The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-27-2003 Planning Commission Packet~T • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: , Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Cynthia Barry, Mohammad Garakani, Susie Nagpal, Michael Schallop, Mike Uhl, Ruchi Zutshi and Chair Jill Hunter ABSENT: Commissioner Schallop Staff: Planner Oosterhous, Director Sullivan, and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 23, 2003. (Approved 5-0-1, Garakani Abstain) ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staf f. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 21, 2003. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR - None PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Monday, a week before the meeting. 1. APPLICATION #03-150, ALAIN PINEL REALTORS: Appeal of An Administrative Decision; Alain Pinel Realtors located in the Saratoga Oaks Shopping Center near the intersection of Cox Avenue and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road has filed an appeal of an administrative decision made pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-30.070, Criteria for review of application. The administrative decision included the denial of a sign permit, which was not in compliance with the sign program for the center. (CHRISTINE OOSTERHOUS) (APPROVED 6-0) `` ~. \ r • • DIRECTORS ITEM None COMMISSION ITEMS 2. The Planning Commission has requested. a discussion regarding an existing generator located at 14038 Chester Avenue. POSSIBLE FUTURE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REQUIRING A USE PERMIT COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN City Council Minutes from Regular Meetings on June 18, 2003, July 2, 2003 and July 16, 2003. ADJOURNMENT AT 8::45 PM TO THE NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, September 10, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale avenue, Saratoga, CA If you would like to receive the Agenda's via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to planning@saratoga.ca.us CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 7:00 p.m: PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Cynthia Bang, Mohammad Garakani, Susie Nagpal, Michael Schallop, Mike Uhl, Ruchi Zutshi and Chair Jill Hunter PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 23, 2003 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Communications underPlanning Commission direction to Staff. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 21, 2003. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" .with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR - None PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Monday, a week before the meeting. 1. APPLICATION #03-150, ALAIN PINEL REALTORS: Appeal of An Administrative Decision; Alain Pinel Realtors located in the Saratoga Oaks Shopping Center near the intersection of Cox Avenue and ,Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road has filed an appeal of an administrative decision made pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-30.070, Criteria for review of application. The administrative decision included the denial of a sign permit, which was not in compliance with the sign program for the center. (CHRISTINE OOSTERHOUS) DIRECTORS ITEM - None COMMISSION ITEMS 2. The Planning Commission has requested a discussion regarding an existing generator located at 14038 Chester Avenue. COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN - City Council Minutes from Regular Meetings on June 18, 2003, July 2, 2003 and July 16, 2003. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, September 10, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA ~: • If you would like to receive the Agenda's via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to plannin @sg arato ag_ ca.us • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION LAND USE AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 -12:00 ri00ri PLACE: City Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Land Use Committee SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 2003 C7 ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1. Application #03-150 - ALAIN PINEL REALTORS Item 1 12772 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 2. Commission Item - DORNBLASER Item 2 14038 Chester Avenue LAND USE COMMITTEE The Land Use Committee is comprised of interested Planning Commission members. The committee conducts site visits to properties which are new items on the Planning Commission agenda. The site visits are held on the Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing, between 12:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. It is not necessary for the applicant to be present, but you are invited to join the Committee at the site visit to answer any questions, which may arise. Site visits are generally short (S to 10 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the public hearing. C • O V MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Hunter called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Hunter, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi Absent: Commissioner Garakani Staff: Director Tom Sullivan, Associate Planner John Livingstone and Associate Planner Christine Oosterhous PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of July 9, 2003. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Uhl, seconded by Commissioner Barry, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of July 9, 2003, were adopted with a correction to page 6. (6-0-1; Commissioner Garakani was absent) ORAL COMMUNICATION There were no Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Tom Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 17, 2003. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Chair Hunter announced that appeals are possible for any decision made on this Agenda by filing an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15.90.050(b). Director Tom Sullivan clarified one exception in that the Appeal of the Administrative Decision to grant a Tree Removal Permit will be final with whatever decision is made by the Planning Commission. • Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar Items. PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 *** APPLICATION #03-019 (APN 503-82-027 and 028) - SHARMA 13095 Paramount Court: Request Design Review Approval to construct a new one-story 6,141 square foot house with a 2,091 square foot basement on a vacant -lot. The .gross lot. size is 47,288 square feet and zoned R-1-40,000. The maximum .height of the residence will be approximately 23.5 feet. Continued from meeting on July 9, 2003. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE) Associate Planner.John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review approval to allow the construction of a new. one-story 6,141 square foot house with 2,091 square foot basement on a vacant lot. The maximum height would be 23.5 feet. • Described this as a unique lot, located at the end of a road and abutting an existing vineyard. • Said that there is no consistent design pattern in the immediate area. • Stated that the proposed home would consist of stucco siding and stone in a light brown: The roofing would consist of brown tile. • S-aid that this project meets the Residential Design Guideline policies as it works around existing mature trees and incorporates a varying roofline and stone along the -front facade, details that add character and interest to the project. • Stated that there is good privacy to adjacent properties and .that this home exceeds ;required setbacks. • Advised that there are 23 protected trees on the site and that the applicant is proposing to remove two small palm trees located on the front property line. • Added that the Arborist's recommendations have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. • Said that input was received from two neighbors and the applicant has attempted to mitigate their concerns. One change was a revision to the landscape plan to increase the distance of the pool equipment from the shared side property line by an additional five feet. Additionally, asix-foot high fence would also mitigate visual impacts. • Said that a grove of redwood trees had been proposed but instead African Locust will be planted, which grows to a maximum height of 30 feet, out of deference to concerns of one neighbor over losing distance views if trees grew too high • Said that the project is modest and fits in well on the site: • .Recommended approval. Commissioner Barry said that it does not appear on the plans that the pool equipment has been moved: Commissioner Uhl pointed out that the plan still reads redwood trees. Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the distance for the pool equipment from the property line has been increased by five feet for a total of 12 feet in distance. Said that the right hand side of the plan should be clouded and pointed out that the redwood mentioned is for the fencing to screen equipment. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003. Page 3 Commissioner Uhl asked if the neighbor has seen the revised plans and is comfortable with the changes. Associate Planner John Livingstone said he would defer response of that question to the applicant. Chair Hunter opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Marty Oakley, Project Designer and Builder: • Said that the plans speak for themselves. • Said he is available to answer any architectural questions and advised that the landscape architect. is on vacation. Commissioner Barry asked about the amount of impervious surfaces and asked if inclusion of pervious pavers has been considered. Mr. Marty Oakley said that the amount of impervious surface is called out on the plans. Commissioner Barry pointed out that the amount proposed is close to the maximum allowed. Associate Planner John Livingstone advised that the applicant is proposing to use cobble pavers on sand and this is shown on the landscape plan. • Mr. Marty Oakley said that the site has 32.5 percent in impervious surface and that stone pavers will be used for the driveway. Commissioner Barry asked about the pool deck material. Mr. Marty Oakley said probably concrete. Commissioner Barry questioned the different window treatments on either side of the front entrance. Mr. Marty Oakley said that this architectural style is a traditional early Californian Santa Barbara style. What is proposed is conducive to that architectural design, including the fixed shutter to the right. Commissioner Zutshi pointed out that there is symmetry everywhere but there. Mr. Marty Oakley countered that the only thing symmetrical is the fact that there is 14 feet on both sides of the entry. Commissioner Barry asked if the reason for this is functional or aesthetic. Mr. Marty Oakley said that the style of ,house is Santa Barbara, a very simple and elegant design. These features are aesthetic rather than functional. i Chair Hunter asked how tall the entrance is. Mr. Marty Oakley: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 4 • Replied that-the ceiling height is 14 feet, the roof/plate height is 15 feet and that the maximum roof height is 23 feet. • • Clarified that two neighbors raised concerns. • Said that one is concerned about the location of the pool equipment and another with possible loss of -views with the proposed planting of redwood trees. • These issues can be resolved with. the planting of a .lower growing tree and the relocation of the pool equipment. With the. move of the pool equipment about 7 feet to the north and the inclusion of a four-foot redwood fence enclosure for the pool equipment as well as landscaping to better buffer the noise. The Goldfarbs were concerned with potential visual impacts between these two properties. They wanted assurances that the existing landscaping would stay. Said that they are proposing to install asix-foot high, redwood good neighbor fence along that side property line. Said that the Goldfarbs are still concerned and would like the fence to be continued down to the street. • Assured that they would do so if they can but can only go up to 30 feet from the front property line with that fence height. • Pointed out that the new house to the north of the Mathis property has a pool with equipment that is closer than this one will be. Commissioner Uhl asked Mr. Marty Oakley if these changes have been reviewed with the neighbors. Mr. Marty Oakley replied no, saying that he had just created the study before this meeting. Commissioner Uhl asked about a letter mentioned by Mr. Oakley. Mr. Marty Oakley said that Mr. Goldfarb can provide that later. Commissioner Nagpal asked why the pool equipment could only be moved 7 feet. Mr. Marty Oakley said that this is the most logical spot for the pool to stay with the natural terrain. Commissioner Uhl asked if the fencing proposed. falls within Code requirements. Associate Planner John Livingstone said that there is a 30-foot front setback wherein the six-foot fence. height would have to drop down to three feet. Mr. Ray Azzi, 13020 Paramount Court, Saratoga: • Said that he is concerned about the total height of the proposed building. • Said that this is a sloping up lot with a large and very high building; which would increase the apparent size going up the hill. • Reminded that there is already an approved subdivision map for Kennedy Estates. • Said his second area of concern is water runoff. • Stated that a lot of water already comes down the hill in winter and that there is already a problem from up the hill for those down the hill. • Pointed out that this project is bringing more impermeable surface. Mr. Charles Goldfarb, 13075 Paramount Court, Saratoga: . Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 5 ~ Said he has reached agreement. with the applicant regarding the fence and submitted a letter to that fact. Commissioner Barry asked Mr. Goldfarb if he understands the three-foot height limitation for the first 30 feet-with asix-foot height being allowed thereafter. Commissioner Zutshi asked Mr. Goldfarb if there is a runoff problem. Mr. Charles Goldfarb replied yes there is a water runoff problem but that he has been told that drainage plans for this site should reduce that problem. Commissioner Zutshi asked Mr. Goldfarb if his property is lower than this property. Mr. Charles Goldfarb said that there is a substantial elevation difference and their property is lower. Agreed that there is a runoff issue. Commissioner Uhl asked Mr. Goldfarb if he is satisfied with just having the six-foot fence height up to the 30-foot setback requirement or whether he also wants the fence to continue thereafter at the allowed three-foot height. Associate Planner John Livingstone clarified that it would be 41 feet back from the street before the six- foot fence could start. . Chair Hunter suggested that this issue be left for staff to work out. Commissioner Uhl suggested screening trees or bushes. Mr. Charles Goldfarb said that he would like for the fence to go up to the window line at his house. 1VIs. Kathryn Kennedy, Saratoga: • Said that she owns several contiguous properties, including the vineyard, and that she does not think that her concerns have been properly conveyed. • Said that she objects to things being jammed into a corner of the property that should not be used at all. • Said that over the last 30 years she has watched an oak grove grow into a natural buffer. Now a center portion has been removed in order to position this house and pool. • Added that she felt that this was illegally done but when she sent a letter to the City to .complain, it was ignored. Commissioner Uhl asked Ms. Kennedy what alternatives she would recommend. Ms. Kathryn Kennedy replied anything gained by the removal of the oak tree. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the proper permit was obtained. • Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes. The necessary permit was obtained on August 6, 2002. Ms. Kathryn Kennedy questioned why notification was not required. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 6 Chair Hunter .said that in the future, with the pending adoption of a .Tree Ordinance, such notification would be required but that it was not required in the past. Commissioner Zutshi asked Ms. Kennedy if one tree was removed or many. Ms. Kathryn Kennedy said that she could not tell. Before it was a solid mass but now the center portion has been taken out. Commissioner Nagpal asked Ms. Kennedy if she had discussed the proposed replacement trees with the applicant. Ms. Kathryn Kennedy replied no. Commissioner Nagpal asked how Ms. Kennedy would like the area screened so that her view is not impacted. Ms. Kathryn Kennedy said she liked the oak trees but it is hard to put them back. Added that pushing the house into that corner is increasing the appearance from the street. Mr. Marty Oakley said that the removed tree was not in good condition. It was just one tree and was removed with the required permit. Commissioner Nagpal asked for the purpose for the removal of this tree. Mr. Marty Oakley advised that many of the branches were resting on the ground and pruning would .not help it. Commissioner Nagpal asked if an Arborist had determined that the tree must be removed. Mr. Marty Oakley: • Said he would defer that question to the owner. • Said as to the issue of runoff, this parcel is currently vacant. Once it is developed, the property will contain all the roof and surface drainage through two dissipaters on the property. This house will not make the runoff situation worse but rather will make it better. Additionally, if water from above this property drains down, it too will be handled with these dissipaters. Associate Planner John Livingstone: • Advised that homes constructed with a basement require a grading plan by a licensed engineer. The geotechnical report was prepared and peer reviewed and approved by the City's geotechnical engineer. • Pointed out Condition 6, which requires a Storm Water Retention Plan to keep water on site and percolate it: Mr. Marty Oakley said that this is a typical requirement in Saratoga. Said that it is important to maintain water on site and not disperse it to other properties. Said that the roof on this home has a shallow pitch that is in proportion with the size of the building. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page.? • U • Commissioner Barry asked Mr. Marty Oakley if he had considered siting the house more forward. Mr: Marty Oakley: • Said that the house has been sited dead center in the middle of the lot to minimize the need for cut and for fill. Said that the maximum cut will be four feet-and the maximum fill will be two feet. • Stated that the house is not pushed back as there is still a 50 foot rear setback. • Added that the house siting is the best for this design. • Reminded that they saved all the trees and worked around all the constraints including slope, setbacks and trees. Chair Hunter asked why the African Locust tree was selected. Mr. Marty Oakley replied that this species only grows to a 30-foot height and that the Landscape Architect selected that tree. Added that Ms. Kennedy's house is 15 feet lower-than her grade and that she would hear her existing neighbor's pool equipment but not this house's pool equipment. Commissioner Nagpal asked what size African Locust tree would be planted. Mr. Marty Oakley said 24-inch box. Commissioner Nagpal asked how high these trees are. Mr. Marty Oakley replied 30-foot maximum height. Commissioner Nagpal clarified her question as to how high the tree would be when planted as a 24-inch box tree. Mr. Marty Oakley hazarded a guess of between 10 to 12 feet in height. Chair Hunter asked why not plant oaks. Mr. Marty Oakley said he could not answer that question as he was not part of that discussion between the Landscape Architect and the client. Stated that they had originally said they would plan whatever was suggested but that the neighbor never made a specific suggestion so they just chose something themselves. Added that if the owners agree, oaks are possible: Commissioner Nagpal asked if the water that drains through the dissipaters is considered cleaner. Associate Planner John Livingstone said he could not really say. Director Tom Sullivan said that it is generally better. Mr. Ray Azzi questioned when the site. survey was done, which states there is no spring on this property. Mr. Marty Oakley replied March. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 8 Mr. Ray Azzi said that kids like to go off-roading there and that he believes that there is a seasonal spring on this property and that there might be more water on the property than is believed: Mr. Marty Oakley reminded that they are putting in a basement. Chair Hunter suggested a Condition requiring the review of the Storm Drain plans. . Director Tom Sullivan reminded the Commission that they are reviewing Design Review. Mr. Marty Oakley assured that there is no spring, on this property. Director Tom Sullivan added that the applicant's geotechnical engineer's report was peer reviewed by the City's geotechnical engineer. Commissioner Barry said that seasonal changes frequently occur in the City of Saratoga. Mr. Marty Oakley said that while they cannot stop what water comes on site from above, they will control what water is on the site. Chair Hunter closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Zutshi said that while this is a big house; the houses around it are big too. Added that she has no problem with the height.- Commissioner Nagpal: • Said that in general the design looks quite nice and she is happy with it. • Said that the storm water issue is not a large enough issue to condition further.. There are enough stopgap measures to address them. • Agreed that the fencing issue can be worked out with the Goldfarbs. • Said she is concerned about the removal of the oak tree and the selection of the African. Locust because it is not too tall. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that the tree removal issue is in the past. Commissioner Schallop said he is fine with the proposal. Commissioner Uhl said he is fine with the design and pointed out that the applicant has made significant effort to meet the needs of his neighbors. Suggested further review of the corner landscaping. Director Tom Sullivan said that this can be left for staff, the applicant and neighbor to resolve: Commissioner Barry said she would like to see pervious pavers required for the driveway and called out as a Condition. •I • Associate Planner John Livingstone assured that this would be called out in.the plans. • Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 9 Commissioner Barry suggested crafting a Condition to allow staff to work with the applicant and • neighbors on the fence-and landscaping issues. Chair Hunter: • Said that the design of the home is very nice albeit very large. • Said she could imagine the shock for someone living in the area a long time to see new large homes added to the neighborhood. • Said that she would be voting yes on this application with the stipulation that the applicant and staff works with the Goldfarbs and Kennedys. Chair Hunter reopened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Ms. Emma Wyckoff; 18660 Paseo Lado, Saratoga: • Pointed out that several details have been deferred to staff. • Said that she has had experience with things being deferred to staff and that she did not think that staff did a good job. • Suggested that the neighbors would be better served if the Planning Commission not let go of these issues entirely. Commissioner Barry asked Ms. Wyckoff what neighborhood she lives in Ms. Emma Wyckoff replied the El Quito Neighborhood. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that the project of concern to Ms. Wyckoff was well under construction prior to the arrival of any of the current Planning staff. Mr. Charles .Goldfarb said he wanted to clarified the understanding that his request for a fence was approved by the applicant and that the only issue is the fence height for the first 30 feet at the front setback. Chair Hunter reclosed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Barry, seconded by Commissioner Uhl, the Planning Commission granted a Design Review approval to allow the construction of a new single-story residence on property located at 13095 Paramount Court, with the added condition that the applicant work with the Kennedys on the number, type and size of trees to be planted on the rear property line and to work with the Goldfarbs on the height of the side property fence within the 30 foot front setback, and to report back to the Planning Commission on the outcome of these details, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Barry, Hunter, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Garakani ABSTAIN: None Associate Planner John Livingstone said that staff could update the Commission as a Director's Item. Commissioner Zutshi asked if there should be a time limit. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 10 Director Tom Sullivan said that it would be brought back as soon as the issues have been resolved.. . *** PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM N0.2 APPLICATION #03 140 (APN 403-27-030) -Appellant CORSON Site Location:. 18372 Swarthmore Drive: Appeal of an Administrative Decision to issue a Tree Removal permit at 18372 Swarthmore to removed a large Redwood tree. The tree in question is a 161-inch, mature Redwood and is located next to the driveway. Continued from meeting on July 9, 2003. (TOM SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this is an appeal of an Administrative Decision to allow. the 'removal of one of two trees. The Administrative Decision can be appealed but the decision by the Planning Commission will be final. • Said that the appellant has provided a great deal of material. • Pointed out that there are lots of mature trees in this area and- that the property owner had asked to remove two trees but only one tree was approved for removal due to damage to the driveway as shown at the site visit. This tree is considered to be placed in a bad location and that a mistake was made 50 years ago to plant this tree in a bad place. • Said that the value of the tree is derived by the Arborist. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the City defines what a heritage tree is L_J Director Tom Sullivan replied that in the proposed Tree Ordinance it is recommended that a Heritage Tree Committee be formed. Right now the only designated heritage trees are in the Heritage Tree Orchard. Chair Hunter sought clarification that in the future, upon adoption of the Tree Ordinance, that notices will be provided of such Administrative Decisions for Tree Removals. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Chair Hunter asked if staff inspectors go out and look at trees proposed for removal. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes, if the trees are of a certain size. Chair Hunter asked if the City's Arborist also goes out. Director Tom Sullivan replied not at this level. If necessary, staff would have the owner pay for an independent Arborist report. Commissioner Barry asked if there is any remediation techniques available. Director Tom Sullivan said that the most logical was to use pavers but that idea was rejected because of utility and sewer laterals. Added that if the driveway is removed and put back it, it would need his approval if located within eight feet of this tree. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 11 Chair Hunter opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. Tom Corson, Appellant, 18337 Swarthmore Drive, Saratoga: • Thanked the Commission for its attention. • Asked if the Commissioners have had time to' read his two packets as it would save, a lot of time if .they had. ' • Said he has lived on Swarthmore Drive for 25 years. It was his first home and the only home he-has. owned. • Said that when he first moved in, there were three large trees, two in back and one in front. These were big huge conifers with large trunks. All three are gone today. • Stated that his backyard was as secluded as being in the woods and now he looks at power lines. • Said that there are two more trees on his own property in front, a Chinese Elm and a Redwood that is approximately 20 feet tall. • Added that he counts these two Redwood trees on his neighbor's property as his too. If one is allow to be removed, this would equal four trees out of seven that are gone from his immediate area. • Said that the Redwood proposed for removal is a magnificent tree and the only reason. given for its removal is that it damages the gutter and driveway. • Stated his disbelief that there is no requirement to replace this tree. • Asked the Planning Commission to think outside of the box, stating that they owe it to that tree; to him and his neighbors to do that. • Asked that this tree not be removed simply because- the tree is inconvenient or costs the .property owner money for maintenance. • Said that homeowners have a responsibility for their trees, to maintain them and to 'take care of any damage to concrete. • Handed out material from the City of Sunnyvale's Arborist. • Distributed something in support of saving this tree as written by Miss Elizabeth Mercado, his five- year-old neighbor. • Provided data that gas mains have never been impacted by a big tree.. Commissioner Uhl expressed appreciation to Mr. Corson for the truly commendable efforts he has devoted to this issue. Asked if any other neighbors, other than the three who have signed his materials, have also signed a petition in support of this tree. Mr. Tom Corson replied no. He added that the- four households have worked on this issue together but that they did not attempt to petition the entire neighborhood. He added that the only one who wants this tree gone is the property owner. Director Tom Sullivan clarified that staff notified all property owners within 500 feet of this evening's public hearing. Mr. Tom Corson expressed his appreciation for the way the City has dealt with him when he raised concerns over this Administrative Decision to allow this tree removal. Commissioner Nagpal thanked Mr. Corson for all his handouts and assured that .she has, read all materials and appreciated receiving it. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 12 Ms. Elizabeth Lara on behalf of her father, Mr. Ole Lara, 18324 Swarthmore Drive, Saratoga: • .Read comments from her father to the Commissioners. • Stated that her dad has resided in Saratoga. for 60 years, 40 of those years at this home on Swarthmore Drive. • Urged the Commission to save this tree. • Expressed his surprise that the City never notified him of the pending removal of a 110-foot tree as well as the fact that his neighbor also did not notify him. . • Stated the potential for harm in the removal of this tree. • Said that the tree has a value and its removal would have impacts on property values in the neighborhood especially with no requirement for its replacement upon removal. • Pointed out that another property recently illegally removed six trees and that nothing was done to correct that situation when reported to the Planning Department. • Asked the Commission to please consider ways to save this tree. Ms. Mary McGuire, 18336 Swarthmore Drive, Saratoga: • Said that she has lived in her home for 7.5 years and remembers the first time she drove down the street, appreciating the wide street, lack of sidewalks and beautiful trees. • .Said that it is important to preserve that which makes Saratoga special. If this is not done, one may as well live in North San Jose. Ms. Encamara Panadero, 18325 Clenson Avenue, Saratoga: • Said that she has lived in Saratoga for 28 years, four years in this home. • Pointed out that the six trees removed were not replaced with large trees but only with small trees. Ms. Elizabeth Lara, 18872 Devon Avenue, Saratoga: • Asked Director Tom Sullivan to describe awell-treed neighborhood. Director Tom Sullivan said that it is a visual subjective analysis that observes. that there are a lot of mature trees. Ms. Elizabeth Lara: • Declared that she is here to protect the life of a childhood friend, this Redwood tree. • Said that she lived on Swarthmore Drive for 20 years and played hide and go seek around this large tree, enjoyed its shade and many other memories. Said that the tree is home to birds and other wildlife and is a part of the local scenery. • Deplored the idea of executing this beautiful tree and asked when is this going to end. • Stated that she contact other organizations for ideas about how to save this tree. • Pointed out that in America the tree canopy is rapidly diminishing and it appears that no one in the City is enforcing tree protection. • Stated that this is a beautiful, majestic Redwood tree. • Pointed out that the timber value alone for a tree this size is from $14 to $35 per ton and from $25 to $45 per ton for a Coastal Redwood. With about 500 tons, the value of the timber alone is from $12,500 to $22,500. • Questioned how to place a true value on a tree that provides oxygen, shade and beauty. • Recited a poem about trees into the record. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 13 Commissioner Zutshi asked. Ms. Lara if she had asked these organizations what methods would allow the tree to be kept where it is.' Ms. Elizabeth Lara said that it is considered to be more dangerous to remove this tree than it would be to simply leave it where it is due to the types of equipment necessary to do the job of removing the tree and its roots. Commissioner Nagpal expressed her love of the poem recited by Ms. Lara and asked her if there are .any technical discussions on saving the tree, including steel plates and/or trimming roots and what the survivability might be if these techniques were to be used. Ms. Elizabeth Lara. said that the discussion was primarily. the decline of City forestation and canopy, which is a serious issue. Ms. Emma Wyckoff, 18660 Paseo Lado, Saratoga: • Expressed her sympathy over the neighbors' concerns over trees. • Said that she herself is concerned about loss of trees. • Pointed out that a towering. spec development was build on the property to the north of hers and that three elms have lost their crowns. Another tree on her property will have to be .removed as it was damaged by a contractor installing a sewer lateral. • Said that she appreciates the effort of the neighbors to save the tree and encourage the Commission to do something. • Said that she loves trees and feels they are important and suggested a middle ground be reached. i • Said she appreciated the efforts underway tonight. Mr. Mark Beaudoin, Arborist and Property Owner's Representative: • Stated that this is a human versus tree issue. • Said that the biggest concern is trying to plant the right tree in the right location. • Described damage costs in other local cities from trees. • Said that replanting of a replacement tree in the same neighborhood should be required. • Suggested that perhaps the neighbors might share the cost of repairing the damage in lieu of removing this tree. • Agreed that this is a nice Redwood tree but that it is located too close to major structural improvements. • Warned that Redwoods need space and this is the wrong tree for this location. Chair Hunter pointed out that the City of San Jose is asking its residents to plant trees. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Mark Beaudoin if he is here on behalf of the property owner. Mr. Mark Beaudoin replied yes. Commissioner Nagpal. asked Mr. Mark Beaudoin why the property owner had originally sought the removal of the two Redwood trees. • Mr. Mark Beaudoin replied that it is hard to grow anything beneath these trees and that they shade the entire front yard. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 14 Commissioner Nagpal said that they appear very healthy. Mr. Mark Beaudoin said that they need more space to expand without doing further damage: Commissioner Nagpal asked if the tree would survive the installation of steel, plates to limit the direction of the roots. ' Mr. Mark Beaudoin replied that in order to install these steel plates, major roots would have to be cut, which could be detrimental to the tree. Commissioner Barry asked Mr. Mark Beaudoin if he resides in Saratoga. Mr. Mark Beaudoin replied no. Commissioner Barry asked if he visits Saratoga often. Mr. Mark Beaudoin replied yes. Commissioner, Barry asked Mr. Mark Beaudoin if he would be willing to become more involved in some sort of Tree Program for the City. Mr. Mark Beaudoin replied sure, he would love to. Commissioner Uhl said that everyone agrees on the importance of trees but questioned the decision not to require replacement. Mr. Mark Beaudoin said that mitigation measures could be worked out and that it would actually be better to distribute trees to other properties in the immediate neighborhood. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Mark Beaudoin if he is aware of any occurrence of gas main damage due to tree roots. Mr. Mark Beaudoin replied yes, roots do break lines. Mr. Tom Corson: • Rebutted the idea that tree roots have resulted in gas leaks and pointed out a document .for 1999 in which not a single such occurrence is documented. • Said that while installation of steel plates may be detrimental to a tree, cutting it down would definitely be detrimental. • Said that the issues raised to support the removal are not valid. They include economic interference, utility services and the overruling of the use of pavers instead of concrete for the. driveway. • Stated that interference with utilities is not a valid reason to remove this tree. • Declared the tree to be irreplaceable. • Said that this property owner is not motivated to save this tree but that they should sharpen their pencils and come up with alternatives to the removal of this tree. • • Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 15 Chair Hunter closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Director Tom Sullivan advised that the Commission needs to use the five criteria outlined in the staff report to support its action on this matter. Reminded that the issue is simply Mr. Corson's appeal of the Tree Removal Permit and not to define alternative designs in paving, etc. There is no vehicle to further condition this matter. Instead the property owner would have to hire someone to design an alternative. Commissioner Barry: • Thanked those who spoke for their eloquent statements and for all their research. • Urged them not to stop and simply go away after this case is settled. • Said that the City needs people who feel strongly and would be active to help with this issue. • Encouraged them to continue their involvement. as it is not just this tree but rather it is a citywide problem. • Said that she has heard about the research from other cities. • Said that she feels very strongly that the Planning Commission and staff are on the same page about saving trees. • Agreed that the need for tree canopy and concerns over the ozone layer are serious issues. • Said that one could make just as good a case for not granting as for supporting the appeal. • Stated that the tree is an extremely healthy tree with no evidence .that it interferes with utility services. • Said that it is not necessary to remove the tree for economic reasons since it would cost a lot to remove this tree. • Pointed out that typography issues do not apply in this case. • Said that the tree is considered to be a neighborhood icon and keeping it does not deny the property owner of property value. • Said that she did not believe the property could support a replacement tree in the same location. • Stated that she can make the necessary findings to support this appeal. Commissioner Nagpal said that the criteria is not there for Finding #1. Said that the economic enjoyment of the property does not require the removal of the tree although the driveway does need to be fixed. Said that Finding #3 does not apply. Concurred with Commissioner Barry. Director Tom Sullivan clarified that the reason there is no vehicle for conditions is since this is simply. an appeal. If the appeal is granted, the property owner can either do nothing or come in 'with a plan to fix the driveway. Commissioner Uhl said that a lot of-great points have been made and that the Commission needs to think out of the box to save this tree. Said that City staff has been put in a bad situation and that they serve as strong enforcers of the values of the City of Saratoga. However, the Commission should appeal this particular decision. Commissioner Schallop said that while he appreciates what is being said, this is a great tree in the wrong location. Said he would deny the appeal since there are two trees in this yard. Added that if this were his property, he too would want this tree removed. Added that it was a mistake to place the tree in • this location. Commissioner Zutshi said that she is torn between both options and cannot yet come to a conclusion. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 16 Chair Hunter: • Said that she passed by a similar tree with pavers below it. • Agreed with what the others have said. • Said that she lost a tree on her own property that she sorely misses. • Stated that there is no reason to take this tree out. • Expressed disagreement that Swarthmore is a heavily treed street. • Thanked the neighbors for their fight for this tree. • Encouraged people to address Council with the Tree Ordinance is considered for adoption. Director Tom Sullivan said that the attached resolution can either be amended this evening or staff can bring back the final product as a consent item on the next agenda. Commissioner Nagpal suggested placing the revised resolution on the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Zutshi suggested that the neighbors consider the idea of helping with the costs of driveway repair. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Barry, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, the Planning Commission upheld the appeal and overturned the administrative approval of a Tree Removal Permit to allow the removal of a 161-inch, mature Redwood tree located next to the driveway on property located at 18372 Swarthmore Drive, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Barry, Hunter, Nagpal, Uhl and Zutshi • NOES: Schallop ABSENT: Garakani ABSTAIN: None Chair Hunter call for a break at 9:30 p.m. Chair Hunter reconvened the meeting at 9:35 p.m: x~** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.3 APPLICATION #03=131 (397-07-039) - SHARMA, 15211 Sobe~Road: Request for Design Review Approval to construct atwo-story residence and attached three-car garage. More than 50 percent of the existing two-story residence will be demolished, therefore, the project is considered a new two-story residence. The proposed residence including garage will be 5,842 square feet. A stucco exterior siding and a concrete the roof material are proposed. The gross lot size is 60,661 square feet. The property is zoned R-1-40,000. (CHRISTINE OOSTERHOUS) Associate Planner Christine Oosterhous presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review Approval to allow the demolition of 50 percent of an existing two-story residence and construction of a 5,842 square foot, including garage, single- . family residence. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 17 • Described the zoning as R-1-40,000, the maximum height as 25 feet and the actual lot size as 60,661 square feet with a 19 percent average slope. • Said that the proposed home would consist of a stucco finish and gray concrete roof tiles. The new home will not exceed the roofline of the existing residence. • Said that one revision is outstanding to require large windows on both sides of the front facade: • Explained that one Coast Redwood is expected to decline and is proposed to be replaced. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Barry thanked staff for providing revised plans. Commissioner Nagpal sought clarification that this application is before the Planning Commission as a courtesy since the sections of the Code to require such review have not yet been adopted. Associate Planner Christine Oosterhous replied correct, adding that the applicant has been patient. Chair Hunter opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Mr. Ron Ikes, Architect: • Said he is available for questions. • Pointed out that the window in front is not being seen in perspective and that neither window could be seen simultaneously and it would therefore not be visible that they are different. One side serves as a picture window while coming up the stairs while the other is an operating window on the other side. Commissioner Zutshi pointed out page A13 of the plans which demonstrates Mr. Ikes' comments. Mr. Ron Ikes said they are not sure what to do with Tree #5. The report says to cut it back. Added that if they should decide to remove this tree, they will seek necessary permits to do so. Associate Planner Christine Oosterhous said that it would be replaced in valuation Mr. Ron Ikes said that there is a gap between two properties that needs to be filled in but that two to three trees would be very appropriate while five would not. Commissioner Uhl pointed out that the total number is not the issue but rather the comparable. value between what is removed and what replaces it. Mr. Ron Ikes said okay. Commissioner Uhl asked if the neighbors sat down and discussed the plans prior to signing off on them. Mr. Raghav Sharma replied absolutely. He added that everyone was happy. Said that they support having lots of trees and, if necessary, would spend the money necessary to plant trees on neighboring properties. Commissioner Barry brought up the neighbor to the left who was concerned that trees were to be cut down. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 18 Mr. Raghav Sharma said that no one raised such a concern. ' e Oosterhous advised that the nei hbor had ex ressed concern over the Associate Planner Chnstm g P potential removal of trees in the future since these trees offer such good screening. Chair Hunter closed the Public Hearing, for Agenda Item No. 3. Commissioner Nagpal said that this project will improve the property; will look nice and she will support it. ' , Commissioner Schallop agreed. " ' Commissioner Zutshi announced that she had received a call from the applicant who wanted to know if she would be allowed to come to this meeting. Advised that she encourage her to do so. Expressed support for this project. Commissioner Barry said that they windows in question are okay with her. Commissioner Zutshi agreed that they would not be seen at the same time. Commissioner Uhl said that he would support this request and appreciates the efforts made. Chair Hunter said she would support and that it looks fine. Assured that applicants are welcome to call and speak with the Planning Commissioners. ~ • Commissioner Nagpal expressed her surprise that Mrs. Sharma did not speak out. Mrs. Seema Sharma thanked the Commissioners for visiting her home and assured that they spent much time with each neighbor. Thanked the Commission for its support. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner .Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Barry, the Planning Commission granted Design Review Approval to allow the construction of a two-story residence and attached three-car garage on property located at 15211 Sobey Road, removing the Condition to require the change. in two front windows, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Barry, Hunter, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi NOES: None. ABSENT: Garakani ABSTAIN: None Associate Planner Christine Oosterhous encouraged Mr. Sharma to advise the rear neighbor if trees are to be removed in the future as a courtesy. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.4 Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 19 APPLICATION #02-129 (503-28-011) - ABACHIZADEH 20981 Canyon View Drive:, The applicant requests Design Review Approval to add 1,422 square feet to the existing house. The addition includes 400 square feet for the conversion of a carport to a garage. The gross lot size is 9,200 square feet and zoned R-1-10,000. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE) Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant seeks Design Review approval to allow a 1,422 square foot addition to an existing home, including enclosing a 400 square foot existing carport. • ,Described the lot as 9,200 square feet with a slope of over 30 percent, which reduces the lot size to 3,680 square feet. • Informed the Commission that the FAR is determined by the Planning Commission for any lot with less than 5,000 square feet. • Said that the total square footage of this home would be 3,,200 square feet, including the carport. This is less than the adjacent neighbors' size homes and lots. • Explained that the project is 90 percent done under a Building Permit, including replacing decks. • Added that the applicant would like to continue with his remodel and enclose some existing areas, which are under existing roof areas. • Informed that this project meets the Residential Design Guidelines as it would have very little impact on the design of the structure and no trees will be removed. • Said that no negative correspondence has been received. • Said that the proposal is consistent with General Plan policies. • Recommended approval and made a correction to the staff report. Chair Hunter opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Ms. Glush Dada, Project Designer, said that there is one area that they would like to extend that might require a Variance. Associate Planner John Livingstone: • Said that he has worked with the applicant for a long time and confirmed the setback.. The proposed addition encroaches on the setback by 1.5 feet and the fix didn't get made on the plans. • Added that a Condition will required that this area be pushed back. • Advised that to keep this as positioned would require a Variance. To process this Variance would require additional noticing and the reaching required findings. Commissioner Barry asked Ms. Dada if they are interested in a vote tonight or a Variance later. Ms. Glush Dada replied that they want to go forward. Commissioner Barry asked if a Variance is possible. Director Tom Sullivan said yes but it would be a new application. Commissioner Zutshi said that this is a very interesting house. Commissioner Uhl questioned whether any neighbors are present. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 20 Mr. Jay Sharma, 20995 Canyon View Drive, Saratoga:. • Said that this is a massive remodel that was. done over the counter with no Planning Commission review. • Said that there are three lots in a row, each the same size., • Expressed concern over privacy at the shared property line, since this home has a new patio that is five to six feet higher than his property at this shared property line. ' • Requested a stucco wall for this patio to allow him continued privacy in his yard as well as additional screening trees. Commissioner Nagpal asked if this is an existing condition or changed as a result of the remodel. Mr. Jay .Sharma replied that this is a change due to the remodel. Added that the retaining wall ends at the property line and that he is concerned that rain will run soil onto his property. Mr. Bijan Abachizadeh, 20981 Canyon View Drive, .Saratoga: • Said that he would love to put in -trees and is willing to discuss what kinds of landscaping is preferred with his neighbor. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Abachizadeh if he supports the installation of a stucco wall. Mr. Bijan Abachizadeh replied if one is allowed. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes. Director Tom Sullivan added that a permit would be required for such a wall. Commissioner Uhl asked if this could be made a Condition of Approval. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Commissioner Barry asked what color the roofing would be. Mr. Bijan Abachizadeh said that they are hoping not to change the roofing as it is only three years old. • Associate Planner John Livingstone added that the applicant is asking to match the existing charcoal gray roof. Commissioner Barry asked if the Commission can make it a condition that the roof color will match existing. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes. Commissioner Schallop said that this is a very interesting house with a great view. Commissioner Uhl said that he agrees with the neighbor's concerns over loss of privacy and bulk but with the addition of native species trees and a stucco wall, he can support this application. Y Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 2I Commissioner Barry agreed and said that the roof color, stucco wall and trees for privacy should be added. Suggested that the concern over soil sliding at the base of the retaining wall. should be investigated. Stated that this is a-very interesting house. Commissioner Zutshi said that she is in favor of this application with conditions and agreed that it is an interesting house. , Commissioner Nagpal concurred. Chair Hunter said that she hopes appropriate trees are selected. Associate Planner John Livingstone said that staff is recommending a row of oleanders instead of trees. Mr. Jay Sharma expressed support for that idea as he already has some oleanders on his property. Reminded that the height of the patio is five feet above his property so the wall would have to be on the patio to offer sufficient privacy screening for his yard. Director Tom Sullivan cautioned that the retaining wall to stabilize soil is a different issue than the privacy wall issue. Chair Hunter closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Barry, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, the Planning Commission granted Design Review Approval to allow a 1,422 square foot addition to an existing house on property located at 20981 Canyon Yiew Drive, with the added conditions: • That the roof color match the existing roof; • That staff work with the applicant and neighbor regarding privacy for the patio, to include a screening stucco wall and landscaping (oleander); • That the slide area be reviewed prior to final; and • That the siding stone match the color sample provided, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Barry, Hunter, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Garakani ABSTAIN: None ~~~ DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Director Tom Sullivan reminded the Commission that the regular meeting of August 13, 2003, has been cancelled. Said that the Special Meeting with the Heritage Preservation Commission will be held on August 5`'' and agendas will be mailed soon. Chair Hunter announced that the Mayor will also be in attendance. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 2003 Page 22 Commissioner Schallop expressed his regrets that he will miss this session since he will be out on business travel. COMMISSION ITEMS COMMUNICATIONS Written: City Council minutes from Regular Meetings on May 21, 2003, and June 4;-2003. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Zutshi, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, Chair Hunter adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of August 27, 2003, at 7:30 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • ~i .ITEM 1 i• REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION .Application No./Location: 03-150;12772 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Type of Application: Appeal of an Administrative Decision -Sign Permit Applicant/Owner:. Alain Pinel Realtors located in the Saratoga Oaks Center Staff Planner: Christine Oosterhous AICP, Associate Planner ~"' Date: August 23,.2003 APN: Department Head: r • N N ~~ E mar __ -- 500 t0i /' ~ '_ _~ -! ~ I ~ Saratoga Cela Centel 9 ~ ~ ~ C Parcels w ifhin 500ft r -. ~~~ ~./ hydro - ~-- ~_: SVeet t~6nes _.. ~ Parcels F. i 1500 2000 ft ~ / ~, ~ ~ I 12772 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Alain Pinel Realtors located in the Saratoga Oaks Shopping Center OOQOQg Application No: 03-1 S0; 12772 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Alain Pinel Realtors CASE HISTORY Appeal filed: 8/05/03 Public hearing conducted: 8/27/03 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Alain Pinel Realtors has filed an appeal of an administrative decision to deny their sign permit application. The application includes replacing existing blue lettering with black lettering and a gold logo. Staff denied the application because the existing sign program for the Saratoga Oaks center restricts facia signage to white or blue lettering. The dimension of. the proposed signage is in compliance with the sign program. Alain Pinel is an existing tenant of the Saratoga Oaks center, which is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Cox Avenue and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. The property owner of the center has provided authorization for the tenant to make application and file the appeal. The Saratoga Oaks center is located in the C-N (neighborhood commercial) zone district. "Sign programs" are defined in the municipal code as general plans for signage. For example, sign programs may regulate dimension, color, material, design, and illumination. Sign programs for the various commercial centers are on file with the Community Development Department. These sign programs prescribe regulations specific to each shopping center. Sign permits for centers with sign programs are reviewed and approved administratively. The signage regulations located in Chapter 15-30 of the Municipal Code, still apply but the sign program regulations take precedent. Most signage for commercial centers along Saratoga-Sunnyvale consists of either. cabinet box illuminated signage or channel lettering signage. Signage at the Saratoga Oak center is channel lettering. All of the facia signage for shopping centers along Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, which consist of channel lettering, have a unifying theme.* In 1987 when the Saratoga Oaks center was established, the sign program adopted by the planning commission restricted facia signage to blue and white colored lettering. Documents on file with the Community Development Department state the goal in establishing specific colors for facia signage was to establish a unifying theme. The color theme has -been maintained since the center was constructed approximately 13 years ago. All existing tenants have blue and/or white lettering for facia signage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION As stated in the sign program for the Saratoga Oaks center; a unifying theme to signage can be achieved by requiring all building signage be the same color. Staff finds the proposed * The Argonaut sign program permits national and/or anchor tenants to use their corporate colors for signage. 000002 Application No. 03-150; 12772 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Alain Pinel Realtors . deviation from the sign program is not consistent with the stated goal of the sign program for Saratoga Oaks center, which was to establish a unifying theme. Staff finds that creating a unifying color theme ,for shopping center signage preserves the natural beauty of the City, maintains the orderliness of the community's appearance, and preserves its residential character. Regulating signage color is essential to maintaining the character of the city and reducing visual clutter; therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission deny the appeal by adopting the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution of Denial. 2. Public Noticing Requirements 3. Proposed Signage, Exhibit "A." 4. Photos of facia signage with channel lettering along Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. • • 000003 Attachment 1 • 00~0~4 RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 03-150. CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Alain Pinel. Realtors WHEREAS, Alain Pinel Realtors has -filed an appeal of an administrative decision to deny their sign permit application. The application includes replacing existing blue lettering with black lettering and a gold logo. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted a duly noticed public .hearing on August 27, 2003 at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and present evidence;-and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that. the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: After careful consideration of the appeal, application, staff report, plans, and, other exhibits submitted in connection with this administrative decision the determination by staff to deny the sign permit, application is upheld by the Planning Commission based on the following findings: • In 1987 when the Saratoga Oaks Center was established, the sign program adopted by the planning commission restricted facia signage to blue and white colored lettering. • Documents on file with the Community Development Department state the goal in establishing specific colors for facia signage was to establish a unifying theme: • The color theme has been maintained since the center was constructed approximately 13 years ago. All existing tenants have blue and/or white lettering for facia signage. • As stated in the sign program for the Saratoga Oaks Center, a unifying theme to signage can be achieved by requiring all building signage be the same color. • The proposed deviation from the sign program is not consistent with the stated goal of the sign program for Saratoga Oaks Center, which was to establish a unifying theme. • Creating a unifying color theme for shopping center signage preserves the natural beauty of the City, maintains the orderliness of the community's appearance, and preserves its residential character. 000005 • Regulating signage color is essential. to maintaining the character of the city and reducing visual clutter. • Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City of held to be liability. of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. PASSED AND ADOPTED, The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, held on the 27`h day of August 2003 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by -the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date • • 004006 0~~4Q~ City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408-868-1222 NOTICE OF HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Wednesday, the 27`h day of August 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. • APPLICATION #03-150, ALAIN PINEL REALTORS: Appeal of An Administrative Decision; Alain Pinel Realtors located in the Saratoga Oaks Shopping Center near the intersection of Cox Avenue and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road has filed an appeal of an administrative decision made pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-30.070, Criteria for review of a sign application. The administrative decision included the denial of a sign permit, which was not in compliance with the sign program for the center. The appellant, Alain Pinel, proposes black lettering and a gold logo. The sign program for the Center restricts signage lettering to the colors of blue and white. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge. a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written. communications should be filed on or before the Tuesday, a week before the meeting. This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor's office annually, in preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of -date information or difficulties with the U.S. Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project. Christine Oosterhous, AICP Associate Planner d~Q~~B • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) .; I, 6' 1~1 11C~`"J~7~~'L~ being duly sworn, deposes and says: that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on the ~ day of ~ _ 2003,. that I deposited in the United States Post Office within S ta. Clara County, a NOTICE OF HEARING, a copy of which is attached hereto, with postage thereon prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses shown, to-wit: (See list attached hereto and made part hereof) that said ersona are the owners of said ro erry who are entitled to a Notice of Hearing P p p pursuant to Section 15-45.060(b) of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga in that said persons and their addresses are those shown on the most recent equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property to be affected by the application; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. ---- __ C>C~ ___ Signed. • Q400Q9 Smooth Feed SheetsT"" tOBERT & SHIRLEY ', ~ANCELLIERI ' 14860 CODY LN 3ARATOGA CA 95070 LOUIS & PAULA PAMBIANCO X0541 WARDELL RD ~ARATOGA CA 95070 RAMESH & PUSHPA SINGH 12528 SPRING BLOSSOM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 MORI 12695 FREDERICKSBURG DR SARATOGA CA 95070 HAMID & SOHEYLA SAJJADI 12757 FREDERICKSBURG DR SARATOGA CA 95070 JERRY D & SUSAN ROSS 12711 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070 WILLIAM S & ANITA LEUNG 12745 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070 PO-CHIN & HWANG LU 12724 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070 SCVWD SUMMER DR SARATOGA CA 95070 I GRACE M & JAMES BALANESI 20385 WOLCOT WAY i SARATOGA CA 95070 BIONDI 205877 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 MARK F & ANN. RYAN 20563 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070_ BARRY D GOTTLIEB 12750 FREDERICKSBURG DR SARATOGA CA 95070 PHILIP J & MEI-HUA ZEE ' 12715 FREDERICKSBURG DR SARATOGA CA 95070 KENNETH B & MARY WILTON 20405 COX AVE ~' SARATOGA CA 95070 JAMES F & KATHY MOCKLER 12729 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070 KENNETH T & DIANE ' FUJIHARA 12753 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070 BYRON A & STEPHANIE ', SCORDELIS. 12716 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070. JOHN G & IVA HOLMES 20395 WOLCOT WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 JOHN W & CAROL BRITTAIN 20380 WOLCOT WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 Use template for 5160® KEREN D & DANIEL RUSANOWSKY 20525 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA .95070 PING T &. HU WU 2047 JAMISON PL SANTA CLARA CA 95051 E L & JEAN DEMMON 12722 FREDERICKSBURG DR SARATOGA CA 95070 . LAWRENCE J & ALLWAR RISLING ~' 12735 FREDERICKSBURG DR SARATOGA CA 95070 SCVWD FREDERICKSBURG DR SARATOGA CA 95070 SING-SHEIK & CHRISTINE :YANG 12737 MCCARTYSVILLE PL i SARATOGA CA 95070 • JAMES M & SUSAN SULLIVAN 12732 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070 CHIAO-CHIN & LI HUANG 12678 MCCARTYSVILLE PL SARATOGA CA 95070 KANTILL H & PALLAVI KHOKHANI 20391 WOLCOT WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 JEN-I & SHEAU-FANG CHE~ , .20375 WOLCOT WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 ./I\~ ~~~E~v® A~Irlrrscc t_afi~?f4 ~~~0~~ `Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160 OHNNEY W & JUDY LEE KATHLEEN E MYLES FRANK L & GOLDIE BROWN ;0370 WOLCOT WAY 38 DAVIS RD !; 12771 BEGAN LN TOGA CA 95070 STOW MA 1775 ~ '. SARATOGA CA 95070 , JENG-LIT LEI . VERNON A & GENEVIEVE ~ HILARY A CRONIN .2791 BEGAN LN MALLINSON ! ' 20361 PIERCE RD iARATOGA CA 95070 12811 BEGAN LN i ~ SARATOGA CA 95070 j SARATOGA CA 95070. ;' DANIEL A & SARA VINSON ;JEFFREY & ANNA SUNG ~ . ~ JIANHUA & LIANG YANG ?0379 PIERCE RD ~ ! 20397 PIERCE RD ', 12851 BEGAN LN 3ARATOGA CA 95070 ~ ~ SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 i TOSEPH R & KAREN ; GERALD G & MARY LASS i , ASSOCIATES L ARGONAUT GAR.APPOLO 12879 BEGAN LN ~ 12772 SAR/SVAT/ RD UNIT 1000 12861 BEGAN LN SARATOGA CA 95070- ', I SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 ASSOCIATES L ARGONAUT ASSOCIATES L ARGONAUT S C V W D 12772 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE 12772 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE ', SARATOGA=SUNNYVALE RD RD 100 RD 1000 ' SARATOGA CA 95070 S TOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 RONNOCO SARATOGA PROP LP ~ ROSALIND L GRIFFITH 43612 EXCELSO DR 20360 PIERCE RD FREMONT CA 94539 ~ SARATOGA CA 95070 ROBERT P & JOY WEISS PETER N & GRACE LYCURGUS SARATOGA OAKS L:LC 20342 PIERCE RD 12870-BEGAN LN 2780 VALLEJO ST SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070. ~ SAN FRANCISCO CA 94123 MILDRED L MILLER DAVID A & NANCY WALB ' 12795 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE PO BOX 343 RD ~ SARATOGA CA 95071 SARATOGA CA 95070 COLEEN & JOACHIM WAGNER BAGHER NAVID JOHN L & POLLY HILLIS -12861 PIERCE RD 13192 MCDOLE ST' 20544 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070. SARATOGA CA 95070 ~AEL M & CECILIA TSO JAMES B & CAROL SCHMIEDT GLENN B & SHARON DEBELLA 203555 ASHLEY WAY 12848 JEPSEN.CT 12826 JEPSEN CT SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 000011 /1.~- ~~~~~~ Address Lahets Use template for 5160® Smooth Feed SheetsT"' LEONARD A & DALVA MARC L KOCIR FULGHAM 12795. SAR.ATOGA SUNNYVALE ' ~ ~ CAO K TIEN ~ ; ~~ 20502 WARDELL RD ' '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ?0552 ASHLEY WAY I '. SARATOGA CA 95070 ~ ! SARATOGA CA 95070 3ARATOGA CA 95070 ! '' ~ARLETON ~ JAU-WEN & CHEN REN ~ DONALD C & VIRGINIA ?0542 WARDELL RD ~ ', 20543 ASHLEY WAY ': FONTES ' 20501 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 ; SARATOGA CA 95070 i i ', I SARATOGA CA 95070 ~ ~ I • '~ oooo~~ =/I.~ t~vEC~l'® Address Labels , d ~1 -- '~ _ s' .v r:s. '•- r ~ a 5 a p 'FP '3 S ~ r ,x -~ I ,yi F ~:~11 ~ ~ ~ 4 p Y ~ ~ ' .k;! 1 ;T ~~~~ ~ s' 4 ~ s ' I _ ~ ~ ~ 4~; 1 ~ ~ _ ry _ F - ~ . y ` _ 1 2'-4.. 1 ~~ ALAIN PINEL 1'_8t, .~ 12'-11" %`' i y, :. t}r { "- ' 1 -If ~i~{~a T7 t. T i r~ * i L 6. / ~'.~'~~ ~~~ ; ' Y ~ ,1 ~; ~y,~ n„~4,~iis€ ~ ~- ~~i ~ ,r3 w i !~ f ~ 3 ~ ~ ~,- L~l.. - > Sf•L" ~ L }~ K } 1 'I ~I ~ ' ~.~.r. ' ryr~ 1.~~ i i}r s~tk , ( ~! _I }~ F 3 , ; s'~ fi.. .i i; q . .1 ~ l~` - d~ 1 1 ,~ -. "4 1 t t 0 1 u 1 I' !+ F' t < ~ I f ' ! Ft7 .5111 , H r , Y I 1' r L }9 ~ ~ 11 ~ f F tl a L l .. ~ L~44e f•, ~ ~°v~ s'~ CS } Irv ~ ~{ W h' ' 3?:~' ` ( ~ ! ' Y`"% I-: ~ ~ 1 ~il.~ j " ~ ~i€ ~ j ^ ~ .t, ~ i t ~.. ~'tf (LE{~,. Y i 1 ~?'yT,(~{ ~ yr1~l r y e rt'T L ~„` ~ r y f ~: „ I.: ~N fh ryita r~ .~: _ ~" i ~ iL ! 4 ~ t ,}:. k !;~ ".w ~'Ef~. yis 5 hM'X~ , q. M1.9~ f-~~, t 5 i [ x I C ~~ ~ .j f15 R (r ~t !~- ,t~ ! L' > ~ ~ ~~ 1 I ~ I A~ii :a..', . x' I _ } ~ .. ,-PARTIAL BUILDING FRONT.~ELEVfAT,.' r" DEEP R'EVERSE'CHANNEL LETTERS,: B-LACK WITH`:1 DESIGNED FOR '' MAX.11/2"SPACE DETAIL"B" ~~ P METAL LETTER L '~~^v., BODY PRIMED 8 r 3" ~'} ,;Y".,y~?;~ r~ REV. 12772 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE RD. PAINTED WIBLACK DETAIL A ~r>''aZ' ~ ENAMEL FINISH`. ~'~iy SARATOGA, `CALIF. r~ is RACEwnv APPROVED DATE '' CLEAR LEXAN ~(~ NEON _ This is an original unpublished drawing, created by Amcoe Sign Co. It is DESIGNER DATE 7-1-03 ~-~ iLLUMwnnorr .v: submitted for your personal use in connection with the project being ~Q TRANSFORMER F ~ ' planned for you by Amcoe Sign Company. It is not to be shown to anyone SCALE SHEET 1I4"X4-,l2"LAG SCREWS 80X ' w~,-,rz"SPACERSINTO wALL outside your organization, nor Is it to be used, reproduced, copied or tt- 1 It 1 /4 -1 -~ - 1 H aF WALL: TYP ®MN. 4 FER ,;,t ~ exhibited in any fashion. All or part of this design (excepting registered LTR.: -~XPANSIONSHIELDS -„ AS REO.) trademarks) remain the property of Amcoe Sign Company. DESIGN NO. aecTION ~ REVERSE CHANNEL C q A 6447 •HALO•LIGHTILLUMINATEDLETIERS' 974 commercial street • palo alto, California 94303 • phone (650)858-1221 • state contractors license no. 332680 :', ,. ~,;, ,. ,~ ~, t -~~.~yar`"r ,~~, ~~.... -~ -~ '`~~ _~ M; :;ter .. .. c..t~ AUG~ 8 200 ~~ 1 y ~. t _ M 1 '_ _~___ ~'~ 4yr ~ / ~ ITEM 2 City of Saratoga .Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Christine Oosterhous, AICP Associate Planner DATE: August 27, 2003 .SUBJECT: Existing Generator located. at 14038 Chester Avenue At a planning commission meeting several months ago, the commission requested that a discussion regarding an existing generator located at 14038 Chester Avenue be scheduled on the agenda for their discussion. Code enforcement staff prepared a timeline of events regarding this case. Relevant background documents from the code enforcement file have been included for your information. In addition, the city attorney was consulted on the matter and has prepared correspondence for your review. Please see attachments. ~~~Q~~. Memo To: Christy Oosterhous From: Steve Prosser, Public Safety Officer Date: 7/22/03 Re: generator timeline July 2002 -received complaint from Herb Radding regarding the installation of a generator on neighbor's property. 7/02 to 9/02 -investigated (trained Rhett on microfiche, plans, sound meter, complaint logging and follow-up) and confirmed placement of generator and excessive noise during weekly testing. (Noise level in excess of 67 decibels) 9/18/02- warning notice sent to 14038 Chester. 9/20/02 to 10/01/02 met with property and contractor to discuss options. They volunteered to try to modify the exhaust. 10/02 to 12/02 noise levels taken (64 decibels) -told home owner that although in compliance with general noise restrictions- still too loud for area. 1/06/03 took noise level readings after exhaust modification and enclosure construction- (57 and 58 decibels) Property in compliance with daytime noise levels. 2/10/03 notified Mr. Radding that the generator was not subject to building code permit requires because of size 2/10/03-4/03- tried to coordinate nighttime noise reading levels- unfortunately scheduled meetings were cancelled or moved. Night reading was never taken. 4/03 In response to Mr. Radding's letter describing the generator as an auxiliary piece of equipment, the City Attorney drafts a response outlining the noise level exemption for emergency generators during specific power outage occurrences: .7 1 JonaE~an wiE4wer ~'~1' ~ Jl Jl 6'0' Jlr~ ~:1L ~ ~ ~L<JC PARALEGAL Gilliam ~. parkin 1~7 SOUTH RIVER STREET, SUITE 221 Jana lZina~di .~6andra ~obrovolny SANCA CRUZ, CALIFORhTIA 95060 'T'ELEPHONE: (831) ~29_g055 . E~ndren M. Kendrick FACSIMILE: (831) X29.4057 T:-MAIL: ofTiceCwiEEwerparkin.com July 15, 2003 Planning Commission- City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: City Noise Regulations to Generator Located at 14038 Chester Avenue, Saratoga, California Honorable Commissioners: The purpose of this letter is to respond to the request of the City Planning Commission for a report as to its options regarding addressing the concern of Saratoga resident Herbert Radding presented to the Commission on the June l 1, 2003 during Oral Communication. Mr. Radding's concern was with regard to noise emanating from his neighbors' (the Dornblasers') generator located at 14038 Chester Avenue, Saratoga. SUMMARY It is too late for any appeal of the City's May 1, 2003 decision regarding Mr. Radding's concern and, in any event, the City Planning Commission does not have jurisdiction over appeals under Article 7-30 (Noise Control Regulations) where there is no permit approval required. However, Mr. Radding has the right to file a complaint with City Code Enforcement any time the generator in question exceeds City noise standards for the time it is operating. The only exemption is when the generator is being operated to protect against a risk of flooding. ANALYSIS A. Lack of Jurisdiction of Planning Commission to Consider Appeal by Mr. Radding On or about May 1, 2003, the City Community Development Department informed Mr. Radding of the City's decision, based on the advice of the Assistant City Attorney, that: (1) the Dornblasers' generator located at 14038 Chester Avenue was exempted oo~roo~ Saratoga Planning Commission • Options re Generator Noise Enforcement July 15, 2003 Page 2 under the City noise regulations under City Code Section 7-30.030(a), so long as it is engaged in essential activities necessary to preserve, protect or save lives or property from imminent danger, loss or harm from flooding. Assuming that the sump pumps are operated by electrical power and that the generator is necessary to render them operable in the event of .a power outage, the use of the generator to protect against flooding would qualify-under the emergency exemption.; and (2) when there is no reasonable need to operate the sump pumps(s) to protect against flooding, the Dornblasers generator was required to comply with City noise standards for the applicable time of day (unless special circumstances are demonstrated which render it necessary in a.-X power outage for the Dornblasers to operate their generator to protect their "lives or property from imminent danger, loss or harm" -for example a medical condition requiring the ready availability of electrical power). Neither the Raddings, nor the Dornblasers have filed an appeal of-the May 1, 2003 decision by the City. No appeal could have been filed with the City Planning Commission because City Code Section limits the appeal jurisdiction of the Planning Commission to decisions rendered under City Zoning Regulations contained in Chapter 15 of the City Code, as follows: "15-90.010 Appeals from administrative decisions. An appeal may be taken to the Planning Commission by the applicant or any interested person from the whole or any portion of an administrative determination or decision made by an official of the City pursuant to any of the provisions of this Chapter." (Emphasis added) The City Noise Control Regulations applicable to the Dornblasers' generator are set forth in Chapter 7, not Chapter 15. The only other possible appeal procedure available to the Raddings or the Dornblasers is under City Code Section 2-05.030. This Section allows an appeal to the City Council, rather than the Planning Commission. This Section also limits the time to file an appeal to 15 days after the decision is rendered. Hence it is too late for an appeal regarding the Dornblasers' generator to be filed with the City Council. C7 ~~~®f~~~ . , • Saratoga Planning Commission Options re Generator Noise Enforcement July 15, 2003 Page 3 B. Options Available to the City Planning Commission As to the options available to the Planning Commission to impose mitigation measures regarding the impacts of the Dornblasers' generator, the threshold question is the extent of the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission regarding City. Noise Control Regulations where, as here, there is no permit application required for the generator. Under the City Code 7-30.100, the jurisdiction over enforcement of the City Noise Control Regulations is vested in the City Planning Director, City Community Service Officers, and County Sheriff deputies: As is set forth above, no appeal may be taken to the Planning Commission as to the City Noise Control Regulations where no permit approval is required. Under City Code Section 2-15.030, the powers and duties of the Planning Commission are those prescribed in Section 65101 of the California Government Code and those duties conferred upon it by the City Code and assigned to it from time to time by the City Council. Enforcement of • the City Noise Control Regulations in the absence of a required permit for a development project is not prescribed by Government Code Section 65101, the City Code or the City Council. Thus, the options available to the Planning Commission are as follows: (1) Request the City Council to amend the City Code to assign enforcement of City Noise Control Regulations to the Planning Commission or at least to establish a right of appeal to the Planning Commission as to decisions of the Community Development Director under such Noise Control Regulations; or (2) Inform the Raddings of their right to file a complaint with a City Community Services Officer (Code Enforcement) that the generator is being operated in a manner inconsistent with the City's May 1, 2003 decision. Option (2) appears the more practical. Since to date, the Dornblasers have not provided any basis for qualifying for the emergency exemption other than to operate sump pumps to prevent flooding, they must comply with the City Noise Control Regulations at all other times. The City Code Enforcement (Community Services) Officer who measures the noise levels found that the, generator complies with City noise standards for the daytime (defined in Section 7-30.020 as from 7:OOa.m. to 7:00 p.m.). Mr. Radding stated to the Planning Commission that the Dornblasers' generator was recently on for a power outage from 2:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. If Mr. Radding were to file a complaint alleging 000404 v ~ • • Saratoga Planning Commission Options re Generator Noise Enforcement • July 15, 2003 Page 4 a similar use of the generator, and the decibel level between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 pm. exceeded the evening noise standards, this would constitute a violation of City Noise Control Regulations. Under those circumstances, a City Code Enforcement Officer, County Sheriff's deputy or the Community Development Director would have the.authority to enforce against such violation. Please advise if you have further questions in this regard. Very truly yours; W WER & PARKIN, LLP J athan Wittwer cc: City Manager Community Development Director Code Enforcement City Attorney • QQ~3~1f)5 _ 4 ° ~ o ~O a~ ~ ~ 1"•7i i 1' i3~ % ~ lit:`' ~ ti.Al1_ _'~ ~%C;f1. C: nI, 11,i' :~(;iiJ ~ -1:(,.> , f~('4-1'_'()i, ~~11 0 ~ ~, } .ncr,r~~eracr:d GGet.ober ~Z. 14,56 ~ tla;a 8vcvsi2r; KaL'~reer? Kfi9 ^iv~r,.ar, Kline May 09 2003 rVicR Sr(ei? Arr b'Vahvnsrrrft; Herb Radding 14050 Chester Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Radding, In regards to the generator located at 14038 Chester Avenue, Code Enforcement requested the City Attorney to review the City's position on the grant a conditional noise exemption status to the property owners. Code Enforcement investigated the complaint and was advised from the property owners that the generator was installed to provide emergency power to the sump pumps during power outages that occur. with winter storms. After review, the City Attorney concurs with the findings of Code Enforcement. The generator is classified as emergency equipment and will be exempt form noise regulations during those periods of potential flooding from storm related power outages. At no time will the generator be exempt from City Code during weekly testing and/or auxiliary power use to supplement or supplant normal electrical service from PG&E. The property owners have been notified that violations of the conditions set forth by the City will result in the revocation of the conditional noise exemption status of the generator that may result in enforcement action including criminal citations and/or abatement of the nuisance. Therefore, at this time, the City of Saratoga has closed the City Code Investigation. I have enclosed a copy of the City Attorney's letter of response for your review. Officer Prosser may be reached at (408) 868-1214, if you have any additional questions. Sincerely, Tomas Su ivan Community Development Director ~~QOQ6 Jona4han ~iEEwer ~~~ ~ ~~ll~~ 9 L~~ PARALEGAL William ~. IDar~cin 147 SOUTH RIVER STREET, SUITE 221 Jane Rinaldi .Shandra l~obrovo~ny SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA 95060 TELEPHONE: (831) 429-4055 FACSIMILE: (83ll 429_4057 E-MAIL:, o{(ice@wittwerparkin.com Apri130, 2003 _. Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director Clty of Saratoga 1.3777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Application of City Noise Regulations to Generator Located at 14038 Chester Avenue, Saratoga, California Dear Mr. Sullivan: Your Code Enforcement staff has requested this office to provide legal advice regarding the application of City noise regulations to a generator in a residential zone district. Our office has been provided with a copy of the April 14, 2003, letter from Mr. and Mrs. Herbert Radding addressed to you as Community Development Director regarding the generator located on the Dornblaser property at 14038 Chester Avenue. After reviewing the Radding letter, I requested additional information from the City pertaining to their complaint. -After reviewing those materials, I recommend that the T~prp}~la.sPr gen~°ratnr he. fou.n~. to n~~alify for pan exPmpti~n from City noise regulations under City Code Section 7-30.030(a), so long as it is engaged in essential activities necessary to preserve, protect or save lives or property from imminent danger, loss or harm from flooding. According to the January 12, 2003 Memo to you from Code Enforcement, the Dornblaser home is built close to a creek that has been known to overflow. City Code Section 7-30.030(2) establishes an exception from City noise regulations enabling the Dornblasers to exercise the right to protect their home from imminent danger or damage that may result from the creek overflowing. The wording of the City Code exception for emergencies is not clear as to whether the word "imminent" modifies "loss or harm" as well as "danger." However, even if the exception is intended to apply only to activities necessary to protect lives or property from "imminent" loss or harm, the operation of a ooooo~ ~~~ Tom Sullivan Re: 14038 Chester Avenue April 30, 2003 Pa e 2 sump pump to protect against flooding would qualify. Therefore, assuming that the sump pumps are operated by electrical power and. that the generator is necessary to render them operable in the event of a power outage, the use of the generator to protect against flooding would qualify under the emergency exemption. it is not clear from any of the materials provided whether the Dornblasers are using, or intend to use, the generator to provide power during a power outage when there is no reasonable need to operate the sump pumps(s). If the Dornblasers have such an intent the following questions arise: (1) Do they intend to use the generator at a time of day when it will exceed the noise standards established by the City Code? (2) If so, do they have evidence that a power outage involving no threat of flooding would nevertheless make it necessary to protect their "lives or property from imminent danger, loss or harm?" As to question (1) above is my understanding that the property owner did build a .stucco wall around the generator and made muffler modifications to .reduce the sound impact on the Radding home. City Code Enforcement has determined that the Dornblaser generator complies with daytime noise standards established by the City Code. This would enable the Dornblasers to test their generator during daytime hours and operate it during anv pow-er outage during the dazrtime. hours. In fact, it would appear to allow them to operate it anytime they want to during daytime hours (including to lower their energy costs or for a lawful home occupation), subject to any applicable PUC Air Quality Regulation or other Government Agency regulation of generators. As to question (2) above; there may (or may not) be special circumstances which render it necessary in an power outage for the Dornblasers. to operate their generator to protect their lives or property from imminent danger, loss or harm." An example would be a medical condition requiring the ready availability of electrical power. To date, the Dornblasers have not provided any basis for qualifying for the emergency exemption other than to operate sump pumps to prevent flooding. • ooooos }( } Y Y Tom Sullivan Re: 14038 Chester Avenue Apri130, 2003 Page 3 If you have any questions concerning this letter, please feel free to call me. Very truly yours, WITTWER & PARKIN, LLP ~~I C~,~ ~ . , , ~~~~~'~ Jonathan Wittwer cc: Code Enforcement • • 4Qao®9 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL JUNE 18, 2003 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session, Administrative Conference Room 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 6:00 p.m. Conference With Labor Negotiators (Government Code section 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager & Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director Employee organization: SEA Conference With Legal Counsel -Initiation of litigation (Section 54956.9(c)) (1 potential case) Conference with Leal Counsel -Threatened Litigation: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b): (1 potential case) Conference With Leal Counsel- Existing Litigation Name of case: Parker Ranch Homeowners Association, et al. v. Tsung-Ching Wu, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case Number CV797015) MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Streit reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Streit called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, Kathleen King, Norman Kline, Vice Mayor Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor Nick Streit ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director John Livingstone, Associate Planner John Cherbone, Public Works Director Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst Morgan Kessler, Civil Engineer REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR JUNE 18,-2003 4. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk; reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda-for the meeting of June 18, 2003 was properly posted on Tune 13, 2003. COMMUNICATIONS -FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS No one requested to speak at tonight's meeting: COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF None ANNOUNCEMENTS None • CEREMONIAL ITEMS lA. COMMENDATION FOR OUTGOING ARTS COMMISSIONER SYLVIA WOHLMUT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read commendation. Mayor Streit read the proclamation and directed staff to forward it to Mrs. Wohlmut. 1B. COMMENDATION FOR OUTGOING YOUTH COMMISSIONER ANDY MILLER- STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read commendation. Mayor Streit read the proclamation and directed staff to forward it to Mr. Miller. • 2 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 2. PRESENTATION -LEON BEAUCHMAN, DIRECTOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS/PACIFIC BELL SBC REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF i LEGISLATION ACTION AB1389 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Hear presentation and consider adoption of resolution. TITILE OF RESOLTUION: 03-043 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ENDORSING POLICIES TO ENCOURAGE INVESTMENT IN LOCAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES IN .CALIFORNIA, INVESTMENT. IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES AND INCREASED EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES Leon Beauchman, Director of External Affairs/Pacific Bell, thanked the City Council for giving him the opportunity. to come before the City Council. Mr. Beauchman explained the as a regulated company SBC already reports on jobs and investments every year to the Public Utility Commission (PUC). Many out- of-state competitors, however, do not currently report this information because they have not been required by any law or regulatory policy to do so. Mr. Beauchman stated AB1389 would change that, requiring them to report to the PUC and the state's legislature policy committees the number of California . employed by the companies and the infrastructure and the investment that they are contributing to the State. The State Assembly passed AB1389 on June 4,.2003, with the support of our local Assembly Member Cohn. SBC has requested that local cities adopt a resolution in support of this legislation as it heads to he State Senate for consideration. Mr. Beauchman requested that if the resolution is adopted,. the City should send a copy to the PUC. Councilmember King asked if any of Saratoga's neighboring cities adopted the resolution. Mr. Beauchman stated that the City of Campbell has it on their July 1, 2003 agenda. Councilmember Bogosian thanked SBC for all of their support in the City of Saratoga but doesn't support the resolution because it is not a Saratoga issue and would be getting into the competitive process. WALTONSMTIH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION ENDORSING POLICES TO ENCOURAE INVESTMENT IN LOCAL TELECOMMUNITCATIONS SERVICES IN CALIFORNIA. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN OPPOSING. 3 CONSENT CALENDAR 3A. 3B 3C 3D. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith requested that item 3A be removed from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith questioned the entry for "class refunds". City Manager Anderson responded that these refunds were due to .class cancellations. WALTONSMITH/KING MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0. BUDGET MONITORING REPORT FOR THE THIRD QUARTER ENDING MARCH 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith requested that item 3B be removed from the.Consent Calendar.- In regards to the City revenues, Vice Mayor Waltonsmith questioned the $870,000, which was more than the previous projections. Director Baloca responded that when staff looked at the budget at mid-year they came up with new revised projections including VLF funds and one time engineering fees and development services fund reimbursements. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO ACCEPT BUDGET MONITORING REPORT FOR THE THIRD QUARTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0: PLANNING ACTION MINUTES -JUNE 11, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Note and file. WALTONSMITH/KLINE .MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE PLANNING ACTION MUNITES. MOTION PASSED 5-0. SARATOGA SPEED ZONE STUDY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt ordinance; adopt resolution accepting Traffic Engineers' Report. • • 4 TTITLE OF ORDINACE: 220 ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 9-30.060 OF THE SARATOGA CITY CODE CONCERNING THE MODIFICATION OF SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN CITY STREETS TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-038 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ACCEPTING THE REPORT OF THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER ON SPECIAL FACTORS AFFECTING REASONABLE SPEEDS ON ALLENDALE AVENUE, BEAUMONT AVENUE, AND COX AVENUE WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT REOSLTi1ION ACCEPTING THE REPORT OF THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER ON SPECIAL FACTORS AFFECTING REASONABLE SPEEDS ON ALLENDALE AVENUE, BEAUMONT AVENUE, AND COX AVENUE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT ORDIANCE AMENDING SECTION 9-30.060 OF THE SARATGOA CITY CODE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 3E. RESOLUTION APPOINTING JESSICA CLAUS TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-037 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING ONE MEMBER TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION Vice Mayor Waltonsmith requested that item 3E be removed from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that it was unfortunate that Jessica could not be present this evening, but wanted to congratulate her publicly. WALTOSNMTIH/KING MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPOINTING JESSCIA CLAUS TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION. MOTION PASSEDS-0. 3F. NOTICE OF COMPLETION -NORTH CAMPUS FENCE PROJECT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept North Campus Fence Project as complete and direct staff to record Notice of Completion. 3G 3H 3I. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVE TO ACCEPT NORTH CAMPUS FENCE PROJECT AS COMPELTE AND DIRECT STAFF TO RECORD DOCUMENT. MOTION PASSED 5-0. GRANTING OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS FOR SEPTIC ABATEMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-039 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING STAFF TO GRANT A MAXIMUM OF $18,000 OF CDBG FUNDS TO A SARATOGA HOMEOWNER FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEPTIC TANK ABATEMENT AND CONNECTION TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STAFF TO GRANT A MAXIMUM OF $18,000 OF CDBG FUNDS TO A SARATOGA HOMEOWNER FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEPTIC TANK ABATEMENT AND CONNECTION TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM. MOTION PASSED 5-0. RESOLUTION AMENDING COUNCIL AGENCY ASSIGNMENT FOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-040 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE APPOINTMENTS OF COUNCIL REPRESENTATION TO COMMITTEES, COMMISISON, AGENICES AND AD HOC OMMITTEES WALTONSMTIH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL AGENCY ASSIGNMENTS. MOTION PASSEDS-0. FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR SARATOGA SUNNYVALE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WITH THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (VTA) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize City Manager to execute Funding Agreement. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR SARATOGA SUNNYVALE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WITH THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY. MOTION PASSED 5-0. • • 6 3J: LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARATOGA AND THE SARATOGA EMPLOYEE'S ASSOCIATION (SEA) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution and approve MOU. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 85.9-136 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SARATOGA AMENDING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY ANDTHE SARATOGA EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, FURTHER AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 85-9.132 AS .AMENDED, ADJUSTING SALARIES AND BENEFITS FOR NON-MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES Vice Mayor Waltonsmith requested that item 3J be removed from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith thanked the members of the Saratoga Employees Association and the members of the Saratoga Management Association for not taking pay increases this year. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that staff has worked very hard with the Council to keep costs down. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she would be also turning her monthly stipend of $250 back to the City. WALTONSMITH/KING MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AND APPROVE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE SARATOGA EMPOYEES ASSOCIATION. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 3K. INTENT TO AMEND PERS CONTRACT TO INCLUDE MILITARY SERVICE CREDIT AS PUBLIC SERVICE OPTION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-041 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINSTRATION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIRENEMTN SYSTEM AND THE CITY OCUNIL OF THE CIYT OF SARATOGA WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PERS CONTRACT. MOTION PASSED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 7 OLD BUSINESS 4. SARATOGA LIBRARY PROJECT UPDATE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Increase total approved for the purchase and installation of track lighting and authorize change order to Public Works contract with Duran & Venables. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report Assistant City Manager Tinfow reported that. following: • Budget Status - $14,731,151 - (total costs both committed and change requests) • Construction Schedule -Thompson Pacific continues to finish work. No new information at this-time: 5 Councilmember Bogosian asked when the portable trailers would be removed from Sacred Heart's property. Assistant City Manager Tinfow responded that she recently talked to William Scotsman said they would remove them by Friday. Assistant City Manger Tinfow noted that the Citizen Oversight Committee met in June and decided they did not need to meet on a monthly basis and would schedule a meeting in approximately in 11 months. The only stipulation is that if the budget looks like it will go over the $14.8 million she has bee instructed to convene them. Mayor Streit thanked Assistant City Manager Tinfow for her update. WALTONSMIHT/KING MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDER TO PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT WITH DURAN & VENABLES TO COMPLETE THE PARKING LOT RESTORATION AT SACRED HEART CHURCH. MOTION PASSED 5-0. ANNEXATION OF THE PARCELS OF LAND ON REDBERRY DRIVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITEL OF RESOLTUION: 03-042 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFSARATOGA ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S INTENT TO NOTIFY CERTAIN REDBERRY DRIVE RESIDENTS AND OTHERS OF PROPOSED INITIATION OF ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS • • 8 John Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Planner Livingstone stated that on June 6, 2003 the City Council directed staff to take the Fennell property, located .on the other side of Redberry Drive, off the proposed annexation plan. Planner- Livingstone further explained the Initiation Hearing process, roadway policies,. CEQA concerns, and fiscal impacts. Planner Livingstone stated that staff was recommending that Council adopt the proposed resolution- initiating the 21-day notice period for action by the Council at the July 16, 2003 meeting. Wanda Kownacki, 19280 Bainter Avenue, thanked the Council and City staff.. Mrs.. Kownacki stated that the annexation process seemed to be moving along quite well. Mrs. Kownacki stated that she is really concerned that the County seems to be moving forward very aggressively on the property they want to annex. Mrs. Kownacki urged the Council to move forward and get the annexation done quickly as possible. WALTONSMITH/BOGOSIAN MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFSARATOGA ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S INTENT TO NOTIFY CERTAIN REDBERRY DRIVE RESIDENTS AND OTHERS OF PROPOSED INITIATION OF ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS. MOTION PASSEDS-0. 6. FUTURE USE OF THE NORTH CAMPUS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report. City Manager Anderson explained the chronological events surrounding the purchase of the North Campus. In regards to future uses of the North Campus, City Manager Anderson described four basic uses: • Senior Center Programs at the North Campus • Keep Property as is • Complete Improvements to Fellowship Hall • Sell North Campus property Councilmember King asked where the money would come from to renovate the North Campus. City Manager Anderson stated that it was listed in the CIP, but Council voted not to fund it. 9 In regards to the Senior Center, Councilmember King asked that if the $1 million dollars was needed to move the Adult Day Care Center and if the Center stayed wouldn't the cost to move the rest of the Senior Center be substantially less. City Manager Anderson responded that the original proposal was to move both the SeniorCenter and the Adult Day Care Center to the North Campus and relocate the Sheriff's Substation to the Community Center. Councilmember King stated that she understood that the major costs, were going towards moving the Day Care Center. City Manager Anderson responded that the over $900 thousand dollars was estimated to bring the buildings up to code and provide for ADA improvements - approximately $200 thousand dollars was to bring the Education Building up to speck for the Day Care Center. If we chose to keep the building as is, Councilmember Bogosian asked what the estimated $80,000 per year covers. City Manager Anderson responded that this money funds the irrigation system, maintenance, and utilities. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that one of the discussions and concerns with SASCC was that they didn't want to break up the two programs in two different locations with one Executive Director. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith asked if all the buildings at the North Campus were renovated the City could rent them and receive more revenue. City Manager Anderson stated that to date outside rentals total approximately $11,000. Councilmember Kline stated that he was not on the Council when this property was purchased so he needs clarification on a few issues. Councilmember Kline asked if the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) was a private foundation and if the City was represented on the Board. City Manager Anderson responded that he believes SASCC is a private foundation and the City doesn't have a member on their Board, but a Councilmember is appointed a liaison to SASCC every year. The concept then, Councilmember Kline stated was to give a private foundation a $4.5 million dollar piece of property and then the City would fix it up for another $1 million dollars. Councilmember Kline stated that the City would be giving a $6 million dollar grant to a private foundation. Councilmember Kline asked if that was why the City purchased the property. City Manager Anderson agreed and added that the Sheriff's Office was going to move to City Hall. 10 Councilmember Kline stated that the motive for purchasing the property was never mentioned in the public record nor ever discussed publicly by the previous City . Council. Mayor Streit stated that the intent was discussed openly. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she felt Councilmember Kline was overstating the intention of the purchase of the North Campus. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that the Senior Center does a great public service to the City. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she agrees that public meetings still have not taken place to discuss this property. Mayor Streit stated that the future use of all City owned property has been scheduled for discussed in public forum in September 2003. Erna Jackman, 14515 Oak Street, noted that she supported keeping the North Campus. Mrs. Jackman stated that land in Saratoga is extremely valuable and the City was smart to purchase it last year. Cheriel Jensen, 13737 Quito Road, noted that the City should keep this land. Ms. Jensen stated that a lot ofnon-profit and community groups have been using the North Campus as meeting place, because it is a inexpensive place to rent. Vic Monia, Granite Way, stated that he is a 30 year resident of the City of Saratoga. Mr. Monia stated that the City should look more closely at the way SASCC does business and look to the future of the needs of the City. Mr. Monia stated he supports keeping the North Campus. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that purchasing this particular property was a rare opportunity for the City. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that the neither public discussions nor strategic planning were ever done partly due to the election and Council decided to wait for these discussions to take place after the new Council was seated. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith suggested not selling the North Campus until the City has had a comprehensive strategic planning session for current and future use of the property. Councilmember Kline stated that he concurred with Vice Mayor Waltonsmtih that due process and public input needs to happen, which it never did last year when the property was purchased. Councilmember Kline stated that the reason the City purchased the property should have been made public. Councilmember Kline noted that he recently visited the site and stated that it is a nice piece of property. Councilmember Kline stated that the City does not know enough about the State budget crisis to make any decisions regarding this property. Councilmember Kline also noted that the City does not know enough about the City's financial situation to make any decisions about this property until after the State has adopted a budget Councilmember Kline suggested that this discussion continue in September. 11 Councilmember King stated that she ran on the platform that buying the North Campus was a good decision and will stand by that now. Councilmember King stated once land is purchased it should never be sold. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he concurred with several of Councilmember Kline's comments.. Councilmember Bogosian suggested that Coucriil form a special task force or adhoc committee prior to any public forums. Councilmember Bogosian suggested that this task force be made up of members of the community, real estate professionals, social service professional, members of the various. religious organizations, etc. Councilmember Bogosian stated that a task force would provide structure and an entry into the public process Mayor Streit stated that he agrees that a public forum needs to be scheduled in order to hear what the residents want to do with not just the North Campus but with all of the City's property and undeveloped land. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that she concurred to continue the discussion until September, but not slow down the process. Vie Mayor Waltonsmith also suggested that the City work more closely with SASCC. Mayor Streit suggested and consensus was given to direct staff to prepare a report and bring it back to Council in July regarding a list of options and processes in regards to City owned property. Mayor Streit declared a 10-minute break at 8:40 p.m. Mayor Streit reconvened the meeting at 8:50 p.m. NEW BUSINESS 7. YEAR-ROUND DECORATIVE LIGHTING OPTIONS IN THE VILLAGE BUSINESS DISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Danielle Surdin; Administrative Analyst, presented staff report. Analyst Surdin explained that a result of overwhelming popularity within the Village business community, the Village Decorative Lighting Guidelines. are being brought back to Council for additional consideration. Local business owners have requested the your-round decorative lighting usage be extended from 3-evenings to 7-evenings a week. Analyst Surdin reminded the Council about the Executive Implementation Plan D-19-O1 issued by Governor Davis in March 200. To date the D-19-1 Plan has not been lifted or updated. Analyst Surdin stated that the energy crisis has eased in the summer 2001 and any decorative lighting program would be curtailed and discontinued in case of a stage 2 or 3 energy emergency. 12 Analyst Surdin presented three alternatives, including fiscal impacts,- for Council corisideration. She continued to explain the quarterly maintenance and supplies costs . from the City's lighting vendor KC Enterprises. Donna Collins, Big Basin Way, reminded the Council that she started and maintained the tree lights 10 -years ago. Ms. Collins noted that year round lights would help, draw customers back during the' day to shop in the .Village. Ms. Collins noted that she fully supported year round decorative lighting. Donnette Teeple, 14421 Big Basin Way, noted that she was present this evening representing her grandparents who own The Bank. Ms. Teeple stated that. her grandparents fully support year round decorative lighting. Ms. Teeple added that the lights provide. ambiance in the Village. Mrs. Benson, 3ra Street, noted that she supports year round lighting. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he did not support three days a week tree lighting program. Councilmember Bogosian stated that would support Alternative 3 for safety reasons: • City cut back one motor cycle office • The City may be loosing the presence of the Sheriff s Department in the Village • Ongoing tripping hazardous Councilmember Bogosian suggested that staff look into installing lights on 3ra and 4tn Street. WALTOSNMTIH/KLINE MOVED TO ACCEPT ALTERNATIVE 3 "7DAYS YEAR-ROUND LIGHTING GUIDELINES" AND DIRECT STAFF TO INVESTIGATE INSTALLING LIGHTS ON ANY STREET IN THE VILLAGE THAT DOES NOT HAVE LIGHTS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 8. OPTIONS FOR ANNEXATION OF LANDS WITHIN URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan explained that four large areas have been identified as being within the City's Urban Service Boundary: 1. Rolling Hills Road area above Parker Ranch 2. Mt. Eden area 3. On Orbit Drive/Apollo Heights Drive Area 4. Glen Una Drive/Redberry Drive/Hidden Hill Road area • Director Sullivan described each area ointin out the economic and urban service p g impacts upon the City, its compatibility and geologic characteristics. 13 Director Sullivan stated that the positive impact of an aggressive annexation policy is that overall taxes increase. Conversely the negative impact of an aggressive annexation policy is that the overall cost- for providing city services increase. stated that staff was lookin for direction from Council to prioritize Director Sullivan g the areas staff should look at first. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith asked why the City does not try and annex contiguous neighborhoods that impact each other. Director Sullivan stated that is one possible way to start. Councilmember King stated that several properties in the County have a Los Gatos address. Councilmember King asked if the City annexed them could we change their addresses to Saratoga. Director Sullivan stated that the City does not have a lot of influence over the Postal Service, but when the time came we could approach them. .Councilmember King asked if there was anything that the City could do with the hillsides: Director Sullivan stated that the City's sphere of influence does not go up the hillsides, but the work we do with the other cities and the county to protect the work of the hillsides is more important then .annexing the four proposed areas. Director Sullivan stated that next week he'll be speaking at the West Valley City Mangers and Mayors meeting and has plans on suggesting that the County have the same Design Guidelines for the hillsides as the cities. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he agrees that the County should have the same guidelines for hillsides as the cities. Councilmember Bogosian stated that annexation is a costly process. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he supports an aggressive annexation process. Councilmember Kline stated that he feels that the City needs to begin the process to annex property as soon as possible. Councilmember Kline noted that the City should work together as a region, as Director Sullivan stated earlier, with a somewhat aggressive policy. Councilmember Kline stated that the County currently doesn't enforce their own guidelines they rely on the City to that. Councilmember Kline stated that he supports focusing on the Glen Una area. Wanda Kownacki, 19280 Bainter Avenue, stated that her property is in Saratoga but she has a Los Gatos address. Ms. Kownacki stated she fully urges the City to work with the Postal Service to change that. Ms. Kownacki noted that even if the County accepts the City's Design Guidelines they would have a hard time enforcing them. The only answer is that the City annexes all property that is within its sphere of influence. us of the Cit Council to direct staff to start, looking at the possibility of Consens y annexing the Glen Una area. 14 9. APPROVAL OF AGENCY AGREEMENTS FOR AN INCREASE IN COUNTYWIDE AB939 IMPLEMENTATION FEE AND HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize City Manger to execute Agency Agreements. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst, presented staff report. Analyst Bloomquist explained the background related. to AB 939 and 'Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program and explained the proposed changes to each program. Analyst Bloomquist added that the Council first approved the agreements in the year 2000 and there have been two subsequent amendments. Analyst Bloomquist explained that. the current amendment to the Agency Agreements expire June 30, 2003. The City Council is being asked to review the Agreements with the rates changes as indicated below and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreements for three-year terms beginning July 1, 2003. Subsequent three-year extensions, upon written agreement of the County and cities, are part of these agreements, and have been executed in past agreements. Analyst Bloomquist discussed in detail the fiscal impacts on the residents stating that the fee increases from the previous agreement as follows: $2.80 to $3.35 per ton disposed, which represents a $.55 cent per ton .increase. The $3.35 per ton fee is comprised of two components: 1. HHW Component: $1.85 per ton will fund the countywide Household Hazardous Waste Collection program, which represents a $.35 cent per ton increase from the previous agreement. 2. Other AB939 Component: $1.50 per ton, which represents a $.20 cent per ton increase from the previous agreement, will be used to fund other AB939 compliance activities. Analyst Bloomquist stated that residential collection rates fora 32-gallon can would increase by $.3 cents a month as a result of the changes to the AB939 agreement: Rate increases for other collection services will be minimal, and have been reviewed and approved by the West Valley Solid Waste Management Authority at its May 1, 2003 executive board meeting. WALTOSMTIH/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR COUNTYWIDE AB939 IMPLEMENTATION FEE INCREASE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. WALTOSMTII-I/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO. EXECUTE THE AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR COUNTYWIDE HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM SERVICES FEE INCREASE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 15 10. RESPONSE TO GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL TO SUSPEND STATE MANDATE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Informational only.. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer stated that Governor Davis has proposed repealing a key portion of California's open meeting law, a money savings move that would scrap the state requirements that city councils, county boards of supervisors, school districts and other local bodies inform the public about upcoming meetings. City Clerk -Boyer stated that in 2001-02 the state reimbursed local agencies $9.3 million for costs associated with postings agendas. Governor Davis stated that any responsible public agency should perform such public notification without being ordered to do so. City Clerk Boyer stated that Amy Brown, League Legislative Representative, stated that no new information has been received in regards to the proposed cut of the open meeting law. The Governor's Office is going through each of the 33 proposed mandates to be cut one by one. Consensus of the City Council to write a letter to Governor Davis urging him not to repeal the Brown Act... AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Streit reported the following information: Vice Mayor Waltonsmith reported the following information: SASCC -working on their Strategic planning process. Advertising and interviewing for a new Executive Director. Councilmember King reported the following information: Sister Cities - focusing on their upcoming Eastern European Tour.. Councilmember Kline reported the following information: Councilmember Bogosian reported the following information: SVACA - discussed a field trip to the Humane Society. West Valley Sanitation -Passed the 2003-04 budget. Looking at administrative cost. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Bogosian stated that at the last City Council meeting the issue regarding land on Quito and Pollard was discussed and Council decided not to do anything with it. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he recently saw a sign on the property stating "Adopted by Saratoga Tree Service" 16 i Mayor Streit stated that the sign has been there for a very long time, Saratoga Tree M Service maintains the land at no charge to the City. Councilmember Bogosian stated that Council recently received a letter from Jack Mallory indicating that he sent City Manager Anderson a letter and- never received a response back. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Streit declared the meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, athleen Bo er CMC C y, City Clerk • 17 .MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL . JULY 2, 2003 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session, Administrative Conference Room 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 6:00 p.m. Conference with Leal Counsel -Threatened Litigation: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b): (1 potential case) Conference With Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation Name of case: Parker Ranch Homeowners Association, et al. v. Tsung=Ching Wu, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case Number CV797015) MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Streit reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Streit called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:05 p.m, and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, Kathleen King, Mayor Nick Streit ABSENT: Councilmember Norman Kline, Vice Mayor Ann W altonsmith ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager Richard Taylor, City. Attorney Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director John Cherbone, Public Works Director Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst Kin Saxton-Heinrichs, Recreation Supervisor ,~ REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR JULY 2, 2003 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of July 2, 2003 was properly posted on June 27, 2003. • COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following people requested to speak at tonight's meeting: Dean. Tsaggaris, 555 E. Washington Avenue, explained that Dr. Charles Lee, from Menlo Park, was arrested on January 22, 2003 as soon as he arrived in China. Mr. Lee was given a trial and was sentenced to a 3-year jail term in March for his intuitions to use the state-controlled television to expose the severe human rights violation suffered by the Falum Gong practitioners in China. Mr. Tsaggaris requested that the City. Council write a letter of support to the Chinese Ambassador and our Senators. Feng Wang, 2978 Brozona Court, San Jose, sated that she also was a "Friend of Charles Lee" and requested that the Council support. writing a letter for his release. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Councilmember King suggested that a letter of support for 1VIr. Lee be agendized for discussion at the July,16, 2003 City Council meeting. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he supported Councilmember King's request. ANNOUNCEMENTS None CEREMONIAL ITEMS lA. COMMENDATION FOR SACRED HEART CHURCH STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Present commendation. Mayor Streit read the proclamation and presented it to Elizabeth Lilly and Monsignor Larkin from Sacred Heart Church. • 2 1B. PROCLAMATION- DECLARING THE MONTH OF JULY AS "PARKS & RECREATION MONTH" STAFF RECOMMENDATION: • Read proclamation. Mayor Streit acknowledged the proclamation. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 2A. PRESENTATION -JOHN MILLS, DISTRICT MANAGER, REPRESENTING ASSEMBLY MEMBER REBECCA COHN STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Hear presentation and consider adoption of resolution.- TITLE OF RESOLTTION: 03-045 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL URGING THE CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE TO USE A BALANCED BUDGET APPROACH IN ADOPTING THE STATE BUDGET John Mills, District Manager 24t" Assembly District (Cohn), explained the State budget situation and requested that'the City Council to adopt the proposed resolution urging the State Legislature to use a balanced budget approach in adopting a State Budget. • KING/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION URGING THE CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE TO PASS A BALANCED BUDGET. MOTION PASSED 3-0 WITH KLINE AND WALTONSMITH ABSENT. 2B .PRESENTATION -SILICON VALLEY MANUFACTURING GROUP ON SANTA CLARA COUNTY HOUSING ACTION COALITION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Informational only. Betty Feldhym, Franklin Avenue, noted that she was the City's representative on the Citizen Advisory Commission for Housing Development and was a member of the Housing Action Coalition. Ms. Feldhym explained the "Realities of Affordable Homes" pamphlet. Mayor Streit thanked Ms. Feldhym for her presentation. CONSENT CALENDAR 3A. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- MAY 21, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Councilmember King requested that due to the lack of a quorum to vote. on the minutes, they should be continued to the next meeting. Consensus of the Council to continued the minutes of May 21, 2003 to July 16, 2003. 3B. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. BOGOSIAN/KING MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 3-0 WITH KLINE AND WALTONSMITH ABSENT. 3C. PLANNING ACTION MINUTES -JUNE 25, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Note and file. BOGOSIAN/KING MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE PLANNING ACTION MINUTES. MOTION PASSED 3-0 WITH KLINE AND WALTONSMITH ABSENT. 3D. MOTOR VEHICLE (MV) RESOLUTION RESTRICTING PARKING & STOPPING ALONG PORTIONS OF DE SANKA AVENUE AND GOLETA AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLTTION: MV-240 RESOLUTION RESTRICTING PARKING ON A PROTION OF DE SANKA AVENUE, GOELTA AVENUE AND GOELTA COURT BOGOSIAN/KING MOVED TO ADOPT MOTOR VEHICLE RESOLUTION. MOTION PASSED 3-0 WITH KLINE AND WALTONSMITH ABSENT. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE BY REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS BRUSH STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing and adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLTUION: 03-044 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ORDERING ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE BY REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS BRUSH • • • 4 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer stated that the attached resolution represents the second- step in Saratoga's hazardous vegetation abatement program administered by the County Fire .Marshall. City Clerk Boyer noted that the County has sent owners of the parcels requiring weed abatement notices informing them that the weeds must be abated, either by the owners or by the County. The notice also informed them that they may, present objections at tonight's public hearing. City Clerk Boyer stated that a representative from the County Fire Marshall's Office was present this evening to answer any questions Councilmembers may have on this topic. In regards to the last hearing in January, Councilmember King asked if the County Fire Marshall's Office addresses the concerns the Council expressed that evening. City Clerk Boyer noted that several months ago the County responded'to the Council's concerns and explained the County's remedies. City Clerk Boyer noted that a copy of that letter would be distributed to the Council. BOGOSIAN/KING MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION'ORDERING THE ABAEMENT OF BRUSH. MOTION PASSED 3-0 WITH KLINE AND WALTONSMITH ABSENT. OLD BUSINESS 5. SARATOGA LIBRARY PROJECT UPDATE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff regarding regularity of future reports. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow reported that following: • Budget Status - $14,704,700 - (total costs both committed and change requests) • Construction Schedule -the punchlist for the library was sent to Thompson Pacific on June 27, 2003. The contractor has 30 days from that date in which to complete the items noted. After that date, the City can assign a value to each unperformed item and issue a deductive change order. The City could then decide to use alternate means to complete the work. Assistant City Manger Tinfow asked the Council if they still wanted her to present her bi-weekly reports on the library or on an as needed basis. Consensus of the City Council to suspend monthly reports to Council on the library. Mayor Streit thanked Assistant City Manager Tinfow for her report. 5 6. AZULE PARK KNOLLWOOD COURT PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FOLLOW-UP STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and provide direction to staff regarding closure of the existing pedestrian entrance to Azule Park via Knollwood Court. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analysis, presented staff report Analyst Bloomquist explained that in March 2002 the City Council received a staff report regarding the inclusion of a pedestrian pathway to Azule Park via Knollwood Court. The report mentioned a survey, which was mailed out to 188 area residents. 48 surveys were returned, 26 supporting an entrance via Knollwood Court and 22 opposing an entrance. During their March -June 2002 meetings the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) voted in favor of the entrance. Analyst Bloomquist stated that Council directed staff to hold a public meeting with those residents who live on Knollwood Court to receive their feedback on the placement of an entrance to Azule Park via Knollwood Court. The meeting was held in Apri12002, with residents expressing no support for the entrance. Council requested the issue be further discussed with the residents of Knollwood Court with the PRC and return to Council. Analyst Bloomquist stated that on July 17, 2002, Council was presented a second staff report regarding the entrance. The opinions of the residents of Knollwood Court had not changed. The PRC and the surrounding residents still supported the entrance. After the public hearing, Analyst Bloomquist explained, Council directed staff to do the following: • Construct an entrance to Azule Park via Knollwood Court on the condition it will be closed for 2 month period after the parks grand opening and then reopened fora 10 month period, at the end of which it would be closed and the issue brought back to Council for review. Analyst Bloomquist noted that the PRC has been discussing this issue at all of their meetings the past several months. At a Joint Meeting on Apri126, 2003, Council instructed the Commission to poll public opinion and hold a public meeting regarding the entrance at their June 2003 meeting. The Commissions polled residents at the park and posted signs inviting them to a public meeting. Subsequently staff received dozens of phone call and emails supporting the entrance be kept open. The PRC also send out a second survey and out of the 40 returned, 36 supported keeping the entrance open 4 supported closing it. Analyst Bloomquist note that the public has heavily utilized the entrance during the past 7 months and the City has not received any complaints regarding its usage. Analyst Bloomquist stated that unless new direction is received from Council, the • entrance would close after the Grand Opening celebration on July 12, 2003. 6 Councilmember Bogosian asked if there has been any Sheriff reports or any other problems reported to the City. Analyst Bloomquist responded that no such reports have been filed. Ma or Streit asked what the residents on Knollwood Court said on their surveys. Y Analyst Bloomquist stated that he could not find any returned survey from the Knollwood Courts residents. , Vandana Sathe, 12141 Marilla Drive, requested that the Council keep the entrance to Azule Park via Knollwood Court open. Ms. Sathe noted that she has been a regular user of the entrance and has yet to experience any problems. Ken Johnson, 20048 Puente Court, stated that he supports keeping the entrance open. Anwar Garzi, noted the he supports closing the entrance for good Councilmember Bogosian and Councilmember King noted that they supported keeping the entrance open. Mayor Streit stated that initially he opposed an entrance to the Azule Park via Knollwood Court, but there have not been any problems and the neighbors seem to enjoy it. Mayor Streit noted that he would support keeping the entrance open. Consensus of the City Council to keep the entrance to Azule Park via Knollwood Court open. NEW BUSINESS 7. ARTWORK LOAN AND EXHIBIT AGREEMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Kim Saxton-Heinrichs, presented staff report. Supervisor Heinrichs reported that the City does not have an Artwork Loan and Exhibit Agreement as descried in the Public Art Policy. Supervisor Heinrichs explained that City Attorney Taylor drafted a standard exhibit agreement based on forms traditionally used by other cities. Supervisor Heinrichs stated that most agreements release the agency from all liability, unless the work is valuable. The' Arts Commission believes that for this simple agreement it is not necessary for the City to offer insurance of artwork that is loaned for display. Supervisor Heinrichs stated that the Council has the option of amending the agreement to offer insurance of the artwork against theft, fire, vandalism, etc: If Council chooses to insure loaned artwork and a claim were made, the City would make payments up to the deductible with the remainder covered by our insurer. Supervisor Heinrichs explained that the City pays $0.75 per $1000 insured per year with a $5,000 deductible for Property Damage. BOGOSIAN/KING MOVED TO ACCEPT ARTWORK LOAN AND EXHIBIT AGREMEENT. MOTION PASSED WITH KLINE AND WALTONSMITH ABSENT. APPOINTMENT OF DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE FOR LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Appoint voting delegate for League's annual conference. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer reported that the League of California Cities Annual Conference is scheduled for Sunday, September 7-Wednesday thru September 10, 2003 in Sacramento. City Clerk Boyer explained that the League bylaws provide that each city is entitled to one vote in matters effecting municipal or League policy. The deadline to return the "Voting Delegate Form" to the League of California Cities is Friday August 8, 2003. City Clerk Boyer stated that the deadline to register to attend the conference is Friday, August 8, 2003 and noted that if Councilmembers would like to attend they should contact Ann Sullivan, Secretary to the City Manger, if you are interested in attending. Consensus of the City Council to appoint Mayor Nick Streit as the City's voting delegate at the 2003 League of California Cities Annual Conference and Councilmember Bogosian as the alternate. COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Councilmember Bogosian reported the following information: Norton Road Fire Access AdHoc -participated in a hillside tour with Director John Cherbone and Chief Duncan of the Saratoga Fire protection District. Councilmember King reported the Following information: Tree Ordinance Update AdHoc -ls` meeting was held. Mayor Streit had no reportable information. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS In regards to a letter received from the Mayor of Milpitas concerning the reorganization of the VTA, Councilmember Bogosian requested that this item be agendize for discussion. Mayor Streit stated it was already on the July 16, 2003 agenda. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Streit declared the meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerlc • • 9 • MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL JULY 16, 2003 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session, Administrative Conference Room 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 5:45 p.m. Conference with Leal Counsel -Threatened Litigation: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b): (3 potential cases) Conference With Leal Counsel- Existing Litigation Name of case: Parker Ranch Homeowners Association, et al. v. Tsung-Ching Wu, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case Number CV797015) • Conference with Leal Counsel - Initiation of litigation (Gov't Code section 54956.9(c): (1 potential case). MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Streit reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Streit called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:05 p,m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Kathleen King, Norman Kline, Vice Mayor Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor Nick Streit ABSENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director John Cherbone, Public Works Director REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR JULY 16, 2003 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of July 16, 2003 was properly posted on July 10, 2003. • COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS No one requested to speak at tonight's meeting: COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS None CEREMONIAL ITEMS lA. COMMENDATION FOR GIRL SCOUT SILVER AWARDS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Present commendation Mayor Streit read the commendations and presented them to the following Silver Award recipients: Katrin Cooper, Kristin Gochnauer, Jennifer Zecchin, Kerry Zweig. Sarah Collonge, Grace Humphries; and Lisa Kolstad were unable to attend tonight's meeting. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 2A. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- MAY 21, 2003 CONTINUED FROM JULY 2, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNICL MINUTES. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. ~J • • 2B. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- JUNE 4, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Councilmember King requested that item 2B be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember King requested that on page 11, ls` paragraph, "8:30 p.m." should be "8:30 a.m.". Councilmember King requested that on page 11, 4th paragraph, "school site" should be "school parking lot". WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. • 2C. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. WALTONSMITH/KL1NE MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT 2D. PLANNING ACTION MINUTES -JULY 9, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Note and file. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE PLANNING ACTION MINUTES. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 2E. COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORDS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Note and file. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE COMMISISON ATTENDANCE RECORDS. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 3 2F. ACCEPTANCE OF SARATOGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT USE RESTRICTION AGREEMENT, RESTRICTION ON TRANSFER. OF OWNERSHIP AND GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLLC PARKING- STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize Mayor to accept Saratoga Fire Protection District Use Restriction Agreement, Restriction on Transfer of Ownership and Grant of Easement for Public Parking. ' WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO ACCEPT SARATOGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT USE RESTRICTION AGREEMENT. RESTRICTION ON TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP AND GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC PARKING. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT 2G. AUTHORIZATION TO CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT TO CAL ID PROGRAM STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize execution of agreement: WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT 2H. RODEO CREEK MONITORING FOR STORM DRAIN POLLUTION. • COST SHARING AGREEMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize execution of agreement. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREMENT. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT 2I. PROPOSED PREANNEXATION AGREEMENT-FOR ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS APN 510-24-002, APN 510-24-027, APN 510-24-003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve pre-annexation agreement. Richard Taylor, City Attorney, requested that item 3I be removed from the Consent Calendar. City Attorney Taylor reminded Council that they have been investigating the possibility of the annexation of three parcels on Redberry Drive and at a prior meeting initiated the proceedings of annexation. City Attorney Taylor noted that tonight Council would hold a public hearing on the annexation. City Attorney Taylor stated that during that process the property owners involved in the annexation have been negotiating concerning pending development approvals in Santa Clara County. There had been some uncertainty during the annexation process as to the effect of the City annexation on those approvals. 4 City Attorney Taylor stated that as the result of those negotiations. the property owners and the City were able to develop apre-annexations agreement which stated the following: • All three property owners agree to be annexed into the City of Saratoga • .City would except the County land use approvals that have been issued on one of those parcels • City would administer the land use approvals approved by the County • Property owners agree that that the design is good for the community City Attorney" Taylor stated that the pre-annexation agreement paves the way for the Council to proceed with what is known as a 100% consent annexation. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City would not have to hold a protest hearing and could approve the annexation this evening. Barton Heckman/Attorney, Mattioni Law Firm, 848 The Alameda, San Jose, noted that he was representing the Navi's. Mr. Heckman noted that this process has been very difficult on the Navi's. Mr. Heckman thanked City Staff who helped work out the pre-annexation agreement. Councilmember Kline thanked Mr. Heckman for all his work he put into this. Joseph Karnes/Attorney, Reality Law, 125 S. Market Street, San Jose, noted that he was present this evening on behalf of property owners Hepburn, Holton, Pfeiffer and Hwang. Mr. Karnes thanked City staff. . WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT FOR THE THREE PROPERTIES ON REDBERRY DRIVE. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. CONSIDERATION OF INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF SARATOGA FROM SANTA CLARA COUNTY TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 510- 24-002 (ALSO KNOWN AS 19418 REDBERRY DRIVE), 510-24-027 (ALSO KNOWN AS 19370 REDBERRY DRIVE), AND 510-24-003 (ALSO KNOWN AS 19400 REDBERRY DRIVE) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing. TITLE OF RESOLTUION: 03- 046 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING ANNEXATION OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND, APN: 510-24-002, 510-24-027, AND 510-24-003 Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report 5 Director Sullivan explained that at the June 18, 2003 meeting the City Council directed staff to notice a public hearing for Council's consideration of the proposed initiation of annexation proceedings for the Redberry Drive parcels. Director Sullivan stated that staff was recommending that Council adopt the proposed resolution initiating annexation proceedings. Director Sullivan noted that the staff report also included the service plan for the parcels to be annexed and presents the remaining factual information required to proceed with the annexation. Director Sullivan discussed the annexation proceedings including the service plan, LAFCo material and CEQA compliance. Mayor Streit opened the pubic hearing. John Holton, 19280 Bainter Avenue, thanked the City Council for their support throughout this process and City Staff for all of their hard work and facilitating the 100% annexation support. Cheryl Jensen, 13737 Quito Road, noted that she read the staff report in which the geotechnical report acknowledge that the land as potential unstable. Ms. Jensen advised the Council to proceed with caution. In response to Ms. Jensen's comments, Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that the County is allowing houses to be built on the hillsides now, if they were part of the . City at least they would be built under City Code. Mayor Streit closed the public hearing. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLTUION APPROVING ANNEXATION OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND, APN: 510-24-002, 510- 24-027, AND 510-24-003. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 4. AMENDMENTS TO VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE R-1 (SECTION 15-12), DESIGN REVIEW FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS (SECTION 15- 45) AND THE SUBDIVISION (CHAPTER 14) AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing; adopt resolution granting the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; introduce ordinance; and place on consent calendar at the August 6, 2003 meeting for adoption. TITLE OF RESOLTUION: 03-049 • 6 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA GRANTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRNMENTAL IMPACT TO THE AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING AND SUBDI~IOSN ORDINANCE OF THE SRATGOA CODE Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan stated that in an ongoing effort to make the City of Saratoga processes and ordinances consistent with one another, Staff has presented to the Planning Commission and now to the Council a set of amendments to three sections of the Saratoga City Code. These sections are; 15-12 R=1: Single Family Residential Districts, 15-45 Design Review: Single Family Dwellings, and Chapter 14: Subdivisions. Director Sullivan stated that these three sections were selected as they are the most widely and often used portions of the Saratoga City Code. These three sections are also inter-related to one another. The proposed amendments also provide much needed streamlining and clarification. Director Sullivan explained in detail all of the proposed changes and/or additions to the three sections of the City Code. Mayor Streit opened the Public Hearing. Cheriel Jensen, 13737 Quito Road, thanked all the effort that the Community . Development Department and the Planning Commission put into this amendment. Although she supports the majority of the proposed amendment she would like to make a few suggestions. Ms. Jensen questioned and made suggestions to the following proposed amendments to City Code sections as follows: • 15-12.020 -2nd dwellings units should be "conditional use". • 15-12.060 -subdivisions in the hillsides. Ms. Jensen asked why this clause was being eliminating. • 15-12.100 -height of structures. Noted that the amended allows permission for additional height in the R-20,000 and R-1-40, 000 districts. Ms. Jensen stated that this amendment would not apply. to her lot even thought she has an acre of land. Ms. Jensen suggested that perhaps adding to this section that a 20,000 square foot lot be allowed additional height. • 15-45.040 -setbacks. Suggested that the current setbacks stay as is. • 15-45-060 -asked why is the clause regarding the floor area was being eliminated. • 15-45.085 - offsite improvements for design review. Suggested sidewalks be included • 14-05.020 - why is "building site approval" being eliminated from the ordinance Geological reports -suggested that these reports should be left in and . required. 7 Councilmember King asked Director Sullivan to respond to Ms. Jensen's comments. ted that in re ards to section 15-45.085 sidewalks are already Director Sullivan sta g listed 15-450085 (a). In regards to geological reports, Director Sullivan stated that .almost every design review the Department takes in is required to have this report and is reviewed by the City' geo tech contractor. In regards to the 2°a dwelling units permit, Director Sullivan noted that this is a State requirement. In regard's to the height exception, if Council desires staff could amend this section to allow lots like Ms. Jensen to be ccosnidered. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to amend section 15-12.100 to allow height of a structure to vary if a lot is 20,000 square feet or larger. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS AMENDED GRANTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION; INTRODUCE ORDIANCE; WAIVE THE FIRST READING: PLACE ITEM ON NEXT CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS 6. VILLAGE GREEN CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC MITIGATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION MV-241 RESOLUTION RESTRICTING TURNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 9 AND OAK PLACE John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. Director Cherbone explained that in 2002 the City Council formed a task force to study and address the issue ofcut-through traffic in the Village Green Neighborhood. The task force included representatives from the Oak Street Neighborhood, Village Green Neighborhood, Saratoga Fire Department, Federated Church, City Council and City Staff. In August 2002 the Village Green Task Force held its first meeting and since that time has been meeting on asemi-regular basis. After numerous Task Force meetings, two neighborhood surveys, and one community meeting, the Task Force agreed to support turn restrictions at the intersection of Oak Place and Highway 9 to mitigate cut through traffic. 8 Director Cherbone noted that it was agreed by the Task Force that the Village Green neighborhood Association (VGNA) must obtain a minimum of 60% support ` from the Village Green Neighborhood before implementation of the traffic mitigation measures. Director Cherbone noted that the VGNA survey results showed 67% of the neighborhood supported the installation of turn restrictions at the intersection of Highway 9 and Oak Place. In addition, Director Cherbone noted that staff was requesting that Council adopt a Motor Vehicle Resolution restricting right turns onto-Oak Place, 7 a:m. to 9 a.m. and left turns onto Highway 9, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. Director Cherbone noted that if Council approves the restrictions, the City Traffic Engineer would be directed to perform a pre and post traffic survey of the streets in the Village Green area to measure the results of the restrictions. Director Cherbone noted that if it is found that the restrictions are ineffective in reducing cut through traffic or they have caused undesirable traffic patterns, staff will report back to Council with recommendations. Staff recommends that the restriction stay in place for at least one year from their effective date to allow traffic patterns to normalize. .Jerry Bruce/Federated Church noted that he fully supported the proposed resolution.. James Kardach, 20271La Paloma, noted that he is one of the VGNA Co-presidents for this coming year. Mr. Kardach stated that this proposal is particularly addressing the a.m. and p.m. commuter traffic. Mr. Kardach noted that he fully supported the proposed restrictions. Denise Michele, 20375 Park Place, noted that she is the Vice President of VGNA and was a member of the Task Force. Ms. Michele stated that this proposal has strong support from the neighborhood and suggested that the City provide adequate enforcement for these turn restrictions to ensure success for these mitigation measures. Ms. Michele noted that she fully supported the proposed restrictions. WALTONSMITH/KLINE-MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION RESTRICTING TURNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 9 AND OAK PLACE. MOTION APSSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 7. LETTER OF SUPPORT TO RELEASE AMERICAN DETAINED IN CHINA STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer explained that at the July 2, 2003 City Council meeting Dean Tsaggaris and Feng Wang addressed the Council under oral communications. Mr. Tsaggaris and Ms. Wang explained that Dr. Charles Lee, from Menlo Park, was arrested on January 22, 2003 as soon as he arrived in China. Mr. Lee was given a trial and was sentenced to a 3-year jail term in March for his intention to use the 9 state-controlled television to expose the severe human rights violations suffered by the Falun Gong practitioners in China. City Clerk Boyer explained that Mr. Tsaggaris and Ms. Wang requested that the City Council write a letter of support to the Chinese Ambassador and our Senators.. Feng Wang, 2978 Briana Ct, San Jose, provided the Council with facts regarding the torture of Falun Gong practitioners in China and urged the Council to approve the letter of support. Clare lee, 4713 Cherrywood Drive, San Jose, urged Council to approve the letter. of support. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that she does not want to discuss the merits of Falun Gong, but people do have the right to practice what ever they want. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith stated that Dr. lee is an American and noted that she supports the letter. Councilmember Kline noted that normally he would not support these types of letters but in his case he will make an exception. Mayor Streit stated that he supports the letter and suggested that the last two lines be removed. WALOTNMITH/KLINE MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR THE RELEASE OF DR. LEE AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR ALLISON KNAPP STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve agreement Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan stated that Allison Knapp worked for the City on a part time basis, between August 1, 2001 and the Fall of 2001. Once the department was fully staffed in 2001, Ms. Knapp's services were no longer needed. With the submittal of the Barry Swenson 60-unit condominiums project, staff was requesting to bring her back to manage. the planning review process. Director Sullivan stated that Ms. Knapp would work directly for him. Her assignments would include assisting with the formal completeness review writing and issuing Request for Proposals for planning consultants to prepare the Environmental Impact Report, staffing community workshops meetings held by the developer and generally preparing Staff Reports and ensuring that all documents are completed in a timely and thorough manner. Director Sullivan stated that here are no fiscal impacts as the department operates on a deposit system that was put into place last year. The City would have full 10 cost recovery including City Staff, consultants, overhead and the City Attorney. Councilmember Kline asked if the applicant does not go forward with the project does the City still get recouped. Director Sullivan responded that the applicant pays a deposit and Ms. Knapp only gets paid for the hours she works. , WALTONMSITH/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH ALLISON KNAPP FOR CONSULTING SERVICES. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WTH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 9. CELEBRATE SARATOGA -CITY SPONSORSHIP OF "KID ZONE" STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly; adopt resolution. TITLE OFRESOLTUION: 03- 048 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING THE 2003- - 2004 BUDGET FOR AN APPROPRIATION OF $2,500 CELEBRATE SARATOGA FUN ZONE SPONSORSHIP Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report. Cit Mana er Anderson explained that the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce's Y g annual "Celebrate Saratoga" would be held on September 13, 2003. Celebrate Saratoga started in 1989 as a small community event and now has evolved into one of the largest outdoor evening street dance festivals in Silicon Valley. More than 300 volunteers work together with more than 30,000 attending this event. City Manager Anderson explained that Mayor Streit suggested that the City become more involved as a sponsor.-The Chamber suggested sponsorship of the "Fun Zone". The "Fun Zone" area is a family activity area located in the Saratoga Village Center. Within this area there will be a variety of games, face painting, bounce houses, etc. Staff contacted. Kristen Davis, Executive Director/Chamber of Commerce, who provided the attached information. City Manager Anderson explained that the sponsor of this activity will receive the following benefits as an exclusive sponsor: • City's logo on all print advertising • City's logo on the Chambers website • 2'by 10' banner at each entrance (provided by the sponsor) • Small poster at each activity. WALTONSMITH/KL1NE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2003-2004 BUDGET FOR AN APPROPRIATION OF $2,500 CELEBRATE SARATOGA FUN ZONE SPONSORSHIP. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 11 10. VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (VTA) BOARD RESTRUCTURING PROPOSAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review attached correspondences and adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLTTION: 03-047 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED RESTRUCTURING OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer explained that On May13, 2003, Mayor Joe Estevas of the City of Milpitas, sent letters to Santa Clara County cities requesting that all of the 15 jurisdictions support public discussion and actions to restructure the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Board City Clerk Boyer explained that Mayor Esteves argues that currently the VTA has been faced with critical decisions that will significantly impact the quality of life in every community throughout the County and the economic vitality of the Silicon Valley region. He advocates that every member jurisdiction should have a permanent voting seat on the VTA Board to provide local elected officials with the opportunity to participate in the critical decisions affecting our communities: Direct representation on the VTA Board would also provide broader and deeper support and ownership for Board actions on service levels, revenue sources, legislative initiatives and transportation construction projects. City Clerk Boyer reported that the proposal to restructure the Board would provide a voting seat for all jurisdictions and also would maintain the same proportional voting representation for the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County. Restructuring the Board in this manner would ensure all Santa Clara County residents and businesses would be directly represented on the VTA Board. City Clerk Boyer explained that currently the City of Saratoga is one of nine jurisdictions not represented on the VTA Board. The Board would increase in size from 12 to 21 members. City Clerk Boyer explained that the. City of Milpitas goal is to generate enough support to start a special working group, composed of representatives. of all member agencies, to begin a formal active dialogue on the matter. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED- TO ADOPT RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS TO RESTRUCTURE THE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (VTA) BOARD. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT. 12 . 11. TRAVELERS INFORMATION SYSTEM (TIS) RADIO STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Danielle Surdin, Administrative Analyst, presented staff report Analyst Surdin explained that as a result of the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, the City of Saratoga wanted to increase emergency communication capability for our local residents. In August of 1990, the City of Saratoga filed request with the FCC for a Travelers Information System (TIS) Radio license. A license was granted in June 1991 and the City purchased all the needed equipment to run the emergency radio from the City's corporation yard. Analyst Surdin explained that since the TIS system's inception, staff's ability to maintain up-to-date information on the system has been a challenge. For TIS to be most effective, the information must reflect real-time events, which requires considerable staff attention and time. Successful management also requires city staff to receive real-time information from others in the field-who often don't think. to alert the City. With the City's limited resources the expectation for successfully managing areal-time TIS Radio station maybe unrealistic. Analyst Surdin noted to that to overcome this problem, the Sheriff's Office and the Saratoga Fire District have recently been granted recording access to the TIS Radio System. This helped solve the problem of posting real-time emergency events since both Saratoga Fire and Sheriff's Office are emergency response agencies. However, lack of trained personal, shift changes during events and general lack of knowledge about how to utilize the system have hampered effective real-time communication. The self-imposed expectation of real-time non-emergency information broadcasting on the TIS Radio System maybe simply unrealistic given the amount of effort necessary to achieve it. Analyst Surdin noted that the inability to meet expectations has resulted in occasional complaints from residents. Analyst Surdin noted that the City advertises that the station provides current information but consistently fails to provide accurate and timely information undermining the creditability of the. TIS System. Analyst Surdin outlined a range of options in regards to the TIS Radio System polices that can be used to establish the future use of TIS Radio System and its operational framework: Option 1 -Operate in times of emergency only Options 2 -Emergency Operations and community events Options 3 -Increase TIS System Policy In regards to the future use of the TIS Radio System the consensus of the City Council was to support Option 2 -Emergency operations and community events. 13 COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Streit reported the following information: Santa Clara County Valley Water Commission -discussed rates. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith reported the following information: County Cities Association Legislative Task Force - keeping a close watch on legislation. Councilmember King reported the following information: KSAR Community Access TV Board -passed their budget and discussed West Valley College's cuts, which affected the KSAR budget. Sister City Liaison -September 13; 2003 "Pig Roast" fundraiser. Councilmember Kline reported the following information Library Joint Powers Association -getting ready for the new bond. Received and discussed polling results. Saratoga Business Development Council -staff presented a report explaining to the group. their status and told them that they need to make a decision of what they are officially. They need to decide whether to be a City Commission or just business group. • CITY COUNCIL ITEMS- ed the followin Vice Mayor Waltonsmith request g • That she be included in the preparation of the staff report for the September 17, 2003 City Council meeting in regards to the UPRR Trail • Updated report on the testing of the Saratoga Creek • Status on the Trail Rules that were approve by the Parks and Recreation Commission and sent to the City Attorney for review In regards to the PRC Trail Rules, City Attorney Taylor responded that this would be included in the review of the Trails Master Plan as part of the Open Space Element that is being updated by City Planner Ann. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith pointed out that on July 9, 2003 she visited the Saratoga Library and had to park in St. Andrew's parking lot because the Library's lot was full. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that she recently visited a small piece of property near Hakone Gardens that is owned by County Quarry, and suggested that it would make a great park for the Village. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith suggested that City Staff look into this. Councilmember King asked when the trail at Gardiner Park would reopen. Mayor Streit stated that he would call Greg Zlotnick at San Jose Water District. • 14 ~ Councilmember King asked when the discussion would take place in regards to a . Christmas tree in Blaney Plaza. Mayor Streit stated that the renovations on the Memorial Arch have to be completed first and staff is already inquiring about trees. Councilmember Kline noted that he also supports a Christmas tree in the Blaney Plaza or possibly lighting the Stone Pine trees. Mayor Streit reminded the Council that there is an approved Blaney Plaza MasterlPlan but was not funded during the CIl' process. -OTHER -None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Streit declared the meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk • 15