Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-07-1985 City Council Minutes l'.flNb'rES S~'IUC.,A CI~ GOUNCIL TIffS: Wednesday, August 7, 1985 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale .Avenue ~. TYPE: Regular Meeting ~ SESSION - Meet and Confer - 6:30 p.m. f~unity Center Senior Lounge, 19655 Allendale Avenue ~ M~:~r['l/qG - 7:00 p.m. I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CAI.I. - Councilmembers Callon, Hlava, bloyles and Mayor Clevenger present at 7:12 p.m. Councilmember Fanelli absent. B. MINUTES- 7/17, 7/23, 7/31 ~ity Attorney suggested that the reference to P~4-4 on p. 5 of the 7/17 minutes be changed to "multiple family residential." HLAVA/MOYLES MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF 7/17 AS AMENDED AND THOSE OF 7/23 AND 7/31 AS SUBMITrED. Passed 4-0. II. ORAL ~CATIONS Dave Smith, Quito Road, rose to express his concerns on several matters. There was consensus to discuss them under Item VI. A. He also expressed appreciation for assistance given him by City employees Jay Hegg and John Turchan. Rise Sissner, 14725 Aloha, stated that there was a traffic hazard for pedestrians in the Oak Street School area because there were no sidewalks. Consensus to discuss under Item VI. A. Carolyn Massakian, 20150 Bonnie Rae Lane, reiterated Me. Sissner' s concerns. III. CONSENT CAI.F~KIAR 1. Final Building Site Approval, SDR 1585, A. Lorincz, Glen Una Dr. (2 lots) 2. Acceptance and Acknowledgment 9f Donation to Hakone Gardens - Pacific Scribes 3. Acceptance and Acknowledgment of Donation to Hakone Gardens - Hill 4. Acceptance and Acknowledgment of Donation to Hakone Gardens - Deller 5. Resolution Denying Drunn Appeal of Chu Project heard 7/3 RESOLUTION 2263 6. Resolution Granting Benson Appeal heard 7/3 RESOLUTION 2264 7. Resolution Confirming David Pines' Appointment to Planning Conmission RESOLUTION 2265 8. Construction Acceptance, SDR 1419, J. Quarnstrom, Carniel Avenue 9. Construction Acceptance, SDR 1523, G. Jacobsen (Day), Sobey Road 10. Final Map Approval, RE-l, John Ross, Austin Way 11. Approval of Warrant List Councilmember Hlava requested renDval of the Warrant List. MOYI,F.q/CALLOH MOVED APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR EXCEPT ITEM 11. Passed 4-0. Staff answered Councilmember Hlava's questions on the Warrant List. HLAVA/CLEVENGER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE WARRANT LIST. Passed 4-0. IV. SCHEDUt.Fn MA'rr~I<S 2-8/7/8~ A. AIIqlNISTRATIVE 1U~POR~S 1. Repo~-~ on Resid~ce ~ ~ Psl~ ~ive objec~onabl~ vehicle fro~ vie~. ~i~y S~ic~s Director added ~h~ ~h~ ~c~in~ Ciuy ~n~e~ ,~l~ined ~epor~. Er~ his vi~in~ o~ ~he si~e, he ~el~ u~e~s provided ~ bu~fe~, bu~ only ~he subjec~ prope~y ~ould b~ 8f~ec~d, uo~ n~i~h~s' Co~cil~e~s ~eed ~h~ ~he~e ~s ~n ~dqu~ u~ of ~re~s even C~H/~ NO~ TO ~ ~ ~P~ FOR ~iO~ OF ~ ~D~D~ ~E ~'~ includiu~ S~o~8 public he~rin~ scheduled October ~. ~ril~ K~n~u~ ros~ ~o spe~k ~9 ~person of ~he Library ~u~issiou. She , ~h~ li~h~i~ ~o~ ~h~ ~nd~ Library p~u~ lo~ be provided ~s soon ~s possible. 1. ~ ~ T~ o~ Si~ ~ce re~d~: 1) ~s ~ si3es ordi~ce (s~ 2. ~ ~ ~ o~ ~,,,,~ Us~ ~ S~--,~ ~di~ r~rd- u-~o~n~ uses ~ s~es; 2) ~~ o~ u-u~o~ ~es ~-0. D. B~ ~ 1. ~pr~l o~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~s 3-8/7/85 HIAVA/MOYLES MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2266 APPROVING APPLICATION FOR FUNDS UNDt~ CALIFORNA SENIOR CENTER BOND ACT OF 1984 FOR ADDITION TO SARATOGA SENIOR CEN'fEK. Passed 4-0. 2. Approval of Agre~n~nt for Professional Services - Callander Assoc. Maintenance Director explained details of finances, noting that more money would need to be appropriated for the extra cost of architectural fees. Mayor Clevenger reported that the Bamboo Society was interested in maintaining a portion of the medians if they were planted in bamboo, and other groups may also wish to participate in median maintenance. There was consensus to give the contractor a free hand in the design rather than requesting him to design with the possibility of volunteer participation in mind. Councilmember Hlava commented on the fact that 30% of the fee was the cost of design. After further discussion, staff was directed to investigate the high fees to find out whether other cities paid comparable amounts and report back to Council. V. PUBLIC tlEARINGS -8:00 P.M. OR EARLIER A. Consideration of Text/~ts to the Seco~ Unit Ordinance which would generally relax the develolm~nt regulations of this ordinance for new and existing second enits, including the following: 1) allow now second onits in the R-l-10,000 zoning district to be located within an existing dwelling and llmlting the size of the second unit and the m~nher of people occupying the structure; 2) allow sane variation, in certain hardship cases, frcm the require.put that the owner occupy the site on w~ich the second onit is located; 3) allow second units to be occupied by the physically handicapped as k~ll as people over 60 years of age; 4) allow existing second units greater latitude to vary frun the restrictions and standards under Section 16A.4 of the ordinance (first reading) (GF 344.1) City Attorney explained ordinance. Councilmember Hlava conmented that the Board of Realtors wished to testify on the matter but could not be present tonight. The public hearing was opened at 8:10 p.m. Douglas Adams spoke representing clients Kith second units. He said that they did not object to the amendments, but felt they should be liberalized with respect to existing units. All existing units should be allowed, he said, as long as they met safety and health standards. He believed neighbors did not generally complain about second units, and the intent of the Legislature was to create them rather than to elminate existing units. He reconmended having everyone with second units register them with the City, then inspecting them. Charles Robbins spoke representing the Good Government Group. He stated that most people wanted single family residential housing in Saratoga. Carol Machol, Ronnie Way, said that a second unit is a duplex. She felt the restrictions were too loose and that some restrictions, such as owner occupancy and physical disabilty, were practically unenforceable. Louise Coo. per spoke as the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council Housing and Legislative Chairman. She favored the Planning Conmissiioin reconmendations because existing housing would be preserved wthout destroying the residential quality of Saratoga. She felt Saratoga was fortunate to have the Good Government Group but believed their concerns were not as serious as they believed they were. Margaret Russell, Saratoga Glen Court, opposed second units. She felt that the residents wanted single family residences, as indicated at ' the General Plan meetings. She also mentioned that second units would be a problem in septic tank areas. Shelley Willjams stated that he wished to preserve the residential nature of Saratoga but feared the loss of existing second units which do not serve senior citizens. He favo~ad "grandlathering" them and deleting the owner occupancy requirement. No one further appearing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 8:28 p.m. Councilmembers discussed the proposed ordinance and agreed to eliminate new second units in the R-l-10,000 district and the paragraph not requiring owner occupancy if the owner resides on the adjacent site. There was discussion of, but no consensus to change, the paragraph not requiring owner occupancy if the owner is unable to reside on the site for certain reasons, the paragraph not requiring a covered 4-8/7/85 parking space in certain cases, and the original suggested change concerning septic tanks. There was consensus to retain the~ original paragraph .concerning the permitted size of existing second units. Councilmember Moyles stated that he opposed the age requirement on the grounds it was discriminatory. Councilmember Callon conmented that the requirementscould be changed later if the Council wished, but she felt that by retaining it the Council would keep faith with those who originally asked for a second unit ordinance. The purpose was to create housing for seniors, she said. Councilmember Callon also pointed out that the Council did not seem to be accomplishing much because the owners of existing second units are not applying for legitlmization as expected. There was consensus to continue consideration of the ordinance to the meeting of August 21, when a full Council was expected to be present. Councilmember Moyles excused himself because of a previous ou~nitment at 8:58 p.m. and was not present for the remainder of the meeting. B. Considerati~ of/~nondfng the General Plan and Zoning Desigrmtions of a .78 acre property at 20375 Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. fran Residential-Median Density Single F~nily (M-10) to Retail G-,.,~rcial and f-fan R-l-10.000 to C-N (Neighborhowl G~.~rcial) (Applicants. F. and E. Youn~ (GPA 85-3. C-225) The public hearing was opened at 9:00 p.m. Lynn Belanger, attorney for the applicants, stated that they intended to withdraw the application and instead pursue a use permit under the Zoning Ordinance. Since a use permit is under the continuing jurisdiction of the'Planning Conmiss/on and the City Council, she said, the conditions of the permit could be as restrictive! as those bodies desired, and the permit could be revoked if the conditions were not observed. She wished to allow those who had come to testify an opportunity to speak even though no application was before the Council. She requested that the Council direct the issue to the Planning Carmission to reyiew under the use permit process. City Attorney stated that applying for a use permit under the nonconforming ordinance brings up questions of interpretations, but the t/me limits still apply. He also stated that the intent of the ordinance was to apply to the sale of the use. In answer to CouncilmenfDer Callon, he said that the Village Plan would not include the subject property, but even if it did a use permit and ~m~ndments to the business regulations on home occupations would be required for a business license. ~yor Clevenger explained for the audience that the matter would go before the Planning Conmission as a use permit and the Council could take no action tonight. Nevertheless, the public hearing would be opened and detailed minutes of conments recorded in the minutes to be forwarded to the Planning Cunudssion so that those in attendance would not heave to repeat their conu~nts to the Conmisslon. The public hearing was opened at 9:13 p.m. .Edna Young spoke as one of the applicants, reading a letter which explained the intended low-key operation of the art gallery and their willingness to work with the neighbors and others involved to develop a solution acceptable to all. Robert Morton spoke as an attorney acting as a consultant for Betty Maas', Greg Gredhaus, and Mr. Matas. He asked the City Attorney for clarification as to the purpose of the public hearing. City Attorney stated that technically there was no application before the Council. ~W. Morton continued to ask technical legal questions, and Mayor Clevenger requested that the public be allow,~ to give input. Councilmember Callonnoted that those in attendance should not rely solely on giving test/mony tonight, since there was no plan before the Council to which anyone could respond. Mr. Morton stated his belief that there was no justification for amending the General Plan, rezoning~, or issuing a use permit. If a use permit for the art gallery were issued, he felt that would be spot zoning. City Attorney pointed out that it was difficult to respond to specific questions, since there was no application before the Council. He suggested that he and Mr. Morton discuss the mtter at another time. Tom Tisch, 14735 Aloha, spoke as a leng-t~me resident of Saratoga who favored the intended use. Rip LaCroix, 14501 Pike' Rd., also spoke as a long-time resident favoring the appeal. 5-8/7/85 He believed the property had always been quasi-c~mercial. He felt the proposed use was the proper one for the location and that the neighbors would agree when they ~nderstood the plan.. KorBregman, 20330 Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd., said that as one who lived less than 200 yards from the property, he opposed the proposed use, although he welcomed the occupants as neighbors. Greg Grodhaus, speaking for 51 of the 72 neighbors in the area, said that he opposed any commercial use in the residential area. He also objected to residents of other areas of Saratoga speaking to what should be in his neighborhood. He felt the proposal to obtain a use permit was not valid because the property had changed hands. Steve Richard said that he favored the use permit as a legal non-conforming continuing use. He believed the proposed art gallery would only improve what had already been there for a long time. Lois Svalya stated that she did not live within 500 feet of the property but was interested in the issue. She felt, however, that the opinions of those who would be most affected by the use should be carefully listened to. Robert Riley, 20568 Lomita, said that he lived two blocks from the site. He had previously been a tenant above the Young Gallery, he said, and had never been bothered by the use. He felt the proposal was an opportunity to preserve the mansion. Betty Maas, 20360 Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd., said that she had lived near the site for many years and had a feeling for its history. She opposed the Young's plans for the home, saying that it looked like a mortuary and needed landscaping, while the Youngs planned to put in statues. Linda Rositas, 20621Lomita, said she lived three blocks from the site. She had known the Youngs for six years, she said, and favored the use. When she tried to canvass the neighbors in their cause, she was shocked at what she perceived as the neighbors' closed-mindedness. Since the hour was growing late, Mayor Clevenger requested that only two more speakers from each side speak on the issue. Dave Johnston, 20616 Brookwood Lane, said that he had lived in Saratoga since 1954. He favored the use and never noticed any disturbance from the previous gallery and antique store. Consuelo Killins, County Arts Council, felt that the gallery was an important part of the arts scene in Saratoga. She believed that there had been no change in the use for 35 years, and the proposal would enhance Saratoga, as well as increasing property values. Margaret Dennis, Hill Avenue, stated that she lived not far from the property. She objected to the proposed ccamercial use on a scenic highway and feared that it would be used a~ a precedent in other areas. ~Yank Matas, who lives next door to the site, stated that a realtor had told him that the value of his property would be decreased by the proposed use. He also stated that while the property was On the market, offers had been made to buy it as a residence, contrary to the applicant's statements. Tme public hearing was closed at 10:05 p.m. City Attorney reiterated that the purpose of tonight's hearing was to let people express their opinions, but the applicants must determine what process to follow. In order to avoid filing an application which could not be processed, he recommended that the attorneys confer on the matter. Councilmember Callon stated that she would like to see the Planning Conmission entertain expansion of the Village boundaries and consider a conditional use permit for a gallery on the site. As to rezoning and General Plan amendment for conmercial uses, she could not support that. She had always seen that site as conmercial, however, during her years of residence in Saratoga. Councilmember Hlava stated that she would vote against the application if it were before the Council because she felt it would be spot zoning. She felt there was a 6-8/7/85 need to go further than the Village Task Force had gone with respect to the Village Plan. She believed the Planning Conmission should look at where the Village boundaries were and how they relate to the r~sidential areas around them. Mayor Clevenger conmented that she was concerned about possible ~nanipulation of laws and boundaries to acc~nnodate special use. .The Council has worked hard on the laws and the General Plan, she said, and would have a difficult time.making the required findings. She then recessed the meeting from 10:13 to 10:28 p.m. C.Appeal of C~ditions of Approval of lighting PZ[an for Residence at 15041 Sobey Rd. (R. Rentre, appellant/applicant) (V-609) Planner Kerdus explained the appeal, noting that there were twenty lights 'on the outide of the residence and five on the cabana, as well .as an interior wall which seemed also to be wired for similar lights. The only lights under consideration, however, were the 59 lights proposed for the .exterior wall, she said. The public hearing was opened at 10:30 p.m. Randy Hess, attorney for the applicant, asserted that approval of the light plm~ was needed because a variance was not needed. :He stated that 'the v~riance was not needed because the wall was not over 6' in height, so it ~et City requirements without a variance. City Attorney explained that the wall had originally been 8' in height. Mr. Renna had applied for a variance, which had been granted on condition that the area around the wall be backfilled to lessen the apparent height and that a l~ght plan be submitted for Planning Conmission approval; thus, he said, the 'variance was not an issue because it had already been applied for and granted. Mr. Hess repeated that the wall was 6' in height. He also stated that the Hexems were building a sports court on the neighboring property. .He then described the proposed lights as being of low wattage, shielded by amber glass, and hiacked oust to the neighbors' view. He distributed photographs of other residence .lights in the neighborhood, saying that there were unshielded bulbs of 100 to .200 watts. Mr. Hess requested that the record show his contention that no lighting plan was required because no variance was required. He stated that the issue was ~not a popularity contest, but an issue of equity, justice and law. He then ref~L'ed to letters from neighbors who approved ,of the lights and the house. The claim of the Hexem-Francis household tbat the lights would destroy the rural atmosphere ~as unfounded, he said, because they would be unable to see them. Others have larger and more visible walls, Mr. Hess said, aund a different standard was being used agaqnst Mr. Renna. Eugene Francis rose to ~speak as the next-door ~neighbor. He said 'there were very few lights lit on Sobey Road, and if Mr. Renna placed nearly 60 lights on the wall and 20 lights on the house it would change the a~nosphere significantly. Walt Hoffler, 15122 Sperry Lane, said he liv~d nearby and did not sae a problem with the lights. He mantioned an incident when a ~_ar trad driven ~lown Sobey Road at night with a "kit car" in front of it using the s.t~ ear's ~h~a~]~ghts fur illumination. Mr. He~s asserted that Mr. Francis had a grudge against Mr. Renna ~nd should clean up his own lot before complaining about Mr. i~enna's. Some l~tters ifrcnn neighbors opposing the plan were ~citten separately by husband and 'wife, .he said. No one further appearing to speak, the public :he~r~ng was dosed at 10:50 p.m. Councilmember Callon a~sked whether there ~re a safety issae involved concealing lights on the road. Acting City .Manager s~t~d ~bmt the rms/~le~Ls ~ Sobey Road did not have street lights;, and any ef.fo~L ZD place street lights ~Lld be mat with resistance by them. Counciln~_mber Callon then stated that she had heard no evidence that would cause her to overturn the Planning; Commission decision. Other Councilmembezs agreed. CALLON/HIAVA MOVED TO DE2qY THE APPEAL. Passed 3-0. D. Confirmation of Report fzrnn ~ f~ces ]li~k- .' ..... ~m ,~.no~sition of Solid Waste Disposal Liens Conmonity Services Director suhud~ted an n,~m~d .list ~f ~y .Dwners to be served with a lien. Counc.~t~n~mher ,V,~]l]~m asked 7day ~h~ ~ in question was March, April and May, and he ~epi~ed ~h~t ~h~ cempany r~Mah b~nd prepared the 7-8/7/85 listings was proceeding in reverse order because of a misunderstanding, but that each time period would be dealt with. The public hearing was opened at 10:55 p.m. Mayor Clevenger invited anyone to speak who was scheduled to have a lien imposed on his property. No one appearing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 10:56 p.m. Mayor Clevenger then invited anyone to speak who had philosophical concerns with the proposed liens. Dave Smith, Quito Road, complained that his garbage was not always picked up. When it was not picked up on Friday, he said, Green Valley would not return to pick it up until Monday. Cannunity Services Director stated that the problem had been resolved, and Green Valley had agreed to return to pick up the garbage of all paying accounts the same day if they were called by 2:00 p.m. CALLON/HLAVA MOVED TO CONFIRM THE REPORT ON IMPOSITION OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PROPERTY LIENS WITH THE REVISED LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS. Passed 3-0. E. Consideration of Text/~ts to the Zoning Ordinance amending certain Zoning Regulations pertaining to uses, site coverage, accessory structures, distance between structures and setbacks in the R-l, ItC-RD and ~ zoning districts (first rending) (C-222) Councilmember Callon stated that she was not prepared to render an opinion on the ordinance as a whole, but she was concerned about the kind of changes proposed. She did not want 'to make the ordinance less restrictive. Councilmembers asked questions on lot coverage, distance between buildings, and accessory structures which were answered by the City Attorney. The public hearing was opened at 11:13 p.m. Margaret Dennis stated that the beauty of Saratoga was in its open space. She feared that the ordinance amendments might change that end reduce the value of homes. She also felt that people should be notified of the proposed changes. Bob Swanson, 19305 Crisp, agreed with Ms. ,Dennis concerning public notification. He also feared that the size of the Oddfellows Cemetery would be increased because of the ordinance. City Attorney explained that one of the purposes of the ordinance was to place any such proposal under Council review. Shelley Williams stated that there were many accessory structures in the City. He felt no need for restricting them if the neighbors did not object. No one further appearing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 11:19 p.m. Councilmembers discussed issues and decided to refer the matter to a study session August 13. Councilmember Callon requested information on current ordinances to facilitate comparison with the proposed ordinance. F. Consideration of Aunts to Certain Zoning Regulations of the City of Saratoga to lengthen the effective period of Design Review, use Permit and Variance Approvals and lengthen the period allowed for the extensions of these applications (first rending) (C-223) Mayor Clevenger stated that the proposed amendments were not particularly significant. Councilmember Callon remarked that she understood the rationale but was not convinced that the use permit approval period, for instance, should be that long. She was not concerned, hqwever, about the extension periods. Councilmember Hlava felt the amendments could make items easier to handle. The public hearing was opened at 11:26 p.m. No one appearing to speak, it was closed at 11:27 p.m._ HLAVA/CLEVENGER MOVED TO APPROVE THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Passed 3-0. HLAVA/CALLON MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE AS READ BY TITLE ONLY. Passed 3-0. VI. NI~ BUSINESS A. Discussion of Oral Cx,,,,--~ications, if any. Acting City Manager stated that he would investigate Mr. Smith's concerns with 8-8/7/85 regard to reducing ~nount of deposit, whether Datacorn had a business license, and availability of City records for citizen review. Acting City Manager also stated he would report to the CounCil on the reque:;t for traffic safety measures on Aloha. B. Written C~p~nunications fr~ the Public ~1 from three residents near Herriman Ave. making reconmendations to deal with problems caused by s[~)rting events - referred to staff. ~2 from J. Poutre concerning traffic on Elva Ave. - meeting to be scheduled with residents. ~3 from C. Robbins expressing concerns regarding adjourned regular meetings referred to staff; Mayor Clevenger stated she would call Mr. Robbins to determine mere exactly what his concerns were. ~4 from M. Berg requesting pull-out lane from Pierce Rd. - referred to staff. ~;5 from P. Brown reporting on outreach efforts of Live Oak Adult Day Care Center information only. ~6 from F. Johnston informing Council of his advice to a client concerning a use permit - referred to staff. C. New Business fron Staff, Administrative Reports not Scheduled C~nnunity Services Director requested conceptual approval of the Saratoga Fall Parade on September 22, with the temporary closure of Saratoga Avenue, pending approval of various p,,blic safety agencies. HLAVA/CLEVENGER MOVED APPROVAL OF FALL PARADE WITH CONDITIONS AS RECCMvZNDED BY THE C~ITY SERVICES DIRECTOR. Passed 3-0. He then requested approval for use of the City bulk mailing permit to n~il a brochure prepared by Creen Valley Disposal on recycling. HLAVA/CLEVENGER MOVED APPROVAL FOR BULK MAILING PERMIT FOR RECYCLING BROCHURE AS REQUESTED BY COMg[~ITY SERVICES DIRECIDR. Passed 3-0. D. New Business fren Co~mcilmembers 1. City Seals on Entrance Signs - to adjQurned regular meeting 8/13. 2. Review of Priorities established in June 1984 and January 1985 - to adjourned regular meeting 8/13. E. Action Referral Log - No con]nents.' The meeting was adjourned at 11:36 p.m. to an adjourned regulsr meeting August 13 at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully suk~n~tted, Deputy City Clerk