HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-07-1996 CITY COUNCIL AGENDASARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: May 7, 1996 CITY MGR.
ORIGINATING DEPT. City Manager
SUBJECT: Measure G Implementation
Recommended Motion(s):
1. Accept the staff report.
2. Move to adopt a policy that applications for development which
are determined to be subject to the election requirements of the
General Plan, as set forth in Measure G, shall proceed directly to
an election without further review unless withdrawn at the request
of the applicant.
3. Move to confirm that administrative determinations as to a
project's status under Measure G may be appealed as currently set
forth in Article 15 -90 of the Municipal Code.
4. Move to adopt a policy that the timing of elections requested:,
under Measure G be determined by and paid for by the project
applicant, such costs to be determined by the Finance Director and
include all actual direct costs of the election and such indirect,
general and overhead costs as may be determined appropriate by the
Finance Director in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles.
5. Move to adopt a policy that exceptions to Measure G are to be
considered only subsequent to the voters failing to approve an
amendment to the General Plan which would remove the condition
requiring an application for exception. Requests for exception..
shall be submitted by separate application.
Report Summary:
The report states that a simple test can determine whether a
project is subject to the Measure G standard, thus requiring an
election. The staff would initially conduct this test with its
determination subject to appeal under Title 15 -90 of the Code.
Applications which are determined to be subject to Measure G should ..
not be processed until the voters have approved an amendment to the
General Plan. Decisions related to the timing of elections for
projects subject to Measure G should be made by the applicant so
the applicant can present what the applicant feels is the best
presentation to the voters. The applicant should pay for the cost
of any election. Exceptions for housing element compliance and
regulatory taking should only be considered by the City Council if
the voters have rejected a proposal. A separate application for
exception consideration should be required.
Fiscal Impacts: None provided full cost recovery is approved by
the City Council. The cost of an election can vary from about
$4,000 to more than $60,000 depending on the election date chosen.
Advertising, Noticing and Public Contact: This subject was
discussed extensively at the Town Hall meeting on April 20th.
SONIC has been sent a copy of the staff report and a notice of this
meeting. Agenda for the meeting posted according to the law.
Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: Staff will
have no guidance in the administration of projects under Measure G
and will have to handle applications as it deems appropriate.
Follow Up Actions: The fee resolution will need to be amended to
reflect charging for the cost of elections and the cost for filing
a request for exception. Community Development Department staff
will need to be briefed on the decisions made by the City Council.
Attachments: Memorandum dated May 7, 1996
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 7, 1996
TO: City Council
FROM: Harry Peacock, City Manager hww--�(4�
SUBJECT: Measure G implementation
Recommended Actions:
1. Accept the staff report.
2. Move to adopt a policy that applications for development which
are determined to be subject to the election requirements of the
General Plan, as set forth in Measure -G, shall proceed directly.. to
an election without further review unless withdrawn at the request
of the applicant.
3. Move to confirm that administrative determinations as to a
project's status under Measure G may be appealed as currently set
forth in Article 15 -90 of the Municical Code.
4. Move to adopt a policy that the timing of elections required by
Measure G be determined by and paid for by the project applicant,
such costs to be determined by the Finance Director and include all
actual direct costs of the election and such indirect, general and
overhead costs as may be determined appropriate by the Director of
Finance in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles.
5. Move to adopt a policy that exceptions to Measure G are to be
considered only subsequent to the voters failing to approve an
amendment to the General Plan which would remove the condition
requiring an application for exception. Requests for exception
shall be submitted by separate application.
Background:
On March 26, 1996, the voters of Saratoga passed Measure G, an
initiative measure, which requires that certain changes to the land
use element of the general plan may be made only by the voters. On
April 20, 1996, a Town Hall meeting was held at which the
implementation of Measure G was discussed by. the staff, the City
Council, and the public. At that meeting the City Manager outlined
Measure G Implementation
Page 2
for those present the processes which he, the Community Development
Director and the City Attorney concluded are appropriate for
implementing Measure G. On April 23, 1996, the City Council acted
to certify the results of the election and to enact a resolution
placing the language of Measure G into the Land Use Element of the
General Plan. As a result Measure G became effective on May 3,
1996.
Discussion:
Determining Application of the Measure G standard
In administering Measure G the first step is to determine whether
or not an application is subject to the Measure G requirement. A
two part test applies.
Only certain General Plan land use categories are subject to
Measure G.
These are:
1. Outdoor Recreation
2. Hillside Conservation Single Family
3. Very Low Density Single Family
4. Low Density Single Family
5. Medium Density Single Family and Its Associated
Subcategories of M -10, M -12.5, and M -15
6. Multi- family
7. P -D (Planned Development) Residential
The first part of the test is whether the property involved is
located in one of these General Plan land use designations, if it
is then it is subject to the Measure G requirement.
Measure G says only the voters may amend the Land Use Element of
General Plan to increase specified densities or intensities for the
designated land uses, or to change the land use designation from a
lower to a higher designation in terms of density or intensity,
except for the Outdoor Recreation land use designation. The
specific densities are:
1. Hillside Conservation Single Family -no more than 0.5
dwelling units per net acre.
2. Very Low Density Single Family -no more than 1.09 dwelling
units per net acre.
3. Low Density Single Family -no more than 2.18 dwelling units
per net acre.
4. Medium Density Single Family
M -10 -no more than 4.35 dwelling units per net acre.
M- 12.5 -no more than 3.48 dwelling units per net acre.
M -15 -no more than 2.90 dwelling units per net acre.
Measure G Implementation
Page 3
5. Multi- family -no more than 14.5 dwelling units per net acre.
6. P -D (Planned Development) Residential -no more than 4.35 to
12.45 dwelling units per net acre.
An exception is made for "granny flats" which, under our zoning
ordinance, applies to some, but not all properties, depending on
their size.
The specific intensities are:
1. Hillside Conservation Single Family - Maximum intensity of
buildings and impervious surface coverage : 15,000 square
feet or 25% of site area, whichever is less.
2. Very Low Density Single Family - Maximum intensity of
buildings and impervious surface coverage: 35% of site
area.
3. Low Density Single Family- Maximum intensity of buildings
and impervious surface coverage: 45% of site area.
4. Medium Density Single Family and Its Associated
Subcategories - Maximum intensity of buildings and
impervious surface coverage.is: 50 -60% of site area...
5. Multi - family- Maximum intensity of building coverage: 40% of
site area.
6. P -D (Planned Development) Residential- Maximum intensity of
building coverage: 25 -35% of site area.
(Note that in the last two land use designation categories the
intensity standard changes from impervious surface coverage to
building coverage).
The second part of the test is whether the project would result in
an increase in density or intensity of General Plan land use (e.g.,
density of dwelling units per acre or placement of impervious
surfaces or buildings beyond the coverage limits set forth in the
various General Plan land use categories) if it does then it is
subject to the Measure G requirement.
For property under the Outdoor Recreation designation, the test to
apply is whether the development being proposed, 1) changes the
land use designation or 2) is consistent with the standard set
forth in the Open Space Element. This standard is recited on page
4 of Measure G:
"This subcategory consists of City or County parks or lands
designated for those uses. Only recreational facilities (i.e.
playground equipment, recreational courts, etc,), structures
necessary to support the parks or structures of particular
historic value are permitted in these areas. These sites are
considered to be of particular value for recreational
purposes. Some parks preserve significant vegetation features
such as Hakone Gardens and Villa Montalvo County Park." .
Measure G Implementation
Page 4
If it is consistent with the standard, the project is not subject
to Measure G.
Administration of Measure G standard
Processing Applications for Projects
Upon receipt of an application the staff will determine whether the
project is subject to the Measure G standard. If it is not then
the application would proceed through the process.
Staff currently reviews all applications for consistency with the
Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. If the application is
inconsistent then it is not processed until it is consistent. This
requires either a change in the plans or the securing of a change
to the Zoning Ordinance and /or General Plan, or securing a variance
or a conditional use permit.
Under Measure G, variances or conditional use permits (which would
have the effect of allowing a different standard to. apply .as
relates to either use, density or intensity, i.e., coverage) would
no longer be available. The sole remedy would be to change the
General Plan through the election process.
Very few applications will be subject to the Measure G standard.
Currently no special notice is given that an application meets all
Code and General Plan requirements, this would not change.
We have considered the issue of how things are done now when
someone is requesting a change to the General Plan versus how
things would be done in the future. Currently, it is typical that
someone seeking a change to the General Plan will also file
associated applications related to the project. The reason, the
applicant expects the City will grant a General Plan amendment if
it likes the project. However, the City can not compel an
applicant to apply for anything more than a General Plan Amendment.
Applications now travel together. This would no longer occur under
Measure G unless the basic Measure G question was delayed in terms
of ballot placement until the entire application process was
completed. If done any other way it is possible that applications
could be in mid - process when an election is held on the. basic
question of changing the land use designation.
What Measure G says is that density and intensity standards, "shall
not be amended to increase such densities or intensities unless
such amendment is approved by a vote of the people." (emphasis
added) . Measure G goes on to state that land, "may be designated
Measure G Implementation
Page 5
to a more intensive residential land use by the City Council
pursuant to its usual procedures only if the City Council makes
each of the following findings:" (emphasis added), and then
discusses findings relating to housing element compliance and
unconstitutional taking of property. Measure G recognizes that it
no longer makes a difference (in terms of Planning Commission and
City Council decision - making) whether a project is approved or
denied. Neither body can approve a General Plan change which would
affect the status of a Measure G impacted property, that can only
be done by another initiative or by the project being placed before
the electorate by the City Council.
Staff recommends no public hearings be conducted on a project until
the issue of Measure G applicability is determined. Review would
consist of a determination as to applicability only. Should the
staff determine an application is subject to the Measure G
standard, the applicant would be notified and given an opportunity
to appeal the staff determination to the Planning Commission. The
administrative appeal process is set forth in Article 15 -90 of the
Code. Should the Planning. Commission determine the application is
subject to Measure G the applicant can either, 1) appeal...to_ the
Council, 2) request an election or 3) withdraw the application.
Should a question arise at the Planning Commission public hearing
as to the determination by staff that a project is not subject to
Measure G, the Commission would listen to the reasoning of the
staff and the reasoning of the person making the claim. Should the
Commission determine that the application is subject to Measure G,
then the applicant may either 1) appeal to the Council, 2) request
an election or 3) withdraw the application.
What happens to the application once a decision has been made that
the Measure G standard applies? The City Council should determine
whether to continue -to have the application processed (at the
discretion of the applicant) or whether to suspend proceedings on
the application until the matter has been settled by the voters.
If the process was allowed to continue any decision made on the
merits of the project would have no effect on whether a project
goes to the ballot. If proceedings are suspended and the voters
approve the change in the land use element the proceedings would
continue, if they do not the project must be withdrawn. If the
proceedings continue during the time scheduled for the election it
is possible that the election could take place before the
proceedings have concluded either in favor or in opposition to the
project, as has been noted above.
It would appear that there is no advantage to either the applicant
or the City to have project review continue pending an election.
Indeed, the applicant might be disadvantaged by having his or her
application prejudged by the City before the voters have had their
say.
Measure G Implementation
Page 6
Placing a Project on the Ballot
Placing a project on the ballot is a decision which is made by the
City Council. Options available are to either, 1) determine when
a project is to go on the ballot or 2) determine to let the
applicant pick when the project is to go on the ballot. In both
cases it is recommended that the applicant pay the full cost of
placing the project before the voters).
As noted at the Town Hall meeting, the City is limited in the
number of times it can amend its general plan to four times a year.
This is a factor to consider when deciding whether to give the
applicant the choice to choose when a project would go on the
ballot. Allowing the applicant to choose could delay other general
plan changes being considered by the City which have no
relationship to the Land Use Element or Measure G. However, as
pointed out at the Town Hall meeting, it is possible to group
general plan amendments so as to avoid this problem.
In weighing which option to recommend to the City Council, it is my
view that the likelihood of this problem occurring is extremely
rare. Therefore, it would be better for the applicant to be free
to chose his or her election date, as. best suits the applicant's
purposes, including the consideration of cost.
Should the City Council determine it wishes reserve the decision
for itself it has the following options:
1) determine that the measure must wait until the next general
City election. These occur only in November of even
numbered years.
2) determine. that the measure can proceed as a special
election. This could mean that the election is either a
stand alone election or one which can be combined with
another election being held which covers all voters in
Saratoga. This is similar to the way Measure G was
placed on the ballot.
Remember, the applicant can always attempt to get the measure
placed on the ballot through the initiative process, bypassing the
application process and the determination process entirely. In
this case the City would bear the cost of the election should the
City Council decide not to enact the ordinance as presented by the
petitioners, but rather require the matter to be determined by the
voters.
Dealing with Exceptions
The final issue to consider is the question of when to deal with
the housing element or regulatory taking exceptions. As stated in
Measure G Implementation
Page 7
Measure G, the City Council can make exceptions if it makes certain
findings regarding either the need to fulfill the objectives of the
housing element, should the City have an approved one, or to
prevent a regulatory taking of the property. In my view this
decision needs to be made by the Council if, and only if, the
voters reject the proposed change to the land use designation,
density or intensity. If the voters approve the change then the
decisions and findings do not have to be made because the outcome
of the election have cured the condition. Should the voters fail
to approve the proposed change to the General Plan, the applicant
could then, and only then, apply for an exception, as provided in
Measure G.
Conclusions and Recommendations
A simple test can determine whether a project is subject to the
Measure G standard, thus requiring an election. Staff would
initially conduct this test with its determination subject to
appeal under Title 15 -90 of the Municipal Code. Applications which,
are determined to be subject to Measure'G should not be processed
until the voters have approved an amendment to the General Plan.
Decisions related to the timing of elections for projects subject
to Measure G should be made by the applicant so the applicant can
present what the applicant feels is the best presentation to the
voters. The applicant should pay for the cost of any election,
including staff, indirect, administrative and overhead costs as
determined by the Finance Director in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. Exceptions for housing element
compliance and regulatory taking should only be considered by the
City Council if the voters have rejected a proposal. A separate
application for seeking an exception should be required.
TO THE HONORABLE CLERK OF TIE CITY OF SARATOGA.
AUG 2 81995
August 24, 1995
we, the undersigned, registered and qualified voters of the City of Saratoga, hereby propose an
ordinance to. ameodthe City of Saratoga General Plan. we petition you to submit the same to the
City Council of the City of Saratoga for its adoption without change, or for rejection and
submission of the same to the voters of the City of Saratoga at a special election. In the event
that the initiative petition is not signed by the number of voters requireil'by Ele -tions Code
section 9214 and the Ditty Council of the City of Saratoga does not adopt the ordinance without
change, we petition you to submit the ordinance to amend the City of Saratoga General Plan to,
the voters of the City of Saratoga at thin= regular municipal election.
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY GENERAL PLAN REQUHUNG VOTE OF THE PEOPLE IN
ORDER TO INTENSIFY EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR ALL LANDS
DESIGNATED "RESIDENTIAL " OR "OUTDOOR RECREATION"
The people of the City of Saratoga do hereby ordain as follows:
A The protection of the character of existing low density residential neighborhoods
and outdoor recz onal open space areas in the City of Saratoga is of critical importance to
Saratoga residents. The City was founded as a semi -rural residential community and most
residents moved here because of this distiocxive feature. Saratoga remains unique among South
Bay communities because of its country atmosphere and open space areas, its majestic trees, an
unusually low a me rate, and quiet neigirbrnhoods free of or only minimally affected by retail, .
commercial and office dev lopmeat.
Pale i of is
1
TO THE HONORABLE CLERK OF TIE CITY OF SARATOGA.
AUG 2 81995
August 24, 1995
we, the undersigned, registered and qualified voters of the City of Saratoga, hereby propose an
ordinance to. ameodthe City of Saratoga General Plan. we petition you to submit the same to the
City Council of the City of Saratoga for its adoption without change, or for rejection and
submission of the same to the voters of the City of Saratoga at a special election. In the event
that the initiative petition is not signed by the number of voters requireil'by Ele -tions Code
section 9214 and the Ditty Council of the City of Saratoga does not adopt the ordinance without
change, we petition you to submit the ordinance to amend the City of Saratoga General Plan to,
the voters of the City of Saratoga at thin= regular municipal election.
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY GENERAL PLAN REQUHUNG VOTE OF THE PEOPLE IN
ORDER TO INTENSIFY EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR ALL LANDS
DESIGNATED "RESIDENTIAL " OR "OUTDOOR RECREATION"
The people of the City of Saratoga do hereby ordain as follows:
A The protection of the character of existing low density residential neighborhoods
and outdoor recz onal open space areas in the City of Saratoga is of critical importance to
Saratoga residents. The City was founded as a semi -rural residential community and most
residents moved here because of this distiocxive feature. Saratoga remains unique among South
Bay communities because of its country atmosphere and open space areas, its majestic trees, an
unusually low a me rate, and quiet neigirbrnhoods free of or only minimally affected by retail, .
commercial and office dev lopmeat.
Pale i of is
B. In recent years, however, the very attributes that make Saratoga so desirable have
become threatened.. The City Council a under strong and unceasing pressrrre from developers to
convert residential and open space lands to retail commercial or high density residential
developments. Proposals for more intensive development m* residential neighborhoods are now
regularly before the City, almost ce tainiy some of these will be granted.
C. The opening of the Route 85 freeway through also dramatically
increase development prem in Saratoga. Newly opened freeway corridors typically undergo an
intensification of commercial, industrial and high density residential development.
D. The unique character and quality of We of City residents depend on the prowl ion
of.Saratoga's residential neighborhoods and recreational open space areas.. This initiative, if
approved by the voters, will provide this assurance by giving greater stability to the City's General
Plan, specifying that general Plan provisions essential to the protection of the residential and
recreational open space areas in the City can be amended or repealed only by the votes ofthe
City of Saratoga In particular, the initiative requires, with certain exceptions, a vote of the
people to permit: (1) the redesignation of residential lands to commercial, industrial or other land
use designations, (2) an increase of densities. or intensities of residential land use, or (3) the
rdesignation of recreational open space lands to other land use designations. This initiative does
not affect the City's casting regulations that authorise the creation of second dwelling units. Nor
doe the initiative interfere with the City's obligation wader state law to revise the Housing
Element of the .Cereal Plan every five years..
E. The Land Use Element of the City of Saratoga General Plan, adopted May 4,1983
as amended through August 7, 1995 (hereinafter, "City's Land Use Element "), sets forth policies
that protect the character of Saratoga's residential neighborhoods, including the following:
Pap 2of 10
wLU.8.0 Affirm that the City shall continue to be predominantly a community of single-
family detached residences.
LU.817 Fasting non - developed sites zoned single -f roily detached residential
should remain so designated."
This initiative saves to firther the purpose underlying the foregoing policies.
-
R. The City's Land Use Element establishes devdopmant standards for residential
land use in six es (using the term 'DU" to refer to dwelling units), as follows:
"A. Hillside Conservation Single Family - Maximum density of .5 DU/net acre
or 1.55 peoplelacre. Maximum intensity of building and impervious surface
coverage: 15,000 square feet or 25% of site area, whichever is less.
B. Very Low Density Single Family - Mmammn density of 1.09 DU/net acre
or 3.38 peoplelacre. Mwiimum intensity of building and impervious
surface coverage: 35% of site area.
C. Low Density Single Family - Maximum density of 2.18 DU /net acne or
6.76 people/ acre. Maximum intensity of building and impervious surface
coverage: 45% of site area.
D. Medium Density Single Family - -
1. M-10 - maximum density of 4.35 DU/net acre or 13.5 peoplelacre.
2. M-12,5 - ma)dmum density of 3.48 DU /net acre or 10.8
peoplelacre.
3. M -15 - maximum density of 2.90 DU /net acre or 9.0 people/acre.
In all crises above, the mwdmnn intensity ofbugding and impervious surface
coverage is: 50' /o- 601/o of site area.
E. Multi -f anily - Maximum density of 14.5 DU/net acne or 2745 peoplelacre.
Mmonium intensity of building coverage: 401/o of site area.
F.. P-D (Planned Development) Residential - 4.35 to 12.45 DU/net acre or
13.5 to 38.6 people/ acre. Maximum intensity of building coverage: 25% -
3S% of site ores. All projects proposed on sites with this designation shall
require use permit approval as provide for in Article 16 of the zoning
ordinance.
Pap 3d10
It should be noted that any disuWon of the number of people per acre is not
-meant to act as-a limit to family size or maxima m number of people that would be
permitted to live on a site. The population densities give are meant only to act as
a guide to the average number of people likely to occupy a given area."
G. The Open Space Element of the Saratoga General Plan declares that the City .
should, where possible, improve the =sting inventory of local public park and recreation
facilities. In the face of inc reasigg development Prom= within the City, it is essential that the
City, at a minimum, affirm its won to ms ftm its existing recreational open space resources.
The City's Open Space Element sets forth policies that call for the protection of Sarmoga's
outdoor recreation open space lands, including the following:
" Preserve, through a variety of methods, as much as possible of the open space area
described in the Open Space Element for visual greenbelts, conservation and management
of environmental resources, public health and.safety protection and for rec restionW use."
Further, the City's Land Use Element establishes development standards for the outdoor
recreation open space subcategory of open space lands as follows:
"Outdoor recreation - This subcategory consists of City or County parks or lands -
desigaated for those urea. Only recreational facilities (i.e. playground equipment,
recreational courts, etc.), structures necessary to support the parks or structures of
particular historic vahie are permitted in these areas. These sites are considered to be of
particular value for recreational purposes. Some parks preserve significant vegetation
features such as Haltom Gardens and Villa Montalvo County Park."
This initiative serves to further the purpose underlying the foregoing policies.
IL The purpose of this initiative is to ensure that residential lands are not
unnecessarily converted to higher density residential, commercial or inial land use
designations and to protect the City's casting recreational open space resources. Accordingly,
the initiative ensures that until December 31, 2025, the foregoing provisions of the City's Land
Use Element governing building densities and intensities on residential lands may not be changed
Pale 4 of 10
i
accept by vote of the people to increase the mas mum densities and intensities stated. In addition,
the initiative provides that any lands designated as - Hillside Conservation Single Family," "Very
Low Density Single Family,' %m Density Single Family," "Medium Density Single Family."
"Multi-Family,' "P D (Planned Development)," or "Outdoor Recreation" by the City s General
Plan and amendments thereto through August 7, 1995 will remain so designated until December
31, 2025 unless the land is redesignated by the City Cowed pursuant to-the prpcedures set forth
in this initiative: or redesignated to another land use category by vote of the people.
A. This Initiative hereby reaffirms and readopts, until December 31, 2025, the
provisions of the Land Use Element of the City of.Saratoga General Plan adopted in 1983 as.
amended through August 7, 1995 specifying maximum densities and intensities of uses permitted
in the City's residential subcategories, which provisions are set forth in their entirety in finding F
of Section 1 of the initiative. In addition, the initiative hereby reaffirm and readopts, until.
December 31, 2025, the %Ude Conservation Single Family," "Very Low Density Single
Family," "Low Density Single Family," "Medium Density Single Family," "Muhl - Family," and "P-
D (Planned Drielopmeot)" designations ofthe City of Saratoga General Plan and amendments
thereto through August 7, 1995. Further, the following text is added as the last paragraph of the
"Residential" section of the City of Saratoga General Plan Land Use Element adopted in 1983 as
amended through August 7, 1995, at page 3 -2:
"Limitation on General Plan Amendments Relating to 'Residents!' Lands.
1. Until December 31,2025, the foregoing provisions governing ma3emnn
building density and intensity for lands designated "Hillside Conservation
Single Family," "Very Low Density Single Family," "Low Density Single
pap 5of10
r
Family," 'Medium Density Single Famiy," "Muhi- Family," and "P D
.(Planned Devdopment)" shall not be amended to increase such densities or
,intensities unless such amendment is approved by vote of the people.
2. All lands designated "Hillside Conservation Single Family," "Very Low
Density Single Family," q ow Density Single Fanuly," Medium Density
Singe Family," Multi - Family," or' P D (Planned Development)" by the
City of Saratoga General Plan and amendments thereto through August 7,
1995 shall remain so designated until December 31, 2025, unless said land
is redesignated to another general plan land use category by vote of the
people, or redea;igasted by the City Council pursuant to the procedures set
forth in subsections 3 and 4 below.
3. Except as provided in subsection 4 below, land designated by the City of
Saratoga General Plan as "Hillside Conservation Single Family," "Vary
Low Density Single Family," "Low Density Single Family," "Medium
Density Single Family," Wulti- Family," or "P -D (Planned Development)"
may be n+edesigoaled to. a more intensive residential land use by the City
coma PUMUO to its usual procedures only if the City Coemal makes
each of the following fmdin
a. The proposed redesignation is essential for the Housing Me went to
be in substantial compliance with state law, and no other feasible
redesigns ion ( duding, but not bmited to, redenignation of lands
designated for non - residential uses) or measures other than the
proposed re rip signation are available to achieve such compliance
that would involve less intensive use of the land to be redesignated;
and
Pap 6 of 10
The Housing Element of the City's General Plan is in substantial
compliance with state law, and the state Department of Housing
and Community Development has Found such compliance.
4. Land designated by the City of Saratoga General Plan as "Hillside
Conservation Single Family," "Very Low Density Single Family,* low
Density Single Family," "Medium Density Sk gl&FamW— "Multi - Family,"
or
*P -D (Planned Development)" may be redesignated to another land use
category by the City Council if each of the following conditions are
satisfied:
a. The City Council makes a finding that the application of subsection
2 of this policy on almitations on General Plan Ammdmecrts
Relating to Timidentiai Lands" would constitute an
unconstitutional talaing of the landowners property, and .
b. In permitting redesigaation, the City Council allows additional land
Ill ses only to the minimum extent necessary to avoid said
unconstitutional taking of the landowners property,: and protects to
the madman extent possible the character of immediately
siazounding residential neighborhoods."
B. This Initiative hereby reaffirm and readopts, until December 31, 2025, the
"Outdoor Pixavation" designation$ of the City of Saratoga "General
Plan and aanendments thereto through August. 7, 1995. Further, the following text is added as
paragraph G of the "Open Space section of the City of Saratoga General Plan Land Use Elemerrt
Pap7d10
adopted in 1983 as amended through August 7, 1995, at page 3-4:
Li
"mitations on General Plan Amendments Relating to 'Outdoor Recreation'
Iands.
1. All lands designated "Outdoor Recreation" by the City of Saratoga General
Plan and amendments thereto through August 7, 1995 shall remain so.
designated until December 31, 2025, unless said land is redesignated to
another general plan land use category by vote of the people, or
redesignated by the City Council pursuant to the procedures set forth in
subsections 2 and 3 below.
2. Except as provided in subsection 3 below, land designated "Outdoor
Recreation" by the City of Saratoga General Plan and amendments thereto
through August 7, 1995 may be redesignated to residential land use by the
City Council pursuant to its usual procedures only if the City makes each of
the following findings:.
L The proposed amendment is essential for the Housing Element to
be in substantial compliance with State law, and no other feasible
designation (including, but not limited to, redesignation of lands
designated for non - residential uses) or measures other than the
proposed redesigoation are available to achieve such compliance
that would involve a less intensive land use of the land to be
redesignated; and
b. The Housing Element of thus General Plan is in substantial
compliance with state law, and the state Department of Housing
and Community Development has found such substantial
compliance.
Pane a of 10
3. Land designated by the City of Saratoga General Plan as "Outdoor
Raxudon" may be redesignated to another land use category by the City
Council-if each of the following conditions are satisfied:
L The City Council.snaices a finding that the application of subsection
1 of this policy on limitations on General Plan Amendments
Relating to XOutdoor Recreation' I.ands" would constitute an
J unoonstidrtional talcing.of the landowne&propeny; and
b. - In permitting redesignation. the City Council allows additional land
uses only to the mini®un extent necessary to avoid said
imconseitational tWdng of the landowner's property, and protects to
the maximum extent possible the character of the immediately
surrounding residential neighborhoods.
A. Upon the effective date of this initiative, the provisions of Section 2 of the
initiative are inserted into the band Use Element of the City of Saratoga General Plan as an
amendment thereof; a ept that if the four amendments of the mandatory elements of the general
plan permitted by state law for any given calendar year have already been utilized in 1996 prior to
the effective date of this initiative, this general plan amendrnart shall be the first amendment .
inserted in the City's General Plan on January 1, 1997. At such time as this genaal plan
amendment is inserted in the City General Plan, any provisions of the City Zoning Ordinance, as .
reflected in the ordinance itself or the City of Saratoga Zoning Map. inconsistent with that
amendment shall not be enfonxd to the extent of the inconsistency.
B. The provisions of this initiative and the terms it adds to the City's General Plan
shall supersede any conflicting provisions of the GenaW Plan and Zomng Ordinance that may be
enacted by the City C=xil between the date this initiative is filed with the City and the effective
�, '�_
Pap !dis
date of the initiative. Upon the effective date of the initiative, an general plan amendments,
rezonings, specific plans, tentative or final subdivision maps, conditional use permits, building
permits and other ministerial and discretionary entitlements for use not yet approved or issued
shall be approved or issued _only if consistent with the policies and provisions of this initiative.
This initiative shall not apply to any development project which-has obtained as of the
effective date of the initiative a vested right pursuant to state law.
Section 5. Seversbifity_
If any portion of this initiative is declared invalid by a court, the remaining portions are to
be considered valid.
Section 6_ Amendment a
This initiative may be
City election.
8 2y -9s
10.1 S HOS%C4 o,►.
SarCLZoga.. CA 9so�o
E.7m -es Shaw
[.Re=al.
amended or repealed only by the voters of the City of Saratop at a
% 4 SY 4 Vow. w�,ec �•
(34412Ib , CR 960- g"..'
rsP 10 of 18
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE G
Traffic, noise, and congestion have increased dramatically in Saratoga Should your
neighborhood Interests be sacrificed to the. Chy's quest for Increased taut revenues?
The Saratoga Neighborhood Preservation Initiative is very straightforward. It
accomplishes two things. A simple majority vote of the people will be required is 1) a
developer wants to change casting residential land to commercial or industrial use, or
rezone for high density, or, 2) the City wants to convert existing park land to commercial
or residential use. Situations where an owner has vested rights, other potential "takings"
situations, and developments allowing Saratoga's General Plan to comply with State
housing requirements, are specifically excluded from vote requirements.
This Initiative is not retroactive, nor does it reduce any property owner's current
entitlements.
City costs will be negligible: any election costs can be passed to the developer applying
for rezoning, A similarly structured Initiative in Napa County, upheld by the California
Supreme Courkhas been In effect for five years without significant problems.
This initiative Is pro-senior. Saratoga's seniors care deeply about maintaining our quiet,
semi -rural atmosphere and about their property values. They are among the least able
to move away from traffic and high density development
This initiative Is the way to:
• Strengthen our current General Plan and zoning ordinances.
- Stabilize development policies, reducing the Impact of changes in Council
membership.
• Protect present zoning at Masson Mountain Winery and surrounding hillsides.
• Prevent the rezoning of park land (Ike Cox and Saratoga - Sunnyvale).
• Reduce high density housing impact on public school classroom size.
Ultimately, this initiative Is about property rights, specifically your right not to find
yourself next to strip commercial development or some other high density, high profit
project that degrades your quality of life.
Help protect Saratoga's future. Vote "yes" on Measure G.
E. JAMES SHAW
18735 Kosich Drive
Saratoga, CA 95070
CHRISTINE FAVERO
19549 Vineyards Lane
Saratoga, CA 95070
KATHLEEN AMEZCUA
14110 Shadow Oak Way
Saratoga, CA 95070
REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE G
January 16,1996
The opposition argument is false and misleading. The City Council must be very
frightened of Saraitogans voting on important land use issues. Otherwise, they would
not resort to scare tactics.
Lie: "Measure G freezes Saratoga's land use policies for the next 30 years.'
Reality: Nothing is "frozen ". Land use policies can change under Measure G; and, only
certain designated changes require a vote.
Myth: "Special elections cost taxpayers and the City $60,000 per election ".
Reality: This special election is costing less than $7,000. Under this Initiative, any
F— costs can be passed on entirely to the developer.
Lie: "In the last 24 years not one residentially zoned parcel has been converted to
commercial use."
Reality: Untrue. For Example: Mayor Jaoobs himself wrote that land at Cox and
Sunnyvale-Saratoga was rezoned from residential to commercial in 1993.
Deception: Minor projects like adding a second bedroom could require voter approval.
Reality: Absurd. Existing Clry practice has been to grant variances rather than amend
the General Plan for minor projects. This practice would be unchanged by
Measure G.
Measure G strengthens our current General Plan, returning to residents some control
over increases in traffic, congestion, density and commercial developments. We
deserve a direct vote before the City converts parks to residential or oommercial uses,
or converts resldentiaT) d to commercial or high density.uses.
Travel Saratoga Avenue. Ask yourself I the City has adequately protected Saratoga or
neighborhood interests. Don't be misled by scare tactics. VOTE YES ON MEASURE G.
E. JAMES SHAW, President CHRISTINE A. FAVERO, President
Saratoga Woods Park The Vineyards of Saratoga
Homeowners Assoc. Homeowners Assoc.
KATHLEEN AMEZCUA
Saratoga Business Owner