Loading...
09-01-1976 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, September l, 1976 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: CouncilShen Kraus, Corr, Bridges Absent: Councilmen Brigham, Mat!:eoni B. MINUTES It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by CoUncilwoman .Corr approval of the minutes of August, 6th and August lOth, 1976..The motion was carHed. C.PRESENTATION RE: SWINE F, LU IMMUNIZATION PROGRAM- SANT CLARA 'COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT Sue Bolte, Assistant Coordinator for the Swine Flu ImmuniZation Program, addressed the Council~ ahd gave a presentation on this subject. She indicated she would like. to receive the City's support of the program and a system of vaccinating the City employ, ees..llhetwo locations i~'6r /~ '~'ub~i ~'ii~fa' i~'S~F~6~a' ~-6~1it"6e ~sli6'~a~'a~Tc~n/n~'i ~ ~ter and at the' M~C Te~,' ~h~y~l~ ~eed s~'~F~'~iT ~6ntrol and crowd control, and the dates for the vaccinations would be set for the middle of October. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to support this program, an~ cooperate with the County Health Department in ~a~iSb~Sa~;!~L~S~i~e. The motion was carried. ~C~- COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval of the Consent Cal:endar domposition. The motion was carried. B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR ]. Extension of CETA Title VI Contract between'Santa Clara Valley Employment and Traini~ng Board and City of Saratoga 2. City E.I.R. Consultan~t List 3, Payment of Claims It was moved by Councilmah Kraus and Seconded by Councilwoman Corr'approva] of the Consent Calendar. +,The motion was carried. III. BIDS AND CONIRACTS A. WOODSIDE DRIVE AND WOODSIbE COURT RE-SURFACING PROJECT The City Manager indicatea there were three bids received on this project, the lowest bid being $21,952, which was approximately $5,900 over the engineer.'s estimate. He advised that it is the recomendation of the Director of Public Works the bids be rejected, and these two streets be included in the Annual Street Re-surfacing Program commencing in late spring or early summer, 1977. Woodside Drive/Woodside Court Re-Surfacing (Cont'd.) It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by CoUncilWoman Corr the bids for this project be rejected. The motion was carried. IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS~ A. RESOLUTION NO. MV-117 Resolution Establishing Automatic'Traffic Signal Devices at the Intersection of quito Road and Polland Road, and Prohibiting Stopping on Portions of Quito and Pollard Roads, and Repea.]ing Portions of Resolution MV-1 It was moved by Councilwoman Corr and seconded by Councilm~n Kraus adoption of Resolution No. MV-117~ The motion was carried. B. PETITION FROM RESIDENTS OF RAVENWOOD DRIVEn MARILYN LANE AND MARSHALL LANE REQUESTING SCHOOL BUSES USE SOBEY.ROAD FOR ACCESS TO MARSHALL LANE SCHOOL WHEN QUITO/POLLARD ROAD INTERSECTION IS COMPLETED (Cont'd. 8/4/76) Following consideration of this m~tter, it was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by CouncilwOman Corr ,to adopt the staff report, dated August 24, 1976, recommending the following action: l) Take no specific action until following the constructi6n of the signal devices, at which time the traffic flow would be evaluated;~2) Forward the petition formally to the Campbell Union School District Governing Board~for~consideration of possible alter- natives to this rou~ipg. The motion was carried. It was requested that Mr. John Laufman, 18591 Ravenwood Drive, and Darwin Barrett, 14050 Marilyn Lane, be notified at the time of any future consideration of this matter. C. RESOLUTION NO. 789 Resolution Authorizing D~partmental Expenditures'and Transfer of Funds between and/or Among Funds It was moved by Councilman Kraus and~econded by Councilwoman Corr to adopt Resolution No. 789~ The motion was carried. D. RESOLUTION NO. 791 Resolution Proposing the Detachment of All Area in Said City Within the Black Mountain Resource Conservation District The Council heard co,~..~.e__nt~"~.~.~F6'~nn~ ~on~mm~v.v~aaT'~ ;j~l s in th~ au~,~this m~r. Vince ~rr~, ~ ~e~id~t of Mt~Ea~'R~ad ~d~F~d t~ Coundl-on beha'lf of the Black Mountain Reso~Conservation Di ~'fi ~ ~d%~r~a'~-i's'~p~rt"fdf 'Sa~ [o~L~' con t in~d part i c i pat i on i n the district. Testimony in favo~ of withdrawing from the District was heard from the following individuals: R~h~rd Martin, 13981 Pike Road Thorn Mayes, 21120. Sullivan Way Bill Sullivan, 21070 Canyon View Drive Marlene Duffin, 21241 Canyon View Drive Fred Hilsenrath, 21270 Glenmont Drive Lois Cockshaw, 20995 Canyon View Drive Marjorie Foote, 20910 Canyon View Drive It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr Resolution 791 be adopted. The motion was carried. -2- E. ORDINANCE NO. 38.70 (Second Reading) Ordinance Amendin9 Chapter 9 of the Saratoga City Code byEstablishin~. a Bus Loadin~ Zone on State Route#85 (Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road) It was moved by Councilman Kraus ~nd seconded by Councilwoman Corr adopti. On of Ordinance No. 38.70, and to waive the reading.. The motion was carried. F. RESOLUTION NO. 85.9-26 Resolution Establishing Management Salaries and Benefits It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the adoption'of Resolution No. 85.9~26. The motion waS' (arried. V. SUBDIVISIONS, BUIL'DING SITES AND ZONING REQUESTS ~ VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS . A. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL BY M. G. APKARIAN REGARDING PLANNING DIRECTOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING SINGLE-STORY STRUCTURE TO A TWO-STORY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 19919 BONNIE RIDGE WAY The Mayor acknowledged written communications received on thisissue from the following: l) Roger A. Graver, 532 Greenwood Ave., Kenilworth, Illinois (legal owner of residence at 19895 Bonnie Ridge Way) expressing opposition to Apkraian appeal regarding modification of residence from one story to two story. 2) E. Carroll, 19931 Bonnie Ridge Way, indicating he has no objection to the second-story additioH at 19919 Bonnie Ridge Way. 3) Mr. and Mrs. E. Douglas Larson, 19902 Bonnie Ridge Way, expressing opposition to second-sto~y addition to Apkarian residence at 19919 Bonnie Ridge Way. 4) Mr. and Mrs. W. Rudolph Kanne, 19918 Bonnie Ridge Way, expressing opposition to granting of a Use Permit to add a second floor at '19919 Bonnie Ridge Way. 5) Martin G. Apkarian, owner of residence at 19919 Bonnie Ridge Way, expressing arguments to the negative opinions expressed in correspon- dence from Mr. and Mrs. W. D. Cofer. 6) Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Nelson, residents of Saratoga, expressing opposition to requested permit by Mr. Apkarian to convert residence to two story. The City Manager explained that :this hearing is not a de novo hearing, and the only issues for discussion this evening would be those specifically listed in Mr. Apkarian's appeal. Mr. Van Duyn, Plannin~i~Director,~ explained that this is a request to.~ convert an existing single-stor~ structure to a two-story structure. He pointed out photos submitted ~by Mr. Apkarian, as well as a rendering of the proposed conversion, for :the Council's examination this evening. He indicated that the Apkarians are requesting approximately 720 square feet of additional floor area, to be located directly over the garage on the'easterly side of the property. -3- · Appeal Re: Two-Story Conversion (Apkarian) Mr. Van Duyn outlined the factors to be taken into-consideration for a two-story conversion: 1) To. protect neighboring properties from invasion of privacy; 2) unreasonable interference with views; 3) adverse impact on aesthetic character; and 4) reduction in quantity and quality of light and air. He indicated that based on 'tHese considerations, the staff had recommended the two-story addition.be denied The'Mayor opened the public heariTng at 8:50 P.M. Martin Apkarian, 19919 Bonnie Ridge Way, addressed the Council. In responding to a point made by the Planning Director regarding the setback requirement, Mr. Apkarian stated that he does have the legal setback between the property line and his garage, which is exactly lO feet, 8 inches. He stated that the 7 feet referred to by Mr. Van D~yn was the pool house which extends 7 feet, and there is a 3-foot walkway in between. Further, he indicated that the 17-foot setback from the rear proberty line to the existing building is not where the new addition is going on.-- that is on the west side of the house, which is the bedroom Section of the house~ He indicated that the proposed area where he wants to construct the 'addition is over 25 feet:setback. Mr. Apkarian then spoke to Ordinance NS-3-ZC-73, Section 16.15, relating to invasion of privacy. He indicates that on the east side of the building there 'are two windows -- ane located in front, which is that looks down Bonnie Ridge Way,~and the other located in the back, which is an obscured glass window with ~o'view into anyone's yard, and would not invade anyone's privacy. With regard to the issue of quality and quantity, of light and air, Mr. Apkarian commented that between his'garage and the property line in front ~Tl~.e~t, 8 inches, and the property line runs back at a slight angle. Also, between the Cofer's property ~nd the property line is another ll feet. Behind their garage, it offsets some 14 feet approximately, so there is approximatel.y 35 feet between his house and the Cofer's family room, which gives them ample light and air. ~e stated that along this fence there is high shrubbery from one end to the other, and if there is any obstruction of light, t~is would do it', and not ~h~thing he would propose to add to his home. Mr. Apkarian then spoke to the aesthetic character of the proposed addition, indicating that he feels it is a very attractive, eye-appealing motif to be added onto a house that is existing. He discussed additional future plans for improvement to his home,-inclQding a new roof, landscaping, painting, etc. Mr. Apkarian commented relative to the location of his home, and referred to the photographs which'he had submitted to the Council, stating. that coming up Bonnie Ridge Way westbound, one cannot see'his home because of the shrubber~ along this area ~ Further, in the photo'taken from across the street, it appears that he iS'~s'ituated on a depressed lot, and~t~dTM he would not be going Up high enough to obstruct anything or make a~i~H~ly · addition. He indicated he has views from the roof looking down into the Cofer's yard,'and in no way can y6u see their patio. He i.ndicated that the p~oposed structure is planned in order that it would drop into the existing garage, and from there go up8 feet,~ and the in- crease to the height of the existin~ structure would be 6 feet. Councilwoman Corr asked Mr. Apkarian if he had altered his.plans from the those or.iginally presented to the Planning Commission. Mr. Apkarian replied that the plans are basically the same; he is only going to move the addition in 6 feet. Councilman Kraus ~nquired if the ~verhang on the proposed unit be the same area that.is on the garage now. . Mr. Apkarian replied that it would., -4- Appeal Re: Two-Story Conversion (Apkarian) Dale Cofer,..19917 Bonnie Ridge Way~ addressed the Council. Mr. Cofer commented that he is' sorry the sketch of Mr. Apkarian's front elevation does not show their property~(~6Gl~s~6~lthe Cofer's elevation as substantially lower than the exi~Tngprop~t~ ~- Without the addition. Mr. Corer stated that his wife and himself did not solicit any of the neighbors to support their point o~ view. He stated it is their belief their property would be strongl9 ~mpacted, and.the verti.cal wail which would appear on their side of the proposed construction is highly un- desirable. Mr. Cofer indicated that yesterday his wife received a call from Mr. Sweeney who occupies the residence directly behind Mr. Apkarian, who indicated he had been on a business trip at th~ time of the Planning Commission hearing. He was on a trip at this time and could not attend this meeting, and authorized Mr. Cofer to express hissopposition to this proposed addition. With regard to enhancing the aesthetic character of the neighb6rhood, Mr. Cofer indicated he feels Mr. Apkarian has a very attractive home at the present, and he feels any evaluation of the aesthetic involvement of the neighborhood is very subj.ective. He indicated that he is willing to agree with the position of the Planning Commission that the addition would have adverse affect. ~"~' ~ ..... ~r. Cofer commented relevant to the.statement made concerning invasion of privacy, stating that the opaque windows at some future date could be changed.. With regard to obstructing the view, Mr. Cofer commented that the present view of the roof is not displeasing.at present; however, it would be some- what displeasing with the proposed. plan. He further commented that he ~elieves the quantity of light would be interfered with, and in the winter the light would be impacted. Mr. Cofer commented with regard to the' fourth point in Mr. Apkarian's appeal, relative to the fact that there was only one desertring party at the Planning Commission hearing. He stated that it would seem to him-regardless of how many people approve or oppose'this, if one party is severaly adversely affected, the appeal should be denied. With regard to point number five, Mr. Cofer stated that Mr. Apkarian has children, and he has 3 bedrooms inthe current house. He commented~when he bought the house, it had approximately 2200 square feet, and it is his information, in checking with real'estate records, before purchasing this house, Mr. Apkarian owned a home with 3200 square~feet. Everett Carroll, 19931 Bonnie Ridg~ Way, addressed the Council, stating that he lives generally west.of the Apkarians. ~e stated that approximatelg'2 months ago,/~r~'T~_~pk~i~'d~'~pr6~(~h~mm W~'he thought about a 2-story addition to his'~6~'~'~owed~'i~'~a~'~k~tch6S'at that time. It was Mr. Carroll's feeling the addition wguld be pretty well blended in with the home, and he would have no problem'with this proposed addition. He indicated there is a 2-story home across and down the street on Bonnie Ridge, and also, one on the corner of Bonnie Ridge, and he would see no problem with this at all. Mr. Apkarian again addressed the Council and again pointed out on the photographs submitted to the Council,views from various points between his home and Mr. Cofer's home, stating at no point would there be an invasion of privacy on block any view from their back yard. -5- Appeal Re: Two-Story Conversion (Apkarian) Mr. Apkarian commented with respect to Mr. Cofer's statement concerning his previous home, he stated this 'is a matter between he and his wife. However, in this particular house, he did not feel there was enough room to bring up 2 children. He stated that the children have no place to do their home studies and no place to entertain their friends, and their plans' would call for a master bedroom forShe and his wife, converting one of the existing rooms into a study for their children so they can further their education. Also, he needs the additional room so his children can entertain their friends in his home, as he wants to keep track of his children and know where they are constantly. Shelly Williams, 11951 Brookridge ~D~ive, indicated he wouldlike to express an opinion as a realtor that he personally would be in favor of additions that are tastefully done. He stated it adds to the property value of that particular house, and increases the'value in the n~ighborhood for resale purposes. Louise Cofer addressed the Council. She stated that Mr. Carroll lives on the other side of Mr. Apkarian an~ i~s not affected by thi~ conversion. She indicated that he has a large oak tree which would block out additional height to the roof line. She further commented .that they also have raised 2 children, and'they raised them in 2100 square feet~ and she didn't see where 700 square feet more would make that much difference. She stated that Mr. Apkarian knew ~ery well What he was doing when he moved into a 2200 square-foot home. ~ It was then m6ved by Councilman K~ads and seconded'by Councilwoman Corr the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried. The public hearing was closed at 9:15 P.M. Councilman Kraus indicated he has viewed this property, and would have a great deal Of difficulty in approving a secondsstory in this particular' situation. He therefore moved, and it was seconded by Councilwoman Corr, to deny this appeal. The motion was carried unanimously. B. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BY SARATOGA FOOTHILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "A" (AGRICULTURAL) TO "R-l-lO,O00" (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, MEDIUM DENSITY) FOR THE 4.456-ACRE PARCEL ON SARATOGA AVENUE (APN 386-14-15), COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE SITE OF THE CAMPBELL CAGE COMPANY The Mayor advised there is a requirement for notifi'cation on the E.I.R. in this matter; however, it would be proper to open the public hearing this evening and receive testimony, and then continue the hearing to a future date. Mr. Van Du~n, Planning Director, advised that this area is approximately 4½ acres, located fronting on Saratoga Avenue. He indicated that the property is presently zoned "A",~and the General Plan has indicated the site for "PD Residential~. A~13-1o~ subdivision is proposed. He advised that the Campbell Cage Company industrial activity has recently suffered a fire, and this somewhat changed the requirements that the Planning Commission placed under conditions for the rezoning approval. He indicated that the matter was considered by the Plannin~ Commission and approved, subject to several conditions which are responsive to areas 6f concern within the Environmental Impact Report -- principally that the site, because of the historical significance of the main building, bes investigated for possible total removal or relocation, and if this were not an available alternative, the removal of the site in a piecemeal fashion to~'besused for historical purposes. : The Mayor opened the public hearing 6n this matter at 9:33 P.M. -6- Saratoga Foothills (Campbell Cage) Bud Budoin,<iT204 Pierce Road,_addressed the Council on beha~'f o~ the Senior Citiz~Mo~i~TT~sk'F~e~ He indicated that when the Plan~ing Commission considered both the E.I.R. and the change of zoning on this property, he had indicated that he 'entirely supported the change of zoning, with the hope that a way could be expedited to use this site for Senior Citizen housing. He stated that the'E.I.R. indicated it would be a good site for Senior Citizen housing; however, inhibitions were imposed on this recommendation due to present zoning. He stated that the site is beauti- fully located in terms of every~kind of criteria we would want to set down on Senior Citizen housing, and it does not impact a great deal on other residential areas. Additionally, its location to shopping is~very.good. He indicated that the buildens,·Lohr and Turgeon, came up with. a proposal in 1972 for about 40 single-story units, and the Task Force after the Planning Commission Meetihg invited Lohr and Turgeon to show them that plan, and the Task Force was quite ~nthused about this as a. possibility. He stated that his reason for appearing at this time is to express the hope that through the cooperation of the City, the~developers and the owners we can exhaust every possibility before lettj·ng~t go~tQ a Further, he i.ndicated that 99 p~e~66T~f"'~h~ Pla~ffi~g-C6'~'~i~ion'~ dis~'~ C~u~ w~'~devoted to the hop~'~t'~Om~'~i~'~l'd~6~'~d'~t~6~ake this a~ior Citizen-type development. · ' · Francis Smith, 2684 Maplewood Lane, Santa Clara, addressed the council as· one of the owners of this property~ Mr. Smith commented that their concern at this point is with the buitding~ indicating that if the stalling of zoning interferes with tearing thebuiqding down, they would raise strong objections. He indicated that'at present this building is a liability because of the fire, and they have. spent much time in trying to keep people from coming in and tearing it down'piece-by-piece. He aomhe~ted that they have been very patient in~C~'~i~g to get some kind of zoning on the piece, and they do not wish~t~i't longer. · Mayor Bridges commented that he wobld presume this process could be started at any time, as the Planning Commission has conditioned the rezoning on the requirement that the applicant advertise in a local newspaper the avail- ability of the barn structure for relocation for historic~use. Said Noti- fication of intent shall be for a ,period of 30 days, to which shall be added a·15-day reply period. Mr. Van Duyn, Planning Director,-advised that the 30-day period has lapsed, and th~s timetable has been accelerated somewhat because of the fire. He indicated that once the signed agreement between the property owner and the . Historical Society has been received, the staff would be .ready to proceed. Therefore, the Planning:Commission Condition has been met. It was then moved by Councilman Krads and seconded by CouncilwOman Corr to continuethe public hearing to October 6, 1976. The motion was carried. Recess and Reconvene VII. ADMINISTRAT'IVE MATTERS , ,' A. MAYOR ~ B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS ' 1.Parks and Recreation Commission Report Re:~Midpeninsula Regional Park District Draft Master Plan. The Parks and Recreation Commission has submitted a report recommending the Council support the concept'of the plan, and th~s support be con- veyed to the Midpeninsula Regional Park District Board of Directors -7- MidpeninsUla Reg. Park District Draft Master. Plan (.Cont'd.) prior to the Master Plan being bresented for final adoption. It was moved by Councilwoman Corr and seconded b~ Councilman Kraus to indicate support of the MidpeninsUla Regional Park District Draft Master Plan, and authorize the staff to communicate this approval to the District. The motion was carried. 2. rlannin~ Commission Report Re: Saratoga Avenue Plan Line Corrections It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by. Councilwoman Corr to set this matter for public hear!ng on October 6, 1976. The motion was carried. 3. Senior Citizen Housin~ Task Force. Memorandum expressin~ Concern over City Council's adoption of Ordinance 60.2, particularly Section 30.3, Part (b)~ and .requesting Council to reconsider such action. It was agreed to set this matter for a Committee of the Whole Meeting on September 7th, at which time~the Task Force could discuss this request in more detail. It was also agreed to include the planning Commission in this discussion. D. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS E. CITY MANAGER 1. Crime and Accident Report for 1975-76 Fiscal. Year l This report presents a 5-year hi.storical perspective in relati~o~_to.__ Burglary,_Auto Theft, Malicious Mischief, and ASsaUlts. ~.~_The City Manager r~ep_~t~d t~b~'~'~l~i~'~'~'~6i~fr~l'~(af~ ~6me'l'3 percent~"~d the avera~T'~l u~b~l'a~ i ~ '~563'f6'~'7~'~-7~~'co~s i derably below the 74-75 period by $244, and $60 below that in 71-72; auto thefts have increased in 75-76; malicious mischief is down 48 occurrences from the previous year; and assaults have increased in 75~76; traffic accidents have reduced by some 41 incidents from the same period a year ago. 2. Applications for Vacancies on Pa'rks and Recreation Commission Friday, AugUst 27th was the de~adlj~nefor accep~i~n_g applications for thep~k~,_a'~,~,J~~'~_~6~{ss~on~n~~i~j~i~G,~!S~tt6~ng' the ~'for ~se inte~]~"fBe near future. ' '~>' 3. Consideration of Argument Against Initiative Measure to be November 2rid General Election Ballot It was moved by Councilman Kraus ahd seconded by Councilwoman Corr to adtho~ize putting the ballot argument against Measure "0" on the November ballot. The motion was carried. VIII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN .... l. R~Ssell [~ C~owth~r~' 20788 ~N6~d~ ~6ur~I~ a~d Ch~ries F=i"HG~r, 20846 Meadow Oak Way, Re: provisions in.Stipulation No, 349070 relevant to' "Save Our Hills" Initiative Measure. The Council affirmed i~s previous position~ob~ting approvals and rezonings in the Slope Conser(~io~' Zo~eTG~ii '~f'~'~ NoVember election. ' 2. Russell L. Crowther and Charles. F. Hunter, expressing concerns relative to City's request that proponents of "Save Our Hills" Measure stipulate that the election be held in co6junction with the NoVember General Election.- Noted and filed. 3. Floyd A. Steinberg, 19020 Saratoga Glen Place, commenting regarding the establishment of a "Blue Ribbon" Committee to review services provided by City. - Noted and filed. 4.Floyd A. Steinberg, commenting ~elative to responsivehess on the part of Mr. Rude,_.California ~rafficlSa~ety Foundation, to Saratoga ctti!zen?'~ ~h~i~'M~r'expl~i~d-{~at ,this situation was not completel~ within the City's jurisdiction, and therefore, was not resolved within the time frame Mr. Steinberg felt it should be resolved~T?~ The City Manager ~ndicated he would respond to Mr. Steinberq concerning this matter. 5Z/Miles Rankin, Saratoga Chamber of Commerce, commenting that two new 'buflding~ 'Q~der'~ohS~i~e~i~"5~the Design"R~i~C6~mittee are hot'i~ compliance with the Village Pla~ or Saratoga General Plan. - Continued for discussion at September 7th Committee of the Whole Meeting. 6. Donna BlaCker, Chairperson, and James P. McEntee, Director, Santa Clara County Human Relations Co~ission Re: Tri-Co~ission Report of Public Hearings on HOusing Patterns, Zoning Laws and Segregated Schools. - Noted and filed. ~in the Vil~ag~ ~s'related to City'Council Resolution 506, lg73 General 'Plan;'~nd ']'974~V~1'~';'~Con~ifi~d for dis~us~i~t Committee of the Whole Meeting.' '8. Copy of letter to City's Code Enforcement Officer from Robert Van der Toorren, questioning the validity of conditions attached to application for business license. - Noted and filed. B. ORAL 1. Russell Crowther - Submitted ballot argument in support of "SAVE OUR HILLS" (Measure "0"). OF PUBLZC GROUP,REPRLSENTAT WS The Mayor acknowledged~he presence bf public group representatives this evening, a~ follows: Dorothy Parker, Good Government Group Marjorie Foote, A.A.U.W, Marlene Duffin, Wildwood Heights Ho~wnerL~d.~on Vince Garrod - Board of Directors,~Black.'Moun~ain--R~S~ce Conservation Distric~ ........... ~' Bud Budoin - Senior Citizens Housing Task Force Rudolph Kanne - President, Good Government Group IX. ADJOURNMENT : It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the meeting be adjourned. The motion was carried. The meeting was. adjourned at 10:50 P.M. -9-