Loading...
CC 03-01-99 MINUTES Cupertino City Council Regular Adjourned Meeting March 1, 1999 ROLL CALL At 5:30 p.m., Mayor Dean called the meeting to order in Conference Room A. City Council members present: Mayor Wally Dean, Vice-Mayor John Statton, and Council members Michael Chang, and Sandra James. Council members absent: Don Burnett. Staff present: City Clerk K.imberly Smith. Council interviewed the following individuals for an unscheduled vacancy on the Public Safety Commission: Mr. Jignesh Bhatt, Mr. Carl Orr, Mr. Norman Frees, Ms. Sulie Goodman, Mr. Philippe Der, Mr. Michael Mandella, Ms. Mary Ann Herlihy, and Mr. Marc Majewski. Council concurred to appoint Mr. Marc Majewski to the vacancy, with a term ending January 2000. RECESS At 6:35 p.m. the meeting recessed. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6:50 p.m. Mayor Dean called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Tone Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL City Council members present: Mayor Wally Dean, Vice-Mayor John Statton, and Council members Michael Chang, and Sandra James. Council members absent: Don Burnett. Staff present: City Manager Don Brown, City Attorney Charles Kilian, Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood, Community Development Director Bob Cowan, Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling, Public Works Director Bert Viskovich, Planner Michele Bjurman, and City Clerk Kimberly Smith. CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS Mr. Ron Gonzales, Mayor of San Jose, introduced himself to the council and said he was looking forward to working with them. He was especially interested in forming regional coalitions to work on issues that were of interest to residents, such as housing, transportation, and long-term financing for local and county government services. Council member James urged that the Mr. Gonzales' office continue funding for Cupertino Community Services (CCS), which is an agency that provides regional solutions, as well as to help identify additional sources of funding. Mr. Gonzales said he was familiar with the good work provided by CCS, and he would certainly look into that. Chang said there is a prominent stretch of town in Cupertino where the businesses are March 1, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 2 actually in San Jose, and it is important to have face to face contact to discuss issues the cities have in corrunon. Mr. C~onzaies said he had spoken to Mayor Dean on those topics and they have agreed to create opportunities for the staff of both cities to work together. POSTPONEMENTS - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None CONSENT CALENDAR James moved to approve the items on the consent calex~a~r as presented. Statton seconded and the motion carried 4-0, with Burnett absent. 1. Accounts payable: (a) February 12, 1999, Resolution No. 99-062 Co) February 19, 1999, Resolution No. 99-063 2. Payroll: February 19, 1999, Resolution No. 99-064. 3. Minutes: February 16, 1999, regular meeting. 4. Approve payment by Symantec of $100,000 for off-site improvei~ents pursuant to Resolution No. 98-294. 5. Byme Avenue - making deterrn'mations and approving the reorganization of territory designated 'Byme Avenue 98-14," approximately 0.165 acre located on the west side of Byme Avenue between Alcazar Avenue and Dolores Avenue; Chyu (APN 358-12-034), Resolution No. 99-065. 6. Five-year office space lease renewal for city attorney, 10320 South De Anza Boulevard, Suite ID, Town Center Associates, Resolution No. 99-073. 7. Acceptance of municipal improvements: (a) Fran Lee Construction, Inc., 10610 Felton Way, APN 359-18-022 (b) Fran Lee Construction, Inc., 10626 Felton Way, APN 359-18-021 (c) Chiao-Fu Chang & Sue-Fay L. Chang, 10152 Camino Vista Dr., APN 342-14-060 (d) Liang Lee, 10066 Byme Ave., APN 357-16-021 March 1, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 3 8. Quitclaim deeds: (a) Erh-Kong and Ding-Wei Chieh, 10333 Degas Ct., APN 342-30-027, Resolution No. 99-066 Michael (3. and Nancy M. Dix, 10111 Lebanon Dr., APN 342-14-002, Resolution No. 99-067 9. Improvement agreement, Michael G. and Nancy M. Dix, 10111 Lebanon Dr., APN 342- 14-002, Resolution No. 99-068. 10. Parcel map & improvement plans, Intrinsic Cupertino LLC, Bollinger Road at Blaney Ave., APN 369-34-001,002, Resolution No. 99-069. 11. Amending housing assistance program for depa, tment heads, Resolution No. 99-070. 12. Grant request - authorization for city manager to submit a grant request to the Packard Foundation for a two-year community-building project, Resolution No. 99-074. Vote Councilmembers Ayes: Chang, Dean, James, and Statton Noes: None. Absent: Bumett. Abstain: None. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR- None. PUBLIC HEARINGS 13. Reorganization of territory designated as Rancho Rinconada 98-09 consisting of the annexation to the City of Cupertino of approximately 325 acres of developed propen'y generally bounded by Miller Avenue, Stevens Creek Boulevard, Lawrence Expressway, Resolution No. 99-071. The City Clerk noted that eight written protests had been received, and presented those protests to Council. Commnnity Development Director Bob Cowan said there are approximately 2100 registered voters in the area, and a protest of 25% of those would be needed to stop Council from voting on the annexation tonight. City Attorney Charles Kilian said that Council also had the right to accept oral protests. Mayor Dean opened the public hearing and asked if there were additional protests or other speakers. March I, I999 Cuper~no City Council Page 4 Mr. Pat McGrath, 10630 Carver Dr., said he was a resident of the Rancho Rinconada area and protested the annexation. He objected to the timing of the process, which has driven away professional development and urban renewal that this neighborhood needs, and the fact that owners are forced to work under city development standards. Finally, new RI zoning regulations will be imposed and the homeowners need nine months to assimilate the changes. He asked for a delay in the effective date. Mr. Richard Weaver, 21425 Rumford, objected to the annexation because he felt the existing residents would have to bear increased costs or suffer a cut in city services. Houses should not be annexed without the revenue that goes with them. Also, houses should not be brought in that have a lower tax rate than existing Cupertino houses. City Manager Donald Brown said a thorough financial analysis of this annexation had been done and it is a break-even situation. Services to the city of Cupertino residents will not be reduced. Mr. David Mendes, 18790 Loree Ave, said a large home had been built next to his and was blocking the sun to his yard. Where new construction is taking place, tho water is left running all day and the sidewalks are blocked by vehicles. Also, construction is going on Saturdays and Sundays, sometimes until 10:00 at night. Mr. Leon Liebster, 10830 Ashborn, asked if it was possible to get an updated map before the annexation takes place, so the street names and lot numbers are correct. Cowan said the map shown in the packet is a locational map. The official annexation map has all the details. Ms. DeAnna Gelbloom, Wunderlich Drive, asked for clarification on the sales tax question raised by Mr. Weaver and agreed with the concerns expressed by Mr. Mendes. The City Manager said there would be no impact on homeowners in regard to sales tax. Regardless of where you spend money in the county, you are taxed at the same rate. Ms. Linda Roy, remarked on a discussion she had with a Rancho Rinconada resident about the homes being constructed which are too large, but the proposed R1 ordinance was too restrictive. Mr. Jeity DeRuntz, 10730 Wunderlich, said he was concerned about speeding in the neighborhood, particularly on Wunderlich and Johnson. The City Manager said that traffic enforcement in the county areas is done by the Highway Patrol. Once the Rancho Rinconada area is annexed, traffic enforcement will be done by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office. It will be much easier to evaluate the need for traffic enforcement when that happens. Mayor Dean closed the public hearing. The City Clerk announced that there were a total of 8 written protests and 1 oral protest. Statton moved to accept the written protests, and adopt Resolution No. 99-071. Chang seconded and the motion carried 4-0, with Burnett absent. March I, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page Cowan said that the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) will need approximately 2 weeks to complete the paperwork, but it will simply be a procedural matter at the county level. Public Information Officer Donna Krey said an informational fair will be held on Saturday, April 17, fi'om 10 a.m. to noon, at Sedgewick School. 14. R1 Ordinance, application 11-Z-97, public hearing to consider an amendment to the single-family residential ordinance, Municipal Code Chapter 19.28, regarding building mass, setback and height. Negative Declaration is recommended and the item is recommended for approval (continued from February 16, 1999). (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1808, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.28, Single Family Residential Zones, of the Cupertino Municipal Code." Planner Michele Bjurman reviewed the staff report and highlighted the policy decisions which Council must make before adopting the new ordinances. Mr. David Steininger sent email objecting to the proposed ordinances. Mr. John Wagner said he has property between Stelhng Road and Bianchi Way with an empty lot that backs up to Warehouse Records. He was trying to sell the property but the deal fell through because the buyer learned about the proposed R-1 ordinance. He described the area, and said that the 20-foot setback rule is very restrictive. Because of the location of his property, a larger home would not be an impact because it would not really be in a neighborhood. Ms. Liling Wang, 21900 Alcazar Ave., said she was in favor of seeing the City of Cupertino modernized. If the FAR is cut from 45 percent to 35 percent that will discourage homeowners from remodeling. If the community insists on reducing the FAR, she asked Council to consider making a minor cut instead of such a dramatic reduction. Ms. Marion Ahce Jarrett, 20668 Scofield Dr., said a freestanding garage has just been erected behind her six foot fence. It has a window which.looks into her pool, yard, and house. She is very interested in a suggestion by Councilmember Bumett that she may be able to get a variance for the foot fence, eight feet on that fence because that would help a great deal. Cowan said that if both property owners agree, no variance would be needed, just a lcRer from both parties. Mr. Eric Hwang, 20697 Hartford Dr., said he is a newcomer to the community and jnst found out about the R1 ordinance. He believed that if people already own the property, they should have the right to maintain their FAR at 45 percent and suggested that only new buyers will be subject to the revised floor ratios. He said there is tremendous ._ difficulty in finding a qualified architect or contractor right now - they are all busy because of the impending R1 changes. March I, 1999 Cupergno City Council Page 6 '-' Council Member Statton clarified that a .45 FAR is still allowed in the corrununity, it is just that if the house is over .35 FAR ,it will be subject to a review process. Ms. Kathryn Nickerson, 11360 S. Stelling Rd., said it seems Council will be limiting the style of house to ranch or Mediterranean styles; the city should continue to vigorously enforce the present code regarding setbacks and building heights; and consideration should be given to houses that abut commercial structures or quasi-public buildings, so that owners are not forced to build their houses in the shadow of larger buildings Mr. Raj Cherabuddi, 10800 Johnson Ave., said when he purchased his home in the Rancho Rinconada area, he was told he would be allowed a .45 FAR. He said that a FAR of .35 is too drastic, and suggested the ordinance be flexible enough to fit the neighborhood. Mr. Garold Pugh, 11360 S. Stelling Rd., said that last month he brought in a petition with over 100 signatures, all opposed to reducing the FAR. He was in favor of the architectural review board, although Cupertino used to have one and eliminated it. Mr. Leslie Buruell, 21466 Holly Oak Dr., said the concept of the design review board was a good one. However the guidelines are so flexible that the committee may find it almost impossible to limit the size of the buildings. He felt the sliding scale FAR was a good solution. Ms. Rebecca Elliot, representing the San Jose Real Estate Board, said they represent organize real estate throughout Santa Clara County. The board feels a .35 FAR is restrictive and oppressive, and it will ultimately have a negative effect on property values. She asked that Council revisit the policy in one year to review the effect on the community. She said that the review board may pit neighbor against neighbor. Ms. Linda Roy said that there has been over a year of discussion on the RI ordinance and many divided opinions. The proposal for a FAR of .35 came up very suddenly at the last meeting, and it is even more extreme than what any of the planning commissioners suggested. Ms. Roy did not feel that this decision represents the wishes of a majority of Cupertino residents. She discussed the FARs of surrounding communities and pointed out several which did not have limits or had sliding scales. She said that notifying neighbors and asking their participation in a meeting creates the expectation that they can control their neighbor's house plans, and that will pit neighbor against neighbor. Ms. Maxine Erlund, 10191 Lebanon Dr., said she thought that privacy concerns had already been addressed by privacy protection roles which require additional landscaping, etc. Although there is firequent reference to obtaining variances, variances also set a precedent, so it is actually a more complicated issue than it appears. She said it was frustrating to buy a piece of property and then have the rules change, and she asked the council to extend the pipeline to allow more time for the architects and contractors to finish their work over the rules change. March I, 199/) Cupertino City Council Page Mayor Dean closed the public hearing. Council discussed the policy issues to be decided -- as set forth in the staff report. Discussion was also held regarding privacy intrusion by single-story homes, especially if they are built higher above grade than usual. Mr. Marc Srebnik said that some other communities have a regulation which limit how far above grade the fucst story may be placed. Cowan said that he would bring back recommendations for Council review regarding the height of ceiling from grade. The current proposal is that the maximum single-story ceiling height is 15 feet, and anything over that is counted as second story space. The Council members concurred with the following points: 1. Approved Ord. 1808 in concept, including the following: First floor coverage expansion to .45 allowed outright with no discretionary review, subject to additional information demonstrating, that one story expansion beyond .35 FAR will not result in privacy/massing problefx-,s on sloping lots. (Page 14-9 of staff report.) · The Residential Design Committee may only grant a special pemdt upon making all of the following findings (Page 14-14 of sta~ffreport) - a. The project will be consistent in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan, specific plans, zoning ordinances and the purposes of this title. b. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition that is detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. c. The addition/home is harmonious in scale and design with the general neighborhood. d. The addition/house is consistent with the adopted residential design guidelines. e. The proposed addition/house will not result in significant adverse visual impact as viewed from adjoining properties. 2. The notification process will include the use of story poles to outline new bnildings and remodels. The poles will be in place 10 days prior to the application meeting date. Adjacent neighbors and adjacent property owners shall receive mailed notice ten days prior to the meeting. No legal publication is required. (Page 14-4 of the staffreport). March I, 1999 Cupertino Ci~y Council Page ~ James made the following motions. Statton seconded, and the motion carried 4-0, with Burnett absent: 1. Continued first reading of Ords. 1808 and 1809 and environmental detei~iiinations to March 15 meeting to incorporate council changes and consolidate duplicative sections. 2. Directed staff to prepare an ordinance creating a Residential Design Review Committee (Page 14-29 of staffreport) as shown below. Planning Commission representative appointed by City Council following selection by Planning Commission (committee chair), with an alternate to be selected in case of absence · The Director Of Community Development or City Planner · A licensed architect appointed by a subcommittee of the City Council and the Planning Commission 3. Directed staffto prepare methodology for residential design guidelines. 4. The effective date of the ordinance will be 60 days from enactment. 15. Prezone 20696 Fargo Drive, First West Investment, Inc. Applications 14-Z-98, and 42- EA-98, to pre-zone a .23-acre parcel to Pre-RI-10. Negative Declaration is recommended, and this item is recommended for approval. (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1813, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Prezoning an Existing Single-Family Residential Lot Located at 20696 Fargo Drive to Pre RI-10 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District." Community Development Director Bob Cowan reviewed the staff report. James moved to grant a Negative Declaration. Chang seconded and the motion carried 4- 0, with Burnett absent. James moved to approve the application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 5011. Chang seconded and the motion carried 4-0, with Burnett absent. The City Manager read the title of the ordinance. James moved and Chang seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Motion carried 4-0, with Burnett absent. March 1, 19!)9 Cupertino City Council Page 16. Cristo Rey Drive, ordering vacation of a roadway easement within the City of Cupertino --' pursuant to Section 50430 Et Seq. of the Goverrunent Code of the State of California, Resolution No. 99-072. Community Development Director Bob Cowan reviewed the staff report. James moved to adopt Resolution No. 99-072. Chang seconded and the motion carried 4- 0, with Burner absent. 17. Appeal of hillside exception at 22261 McClellan Road, Tom McNair. Public hearing to consider appeal of Planning Commission approval of Application 14-EXC-98 to locate a new residence on slopes greater than 30 percent (in an R1 zoning district). Mayor Wally Dean is appellant. Community Development Director Bob Cowan reviewed the staff report. Mr. Tom McNair, applicant and architect, responded to the three points listed in Mayor Dean's letter of appeal. Regarding road safety and garage access, there were sight line studies and engineering studies performed that clearly indicate this is a safe location for the driveway. Regarding the impact of the parks and recreation activities on the site, Mr. McNair said he has been given adequate warning regarding changes planned for the park, including a regional trail system, and even the possibility of a soccer field. He has his own opinions about some of those activities, but approval of this project will not prevent the city f~om proceeding with any of those plans. This project has been reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee, the McClellan Ranch Task Force, and twice by the Parks and Recreation Commission, and all three groups have recommended approval. Most lately it has been approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. McNair said the final item in the appeal letter dealt with floor area ratio (FAR) and house size. The proposed house would have 3879 square feet of livable area. One reason that a house this large is necessary is that he works out of an office in his home, and has two small children. The other reason is that 748 square feet of the house is pure circulation because of the need to traverse a number of levels, and 282 square feet is cellar. The majority of rooms are actually fairly small in comparison to other new construction. If required to reduce the square footage on the house, the first two things to remove would be the cellar and the office, and the loss of either one effectively eliminate the ability of his family to use the house. Also, the reductions would not create any change in the view from the park. Mr. McNair said these plans comply with both the current floor area ratios and the new ones under consideration. Mr. McNair showed a series of slides illustrating his property and neighboring homes, and discussed the relative sizes of the other homes. He said that one holly leaf cherry tree will be removed, which has been determined to be in declining health. The height of the house is dictated by the proximity of the street relationship and where the garage has to be placed because of minimum slope requirements that have to be met for the driveway. March 1, 1/)/)/) Cuperino City Council Page Mr. Richard Adreau asked why it was being treated as an RI zone and not a hillside zone. -- He said his property measures 80 by 13:5 feet, and asked if he would also be able to get the same exception to build a larger home on his site. He was concerned about the impact of adding more cars on that road, and he requested permit parking for the residents. He was also concerned about safety issues created by traffic and joggers sharing the road, because many drivers are speeding through that area. Ms. Barbara Rogers said that the architecture is ingenious, and she had always believed this lot to be unbuildable. However, it juts out into McClellan Ranch Park, and will be an intrusion into that space. The community regards McClellan Ranch Park as something very special, and this house does not belong there. Dean said that the size and height of the building are much too large, especially considering the steepness of the lot. If this project is approved, it will set a precedent for others like it. This house would be practically in the park, which is a special area which should be preserved. He said he had spoken with Mr. McNair about the possibility of trading property, and he is open to that suggestion. The City Attorney discussed Council's options. One would be rezone that property as a hillsize zone (RHS) or specify that if property has a 30% slope or greater in an R1 zone, it then is designated as an RHS zone. He said that law requires the property owner to have a reasonable use of his property. That does not mean that the council must approve - a house that is too big or too high. However, council cannot deny any use of the property for a home without creating some consequences. If council decides to rezone this property as RHS, they would have to change the general plan, and should therefore take inventory of all property that has a slope of 30 percent or more. Statton said this is a nice looking house and it is well-designed to fit on this difficult lot. However, this is one of the last few pieces of open space so this project is receiving a great deal of scrntiny. The idea of property swap within our community should be discussed because that would be one way of being able to preserve a contiguous parcel to that park. The city has several parcels on the Diocese property which have been land- banked for various options. Those are high value properties, but this parcel is also of high value to the community, so he would like to continue this itei~ for two weeks to allow further discussion of a land swap for some other parcel. Chang said he believed that landowners should have the ability to make reasonable use of their property, but if the site were to be developed it does not have to be developed to its maximum. Council has to allow a house there, but it should be a much smaller house, with minimal intrusion into McClellan Ranch Park. James said she liked the design of the home but had received many telephone calls in opposition to it. They did not object to the design, but no-one expected that lot to be buildable. She had not heard of a possibility of a land swap until this evening, but was open to those discussions. March 1, ! 000 Cupertino City Councll Page 11 Statton said he would like to continue the matter for a couple weeks to discuss the -- possibility of a land swap, and also to allow Council Member Burnett an opportunity to review the issue. City Manager Don Brown said it seems this is being approached as an either/or project, the current house proposal or the city owning the site. However, those are not the only options. This steep hillsidc, with or without a house on it, is not going to be of much value to the park. There will be no public access to it and it will never be used for trails or used as part of the park. The only reason it is useful is how it looks for people down in the park. If council can come up with a way to make this less intrusive and still allow a house, they will have met their purpose. Dean asked to the applicant if he would be willing to wait two weeks for further discussion, or he if he wanted a decision tonight. Mr. McNalr said he had spoken to council member Bumett previously, and thinks he understands his outlook on this project. Mr. McNair said he was willing to consider a land swap or purchase of the property, but did not want to continue the item for two weeks, but to have council take action tonight. If council chooses to deny the project, he asked for direction as to the exact reductions he should make in size, FAR, massing, house design, etc. Cowan said that there would be roughly a 30 percent reduction in house size, which would reduce it from 4400 square feet to around 3200 square feet, including the garage. Chang moved to grant the appeal and deny all variances, including following: The maximum building height of 28 feet; the front setback of 20 feet; the second-story side setback of 10 feet; the second-story front setback of 25 feet; allow 4 onsite (driveway apron) parking stalls that do not function independently of each other. James seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 with Burner absent. The findings were that the proposed development does not require an exception because these variances exceed a reasonable use according to current city standards, and they will be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. Chang moved to grant the appeal and deny the exception. James seconded, and The motion carried 4-0 with Bumett absent. The reasons for granting the appeal are as follows: (1) It does not involve the least modification of, or deviation from, the development regulations prescribed in this chapter (19.40) necessary to accomplish a reasonable use of the parcel. (2) All alternative locations for development on the parcel have not been considered and found to create greater environmental impacts than the location of the proposed development. (3) The proposed development is not located on the parcel as far as possible fi'om public open space preserves or parks (if visible therefrom) riparian corridors, and wildlife habitats. March 1,199~ Cupe~no City Council Page Chang moved to direct staff to prepare an urgency ordinance to place a moratorium on all homes or remodels zoned R-1 on a slope of 30% or more, and directed staff to consider applying established RI-IS (residential hillside) guidelines for R1 lots with a 30% slope. Applicants may institute an exception process during the moratorium and would be required to build under PHS guidelines. James seconded, and the motion carried 3-1, with Burner absent and Statton voting no. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 18. Lake Biltmore Apa~hs~ents, 10159 South Blaney Avenue (APN 369-03-008), applications 14-U-98 and 31-EA-98. Report to council on the lake portion of a comprehensive landscape plan and minor adjustment of building placeihant of an approved use permit at an existing aparh~ent complex. Item is recommended for approval (continued from January 4). Community Development Director Bob Cowan reviewed the staff report. He explained that the applicant has decided to maintain all the lakes originally proposed for removal. Two lakes will be shortened by the new building construction. Also, a minor change was made to the approved site plan, causing four new buildings which were proposed to be attached to existing buildings to be detached instead. Statton moved to approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 5016, which was to uphold the lake retention and detached buildings. James seconded and the motion carried 4-0, with Bumett absent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS 19. Review of bids and award contract for Homestead Road Arterial Management Project, Federal Aid Project No. STPLHG-5318 (006), Project No. 9525. Public Works Director Bert Viskovich reviewed the staffreport. Statton moved to deny the request by Hertz Contractors to be relieved of the project and specify that the contractor must forfeit the bid bond; and (2) Award the contract to Richard A. Heaps Electrical Contractor, Inc., as the next lowest bidder, in the amount of $75,479.00. James seconded and the motion carried 4-0, with Burnett absent. 20. Review of bids for traffic signal project, Stevens Creek Boulevard at Saieh Way, Federal Aid Project No. STPLHG-5318 (007), Project No. 9526. _ Public Works Director Bert Viskovich reviewed the staffmport. March 1, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 13 Statton moved to accept Tennyson Electric's seek for relief of the project and establish that Tennyson Electric, Inc. cannot re-bid the project; and reject all bids based on high cost. James seconded and the motion carried 4-0, with Bumett absent.. ORDINANCES 21. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1810: "An Ordinance of The City Council of The City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Regarding Heritage and Specimen Trees." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. James moved and Chang seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion carried 4~0, with Burnett absent. James moved and Chang seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1810. Motion carried 4-0, with Bumett absent. 22. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1811: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.80 (Accessory Structure) and 19.84 (Second Dwelling Unit) of the Cupertino Municipal Code." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. James moved and Chang seconded to read -- the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion carried 4-0, with Burner absent. James moved and Statton seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1811. Motion carried 4-0, with Burner absent. 23. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1812: "Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending the City's Ordinance Code to Streamline the Procedure Regarding Condition Use Peimits and Variances." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. James moved and Statton seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion carried 4-0, with Burner absent. James moved and Statton seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1812. Motion carried 4-0, with Bumett absent. STAFF REPORTS.- None COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember James said she attended the Housing Consortium reception for Tipper Gore, and the focus of the group is about interagency cooperation regarding housing and employment. March 1, 1999 (~upert~no City Council Page 14 CLOSED SESSION At 10:45 p.m. Council adjourned to a closed session regarding pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section $4956.9(c), Donald Bearden vs. City of Cupertino. At 11:10 p.m. Council reconvened in open session. The City Attorney announced that the council was advised of pending litigation and related topics, and no action was taken. ADJOURNMENT At 11:10 p.m. the meeting was adjourned. ~~b~ Smith City Clerk