Loading...
CC 02-22-82 , . CITY OF CUPERTIN:J, STATE OJ' CALIFORllIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertin:), CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 K1NUTI!S OF TRI ADJOurum> RJ!GULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JI!1.j) ON J'EBRUARY 22, 1982 IN THE COOHCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CALIPOIIRIA Mayor Pro Tem Gatto called the meeting to order i., the Coencil Chamber of City Hall at 7:l0 p.m. ROLL CALL Counc. Present: Gatto, Johnson, Plungy, Rogers, Sparks (7:30 p.m.) Staff Present: City Manager Quinlan City Clerk Cornelius Director of Public Works Viskovich Director of Planning and Development Sisk Assistant Planning Director Cowan (All members of the Planning Commission were present.) DISCUSSION OF TRI CUPERTIBO CITIZENS GOALS COMHITrEE REPORT ENTITLED, ''LooKING I'ORWARD TO THE 1980' S. " . Mayor Pro Tem Gatto expressed thanks on behalf of Council to the members of the Citizens Goals Committee. Martin Miller, Chairperson of the Goals Committee, introduced Comm1tt&e members present. These included Debbie Nobel, Vice Chairperson; Ann Anger: Barbara Itoppel: Robert Itretschllann; Betty LaBrie; Helen Ewbanks; Richard Childress: Fred St. Claire; Don 'rolich: Tom Boyd: Katie Boven: Lois Woodruff: Nick Szabo; Will Lestcr: Burrel Leonard: Stan Scarborough and Ann Robertson. Mr. Miller informed Council that the Citizen Goals Committee report being presented was an amendment to the original Goals Report and not meant as a replacement. Assistant Planning DireL..:>r Cowan stated that it would be used to update the General Plan. Mayor Pro Tem Gatto informed those present of guidelines that would be used for the evenIng's discussion. The report would be considered sec- tion by section with an opportunity for Council comment and then audienc comment. Jobs/Housing Balance and Housing . Council requested clarification on page 5 of thc report regarding the rejecting of governmental money assistance. Chairperson Miller stated that th¿ Committee felt the City should be careful and on occasion perhaps go to a vote of the people. CC-56l '8g8 1 1.1 , Page 2 i ftJ.l'lUTIIS OJ' TIlE FEBRUARY 22. 1982 CITY COoøcD. MEETING Mayor Pro Tea Gatto suggested that the City encourage the private sector es the preferred means but not to totally reject govern..nt assistance. Counc. John_ requested that page 6, Itea Ro. 7, be reworded to state that properti_ being developed are encouraged to use the higher end of the zoni1l8 r2Dge. Discussion folloved regarding Goal I as stated on page 5, Item Ro. 6 on page 6, and Coal III stated on page 5. Ann Anger, a ...tJer of the Committee, said that she was un¡;oafortable with Policy I. Itea No.3, on page 5 pertaining to two families sharing a home. (City Clerk's Bote: Mayor Sparks arrived at 7:30 p.III.) Transportation Coonc. Plungy asked why on Page 10, Policy III stated the City should contract with _ independent traffic engineer. . Chairperson ~11~ stated that there was some debate among people regarding certain City figures, and therefore, they included the use of an independea1: traffic engineer. Counc. Gatto stated that he felt this document st.ould be a policy document, and the item should say something to the effect that the City should work to improve street carrying efficiency and not state how to carry oat that policy. Counc. Johnson asked if on page 12 the term "general taxpayer" meant going to _ election. It was determined that it referred to use of the General J'und. Counc. Plungy referred to Policy I on page 11 regarding cost benefit ratios. In regard to four lanes for the Highway 85 corridor, the feeling expressed by the Citizens Goals Committee was that it would benefit CupertiDo. There was a strong feeling to do something with the corrid~T, bu~ ~he Commictee felt that two lanes would not be adequate. However, loere would be no grade separation. Discussion followed regarding what streets in Cupertino were considered major arterials. City Manager Quinlan asked if the widening of Highway 280 had been addressed. . Chairperson Miller stated that he believ~d the subcommittee working with the consultant would address the ~idefi ng of Highway 280: however, the Goals Report did not. .' . . MDlUTES OJ' THE FEBRUARY 22, 1982 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Director of Public Works Viskovich informed those present that the sub- committee and consultant are assuming tlat the widening will take place. CoaIUnity De..!!E Chairperson Miller vas asked the definition of "quality level c01l lati- biUty". He explained that meant compatible with existing buildings. Council requested clarification regarding figures used on page 14 which were related to the vacant land in the City and also a definition of t word "redevelopment" on page l6, first line. Discussion followed regarding building heights and the effect ou the community character (page 17, No.8: page 18, Policy VI). Regarding page 18, Policy IV pertaining to parking spaces per unit, it was requested that intensity and size determine parking requirements. Government Methods and Co...nty Services Discussion occurred regarding Policy I on page 20 pertaining to the Council's role as a hearing body in arbitrating disputes between pri- vate "ntities. The City Manager stated that tbe Code Enforcement Officer handled many neighborhood disputes and asked if Goal I would eliminate that proceas. Tbe general opinion seemed to be that as many disputes as po~sible ~e resolved at the staff level. It vas also suggested that people solve as many of their own neighborhood problems as possible. In regard to Policy III, page 22, the Committee was cautioned that publi input is necessary at times and citizens do want the opportunity to pro- vide that input. Peter Pizzino, 10370 Norwich Avenue, cautioned Council not to give away their powers and to be available to citizens. Discussion followed regarding definition of "government subsidized housing project" and the Article 34 provision for election. Council was informed that the Committee did have some differences on so things, and differences often occurred in regard to low income housing. Policy VI, page 24, was discussed in regard to public rights vs. pri- vate rights. An example was the proposed ordinance pertaining to smoke detectors. The public hearing notification process was discussed as well as the appointment of a citizens' group to review the General Plan at least once every five years. r.c-56 1 Page 3 r .6¡ MIRtJTES OP TBI FDRUARY 22, 1982 CITY COIJIIICD. Mll'rIllG Policies III aud IV on page 21 were also discuased in regard to both control and flexibility. Mr. Pizzino rec~nded that the Architectural and Site Approval eo-Utee and Planning Co~s.ion not meet at the _ t.'M. Be also requested that vben there va. a large public: turnout for a certain item, that it.. be taken early in the meeUIII. The report submitted by the Citizens Goals eo..ittee "aLitled, "Looking Porward to the 1980's" vas referred to the Planning Coaaission to review with the General Plan. At 9:l0 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to 7:00 p.m.. Tuesday, Peb- ruary 23, 1982. ¿¿~ £~ City Clerk . .