Loading...
M04-22-13 Town Council Meeting 5/6 /13 Item #1b Page 1 MINUTES OF THE TOWN COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING APRIL 22 , 2013 The Town Council of th e Town of Los Gatos conducted a Special Meeting in the Town Council Chambers on Monday, April 22 , 2013 at 7:0 0 P.M. CLOSED SESSION – 6:15 P.M. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8) Properties: 4 New York Avenue , APN: 529 -27 -024; New York Avenue ROW; Brooklyn Avenue ROW; Chicago Avenue ROW; High School Court ROW Negotiating parties: Town of Los Gatos (Negotiator: Greg Larson, Town Manager); Los Gatos -Saratoga Union High School District (Negotiators: Bob Mistele an d Tom Woodruff) Under negotiation: Price and terms of potential sale or payment of lease CONFEREN CE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL / PENDING LITIGATION (Government Code Section 54956.9 [a]) Sara Cole v. Town of Los Gatos, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 108CV109033 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Barbara Spector, Vice Mayor Steve Leonardis, Council Member Marcia Jensen, Council Member Diane McNutt, and Council Member Joe Pirzynski. Absent: None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Spector l ed the Pledge of Allegiance. The audience was invited to participate. CLOSED SESSION REPORT Judith Propp, Town Attorney - Commented that Council met in Closed Session and took no reportable action. Page 2 VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS - There were no verbal communications for this meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Planned Development Application PD -11 -006. Negative Declaration ND -11 -008. Architecture and Site Application S -12 -098. Project Location: 219 Bean Avenue. Property Owner: Roman Catholic Bishop of San Jose. Applicant: Jeffrey T. Berg, AIA/Steinberg Architects. a. Consider a request to adopt the Negative Declaration ND -11 -008 and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. b. Consider a request to approve Planned Development Application PD -11 -006 to rezone from R -1D and C -2 to R -1D:PD to allow for the construction of a new Jr. high school, modify existing school operations, and continue church services and activities c. Consider a request to approve Architecture and Site application S -12 -098 for the construction of a new Jr. high school. Council Comments - Vice Mayor Leonardis recused himself because he recently sold property within 50 0 feet of the project property. - Council Member McNutt disclosed her personal connections with St. Mary's Parish. Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Council Questions - Questioned whether it is advisable to include a separate letter as part of the CUP. - Requested clarification regarding the Conditional Use Permit wording as it relates to hou rs of operation, speci al events, and number of staff. - Commented that it is advisable to avoid list ing special events in the CUP. Ms. Savage - Commented that a letter is part of the Planned Development, so the rec ord can show a history of uses. - Commented that there is one event that is a special event and that a special event is identified in part by the presen ce of a larger crowd of people. - Commented that "employees" are counted based on a number of bodies and not by another measure , such as hours worked. Page 3 Item #1 – Continued Council Questions – Continued - Questioned whether there could be a reporting requirement for the school to the Town Council. - Questioned the Planned Development compliance mechanism and whether a report would be made to staff or a public body. Ms. Savage - Commented that a performance standard for reporting could happen, but is not currently in place. Mr. Larson - Commented that a planned development report could come before the Planning Commission every year. - Commented that Council will discuss the CUP enforcement system during the budget hearing. Council Questions – Continued - Questioned whether the community b enefit is required or voluntary - Commented that the Planning Commission wanted softening of east wall but deferred design to applicant and staff. - Questioned whether the project is in the parking district and whether there are public sp a ces or are reserved for St. Mary's. Ms. Savage - Commented that there is a difference in the number of traffic trips created, which requires an increase d community benefit. - Commented that the elevation presented to the P lanning C ommission had no brick and only stucco siding. - Commented that 59 Victory Lane is in the parking assessment district, with one parking site an d six parking credits ; the parking space is not part of the public parking lot ; the property continues to contribute to the parking district . Mr. Berg, Applicant - Described the proposed project and encourage d Council to support it. Council Questions - Council confirmed that the number of employees is 53 and th ere are no plans to add staff. Ms. Larson , Principal - Commented that there are 9 full time teachers and 19 part time staff and no changes to the number of staff is planned because there is a maximum of 35 students per class and 315 total students . Page 4 Item #1 – Continued Rev. Rodoni - Commented that t here will be change s in Parish staff . Mr. Mendes - Expressed support for the proposed project. Ms. Hogan - Expressed concern about increased construct ion traffic and requested to be included in future meeting s . Mr. Stahl - Encouraged the Town Council to study carefully the parking issue. Ms. Despars - Expressed support for the proposed project. Mr. Im walle - Expressed support for the pro posed project. Mr. Davidge - Expressed concern about the parking situation. Ms. Scott - Expressed concer n about the proposed project, especially about the proposed wall between her property and the school . Mr. Cummings - Expressed concern about the proposed p roject. Mr. Farwell - Expressed support for the proposed project. Mr. Berg - C ommented that the contractor will work with neighbors prior to and during construction - C ommented that story poles were visible and stated there will be limited e ffect on view corridors - Commented that the proposed wall was recommended by an environmental expert Page 5 Item #1 – Continued Council Questions - Clarified with the applicant that there are no problems with keeping neighbors informed about the construction process and oth er issues as they arise. Closed the public hearing Council Discussion - Questioned whether staff has any input on the parking issue and noticing requirement s for this project. - Requested clarification regarding the mitigation monitoring plan. Ms. Savage - Commented that St. Mary's is in the parking assessment dis trict and has parking credits. - Commented that 30 Tait Avenue was on the noticing list. - Commented that noise mitigation component requires a wood fence with no holes, but if a wood fence is not acc eptable to neighbor then alternatives could be explored. Mr. Larson - Commented that the parking requirements would not be voided even after the termination of t he parking assessment district. - Commented that staff met with the Chamber and discussed a ne w parking assessment district. Ms. Propp - Commented that the initial study addressed noise issues at the property line. - Commented that generally once environmental conditions have been established and there is an adopted mitigated negative declaration and a mitigation monitoring plan, changes are not made; how e ver, the parties could work together but there must be a solid barrier. - Suggested alternative language regarding the noise mitigation plan. Council Discussion - Commented that the potential noise increa se is a 1 decibel increase and that the noise issue should not hold up the project. - Commented that the Planning Commission did a commendable job on this project. Mayor Spector directed Mazarin Vakharia, Clerk Administrator, to r ead the title of the proposed ordinance . Page 6 Item #1 – Continued MOTION: Motion by Council Member Joe Pirzynski to accept the Planning Commission's findings and recommendations in the form of meeting minutes (Attachment 11) and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment 1) and Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Attachment 4) and to i nsert the change regarding other alternative material approved by a noise consultant to reduce the potential noise impacts to meet the requirements of the mitigation monitoring plan. Se conded by Council Member Diane McNutt. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Joe Pirzynski to waive the reading of the proposed ordinance Se conded by Council Member Diane McNutt. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Joe Pirzynski to make the required findings (Attachment 3) and adopt the Planned Development Ordinance (Attachment 5) approving the Planned Development application PD -11 -006 with modifications as recommended by the Planning Commission. The following items are added to the motion as referenced by staff : - noise alternative for fencing - item #3 7 - revised Junior High elevation on page 3 item 4 - correct typographical errors under items 76 and 94 - the condition regarding employees is limited to 53 individuals - at least annually shall submit a report providing the number of students and church and school staff to the Town of Los Gatos , with any non -conformance reported to the Planning Commission . Se conded by Council Member Diane McNutt. VOTE: Motion passed u nanimously. Page 7 Item #1 – Continued The following C ouncil d iscussion occurred prior to the vote: - Commented that annual reporting is not unprecedented and it is not burdensome to have a public hearing on how construction went and how school is doing because it is important for people to be heard - Commented that counts and reports to go to staff - Questioned what would happen if numbers submitted in the planned development are exceeded . Mr. Larson - Commented that staff would take enforcement actions if numbers are exceeded. - Suggested adding language to the motion, such as “Any non -conformance to these established standards in this P lanned D evelopment” shall be presented to the P lanning C ommission for direction.” MOTION: Motion by Council Member Joe Pirzynski to introduce to the ordinance to effectuate the zone change . Se conded by Mayor Barbara Spector. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Motion by Council Member Joe Pirzynski to make the required findings (Attachment 3) and approve the Archi tecture and Site application S -12 -098 with modifications as recommended by the Planning Commission and with recommended conditions of approval (Attachment 8). Se conded by Council Member Diane McNutt. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS 2. Verbal presentation on Attorney -Client relationship and communication Judith Propp, Town Attorney, presented the staff report Council Questions - Questioned if c lient is the council majority, then h ow do you determine the majority when you are providing legal advice . - Presented hypothetical situations and asked for guidance about the attorney -client privilege in those situations Page 8 Other Business - Continued - Expressed concern about the possibility that too much documentation is labeled privileged when it is not. - Questioned the re lationship between the attorney -client privilege and closed session categories. - Questioned what happens to communication when it is submitted to one Council member and whether all Council Members receive the same information. - Council discussed the process regarding t he dissemination of information among Council Members and among Council, staff , and the public. Ms. Propp - Commented that the Town is the Town Attorney’s client and the Town acts through the Council majority . - Commented tha t specific applications of the attorney -client privilege would depend on the facts of each case. - Commented that only documentation that is necessary to be privileged will be so labeled. - Commented that Council can go into closed session for personnel, pending litigation, and to consider certain real property transactions, but that the attorney - client privilege can apply to broader categories. Mr. Larson - Commented that there is a need for staff to be forwarded emails when a member of the public emails all Council but staff is not copied and that a process for this should be established . - Commented that generally all Council members are given the same information , and information is made part of the public record if it relates to an agenda item. A DJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Attest: ______________________________ /s/ Mazarin Vakharia, Clerk Administrator