Loading...
CC 08-07-95 CC-906 MINUTES Cupertino City Council Regular Meeting August 7, 1995 ROLL CALL At 6:05 p.m., Dean called the meeting to order in Conference Room A, Cupertino City Hall, 10300 Tone Avenue. Council members present: John Bautista, Don Bumett, Lauralee Sorensen and Wally Dean. Council members absent: Barbara Koppel. Staff present: City Clerk Kimberly Smith. INTERVIEWS OF APPLICANTS Council interviewed Ms. Diana Wu, Ms. Mary Minow and Mr. Harvey Barnett for a position on the Cupertino Library Commission. Applicants Sheila Ettinger and Edward Jajko were not able to attend the interviews. Council appointed Mary Minow to the Library Commission for a term ending in January, 1997. RECESS At 6:35 p.m. Council recessed. At 6:45 P.m. Council reconvened in the Council Chambers. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Dean called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Council members present: John Bautism, Don Bumett, Barbara Koppel, Lauralee Sorensen and Wally Dean. Council members absent: None. Staff present: Acting City Manager Bert Viskovich; City Clerk Kimberly Smith; Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood; Community Development Director Bob Cowan; City Attorney Charles Kilian; Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling; Public Infomtation Officer Donna Krey; and Planner II Vera G-il. August 7, 1/)~)~ Cupertino City Council Page 2 CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS Ms. Ann Eng, a member of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee, discussed the first annual Bike to Work Day held last May. She said that four of the five major companies participated and Tandem Corporation was the winner. She also reported on Bike To School Day and said the Lynbrook High School had won that competition. They hope to expand next year to include junior high schools and smaller employers in this competition, thereby encouraging more regular bicycle fidership. Mayor Dean presented a plaque to Mr. Nick Yasco and Roger Hansen of Tandem Computers. POSTPONEMENTS City Council agreed to continue Item Nos. 21, 22 and 23. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. CONSENT CALENDAR Koppel moved to add Item No. 30 to the Consent agenda. Burner seconded and the motion carried 5-0. Sorensen moved to approve Consent Calendar Items No. 1-20 and Item No. 30. Koppel seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 1. Resolution No. 9392: Accounts Payable, July 14, 1995. 2. Resolution No. 9393: Accounts Payable, July 21, 1995. 3. Resolution No. 9394: Accounts Payable, July 28, 1995. 4. Resolution No. 9395: Payroll, July 14, 1995. 5. Resolution No. 9406: Payroll, July 28, 1995. 6. Monthly Treasurer's Report and budget update, June, 1995. 7. Minutes of the regular meeting of July 17, 1995. 8. Resolution No. 9388: Amending the rules on the conditions of employment. 9. Resolution No. 9389: Fixing the employer's contribution under the Meyer-Geddes State Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act. 10. Resolution No. 9396: Approving change order for Santa Paula Avenue Water Main Replacement, Project 94-113. August 7, 100~ Cupertino City Council Page 3 11. Resolution No. 9397: Approving change order for Homestead Road and De Anza Boulevard Widening, Project 94-112. 12. Acceptance of city projects performed under contract: (a) Santa Paula Avenue Water Main Replacement, Project 94-113; (b) Homestead Road and De Anza Boulevard Widening, Project 94-112. 13. Acceptance of municipal improvements: Tract No. 8657, Summer Hill Monta Vista Ltd. 14. Resolution No. 9398: Accepting a grant of easement for public utility purposes from SCS Development Co., a California Corporation (Citation Homes), portion of Lot 83 of Tract 8325, DeAnza Boulevard and Homestead Road. 15. Resolution No. 9399: Approving final plan for improvement of frontage at I0080 Carmen Road, Developer Henry Y. Hong. 16. Resolution No. 9400: Accepting a grant of easement for public utility purposes from Green Valley Corporation, a California Corporation; APN 375-07-003, Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Avenue. 17. Resolution No. 9401: Approving parcel map and improvement plans from 20800 McClellan Road, APN 359-20-034, Pine Bridge (Emily Chert) 18. Resolution No. 9402: Accepting a grant of easement for public utility puxposes from Community Housing Developers, a California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation; APN 375-07-002, Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Avenue. 19. Resolution No. 9403: approving destruction of certain records (Community Development). 20. Six-month review of electronic access to City Council meetings. 30. Resolution No. 9405: Approving a cost of living adjustment in service rates charged by Los Altos Garbage Company. Vote Members of the City Council AYES: Bautista, BurneR, Dean, Koppel, and Sorcnsen. NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None August 7, 1OOi Cupertino City Council Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. Public hearing to consider an application for a bingo permit submitted by Northem California Community Foundation, Inc. (Continued to the meeting of September 5, 1995.) 22. Public hearing to consider cancellation of Williamson Act Contract No. 71-907; Otis F. and Muriel N. Forge, 20691 Homestead Road. (Continued to the meeting of September 5, 1995.) 23. Application 2-Z-94 (Modified), Ju-Ping Chang (Emily Chen), The E & H First F.L.P., 19340 Phil Lane. Modification of a zoning condition of approval regarding tree protection and bond. Recommended for approval. (Continued to the meeting of September 5, 1995.) 24. Public hearing to consider amendments to Section 16.40.250 of the Cupertino Municipal Code regarding the Uniform Fire Code to add Qna.qi Public Zone as an approved location of above-ground storage tanks. Environmental Detemiination: Negative Declaration recommended. (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1693: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 16.40 of the Cupertino Municipal Code." The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. Koppel moved to grant a negative declaration. Sorensen seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Sorensen moved and Baufista seconded to read the ordinance by title only and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. Council concurred to discuss the two Citation Homes items at the same time. 25. Application No.(s) 13-TM-89, 10-U-89, 8-U-94 and 6-TM-94 - Citation Homes - Modification of conditions of approval regarding below market rate housing, phasing of development, access to open space, and other related matters. The project is located at the southeast comer of De Anza Boulevard and Homestead Road. Environmental Detemdnation: Categorically Exempt. Recommended for approval. 31. Request from Citation Homes to set a public hearing to change the land use designation for an 18+ acre site from 20-35 to 10-20 dwellings per gross acre. The site is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Homestead Road and DeAnza Boulevard. August 7, Cupertino City Council l age 5 The Community Development Director presented the staff report. He said there was some urgency in deciding this matter because the developer wants to get the roads built for phase 3 prior to the rains. He distributed an amended Condition No. 15 prepared by staff. The City Attorney noted there was pending litigation commenced by Citation Homes to require that recreational space in Portofino be opened to the Corsica Homeowners Association. There will be a preliminary injunction hearing on August 22. Cowan explained there is no open space area in phase 3, and it is not clear that all residents in phase 1 have access to the open space in phase 1. The complication was created by the bankruptcy, and the result is that a portion of phase 1 was built by the Mariani family and another portion is being built by Citation Homes. Mr. Steve Schott, representing Citation Homes, said if this item is continued it will hold up the final map. If the streets are not paved by winter the project could be delayed until June or July which would create a financial loss. Mr. Schott also was concerned about the condition drafted by staff. It is the app[icant's intention to have two distinct developments. One is 147 town homes, Phases 1 and 3, and the second is 195 apartments, Phase 2. Another concem is that sharing common facilities will complicate a joint maintenance agreement. He also objected to the condition that says occupancy permits for Phase 3 shall not be issued until construction has begun on the conunon recreation area in Phase 2. Phase 2 common facilities have not even been designed yet. He said the applicant prefers the Planning Commission recommendation, option B. Mr. Tim Robertson, president of Portofino Villa Homeowners Association, distributed a copy of his statement and gave a brief history of the Portofino Villas development. He said that Citation Homes purcha.~ed the incomplete homes, six lots in that particular phase, and the rights to the remaining portion of the development. Then Citation proposed an amendment to the CC&Rs which included the right to annex subsequent phases into the development. The proposal was rejected by the Portofino Villas Homeowners Association. Some of the construction contingent upon the passage of that amendment was completed by Citation even though the amendment had been rejected by the association. There is now a conflict about the interpretation of staff's recommendation which conflicts with the Portofino and Corsica CC&Rs, and which would result in one swimming pool being shared by nearly 200 families. This interpretation fails to take into account the original map and what was represented by Citation Homes. He said that residents from their community met with City staffthis morning and staff suggested a broader interpretation of the conditions. The City has an obligation to assume a neutral position in this matter. Either the conditions need to be deleted or a proper interpretation of the past conditions on the developments needs to be developed. Also, any future development in the entire community needs to be adjusted to conform with that decision. August 7, ! 00~ ( uper ino City Council Page 6 Bautista asked how they interpreted condition 15 to mean anything other than the fact that open space area should be available to the entire development. Robertson said that would be discussed in the actual suit. Ms. Sandy Adams, 11040 Via Sorrento, said the city has continually claimed in this regard that they are neutral. However, the city imposed a condition of approval for 8-U- 94 that Citation diligently pursue a legal action against the Portofmo homeowners. The homeowners relied upon approved documents, including the same CC&Rs which Mr. Schott cited and wants to rely on. Now the homeowners are told to place their trust in revised documents, revised maps and revised representations. They were told many times that the City was going to recommend deletion of condition 15 of 10-U-89 but then Citation found a windfall and was insisting on pursuing this through legal action. Ms. Adams noted that the City Attorney attended the hearing for a temporary restraining order at the Superior Court in Citation's lawsuit against the Portofino homeowners. After denying the motion for a TRO, the judge invited Mr. Kilian to submit an amicus brief representing the city's position for the next court hearing. Ms. Adams said the city should delete condition 15 or that Citation first build substantial recreational facilities originally contemplated. The City Attorney explained that the court did not request his appearance. The attorney for Citation Homes not only obtained a declaration f~om the Community Development Director on the facts but requested that the City Attorney appear to explain the city's present position on the condition. At that time the condition was in full force and effect, and the city had a definite interest in seeing that it would be enforced. The City is not in a neutral position. The city's position is clear in its letter to the homeowners association which says condition 15 is either in force or it is changed in some fashion. It has not been changed, so it is in force. The city has a right to be present at a hearing which will impact that particular condition. The judge was very interested in the city's point of view because it is the city's condition. Baufista asked the City Attorney if he would advise that any deliberations be postponed until after the court has looked at the issue. The City Attorney said there may not be a decision for a year or more, so the condition is written to address whatever situation may occur, regardless of the decision of the court. He indicated that the city is not a party to this litigation. It is a real party in interest and may or may not want to be involved as an amicus, but Council could proceed at this time if that was their decision. Mr. Bill Lapson, Portofino resident, said that annexation was only one of a number of issues Citation wanted them to vote on. The issues were combined into a single document by Citation and referred to as the "Amendment to the CC&Rs." When they voted it was either for or against the amendment, which included annexation. This complex document required them to vote on amendments which, if passed, would give Citation the same rights as the Portofmo Development Corp., the original declarant. Mr. August 7, l O0~ Cupertino City Council ?age 7 Lapson listed some of the other amendments that Citation requested. Those elements in the amendment had a negative economic impact on their property and therefore constituted the basis for the explanation of the counter offer of $200,000. He noted that the pool and annexation were one of many issues.. According to the CC&Rs, amendment changes require a 75% approval of the membership. At the time of the first vote this meant that of the 38 total votes, 28 yes votes were needed for the amendment changes to pass. Even with their own 12 votes, Citation got only 26 yes votes at the first vote. Mr. Lapson showed a slide illustrating the voting percentages, then described the circumstances under which the $200,000 counter offer occurred. Mr. Holger Fabian, 20425 Via Vocante said that prior to the vote by the homeowners association regarding annexation to the next phase, Mr. Steve Schott stated that if the vote was against annexation he would form his own association. Mr. Fabian said he had no interest in the common property area and his market research indicates it has no economic benefit. He asked that Council delete condition 15, and said Mr. Schott's lawsuit is nothing but a business deduction or a tax write-off, but for the homeowners the funds come out of their savings accounts, college funds and pension funds. Dr. Frances Winslow, 20405 Via Volante, discussed the new interpretation of condition 15 that was reviewed with the city staff today. If condition 15 applies to Portorino as the city staff asserts that it does, it in fact applies to all 18 acres of this development. This is the basis for the lawsuit. It is an unreasonable burden on one small pool. Originally the phasing was done to assure that adequate open space and recreational facilities were available for everyone. Just requiting a bond will not solve the problem because if the developer is not required to build amenities before occupation of Phase 3 homes, there will still be some time with one pool to accommodate 200 families. Also, in the original plans there was a common circulation pattern and enmmces. Mr. Schott said they were pursuing legal action because they believe they have a property right that they do not have right now. Their homeowners cannot use the pool, so that's why they are enforcing condition 15. Currently only the 32 homeowners now there use the pool. He said that the wording of the amendments was worked out with the homeowners and their attorney, who recommended annexation. The vote was deceiving because unfortunately when people did not vote it was considered a "no" vote At 7:52 p.m., Council adjourned to a closed session regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9.(10)(1) involving the Citation Homes vs. the Portofmo Homeowners Association. At 8:25 p.m., Council reconvened in open session. The City Attorney announced that the Council discussed various legal aspects of the pending litigation between Citation Development and the Portofino Homeowners Association but no action was taken in closed session. There will be action taken in open session and that has to do with the approval or non-approval of agenda ~'- items 25 and 31. August 7, 1005 Cupertino City Council Page g Burner expressed concern that maintenance costs be distributed fairly both duets and single family units. Because of the City's policies the residents now have open space areas, but Council is also concerned that new residents have recreational space too. For this reason, the City's role is not neutral, and the best way to accomplish this goal is to adopt the modification of the Planning Commission resolution that the staff presented. Koppel said that Council has an obligation to represent what was the intent of condition 15, and she would support staff's recommendation. Bautista moved to support modified condition 15 as presented with some additional modifications. Sentence 3 ofthis condition shouldnotjust ensure that the designand extent of access will be detemdned at a hearing on the tentative map for Phase 2, but the size of the recreational open space will also be decided. He proposed a modification that would restrict occupancy pemdts for not more than 50% until construction of the common recreational area. Kilian restated Bautista's motion as follows: Modified Condition 15 would say the common recreation areas shall remain available to all phases of the project provided the applicant, Citation Homes, diligently prosecutes its legal action to require said access. In the event that the applicant is unable to obtain legal access Condition 15 is hereby modified to require the properties in the Corsica Homeowners Association have access to recreational facilities in Phase 2. The design including size and type of facility and extent of access to the recreational open space in Phase 2 will be determined at a hearing on a tentative map for Phase 2. Said access if required shall be conditioned upon an agreement for joint maintenance of the recreational facilities. Occupancy permits for 50% of the units in Phase 3 shall not be issued until construction has begun on the common recreational area in Phase 2. Kilian said that if this condition is adopted there would be no impediment to the developer to record his final map on Phase 3. Sorensen said her overriding concern was the protection for future residents in Phases 2 and 3. She said she was a member of the Planning Commission at the time when this project came through, and she was aware that condition 15 was meant for the whole development. She was prepared to second Baufista's motion. Burner said there are advantages in everyone sharing the facilities. Council has a responsibility to decide what recreational facilities will be so there will be oppommities for facilities that are not now available. The Community Development Director noted that the condition addresses the question of making those changes at the hearing on the tentative map. It should say use pemdt and tentative map. Mr. Frank Nicoletti, the attorney for Citation Homes, said that when Council went into closed session they obviously discussed the condition as well as legal matters. Then it was modified with no oppommity for the applicant to discuss that. The City Attorney August 7, 1 ~)~ (~upert[no City Council Page 9 said the condition was before ~¥lr. Nicoletti tonight and he had a chance to comment on it just as the homeowners did. The discussion in closed session was on the legal impacts of adopting that condition. Mr. Nicoletti said he wanted to make a point of due process. At 2:30 this afternoon this document was faxed to them, but they were never contacted by staff. This is a serious document that affects the development in which they have millions of dollars tied up. He asked for a cuntin~ance so that it can be discussed with Mr. Schott. The City Attorney said there is a motion on the floor but a motion to continue takes precedence over that and that means also that the public hearing shall be reopened as well since there is a potential of communication at the next hearing by the applicant. Bautista rescinded his motion. Koppel moved to continue this item to Tuesday, September 5, 1995, and that the public hearing will continue to be open. Bautista seconded and the motion carried 5-0. Baufista moved to approve item No. 31, to schedule a public hearing to change the land use designation for 18+ acres from 20-33 to 10-20. Koppel seconded and the motion carried 5-0. The City Attorney requested that the Council, by virtue of minute order, authorize the City.Attorney to appear at all hearings in regard to this and to present the interests of the city as they currently exist before the judge, which includes the possible filing of amicus briefs or other involvement that would be in support of the city's position. Sorensen offered that motion. Burnett seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 26. Resolution No. 9404: Providing for lien assessments and for the collection of same resulting from the abatement of public nuisances (weed abatement). Mayor Dean opened the public hearing. No individ~mls wished to be heard. Sorensen moved to adopt Resolution No. 9404, Burnett seconded, and the motion carried 5-0. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 27. Application 4-U-85 (Mod.), Ola Hassan, Tandem Computers, Inc. Use Pe~,,,it Modification to allow late evening activities at 10905 N. Wolfe Road. Environmental Detemiination: Categorically exempt. Recommended for approval. The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. Koppel moved to approve the application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 4623. Sorensen seconded and the motion carried 3-2 with Dean and Bautista voting no. August ~, 100~ Cupertino (Jify Council Page 10 RECESS At 8:45 p.m. the meeting recessed. At 8:55 p.m. the meeting reconvened. 28. Application 26-U-86 (Mod.) and 13-EA-95 - Tosco Northwest Company - Use Permit modification to expand the existing retail space by approximately 100 sq. ft. and construct an 840 sq. ft. car wash. The project is located at 21855 Homestead Road. Envimmnental Determination: The Planning Commission recommends the granting of a negative declaration. Recommended for approval. Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. Jim Shively, representative from Robert H. Lee & Associates representing Tosco Northwest, said he had been working with staff and Planning Commission and accepts all the conditions that have been placed on it. He said they have one of the best operators he had seen. His company works with hundreds of stations and this is one of the cleanest he had ever seen. The main reason they want to add the car wash is to remain competitive in the service station market these days. He said they are not looking to intensify the use, but to keep the customer base they have now by providing a service. The retail they are adding is only 100 sq. ft. They are working with staff to get the architectural styles compatible with the car wash and the building. Sorensen moved to grant a negative declaration. Koppel seconded and the motion carried 5-0. Sorensen moved to approve the application per Planning Commission ResolUtion No. 4624. Koppel seconded and the motion carried 5-0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 29. Review of architectural design of the Fontana building (Application 8-U-95, Byer Properties). Sorensen moved to approve the revised design for the restaurant building for use pc. mit Application No. 8-U-95 and approve a development allocation of 250 sq. ft. from the Heart of the City development pool. The following condition is added: Approved Exhibits The approval is based on the plan set entitled "Whole Foods Market/Fontana's Restaurant, Byer Properties Crossroads Center, Cupertino, Caiifomia." sheets A1 and L1 revised 6/27195, sheet A1 dated 811195 and the food market elevations entitled, "Whole · .-- Foods Market, Cupertino, California, C/D/M Project Management" of Application No. 8- U-95 except as may be amended by the conditions contained in the City Council action letter dated 7/25/95 for this application. August 7, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 11 NEW BUSINESS 30. Resolution No. 9405: Approving a cost of living adjustment in service rates charged by Los Altos Garbage Company. Previously approved as part of Consent Calendar. 31. Request from Citation Homes to set a public hearing to change the land use designation for an 18+ acre site from 20-35 to 10-20 dwellings per gross acre. The site is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Homestead Road and DeAnza Boulevard. Previously approved during discussion of Item No. 25. 32. Request to set heating dates to review "Heart of the City" (Stevens Creek Boulevard Specific Plan). Council concurred to schedule the Heart of the City meeting at 6:00 p.m. on September 6, 1995, with a wrap-up of the project on September 18 if necessary. 33. Designation of voting delegate for League of California Cities Annual Conference. Don Burner was chosen to be the delegate. 34. Appointment of representative to Santa Clara County Library Commission. Koppel moved to appoint Jean Bedord of the Cupertino Library Commission as the City's representative. Burner seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 35. Resolution No. 9390: Adopting a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Cupertino and Operating Engineers Union Local No. 3. Bautista moved to adopt Resolution No. 9390. Burnett seconded and the motion carried 36. Acceptance of resignation of Patricia Corcoran from the Fine Arts Commission and approval of schedule for recruitment and interviewing of applicants to fill unexpired term. Council concurred to accept the resignation of Patficia Corcoran and schedule September 12 as the deadline for receiving applications and September 18 at 6:00 p.m. for interviews of Fine Arts Commission applicants. 37. Approval of Housing Mitigation Manual. Planner II (Housing) Vera G-il presented the staff report which included recommendations from the Affordable Housing Committee and the Planning Commission. August 7, 1{)~)~ Cupertino City Council Page 12 The Community Development Director reviewed some info~mtion prepared by thc City of Milpitas to explain their fees and how they compete with other jurisdictions. One of the difficulties of doing this kind of study is that every jurisdiction has a myriad of fees and there is no commonality in any California cities. He explained how Cupertino's fee's might be calculated and how they would compare with others in the county. Using the hypothetical numbers, it could increase the fee to the point where Cupertino would at least be considerably higher than the other cities in Santa clara County if the housing fee were added. Sunnyvale has a housing mitigation fee but it is unclear from the Milpitas study whether they charge a fee for that. Cupertino and Campbell are high because park dedication fees are quite high. The Community Development Director said the fees are being examined as a part of housing policy and in trying to provide a Below-Market-Rate program. He said that if cost analysis is important in the Council's decision, staff could come back in two weeks with more dc~dls. Dean said that implementing this program would add to the cost of a house, which throws more fuel on the fire of housing costs which people can't afford. Planner Vera Gil reviewed the existing housing policy and said the changes would affect the fees. The Planning Commission is asking that they be calculated differently than the Affordable Housing Committee has suggested. ACH says no-one should be exempted, and the Planning Commission wants to exempt 1-4 units. Mr. Dick Schuster, 777 Stendhal Lane in Cupertino urged that Council disapprove the recommendation by city staff and the Planning Commission and adopt the recommendation of the Affordable Housing Commission. He was in opposition to the exemption of one to four units, the exemption of remodeling upgrades, the capping of home size in determining construction cost, and the capping of actual rental amounts in deteLmining the mitigation fees. Bumett asked to see a breakdown showing how much affordable housing is being charged in park fees, etc., to see what it is that makes Cupertino so expensive. Sorensen asked that the ma/rix also include present costs. Bautista asked to see how much fees will be raised under each of the situations. Burner referred to the housing development bank in the manual. The office and industrial mitigation and section 1.2.2 have very extensive and elaborate requirements. His feeling was that the housing development bank creates little chance that housing will be built. The City will get in-lieu fees two years later instead of right up front. He asked that a modification be considered when the item is brought back to Council. August 7, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 13 ORDINANCES 38. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance 1687: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.56, General Commercial Zones, of the Cupertino Municipal Code." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to read the ordinance by title only and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1687. Motion carried 5-0. 39. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance 1692: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Section 11.12.030 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to Establishment of Prima Facie Speed Limits on Regnart Road, from 650 Feet Southwest of Lindy Lane to the End." The City Clerk read the title Of the ordinance. Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to read the ordinance by title only and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1692. Motion carried 5-0. COUNCIL REPORTS Counc. Koppel reminded those present of the CCS barbecue on September 9 and asked them to serve that night. She said she had tickets for the event. CLOSED SESSION At 9:37 p.m., Council recessed to a closed session to discuss pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - Dean Witter litigation update. At 11:12 p.m., Council reconvened in open session. The City Attorney announced that no action had been taken and that the City Council had given direction to the representatives and attorneys for the City of Cupertino ADJOURNMENT At 11:12 p.m., Council concurred to adjourn.