Loading...
M12-17-07 1 MINUTES OF THE TOWN COUNCIL/PARKING AUTHORITY/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECEMBER 17, 2007 The Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Meeting on Monday, December 17, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. TOWN COUNCIL/PARKING AUTHORITY/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING CALLED TO ORDER ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Barbara Spector, Vice Mayor Mike Wasserman, Council Member Steve Glickman, Council Member Joe Pirzynski, and Council Member Diane McNutt. Absent: None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - LED BY FUTURE LEADER Mayor Barbara Spector led the Pledge of Allegiance. The Audience was invited to participate. BOARDS/COMMISSION/COMMITTEES APPOINTMENTS  Architectural Standards Committee (1 vacancy; 1 applicant)  Arts Commission (5 vacancies; 6 applicants)  Arts Selection Panel (2 vacancies; 1 applicant)  Building Board of Appeals (3 vacancies; 3 applicants)  Community Services Commission (4 vacancies; 5 applicants)  General Plan (1 vacancy; 1 applicant  Historic Preservation Committee (1 vacancy; 4 applicants)  Library Board (1 vacancy; 3 applicants)  Parks Commission (3 vacancies; 8 applicants)  Personnel Board (1 applicant; 1 applicant)  Planning Commission (2 vacancies; 5 applicants  Transportation and Parking (3 vacancies; 2 applicants) 2 Boards, Commissions, and Committee Appointments – Continued The following applicants were appointed to the Town’s Boards, Commissions, and Committees: Ar chitectural Standards Committee  Peggy Dallas – Incumbent Arts Commission  Jade Bradbury – Incumbent  Tricia Capri  Jonathan Knowles  Mary Curtis  Penelope O’Neill - Incumbent Art SelectionPanel  Sol Carson – Incumbent Building Board of Appeals  Tom Dodge – Incumbent  Tom Kane – Incumbent  Adrienne Paolini-McGrath Community Services Commission  Leslie Alexander  Toni Blackstock – Incumbent  Susan Gomez – Incumbent  Anita Wolf General Plan Committee  Jane Ogle – Incumbent Historic Preservation Committee  Leonard Pacheco – Incumbent Library Board  Dale Hill – Incumbent Parks Commission  Stephen Endweiss  Gary Schloh - Monte Sereno Resident  Barbara Holden Personnel Board  Berkeley Miller – Incumbent Transportation and Parking Commission  Edgar La Veque – Incumbent  Chris Tanimoto Planning Commission  Thomas O'Donnell – Incumbent  Joanne Talesfore – Incumbent Mayor Barbara Spector directed Jackie Rose, Clerk Administrator to re- advertise the vacant positions on the Arts Selection Panel, Rent Advisory Committee, and Transportation and Parking Commission. 3 PRESENTATION Commendation Police Canines Mayor Barbara Spector presented Corporal Erin Lunsford and Eddie, and Sergeant Sam Wonnell and Quarz with a commendation for their excellent performance as Canine Officers for the Los Gatos-Monte Sereno Police Department. Mayor Barbara Spector  Commented on the acceptance of an $8,000 donation from Society Dog to support the purchase and training of a police dog for the Los Gatos-Monte Sereno Police Department.  Thanked the Society Dog organization for the donation and support in the community. TOWN COUNCIL CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) 1. Ratify payroll for the month of November, 2007. 2. Ratify accounts payable for November, 2007. 3. Approve Council minutes of November 7, 2007 Town Council/Planning Commission Retreat. 4. PPW Job No. 07-04 - Fiscal Year 2007-08 Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project 400-0352 Adopt resolution approving plans and specifications for the annual street repair and resurfacing project and authorize staff to advertise the project for bid. RESOLUTION 2007-128 5. Adopt resolution authorizing the Interim Town Manager to execute a second amendment to the agreement between the Town of Los Gatos and the City of Campbell until June 30, 2009 to increase the fee for underground utility locating services from $65.00 to $75.00/per USA inspection. Resolution 2007-129 6. Adopt resolution authorizing the Interim Town Manager to execute a second amendment to the Professional Consultant Services Agreement with Harris & Associates to extend the agreement until June 30, 2008 for providing engineering support services. RESOLUTION 2007-130 4 Consent Items - Continued 7. Adopt resolution authorizing the Interim Town Manager to accept a donation from the Los Gatos Police Foundation in the amount of $8,000.00 to be used towards the purchase and training of a general purpose canine and the equipment needed to support the canine. RESOLUTION 2007-131 8. Adopt resolution setting date for consideration of reorganization of uninhabited area designated La Chiquita No. 1, approximately .65 acre located at 16357 East La Chiquita Avenue (APN 532-04-035). RESOLUTION 2007-132 9. Adopt resolution setting date for consideration of reorganization of uninhabited area designated Blackberry Hill Road No. 5, approximately 1.98 acres located at 15401 and 17689 Blackberry Hill Road (APN 532-25-009 and 010). RESOLUTION 2007-133 10. Adopt resolution setting date for consideration of reorganization of uninhabited area designated Kennedy Road No. 16, approximately .52 acre located at 16683 Kennedy Road (APN 532-08-057). RESOLUTION 2007-134 11. Consideration of reorganization of uninhabited area designated Marchmont Drive No. 2 (approximately .28 acres) located at 16666 Marchmont Drive (APN: 532-08-006). RESOLUTION 2007-137 12. Approve Council Committee Appointments effective January 1, 2008. 13. Adopt resolution approving an extension of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Town of Los Gatos and TEA for the period of November 1, 2007 through October 31, 2010 and authorize the Interim Town Manager to execute the side letter agreement to extend the Memorandum of Understanding. RESOLUTION 2007-135 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 14. Ratify accounts payable for November, 2007. 5 Consent Items - Continued TOWN COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 15. Approve Council/Agency minutes of December 3, 2007. 16. Consider adopting resolution approving the 2006/07 Annual Report for the Los Gatos Redevelopment Agency. RESOLUTION 2007-136 Council Member McNutt recused from Consent Item #4 due to the fact that she resides within 500 feet of the project. Mr. Davis pulled Consent Item #3. Mayor Barbara Spector stated that the pulled Consent Item #3 would be heard after the Public Hearing this evening. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to approve Consent Items #1, #2 and #4-16. Seconded by Vice Mayor Mike Wasserman. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously for Consent Items #1, #2 and #5-16. Consent Item #4 carried 4/0. Council Member Diane McNutt recused due the fact that she resides within 500 feet of the project. CLOSED SESSION REPORT Mr. Korb stated that Council did not meet in Closed Session this evening. VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Knopf  Commented that a prior Town survey recommended converting the vacant land on Miles Avenue to a parking lot, which was later implemented.  Commented that the community uses the Miles Avenue parking Lot.  Commented that he is against converting the parking lot to a skate park. 6 Verbal Communications - Continued Mr. Davis  Commented that he feels that there are at least 80 new parking spaces available around the Miles Avenue area.  Commented about being thrown out of a public meeting on November 17, 2007.  Commented about the distribution of the skate park measure petitions by the Clerk Department. Mr. Burke  Commented about the amount of cars parked in the permit parking zones without permits.  Requested an increase in signage to better identify permit parking zones. Mr. Murphy  Commented against Measure D.  Commented that parking for sports uses and downtown businesses would be impacted if Miles Avenue parking lot was converted to a skate park.  Commented on the lack of sidewalks, curbs or gutters which would be a safety concern if the skate park was built. Mr. Leonardis  Commented on supporting Measure D.  Commented that there are no parking and safety issues related to Miles Avenue.  Commented that the Miles Avenue property will always be owned by the Town. Ms. Currie  Stated that she feels it is unfair to force the Town to pay for a skate park.  Commented that she supports a skate park built for the community and paid for by the community and not with Town funds. Mr. Spilsbury  Stated that he feels it is unfair to force the Town to pay for a skate park with money from the Town’s General Fund.  Commented that he feels that there are other ways that public funds would benefit the entire community. 7 Verbal Communication – Continued Mr. Decker  Commented against Measure D.  Commented on the concept of a skate park that was previously proposed to the community.  Commented on privately funded programs that benefit the community.  Commented on the lack of parking in the downtown area.  Commented that Measure D is a poor use of public funds. Closed Verbal Communications Mayor Barbara Spector  Commented on the public hearing process for this evening.  Called for a brief recess at 7:51 p.m.  Meeting resumed at 8:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS 17. Consider a request for approval to change the zone from R-1:8 to R- 1:8:PD for a seven lot subdivision, for a lot line adjustment between two parcels zoned R-1:8 and approval to demolish a single family residence. No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. APNS 523-25-020 and 036. Planned Development Application PD-05-02, Architecture and Site Application S-06-050 and Negative Declaration ND-07-07. Property location: 15881 Linda Avenue and 15950 Stephenie Lane. Owners: Jennifer Den Daas and Dan Blue. Applicant: Linda Court Partners Staff report made by Bud Lortz, Director of Community Development. 8 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Council Comments  Questioned if staff could advise Council regarding the accuracy of input received during the public hearing.  Questioned the Town’s analysis of the FAR for the proposed Planned Development.  Questioned if the re-alignment of the back lot would change the calculation of the FAR of the homes.  Clarification about the proposed changes to the common area, garden wall, and lot lines for the Planned Development.  Clarification about the common area between lots 3 and 4.  Clarification about the riparian buffer line for the proposed Planned Development.  Questioned how calculations regarding the decrease of the footprint of the homes would be presented.  Questioned the methodology used for the Coyote Joman Report. Mr. Lortz, Director of Community Development  Commented that he believes the FAR is consistent with the Town’s requirements.  Commented that staff could run a re-calculation of the FAR as the meeting progresses. Mr. Tsuda, Assistant Director of Community Development  Clarified staff recommendations relating to the garden area, common area and lot lines of the proposed project. Open Public Hearing Mr. McElroy, Applicant  Commented about the project process and proposed changes over the past three years.  Commented that all agencies have approved th e proposed Planned Development.  Commented that the only residents against the project are county residents. 9 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Mr. Guzzetti, Applicant  Commented that the proposed Planned Development was passed by the Planning Commission on October 10, 2007.  Commented about the Architectural and Site review process.  Commented that the Planning Commission had five architectural issues relating to the proposed Planned Development.  Commented that the applicants agreed to sufficient vegetation screening, a retaining wall, and a 6 foot fence between the house on lot 1 and the easterly property line.  Commented that the applicants agreed to recess the garage doors on lots 1 and 2 and have re-designed those plans.  Commented that the applicants agreed to relocate the bio -swale outside the drip line of the existing riparian trees and that their civil engineer will be completing the re-design.  Commented that the applicant thinks the condition to limit the impervious surface in the rear yards of lots 1 through 4 is unfair.  Commented that all agencies have had no concerns with the property lines as proposed.  Commented about residential zoning guidelines. Mr. Davis  Commented about a statement by Mr. Lortz at the Planning Commission stating that the riparian corridor of Ross Creek was not addressed properly.  Stated that the West Valley Water District turned over land use by creeks and streams to the Town and questioned if the Town has addressed the riparian corridor at Ross Creek. Mr. Orion spoke on behalf of Ms. Orion, Mr. Ownberg, Ms. Swanson, Mr. Dunlap, Mr. and Ms. Rossmassler, Mr. and Ms. Lambert, Mr. Yanez-pastor  Commented that there is no flood plain and riparian corridor buffer.  Commented about the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams.  Commented that he feels that the stream would be hidden and would like to see designs that do not have homes backed up to the creek or stream.  Commented that they do not support the proposed project. 10 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Council Comments  Questioned how the funding for the Coyote Joman Report came about. Ms. Engrin spoke on behalf of Mr. Hslao, Mr. Colhour, Ms. McWaters, and Mr. Ryan  Commented about the riparian corridor setback.  Commented that the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams adopted in February, 2007 states that 20 feet is adequate for a riparian buffer.  Would like to see more open space for the Ross Creek area.  Commented about the project being inconsistent with the Town's General Plan.  Requested that Council spend more time studying the proposed development. Mr. Crites  Commented about the amount of trees that would be removed for the proposed project.  Commented about the Town Tree Ordinance for removal of trees and riparian vegetation.  Commented that the FAR is too dense for the proposed project. Mr. Engin  Commented that the project fails to meet 6 conditions in the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams adopted by the Town.  Commented that he feels that the proposed project violates the riparian corridor and tree protection ordinance.  Commented that many concerns would be addressed if the homes did not back up against the creek. Mr. McElroy, Applicant  Commented that he feels that the reports misrepresent the project. Council Comments  Questioned if the applicant would consider changing the boundary line of the intended wall if the change would not count against the FAR of the proposed home. 11 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Mr. McElroy, Applicant  Commented that he would agree to change the boundary line if the project would be approved.  Commented that the creek would be less traveled if only one family has access to the creek.  Commented that he feels that the Homeowners Association should be responsible for maintaining the creek and the creek accesses. Council Comments  Questioned the amount of travel along the creek if the homes were facing the creek instead of backing up to the creek.  Questioned the open path proposed along the creek.  Questioned the view of the garden wall from the neighbors across the street.  Questioned moving the road down by the creek. Mr. McElroy  Commented that the location of the street is limited due to technical reasons and is needed for public access. Mayor Barbara Spector  Closed the public hearing  Requested staff comment about the environmental and technical issues raised by the public. Mayor Barbara Spector  Called for a recess at 9:17 p.m.  Meeting resumed at 9:27 p.m. Mr. Korb  Clarified the California Environmental Quality Act requirements and how it applies to the project.  Commented about the fair argument review when a project is challenged under CEQA guidelines.  Commented that substantial evidence is required to support a fair argument review.  Clarified the type of reports that qualify for CEQA and a fair argument review request. 12 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Mr. Lortz  Stated that if staff recommendations were approved, the FAR would be slightly over the guidelines, but would stop the encroachment into the riparian corridor.  Commented that the road location has been a long evolution and due to the topographic constraints of the site the design did not include a road near the creek.  Commented that the project is compliant with the Town’s adopted Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams. Council Comments  Questioned if the garden wall minimizes access to the riparian corridor.  Questioned if the Town has a desire to decrease access to the creek. Mr. Lortz  Commented that Fish and Game, Water Resources, Water Quality Control Board, Santa Clara Valley Water District, and numerous biologists agree with the approach to move the lot lines and support passive use along the creek.  Commented about the different methodologies used for the proposed project. Mr. Korb  Clarified Council decision making process when dealing with different expert opinions. Mr. Tsuda  Commented that Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams have at least 8 chapters, but only two are considered regulatory chapter s.  Commented that chapter 2 clarifies the permitting tools and permitting process for the review and chapter 3 contains the guidelines and standards.  Commented that the remaining chapters are guidelines to contractors, homeowners and developers.  Commented on chapter 7 which is called enhanced practices, but it does not include requirements.  Commented that creek slope stability analysis is not required for the project.  Commented that the guidelines and standards do not state a number for the riparian buffer, but suggests that the cities should make these findings.  Commented that the biological areas should be protected. 13 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Council Discussion  Questioned what amount of public use is appropriate along the riparian corridor.  Commented about locations of fences on the proposed project.  Questioned if the property line should go along the proposed garden wall.  Clarification about public access along Ross Creek.  Questioned if public access to the creek would harm the ecology. Mr. Geier, Consultant  Commented about the reports on the riparian resources.  Commented that they had identified a buffer zone to protect the riparian zone.  Commented that the Fish and Game along with other agencies agreed that impacts could be mitigated. Council Discussion  Questioned if the footprint of the homes encroaches o n any of the riparian corridor.  Questioned if the riparian zone would be wide enough for public walks and whether it would harm Ross Creek. Mr. Geier  Commented that the reports discourage public access. Mr. Wood, Consultant  Commented on the concept of placing roadways adjacent to waterways.  Commented that public access would enhance natural resource awareness and encourage clean-up along Ross Creek. Council Discussion  Questioned if Mr. Wood would share his opinions about flooding along Ross Creek.  Questioned if there were concerns about the fair argument review process. 14 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Mr. Wood  Commented that staff has adequately addressed regulatory concerns by the State of California. Mr. Wheeler, Consultant  Commented about the geomorphology of land forms a s it relates to channel bed forms and streams.  Commented on the calculations used to determine flood issues along Ross Creek. Council Discussion  Questioned the reports about the flood plains for Ross Creek.  Questioned if Mr. Wheeler believes the flood plain would be within the riparian zone. Mr. Wheeler  Commented on historic conditions and flood plains along Ross Creek.  Commented on the perception of a 100 year flood plain along Ross Creek. Ms. Geier  Commented about specific guidelines set by CEQA.  Commented that the riparian corridor would supply adequate screening for the proposed project.  Commented about the alder and valley oak trees that were not evaluated by the arborist. Mr. Wood  Stated that the arborists could have missed the trees or the valley oak may have been mistaken for the blue oak.  Commented that the alders that were missed may have been saplings at that time. 15 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Mr. Korb  Commented that Council should determine whether reports are based on opinions supported by facts or erroneous information, which in that case should be disregarded.  Commented that Council has an obligation to act if they feel that the opinions are supported by fact.  Commented that the Joman Report reached its conclusion about the location of the 100 year flood/high water mark using a methodology different from Town staff, the water district and FEMA.  Commented that all of the agencies involved have computed a study on Ross Creek, indicating the 100 year flood issue, and have similar conclusions.  Commented that the difference in the reports is where the top of the bank should be determined along Ross Creek.  Commented that the Town has guidelines that would address where the top of the bank is located. Mayor Barbara Spector asked for suggestions on the next steps regarding the motion process. Mr. Korb suggested that Council may start with a motion about the CEQA question. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman that further study is not required for the proposed project. Seconded by Council Member Joe Pirzynski. Council Discussion  Questioned the flood scenario in the Joman Report and asked which lot setback is not sufficient. Mr. Lortz  Clarified that lot #3 would be the only lot impacted. 16 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Council Discussion  Commented about the rain fall gauges in the Joman analysis.  Commented that the Coyote Guadalupe Joman Report is not a fair argument. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Diane McNutt to accept report in the form of meeting minutes from the Planning Commission for the meeting of October 10, 2007 regarding a Planned Development at 15881 Linda Avenue and a portion of 15950 Stephanie Lane. Seconded by Council Member Steve Glickman. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to make the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Seconded by Council Member Joe Pirzynski. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 17 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Council Discussion  Commented that the Planning Commission had two elements in its motion that were not part of the proposed Planned Development.  Commented that one element involved impervious surfaces and should be included in Council’s motion.  Requested that the motion indicate that the amount of impervious surface in the backyards of the houses facing the creek be limited to only what is required for pedestrian circulation.  Commented that by adding the garden wall, there would be no need for restrictions on impervious surfaces.  Requested that staff clarify the recommendation to restrict impervious surfaces. Mr. Lortz  Clarified recommendations made by the Planning Commission relating to impervious surface restrictions. Council Discussion  Questioned if the issue of impervious surfaces would include swimming pools.  Suggested that the motion be modified to include the issue of impervious surface run off into the creek, which would be addressed by staff.  Commented that the maker of the motion and the seconde r of the motion agreed to the suggested wording. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to approve ordinance as stated in Attachment #23. Motion was modified to include:  Staff to determine mitigation measures to significantly reduce impervious surface run off from backyards of homes that face the creek. Seconded by Council Member Joe Pirzynski. Mr. Korb Suggested that Council table the motion to approve ordinance until all other motions are called. 18 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued MOTION: Motion by Mayor Barbara Spector to include that the Architecture and Site application go back to the planning Commission. Motion failed due to lack of second. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to make the required findings as listed in Attachment #19 of the staff report. Seconded by Council Member Joe Pirzynski. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to adopt Mitigation Monitoring Plan as listed in attachment #21 of the staff report. Seconded by Council Member Joe Pirzynski. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Barbara Spector directed Jackie Rose, Clerk Administrator to read the title of the planned development ordinance. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to wave the reading of the Planned Development Ordinance. Seconded by Vice Mayor Mike Wasserman. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 19 Public Hearing Item #17 – Continued Mr. Korb advised Council that they may vote on the tabled motion related to approval of the planned development ordinance. Council Discussion  Motion made by Council Member Steve Glickman to approve the planned development ordinance (Attachment #23) with amendments regarding impervious surfaces was reiterated at this time.  Commented that for a previous project, Council approved the Architecture and Site application returning to the Planning Commission, as the Planning Commission minutes had indicated that it would return to them. For this project, Council is comfortable with the Architecture and Site application going to the Development Review Committee as is the practice when a Planned Development application includes significant architecture and site details. VOTE: Motion carried 4/1. Mayor Barbara Spector voted no. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to introduce ordinance to effectuate Planned Development Application PD-04-5 and the zone change as listed in Attachment #23 of the staff report. Seconded by Council Member Joe Pirzynski. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to approve the Architecture and Site application subject to conditions listed in Attachment #22 of the staff report. Seconded by Council Member Joe Pirzynski. VOTE: Motion carried 4/1. Mayor Barbara Spector voted no. Mr. Korb  Clarified the process to introduce and adopt the ordinance for the Planned Development located at Linda Avenue.  Commented that the ordinance will be brought back for adoption at a future Council meeting. 20 PULLED CONSENT ITEM #3 3. Approve Council minutes of November 7, 2007 Town Council/Planning Commission Retreat. Mr. Davis pulled Consent Item #3, but was not in attendance to speak to the item. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Glickman to approve Consent Item #3. Seconded by Council Member Diane McNutt. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS There was no Other Business scheduled for the meeting of December 17, 2007. COUNCIL/TOWN MANAGER REPORTS 18. Council Matters Council Member Mike Wasserman  Requested Council consider making the park/sports use needs assessment a priority and have it completed by April 1, 2008. Pamela Jacobs, Interim Town Manager  Clarified that the park and sports use needs assessment survey should be complete by March, 2008. Council Member Steve Glickman  Questioned if the survey would include recreation facilities. Mayor Barbara Spector  Suggested that residents in Los Gatos who have switched to LED lights for the holidays should register at www.westvalleygreenleaf.com so that Los Gatos can win the LED competition. 21 19. Manager Matters Pamela Jacobs, Interim Town Manager  Announced that the Town has purchased a ford escape hybrid which joins the Town’s large fleet of green vehicles.  Commented that the Northern California Solar Energy Association recently presented the Town of Los Gatos with a second place award for the number of solar applications granted for a medium size city.  Thanked Council and staff for their support during her term as Interim Town Manager.  Thanked Patsy Garcia for her assistance and support during her term as the Interim Town Manager. ADJOURNMENT Attest: Jackie D. Rose, Clerk Administrator