Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-07-2002 City Council MinutesMINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 7, 2002 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session, Administrative Conference Room. 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 5:00 p.m. Initiation of litigation (Gov't Code Section 54956.9(c): (1 potential case) Conference With Legal Counsel -Existing Litigation (3 cases): (Government Code section 54956.9(a)) Name of case: City of Saratoga v. West Valley-Mission Community College District (California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District No. H022365) Name of case: City of Saratoga v. Hinz (Santa Clara County Superior Court Doc. No. CV-784560) Name of case: Saratoga Fire Protection District v. City of Saratoga (Santa Clara County Superior Court No. CV-803540) Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov't Code 54957) Title: City Manager MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Streit reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Streit called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and requested Evan Baker, Vice Mayor, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, John Mehaffey, Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Evan Baker, Mayor Nick Streit ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director John Cherbone, Director of Public Works Joan Pisani, Recreation Director John Livingstone, Associate Planner Lata Vasudevan, Assistant Planner Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR AUGUST 7, 2002 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of August 7, 2002 was properly posted on August 2, 2002. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following person requested to speak at tonight's meeting: john Keenan, 22215 Mt. Eden Road, explained to the Council that last week his wife had a garage sale. The Code Compliance Officer also stated that if she reported them there would be a $100 fine. Mr. Keenan requested that the City Council direct staff to treat garage sale signs like the City treats political and real estate signs. COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Councilmember Waltonsmith stated that she did not know the City had a garage sale sign ordinance and requested that this issue be agendized. City Manager Anderson stated that the City's ordinance for garage sale signs states that they are not suppose to be posted off site. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he supported Councilmember Waltonsmith's requested and asked that lost pets signs be included in the review of signs in the City. Councilmember Mehaffey also requested that car wash signs be added in the review of the ordinance. ANNOUNCEMENTS None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None City Council Minutes 2 August 7, 2002 CEREMONIAL ITEMS lA. PRESENTATION -CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY/INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive award. Mayor Streit noted that the City of Saratoga received an award from the California Protection Agency. CONSENT CALENDAR 2A. APPROVE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 19, 2002 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Councilmember Bogosian and Councilmember Waltonsmith requested that item 2A be pulled from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Waltonsmith requested the following changes: Councilmember Bogosian requested that on page 10, 4`h paragraph, Council's direction should read as follows: Council requested that the Parks and Recreation Commission explore options to possibly hire an independent consultant to facilitate community meetings. Councilmember Bogosian requested the following comments be added to page 10, 5`h paragraph: Councilmember Bogosian stated, that he did not want to go down the same road the City went with the play fields and wanted the process for this project to be independent, rather than user group driven. Councilmember Waltonsmith requested the following changes: Page 6, 4`" paragraph. The comment should read as follows: Councilmember Waltonsmith asked about the possibility ofpeople constructing basements under secondary units. WALTONSMITH/BOGOSIANMQVED TO APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES OF JUNE 19, 2002 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2B. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTERED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. City Council Minutes 3 August 7, 2002 2C. REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES - JULY 24, 2002 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Note and file. WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEYMQVED TO NOTE AND FILE PLANNING ACTION MINUTES. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2D. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - REQUIREMENTS FOR BASEMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt ordinance. TITLE OF ORDNANCE: 206 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR BASEMENTS Councilmember Waltonsmith requested that item 2D be pulled from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Waltonsmith stated that she was concerned why the Planning Commission has not reviewed basements under secondary units. Director Sullivan explained that the Planning Commission has reviewed in length the basement ordinance and has made their recommendations to the City Council. The City Council has made minor alterations to the ordinance. Director Sullivan noted that in regard to a second units ordinance amendment, staff is in the process of developing that ordinance and would provide the Planning Commissioners a draft for an independent review. The Planning Commission will the give their independent comments and hopefixlly start the public hearing process in the fall. Director Sullivan stated that currently an accessory structure and a main structure could have a basement. The critical issue is whether or not a basement under a second unit should count as floor area. Director Sullivan explained that the way the ordinance is currently written an accessory structure and a main structure can have a basement so conceivably if a second unit was part of the main structure it could have a basement, but it is all subject to review by the Planning Commission. Director Sullivan noted that there are no pending applications for second units at this time, although several members of the community are waiting until the City completes the ordinance with more streamline regulations. Director Sullivan requested that Council move forward with the adoption of the ordinance. WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT -REQUIREMENTS FOR BASEMENTS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. City Council Minutes 4 August 7, 2002 2E. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT -SINGLE STORY OVERLAY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt ordinance. TITLE OF ORDNANCE: 207 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ESTABLISHING A SINGLE STORY OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE SARATOGA WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD Vice Mayor Baker requested that item 2E be pulled from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Baker noted that he would be recusing himself from voting on this item and stepped down from the dais. Mayor Streit noted that he had numerous requests from the public to speak on item 2E. David Greimer, 12388 Redoyka Drive, noted that he supports the ordinance and stated that Kosick Court should be included in the overlay. Carl Nielson, 18921 Cyril Place, noted that he has lived in the Saratoga Woods neighborhood since 1973. Mr. Nielsen pointed out that the single family, ranch style homes is what attracted him to the neighborhood. Ronald Schoengold, 19000 Saratoga Glen Place, noted that he is the president of the Saratoga Woods neighborhood Association that represents 400 families. Mr. Schoengold noted that the Association fully supports the ordinance. Giovanni Barbarossa, 12430 Curry Court, noted that he opposed the proposed ordinance. Dory Albert, 12304 Saratoga Creek Drive, noted that she opposed the proposed ordinance and would like it pulled off the agenda this evening. Ms. Albert stated that this ordinance goes against her rights as a homeowner. Ms. Albert noted that the resale value on the homes in the Saratoga Woods neighborhood would plummet. Ms. Albert suggested that each lot should be looked at case by case. Ms. Albert suggested that the City should allow designated styles of two story homes if a homeowner wanted to construct a second story. Marcia Fariss, 18983 Saratoga Glen Place, noted that she supports the ordinance and presented a brief history about the Saratoga Woods neighborhood in regards to second story additions. Ms. Farris noted that the proposed ordinance ensures that current and future homeowners will know the constraints on expansion in Saratoga Woods. Ms. Farris noted that the proposed ordinance does allow for variances for individual situation and extenuating circumstances. City Council Minutes 5 August 7, 2002 Referring to comments made by Ms. Farriss, Councilmember Mehaffey asked for an opinion from the City Attorney regarding variances. Councilmember Mehaffey asked if the variance process allows second story additions even thought he ordinance prohibits it. City Attorney Taylor explained that depending on the circumstances of each case. City Attorney Taylor stated that if a property owner were to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission that the circumstances of their property the single story restriction denied them the benefit of other people similarly situated to them. City Attorney Taylor stated that it is conceivable that such a case could be made. Mayor Streit stated that in regards to limiting expansion, the City has allowed 60% coverage on these lots due to the single story overlay. BOGOSIAN/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT -SINGLE STORY OVERLAY. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BAKER RECUSING. 2F. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE MANNER IN WHICH MEMBERSHIP TERMS ON CITY COMMISSIONS ARE STAGGERED TITLE OF ORDNANCE: 209 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING STAGGERED TERMS FOR COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED TO CITY COMMISSIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt ordinance. WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE MANNER IN WHICH MEMBERSHIP TERMS ON CITY COMMISSIONS ARE STAGGERED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2G. PROPERTY TAX LEVY TO SERVICE THE DEBT ON THE LIBRARY BOND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-057 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN INCREASE IN THE CITY'S PROPERTY TAX RATE TO FUND DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ON THE LIBRARY GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEYMQVED TO ADOPT RESOLTUION APPROVING AN INCREASE IN THE CITY'S PROPERTY TAX RATE TO FUND DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ON THE LIBRARY GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-03. MOTION PASSED 5-0. City Council Minutes 6 August 7, 2002 2H. COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORDS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Informational only. WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEYMQVED TO ACCEPT THE COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORDS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2I. MEDICARE COVERAGE FOR EMPLOYEES HIRED PRIOR TO APRIL 1, 1986 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-058 RESOLTUION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT ALLOWING THE CITY OF SARATOGA TO ENTER INTO A SECTION 218 AGREEMENT WITH THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINSTRATION AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIRENMENT SYSTEM (PERS) WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR MEDICARE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2J. DESIGN SERVICES FOR BLANEY PLAZA IMPROVEMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution amending the FY 2002-03 Budget; approve proposal from Greg Ing & Associates; authorize execution of agreement; and authorize miscellaneous costs. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-059 RESOLTUION THE CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE 5-YEAR CIP BUDET TO ESTABLISH AN ADDITONAL PROJECT "BLANEY PLAZA IMPROVEMNTS" WITH AN APPROPRIATION OF $19,400 Councilmember Bogosian and Councilmember Waltonsmith requested that item 2J be pulled from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he felt the schedule was a bit ambitious and requested that this item come back to the Council when the architect has preliminary deigns. City Manager Anderson suggested that this item come back fora 50% design review. City Council Minutes '7 August 7, 2002 Councilmember Waltonsmith concurred with Councilmember Bogosian and also requested an opportunity for public input. Director Cherbone noted that the plan was going to be brought back to Council at least twice. Director Cherbone noted that he could bring this item back to Council on September 4, 2002. BOGOSIAN/BAKER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FY 2002-03 BUDGET; APPROVE PROPOSAL FROM GREG ING & ASSOCIATES: AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT: AND AUTHORIZE MISCELLANEOUS COSTS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING REPORT AND ASSESSMENT OF WEEDS AND BRUSH ABATEMENT CHARGES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-060 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING REPORT AND ASSESSMENT OF WEED AND BRUSH ABATEMENT CHARGES Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer stated that under State and local laws, local govenements routinely abate seasonal fire hazards of brush on undeveloped property. For the County and several cities, including Saratoga, this brush abatement program is administered by the Coutny Fire Marshall's office. In many cases, property owners find it convenient to have the government take care of brush removal and to pay through property tax liens. City Clerk Boyer reported that this past year the County performed brush abatement on parcels that totaled $24,526.24. In order to recover this cost, it is necessary for the Council to adopt a resolution to confirm the assessments and direct the County Auditor to enter and collect the assessments on the property. WALTONSMITHBAKERMQVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION ORDERING ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE BY REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS BRUSH. MOTION PASSES 5-0. City Council Minutes $ August 7, 2002 4. RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 01-060 REGARDING SARATOGA FIRE DISTRICT FIRE STATION AND TEMPORARY FIRE STATION AT 14380 SARATOGA AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve motion for reconsideration; open public hearing on reconsideration; close public hearing; reconsider resolution; and provide direction to staff. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-061 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO.O1-060 AND REFERRING FIRE DISTRICT APPLICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION OF REVISED PLANS John Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Planner Livingstone reported that at the September 5, 2001 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution 01-060 denying the applicatian of the Saratoga Fire Protection District to build a new fire station at 14380 Saratoga Avenue and to maintain a temporary fire station during construction of the new a fire station. At the July 17, 2002 City Council meeting, a motion was made to place Resolution 01-060 on the next agenda for reconsideration before the City Council pursuant to 2-10.110 of the City Code that allows the Council to reconsider any action at any time. Planner Livingstone stated that on July 17, 2002 the City Council approved a settlement agreement with the Fire District. The settlement agreement established a process for consideration of a new fire station design consistent with "Scheme A", including a front apron of at least 59 feet and compliance with the City's height limitations and standard front yard setback. The "Scheme A" approach requires minor exceptions to the City's rear and side-yard setback requirements and site coverage requirements. The agreement requires preparation of an environmental analysis of the new design by the Fire District and review by the Planning Commission. The agreement also requires the City Council to consider (1) vacating the alley between the existing fire station and the post office and (2) transferring the Heritage Plaza property to the Fire District in exchange for ten new public parking spaces, in addition to the 24 required by the District and bicycle and pedestrian easement along Saratoga Avenue and State Route 9. The agreement specifies that nothing in the agreement restricts the City's discretion in considering these matters. The agreement requires the City and the District to confer regarding proposed changes to the project. Planner Livingstone noted that in accordance with the Code, the motion for reconsideration was agendized for this meeting of the City Council approve the motion for reconsideration and then conduct a public hearing to reconsider the issues addressed in Resolution 01-060. Planner Livingstone noted that reconsideration of the resolution denying the original application is the first step in the planning process set forth in the settlement agreement. City Council Minutes 9 August 7, 2002 Planner Livingstone explained that by reconsidering the resolution the City Council can take any of the actions that were available to them at the September 5, 2001 meeting. These are (1) approve the application as submitted at that time; (2) deny the applications; (3) approve the applications as submitted with modifications specified by Council; (4) refer the matter back to the Planning Commission. Planner Livingstone explained that if the Council refers the matter back to the Planning Commission it should also request that the Planning Commission review concurrently with the Fire District application (1) the proposed vacation of George Whalen Way (the alley behind the existing fire station) and (2) the transfer of the Heritage Plaza property to the District for conformity with City's General Plan pursuant to Government Code Section 65402 (a). Planner Livingstone noted that the Settlement Agreement contemplates that the District will submit a revised application to the City by August 23, 2002. This would allow the matter to be presented at the Planning Commission at its meeting of September 25, 2002. Following the Planning Commission's action on the project, the City Council would hold a public hearing on the vacation of the alley and the conveyance of the Heritage Plaza property to the District. The hearing would be at the October 16, 2002 City Council meeting. In regards to concerns raised regarding the Council's decision to reconsider Resolution 01-060, City Attorney Taylor explained the process of the process as stated in the City code. Mayor Streit opened the public hearing at 7:51 p.m. John Keenan, 22215 Mt. Eden Road, stated that he is disappointed that the City Council is reconsidering the decision made in September 2001. David Dolloff, 20685 Sigal Drive, stated that he is bitterly disappointed in the City Council. Mr. Dolloff noted that a group of citizens pointed out gross inadequacies of the Saratoga Fire District, formed the F.A.C.T committee, the City then formed the Ad Hoc committee, and a consultant was hired. Mr. Dolloff stated that he feels the District bullied the City Council. Mr. Dolloff stated that he feels the District got what they wanted by threatening the City with a lawsuit. Mr. Dolloff stated that the Council betrayed the citizens of Saratoga. Aaron Katz, PO Box 116, stated that he opposes the proposed action before the Council this evening. Mr. Katz stated that this situation sets a terrible message for the future of "backdoor politics". Hal Toppel, Attorney, 660 West Dana Street, Mountain View, stated that he represents the Fire District. Mr. Toppel stated that "backdoor politics" never took place regarding this issue. Mr. Toppel noted that everything has been through the public process and will continue to be a public process. Mr. Toppel urged the Council to adopt the motion for reconsideration. City Council Minutes 10 August 7, 2002 Ernest Kraule, Chief/Saratoga Fire District, 14445 Springer Avenue, stated that the process has started to design new plans for the new fire station, which includes four bay doors and the creation of a basement. Chief Kraule urged the Council to adopt the resolution before them this evening. Mayor Streit closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. BOGOSIAN/MEHAFFEYMQVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION 01-060 AND REFERRING PROJECT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MOTION PASSED 5-0. Councilmember Mehaffey stated that there were no "backdoor" proceedings. Councilmember Mehaffey stated that the Council is not approving anything tonight except for sending the Fire District plans back to the Planning Commission and that any decision they make can be appealed. Vice Mayor Baker noted he resented the comments insinuating that the Council participated in "backdoor" politics. Mayor Streit declared afive-minute break. Mayor Streit reconvened the meeting at 8:30 p.m. OLD BUSINESS IMPLEMENTATIION FOR USAGE OF THE NORTH CAMPUS FACILITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-062 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $53,550 FOR EXPENSES FOR NORTH CAMPUS Joan Pisani, Recreation Director, presented staff report. Director Pisani explained that on July 17, 2002 the City Council approved the purchase of the Grace Methodist Church property located at 19848 Prospect Road. Director Pisani noted that out of the four buildings on the property it is felt that the Administration Building is in the best shape to be used by the public. Brad Lind, the City's Building Inspector, completed an inspection of this building to identify any building code requirements and ADA concerns. He felt the building was usable, as is, but he did recommend a few minor repairs before occupancy. The total cost for repairs and maintenance is $53,550. Councilmember Bogosian asked how many people the Administration Building could accommodate. City Council Minutes 11 August 7, 2002 Director Pisani stated that the maximum occupancy is 82. Councilmember Waltonsmith suggested that the City hold a series of open houses to allow the residents of Saratoga visit the site. Director Pisani agreed that the City should hold an open house. Memuna Ali, 20014 Seagull Way, stated that she has been a resident of Saratoga for the past 25 years and has been using the Fellowship Ha1160 times a year for the past 14 years. Ms. Ali noted that her group requests that the City continue to allow them to use the hall and Reverend Stone can provide the City with a referral letter. Betty Feldheym, 20184 Franklin Avenue, suggested the City use the North Campus as affordable housing. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he supports renovating the Fellowship Hall. Director Pisani noted that there are several ADA issues that may cost the City over $25,000, but she will check with Field Paoli. MEHAFFEY/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $53,550 FOR THE NORTH CAMPUS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 6. MOTOR VEHICLE (MV) RESOLUTION PROHIBITING PARHING ALONG A PORTION OF HERRIMAN AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: MV-238 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNIL PROHIBITING PARHING ON A PROTION OF HERRIMAN DRIVE John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. Director Cherbone noted that both items 6&7 are continued from the July 17, 2002 City Council meeting. The City Council directed staff and Public Safety Commission Chair to bring back more information. Bridgett Ballingall, Chair/Public Safety Commission, noted that in regards to the recommendation prohibiting parking on Herriman, it is currently red all around the corner on both sides. Chair Ballingall noted that every member of the PSC visited the site and the consensus was that there was clearly a visual obstruction. Vice Mayor Baker noted that he visited the site and disagrees with the PSC recommendation. City Council Minutes 12 August 7, 2002 BOGOSTAN/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION PROHIBITING PARKING ALONG A PROTION OF HERRIMAN AVENUE. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BAKER OPPOSING. 7. MOTOR VEHICLE (MV) RESOLUTION PROHIBITING PARKING ALONG A PORTION OF TAMWORTH AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: MV-239 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL PROHIBITING PARKING ON A PORTION OF TAMWORTH AVENUE Bridgett Ballingall, Chair/Public Safety Commission, explained that sine the construction at Foothill School has improved and noted that the school supports this request because it increases the visibility. 7eremy Tennenbaum, 13841 Tamworth Avenue, noted that he is the property owner who requested this restriction. Mr. Tennenbaum stated that it is not a real big issue for him but more concerned with the safety of the school children BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION PROHIBITING PARKING ALONG A PRTION OF TAMWORTH AVENUE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 10. AZULE PARK -AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Award construction contract; authorize execution of contract; and authorize change orders. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. Director Cherbone noted that the sealed bids for the Azule Park Project were scheduled to be opened on July 10, 2002. Unfortunately the City did not receive any bids on the project. Staff mailed bid packages directly to approximately 20 General Landscape Contractors and 10 Bid Exchanges. Staff made post-bid inquires to the most promising and experienced plan holders. A majority of the plan holders indicated that they were to busy with other contract work and hat they would not be able to perform the Azule Project in the timeline specified in the contract. They also indicated that the numerous hardscape elements in the park were more than they preferred to take on at this time. Director Cherbone noted that because the City had gone through a formal bid process as specified by the Public Works Contract Code and received no bids; staff was able to solicit bids informally. Staff decided to solicit bids from grading and paving Contractors instead of landscape Contractors. City Council Minutes 13 August 7, 2002 Director Cherbone explained two options. Option A precludes the construction of one of the two tennis courts. As recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Azule Park Task Force, the second tennis court was to be the first of the add alternative bid items to be eliminated if bids came in over budget. The cost for the second tennis court is $62,203. Option B supplements the original Azule Park Budget ($880,000) with Pavement Management Funds (PMP) in the amount of $62,203 bringing the total project to $943,203. This option would fund a portion of the asphalt pathway construction and would allow the second tennis court to be constructed. Director Cherbone explained that in order to accomplished the project in either Option A or Option B and to be able to have a reasonable construction contingency ($30,000), it is necessary to perform part of the park construction in house. This work consists of demolition, tree removal, and installation of park furniture. Director Cherbone explained that this will save the project approximately $54,593. The Public Works crew is ready and willing to perform these tasks and will begin demolition work on the park next week. Director Cherbone stated that staff recommends that Council move to award a construction contract to Duran & Venables and authorize change orders to the contract up to an amount of $30,000. Mayor Streit asked what would the City be sacrificing in pavement management if the construction of the tennis court were supplemented by the PMP funds. Director Cherbone responded that approximately 2 % miles of slurry seal and %2 mile overlay would be eliminated. In order to spare the use of PMP funds, Vice Mayor Baker noted that he supports Option A. Tom Soukup, 12340 Goleta Avenue, thanked the City Council for moving forward with the construction of Azule Park. Mr. Soukup noted that his wife sent an email to the neighbors explaining the need to cut one of the tennis courts due to budget constraints. Fortunately, no one was disappointed not having two courts. Mayor Streit noted that he supports option A because he is not willing to sacrifice PMP funds. Councilmember Bogosian noted that supports Option A. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that perhaps in the future when funding becomes available the second tennis court could be added. Director Cherbone noted that he could put the second court in the CIP as an unfunded project. City Council Minutes 14 August 7, 2002 BAKER/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO DURAN & VENABLES IN THE AMOUNT OF $679,615.81 FOR OPTION A AND ADD THE SECOND TENNIS COURT IN THE CIP AS AN UNFUNDED PROJECT. MOTION PASSED 5-0. BAKER/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH DURAN & VENABLES. MOTION PASSED 5-0. BAKER/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDERS TO THE CONTRACT UP TO $30,000. MOTION PASSED 5-0. Mayor Streit declared a 10-minute break at 9:45 p.m. Mayor Streit reconvened the meeting at 9:55 p.m. NEW BUSINESS 12. LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AT MOUNTAIN WINERY PROPERTY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Richard Taylor, City Attorney, presented staff report. City Attorney Taylor explained that at its June 19, 2002 meeting City Council requested a report on the land use designations applicable to the Mountain Winery property and the scope of the City Council's discretion to amend those land use designations. The Council also requested a report in the status of any annexation applications filed by the Mountain Winery. City Attorney Taylor explained that the Mountain Winery property is subject to several land use designations. The portion of the property within the City limits is designated in the General Plan as Hillside Conservation Single Family (RHC) and is zoned Hillside Conservation. Santa Clara County regulates the portion of the property outside City limits. The County's General Plan designation for the portion of the Mountain Winery property outside City limits is Hillside (H). The City has prezoned a portion of the Mountain Winery property outside the city limits as Residential Open Space (R-OS). This zoning would take effect if the property were annexed to the City. The General Plan does not apply any land use designations to the portion of the property outside the City but states that Residential Open Space zoning should be applied to any lands included in an expanded Sphere of Influence. City Attorney Taylor noted that any change to the General's Plans RHC designation for the portion of the property within the City limits would require voter approval pursuant to Measure G unless the redesignation was subject to one of the exceptions to Measure G's voter approval requirement. The City Council has broader discretion with respect to establishing a General Plan designation for the lands outside the City limits, as those lands are not subject to Measure G. City Council Minutes 15 August 7, 2002 City Attorney Taylor noted that any designation for lands outside the City limits, however, would not apply to that portion of the property and could not be used to regulate land uses on that portion unless that portion of the property annexed to the City. City Attorney Taylor noted that the Community Development Director has been in contact with the property owner and has been informed that no annexation applications have been filed for any portion of the Mountain Winery. City Attorney Taylor further discussed applicable land use regulations and the scope of the City Council discretion in considering general plan and zoning ordinance amendments. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if the Mountain Winery could be annexed to a sanitary district without being annexed by the City. City Attorney Taylor noted that the Mountain Winery could apply to LAFCO for annexation, the City would get noticed and we would participate in those proceedings. Meg Caldwell, 20201 La Paloma, encouraged the City Council to do everything in their power to protect the Mountain Winery area. Ms. Caldwell offered her assistance in any capacity to help the City deal with the Mountain Winery issues. Vic Monia, Granite Way, noted that he encourages the City to look at Mt. Winery prezoning and clearly state what the intentions of the City are in the General plan. The City should prezone all of the sphere of influence Residential Open Space (R- OS). James Baron, 419830 Via Escuela, noted that he was also with the Saratoga Trail Enthusiast. Mr. Baron noted that the Enthusiast conducted a survey sending out approximately 475 questionnaires in regards to the Mt. Winery. Mr. Baron explained some of the residents concerns: • 42% noise • 59% septic system • 61 % regarding traffic • 21%lights • 30% signage Mayor Streit stated that the City of Saratoga has to figure out a way to annex the Mountain Winery in order to maintain the quality of life of the people who live around the Mt. Winery and to control the development. Mr. Baron stated that there are two prior solutions to annexing the property. First, the residents could file an action to enforce the CUP conditions, go to court, prove that the Winery violated the CUP, and the County did not enforce their own conditions, and get an order to make the County enforce the Cup. Secondly, Mr. Baron noted that since the ticket taking takes place in the City, he feels the City could ask for a permit. Councilmember Mehaffey asked if the Mountain Winery was noticed. City Council Minutes 16 August 7, 2002 Director Sullivan stated that Mr. Hirschman is on the City Clerk's agenda mailing list and the report was faxed to him. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that the City should make a statement in regards to all the land that surrounds the Mt. Winery. Vice Mayor Baker stated that the Mayor should write a letter to the Cupertino requesting that the City be noticed if the Winery applies for any permits and secondly approach LAFCO to redefine the sphere of influence. Councilmember Bogosian stated that the most important step is getting the dialogue started with all parties involved. City Attorney Taylor reiterated Council's direction as follow: • Staff to make sure the contacts are set up with Cupertino Sanitation District and the County concerning plans for this area • Planning Department to look at land use designation for the General Plan. for the lands in the sphere of influence not just at the Winery but all of the hillside Mayor Streit thanked City Attorney Taylor for the report. 13. CELEBRATE SARATOGA COST ANALYSIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Danielle Surdin, Economic Development Coordinator, presented staff report. Coordinator Surdin explained that at the City Council's request staff was directed to present all city costs and services associated with sponsoring Celebrate Saratoga, and provide Council with various options to potentially lower expenses associated with in-kind services. Coordinator Surdin noted that the City has a history of supporting Celebrate Saratoga dating back to the event's creation in 1989. Celebrate Saratoga was created not only as a community event, but as a business promotion tool to draw customers down to Big Basin Way after road closure associated with Caltrans water line improvements in 1989. Coordinator Surdin noted that today approximately 30,000 people participate in Celebrate Saratoga. Coordinator Surdin explained the funding for Celebrate Saratoga. Coordinator Surdin stated that the funding has vaned during the years ranging from $7,000 in seed money to only in-kind services (approximately $12,978). Coordinator Surdin presented three potential in-kind services options. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked Coordinator Surdin if she has been in contact with the Chamber. City Council Minutes 17 August 7, 2002 Coordinator Surdin responded that she faxed the report to the Chamber on August 2, 2002. Councilmember Waltonsmith stated that Celebrate Saratoga is a fund raising event for the Chamber. Councilmember Waltonsmith ask Coordinator Surdin if she was able to find out the cost to the vendors who participate in the event. Coordinator Surdin stated that staff was unable to obtain those figures. Referring to Option 3, Mayor Streit asked Supervisor Torres if he felt comfortable allowing an outside service run the event with no City employees present. Rick Torres, Public Works Supervisor, responded that he would feel most comfortable is having the usual eight City employees present at the event, although six would be adequate. Supervisor Torres stated that his main concern is safety. Councilmember Bogosian stated that the Public Works employees have always done a remarkable job during Celebrate Saratoga. Councilmember Bogosian stated that the cost to provide in-kind services is not a lot of money to invest in the community. Councilmember Bogosian stated that next year he feels the support of the City contributes to the event in-kind services should be conditioned that the profits from the sale of liquor be given to nonprofit groups. Ray Froess, 20225 Ljepava Drive, stated that he has been participating in Celebrate Saratoga for 18 years. Mr. Froess read a statement explaining the history of the event and it's growth. Mr. Froess stated that many nonprofit groups participate in the event. Mr. Froess noted that planning for Celebrate Saratoga starts months prior with 15 committee leaders. Mr. Froess noted that the profits from the event help to keeps the membership dues the lowest in the valley. Mr. Froess stated that the Chamber feels Celebrate Saratoga is good for business, residents, and the City. In regards to the contract between the City and the Chamber, Mr. Froess explained that there are three main issues: 1) Chamber office relocation; 2) fee for service contract; 3) Celebrate Saratoga contract. Mr. Froess stated that that prior to this meeting the City provided the Chamber with a break down of services. After reviewing the labor costs, Mr. Froess stated that the Chamber feels that they pay for some of the same services the City provides such as the Sheriff's office for street closure and traffic control and an eight man crew to empty the garbage cans. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked why the Chamber has not provided a cost break down to the City and supports cutting down on City services. Mr. Froess responded that the Chamber spends approximately $10,000 on the same services the City claims to be providing. Mr. Froess stated that this is an issue that the Chamber would like to discuss with the City. City Council Minutes 1$ August 7, 2002 Mayor Streit stated that he has seen the City's trucks loaded with garbage during the event. Mayor Streit noted that the communications between the City and the Chamber must improve. Councilmember Bogosian proposed that the City and the Chamber continue discussions and try and work out all the issues discussed tonight. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he is willing to represent the City Council. City Manager Anderson suggested that the Chamber and the City have a post event meeting. Mr. Froess suggested that Supervisor Torres attend their monthly planning meetings. Vice Mayor Baker noted that he is in favor of supporting Celebrate Saratoga at a level that the City gets that job done and done correctly. Councilmember Mehaffey noted that he feels the Chamber and the Public Works department do a great job. 15. SHERIFF'S OFFICE PARKING OPTIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. Director Cherbone explained that the Sheriffs Office is losing its parking arrangement with the Federated Church in September. As a result, it is necessary to find additional or available parking spaces for Sheriff personnel to park their vehicles. Director Cherbone noted that proximity and availability are the two main concerns in locating parking. Director Cherbone explained that the Parking District, in particular Parking District #3, holds the greatest potential to accommodate Sheriff Office parking demand. A parking study prepared by Fehr & Ppeers from July 23, 2002 showed the peak demand for parking occurred in Parking District lots between the hours of 6-9 p.m. This coincides with the period of lower demand by the Sheriffs Office. The Sheriff's Office need for parking at this time of day is approximately 12-15 parking spaces. At 10:00 p.m. this demand is reduced to 6 spaces. Sheriff office parking demand peaks between 2:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m. Monday, Wednesday, and Friday during swing shift overlap, which is the time when administration staff is still present. Director Cherbone noted that an additional resource is Neal's Hallow where there are 18 public parking spaces available. City Council Minutes 19 _ August 7, 2002 Director Cherbone stated that the creation of additional parking spaces and the optimization of existing public parking lots can also provide a resource for Sheriff's Office parking. There will be 10 public parking spaces created when the new fire station is developed and staff has determined that an additional 13 spaces could be created in Parking District #3. Vice Mayor Baker asked that if the City designates parking areas for the employees of the Sheriff's Department that are not adjacent to the office would the employees park their personnel cars there and walk to the office or is the parking going to flow back into the neighborhood streets. City Manager Anderson noted that he toured the different parking sites with Captain Bacon and Lieutenant Hirokawa and the consensus was if personnel parking is dispersed throughout the public parking areas it should keep their personal cars out of the neighborhoods. City Manager Anderson noted that the Sheriff s Office has to work hard to regulate their employees. Lieutenant John Hirokawa, SCC Sheriff s Department, stated that in regards to the Sheriffs employees parking in the neighborhoods, if its public parking, he cannot discipline employees for parking legally, he can only stress to the them that they need to park in the other designated parking areas. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that trying to change human behavior takes time. Arvin Engleson, Federated Church, noted that the Church has had good communications with the Sheriff s Department; the difficulty is their personnel do not comply with repeated requests such as no parking along the curb on Wednesday and Sunday mornings in which the employees still park there. Mr. Engleson noted that he thinks some type of restricted parking around Federated Church and throughout the surrounding neighborhood is probably a good solution. City Manager Anderson noted that he would be happy to facilitate a meeting between the Church, Sheriff s Department, and the neighborhood. Mayor Streit noted that maintaining the character of the neighborhood and keeping the Sheriff s Department in Saratoga is very important to this Council. Mayor Streit noted that some type of compromise has to be worked out. Councilmember Waltonsmith requested the Sheriff s Office report back to the Council on their progress or new suggestions and/or new problems. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to re-strip the parking stall in parking District 3 and permission granted to the Sheriff s employees to park in any public parking area. City Council Minutes 20 August 7, 2002 14. VILLAGE PARKING STUDY RESULTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Danielle Surdin, Economic Development Coordinator, presented staff report. Coordinator Surdin noted that the lack of adequate parking in the Village has long been a topic of discussion within the Village business community. Most recently, the Saratoga Business Development Committee raided the issue as [part of economic development discussions. To determine whether the lack of adequate parking was a reality or a perception staff hired Fehr & Peers Inc. to gather analytical data and draws conclusions about parking availability in the Village. Coordinator Surdin noted that unfortunately last year, Fehr & Peers were unable to conduct the study until after the September 11`" attacks and those events most likely skewed the resulting data to some degree. Many businesses have reported some decrease in traffic and revenue since the event. Council directed staff to conduct an additional parking study in Summer 2002 to compare to last years results. Coordinator Surdin summarized the results as follows: Saturday • Lots 1,2 & 4 had the same occupancy patterns with occupied spaces increasing throughout the day and peaking in the evening hours • Lot 3 is least utilized; there are spaces available all day • Lot 5 (Saratoga Village Center) peaked during the lunch hour and steadily decreased throughout the day Wednesday • Lot 1 never fully utilized • Lots 3 & 5 experienced the majority of the demand in the midday hours between 11 a.m. - 2p.m, but never fully utilized • Lots 2 & 4 near capacity at the lunch hour and is fully utilized during the dinner hours • Lot 5 (Saratoga Village Center) was only fully utilized during the lunch hour Coordinator Surdin noted that on-street parking spaces were never fully occupied in the Village area on a weekday or weekend day. The highest percentage of occupied spaces during the evening hours between 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. Coordinator Surdin explained that the survey results from the July 2002 parking Study to the September 2002 parking study noting that generally the percentages did not vary. Coordinator Surdin suggested parking management options such as: • Improved signage to alert drivers of parking lots • Incentives such as no time limit spaces in areas farther from destinations to encourage business owners and employees to park in less used spaces City Council Minutes 21 August 7, 2002 • Better enforcement of time limits on the premium spaces nearest businesses • Development of a parking brochure that highlights all parking areas for distribution by businesses to their customers • Broadcasting of parking information over the TIS radio station Vice Mayor Baker asked where the valet parking services park the cars. Councilmember Mehaffey responded that they park the cars in the public parking lot to the left of Wild Wood Park, along 4`" Street, and sometimes into the neighborhoods. Mayor Streit thanked Coordinator Surdin for the report. 11. CITY OF SARATOGA INTERIM CDBG FUNDING PROGRAM GUIDELINES FOR SEPTIC ABATEMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution and guidelines. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-064 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING INTERIM CDBG FUNDING PROGRAM GUIDELINES FOR SEPTIC ABATEMENT Lata Vasudevan, Assistant Planner, presented staff report. Planner Vasudevan explained that in an effort to improve underground and creek water quality in the region, the Saratoga City Council adopted a septic abatement ordinance that applies to all properties within the City. The ordinance requires abandonment of septic systems and connection to the public sanitary sewer system when a public sewer line is available within 200 feet of a property line. Pursuant to the ordinance, owners of properties that meet certain criteria may obtain a maximum five-year extension to comply with the requirements of the ordinance. Planner Vasudevan noted that property owners facing financial hardships have two options. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 7-10.080(d), the City Council may further extend the five-year time period granted to property owners upon a determination of financial hardship. The other option is that qualifying property owners may apply for grants from the CDBG program to cover the cost of septic abatement and sewer connection. Planner Vasudevan explained that in September 2001, the City Council appointed a Sub-committee comprising of Council members Evan Baker and Ann Waltonsmith to review all applications from property owners requesting CDBG funds or an extension of the five-year period due to financial hardship. Planner Vasudevan noted that the purpose of this Staff report is to adopt guidelines for determining applicant eligibility for receiving CDBG funds to cover the cost of septic abatement. City Council Minutes 22 August 7, 2002 Planner Vasudevan explained that staff referred to the City of Campbell's housing rehabilitation loan program guidelines to assist in developing the criteria. The evaluation of household income as well as the "Substantial resources" eligibility is the same criteria adopted by the City of Campbell. The income limits for low- income households are based on current Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Income Guidelines for Santa Clara County jurisdictions. Planner Vasudevan noted that staff was requesting that Council adopt a resolution approving the Interim CDBG Funding Program Guidelines for Septic Abatement. Vice Mayor Baker stated that the problem will not be the disclosure of income, but the additional resources that people have that does not provide income, to him this is the only gray area of the guidelines. BAKER/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION ADOPTING INTERIM CDBG FUNDING PROGRAM GUIDELINES FOR SEPTIC ABATEMENT. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 9. SARATOGA LIBRARY ROOM-NAMING POLICY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that in April, Council asked staff to draft a room-naming policy for donations of $200,000 or more to the library. BOGOSIAN/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED LIBRARY ROOM-NAMING POLICY. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 8. INTRODUCTION OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING ORDINANCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst, presented staff report. Analyst Bloomquist reported that the purposed of this report tonight was to provide background information and introduce Council to the proposed Construction and Debris Recycling Ordinance. Analyst Bloomquist stated that the California Integrated Waste Management Act was passed by the State Assembly in 1989 to divert materials from landfills in order to preserve decreasing landfill capacity and diminishing natural resources. The bill mandates each California City and county to divert 50% of all solid waste from landfill or transformation facilities through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities by January 1, 2000. City Council Minutes 23 August 7, 2002 Analyst Bloomquist reported that the City has achieved a 56% diversion rate for the past 2 years and will most likely maintain this rate based upon the present level of source reduction and recycling participation by Saratoga residents and business owners. Analyst Bloomquist explained that to assist the City in maintaining a diversion level above 50% and to avoid statutory penalties associated with non-compliance, it is important that the City be proactive and continue to implement cost-effective programs aimed at increasing a diversion of waste from the landfill. Analyst Bloomquist explained that construction and demolition debris recycling (C&D), as a condition of construction and demolition permits, can result in significant diversion of C&D material form Bay Area landfills. Of the programs and activities in Saratoga's Source Reduction and Recycling Element, the non- residential inert recycling program has yet to be implemented. Analyst Bloomquist stated that the Board of West Valley Solid Waste Management Authority, of which the City is a member, recommends a Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance be approved by City Council for inclusion in its permit conditions. These conditions apply to all major construction, remodeling or demolition projects over 2,500 square feet. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to schedule the public hearing for the first reading of the construction and demolition debris recycling ordinance on September 4, 2002. COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that on September 28, 2002 the Saratoga Arts Commission would be holding their first "Art in the Park". Vice Mayor Baker noted that the Finance Commission is in the process of developing a matrix to measure efficiency. Councilmember Bogosian noted that the Library Expansion Committee recently reviewed the landscaping plans for the Library. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS None OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None City Council Minutes 24 August 7, 2002 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business Mayor Streit recessed the meeting at 11:40 p.m. noting that Council would be returning to Closed Session to finish the City Manager's evaluation. Due to the fact that it is late, Councilmember Mehaffey suggested that the City Manager's evaluation be added to the September 4, 2002 agenda. Consensus of the City Council to continue the City Manager's evaluation to the September 4, 2002.-pity Council meeting. City Council Minutes 2$ August 7, 2002