CC 01-10-6310321 50. 3A3ATWA-F--"- NYPA1E MPD
C I7`.' r 7r• E 9 0
AL 2 -45C.?
ylpU2p3 PM1 7AC A1kTOt'2';EO i'.E��'.'7..4ii IS=' ?tY. OS '117: C1TiC COUNCIL - JAITJARY 10, 1
Place: 10321 So. Saratoga -Sun: vile :toad
Time: 7:00 P.M.
I it" CALL
Counailmen Present: Jewett, Balch, Denetti
0086011een Absent: Dempster, Finch
Staff - Present:
II NzodliMo,Y 691: Giving Notice of the Proposed Annexation of Certain
lwntnhabited Terrltory, Designating it by the :Name of "Pruncridge 2, 62 -,
The City Cleric read the petition. The potition is signed by owners of
not leas than one - fourth of the lard in the territory described in the petits,
and less than twelve registered voters reale- -:thin the territory. The
petition was fotuxl to be in order.
It was moved by :!o,,ncllwan Saieh and seconded by Councilman Jewett that
Resolution 691 be adopts.:. !lotion carried 3-0.
III PIK= BOMM, INC.: Seeking Review of Orr•imunec 216 re: Wolfe Rd.
BMdge; also 0-- Jinarce 2C6, Les -iom acset,mcnt for Wolfe Rd. Bridge
Viecommendation of City Meager and --ity r7:gi.neer /.
After reviewinE the aas•ssmerta and alterations in the design of the
bridge, The City Manager and City Engineer recommend an assessment of $23.75
per tarp.
Pr. Jim Lipaholz, 1617 E. :-:rta Clara, San Joao spoke in benal.f of
Fonta>_nbleu. The developer has feun3 many ;;nfcrr=; en expenses, suet. as a
channel re311gnment, dedicating property to fico.l !Ontrol to enticn a
few. the developer feels they are payln„ ever 207,1 of the coo of the bridge,
and feels this exceedingly !Ch. Y.P. Llpcholz statew] that he expre:aed
Mr. Faaa't view on the natter as wel) n: h'-i own. There are 123 units in the
Fontairtblue develepcent, and :cJ _r the Joe Tom de: al ^p :vent.
Councilman Salch felt that a reduction frtn $550 to $32.7r was quite a
large one, and a favaimble redu-t.n :,. I1t:en Ghc :.oning w,:nt thrcurh, the fee
was $, J, and 1 feel the ad.�ust_i f-e is sat'- foetot•y.
Gvur_cilman Jewett wondered what Mr. Lipaholz cens!dereP a fair price,
and what the cost of the bridge would be.
:^r- City kntirear had f1E7sred the cost of the bridge to be around
$30,CGG. The developer'a eativate was the Lama.
linen H-. Lipaholz reminded the Council thit the crlginal estirrite of
the cost of the bridge wan $=0,000, the fee was $50, b::t there r:elly wasn't
a reduction, since !.ow the eatiaaed coot was y3' °10; iue Mayer ported ov!
that the proportionate there was t a sa:ee.
The portion of the bridge we siculd share is the Quecl ion, not the cost
of the bridge, replied Mr. Lipsholz.
Councilman Jewett again as,ced if the d,:.eloer rr.a willl.ng to -a",.e a
propozal of their fair sure, percent: ge wise or in coilora and cents.
Xr. Lipaholz , speak:rg fr. hloaelf new: t! Dama, ZLggeated 1C$, tetwee:
the two developers, c :.3,500 whrcn wca?.d b:! rail lann :i].riely.
Mayor Denettl than atitce his thoi�ghlr in tlr. utter. Yh.a_i the two
developers came befa: a np cit:•, t:rw agrrad to •uy Give $50, Caen asked tip.;.
the figure be review r;. when c1: ^y tree,_, -.l -i "0 to 3fi reduction,
because of rovlsed enCinrcrinj figure.:,:Irn nrc!oortio.,s is the argument. T
rayor stated that he is not in favor of negot:tt.Inr, a fie re which Council
consitlers fair.
The developer aired if the Mayor considered t1r. Rama's and Pontalnble'a
Utility of the bridge to be �nY.
.l�
The May.:' repl e_ asking if c'wv felt this *.s fair when the first
came to the City for
71e. Lipaholz ex- _ ='-ei t!t the #50 f ^' -e wan "'"'''a before their purchaee
of the p2eyerty, anu =:_: rocently, they die not !r :-1e opporttnity to
protest.
Mr. iffilph Ramona, y represented Mr. Fama on t'_a original application,
added a few -vorda. de s_ifii.d Mr. 'vans of the fi at the time of the
original application. '.. gams stailed it, and itx:iczted the figure of $25
per UNIt.. Ubm the i`_ f-e -.!as indicated for appr:va', it was indicated that
It world be subject a study s °esioa to ascertil -i t`e validity of the fee.
�tW,Mmnetti: �a developers agreed on this fze and knew full well whP':
the t_fa nos purcti ed that it tsaa ;50. If ttr.r engineers and ours agre<
with east of the tridge, then I don't think there 13 a point for argument.
i!. Lipaholz: We :acid build one unit, or no units. We hope to build
323 writs, therefore assessment on a per unit basis isn't sound. Perhaps
an asiaaomest on acrezce would be more wound.
COUeellasn Jewett: 11d like to see a report of which properties are
going to be developcti, ._ we will ianw how to derive the cost of the shares.
The existing properties should have paid their share, but unfortunately, they
are getting a free rich. '_'m not in favor of two developers paying for
sometsif:g that will : < -2f :6 so Mary.
Ifte City Manage- .ated that t1Y City will pay tre balance of the bridge
cost., and tbat the ^�.n�s will come free gas tax.
The developer as,_: that the building permits issued immediately,
rather than wait unt_= : =a results of f4rther study :' the fee.
It was moved by :_ =:1lman Jewett, and secondei t7 Councilmen Saich that
Fontainblem and Les ' -:a a:terprises be allowed to ta. :e out building permits
January 21, in lieu :f = ee:ision made by Council when assesment fig.re is
resolved. Motion ca^'i- 3 -0.
Aayor Benetti: -ncur with yc`i *_n part, bit °`_::ce Council wasn't sure
the oust of the br;c_e an arbitrary fizire was p_ci.e1. However, I do not
a tffi2 this fin -_e ° :���ld be ors- to nrgotiartcr. The developers agreed
6»e
to their ;:ropertiorz:e -are, and tY•.;: we she to a gsntlemen's
agrees•!nt. I belie-: _ c City is _25,000 or $2"1,000.
The developer who d= -__s on apart_.a: street c_, for the necessary
impmeemems, and t'_s is the case T =re.
The G'ity Mane. = az'_ City Engir _r :itll peps,: _ :heir report at the
January 21 meeting.
Cowie_lman Sa_. = -_cted to is irk all the S:- -r money in one are$4.
He felt tcr-re mignt _rather need uz t as great.
IY IZS -'.lhM �1'Pl'Jii __P=c applieat2cn for Are!,_t-ecr - :'a'_ & Site Approval:
lots 13, 14, iI 17, 10, 19 ^ -' Tract 3277' -Flex L'nits on H -3 -11;
Wolfe goad op-:__.: Cupertino Sign School on Ca :aLj zaa Creek. (Appl.
59-A anti S -62) ' = ::=.ended by S-Ccjntrol.
9pestl_ -:g for tar =-_'Scant, Mr. F..a5nca pol :ito:! the closed 4 -plex
ca:yort. also the lit_! :acing, to be eo=Acted At t_n- ,f building.
Comatssioner Sma :x�gslned that the lanlsea'irZ clsnee is ineieded
to keep tine propert -.- :a acterloratire for lacK o: an owner.
It was moved t; _ •_.'-rrtn Jewett s --.d 3ecorr!,�' :;puncilman Saich thr.+
the H Cadrol reco= �%_ `ation be apprc —ed. Motion c ?'r.ed 3 -0.
V WADE E. AIJREl - :--p"Ica`-irn for Archite- :t. :-a_ Site AFproval: Lot 1,
?pact 7527, Lt _ 7-sts; Ain : :ne :wive. (Appl. .. n 4 5 -62, Ntcocmen•1ed
by 1- Control.
j:t imtw moved t•- 'c_r,, :ilmau Saich a74 a ^condtd = , 'o.ncilman Jewett that
APpU atum GOd k 5 - :� ;e approved as rrcemms : : :'. ti t_ :; ';patrol. Motion
carrimd 3-0.
VI ?R,IOUS
MW C ty A- tomer real nesalutiam 6 ?3. He Sth-ed that two loops of a
-2-
cloverleaf ati now inc:.a'.ec' in the Route 239 intersection at Volfe Road,
and the C1t7 has recoww-reed a full clover.
It was moved by a.lcan Saich and amended by Councilman Jewett that
Resolution 693 be at:op:akL Motion carried 3 -0.
The City Attorney `- svussed the formal agreement between Fremont Union
School Dis«iet and the City on the storm drain. The district has asked for
a credit ed $1,380 for _Wrovements. Should the improvements not be complete.
by 19677 am owney is 'a be refunded. The City Manager pointed out that this
is subject to a request ror an extension of time. This is so stated in the
agreameM. me City Attorney recommended the agreement for approval.
It uW, wo 11 by Councilman Jewett, and seconded by Councilwan Saich that
the C1tW C and the Maymr be authorised to sign the agreement with Px nt
union D4*0m1ool. Motion carried - 3-0.
VII
c It w was by Councilman Jewett and seconded by Co•,.nellman Saich
that the weetlmg be adjourned. Meeting adjourned 8:10 p.m.
ATTEST;
Mawrencs n, __er
/s John 6. Benetti
ayor
-3-