Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/03/1993Minutes of a Regular Meeting March 3, 1993 Town of Los Altos Hills City Council Meeting Wednesday, March 3,1993,6:00 P.M. Council Chambers 26379 Fremont Road 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Tryon called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 6:10 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Mayor Tryon and Councilmembers Dauber, Hubbard, Johnson and Siegel Absent: None Staff: City Manager Les Jones, II, City Attorney Sandy Sloan, ` Director of Public Works Jeff Peterson, Town Planner Linda Niles and Acting City Clerk Karen Jost Press: Bill Kisliuk, Town Crier 2. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 2.1 Appointments to the Environmental Design and Protection Committee, the Finance Committee and the Pathways, Recreation and Parks Committee Applicants Kelyn Dewar and Les Earnest were interviewed by the Council. Mrs. Dewar noted that she has an interest in native plants and is a member of a gardening club. Mr. Earnest commented that he had an interest in preserving and extending the Town's pathway system and improving our bicycle policies. Following Council discussion appointments to the Standing Committees were made as noted. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Dauber and passed unanimously to appoint David Struthers to the Finance Committee for a term of two years. March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Dauber and passed unanimously to reappoint Philip Dauber, Frank Lloyd, James W. Steiner and Lew Throop to the Finance Committee for terms of two years. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson , seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to appoint Robert Hatch to the Safety Committee for a term of two years. The City Clerk was asked to extend an invitation to Mr. Hatch to attend the next City Council meeting. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Hubbard, seconded by Johnson and passed unanimously to reappoint Barbara Vetterlein, Barbara Danluck, Yvonne Fisher, Thornton Fisher and Ralph Vetterlein to the Safety Committee for terms of two years. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Dauber and passed unanimously to appoint Les Earnest and Diane Madgic to the Pathways, Recreation, and Parks Committee for terms of two years. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to reappoint Carol Gottlieb, Christine Cole, Kathy Freeman, Muriel Knudsen, Gwendolyn Kratz, Katherine Stella and Bob Stutz to the Pathways, Recreation, and Parks Committee for terms of two years. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to appoint Kelyn Dewar and Vicki Oldberg to the Environmental Design and Protection Committee for terms of two years. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Dauber, seconded by Johnson and passed unanimously to reappoint Theresa McDaniel, Sharyn Brown, Ruth Buneman, Brenda Butner and Jean Struthers to the Environmental Design and Protection Committee for two year terms. The City Clerk was directed to contact Mr. Nissley and to inform him of the Committee standings and determine his interest in reapplying. March 3,1993 Regular City Council Meeting 3. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Planning Commission Chairman Stephen Pahl reported on the February 24th meeting of the Planning Commission. He noted that there were two primary issues addressed by the Commission on the agenda. The first, a lot line adjustment for the Lands of Carter, 24000 Oak Knoll Circle and 12101 Oak Park Court resulted in an affirmative action. This change allowed the property to flow with the contours of the land and had no impact on the MFA or MDA of the sites. The second issue was the question of a zoning code interpretation regarding the calculation of floor area relative to basements. Pahl commented that the Commission is routinely confronted by this question, noting that applicants are utilizing our present code interpretation where basements are not calculated in the MFA to increase their allowable floor area. The Commission chose to table one item on the agenda impacted by this issue and to forward to the Council a request for an interpretation of the code. Mayor Tryon noted that it would be addressed by the Council on this evening's agenda as item 6.1. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Item Removed: 4.4 - Santa Clara County Invoice for June 1991 (Siegel) MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar, specifically: 4.1 Approval of Minutes: 4.2 Approval of Warrants: February 17, 1993 Regular Meeting $123,892.12 (2/17/93) 4.3 Decided Not To Review the following Planning Commission Actions at its Meeting on February 24,1993: 4.3a LANDS OF CARTER, 24000 Oak Knoll Circle and 12101 Oak Park Court; A request for a Tentative Map for purposes of a lot line adjustment for 24000 Oak Knoll Circle and 12101 Oak Park Court. 4.5 McCulloch Subdivision, Phase II, Tract 18331; Acceptance of Subdivision Improvements--Reso#8-93 March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting Mayor Tryon thanked Louise Parmett, Town Finance Officer for the new chart of accounts that she had developed for the City Council. They have proven to be most beneficial in assisting the Councilmembers in their review of Town finances. Item Removed: 4.4 Santa Clara County Sheriff Invoice for June 1991 Siegel requested an explanation from the City Manager on this item; adding that the invoice was being billed to us almost one year late. Jones explained that the underpayment was due to the unusual format of the Sheriff's billings. The Finance Officer is now reconciling the Sheriff's billings on a monthly basis and he assured the Council that this problem will not occur again. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Johnson and passed unanimously that the Sheriff's invoice #4967 dated 9/8/92 be paid. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ` 5.1 Memorandum of Understanding regarding Solid Waste with LAGCO -- Reso # The Council had before them a corrected MOU and Attachment A. The City Attorney noted that two changes had been made to the MOU and were primarily for clarification. The City Manager noted that these changes to the MOU were acceptable to both Town Staff and LAGCO. The Council also had before them for consideration a report from Councilmember Dauber that included four alternatives for garbage rates . Jones noted that the Sub -Committee had invited Jon Angin from Los Altos Garbage Company to tonight's meeting to answer Council questions and to outline the issues from the company's perspective. Angin thanked the Sub -Committee for their diligent efforts over the past many months, adding that he had confidence that the final proposal was a good one. However, he felt that it was important tonight to clarify issues that have arisen from the community during this long process including the following: March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting What makes Los Altos Hills different and the garbage rates higher? Angin explained that the reasons include: specialized service (backyard pickup) - an option that is offered in very few Towns; distance to the landfill, which is approximately 50 miles round-trip; the terrain of the Town and the length of the driveways necessitates smaller routes with fewer homes per route, and lastly, there is no commercial base to help subsidize the cost. Angin added that the Town's recycling program has been a resounding success. He explained that limited markets for recyclables are the main determining factor in what is included in the program. Materials need to have a consistent resale value to ensure that they are targeted for reuse and not put back into the landfill. In reference to the program in San Jose, Angin noted that they are developing markets for their materials, i.e. scrap metal on a residential basis. San Jose is also the host city for landfill which enables them to negotiate more favorable rates --$9.00 per ton vs. the Town's $35.00 per ton. New programs that LAGCO will be incorporating into our present recycling program will include a cardboard drop off site at the Purissima yard waste center with no additional cost except for minimal improvements to the site (concrete pads) and more plastics will be added to the acceptable list of recyclables. Residents will be able to drop these off at the same site. Angin added that this should be monitored closely to ensure there is no contamination from the new materials, i.e. detergent bottles. LAGCO is also looking at alternatives for our yard waste program and trying to develop something that would work within our present rate structure but be more accommodating to the residents. Siegel asked if it would be possible to offer compost from our yard waste materials to the residents under a similar program to Los Altos. Angin felt this was feasible and could be done perhaps on a monthly basis with a debris box of material available at the corporation yard with no additional cost to the program. Dauber questioned whether window envelopes and glossy paper could be included in our paper recyclables. Angin noted that it was an option being considered but because it down grades the value of the newspaper which is already suffering from a limited market these additions could eventually cost the program. Angin proceeded to explain the spreadsheet from LAGCO that was included in Attachment A referencing the categories and their breakdown into revenues, expenses, fees and Town costs, total costs and revised costs, revenue increase required, percentage rate increase, average cost per ton and average cost per container/annual. Mayor Tryon thanked the Council Sub -Committee and the City Manager for the hours they have expended in resolving this difficult issue. She noted that as a result of the Public Hearing the Council had directed changes in the original proposal and March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting all of these had been incorporated in the recommendation the Council had before them tonight. Councilmember Dauber presented her four alternatives for garbage rates to the Council. She added that she had used the LAGCO spreadsheet as her reference and removed the driveway consideration from her calculations listing all rates at the 100ft rate, then applied the rates in varying structures with each proposal targeting $80,000 as the recoverable amount. This incorporates the costs for recycling, trash days and garbage collection. The Alternatives were as follows: #1 the total bill was divided by the total number of cans imposing the rates equally by can; #2 actual recycling expense plus trash day costs was divided by the number of people in Town and also divided by the number of cans in use with the same results of $11 per can; #3 moved a small percentage of the garbage expense into the amount that all residents would pay and divided the remainder of garbage costs equally among all cans; #4 approximately 25% of the garbage costs was divided equally among the residents with 75% of the cost distributed among the number of cans(Council Sub - Committees proposed rates). Dauber added that her preference was alternative #2. Councilmember Hubbard commented that the Sub -Committee's proposal (#4 ) which he supported was proposed to protect the large families, noting that the number of cans a residence uses already subsidizes the 0 or 1 can family and that the costs to LAGCO to pick up additional cans was considered. Johnson added that as a member of the Sub -Committee he concurred with Hubbard's comments Dauber reported on a small telephone survey she had conducted with residents with large families and the number of cans they use noting that she had received a wide range of responses. She did find, however, that consistently they felt the holidays produced more waste and would appreciate one of the Town clean-up days being scheduled after Christmas. Siegel commented that basically the rates are very similar especially the charges that would affect the majority of residents - the one and two can users. The primary differences were the charges to the 0 can users or baseline rate and he supported the Sub -Committees recommended rates adding that they would now be paying a fairer contribution for the services they receive plus a standby availability for that residence for the whole program. Mayor Tryon invited the public to speak, noting that the Public Hearing on this item was closed but that comments from the public would be appreciated before the Council final vote. March 3,1993 Regular City Council Meeting Stephanie Munoz, 13460 Robleda Road, commented that she thought that the proposal before the Council would not help to reduce the amount of garbage produced by the Town and that this was the real issue. A new resident to the Town questioned whether the garbage rates could be applied to the property tax bill and therefore be deductible. The City Manager responded that they could be added to the tax bill but because they are fees not taxes they would not be deductible. Burns R. Searfoss, 25531 W. Fremont, commented that he has been able to reduce to 1 can pick up by recycling and preferred the alternative which was similar to the City of Los Altos. Keith McFarland, La Paloma Road , noted that he was not in favor of alternative #4 but realizes that there are universal fixed expenses that need to be addressed. Mayor Tryon thanked the public for their comments tonight and the letters that have been written during this process. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Hubbard and passed by the following roll call vote to adopt the following monthly rates effective March 1, 1993, as recommended by the Council Subcommittee: Baseline Service $15.95; Each additional 100' or part $2.50; One can service $24.05*; two can service $32.15*; three can service $40.25*; four can service $48.35*. (* For each additional 100' or part $5.00). A complete rate schedule will be attached to the Memorandum of Understanding. AYES: Mayor Tryon and Councilmembers Hubbard, Johnson and Siegel NOES: Councilmember Dauber ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Dauber added that she would like to see the Environmental Design and Protection Committee launch a program of public awareness and education to encourage the residents to recycle. Council discussion on the Memorandum of Understanding was opened. Siegel noted that he would like to see several additions to the language of the document including: Section 1..."within the Town limits, except those residents who have received an exemption by the City Manager shall continue to be exempt from garbage pick up and shall pay the baseline service charge." Johnson added that he would like to see ......No further exemptions shall be granted by the City Manager' added to the conclusion of that paragraph. kw March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting Siegel would also add Section 13 to the MOU which would read: By July 31, 1993 or Mow sooner LAGCO and the City Manager shall present to the City Council a program for cardboard recycling, expansion of plastic recycling and delivery to the Town of compost material. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously that we adopt the Memorandum of Understanding -- Redo# 9-93 as amended. 5.2 Eighth addendum to agreement between Town and LAGCO-- Reso # 5.3 General Plan Amendment for Quarry Hills --Santa Clara County Board Of Supervisors March 30,1993 Meeting Item moved and joined with Item 7.1 Quarry Sub -Committee 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 Lands of Harrington, 12000 Hilltop: Request for extension of expired site development permit for a garage/shed and guest house and consideration of deviation from Town standards for pathway improvements. Mr. Harrington, applicant, distributed background materials to the Council. He voiced his concern that the Lot Line Adjustment he had been required to obtain for his development had been the primary reason for the delay in his project with the consequence being the expiration of his site development permit. He added that he had been issued the building permit for the poolhouse and was under the impression that his site development for the guest house was still valid. The City Engineer commented that the Conditions of Approval that Council had imposed on the Lot Line Adjustment specifically called for the LLA to be created by a parcel map. The Town Planner added that the Lot Line Adjustment was necessary for this particular project due to the siting and construction of the poolhouse by the applicant in the setbacks. Niles noted that the poolhouse has now received the necessary inspections by the Building Official and has been signed off, explaining that Mr. Harrington had failed during the building of the structure to call for inspections at the appropriate stages of construction. The applicant explained that the design change noted in the staff report was the addition of a new bay window and deck. The window is similar to the window on the residence. The guest house will be constructed of the same materials as the main house, painted and roofed with fire retardant materials. March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 16. Mayor Tryon expressed her concern that this application had two out -buildings of 600 square feet of livable space and questioned whether these could be construed as secondary units. The City Attorney referred to the Town's code that defined secondary dwellings as... "attached or detached residential dwelling units which shall provide complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. A secondary dwelling shall include facilities for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation and be located on the same parcel under the same ownership as the primary dwelling". She added that The Town has been interpreting that definition to mean that you can have any number of buildings but with the addition of a kitchen it becomes a secondary dwelling. Carol Gottlieb, Chair - Pathways, Parks and Recreation Committee, asked the Council to consider requiring this applicant to construct the previously required path prior to the issuance of any building permits for the property. She added that the path had been partially constructed but has disappeared and the applicant has placed rocks in the path which are dangerous. Niles added that a landscape plan for the main house and the completion of a Type IIB pathway were Conditions of Approval for the original application and were to be completed prior to the occupancy of the house. However, since the applicant is presently living in the residence and neither condition has been completed, she would require a landscape planting plan for the guest house be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits for the guest house to ensure there would be adequate screening of the project. Niles also felt it would be appropriate to require a time limit on the construction of the path ( 3 - 6 months ) and a deposit for the amount it would cost the Town to improve the path if the applicant failed to do so. These requirements could be imposed if the Council chose to grant the extension and allow the applicant to obtain his building permits prior to the completion of the path. The City Engineer noted for the applicant's information that the cash deposit amount that would be required for the path is the amount it would cost the Town to construct the pathway. In the past, the Town has determined this cost using the Taaffe Road project as a reference, noting that the low bid was $14.00 per linear foot. Allowing for inflation, administrative costs and inspection fees the deposit could be substantial. Mr. Harrington commented that he was prepared to pay the deposit and to construct a Type IIB path within 6 months. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Dauber, seconded by Johnson and passed unanimously to approve the request for site development extension for one year for a guest house for Lands of Harrington, 12000 Hilltop with the following additional Conditions of Approval: March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting In 1. An adequate deposit be submitted to the Town to accommodate the Staffs processing of the redesign of the project and review of the MFA and MDA calculations. 2. A landscape plan for the guest house be submitted and reviewed prior to issuance of the building permit for the guest house. All appropriate fees and deposits for the landscape plan shall be paid by the applicant. 3. The applicant has agreed to improve the required path to Type IIB standards within six months and to deposit with the Town, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the guest house, the amount, as determined by the City Engineer, that it would cost the Town to make the improvements of the Type IIB path. Mr. Harrington stated that he was agreeable to submitting the deposit required on Condition #1 above; that he would submit the landscape plan fees and deposits as setforth in Condition #2 above; and he agreed to Condition #3 as previously stated. 6.2 Request forwarded to City Council by Planning Commission for Zoning Code Interpretation as soon as possible regarding calculation of floor area, relative to basements. Mayor Tryon commented that the Council had just received lengthy documents dated March 3, 1993 and asked directiom from the Council on whether to stop to read these or to continue on with the meeting. Council elected to continue forth noting to the applicant they were unable to read all of the newly presented materials The Town Planner explained to the Council that before them was a request forwarded by the Planning Commission for a zoning code interpretation. This issue was before the Commissioners at their last meeting. At question was the formula for calculation of floor area used by staff and former staff as they interpreted the code as written. The applicants and their representative had some questions regarding this interpretation as it affected their project. They requested an interpretation of the code from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed the code as written without referencing any particular application. The packet before the Council prepared by the Town Planner included several different alternatives to the floor area calculation. Niles noted that staff is 10 March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting requesting from Council consideration of two different options: to make an interpretation of the zoning code wording regarding the floor area calculations or direct staff to return to the next City Council meeting with revised wording that could be framed into an interim urgency ordinance to clarify the code. Niles also requested that the Council direct staff to go through the Public Hearing process as soon as possible with the Planning Commission and City Council to amend the wording of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the definition of basement and the method of calculating floor areas to better reflect the intentions of the Town and Council. As referenced in the packet, the Zoning Ordinance Sections in question are Section 10-1.223 and 10-1.208. Niles noted that in the past the staff has understood the intent of the ordinance was not to count floor area that was of little or no visual impact to the bulk and mass of the structure. This area was considered to be unobtrusive since it was sunk at least 6' underground. This interpretation encouraged garages and storage areas to be placed underneath the house. Siegel commented that the Council had before them two separate issues. The first being the interpretation as requested by the Planning Commission of an existing section of the Code that is relative to applications presently in process and the second being a review of the Floos Area Section of the Zoning Ordinance regarding an interpretation with significant change from practice, i.e. to exempt garages from inclusion in floor area calculations if they are enclosed on three sides and 6' underground. Siegel noted that this needs further clarification and should be done through the Public Hearing process. Mayor Tryon requested the issues be separated-- an interpretation in the instant case and potential for action for future cases. Tryon noted that the Council had before them the Site Development Policy Statement adopted by the City Council October 16, 1991 for reference, adding that the paragraph stating ..."Inconsistencies in permitted site development of the past are not to be considered as reasons or precedents for allowing exceptions to the purposes of the ordinances in the future", might be relative in this issue. The Town Planner reflected that one of the reasons this section of the code (§ 10- 1.223) has been misinterpreted is the use of the word "structure", noting that in the zoning code "structure" is defined as ..." shall mean anything such as buildings, decks, swimming pools, tennis courts, and patios requiring construction or erection on the ground". The interpretation seems to have strayed from the meaning of "dwelling" or the "building", and meant anything that was constructed on the ground. Niles recommended that the wording in the section be changed to ..."When a retaining wall is the perimeter wall of the dwelling and earth is backfilled against the retaining wall, any Floor Area which is at least six feet below the backfill, when that distance is referenced from the extension of contour lines from the ground along the perimeter of the dwelling, is not counted". March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 11 Julie Hall, 26070 Newbridge Drive, the applicant, commented that they had not requested an interpretative ruling on this issue but it was suggested to them because of the inconsistencies in the interpretations of the past and they wanted to lend some consistency to this controversial subject. Hall added that before purchasing their home they had researched the issue of basements and felt secure in incorporating into their plans a basement that had a garage opening at one end and windows for access to a lower court at the other end. The problem with their project arose when the Planning Consultant determined that their structure was a three story structure. The applicant added that in appearance the house is a two-story house in all four of its elevations. She has shown her plans to her neighbors and their responses have all been positive. The Town Planner noted that the applicant was not directed to request an interpretation of the code, but since her project did not meet the allowed floor area for her site, she could either reduce the square footage; or since there was a question regarding how to calculate floor area, she could request the Planning Commission review an interpretation of that section of the code. Mark Sandoval, 885 San Antonio Road, the applicant's architect, apologized to the ` Council for the presentation of materials at this late date, explaining that attached to the packet are diagrams for reference in this issue. He hoped that his illustrations would assist the Council and described them in more detail. Sandoval added that the floor area in relationship to the retaining wall is exempt in reference to the specific language of the code and that any court or driveway at the open end has no bearing because it is MDA and a basement as defined by code is a definition and does not describe any intent of use. The Uniform Building Code places certain requirements on basements, i.e. outside access to a basement space. This puts certain parameters on its function. Sandaval concluded that a design with a basement or areas below grade need not mean a massive look or three story facade but can be a positive design tool that reduces bulk and gives the applicant different options in developing their site. Dot Schreiner, Planning Commissioner, commented that she felt the original intent of the Planning Commission at the time this Ordinance was drafted was to reduce the appearance of bulk. She added that recent applications have misused this ordinance by stretching the interpretation to the maximum by still having bulk on the top of the design with an additional basement below grade. Mr. Reddy, 11011 Magdalena Avenue, remarked that he has an application for a new residence before the Planning Commission. This has been tabled pending the Council's interpretation and hoped they would be able to come to a conclusion tonight so that he could proceed with his project. March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 12 Carol Gottlieb, Chair - Pathways, Parks, and Recreation Committee, referred to a past approved application that was allowed to "daylight" a patio instead of the required backfill to the house. She feels the original intent of the code was to possibly permit garages to be exempt to reduce bulk but felt that the interpretation of this code has been improperly used and hoped that the Council would strictly interpret this code. Bill Kull, Giuliani and Kull -- 20431 Stevens Creek, thanked the Council for this forum which enabled the professionals to get a better understanding of the code and the method for calculating the area. There has been a great deal of gray area from project to project and site to site and he is looking forward to a final interpretation. Wendell Roscoe, 12234 Tepa Way, noted that he was the designer of record for the Reddy project and he has taken great effort to design the house with the contour of the property and to reduce the bulkiness of the structure. Roscoe added that he has incorporated an area under the house to provide the children with a play area on a steep site. Mayor Tryon commented that the Planning Issues Sub -Committee has focused on attempting to keep projects from being obtrusive and by exempting development that was below grade and wasn't visible in the past. The Sub -Committee concluded that the intent was to reduce bulkiness and encourage designs that receded into the hillside. kir Councilmember Dauber noted that she could accept 1 foot window wells if the ground went 6' below that. Council discussion insued resulting in the following action. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Hubbard, seconded by Dauber and passed unanimously to adopt the following interpretation of the floor area section of the code (§ 10 - 1.223), "When a retaining wall is the perimeter wall of the dwelling and earth is backfilled against the retaining wall, any Floor Area which is at least six feet below the backfill, when that distance is referenced from the extension of contour lines from the ground along the perimeter of the dwelling, is not counted". MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously that Council instruct Staff that the new interpretation of the code shall apply to those applications that have not yet been scheduled for hearing before the Planning Commission. March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 13 MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by / A1/ Dauber and passed unanimously to continue past the 10:30 p.m. hour of adjournment. �W MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Hubbard and passed by the following roll call vote to add to the approved interpretation of the code, an exemption from calculation as floor area the garage space that is below grade at least 6 feet. AYES: Councilmembers Dauber, Hubbard and Siegel NOES: Mayor Tryon and Mayor Pro Tem Johnson ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Tryon added that she was unable to support the motion because it was not in the Town's Codes. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: That staff and the Council Planning Sub -Committee return to Council as expeditiously as possible with a proposal relative to basements for purposes of debate. 7. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES, SUB -COMMITTEES, AND COUNCILMEMBERS ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES 7.1 Quarry Sub -Committee 7.1a Policy Statement Siegel reported that the Quarry hearing has been scheduled for April 6th and that he will not be able to attend the hearing. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To direct the City Manager to request the Board of Supervisors reschedule the hearing to accommodate the schedule of the Council Sub -Committee members and enable them to attend the proceedings. Siegel added that the Sub -Committee will be meeting with Supervisor McKenna, Mr. Vidovich and his attorney on March 23, 1993. 14 March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to add to the Quarry Hills policy statement of September 30, 1992 relating to the proposed general plan amendment before the County of Santa Clara the following sentence..."It should be noted that the Town has the right to refuse sewer connections and annexation to any property that has not been subdivided under our jurisdiction". 7.2 Residential Design Guidelines Sub -Committee 7.3 Pathway Committee 7.3a Rejected Tracts --On and off road pathway easements Mayor Tryon thanked Dot Schreiner and Carol Gottlieb for their dedication and hard work in pursuing this matter and developing this report. The City Engineer clarified for Council the procedure in accepting previously rejected easements. He noted that the City Attorney, Town's Surveyor and several Title Companies have been discussing the process that could be followed. On Tract Maps where the pathway easements were rejected, the Town must now accept the pathway easement for each individual lot crossed by the pathway. This enables the information to be shown on a title report for the property. Peterson added that this can be done relatively easily by naming the lot on which the easement appears in each recorded Tract. It then becomes a part of the legal description of the lot. Council would accept dedications of the previously rejected pathway easements for each individual lot. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: That Staff select five of the rejected Tracts from the list and proceed with the process for accepting dedication of the pathway easements. 8. STAFF REPORTS 8.1 City Manager 8.2 City Attorney The City Attorney recommended that all messages from the Mayor and Councitmembers be eliminated from the Town Newsletter. She also recommended that the Editor shall develop an outline on the subjects to be covered in each proposed Newsletter with a two member Council Sub -Committee. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To appoint Roger Burnell, Chair -Community Relations Committee, as the Editor of the Town Newsletter. March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 15 PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To appoint Councilmember Dauber to the Newsletter Sub -Committee. This appointment will be for future issues. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To add to the Newsletter policy "there will be no messages from the Mayor or Councilmembers (elected officials)". 8.3 City Clerk 8.3a Report on Council Correspondence Tryon noted that she is working with the City Manager to respond to the letter from Mr. Estrada and the City Attorney is developing a response for Mr. Springate. 9. COUNCIL -INITIATED ITEMS 9.1 Council Correspondence Policy Councilmember Hubbard questioned why this policy was under consideration for modification, adding that he was concerned that residents that corresponded with a Councilmember would be unaware that their letter would become public record. Mayor Tryon noted that it had come up in discussion and that the City Attorney had voiced support of the previous policy and therefore she felt discussion of the issue ` was appropriate. V Dauber noted that a letter that had been sent to the Chair of the Board of Supervisors from the Sub -Committee had not been copied to all members and she was quite surprised and had assumed that all would be made aware of it. Hubbard commented that under our present policy, the Mayor's mail is opened and copied to Council and that any correspondence that a Councilmember receives that is relevant to Town business, that Councilmember is obliged by law to disclose that information. The City Attorney noted that if someone corresponds with a Councilmember at their home and it is about Town business, it is public domain. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Dauber, seconded by Johnson and passed by the following roll call vote to return to the previous correspondence policy as contained in the City Council minutes dated September 20, 1989 Agenda Item 7.5 which provided for the City Clerk's responsibilities with regard to mail with the following modification ... replace the wording"such as the Intergovernmental Council" with "or correspondence of an obviously personal nature." 16 March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting AYES: Mayor Tryon and Councilmembers Dauber and Johnson NOES: Councilmembers Hubbard and Siegel ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 9.2 Building Inspection Policy (Councilmember Siegel) MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously to adopt the following Building Inspection Policy: "Make it standard practice for the building inspector to measure a house at the foundation inspection for compliance with approved plans. This should assure compliance with square footage." 9.3 California Healthy Cities Project --Tobacco Control Publication (Councilmember Dauber) Dauber suggested that we send a letter to the League of Cities voicing the Council's dismay with their recent publication and mailing policy. Tryon commented that she would pass the message on to them personally. 9.4 Duties of Council Liaison to Town Committees (Mayor Pro Tem Johnson) Continued to a future meeting. 9.5 New Fire Station(Mayor Tryon) Tryon requested periodic updates from the Fire Commission on the progress of the new fire station similar to the library building reports. 9.6 Mayor Update Tryon reported on her most recent activities . She will be meeting with Judy Moss, Trustee from Foothill College, to discuss Griffin House on Monday, March 8. She has completed her work with the Joint Venture Silicon Valley project which included the development of flagship initiatives. These will be introduced in a public forum March 10th. Tryon is also participating in a farewell salute to Moffett Field to be held on Armed Forces Day May 15th and she has assisted the World Cup '94 Committee in placement on agendas of local Councils and governments. 10. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 17 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.1 Request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence, Pool and Spa, Lands of Harker, 11893 Francemont Drive PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Councilmember Siegel voiced his concerns with the application and his reasons for removing this item from the Consent Calendar and scheduling it for a Public Hearing. He noted that during the Final Map procedure for the Gaither subdivision the developer (Gaither) had proposed that his residence would be situated on the upper area of the lot and his request was approved and the Conservation Easement modified to adapt to his request. The new proposal situates the residence on the lower portion of the lot, a much more appropriate siting --and one which would allow the approval to be conditioned on restoring the Conservation Easement to its original integrity in the upper area. The Town Planner commented that a new condition (COA #17) had been placed on the application that would address this concern. Siegel added that he would also like to see as many of the Bay trees saved as possible during this development and was concerned by their close proximity to the pool. He felt they could be most beneficial in screening the residence. Bill Kull , Guiliani and Kull -- the applicant's engineer, commented that there were three separate clumps of Bay trees. He and the project developer, Bob Owen, hoped to address this problem by thinning the grove of trees closest to the pool site but leave the other groves intact to retain the screening element. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To add to the Conditions of Approval recommended to the City Council (Staff report dated March 3, 1993) the following: Condition #18 The developer shall work with the Town Planner to save the maximum number of trees on the site whose purpose is to maintain the mature screening of the house. Bob Owen, The Owen Companies , added that he appreciated Councilmember Siegel's positive remarks regarding the siting of the house in the lower area. It had been their intention to design the house to follow the contour of the land making every effort to preserve the ridgeline. Carol Gottlieb, Chair - Pathways, Recreation and Parks Committee, requested clarification on the location of the pathway easement. The City Engineer commented that it was over the private driveway going up to the dirt road. March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 18 PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Dauber noted that although she would vote for approval of this project, she would like to state for the record that she felt the design would have benefited dramatically from the addition of eaves. She added that in the new design guideline manual that is being developed, eaves are strongly recommended. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to approve as conditioned a request for a site development permit for a new residence, pool and spa, Lands of Harker, 11893 Francemont Drive. 12. CLOSED SESSION: PENDING LITIGATION 12.1 City of Cupertino et al v. the City of San Jose et al: Government Code Section 54956.9(a) 12.2 McGowan v. Town of Los Altos Hills: Government Code Section 54956.9(a) The City Council adjourned to a Closed Session for purposes of pending litigation at 11:25 p.m. and reconvened at 11: 50 p.m. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further new or old business to discuss, the City Council Meeting was adjourned at 11:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, & Karen Jost Acting City Clerk The minutes of the March 3, 1993 City Council Meeting were approved at the March 17, 1993 City Council Meeting. March 3, 1993 Regular City Council Meeting 19