Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-21-1972 City Council Minutes SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES TIME: Wednesday, June 21, 1972 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777~ Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, Californxa TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Dwyer, Smith, Bridges ,~fr~us ~=d'~Diridon Absent: None B. MINUTES Councilman Bridges suggested that the minutes be corrected re: Kobara and Battaglia, to reflect that the re'scinding action was taken at the applicantis request. A motion was made and carried nhat the Jute 7, i1972 Minutes be approved with the above addition. C. APPOINTMENT OF RA_~MOND ZARAGOZA, JR. TO PARKS AND RECREATION CO~IISSION The City Manager swore RaymOnd Zaragoza into the Commission. II. .BIDS AND CONTRACTS .- . - A. Q~ITO ROAD-ALLENDALEI AVENUE SIGNAL.INSTALLATIO~ It.was unanimously v~t~d"that the Ma~o~ b~ authorized to award the contract to second-low bidder, Steiny and Company,~'in the amount of $21,773.05. B. SEAL COATING AND OVERLAYING CERTAIN CITY STREETS FOR [972 It was approved to accept the contract for theY'd) A.C. Overlay - $32,701 b) Gilsonite Seal - $5,371.78 ~nd. c)~Slurry Seal - $29,557.88. It was also approved to divert $7,000 towards "extras" that may be required at a later time. Rejected bid for Oil an~ Screens - $12,~16.57. Authorized Mayor to sign contract on the basis ~f the above figure~. C. RESCISSION OF AGREEMENT WITH VALLEY TITLE' COMPANY . C The Mayor was given authorization tO ~exe ute Recission Agreement. III, FSTITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL RESOLUTIONS A. PETITION REQUESTING 'TH~ CITY OF- SARA~,OGA TO INSTALL TWO "STOP" SIGNS ON SCOTLAND DRIVE AT THE CORNER'O~ GLEN iBRAE; DRIVE It was approved to install signs making this a four-way stop. 'L B. RESOLUTION NO. 618 ADOPTING BUDGET FOR 1972-73 It was approved to adopt the Budget i~ th~ form of a Resolution. Approved to allocate $7,500 for twicd-a-year street sweeping, with the understanding that a study be made and report backL Approved increase of $18,000 to Fund '99 for Bikepaths and Trails, originally shown in Street Improvements, Fund 9~. Approved to adopt Resolution'No. 618, adopting~1972~73 Budget with the above changes. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE, 2 C. RESOLUTION NO. 617 APPROVING INTERFUND TRANSFERS FROM 1971-'72 BUDGET It was unanimously ~zoted to approve Resolution No. 617.. ; IV. 'SUBDIVIS. ION, BUILDING SITES AND ZONING REQUESTS ' A. TRACT 5161 -'KbBARA AND BATTAGLIA , -Motion-was made and carried to approye final map, subject do consideration of requested waiver of park fee in the amount of $776.. B. TRACT 5069 - AVCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS, INC., SARATOGA PARK-PROSPECT ROAD It was approved to accept improvements for construction. C. SDR-859 - ROGER ROSS -. SARATOGA HILLS ROAD..' It was approved to ~ccept lmprov~ements'. and ~elease. 75% of dash bond. D. SDR-935 -JOHN L. RICHARDSON, QUITO ROAD, CONT. FROM 6/7/72~ Motion was made and.'carried that l. t. he-Request fo~ Reconsideration of. Conditions b~ continued for '30 y ~t ~as agreed' ~hat I~Re Staff would discuss this maeter 'with San Jose Water Works during this time. E. SDR-955'- ANGELINA ARATA. MAUDE AVENUE- It was approved that the Request for Reconsideration of .Conditions be continued to the 'July 5th meeting. F. SDR-970 - ARTHUR J. PALERMO, PIKE ~OAD, CONT. FROM 6/7/72 C 1 s ' It was approved chat ~he Request for Reconsideration of ond~t on be continued co the July 5th meeting ~n order for the Staff to examine legal aspects in connection with this matter. G. SDR-971 - CARLTON TROPILA, THREE OAKS WAY It was approved to adopt Resolution No. SDR-971-1, grantin~ final building site approval. H. SDR-966 - MARJORIE W. MC INEREY, ORCHARD ROAD It was approved to adopt Resolution No; SDR-966-1, granting final building site approval. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. JOHN J. GORMAN, JR., BROOKVIEW DRIVE- indicated that the matter had been duly no.ticed as is required by law. He then asked Mr. Greg Morris, Code Enforcement Cfficer for the City of Saratoga, to present the City!s position on this matter: , Mr. Morris indicated that Section 4~-115 of the City Code st[ates that "Any license issued by the City Clerk is subject to revocation ~for cause of any of the following grounds SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 'I PAGE 3 ~ L ~', ~ .I a) When the cbntinuahce 'of the operae{on o~ th%~. license~ ·under~the license _shall be contrary-to the public health,,s~afet~, pe~ce,.welfare or morals, or b) The violation of any of the penal provisions of this article by ~he. ,- lice~see, or c) The misrepresentation of any material fact by any applicant]i~ obtaining any license hereunder, or d) Any·~lea, verdict ,or ljudgment 'of guilty df any public offense involving moral turpitude charged-agaxnst the,lice~ee, or e) A~y misrepresentation-as to the quality or nature of the go6d~ or services- sold[or offered for sale made by the lic4n§ee or his agent, servant.or ,employees to any prospective or actual purchaser, ~ustomer or cgnsumer. · Fir. Morris .explained that the City is particularly concerned w~th "a", ~"c" ~nd"" e . He then followed with an explanation: This matlter was in th~ criminal. courts during s6me portion of l~st year. Fir. Morris explained that last F~ll'he was instrhdted to issue a business ·' licehse to Mr. Gotman. He had first consulted the City Attorney regarding thisFissuance. The nature of business i~dicated on the'licenSe, application was f'photpgyaphing ,brides 'at ~he'ir weddin~S"~ Upgn,~the recommehd'ation of the 're. The license was issue November 17, 1971. ' Mr. Morris indicated tha~ he'was~later advised by neighbors 'of Mr. Gorman that~Mr. Gorman'was conducting a business that'was causing off x traffic. AS r suit ~f th~ complaints received, Mr.I Morris did investigate the property and discovered that Mr. Gorman' was donductin~'a prosperous business / in hi's home. In ~ddition, it appeared that the'amount of Qtraf~ic was above' and beyond ~he normal traffic flow inlthe neighborhood. .,It was also determfnedI that the nature of services were not in line with those as indicated on the license application. Mr. Morris then inquired'of~Mr. Marvin S~einberg, a neighbor of the Gormans, 'TDid Mr~ Gorman conduct business prio~ to November 17, 197~ and this sam~ business after Nov~mb'er ~971'?" Mr. Steinberg of 19129 Brookview Drive, replied"that Mr. Gorman had conducted business.prior to this date and the'business had "picked· up" i~ the spring. He indicated that he had been asked by the City to jot down license numbers'of cars Rar~ed in f~hnt of the IGorman'residence and, also, to note whether brides wer'e going ~n for photo- graphing. Fir. Steinberg,indicated that"between Mar 2 2 d he ch 5, 197 ~and to ay has'observed approximately 11 brides going forlphotographs. I~ addition, he" hasTobseryed young couples and people w~th'.children who do not~ppear to be friends. of the Gormans as observed in ~e,past. Mr. Steinberg indicated t~at ' · the ad in the telephone book makes reference to "Bridal Faire photography-- open until 10:00 P.M;, etc."' add not· only does this ad establish Mr. Gorman photographs other tha~ brides,-but also, that he does. his b x s is ~is home, unlike'other photographers who conduc~ ~heir business in studi6s. Another pSint ' · m~d~ by Mr. Steinberg was that the cars.of those brides coming to be photographe~ are sometimes parked in front of the Beighbors" houses, a~d this is a concern because of the risk involved ~ith children playing.· Mr. Steinberg assured the' lxc - Council that he and his family do not "sit and take ' ense numbers"; however, on May 26, at 'the request 6f the C~ty, he did record 27 licen~ numbers, and on June 6 he recorded 12. He stated that there are people coming Late at night and people staying overnight. 'Mr.. Steinberg commented that in,'thepast it has. been his word agains't Mr. Gorman'ssin this matter. Mr. Morris.indicated that he personally h~d observed one of the cars and one of the Ibride~ referred to by Mr.~Steinberg on May 27 and that'the:brid~ had had, gown with her. - -.. SARATOGA CITY' COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE 4 Mr. Dlridon inquired of Mr. Steinberg how long'the situation h~s been going on, and Mr. Steinberg,state~ "since March 1971". --,o' Mr. Morris advised that he had asked several other neighbors of Mr. ,Gorman to b~ present tonight. He then presented Mrs. Iorin Thompson:' %%. Lorin Thompson, 19110-BrookvieW Drive-Saratoga, advised= t at she as' n ladies going in and out ~f the Gorm~n-house with wedding gownS'. ' At , 11:415 A.M.' last Monday', a lad~ with a gown came out, and at 12:00 Nooh' another lady came out. Mrs. Th0mps~'lives'on the sameside~of_th~'street· as the Gormans. She indicated that there have'been times when-~she has ob~ served 8 to 12 cars parkeHr i~ 'frbnt.'- o se red several ars at .thfs r~sidence;~' She continued that she ha~ observed 5 or[ 6 young gi~ls carrying bridal gown~ and there has been-a great deal of traffic along the-street. Mrs. Ben ' -' S~ippen who lives across the street from Mr.'Gorman i~dicated' that she has also seen young couples going ~ntb the ~o~an house. She s~ated that on one occasion a girl had stqpped and asked where the "bridal fai~'! was being heldl., She also-mentioned [ha~',~ithin the·laSt 30'days she'has]o rved a bse lot 'of raffx on t c the street and cars--par~ed~'in front of th{s hohse. Mr.-Ralph Walgren, 19160 Brookview Drive,, stated that he lives~next~door to the Gormans. Mr. TWa!grem pointed out that 'there are n'o'sidewa ks alOng.this ,. · a d part'eul'ar red on Brook~iew Drive. Seco~ ly, h~ indicated ,that one e~ening ,Mr. [Steinberg came to[ his do0~' and a~ked that ,~e. observe wi~h him M~. ,Gotman .I Mary. pisano, 828, Morri venue, Sunnyva e, came 'forth,Morris [d :aske if' she had recently bee~ photographed by Mr. Gorman. Mrs. iPisano ~tated tha~ she ha~ be~n photographed for the San Jose Mercury News, ahd also, fb~ h~r " ownSuse. She indicated that some'of the~ p~ctures had been taken upstairs' in one of the rooms-that looked like a busfness' office. 'She ~urt~er indicated ~ that she had been uhder the impressibn that Mr. Gorman was going to take the .pictures at her wedding, but instead, an'other man.had taken the picture~. t · -; . '_ .,. ., · Mr. Morris asked i~ she had req~{v~d the' ph'otographs, and'Mrs.~Pisaho indichted i she ad received them; however, i6 didn't appear [hat a' p~ofessional had . that h done the work. " - Councilman Diridon a~ed if Mrs. Pisano could'-be more specifie'ii~ stating that· the[pictures "didn't look p~ofessional". He asked if the pi~tdres ~ere of~ similar quality no that of friends that have bee~ photographed~ ,Mrs.-Pisano st t d that, her friends~ pictures 'looked be~ter~'I i -' · . ,;. . .. - · Mr. Morris asked.Mrs. Glenda Hedegard td co~e for'th. He advised that Mrs~ Hedegard is recently married. She had ~ad pictures taken at a brid~mai~'s hoUse','and, also, .. and tshe replied, eJ_yrtherif there had beea other photo- g phers in Mr~G~or.~s~h_~om&, at this time, and ~Lrs. Hedegard ~tated tha~ there' · ' d d indicated that on her'wedding date she had r c d a phone call advising her that the photographer had been detained and-woqld~be late in arriving· for the ~ictures at the church. Sh~ further indicated that abbut oneshalf o~. the picthres at th~ church had been taken by Mr. Gorman and one-half. by'someone else.· - . . - '~' Mr. Morris' ' asked if Mr. Gorman's garagelhad had the appearance'of photog~apher's ~ rters·. Mrs Hedegard replied that, "No, there did~'6 seem to be the reguDar lz it~ that photographers have.". g SARATOG~ :IT~ COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE 5 ,,, : I' '., : Mr. Morris commented, at this point, that had information been available conzernfn~_the way'Mr. 'Gor~an'h~d intended to use the licens*e,.he'would not ha~ 'issued the licehSe. · 'o ' , 4 Brookview, 'S~rat6ga, ~ame forth. Mr. Gorman advised that hh~ea h~s ,a.'cOllege degreejiniphotographya' a~qapp~oximately 3 years ago, h~' d[ e ided,t'o go int~ PhOtography on a~fu~l~time b'asis'.ahd'different medias. half, It la~er be~a~ne',,4ppArep~ that h~f~houla have a'7:busiHess license,. He, explained that his ~f~S'~ "~is~['.'.t6'cou~<','had~.~esulte~,'in' a'"hung. ju~y"; his second hearing had'~un ~hoft on ti~, ~nd on his third visit it was deter- mined that he-should ~ave ~ lide~s~, and it was his f~el'ing-that there wouldt ~e no more trouble. Mr. Morris, therefore, had proceeded to, issue the license~ Mr. Gorman is o~]the opin~D-that his advertisement ~s. similar to that of,other home occupations.,, C6~cerning the "business of brides coming _. to his ho~e" , Ther ,.,. e x~"a'requxremept of the San Jose Mercury News that - (~br~des wanting'their picture;and a stor~ in the paper must provide .same to ~ ' -' the paper 24 hourS<before~ ~he girl is ~r~ied~so she hgs to.~ak~ special arrangements to c6me to my home . .~. or'I can come to her home . . and do the pre-bridal picture for.tthe newspap~.~We'do a Polotold of this pkcture - ~" so we can get the picthreLto the 'paper"early., This~iS offered in the 'bridal · package:'}:h Mr. Gotman exp~afned that h~ does~most of his photography [n'his g ~ge--th~se ~re the blac~ ~Hd white 'Polorgid pic6ures for the newspaper'· HZ'%[ommented that he had 'p~eviousl~ bee~ £ound "n~t guilty." fo~ doing this. .[ orman repl{ea, ."approjim teiy y~r Smith inquired what ~ome 'of the nem~S of p~0tographers,who a~sis~ ,...-., other weddihgs have to,be ~overed bY 0the~ photographers. · G~rman repliedl The Mayor-inquired if the ~hotographers;then bring the film back-to Mr. Go~man. Fir. that the~ ~hotographe~s generally come on Monday morning and hand-deIiver; the film. The film is the~ taken .Eo Eastman K6dak-at'.Palo.Alto p ,' Ma r y? Smith made ~eference to Mrs. Pisano, formerly Mary Willjams, married on.May 27, who claimed' that} he~ 3 x 5 photos were of' poor quality .... Mr.. Gotman explained.~ha~ one o'f the problems they have with'3 x 5 pictures is that they.don't appear 'tb hhve. the same !quality as the -larger pictures.' He also commented that he trxes to make it as clear as possible to the girl who ' is calling regarding~the p i sibility of another photographer.doing ~he pictures. o~ ThelMayor ~nquired of Mrs. hedegafd a~proximately what time she had received .- . 2~e ~all abou~ the photogrh~her .being l~te.' Mrs. Nedegard. re~lied that it wa~ · out 1:35 and the w~dding Was sch'eduled fGr' 2':00. . '- ' : .. Mr. iGorman indicated tha~'bhsically, wh~t the witnesses ale ~ay~ng is correct; however, he fe'elS'th~t. theyi are e~agge~ating somewhat.. He'advised that he has a l~cense under ,the""home occupations" s'ection to ~o business, and he feels .. ~hiS is simply-a"'re-hash" ~f last Xear'~ situation. He commented that "things :- were relative]y qui&t"until~Januar~ 1971, and at that time, the City of Saratoga dec~d&d to hire a Code Enforcement;Officer..' He claimed that Mr. Morris was very efficient in that he considered direct-action to'be appropriate, Le., if there 2XZ* Xtp rd.a. 'i" '"' ' r a 'f hg 0 i - U eSt S a.weapon".. He dlaimed that]Mr. Morris went to Los Gatos Court and then called SARATOGA ITY COUNCIl MINUTES PAGE 6 the Mercury News for release.of an artidle about "illegal photqgraphy felony e" chang . Mr. Gorman advised that he went througb~ felony hearings in court, and also to Superior Co6rt, where his bail amounted to s500. He indicated ths , in addition, tbeEe were 2 'counts qf felony kidnapping. He claimed'that "if Mr. Morris cannot do something legally, he will do .it.artificially". He stated that Ithe Sheriff's Department threw thelkidnapping charges out. Mr. Gotman is of the opinion that he has be'en."harassed" and undergone "false imprisonment" long enough. He further-indi6ated that he feels he has the legalright to 6perate in Saratoga and ~oesn't feel he is exhibiting "healt~ safety or morals" or "misre~resentxng a~y materia~'through his services. Mr. Gorman indicated that everyone xs talking about "offensive traffic", and he inquired if the people coming to his home,are~saying"'offensive things"? He commented that Fir. Steinberg must h~ve put forth a tremendous amount Of effort in order to observe his taking pictures in the ga{age because of the loc~tion, shrubs, etc~ Mayor. Smith inquired if the Rhotography Isupplies are delivered to histLhome.- Fir. Gorman replied that some of them are delivered to his home by parcel service. He indicated that there is somewhat of a confusion onMonday mornings because of film deliveries. Mrl. Gotman stated that when'the .photographers finish the weekend weddings they often come over for a "bull session" until sometimes quite late. Tbe lMayor asked how mapy would usually ~t~end these meetings. Gorman re- plie that ther wer~ no meeti gs 'as such, but ehe p otographers would ~ust ~d e n h "stop in". SOmetimes they would talk toy2:00 A.M. Mr.' Gorman con[inued that~' "basically~ the way Mr. Morris stands is that it is 'criminal'to do business in '~y home", Mr~ Gorman stated that'theI only p~ctnres taken at his home are for !he Mercury News and that he never takes any color pictures at his home. Ma o h d c · Gotman that y Smit aSke , "Are you ompensated for"th's?"'Mr. replied he is compensated, ms the picture is a part of the packet.which is offered. He c~ntinued by saying "If the Council determines that no home pictures should be taken, he will 'turn it off~'' Mr. Gorman indicated, however, that .n he ~s not the'only person doing business such as this in his ho~e; there are at least 30 others in the area.. Councilman Dwyer asked, "Didn't it occur%to'you that the neighbors might be sensitive at the time you started this business?" Mr..Gotman replied that "The neighbors were sensitive, and they were-.sensi[ive when .we were con- ducting the day care center". Mr. Gorman added that.he"wasn't b~eaking a~y law in conducting his-business. eal-I' Mr. Diridon asked Mr. Gorman i'f he r ~zed that the licens~ indicated he could ~ot have brides in his home. Mr..Gorman stated that the first part of the license asks for!"nam~of business"'and ~"nature .of business!'. He had · 'ilated "photographing brides ,at their weddingS", but h~ had .not indicated znd ,, I . dev lo pictures", etc. e pxng Mr, Diridon asked Mro Gorman.i~ the neighbors had made hi~ aware of the fact that[ they were not satisfied with the traffic flow. 'Mr° Gorman replied that 'he had seen them outside with flashlightS, and h& ~as aware 6'f the' fact that Mr. Morris-had put them up to this. CounCilman Bridges inquir~d lif Mrln ~rman Had/readc the. o~d{qan&e which applies to home business~ Mr. Gorm~n ~epli~ .~h~t h~ was familiar with every code and be I point, a motion'was ~de, seconded and ~arried that the Public Hearing closed. ,:,. .- "- !,v ,,. SARATOGA $ITY COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE 7 Mayor Smith was of the opinion that~due to the fact that Mr. Gorman has employees working under him, it appgars that he has a "full-f~edged~' business. He indicated that he feels Mr. Gorman is operating'Outside of the scope for which the business license was issued. A motion was made, seconded and carried that Mr. G~rman's bus'iness ~I, .ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A, MAYOR 1, Request to.City Manager. fo~ m~re. utili~ation o'f police reserves, 2. Complaint by realtor concerning ~'Open House" signS.gn.publ~c rfght-of- iways, . · 3. Cal~bazas Creek - City Manager to meet ~ith homeowners. 4. Santa Clara County TranSit ~Dis'tri&t ~o ~epr'ace T.~.C, under the Policy Planning CommitteeS- It was recommended by the Mayor and~ approved by the Council tba~'M~j~!~ole-Bridges be appSinted as the City's repr~sentatiye-fo'r the Santa Clara County Transit District, 4, Reid Lane and Highway 9 - Public~W6rks will communicate with'State concerning the ppssibility~of signals, Consideration of a s~cond 35 M,P.H. sign in this area. B, FINANCE " · 1, Payment of.Claims - May6r authorized to sign warrahts, 2. City Clerk's Financial ,R~port - ~roved- 3.'ITreasurer~s Report - Appro~ed. C.COUNCIL COMMITTEES.'& COMMISSION REP6RTS None D. DEPARTMENT HEADS & OFFICERS 1.Sanitary District ~4 - Mr. SBo6k~ .-Moving ahead to install fivelaterals in front of capping program on Saratoga Avenue. -2. Noise Ordinance -.Mr. Beyer: Dr~ft<to 5e~composed~._ .' . Y'~' '..~. 1. Two requests for street closures for Fourth of-July.- Approved. 2' Public Hearing for July ~th,~Mr! Wiley - Approved.' 3. Sobey Road - Will agendize for. J~ly 5th. . ~.~ Former Miljevich property'on Sara[Oga-Sunnyvale Road ecological project costs adjusted to approximately $300~less thankoriginally planned. 5. Brookview Mini-Pa~k =Will disCuSs'at next meeting. . SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES '- ,'~i c .,~ --.. PAGE 8 VII.COMMUNICATIONS A. . WRITTEN 1. Historical ZBning with 'regard tb General Plan - To be covered in Geher~l Plan Review 2. Street '~igns changed for better visability - Referred to Street [ CName Committee. ' B. ORAL VIII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 12:25~A.M. 'i ~"'~ ' '%' ~~':'~". R peqt£ 11 submitted,