Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/02/1962 ; CITY COUNCIL TOWN OF LOS ALTO& HILLS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING July 2, 1962 / The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the Town of Los Altos Hills was called to ord€r by Mayor van. B. Clayton Monday, July 2, 1962 at 7:51 P. N. at the Town Hall, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, California. ROLL CALL: PICSENT: Councilmen Aiken, Fowle, Sherlock, Mayor Clayton ABSENT: Councilman Henley MI.NUTES: June 18, 1962. Corrections: Page 1: Corrections: Page 6: Change Order - para 1: Delete the name of hr. Jm. H. Longmire and add the name of Mr. .;atson Clifford. Page 5: Robleda Hills Assessment District - para 2, 1st line: Delete the words "all of". Page 5: Fremont Hills Country Club - ACTION: Should read, "That Use. Permit be granted". Page 3: Fernhill Assessment District - para 2, last line; Add the name of Dr. G. Metaxas. Page 7: Munson, Theodore P. ACTION: Last 2 lines should read, ". . . . . subdivision, be improved for one-half ('h) width by the sub- divider." ACTION: Adopt Minutes of June 18, 1962 with additions and corrections. MOTION: Fowle; SECOND: Aiken; VOTE: Ayes: Aiken, Fowle, Noes: None Abstained: Mayor Clayton Absent: Henley COMMUNICATIONS: 1. F. Malcolm Smitn, Pres. Hills Little League - Letter of June 23, 1962 requested con- tribution (about 825.00) to purchase new caps for Los Altos Hills boys in the Little League. The City Attorney ruled that monies from the Town's Budget cannot be expended for this type of expense. Mayor Clayton stated that he would personally take care of the matter of obtaining contributions. 2. Santa Clara County Flood Control & 'dater Conservation District - Letter from Donald K. Currlin, Manager-Counsel, announced that the Board of Supervisors reappointed Mr. John M. Fowle Representative and Mr. Thomas Sherlock Alternate on the Santa Clara County - Water Commission. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 401. Boundary Commission of Santa Clara County - Proposed Annexations to the City of Moun- tain View designated as Church No. 9, Evelyn No. 8, Middlefield Nos. 41, 42, 43, and Stierlin No. 23; to the City of Sunnyvale, De Ansa 62-23. To be filed. i Y .. -2- Announcements Cont'd. 41111 Santa Clara County Inter-City Council - Notice of cancellation of meeting of July 5; next meeting to be held August 2, 1962 in Campbell. COMMITTEE REPORTS: 1. Traffic Problems - Councilman Aiken commented on hazardous traffic conditions in the Town with regard to speeding sports cars. He suggested that steps be taken to al- leviate these conditions, perhaps by posting signs at the Town's entrances. Comments were heard from Mr. Gardner Bullis, relative to requesting the Sheriff's Dept. to use motorcycles or additional cars. Mr. ::m. T. Newman commented on the use of patrol cars. OLD BUSINESS: 1. Fernhill Assessment District - Continuation of Public Hearing. Mr. Gardner Bullis, Counsel for hr. R. h. Gieseker, Mr. Eugene Buitrago, and Mr. Joseph H. Cox, commented on the requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance--that sub- dividers must improve one-half (M width of the road contiguous to the property. Mr. Gieseker questioned what improvement is anticipated for Camino Merraoso. lar. Salfen, City Clerk, answered by announcing that the following subdividers will he required to make improvements: Mr. R. Deal, Beekhuis-MacDonald, and Mrs. G. MacDonald. Mr. Gieseker presented a plan showing the assessment of properties which, in his opinion, was an inequitable distribution of the assessment. Iie made reference to letter, dated December 15, 1961 and Memo, dated April 17, 1962, both from the Engineer, hr. .:atson Clifford, to Mr. Paul w. Salfen, City Manger. Gieseker suggested a respread of the assessment, stati:g that he would be in favor of having the lower lot, fronting on :ernhill, assessed the full amount, disregarding the 41200 paid at the time the property was subdivided, and exempting the three lots fronting on Lomita Linda from the assessment district. Mr. Buitrago read and submitted a letter, dated July 2, 1962, to the Mayor and Coun- cilmen. lie requested that the letter be made a part of the Minutes. Mr. Buitrago's letter is by reference hereby made a part of these minutes and the same is filed with the Record Copy of the Minutes which are on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Following dicussion of Mr. Buitrago's letter and remarks, the public Hearing was closed (8:56 P. M. ). The City Attorney commented that problems relative to right-of-way have been resolved; that the proposed refunding agreement has been prepared; that there has been favorable response eith regard to bids for sale of bonds. He further stated that he felt the Contractor for proposed improvements to Fernhill will extend his contract for a few more days if favorable action taken at this meeting. 4 Mr. Faisant commented on the alternative action that could be taken in view of the protests heard. (1) That the Council proceed with the District as presently pro- posed and overrule the protests. (2) Propose a respreading of the assessment (bo be done by resolution). - (5) That the entire project be dropped at this time. o J ., 3_ Fernhill cont'd. Following discussion, and at the request of Councilman Aiken, Resolution No. 206, call- ing for a respread of the assessment for the Fernhill Project 61-1, was read by the City Attorney in its entirety. ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. 206 as read. MOTION: Aiken; Councilman Sherlock questioned whether or not the Resolution set forth the proposed respread. The Attorney answered that it did not. SECOND: Sherlock; ROLL CALL: AYES: Aiken, Fowle, Sherlock, Mayor Clayton NOES: None ABSENT: Henley 2. Roblede Hills Assessment District. Mr. Wm. T. Newman, Developer, Mr. Charles Coburn, Engineer, and Miss Peggy L. McElligott, Attorney for the Robleda Hills Assessment District, were present. Miss McElligott explained in detail the mechanics of the Assessment District with regard to the sale of bonds for the proposed road, drainage, and water improvements for the Robleda Hills Subdivision, and answered questions asked by Councilmen. Mr. Coburn explained the nature of the improvements proposed, stating that the cost of bringing water to fifteen of seventeen lots, has been estimated at approximately 18,000 or about 41787 per lot; the amount estimated for roads (public only) is x44,500 or about 42615 per lot ; and about 490.00 per lot is estimated for storm drainage. He explained that only improvements within the subdivision, excluding paths and private roads, are included in the District. After discussion, the Mayor suggested that action be postponed until a full Council is present. ACTION: That consideration of the Robleda Hills Assessment District be tabled until the meeting of July 16, 1962. NOTION: Aiken; SECOND: Sherlock; VOTE: Passed unanimously VARIANCES: 1. Stewart, Ray W. (V-112-62) - Request for Reduction of Setback Requirement. Planning Commission recommended approval of the request for forty-five ft. (45' ) re- duction in setback from the centerline of a driveway easement for the construction of a residence. ACTION: That Er, Ray W. Stewart (V-112-61) he :=ranted c_ variance of forty feet (40' ) from the property line. MOTION: Sherlock; SECOND: Fowle; VOTE: passed unanimously r ;S -4- 2. Strasman, Fred S. (V-113-62) - Request for Reduction of setback Requirement. 4 The Planning Commission recommended approval of reduction to fifty-seven feet (57') from Fremont Pines Lane and twenty-four feet (24') from the rear property line. ACTION: That the request of Fred A. Strasman (V-113-62) be aproved. MOTION: Fowle; SECOND: Aiken; VOTE: Passed unanimously DIVISIONS OF LAND: 1. Baker, Milton L. (226-62) 2 lots. Engr. M. Solff. In compliance with the Council's condition of approval of June 16, 1962, the City Attor- ney stated that an alternate proposal has been submitted. He read letter, dated June 25, 1962 from J. D. Vanderlaan, of '. estern Title Guaranty Co. , which outlined the proposal. He stated that the proposal is satisfactory. ACTION: That the Tentative Map of i5. L. Baker (226-62) be approved, subject to the agree- ment by Mr. Baker and the ':.'estern Title Guaranty Company as set forth in letter of June 28, 1962 to Mr. Faisant and signed by Mr. J. D. Vanderlaan; that Mr. Baker be allowed to draw up a deed by metes and bounds description. MOTION: Fowlo; SECOND: Aiken; VOTE: Passed unanimously WARRANTS: Bills, in the amount of Five Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-Eight Dollars and Thirty Cents 05498.30), were presented by Councilman Sherlock. ACTION: That the bills presented be approved for payment; that the Clerk be authorized to draw the appropriate warrants. MOTION: Sherlock; SECOND: Fowle; ROLL CALL: AYES: Aiken, Towle, Sherlock, Mayor Clayton NOES: Noun ABSENT: Henley OTHER BUSINESS: 1. El Monte Road.Improvements. Councilman Fowle cots-rented on the improvements proposed by the County, stating that in Council's approval of the Relinguishment Agreement, paths were not mentioned. Following discussion: mad upon reaching the conclusion that the path requirement was overlooked, but desired, tL. .:_tor stated that he would negotiate to see if paths might be included in the improvements. -5- 2. Land Use. C. Councilman Fowle commented on non-residential land use and suggested that the Council review the Master Plan. =TIHG ADJOURNED: 10:15 P. M. /OCT REGULAR NRETING: Monday, July 16, 1962 at 7:45 P. M. at the Town Hall. Respectfully submitted, PAUL W. SALFEN City Clerk TOJN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS jlm 7-2-62 July 2, 1962 41, Honorable Mayor and Councilmen:- May I ask that my remelts be made a part of the minutes because I may have future need to refer to them officially. There is a very old and accepted Principle of Law which says, that one is considered innocent until proven otherwise beyond any doubt. Here, odd enough, we have a case where a Principle diametrically opposite has been applied. Mr. Cox, Mr. Gieseker and myself find ourselves in a situation wherein a petition is presented, partially in our behalf, to this council, imposing a penalty on each one of us without even f+hd,v4 ?-tc j =res-* ;uree.1OOJE reciting what benefits accrue to us or even i=pegorming us of such request prior to presentation to you. Briefly reviewing: 1. We as subdividers of our own property met all contractual obligations required of us by you gentlemen. We did this by ourselves without requesting anyone to share our cost which is as it should be. In other words we built a road, we contributed to the road fund and we installed a Fire Hydrant. 2. At the inception of the idea of the Fernhill Assessment r€1. Oberf.t District the matter was presented to this Council by Mr. Deal and he specifically stated that we were not to be included because we had already satisfied the City's contractual requirements. On that basis, I representing Mr. Cox and Mr. Gieseker as well, supported his request. ~ V -2- Aaw 3. Subsequently and without our knowlege or invitation to (presumably because we were not considered a part of the district) meetings were held, decisions were made, and out of the blue we are notified that a meeting is to be held by Council on this petition and in essence that we better be here to defend ourselves. Gentlemen I submit that the preparation and presentation of such a petition carries evidence of collusion and un- ethical processes . Without our consent and/or knowledge:- a. Meetings were held concerning us. b. Decisions were made concerning us. c. Boundaries were established including us. d. Engineers were hired or appointed without our knowledge. e. And finally a Lawyer has been hired to draw another petition again without our knowledge or consent. 4. We object to the application of double taxation to us. This is neither fair nor constitutional. 5. In justice every sub-divider, as established byyour own Laws , and every property owner should pay his own costs. We have paid ours. 6. Yet we recognize the evidenced desire and need to improve this road and, probably, the most expeditious way is through the Assessment District. In order to help in this matter 0 J -3- Ar if our three lots not contiguous to Fernhill Road (mine, Mr. Gieseker' s and Mr. Cox' s) are deleted from the present boundaries, we will agree to pay our full share for our commonly owned lot which does border on Fernhill. Gentlemen, we made this offer to those who came to a meeting we called and we believe it to be fair and even generous . L