Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-04-1978 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, January 4, 1978 - 7]30 P.M.. PLACE: Saratoga City Council.Chambers, .13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, Calif. TYPE: Regular Meeting ~ I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Brigham, Corr, Kraus, Bridges Absent! C6unhilman Mattcon± B. MINUTES It was moved by Councilman, Brigham and' seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval of the minutes of December 21, 1977. The motion was carried. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Councilm~an Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham approval of the !composition of Consent Calendar. The motion was Carried uAanimously. B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Resolution 837, A Resolution of the City Codnci~l of the City of. Saratoga Authorizing the C±ty Manager to Sign for the City Agreements, Documents and Loan Forms Related to the Saratoga Housing Assistance and Rehabilitation Program (SHARP) 2. Payment of Claims It was moved By Councilman' Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus approval of the Items for Consent Calendar. The motion was carried unanimously. III. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: SUPERVISOR ROD DIRIDON RE: COUNTy, OF SANTA CLARA SPECIAL DISTRICT CONSOLIDATION TASK TEAM RECO~MENDATIONS Supervisor Rod Diridon addressed the Council hnd outlined the Santa Clara County Special District Consolidation Task Team evaluation cgncerning this issue. He r~viewed the three documents which had been issued to the City Council, indicating that some of the criteria used in compiling this evaluation was as follows: '. economic efficiency, political acdessibility and accountability, administrative effectiveness and fiscal capability to meet all assigned. He explained the composition of Consolidation A, and that the advantage of this consolidation is in terms of raising the consciousness of the public regarding these services. Consolidation B would have a ver~ distinct terms of simplifyi{~g government and reduci~g qthe cosf to residents of Saratoga, and this proposal: is to-merge Sanitation Districts 2 and 3, as well as Cupertino Sanitary-District, into District 4. Superviso~ Diridon referred to the report by S~eve Gbodman, Chief Engineer and Administrative Officer for Sanitation District No. 4, which projects potential savings of $214,000 per year after the consolidation is accomplished,~n~ 7~3 ~ddi~i6nal p~r'So~n&l'~o ..~I ~dr~'[h~'responsiSilities 8ft'h~ CU~r.tino;Sanitary District and Di~'~i~t~ 2 and 3, along with his current DistriCt 4 responsi- bilities. .Also projected in this report!is the equipment required, housing, staff, etc., tohandle this additional responsibility. He further stated ~he County Executive in'his evaluation of the consolidation, indicates between 10 and 25 percent cost savings. Superyiso'r Diridon Qommented that he felt the City would far exceed these kinds of savings to the residents of the district, and ~ndicated that .this would be in line with his objectives relative to this issue. The Council then heard cormnents from members in the audience, as follows: John Hoff~(~eprese~ting Wildwood Heights Homeowners Assoqiation), opposing the inclusion of urban areas in R.C.D.'s, and urging the Council not to take a Stand on Task Team proposal B. Robert Van der toor~en, ~n~ng~ccep'tance~f the Vince Garrod, expressing oppositio ~to proposed c6nsoli- dation. Richard Martin, favoring proposed consolidation. Dr. Brown, Board Member, Cupertino Sanitary DiStrict, urging the Council to take its time and Study all facts relevant to the proposed consolidation. Maurice La Brie, Director, Cupertino Sanitary District ~nd member of the Special District Consolidation Task Team, Re: process used in Task Team recormnendatiSn to Board of Supervisors. Norma Mencacci, Vice Chairman, Special District Consolidation Task Team, responding to Mr. La Brie's concerns relevant to obtaining recommendation On proposal through a vote of the people.. The Mayor then ~ckngWledged i~ems of correspondence received on this matter, as follows: John H. H~ufe, President..~ildwood Heights Homeowners Association, and ~M~fI~e:~f'~in, past President, Wildwood Heights HomeownerS As~o~i'~ti6n, Re: report of Special District Consolidation Task Team. Jeffrey C. Kalb, 20027 Puente Court, urging the Council not to support p.roposals by Special District Consolidation Task Team as presented. Sally Price,'President, Los Gatos-Saratoga League of Women Voters,.urging the City Council to consider advantages of recommended consolidations~ Following Council deliberation of this matter,it was moved by Councilman Brigham and Seconded by Councilwoman Corr the City support Consolidation A and B., with the recommendation that urban area~ he excluded from the R.C.D. distr~cts. as a matter of policy. Councilman Kraus indicatedhe'would vote in.opposition to this motion, due to the haste in which this proposal was presented. The motion was carried, 3 to 1. IV. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A. BID RE: ADDITION TO CORPORATION YARD BAY It was moved by Councilman Kr~us and seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval of ~ minute resolution declarihg that the projec~ can be pe~formed more economically by day labor, with the materials and supplies furnished at a lower price on the open market, and authorization to reject bids and allow the staff to negotiate for this work. The motion was carried unanimously. V. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FORMAL RESOLUTIONS A. ORDINANCE NS-3.39 An Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Amendin O~dinance NS-3, The Zoning .Ordinance, by Modifying SectiOns ~.5 and 14.6 Thereof in Relation to the Method of Me.asuring Front Yard Setbacks in Certain Pre-Built Areas of the City Subject to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus ~pproval of the Environmental ~mpact Negative Declaration and introduction of Ordinance NS-3.39 and waiving of the reading ~"~i'e~' ~u~l'i~f~g 'b~{ng'~"~r .~ruary 1, 1978. The motfo~ was~carried unanimously. ~: - ~' B. ORDINANCE 38.72.1 An Ordinance Extending'Ordinance 38.72, an Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Amending Chapter 9 of the Saratoga City Code, Which Chapter is Entitled/'MotorVehicles and Traffic" by Adding A~ticle IX Thereto Regulating the Off-Street Operation of Vehicles in the City of Saratoga Indefinately C~i!l~o~a~ Co'~rindiCate'd~she was concerned that Section 9~203(e)'~did~ot'-°qu~rffy'the problem of the indiscriminate use of motorbikes on private property adjacent to residences. She indicated this wa~ spoken to in Section 9-203(a), but not in 9-203(c). It was suggested to ad6pt the~ordinance this eveping as an emergency ordinance, and then bring back an amendment to the ordinance for consideration. This was agreeable to the Council. ~'~'Ci~"~nager proceeded to read the proposed ordinance in f~i~.' It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the adop. tion of Ordinance 38.72.1~.an emergency ba~isj._. The motion was carried unanimously. VI. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES, ZONING REQUESTS A. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY ALLEN DE GRANGE THAT THE PARKS AND RECREATION FEE FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING ON SARATOGA COURT BE WAIVED (Cont'd. December 7, 1977) Mayor Bridges advised Mr. De Grange is out of town this evening, and has requested a continuance of this request. This was acceptable to the Council, and the matter will be agendized for the February 1st Council Meeting. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT OF 1974 GENERAL PIiAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT THROUGH ADOPTION OF NORTHWEST SARATOGA CIRCULATi'ON PLAN :~ 1. Approve EnvirOnmental Impact Determination - Negative Declaration 2. AdOpt ReSolution 820.2, Amending the Circulation Elementof the General Plan by Adding a Northwest Circulation Plan The City Manager reviewed the Council's previous ~Qt!q~.on this matter, which was to request that the staffsreview " ~- several other'optig~s which might be considered, based on the input at the June 15, :19y7 public hearing and to come back with a report within 6 months.. Further, on November 29th, a-citizen's comrhittee met with the City Council at a study. session to review three al'ternatives Which had been developed by the staff. He asked that Mr. Van Duyn.,~n~ri~'the three alternative pla~s w~ich were reviewed on Nbvemb~? 29'th. Mr. Van Duyn, Planning Director, summarized the three plans as reqdested: Alternate No. l:'~'~"~'~h~u-street con~ection from Prospect to Comer, and ex~e~di~"t6 Chiquita, and across Pierce Road would be Surrey Lane. Intermediate connections would be up through Hillmoor Drive and through the Fremont unioh School District property, and an additional ex~ensiGn of K~eisler Court.and the western extension of Prospect Ro~d. In all three alternatives, the circulation 'propose~ for t~e southern area .(Mr. Eden, Pierce Road), is to extend'Old Oak Way through and connectinE with Mr. Eden Road. Alternate No. 2 demonstrates a similar alignment as in No. 1~ however, the major ~hrOugh connection between Prospect.and the lo~er end (Ch~quit~) has now been severed, with the lower end heine the Comer loop back through to ChiqUi.ta, and a cul-de- sac to service the vacant area, and the northernmost part of the circulation area being'serviced by Prospect Road extension on the west byProSpect Creek. Also, there is a singular access point from Prospect th~ouEh'the Parker Ranch Which. would service Rarker Ranch at the north end, ~s well as the Fremont Union High School property, with connections possibly at Kreisler and at Hillmoor. Alternate No. 3 is similar.to Alternate 2, with the exception tha~ the 'thrOugh connection is severed between the north and the south areas,. or the Prospect extension down through Chiquita, and the lower end (Comer, ChiqUita) is expanded to incorporate a much larger'ServiCe area, with a potential of approximately 20 more home sites than Alternate No. 2. The Mayor opened the public hearing at 9:33 P.M. 3erry Engle, resident of Baquero .~ourt, addressed the Council. He indicated that Quarry Roadis still maintained by them. He asked if this road is put in by a developer, would they tack on from the private road and the residents still have to main- rain it, or would they developer have to improve the entire road. Mr. Van Duyn replied the developer would have_to improve the entire road~na b'ri~ {~-to7 ~BTi'c~s~t~&~&~da~ds in order to complete~a~'~d~ition~l~'pui'l'd~n~~ pot~n~i~'!Ch~'~ight have for that area. - 4 - Fred Bedal, 20785 Kreisler Court, indicated his concern is it appears the people who came up with the alternatives did not have representation from the people who live in the Hillmoor, Kreisler Court area. He indicated he is particularly concerned about a through street at Kreisler Court. Mr. Bedal mentioned the traffic hazard on Arroyo de'Arguello, and the fact that the School District has acknowledged this as a hazardess area. He urged that the Council consider some other alternative than a through street at Kreisler Court. Mayor Bridges commented that Kreisler Court has been shown since the development of the Arroyo de Arguello area as a through street. Mr. Bedal replied that when they purchased the home in 1968, the intent was to connect intoj~h~stadium,-,±th very infrequent traffic. Mayor Bridges stated it was his understanding this was indicated as a through street long before 1968. Robert Van der toorren, resident of Horseshoe Drive, commented that ever since he has lived at the inside curve of the loop street, he is glad he doesn't live on the outside curve of the loop street. He indicated~{~ wa~hi's ~6n"lif"C~"!'Ci~y-~-.~-. · ~p~t~ - s ~ d~l feng~' ~o- t~'~oung ?~iver s! '~ho want to~ ~S~6w ~off 'that they =r~ali~'jeR~ne~'!'t~ir dri~er"I~il~s~'~ ~ are going to take us up on it, and the average speed in which they can whip around Horseshoe Drive is 55 to 60 miles-per-hour. He asked if these loop streets couldn't be eliminated by closing them at the end. Mayor Bridges replied that this is a General Plan consideration, and he is sure these kinds of decisions will be made at the time the streets are actually engineered. Joe Kitts, Kreisler Court, commented that there a couple of items that would cost the City a considerable amount of money if roads of any nature be increased in this area. He commented that there is a bridge that restricts at least one lane of traffic a block west of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road on Prospect. He Stated that Wardell is the other road that has a very narrow bridge which somebody will have to pay for. Mr.' Kitts stated that Kreisler Court is the.street that deps deepest into the running line of Arroyo de Arguello, which makes a cutback necessary in both direction. In reference to Mr. Bedal's earlier comments, he indicated that the School District not only moved the kids off one corner, but moved them down Arroyo de Arguello to see that they would not get run over°because you cannot see around that corner. Mr. Kitts felt that this would seem to imply that an alternative for ~unning this street in a continuing line ~i ,~B~d~ of both Hillmoor and Krisler, and connect to Wardell'~~ s~oul'd'be explored. Barbara Stevenson, Rolling Hills Road, addressed the Council, inquired if there was any guarantee that this plan will not be hooked up between the access to Prospect on the west side of the Parker estate. Mayor Bridges replied that all the Council has is the ~b~ to make the determination to put this down on the General Plan map, and if some future Council were to feel there is a reason for this to be hooked up, this could not be prohibited. Mr~ Van Duyn clarified that the emergency connections are non- improved areas, and emergency routes will be provided as unimproved easements. · However, it would be the Council's prerogative to make any decisions as to whether or not this publ.ic street went through, by 1) amending the General'Plan; and 2) approvihg the connection through public hearing. Mr. Bedall again addressed the Council and stated that since his earlier comments indicated it was obvious to him that residents of the area hada contribpt~q~ to the.alternatives developed,.'he would suggest that~there!be a delay in this decision until there is a contribu~i~ ~m'members of the portion of the community that he is specifically concerned with. Mayor Bridges pointed out the fact that all previous meetings on this subject have been public'meetings and have been noticed, and he did not feel another delay was justified. Jim Skinner, resident on Chiquita Way, addressed the Council. He commented that prior to the development of these three proposals, heand~.other residents presented to the Council over 300 signatures of people representing Arroyo de Arguello, Surrey Lane, Chiquita Way, Comer Drive, and the title of the petition was "In .opposition to the connection of Stelling and Chiquita Way'.'. Mr. Skinner stated that he believes proposal 2 does accomplish the.non-connection of Chiquita with Stelling. He indicated that he personally feels he would like to see Chiquita stay exactly where it is,and not connect with-Comer; however, he would be satisfied with this type of plan which would still allow the development to continue and give reason- able access, and yet keep the traffic away from a thoughfare. Ken Tynes, reside~t'7of Comer Drive and Arroyo de Arguello, addressed the'Coundil. He agreed that of the three proposals presented, he would favor No.2, He indicated that he would like to remind the Mayor that when the residents had their meeting in November, they were not asked for contributions, but were presented with three proposals. He pointed out that every time they talked about Wardell, which is the obvious way for anyone trying to get south'f~om this district, they were always told they would have to have a tunnel, Yet, he is quite interested to notice that there'is an arterial stop sign to stop this inaccessible traffic from this particular site. Therefore, there are two existing ways'to get around that hrll. Mr. Tynes stated that if these are the only three pro- posals available, he wouldlike to cast his recommendation .for No. 2. Lauralee Harris~ a resident on Maureen Way and Via Roncole, indicated that everyone is concerned about access to Arroyo de Arguello or off of Arroyo de Arguello. She indicated that the Council neglects to notice that Arroyo de Arguello does not go through to ProSpect, rather it is Via Roncole that goes through. Mrs. HarrisSasked if there is a reason why Kreisler has to be open.' Mayor Bridges replied that the policies~iof'.'~the City are such that it is a necessity to have a back ~ay into the stretch that enters the high school property. He state~ that if there is not a secondary access and the one way in is blocked off, there is no other way in. Mrs. Harris indicated that she is concerned that the circulation plans that she sees will not. be the.~!.B~k,~wa~'~ but the primary way for so many people. If this'~fAnis - 6 - accepted, she would feel s~trongly that there needs to be some sort of enforcement so that it is treated as a residential street. Russell Crowther, Norada Court, addressed the Council, stating that it is his understanding all three of these.plans violate the City ordinances. Mr. Van Duyn explained that there are policies for which emergency access roads would absolve any of the inconsistencies with the present cul-de-sac extensions, and he believes this is what is being addressed here. Mayor Bridges pointed out that if the City were to follow the policies as set down, we would have a throughway that would run from Prospect,cdown Chiquita Way into Pierce Road -- there would be no loops or cul-de-sacs in excess of 1,000 feet -- and there would be no more than 15 homes served on those cul-de-sacs. Mr. Crowther commented that he believes nothing more graphically illustrates the fact that the City is trying to put too many homes in this areas than this street plan]~ ,and he believes it clearly shows that you can't pack that kind of density in without having major problems. He further indicated that he believes the plan is inconsistent with the General Plan in that the General Plan indicates. that the City will preserve the scenic ridge lines, and he noted a figure 8 up around the eucalyptus grove and other side cuts into the fact of the hills. Mr. Crowther commented-.~that-he~ecalls hearing the~s.tatement ...... ~K{"~hi~-cl~~dL'~'' t' have- t0' ~o'~s i de~~ ~hviron~sneaf'%~c ts ~-~'_this~tim~,=and_all th~City~is doing is ~odifying-the =~lanl 't~!H~' p'oint'ed 'D'de' t~tc th=~"Calff6r6fS<'St~t~LaF~'~uif~ that any development be consistent with the GeneraI~P~an-~.and~ it could be argued later that thereis no recourse but to be consistent with this plan, and therefore, environmental impacts do not have to be considered related to the layout of these streets, and there will be no alternatives but to follow this' specific plan. Therefore, Mr. Crowther was of the opinion the kinds of questions people are bringing up tonight clearly indicate that the City should prepare an environmental impact report and the Council should consider the many factors related to these 'considerations before it mhkes its decision. Mr. Crowther Co~ented that the preliminary report indicates there will be increased flooding,~'~[S~dTt{affic, scenic damage, etc. He stated that he b&'l'i~i~it~{~~ clear thia is not the kind of project that can be undertaken exempt from the environmental requirements. He felt that if the City would take the time to prepare a report, considering all the environmental impacts, it would probably come up with a better plan than the one it is considering, and there would be an opportunity for public input all the way along. Secondly, Mr. Crowther cohented that all of the hearings on this issue have been held at times the public had great difficulty getting here -- one was held on June 15th, another was held on July 3rd, and this one on January 4th. - 7 - Councilman Kraus asked Mr. Crowther what time he would pick, and what is wrong with June 15th and January 4th. He further pointed out that the Clty is not planning one home, and if no one wants to buy this land, leave it the way it is. Mayor Bridges pointed out that that the handout Mr. Crowther received shows the number of homes which can be developed on that land, using the ordinances in effect in this city. Vince, GarrOd indicated he would like to see these two roads come through his area, but he would like~to see that lower end hooked together in some way. Jack Kehoe, resident of Kreisler Court, addressed the Council. Mr. Kehoe indicated that he cannot conceive of that street being opened up to thrd'traffic from Prospect. He indicated that the intersection of Kreisler and Arroyo. de Arguello is not only a poor intersection, but a very dangerous inter- section. Carol Schuster, 20802 Hillmoor Drive, addressed the Council. She commented that she believes they also have a very severe traffic problem,~and in addition to the curb on Arroyo de Arguello, they have a ver~ steep hill. Mrs. Schuster commented that she wonders why ~~6'&d'~mi~g over from Prospect and down from Hillmoor an~ ~%~ dduld not be cul-de-saced. It was her feeling that in case of fire, you could get out on Highway 9, down to Prospect, as quickly as coming through Wardell. Frank Saddler, resident of Kreisler Court, indicated he would like to echo the sentiments of his neighbors that Kreisler does not make a good street for this plan. Don Klein, resident on Hillmoor Drive, expressed the fact that he'would favor Mrs. Schuster's suggestion with regard to cul-de-sacing Hillmoor and Kreisler. George Gillespie, residen~ on Hillmoor Drive, indicated that ~"~'~el~h~7'-~' ~'~'h'i~"~S'~B~ing ~ne in a vaccuum -- that we ~e g~heratih~'aIl'~hes~dW&lli~ hnits and all these cars, and yet, when you get off of city property, you run into some terrible bottlenecks. Also, he pointed out the ~arrow bridge on Wardell, and also, the bridge on Cox is being widened for this new development. Mr. Gillespie commented that he believes the Council should recognize the reality that these people are all here because they don't want traffic on these streets, and would like to see as many cul-de-sacs as possible. With regard to enforcement, Mr. Gillespie commented that it should be apparent there is no police power in this town. It was his feeling the least the City could do is to put in cul-de-sacs and no thru streets. Dick Felder, resident on Hillmoor Drive, indicated he recently moved to Hillmoor from a crowded and heavily travelled area. Mr. Felder he agrees with the previous speakers that the corners of Kreisler and Hillmoor are extremely dangerous, and he believes extending these streets and attaching them in the back to Stelling would be a major mistake. Mr. Felder commented that he believes the suggestions of a cul-de-sac or loop would be a much better and safer idea. He was of the opinion ~i~ i~d~"~/' get all the suggestions of the people in this area, the Council should either delay the vote on this or propose some kind of change on the Kreisler-Hirlmoor area. It was his feeling the three plans as proposed are very unimaginative. - 8 - Marilyn Norling, resident on Comer Drive, commented that she moved to Comer Drive five years ago when it was a dirt road, and they had to brave this through the muddy'season. She indicated that when they first moved to this location, Arroyo de Arguello did not go through, and the last circulation study showed there were approximately 300 cars using'the street at that time and she believes this has increased. Mrs. NoTling commented that she is really concerned about Comer Drive going through. She indicated they were advised approximately one year ago=by the Planning Department that plans then were for Comer to be cul-de-saced, and this is what they would like to see. Mrs. Norling commented that if you connect Comer. Drive with Chiquita Way, it is apparent this is very hilly, creating a ~oller coaster effect, which the kids will love. Therefore, she would like to see Comer, as well as some of these other · streets, cul-de-saced. She further stated that residents are paying dearly fo keep the:~a~Sphere. Mr. Bedal;~ again addressed the Council, suggesting that this public he~ring be continued, and request that the Planning Commission consider alternatives mentioned this evening, specifically the breaking .of the loops, the extra cul-de-sacing off Hillmoor and Kre'isler the ~,~7~cing.9~.~iq~.~!~,l~,~ CoUncilwoman Corr commented she is concerned with have too many houses on cul-de-sacs, bedause of the safety factor. Councilman Kraus. indicated he would have to objection to cul-de-sacing these two loops as discussed this evening, as well as the suggestions by Mr. Van der toorren. Barbara Stevenson, Rolling Hills DriVe, commented that she believes the people here this evening are not concerned about getting down from either side of the cul-de-sac; rather, they are concerned about the traffic that comes from East San Jose that comes out here to race up and down the hills. She commented that she doesn't believe it makes sense to try and plan these roads without trying to figure out, if it is going to be subdivided, how many. homes there are going to be. Mayor Bridges explained that one of the reasons the City is going through this is in.the past, the developer has set the s~reet pattern, and then we end up trying to connect to it. Bill Heiss, Civil Engineer, con~ented that the figure 8 con- figuration._is basically one way, in and out, and when you break the loop, you Obviously have to put a turn-around-at the end. He pointed out in some cases this is desirable, and in others, it is not. It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the pu~.]i.c_~e~i~g b~qoBtin~ej~_~t.o ~he next regular meeting, a~a~equ~s~'th~'_~s~aff~ipresen't Alfe~native Plan No. 2, with: ~ p~pb~ed modi~l~'~'~n', 7~s ~7i~ re~t!~f~Kreisler Ct. and Hillmoor. .-~ ~'Th~mOtloh i~a's~car~i~d- unanim~usl~ "~ -- ' -~"~7''~' -'7' - '~. CO -i-D kk ON '-OF=A-P EAL RE DEVEnOP i NT CO i E DE S%ON= CONCERNING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF PROPOSED PARCEL M~P NO. SDR-1334, LOCATED AT 18630 ALLENDALE AVENUE The City Manager explained that the two items being appealed are as follows: II-E. Dedicate and improve 'Allendale Avenue to prbvide for a standard 30-foot half-street along the entire frontage ofl-~ - 9 - lots "A" and "B", and along lot "C". II~F. Widen bridge at Vasona Creek along'frontage. Mr. Van=Duyn explained the principal objection with the bridge is the improvement cost of approximately $25,000 to $35,000. He indicated it is the st~ff's recommendation to maintain the conditions as specified by the Land Development Committee,'.with~?'? exception of retaining two~Imajor standing trees at the northeast" end of Mr. Snyder's property.. The staff is recommending maintaining the same street improvement standards, but continuing the walkway area fromtheabutting property, putting it on the baCkside of the eucalyptus grove. He indicated it is intended to retain the bridge improvement as a condition for this building site approval. This further involves a transfer of land in order to give additional footage to the smaller non-conforming lot. The Mayor opened the public hearing at 10:58 P.M. Bob Snyder, 18630 Allendale Avenue, indicated he would~.like to defer his comments to his Civic Engineer, Mr. Reckenmacher. Mr. Reckenmacher of the firm Allied Engineering addressed the Council. Mr. Reckenmacher commented that it is felt the Council has set a precident for paying for the extension of the culvert by the Cox culvert extension. Therefore, they would request the Council's consideration in paying for this culvert extension. In reference to the small piece of land whiCh_this property. encircles, Mr. Reckenmacher conn~ented that they.left ~t out ~ of the tentative map application because it wasn't part of the development. ~He indicated the only reason Mr. Snyder wanted to ~ive a little additional land on this Darcel.is because a neighbor has a garden back there, and the staff had told him he could do this by a property adjustment. However, they do not want to include this property in the tentative map. Mr. Reckenmacher stated their recommendation was to put in an alternate plan which would give the same traffic flow that would be achieved by a full development by a 12-foot traffic lane. Also, he indicated they would be willing to offer the alternative of combining the two plans, by giving a bicycle lane, a traffic lane, and a sidewalk, and Mr. Snyder would be willing to pay for the full improvement across the Lowrie property. Furthermore, he indicated this. plan eliminates the necessity to take out any trees. Mr. Van Duyn pointed out that as it was represented at the Land Development Committee, with the inclusion of the square footage to the Lowrie.property, the Land Development Committee considered it to be a three-lot land division. He indicated that if it is now represented not to be that particular situation, then we are not looking at the same tentative map, and he would recommend this go back before the Land Development Committee as a two-lot subdiyision. Further, he indicated if the Council is of the mind to consider this alternative, he would have to suggest the'Public Works. Department .be given an opportunity tO review this. Mr. Van Duyn advised Mr.,Reckenmacher'if he wanted to come in for a boundary line adjustment, separate action can be taken to accomplish it; however, if he is trying to record it with - 10 - this particular tentative map, then he would be dealing with a three-lot subdivision. Mr. Reckenmacher indicated they would then withdraw their map on this building site approval, thereby withdrawing the appeal. It Was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the public hearing be closed, and no further action taken on this matter. The motion was carried unanimously. The public hearing was closed at 11:10 P.M. C. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL RE: PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION CONCERNING DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL OF FENCING AND LANDSCAPING OF PATHWAY LOCATED ON CARNIEL AND SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD (A-535) The City Manager advised that this appeal has been continued from the December 7th meeting at the request of the applicant. He asked Mr. Van Duyn to summarize the appeal. Mr. Van Duyn explained that'the fence in question was a matter under Design Review,~approved in July, 1976 under an application by a previous owner. The Planning Commissi'on's approval included a 6-foot high woodenlfence with recesses, a meandoting pathway. a 2-foot berm and a serie~ of landscaping alternates ~ property sold before the improvements were completed,"and a bond was posted for landscaping improvements. Subsequent to that, Mr. Whitfield, present property owner, has placed the fence and is suggesting several alternate treatments to the property. The Planning Commission reviewed his proposed amendments; however, they did not feel the straight fence was in keeping with the design features which they had suggested for this property. Mr. Van Duyn further advised plans have been sub- mitted for fencing on the abutting properties'to the south, and this is designed to match up with the plan Mr. Whitfield originally obtained approval for. Therefore, the design of the fence and the recesses is the issue under discussion. The Mayor then opened the public hearing at 11:38 P.M. 'Wendall Whitfieldaddressed the Council. He referred to the the'~r~gi~ drawing which had been submitted indicating that the fence wouldbe on the state's property, and this is what. the Design Review Committee had approved. He explained that the.State had indicated that he could not construct the fence fence on the property. They then had an.informal meeting with the Planning Commission and, at that time, Mr. Van Duyn had mentioned the ~ermit did include the fence. M~.~Wimberly ~Pfi~fi~ :~ 'De~me'~!h~d~t~{~' ~'f~r-~V-~'~ 77¢.: ' ~ ' '~dv~s in'g~=~E~'~~' the -S~h~d.~f~e~ ~l~ Mr. '~fefield~ to construct the fence on this property. Therefore, in his appli- cation he asked to delete the offset fence. 'He had advised the fence company to consult the City of Saratoga before constructing the fence. Mr. Whitfield was subsequently called by the City and advised that the fence was of the wrong configuration. Now he mentioned that there is another problem, that being the redwood fence having 'little or no sound abatement quality. Therefore, Mr. Whitfield indicated he would like permission-to remove the fence and construct another fence, 'perhaps a rock fence. 11 - Mr. Van Duyn advised that if Mr. Whitfield's intent is to put in a different type of fence, he would suggest he go back before the Planning Commission under another fence con- cept. He indicated that Mr. Whitfield does have a bond posted for the landscape and fence improvements, and in order to get this matter resolved, he is going to have to get this cleaned up. l" ~."~i~id" cg~d'..;['~'~ ~thei~ ~edroo~ ,hich f~eS ~:[he ~'t~eet'iis~:[h~:~6m~6~- ~f~6~d-bI_i~h~nois~ across-the - Mayor Bridges Suggested rather than Mr. Whitfield trying to -handle this matter by appeal, he go back to the Planning Commission with his new plan. Mr.lrIWhitfield, therefore, indicated he would withdraw his appeal at this time. It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus the public hearing be closed..~ The motion was carried; the public hearing was closed at 11:50 P.M., and no further action taken. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS C. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS 1.Reports from Director of Public Works a) Quito/McCoy Traffic Signals It is the staff's recommendation no action be taken con- cerning pulling this project from the Capital Improvement Program,?and wait to receive the report that is being conducted under the Office of Traffic Safety grant for the identification and surveillance of high accident locations. This ~ecommendation was acceptable to the Council. b) Sweeping Bus Stop on~ Third Street It is recommended the City continue the sweeping program on a once-a-week basis. It was then moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval to continue sweeping the bus stop on Third Street, per the request of Mrs. Mitchell. The motion was carried unanimously. D. CITY MANAGER 1. Recommendation Re: Re-structuring of Building Inspectlon Department The City Manager outlined his recommendation, .~in~ic~ted in his memorandum to the City Council, dated D~cem~f'~9, 1977. It was agreed to'continue this item for discussion at the Committee of the Whole Meeting on January 10th. 12 - 2. Recommendation Re: Economic Consultant The City Manager outlined the~Iconcept of this program .... which is included in his memor~hd{xm-t'~'th~'~City~C~un~cf~~' dated December 28, 1977. It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr acceptance of the recommendation to . authorize a one-time expendutUre of approximately $5,000 for the preparation of two reports by John W. Cone, Urban Economic and Planning Systems Consultant.' Councilman Kraus indicated he would vote in opposition to this motion on the basis that he did not feel this infor- matiom could be put to meaningful use by a city of this size. The above'motion was carriedr.~o 1~ .... ~7"'~'~ IX. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN 1. Ms. Rina Rosenberg, DireStor'of the CommisSion on the Status of Women, including a resolution concerning women's rights. Noted and filed. 2. Russell ~owther, 20788 Norada Court, appealing Environmental Impact Determination on Ordinance NS-3.37. - Noted and filed;~ City Manager has responded to this letter. B. ORAL C.. PUBLIC GROUP REPRESENTATION The Mayor acknowledged ~he. presence of the following public group representatives: Gladys Armstrong, Los Gatos-Saratoga A.A.U.W. Linda Callon, Saratoga Planning Commissi6n' Arnold Loe, Good Government Group Barbara Watrous, Good Gbvernment Group, coffee hostess The Mayor further acknowledged Troup 537 of Latter Day Saints Church. X. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the meeting be adjourn~do The motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 12:5OA.M. espe~ submitted, 13 -