Loading...
CC 02-18-6310321 sv. SAPAT" YIA- STRPSWALB ROAD 252 -4505 C Y T° n F C U r R R T I N A M3XUM f9R THE HHGJLAn AEL-r NO OP T[iE CITY COUNCIL - i'E3ItUARY 18, 196, Mee: 10321 So, sarstoga- sunnyvale Road Time: 8:00 P.M. I SALUTE TO rAE TUG n ROLL CALL CoUneilm9n plseent: Dempster, PincS, Saleb, Jewett Oalnsfleen Ab*=%: Bsaetti. .Staff Present: City Manager. City Attorney, City H:ginser, City Clerk III MINUM OF THB FMVZM MEETING - February 4, 1963 It was requested that the Planning Commission Report be corrected am follows: Page 1, 2nd paragraph under N should read: The Stoneson Development application is continued to March 25. 'te Planning Commission was concerned with the q-lestion of whether or not the applicant had furniz-aed the necessary docraents to comply with the requirements of the ordinance. The following paragraph should read: There was no decision made on the Mariann et al application. It was suggested that the application be amended to PCli and POH. On Page 4, the City Manager requested that the second sentence of the last paragraph read: It was the recormendation that radii of the loops be lengthened, service roads be widened, sl&nalization on left hand turns where service roads connect b_ required, and that the Wolfe Road overcrossing be widened to six lane::. It was moved by Councilman. Saich and seconded by Councilman Deadater that the minutes be approved as _,rrccted. Motion carried 4 -0. IT REFORT OF THE PIAMN D+C�COMMISSION: (See Planning Commission -hates of February 11, -S, The Chairman of the Planning Commission pointed out two things that were presented by the Planner on :.he meeting of February 13• 1. An analysis of population and economics for General Plan area, Commission plans to review this and meet again with the Planner on February 26. 2. There 1s a zoning map available showing existing zoning as of November 1962. The Master Plan schedule has been revised somewhat, however when Councilman Pinch asked if this would delay presentation, the Chairman answered that the Planner stated they would be back on schedule by :he time of the presentation to the public in tby. V ORAL AND Wr -ITTEN 0CMNICATIONS A. Oral Communications There were no oral communications. L. Written Communications 1. Letter from Westwood Oaks Homeowners Association. This Is a copy of letter sent to the President of the on Jeffers School District. , -1- 2. Due to Elliott: Application 22 -im-63 ffooret0� a8ot ink Or approval; 59 lots south of Phar Iap Stevens Creek. Approved by Planning Commission. Con - ditiona (See ldnutea of Feb. 11) Conditions: 1. Well on Lot 54 be capped to the satisfaction of City Engineer. 2. Applicant to check with the school for need of walkway. 3. Flood control requirements be met. Councilman Saich asked 1P there wasn't an irrigation line going the property for oreberd irrigation. Mr.schott, repotlax Due 3 Elliott, replied that there was no easement recorded on ama. The Title Oompmw was working on t.is but there Bias no fixed looatibm of a pdpel3ma. It there is one im use. they w" relocate it. Mr. Due: There ma an easement f wm a Liebe, but it did not go from there to the City. Councilman Finch asked if Lot #35 bas 20 ft. access. The builder replied that the lot has 15,E aq• ft, and has the 20 ft. access. The City Engineer felt this provides adequate access. Mr. Duc told the Council he has an offer in to purchase the site tht20 a s and the still wa nt if ft. ccesswould be used to g to another lot, thepplica stated it would be for the one lot only. It was moved by Councilman Dempster knd seconded by Councilman Saich that the tentative map be approv -d, subject to Planning Commission conditions plus an additional condition, namely that the water Irriga- tion line, known as Alves, City of Cupertino, be situated under a public easement as approved by the City Engineer. AYES: Councilmen: Dempster, Finch, Saich, and Jewett NAYS: Councilmen: None ABSENT: Councilmen: Benetti Notion carried 4 -0 3. National Engineering Naek 17-23. Santa Clara County lairgrourds. 4. Letter fro¢ Girl Scouts asking permission for cookie sales. It was moved by Councilman Saich and seconded by Councilman Finch that the Oirl Scouts be permitted to a ;gage in cookie sales. Motion carried 4 -0. 4. Owner of the Williams property appealed the Planning Commission denial of the Humble 011 Application. Hearing will be March 4, 1963. It was moved by Councilman Dempster and seconded by Councilman Finch that the communications be received and filed. Notion carried 4 -0. IV PUBLIC HEAKINGS: A. 'GEODE R ROSE VOSS: Application 71 -Z -62 to rezone 29.7 acres from A -2: B-2 to R -1 and R -3-H; west of Foothill Boulevard, adjoining west side of Monta Vista School. Recommended by Planning Commission Resolution 124. conditions. Councilman Dempster questioned Condition 13 of the Resolution: That the developer and/or arehltect make every effort to avoid showing open earports on the east elemation of the apartment complex. The Councilman felt thin seemed arbitrary. -2- 'me city Manager said this world still be dEfined with the arChl 9LfAVl2 lop, Ihe only eonsiderstio-1 here 1s rezoning. 'th VICe payor asked for any protests from the audience. 'there were nome. Osmeilsan Saich moved.the public hearing be closed. Seconded by Cowma2 em Pinch. notion carried 4 -0. CUMnsilean Salch moved that Flesolution 124 be approved as 14 ONM@Md" by the Planning Commission, and that the City Attorney draft the off. Seconded by Councilmm Pinch. Oouneilman: Despatch, Pinch, Saich, Jewett : Councilmen: Mona 1 Ooae-- ilman: Benetti Fstim carried 4 -0. FL ftiv er Nilsen: Application 62- ASS -63 for architectural and site approval of a MoDonalds Restaurant; south side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, 1604' west of Highway 9 adjacent to U.S Post office. Denied by "H" Control. Appeal. W. Slaytor, T04 Market Street, San PranciSCO, a realtor rep - resentYag lseConald's in site selection program in northern California, that the presented sketches of McDonalds Reritaurants. esfipointed tou _ building. H Couadttee did not object to the type of The restaurant was planned as part of a shopping center with well over 1600' aS froauge on Stevens Creek Blvd. The property was not zoned commerelal for buildings not contairing arches, which was the Min objection of the H- Committee. The guides in the Architectural Ordinance point orst site layout and landscaping as prime areas of the H. Control Committee. 1andsca ping is most extensive, traffic pattern is most experienced. The objections were to shape of building and matevials. This is a very difficult thing and a matter• of personal opinion in judging ghat type of commercial should op-rate in Cupertino. if the Committee did not like shake roofs, this would change the entire com- plexion of the City. We believe that to deny the application because the bu l -lding contains an arch is an unfair decision concerning the business operator, ani it also deprives the landowner of a legal use of land. nouncIlman Saich asked if there were tabl?s on the outside. Mr. SI:ytor replied there weren't. The primary type of service is •Carry nut', There is a small dinlrrg unit built in at the side. Most customers will take their food homc. This is not to attract loitering. About half would eat their meal in their toss. Vice Mayor Jewett: The business has probably been well proven, however, this is an appeal from the H- Control decision. Their objections were to the general appearance of the arches, especially the colored lights and the location of the air conditioning unit on top of the building. The arches are the things in question. TC was moved by Councilman Pinch and seconded by Councilmr Salch that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried 4 -0. Zt was moved by Councilman Pinch and seconded by Councilman Smich tint tto appeal be denied as recom•„ended by H- Control. A$q: Cowicilmen: Dempster, Pinch, Saich, Jewett >♦=S: Conncilmen: None ;DSM: Councilmen: Benetti lvouen carried 4 -0. request of the applicant, it was moved by Councilman DampstiEt an& seconded by Oouncilman Saich t!:nt the documents be returned to the applitamt. All in favor. Fbtion carried 4 -0. VIII QM=jA F8 Km RPHSOUIrIOM FOR ADOPtION A. )F -1tD -2 to2R 1, t1.5 sM7;s Property n he south aide of iA dVICUes. =m001d leading.' It was moved by oorneilman Dempster ant seconded by Councilmen Btleb tba; Ordinance 225 be read by title only. Motion carried 4 -0. NPt was moved by Council— Balch and seconded by Councilman Penh that Ordinance 225 be enacted. AM=: Councilmen: Fineh, Dempster, Saieh, Jewett ARTS!, Councilman: Home APSLN': councilmen: Henetti - :SPtion carried 4 -0. B. Ordinance 226: Stc2nd2mg a Portion of Uninhabited Territory from the City Desigated m`R" Ekelusion 62 -8". Second reading. It me roved by Co neilan !inch and seconded by 0ommilman Saich that Ordinance 226 be read by title only. Motion carried 4 -0.. *lt_was saved by Oounallom Balch and seconded by Oomeilman Finch that ordirance 226 he enacted. AM: Councilmen: Finch, Dempster, Balch. Jewett HATS: Councilmen: Home ABSE31T: Councilmen: Bemetti Notion carried 4 -0 C. Resolution NO. 703. A resolution of the Cit. Council of the City of Cupertino establishing Policies and Procedures for the Planni-k-- and Development of Iands Within the Northeast Quad- rant of the City and Property Iyirug Within the Proposed Annexations "Pnrneridge 1, 62 -6 and "Pnuueridge 2, 62 -7 ". Mr. Walter rare!, 148 Euclid, Los Gatos, a CPA, spoke for the property owners a_nd :arian, but pointed out there cannot be an "official" spokesman until a- _.exation and zoning have been completed by t'x City, and Varian and the ;roFerty owners can formally contract with each other. All of the ;rcxsed development has been shown as an 'industrial reserve" on the C »t­ :,eneral Pl-. since February 17, 196C. It is a planned development r 469 acres, 45 of which rave been condemned by the State for Juniper: Serra Freeway. 16 or 23 a14l - tional acres will be lost to streets. Varian and the owners will spend about li million dollars to imprare major stints, and the property owners' cash contribution will come from freeway n ;ht -of way settlements. 71he Internal Revenue Ser- vice can take about a quarter or the cash through tax levies, unless the land owners replace !a.-As taken for the freeway. Varian has obtained optics for all lands south of Homestead Rd., West of Calabazas Creek, and north of Westwood Oaks (except Jefferson School site) to permit the excksage of lands tc property owners whose lands were purchased for the freeway. 7bls keens the cash needed to pay for street development. 7bere is do=ubt that the school site will be developed, therefore this land should be zoned logically in the same context as She adjoining lands to the west, north., and east. If the site is required. Varian and the property owners have two solutions. If a school has not been constructed at the time of development, the property owners will fence the suet 1 site, and allow no vehicular traffic into the school site from the development, or, if a school is built, then Varian and the property owners will provide their one -half of a minims street required by the State on the west and north rides of the school site. Probably the entire 469 acres will be owned by either Varian or a paeyerty owner group. Varian and the property owners desire a planned, homogamOUs co memity developmemt of the entire area, taking into con- ald*wation existing development of the surrowding areas, in accordance with Cupertino Resolution No. 70% and logically this school site, if it lases out to be surplus, belomgs in the larger planning complex. %a preferences of the pwopesty owners cannot be forgotten. The Bteposich family have *leaked to.annex to Cupertino, an4 dim not want to pr11 their land foie f a*mimol. Zr the lam were at&x3 the Sts iAlt, there would be ap U063m before us todmV. Tt Vas moved by CouncilNan 'Dempster a74 seconded by Councilman pinels tint Mr. iklyd's report be mode part of the reco,d in conjunction with Nemolution T03. Motion carried 4-0. Zt was moved 'cy 0ouncilman Finch and seconded by Councilman Dempster that Resolution T03 be adopted. AYES: Councilmen: De apster, Finch, Saich, Jewett )<ZS: Councilmen: None ABEW: Councilmen: Benettl motion carried 4 -0 *Xt was hosed by Oounel3gan FI th and seconded by Comeilaan Dampagl* fiat a eopy of NesolstAm T03 be signed and ibmudsd to the adjaQtlas elties. Notion asrrled 4-0. • u � :u A. RB9 WricSS T04 a 705 It Vas moved by Coumeilasn Dempster and seconded by Coaneilman 72ne6 "that Resolution TO4 be adopted. AM* Concilmen: Dempster, Finch, Saich, Jewett moT.i: Ccu;:cilmen: Noce ABsmr: Councilmen- Ek netti Notion carried 4 -0 it wAS moved by Councilman Pinch an:' seconded by Councilman Saieb that Resolution T05 be adopted. AYES: Co=cilmen: Dempster, Finch, Saich, Jewett NAYS: Councilmen: None A3SENT: Comcilmen: Benetti A tion carried 4 -0 X -PORT 0_ - =CERS AND COWMSIONER_: A . REF07: C? CITY TFMAS'J -. No furr!xr report. H. REPO-": C? CITY MANA�-Zi The 900 Mc-de'- Polaroid Camera lists for 1209, films $2.25. Geaeo•s cost $1T2 f_r camera, $1.60 for film. It was moved by Councilmen Saich and seconded by Councilman Pinch that the City purchase the camera for City use and that the camera be kept in City Offices. AYES: Councilmen: Dempster, Finch, Saich, Jewett NAYS: C- m- mcilman: None A SENT: C=wilmen: Benetti Notion carried 4 -0. T%e City Manager is awaltirg a report rrum the County Sheriff's Department on a private patrol applicatior. The report will be submitted at the next meeting. -P be City Manager had presented the Councilmen with a report on cheekSM and inspection charges re Portal Plaza, Mobile Oil, and Eaywood Terzaee. The Om=ilmen tau: a 10 minute mess to read the report. EXCESS: 9:15 RECONVENE: 9:25 ?be City Narager pointed out that he :Ad used the actual cost tram the developer and related ti=t percentage. The former City Rgimaer weed the bond figure. amoliman Finch asbd if an site plan checkingaa rquestod by 21�a Da21144 n6 IIepartweat. --.,t4 , City Munger: I have checked in the Building Department plans, and tbeye is nothing shown that there has been a modification or changes in an site Vbm. The only thing checked cn On site is the drainage. CbMWlM Finch; Ny point is: Would there not be a charge .levied for inspecting the on rite plants. Did the Building DepartOMt ohargs a fee for this. 'Se City Munger replied "W . CMncjlm Salch: Did the Building Department ask these to be ebadma {ZWaImSer. Uds bas heels stated. 7h mh3 �in an tame ed t sits" related only to a201-80- 41013- Cemnei2man Dempster, refe for he Cit�se rtbst the former aCi�a�� sser asked $155W. X96. Mash dimmussion followed on !brother the City and the former City ftgimmer Lased their estimates on boiod amounts or estimated construction eowft. It me si stroetlom costs. Mr. Fleming based his estimates f th on the ebond amount.- rr , Fly: on the $2900 paid to develop Haywood, I was not paid that amount. $375 vent into the city coffers for overhead. I got 62oo. when I requested $1500 to finish the Job, $400 was owed me. This is wbat 1 am requesting. Councilman Finch: The City Manager has estimated it would have cost $1973. This is a variation of $625. Was there any additional inapectiou that would have run up the cost. Dia the City Manager consider this? Mr_ Fleming: There was a Solis Engineer required to =ae if the to l emdnent domain part of s necessary his. I also negotiated with Mr. calf o obtain this. . 3ubb Bd. had to be opened. A man had to be there all day. Originally this was to be one unit,•Baywood Terrace. Then it was divided. The entire plan had to be checked for the first unit. The second unit was benefiting by the engineering expended. Now when a map is filed, in add.tion to plan checking fees, the developer pays so much per lot for checking. We were never paid that amount. This is one of the reasons why the percentage would be higher. The city Manager did not know of any additional work that had been done. The City's fee is flat regardless of what happens t_aless the plans are elaborated on, and then additional costs are charged. Mr. Fleming asked how the soft spots in the road and the pt+viM required to dress up the spots could k done for $96. The city tanager said there may be some additional costs, that the final inspection costs will still be assessed to the developer. Mr. Crap, Baywood Terrace, was the only one of the three developers protesting the charges, who was present. 'Zhs vice -Mayor asked about the amount of plan checking fees. Would May be 4% on bond amount. Vr. Fleming: It was a sliding scale. 4% on large projects. It mda rfi be 7% on smaller projects_ vioe Mayor Jewett: we have corrected a nistalce that we have laid in the past. One charge shmili take care of the there Thin have an jrob2m world rot have arisen. I see your problem open end'. Tim City Attorney coo•mnted* I think you are committed to Miatever the agreement was with Mr. Fleming. Apparr.otly the ;y bed some kind of an agreement. C on"Im a Pinch: In view' of the fact tbat the City is ot-114pted to Ogogtaafte, go to court, or pay, ISo the City pay the ammmt requested for et.peking and Inspection on Portal Plaza, Mobil Oil, W d Srywood Terrace. Seconded by Councilman Saich. ev=ci'!�r Dempster as ced the City Attorney if it was his opdnion that the City was under contract at the tiro the fees were assessed. The City Attorney replied: "Yes. The contract was between the City and Mirk momas Coapew . Ar_ Crimp, from Baywood Termee asked for a copy of the contract. 'I women Moe to ask if there is arpthing that authorized paying of fee- timt are unearned. Qty Attorney: unless it is established that these charges are A* mitfdn the contract, then they arm oswed. 'this body has a decision to =No;, .Af the calcaladiaaa are, as per the contract, and if they are raamordm. Cb mledlsan Finch: As a Comallmn, I can't say who is right. go XWft IM mm : Company claims they perforsed the work. lr. crugK You have before you an analysis of the fact that we pain tit established percentsgp of fec set by the City for normal ehweltIM and motion fees. Yon have the fact before you that Ehrk 12 a A Compaq► contended these fees had been exhausted and they aa&sd fen an additional $1500. You have before you what it actual " +y cost to complete the Sub. The fact that they wanted $1500 to do $9b worth m' work is proof enough. Councilmen ?inch: Mark Thomas said there had to be additional work. Mr. &rump: I did not dispute `he fact that there was additional work, srothing that isn't usually er. ^o:mtered. The City and County all take care of this in their standard schedule of fees, they have a flat rate and live within it. Nhen fees nm under that amount, it ras said they are refunded. No deveioper had any refunds. To pay additional fees to nark Thomas Co. is a gross misuse of moneys, whether mine or the taxpayers. I ion't think you as a Council have this right. e City Attorney answered that in court, it would take the testinorI of another professional as to the reasonableness of fees for services performed. Mr. Fleming: There is in the confusion of figures. Again the comparison of 51500 and $; ar $475 has already been expounded. When I said that the plan checking fees had been refunded, I was referring to the first few years when they were refunded. The City Phzn ger felt these should go into the City coffers. As far as de- grading myself, I will not get into this type of discussion. I have perfon :vd professional services for the City as I was Instructed to do. ATM: Councilmen: MAYS: Councilmen: ABSENT: Councilmen: Wotion carried 3 -1 Finch, Saich, Jewett Dempster Benetti The City Manager presented the analysis of the Calabazae Creek Bridge prepared by the City Engineer. Total cost of the bridge will be appaoxisntely }41 000. $50 per unit from each of the two evelop- ere would amount to 16150 for Les Tom, $6000 for Fontainbleu, a total of =12,150. The deficit of $29,a50 would be made up by the City. Courieilman Saich asked if the $50 fee was known at the time of rezonIft. He was told that it was. He then asked about the $32.75 fee presented at an earlier meeting. The City Manager pointed out that the :32.75 fee was considered during negotiations, and that it had been based an a lower bridge cost. Council had teen no action on the figure of ;32.75_ They had asked for a new report. 0omcilman Finch: In view of the fact that the developers have at cos tins agreed to pay $50, I move that we assess the developers at $W per unit as per the City gogiawr's report. Seconded by Comeilmma Dempster. -7- jar. WSIM1, 1.:' z. Santa Clara, San Jose: I am cn interested party is lnntainbir— die have a problem with erg' - veering and fees, to as just sitting by, -here are any fees that were orginally assessed am fie ehetOW1 cos: '1d not cone Alp to the original awat, that, tiakd goes 2=00 tee general rind of the City. Perhaps you think all bulldsrs are umA>ft and Lan afford to overpay 20 or 30'=. We also submitted a letter amplmg that we would be in agreement to pay a - ertaln assessment toward a irUr whist we felt was a donation. We felt it ass charitable, just MMOIEW developer whose festpers rare plucked." It the Cmmaeil rises 20 gMSSs Pbntaiablsu $50 leer nit, we will pay it, but It rill bs ! Matest, sad I believe that the City should ask their aettugw7 aeslirfit gatleeea have s right to assess Pbatainbleu or Ira TM afar 41, WIdge. we are w1211M to donate a reasonable .vM6 ia�chats,repeesaatiag'len, also !rd some eamasmts. so 40a or the Orldge ham no is7atlsn to what we are v1pim to low or s N assessed, its cost L arafmd $01,000. f16, dll sons x::; :woos; It won't come from City funds. 'iw baiamls ,000 y-a wish to get calf tla two developers ores am DimmtZd� d at the time the brlage is going in. You will r2md that 64= Wad Wolfe amd. Our truffle can go to Mller. No p]ane bave be imb a to assess agMo else. You can't tax the mmoy for the flew meow tale row for the anw. Mr. Mef sel has stated we look at this as w d eeftm, we don't ,'eel you bave the right to assesp us far half taw budge. You stated that the land was so zoned because the bridge Ommefement was thrown in at the end. I ran into a fbimar City Couoel2a sho said he was against it. Just because we knM about this does not make :t right. we are at the stage where we have to rectify a wrong. Ra Mayor Jeve—: You said the developer was paying half the cost. We peoposed using ma tax ftmds. If the LIty was to assess YOU. or you made t*e donation, and paid $12,000, the City would still have to came up with 529,000. ComaMlasx: Den -ster: He said that they would like to make some kind of donation. : at do they have in mind. Mr. Idpeebut_: : stated 10%, but this was rot binding. We are wil'±ng to make a d::atian of $410C between the two developers, or 5% apieee- Ommellman F!-: About a past councilman stating what he would have done, he wasn't sitting here at the time. I was. City Attorney: !faybe this g_^mxd wasn't s-.:bject to rezoning unti. the bridge was i- there. The rezoning of this property was conditSomsd upon the :ridge going is thee, and the Engineer was asked to report what the developer's share would be. If the Council feels tee property s.` -_,ld have been left in the original state until the bridge was in there, then the rezone shouldn't have been granted. On the ether hand, i' the City is willing to use City funds, then It comes down to w!:e:!wr this is an assessment or a gift. Assessor -nt pioopdiags create a .try expensive method of arriving at perhaps the same amotat. kar. Llpschut:: If Les Tom and Yontainbleu weren't developing this year, who woui= pay the cost of the bridge. Would you assess the next Luis developers, :r would yo.x wait %mill we developed. tae Mayor Jewe•:t: That can't be answered now. I feel a: the time or smsoning the condition of $50 assessment ner unit was added. It aw mot a decision of whether or not it was to be rezoned at that Lime_ I as not one :o condition a zoning. This is a situation whereby theme Montlemen are developing and these two apartment units are unjamt2y assessed. I feel they have aa" a good overture in eontriba- Ung WO an the cost of the bridge. 4b restrict the cost to two develops!, I feel we are stield our necks out a long way. hsmei The bsYbe is a do etfi amt 1Z#ts: loran Saich. I don't believe in assessments against land. city -wide project. If a developer is willing to a br -dge, I aw't may that I like Reseessr_nts. Councilmen: Dempster, I inch Councilmen: 9aleb, 7emett Councilmen: nsnstu La It US W?ed Ty CoMWIIMU Dempster, and - !ceded " COmcllmsn Fineft ttmt ti-is ca =ter be cantinued to !larch 1. )4r -`ta1 Mimed # -C. C. REPORT C? CITY EIX nom 1. Dedication of Real Pro rt for ?oadw purposes (File y , � .r_ SSe followiae is a list of the property o rs � n� limits of the Creek #1, I,osal ��n �, etv ut dui with tjM City the dedleatlal of rights -af -way whoa no ,.hits of thls Iapsosement District. lbsslution To6 - miz"eth T. anrron Mmw2utlon TO% - Rts"M* 61vf1V1da, et luslatian Tad - GeO4a_I. lsl� eyss, et me � slutlaa 709 - 108-TOM Ik torpr1ses, Inc MMM02mtlon T30 - Join NjUeb6 et Jr. 29092X tin es T11 - Stepb isolation T12 - Hlisabrth C. NCCLin, et al Smoolution T13 - Ray Inane, et uz l♦esolntlon T13 - Pivd Iawisnee, at al lsolation 715 - Victor K. Nudella, Jr., et uz It was moved :v Councilmen Pinch and eeco:ded by Councilmn Despstsr that Resciction 706 be adopted. AMM- 00crcilmen: Dempster, Finch, Salch, Jewett 3KT3: C.=..ilmen: None ARSM: C: r..ilmen: Benet.i lotion care' -e; = -J. It was moved Councilman ?Inch and sec.nded by Councilman Dempster that Resc_ : ::on TCT be a;�:pted. ATM: Cz-rcilmen: Dempster, Finch, aich, Jewett MYS: C: _' lmen: None ASSENT: ilmen: 9enetti lotion carr_ - -C`. :t was move'- ', Councilman 'inch and se.�-nded by Councilman Dempster that Res ,-1: -1on 708 be adopted. AYM: .,:linen: De}m- r,.ter, Finch, Salch, Jewett K►T5: None ABSENT: '__. ilmen: Benetti Nation c3rr__ -: -0. It was move_ Co•,mcilman Finch and se;.^.ded by Councilman Dempster that Res :_Ution T09 be adopted. AM- : ».11men: Dempster, Finch, Salch, Jewett MYS: Ca xilmen: Nor ASSM: C_- mcilmen: 14 ttd notion carried 3 -0 It was moved by Councilmen Pinch and seconded by Councilman Dempster that Resolution T10 be adopted. A]=- Coimcilmen: Dempster, Find,, Salch, :ewOtt ]KIM: Cmmctlmen: Noce ABBEW: ra-;.ncilmen. Benetti ■otlon carried 1 -0 It was moved M Councilman Finch and secjnden b,► COumllmn Dempster that Resolution Tll br: ad %pted. Ate: Councilmen: Dempster, Finch, Sal-ft, Jewett go=: Cxacilmen: Koss AJP�: Councilmen: Hmyetsi eanled 4-0 St an mpn4 by COtmelllan Finch and seconded by Councilman Dempster that Resolution 712 be adopter;. AM: Co mcilmen: Dempster, Pinch, Seich, Jewett MIS: Coumcilon: loos ASSENT: Councilman: Bemttl Notion carried 4 -0 It w moved by ameaiLao Binh and seconded by Councilman Dempster not Resolution 713 to adopted. AYES: Councllass: Dam Aster, Finch, Salch, Jewett ROSS: Cdbnailmss: loam! ANMOM oaoeilmmr: •Rreetti Rbtlon carried 4-0 It me on by Oowsilman !inch and seconded by Obum ll—n Dsarpmosr that no lntloc� 7118 *a adopted. &IM Do nc1L u se: Dempster, Finch, Salch, Jewett NM- Councilusn: lane A1MENf: cou oOImen: Bsaetti lotion carried 4 -0 It was moved by Councilman Finch and seconded by Councilman Dempster that Resolution 715 be adopted. AYES: Councilmen: Dempster, Salch, Finch, Jewett ARTS: Councilmen: None ABSENT: CoLn;_ilmen: Benetti Notion carried 4 -0 2. Dedication of Real Pro rt for Roadway Purposes (File p, rtal laze George Yamaoka, et al, have filed with the City the dedication of r- 49)T- -of -way for widening of Stevens Creek Boulevard at the rvrtal Plaza. It was moved by Councilmen Dempster and sec nded by councilman Salch that Resolution 716 accepting George Yamaoka, et al be adopted. AYES: councilmen: Dempster, Finch, Saich, Jewett NAYS: Councilmen: None ABSENT: Councilmen: Benetti Notion carried 4 -0 3. Rodrigues Avenue Drain (97,503) Present drainage conditions and new developments westerly from existing City ilall, necessitate immediate construction in extending the above drain line east from the westerlY side of Highway $9 across the High- way toxard Aeg mrt Creek. Delay on this construction would muse expensive jacking and higher costa. It was moved by Cormnellman Dempster and seconded by Councilman Pinch that the City Nsrrger authorize the City Engineer to prepare estimates and specifications for advertising and flnaneing wt of Drain Vend Monies - fer the City Council approval. AIM: Councilmen: Dempster, Finch, Saich, Jewett MYS: councilmen: lone ADAM- councilmen: Benettd notion carried 4 -0. 4. Yolfa Road Bridme 11110 90,000) coostroetion ad a mtract Documents for the above Bridge arm in WWWAP draft form. Belbia Psessading with —tG- final work ard. Cmmty Contribution Agreement preparation, it is necessary to establish a time schedule for action. It was moved by Councilman Dempster and seconded by Councilman Salch to postpone until March 4. AYES- Councilmen: Finch, Dempster, Saich, Jewett WAYS: Councilmen: None ABMW: Councilmen: Benetti Notion carried 4-0. D. RKPOIW OF CITY PT-7010W Q a letter dated February IS. on Tract 3M, few Y. J. Fame. The Qty Attorney suaarimed tae contents. Mr. Fes is asking for a mstbod of flmencdng street improvements which would require two or fusee )vwaolutiona adopted by the City. There 18 no legal obligation to the Qty. Mr. >ass is asuing permission to use the name or the City In havIM the bonds issued. It would be bandied by the County Treasu- rer. Sm suggestion was informally made that this would be a good may to enter into an agreement that whatever sum was reached, the bridge cost would be paid out of the bond moony. It was moved by Councilman Dempster that the matter be continued to Pbbavaay 21. Seconded by Councilman Finch. Motion carried 4 -0. A. Review of City Manager Report on Bond improvement ,Program It was moved by Councilman Dempster and seconded by C- uncilman Pinch that this matter be continued to February 21. Motion carried 4-0. B. Mlucr.11aneous It was moved by Councilman Demr-,ter that the City Manager be authorized to dntervieo architects in regard to a master plan for building the Civic Center, and submit five or six screened applicants for Cgmcil's cons_deration, along with a schedule of fees. 3ecooded by Councilman Finch. AYES: Councilmen: Dempster, Finch, Saich, Jewett NAYS: Councilmen: None ABSM: Councilmen: benetti Motion carried 4 -0. Ow.awilaan Dempster stated that he is interested In knowing who is responsible for the E;abb Road bridge. It was moved by Councilman Dempster and seconded by Councilman Saich that the City Manager report on the narrow brldE,e across Bubb Road, with the road widening on either side. Motion c.,rrie6 4 -0. IIII ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilman Dempster and seconded by Councilman Salch that the meeting be adjourned to February 21st at 8:00 P.M. Meeting adjourned 11 :10 P.M. /S/ John G. Ber .ai -`Tla"r- wrence K. Martin, . -Ity Z`iera -11-