Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-20-1974 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME:/, Wednesday, March 20, 1974 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: ~ Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., ~aratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Bridges, Brigham, Diridon, Kraus and Smith Absent: None B. MINUTE S It was moved by Councilman Bridges and seconded by Councilman Diridon that the minutes of March 6~ 1974, be approved. The motion was carried. C. KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS MARATHON RUN Mayor Smith introduceha letter, da[ed March 18,.1974, to the Council from Mr. Dan O'Keefe, ~hairm~p ~f the F~ni~hts of Columbus,',which requested per- missionto use Saratoga city ~treetS on April 7, 1974, between 9:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., for the Second Annual Knights of Columbus Marathon. Mr. O'Keefe stated' 500 runners 'were expected to participate in'the 26-mile · . race, and added that there would be, coordination between the Saratoga Sheriff's Department and the Knights of ~01umBu~. He invited Mayor Smith to attend the subsequent banquet honoring the participants, and stated that he hoped the Mayor could attend to present trophies to the winners. It was moved by Councilman Bridges ~nd seconded by Councilman Kraus that the Knights of Columbus be permitted to. use Saratoga city streets on April 7, 1974 for the Second Annual Knights of Columbus Marathon. The motion was carried unanimously. II. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARATOGA AND ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO. FOR PURCHASE OF ARCO STATION PROPERTY ON BIG BASIN WAY The Mayor explained that the purpos& of this purchas~ contract was to 'acquire the ARCO Station property on Big Basin Way in order to obtain parking facilities for the Village area. The City Manager stated. the proposed Purchase Contract had bern modified by changing Item 9 to provide acceptance of the Purchase Contract within 15 days, rather than the proposed 30-day period. He noted that ANCO had requested a 10% down payment. of $6,000, which was in alignment with p~evious discussions held on this matter. It was moved'by Councilman Bridges and seconded by Councilman Kraus that the City Attorney enter into an agreement with Atlantic-Richfield Company for the purchase of the ANCO property on Big Basin Way. The motion was carried unanimously. B. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE HIGHWAY 9 WALKWAY, OAK STREET TO .ALOHA STREET' Mr. Beyer introduced a Memorandum from the Director of Public Works to the City Manager, dated March 14, relative to this matter. He stated the proposed Cooperative Agreement with the D~partment o~. Transpor[ation - Highway 9 Walkway~ Oak Street to Aloha Street Cooperative Agreement provided for: 1) the City to prepare plans and specifications for State approval; .2) upon approval, the City award the con- tract and supervise the construction of the project; 3) the St~te's share of · the total cost was not to exceed $21,000; 4) the City would furnish the State with a detailed statement of total ~osts expended upon completion of the project; and 5) the City maintain i~provements of the project at its own expense. It was moved by Mayor Smith and secbnded by Councilman Bridges that the Mayor be authorized to execute the Cooperative Agreement~ with the Department of Transportation, and authorize advertising for bids upon execution of same. The motion was carried unanimo~sly.~ C. AGREEMENT BETWEEN' THE CITY OF SARATOGA AND ENVIROS TO PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONSULTING SERVICES Mr. Beyer explained it had been recommended at prior discussions that the City hire ENVIROS, an environmental consultant, to evaluate the Environ- mental Impact Report on the. Blackwell Homes project of the Parker Ranch. Councilman Diridon expressed concern over whether ENVIROS ,as i~volved in doing business with developers in Saratoga. The Ci.ty Manager replied he was not certain about this, but suggested this be a condition of the contract. It was moved by Councilman Diridon and seconded by Councilman Kraus approving the authorization to execute a Contract Agreement between the City and ENVIROS to prepare an EIR on the'Parke~ Ranch, subject to certification that this firm was not doing business with. B~ackwell Homes. The motyon was carried unanimously.. D. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARATOGA .ANDSRALPH ANDERSON & .ASSOCIATES FOR PERSONNEL CONSULTANT SERVICES Mr. Beyer stated all applicants forZthe position of Planning Director had be~n dismissed. He requested that, due to the time frame involved, the consulting firm of Ralph Anderson and Associates be contracted to assist in. hiring a Planning Director. He added that the cost of this servic~ would not exceed $2,000'. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Bridges, approving authorization to execute a contr'act between the City and Ralph Anderson and Associates for personnel consultan~ ~services. The motion was carried unanimo~ ly. III. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL RESOLUTIONS A. PETITION FROM RESIDENTS IN CHESTER AVENUE AREA TO ~LA~E A WARNING SIGN ON EITHER SIDE OF CHESTER AVENUE TO REDUCE THE RISK OF ACCIDENTS AT THIS LOCATION Mayor Smith read a. petition concernfng approximately 40 signatures from the residents of the Chester Avenue area. which requested warning signs be placed on Chester Avenue. Mr. Robert Shook, Director of Public~ Works, stated.he had no objections to the installation of the signs~ but felt the real problem was in the maintenance of Chester Avenue. He suggested this matter be explored further. Mr. Larry Numes, 14038 Chester Avenue, stated he felt the problem was more tha~ "just the chuckholes inthe road". He explained there were many pedestrians who/~d this road, and there Was a blind corner. He pointed out.that a serious accident could occur, and the installation of these warning signs would eliminate most. of the prob.%~m~ion Chester Avenue. It was moved by Councilman Diridon and s~conded by Councilman Bridges that the staff be directed to install warning signs on Chester Avenue, and report to the Council if further action w~s wa~ranted~ ~he motion was carried unanimously. - 2 - ' B. RESOLUTION NO. 85-9~.1~ . , Resolution Amending Resolution No. 85-9.8 Adding to Basic Salary Classes, Employment Position Classification'and Compensation. Schedule for Employees of the City of'Saratoga Mr. Beyer stated the proposed Resolution 85-9.13 provided for two additional job classifications: P~rsonnel/Accouhting Clerk and Maintenance Foreman. He requested action on this matter be postponed to the first meeting of April, pending further review. Mayor Smith directed this matter be continued until April 3. C. RESOLUTION NO. 489-2 Resolution of the City Council Amending and Superseding Resolution No. 48q and Resolution No. 489-1, Establishing the Procedure for Recognition of · Employee Organizations and Conferring with Said Organizations The City Manager stated that, in conformance ~ith the State Law pertaining · to the Meet-and-Confer process, the City Manager had met with representatives of the Saratoga Employees Association and their attorney to review the pro- posed resolution. He stated this resolution contained a process for unit determination, particularly if ther~e was a change in the unit; and it established an arbitration procedure whereby a third party couldbe brought into discussions to assist in settling disputes. He stated the employees · had suggested a binding arbitration statement be added pertaining to the resolution of other items, but tha~ he had opposed this on the basis that final decis$ons should be made by the City Council. It was moved by Councilman Iraus and seconded by COuncilman Bridges that Resolution No. 489-2,,establishing the'procedure for ~ecognition of,employee Organizations and conferring with slame, be adopted. The motion was carried unanimously. Mayor Smith requested the City Manager agendize this matter for further discussion at a future Committee of' the Whole meeting. Mr. Beyer noted this request. D. RESOLUTION NO. 8.2 Resolution Amending Resolution No. 8 tolAllow City Manager Authorization to Enter into Certain Contracts for Services Mr. Beyer stated this proposed resolution provided that the City Manager be granted authority to enter into contracts for service within the scope of the adopted budget, and.according to Resolution 8 and Resolution 8-1, which authorized the City Manager to approve capital expenditures and operating and maintenance expenditures up to ~3,500.' The City Attorney added this resolution was simply a clarification of the existing procedures. It was moved by Councilma~ Diridon ~nd seconded by Councilman Bridges that Resolution No. 8.2, giving the City Manager authorization toenter into certain contracts for,services, be adopted. The motion was carried. E. ORDINANCE NO. 38.54 [ Ordinance Granting a Franchise to Saratoga Cable Television, Inc.~ to - Construct, Operate, and Maintain a Cable Television System within the ~City of Saratoga.-y This matter was postponed until later in the agenda. IV. ~UBDIVISIONS, BUILDING'SITE'S AND ZONINg REQUESTS A.SDR-1091 MATE VOROS, 'PIERCE ROAD Replacement of Improvement' Bond Mr. Beyer stated the building site!for SDR-1091 had been approved at 'the last City Council Meeting. The applicant had requested the cash~bond in the amount of $1,688.39 posted forthis building site be replaced by an investment ~certificat~ in the amodnt of $1,690. It was moved by Councilman Bridges 'and seconded by Councilman Kraus that the applicant's.cash bond b~ refunded and the investment certificate be accepted in its place. The motion .was carried. B. TRACT 5135 SARATOGA' FOOTHILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WARDELL ROAD AT HIGHWAY 85 Construction Acceptance A question was raised as to.whether the property owner of the private portion of Wardell Road was required tomaintain wooden barriers between 'the private and public sections of this road. The Director of Public Works replied that there was no stipulation-in.the bond to provide for this. It was noted that if the property owner requested'the~City assist' in barricading this abandoned right-of-way, the City would cooperate. It was moved by Counciiman Diridon and seconded by .Councilman Bridges that construction by Saratoga Foothills ~evelopment Corporation. of' Wardell Road at Highway 85 be approved. The motion was carried. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ordinance No. 38.56 (S~cond Reading) Consideration of an'Ordinance Providing for Truck Traffic Route Through the City and Prohibiting Certain Overnight Parking of Certain Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Mayor Smith stated this matter h~d'.been continued.and reopened the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. There were no comments atthis time. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and* ~ec~nd~d b~ Councilman Bridges that the public hearing relative to Ordinance No. 38.56 be closed. The motion was carried. The publicshearing was Closed at 8':26 p.m~:= It was moved by Councilman Kraus and' seconded by Councilman Bridges that Ordinance No..38.56 be adopted. -The motion was carried unanimously. The City Attorney suggested those owners of trucks in the city who would be affected by this Ordinance be advised regarding the adoption of this ordinance and that it would go into ~ffect in 30~.days. The Mayor directed Mr. Beyer to advise same. B. DEMONSTRATION BICYCLE ROUTE SYSTEM -~PHASE I The City Manager explained that after public hearings were held on this matter last year~.the Mayor had appointeda Select Committee to.review the proposed bike plan. He. stated a plan had been prepared, but the Mayor's Select Committee .had requested a joint session be held with the City Council prior to taking action. He suggested this session be held on April 23, 1974, and MayOr Smith directed this matterlbe continued until the first Council Meeting in May. Demonstration Bicycle Route System (Cont'd.) The Mayor opened the public hearing'relative to'this matter at 8:33 p.m. Mr. Martin Gandel, 103i6 Dennison Avenue, Cupertino, stated he was building a home in the Shadow Oaks area and%asked if there was a way !to restrict motor bikes to the streets instead.of the dirt area behind the high school. The City Attorney explained this'was private'property and the City hap no jurisdiction to enforce'this request. Mayor Smith stated the Staff would communicate this complaint to the SchoOl District. .Mr. Norm Matteon~, Chairman of the!Mayor's Select,Committee, presented a brief report of the bike plan, as follows: 1. Highway 85 - Traffic conditions were such that there was not sufficient room f~r pedestrian ztraffic.and/or a bike path. He stated further'consideration wo.uld be !given to this.' 2. Highway 9 - This would be coord~inated with the Highwas 9 walkway project which was adoptedlearlier. 3. Cox and. Saratoga Avenues - These routes appeared'to be satisfactory.. 4. Fruitvale Avenue - There should~ be particular attention given to the interfacingin front of RedHo0d School. 5. Herriman Avenue - "Bike routes-striped" and parking prohibitions were indicated as pe~ the letter, da~ed January 15, 1974, from DeLeuw, Cather and Company. Mr..Robert Miller, 20322 Carol Lane~ stated he represented the Northwestern Homeowner's Assqciation, and requested a bike trail be considered for the · .Prospect Road/proposed new freeway ~rea in that the pavement was narrow and the road was in poor condition. Mayor Smith directed this be discussed further at the Study S~sSion on April 23. Mr. Bill Souza, 13830 ~aratoga Avenue, inquired if a bike trail would be considered along the creek behind Redwood School. The Mayor explained this would be discussed as part of the T~ails Plan portion of the 1973 General Pla~ There were no further.comments made. It was moved by Councilman Bridges and seconded by Councilman Brigham that the public hearing relative to the Bike Route Plan be continued to the first council meeting in May, with the understanding that a study session be he~d! on April 23rd to discuss this matter. The motion .was carried. The publicshearing was closed at 9:09 p.m. Councilman Bridges stated there was'a public funding program by the state and federal governments'regarding bike routes. He suggested the Staff contact the Santa Clara qounty Transportation Commission regarding this. Mayor Smith announced th'at a movie on bike safety would be shown at the first Council Meeting in April. C. RESOLUTION NO. 686 SANITARY SEWAGE'PROJECT 1974-1, UNIT NO. 1 (Informal HeariBg) Mayor Smith stated this'was an informal hearing. He explained there had been a number of failure§ 0flSepti~ 'tank~ ih'the area.'north. of Prospect Road, and the residents thereof.had'reque~edthe SanitatiOn District install a sewage 'system in the area. Sanitary Sewage Pro~ct 1974-1 (Cont'do) Mr. Goodman of Sanitation District% No. 4 explained there were 67 parcels involved in this project and gave .the following report': If this is approved at the Council Meeting?.a public ~hearing would beheld on May 9; construction would begin the first para of June and would be comple'ted in approximately 60 days; the streets would be repaVed by the e'nd of August. He stated the estimated cost per parcel would be $1,097. There were,no addiDional comments. It Lwas moved by Councilman~ Diridon! and seconded 'by Councilman Kraus that the public hearing relative to Resolution No. 686 be closed. The motion-was carried unanimously. The 'public hearing was closed at 9:55 p.m. It was'moved by Councilman Diridon and seconded by C~uncilman Kraus' that 'Resolution No. 686, pertaining to Sanitary Sewage Project 1974-1, Uni~l, be adopted. The motion was carried unanimously. III. E. ORDINANCE NO. 38.5~ '(Cont~d.) Ordinance Granting a Franchise to Saratoga Cable Television~ I~c., to Cons~ruct~ Operate, and Maintain a Cable Television System within the City of Saratoga The City Manager introduced the revised CATV proposal whicb reflected the following changes: (1) Section 6 ~ad been rewritten to ipclude ~ time schedule.for Service Area I; (2) Section 7~ ~hibi~i~A-hadibeen deleted; ~) the Service Area Map had been modified to expand Area I be decreasing Area II. He a~ded the appligant had requested the Toll Gate area be deleted from Area I. He explained that Service Area II (the hillside community) posed a difficult problem in that it was a less dense area and would require higher installation and maintenance costs which c~uld ~e offset by an ~ssessment charge to the homeowner. He presented the following proposal, which had been aimed at after discussions with the applicant: . 1. The applicant would be required to pre-sell to 50% of the homeowners in 'Area II within 6 months after completion of Service A ea I. If this 50% f{gure was not reached,.the~ applicant would not'be obligated to take any further action.. 2. A formula~was developed for compiling this assessment charge, and as a basis of the formula the following hypothetical figures were used: 60 homes per mile based on Service Area I, with 50% subscription sign-up, at a cost of $21,000 per cable mile. (a) 300 homes in Area II ='5 h6mes per cable mile 60 homes in Area (b) 5~hom~_':pg~'caB~emiig~x25~i'~0~O'p~-mii~'==$25~,~000 - (c) Less ~108,000 applicant~s share = ~147,000 = $980/per subshriber 150 or 50% of 300 homes The assess~en~ Charge would be $980 per homeowner. He explained this charge could be paid by the subscribers in a lump sum or on an amortized monthly rate. The dollar am~un~ i~ hypothetical as the example was used to illustrate the formula. 3. The assess~ent,'charge wg~ld b~ ~ei~bur~ablelto the initial s.ubscriberas new subscriptiohsI wereadded..~This reimbursement would be either in the form of cash or credited toward the yearly service charge. He added that if a home was sold, the ass,essment charge reimbursement would ~emain as 'part of the property. - 6 - Ordinance No. 38.54 (CATV) Councilman Diridon stated he felt the fallicy of the process was that if 50% of the homeowners in Area iI did nqt sign up for the service, the service wouM not be rendered in the area at all~ and this area was where cable television was needed the most. He indicated that i~ was not likely 50% of the home- owners would subscribe for cable television service 'at a $980 assessment charge. . Mr. Warburton, attorney representing Communications Systems Corporation, stated that since Service Area II ~as~sparsely populated, it would increase the installation and.maintenance c6sts. He stated there may be a greater desire for'service in the area, and if more than 50% of the homeowners sub- 'scribed, the assessment charge would be less. He explained that ultimately the people who paid for this assessment charge would be reimbursed by others who tied up later. He added that the monthly rate in Service I would be $8.50; and in ,Service tI, $11.77. Mr. Nishimura, the applicant, ~tated this example was for illustrative pur- poses'only and explained the figures used could change. He pointed out one of the.engineering consultants bidding on this project had indicated the cost of constructlob might be as low as $13,000 per mile, and the 12~mile figure used was over the actual figure in ~the area; therefore., the assessment charge might not.be $980, but less. The Mayor requested the applicant and Staff prepare new examples based on more realistic figures and presen~'~this report Tuesday, March 26, at a 7:00 p'~m. meeting. He stated this would be agendized as an action item. Councilman Bridges asked what the i~pact of additional homes in the area would be, and he questioned the composition of the installation cost. Mr. Warburton replied that if new homes were built in the area between now and the pre-sell period, they would' be 'coUnted in the percentage figure. He added that ~f this figure was over 60%, there would be no additional cost to the residents and Mr. NiShimura would pick up this cost factor. If, however, this figure was net over 60%, the added installation and maintenance cost would'be picked up by the subscribers. Mr. Nishimura explained that labor, amplifiers and cable were the factors involved in the composition of the cost.for installation. Mr. Harvey Ingha~,' a resident of Saratoga, stated t'he standards put together ~y the Citizens Committeeshad been changed considerably, and made the followi~ comments: (ly the rate had 7gone from $~.50 to $8.~0 per month; (2) the installation costs had gone from zero to $35; (3) the professiopal performance bond had been lowered from $200,000ito $75,0001~_a_~s~;,..(4) a large area might not be serviced'at~all;fand'(5) most people wouldn6t pay $980 for this service. He stated he felt the Council neede~ more inpu[ from the citizens of Saratoga in that there had not been a public hearing on this for over a year, and suggested that other cable televis~pn companies might have other lsolutions to the problem. Mr. Andrew Varardi, 20566 W~rdell Road, stated there could be two results to 'a 50% front-end sale: (1) it would discourage completion of the System because of the large amount of money involved; and (2) ther~ would be no incentive for the builder to 'sell more subscriptions. He suggested w~en redoing the formula for Area II, instead of basing an a~bitrary 60 homes per mile figure, use the average number'of ho~esjin Area I as the basis. At this'point, the City Manager explained the reason.60 homes had been used as the base was that the City.required cable be installed on both sides of the streets to prevent c~oss-cutting o~ the streets; therefore, the system had to! be duplicated and thus~ the 60-homes figure. Ordinance No. 38.54 (CATV)- Mr. Martin Gandel, 10316 Dennison Avenue, felt the'example used seemed "almost deliberately chosen to be deceptive." He felt that in preparing an analysis there should be an upper'limit of 100% acceptance as well as a minimum rate. He stated, "There!are only 5 parcels that are geared for 50% acceptance, and lif there is a Eequirement for 50% acceptance, you may as well call for a referendum for community acceptance." A gentlementfrom the audience suggested each subscriber be given the option to pay the assessment charge in a Lump sum or an amortized monthly rate. The Mayor concludgd the discussion~ by stating that a real example should be created using actual geographical and cost figures.' He stated that with this re.al example, a decision could be made as to whether (1) to allow 'a differen- tial rate in installation charges; *(2) to allow a monthly differential rate; (3) to allow differential ih the time element required for servicing AreaII; or (4) to look elsewhere for the cable television system. He directed this. matter be continued to th~ March 26 meeting for 'further discussion. VI. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR 1. The following lappointments wer~ made: Committee Representative Alternate Planning Policy Committee M~r'Smi~h'''~ '3 ~C°uncilman~B~fd~s~ Transportation Committee Couqcilman~rriH~s Councilman Brigham Sanitation Committee -MayOr Smith Councilman Bridges' ABAG Councilman Diridon Councilman Brigham Inter-City Council May6r Smith Councilman Bridges · U.D.O.S. Councilman Diridon The City Manager ~tated 'names regaEding Planning Commission and Parks Commission openings would be distributed. The Mayor directed this be discussed at the next Executive SeSsion. 2. County of Santa Clara Proposed OrdinancesRelating to Containers, i.e., Litter Control (Referred from Mayor's Committee, Inter-City Council) Mayor Smith stated the Santa Clrara Inter-City Council had met relative tothis ordinance and had referred the matter back to the individual cities in the County for further study. He pointed out that California law provided for a Solid Waste ~Commission which had made various reports relative to this problem~ At this time, a letter was introduced to the Council, dated March 11, 1974, ifrom Mr. George Figner of the Coca-Cola Company. Mr. Figher stated he was representing the Santa Clara County Beverage Industry Group which was composed of the beer industry, the soft drink distributors and the container manufacturers. He seated they felt legislation of this type was,d~fflcult to implement, particularly on the local level, from the standpoint of bootlegging. .He explained one could simply purchase the desired product prohibited in one communit~ a few miles awayin another community. He pointed out there were'effective alternatives to reducing the l~tter problemin the form of enforcin~ litter laws and supporting educational programs which would generate public concern. He presented ~ brief report based on 1972 Oregon Highway Patrol statistics to support thLis a~gument, as follows: In 1973 there were 721 citations issued for littering,'which resulted in 666 convictions, $9,872 in fines, and a total of 123 days spent in jai~ by repe~tors; 4,745 warning citations were issued as well. .- 8 - Ordinance Relating to Containers, ~tc. (Cont'd.) In the first 10monthslof 1973, there'were 701 citations issued which resulted in 645-convictions, $12,000 in fines, and 198days .spent in jail by repeaters. Mr. Fignet indicated that the li~te.r problem in O~egon was'being .cleaned up primarily by the enforcement'of Litter l~ws and ~ducatiOn of the public. He added that the costs to consumers for the mandatory returnable bottles were risin~ ata tremendous~rate du~ t07~h~ production, washing and trans- portation of these bottles. He'~urgedthe City to make a further study into this matter before t~ing action, and stated he would submit further information regarding"'~his prior tO. the next Councilsm~ting. Mayor Smith informed the Council th~is matter would be on the next ICC agenda, and if action was to be taken, that would be the time to do it. B. FINANCE 1. Payment of Claims Councilman Bridges moved, seconded by Councilman Di~idon, that Disbursement Report, dated'March 20, 1974, from Warrant No. 18936 to Warrant No. 19016, be approved.~ The motion was carried. 2. City Clerk's Financial Report -,Noted and f~led. 3. City Treasurer~s Report -' Noted!and filed° C. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Councilman Kraus reported that the request to change the report prepared by the P.P.C. Hillside Committee had been denied by a vote of 10-5. He ~dded that Saratoga was affected in that~fhe~' report showed Congress Springs Road and Big Basin Way as trouble spots in 'the CoUnty hillside area. D. DEPARTMENT HEADS 1. Acting Planning Director - Report Re: Land Development Application - i Robert W. Madden, Orbit Drive Mr. Rowe reported that Staff ha~ reviewed the Madden lone-lot request for building site approvalon Orbit Road. He stated that it was Staff~s recommendation that if the cqnditions placed on the property by Fire~Chief Kraule'weremet, the City need not continue its appeal. Councilman Diridon contested this recommendation and stated that the Council had beeninformed.by the Healt~ and Fire ,Departments that it would be almost impossible to fight fires in the area and to install adequate sanitation due to the ~ubstandard road. He suggested this area be considered for a moratorium,~and that a request be made to the PPC to freeze further development in this area until these problems were addressed. ' Mr. Rowe stated that the issue was: What action should be taken by the City regarding all Land DeVelopment Committee decisions?' He indicated there was an interfacing problem between City and County ordinances, and the problem Of the time and means to review LDC decisions. Mr. Matteoni stated he felt the more appeals the County received from Saratoga, the less favorable they would probably be. He stated better groundwork 'should be laid by the City staff before appealing decisions - 9 - ~eport Re: Land Development ADp]ic~tinn Rnb~rr W. M~dd~n: Orh~ ~Dr~v~ (cont~d.) in order to convince the County!to change their ordinances to be ~ore compatible to those of Saratogays hillside ordinances.. MayorSSmith stated he felt appeals should be made ~when there was a question.that urbanization might take place, and he felt the Stanley R. L~ decision should be the vehicle hsed to a~dress the Board of Supervisors. 2'. Director of Public Works - Report Re: Communication from John Nora - Leaking Storm.Drain~ Alta Vista Avenue Mr.. Shook reported. that a letter had been received from Mr. John Nora which requested efforts be,set ,forth fo~ additional storm drains on his property. He stated he fel!t this work was not warranted but that a soils.engineer would review the matter further; findings of same would be reported to the City ~ouncil. 3. Director o~Public Works: 'Storm Drain Reimbursement - Saratoga Foothills Development, Tract 5256 · Mr. Shook 6~pla'ih~d 'the Cl[y (~uncii had previously agreed to parti- cipate in ~he cost of the storm drainage facility at the time of construction. He therefore reqomm6nded the amount of $6,232.69 be reimbursed to the developer of-]Tract 5256.~: " It was moved~y. Ma~or Smith'~nd ~sec~nde~ by Councilman Diridon that the devel~er*ofTract 52'56 of the Saratoga Foothills Development be paid $6,232~69 as a storm drain reimbGrsement. The motion was carried.' E. CITY MANAGER 1. Mr. Beyer recommended to the Council that April 2 a~d April 9 be set aside as ~ates for public hearings on the 1973 General Plan. VII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN 1. Two letters dated Ma~ch 6, 1974, 'from the Town of Los Gatos, requesting the Saratoga City Council join .with Los Gatos in requesting AMTRAKbe restored to Vasona Junction in~Los Gatos. - Approved request. 2. A letter from Ms. Kay Duffy, dated March 18, 1974, requesting the speedy implementation of the B{ke route system. - Noted and filed. 3. A memorandum, dated March 15, 1974, from Kent Dedrick, President of the Committee for Green Foothills inviting the Council to attend a conference on Saturday, April 6, to'discuss "Unstable Lands and Public Policy." - Noted and fi~ed. 4. A letter, d'ated March 13, 1974, from Mr. John Weir of the Greate~ Arguello Homeowners Association, concerning the 1973 General Plan. - The Mayor referred this letter,to the first'public hearing of the General Plan. ~ 5. A letter from Robert and Jeanne Sheffield, dated March 19, 1974, and a report entitled "Foothill EnVironmental Design Study".' The letter urged that a similar study be prepared concerning the Painless Parker Ranch. - The Mayor referred th~s matter to the Planning Commission. for review. - 10 - B. ORAL Therelwere no oral communications. VIII. ADJOURNMENT It was ~oved by Mayor Smith, seconded by Councilman Bridges that the meeting be adjourned to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on March 27, 1974, to consider Ordinance No. 38.54 (CATV). The motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:06 p.m. Respectfully.submitted, Ro - 11 -