Loading...
CC 05-04-70 CITY OF CUPERTINO, Stac" of C,¡liturn'a l0300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, Califorrrìa Phone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL HELD May 4, 1970 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA The meeting was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Mayor Stokes who led the salute to the flag. Roll Call Councilmen in attendance: Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Mayor Stokes. Also Present: City Manager Storm, City Attorney Anderson, City Clerk Ryder, Director of Public Works Yarborough, Planning Director Sisk, Chief Building Inspector Benevich, Director of Parks and Recreation Parham, Assistant Planner Cowan. Minutes of Previous Meetings It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Frolich and pass ed unanimously that the minutes of the regular meeting of April 20, 1970 and the minutes of the regular adjourned meeting of April 21, 1970 be approved as submitted. Written Communications 1. A request from Mrs. William M. McGuire, l0421 Phar Lap Drive, for a public hearing to consider the feasibility of constructing a foot bridge across Stevens Creek at the City's right-of-way off Phar Lap Drive. A public hearing was set for June 1, 1970. 2. A proposal submitted by members of the Radio Club of Cupertino for the use of the Water Department building at the corner of Granada and Pasadena Avenues in Monta Vista as the location for the FM radio station to be known as KKUP. (Referred to Unfinished Business) 3. A request submitted by John B. Youmans, l0397 Somerset Court, t have street lights installed on the P. G. & E. poles on Blaney Avenue be tween Stevens Creek Boulevard and La Mar Drive. 4. A letter dated April 21, 1970 submitted by George Choppelas, Suite 805 Fox Plaza, l390 Market Street, San Francisco 94102, requesting the establishment of a public hearing on the issue of extending Mary Avenue across the freeway. 5. An advice from the Clerk, Board of Supervisors, of a pending vacancy on the Santa Clara County Library Commission with the request that the Council submit a list of nominees by June 1, 1970. r 6. A letter from Edward S. J. Cali dated May 4, 1970 requesting a favorable vote on Application 5-U-70. Mayor Stokes announced that anyone who wished to be considered for the Library Commission vacancy should submit their name prior to the meet- . CC-44 roll call minutes approved communications received page 2 request referred to City Manager request placed under oral communicatfuns welcome by Mayor Award of Merit construction of antenna tower opposed remarks by Chief Build- ing Inspector ruling by City Attorney Minutes of the City ( II) CC-44 ,[ 1., Written Communications ccnL'd, ing of June 1, 1970. The request of Mr. Youmans for street lights on Blaney Avenue was re- ferred to the City Manager for appropriate review and action on in- structions of the Mayor. On the motion of Councilman Noel which was seconded by Councilman Frolich and passed unanimously, the letter and request of Mr. Choppelas was placed under the Oral Communications portion of the agenda. Oral Communications 1. Mayor Stokes took cognizance of the standing room only crowd and those in attendance who were sitting on the floors and welcomed all to the Council meeting and to the City Hall. 2. Mayor Stokes read a citation contained in an Award of Merit which had been presented to the Parks and Recreation Department of the City of Cupertino for their outstanding work in this field in the pre- vious years. The Award of Merit was accepted by Mr. John Parham, Director of Parks and Recreation. 3. The Mayor recognized Mr. John McCrory, 10845 Dryden Avenue, who submitted a petition containing 61 signatures requesting the City Council to rescind the Building Permit granted to Mr. Richard Igas which allows him to construct an antenna tower on his homesite at 10855 Dryden Avenue. The petition also requests that no other requests for antenna towers be granted in that neighborhood. Mr. McCrory remarked that all utilities in the area had been under- grounded and that since the newly planted trees had not yet attained adequate growth, the erection of such an antenna tower by a ham opera- tor created an eyesore. He explained that there was nothing personal in this action and recognized the rights of both the applicant and the opponent but asked that corrective steps be taken. In answer to the Mayor's question Chief Building Inspector Benevich advised the Council that the permit had been issued when it was dis- covered all aspects of applicable ordinances had been met. He said that the installation had not yet been completed but that it would be of a pole type having three separate antennas on it. Councilman Frolich commented that during his tenure on the Planning Commission this question had been disussed at some lengths. He thought that there should be some limitations to the height of the antenna and that it was the antenna itself and not the mast that created the offen- sive sight. In response to Mayor Stokes' question, the City Attorney advised the Council that it could not stop action on the application if the appli- cation was within the requirements of the ordinances. If this was so, and it still was undesirable,the alternative would be to repeal the ordinance. He stated the possibility that a public nuisance could ex- Minutes of the City Council May 4, j " í0 Oral Communications Cont'd. ist and if this was so, then the existing ordinances should be reviewed for possible modification. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Noel and passed unanimously for the staff to review the various aspects of this situation,to submit a report on the findings at the next Council meet- ing and, in the meantime, to suspend, temporarily, the Building Permit issued. 4. Mr. John G. Dittman. 10721 Wunderlich Drive, said he was pre- senting an appeal to the audience fot any and all interested persons to attend the Fremont Union High School Charrette to be held May 15 and May 24. He said the purpose of these meetings was to try and solve some of the District's problems and to get parents, citizens and taxpayers interested in the activities of the school district. He then requested of and received permission from the Mayor to make avail- able in the City Hall foyer some hand-out material advising of these meetings. 5. Mr. George Choppelas identified himself as the attorney re- tained by an organization known as CARE,Citizen's Association for Re- sidential Environment. He reviewed briefly the purpose of the organi- zation and their opposition to any further work toward the extension of Mary Avenue and requested the City Council to hold a public hear- ing at which this issue could be reheard. Mr. Melvin G. Snyder, 10649 Nathanson Avenue, was introduced by Mr. Choppelas as the President of the organization who, in turn, advised the Council that he had a petition containing 1,022 signatures in sup- port of the organization and opposing the extension of Mary Avenue. Those individuals who spoke in opposition either in their own right or as spokesmen for the members of the audience were: Jack Birkholz, 2l38l Milfot'ii, Cupertino; Bill Usim, 1543 Mary Avenue, Sunnyvale; Thomas Connolly, 10639 Nathanson, Cupertino. Those who spoke in favor of the project being continued were: Mr. R.D. Koenitzer, 10060 Phar Lap Drive; Robert F. Sterling, 1457 Hollenbeck Road, Sunnyvale; Richard H. Brazeal, Jr., 1455 Hollenbeck Road, Sunny- vale; Bob Smith, 1493 Revelstoke Way, Sunnyvale. It was the contention of those opponents to the extension of Mary Avenue that residents of both communities, Sunnyvale and Cupertino, have ex- pressed their opposition to the plan time and again. It was said that "This controversial plan of action was furthur initiated and resolved without benefit of public notice or public hearing". It was also con- tended that homeowners along Mary Avenue had not been advised of the proposed overpass at the time they had purchased their homes. Also, that the extension of Highway 85 could not help but allèviate some of the commuter problems. Those speaking in opposition to the requested rehearing related the cc-44 pg. 3 building permit suspended pending report Fremont Union High School Charr'ette remarks by Attorney Choppelas opposition to Mary Avenue extension proponents of Mary Ave. extension remarks by opponents page 4 problems discussed comments by Councilmen motion for rehearing motion de- clared dead Council comments Minutes of the City Council Nay 4, l' /0 CC-44 Oral Communications Cont'd. long standing problems of having this project come to fruition. Also, that this same extension would have been required by the County Planning Commission if it was a new proposal today. Hollenbeck is currently car- rying the brunt of the north-south traffic and has nearly reached its capacity. During the presentations one person addressed the Council inquiring if it would hear a statement from a Sunnyvale resident. Mayor Stokes ad- vised all those present that the City Council of Cupertino never has re- fused to listen to anyone, be they residents or nonresidents. Everyone always had the opportunity of addressing the Council under the Oral Communications portion of the agenda. Councilman Fitzgerald commented that while he had some sympathy with the people in wanting more information, he was against reopen- ing any hearing on this subject. It was nis worning to all interested persons that they should be aware of the extensive plans which had been drawn and approved by both the Cities of Sunnyvale and Cupertino. Also, that this project had the unqualified endorsements of the Foothill College District , the Cupertino School District and the Fremont Union High School District. He said that during the 01",.1 petitioos he had not heard anything that would justify his changing his mind. Councilman Frolich said that during his years as a member of the Planning Commission he had argued quite strenously for this crossing. He said it did not make any sense to him to have the City split and not have ade- quate access from one side to the other. He commented that there was a distinct need for th~ proper servicing of scnool district pupils but this in itself was not adequate reason to reopen this hearing or to stop the construction work now in progress. Councilman Green said that he was unaware of any public hearing having been held in the City of Cupertino. As a new member to the City Council he would like to hear the pros and cons of the issue for his own bene- fit. He then made a motion to have the public hearing held at the earli- est possible time. On not being able to receive a se~ond to the motion Mayor Stokes de- clared it dead. Councilman Noel reiterated the letters from the school districts and the City of Sunnyvale which had requested assurance for the completion of this project. He said this was the considered judgment of several other political bodies. He commented that during the campaigning for the last election he had occasion to inquire of people in the immediate area as to whether they were in favor or against the extension of Mary Avenue. Of fifteen people he spoke to on Amulet Drive and Nathanson Avenue only one had registered an objection. He offered that some $100,000 in gas tax funds had been spent to date on this project and if it was stopped that sum would have to be refunded from the General Fund. Minutes of the City Co>c.ncil Nc) Oral Communications Cont'd. Mayor Stokes remarked that the issue of Mary Avenue had been debated and discussed for at least eight or nine years. Much work, effort and money has been expended, not only by this Council but also by the school dis- tricts and the City of Sunnyvale to put this overpass in. He agreed with the statement made earlier that we were b::>o close to being there to stop now. Mr. Thomas Connolly, 10639 Nathanson Avenue, spoke to the Council say- ing that he had purchased a premium lot in Somerset Square and had ask- ed staff in the City Hall as to the eventual disposition of Mary Avenue. He said that at that time he was told it was possible a pedestrian over- pass would be constructed some time in the distant future. He made a plea for a public hearing, if nothing else, then on the basis of invest- ment in expensive homes made by residents in this area. It was his position that the proponents should have a chance to prove their posi- tion and claimed that any denial of a public hearing is a miscarriage of justice. Mayor Stokes said that, as previously stated by him, the Council had never denied anyone the right to speak before the City Council and that any presentation could be made under Oral Communications at that time. He said the action of the Council tonight in not taking any action, in effect, was denying the formal scheduling of a public hear- ing. He said the City cannot always rehear any application solely on the basis of the objections of one or more persons. Such a program would create havoc in the ordinary process of City government. At this point the Mayor advised the Council and all present that they would move on to the next item on the agenda. Report of the PlanninR Commission 1. Application 8-TM-70 from Tom Traeumer, Jr. for a Tentative Map; 2.67 acres located southerly of Riverside Drive, between Foothill Boulevard and Drea Road. Recommended for approval by Planning Commission Resolution No. 758, April 13, 1970. Councilman Fitzgerald srlrl that, inasmuch as this was a companion ap- plication to that which was scheduled for a public hearing later in the agenda, it was his motion that this particular application be heard at that time. The motion was seconded by Councilman Frolich and passed unanimously. Report of Architectural and Site Approval Committee 1. Application 298-HC-70 from Vallco Park request- ing approval to construct an addition (Phase II) to Mark Systems, located at the intersection of Homestead and Tantau Avenue. Recommended for approval. ~ CC-44 page 5 Mayor's comments audience comments statement by Mayor 8-TM-70 rescheduled to be heard under public hearings 298-HC-70 legend page 6 298-HC-70 approved 455-HC-70 legend 455-HC-70 approved 462-HC-70 legend 462-HC-70 approved 5-TM-70 5-U-70 Appeal inutes of the City Council May 4, ~9 ii' CC-44 Report of Site Control Committee Cont'd. Upon determining that there were no considerations in addition to the information supplied by the Committee minutes it was moved by Council- man Noel, seconded by Councilman Fitzgerald and passed unanimously that Application 298-HC-70 be approved as recommended. 2. Application 455-HC-70 from Daniel Fitch request- ing approval to construct a duplex on Lot 25, Greenwood Court. Recommended for Approval. There being no further questions it was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Noel and passed unanimously that Application 455-HC-70 be approved as recommended. 3. Application 462-HC-70 from Ad Art, Inc. request- ing approval to erect a l' 9" single-face plastic sign for Lovely Look Coiffures, located at 10040 N. Blaney Avenue. Recommended for approval. It was passed ed. moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Noel and unanimously that Application 462-HC-70 be approved as recommend- Parks and Recreation Committee There was no meeting and there were no minutes. Public Hearings 1. Appeal of Donald Pritzker and George Fernandez (Application 5-TM-70 and Application 5-U-70) requesting the City Council to reverse the de- cision of the Planning Commission of March 9, 1970 denying approval of a Tentative Map and Use Permit for l81-unit apartment project in a Planned Development Zone, approximately ll.3 acres located westerly of and adjacent to Blaney Avenue, 360 feet south of Stevens Creek Boulevard. (Planning Commission Resolution No. 745 and No. 746.) Planning Director Sisk, using visual aids, presented the application and located the site for the members of the audience and the Council. He presentation also reviewed the existing zoning, the history of the creation of a plan- ned community development for this area and the specific actions pre- viously taken on the proposed developments for this subject property. remarks by Attorney Donovan Mr. Dan Donovan addressed the Council stating he represented the appli- cant, requested and received approval for a five-minute rebuttal at the end of the presentations. Mr. Donovan went into more detail on the basic information given by Mr. Minutes of the City COunci~ j~: Y¡0 Sisk relative to the existing and proposed zoning of this planned com- munity development. He said that the proposed property consisted of two parcels which were being consolidated and that a recalculation of the density had reduced the number of units from l8l to l76. Com- ments were made as to the dedication by the developers of a 60 foot Rodrigues Avenue on the south side of the project. It was said that the old Town Center plan had included a street layout which called for some flexibility in the street patterns. This area now was par- tially developed and during these stages of development there had not been a requirement for the improvement of ~ll roads in the Town Center but only for those within the present development at that time. Mr. Donovan said that the old Town Center had been created through the cooperation of eight individual owners in 1962. At that time there was very little, if anything, in the way of City identification. He commented that some $40,000 had been invested by the owners in surveys, expert help, etc. to develop the old Town Center plan. He said that legal zoning required specific uses for given parcels and that this particular property had called for garden apartments. The planned de- velopment ordinance was enacted at a later dat~ specifying l6 dwelling units per acre. It was in 1968 that a Use Permit had been granted to Mr. Pritzker with- out any objection from immediate neighbors or the City government. At that time there had not been any question relative to increase in traffic. This Use Permit had lapsed due to the formulation and pre- sentation of the formal application. Mr. Donovan said it later had been sold on the basis that l86 units could be constructed. The townhouse concept had been approved by City staff and the Planning Commission. This had been presented to the Council but was returned to the Planning Commission in an attempt to determine the best way of developing the east side of Blaney Avenue. It again was presented to the Council on January 19, 1970 where it was denied on the basis of increased traffic on Blaney Avenue; the pro- posed modular construction was outside the area of City experience and the low cost of the units had been thought of as a prelude to probable low quality. Mr. Donovan then read excerpts from previous Council minutes relative to the history of these applications. When the renderings were placed on the board Councilman Noel inquired if this was not a new application. Mr. Donovan said that the render~ ings were new but the application was not new to the Planning Commis- sion. It was explained that the proposed project would have cedar or redwood exteriors, shake roofs, front and rear overhang decks, lakes, pools, recreation areas, extensive landscaping with trees in the park- ing area and better than 2-1 parking ratio with 362 parking spaces, l80 of which would be uncovered. It was said that the pool would be 19'deep but would be restricted to persons age 13 and older. It was the developer's proposal 'that the project would cater more to the retired people and those others who could afford homes in the $35,000 to $40,000 bracket. It was pointed Cc-44 page 7 Remarks by Attorney Donovan renderings presented page 8 facts reported by traffic consultant audience comments Minutes of the City COl:ncil ), CC-44 Public Hearing 5-TM-70 and 5-U-70 Cont'd. out that there was an ingress on the north side of the property from Blaney Avenue with the internal roadway cin,ulating to two exits on Rodrigues Avenue. In response to the question of density and the impact on school~Mr. Donovan said that the 136 unit proposal would possibly have 722 people in the development. By using a ratio of 2.3 children per unit this would mean 312 school-age children. For the 181 unit project under consideration there would be 362 people, none of whom whould be under 13 and probably not more than one or two dozen teenage persons. It was reiterated that the City staff had never recommended denial of the application due to traffic. The advantage to the City for the improving of Blaney Avenue was pointed out in that some $22,000 would be saved by having the developer improve the west side of the street. Mr. Donovan then introduced Dr. Faustman, Consulting Traffic Engineer hired by the developer. Dr. Faustman said his survey indicated there would be a traffic generation of 1,100 trips per day from this project. He based that on l81 units having 6 trips per day per unit. He said the total traffic was not as important as the peak hour movement. As a rule of thumb, lO per cent of the total probably occur during the peak hours in the morning and night. The City's traffic count of the previous week indicated 650 vehicles northbound to Stevens Creek Boulevard between 7:00 and 8:00 A.M. The probably expectation from this development for this hour would be 85. It was his contention that the capacity for a 40 foot street is 825 cars per hour. He said that under present conditions this development was feasible so far as traffic was concerned. He said no doubt Blaney would reach its capacity in seven to ten years but that capacity would be reached with or without this particular project. Mr. Donovan continued addressing the Council on the matter of density and stressed the point that this project would be an adult community but would not be transient in character. He said the applicants had complied with all ordinance requirements. The traffic problem would be helped - not aggravated. The project was in conformity with the old Town Center plan. This was a high quality development and, ac- cordingly, he requested approval of the applications. Mayor Stokes ascertained that there were no other individuals in the audience who wished to speak in favor of the application. Mr. Marvin Nathanson, 10197 Cold Harbor Avenue, spoke in opposition to the applications. He said that the Cupertino School District was headed for a financial crisis and was over extended at the present time. He gave several reasons for the position of the District as it now stood and disclaimed a lack of responsiveness on the part of those school officials who said they didn't want to get involved with City pol! tics. Minutes of the City Counci 1 .'icy 4 971) Public Hearing 5-TM-70 and 5-U-70 Cont'd. Several other points of contention were made, being addressed to in- dividual members of the Council. Mayor Stokes then requested that comments be addressed to the Council as a body and not to individual members. ,# Mr. Eugene West, 10208 Cold Harbor Avenue, said that traffic still was unresolved despite the hiring of a consultant. He said the north entrance on Blaney still permitted a left hand turn and this could not help but impede the flow of traffic. He raised personal doubts of the accuracy of the statistics quoted by the traffic consultant. He claimed the argument of sidewalk costs was not valid in that the developer of an Rl project would be required to do the same as a developer for multiple dwellings. Other comments by Mr. West included his fear on the increased usage of Price Avenue effect on the grammer school children in the vicinity; the suggestion of an unbiased study of tax revenues comparing poten- tial income for this and a different type of development; also, the possible difficulty of mosquito control with so much water area and that quality can no more be assured for this development as for any other development with a prime and subcontractor. Mr. Earl Therian, 10108 Mello Place, also spoke in opposition claim- ing that traffic takes the flow of least resistence which would place it on Price Avenue. He also doubted the quoted 85 trip figure and inquired as to the means of circulating water in the pools. Mr. Donovan was recognized for his rebuttal period and commented on the points made by those in opposition. These comments were, in effect, a reexplanation of previous statements made. Mayor Stokes inquired as to the depth of the lake and was told it would be not more than 18 inches. Councilman Noel asked if there would be a no parking restriction on Blaney Avenue and was advised that this was so. He then asked how moving vans would be able to accommodate those many units fronting on Blaney Avenue. He was told that the vans would have to park on Blaney with the household goods being transported along the sidewalks to the appropriate apartment or that the moving vans would have to park somewhere in the interior for loading and unloading. Councilman Green was told that the distance between the north pro- perty line of this development to Stevens Creek Boulevard was ap- proximately 350 feet and that there was another parcel between the Burger Pit and this subject property. It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Fitzgerald and passed unanimously that the public hearing be closed. It was Councilman Green's position that his main objection for some CC- 44 page 9 further comments from audience rebuttal by Attorney Donovan Council comments public hearing closed page lO comments by Director of Public Works Council comments City Council minutes 0t Md) CC-44 Applications 5-TM-70 and 5-U-70, dis~ussion C~,,'d. time had been the traffic pattern in this area. He said that in his opinion it was not adequate. He thought that the original intent of the Town Center plan was for adequacy of the entire traffic situation with outlets to Stevens Creek Boulevard as well as Blaney Avenue. Councilman Noel commented that he thought this was a quality develop- ment but that he was still confused as to the traffic situation. He asked Mr. Yarborough, Director of Public Works, what the past and pre- sent plans had been for developing Blaney Avenue. Mr. Yarborough replied that plans had been for a curb and gutter to be installed on the east side with only a pedestrian path on the west. If and when the west portion of Blaney Avenue was developed then there would be dedication by the developer with full street curb, gutter and sidewalk. The proposed width would have been sufficient to per- mit parking on both sides and to have two lanes of moving traffic. To Councilman Noel's question Mr. Yarborough said that it would be possible to coordinate the improvements of both sides of Blaney Avenue at the same time. Councilman Fitzgerald commented that the present plan was much superior to the one that had been presented before. He thought the quality was good. He said he had favored the original plan for traffic in this area but, not being a traffic engineer, he had listened to the expert, advice of those who were. He said he could find no fault with the pro- ject as it was presented. It was his feeling that better developments such as this could not help but be of benefit to the City and, in par- ticular, this development would certainly help the traffic problem on Blaney Avenue. He said he would vote in favor of the Application. Councilman Frolich said that quality could not be determined solely by looking at a picture. It h~d to be on the basis of reliance on the history and experience of any given developer. It did not make any difference in this respect whether the project was for apartments or single-family residential. He said he could not see 176 units as creating any particular traffic problems but that he did have a feel- ing that the 2-1 parking ratio was insufficient. This was an ordi- nance problem, however, and should be reviewed. Councilman Frolich continued by saying that his main concern with the development was one of density. Contrary to many people's contention, the City of Cupertino did not have any high density. Councilman Frolich said, however, he could not help but wonder on the appropriateness of the ratio of apartments to single-family dwellings in the City. He said this particular issue was not a problem at the moment but could become one before the City was ready to cope with it. He said that. as a member of the Planning Commission, he had voted for 136 units on Minutes of the City Co,,,,,L Applications 5-TM-70 and 5-U-70, discussion cont'd. this property as the basis of a compromise and he had seen nothing yet which would be enough to change his mind. Councilman Noel then asked whether or not the extension of Rodrigues Avenue would create any undue influence on a potential project behind this development if Rodrigues was to be straight or curved. Planning Director Sisk said that it had been deliberately left flexible and it could be a decision of the property owner. Councilman Noel then as- certained that the adjoining area behind this project was zoned for multiple use. Mayor Stokes commented that those thoughts as expressed by Councilman Frolich were much along the same way that he had thought. He said that there was a problem of locating multiple units in the City and that the City must be extremely careful in where future multiples would be placed. He thought that the City now had some of the best units in the area and that this particular development, ds presented, was easily re- cognized as Dneof quality. All of this, however, does not take away from the problem on the ratios of multiples to single-family. He said some areas are tailor-made for multiple ~well~gs. He then com- mented that he could find no justification for the premise that costs dictate the development. He said, in all concience,he must oppose this particular development. Mayor Stokes then asked that the City Clerk full that letter dated May 4, 1970 from Mr. quested a favorable vote for this complex. read into the record in Edward S. J. Cali who re- The letter was duly read. Councilman Fitzgerald made a motion for the approval of the subject applications. After ascertaining the failure of a second, Mayor Stokes declared the motion dead. It was moved by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Frolich that Application 5-U-70 be denied. The motion was passed on a 4-l vote with Councilman Fitzgerald voting No. Mayor Stokes called for a recess at 10:40 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 10:51 P.M. Mayor Stokes said that the hour was getting a little later than he had anticipated and because there were several students in the audience who were waiting to have some business discussed, he asked permission of the Council to take the item of the Radio Club out of order. It was moved by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Frolich and passed unanimously that the item relating to the Radio Club of Cupertino be taken from the Unfinished Business portion of the agenda to be dis- cussed at this time. CC-44 page 11 Mayor's remarks letter read motion for approval motion dead 5-U-70 denied recess request for Radio Club item to be heard page l2 presentation by Radio Club member \. \ comments by Councilman Noel Comments by City Manager \ Mayor's remarks Minutes of the City Cc."" CC-44 Discussion Cont'd. - Radio Club For the benefit of the people in the audience Mayor Stokes reviewed the occurences and the situation leading up to the request by the Radio Club of Cupertino for a location in which they could house their studio. He mentioned that the City had thought the duplex which was to have been moved to the Hillside Park would have been this location. Mr. Dana Jang addressed the Council and requested permission to build the studios in the Water Department building located at the corner of Pasadena and Granada Avenues in Monta Vista. He said the Radio Club had received a construction permit from the FCC as well as donations from various interested citizens and commercial enterprises. He said time was of the essence as the construction schedule had called for it to be started April 16 and completed by October 16 of this year. Mr. Jang answered the Mayor's inquiry as to location of the transmitt- ing tower by saying that it had not yet been finalized but several sites had been selected. The one to be used depended on the location of the studios. Transmission between the studio and the tower would be by remote control telephone lines. Councilman Noel asked the Parks and Recreation Director the extent of the City's involvement and responsibility for this particular club. Mr. Parham responded by saying the Parks and Recreation Department in- itially had sponsored this organization but then after it had been formed, the young people had done all their own leg work. He said that most, if not all, of the funds would come from community subscriptions. Councilman Noel related how the failure to place the duplex in the Hillside Park resulted in many of those young people feeling let down. Councilman Noel said that many people have shown lots of faith in them and their project and the least that the City could do would be to provide a suitable site. He thought the Water Department Building was logical. City Manager Storm commented that, technically, the subject building belonged to the bond holders of the Cupertino Water Department. He suggested a possible alternative to the use of this building. He mentioned that this particular building really had outlived its useful- ness and he was going to suggest in the very near future that it be de- clared excess property and notify the bond holders for permission to sell it. \ \ \ Mayor Stokes said that if a need exists, the building could not very well be declared surplus. A need does exist now. If necessary, the bond holders could be paid rent for it and the Council can deal with the matter as it chooses. He said the Parrish House had been offered as a possible site but he thought that the cost of rehabilitation would be exorbitant and that at the same time it would lose some of its significance as a historical edifice. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Noel and passed unanimously that authorization be given to the Parks and Recrea- Minutes of the City CJUn~l " Discussion Cont'd. - Radie Club of Cüp~rtino tion Department and the Radio Club of Cupertino to use the office build- ing of the Water Department foe studios" It then was the consensus of the Council that this authorization be re- stricted to use of the offìce buìlding only and did not entail the use of the warehouse and garage at that location. Public Hearings Continued 2. Appeal of Jacob P. Fecht and others (Application 19-Z-69 and Application 18-U-69) requesting the Council to reverse the decision of the Planning COßID1ission of April 13, 1970, recommending the granting of a zone change from RI-IO (Single-family Residential) to BQ (Quasi-Public Building) and re- commending the granting of a Use Permit to utilize the existing facilities on the property for a fra- ternal lodge. Planning Commission Resolution No. 753 and No. 754, and Ordinance No. 460 on first reading under VII-A-2. Using visual aids and photographs to acquaint the Council and audience as to the site location of these applications, Planning Director Sisk presented the history and conditions causing this appeal and public hearing to be held. He explained that the existing facilities would be used for a lodge and the men's club but it was a question of the timing on street improvements which were a condition to the applica- tions. He mentioned that one way the City could be protected was that a requirement be attached for the parcel map which had been submitted to be filed to assure the improvement prior to occupancy of the buildings. He mentioned this as a possible condition should the applications be approved. Mr. Paul Venezio, 1287 Husted Avenue in San Jose, District President of the Moose Lodge, submitted a petition signed by 30 people who he identified as being residents near this site. Those signing the peti- tion were in favor of the Moose Lodge being located there. Mr. Venezio advised those present of the character of the lodge and its charitable and civic activities. Mr. Jay E. Sevy, 10910 Barranca Drive, said that he was not a member of the Moose Lodge but he did live near the lodge site. He mentioned the time, money and effort he had spent in upgrad- ing his house and property over the years and offered his opinion that the lodge would not be detrimental to his property. Mr. Ed Bloom, 22150 Wallace Drive, said his objection was not against the Moose Lodge itself - it was that this particular area of 70 homes was served only by Barranca Drive and Maxine Avenue. There was only one exit and traffic was a problem. Mr. Dean Finkenbinder, 954 Henderson Avenue, Sunnyvale, said there was no reason for any lodge member to use Maxine Avenue in going to Homestea cc-44 page 13 use of office building authorized 19-Z-69 l8-U-69 presentation favorable comments objection voiced page 14 audience comments comments by lodge president public hearing closed 19-Z-69 l8-U-69 approved with conditions 6-Z-70 legend Minutes of the City Coulld 1 ,) 4, .);-- \__' CC-44 Public Hearing Cont'd. 19-Z-69, 18-U-69 Road. Cars of members come and go at different times and he could see no congestion resulting. Mrs. Elizabeth Cabral, 22103 Hibiscus Court, said that her home eighteen years ago. At that time she did not next to such an organization nor did she want to now. was a very disturbing element. she had bought want to live She said noise Mrs. Adieu, 10944 Barranca Drive, complained that the bedroom of her house would be in the vicinity of the proposed men's club and objected to the place having a liquor license. She said that earlier a stone fence had been proposed but now there was talk of having only a wood fence. Mr. Venezio said that fencing was no problem. The lodge would put in a block fence according to ordinance standards. He also could not see traffic as creating any problems. The Moose Lodge was trying to be an asset in the community and that the liquor issue was not really an issue at all. Lighting on the premises would be such that no reflec- tion would be cast into the homes of adjoining properties. Councilman Fitzgerald asked if Mr. Venezio was aware of Condition l7. Mr. Venezio said that the local lodge knew what it had to do to comply with these conditions and that it would be only twice a month that they would have a late closing, as 1:00 A.M. -at least this was the operating schedule now. It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Fitzgerald and passed unanimously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Green to approve Applications 19-Z--69 and l8-U-69 subj ect to the conditions im- posed by the Planning Commission. During the discussion the suggested condition offered by the Planning Director at the beginning of the hearing was referred to as being a necessary part of the motion. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Green that the preceding motion be amended to require the recording of the submitted parcel map prior to occupancy of the existing facilities. Mayor Stokes called for a vote on the amendment which resulted in uanimous approval after which he called for a motion to approve the ap- plications which, also, resulted in unanimous approval. 3. Application 6-Z-70 from Tom Traeumer, Jr. for rezoning from Agricultural-Recreational (A-ua) Zone to Residential Single-family 7500 square foot lots (RL-7.5) Zone. Approximately 2.67 acres located, southerly of Riverside Drive Minutes of the City uOlalC,i) Public Hearing cont'd. - 6-Z-70 between Foothill Boulevard and Drea Road. (Ordinance No. 459 on first reading under VII-A-l) Councilman Fitzgerald requested permission of the Mayor and Council to abstain from all discussion and voting on this application as his office was involved with the real estate transaction. This permission was granted. Planning Director Sisk presented the application by the use of photo- graphs and visual aids and advised the Council of the action taken by the Planning Commission. He said that subsequent to the Planning Com- mission action the developer had suggested a possible alternative to that condition relating to a height limit. The suggested amended con- dition, as approved by the Council, to be: "No two-story residence shall be constructed that will have a roof peak that exceeds six (6) feet above the finished floor elevation of the highest residence abut- ting the rear property lines upon which it is to be constructed". Mr. Tom Traeumer, the applicant, said he was available to answer any questions the Council may wish to ask and added that the requested change in the condition previously referred to would make the view site level from the house and not be subjected to variances of lot slope. Mrs. Herter of San Juan Road posed several questions to the Council and wanted assurance that drainage from this development was proper and expressed interest in the preservation of view from existing homes. In the absence of further audience comments it was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by Councilman Noel to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously with Councilman Fitzgerald abstaining. Councilman Frolich said that the suggested change in condition met the intent of the Planning Commission for the preservation of view from existing homes. Mr. Sisk advised Councilman Green that more study would be made of the storm drainage facilities before grading could be done. Mayor Stokes advised the audience that the City did have regulations regarding setbacks which applied to all single-family residential de- velopments and these same setbacks would be applied to this development. It was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by Councilman Noel to ap- prove Application 6-Z-70 and Application 8-TM-70 subject to the condi- tions imposed by the Planning Commission with the amended Condition l3 as read by the Director of Planning. On individual votes for each of the two applications the motions were approved unanimously with Councilman Fitzgerald abstaining in each case. CC-44 page l5 6-Z-70 cont'd. presentation questions from audience Council comments 6-~-7() _¡;-TM-70 ãt>proved with conditions page 16 Ord. 459 first reading Ord. 460 first reading Ord. 457 second reading Minutes of the City Councìl :, y 4, J '!' ) cc-44 Before proceeding to the next agenda ìtem,Mayor Stokes said that he would like to take this opportunity to commend publicly the City's Planning Department and the Planning Director, Mr. Sisk, specifically, for the improvement in the quality of presentations which were being made by the staff. He said these were most clear and of great bene- fit to all. Ordinances 1. First reading of No. 459: Rezoning from Agri- cultural-Recreational (A-au) Zone to Residen- tial Single-family 7500 square foot lots (Rl- 7.5) Zone. Approximately 2.67 acres located southerly of Riverside Drive between Foothill Boulevard and Drea Road. (Planning Commission Resolution No. 757) It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Frolich that Ordinance No. 459 be read by title only and the Mayor's reading con- stitute the first reading. Ayes: Councilmen Frolich, Green, Noel, ~ayor Stokes Noes: None Abstain: Councilman Fitzgerald 2. First reading of No. 460: rezoning from Single- family residential (Rl-IO) Zone to Quasi-Public Building (BQ) Zone. Approximately 1.063 acres located at southwest corner of Homestead Road and Maxine Avenue. (Planning Commission Resolu- tion No. 753) It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Frolich that Ordinance No. 460 be read by title only and the Mayor's reading con- stitute the first reading. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Mayor Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 3. Second reading of Ordinance No. 457 rezoning from Agricultural-Residential I-acre lots (Al-43) Zone to Light Industrial (ML) Zone. Approximately 20.67 acres located easterly of Blaney Avenue, south of Homestead Road and north of Junipero Serra Freeway. It was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by Councilman Noel that Ordinance No. 457 be read by title only and the Mayor's reading con- stitute the second reading. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Mayor Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 4. Second reading of Ordinance No. 458 rezoning from Multiple Residential (R3-2.2 Single-family Resi- Minutes of the City LOLucl1 Maj ., Ordince 458 Cont'd. dential (Rl-7.5) Zone and General Commercial (CG) Zone to Multiple Residential Cluster 2200 square feet per dwelling unit (R3C-2.2) Zone. Approxi- mately 38.49 acres located southwest corner of Homestead Road and Blaney Avenue. Councilman Green requested permission of the Mayor to make some comments prior to a vote being taken. Mayor Stokes said this was the second reading of the ordinance and re- ferred the question to the City Attorney for an opinion. Mr. Anderson then said the question of allowing any comments was within the discre- tion of the Chair but that this was not a public hearing. Mayor Stokes then recognized Councilman Green. Councilman Green said that he did not want to belabor the issue too much as there already had been a lot of discussion on it. There were, though, a couple of facts he wanted to present. The zoning of this application now to allow 374 units on this parcel then would leave 9 acres in Commercial if the present Residential Rl zoning and present 21 acres of R3 Zoning was maintained. He said there has been a lot of discussion on the density from 16 units to 19 units, however, he thought it was not pointed out adequately that this really is an increase of 376 units over the present zoning. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Frolich that Ordinance No. 458 be read by title only and that the Mayor's read- ing constitute the second reading. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich Noes: Councilmen Green, Noel Abstain: Mayor Stokes Mayor Stokes said that he did not believe the members of the Council understood correctly that the foregoing vote was on the question of reading the title only of the ordinance instead of having to read the entire ordinance out loud. He asked that the motion be restated and another vote taken. Councilman Fitzgerald moved that Ordinance No. 458 be read by title only and that the Mayor's reading constitute the second reading. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel Noes: None Abstain: Mayor Stokes It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Frolich that Ordinance No. 458 be enacted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich Noes: Councilmen Green, Noel Abstain: Mayor Stokes CC-44 page 17 Ord. 458 second reading Comments by Councilman Green Mayor requests restatement of motion motion restated page l8 tie vote opinion of City Attorney Mayor's remarks motion for return to Planning Commission Minutes of the City COuncil I'"~, 4, l"iU CC-44 Ordinance No. 458 Cont'd. The Mayor declared a 2-2 tie vote. He said the Chair had assumed the position of not voting on this application for all of its previous hearings and will maintain that position at the present time. He then requested advice from the City Attorney. City Attorney Anderson said it to be the prerogative of any member of the Council to refuse to vote on any issue for reasons of his own which are generally considered self interest, however, it takes three votes to conduct the business of the City. He said the courts have establish- ed a rule of necessisty requiring that the fifth voter who has abstain- ed shall be relieved of his inability and be instructed to vote to break a tie and to conduct the business of the City. Mr. Anderson said that the City Attorney did not have any police power nor was there any power within the Council for the requiring of a vote. The answer to this would be to go before the Superior Court who then would order the abstainer to vote under penalty of contempt of court. Mayor Stokes then commented that the members of the Council were aware of why he had abstained and it was not because he owned any piece of this property. He had checked with the rulings put out by the League of California Cities on voting. On failure to vote every member should vote unless disqualified for cause excepted by vote of the Councilor by opinion of the City Attorney. So, being disqualified without appröval which results in a tie vote should be averted as thwarting Council action but no Councilman can be forced to vote. He said he would not vote. Councilman Fitzgerald said he disliked seeing the Mayor put in such a position and suggested the possibility of a study session between the City Council and the developer which might possibly change his mind or one of the other Councilmen. City Attorney Anderson said the Mayor has his reasons and has stated emphatically that he would not vote. Since this position was original- ly taken new conditions have risen, nameiy, a new Planning Commission and a new City Council. He said this means new minds, new ideas and new approaches to this particular controversial ordinance. He said he respectfully submitted the idea of having reconsideration by the Council to return it to the Planning Commission for review and report to be returned to the Council to see if there was a change of mind. i Councilman Fitzgerald moved that it !mission for review and report to be consideration at its next meeting. Frolich. be returned to the Planning Com- sent back to the Council for re- It was seconded by Councilman Councilman Noel said he would change his vote to permit it to be sent back to the Planning Commission. He preferred not to give the Plann- ing Commission any kind of instructions. He said he had one other Minutes of the City Council "c'ý ¿', ," " Ordinance No. 458 Cont'd. comment and that was the Council earlier in the evening had turned down an application on the basis of a balance of apartments versus single home ownership. He said it was discussed and denied and now, with this one which is three times as much, it results in a 2-2 vote. In view of this he suggested starting anew with the Planning Commission. In answer to Councilman Green's request for clarification, Mr. Anderson said the purpose of returning it to the Planning Commission was for reviewing it to see if they have any change of mind or new ideas that would apply on this subject. They then would make a new recommendation one way or the other; then it would be up to one of the Councilmen to change his vote or else it would remain as 2-2. It was the City At- torney's opinion that this was a proper municipal remedy and the pro- per form of attempting to solve this problem. The vote Ayes: Noes: Abstain: on the motion was as follows: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Noel Councilman Green Mayor Stokes After the vote Mayor Stokes said, for the record, that some of his reasons for abstaining on this particular application had been removed. It was his opinion that the City Attorney was entirely right in his statement that we do have a new Council. He also said he felt he could approach this application as it should have been approached the first time. He stated he would participate in the discussion and vote when it comes before the Council again. Resolutions 1. No. 1976, approving miscellaneous and general ex- penditures. It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Frolich that Re- solution No. 1976 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Mayor Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 2. No. 1977, approving payroll for period ending April 21, 1970. It was moved by Councilman Noel, Seconded by Councilman Frolich that Re- solution No. 1977 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Mayor Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 3. No. 1978, approving the improvement of frontage at 22780 Mercedes Road, and authorizing execution of agreement in connection therewith. CC-44 page 19 4-Z-70 7-TM-70 returned to Planning Commission Res. 1976 adopted Res. 1977 adopted page 20 Res. 1978 adopted Res. 1979 adopted Res. 1980 adopted Res. 1981 adopted Res. 1982 adopted 429-HC-69 legend Minutes of the City Council May 4, 1970 CC-44 Resolutions Cont'd. - No. 1978: It was moved by Councilman Noel, Seconded by Councilman Green that Reso- lution No. 1978 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 4. No. 1979, approving the improvement of frontage at 22637, 22639 and 22645 San Juan Road, and authorizing execution of agreement in connection therewith. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Green that Resolution No. 1979 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 5. No. 1980, accepting quitclaim deed and authorization from Mrs. Delbert A. Goodwin. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Green that Resolution No. 1980 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 6. No. 1981, accepting quitclaim deed and authorization from Robert R. Casella and Mary Jo Casella. It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Green that Resolution No. 1981 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Stokes Noes: None Absent: None 7. No. 1982, accepting quitclaim deed and authorization from James Brisco, Jr. It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Green that Resolution No. 1982 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Stokes Noes: None Absent: None ö. No. 1983, approving miscellaneous and general expenditures. It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Green that Resolution No. 1983 be adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Fitzgerald, Frolich, Green, Noel, Stokes Noes: None Absent: None Unfinished Business A. Application 429-HC-69 from The Original House of Pies re- questing approval to erect three 6'2" diameter logo signs at The Original House of Pies located at 10055 Miller Ave- nue. (Cont'd. from April 20, 1970) Minutes of the City C ,"ì Unfinished Business Cont'd. - 429-HC-69 CC-44 page 21 Chief Building Inspector Benevich presented the application and said that each of the three signs requested would have a square footage of 29.8662 and that the ordinance allowed 103 square feet. He affirmed to Councilman Frolich that a pole sign would have been permitted but that the applicant had chosen these particular gable signs. presentation It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Frolich and pass- 429-HC-69 ed unanimously that Application 429-HC-69 be approved as recommended. annr0H0~ Mayor Stokestlren commented that the setback of this building probably was at least 5 feet. He said the traffic emerging from Richwood Drive to Wolfe Road was dangerous in that a motorist had to move out into the intersection to get a clear vision when cars were parked alongside this building. He said it was his recommendation to prohibit parking on Wolfe Road between Stevens Creek Boulevard and Richwood Drive. It was moved by Councilman Noel, seconded by Councilman Frolich and passed unanimously that the City Attorney prepare an urgency ordinance according to the Mayor's suggestion and have it presented for the next meeting. urgency ordinance requested New Business Mayor Stokes then read a list of recommended appointments to commissions and committees requiring representation from the Commission or Committee City Representative the various City Council: I Alternate Transportation Policy Committee Planning Policy Committee Planning Commission Member to the Planning Policy Committee Flood Control Advisory Commission Santa Clara County Water Commission Association of Bay Area Governments League of California Cities Inter-City Council The Solid Waste Committee of the Planning Policy Committee Stokes Fitzgerald Frolich Green Hirshon Noel Noel Frolich Stokes Stokes None Yarborou h Yarborough Noel Noel Noel commission appointments Green None It was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by unanimously that Councilman Fitzgerald be named ending April, 1971. Councilman Noel and passe City treasurer for the year I treasury appointments Noel, seconded by Councilman Frolich and passea Green be named as Vice Treasurer for the year It was moved by Councilman unanimously that Councilman ending April, 1971. Report of Officers A. City Treasurer There was no further report. page 22 trash pickup dates request for foot bridge fireworks permits interviews for planning commission request for joint session postponed reimbursement request that Mr. Avery attend next meeting Minutes of the City C:JunciJ CLy 4, l' CC-44 Report of Officers Cont'd. B. City Manager 1. Mr. Storm reported to the Council on the Trash Pickup Program and said that if the Council was going to want another one in the Spring, the garbage company had suggested the date of May 23. Councilman Noel said that he had received some complaints with the pre- vious pickup in that the work of picking up started too early on Sat- urday morning. This made it difficult on the family's breadwinner to get all the trash collected during the week and have it available for pickup that early on a Saturday morning. After further discussions on the preference of times and days when this pickup should be made it was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by Councilman Fitzgerald to instruct the City Manager to contact the gar- bage company and ask for a Monday, May 24th date and if that was not possible then to request Sunday, May 24 as the date. 2. Mr. Storm reported on the request of citizens to have a foot bridge constructed over the proposed extension of Highway 85 to accom- modate those residents living to the west of Mary Avenue and the free- way. It was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by Councilman Fitzgerald and passed unanimously to have the City Manager write to the engineers in the Division of Highways, setting forth this problem and inquiring as to the feasibility of the proposal. 3. Mr. Storm reported that the Council would receive the re- quests for fireworks permits at its next meeting at which time the permits would be issued. 4. It was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by Councilman Noel, that applications for appointment to the Planning Commission have a deadline of May l8 for being received and that the City Manager schedule the interviews beginning at 7:30 P.M. on May 25, 1970 with all candidates. The motion passed unanimously. 5. The City Manager mentioned a request from the Planning Policy Committee to meet in a joint session with the representatives of Sunnyvale for the purpose of seeing some slides and a program prepared by the County Planning Department. This matter was postponed tò the next meeting. 6. Mr. Storm received Council assent for the reimbursement of Plan- ning Commission Members who attended the League of California Cities Planning Conference. 7. The Council requested the City Manager to have Mr. Avery present at the next Council meeting for the purpose of answering or asking ques- tions relative to the proposed realignment of Mary Avenue and the poten- .tia~.sal~ Qf s~~plus land by the State to Mr. Avery. '.'... . ,,:¡'.., ' ""t ,t:'"'-':.,:". ''':>0. ", Minutes of the City Council May 4, 1970 Report of City Manager Cont'd. 8. Mayor Stokes asked that the proposal as submitted by the Mayor of Palo Alto relative to open space and park areas in the Palo Alto foothills be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. C. City Attorney City Attorney Anderson reported on the progress to date on the litagation involving the Landscaping Contractors' Association. He said he had that date prepared and filed a Motion to Dismiss and expected action on this shortly. D. Director of Public Works At the request of the Director of Public Works it was moved by Council- man Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Noel and passed unanimously that the City Council accept the improvement of Bubb Road project and authori- zed the staff to file a Notice of Completion as of May 4, 1970 with the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office. It was moved by Councilman Fitzgerald, seconded by Councilman Frolich and passed unanimously that the City Council accept the improvements and authorize the release of bonds on Projects A - D contained in Item 4 of his report and authorize the staff to notify the developers and bonding companies of the appropriate actions. E. Director of Planning There was no further report. F. Chief Building Inspector No further report. G. Director of Parks and Recreation CC-44 page 23 proposal continued legal otion filed public orks improvements accepted Director Parham acknowledged receipt of the Award of Merit presented earlier in the evening and commented that it would not have been possible without Award of Merit the support and cooperation of the Council and other City staff. acknowledged H. City Clerk-Finance Director There was no further report. Adjournment It was moved by Councilman Frolich, seconded by Mayor Stokes and so de- clared by the Mayor that the meeting be adjourned at l2:50 A.M. ATTEST: APPROVED: ~gß City Cler adjournment