Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-19-1978 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME Wednesday, Aprill9, 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 Callon, Corr, Kalb, Matteoni, Kraus Absent: None B. MINUTES The City Attorney noted a correction to page.4,~ Re: Request by'Dr. and Mrs. Fox for ClarifiCat{~'~-D~fe~d Improvement Agreement, and ~uggested'deleting the last sentence of the last paragraph on the page. This was acceptable to the Council. Councilwoman Callon suggested a correction to page 10, paragraph 7, and that it be revised to state: "It was her feeling when a person improves their own property, they should not be held responsible for more-~ than the half side of the street that extends in front of their own property line." -It was then moved. by Councilwoman Corr and seconded by Council- man Kraus the minutes of April 5, 1978 be approved as corrected. The motion was carried unanimously. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT C~L~NDAR " It was moved by Councilman~and Seconded by Councilwoman Corr approval of the Consent Calendar' composition. The motion was carried unanimously. B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Requests from Director of Community Services Re: a. Closing Allendale AveDue from Fruitvale Avenue to the City Service Yard on Saturday, May 20th, for Purpose of Holdingsthe Second Annual Skateboard Contest. b. Blocking the Bikeway and One Traffic Lane on Saratoga Avenue from Fruitvale Avenue to Paul Masson Winery on M6nday, May 15th, 9:30 - 11:30 A.M. for Purpose of Senior Citizens "Walk a Golden Mile" 2. Authorization to Call for Bids for City Building Re- furbishing Project. 3. Payment of Claims 4. City Treasur'er's Report 5. City Clerk's Report it was moved by Kraus approval of the items'fOr theConsent ~al~d~rZ' motion was carried unanimously. III. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A. MODIFICATION TO AGREEMENT WITH HOTOYAMA AND ASSOCIATES FOR HAKONE GARDENS RESTORATION The City Manager explaine~ that in follow up to the agreement which the City had negotiated with Mr. Hatoyama, there are some additional expectations by the City which the consulsuttant had not understood in the initial agreement, primarily pertaining to the bridges and observation decks at Hakone Gardens. As a result of this misunderstanding, a time lapse resulted, increasing the cost of the project approximately $2,500· Barbara Sampson, Director 'of Community Services, commented that at this time, the pla~tforms are closed off because they are unsafe due to the rotten timbers, and thus create a great liability for the City to have them available for passage. She indicated if the City is not going to go through with some drawings in order to repai~ the platforms, it is likely it will be recommended they be torn down, and Mr. Hatoyama's fee for this work is 78 percent of what a certified California landscape architect's fee would be for the estimate of cost of construction· Councilman Kalb inquired how the City had gone out for bid on this project. Miss Sampson replied that the City did not specifically go out for bid on this ~gre~m~ent..~Rat~he~, the Parks and Recreation Commission has workedCf6~B~u~e~ea~s to get to this point, and tried · to go aroun~he~'p~8-~s~'~ding because of the definite type of expertise needed in Japanese structures· It was the Parks and Recreation Commission'S recommendation, therefore, to hire the architectural firm of Hatayama and Associates in that they have not only landscape architects, but also, building architects· However the written definition submitted to Miss Sampson in December 1977 did not include the bridges and the platform. Councilman Kraus inquired if the viewing platforms are such that you need an authenticity in rebuilding them. Miss Sampson replied it isn't as mandatory as it would be:with the structures themselves. Councilman Kraus suggested leaving the viewing platforms out of' the bid, and if later the P~rks and Recreation Commission and the Council decide, they could still rebuild them. " Miss Sampson indicated she.would have to go bac~ to Mr. Hatayama to obtain this s~parate figure. Councilwoman Callon commented that at 'the Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Monday evening, it was pointed out the expense of maintaining Hakone is presently $6,300 per acre, as against $2,700 per acre of otZm'~7~parks in the city. It had been mentioned that the·C0unt~ ~ad asked Sarato~ga if the city was interested in a regional sharing of this park, but the Council had turned it down due to the fact that the Count~'~required ownership or control of the park· She indicated that one of t~lh~e~Commissionersh_ha~dadpointed' ~ut if the City does ~'t"~'he~i'l~Z~rena-~h'~ will be of no value to ahy unit ~0v~g~m~n~'~r iS~'~ff~"~T. Therefore, she would support the Council considering approaching another level of government and see, due to the GaKden'S regional significance, if another element of government would like to ~ntrol it. MODIFICATION TO AGREEMENT - HAKONE GARDENS RESTORATION (Cont'd.) It was then moVedby Councilwoman Corr and'seconded by Councilman Matteoni to accept the modification to the agree- ment with the designer for Hakone Gardens restoration. Councilman Kalb indicated ~e'would prefer to see it set up to eliminate the design of the platforms, and r~ques'ted Councibx~nan'. Corr accept this modification to her motion. Councilwoman C0rr was agreeable to this suggestion. Mayor_.Kraus indicated he has some real concerns approving this $2,200 additional expenditure, as part of this i~e~wa?_~he fault of the contractor. He suggested this matteY'b~con[~nued for ~A'd]ou'nYh~d~ul~'~'~t'~ ~n'~YTl'2'5~?~ This to the of Co' Ffi. .... The matte_~r~as therefore.~continued IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND FO~4AL RESOLUTIONS A. ORDINANCE NS-3.40-1 (Introduction) An Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Amending Ordinance No. NS-3.40~ an Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Proposed by the Initiative Process by Adding Non-context Provisions as Contained in Initial Petition It.was moved by Councilman'Matteoni and seconded by Councilman .Kalb to ihtroduce Ordinance NS-3.40-1 and waive the reading. The motion was carried unanimously. V. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES, ZONING REQUESTS A. CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT SDR-1311 (DR~ FOX) The City Manager explained that in follow up Eo the Council's request the last time this matter was discussed, there is this evening a sample of the Deferred Improvement Agreement ~s proposed to be entered into between the City and Dr. Fox. He indicated the question relative to the sanitary sewer and at at what point the 300 feet would be measured has been clarified on the revised Exhibit "B' The other key element is Item II-A of the Deferred Improvement Agreement, having to do with Street and Drainage Improvements. He further pointed out the fact that the Sisters of Notre Dame are the current property owners, and they are splitting a piece 'of this property with Dr. Fox. The way it is currently written, both parcels are tied together; however, if there is any future development of either of these p~eces, then the entire package is put together to get these conditions imposed. Councilman Matteoni inquired if Dr. Fox were to develop his property and only create one additional lot two years from now,- wouldn't it be considered at.that time whether this is sufficient to'trigger a need for the full improvement of the road. Mr. Johnston, City Attorney, affirmed this, explaining that-it is nothing more nor less than an agreement between the doctor, the Sisters, and the City, and the agreement could always be modified. It was moved by Councilwoman Corr and seconded by Councilman 3 DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT SDR-1311, DR. FOX It was moved by Councilwoman Corr and seconded by Councilman Kalb to approve the conditions of the Deferred improvement Agreement for SDR-1311, including the revised Exhibit "B". The motion was carried unanimously. B. REFERraL FROM SANITATION DISTRICT #4 RE: ANNEXATION REQUEST' FOR RAVINE ROAD-LITTLEBROOK ROAD AND OVERLOOK DRIVE (Cont'd. 3/15/78) The City Manager indicated that this matter was discussed ~at the Committee of the Whole Meeting last week, and the issue before the Council pertains to an application before County Sanitation District #4 for certain parcels 6f land in the Ravine Road-Littlebrook Road area. ,to be annexed into theiSanitary District. He explained that part of LAFCO's requirements, and also the City's policy, is that when there is an annexation to a special district that serves the City, the property is generally also required to annex to the City at the same time. The letter from the District requests direction from the City as to whether or not the City is going tol require annexation to the City at the same time as annexation to District 4, or whether or not the City elects to waive that requirement. He indicated that in 1971, the City Council did waive the requirement-for simultaneous ation in the Redberry Road area. Also at that time, the Council reiterated its concern in having urbane type development take place within the city limits of Saratoga. The City Manager pointed out those communications received by the Council on this issue, as follows: Mr. William Robson, !58~91 Ravine Rgad A petition from residen'ts of Ravine, Overlook, Littlebrook and CanOn Drive area, asking that . the- Council deny any' re'quest for waiver 'of LAFCO, ~ Sanitation District and City of Sara~toga require- ments for sewer disfrict annexation. Mr. David Myers, 22393 Riverside Drive Ms. Margaret Marsden, 2!194 Nimrick Lane, Councilman Kalb inquired~if this area is legally within the City's urban service area. Mr. Beyer replied that the 'staff has spent some time with the County during the last couple of days clarifying this issue, and it is his opinion that all of the land in question tonight was in the original urban service area. Councilwoman Callon dopmnented her concern is that the extension of sewers has growth-inducing potential, and from that point-of- view, she would be reluctant to see the sewers extended to serve this property as it may also cause the introduction of further development o Councilman Matteoni expressed his further concern that if Saratoga eventually intends tO take this into its boundaries~ and Saratoga has decreed that it is not going to accept septic tank systems, and if there are other concerns, i.e., traffic, terrain, geologic problems, these have to be the reasons for the denial or the minimization of further development.. Mayor_Kraus 'inquired if th~ Council were to agree to annex to the District, would the people to be served by that area have the opportunity of voting o.n whether or not they would accept sewers in this area. - 4 - ANNEXATION REQUEST FOR RAVINE ROAD, LITTLEBROOK ROAD, OVERLOOK DRIVE (Cont"d. Bob Molay of Sanitation Dis,trict #4, repl~i_~_d] that the District has already surveyed the area, and the bulk of the residents would oppose it, and if there is a 25 percent protest, then it has to go to a special election. Councilman Kalb commented that his understan~Uipg. is that most of the people are not inter.ested in the system at this point, and if in a few years they 'decide to tie into the system, there would be some reimbursement to those people that put it in and bore all the costs t,o begin with. Councilwoman Callon qUestiohed if this would be a reimbursement to these ownersor to-the District itself. Mr. Molay replied that it could be either case, and he does not know what Lthe financial aspects of the whole. thing would be. He explained that the installation part would not be under special assessment, and this would be another financial arrangement. Mayor Kraus indicated part Of his concern was that in tearing up this private road, the people would have no other way in or out of their property Councilwoman Callon commented it was her recollection that with County-type zoning there are bonus lots, resulting in better development potential with sewers than without. TherefOre, if the developer does not get the sewers out there, there will be fewer lots developed. Councilman Matteoni indicated he recalls from the Council,s last discussion, this would result in 9 lots instead of 12. Councilwoman Callon commented that therefore, the landowners who do not want the sewer system own the private roads. Mayor Kraus indicated that it was his Keeling this property should be annexed to the District. However, on the other hand, he feels the people involved should have a vote on whether or not t;he~Zy__~nt it~o.~7I~_ a~~'e'~l~_~D~l~-~'~h'~'h~e ~he-.'~,vofe eyer~i~cat~%~d~..it~-W'ould-seem~t~.h. im-the City~'has '6nly'tWo ~ ~s~"i~ fri t · e s --'~8~'i~S~RB~ o~ ~a i~ 'i~t'~u ±r e~C~ ~'~=~ other is to waive it only conditiionally upon the approval of the local residents. However, a third option might be one that says the City is not interested in the annexation piece and questions whether or not DiStrict 4 should even be providing 7 service up there at all. If this were the Council's position, the City would state to both ~FCO and DiStrict ~ that it is opposed to the whole issue. Co~cilman Kalb inquired if this might not be leaving the issue mo~e 'to chance than the City intends. Co~cilwoman Callon felt that the City Would not be answering the question of the District -- rather, it would be asking them to withdraw its question. ~I~.~was then moved by CouncilwOman Callon and seconded by Councilman Kr~us the City not take action on the waiver of the requirement .of .city annexation in order to facilitate sewer district annexation, but as~ the Sanitary District to not provide ANNEXATION REQUEST FOR RAVINE ROAD, LITTLEBROOK ROAD, OVERLOOK DRIVE (Cont'd. of the strong environmentalproblems, and also, the strong opposition. This is based on the fact that the parcels requesting annexation are not contiguous to the ~anitary sewer, and from the City's point of view, this could be growth inducing, and also, the fact that those persons affected will not have a vote in the matter. The motion was carried, 4 to 1, Councilman Matteoni in opposition. C. REQUEST BY RESIDENTS ON HARLEIGH DRIVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC EASEMENT BETWEEN TRACT 6074 AND 5243 TO PEDESTRIAN ACCESS Rob Robinson, Acting Planning Director, advised that several weeks ago, the Planning Department received a letter from Mr. Mark Scott Collins requesting action be taken to close the pedestrian easement between the two Harleigh Courts. He indicated that Tract 5243, which is the older subdivision, received final approval from the Council in October 1972, and all streets and dedications were accepted in December 1973. Condition 12 of the Subdivision Committee's report required that a 40-foot right-of-way be dedicated with barricades to prevent any traffic other than pedestrians between the cul-de-sac and school property. In Tract 6074, although the final~map doesn't specificall'y ~ state=there will be a pedestrian easement, the owner certi- ficate clearly states that Osterlund Enterprises dedicate all easements for any and all public uses upon and over said streets and said portions thereof. In February 1976, there was a ~ petition ~±gned by approximately 90 individuals requesting the abandonment of such easements located on the west end of this tract. The Planning Commission recommended to the Council that this easement remain in existence, and the City Council. voted not to abandon the easement, but to retain it for emergenci access. Councilwoman Corr commented that in planning this development, the City went out of its way to protect the people back on Harleigh Drive from the through traffic on Allendale. It was damage to the landscaping by changing the format of the gate; however, she would not like to see the City abandon the easement. The City Manager clarified that the owner's certificate on the deed or on the recorded map provides for dedication of easements for public uses under, upon or over said streets and said portions thereof, and the street's pedestrian right-of-way or access is a part of that coverage. Councilman Kalb commented that he sees two problems: He is not sure the present emergency access provided is viable because, according to his measurements, you can't open_~t. he g~far ~.~ enough to get an emergency vehicle through_~eca~j~h~{s"~o~~ access through~m{ddle, then we could rl~ of t~e problems~ with bicycles, skatebeards ~iminate this other problem too. Councilwoman Callon commented that she would like to see the City reduce the easement and make alterations in the fence so a bicycle could be walked through the middle, staying away from the sides. Councilman Matteoni commented that he would like to ask Faber to look at the questions raised in the letter from Mr.. Mark Collins relevant to the subdivision maps, and look at the alternatives of what may be done to mitigate the circumstances, as well as the request to close it completely to pedestrian traffic. 6 REQUEST BY RESIDENTS ON HARLEIGH DRIVE (Cont'd.) Follgwing some additional disqussion, it was the consensus of .the Council to continue thils matter for 30 days to allow the City Attorney time to review the legal questions raised in subject letter, and to give an opinion. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS. A. TO CONSIDER APPEAL OF LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE DECISION RELEVANT TO CONDITIONS IMPOSED ON BUtlLDING SITE APPROVAl, }~DRONNE HILL ROAD (SDR-1337, RUDY L. CHA2IDES) (Cont'd. 4/5/78) The City Manager indicated that this matter had been continued from the last regular. meetihg, and at that time, there were two items under consideration: One pertaining to the issue of the swi~aing pool which had not been approved --.the other pertaining to. the issue of the!deferred improvement agreement, specifically related to Condition II-C. " The Mayor opened the public hearing at 9:07 P.M.' There being no discussion from members of the audience, it was moved by Councilman Kalb and seconded by CounCilWoman Corr the public hearing'be closed. The motion was carried. The public hearing was Closed at 9:08 P.M. It was then moved by Couniclman Kalb and seconded~by Coundilman Kraus to deny the appeal onConditions II-C and Ill-F, relevant to SDR-1337. The motion was carried unanimously. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR · 1.' Consideration.of Grand J~ry Transportation Committee Report on Transit in Santa Clara County~ Following discussion on this matter, it was moved by CounCilman Matteoni and. seconded by Councilwoman Corr to communicate with the'County, advising that the City Council recognizes the work overload associated with the Board of Supervisors handling the area of transportation, indicating that the condept which the Council had endorsed was that of a separate board. The motion was carried unan£mously. 2. Referral to Parks and Recreation Commission Re: Trails and Pathways Report Implementation The City Manager indicated that based on the Counicl's discussion with the Parks and Recreation Commission the previous week', he has attempted to pull togethe~ what he had'interpreted to be the Council's Concensus on how to proceed concerning the Trails and Pathways R~port. Councilman Matteoni commented that he sees the five~oints as outlined in the City: M anager's Referral as fitting the Bikeways Cornmitt'ee analogy in selecting a demonstration-route system. The Council discussed the public hearing and notification process that should be.followedinbringingtb~s before the Conmission. .Councilwoman Callon q~e~tioned why ~he. Council is~Dicking out only areas 1 and 2. for the Commission to look at, and commented that she would hope they would take into consideration where thedemonstration route'~ould suit the most number of people. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS - MAYOR '(Cont'd.) Councilwoman Corr was of the opinion the hearing should be related to the County proposal or somewhere where it would be an integral part of the county map. Councilman Kalb commented that he believes the Council is saying they do not want to restrict the Parks and Commission in any particular area. With regard to the notice, Councilman Kalb indicated he would like to see some form of notification to the residents so they recognize what the issue is about, and so they have a valid opportunity to express their opinions. It was then moved by Councilwoman Corr and seconded by Councilman K~Ib~.~72_ to formally refer the Trails and Pathways Report to th~rks and Recreation Commission for action. The motion was carried unanimously. 3, I.C.C. Conference = Mayor Kraus reported that the conference would take place on October 6, 7 and 8. He would have further information on this at a later date. B. COUNCIL AND CO~ISSION REPORTS : Master Trails and' · ~ 1. Parks and Recreation Commission Re~. ~ ~_~a~h~s PI~ for- Santa' Clara Co]~nty ~ -_~c~l Barbara Sampson, Director of Co~unity Servi~s, s~arized the reco~endations of ~Earks and Recreation Co~ission. ~8~l~l~n'~C~ r~n~f~s of the' Co~ssion. The County plan has been broken into areas A1, A2, etc. Section A 1 - Saratoga reco~ends that the county plan be ~mended to show the extension of trail from the south end of Painless Parker to Mt. Eden Road .with the primary route and the alternate route which is sho~ by a dotted line. The purpose of this is to provide access to Mt. Eden Road and to fit in with the city plan. This is an~area the Co~ission has looked at recently with the potential "develop ~nt of the Cocciardi property, and has. reco~ended that this be a potential access from that area to Mt. Eden Road. Section A 2 - The City reco~ends that the county plan be amended by deleting that'. portion of trail from the corner of Big Basin Way and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road through Verde Vista and Serra Hills to Pierce Road. Section A 3 - This requests that the co~ty plan be amended to show the portion of t~ail on Saratoga-Los Gatos Road between Big Basin Way and Carnelian Glen be restricted to pedestrians only because only hard-surface is available. Section A 4 - This is requesting a limit to the Saratoga plan to show equestrian and pedestrian access on Saratoga- Los Gatos Road from Carnelian Glen to the city limits near Quito Road as both hard and soft surfaces are available for equestrian/pedestrian. This would provide a link we do not have with the current Los Gatos area. - 8 - PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION RE: MASTER TRAILS AND PATHWAYS PLAN (C~nt' d. ) Miss Sampson explained the first three items Saratoga recommends that the County plan be amended. On A 4, it is recommended the Saratoga plan be amended to show the equestrian-pedestrian easement on Saratoga-Los Gatos Road from Carnelian Glen to the city limits. Section A 5 - This recommends that the City of Saratoga amend its plan to add the portion of trail which follows the transportation corridor from Saratoga Avenue to the ~ity limits at Prospect. Section A 6 - This is probably the most controversial item the County has on its plan. This is the portion from the base of what is currently Congress Springs Park to Prospect,along the Saratoga Creek. This plan was in the original 1968 Trails and Pathways Task Forte Report, and was dropped when the current Task Force finished their report because they felt it was not available. The Parks and Recreation Commission felt that in keeping this and adding it to the city's plan would be questionable because it would become a summer trail only at the bottom of the creek, and would require full annual maintenance. Further, the Commission has recommended before any action be taken to add it to the city's plan, the area be walked with the Flood Control personnel to determine property lines. Miss Sampson indicated that the Commission further recommends the County delete the upper cross portion of the Winery Trail which is on Mt. Eden Road, and add the city's access from the Winery Trail to Mt. Eden Road adross the P.G.&.E. maintenance road. Further, ~he Commission recommends that the County add a portion of the Sanborn Trail, as this makes a complete triangle. Following some discussion concerning the recommendation, as well as the voting structure On the I.G.C. Board, it was moved by Councilwoman Callon and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to accept the recommendation of ~he Parks and Recreation Commission ~egarding the Master Trails and Pathways Plan for Santa Clara County, and forward this action, along with the recommendation, to the P.P.C. The motion was carried unanimously. 2. Councilwomanf~Re: Actions of City Planning Commission a. Allen De Grange property received final building site approval b. Odd Fellows property has not yet received final site approval~ in that there is still a problem with the bond on Chester Avenue. c. Saratoga Associates request for variance - strong interest by the Planning Commission to let the Council again take some action on the land on the ~ corner of Cox and'Saratoga-Sunnyvale Raod. 3. Councilman Kalb Re: Transportation Commission Issues a. Indicated support of Pen Tab alternative B, a plan to subsidize Southern Pacific operations. -'9 - COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS (Cont'd.) b. Downtown San Jose is trying to come up with a plan to restructure traffic down First Street, Second Street areas, with considerationof a shopping mall. C. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS" 1. Report from Director of Publiq Works Re: Request for "No Parking Zone" on Lumbertown Lane Mr. Shook, Director of Public Works,.advised that this item is in follow up to a petition!received at the April 5th Council Meeting, requesting to'provide ~"'No Parking" limit between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. ResolutiOn MV-130 has been provided for'consideration this evening, which would accomplish this no parking limitation. Mr. Shook indicated he cannot support the request, based on the potential cost of.providing such relief in not only this area, but other areas with similar problems.. The Council discussed this request. Ma~or~.Kraus indicated he would have no Objection to providing the signs, if the property owners involved are ·Willing to pay for them. It was then moved by Councilwoman Callon and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to adopt Resolution MV-130, Prohibiting Parking on a Portion of'Lumbertown Lane, between 6:00 P.M. D. CITY MANAGER · 1. Report Re: Re uest by~Sheriff's Department Re:. LicenSing Requirements ~or Selling Concealed Weapons The City Manager indicated it has been brought to his attention by the Sheriff's Department because of a change in Penal-Code Sectio~ 12071, licensing authorities of any'city or~_~. in order to accept applications permitting sale of'~a~ble Due to the fact the City of Saratoga currently has no acti~.t! of this type, it was his recommendation not to adopt ordinance at this time; however, if someone requested to sell such weapons, the Council consider the specific case in point. It was moved by Counc{iwoman Callon and seconHed by Councilwoman Corr to support the City Manager.'s recommendation. The motion was carried unanimously.. 2. Review of Program Areas for Possible Reduction in Service Due to the Jarvis/Gann Initiative The City Manager discussed some options that might be considered in·the event the Jarvis/Gann Initiative were to pass, and the impacts that would result in terms of · - the 78-79 operating budget.. Councilman Kalb commented he would like to propose one particular item, and that ~s in the new budget ~here not pe~a transfer of funds fro~ the general fund~f~et ~m~nte_'~n~c~po~~ie~t~n~mlke' ~--~balance eff~ctivelM ,so that~t, he Ge~al_.Fund~w~ld'~g~'7~e~ bur~e~edw'Y'th~es~xpen~es~'~ ~ ~ ~z ~-~ 10 - CITY ~NAGER Cont'd.) Mr.., Beyer indicated another option to this would be to go to more Gas Tax money. Councilwoman Callon commented with respect to the Code Enforcement Officer function requiring weekend patrol for enforcing the Sign Ordinance, and felt this should be eliminated. Councilman Kalb suggested maintenance functions,. such as trimming of grass, be scheduled every two' weeks. Mayor Kraus mentioned doing something in the area of the Community Gardens, and also, the Chamber of Commerce. Councilman Kalb commented he would think the City would want to make the Community Gardens a communit~_pr_~oj~eq~.a~nd get it off the city tax roles. f~_~.' '.'- : ~ : ~ going to have is co~unicating to the public the reduced level of service that i~ going to take place. because of the cut. The total figure that has to be either replaced or cht is $370,000. A. WRITTEN 1. Mr. Shorter, Lutheria Way, expressing the fact that nothing has been done relevant to the 'Cit~qu~emedt; ~th'a' t~C~d]~t~~7'~C~[ a_ r ~ ~~ t 1'.' ~'d3~ to 'M~. 'Sh~ property, or ~e~ove ~'~ d~t~Sn two horizontal and one vertical slope t% cj~p.!y w~3.h_.~bt .... .... Grading- Ordinance. The matter was ref~red:to staff for'follow up. 2. Councilman Jeffery Kalb regarding organization of the Village Parking District in conjunction with the Arco site. Mayor Kraus inquired what action the City could take in 'r reference to this, and whether or not it isn't up to the lando~ers to do something. The City Manager coEented that the City has done some previous staff work on this whole district, and would concur that it is probably time to proceed to again go back to the property o~ers to see if there is renewed interest. He indicated~t'~~'~a~&uS~i~i~ Mr~Fenfeld [~ B~ck~ who would be interested in this, and he would like to discuss the matter further with the Planning Department and Public Works Department to see where the City is in terms of priorities. 3. James J. Clancy, Attorney at Law, requesting the City Council adopt a formal resolution concerning "abatement 'of moral public nuisances law". = Noted and filed. 4. A letter to the Planning CoEission from William R. Benevento, Kirkdale Drive, re: proposed development of the southeast corner of Prospect and ~ighWay 9. - Noted and filed. 11 - WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS (Cont'd. 5. Mrs. Violet Enander, Clerk/Board of Directors, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Ire: appointments to the Water Commission and Central Flood Control Zone Advisory Cormnittee. Mayor Kraus advised that Councilman Nor~cj~atteoni is repre- sentative~t~h'~'~t~.2~o~.~s~ion,~d~'Councilwoman Linda Callon is~ ~entatT~'Y'~ti~ 'FF~8'd~C~ontrol Zone Advisory Committee, with Robert Shook as the alternate 'representative. 6. Jerome Kocir, 12855 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, re: development along Saratoga-Sunnyvale and Cox Avenues. Scheduled for discussion at Committee of the Whole Meeting on April 25th. 7. Ms. Martha Konrad, Secretary, Greenbriar Taxpayer Association, expressing support for the recommendation re: development of the Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road frontage property. - Included as part of the file on this subject. B. ORAL C. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PUBLIC GROUP REPRESENTATIVES The Mayor acknowledged the presence of the foliowing represen- tatives: Gladys Armstrong, A.~.U~.W. Jean Hills, G.G.G. - Dick Martin, G~G.G. IX. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by CouncilmaL Kraus and seconsed By Councilwoman Corr the meeting be adjourned to. an ,Adjourned Regular Meeting on Tuesday, April 25th. The motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 P.M. Respectfully.. submitted, Rob - 12 -