Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-28-2004 Planning Commission Packet• C] CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 - 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: Commissioners Garakani, Uhl, and Chair Hunter STAFF: Planners Livingstone &t Oosterhous, Director Sullivan and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of January 14, 2004. (APPROVED 4-0) 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 Sta f f. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 22, 2004. 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). In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerhOsaratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Ciry to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). CONSENT CALENDAR 1. CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM &z GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY FINDING; - The Saratoga Planning Commission will review and determine if the additions to the proposed 2003-04 Capitol Improvement Program are consistent with the various goals, policies and programs of the City of Saratoga General Plan. (APPROVED 4-0) 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. • 2. APPLICATION # 03-201 (APN 503-48-029 and APN 503-48-028), located at and adjacent to 21170 Big Basin Way; -Request the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to expand the City of Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels, APN 503-48-029 and APN 503-48-028. (Continued from January 14, 2004) (JoxN LIVINGSTONE) (APPROVED 4-0) 3. APPLICATION #03-267 (389-33-007), MUELLER (Appellant), 19351 Athos Place: The City denied a tree removal permit for three Eucalyptus trees located at 19351 Athos Place. The property owner has appealed the denial. The trees are located in the side yard, toward the front of the residence. (CHRISTY OosTERxous) (APPROVED 4-0) 4. APPLICATION #03-092 (397-19-024) - CHU, 19554 Three Oaks Way; -Request Design Review Approval to add 1,504 square feet to the existing 3,169 square foot house with an existing 434 square foot garage for a total floor area of 5,107 square feet. The addition includes a new 1,007 square foot second story addition to the existing house. The gross lot size is 40,140 square feet and zoned R-1-40,000. The maximum height of the residence will be approximately 23 feet. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE) (APPROVED 4-O) DIRECTORS ITEM - None COMMISSION ITEMS - None COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN - City Council Minutes from Regular Meetings on December 3, 2003 and December 17, 2003 ADJOURNMENT AT 8:15 PM TO THE NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, February 11, 2004 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 SITE VISIT AGENDA DATE: Tuesday,]anuary 27, 2004 -12:00 noon PLACE: City Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Site Visit Committee SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING CO>\9MISSION AGENDA FOR WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 2004 ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTINTG AGENDA AGENDA 1. Application #03-267 - MUELLER Item 3 19351 Athos Place 2. Application #03-092 - CHU ltem 4 19544 Three Oaks Way SITE VISIT COMMITTEE The Site Visit 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 (5 to 10 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the public hearing. CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 - 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, Michae] Schallop, Mike Uhl, Ruchi Zutshi and Chair Jill Hunter PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of J anuary 14, 2004. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any mc~nbel' of the Public will be allowed to address the Plamling Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The law genel'ally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taping action on such items. Howe,~er, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly ~'egarding Oral Communicatioiu under Planning Commission direction to Sta f f. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 22, 2004. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If }'ou wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" ~~'ith the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b). In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerh at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerhC~saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting hill enable the City to make ~'easonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). CONSENT CALENDAR 1. CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ~ GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY FINDING; - The Saratoga Planning Commission will review and determine if the additions to the proposed 2003-04 Capitol Improvement Program are consistent with the various goals, policies and programs of the City of Saratoga General Plan. 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. 2. APPLICATION # 03-201 (APN 503-48-029 and APN 503-48-028), located at and adjacent to 21170 Big Basin Way; -Request the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to expand the City of Saratoga's Urban Sen~ice Area Boundary to include two new parcels, AP1~T 503-48-029 and API\T 503-48-028. (Continued from January l4, 2004) (JOHN LNINGSTONE) 3. APPLICATION #03-267 (389-33-007), MUELLER (Appellant), 19351 Athos Place: The City denied a tree removal permit for three Eucalyptus trees located at 19351 Athos Place. The property owner has appealed the denial. The trees are located in the side yard, toward the front of the residence. (CHRISTY OOSTERHOUS) 4. APPLICATION #03-092 (397-19-024) - CHU,' 19554 Three Oaks Way; -Request Design Review Approval to add 1,504 square feet to the existing 3,169 square foot house with an existing 434 square foot garage for a total floor area of 5,107 square feet. The addition includes a new 1,007 square foot second story addition to the existing house. The gross lot size is 40,140 square feet and zoned R-1-40,000. The maximum height of the residence will be approximately 23 feet. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE) DIRECTORS ITEM - None COMMISSION ITEMS - None COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN - City Council Minutes from Regular Meetings on December 3, 2003 and December 17, 2003 ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, February 11, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA ou would like o rece've the A enda's ~~ia e-mail lease send our e-mail address to lamun @sarato a.ca.us Ify t i g ,p y p g g MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION P tf / /' t ~ . /l/} ~^ L=.~ ,~, . ~.. ~, - N.i c" DATE: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Acting Chair Zutshi called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Garakani, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi Absent: Chair Hunter Staff: Director Tom Sullivan and Associate Planner John Livingstone PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of December 10, 2003. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Barry, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of December ] 0, 2003, were adopted as submitted. (5-0-1-1; Chair Hunter was absent and Commissioner Uhl abstained) 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 January 8, 2004. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Acting Chair Zutshi 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). COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS «'ITH DISABILITIES ACT Director Tom Sullivan advised that special assistance is available to ensure accessibility to any of the City's public meetings in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Interested persons should contact the City Clerk's office 48 hours in advance of a meeting to be accommodated. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2004 .Page 2 *** CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM NO. 1 APPLICATION #03-266 (397-16-128) RAHIM. 14350 Taos Drive: The applicant's request for modifications to a previously approved Design Review was approved at the meeting on December 10, 2003. The resolution for this project is back to the Planning Commission' for review and approval df the conditions. (THOMAS SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the Commission can adopt the resolution or pull it for additional discussion. • Reminded that this action is to formalize the action taken at the last meeting. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission adopted the Resolution for Application #Q3-266, to allow the modifications to a previously approved Design Review Approval as approved by the Commission at its meeting of December 10, 2003, for property located at 14350 Taos Drive, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Barry, Garakani, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter ~ , ABSTAIN: None ~** PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM N0.2 APPLICATION #03-201 (503-48-029 and 503-48-028) located at and adiacent to 21170 Bid Basin Way: Request of the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to expand the City of Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels, APN 503-48-029 and APN 403-48-028. Recommend that the City Council Amend the City of Saratoga's General Plan to add the two new parcels to the General Plan with the designation of Residential Hillside Conservation (RHC). The area has already been pre-zoned as a Residential Open Space District (ROS). Recommend that the City Council approve an Environmental Negative Declaration. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE) Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that staff is recommending that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council in support of LAFCO's proposal to expand the City's Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels. • Described the properties as being pre-designated to be in the Residential Open Space District with an existing General Plan designation of Hillside Open Space. • Reported that Council had previously directed staff to proceed with this matter. • Stated the reason for the expansion of the Urban Service Area Boundary is to give the City influence on future development near Hakone Gardens. By expanding these properties into the Urban Service Area Boundary, the City would get notification from the County and allowed to provide input on any proposed projects. The pre-zoning would not be applicable unless these parcels are one day annexed into the City limits. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2004 Page 3 • Added that if, in the future a home is constructed on these properties, the opportunity to annex this property into the City would result due to its being in the City's Urban Service Area Boundary Area. • Informed that there is little impact to County projects unless this property is annexed. If the properties were to be annexed, the density would not change, as the City's density is similar to the County's. The difference would be that the City's design policies would apply should the property be annexed. • Advised that Hakone Gardens, consisting of 18 acres, is owned by the City of Saratoga and leased and operated by the Hakone Foundation. Hakone Gardens was created in 1915 as a Japanese-style garden and is the oldest such garden in the, Western I-Iemisphere. It is included on the National Trust. • Said that this proposal is consistent with General Plan policies as it may assist in preserving the area around the Hakone Gardens and preserve a rural area. Additionally, it would allow the City to annex future major projects into the City. • Reported that staff had originally thought that a Negative Declaration was required as well as a General Plan Amendment to bring these parcels into the Urban Service Area Boundary. However, while preparing the staff report, staff found that the area is already designated appropriately within the General Plan. This meeting was noticed for a Negative Declaration, which was subsequently found not to be required. • Advised that comments were received from one of the property owners raising three issues that they asked be discussed. • One is the fact that the project was noticed differently than required (the issues of the Negative Declaration and General Plan Amendment). Therefore, staff feels that this item could be continued to the next meeting so the item can be re-noticed properly. • Second, the Design Review process is only applicable to properties annexed into the City. • Third, concerns were raised that it is the City's intent to purchase the property. • Assured that the City's only interest is in increasing the Urban Service Area Boundary. • Concluded his presentation with the recommendation of a continuance to the meeting of January 28, 2004, so staff can correctly notice this item. Commissioner Nagpal asked for clarification that if the City wanted to annex this property, it could. The City simply wants to be notified of any proposed development and provide input to the County at that time. Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the City would be noticed on all major projects that require entitlements. At that time, the City is asked if the proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan and whether the City wants to annex. Commissioner Garakani asked staff to define major. Director Tom Sullivan replied single-family homes on up. Commissioner Barry asked staff whether representatives of Hakone Gardens gave testimony at the August Council meeting where this issue was first raised. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2004 Page 4 Director Tom Sullivan replied no. He advised that he provided the staff report to Council and that there was no discussion of Hakone Gardens. While the initial proposal from LAFCO included more parcels, Council's specific instruction was to consider just these two parcels. Commissioner Nagpal suggested that the Commission take the opportunity to listen to the public. Commissioner Uhl asked why continue this matter. Director Tom Sullivan replied that the property owners have requested so. Also doing so allows both the notice and staff report to be clear that no CEQA review is required. Staff decided that the most prudent thing to do is to re-notice this item so that there is no confusion on what is occurring. Acting Chair Zutshi opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. David Britton, 21170 Big Bason Way: • Expressed his confusion. • Said that he understood the proposal to continue this item to the next Planning Commission meeting agenda, however, it is already on the Council agenda for January 21S'. Director Tom Sullivan explained that the Planning Commission makes recommendation to Council. While the item will remain on the agenda for the January 21s` meeting, the item will simply be opened for public hearing and continued as it must be since it has already been advertised for that meeting. Mr. David Britton: • Stated that his lawyer does not see eye to eye with the staff report and is opposed to this action. • Declared that he resides in Santa Clara County and questions why he is even here before the Saratoga Planning Commission. • Advised that the first time he heard of possible annexation is this evening. • Stated that inclusion in the Saratoga Urban Service Area Boundary will reduce the value of his property due to increased restrictions. • Said he feels he has been damaged by this action. • Stated that it is illegal for a governmental entity to take action that decreases market value. • Restated that the Britton and English properties are in Santa Clara County. • Informed that his property is up for sale and that the City of Saratoga Design Review guidelines do not apply to his property. • Stated that he likes Hakone Gardens and if the City wants to purchase his property, he would consider an offer. • Listed the possible scenarios, as he understands them. The first is possible inclusion in Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary. The second is possible annexation into Saratoga. The third is the possible purchase of his property to expand Hakone Gardens. • Added that he is required to disclose these issues as he tries to sell his property. In fact, he cannot sell his property right now. • Estimated his loss as being approximately one-third of the property value or approximately one million dollars in damage. • Said he is happy with a continuance but not with the process. Commissioner Barry asked Mr. David Britton what is on the property right now. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2004 Page 5 Mr. David Britton replied a house and cottage. Last year, trees fell on both the house and cottage, damaging them. His neighbors, the Englishes, have a large house on their property, which is about 1..25 acres. The total acreage in question is 10 acres. Commissioner Barry asked Mr. David Britton if he lives on his property. Mr. David Britton replied that Mr. and Mrs. English still live on their property. He and his wife used to live on their property but now live in Santa Cruz. Commissioner Barry asked Mr. David Britton how long his property has been on the market and whether he has had any offers. Mr. David Britton said he has had interest. His broker has worked to sell the his property for two years but cannot give potential buyers concrete information on jurisdiction. Commissioner Barry asked when the property was listed. Mr. David Britton replied over two years ago, the beginning of the dot com crash, which is a part of the problem. Ms. Geraldine English: ' • Explained that her husband is deaf and could not come this evening. • Stated that they are passionate about their property. • Said that this property would be a fabulous acquisition for Hakone Gardens. • Added that she has a 100-year-old home. • Expressed agreement with the comments of Mr. Britton. • Said that she wants to see the Brittons get a fair price for their land and that she is in awe of how lovely their property is. • Stated her hope that the City finds the money to buy the land. Commissioner Barry sought clarification that Hakone is a private Foundation. Director Tom Sullivan replied that the City owns the land and the private Hakone Foundation operates it. Commissioner Nagpal asked staff to clarify that the only issue before the Commission is the issue of the Urban Service Area Boundary. Director Tom Sullivan replied correct. He added that Council has not discussed the idea of expanding Hakone Gardens as a part of this expansion of the Urban Service Area Boundary. Mr. Geoffrey Lee: • Identified himself as a partner of David Britton. • Stated that he has cared for the property for the last two years. • Said that this action has stopped their capabilities to sell this property and therefore effects the Britton's current financial situation as well as their kids' inheritance. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2004 Page 6 • Declared that this is a destructive process and questioned why it needed to occur. • Stated that they would be happy to sell the land to either Hakone or the City. • Stated that this is a frightening process. Ms. Sara Louise Freytag Britton, 21170 Big Basin Way: • Said that she has no written remarks prepared, as she had not planned to speak. • Said the first time she knew that the Commission and Council had discussed their property in detail was on August 6`~ with no notice. • Asked if this is a dictatorship. ' • Said that this action is being taken under false pretenses. • Advised that City representatives went to the property in August and spoke with their realtors. Their realtor was excited at the potential interest in the property. However, at Christmas, a small letter was sent out that was received on December 23, 2003, with incorrect information on it. • Said that this notice told neighbors bad things about our property. • Asked about possible Brown Act violations. • Described her neighbor, Mr. English, as an 8]-year-old stroke survivor and said that the Englishes are dear nei ahbors. • Said that the City speaks as if there are plans to put a hotel up. • Added that several potential buyers have disappeared and she does not know what they have been told. • Advised that she is a cancer survivor and asked if the City is waiting for them to die. • Expressed that she is upset and apologized for exceeding her allotted time to speak. Acting Chair Zutshi asked staff to respond. Director Tom Sullivan: • Said that he was at the August Council meeting at which a Resolution of Intent to start this process was approved. Further work on this proposal got delayed until this winter due to heavy work load. • Added that Planning staff did not attend any site visit to this property. Commissioner Barry added that no member of the Commission visited the site either. Commissioner Uhl stressed the importance of making it clear to these owners that Council has to approve any action to be taken. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Garakani, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, Application #03-201 to consider the expansion of the City of Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to include APN 503-48-29 and 503-48-028 was CONTINUED to the next regular Planning Commission of January 28, 2004, to allow correct noticing, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Barry, Garakani, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter ABSTAIN: None ~~* Sarato:?a Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2004 Page 7 PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.3 APPLICATION #03-270 (CITYWIDE) - CITY OF SARATOGA: Multiple Municipal Code Amendments are proposed to Chapter l4 -Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 15 -Zoning Regulations and Chapter 16 -Building Code. The proposed amendments are intended to ensure that the City Code is consistent with the policies of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program advocating using site design and source control measures to minimize storm water pollutant discharges to the maximum extent possible. Additionally, Municipal Code Amendments are proposed to Chapter 14 - Subdivision Regulations related to Lot Line Adjustments and Building Site Approvals. (THOMAS SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that staff has bundled several issues together, including amendments in the Subdivision, Zoning and Building Codes; changes in the City's Lot Line Adjustment Program, which is part of the Subdivision Ordinance. • Explained that these changes include adding a purpose statement and adding language (per pages 6 and 7 of the staff report). • Said that essentially, Lot Line Adjustments cannot be done to create new building sites. That is not the purpose of Lot Line Adjustments. They are intended to work out small differences between two property owners. Language has been put in that reemphasizes that. • Reported that previous action taken to eliminate Building Site Approvals was never codified. Commissioner Nagpal asked if two lots need to conform in order to allow a Lot Line Adjustment. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Commissioner Nagpal asked for clarification that one could make a Lot Line Adjustment on a substandard lot. Director Tom Sullivan agreed and added that one also can't make an already substandard lot smaller in order to make another lot buildable. Commissioner Uhl said that the changes appear to be environmentally focused and wondered if design issues would come back to the Commission later. Director Tom Sullivan replied that the design of storm drains would not come back to the Commission at all. Commissioner Uhl asked about Building Site Approvals. Director Tom Sullivan said that the process for Building Site Approvals has gone away. Exactions are imposed during the Design Review process. Commissioner Uhl asked who is the approving authority for Lot Line Adjustments. Director Tom Sullivan replied in some cases, it is the Community Development Director. In other cases, it is the Planning Commission. On appeal, it goes to Council. Staff reviews carefully to Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2004 Page 8 .; determine legal structures using a variety of methods including microfiche records and Tax Assessor information. This task is not taken lightly. Acting Chair Zutshi opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Acting Chair Zutshi closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Barry, the Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval for Application #03-270 for the multiple Municipal Code Amendments as proposed to Chapters 14, 15 and 16, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Barry, Garakani, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Barry thanked staff for its excellent work and the clear presentation of this material. Acting Chair Zutshi thanked staff for the historical information provided on Hakone Gardens. ~~~ DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Director Tom Sullivan extended best wishes for the New Year and reported that his son=in-law just has 70 days remaining in his tour of duty in Iraq. His son is now home from lraq and as a surprise brought his older brother home with him for the holidays. Therefore, with the exception of his son-in-law, his entire family was able to be together this year. COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioners Garakani and Schallop both reported that they would be absent from the next meeting on January 28, 2004. ADiOURNMENT TO NE7iT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Barry, Acting Chair Zutshi adjourned the meeting at 7:55 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of January 28, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • ITEM 1 City of Saratoga Community Development Department MEMO TO: Planning Commission FROM: Thomas Sullivan, AICP Community Development Director DATE: January 28, 2004 '. RE: Capitol Improvement Program/Finding of General Plan Consistency The Public Works Director is requesting that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution finding that the City's Capitol Improvement Program is consistent with the City of Saratoga's General Plan. In the material provided by the Public Works Director each project is listed and the associated General Plan goal or policy is stated. The environmental determination will be addressed project by project as they are funded for construction. Staff recommends the Commission adopt the attached Resolution. Attachments 1. Memo from Public Works Director, John Cherbone 2. Resolution 3. Pages from General Plan which include supporting Goals and Policies cited in spreadsheet 4. Capital Improvement Project List Spreadsheet • ~~~~1 • Attachment 1 • 000002 • Memo To: Saratoga Planning Commission From: John Cherbone, Public Works Director Date: January 28, 2004 Re: Additional Projects for the 2003/2004 CIP Update I am pleased to transmit to you for your review three additional projects in connection to the Fiscal Year 2003/2004 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) update. These additional projects were added to the list of CIP projects since your review of 14 projects at your December 10, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting. r the As before, the role of the Planning Commission is to determine whethe new CIP projects are consistent with the General Plan. The three new projects for consideration have been reviewed by the City Council. Attached to this memo is a spreadsheet with a brief description of each new project and the applicable pages from the General Plan, which correspond to the referenced Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures of the applicable General. Plan Element. I will be in attendance at your meeting if you have any questions regarding the new ~roj ects. Ultimately your recommendation on the projects will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at the February 4 CIP Public Hearing. If prior to your meeting you have any questions about this information, please feel free to contact me at 868-1241. • OQ7U003 i Attachment 2 • oaooo~ • APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION -STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received a request from the Public Works Director to find that the Proposed Capitol Improvement Program is consistent with the City of Saratoga General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the materials submitted by the Public Works Director which include a listing of each capitol project and the corresponding General Plan Goal and Policy, attached as Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby find that the proposed Capitol Improvement Program is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the City of Saratoga General Plan in that the various improvement projects implement the programs and objectives outlined in the various General Plan Elements. PASSED AND ADOPTED b the Ci of Saratoga Planning Comrriission, State of California, y ry on January 24, 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: r~1 L_J Secretary to the Planning Commission • • ~~ ooooos Land Use Element ~~ ~~ LAND USE ELEMENT r~ • 1 of 9 City of Saraloga General Plan Executive Summary O~O~~ Land Use Element OVERALL HEIGHT LIMIT Except for structures located within the Village boundary (as defined by the Vi]]age Area Plan, ] 98_), no structure shall be over tv~ro stories or 26 feet in height. In the Village, structure height will be limited based on compatibility with existing structures and the natural environment. (lnclude graphics to extend this to a full five pages; begin land use Policies on next page...) LAND USE GOALS, POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES The following goals, policies. and implementation measures are an important part of the Land Use 'Element in that they offer specifics to help guide citizens and policymakers. GOAL 1 : SHPERE OF INFLUENCE PLAN 'Adhere to the adopted Saratoga Sphere of Influence Plan POLICY 1 Land shall not be annexed to Saratoga unless they are contiguous to the existing city limits and it is deternvned by the city that public services can be provided without unrecoverable cost to the Ciry and dilution of services to existing residents. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 1 Annexation proposals shall be carefully studied to determine their economic and urban service impacts to the City. ~~ POLICY 2 The City shall evaluate its designated unincorporated Urban Service Areas to determine if the areas are compatible with the County's Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Policies and area appropriate for annexation and urban development. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 2 All four urban service areas to be studied to determine if further retraction of urban service boundaries is required. These studies should be coordinated with LAFCO with public, hearing before the Commission and Council. GOAL 2: NORTHWESTERN HILLSIDE SPECIFIC PLAN Adhere to the Northwestern Hillside Specific Plan which is incorporated herein by this reference. GOAL 3: HISTORIC CHARACTER Enhance the unique historic character of the Village as the center of community activity, commerce; and vitality. 6of9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary O~U~~ Land Use Element POLICY 3 The City shall encourage the designation of heritage resources and assure their protection, maintenance, and enhancement by the provisions of the heritage preservation ordinance. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 3 To be implemented by the Heritage Preservation Ordinance and the Heritage Preservation Commission. GOAL 4: ECONOMIC VIABILITY Encourage the economic viability of Saratoga's existing commercial areas and their accessibility by residents; keeping in mind the impact on surrounding residential areas. POLICY 4 Non-residential and industrial uses shall be buffered from other uses by methods such as setbacks,, landscaping, berms, and soundwalls. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 4 Review the Design Review and Limited lndustrial Ordinances to determine if increased setbacks and landscaping are required. PoucY 5 Non-residential de~uses Existinglnoncresfdenti ] zoningrshal] noabe expanded nor nev~enon-]an for non-res~dent~al residential zoning districts added. POLICY 6 , , The City shall revise the zoning ordinance to allow bed and breakfast establishments as conditional uses in commercial or residential zoning districts where such uses have not previously been permitted and where such uses would be appropriate. GOAL 5: DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS The City shall use the design review process to assure that new construction and major additions thereto are compatible v~~th the site and adjacent surroundings. GOAL 6: NEW DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USES Relate new development and its land uses to presently planned street capacities so as to avoid excessive noise; traffic, and public safety hazards. If it is determined that existing streets need to be improved to accommodate a project, such improvements shall be in place or bonded for prior to - issuance of building pernrits. 7 of 9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary n~l~~q en Space Element OPEN • SPACE ELEMENT • ~~ 1 of 9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary OO~~~~ Open Space Element • PREFACE GENERAL OPEN SPACE GOALS GOAL 1 To provide and maintain open space resources of local and regional significance accessible to the public. GOAL 2 To preserve the hillside and mountainous land in its natural condition and inherent natural beauty. GOAL 3 To use open spaces to protect human life and property from natural hazards such as fire; flood; seismic, and geotechnical hazards. GOAL 4 To achieve and maintain a harmonious relationship between the natural environment and man- made structures and land uses. GOAL 5 To protect and conserve natural resources including watersheds; water quality; productive agricultural land. native vegetation and wildlife habitat; mineral land, archaeological and historic sites and areas of ecological significance. GOAL 6 To encourage preservation of ]and uses for open space and agriculture. GOAL 7 To preserve the natural and rural character of Saratoga. GOAL 8 To preserve and protect existing view sheds, view corridors, and scenic open spaces. GOAL 9 To create and maintain distinctive; amactive entrance ways reflecting the City's rural character and scale. 2of9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary 'n~~~: Open Space Element GOAL 10 To ensure that any new development is sensitive to the natural environment and the community's open space resources. GOAL 11 To provide and maintain parks which are located, designed; and improved to serve the needs of the residents, the community, and the neighborhoods of Saratoga. GOAL 12 To provide and maintain a trail system v~fiich ]inks open spaces, schools, public facilities; the Saratoga Village, and historic sites. GOAL 13 To encourage the awareness; appreciation. and use of the City's open space resources in Saratoga's residents, particularly its youth. GOAL 14 To preserve and maintain existing open space resources. GOAL 15 To preserve open space and recreational resources provided on school sites and surplus school sites through acquisition and/or land use controls. GOAL 16 7o preserve, protect; and maintain riparian habitats and creek corridors. GENERAL OPEN SPACE POLICIES POLICY 1 Preserve; through a variety of methods, as much as possible of the open space areas described in the Open Space Element for visual greenbelts, conservation and management of environmental resources, public health and safety protection and for recreational use. POLICY 2 Prepare an open space management plan in conjunction with its Capital Improvements Program. The Plan wotald identify open space needs as well as the appropriate use and ongoing maintenance needs of open space areas. POLICY 3 Encourage and facilitate the participation of individuals, citizens, groups, civic organizations; and those having special needs, such as the physically disabled, in the open space planning process. • • 3 of 9 City of Saraioga General Plan Executive Summary r-~clc`i72 Open Space Element POLICY 4 Improve and upgrade existing municipal open space, parks, and trails to serve the current and future recreational needs of the community. These shall lie consistent v~~ith preservation of open space. POLICY 5 Be vigilant in maintaining existing and future parks and dedicated open spaces to ensure that.th~y remain part of the public domain in perpetuity. UNINCORPORATED HILLSIDE AREA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES POLICY 6 The City shall make a concerted effort to piotect open space and manage future land uses v~~ithin the unincorporated hillside area and shall apply the Residential Open Space zoning district standards [to] these lands [should they] become part of the City of the City's Sphere of ]niluence. POLICY 7 A significant component of the open space ~~alue in the foothill area comes from agricultural uses v~fiich have a Jong history of existence tied to the heritage of Saratoga. In evaluating future ]and uses; efforts shall be made to maintain agricultural lands as a component of open space and to preserve the rural and agricultural heritage of Saratoga. The City shall discourage the early cancellation of ~~i]]iamson Act Contracts. POLICY 8 p oses shall be Public use and enjoyment of the unincorporated hillside areas for recreational utp encouraged through direct or indirect public land acquisition, encouraging both private and public recreational uses. Appropriate regulation of privately held lands to obtain maximum use of open space resources; such as the establishment of trail and open space easements, should be consistent with conservation of the natural environment. POLICY 9 . Future land uses within the western hillside or any sphere of influence expansion area shall be consistent both with existing patterns of ]and use in the unincorporated hillside areas, and with the City's desire to maintain the area as predomin rksynature Preserves and resource prof ct on areas; city county, state, federal, or special district p P private campgrounds, picnic areas, and similar low-intensity recreational uses; non-residential, for- profit uses, which invite members ofdentialbuses which are enviPronmentally sensitive andivisually small-scale, ]ow impact manner; rest non-obtrusive, maximizing open space protection; the environmentally sensitive expansion of agricultural uses, including vineyards, v~~ineries, orchards, and pastures; and existing recreation facilities. 4of9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary ,aO~~~~ Open Space Element ~. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 1 To promote the preservation and maintenance of open space in the foothill area, the City of Saratoga should pursue a cooperative agreement with the County of Santa Clara that will ensure Saratoga's ability to comment on development projects in the unincorporated hillside area. If necessary to secure the ability to comment on development projects in the unincorporated area, pursue expansion of the sphere of influence; to include those areas with a strong relationship to the, City due to visibility and/or the protection of infrastructure and services. If the expansion of the , Sphere of Influence is pursued; the City will apply the Residential Open Space zoning district standards as the prezone classification for al] ]ands outside the existing Sphere of Influence. The City of Saratoga should work with the Town of Los Gatos and the City of Monte Sereno to establish logical planning area boundaries pursuant to Local Agency Formation Commission regulations. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 2 The City should offer incentives to agricultural ov~mers and operators as away of contiriuing 'such uses. Incentives could include allowing the sale of agricultural products grown or produced on the site. as ~vel] as the resale of goods related to on-site operations (e.g. equestrian equipment); residential density bonuses for significant investment in agricultural improvement (e.g. vineyards, wood lots, or orchards) or open space dedications; allov~'ing additional dwellings on family farm operations v~'hen such additional dwellings v~'i]] permit continuance of inter-generational agricultural uses consistent with Villiamson Act provisions (not constituting a residential subdivision of the ]and under the Williamson Act); modifying road construction standards in hillside agricultural areas (e.g. curbs and gutters; which could interfere with agricultural , operations, should not be required). SCENIC OPEN SPACE POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ~, MEASURES ~ , POLICY 10 ]n evaluating scenic open space for planning purposes, the Ciry shall consider microscale, intermediate scale. ~ hree scaleslmay havne the h ghesttpotenria] fornproviding qualityts enictopen which encompass a] space. POLICY 11 Hillside Development The hillsides and the valley provide Saratoga with its prime macroscale views.; Therefore, development must include careful study of the effect on scenic open space. POLICY 12 Existing Vegetation ' The preservation of native and other vegetative species indicative of Saratoga's cultural heritage shall be given priority o anta onsideratiotn whenoe ~aluaring the. preserva on of nat ve vegetation.. safety shall be an Import 5of9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary ~Q~~~~ Open Space Element PoucY 13 Natural Environmental Features The preservation of the natural environment including geological and ecological features shall e encouraged. POLICY 14 Major Entryways and Arterials The major entryways and arterials throughout the City s steal be angimportant consideration in residential character and scale. Public health,and safety evaluating the design of major entryways and arterials. PoucY 15 Street Improvements Open space objectives shall take precedence over the width and landscaping of roadways and the inclusion of curbs, sidewalks; and gutters. PoucY 16 Parking Lots The design of parking lots shall be a sa~ent of visually interesting and aesth tically pleasingpanses of asphalt and to promote the establi parking lots. POLICY 17 Acquisition of Scenic Open Space The acquisition of scenic open space for park sites shall include an evaluation of the microscale; intermediate scale. and macroscale potential of each site. POLICY 18 Scenic Views and Trail System The City's trail plan shall access as many natural views as possible; including hillside macroviews and microscale views. PoucY 19 Creeks The City's creeks shall be preserved and restored v~'here possible, as natural scenic views. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 3 Hillside Development otentia] im acts to scenic views shall be In addition to the applicable city development standards, p P evaluated prior to developmentted disrua lion of naturalveget tion~ruse of structural heighbl~rrritse colors, controlled grading, lirrv P and structural design and density guidelines. Special consideration should be given to the eventua development of a canopy effect of tree growth. 6of9 s~ City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary ®~Q~~~ Open Space Element IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 4 Existing Vegetation The Ciry should provide information and assistance to the public in the preservation and care of native trees v~~hose existence can be tlueatened by environmental stress and development. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 5 Major Entryway and Arterials A street tree planting, landscaping; and maintenance program should be developed to encourage drought resistant; native vegetation to be planted and maintained throughout the City, especially in City owned and privately maintained rights of way. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 6 Parking Lots Large continuous expanses of asphalt should be limited by measures such as overflow parking on pervious surfaces; an increase in tree canopy coverage required and the encowagement of shared parking v~~ith adjacent and compatible uses. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 7 Non-scenic views enhanced Man-made, non-scenic, or unenhanced views such as railroad and utility facilities and quarries should be enhanced insofar as possible by erosion control measures, landscaping; use of color; and other methods of scenic improvement. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 8 Scenic Open Spacelnventory As a public reference; the City should prepare and update an inventory indicating al] dedicated 1 ; scenic open space resources in Saratoga. TRAIL SYSTEM POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES POLICY 20 Regional Trails Network A regional system of hiking; bicycling; and horseback riding trails shall be encouraged, which includes trails within and between al] City; County, State, and regional parks; and other publicly owned open space lands, as well as trails providing access from the City of Saratoga to these ]ands POLICY 21 Trail Acquisition Criteria The City shall promote the acquisition of trails as a mode of access and for recreational purposes, through purchase, dedication, or gift. T"rte trails network should emphasize creating connections between neighborhoods, schools; parks, public open spaces, historic sites; and activity centers; connections to the regional trails network; and acquisitions of trails that respect the rights of property owners as well as their privacy and security. Trails proposed for acquisition are identified on the Trails Map. City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary 7 of ~0~~1~ Open Space Element POLICY 22 Coordination Trail planning, acquisition. development, and management shall be coordinated among the various volunteer agencies and local, regional; state; and federal agencies ~~hich provide trails or funding for trails. POLICY 23 Traditional Trail Routes Trails shall be established along traditional routes whenever feasible. POLICY 24 Development and Maintenance Trail deve.]opment, patrol, and maintenance responsibilities shall be coordinated with a]] entities im~olved in each trail segment. In most cases, development responsibilities are borne by the property owner and maintenance activities are undertaken by the City. The Ciry is encouraged to ~~ork ~a~ith volunteer groups to maintain City trails. POLICY 25 Trail Location and Design Trails shall be located; designed, and developed ~~ith sensitivity to the resources and environmental hazards of the areas they traverse, as well as their potential impacts on adjacent lands and private property, including potential impacts to private property owners' privacy and security. Trails shall be designed to City specifications;'require minimal grading; and include effective erosion control measures. POLICY 26 ~, Development Controls ' The City shall control land development along designated trails in order to provide sufficient trail right-of--way and ensure that new development adjacent to the corridors does not detract from the scenic and aesthetic qualities of the corridor. POLICY 27 Creekside Trail Restriction The City shall not acquire, plan. or develop trail easements or public access easements along Wildcat Creek or Saratoga Creek, across single ofmulti-family land uses as designated in the Saratoga Genera] Plan abutting said creeks, or adjacent to said creeks between the centerline thereof and any single or multi-family designated property. This policy statement shall apply to Saratoga Creek from Prospect Avenue south to Tollgate Road, and to Wildcat Creek from Quito Road south to the Villa Montalvo Arboretum property line, with the exception of the section between Carnelian Glen Drive and Douglass Lane, as shown on the Trail System Map. POLICY 28 Access for the Disabled Whenever feasible, trails shall be designed and developed to meet the accessibility needs of all segments of the population 8of9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary Q~~~~~ ace Element POLICY 29 Trail Access Trails shall be designed v~~ith adequate ingress and egress points to minimize the need for parking at trailheads. Parking should be designed to be as unobtrusive as possible. POLICY 30 Transportation lmprovements Transportation improvements; such as road widening and bridge construction; shall include bicycle paths; as indicated on the master • • 9 of 9 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary 0~~~'~~ i~ Circulation and Scenic Highway Element CIRCULATION AND SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT i• i• City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary 1 oi~~~~g~ Circulation and Scenic Highway Element • PREFACE Fo]]o~ving is a circulation element consisting of the genera] location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes; terminals and other local public utilities and facilities; al] correlated v~~ith the ]and use element of the plan. Also included is a scenic high~~ay element for the development; establishment, and protection of scenic highways pursuant to the provisions of Article 2.5 (commencing v,~ith Section 260) of , Chapter 2 of Division l of the Streets and Highways Cade. GOAL 1 : BALANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ' Promote a balanced transportation system in Saratoga v,~ith attention to energy efficient transportation. • ~' POLICY 1 The City shall encourage and participate in the Count,-v~~de implementation of a variety of modes of transport to serve Saratoga. POLICY 2 The City shall v~~ork toward improved public transit, including more frequent service and access to the village. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 1 ' Coordinate with County Transit on City efforts necessary to increase transit availability. .ti., POLICY 3 The West Valley Corridor right-of-way shall be designated as a public use corridor. GOAL 2: SAFE. MOVEMENT Facilitate the safe movement of vehicular traffic within and through the City, taking into consideration the environmental; historical, and residential integrity of the City. PoucY 4 The City shall require public right-of--way to be offered and all private roads designated as collectors. POLICY 5 For safety, every new or developing public or private cul-de-sac greater than 500 feet in length, and every new and developing residential area in the City with more than 15 residential lots on a cu]-de-sac should have a primary and an emergency access. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE 2 Modify Subdivision Ordinance accordingly. 2 of 8~3 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary VQ~~~~ City of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures A circulation element consisting n t ortationrouotestttoerminals,land other local public proposed major thoroughfares P utilities and facilities, al] correlated with the land use element of the plan. • ~~a ~ element for the development, establishment, an~dthrSectionn260sofnic A scenic high highways pursuant to the provisions of Article 2.5 commenctng Chapter 2 of Division ] of the Streets and Nighways Code. O\~ERALL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Goal CI.J.O Provide a balanced~transporiation sysaintainSheaCity's rota] character,to all segments of the community and to m Policies C].1.1 The City shall encourage and participate in the implementation of a iety of modes of transport to serve Saratoga. vat - CI.1.2 Encourage development of a ion solutionlandaimprov ements.n to support local and regional transport STREET SYSTEM A.I~rD STA1~'~ARDS OF SER~'TCE Goals CI.2.OaFacilitate the safe movement of vehicular traffic within and through the City, taking into consideration the environmental, historical, and residential integrity of the City to maximize benefits and minimize adverse impacts and costs. For traffic management and street design, balan ~ areas.fficiency of vehicular Cl.2.Ob traffic with the safety and livability of res~dentta Policies CI.2.l Make efficient use of existing les [ra °eled ~luoughtthe arransgement of land the total number of vehicle mi uses, improved alternative modes, and enhanced integration of various transportation systems. wide street system that manages vehicular Cl 2 2 Maintain and develop a City- access, but also provides for emergency access. Page 39 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. ©O~•~02~ Ciry of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures CI.2.3 Adopt the proposed roadway classifications as shown on Figure C-2 and as described in the Background Report. CI.2.4 Maintain a minimum Level of Service (LOS) D operations standard at all signalized street intersections that are under City jurisdiction. (Intersections and roadways included~in the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program are held to a LOS E standard). CI.2.5 Require public review of any development project or other proposal that. causes an intersection to degrade by one or more levels of service (e.g: LOS A to B, LOS B to D). C1.2.6 Accept Level of Service E or F operations at City-maintained ,signalized intersections after findingte the lower levels of servicee A proposed is can be implemented to mrtiga development that exacerbates LOS E or F operations and causes a significant intersection impact should be considered for approval if it will provide a clear, overall benefit to the City (e.g., library expansion or relocation, new community center). CI.2.? Ensure that new development or redevelopment projects provide adequate property dedication to accommodate future roadway improvements at key intersections and other problem areas. C1.2.8 Manage traffic flow on major and minor arterial road~~ays to discourage through traffic in residential neighborhoods. CI.2.9 Align and design through collector streets to minimize adverse impacts on the character of residential neighborhoods through which they pass, while functioning efficiently to collect and distribute traffic. C1.2.]0 Design new local streets to reduce travel distance, promote alternative modes, and provide a more even distribution of traffic. CI.2.11 Establish the primary access for major traffic generators on arterial roadways and design overall access to minimize traffic intrusion to residential neighborhoods. CI.2.12 Strive to maintain traffic volumes and speeds on collector and local streets that are compatible with the character of the adjacent land uses, the function of the street, and bicycle and pedestrian traffic. CI.2.l 3 Protect- the integrity of and improve existing hillside streets by planning future development according to existing street capacities. • • Page 40 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. ~©~ ~2~ • City of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Higl+way Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures C1.2.14 Focus future improvements on the most congested intersections to maintain an acceptable level of mobility for all modes of transportation. CI.2.15 Require development projects to m ementingdpract cal and feaP ble street traffic and parking impacts by imp improvements. C7 Implementation 1\geasures CI.2.l 6 Continue to use the Capovements to the streetgsystempro~~ and implement needed tmp , C1.2.I7 Implement roadway and signal timing modifications to improve operations and enhance safety (e.g., lengthen turn pockets, adjust left-turn phases, . widen Janes). CI.2.18 Establish street and dri 7emm r arteriallroad ay as shown onlFigure C-2. designated as a mayor o Ensure that driveway or street r view d~ocesstforbmdividulal deve opment al traffic i7ow as part of the C ty P projects. CI.2.19 Install coordinated signal systems on all eaJFundm~ashould be obt fined City to improve traffic flow as appropr~a g from all available City, County, State and Federal funding sources, and developer contributions. CI.2.20 Evaluate the need for upgrading or enhancing intersection control (e.g., . at existin intersections on arterial roadways and signalization, stop signs) g collector streets to improve overall access and circulation. CI.2.21 Install traffic signals to serve existing and Prand enhance~ped strian safety. provide acceptable traffic operations issues, CI.2.22 Require a transportation analysis for all des s s me denrify potent al g ~ 50 or more net new daily traps. The analy impacts to intersection and roadway operations, project access, and alternative travel modes, and shall identify feasible improvements or project modifications to reduce or elimia~tained by thenVTA,s C ty~st ffe should be consistent with the cntena m should have the disothe~roo terational and safety issues regarding access, sight distance, and P CI.2.23 Evaluate development proposal st ndardsgn roadway improvements based on established Level of Service Page 4J Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. {~OU~2~ City of Sararoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/cools, Policies, and Implementation Measures C1.2.24 Require that roadway improvements identified as mitigation measures for development projects be in place prior to issuance of occupancy permits. C1.2.25 Require new development or redevelopment projects to dedicate property to accommodate roadway improvements at the following intersections: Saratoga-Surmyvale Road/prospect Road, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road/Saratoga Avenue; and Saratoga Avenue/Cox Avenue. C1.2.26 Identify potential capacity improvements and access modifications to maintain adequate circulation in the vicinity of the Civic Center, West Valley College, Redwood Middle School, the Public Library, St. Andrews School and Sacred I-Ieari. CI.2.27 Consider paying for improvement costs to serve a developm6nt project, as appropriate, where the City's economic development interests may be served. C1.2.28 Develop and adopt a Neighborhood Traffic Management (NTM) Plan to specifically include a process for identifying problem areas, and. for .. evaluating, funding, and implementing traffic calming measures to reduce 'high traffic volumes and travel speeds on City streets. CI.2.29 Design local streets to carry low traffic volumes at low speeds and. to function safely while minimizing the need for traffic control devices or enforcement. Physical features should include gentle curves, changes of , grade, narrow widths, short lengths, and T-intersections where feasible. CI.2.30 Design streets to minimize impacts to topography, riparian habitats and wildlife corridors. CI.2.31 Implement the action programs identified in the Hillside Specific Plan to provide adequate vehicular access including improvements identified. for Pierce Road consistent with Policy CI.2.13. Where feasible, improvements will include widening of travel lanes, increasing vertical clearance, installing additional signs, and providing new pavement overlays to improve safety. TRUCK TRANSPORTATION Goal Cl. 3.0 Limit the intrusion of commercial truck traffic on streets within the City. Page 42 Fehr & Peers Associa~es, Inc. ~~.~~~^' City of Soraroga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures Policies C1.3.] Require trucks to only use the designated routes shown on Figure C•3 .unless making a local delivery. ncoura e or require deliveries to be made during off-peak periods (i.e., C1.3.2 E g and evening commute Periods), especially in areas outside the morning where intersections operate at LOS E or F during the peak periods. • lrn ]ementation Measures CI.3.3 CI.3.4 CI.3.5 CI.3.6 TRANSIT Continue to strictly enforce the truck route ordinance by citing violators. Require as part of the develo u h del v eries be fmade oupside theWtypica] regular truck deliveries that peak commute travel periods (e.g., 7:00 am io 9:00 am and 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm) as appropriate. stablish and maintain reserved commercial truck ]oedimits forsdesignated E streets in appropriate areas such as the Village. Tun loading areas may be established to allow public on-street parking in loading zones at other times. Re wire new or redevelopment protects tom th small cottmmercial jaoding q areas except for areas such as the \ illage Enforcement will be provided by the Sheriff s Department similar to other on-street parking areas in the Ciry. Goals I.4.Oa Promote local and regional transit as a viable alternative 1o aulomobile travel for C destinations within and outside the City. ote the use of alternative modes of transportation b wed transg,tb cycle and CI.4.Ob Prom and convenience of existing and pla safety, accessibility, • pedestrian systems. Policies Coordinate with the Valley Transportation Authority to increase service C}.4.1 range and frequency within the City as appropriate. Existing service is illustrated on Figure C-4. Fehr ssociares, Inc. Page 43 OOOQ2~ Sara to a Circulation and Scenic Highway Element City of 8 Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures C1.4.2 Install transit improvements to improve service, increase safety, and maintain tr~'ffic flow on streets serving as transit routes. rivate schools, recreation groups or .' CI:4.3 Encowage the public school districts, p , . other operators to develop a local bus system and to expand ride-sharing , activities that will help to reduce school-generated vehicle traffic in neighborhoods and on City streets. Bussing should be the first measure considered to reduce school-generated traffic before substantial roadway capacity enhancements are implemented. ~ ,' CI.4.4 Investigate the feasibility of a local shuttle service within Saratoga to reduce local traffic volumes on City streets and overall parking demand. The feasibility study shall identify potential routes and fundira~ sources.. Implementation Measures CI.4.5 Require development projects to dedicate right-of--way for purposes of constructing bus turnouts and/or bus shelter pads on major and minor arterial roadways as appropriate. CI.4.6 Provide seating and shaded waiting areas at transit stops, with stop, locations near entrances of buildings to encourage ridership.' CI.4.7 Recommend to the ~cluded on new or mo fiedrity specific streets (e.g., Cox Avenue) to b CI.4.8 Improve the links of local transportation sb;'Cme aonal Itransitr such as bus bicycling and walking with private and pu g transit, light rail, and Cal'Train. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements should be funded as Capital Improvement Program projects or through private development projects to further encowage the use of transit. CI.4.9 Provide information to the public on available alternative transportation choices and routes. C1.4.10 Encowage local businesses to p trans to co°mmute to and from the s or other financial incentives to use workplace. CI.4.l 1 Recommend potenetaand andscapingf omprovementosl asuappropriate a provide minor stre CI 4.12 Commission a feasibility study ofbli wed from federal anrd st earatoga. l=anding for the study should be o grants/sources and private development projects. • Page 44 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. ~(~V02~ City of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background RepordGoals, Policies, and Implementation Measures BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN A1~TD EQUESTRIAN FACILITIES Goals CI. S.Oa lntegrate facilities for safe bicycling, walking, and horseback riding into the overall transportation system. CI.S.Ob Encourage equestrian and ped o dwa is ~ area swhere safetysandtaesthetc s ks and Trails Master Plan along r y permit. Policies CI.S.I Develop and maintain a comprehensive and integrated system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for commuting and recreation. C1.5.2 Integrate the City of Saratoga bi economicall feasible.e bikeways system of adjacent communities, where y C1.5.3 Pwsue the development of a new multi-use path along the Union Pacific Railroad alignment through the City of Saratoga that will link the Stevens -Creek Recreational 7rai1 in Cupertino with the Los Gatos Creek ?rail in Los Gatos. CI.5.4 Pwsue other potential rights-of--way suce a edestraan, andlor equestrian District and utility easements for bicycl , p trail development. CI.5.5 Assure implementation of the City's trails s a l maintenance pursuant to the dedication, construction, and a method of tr Parks and 'trails Master Plan as part of the subdivision or site approval process. C].5.6 Provide safe grid direct pedestrian routes enters andams octant c rnmunily through residential areas linking transit c P centers such as the Village. CI.5.7 lmprove pedestrian and bicycle access to all public and private schools to enhance safety. CI.5.8 Provide trails, sidewalks or separated patwhere needed to prow de safes and along some collector streets ui areas . pedestrian access to schools. CI.5.9 Require adherence to the trails policies noted in the both the Parks and - Page 45 Fehr & Peers.9ssociares, Inc. ~~Onn~ City of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures Trails Master Plan and the Hillside Specific Plan. CI.S.]0 Develop a'set of practical and realistic transportation demand management (TDM) measures that can be used by employers in the City to reduce the number~of single-occupant vehicle trips. These measures would encourage ride-sharing and transit alternatives. Implementation Measures CI.5.1 l Update and adopt the Bikeways Master P]an to include goals and objectives, a detailed list and map of improvements, a signage program, detailed standards, and an implementation program. The Bikeways Master Plan should include the proposed facilities shown on Figure C-5. CI.S.]2 Upgrade existing bikeways and designate new facilities where they can be accommodated according to current Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) technical guidelines (prior to adoption of City standards in the Bikeways Master Plan). For example, travel lanes on Frvitvale Avenue north of Burgundy Way should be restriped to provide bicycle lanes with , 5-foot minimum widths or, pathways. CI.S.l3 Coordinate with the school districts and other entities to develop , "Suggested Route to School Plans" for all public and private schools in the City. Plans shall identify all pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and traffic control devices for residents to determine the most appropriate travel route. The plans shall also identify existing easements for sidewalks. , , C1.5. ] 4 Prohibit parking in designated bicycle lanes on all streets unless adequate width is provided according to VTA guidelines or City standards. CI.5.15 Require the provision of secure bicycle parking as part of all future development projects that include multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, office, and institutional uses. C1.5.16 Develop a plan to review and identify additional bicycle parking locations in the Village area. CI.5.17 Require new development projects and redevelopment projects to dedicate right-of--way and/or provide improvements to accommodate bicycle lanes on streets identified on Figure C-5. CI.S.] 8 Require new cul-de-sac streets to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian access between residential areas, public uses, and community areas. CI.S.I 9 Encourage non-residential development projects. to include amenities such Page 46 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. ~~~~~~ C: City. of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures as showers and lockers for employees to further ,encourage bicycling as an alternative to automobile travel. edestrian safety projects (i.e., pedestrian street C1:5.20 Increase priority of p crossings, sidewalks or pathways) as part of the Capital lmprovement Program. rovements a funding priority by: 1) continuing to 01.5.2] Make bikeway imp consider financing bikeway design and construction as part of the City's annual construction and improvement fund;. 2) incorporating bikeway' improvements as part of the Capital lmprovement Program and pavement management efforts; and 3) aggressively pursuing regional funding and other Federal and State sources for new bikeways. C1.5.22 Update the Parks and Trails Master Planlan shouldnnclude the proposed Citywide pedestrian path system. The p trails shown on Figure C-6. CI.5.23 Prohibit motorized vehicular traffic on trails, pathways, parks and dedicated open space areas except for maintenance and emergency purposes. C1.5.24 Include new sidewalk or path c develo tment, oeclCose] gaps inrpedestrian program; or as part of any new P facilities on the following t Road] and Cox Avenue (see F pure C 6) ad, Saratoga Avenue, Prosp CI.5.25 Include new sidewalk or path constructio ent or redevelopmento, to cclose Program, or as part of any new developm gaps on local and collector streets near schools. CL5.26 Review the need to install sidewclschoo] crosswallcs on all City streets- w~thin one-half mile of all pubh ,5,27 Review the present equestrian zones and assess e i it consistency with the CI trails and pathways plan of the circulation elem n AESTHESTIC QUALITIES Al~'D HERITAGE LANES Goals CI.6.Oa Protect the aesthetic, historic and remaining rural qualities of Saratoga through street design and landscaping. Page 47 Fehr & Peers Associates, Jnc. ~~Q~2~ City of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures. C].6.Ob Strive for aesthetically pleasing views, from all roads in Saratoga and the Sphere of Influence. I.6.Oc Encourage the preservation of the width and appearance of those roads designated C as heritage resources by the City. Policies C1.6.1 ]dentify areas of critical need for beautification and coordinate plans with revitalization or anticipated development of areas. such as City gateways. CI.6.2 Adhere to minimum d the anticipated funs ion of the oadway rram, character of area ~i CI.6.3 Permit variation of the con~~entional City street development standards, as described in the City's Subdivision Ordinance, in order to preserve environmentally sensitive roadside features where traffic safety will permit such variations. CI.6.4 Identify the function of a street in advance of construction, an ou hl or • design criteria to mintmize disruption to the area caused by thr g heavy vehicle traffic. CI.6.5 Encourage the planting. of trees and plan the development of landscaped i medians along major arterial roadways. CI.6.6 Enforce ordinances to prevent the use of non-conforming roadside signs on all roads and highways within the City, whether erected by private individuals or business enterprises. CI.6.7 Require increased setbacks of up to 100 feet for structures,-walls or fences to be located on lots adjacent to officially designated scenic highways where it is determined by the City that such increased setbacks are necessary to preserve the scenic qualities of the highway. CI.6.8 Require increased setbacks and landscaping for commercial and multi- family residential structures on corner lots adjacent to arterial streets, as required, to reduce the visual impact of such structures and to enhance the appearance of important intersections where it is determined by the City that such increased setbacks are necessary to preserve the scenic qualities of the highway. CI.6.9 Approve designs for new hillside streets that maximize the use of natural terrain for roadbed construction and minimize "cuts and fills." Page 48 Fehr & Peers Associates, ]nc. ~©~Q~,D. i City of Saratoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Elemen) Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures • Im lementation Measures C1.6.10 Review Subdivision Ordinance street stcrossTsectoons equacy and prepare illustrations of corresponding roadway Re wire a sight distance analysis to ensure adequate~eeCacc or by private CI.6.l 1 q .variances from street design standards proposed by developers. Use Caltrans design standards as guidelines for sight distance studies. .6.12 Encourage residents of streets and roads beln as heritageelanes rthroughtthe CI nominate those rights-of--way for des~gnat~o Heritage Preservation Commission. Desi conunercia] areas with pedestrian amenities, shade trees, and on- C1.6.13 gT' street parking to create inviting environments. C1.6.14 The designation of Heritage Lane encll vehcles while maintatrung theses to guarantee safe access for emerg y integrity of the existing heritage lane. PARKING SUPPLY AI~TD 1~ZANAGEPZENT Goals CI.7.Oa CL7.Ob Policies Review on-street parking policies and utilization in the Village area. Provide adequate parking for non-residential uses to minimize intrusion into adjacent neighborhoods. e on-street parking spaces in commercial areas thatrpvate d arkingtlots tos to Proved off-street public and p P abutting properties while requiring serve the majority of the demand. . CI.7.1 1 CI.7.2 CI.7.3 CI.7.4 Designate cwb parking in the Village area for short-.term use by those visiting businesses and public facilities. Encowage the location of parking lots behind buildings to emphasize the buildings' physical and visual connections to the street and to maximize pedestrian access and safety. Encowage the use of carpools and vanpools by providing preferential spaces as appropriate. Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. t'age vy Qp~~31 City ojSararoga Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Background Report/Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures lmplementation Measures CL7:5 Enforce parking ordinances in terms of. time limits and zones. . CI.7.6 Establish time limits for on-street parking in commercial areas. C1.7.7. Adopt design standards for parking stalls, aisles and driveways for on- street and off-street facilities. P X32 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. . • . ~ • Safety Element i• i~ Safety Element t PREFACE: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION The identification of hazards that affect the city.is the initial step in the safety.planning process. It is also the most important stage in this process since inaccurate hazard identification and the formulation of inadequate safety land use policies could result in unnecessary loss of life, injury; , and property damage. The natural hazards that have affected Saratoga in the past and those that may affect it in the future can be identified with a high degree of accuracy. Geologic, flood, and fire hazards have al] caused considerable damage within the community in the past, while recent earthquakes have been minima] in their damaging effects. Although the future extent of natural hazards is unknown, in all probability the future will include the same types of hazards as have occured in the past. Accurate hazard identification is an accounting of historical information to be used as the basis for the evaluation of the future and the risks involved in relation to current and proposed land uses. HAZARDS OF LAND INSTABILITY The physical and geologic characteristics of Saratoga have the potential to produce geologic related problems for land development. Land development in areas of geologic instability can sudject life and property to hazards caused by both seismic and non-seismic conditions. Many hazards occur v,~hen property is developed in ways which are unsuitable to geologic conditions in the area. When structures or roads are built on geologically unstable land such as landslide areas or unstable slopes and soils, there is a definite risk to the community. Geologic hazards are unavoidable in California. However, some geologic conditions represent greater hazards than others. Faulting and unstable bedrock present great risks, while surface instabilites can often be engineered to make construction safe. When unstable soil combines with steep slope, development can be hazardous and the environment is endangered by potential landslides. Recognizing and delineating the geotechnical hazards which could result in injuries,. property damage, and economic or social dislocations is an important function of the city planning process to protect.the public health, safety, and welfare. The background geotechnica] data for the Safety Element of Saratoga's General Plan is contained in the Saratoga Geotechnica] Report (1974) ek Watershed and of the Congress Spn ngs StudygArea Hazard Analysis of the Upper Calabazas Cre by William Cotton and Associates (1980); and also in the Geologic Hazards Analysis of the Lower Saratoga Hillsides Area by Terratech (] 985). Included here is a summation of those data, and additional geotechnical information which has been compiled from more recent site specific geotechnica] investigations. GENERAL GEOLOGY AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS TOPOGRAPHY Includes the ]ow-lying, relatively flat valley floor and northwestern foothills. Outside the city limits, but within the sphere of influence, areahcomasrised of teertioanyons andasharp to rounded Mountains. These mountains are very rugg P P ridge tops. 2 of 22 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary Q~'~~~~ Safety Element • VEGETATION The mountain areas in the sphere of influence have a solid cover of vegetation. Hardwood trees of oak and madrone are abundant in this area, as well as redwood and douglas fu. The canyon floors near streams are covered with sycamore, elder, and maple trees. Much of the area is densely covered with chaparral, with only a few areas covered with grass. GEOLOGY The dominant geologic feature v~~ithin Saratoga's sphere of influence is the San Andreas fault zone, bisecting the mountainous portion of the terrain. The,fault zone determines the geology and topography of the area by separating two different rock assemblages and their associated erosional characteristics. The fault zone is composed of a complex system of fault traces and fractured rock. The rock formations to the east of the San Andreas fault are composed of sandstone, shale, volcanic rocks, some diabase and gabbro; and also large shear zone areas. 'The mountain area is separated from the flat area within the city limits by the Santa Clara formation, composed of unconsolidated to semi-consolidated gravel, sand, and clay. The valley floor of Saratoga is comprised .of several alluvia] fan deposits from the creeks and streams flowing from the mountainous area. The.alluvium is composed of unconsolidaed particles consisting of clay; silt, and grave]. This is Class I and II agricultural soil and is considered fertile by the United States Conservation Service. • GEOTECHNICAL TERRAIN UNITS AND RELATED HAZARDS There are large areas of the ciq~ and' its sphere of influence which have similar bedrock and soil characteristics. These areas of similar geotechnical characteristics are designated geotechnical terrain units. There are five such terrain units in Saratoga and its sphere of influence. The following conclusions can be made based on an evaluation of the geotechnical data for each terrain unit. 1. Terrain unit I (not shown) cannot support urban residential development but can . support very limited rural residential development in accordance with site- specific geotechnical studies. The Santa Clara County General Plan states that specific hazards within this terrain unit must be placed in permanent open space. 2. Terrain unit II can support both controlled urban residential development and rural residential development in accordance with site-specific geological and soils investigations. 3. Terrain unit III cannot support urban residential development but can support rural residential development in accordance v.~ith site-specific geological and soils investigations. 4. Terrain unit IV cannot support urban residential development but can support rural residential development in.accordance with site-specific geological and soils investigations. 3 of 22 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary U~U~3`J Safety Element 5. Terrain unit V .can support urban residential development. Geological investigation is not necessary, but soil analyses should be required. Additional data on each terrain unit is available in the 1974 Geotechnical Background Report. These data are supplemented by the geology and soils section of the Northwestern Hillsides Specific Plan (adopted in l 9~ LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE INSTABILITY Although most landslides are natural occurences, some damaging landslides are the result of human carelessness or haphazard construction. When construction is allowed in areas where landslides exist or where landslide susceptibility is high, the potential for substantial property Goss and human endangerment increase. The potential public costs for the repair of roads and utlities or disaster relief make it imperative that the city restrict developme in geologically hazardous areas. Most sloping ]and has some potential for ]andsliding. Slope stability is affected by several interrelated factors, such as steepness of slope; weak, unconsolidated soil units or formations with a high clay content; water saturation; vegetation removal; and seismic activity. Usually a combination of several factors will bring the hillside to the verge of a failure, and single factor such as heavy rainfall or an earthgese contditbions exist mayralsootriggler landslidelagtiv~ty. failure. The development of saes where th As shown on map 2 (relative geologic stability), a major portion of Saratoga is underlain by a geologic stability zone. This type of geologic unit is moderately stable when dry, but moderately unstable when saturated. Within the city boundaries, landslides are most likely to occur where silt and clay have been eroded along the stream channels traversing the city. Map 2 also shows areas in Saratoga that contain rock formations conducive to abundant landslides. ' These areas primarily lie west of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, pass through a portion of the , ~, Northwestern Hillsides Residential District, and continue past Big Basin Way. The zone is also present within the sphere of influence, along, the city's northwestern boundary and crossing , , Bolhman Road. Landslides and unstable slopes are prevalent in this area, and can create hazards within the city limits as the slide debris and rock moves down the incline toward the city's valley floor. .Landslides and slope instability are the major non-seismic geologic hazards in Saratoga. Although most of the hillside areas in the city experience these hazards to some degree; the most severe risks are found in the vicinity of the Congress Springs area and the upper Calabazas watershed. The present land use consists of hillside residential and watershed areas. The northern portion of the Congress Springs area is traversed by the potentially active Berrocal fault, which has contributed to deformation and fracture of the bedrock in the vicinity. It also lies within a nvle of the San Andreas fault; the proxinvty of these two fault systems has produced unstable slope conditions. Large landslide deposits blanket the underlying bedrock throughout much of the hillside region, and approximately 50% of the hillside contains landslide debris. The most geologically unstable area of the city lies in the Congress Springs area. An extensive section of several active landslides is shown on Map 3. The upper portion of the section includes the hilly region south of Congress Springs Road, part of the natural channel of Saratoga Creek, a section of the Congress Springs Road alignment, and a considerable amount of the low foothills located north of the road. Slope movements have been noted in this region for over 50 years. The Congress Springs Road surface has been significantly deformed and elevated about 14 feet since City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary ~~~~~6 Safety Element constructed. Extensive structural damage has been 1931 when the present alignment was experienced by all man-made construction within or south of this region. (MAP KEYS) Bohlman, and On Orbit Roads and private Active ]andsliding can also be traced across Belnap, driveways at a number of locations e'edra short segtion ofBohlman Road below the intersection of areas. Santa Clara County has surv y On Orbit Drive and found it to be me degeloament~even in those aheaspwhich appear to be st ble ' an extremely high risk area for futur P at the present time. The equilibrium of ct~ nth~i ationt alteration of natutral drainageeo the be destroyed by the advent of road constru , g introduction of septic tanilt effluent. Rapid failure of these slopes could cause considerable property damage, personal injury, or loss of life. Other highly unstable geologic units within Sarato GEnd its These units include all landslides designated on map 2 according to the key (ON PA ) articular] when saturated. The upper Y shown on Map 3 which are considered extremely unstab e, p Calabazas Creek watershed is located the stabililty of la~ge portionsuof tthe hillside is,undeermined by underlain by relatively stable ground, landslide deposits and unstable soils. The most extensive occurrence of ]andshRoadeP~erce1Road intersectionrtForry p rcent ofhhe total located north and south of the Mt. Eden land area in the Mt. Eden-P~es areaoas arse large~landsl de complexe swhi hocover entire hillslopes. landslides are common in , Examples of these large slide deposits areRoad l'de adjacenato tthe C labazasoc eek h srnoved Within the same genera] area, the Quarry part of the roadbed into the creek. To prevent potential geologic hazards from occa ingestiaat ons be made foralltjand usesproposals soils, Saratoga requires that detailed geotechmc ghe northwestern hillside area of Saratog, , in the Northwestem Hillside Residential District (NHR), and adjacent Santa Clara County ]a ~ Sect on IS)~13 050 and115114 050 of theaC•ry Code.ential District (HC-RD) in accordance wit The sphere of influence is within Santa Clara County's jurisdiction and development review area. Sarato a's sphere of influence is defined as that area outsidtrtoneCo~ssionas the unincorporated g Local A enc Forma designated by the Santa Clara County g y area most likely to be influenced aad tr~ewhereydevelopmen~is restrictedadue to large area-wide adopted a geologic hazard zoning landslides. The county has established specific guidelines for review of development proposa s to this district to aid in identifying are de ~ ]nation hasbeen applied loathe maajorslide area atnditions be met by developers. "This zoning g Congress Springs Road, shown on map 3. SOIL CREEP AND EXPANSIVE SOILS Soil creep and expansive soils ovementpof nearnsurface materialsilTheerate~of soil creeptis a oil creep is the slow, downslope m function of slope angle, soil thickneonsaande av~ed roads to fail overea perioa of t me s process, and may cause retaining walls, foundat~ P unaccompanied by any obvious signs of slope failure. Soil creep should not have a prohibitive 5 of 22 City of Saratoga General Plan Executive Summary ~®~~~~ I~ • Five-Year 2001-2006 Capital Improvement Plan F.Y. 03/04 Update -New Project List NEW CIP PROJECTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY LAND USE ELEMENT OPEN SPACE ELEMENT CIRCULAT ION ELEMENT SAFETY ELEMENT NOTES Public Safety Projects GOAL POLICY IlVIPLEMENTATION GOAL POLICY IlYIPLEMENTATION GOAL POLICY IlVIPLEMENTATION ISSUE High~~a~ 9/oak Place Pedestnan New pedestrian traffic signal ~2~ High~va~° 9 & ~ Signal: Oak Place. Warrant study and Caltrans approval ~ ~~~ ~ ; ~ ~~ ~~> '.:. ~~ ,,. ~ 2 Oa ~ 6,'I221,2 ~~ ~ .20, 2 > .. .. ,; ;: :: . ,. Infrastructure Projects Chester Avenue Storm Drain Storm dramage mtprovements nithe Chester ~' ' '~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ Improvements Avenue area ,. 9 ': al Pl No Gener an .. ,. ,.; . ;; > > . ... > .: >: Element Identified ,~ j Facili Pro ects r _. .._.... B k G -A oo - o rolmd Repvrs: - Roof repair and storage room repair w ork at the Book-Go=Around building > ': o General Plan El t Id tiff d emen en e • ITEM 2 • i~ REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: App # 03-201/ 21170 Big Basin Way Applicant/Owner: City of Saratoga Staff Planner: John F. Livingstone AICP, Associate Planner ~`lZ1 Type of Application: Request to LAFCO to adjust the Urban Service Area Boundary Date: January 28, 2004 APN: 503-48-029, 503-48-028 Department Hea ,C ~y ~v~ cn ~ ` `~" Q Buffer zones around Big Basin Way USA p k Q Big Basin Way USA ~ Cj ~ ~R ' i Big Basin Way USA parcels w ithin 500 ft - ~ • .~ i /`, Con ,~ ' c City Limit Line/L7rban s ~. Service Boundary N i - -...._...~.,__ ... ., ..; ~---_-- I ~.._ .._. wr ~ E I J S i, 'D o ~ fKi 9e 21170 Big BasinWay ~~O~a1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION N/A N/A 1/14/04 1/15/04 1/22/04 Request that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council a request to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to adjust the City of Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels, APN 503-48-029 end API~T 503- 48-028. The area has already been Prezoned as a Residential Open Space District and has the General Plan Designation of Hillside Open Space. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached Resolution recommending to the City Council that they request the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) adjust the City of Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution to adjust the Urban Ser<rice Area 2. City of Saratoga Notice, Noticing Affidavit, and Noticing Labels • • • ~~~~~~ File No. 03-201; Adjust Urban ServlceArea Boundary • r~ STAFF ANALYSIS CITY PREZONING: ROS (Residential Open Space) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: OSH (Hillside Open Space) MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: Britton Parcel APN 503-48-028 is 7.53 Acres English Parcel APN 503-48-029 is 1.261 Acres AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Unknown GRADING REQUIRED: I~TOt applicable ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Urban Service Area Boundary changes are projects subject to the environmental re~~iew requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In this case the boundary change would be exempt from CEQA review pursuant to section 15319 of the CEQA Guidelines. That section pro~~ides that boundary changes are categorically exempt from CEQA review if they include only existing structures developed to the density allowed by the current zoning or pre-zoning of either the gaining or losing governmental agency whichever is more restrictive. In this case the density would not increase therefore deeming the project categorically exempt. BACKGROUND At the August 6, 2003 City Council meeting the Council directed staff to proceed with preparing for Council consideration a proposed adjustment of the City's Urban Service Boundary to the area near Hakone Gardens that includes the Britton and English properties. On January 14, 2004 the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed boundary adjustment. At this meeting one of the property owners of the proposed Urban Service Area Boundary adjustment area expressed concerns with the noticing. In response to this the Planning Commission continued the item to the next Planning Commission meeting January 28, 2004 to allow the item to be renoticed. When Staff started this project it appeared that the General Plan would need to be amended and a Negative Declaration would be required. This needs to be done almost a month before the Planning Commission meeting. -While preparing the staff report for the Planning Commission meeting staff learned that the General Plan land use designation for the site was presented in the text of the General Plan and that, accordingly, a General Plan amendment was not needed. Staff amended the staff report but the noticing referring to the General Plan Amendment and Negative Declaration had already gone out weeks earlier. Continuing the item has allowed staff to renotice the project without the General Plan or Negative Declaration reference. ~Q~®®3 File No. 03-201; Adjust Urban Service Area Boundary PROJECT DISCUSSION The reason for the expansion of the Urban Service Area is to give the City of Saratoga greater influence over any future development to the properties near Hakone Gardens. If a major project such as a new home were proposed on one of the properties the Ciry would currently not receive any' notice from the County. If the area were in the City's Urban Service Area Boundary the City would receive a notice from the County and be granted certain review rights under Santa Clara County's ordinances and procedures. The area is currently designated by the General Plan as Hillside Open Space as described on page 3-4 of the City of Saratoga's General Plan. This designation was taken from the County General Plan and covers all area within Saratoga's Sphere of Influence that are not designated as parks. This designation allows uses that support and enhance a rural character. Density development allows for one dwelling unit per 20 acres to one dwelling unit per 160 acres based on slope density formula subject to stringent criteria. The prezoning of ROS (Residential Open Space) allows for a minimum of 20-acfe sites with a required thirty percent of the lot as dedicated open space. The existing County zoning is HS-dl. This allows for a minimum lot size of 160 acres with an exception that the density may be reduced to one lot per 20-160 acres depending on lot slope for one-time two-lot splits. • The City's Urban Ser~~ice Area adjustment gives the City no direct control over land use in the area but does give the Ciry greater opportunity to comment to Santa Clara County. In addition, inclusion in the Urban Ser~~ice Area is a prerequisite to annexation. If the properties were eventually annexed the density would not change due to the City's slope density requirements. The only differences if the area was annexed to the City would be the design re~~iew process, floor area allowed and height requirements. Under the proposed adjustment to the Urban Service Boundary the property would stay under the County Design Review process unless it is annexed. The Local Agency Formation Commission only allows one Urban Ser~~ice Area Boundary change a year. Hakone Gardens Hakone Garden is an 18-acre site owned by the City of Saratoga and leased to the Hakone Foundation. The site is on the City and County's Historic Resource Lists. The site was created in 1915 as a Japanese style garden. The garden is the oldest Japanese residential garden in the Western Hemisphere and has been recognized as a historic place by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Correspondence No further correspondence has been received on this project since the last Planning Commission meeting on January 14, 2004. • ~~~~~~ File No. 03-201; Adjust Urban Service Area Boundary GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY Conservation Element Policy 6.0 Protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. Land LIse Element Policy 5.0 The City shall use the design review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. Land Llse Element Policy 1.2 The City shall evaluate its designated unincorporated Urban Service Areas to determine if the areas are compatible with the County's Local Agenry Formation Commission (LAFCCO) Policies and are appropriate for annexation and urban development. The proposed Urban Service Area adjustment is consistent with the above General Plan Policies in that the adjustment of the Urban Ser<~ice Area may assist in protecting the rural atmosphere of Saratoga by allowing the Ciry increased influence over any major projects in the area. The proposed Urban Service Area adjustment will also allow the City the option of annexing future major projects into the City if the City determines that annexation would be consistent with City annexation policies and otherwise be in the public interest. CONFORMITY WITH LAFCO POLICIES The proposed Urban Service Area Boundary change is consistent with LAFCO policies in that the sheriff and fire sers~ices, school districts, water district, and the role of other special districts will not be altered. The area will remain consistent with Counry density limits for development and have a less than significant impact to any housing due to the City's General Plan designation being consistent with the County designations. The proposed expansion will also have a less than significant impact to any County open space in the proposed expansion area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of a request to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to adjust the Ciry of Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to add two new parcels. • ~~~~~S • Attachment 1 ~~~~~6 r, u APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADJUST THE URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY TO INCLUDE PARCELS 503-48-029 and 503-48-028 LOCATED AT AND NEARBY 21170 BIG BASIN WAY WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga has initiated consideration of an adjustment of the Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels, APN 503-48-029 and APN 503-48- 028 prezoned in the Residential Open Space District and with a General Plan Designation of Hillside Open Space; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at v;~hich time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the testimony and evidence of all interested parties together with the staff report and all other information submitted by staff. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: 1. The adjustment to the Urban Service Area Boundary would be consistent with the following General Plan Policies: Conservation Element Policy 6.0 Protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. Land Use Element Policy 5.0 The City shall use the design review process to assure that the new constn~ction and major additions, thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. Land Lase Element Polio The City shall evaluate its designated unincorporated Urban Service Areas to determine if the areas are compatible with the County's Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCCO) Policies and are appropriate for annexation and urban development. The proposed Urban Service Area adjustment is consistent with the above General Plan Policies in that the adjustment of the Urban Service Area may assist in protecting the rural atmosphere of Saratoga by allowing the City increased influence over any major projects in the area through consultation procedures established by Santa Clara County for projects within a city's Urban Service Area. The proposed Urban Service Area adjustment will also allow the possibility of annexing the, lands in question to the Ciry in the future if the City determines that annexation -would be consistent with Ciry annexation policies and otherwise be in the public interest; and ~~`~Q~~ ~' 2. The ad'ustment to the Urban Service Area Bounda is consistent with LAFCO (Local Agency Formation Commission) Policies in that the sheriff and fire services, school districts, water district, and the role of other special .districts will not be altered. The area will remain consistent with County density limits for development and have a less than significant impact to any housing due to the City's General Plan designation being consistent with the County designations. The proposed expansion will also have a less than significant impact to any County open space in the proposed expansion area. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 28th day of January 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission t ~~~~~8 r~ Attachment 2 ~~~~~~ City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 , 408-868-1222 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Wednesday, the 28`h day of January 2004, at 7:00 p.m. Located in the City Council Chambers at 1377 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. App. NO. 03-201 (APN 503-48-029 and APN 503-48-028), located at and adjacent to 21170 Big Basin Way; -Request the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to expand the City of Saratoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels, APN 503-48-029 and APN 503-48-028. 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 for information 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. John F. Livingstone, AICP Associate Planner 408.868.1231 • ~~~~~.® • 21170 Big Basin Way and adjacent property • ~~~~~.~ AFFIDAVIT OF MAILINGNOTICES • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) I, John F. Livingstone, being duly sworn, deposes and says: that 1 am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18 years; that acting for the Ciry of Saratoga Planning Commission on the 15th day of January, 2004, that I deposited in the maL< room at the City of Saratoga, 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- ~vit: (See list attached hereto and made part hereof) that said persons are the owners of said property who are entitled to a Notice of Hearing pursuant to 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 at and adjacent to 21170 Big Basin Way; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. • C~~~~~2 ,mootn reed ~r~eets , ~°~ SANTA CLARA COUNTY Or Current caner N 50348014 BASIN Y S T A 95070 KENNETH L & SHELLEY LUSKEY Or Cun-ent Owner, APN 50355002 21185 TOLL GATE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 ALLEN R & LEYDA ADAMS Or Current Owner, APN 50355019 21 SS VENTURA PL SANTA CLARA CA 95051 JONAS & JENNIFER PERSSON Or Current Owner, APN 50355053 21194 HAYMEADOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 FRANCISCO & NANCY CALDERON Or Current Owner, APN S 03 S S OS 9 TOLL GATE R:D TOGA CA 95070 JOSE W SAN Or Current Owner, APN 50355069 374 W SANTA CLARA ST SAN JOSE CA 95113 SARA OGA CITY OF Or Curre Ow r, APN S 03 S S 076 BIG BAS AY SARAT A C 95070 RAYMOND L & TINA MCMAINS Or Current Owner, APN S 1713010 1 SO1 S BOHLMAN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 MARTIN & SAKAMOTO HERBACH Or Current Owner, APN 51714089 15389 BOHLMAN RD S RATOGA CA 95070 L D & BETTY MCMULLIN Or urrent Owner, APN S 1736006 20915 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA CA 95070 DAVID L & SARA BRITTON Or Cun-ent Owner, APN 50348028 PO BOX SS8 SARATOGA CA 95071 NERVE & BIRUTA LE POULLOUIN Or Current Owner, APN 50355003 21278 BANK MILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 JOSE W SAN Or Current Owner, APN 50355020 374 W SANTA CLARA ST SAN JOSE CA 95113 RICHARD A & ABBY WEISER Or Current Owner, APN 50355054 21216 HAYMEADOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 JOSE W SAN Or Current Owner, APN 50355061 374 W SANTA CLARA ST SAN JOSE CA 95113 RICHARD J DEVILBISS Or Cun-ent Owner, APN 50355070 21164 TOLL GATE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 COX Or Current Owner, APN 51707030 SSO HAMILTON AVE 220 PALO ALTO CA 94301 RAYMOND L & TII~TA MCMAINS Or Current Owner, APN 51713011 1501 S BOHLMAN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 CAROL & MICHAEL MAULDIN Or Current Owner, APN 51714090 15345 BOHLMAN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 KEITH J & JUDITH CRAIK Or Current Owner, APN 51736007 20959 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA CA 95070 lfse template for 5160`"' THOMAS G & GERALDINE ENGLISH Or Cun-ent Owner, APN 50348029 2.1170 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 GEMMA HWANG Or Current Owner, _APN 50355005 25313 LA LOMA DR LOS ALTOS CA 94022 VAUGHN R & DOROTHY MARIAN Or Cun-ent Owner, APN 50355052 21 ] 82 HAYMEADOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 DAVID A & SUSAN ROGAN Or Current O«~ner, APN 50355058 21282 TOLL GATE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 KI Y KIM Or Current Owner, APN 50355064 21175 BANK MILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 JUDI W & R HARTMAN Or Current Owner, APN 50355071 21244 BANK MILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 SAMPLE STEPHEN P & PHI CHINH T Or Current Owner, APN S 1713009 15027 BOHLMAN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 MORROW INVESTMENT LTD Or Current Owner, APN 51736010 14170 BLOSSOM HILL RD LOS GATOS CA 95032 ~~~~~3 ITEM 3 • REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 03-267;19351 Athos Place Type of Application: Appeal of a Denied Tree Removal Permit Applicant/O~~~ner: Cindy and Keith Mueller, Appellant and Property Owner Staff Planner: Christy Oosterhous AICP, Associate Planner Date: January 28, 2004 .. ~ ~ ~,~ , APN: 389-033-07 Department Head: ~~•--°~; i~ Q~~~®~ 1yj51 Athos Ylace Application No. 03-267; 19351 Athos Place PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City denied a tree removal permit for three eucalyptus trees located at 19351 Athos Place. The property owner has appealed the denial of the tree removal application. The tlv-ee Eucalyptus trees are located in the side vard in close proximity to the left side property line and fence. Upon receipt of the appeal, the city arborist inspected the subject trees and compiled a report (Attachment 2). The city_ arborist found the trees are in fair to good condition, but have poor structural integrity. The applicant's grounds for appeal are attached. h~ summar_y. the grounds for appeal include safety concerns (Attachment 3). The neighbor which shares the left side property line has provided a statement in support of removing the Eucalyptus trees (Attaclvnent 4). Relevant background information is enclosed including the arborist comments, tree removal application, and appeal statement. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-50.080 the following criteria shall be used in detenninin~ if a Tree Removal Permit shall be issued: (1) The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures. and interference with utility services. (2) The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property. (3) The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values and established standards of the area. (5) The number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. STAFF RECOM>\'IENDATION Staff recommends the Plarvling Commission conduct the public hearing and take appropriate action. ATTACHMENTS 1. Tree removal permit, including city denial. 2. Arborist Comments, dated December 16, 2003. 3. Appellant statement from Cindy and Keith Mueller. 4. Statement from adjacent neighbor located at 19363 Athos Place, John and Judy Vance. 5. Mailing labels for public notification. • • • ~~'~~}®~ ~~ ~ ~J t Received: I ` ~ ~-~ ~ree Removal Permit Applieatio~ Permit No:~.y Da e Permit Cost • $25.00 Expiration Date:. '' Phone hm i~~,,lr, j-~~~. ~ r. ~wk) 4c i~-( ~'i( =f ; ~- Property Owner: ~ ! `''~ i~; ~ 1: :( ) ~ ~ 'C.` _. ` ~,_ Mailing Address: '~1 < ~~ ~ /~, ~_~~~ -I-~ lc c _~ n ,: ,--,^ r: :;~1 `=)~ ~ -..`: „ `~ Address where tree(s) to be removed: ` I %`~ ~ -~ "~-'~ ^~ ~ ~' <<~~ ' ~' ~ (~^~ ~` ~~ '~=~~~~ ` +~~. ~;-~,~. Company to remove tree(s) _~ ,-~ ~ 1 ~~ , ~~ ~ ~ ~ i~ ~ ~~!: Nearest cross street: '~~~~ ~~~ ~ 1 understand that the tree(s) may be removed only if found to be with in the criteria as established by Artic]e15-50.080 of the City code and that by signing this form, l am certifying that the tree(s) to be removed islare solely on my property. ~ J' 1 Signature`of Property Owner Tree Removal permits are required for the removal of trees of the following size or larger (size refers to the circumference of the trunk measured 2 feet above the natural grade). Oak Trees: 32 inches or larger, All other Trees, 40 inches or larger. Please list all trees to be _.] ] at_ ~..Ll,. L,.1 ...., ,v.vv ..SPECIES Vv v SIZE REASON FOR REMOVAL ~, ~, .~ l ;~ ~ i Location of Trees +I Prepare a small site plan the area below,showing all trees to be removed from the property; include dimensions from property lines and existing structures. I ~= Q.r,c-~- --~~ ~~~ 4~ i ~~ ~~~~f~ ?...~ •~ ar.~, r~ot,Fa ~~ ~nf'~'"° r. s" ~ ~~ '^r l r~....t nr Co ~ttt' 4 ~~_--__~l ~} ~a6_e..~. 'fi'r-O.^~ 9 ' i GLha roc-'L,~-~b~-• 0 y a.~~-. FEES PAID: ~s ~'~ RECEIPT NO. (~es~C~~ u~ NOV 0 6 2003 U CITY OF SARAT(xiA ^•n~~I IUITV IlFVC~ n••, •- ~Q~~CD3 Applicant: CITY OF SARATOGA Tree Removal Petmit ~ `a~~ Address Where Tree(s) Are To Be Removed To Be Completed By A Field inspector 5 This tree removal pernvt is APPROVED in accordance with Article 15-50 of the City Code based on the following findings. The tree is DEAD Meets Criteria Does Not Meet Criteria The Condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling. ence with utility f t d i er er n proximity to the existing or proposed structures an , serv~oes. Removal for economic or other enjo}m~ent of the property. - ~~ ~ The topography of the land and the effect of the removal upon erosion; soil ^ retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters. The number, species, size and location of the existing trees in the area and the scenic beaut t i d i ^ y, mpac ; vacy e, pr effect the removal would ]lave upon sha and any established standards of the area. The number of healthy trees on the property is able. to suYpert according to good U' forest practices. • ' Conditions of Approval Replacement tree(s) shall be planted within 3 months from the approval date. /The~City will re-inspect to enstu•e compliance with all conditions of approval. ~ t V This tree removal permit is DENIED for the following reasons: ~~~ /C.~l ~~ ~~__1.r.T ~2iO~l ~,p ~~vy~ 15-50.090 APPEALS (a)Except other~nse provided in the subsection (b) of this Section, any person objecting to a decision by the Planning Director made pursuant to any of the provisions of this Article, may appeal such decision to the Planning Corrunission in accordance with the procedw•e set forth in Article 15-90 of this Chapter. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 15-90.020, the decision of the Planning Commission shall be final and no further appeal maybe taken to the City Council. PERMIT EXPIRAT]ON DATE= Signature of Inspector ~. • I / ~''~-~cfi Effecti e Date of Permit Date of Inspection Community Development Representative ~~~Q~~ Attachment 2 ~~'~~Qa~ a~'~r,;, R~OR R.ES~L~RCES _ r~- ~PCC~8a~9~1.C?Y~Ccc'.~ ~T-BUR c. f-L~if.4~~t1'c:(I.L} ~-0/2.1tLL~t;CY1Q ~ ~Jr6F.f C:.Ce.'~:. ' ~ ~r ~_ _ ,.a...~-___~,.r. A REVIEW OF A TREE REMOVAL PER~97:T APPLICATION FOR REMOVING THREE EUCALYPTUS FROM 19351 ATNOS PLACE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA OWNER'S NAME: MUELLER APPLICATION #: 03-276 APN: 389-33-077 Submitted to: Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga. CA 95070 Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA Registered Consulting Arborist #399 Certified Ar•borist #WE-4001A Site Inspected: December 13, 2003 Report Submitted: December 16, 2003 P.C}. Box 25295. San Mateo. California 94402 ~ Email: arborresources@earthlink.net Phone: 650.654.3351 ~ Fah: 650.654.3352 o Licensed Contractor X796763 ; ri.l0'i~!' ®O David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist December 16, 2003 INTRODUCTION l have been requested by the City of Saratoga's Community Development Department to reviev~~ the Tree Removal Permit Application #03-276 (prepared by Mrs. Cindy Mueller, dated 1 l /6/03). The application requests the removal of three Eucalyptus trees from l 9351 Athos Place. Saratoga. My f ndings, conclusion and recommendations are presented below. Data compiled for each tree is presented on the table attached to this report. Their locations are shown on the site drawing presented on the application. Note numbers are assigned to each tree and are shown on the attached table:. tree #l is located nearest the home's front and #3 nearest the home's rear. FINDING S The three subject trees are named Red Ironbark (Eucalyptus sideroxylon) and are located as a small clump along the home's west side. The trunks are situated approximately four to five feet from the western boundary fence and five to six feet from the home. The canopies are located over the subject and western adjacent property (19363 Athos Place). Each tree appears in overall fair to good condition but has poor structural integrity. Cuts for height reduction were made at approximately ] 5 feet below the existing tops. Subsequently. this type of pruning on these trees alters their structural form and results in weakly attached branches growing from the cut areas. These branches are highly susceptible to breakage tlu-oughout the life of each tree. To minimize the risk of branch failure, frequent maintenance. such as every one to two years, would be necessary and includes height reduction. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the trees' poor structural condition and location, I believe their removal is appropriate and 1 reconunend the subject Tree Removal Application be approved. if retained, the trees will continue to present a risk to public safety and property below. a risk that will increase as the weak branches become larger. I recommend the removal of these trees is mitigated with three trees of 24-inch box size planted anywhere on the property. Acceptable native species includes the following: Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), Valley Oak (Quercus lobata), Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Big Leaf Maple (Ater macrophyllum) and California Buckeye (Aesculus californica). J A Review of Tree Removal Application #03-276, 19351 Athos Place, Saratoga Page 1 of 2 City of Saratoga ComnaunityDevelopment Department ~~~~®,~ David L. Bobby, Registered Consulting Arborist December 16, 2003 APPRA] SED M ONETARY VALUES The combined monetary value of all three trees is $1.970. The value for each tree is shown on the attached table. All values were calculated' using the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9`" Edition. authored by the Council of Landscape Appraisers. 2000. Attachment: Tree Inventory Table • • A Review of Tree Removal Application #03-276, 19351 Athos Place, Saratoga Page 2 of 2 City of Saratoga Community Development Department ~®~~®8 -:. ARBOR RESOLiR CES ~20fE11iOr1QL Og2t7041L'ULt1l2RL C.:OI21U.~'tin9 ~ ~2EE C.:Q2E TREE ITTVENTORl TABLE ~: N ~ V'1 u r-. ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ .b ti ,,~, `. r, I I ~ Y I I 4. ~ ~ C ee ~. ~ w Cp ~. ~. ~ bD ~ C c ~ c . ~. ti ~ ~ R C y ~ ~ O ~ 'O ~ C ~ ~ ~ F--i ~ ~ C c.G., F v. ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ T U ~ ~ 10.11 U ~' 'w ? T ,,,, ~ TREE ~? ~ aG ~ ~ o° ~ ~ c c c " c i ~ ~ °~ NO TREE NAME , c H ~ H " U ~ x ~ cn ~ ' C .. `' ~ ~ a i F- . . . - Red lronbark l (Eucalyptus sideroxvlon) 27 24 45 25 75% 25% Fair Love $].300 Red Ironbark 2 (Eucalyptus sideroxvlon) 15 ] l 35 20 75% 25% Fair Lov,~ $300 Red Ironbark 3 (Eucalyptus sideroxvlon) l 3 ]2.5 35 20 75% 25% Fair Lo~~ $370 i• i~ Job: 19337 Athos Place, Smmoga Prepored jor: City ojSmatoga Community Development Deportment Prepmed by: DmzdL Babby, RCA Decetnber,]¢~~~~~ Attachment 3 L' ~'~~~~® • • • • ~~=> -> ~ ~_. 1r~a ~~ -- ,r: `=' THIS BOA TO BE COP7PLETED BY THE CITY CLERK DATE T2F,CEIVED: ~ ~-' ~ ? / t% ~ l3EA_RINC DATE: ~ 1-~'~''=;-. FEE: ~ ~ ~-' =-t. RECEIPT # ~ ~ ~` ~ =~" CITE' OF SARATOGA PLANl`~ Il'~ G COM1~Zl SSION APPEAL APPLICATION ~~~o~~ DEC 0 3 2003 CI'iY Of SARATOGA ~~nnenUlTV ~1FVE1_,Gp~F*'~~ This two-part application must be submitted to the City Clerk, ] 3777 Fruitva]e Avenue, Saratoga CA 95070. by 5:00 p.m. within fifteen (l 5) calendar days of the date of the decision. Appellant Name: Address: Telephone #: .~ ~i C~_ ` j ~2~~~. ~~ (`~;~~ ~~ J r Name of Applicant (If different than Appellant): - - _ Project file number and addxess: Decision being appealed: ~ Grounds for appeal (letter may be attached): ~a~s~~. Appellant's~S~gnature Date (Please do not sign this application and the attached authorization until it is present at City offices) ~~~~1~~ ,;r ;, ti '- '~ ~4 ~....~-. i -:~ • • • Dear Planning Commission, We submitted for approval to remove three eucalyptus trees which are a hazard to both our property and our neighbor's property. We are very concerned about the safety hazards of these trees: 1. The trees present an extreme fire hazard as they are too close to the roofs of both houses. 2. The limbs are brittle anubbaak,dandamat~ a lyleach year (which makes themr look this, the trees must be c unamactive). 3. Our neighbor has additional concerns. including large cracks in his driveway. Please see his email attached. We would greatly appreciate being able to remove these trees and plant something that will not present a hazard to either house. We appreciate your consideratio~;_ Thank you and best regards, Cindy and Keith Mueller +~~~Q~,,21', Attachment 4 ~~~~~3 Page 1 of 1 • • IV~ain Ider~tit From: "jackvance" <jackvance@earthlink.net= 70: "Jack" <jackvance@earthlink.net= Sent: Friday. November 21, 2003 11:58 AM Subject: sara city/tree Address: 19363 Athos PI. Voice: 867-9753 RE: Denial of neighbors Tree Removal Permit App. No. 03-276, 11/6/03 Neighbor: Cindy & Keith Mueller, 19351 Athos PI. Ph. 741-0737 Mrs. Mueller advised me this am; that their request to remove three Eucalyptus trees was denied. I was told that there was a ten day period tc respond to the denial. My wile and I live next door to the Muellers, and the trees in question are between their property and ours. No one from the City has contacted us regarding the request. and I believe the ten day window is up on Nov. 23. We stongly request that the application be re-examined, and the permit be approved for the following reasons: 1. Our driveway has several major cracks that are widening due to the shallow roots from the trees, and will require repair or replacement at our expense. 2. The trees present an EXTREME fire hazard to both properties, and the prevailing wind is in our direction. 3. The trees/large branches present a danger in terms of falling on our house in the event of a major rain/wind storm. 4. Year round clean up on our drive~n~ay(detached garage) from the tree debris is required. 5. The trees do not in any way make any significant esthetic statements to the nearby neighbors. They are not out in front of the property, but down the side between the two houses. 6. 1f our request to re-view the permit denial cannot be honored, please specify how we can jointly with the Nluellers appeal the decision. I will be out of town from Nov. 25 through Dec. 4. I will be checking for messages on the 867 number, and I can be reached by cell, 408-621-1552. I hope you will give this request serious consideration John and Judy Vance cc: The Muellers • ~..J • 11/21/2003 ~~~~~ • • Attachment 5 • ~'~~~~~ DOUGLAS A & ,IOANNE MCFARLIN 19285 HARLEIGH DR SARATOGA CA 95070 DAVID B COSTA PO BOX 3341 SARATOGA CA 95070 DONALD H & JEAN WALLIS 19349 ATHOS PL SARATOGA CA 95070 BERNICE E SCHEIBLE ]9358 ATHOS PL SARATOGA CA 95070 BARBARA L MAGER 19324 ATHOS PL SARATOGA CA 95070 CHARLES & AMY EBERTIN 19303 ALLEI~rDALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 EDWARD H &PATRICIA BROWDER 13800 YERBA SANTA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 BRADNER L & DORIS H1SEY 19325 ATHOS PL SARATOGA CA 95070 KEITH J & CYI~TTHIA MUELLER 19351 ATHOS~PL SARATOGA CA 95070 SAEED & SHEILA RAHNE]V1A 19348 ATHOS PL SARATOGA CA 95070 DUE-PEP-REX 19312 ATHOS PL SARATOGA CA 95070 .IOSEPH & BONNIE BARB 19365 ALLENDALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 JOHN T &PATRICIA BROWN 13801 YERBA SANTA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 DAVID R MATHER 13 519 RONNIE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 JULIA J PON 19301 HARLEIGN DR SARATOGA CA 95070 DAVID D ~ KUMIKO CARKEEK 19339 HARLEIGN DR SARATOGA CA 95070 CHARLES H & LINDA EMPEY 13832 YERBA SANTA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 RUSSELL P & JULIE HULME 13833 YERBA SANTA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 SCVWD HARLEIGH DR SARATOGA CA 95070 ~~~~~~ DONALD P BOWDEN 13 5 51 R ONNIE WAY TOGA CA 95070 ALICE E COOPER 13655 RONNIE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 TH OMA S L & B ONNIE MARANTETTE ] 3654 RONNIE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 CHEIN L CHANG 19240 KERWII~T RANCH CT SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CITY OF SARATOGA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 PING & HUl SHEN 13668 RONI~TIE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 DOLOREZ 1VI BATTAGLIA 13636 RONNIE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 FU-HWA & LING-YUN WANG 19241 KERWIN RANCH CT SARATOGA CA 95070 DAVID L & LINDA MIGHDOLL 13664 RONNIE ~~~AY SARATOGA CA 95070 .LAMES C ~ CAROLLYN KUFIS 19264 KER~~I'IN RANCH CT SARATOGA CA 95070 WEST VALLEY' ALLEI~TDALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 ~~'~~ ITEM 4 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: App # 03-092/ 19554 Three Oaks.Way Applicant/Owner: Marc Robinson/Raymond Chu ~r ~ Staff Planner: John F. Livingstone AICP, Associate Planner ~~~, Type of Application: Design Review for a Second Story Addition Date: January 28, 2004 APN: 397-19-024 Department Head: .~ ~~. Three Oaks 19554 Q Three Oaks 19554 500 it radius Q Three Oaks 19554 parcels in 500 ft ii N ~~ W C ,- E _I I --~. i 'x n 19554 Three Oaks Way c~oc~a~oi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application compete: Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 04/16/03 12/1.0/03 01/14/04 01/15/04 01/22/04 Request Design Re~~ievt~ Approval to add 1,504 square feet to the existing 3,169 square foot house with an existing 434 square foot garage for a total floor area of 5,10 square feet. The addition includes a new 1,00 square foot second story addition to the existing house. The gross lot size is 40,140 square feet and zoned R-1-40,000. The maximum height of the residence ~~ill be approximately 23 feet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve the application for Design Re«ev~~ v,~ith conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution with conditions 2. Ciry of Saratoga I~~otice, Noticing Affidavit, and Noticing Labels 3. Applicant's Plans, Exhibit "A" • ., • ~~U®02 File No. 03-092;19554 Three Oaks Way/Chu Property • STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: R-1-40,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density) MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 40,140 square feet gross and 33,718 net AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 12.7% GRADING REQUIRED: The applicant is proposing minimal grading. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposal is Categorically Exempt from the En~nromnental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. Proposal Code Requirements • Lot Coverage: Applicant is removing 5,191 sq. ft. Building Footprint Driveway, Patios, Pool; light ut~ells, tennis court and Walkways TOTAL Floor Area: Setbacks: Height: Main Floor Garage Addition TOTAL Front Rear Left Side . Right Side Residence Detached Garages C:\MyDocuments\Design Review 03\Three Oaks 19554 Staff Repo.doc Maximum Allowable 42% (11,801 square feet)35% 4,134 sq. ft. 9,912 sq. ft. 14,046 sq. ft. (E)19,237 sq. ft. 57% Maximum Allowable -3,169 sq. ft. 434 sq. ft. 1,504 sq. ft. 5,107 sq.ft. 5,532 sq. ft. Min. Requirement 43 ft. 30 ft. 140 ft. 50 ft. 24 ft. 20 ft. 41 ft. 20 ft. Maximum Allowable 23 ft. 26 ft. N/A 12 ft. ~~Q®~33 File No. 03-092;19554 Three Daks Way/ChU Property PROJECT DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting Design Re~~iev~~ Approval to add 1,504 square feet to the existing 3,169 square foot house v\~ith an existing 434 square foot garage for a total floor area of 5,10 square feet. The addition includes a new 1,00 square foot second story addition to the existing house. Currently the improvements on the property exceed the maximum allovti~ed imper~rious coverage. As part of the proposal the applicant will be remo~~ing an existing driveway across the front of the property reducing the imper~~ious coverage by 5,191 square feet. The gross lot size is 40,140 square feet and zoned R-1-40,000. The maximum height of the residence v~~ill be approximately 23 feet The homes in the area vary in age and design with no consistent design patter. The proposed exterior finish chill be a combination of Redwood board and batten siding to match the existing structure and a stone veneer at the base of the front elevation. The wood siding will be painted a tan color. The roof will ~be brown "Weathered~vood" composition shingle. Color and material samples wi71 be available at the public hearing. The proposed project implements the following Residential Design Guidelines policies. Polity 1,"Minimize Perception of Bulh" The project meets this policy in that the proposed additions will have varying rooflines that will break up the elevation of the building and add character and interest to the structure. This along with the wood siding, brown roof color, and landscaping, will considerably minimize the perception of bulk. • Polity 2, "lntegrate Structures with the Environment" The proposed project meets this ~~ policy in that the house vt~ill be surrounded by the existing tree canopy including ' ' the proposed ne~v landscaping. The structure will blend in with the surrounding landscape with the brown roof and tan wood siding. • Policy 3, "Avoid lrlter Terence with Privacy" The proposed project will protect the privacy of adjacent properties in that the house on a large lot with generous setbacks. The applicant will also maintain the existing landscaping that surrounds the property in addition to pro~~iding new landscaping. • Polity 4, "Preserve Views and Access to Views" The proposed house is not in a view corridor and will not have an adverse affect on neighbor's views. The existing mature trees that surround the site will also be maintained. • Policy 5, "Design for Energy Efficiency" The project meets this policy in that the Iocation of the proposed house has not altered the solar access of adjacent properties. The addition will meet the State Energy Guidelines. r~ C:\MyDocuments\Design Review 03\Three Oaks 19554 Staff Repo.doc ~ ~~~ ~4 File No. 03-092;19554 Three Oaks Way/Chu Property Parking The Saratoga Citt~ Code requires each residence to have at ]east two enclosed parking spaces within a garage. The applicant will be maintaining the existing two-car garage v,~ith open parking for at least two cars in the driveway Trees The applicant is not proposing to remove any protected trees on the site. The applicant is prosing to install fifteen 15-gallon Oak trees and six 24" box trees. Correspondence No negative correspondence was received on this application at the date that the staff report was distributed to the Planning Commission. The applicant his shown the proposed plans to the adjacent neighbors as documented by the applicant. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY Conse~wation Element Policy 6.0 Protect the existing lural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual, impact of new development. Land Llse Element Po1ic~5.0 The City shall use the design review process to assw~e that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. The proposed additions are consistent with the above General Plan Policies in that the proposed project will be surrounded by existing and proposed trees thus protecting the rural atmosphere of Saratoga. The proposed materials and colors will be earth tones that will blend the proposed house into the existing landscape. CONCLUSION The proposed project is designed to conform to the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook and to satisfy all of the findings required within Section 15-~- ~- 45.080 of the City Code. The residence does not interfere with ~~iews or privacy, preserves the natural landscape to the extent feasible, and will minimize the perception of bulk so that it is compatible with the neighborhood. The proposal further satisfies all other zoning regulations in terms of allowable floor area, setbacks, maximum height, and imper~~ious coverage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the application for Design Review with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. C:\MyDocuments\Design Review 03\Three Oaks 19554 Staff Repo.doc ~ ~'LJ l J ~~ • Attachment 1 • ~~~~~~~ • APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Chu; 19554 Three Oaks W ay WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Reviev~~ approval to add 1,504 square feet to the existing 3,169 square foot house with an existing 434 square foot garage for a total floor area of 5,10 square feet. The addition includes a new 1,00 square foot second story addition to the existing house. The gross lot size is 40,140 square feet and zoned R-1-40,000. The maximum height of the residence will be approximately 23 feet; and VVxEREAS, the Planning Commission held. a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a fall opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and VVx~REas, the proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences; and ~VxFREas, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Revievt~ Approval, and the follov,~ing findings have been determined: • Policy 1,"Minimize Perception of Bulh" The project meets this policy in that the proposed additions will have varying rooflines that will break up the elevation of the building and add character and interest to the structure. This along with the wood siding, brown roof color, and landscaping, will considerably minimize the perception of bulk. • Policy 2, "integrate Structures with the Environment" The proposed project meets this policy in that the house v1~ill be surrounded by the existing tree canopy including the proposed new landscaping. The structure v,~ill blend in ~~vith the surrounding landscape vt~ith the brown roof and tan wood siding. • Policy 3, "Avoid lntei Terence with P~~ivacy" The proposed project will protect the privacy of adjacent properties in that the house on a large lot with generous setbacks. The applicant will also maintain the existing landscaping that surrounds the property in addition to providing new landscaping. • Policy 4, "Preserve Views and Access to Views" The proposed house is not in a view corridor and will not have an adverse affect on neighbor's views. The existing mature trees that surround the site will also be maintained. • ~~~~ • Policy 5, "Design for Energy Efficiency" The project meets this policy in that the location of the proposed house has not altered the solar access of adjacent properties. The addition will meet the State Energy Guidelines. WHEREAS, the applicant has inet the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Review and is consistent with the following General Plan Policies: Consen~ation Element Polio Protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. Land Use Element Policy 5.0 The City shall use the design review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto arc compatible with the site and the adjacent sw-roundings. The proposed additions are consistent ul~ith the above General Plan Policies in that the proposed project will be surrounded by existing and proposed trees thus protecting the rural atmosphere of Saratoga. The proposed materials and colors will be earth tones that will blend the proposed house into the existing landscape. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Raymond Chu for Design Re«ew has been approved and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" date stamped November 19, 2003, incorporated by reference. All changes to the approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes with a cloud and are subject to the Community Development Director's approval. 2. The following shall be included on the plans submitted to the Building Division for the building and grading permit plan check review process: a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page and containing the following revisions: i. A maximum of one wood-burning fireplace is permitted and it shall be equipped with a gas starter. All other fireplaces shall be gas burning. ii. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor. • ~~~~~ iii. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: "Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the RCE or LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans." 3. The final landscape plan submitted. during the building permit plan check review will need to meet all of „the requirements outlined in Section 15-47 of the City Zoning Ordinance. 4. No retaining wall shall exceed five feet in height. 5. FENCING REGULATIONS - No fence or wall shall exceed six feet in height and no fence or wall located v~~ithin any required front yard shall exceed three feet in height. Any existing fences or walls not meeting the zoning ordinance standards shall be removed prior to the project being final. A storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be retained on-site, and incorporating the Ne~~~ Development and Construction - Best Management Practices. If all storm water cannot be retained on-site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, an explanatory note shall be provided on the plan. 7. Landscape plan shall be designed v,~ith efficient irrigation to reduce runoff, promote surface infiltration and minimize use of fertilizers and pesticides that can contribute to water pollution. 8. Where feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. 9. Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. 10. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. 11. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent possible. 12. Proper maintenance of landscaping, with minimal pesticide use, shall be the responsibility of the property owner. 13. The height of the structure shall not exceed 23 feet as defined in Section 15-06.340 of the City Zoning Code. • ~~~~Q9 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 14. Required Fire Flov,~: The fire flow for this project is 1,750 gpm at 20psi residential pressure. The required fire flow does not appear to be available from area water mains and fire hydrants that are spaced at the required spacing. 15. Required Fire Flow Option: Provide an approved fire sprinkler system throughout all portions of the building, designed per National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard #13D and local ordinances. The fire sprinkler system supply valuing shall be installed per Fire Department Standard Detail and Specifications. l6. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background. CITY ATTORNEY 17. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection v~~ith City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 24 months from the date of adoption of. this Resolution or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 28`h day of January 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: • ~~~~® • Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, 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 acknov~~ledges 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 • • ~~~®~.1 • Attachment 2 • ~Q~~'~~ . City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13 ~ ~ 7 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 9500 408-868-1222 NOT]CE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Wednesday, the 28`x' day of January 2004, at 7:00 p.m. Located in the City Council Chambers at 13~~~ Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 9500. Details are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. App. N0.03-092 (397-19-024) - CHU,19554 Three Oaks Way; -Request Design Re~~iew Approval to add 1,504 square feet to the existing 3,1.69 square foot house ~~ith an existing 434 square foot garage for a total floor area of 5,107 square feet. The addition includes a ne«~ 1,007 square foot second story addition to the existing house. The gross lot size is 40,140 square feet and zoned R-1-40,000. The maximum height of the residence will be approximately 23 feet. 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 for information to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, «nitten 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 Sen~ice 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 pro~~ide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project. John F. Li~ringstone, A1CP Associate Planner 408.868.1231 • ~~~~~~. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) I, John F. Livingstone, being duly sworn, deposes and says: that 1 am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on the 15th day of January, 2004, that I deposited in the mail room at the City of Saratoga, a NOT]CE 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 persons are the owners of said property who are entitled to a Notice of Hearing pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance ' of the Cit ~ of Sarato a in that said ersons and their addresses are those shown on the ~ g P most recent equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara as being ov~~ners ,. of property within 500 feet of the property to be affected by the application 19554 Three Oaks Way; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. F. Li«ngstone :iate Planner ., ~~ ~~~~'~.~ LPN 39710013 !LPN 39711025 HOMAS W & SUSAN COLLINS ,PN 39718034 4890 BARANGA LN ~ARATOGA CA 95070 LUPE & BARBARA RODRIGUEZ APN 39710014 APN 39711024 PO BOX 3563 SARATOGA CA 95070 JENNIFER LEE APN 39711027 APN 39711026 15020 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 SU-SUNG & SUSAN WQN APN 397]8035 14870 BARANGA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 UNIFIED PROPERTIES INC TTEE APN 39718036 PO BOX 2221 SARATOGA CA 95070 PAUL L & HELGA HULME MELVYN L & JANET GERST IOANG APN 397] 8058 API~T 39718071 APN 39718072 12771 SARATOGA SUNN~'VALE 14901 FRUITVALE AVE ~ SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 ZICHARD E & JYME 3CHMIEDER APN 39718088 19525 THREE OAKS WAY 3~TOGA CA 95070 APN 39718091 APN 39718092 APN 39719002 APN 39719005 ELAINE H MILDRED APN 39719003 L R & JESSIE MCGUIRE APN 39719006 15350 BESTVIEW CT SARATOGA CA 95070 ROYCE B & LORRAINE , ANDREWS APN 39719004 15351 BESTVIEW CT ' SARATOGA CA 95070 BRIAN & PAMELA KAISER APN 39719007 19610 THREE OAKS WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 JOHN & LILI DILLON SIDNEY T & MARCIA APN 39719010 APN 39719015 KAUFMANN APN 39719016 19661 SARATOGA LOS GATOS 19677 SARATOGA LOS GAT OS RD ~ SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 WALTER & CONNIE APN 39719024 APN 39719025 HILLBLOM APN 39719026 15131 ALONDRA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 . GARY P KENNEDY APN 39719027 APN 39719028 APN 39719033 15155 ALOI~TDRA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 ~~~®~~ .IOHN H & ANNA JOHNSON RONALD C FOX APN 39719034 APN 39732012 APN 39732013 PO BOX 2518 14961 HAUN CT SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 SUSAN M & PETER CAMP JEFFERY S & DANA GALT APN 39732014 APN 39732015 APN 39732020 14950 HAUN CT 14991 GRANITE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 Chien ing-Sheng Esc Francis Or Current Owner 15160 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Robinson, Kar] ~ Theresa Or Current Owner 19670 Three Oaks Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Chu, Raymond ~ Betty Or Current Owner 19554 Three Oaks Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Nguyen, \%an Dat ~. To-Nga Or Current Owner 19557 Three Oaks Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Thorburn, Jim ~ Jackie Or Current Owner 19430 Valle Vista Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 Peters, John K. Trustee Et Al Nguyen Cong K. ~ Noang Ngoc Or Current Ov~~ner Or Current Owner 19901 Buckhaven Lane 14995 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 P k ~ N at a James ancy Shukla Rama Trustee Et Al Or Current Owner. Or Current Owner 15360 Bestview Court 14765 Live Oak Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Cilker, James ~ Elizabeth Coo, Robert &t Mary Or Current Owner Or Current Owner 3772 Benton Street 19480 Valle Vista Drive Santa Clara, CA 95051 Saratoga, CA 95070 Keating, William ~ Mary Zadwick, Kenneth ~ Dolores Or Current Owner Or Current Owner 14903 Three Oaks Way 15031 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Ferrari, Richard ~ Beth Guldner, Erik ~St Maria Or Current Owner Or Current Owner 19575 Three Oaks Way 15061 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 • ~~~~~;s • ~~ ~~,o' . ~ ~, ~~ .. ~__ _ --- - ~ - nsloNs I + ~ , ~ ~I ~~ n~~ D ;- ~ ~ .. ~~> ~ ~ ~ - '~ F~ (E) _ p.~. ~wlvA~ ~ ~ e ~ ''~, s ~~ _ i ~ ~ ~~ ~ Q - ~` ~i vl ' ~ ~ 1 \ ~ ,~~ i + X934 ~ DRIY[Y~AT ~ • ~ ~ ~ q - ~ . ~~ i,/ , ~. I ! ~~ a , ~ ~ it + , I \ ~ S jge ~ 1 I ~E~ ~ /i i `; EltlgnelG RES pt• ~oaA (uv~+ ( t~~) ~ GoNc. W41,K-!d~ i J~ m~ ~ ~ U' ~ b ~ ~ ~ / ~ /~ F ~•~ ~i~~ ( (~ ' !~ j ~ ~ bEr~K ~ f ~~ ~ 1 i I ~ =110 .%~ ~ ~~-.. 0 ~ ~~ `` r' ~ \{ ...-_.~ ~-(NPR'fHyS~u l.dllOSil 8 I ~ Tece) ,, ,~~ ~ ~ ..1 I '' v'`. (s) ~~ ~ hN '~1 $Oto ' q h%L, 1 ,0 1 ~ P~OOL~I~ I ~ `~ ,~ i ` EXI511N0 RLSIOENL6 (E)~, ~ II r' '' 11 t:i f. Sea. o ~. iN i - 9~. ~>:r1wa ( / 1 ~ ~ cnuo. I IY/ PAt~a ~ f i 7i1tE I••~ I~t/l ~~ Y '1.119 ~ I ~ PLANNING DATA - ~ A.P!N. 397-19-024 H ADDRESS: 19554 THREE OAKS WAY, SARATOGA ~ OWNER'S NAME: DR. & MRS. RAYMOND CHU ZONING: R-1.40,000 BUILDING TYPE: 35 +! YR OLD RESIDENCE U a ~ ~ . - q IAA, sOP • 12.7% >~ ~~~~ 0 ~ GROSS: 40,140 SF. ~. "® }k'NiWNU4k ~ NET: (40140 X (1.16%) = 33,71 B SF. ~ 00 MAx ~ Fj pnpgA AA !n 0• 4050 +(33718.15000)=1000 =19 X 78 =1482 S.F 5532 S.F. LY F7 ~ RAR,_EA ppOPOyS_F~• EXIST. GARAGE: 434 S.F. EIIST. HOUSE: 3140 S.F. ` (N)ADDITION (1STFLR.) 380 S.F. • ~ (N) ADD. STORAGE (1ST FLR.) 117 S.F. I i (N) AODITK)N (2ND) 1007 S.F. \ ~ / . 3-SfDED COV. PORCH: 8.49 S.F. E ' AR A OVER 15 HGHT: 20.25 S.F. I I/ ~ ~ TOTAL 5107S.F. ( EXI STING IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: 48% I 19,237S.F, t ~ _ IMPERViOLYSCOVERAC.EAlYOWED~ 35% ~` tr- ~ 14,049 S.F. - PRnP[~SEDIMPERIRnrI.S _ ~BAGE'- 34.9% J ) / I 14,046 S.F. . ~. -_. ( ~ , ~ e ~~ D ° ~ O I O ~ `l . ~ Q ~ -- - aRO.~crsuMMnRr: W s• b • L • - _ ~- r V ADDITION OF A NEW 2ND STORY MASTER BEDROOM, 8+47H ANO STTING AJgA i ~ YrTIFi DECK OVER THE CENTER POR110N OF RESIDENCE, WI1H NEW ENTRY PORCH TO THE FRONT ELEVATION . ALSO, A NEW BEDROOMlOFRCE WtfH SMALL > O ; p I ~ ...-... - _ LOFT SPACE ABOVE TO BE ADDED BEHIND 04RAG£ SffEN~ORK INCLUD@S THE r _._ _ _. ~-__- __- ~ REMOVAL CF 5283 S.F. OF HARDSCAPE AREATHROUGFIOUT SITE ~ i ~ WU ~}1clE(E) ~ ` ~ .. ~ THE PROPOSED PROJECT REFLECTS THE DESIGN GNDEUNES OF TONM BY: Q. Z Aa 0A,/iu[, ~ USE OF OIFFERErIf MATERULLS ~ STONE AND VIgOD SIDWG; BALANCES 2ND l~ W CT I ~ _ ~ ~ STORY SPACE OVER CENTER OF E1tl511NG Ham, WITH UPPER FLOOR BF1N0 O ^ I 1 STEPPED BACK FROM FRONT. 51MPLE NATNE LANO6CAPING BEING ADDED TO ~ ~ E705RNGTREESANDBHRUBS ~ W u T) ~' 1 r. ~. Taxasco~lr~7 ~ x ~ \~ I 4p4 ! ,il I; ~ U I ` I W '~ i ~ ) 8 { _ _....._ t ~¢ ~ _ ... _. 1 ~ 1 0 ~ i ~ I -_ u d1 ~ ~ scale IeSU~E (J E ; oro,. - ~• fFior~ Ta 1'oUIJCATimJ 1114PLg1 Jae U1'f j TH:, Rce oR LIB op RREU+fa 4Hdw Ic» ~ Wf•i11N1G°~TIYioAlbNTtfAT aw Ul~olw~ 4eTOt+.~s P~ P~`Me APP' PVWYi, sMec a• {~Ia }'IRL SPr~IN~ePti?eR^wNaaf SITE PLAN S1 b of snea. IIEY19pN8 • • ~r h~ ~, • 1 1~ ' F U K M W p~~ e 0~ ~~ ra A ~. p- Z ~_ H 0 0 Q w U O 3 ~,~~ $wc~ a o~ . `Q~~~ CO ~'~ ~(~~~ N~ ~w oa.l.~.~.oj Sceb Y I~.p~O ~.~~ ~~ M m..n i LOWER FLOOR PLAN e•qq sr rte. ~ M y~o~~am~Ev REVWpM6 • • • UPPER FLOOR PLAN a Imp yP Avant-rJ f 4au, (oVEtc ~e' M U. as H w U~~ a~~.~ ~~ o~ q a a 0 0 g U LL ~ 0 ~~ ;~ g~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~., ~~ Otle ~~ • ~•D7 9cW ~`e~~.p orewnewnn dee BMet OI 9Mete • r1 U • i_..i_ RN Ma~+ ~:12= ;'it~H (tYiw~) / (~> ~eRO d abrt 1 bd ~H MbF ~~ ~6+c~s7 ~~ _ ___. N F - ~~ ---- - --,. ~ Mdth{ , - Rcp~acn (e) . Pbwu oo, t, AJti~a s 4%Pt311i~+1 ~ 2e69-~a Dv.f 5'y°a•i pars nu,aR, ~ (~}-e~w t ~6,+, (~{IO ~,p 2KG l~iuX~( ~,~~~ ~~ e ~~ 2ND s1~"( iw pI _, iwiv.fnA~fE -~M. _._~~ I - 2~ f M~('fi~~)~ ~- 2~a1 Fuq AMID ~~~ f 12° •f~~ NORTH ELEVATION '~a~N~T ti % l...: vaS~ V~ - (hn~r i ~ ~ ~.r. i ,y I / ~,a ~~~N7 (~°~~> ~ ~- -- - -- I ~; _ - --, -- 57~~Ib~ ~ _ ~ .... i A ~~b MATFRIAI Sf;HFt ~' t N11F raooF: wl-loovrs: ~___ as~ur col~.s-s ~a~c,~w wpm Euc Puss v~aTr~vooo• Isaurnx~ awo- vn+rn: ~a~: ~: eonRn awe Barr z x a Imo. ~~ I r~.~w.u~us ann~osrome s,R•F,~aur>sr+sa w~sarnre~ar~ 2xermrJo.F~sa~e~. a~4re+one~oRansroHE __ ----._--_ __._-- +ia'r ~ 4 M~>t~ '~ EAST ELEVATION ~LG ~~' 4i v1, ~ .- i aavuaNa 9 h u N . ~ pa$s pLj U~ as Z 0~ ~~~ 7a A 0 p Z g W U 0 3 Qo ` ~ ~i n~ W BW~ ~~~d Q~+ IU m ~~~~ w ~~ on. II11•df s<n. ~ IA o„wo Job SMn Of 9beete • ~4 . 2 f~ ~~swxa H U W h Aj~QQ U~ q 0 Qd~ ~~ A 0 p l~ ~ l~n ~~ MA R AI S .H ~ I ROOF: ASPHALT COMP.~iINGLES Ell('PRESIIOUE PL113' ~~ SIDING: ~, BOARD AND GATT @NTCH E10SiING) STONE WAINSCOT: CULTURED STONE ~ F06 SOUtFERN LEDOESTOlIE d ASPBJ DRr'SSED REL NANDOWS: M~GARD VINYL (SCUIPTUED GRID) YxtTE TRIM: 2X4RDWD. Z F- 0 W 'U 0 ,3 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ w c~ w~~~~ ~~01~ rn .. ~~ .i = WEST ELEVATION ~4N1' gi96 SOUTH ELEVATION ~~ I i , _ ~ ~. _ _ ~ u~l-~ - sew R,)b { ~ ate, __ ~ ---- ~ / ~ o~ ~ , • ,~ 39c.52~~t _ .. SECTION A-A ~i •i 4ii ,. i 57~i~w~~~(N) ,; _. ~~~tir~~ ~ _ .: E- (~Gtor1 yraPS) . -- ~-.. ~crea+ ac ~o ~bb~ ~~ ,~,~ . u i AN io yraL- vex _; ~__ i ~~- I r ~,' ~n ~ Po 'N ~~~ ~~i .! SECTION B=8 1 ~~re~aMs U ^a M U~ ~~~ p ~ C~~ ~~ ., Q 0 a z 0 H D w U } 0 30 ~~ OW ~ W~ m~~ ~a~~~ W ~~ ore ~) . ~ ,a~ Sctle ei `4p o~e.e Joe Sear , 01 9MeM I ~~ /2dP~re 0 0 f fob ab ~_ I o° 3 3 a 0 . in r I ~ 1 h 4 Dn ~ NN ~~ al n a i `~ 4 Z Afi~ N c H o. ~ M a + n~ 0 4 u/h%t geld Yin 500 N0°00"3_0"W 219.30 -,~n. Edge o{ paYlM9 -----°"' fQnce x 0 4 ~' ~"9 N (Tennis Court +09.9 sa I s . Go S.Q1.. ~70l5 E) Pool E Deck Id RwD ~ /2dP1rc 975 ~: ~ j ~IL"P~~e 99.3 ~ \l ,-. r°. \iBP~rc 99.5 `a 3 a ~ ____--- ,n.o.o 3 ° c9~ a I aN r qy ti6 • e ~~ ' ~In +`~ `~ ~ P . to T o f 9 .~"' ~% ~0 / Y Pn ~ V _.. 1 lI ~ ~ ~~ i; ~ ~ : ~ I „i-. q Lai' 5 I T E -DATA. NET AREA Q0,/do sq. Ft. APN 397- 19- 024- ADDfZE55 19554 rhree Ooks Way LEGAL ~ Lot'6" Of Record oQSUrJ~y~ o v °+ S5 \ ~ y - ~f50945 ~ , C 1 A ~ I n \ ~ o' ~.. ~` R~r+a1e conc. 4 . ~..T ~~~ SEE SL - ~ j ,~ ; "' ~ ~ - ~'r... 04~ ~ a 1~ JJ ~ ~ .,.... •se3 ~ f ~ ~ 0~ ~s ~T iso3.2 ~~:. I 'f p 0 Y/p~~F~r __"~ O ~, 0 ~' k. ~1 I::I ~ '~HO\W b ~°,5 f .. ~ a 7 `~ ~5 ~ ' W \ } ~•.; ya~Q~ Room ;gg35~~ d J \ 5 ~ Y ~ i ry4 +pFS° ~ m o ti. s \ \ ~ ~;~. 98sc'. \\ Fln plc 5~y0 o~ ~ \ •~~3c g ~~ .\ ary n ~ y \ ~ A, ` e°~ 'nr kis s `..`, ~~?l 1:;. ~y' \ ~~ `~~ ~ ~nl/'~- 0 fig„ SO ~ ~• e ~° ~ S ~ ¢~ \ ~ 2, y \ ~ N Mp ~ ///~~~ N +so~,9 i4 a• .~ o t~~R• s ~~ O i SB.L• ~(ioN ` r ~ i ~. I Q I 0 I I h ~ I I y q °' ~ o I h ~ 0 1 ~ m I~ _~ \ Y ~ le ~ N + p O I I W . v 3i I ~ W` ~ / o I ` y I 1 c ~ t i 1. i / I l 1 1 F I /, : I n a l / ~ 1• I 1 ~ ~ l a ~ I ,. I ,; ' a 2 ° . 1 I I d m m ;~ I 7aj I W 1' 1 I I 1 I II °' i 'I ~1 1 I ~`-~ I ~ 1 I- I 1 1 ~ I 1 -- + W i 3b `SB } ~ i \J Te 6t~n • I I 1 ~ ~ I 11 ~1 Z,\ : 11 1 1 ( I 1 ~ a~ ~ 1 11 ` I 1 1 \ 1. l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ I o Rerrro~e - sA S-I ~ ~ V } ~ ~ .o ~ \ ~ .li ~ .\ ~ ~ ~ 932 •a , 1 ~ 1 \ U7 ~ ~ \ \ \ ii 1 I1 \ ~ \ \ \ \~ \1 ~ \ 1l I 1 ~ 1 \ 1 p' o<k oils _i~ , \ 1 I 1 ( Y s 0°2/'W 96 00 fi ~ - u D (~ ~ ~ +. ti n ~ ZOc~witk ~ ~ iti Ex1 St 1EN CE REStO STEPPI_NC~ ,',. ~11111111111~1 ~\ 4111111j1j • ~ _ O i X11 W • ~~ O ,•' IlplllllA' 11'11 1j' III1111111j1111\\I\Illl~\\ ao aa0 ~ ~ Y'Ie>~WrJ1 ''111111 ,. ~_ '111111111111111 ;~?; j, '~,; o C •'.' /i 'i. ~. i /./ I i ~ ' . 1111111111j1 ., ~,, ,/ (EJLATM . ~'/ ~ /%' , j ~ ~ ~ i '' ~ ~ :10 ~ ~ ~ ~/ i n .11.1 / ~r ~ ~ ~, ~ 1j1nn1N11P1 ~ (E)RETAINING / y3 CONC. f• 1 1 WALK SRiPPING 1= STONES t ~'y11 l ;71 e°.~1d,..s. .I ~ E I t; I I ' `c Rg1SID1EN~E Ii 1p 1111\111\11\ L ~ I REMGVE CONC. LJ1 m ~ 0 _ `REMOVE (E~ Q ~ ~Q~ ~ nl+r aa"a uu I AC. PANnnO Q I ~ \1pp(u llrlgq °~' I `D, ~`~ _ --________ _J _ N /I'11j1j11111111111111j11\11 11\1111111 1 ' 1l `~ \\I~j 1\11111 \ IJ\ ~ - 0 O ~Q. i ~~ - p-r0m11.au 0 1,11111 O ••219.30 N00.003-FO"W ••''--••-r'"'ll~ Pt,aNr usr - _ 16T HI(laCIL.tlIR Ales CAE 9If. CQ1 A R MUIRPm+allifA'axR Y,OGINOPaxLlIfiBIDIB 9NLxIMYingN @ m1115xx11Ylx 1 t NBDIt ORA1B Iremc A OJEIUax#IIiRl1 OUlnflNEOM 1/ 166WCx A .W91FMW1LY 6110Y AlxlBElxiLE 1 XBm A A N:BIVMW1W SyF111 xmuxxeelwea•maa• 1VNIBExIPIE xA1Al Apgpp7pg t 6 N/m MEm m %IIIaOpF/xluwrtaxama A0N9x0 PIW 6 x'Bml tMPV11 1 uvxau'mloarsr u\aaa n IaNlal + Imwuecmn ur + iAlL1HOSPFWE4.0.9~E19 BAPJ.9aE A 6WLW I / 1 amswwmFA wllmuaxEmramncm IIAEII annlmroa NVIIA I IEwm IxAYNY xwslFxrlEF I IQWLN OIpU1x9rER1 - m xclwon olalsnallraoE nwlamlaua m aFEallxexrWnEEnan wlflcre~x ertwlaNr.al ® IID4NaIaNpxWA 1P.\I11]ABEWM IIf.GF IQILLOI w1e1N1u sueeo x 1n1 Ax0 rt uaauw Inalrtc4 + MIF1xNNUfMACBFYIxp WF.Nw nom a laNlvl a xFeTemxuaaNa r®EA n iauia~ C o S11Yx NpRNAllxly.(!Ir m~mveevoaarN BYVN mnEasa a a A11Lfx 181LLd E F IAx1aO11FAA]iMIW+ AEtC9aAn1A RIx11FBa181ON 3aNCa1 WRY a a 1W1GN IQIILON a uluauvlalsly Exuwuveoel A iaua x ;urxowmme Fnee~lursael a aNwll . .nnaaoewlllwr awunvs• A icwa ~~ ~1\11111111111 r1~00ami EXISTING POOL cx L' 1=11 S jj ~ ~..~a1 NEw soD uwN e " n1-.~I101.101,. 0 0 ,, 1111111111 11 NEW flFTAINING Wll ~ LEGEND .. I Flxrmn u~r eusnNC FFNQ } IlanululullnnJ1111 ' E>tsrvlc mE[ cwlyr ~ II, .Na aNro IxE ~, 'r , ~~^~•' Easnxa swues 0 A-N i 4IDN IFiFRS 10 Ed5AY7 >Rfa ~(E ~ Ea571NC iREF It) ~ JJ°~l Im101to- O (llouE) n I rr;Ev tt ~ m ou~•n • oo G4 I ~ m Fuvr eEr I= Ol.w.wla ~ ~ I ~w 0 ._ o ` rn ~ nwo N i i 11111111111111111 Io-M mm 0lvMOi 111 1 ~'~' I I 1~ LANDSCAPE PLAN E la m w 961.00" 9 I! 31- l 3! Q 1-1r ®u ®r I W mlmnA III . i r I ~~ I r GARAGE .%/, ~' / ~ / J'pVL ¢~~',' IE ~~: f ~// // /' / ~' e D ~EWAV 154fl 4P• \ 1111111111111j11 \ ~ J 0 / G m-Ir..m ! ~ `~ 1 \,~~ '",1111111111,111111 1111 1\ a I ~'I~ m 1 ; I ,o ~ . ID 7 '~ 1 u1g1M11j1 I ~ I .... f. 111 ~~ ~ 1 I `I Y . Q:':':::': Q ~,a,,, ~ ~. °' ' i ~\ I Q.'r~'r'.F 10 '% o O I:'. •~ W ~4 '. '. i . l W '111111,111 -.~ .: ~ iy lunnald'11 {, LTL ~..11.':. i ~J '':.1':.: ~;~; ':.~.1:.': I' .. . ~~ :;:: i:. ~ ~;:. . 1mEtW1,111111111,, i~::'; :: •' (:'.. L: ::'(?~ : i:: ~0.:.4. ~a I r 0 '~::: J _ flo~ l.. 1 • m~..11\ - dr • ~ ~::: ~, Q L.I~ jj11111111111111111 ~n O ~~ ~\ I ', ~` I O 'llln '~1\.. ~ REMOVE fE1 " ~ A.C. PAN 1 NEW SOD LAVM REV~IONB U U g~ ~ ~. ~W~~. ~~~gN °~~ m~~~ Q N UOQ iZWU ~~~ ¢~~ U+-~ JDB ND. RTE q,•I•a3 ~~ ~~ ~F Il•ID L-~ a_ MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 3, 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 Legal Counsel -Threatened Litigation: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b): (l potential case) Conference with Leal Counsel -Consideration of Liability Claims (Gov't Code 54956.95): Claimant: Charles O'Leary Agency claimed against: City of Saratoga Conference with Leal Counsel -Consideration of Liability Claims (Gov't-Code 54956.95): Claimant: Zoreh Tabatabaie Agency claimed against: City of Saratoga MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 n.m. Mayor Streit reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Streit called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 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 Cherbone, Public Works Director Cay Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR DECEMBER 3, 2003 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of December 3, 2003 was properly posted on November 26, 2003. COMMUNICATIONS FORM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following person requested to speak at tonight's meeting: Terry Bruce noted that he was representing Federated Church. Mr. Bruce stated that Federated fully supports the proposed pedestrian activated light at the intersection of, Highway 9 and Oak Place. COMMUNICATIONS FORM. COMMISSIONS None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Referring to Mr. Bruce's comments, Councilmember Bogosian requested that the pedestrian activated light be discussed when the CIP comes back to Council. Councilmember Kline supported Councilmember Bogosian request. ANNOUNCEMENTS None ~ , CEREMONIAL ITEMS None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR lA. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2 1B. 2004 HAZARDOUS VEGETATION PROGRAM COMMENCEI\'IENT RESOLUTION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution and set a public hearing date. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-076 Councilmember King requested that item 1B be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember King asked if the County would be sending two notices to effected property owners. City Clerk Boyer noted that she would contact the County Fire Marshall's Office and report back to Council. KING/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION DECLARING HAZARDOUS VEGETATION GRO~'~'ING ON CERTAIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1 C. REQUEST SANTA CLARA COUNTY TO AMEND THEIR SANBORN PARK TRAILS MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE AN EASEMENT ACROSS COUNTY OWNED QUARRY LAND FOR POSSIBLE TRAIL DEVELOPMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-077 Councilmember King requested that item 1 C be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember King stated that this was the request from the County to amend their Sanborn Trails Master Plan. Councilmember King stated that she recently discussed this property with the County and was told that Mid Peninsula Open Space District may be interested in this property. Councilmember King stated that Mid Pen suggested that the City get an appraisal on the property. Councilmember King asked if staff could be directed to get an appraisal of the property. City Attorney Taylor stated that it would not be appropriate for Council to give staff direction this evening, but can place the item on a future agenda. Councilmember King requested that the staff be directed to return to Council at the next meeting with a report in regards to hiring an appraiser for the Quarry property. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that she supported Councilmember King's request. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith requested that the resolution also be sent to the Board of Supervisors and the Road and Airports Division. WALTONSMITH/KING MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION E?~PRESSING INTEREST IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF QUARRY AS "SARATOGA TO THE SEA TRAIL" AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1D. CLAIM: OF CHARLES O'LEARY: CLAIM NO. GL-055255 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Reject claim. Councilmember Kline requested that item 1D be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Kline requested that an update to the Claims Policy be drafted and brought back to Council in the near future. KLINE/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO SETTLE CLAIM OF CHARLES O'LEARY. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH WALTOSNMTIH OPPOSING. lE. CLAIM OF ZOREH TABATABAIE: CLAIM NO. GL-054954 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Reject claim. WALTONSMITH/KLINE MOVED TO REJECT CLAIM OF ZOREH TABATABAIE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. REVISED TREE ORDINANCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct Public Hearing; review changes suggested by the Tree Committee; give Ordinance 1St Reading; direct staff to place item on the next Agenda's Consent Calendar for Second Reading and Adoption. Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. 4 Director Sullivan stated that the new Tree Ordinance Committee met on October 29, 2003 and addressed the issues that had been raised during the last Public Hearing. Director Sullivan noted that the City also received a letter from Chenel Jensen. Ms..lensen requested that the number of listed native trees be increased and suggested to decrease the size that some natives would be considered protected. The Committee discussed Ms. Jensen suggestions and made recommendations to the ordinance. Director Sullivan stated that following the adoption of the new tree regulations staff would modify the City's Tree Protection Handbook to ensure that it is fully consistent with the new ordinance and would prepare a series of educational articles for the Saratogan. Mayor Streit opened the public hearing and invited any public input F.L. Stutzman noted that he supports the ordinance but is concerned that the $5,000 penalty is not high enough. Robert Zager thanked the Council for appointing him to the subcommittee and noted that he feels the City should adopt a "Good Forestry Practice". Cheriel Jensen suggested a couple of types tree species be removed from the protected tree list. Holly Davies noted that she fully supports the proposed ordinance. Marge Ottenberg noted that she fully supports the proposed ordinance. Isabel Gloege noted that she fully supports the proposed ordinance. Muriel Maher noted that she fully supports the proposed ordinance. Jill Hunter noted that she fully supports the proposed ordinance except would like to see the appeal process remain at the Planning Commission level. Elizabeth Lora stated that Director Sullivan did a great job crafting the proposed ordinance. Ms. Lora noted that she fully supports the proposed ordinance except would like to see the appeal process remain at the Planning Commission level. Jeff Schwartz noted that he fully supported the proposed ordinance. Tom Corson made suggestions to the ordinance. Mr. Corson pointed out that the section on required replacement of trees should be clearer, it has been his experience that replacement trees never get planted. Vic Monia noted that he fully supports the proposed ordinance. Chandru Idnani noted that he supports the preservation of trees because of their beauty and their ability to reduce noise. Mayor Streit closed the public hearing. Councilmember Kin su ested that the Cit start a nei hborhood mediation g gg Y g program. Director Sullivan noted that staff would be bring a report forward in January 2004 in regards to mediation. Councilmember Bogosian requested that the City initiate the process to develop a Forestry Plan. Councilmember Kline supported Councilmember Bogosian request. WALTONSMITH/KING MOVED TO WAVE THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE; DIRECT STAFF TO PLACE LTEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA'S CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION. MOTION PASSED 5-0. OLD BUSINESS 3. ALTERNATE PROPOSAL FOR THE COMMEMORATIVE BENCH FOR WILLYS PECK AT THE SARATOGA LIBRARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consider an alternate approach to honoring Willys Peck with a bench at the Saratoga Library. Consensus of the City Council to continue this item to December 17, 2003. 4. DEANZA/PG&E TRAIL PUBLIC PROCESS OPTIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and provide direction to staff regarding the pubic process.. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst, presented staff report. Analyst Bloomquist stated that at the October 15t" City Council meeting staff was directed to move ahead with the process of developing a pedestrian cycling trail on PG&E right-of--way lands running parallel to the railroad tracks between Saratoga and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Avenue. Council requested that staff generate options for an active public process and project development, which would occur over an estimated 12-24 month time frame. Analyst Bloomquist stated that public outreach for this meeting consisted of: • A direct mailer card to all 11,800 Saratoga households • A letter to 4,210 households within 500 feet of the proposed project • Hand delivered the same letter to over 50 homes in the Fredericksburg Drive neighborhood 6 Analyst Bloomquist presented three possible action plans to the City Council in order to move forward with the process for the proposed project: • Action l Determine type and composition of body to conduct the public input process and project such as the Parks and Recreation Commission, Council AdHoc, or Blue Ribbon Committee. • Action 2 Provide direction to staff regarding the use of a professional facilitator to assist with the public. • Action 3 Direct staff to develop a cooperative agreement with the VTA and draft an escrow agreement with the anonymous donor for the purposes of procuring funding for the project. Councilmember Kline noted that he thinks the three points should be reversed. Councilmember Kline stated that the funding sources should be secured first and then a facilitator should be contracted using funds from VTA and the anonymous donor. Director Cherbone responded that the actions presented tonight would happen concurrently. Darren Deffner, PG&E/Government Affairs Representative, noted that this project along their right-of--way is consistent with use of their property. Mr. Deffner stated that PG&E recognizes that tonight's decision is only the beginning of the process and there are no specific plans on the table. Mr. Deffner stated that PG&E would like to think the City would address some of their concerns such as safety, access, and maintenance. Mr. Deffner stated that PG&E looks forward to be a part of the process. Robert Battalia noted that his concern is the increase of noise and cars in his neighborhood if the trail project moves forward. Mr. Battalia noted that an EIR has not been done nor has the neighbors concerns of liability and maintenance issues been addressed. Mr. Battalia noted that he opposes the project. Cal Coran noted that he has lived in the neighborhood for 30 years. Mr. Coran stated that he opposes the project. Michael Gilbert noted that he lives near the trail and fully supports the project. Sally O'Hearn stated that the proposed project would impact her quality of life. Ms. O'Hearn noted that there are many other trails throughout Saratoga. Ms. O'Hearn noted that she opposes the project. Lyle Leverich stated that he thinks the trail comes from nowhere and goes nowhere. Mr. Leverich stated that he opposes the project. Alden Heintz requested that City Council to take the time to look ~at the whole picture. Ms. Heintz stated that if the trail is paved it would bring in different types of users. Ms. Heintz pointed out that the area around Rodeo Creek is a wild animal habitat and may need protective fencing. Margaret McCartney explained that her house backs up against Congress Spring Park and is opposed to the project. Referring the letter Mr. Brooks send to the neighborhood, Ms,. McCarthy noted that she was shocked that he would have the audacity to send out such a letter. ' Bob Wallace suggested that the City secure the land and look at the project in the future. Donna Poppenhagen noted that she has lived in her neighborhood for 35 years and is opposed to the project. Ms. Poppenhagen stated that her concerns, safety and the potential danger at the rail crossing at Cox Avenue. Ms. Poppenhagen stated she feels the project is being rushed through the process. Jack Palmtag noted that he opposes the project and thinks it is a waste of money. Rita Witmer noted that she opposes the project and thanked the Council for all of noticing she received in regards to this meeting. Mrs. Witmer asked how the City could possible built another trail with the current budget constraints. Bill Witmer stated that in 2001.85 people directly affected by the trail signed a petition opposing the trail and submitted it the City. Mr. Wittmer stated that in November 2003, a second petition was submitted to the City with 168 names opposing the trail. Mr. Wittmer stated that the City assured the neighbors that the ~~ trail project would not move forward without neighborhood buy in. ' Cheriel Jensen noted that she has been walked many trails all over the county and never experienced any of the problems mentioned here this evening. Ms. Jensen noted that she supports the project. Richard Brown noted hat he has lived here for 29 years and urged the Council not to go forward with the trail. Joe Walton noted that he is a City of Cupertino resident and lives along a trail. Mr. Walton noted in order for the project to be a success the neighbors concerns need to be mitigated. Mr. Walton stated that he supported the project. Diane Reese her entire back fence runs along the trail. Mr. Reese stated that many people currently use the trail as is and she has never had any problems. Ms. Reese stated that the project would make the trail safer and cleaner. Marge Ottenberg noted that she has lived in Saratoga for 42 years and the last ten years she has been riding her bicycle along the trail to get to De Anza College. Mrs. Ottenberg noted that someday the railroad line will be deserted and at that time the land could be sold to VTA for a light rail system. Ms. Ottenberg stated that she doesn't' think that formalizing the trail would bring in more users. 8 Pat Andresen noted that she uses the trail frequently. Ms. Andresen noted that the City doesn't have the funds to maintain or protect another trail. Ms. Andresen • noted that she opposes the project. Bret Bigley noted that his property abuts the trail and stated that he opposed the development of the trail. Mr. Bigley pointed out that there are currently several other places to walk throughout the City. Una Daily noted that her concerns are safety and security. Isabel Gloege noted that she fully supported the trail. Steve Benzing noted that he opposed the development of the trail. Mr. Benzing stated that formalizing.thetrafl would increase noise and traffic in his neighborhood. Sondra Benzing noted that her property abuts the trail and noted that she does not support any further development of it. Sue Barrera noted that she opposed the development of the trail. Steve Olson noted that he is a Mountain view resident who lives along a trail. Mr. Olsen stated that he has no particular vested interest in this trail but was present tonight to give his support. Mr. Olson stated that he and his neighbors shad similar concerns that have been voiced this evening. Mr. Olsen stated that studies have shown that crimes on urban trails are usually based on the crime rate in the community. Annie Ng noted that she was a Cupertino resident and was the Chair of the UPRR Trail Task Force a few years ago. Ms. Ng encouraged the City to move forward with the process of the trail. Phillip Baker noted that he was representing the Youth Commission. Mr. Baker noted that the Youth Commission fully supports the development of the trail. Marty Goldberg noted that he supports the development of this trail Louise Schaffer presented the Council with a letter because she lost her voice. Councilmember King read Ms. Schaffer's letter stating that she supported the development of the trail. Maria Guerra that she opposed the development of the trail Vic Monia noted that he supports the development of this trail. Anne Dunham noted that her property is in the County and directly is in front of a Mid Peninsula Open Space Trail entrance. Ms. Dunham stated that she has never had any problems since the trail opened. 9 Howard Miller stated that he lives along Highway 85. Mr. Miller stated that he moved here before Highway 85 opened. Mr. Miller stated some days it is really loud. Mr. Miller stated that his house has been robbed. Mr. Miller stated that he fully supports the trail because it would be a great benefit to the community just like Highway 85. Doug Robertson stated that he is a new resident to Saratoga and moved here because of the quality of life and the schools. Mr. Robertson noted that he supports the development of this trail and stated that the neighbors need to be included in the process. Chuck ,lacobson noted that he supports the development of this trail. Logan Deimler noted that he supports the development of this trail. William Brooks noted that he supports the development of this trail. Patty Ciesla noted that she represented the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Commission. Ms. Ciesla stated that studies have shown that people who live along trails have the greatest benefits. Walter Spector noted that he supports the development of this trail in an effort to get more cars off the roads in Saratoga. Dennis Dumont noted that he supports the development of this trail. Julie Daniel noted that she supports the trail as is but the City should move forward to secure the land as open space. Sandra Dodge noted that she is a Parks and Recreation Commissioner. Commissioner Dodge stated that the City has to establish this land as an easement. Commissioner Dodge stated that the PRC is willing to facilitate public forums to help the Council with the process. Ray Cosyn noted that he supports the development of this trail. Jeanne Carter stated that the people in favor of the trail do not live near the trail and will not be affected. Ms. Carter asked how the City would police the trail. Captain John Hirakawa, representing the SCC Sheriff's Department, stated that he cannot find any correlation between pathways/trails and home burglaries. Captain Hirakawa stated that burglaries don't go up with new trails. Mayor Streit asked if the Sheriff's Department have the capability to use deputies on bicycles. Captain Hirakawa responded that it was a possibility. 10 Ben Lopes, Chief/Santa Clara County Fire District, noted that the District would be interested in the being involved in the process. The District's concerns with the trail are access, vegetation, and maintenance. Gordon Duncan, Chief/Saratoga Fire Protection District, stated that he has over 20 years of experience with bike trails. Chief Duncan stated that adequate access has been a priority. Chief Duncan noted he believes that crimes along this trail would be minimal. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that she feels parks and trails are amenities to the community. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith believes this trail, addressing the concerns of the neighbors, would be a great amenity to the community. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that the City must go forward with this project. Councilmember Kline thanked everyone for coming this evening and pointed out that there seems to be a split vote in the community for and against the trial. Councilmember Kline noted that the arguments on both sides were very impressive. Councilmember Kline noted that he was involved in the City of Santa Clara's San Tomas Aquino Trail. Councilmember Kline noted that this trail added value to the surrounding properties. Councilmember Kline noted that he supports moving forward if the funds are secured. Councilmember Bogosian pointed out that this discussion was democracy at it's best. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he was concerned about the costs for maintaining the trail since the City could be facing a 20% budget cut. Councilmember Bogosian stated that if the project were to move forward the scope of work should be clearly defined and the City hire a neutral facilitator. Councilmember King noted that she concurred with her colleague's comments and the City should do their due diligence to mitigate the neighborhood's concerns. Mayor Streit stated that he supports moving forward with the project. Mayor Streit noted that the first step must be to secure the funding sources. Ceil Chung, VTA/Bicycle Program Coordinator, stated that the first phase of investigation would be funded from Measure B. Currently there is approximately $12 million for Santa Clara County and only $3 million has been programmed. These funds are programmed in phases. Ms. Chung stated that there are no restrictions on what measure B funds could be used. Ms. Chung stated that the overall allocation for this project is $1.6 million. A discussion took place in regards to the anonymous donor agreement. Councilmember Kline asked if the name of the donor would be made public. Director Cherbone noted that the donor would like to remain anonymous because of the opposition. The donor feels intimidated. Vice Mayor Waltonsmith noted that eventually a plaque would be placed on the trail. 11 City Attorney Taylor noted that the structure of the agreement would be for the anonymous donor to set up an escrow account. The agreement would be public information but the donor has given their attorney the power to speak on their behalf. Councilmember Kline noted that an anonymous donor is bad government. Councilmember Kline noted that he would not support the project because of this. WALTONSMITH/KING MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO DEVELOP A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ~~1'ITH THE VTA AND DRAFT AN ESCROW AGREEMENT ~~1'ITH THE ANONYMOUS DONOR FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROCURING FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH KLINE OPPOSING. WALTONSMITH/KING MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN RFP FOR A PROFESSIONAL FACILTIOR AND RETURN TO.COUNCIL TO DISCUSS OPTIONS FOR SELECTING THE FACILITOR. MOT10N PASSED 5-0. ANIMAL CONTROL ALTERNATIVES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ~ , Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report. City Manager Anderson stated that at the October 15, 2003 City Council meeting , , Council directed staff to issue a request for proposals to San Jose for Animal Control Services. The RFP was presented to the Council at the November 19, 2003 meeting. City Manager Anderson noted that negotiations are ongoing with San Jose to refine and clarify provisions in the RFP response. As reported on November 19`h City Managers worked with the SVAC staff to put together several alternatives for Cupertino, Los Gatos and Saratoga to consider. The alternatives , were presented to the SVACA Board on November 24`h City Manager Anderson stated that the SVACA Board discussed the City Manager's proposal and approved options 1 and 2. Option 1 would maintain the JPA as is, but reduce the shelter contribution for Cupertino, Los Gatos, and Saratoga to match that required in San Jose's proposal and is intended to provide competitive level of service and cost of operation. The equity position would be proportionate to the contribution and the Board composition and voting structure would remain the same. The Board also acted to authorize staff to negotiate with the owner of the Thomas Road property to extend earnest money deadline to February 15, 2004. The Board also acted to extend the deadline for withdrawal from SVACA to January 25, 2004. 12 • City Manager Anderson explained stated that under Option 2, the three cities would withdraw from the JPA; and would enter into separate contracts with the JPA for field and shelter services. The capital contribution would be the same as quoted in the San .lose proposal and would be "non-equity" positions. City Manager Anderson stated that both the SVACA and San Jose proposal would be presented and analyzed in a comprehensive report at the December 17`'' City Council meeting. In addition, Councilmember Bogosian added that it looks like SVACA would be given an extension on the Thomas Road property. Mayor Streit thanked, City Manager Anderson for his update. NEW BUSINESS 6. FIRE ALARl\9 COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director, presented staff report. Director Baloca explained that at the November 5, 2003 City Council meeting, the bid for the contract for the installation of a fire alarm system was av~~arded. The contract provided materials, equipment and labor to install fire alarms at the Civic Center Administration/Planningbmldings and the Civic Theatre. Director Baloca stated that during Council's review, the issue regarding the potential savings in insurance premiums if fire alarms were installed in the public works corporation yard and the Warner Hutton House was raised. Director Baloca explained the City's membership in the Association of bay Area Government (ABAG) liability pool. According to the City's Risk Manager at ABAG, the overall values of the property program are so large that the change probably won't be reflected in the premium. Consensus of the City Council to bring this item back for review in one year. Mayor Streit thanked Director Baloca for his report. Mayor Streit declared a break at 11:10 p.m. Mayor Streit reconvened the meeting at 11:25 p.m. 7. LAFCO COUNCIL ADHOC COMMITTEE REPORT ON COUNTY-WIDE FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE REVIEW STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and pride further direction to City staff and Council Subcommittee. 13 Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report. City Manager Anderson stated that the draft countywide Fire Protection Service Review report was issued on November 18, 2003. The Service Review includes all fire service agreements in the County including seven city fire departments and four Fire Protection D~str~cts. City Manager Anderson stated that the report includes a special in-depth report on regional fire protection alternatives for Saratoga and surrounding areas. This special area of study was initiated because of a concern with duplication of service with two separate jurisdictions providing for emergency and EMS response in the City of Saratoga. The report presents four alternatives related to possible governmental reorganization of the for service delivery, including: 1) Dissolution of the Saratoga Fire Protection District and annexation to County Fire 2) The City withdrawing from both Districts and making a decision about unified approach to service delivery to the City of Saratoga 3) Expansion of the Saratoga Fire protection District into the County fire area of the City of Saratoga 4) Continuation of the current approach with/without additional service improvements City Manager Anderson stated that LAFCO consultants would present this item at the LAFCO meeting on December 10, 2003. A public hearing is scheduled for February 11, 2004. LAFCO is soliciting comments from the affected agencies and the public by January 7, 2004. City Manager Anderson explained to the City Council the four recommendations formed by the LAFCO AdHoc Subcommittee to pass on to LAFCO. Hal Toppel, Attorney/SFPD, noted that the SFPD would provide LAFCO a full response. Mr. Toppel noted that he found many factual errors in the report. Mr. Toppel requested that the City meet with the SFPD before responding to the report. Ed Ferrrell noted that he is in the SFPD service area and requested a copy of SFPD response to LAFCO. Ben Lopes, Chief/Santa Clara County Fire District, noted that both districts have a lot at risk. Chief Lopes pointed out that the report identifies issues throughout the county not just in Saratoga. Chief Lopes noted that he also found a few factual errors. Discussion took place amongst the Council in regards to the recommendations of the LAFCO Subcommittee. Consensus of the City Council to direct the LAFCO Subcommittee with meet with both districts before January 7, 2004. 14 8. COMMISSION VACANCY UPDATE AND PROPOSED INTERVIEW DATES STAFF RECOI\1MEN'DATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Consensus of the City Council to continue this item to December 17, 2003. 9. CLTY COUNCIL POLICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Consensus of the City Council to continue this item to December 17, 2003. AGENCY ASSIGNMENTS Mayor Nick Streit had nor reportable information. Vice Mayor Ann Waltonsmith had no reportable information. Councilmember Kathleen King had no reportable information. Councilmember Norman Kline Library Joint Powers Association - JPA Board passed two reso]utions in regards to the March 2004 ballot. Campaign fundraising efforts are low. Councilmember Stan Bogosian had no reportable information. C1TY COUNCIL ITEMS Referring to the new Chamber of Commerce Directory, Vice Mayor Waltonsmith pointed out that it is very nice. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None • 15 ADJ OURI~TMENT There being no further business, Mayor Streit declared the meeting adjourned at 12:05 a.m. Res ectfull submitted P Y Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk • • 16 • MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 17, 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 Leal Counsel -Initiation of litigation (Gov't Code section 54956.9(c): (1 potential case). Conference With Leal Counsel - Existing Liti_eation: (Government Code section 54956.9(a)) Name of case: City of Saratoga v. Escamilla (Santa Clara County Superior Court • No: 1-03-CV-0053) Conference With Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation: (Government Code section 54956.9(a)) Doug Adam Jonathan, Debtor U.S. Bankruptcy Court, N. Dist. CA, Bankruptcy No. 03-57342-JRG] 1 MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Waltonsmith reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Waltonsmith called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, Norman Kline, Nick Streit Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Ann Waltonsmith 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 Cherbone, Public Works Director REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FORDECEMBER 17, 2003 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of December 17, 2003 was properly posted on December 12, 2003. COMMUNICATIONS FORM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following people requested to speak at tonight's meeting: Ed Ferrell spoke in regards to the proposed emergency access road on Norton Road. Mr. Ferrell stated that Montalvo has dozen of acres of flammable land. Nlr. Ferrell stated that the Villa Montalvo Trustees must be made to realize that they have more to loose than everyone if the fire engines cannot get to the fire. Mr. Ferrell asked for a status report in regards to the road. , Beverly Phipps spoke in regards to the proposed emergency access road on Norton Road. Mr. Phipps stated that two years ago he brought this to the City Council's attention. Mr. Phipps noted that he would like a status report on the matter. COMMUNICATIONS FORM COMMISSIONS Phyllis Ballingal, Chair/Heritage Preservation Commission, congratulated the new Mayor and Vice Mayor and thanked Councilmember Streit for his support as the liaison on the , HPC. Chair Ballingal] requested that the City Council agendize a discussion in regards to establishing the Village as a Historic District. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Councilmember Bogosian requested that the Heritage Preservation Commission's request be brought back to Council with a formal report. Councilmember Kline supported Councilmember Bogosian's request. Councilmember Bogosian requested that a formal status report on the Norton Road fire access be brought back to the City Council. Vice Mayor King noted that issue is on the agenda planner for February. Councilmember Streit added that the AdHoc Committee is still having discussions with the Board of Director from Villa Montalvo. 2 Councilmember Bogosian repeated his request stating that the public has a right to know what is going on and participate in the discussions. Mayor Waltonsmith directed staff to prepare a status report on the Norton Road fire access. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Waltonsmith announced that City Hall would be closed from'December 24, 2003- January 5, 2004. CEREMONIAL ITEMS None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1 A APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -OCTOBER ] 5, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Vice Mayor King requested that item lA be removed from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor King pointed out that Councilmember Bogosian is listed as absent on the roll call, but he was present that evening. KING/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF OCTOBER 15, 2003 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1B APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -NOVEMBER 5, 2003 STAFF RECOI\ZMENDATION: Approve minutes. Mayor Waltonsmith requested that item 1B be removed from the Consent Calendar. Mayor Waltonsmith requested that on page 16 the comment should say "Vice Mayor Waltonsmith asked Director Sullivan if the word "horses" could be replaced with the word with "equines"." KING/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 5.2003 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 3 1 C. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. KING/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTER PASSED 5-0. 1 D. PLAl\TNING ACTION MINUTES -DECEMBER 10, 2003 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Note and file. MOTION K1NG/KLINE MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE PLAl~'NING ACTION >\9NUTES FORDECEMBER 10,2003. MOTION PASSED 5-0. lE. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COUNCIL AGENCY AND COMMISSION LIAISON APPOINTMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-078 Vice Mayor King requested that item lE be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember King requested that she and Councilmember Streit remain as the liaisons on the Norton Road AdHoc Committee; they have already scheduled two meetings in January and are expected to be there. Councilmember Bogosian concurred. Councilmember Kline noted that he has a conflict with the Chamber of Commerce's meeting time. Vice Mayor King noted that she would take the Chamber assignment. In regards to the Boundary Drop Oversight Committee, Councilmember Bogosian asked when this Committee was formed. City Manager Anderson responded that the Committee was part of the Boundary Drop Agreement. KING/STREIT MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COUNCIL AGENCY AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. • 4 1F. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF TREE REGULATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt ordinance. TITLE OF ORDINANCE: 226 Tom Corson requested that item 1F be removed from the Consent Calendar. Mr. Corson stated that in the new ordinance there is a three level appeal process, now it would cost the appellant $400; which to him seems onerous. Ed Ferrell noted that he recently read the ordinance on the City's website and thought it was quite onerous and vague. Mr. Ferrel] noted that he didn't agree with the section on pnamng. STREIT/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 15-05.020, ] 5-45.070,15-45.080, 15-46.030,15-46.040. AND ARTICLE 15-50 OF ZONING REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA RELATING TO TREE REGULATIONS AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE PRUNING STANDARDS (2001 EDITION) AND TREE VALUATION FORMULA CONTAINED IN THE GUIDE FOR PLANT APPRAISAL (APRIL 2000 EDLTION. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1 G. SECOND AMENDMENT TO SECOND RESTATED AND AMENDED JOINT EXERCISE OF PO~~'ERS AGREEMENT CREATING THE SILICON VALLEY ANIMAL CONTROL AUTHORITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize execution of agreement. KING/KLINE MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1H. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR VTA'S OPERATOR'S FACILITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Reject all bids received on the project. 2. Direct staff to solicit new bids for the facility located in the parking lot. Councilmember Kline requested that item IH be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Kline noted that Director Cherbone had an update on this project. 5 Director Cherbone explained that he recently met with the residents and they _ would like to keep the hillside design as an option and are looking at funding opportunities outside the City Director Cherbone stated that the Council should reject the bids and allow him to work with the contractors to find ways to reduce costs. l I. Councilmember Streit stated that staff has spent a huge amount of money over the past year on this project and suggested that it maybe the appropriate time to turn the project back to the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). Councilmember Streit stated that the City budgeted $220,000 for this project and the bids came in over $500,000. Councilmember Streit stated that the residents should cover the difference. Director Cherbone asked if staff could have another attempt at this project before turning it back over to the VTA. KING/KLINE MOVED TO REJECT BIDS AND DIRECT STAFF TO SOLICIT NEVI' BIDS FOR THE FACILITY LOCATED IN THE PARKING LOT. MOTION PASSED 5-0. REQUEST CHANGE ORDER AUTHORITY ON HERITAGE ORCHARD STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve increase of $35,138 to existing contract with Republic Electric for electric power extension from Saratoga Library to the Heritage Orchard. Approve increase of $36,474 to the ex~stmg contract with Magg~ora Brothers Drilling, lnc. for Heritage Orchard irrigation system. KING/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE INCREASE OF $35,138 TO EXISTING CONTRACT ~~'ITH REPUBLIC ELECTRIC FOR ELECTRIC POWER EXTENSION FROM SARATOGA LIBRARY TO THE HERITAGE ORCHARD. APPROVE INCREASE OF $36,474 TO THE EXISTING COI\TTRACT WITH MAGGIORA BROTHERS DRILLING, INC. FOR HERITAGE ORCHARD IRRIGATION SYSTEM. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1J. SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUNDS (SLESF) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-079 K1NG/KL1NE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION REPORTING ON USE OF SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNDS KNOWN AS "COPS" FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-04. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1K. APPRAISAL FOR QUARRY PROPERTY (SARATOGA-TO-THE-SEA TRAIL) STAFF RECOMI\'IENDATLON: Authorize staff to retain the services of an appraisal company to perform an appraisal on the two County owned properties. KING/KLINE MOVED TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO RETAIN SEVICES OF AN APPRAISAL COMPANY. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 1L. INCREASE 1N COI\'SULTING CONTRACT FOR GATEWAY PROJECT/DESIGN STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve a $29,375 supplement to design contract with Greg G. Ing & Associates for additional services in connection with Gateway entry redesign and Right-of- way modification work. Councilmember Bogosian requested that item l L be removed from tl~e Consent Calendar. In regards to the increase in cost for right'-of- way modifications, Councilmember Bogosian stated that he thinks staff should of known about this in the beginning. BOGOSIAN/STREIT MOVED TO APPROVE A $29,375 SUPPLEMENT TO DESIGN CONTRACT WITH GREG G. ING & ASSOCIATES FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH GATEWAY ENTRY REDESIGN AND RIGHT-OF-WAY MODIFICATION WORK. MOTION PASSED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CREATE AN OVERLAY ZONE FOR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct Public Hearing; Grant the First Reading; Direct staff to place item on the next Agenda's Consent Calendar for Second Reading and Adoption; Adopt Resolution of Negative Declaration. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 03-080 Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan explained that the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing to consider recommending the City Council establish an Overlay Zone; which would conditionally allow drive-through services in CN Zone bounded by Lawrence Expressway and Prospect Avenue. Director Sullivan stated that part of the Planning Commission's recommendation is that if such an Overlay Zone is established it should also include the requirement that a Use Permit be required in all cases to establish a business with adrive-through 7 services. This would allow the City to require traffic and circulation studies for all such applications. It v~~ould also allow each application to be evaluated on its own individual merits. Mayor Waltonsmith opened the public hearing and invited public comments. See none Mayor Waltonsmith closed the public hearing. STREIT/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO GRANT THE FIRST READING: DIRECT STAFF TO PLACE ITEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA'S CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION. MOTION. PASSED 5-0. STREIT/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO ADOPT REOSLTUION GRANTING NEGATIVE DECLARATLON OF ENVIRONMEI\'TAL IMPACTFOR A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CREATING AN OVERLAY 70NE FOR THE CN DISTRICT BOUNDED BY LA~~~RENCE EXPRESSVI'AY AND PROSPECT AVENUE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 3. FIVE YEAR (2001-2006) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN -FISCAL YEAR 2003/2004 UPDATE STAFF RECOMMEI\'DATION: Adopt Resolution amending 2001-2006 CIP Budget reflecting Council direction from the November 5, 2003, City Council Meeting; Open the Public Hearing continued from the November 5th City Council Meeting for the F.Y. 03/04 CIP Update; Consider additional candidate CIP Projects as listed in the report and Review Projects in the adopted CIP and amend their funding levels if desired; Continue Public Hearing to the January 7, 2004, City Council Meeting for environmental review and final adoption of new CIP Projects. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. Director Cherbone explained that there were three additional CIP projects that are being submitted for Council consideration for inclusion into the 2001-2006 CIP and/or the 2007-2012 CIP. The cost for these three project total $358,000. These projects were generated from public input during the CIP process and therefore are appropriate to consider prior to the conclusion o f this year's CIP update. Director Cherbone described the three additional projects as follows: 1) Book-Go-Round Repair Work -roof repairs and interior storage room repairs $35,000 2) Chester Storm Drain Improvements -installation of a new' storm drain at the intersection of Chester Avenue and Vasona Creek - $178,000 3) Highway 9/Oak Place Pedestrian Signal • Option 1 -install pedestrian signal - $145,000 including $20,000 design work • Option 2 -consider other remedial measures -ranging from $1,000 to $50,000 Director Cherbone noted that funding of these three projects is a challenge considering the current fiscal state of the City. However, Council could repr~oritize the funding levels of the new CIP projects being considered or fund them utilizing other sources such as unobligated General Funds or City Council Contingency. In regards to the Highway 9/Oak Place Pedestrian Signal, Councilmember Kline pointed out that it would probably take CalTran approximately 2- 3 years to approve the process. Councilmember Kline noted that it doesn't make much difference which CII' we place it on. Director Cherbone stated that if Council decides to move forward with this project; seed money to start the design work could be allocated now and placing the capital project on the next CIP. Councilmember Kline asked how much would seed money be. Director Cherbone noted that the complete design would be approximately $20,000. The City could submit a cursory design to CalTran for approximately $5,000, which could be covered in the Engineering budget. Director Cherbone pointed out that the capital cost would be about $120,000. Mayor Waltonsmith opened the public hearing and invited public comments. Marcia Manzo pointed out that the Book-Go-Round makes approximately $ ] 00,000 per year that goes directly into the Saratoga Library. Ms. Manzo urged the Council to approve the project for repairs listed in the CIP. Ethel James noted that she represented the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC). Ms James stated that SASCC is struggling with space limitations. Ms. James stated that SASCC would like to use the Fellowship Hall at the North Campus. James Kardach noted that he was Co-president of the Village Green Neighborhood Association (VGNA). Mr. Kardach stated that he supported the crosswalk at Highway 9 & Oak Place and urged that Council to at least approve the funds for the design. Jerry Bruce noted that he represented Federated Church. Mr. Bruce stated that Federated Church supports the crosswalk at Highway 9 and Oak Place. Mary Jean Fenn noted that she was the Manager at the Book-Go-Round. Ms. Fenn noted that the roof leaks in the Book-Go-Round. Ms. Fenn urged the Council to approve the project for the building in the CIP. Ms. Fenn also read a letter from Bill McDonnell who also supports the CIP project. Denise Michel noted that she participated on the AdHoc Committee to look at the alternatives for the intersection of Highway 9 & Oak Street. Ms. Michel stated that the AdHoc fully supports the crosswalk and urged the Council to include it in the CIP. 9 Phyllis Ballinga] urged the City Council to make necessary improvement at the Book-Go-Round. Brain Rosevear noted that he was Co-president of the (VGNA). Mr. Rosevear noted that he supports a pedestrian activated crosswalk at the intersection of Highway 9 & Oak Place. ~~ John Feemster noted that he represented SASCC. Mr. Feemster noted that he was present this evening to support improvement at the North Campus. Mr. Feemster noted that SASCC has had to limit the number of participants in certain programs due to lack of space. Mr. Feemster stated that if the City installed ADA bathrooms in the Fellowship Hall they would work with their connections to make additional improvements to the building. ' Mayor Waltonsmith closed the public hearing. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he thinks public safety projects should be the Council's first priority. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he supported the pedestrian light and the repair at the Book-Go-Round. Councilmember Streit noted he supports the pedestrian light initial studies and suggested that it be placed on the CIP unfunded. Councilmember Streit stated that in regards to repairs to the Book-Go-Round, there are several City owned buildings that need repairs. As for the overall CIP, Councilmember Streit noted that due to our economic uncertainty the C1P could be frozen until we know what the State is going to do with the VLF. Councilmember Streit stated that if needed the funds in the ClP could be placed back into the General Fund. The projects that are funded by grants '; should go forward. Councilmember Bogosian noted that the pedestrian light and the roof repairs should be placed in the CIP and the Counil should reprioritize all of the projects. Councilmember Kline noted that he supports Councilmember Bogosian's and Councilmember Streit's suggestions and go one-step further. Councilmember Kline proposed with the exception of projects that have already been contracted out, safety and maintenance projects, and projects that have been funded by grants or matching funds, everything else should be temporarily frozen until we know what is going on at the State level. Councilmember Kline stated that the funds in the C1P are the City's only reserves. City Manager Anderson stated that with clear direction from Council, staff could come back on January 7`h with a report to assist the Council to prioritize the CIP according to safety, ongoing maintenance, and projects funded by outside sources including grants and matching funds. • 10 KLINEBOGOSL4N MOVED TO PLACE THE BOOK-GO-ROUND ON THE CIP AS A FUNDED MAINTENACE ITEM; FUND THE INTIAL STUDY FOR THE PEDESTRLAN Ll GHT OF $4.000 FUDNED OUT OF THE ENGINEERING BUDGET; PLACE THE CHESTER STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS ON CIP UNFUNDED: RETURN TO COUNCIL ON JANUARY 7TH V1'ITH A REPORT TO PRIORITIZE THE CIP ACCORDING TO SAFETY. ONGOING MAINTENANCE, AND PROJECTS FUI\'DED BY OUTSIDE SOURCES INCLUDING GRANTS AND MATCHING FUNDS MOTION PASSED 5-0. OLD BUSINESS 4. ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE PROVIDER CHOICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that Saratoga received a proposal from the City of San Jose and brought it to Council for consideration on November 19, 2003. After review of the proposal Council directed staff to continue negotiations with the City of San Jose with the purpose of signing along-term contract for animal control services. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that the cities of Cupertino and Los Gatos have also been negotiating with the City of San Jose for animal control services. In addition, SVACA has issues a new proposal to all three cities in an effort to keep us in the JPA. Assistant City Manager Tinfow briefly went through comparison tables in regards to the San Jose proposal and the new SVACA proposal. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that the new SVACA proposal provides competitive pricing, shelter equity, a vote on the board, and continued input and control on the operation and budget level of SVACA. Shelter construction must still be completed so some uncertainty with final costs still exists. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that San Jose offers competitive pricing, possible refund of capital contribution during the first 3 years, and a higher field ratio for the three cities than provided by SVACA. However, staff remains concerned about San Jose's response times. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that the actual cost of each option to Saratoga is contingent on the decision of the Los Gatos and Cupertino City Councils. 11 Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that last night the City of Cupertino voted to withdraw from SVACA and Los Gatos has it on their agenda for January 5, 2004. Assistant City Manager Tinfow presented and explained in detail two options to the City Council: „ • Option ] Remain with SVACA under new conditions • Option 2 Contract with San Jose In regards to fiscal impacts of each option, Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained the following: Option 1 - • Annual service contract costs would change each year • 5300,000 capital contribution is budgeted in the CIP • SVACA would accept the contribution as an equity investment in the shelter • Saratoga would receive a share of any sales proceeds should the facility be sold in the future Option 2 - • Annual service contract costs would be specified for three years and depending on the actions of Cupertino and Los Gatos maybe less than the proposal offered by SVACA Mayor Waltonsmith asked if staff knew what the Town of Los Gatos might do. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that staff is recommending that they withdraw from SVACA and sign a contract with the City of San Jose. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that the Town of Los Gatos is still waiting for the City of Saratoga to make a decision. Councilmember Kline asked if the City would be locked into a decision made this evening. Assistant City Manager Tinfow responded that we could withdraw up until January 25, 2004. Councilmember Streit noted that a five city JPA would work, but would not support a four city JPA. Mayor Waltonsmith noted that she is still concerned that the SVACA site does not have an outdoor area for the animals. • 12 Referring to Mayor Waltonsmith's concerns regarding the outdoor area for the animals, Debra Briggs, Executive Director of SVACA, noted that for the past 50 years the Human Society did not have an outdoor exercise area for the animals. Director Briggs stated that SVACA is looking into tearing up part of the parking lot to convert it into an exercise area. Director Briggs thanked Councilmember Bogosian for his participation on the JPA Board and noted that they look forward to working with Councilmember Streit. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO REMAIN ~'~'ITH SVACA V1'ITH THE PROVISO THAT IT IS A FIVE CITY JPA; DLRECT T~~'O MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL TO MEET ~'1'1TH THE CITY OF CUPERTINO TO TRY AND PERSUADE THEM TO STAY WITH SVACA; URGE THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS TO STAY ~'1'lTH SVACA. MOTION PASSED 5-0. ALTERNATE PROPOSAL FOR THE COMMEMORATIVE BENCH FOR ~~1'ILLYS PECK AT THE SARATOGA LIBRARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consider an alternate approach to honoring Willys Peck with a bench at the Saratoga Library. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that at the October 1st City Council meeting, staff presented a request by the family of Willys Peck to install a teak bench and landscaping in celebration for NIr. Peck's 80'h birthday. The Peck family offered to contribute $2,000 to the project and submitted several ideas for landscaping prepared by a landscape architect. Council approved the special teak ' bench and directed staff to work with the Library Commission on the landscaping details. Council also limited the amount of City funding for the project to that already budgeted for sod and irrigation in the dirt area south of the community patio room, a total of $1,700. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that staff presented Council's decision to the Library Commission at their October meeting, and explained the financial limitations and asked for input on the design within financial constraints given a total of $2,700. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that the Commission initially balked at installing anon-typical bench at the Library for a number of reasons. The alternative suggestion put together by Councilmember Kline Chair Anne Cross and Betty Peck is to select an existing bench on which to install a commemorative plaque and a one of Mr. Peck's columns about the Heritage Orchard from the Saratoga News. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that staff is requesting final direction on how to proceed. 13 To clear up an issue; Councilmember Kline explained that the Library Commission did not actually reject the bench. The Commission was confused about what their direction was. When Council discussed this issue many compromises were made including rejecting the Peck's landscape plan. After Council met, Mrs. Peck decided to use an existing bench already at the library, and recently chose one. Councilmember Kline noted that an existing bench with a plaque and a storyboard is satisfactory for Mrs. Peck. Councilmember Streit noted that he agrees with the compromise, but doesn't agree with how the Council got to this point. Councilmember Streit stated that the Council made a decision and then the newspaper.drug it out because the Library Commission made it a huge issue. , Councilmember Bogosian suggested that the City needs a Gift Policy to address these types of issues. Marcia Manzo stated that the Library Commission never agreed or disagreed that there should or shouldn't be a bench for Mr. Peck. At the time of discussion the Library Commission asked staff what their task was in regards to this issue. Discussion took place in regards to developing aCity-wide Gift & Donation Policy. It was suggested that the Council Policy AdHoc Committee be assigned this task. BOGOSIAN/KLINE MOVEDTO APPROVE THE BENCH, PLAQUE AND STORYBOARD FOR MR. WILYS PECK. MOT10N PASSEED 5-0. NEW BUSINESS 6. CITY COUNCIL POLICIES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct Council Sub-Committee accordingly. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer explained that at the City Council Retreat on February 1, 2003 staff was directed to begin the process of drafting a City Council Policy document. Councilmember Kline and Councilmember Bogosian were both appointed to the AdHoc Committee to work with staff to prepare this document City Clerk Boyer stated that as the Subcommittee prepared to for this assignment, many old council polices were found, some extremely outdated and other current practices never formally adopted by Council. Many issues addressed in the attached policy are consistent with best practices of many other cities but may not in all instances conform to current practices. The Council Subcommittee recommends the changes to current practices included in the draft policies. The Subcommittee seeks comments from the Council as a whole to insure that the Council policies reflect a Council consensus. 14 • The City Council discussed each section and made changes to the draft City Council Policy. Council directed the AdHoc Committee to bring the item back in January with a resolution repealing all past City Council polices. 7. COMMLSSION VACANCY UPDATE AND PROPOSED INTERVIEVI' DATES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer explained that on April 1, 2004 the Arts Commission, Heritage Preservation Commission, Planning Commission, and Public Safety Commission would have a significant number of vacancies due to expired terns or resignations. City Clerk Boyer added that the on July 1, 2004 the Youth Commission would have 10 vacancies: City Clerk Boyer stated that in an effort to allow Council to make personal scheduling arrangements and in order to fill these vacancies in a timely matter staff is requesting approval form Council to schedule interviews for the Arts, HPC, PC, and PSC on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 and Tuesday, March 23, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. The normal practice has been to interview candidates prior to City Council meetings. City Clerk Boyer noted that if Council concurs the deadline for applications would be set for February 27, 2004 for all the Commissions except for the Youth Commission, which would be April 30, 2004 with interviews held on May 11th and May 25th Consensus of the City Council to support staff's recommendation. AGENCY/COMMISISON ASSIGNMENTS None CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Bogosian wished everyone a Happy Holiday. Referring to the malfunctions of the lights and sound in the theater this evening, Councilmember Streit requested that staff make sure the lights and sound during future council meetings are adequate. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None 15 i ADJOURI~TMENT There being no further business, Mayor Waltonsmith declared the meeting adjourned at ' 11:00 p.m. ~~ Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk • • l6