04/17/2007

REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER

At 7:30 p.m., Mayor Baxter called the meeting to order.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG

ROLL CALL

Present:  Council Members Aerts, Perry, Wright and Mayor Baxter
Absent: Council Member Garner
Staff Present: City Manager Loventhal, City Attorney Powell, and City Clerk Chelemengos

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

Jack Lucas, Trustee for West Valley/Mission Community College, introduced newly elected trustee Don Cordero.

Don Cordero, Trustee for West Valley/Mission Community College, provided background information on himself and stated that he looked forward to serving the community.

Ray Davis, Los Gatos, spoke with regard to lane markings on Winchester Boulevard and land for lease within Vasona Park.

Council Member Wright offered to attend the meetings regarding the subject land in Vasona Park.

Jo Ann Peth, Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, spoke with regard to the Highway 9 improvement project and urged the City to pursue funding opportunities. 

Cindy Brain, Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, spoke with regard to a citation issued on her property and submitted a letter requesting refund of the appeal fee.

 
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 

1. Letter from Joint Venture Silicon Valley

Lisa Bruner, representing Joint Venture Silicon Valley, spoke with regard to the organization and requested funding in the amount of $1000 for fiscal year 2006- 2007.  She also requested funding for the next fiscal year and answered questions from the Council.

Following discussion, Council Member Wright moved to grant funding in the amount of $1000 to Joint Venture Silicon Valley for fiscal year 2006-2007.  The motion was seconded by Council Member Perry and the motion passed with a 4-0 vote.

Ms. Bruner was directed to resubmit the funding request for the next fiscal year at a later date for consideration.

CONSENT CALENDAR
2. Approve Minutes of April 3, 2007 City Council Meeting
3. Approve Monthly Financial Report, March, 2007
4. Adopt Proclamation Recognizing the 150th Anniversary of the American Institute of Architects
5. Adopt Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Monte Sereno Preliminary Approval Of Engineer’s Report, Rose-Andrews Lighting District, Fiscal Year 2007-2008
6. Adopt Resolution Declaring Intention To Order The Levy And Collection Of Assessments Pursuant To The Landscaping Act Of 1972 for the Rose-Andrews Lighting District

Council Member Wright moved to approve the Consent Calendar.  The motion was seconded by Council Member Perry and the motion passed with a 4-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. SS-07-11 - Address:  18723 Withey Road - Property Owner: Pakravan
Appeal of an approved modification to a Site Development Permit. The approved modifications consist of a change in the driveway design and approval to remove six (6) trees.   The modifications were approved by the Site and Architecture Commission at their meeting of March 7, 2007.

City Manager Loventhal presented a staff report and he and City Attorney Powell answered questions from the Council.

Mayor Baxter reported that he knows the attorneys representing each party but there would be no financial interest or benefit to him in the out come of the proceedings.

Charles Killion, attorney representing Steve Mortara, appellant, spoke with regard to the appeal.  He stated that the existing driveway is accessible to emergency vehicles of all types and that other alternative exist that would allow the applicant to develop the property without having to upgrade the driveway.  He stated that the plan approved by the Site and Architecture Commission may affect his client’s foundation, septic tank and privacy.  He urged the Council to uphold the appeal and overturn the decision of the Site and Architecture Commission.

Steve Mortara, appellant, spoke in opposition to the driveway plan and stated that the removal of the trees to accommodate the new drive way would expose his property to traffic noise, sun, and privacy impacts.  He stated that removal of the trees would impact the quality of life in the neighborhood and destroy the landscape symmetry of the neighborhood, thus changing the existing character of neighborhood.  He also expressed concern with erosion.

Mark Fredkin, representing  Mr. Pakravan, subject property owner, explained that his client had been subject to a two year review process and had modified his development plans many times to appease and mitigate the concerns of the neighbors.  He discussed the Fire Department’s comments with regard to the driveway and spoke with regard to the safety issue relative to the existing driveway.  He stated that other options had been explored involving the abutting neighbor but consent of the neighbor could not be obtained.  He stated that the only option available to his clients was the plan approved by the Site and Architecture Commission which involves removal of trees.  He urged the Council to uphold the decision of the Site and Architecture Commission and allow his client to proceed with development of their property.

Council Member Aerts recalled the initial review of the project and the modifications made by the property owners.

Discussion commenced with regard to driveway alternatives.

At 8:20 p.m. the Public Hearing was opened.

Heidi Sprick spoke in opposition to the proposed construction project citing its impact to the neighborhood.   She expressed concern with the removal of trees, grading, noise and dust.  She stated that the project would diminish the rural character of neighborhood and suggested that the size of the proposed house be reduced to circumvent the requirement that the driveway be upgraded.

Since there was no one else wishing to speak, the Public Hearing was closed at 8:23 p.m.

Chuck Killion stated that his client was not the reason for the modifications represented by Mr. Fredkin and stated that reduction of the size of the house was an option and that upgrading the driveway would not increase safety that much and would only meet an arbitrary standard.  He stated that the current plan will create significant environmental degradation to his client’s property.

Said Razavi, Project Engineer, explained that several alternatives had been considered. He stated that the best solution would be if the neighbor allowed for access to and upgrading of her driveway in conjunction with the improvements to the subject driveway.  He also answered questions from the City Council.

Discussion commenced with regard to the grading involved for the different alternatives.

Mark Fredkin, Attorney representing the subject property, explained that the neighbor had been approached with regard to allowing access to her property as well as upgrading her driveway in conjunction with the project, but was unwilling to agree to such an arrangement.

Discussion commenced.

Council Member Wright stated that he hated to see the trees be removed, especially since there is another alternative.  He pointed out that the property owner had tried to accommodate the neighbors and that it is unfortunate that the neighbors are unwilling to work together to come to an acceptable solution.  He
expressed concern with regard to safety and emergency vehicle access and stated that regardless of the size of the house the existing driveway is inaccessible for emergency vehicles.  He stated that he was inclined to vote for alternative 2 which would require cooperation from the neighbor.

Council Member Perry stated that the issue at hand is safety and that he is inclined to follow the recommendation of the Fire Department.  He noted that the subject property has many trees on it and that the property owner is willing to replace the trees slated for removal.  He stated that he supports denial of the appeal.

Council Member Aerts asked for clarification. 

Discussion commenced with regard to the easement rights held by the neighboring property owner.

Council Member Aerts pointed out that the cooperation from the neighbor would solve all parties’ issues.  He expressed disappointment that the neighbor was unwilling to cooperate in order to save the trees that the neighborhood adamantly wants to preserve.

Mr. Pakravan, subject property owner, stated that he has made many concessions and modifications to try to accommodate the neighbors.  He explained that he has tried many times unsuccessfully to communicate with the neighbor, Ms. Kouns, to try to work out the issue of the driveway.  He states that that alternative is not an option and would stop any further plans to develop his property.

Council Member Wright asked Mrs. Kouns to address the Council.  He inquired if she understood that the neighbors do not want to see removal of the trees to accommodate the driveway and that without her cooperation on the matter there would be no choice for the Council but to allow removal of the trees.

Mrs. Kouns, Withey Road, stated that she just wants peace and no problems with any of the neighbors, but because of past incidents such as work without permits, tree removals, and lack of tree replacements, dirt and debris on her property she is skeptical of cooperating with the neighbor.  She stated that she did not believe the proposed house would be occupied by the property owner and that it would be placed for sale as soon as the construction was complete.  She stated that she was also concerned with erosion and drainage problems as a result of the construction.  She also expressed concern with the size of her property being decreased.

Discussion commenced with regard to the driveway alternatives and the issues surrounding the matter.  In response to the Council’s question, Mr. Pakravan, subject property owner, stated that he would be agreeable to a two week delay in the Council’s action.

Following discussion, Council Member Wright moved to continue the matter to the meeting of May 1 in order to allow time for the involved parties to meet with Mrs. Kouns to work toward an acceptable solution.

Council Member Perry spoke with regard to the situation and stated that he would like to move forward on the matter.

Council Member Aerts agreed with Council Member Perry’s comments and expressed disappointment in the lack of cooperation on the neighbor’s part.

Mayor Baxter stated that he is inclined to try to negotiate one more time and continue the matter if progress might be made. 
Following additional discussion, Council Member Aerts seconded the motion to continue and the motion passed with a 4-0 vote.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS – None
NEW BUSINESS
8. Discuss Addition of Fifth Commissioner to Site and Architecture Commission

City Manager Loventhal presented the proposal to the Council.

Council Member Aerts spoke with regard to the number of members on the Site and Architecture Commission and spoke with regard to past delays to applicants because of quorum issues.  He stated that additional members to the Site and Architecture Commission would provide a wider scope of input would eliminate quorum conflicts and better serve the residents.  He suggested that the Council continue to look into the matter and conduct a comparison of neighboring jurisdictions.

Barbara Allen, Site and Architecture Commission Chairperson,  spoke with regard to the proposal and stated that she and the current Commissioners feel that the Commission works efficiently with its current number of members.

Discussion commenced.

Councilmember Wright stated that he agreed with Mr. Aerts suggestion and would like to explore the suggestion.

Council Member Perry stated that if the Commission is happy with four members, the Commission should not be changed.

Discussion commenced and there was consensus to direct staff to conduct a comparison study of the Planning Commission of nearby jurisdictions and to bring the information back to Council for further consideration.

9. Discuss Senior of Distinction Award and Request for Nominations

Mayor Baxter spoke with regard to the Senior of Distinction nomination and urged the residents and Council to suggest a Monte Sereno resident as a nominee.
 
COMMITTEE/COMMISSION REPORTS

The Council Members reported on their various Commission/Committees as assigned.

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

City Manager Loventhal reported on various administrative matters.

At 9:58 p.m. Mayor Baxter announced the subject of the Closed Session and adjourned the meeting to Closed Session.

RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

At 10:15 p.m., Mayor Baxter reconvened the meeting into Open Session.

REPORT ON ACTION TAKEN DURING CLOSED SESSION

Mayor Baxter announced that there was nothing to report.

ADJOURNMENT 

At 10:20 p.m., Mayor Baxter adjourned the meeting to 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, May 1, 2007 to be held in the City Council Chambers located at 18041 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, Monte Sereno, California.

        ______________________________
        David Baxter, Mayor
ATTEST:

______________________________
Andrea M. Chelemengos, City Clerk