Loading...
CC 07-05-94 . . . .' CC-883 MINUTES Cupertino City Council Regular Adjourned Meeting July 5, 1994 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6;04 p.rn., Mayor Koppel called the meeting to order in the Conference Room A of City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino. ROLLCALL Council members present: Jolm Bautista (6: 1 0 p.m.), Don Burnett, Lauralee Sorensen, Wally Dean, and Mayor Barbara Koppel. Council members absent; None. City Clerk Kim Smith was present NEW BUSINESS The City Council interviewed the following individuals for the vacancy on the Library COmmi......ion; (1) Ms. Gail West; (2) Ms. JilIian Hamer; and (3) Ms. Rosemary Aquilante. Applicants Brooke Ezzat and Kathryn Olsen were not present. After interviewing the candidates, the Council members voted unanimously to appoint Ms. JilIian Hamer to the Library Comm;"'<¡ion for the partiaI tenn which ends January, 1995. RECESS At 6:30 p.rn. Council recessed. At 6:50 p.m. the meeting reconvened in the City Council Cbambers. ROLLCALL Staff Present: Public Works Director Bert Viskovich City Clerk Kim Smith City Attorney Charles Kilian Community Development Director Bob Cowan Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling Planner II Tom Robillard Public Information Officer Dor.na Krey July 5,1994 cupertino City Council Page 2 þ ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. E. J. Conens, 10480 Pincville Ave., expressed concern about an article printed in the Cupertino Scene in which the Clean Air Coalition promoted the use of electric cars. He suggested that the City use vehicles which are already designed to run on clean-burning naturaI gas or propane, rather than promoting electric cars. CONSENT CALENDAR It w-..s moved by Counc. Dean, seconded by Counc. Burnett, and carried unanimously to adopt the consent calendar as recommended. 1. Resolution No. 9123: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Allowing Certain Claims and Demand$ Payable in the Amounts and From the Fund$ as Hereinafter Described for General and Miscella..'1eous Expenditures for the Period Ending June 17, 1994." 2. Resolution No. 9124: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Allowing Certain Claims and Demand$ Payable in the Amounts and From the Funds as Hereinafter Described for General and Miscellaneous Expenditures for the Period Ending June 24, 1994." . 3. Resolution No. 9125: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Allowing Certain Claims and Demand$ Payable Íù the Amounts and From the Funds as Hereinafter Described for Salaries and Wages for the Payroll Period Ending June 17, 1994." 4. Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage Control license for American Ginseng Beer, 10400 MMD Drive. beer and wine importer and wholesaler. S. Approval of minutes of the City Council meeting of June 20, 1994. 6. Resolution No. 9105: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino DesirAtillg Permit Parting on Willñn""'D Avenue From Hyannisport Drive to Columbus Avenue." (Continued from June 6,1994.) 7. Resolution No. 9126: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Making Determinations And Approving the Annexation of Territory Desigl'sotM 'Byrne Avenue 94-01', Approximately 0.85 Acres Located on the West Side of Byrne Avenue Between Lomita Avenue and Almaden Avenue - O'Connor (APN 357-II-01S}." . 8. Resolution No. 9127: "A R!:SOlution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Accepting Quitclaim Deed and Authorization for Underground Water Rights ftom Wen Ku and Pei Fung Ku, 10450 Phar Lap Drive." . July 5, 1994 Cupenino City Council Page 3 · 9. Resolution No. 9128: "A Resolution of the City Cou.~cil of the City of Cupertino Authorizing Execution of Agency Agreement for a Countywide AB939 Implementation Fee Between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino." - (Solid waste reduction legislation.) 10. Acceptance of City project performed under contract - Stevens Creek School Site (part of Nine School Sites, Project 93-9106) - no documentation n""'"' ~Slry. 11. Resolution No. 9129: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Contract Change Order No. 10 for Cupertino Nine School Site Improvements, Project 93-9106." 12. Resolution No. 9130: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Authorizing Execution of Agreement Between the City of Cupertino and the City of Saratoga for Maintenance of the Traffic Signals on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road at Prospect Road." 13. Resolution No. 9131: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Authorizing Execution of a Cooperative Agreement Between the State of California, Department ofTransportation and the City of Cupertino Providing for · an Exit Driveway from DeAnza College Onto Stevens Creek Boulevard as Part of Route 85 Project." 14. Resolution No. 9132: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Application for 1993/94 Used Oil Curbside Collection Promotion Grant." IS. Resolution No. 9133; "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Setting Date for Consideration of Annexing Area Desi81'''ted "Hermosa Avenue 94-05", Property Located on the South Side orHermosa Avenue Betwæn Orange Avenue and Byrne Avenue; Approximately 0.17 Acre, Lee (APN 357-16-049)." 16. Resolution No. 9134: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Adopting a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Cupertino and the Cupertino Employee Association." 17. Resolution No. 9135; "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Adopting a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Cupertino and the Operating Engineers Local No.3." 18. Resolution No. 9136: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino · Fixing the Employer's Contribution Under:he Meyer-Geddes State Employees Medical and Hospiial Care Act." , July 5, 1994 Cupertino City Council Page 4 þ 19. Resolution No. 9137: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending the Rules on Conditions of Employment." 20. Resolution No. 9138; "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending the Unrepresented Compensation Program." 2\. Resolution No. 9139: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Establishing Salaries for Positions Not Within a Schedule of Pay Grades." ~ Members of the Ci\y Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Bautista, Burnett, Dean, Koppel, and Sorensen. None None None PUBLIC HEARINGS . 22. Appeal of Planning Director's decision to deny a variance to allow a 7 ft. second story sideyard setback instead of approximately 10ft., as required for single family residential zones (Application No. 3-V-94 - Roy and Yvonne Hampton). The property is located at 21821 Oakview. The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report and said that he denied the application because he could not meet the findings A and B as specified in the staff report. Mayor Koppel opened the public hearing. . Mr. Roy Hampton, the appellant, asked Council to give the Planning Director more flexibility. Mr. Hampton showed transparencies of the plot plan and said that they were no longer requesting the second addition, but they still wanted to build an addition over the garage. Mr. Hampton reviewed a series of transparencies and said that a ten foot setback would create a strange architectura1 look. Mr. Hampton said the variance was exceptional because (I) The building was built with smail side setbacks on a quarter acre lot in 1955 before the City's current requirements; (2) The existing fence and second story addition was granted by the county variance approving the side setbacks before the city annexation; (3) The requested variance is compatible with previous additions and with the county; (4) The only reason the addition is not extending further was to avoid changes to the chimney; (5) The proposed second story addition will rectify the unsightly chimney problem as well as complete the originally planned addition. He showed a color photograph with the chimney section. He said the proposed extension would not greatly increase the house's visual impact but would improve the house's appearance by removing the existing unsightly chimney extension and making it stronger than an addition with a three foot jog. He showed copies of several petitions which had been signed by his neighbors in .' ]uly S, \994 Cupertino City Counci\ Page 5 support of his request. Mr. Hampton said that no other viable options were found which would provide the desired second story 100m while still addressing the chimney problem Mrs. Yvonne Hampton explained their plans for the sewing room, dinette, and kitchen areas and the competition for floor space because of the number of family members sharing the home. Mayor Koppel said the house would be much more aesthetically pleasing if Council supported the variance, and although staff and Planning Commission have to go by the Council's guidelines, Council may always overrule them. Counc. Sorensen agreed. Counc. Burnett said the deciding factors for him were the structura1 considerations and granting the variance would make this a stronger house. The Community Development Director said that this is the kind of decision which must be made by City Council, but he agreed that it was an acceptable modification. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Dean, and carried unanimously to adopt the Resolution No. 9143, as shown by the model resolution provided on page 6 of the staff report, granting the variance to allow a 7 foot second-story sideyard setback. 23. Appeal of Planning Commi!<"ion decision regarding Applir.ation No. S-U-94 filed by Landmark Development Corporation (Lawrence Guy). The application requests a use permit to construct six townhomes on an 11,761 sq. ft. parcel in a Planned Development residential zoning district located at Gardenside Circle and Rainbow Drive. (Continued from June 20, 1994.) The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. Counc. Burnett said he was concerned about overbuilding, yet the city is asking for more units on this site. Mayor Koppel opened the public hearing. Mr. Lawrence Guy, representing Landmark Development Corporation, displayed transparencies and distributed copies. They included elevations from Rainbow Drive, vicinity maps, a diagram of existing easements, and a survey of parking requirements in Santa Clara County municipalities. Mr. Guy explained that the origina1 development was part of the third phase of the Gardenside Development, for which they got credit for 20 to 30 units per acre which would result in a ten to twenty units per acre requirement on this parcel. Then the plans were changed regarding ingress and egress on Rainbow and the utility easements were established. Consequently, part of this property is very July 5, 1994 Cupertino City Council Page 6 . restricted because of the utility easements on the west side. Mr. Guy discussed the unit size and garage size tòr this proposed development and said they would be very similar to Gardenside Townhomes although the prices will be less. He said that staff suggested ten to eleven units but becaJI5e of the utility easement rernctions. it would require underground parking and sma1I decks instead of the large yards that are currently proposed. Counc. Bautista asked why it was not economically feasible to place more units on the property. Mr. Guy explained that it would require a parking structure and smaller, 800 square-foot units, and the market price for those is under $190,000. The cost would be over $1,000,000 in structure and there were not enough economies of scale. An apartment or air-space condo might just break even, but townhomes and houses are better accepted by the public. The Community Development Director clarified that eight units would be in the density range of up to twenty units per acre. Mr. Guy said the original plans were for three units, then they changed them to four, then to six. The Community Development Director said that having only four units on the property will be inconsistent with the General Plan. . Counc. Dean said this is a classic example of a developer coming with a particular proposal and the City trying to force more. He said he did not share that ambition, that this site is on a road that serves as fteeway on-ramp, and he could not support six units on the property. Coone. Burnett said it is a difficult choice b«-"\'5e the General Plan asks for twenty units and the only way to get those would be to deny the appea1 and increase the number of units. Counc. Sorensen said that she could support four or five units on the property and that the City's parking standards need to be reviewed as soon as possible. Counc. Bautista said that he would favor six or less. If five or four units were consistent with phase I and 2 of the Gardenside Development, that would probably be the best measurement since they are architecturally compatible. He said that this would set a precedcnt as to how Council wants this neighborhood to look. Counc. Burnett said this is about as suitable a place for apartments as any location that there is in the City, and he didn't know where there would find a location for any more apartments unless they started now. He was in favor of denying the appeal. . There was no other public testimony and the public hearing was closed. July 5, 1994 Cupertino City Counc:il Pa&c 7 . The City Attorney said that there was a determination made by the Pl8lìlÙDg Commission as well as by the Director of Community Developmeot that the project is inconsistent with the General Plan. If Council decided to approve the project. they must make either findings that somehow it is consistent with the General Plan or send it back for a General Plan Amendment, either in the general area or for this particular property. Counc. Bautista said the next lowest density designation would be ten to twenty units per acre and that would allow four, five, or six units to be constructed and still be in compliance with the General Plan. Mayor Koppel said that if this item goes back to the Planning Commission and is designated for four units, they haven't gained anything. The City's Housing Element was just approved and sometime Council would have to bite the bullet. Counc. Dean said that he did not agree with the numbers used by the State in their calculations. Counc. Bautista pointed out that it is currently an empty lot aad it may remain SO if it is not economically feasible to go with the higher density. Therefore, it is in the city's best interest to proceed with lower density on that site. . It was moved by Counc. Dean, !JeCOnded by Counc. Sorensen, and carried with Counc. Koppel and Burnett voting no to refer this item back to the Planning Commission with direction to consider a General Plan amendment which would designate this site for 10-20 units per acre. The Community Devt"iopment Director noted that State law allows only four Genera1 Plan amendments per year, and he would report back to the Council on how many had been passed to date. It was possible that this item would be the fourth, and any further Genera1 Plan amendments for the year would have to be postponed. 24. Application Nos. 80,052.2 and 100EA-94 - City of Cupertino. First reading of Ordinance No. 1657: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City ofCupertioo Adding Chapter _ to Title 19 and Amending Various Sections of Title 19, Zoning, of the Cupertino Municipal Code, Regulation of Day Care Homes," including prescriptive requirements ~or large family day care homes. The Planning Commission recommends the granting of Negative Declaration. Recommended for approval. . The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report and suggested that Council consider allowing an administrative permit process to bypass the requirement for a public hearing. The permit would be a type of sign-off sheet July S, \994 Cupertino City Council Page 8 t and it would allow the planning department to map out the locations of all of the day care centers, so that they can investigate any issues regarding proximity. He also corrected page 3 of the staff report to indicate that the Section 19.100 was missing some text. Mayor Koppel opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak, and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Coone. Dean, seconded by Counc. Sorensen, and carried unanimously to continue this item for first reading, so that the corrections could be included as well as the section about an administraûve pennit. 25. Applicaûon Nos. 81,156 and 9-EA-94 - City of Cupertino - Amendments to various sections of Chapter 19.40, Residential Hillside Zones, of the Cupertino Munici!'al Code, regulations for flat yard area, second story off-sets and house sizes. The Planning Commission recommends the granting of Negative Declaration. Recommended for approval. (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1658: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.40, Residential Hillside Zones, of the Cupertino Municipal Code." . Planner Tom Robillard reviewed the statfreport and indicated that this was the appropriate item under which to discuss the topic of animal regulation. He noted a correction to page 2, paragraph 2 of the staff report which should be amended to say that "Woodside's fonnula is much easier to understand and calculate and has a maximum size limit of 6,500 sq. ft. for the house." He explained that the Planning Commission had taken action on this item before hearing input fÌ'Om individuals concerned about restrictions on animals. Therefore, the Planning Commission by minute order reqUC!Jted that the City Council consider additional flexibility in the RHS zoning district for the preservation of historic agricultura1 uses and life styles with an exemption for additional animals raised for a limited period of time for educational PUIpO$CS. He added that the Planning Commission had also suggested that the 6,500 sq. ft. maximum house size be lowered to 5,000 sq. ft. That would mean that any reque!Jt for a house larger than 5,000 sq. ft. would need to go to City Council for fmaI approval. Mayor Koppel said that people can be very creative and that Council is assuming everything built would be visible fÌ'Om the valley floor. She did not want to dictate house size. Mayor Koppel opened the public hearing. . Mable Jane Riley, a resident ofRegnart Canyon, said that she and her animals had been active in 4H and petting zoos for children, and she was in favor of being able to keep animals of all varieties. July 5, 1994 cupertino City Council Page 9 · Mr. Richard T. Schumacher, 11331 Bubb Road, objected to a residential designation for Regnart Canyon. Ms. Christine Pierce, 21869 Gardenview Lane, spoke of the need to preserve the natural environment and to preserve' the values that come from living off the land. She suggested that the Planning Commissioners meet with property owners in Regnart Canyon and any other interested individuals to look at the issues associated with Regnart Canyon and find a way to maintain its agricultural use. The Community Development Director said that some people seem to think that this proposal would create additional restrictions. He showed a map of the existing zoning in Regnart Canyon and explained that there only a few properties zoned agricultural. The proposal tonight is to return the item to the Commission to lessen the requirements for the RHS zone and rezone everything to RHS, which will be less restrictive than it is now. Lonnie Toensfeldt, 21640 Fitzgerald Drive, said she was a very strong advocate of youth education using anima1s. She asked why it was necessary to change the zoning. If the purpose is to protect the hillsides, why is it necessary to restrict animals? It would have a major impact on the lifestyles of those who chose to live in Regnart Canyon. · The Community Development Director reminded Council that the testimony ~ing heard tonight was not available to the Planning Commission at the time they made their decision on this draft ordinance. He added that the Planning Commission did want to make the zoning more accommodating to people who wanted to keep animals. Counc. Sorensen said that she did want to send the matter back to the Planning Commission for discussion of the animal issue. Mr. Jolm Coogler, 22245 Canyon View Drive, said that there had been no interaction with the people that live in the Regnart Canyon area and he felt that the 5000 sq. ft. limit on house size was an arbitrary figure. He said he did not support changing the regulations as they now stand. Rande Harris, 1040 Chula Vista Terrace , Sunnyvale, said that her parents bad encountered many rezoning problems since 1965 and every time something was rezoned it would create additional problems. The properties got zoned into smaller and smaller parcels until everything was residential and there were no large pieces of property left. · Trevor Garliepp, 11690 Regnart Canyon Road, read a letter from his father, Jolm Garliepp. The letter said that agriculture was an integral part of the canyon and should not be discontinued. Although the commission discussed grandfathering July 5, 1994 Cupertino City Council Page 10 J clauses which would allow agriculture uses to pass through to new owners, there are some properties which used to have five horses and now can only have three. The pre$ent zoning ~hould be retained. Barbara Black expressed concern about the purpo$e behind the rezoning and agreed with the suggestion for the formation of a committee composed of canyon residents. James Black, 11691 Regnart Canyon Drive, said he agreed with most of the comments made by the speakers. He agreed with the request to send the item back to the Planning Commission and to form a committee of Canyon residents. . Tom Winegar said he was vehemently opposed to zoning out agricultural uses. He distributed to the Council Members a folder containing photographs of the hillside area, a document titled, "Citizens Response to Ordinance No. 1658, Residential Hillside Zones," and an excerpt from the land use chapter of the Cupertino General Plan. He showed a ser:es of slides of the hillside areas in Saratoga, Cupertino and other communities, and said that agriculture was the basis for the local fauna. He said that the use of open space was still experimental and that it would be much easier to maintain some of the mountain properties if more agriculture were allowed rather than the residents growing dry grass. He discussed the potential for mismanagement of open space areas. Jeanne Haggerty, 20362 Glasgow Drive, Saratoga, was opposed to rezoning Regnart Canyon because it was one of the few remaining areas where children could live and rai$e animals. Regina Matthews, 2210 Villanova Road, San Jo!Je, said that she grew up in the Los Angeles area, which !Jtarted out much like Cupertino. The problems began with rezoning and the character changed so much that she would no longer live there. Mario G1I7man, 11680 Regnart Canyon Drive, said the entire area should Ix' zoned agricultural bec..nuo it is a fire hazard and it would be an incentive for people to grow something other than grass. He said that he resented the Plannil'lg Commission reducing his way oflife or quality oflife into graphs and charts, and that their role was to improve the quality of life. Chris Martinez, 11311 Bubb Road, said that she was an animal caretaker in the area and agreed with most of the comments made tonight. She said the Canyon residents committee was a good idea. . May Koski, 22030 Regnart Road, said she chose to live in Regnart Canyon because of the rura1 atmosphere. She said that animals get lonely if kept singly and that should be considered when the zoning laws are established. When ]uJy 5, J 994 Cupertino City Council PageIJ . including grandfather clauses, it is important not to change the number of horses previously allowed. She supported the idea of rezoning ûom RI to RHS if that would allow them to have more animals. Beverly Wmegar, 11741 Regnart Canyon Drive, introduced her daughter and her mend who displayed a 4H flag. She said that she had pur .:based her property for the agricultura1 rating. She felt it would be unconstitutional to have that rating changed without her agreement Man:ella Mahon said that she was neutral on these issues. She was in favor of rezoning but supported the idea of the Canyon residents committee to work on the rezoning. She said it should not change the country look, and some things need to be kept the same. Robert Bigler said that it was not necessary to limit houses to 5,000 sq. ft., especially on the larger size parcels, because building restrictions no longer allow large, boxy houses. The property owner!J have earned the right to build a house the size they want and that shouldn't be taken away. He said that even if the RHS zoning were written to relieve properties ûom some of the restrictions, when those restrictions were enforced they would still be more stringent than the current situation. which has not been enforced at all. , It was moved by Counc. Dean, seconded by Mayor Koppel and carried unanimously to (I) Continue this item to the Council meeting of September 19, 1994; (2) Keep this item with Item No. 26 ( regarding rezoning of hillside properties in Regnart Canyon); and (3) S~nd the item back to the plannil1g Commi...'¡on in order that they might meet with staff and a committee composed ofRegnart Canyon residents to discuss appropriate zoning. more leniency regarding agriculture, livestock, and pets, and to discuss minimum house size. The City Attorney said a good deal of agriculture Í$ allowed in the RHS zone as it stands or as it is amended. The A zone historically was intended to regulate daily farms, huge agriculture type activities. It would !JeeID appropriate that the e:rtire area be zoned one zone to regulate tho$e types of things Council wished to regulate. They could change the RHS zone to allow many things normally allowed in agriculture zones. The citizens should be aware that these terms can be defined and regulated to accomplish everyone's purposes. Mayor Koppel said that she did not support the 5,000 sq. ft. limit on the house size and that limit should be addressed by the committee. . 26. Application Nos. I-Z-94 and 2-EA-94 - City of Cupertino - Rezoning of various hillside properties encompassing 185 net acres in the Regnart Canyon area. The site is located in the west foothills of Cupertino. The Planning Commission recommends the granting of Negative Declaration. Recommended for approval. . July 5, 1994 Cupertioo City Council Page 12 . (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1659: "An Ordinance of the City COWX:jJ of the (.11y Of Cupertino Amending Title 19 of the Cupertino Municipal Code By Rezoning Various Hillside Properties Encompassing Approximately 185 Net Acres in the Regnart Canyon Area; Located in the West Foothills of Cupertino (Application l-Z-94 - City Of Cupertino)." Mayor Koppel opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Coone. Dean, seconded by Mayor Koppel and carried "nanimously to (I) Continue this item to the Council meeting of September 19, 1994; (2) Keep this item with Item No. 25 (amendments to the Residential Hillside Zones) when it goes back to the Planning Commission. RECESS At 9: 18 p.m., the City Council recessed. At 9:30 p.m., the meeting reconvened. PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) . 27. Application I-GPA-94 and 3-EA-94 - City of Cupertino - Receipt of Certification by State Department of Housing and Community Development of the City's Housing Element of the General Plan, adoption of final Housing Element. The Planning Commission recommend$ the granting of Negative Declaration. Recommended for approval. (Continued ûom the meeting of June 6, 1994.) (a) Resolution No. 9140: "A Resolution of the City Cowx:il of the City of Cupertino Approving Amendments to the Housing Element of the Genera1 Plan (Application l-GPA-94)." The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. Mayor Koppel opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak. and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Mayor Koppel, and carried with Counc. Dean voting no, to grant a Negative Declaration. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Mayor Koppel, and carried with Counc. Dean voting no, to adopt Resolution No. 9140 approving the application pursuant to the recommendations of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4525. 28. Public hearing to place liens on private property for delinquent payments for garbage !JerVÏces. . (a) Resolution No. 9141: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Property Lien for Delinquent Garbage Charges." , . July S. 1994 cupertino City Council Page 13 The Public Works Director reviewed the staffreport and noted a correction on page 2. He said that the correct amount due for State Street Bank (for Bruce Irwin) was S121.50 instead ofS40.50. Mayor Koppel opened the public hearing. There were no requests to spe.1k, and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Burnett, and carried unanimously to approve Resolution No. 9141. 29. Hearing to order vacation of public utility easement located with Tract 7277, Lots 5 and 6, Tula Lane. (Statfrequests this item be continued to July 18, 1994.) (a) Resolution No. 9142: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Ordering Vacation of a Public Utility Easement Located Within Tract No. 7277, Lots 5 and 6, Tula Lane Pumsant to Section 50430 of the Government Code of the State of CaIifomia." Council concurred to continue this item to July 18, 1994. NEW BUSINESS 30. First reading of Ordinance No. 1660; "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 2.16 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, City Council-Salaries." The City Clerk read the ordinance title. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Dean, and passed unanimously that Ordinance No. 1660 be read by title only, and the Clerk's r-iing to constitute the first reading thereof. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Burnett, and passed with Counc. Bautista voting no to approve Ordinanc..' No. 1660, for first reading. 31. First reading of Ordinance No. 1661 ; "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 10.25 Of The Cupertino Municipal Code To Clarify That Regulations On Smoking In Private Places May Be More Restrictive Than Chapter 10.25." The City Clerk read the ordinance title. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Burnett, and passed unanimously that Ordinance ~o. 1661 be read by title only, and the Clerk' s reading to constitute the first reading thereof. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Burnett, and passed with Counc. Bautista voting no to approve Ordinance No. 1661, for first reading. · · · , . . July 5, 1994 Cupertino City Council Page J 4 ORDINANCES 32. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1656: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Title 19, Zoning, of the Cupertino Municipal Code, to Regulate the Processing of Combined Development Applications Which Involve Differing Review Bodies." The City Clerk read the ordinance title. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Burnett, and passed unanimously that Ordinance No. 1956 be read by title only, and the Clerk's reading to constitute second reading thereof. It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Burnett, and passed unanimously that Ordinance No. 1956 be enacted. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Koppel announced that Marty Clevenger, a former council member in Saratoga, was hired as the new Administrative Director of the Santa Clara County Cities Association. Mayor Koppel said she had been chosen to serve as chairwoman for the City's group on the Cupertino Library, as well as co-chair of the overall group, and had been put in charge of fund-raising. Counc. Bautista said he had attended an Innovative Housing breakfast in Palo Alto and remarked on the broad-based support from local manufacturing groups. He offered to provide additional information to IiIlY Council members that were interested. Coone. Sorensen announced that the Diversity Summit was held and about 130 people attended. 0vera1I evaluations were good and they will soon begm'1 planning their next meeting. ADJOURNMENT At 9:45 p.m., the meeting was adjourned. ~~~tl Kim Marie Smith City Clerk