day moratorium and set a~public hearing for Feb. 7 to review current development standards and to come up with new policies and a revised ordinance which would allow these kinds of facilities to be constructed. He said this~is a new technology that will be in demand but it should be situated in Saratoga in a manner that is most acceptable to the community. Mr. Peacock said the Planning Commission has received a report from'him based on previous Council discussions. The Community Development Director has indicated that the Commission will discuss this at their ~etreat later this month and Council's next joint meeting with the Commission in February might be a good time for them to give an initial report and have some dialog. He said he thought the hearing in Feb[uary would be primarily about whether the City should continue the moratorium or not and hear arguments pro and con. BURGER/MORAN TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 3E-26. Passed 5-0. 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Oral Communicat!ons (continued) and instructions to staff regarding actions on current oral communications - None. B. Memo Authorizing Publicity for Upcoming Hearings - No hearings scheduled. 9. ROUTINE MATTERS A. Approval of Minutes - 12/20 City Manager Peacock pointed out that a quote on page 6, third paragraph, didn't have quotation marks. Mayor Jacobs said he had ia list of several corrections that were relatively. minor that he w6uld give to the secretary. Council member Moran asked ~hat on page 7, paragraph 2, battle system be changed to ballot system. Councilmember Wolfe referred to page 9, last sentence. He said the Council had directed that the City Manager would help put together a letter expressing their cgncerns to the regional water board and others. WOLFE/MORAN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES WITH THE CHANGES PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED. Passed 4-0. CoUncil member Tucker abstained, stating that she preferred to see the corrected minutes. At 8:04 p.m., the Mayor returned the agenda to Item 6. 6. PUBLIC HEARING A. Appeal of conditions of variance approval to allow a 6 ft. tall wall to be located within a required front yard setback at 20650 Montal~o Heights Dr.; fences and walls are not permitted to exceed 3 ft. in height within front yards. The wall has already been built. The subject property is approximately 1=.12 acres in size and is located in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. (v-95-012) (APN 517-18-042) - City Council Minutes 4 January 3, 1996 (Appellant/applicant, Butler) Planner Walgren presented the~ staff report and said it was staff's recommendation that Council~ uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation andsdeny the ~ppeal. He said he believed there had been a window of time when Saratoga allowed 4-5 ft. front yard fences. He said the fence had recently~been completed and the applicant should have come to the City for a variance before it was built. As background he said there is a decorative masonry and open bar style wall that fronts all the lots within the subdivision that appears to have been built about ten years' ago when they were permitted. He said that is primarily the special circumstance that the staff report noted. He said staff found that because the existing subdivision wall was built legally, this was the special circumstance that supported the variance as presented. He stated that at one time the City required an open wall on the front of properties. He said the wall inquestion is on the side of the property'line but within the two parcels' front setback. Mr. Walgren said it is in an area that would normally allow only a three foot high fence but there are other walls in the development that exceed the three-foot requirements. They appear to have been built legally when the subdivision was approved. Councilmembers Burger, Moran and Wolfe said they had visited the site. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Virginia Fanelli, 10052 Pasadena Avenue, Cupertino, said she was representing the applicant/appellant. She presented pictures of the wall to Council members and asked them to grant the variance and allow the wall to remain as constructed. She described the building of the wall and said Mr. Butler built the wall he thought was legal. She said the staff report to the Planning Commission stated,"The 5-6 ft. portion of the wall located in the required front yard is behind an existing decorative fence built at a similar height. Requiring that the new wall be lowered to 3 ft. would not be visually noticeable from Montalvo Heights Dr. The subdivision-bUilt existing wall therefore establishes. a special circumstance." Ms. Fanelli described the pictures given to Council. She said there are 9ther fences in excess.of three feet in front setbacks in the area and referred to letters from three neighbors urging approval of the variance. The variance procedure was established to let Council consider each situation based on specific circumstances and many variances have been granted in this area She said staff had found they could meet the three criteria: special circumstances (existence of the front wall); consistency with other similar properties in the area and thereby granting no special privilege; and no impact on public welfare, safety and health. She said requiring it to be lowered may be within the letter of the law but it would result in an impractical solution which has no positive effect. She said the neighbors have asked for Council's approval of the variance and she asked for their approval per original staff resolution prepared for the November 21 Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Fanelli informed Council that the front gate is 4-6 ft. high and the wall pre-existed the present ordinance. At 8:23 p.m., Mayor Jacobs clo~ed the publkc hearing. Councilmember Wolfe said it seems the applicant felt he was building a wall that was consistent with existing walls in the area. The height / of the front portion of the wall does not seem to have any impact on health and safety, and neighbors are not complaining. He said he thought the variance was appropriate in this case. Councilmember Burger agreed an~ urged Council to think about what is the purpose of a three-foot limit on walls to begin with: 1. To prevent a tunnel effect. 2. Safety consideration - line of sight as people were backing out of driveways. She said she didn't believe either situation exists. This is an area of estate homes and the walls are an appropriate statement of the quality of the homes. She said the variance process exists for this kind of situation. Councilmember Tucker said that one of the'reasons besides the tunnel effect was to have the feeling iof open space within the City. Because they were considering the side'yard wall, she said she could make the City Council Minutes 5 January 3, 1996 variance findings. Councilmember Moran said she didn't think that quality and style of homes is relevant. She agreed they are trying to promote openness. She said she was planning to support the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mayor Jacobs said he had an aversion to approving something which has been done before it was approved but had looked at the proposal as if the wall did not exist. He said that since the wall existed prior to the ordinance and is higher than 3 ft., he thought it created a practical difficulty in matching the side fence of 3 ft. to the higher one. WOLFE/BURGER TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVE BOTH VARIANCE REQUESTS AS SUBMITTED. Passed 4-1 with Moran dissenting. City Manager Peacock informed Council this matter will come back for approval of a resolution on the Consent Calendar at their next meeting. Mayor Jacobs returned the agenda to Item 10. 10. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS A. Agenda items for adjourned regular meeting January23 - Park Task Force Policy Guidellne Discussion City Manager Peacock said the Parks and Recreation Commission will be meeting to list their park and'recreation improvement priorities. Council will exchange lists with them and when they meet on February 27. Council will ratify policies after discussion with the Commission and the priorities as submitted by the Commission. They will then move into the task force or focus group process.. On January 23 Council should come up with a list of policy guidelines for the Commission to consider before the February 27 meeting. Mayor Jacobs said Council should prioritize major policy decisions, such as neighborhood vs. community parks. Mr. Peacock said Councilmembers should submit their lists to the Deputy City Clerk by January 18 or 19 so they can be sent out to everyone. Mayor Jacobs said they should not just apply to parks but to the whole recreation system. B. Other - None. 11. ADJOURNMENT BURGER/TUCKER TO ADJOURN AT 8=35 P.M. TO 7=00 P.M. ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 9# AT ADMINISTRATION MEETING ROOM, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE. Passed 5-0. Respectfully submitted, Roberta Wolfe~ Minutes Clerk