HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-04-1987 City Council Minutes MINUTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
TIME: March 4, 1987
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
1. ROLL CALL: Mayor Hlava, Councilmembers Clevenger, Anderson, Moyles,
Peterson present at 7:07 P.M.
2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS:
A. Resolution 2405 commending Pauicia Mahler for Library Commission service
B. Resolution 2406 commending Wilma Morrison for Library Commjssion service
C. Resolution 2407 commending Yoshihiro Uchida sponsored by Mayor Hlava
CLEVENGER/PETERS ON MOVED APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS 2405, 2406,
COMMENDING MS. MAHLER AND MS. MORRISON FOR SERVICE ON THE
LIBRARY COMMISSION AND RESOLUTION 2407, COMMENDING MR. UCHIDA.
Passed 5-0.
3. ROUTINE MATTERS
A. Minutes of the Meetings of February 18 ·
Councilmember Clevenger requested that on Page 1, Ceremonial Items, to read; "Vice Mayor
Anderson read into the record..."
CLEVENGER/ANDERSON MOVED APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 18,
1987, AS AMENDED. Passed 5-0.
CLEVENGER/HLAVA MOVED APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 24, 1987, AS
SUBMITTED. Passed 5-0.
B. Approval of Warrant List:
ANDER~ON/CLEVENGER MOVED APPROVAL OF WARRANT LIST AS SUBM/T]TED.
Passed 5-0. "
C. Report of City Clerk on Posting of Agenda
PursUant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on
February 27, 1987.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR - CLAIMS:
A. lrvine Claim Concerning Traffic Accident
MOYLES/CLEVENGER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE CLAIM OF PATRICIA IRVINE AND
REFER TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR SETI'LEMENT. Passed 5-0.
MEETII~G OF THE CITY COUNCIL .... page 2
MARCH 4, 1987 : ~ ~:: ' ...
4. CONSENT CALENDAR - OTHER ITEMS:
A. Planning CommisSion Actions, February 25, 1987, - Noted and flied..
B. Heritage Preservation Commission Actions, February 4, 1987, - Noted and fried.
C. Library Commission Actions, February 25, 1987 ·- Noted and flied.
D. Resolution 36-B-223 Final Acceptance for SDR 1571, Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd.
(2 lots) (R. James HI, developer)
E. Ordinance 71.21 Adding Section 10~05.055 Relaiing to Sales on PUblic Rights of
Way, amending Sections 10-10.020, 10-10.030 and 10-10.070 Relating to Special
Event Permits, and Repealing Ordinance No. 3E-23 (second reading and adoption)
F. January Financial Status Report - Received and fded.
G. Investment Report - January 1987 - Received and filed.
Councilmember Anderson commented on the Action of the Planning Commission, denim of
AZO-86-001, and asked that this Item be discussed at the Study Session of March 24, 1987.
PETERSON/CLE, VENGER MOVED APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR. Passed 5-0.
5. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC:
A. Oral Cotnmunications from the Public and Commissions
Mr. Bert ~Martel, 14420 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, read a written statement into the
record asking that his community services ftie, 84-6-020, not be destxoyed.
Mr. Eugene O'Ro ' ke read a written statement into the record, representing views of
the Good Government Group, Board of Directors, regarding the State of the City
. Memo, dated February 6, 1987, and Midyear Review of the City Budget, 1986-87.
- Ms. Marilyn Kanemura, Library Commission Chairwoman, requested that the City
Council issue a resolution proclaiming 1987 as the "Year of the Reader" and that the
Council intervene with the Govemer, requesting additional funding for the State
Library System and the California Literacy Campaign.
B. Written Communications from tile Public
1. Roberta Hughan, Santa Clara County Intergovernmental Council, requesting
support for National Recycling Policy.
CLEVENGER/ANDERSON MOVED TO SUPPORT THE NATIONAL RECYCLING
POLICY. Passed 5-0.
2. State Senator Bill Lockyer, requesting support for Ring Around the Bay bicycle
and pedestrian path concept.· _
Councilmember Clevenger requested support for this project. Councilrriember Moyles
requested additional information; Mayor Hlava concurred and noted concern that land
surrounding the Bay was privately owned and would be costly to'acquire. She preferred that
transportation needs of the City be met first. Consensus reached that additional information on
funding sources of this project be requested.
3. Mrs. T.G. Roland, 20812 4th St. #23, objecting to religious banner in Blaney
Plaza.
Councilmember Moyles noted concern regarding content evaluation required in determining
religious adverdsing as opposed to advertisement of an acceptable community activity; he asked
for consideration of banning all advenjsing in Blaney Plaza. Mayor Hlava favored Staff
recommendation of acknowledging and fding this letter, Councilmember Peterson fa voted
continued use of lManey Plaza for advertising and marketing community events.
MEEiiNG OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 3
MARCH 4, 1987 :
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND PUBLIC Continued
The City Manager stated that since this Item was potentially a litigated matter, he did not wish
to discuss further in an open meeting. Consensus reached to accept Staff recommendation to
acknowledge and f~e at this time.
4. Ellen Fletcher, Councilmember, City of Palo Alto, supporting no-smoking
regulations.
Councilmember Moyles asked that this letter be included in consideration of the no-smoking
regulations when the Public Hearing was held. Consensus to accept Staff recommendation to
acknowledge and fde letter.
6. OLD BUSINESS - None.
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. Countywide Coordination of Toxics/Hazmat Programs
\
The City Manager called attention to the letter from Santa Clara Co. Intergovernmental Council
of February 19, 1987, and reviewed the history of this Item. He recommended the Council
authorize the Mayor to execute a Letter of Agreement with the County on behalf of the City of
Saratoga. - ' -
CLEVENGER/HLAVA MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A LETFER
OF AGREEMENT W1TH THE COUNTY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA.
Passed 5-0.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Ordinance an~ending Zoning Ordinance Subsection 5-20.020 (a) to include bed and
breakfast establishments in the definition of "Hotel;" amending Section 15-12.030 to
- . include bed and breakfast establishments as a conditional use in R- 1 zoning districts
adjacent to the Village; and amending Subsection 15-35.030 (e) pertaining to required
parking facilities for bed and breakfast establishments. (AZO 86 003) (fnrst reading)
The City Manager read into the record written communications received from:
Ms. Ann Fitzsimmons
Lawrence and Helen Abruzziul
- Mr. Eric Jeffery
Gay and Roy Crawford
A telephone call was received from Ms. Mary Dutro.
The City Attorney addressed his remarks to the audience, summarizing the history of the
Ordinance amendment. He noted incorrect information circulating in the community; he
defined bed and breakfast establishments and reviewed the proposal under consideration,
Section 2 of the Ordinance, procedure required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit.
In response to Councilmember F~yles' cuttt~-vltst the City Manager stated that he had
' investigated the circulation of a notice of the public hearing by a private party
through Saratoga Elenentary School; it was the City Manager' s understanding that
neither the school board nor the Superintendent of Schools had made any policy
decision on the proposed ordinance amendment.
The Public Hea~ng was opened at 7:53 P.M.
Mr. Warren Held, Chairman, Heritage Preservation Commission, reviewed the purpose and
accomplishments:of the Commission and cited the Memorandum of March 4, ]987. He stated
it was the intent of the Commission that bed and breakfast use have very limited application in
Samtoga and reaffmned the need for strict regulations. The Commission favored appropriate
public hearing of each application.
.' :
MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL -
MARCH 4, 1987
:
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
In response to Councilmember Moyles' question, Mr. Heid stated that through the years,
certain historic buildings have disappeared; currently, there were buildings in the City that
should be mstore~t. Citing a letter of Mr. Willys Peck, he stated that the unique flavor of these
homes would be tnaintained only through preservation of these structures; the Heritage
Commission encourages ownerS to preserve these structures He noted inns and lodges in the
community which had operated for many years without affecting the neighborhood.
Mr. John.Kahle, 20601 Brookwood Ln., Saratoga, noted that these homes required constant
. attention; he has owned the Julia Morgan House since 1955. He reviewed discussions
regarding the B&B's which have occurred since 1982; the Conclusion of which was that
B&B's should be a part of Saratoga. He felt that B&B's would preserve houses worthy of
such and allow visitors to experience the ambiance and history of the area; the letter of Mr.
Willys Peck was cited. He felt that B&B's could be best controlled through the Use Permit
process.
In response to Councilmember Peterson's question, Mr Kahle stated that renovation of the
Julia Morgan House would cost $50,000 - $100,000; the house has 5 bedrooms, 5 baths and
the lot size was 2 1/2 acres; parking would not be a pmblent .
Ms. Ann Fitzsirmnons, 13480 Saratoga Ave., Saratoga, stated she owned Lundblad's Lodge
-for the past year,, this ledge was a B&B for nearly 80 years. She supported the Ordinance
amendment since it would again allow the lodge to be used as a B&B; she plans to restore the
lodge. In response to Councilmember Peterson's question, she stated that Lundblad's has 6
bedrooms, 5 baths and the property is 2/3 of an acre; renovation would cost a minimum of
$300,000.
Mrs. Betty Peck'read a letter written by her husband, Mr. Willys Peck, in which he addressed
the historical perspective of the inns and lodges. ' ':
Ms. Lois Svalya, 14277 Elva Ave., Saratoga, stated she was puzzled by an alliance between
people holding forth historical perspective and people holding commercial interests which
sought to close one of the most significant historical landmarks in Saratoga--Saratoga School.
She:stated there was an associations between developmental interests which wished to see
Saratoga School replaced with commercial development, i.e., Old Town, and those who
wished to displace the children for more noble reasons--learning. Her primary reason for
being at the hearing was that zoning ordinances, spot zoning changes, or moving Village
boundaries, benefiting special interests of some individuals, was an unhealthy precedent. She
did not agree with the argument that citizens could not preserve the beauty, history and
ambiance of Saratoga Without creating bed and breakfast establishments.
In response to Councilmember Moyles' request regarding information to substantiate the
conclusion that there was an alliance between developers and individuals who favored the
closure of Saratoga School, she stated that she would reveal her sources in private; however,
unofficial remarks of individuals in the real estate business were that people who would most
like to see Saratoga School closed were those who believed they stood to gain an economic
interest. The issue of closure of this school has come up again and again. In response to
Councilmember Peterson's question, she had been told that the people who are working
actively for the B&B's were also working for the closure and replacement of Saratoga School
with a commercial establishment of retail Shops.
Councilmember Clevenger reiterated the position of the City Council during the past seven
years regarding Saratoga School; the Council has never taken any position on the out come of
O~ Street School.
Mr. John Hurley, 1524 Madtone Hill Rd., Saratoga, reviewed the historical value of
preservation of these establishmems and stated he had known Mrs. Hazel Bargas of
Lundblad's Lodge.
Ms. Erma Jachmm~, 14515 Oak Street, Saratoga, was very much in favor of restoring and
maintaining Lundhlad's as a lodge. She conveyed testimony of Mr. Warren McLaughlin, who
was unable to be present and introduced three Oak Street neighbors who were present.
· MEE'HNG OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 5
MARCH 4, 1987 .. · ~."
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Mr. James Cohen, 1492 Vickery Ln., Sal'atoga, noted the following concerns:
Questioned commercialization of buildings to restore them; he cited examples of
homes in San Francisco which had been restored without becoming B&B's.
Suggested the use permit process be used to monitor requests to tear dow~ or change
historical buildings.
Questioned the purpose of a Planning Commission, if their decisions were reve~ed by ~.he
City Council. -
This proposal would require Citizens to be present for a hearing on each applic'ation.
QUestioned the relevance of recreational activities cited in the letter from Mr. Peck.
Questioned the Heritage Preservation Commission, their mandate and authority '-
Noted his preference for living next door to a family residence rather than a rental unit.
Mr. Jack Schaub, 14732 Oak Street, Saratoga, was definitely opposed to the proposal and
noted there were better ways to preserve historical sites than commereialization of them. He
did not agree that establishment of B&B's was the solution to preservation of historical sites.
Ms. Diana Parham, 14613 Oak Street, Saratoga, was unfavorable to B&B's in residential
neighborhoods. She noted that no other city in the area allowed B&B's in residential areas and
suggested they be located in commercial zones. She asked that research be done on the
financial costs of renovation, possibility of marketing of the Hotel already located in Saratoga
and provision of information to adjacent home owners. She registered a complalnt regarding
the lack of notice by mall.
Ms. Carol Machol, Ronnie Way, Saratoga, noted continuing strong opposition to B&B's in
Saratoga. She reviewed statements from the General Plan, Land Use 4.2, and strongly urged
the Council not to bring commercial zoning to a residential area. She felt it vital that Saratoga
be primarily a residential area and stated that the proposed Ordinance amendment was not
sufficiently restrictive; in addition, the City had no means of monitoring these establishments.
She cited testimony given at both Planning Commission and Heritage Preservation
Commission Meetings and noted that the Heritage Preservation Commission wished to see
B&B's throughout the City. ! '
Mr. Gary Espinoza, 14510 Oak Street, Saratoga, concurred with Mr. Heid's comments and
favored allowing B&B's to save the heritage of the area. He noted that Lundblad's had always
been a lodge and favored its preservation as a lodge and the Kahle home as a B&B.
Mr. Clarence Neale noted that petitioners of a B&B use were interested in preserving the
historical nature of their homes, were collectors of antiques and desirous of doing something
with their property. He urged careful consideration of the proposed amendment.
Ms. Jackie Welch, 20925 Jacks Rd., Saratoga, noted that Saratoga was once famous for its
inns and lodges which brought distinction and vitality to the town; these establishments existed
harmoniously with neighbors. She would not object to having aB&B in her neighborhood ifit
insured preservation of a historic building. She noted that Lundblad's Lodge had always been
a guest house and thus, was not a change in use; preservation of Lundblad's as a lodge served
as a reminder of Samtoga's past. In addition, the City would benefit through Hotel/Motel
taxes.
Mr. John Schaub, 20300 Orchard Rd., Saratoga, had no objection to B&B's in Saratoga and
recommended that the Council consider them on an individual basis; however, he questioned
the logic of a 500 ft. area around the Village and noted that this was an accommodation of the
requests of two individuals who wished to establish B&B's.
Mr. Frank Matas, Samtoga-Los Gatos Rd., Saratoga, stated that he was very angry that some
citizens opposed to B&B's were questioned on length of their residency in Saratoga. He stated
he was a resident of Saratoga for 25 years and was against B&B's.
Ms. Loreen Eale, 14165 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd., Saratoga, .suggested that B&B's may be a
way to save historic smactures.
Mr. Dennis Aidridge, 14607 Aloha, Saratoga, moved his family to this location due to a well
defined commercial area in the Village and the proximity of a prime residential district. He
opposed B&B's, which would attract transients and pose potential threat to his children.
MEETING OF '['HE CITY COUNCIL - ~ page 6
MARCH 4, 1987 : '-:
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
· Mr. Greg Grodhaus, 20379 Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd., Saratoga, noted that individuals opposed
to the proposed amendment were not opposed to B&B's; rather they oppose allowing B&B's
in residential nei~;hborh0odS. Cities which prohibited B&B's in residential areas, regarding
~ them as a commercial use were cited. He protested the insinuation that opposition to B&B's in
residential neighborhoods was equivalent to opposition to the preservation of the history of
.. ' Saratoga.
A letter from the Cor Bregrnan s, 20330 Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd., Saratoga, was ~resented to
be entered into the record by Mr. Grodhaus.
Mr. Sam Armijo, 21053 Canyon View Dr., Saratoga, noted that it would be a mistake to
rezone a large part of Saratoga for a localized issue involving two parcels of property. He
concurred that perhaps special consideration could be given for historical purposes to
Lundblad's Lodge; however, the residential integrity of Saratoga should be preserved.
Ms. Betty Rowe, 20360 Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd., Saratoga, noted the importance of this issue
and asked that it be voted upon by all Saratogans.
Mr. Edward Lebowitz, 20295 La Paloma, Saratoga, noted renovation of older homes all over
the City and suggested that it was not the Council's responsibility to support the investment of
some private citizens; rather, it was the responsibility of the Council to see that these structures
'were maintained for residential purposes ff such was the will of the community. He noted the
proximity of the Lundblad's Lodge to Saratoga School and suggested thartransients at this
location might not: be in the best interests of the students.
Mr. Bill ThOmas, 13282 Pierce Rd., Saratoga, stated that experiences with B&B's were very
favorable; he noted that the only practical use for the two buildings in question was a use as a
B&B. He noted the atmosphere and the history of B&B's he had visited.
Mr. Don Prolo, 20471 Forest Hills Dr., Saratoga, stated that the policy under consideration
was clearly discriminatory. He and his wife moved to the area because of the distinctive
character, namely, a residential community without invasion from commercial business. He
cited. adjacent neighbors who also wished denial of the proposed amendment.
Mr. Bill Cummingham, 21070 Canyon View Dr., Saratoga, concurred that extending the
Village boundary 500 ft. was illogical; however, he was not opposed to individual review of a
B&B. He asked why Wildwood Park was not being used as a natural barrier between a
commercial and a residential zone, noted existing traffic problems on 4th Street and questioned
parking requirements for the proposed B&B's.
Ms. Lynn Johnston, 20611 Brookwood Ln., Saratoga, stated that She would not oppose a
small operation of the proposed B&B. She felt B&B's should be evaluated on an individual
basis and saw no reason the Julia Morgan Home could not serve the community as a B&B.
Ms. Lois Cockshaw, 20995 Canyon View Dr., Saratoga, questioned the legality of the notice
· given; the City Attorney responded to questions. Ms. Cockshaw questioned whether this was
not a lot of trouble for two people whose applications were turned down by the Planning
Commission and asked why it was being heard again. She noted the location of one of the
individuals desiring use of their property as a B&B which was within the 500 ft. area.
Ms. Nancy Lurid, 14805 Vickery Ave., Saratoga, supported statements made opposing the
amendment. She noted traffic problems in the Oak Street area and did not want to see
increased traffic from individuals not associated with the school. She did not wish the'area to
become more commercialized and noted that it was becoming an area for young families.
Mr. Kurt Russell, 14634 Aloha, _SaratOga, questioned that if preservation of facilities of some
historical value were considered, why was the area only 500 ft. from the Village, rather than
extending to the Cil~, limits in order to save all the historical facilities.
MEE'HNG OF THE CITY ~OUNCIL Page 7
MARCH 4, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Mr. Jeffrey Braun, 20220 La Paloma, Saratoga, was astounded that formal notice was ;mot
sent, considering the size of an area would be quadrupled within which commercial or
semi-commercial use would be permitted. He suggested noticing in writing and possibly sent
to everyone in the City. He questioned an Ordinance of this magnitude for two possible uses
and asked that the experience and decisions of other cities regarding commercial B&B's in
residential areas be carefully considered. He added that allowing B&B's in the area may create
the pressure wherein a use slightly more commercial than a B&B .would be approved and, in
time, the entire area would no longer be residential.
Mr. Mike Fitzsimmons, 14550 Oak Street, Saratoga, was in favor of the proposed Ordinance
since it would add class to the City. He supported the efforts of his mother Ms. Ann
Fitzsimmons, in making Lundblad's Lodge a worthwhile venture and noted that developers
considered putting in condominiums on the site before it was purchased by the Fitzsimmons.
CLEVENGER/ANDERSON MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:39 P.M.
Passed 5-0.
In response to Councilmember Anderson's question Whether the two properties in question
could apply for approval to operate as a B&B in a process other then the proposal under
consideration, the City Attorney stated that the options available were:
Establishment of a new category of Conditional Use while retaining the R-1 zoning
classification, which the Ordinance under consideration did; application to be restricted by
the 500 ft. boundary, or : .
Creation of a different zoning classification, as done in the Paul Masson Winery site; in
this case, a "residential, bed and breakfast:' zoning. He suggested consideration of various
zoning regulations such as minimum lot size.
The Mayor recessed the Meeting from 9:46 - 10:07 P.M:
Councilmember Peterson stated that the 500 ft. boundary had caused a great deal of confusion;
he summarized the amendment under consideration, stating that rezoning was not being
considered nor was there consideration of changing the Village boundaries. In addition, them
was no cause/effect relationship between this proposal and Saratoga School. He stated that
having Lundblad's Lodge request a Conditional Use Permit with the public hearings and an
opportunity to fully consider such an application would be desirable. He stated he would vote
against the proposed amendment due .to the confusion regarding the 500 ft. boundary unless
individual uses could be considered separately.
Councilmember Clevenger questioned long term effects of the proposed Ordinance, namely:
Will a B&B designation encourage preservation of historic homes; she concluded it
unlikely that either of the structures under consideration would be destroyed and noted
that many property owners were engaged in the restoration of their homes.
Will a B&B designation serve to enhance the neighborhoed; she concluded that such
designation would not further preserve a neighborhood. Preservation of existing
residential neighborhoods was the overriding consideration in the City of Saratoga.
She concluded that designating certain structures as B&B's would be deleterious to the
neighborhoods and noted the constant threat of commercialization in the area surrounding the
Village. She stated she would vote against the proposed Ordinance.
CounCilmember Anderson concumed with comments made and stated she was not convinced
that B&B's were needed to preserve heritage resources. She noted concern regarding traffic
problems and the cost of resources provided for tourists, which would not be recovered in
taxes placed on the B&B's. Her primary concern was the setting of a precedent'of commercial
use in a residential neighborhood and the resulting de~rircenta]~effect upon neighbors; in
addition, other commercial ventures would be proposed for this area.
In response to Councilmember Moyles' question, the City Attorney reviewed aspects of the
General Plan referred to in public testimony, noticing requirements and definitions used in the
proposed amendment.
MEETING OF I.HE CITY COUI~CIL . ~. ' '- '. Page 8
MARCH 4, 1987 : - .: '-~ -. '
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Councilmember lvloyles stated he was not persuaded that the proposed Ordinance amendment
would cream the incentive to preserve the homes in question. He noted the letter written by
Mr. Wiilys Peck and commented that Mr. Peck captured the flavor of Saratoga in his writings.
Perhaps what was being sought was the character found in communities which would preserve
', their heritage; he suggested that an answer could be found without commercializing residential
neighborhoods. lle was not in favor of a general use of B&B's throughout residential
neighborhoods and noted that several members of the public had addressed this issue. He
favored a selective, limited use of B&B's, preserving those homes which had historically
served thii purpose from the turn of the century.
Mayor Hlava noted that she appreciated the problem encountered by residents within the 500 ft.
area of the Village boundary; in addition, she questioned whether B&B's would necessarily
encourage people to preserve historic homes. However, homes in Saratoga which traditionally
had been used as lodges or bed and breakfasts should be allowed to serve that use in an attempt
to preserve them as historic structures also. She would not vote in favor of the Ordinance
under consideration..
The City AUomey suggested the addition of a requirement, stating that the Applicant must
demonstrate that among the heritage features of the home, that it had been used as a ledge or a
similar use. He deferred to the Heritage Commission regarding the number of homes in the
City as a whole which could meet this additional requirement; from this information could be
determined whether the 500 ft. boundary was necessary or even applicable. Councilmember
Moyles asked that conditions insure that not even one new bed and breakfast establishment be
introduced into the City of Saratoga; however, consideration should be given to establishments
which could demonstrate such a use before the neighborhood grew up around them.
The City Attorney suggested that within the Conditional Use Permit process, Conditions could
be imposed requiring that the structure be a designated heritage resource and distinctive in
having been used in.the past as a place of lodging; this would be a restoration of a use. In
response to Councilmember Anderson's concern regarding the Irafire impact of such use,
Councilmember Peterson responded that a condilional use permit could be sufficiently
restrictive so as to not unduly impact residential neighborhoods; minimum acreage was
suggested as an additional condition.
The City Attorney suggested an addition to Section 2: (2) to read, "and the applicant establishes
that the structure was previously and historically utilized as a place of lodging."
In response to concems raised by Councilmembers Clevenger and Anderson, Councilmember
Moyles suggested the Hmitation of usage to those establishments which operated before a set,
historical date, for example, 1945. Staffand the Heritage Preservation Commission wiil
provide a comprehensive list of historical resources in the area; noticing of the Public Hearing
· · through the newspaper. 500 ft. area from the Village boundary to remain; consensus
reached that the 500 ft. area be the only area of consideration at this time. Public Hearing to be
continued to the Meeting of April 15, 1987.
B. Ordinance 71.22 Amending Ardcle 6-10 of the City Code Relating to Alarm Systems
(Continued from February 18, 1987; second reading and adoption)
The City Manager noted there was no public testimony it the previous hearing; the Council
continued the Public Hearing in order to further solicit testimony. He reiterated concern as to
the number of false; alarms and danger to public safety.officers in responding-to them.
The Public Hearing was opened at 11:08 P.M.
Mr. Ralph Metcalf, 14150 Douglass Ln., Saratoga, stated that he has paid approximately $500
in fines. -He favored the present Ordinance with the exception of the fact that a grace period
was not granted and was favorable to this change in the amended Ordinance. He suggested the
keeping of records on the systems used by individual homeowners and performance of various
system operators. He asked that permit applications be available upon phone request with a
mailed return.
· MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Page 9
MARCH 4, 1987 - .
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Ms. Sylvia Katzman, Farwell, Saratoga, stated that possible disconnection of an alarm system
was of concern to her and questioned who would determine whether an alarm was false or not.
Ms. Bonnie Hughes, 20768 Sevilla Ln., Saratoga, concurred with concerns already raised
regarding possible mechanical failure of alarm systems causing a false a/ann.
Mr. Willjim Notz, 18276 Purdue Dr., Saratoga, stated that the proposed Ordinance amendment
was aimed at the wrong people and the wrong problems. He suggested:
Increased fines to cover expenses incurred and questioned why fines were not collected
Favored existing Ordinance; he was unfavorable to disconnection of alarm systems
Fines to include all costs of collection; he cited costs of the repeat offenders
Fines be levied on companies who install faulty equipment
Mr. Roy B0sw0rth, 20386 Chalet Ln., Saratoga, noted the difficulty of enforcement in the
disconnection of an alarm system.
Ms~ Michelle Rainey, 14268 Saratoga Ave., Saratoga, questioned the fairness of proposed fees
Ms. Chris Burnside, Santa Clara Co. Alarm Association, President, reviewed the primary
purpose of the Association. She noted that one of the major problems encountered was false
alarms and stated that the Association met on a monthly basis with police and fare departments
to solve any problems which occur. City representatives were invited to attend these meetings.
With respect to the proposed Ordinance amendment, she noted that:
Telling residents that they had to dismantle their alarm system was a major problem
Emergency situations were not defined in the proposed Ordinance.~ Effective alarm
systems are designed to get rid of perpetrators, and such a Situa'tion
may not be considered an emergency if no one was present when officers arrive~
Mr. Rus Maynard, Vigilante Alarms Owner, operator, addressed the following concerns:
Posting names of responsible people on the outside of a building; he state that their lives
may be endangered by such a requirement.
5 minute automatic shut-off; he suggested a 15 minute automatic shut-off for existing
systems and 10 minute shut-off for new systems.
Definition of a false alarm in the proposed Ordinance; systems which have automatic
alarms will not have anyone present when the police arrive. He cited examples of so-called
false alarms when a window had been broken or a door chiseled open; however, no
burglars was present when officials arrived.
Mr. Bill Ladd, President, Bolt Security Systems, noted the following concerns:
Definition of a false alarm. He cited examples where emergency circumstances no longer
existed when the officers arrived; however, damage to property had occurred.
Collection costs should be covered in the amount charged
Individuals with a/ann systems can be penalized, when in fact they are protecting the rest
of the community; he Objected to the fact that if mechanical problems arise, these
individuals could be told to disconnect their alarm system.
ANDERSON/CLEVENGER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 11:43 P.M.
Passed 5-0.
CounCilmember Clevenger noted that significant issues had been brought to the attention of the
Council, namely, the posting of names of responsible persons and the charging of higher fines
' for repeat offenders. She suggested consideration of a further discussion at.a study sessior~.
Mayor~Hlava 'noted the cOnCern regarding disconnection
of alarm systems; she suggested that such might be an incentive to insure that burglar alarms
are operating correctly.
The City Manager reviewed sections of the Ordinance conceming disconnection of an alarm
system; the City will work with responsible home owners to insure a better alarm system.
MEETING OF 7:HE CITY COUNCIL Page 10
MARCH 4, 1987
With regard to the d~efini tj. on of a false alarm, the City Manager suggested the following:
"FalSe alarras means the activation of an alarm system through mechanical failure,
accident, misoperafion, mallunction, misuse or the negligence of the owner or the leasee
of the alarm system or any of their employees or agents. False alarms shall not include
alarms caused by acts of God or other causes which are beyond the control of the owner
or the leasee of the alarm system. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or the leasee
of the system to show that the cause was beyond their control."
He stated that if there was any indication that a break in had been attempted, it would not be
considered a false alarm. The permit process would allow the City to monitor alarm companies
which were operating in the City. He concurred that the 5 minute turn-off was too short and
suggested a 15 minute tum-off time. Councilmember. Clevenger asked that the City be
~'epresented at meetings held by the alarm companies.
Councilmember Moyles noted his concern regarding the sanction to disconnect an alarm system
and suggested that the perceived risk by home owners would be very great. He sugges!ed
further increasing frees and stated that he favored the regulation of the alarm system
companies. He was not in favor of the proposed Ordinance. Councilmember Clevenger
concurred; however she noted the following concerns:
failure of some individuals to apply for a use permit
-, Vossible disconnection of an alarm system
OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO'ALARM SYSTEMS, AMENDING SECTION
6-10,120 TO READ," 15 MINUTE AUTOMATIC RESET" AND AMENDING SECTION
'.6-10,020, DEFINITION OF A FALSE ALARM AS PREVIOUSLY STATED.
Passed 3-2, Councilmembers Clevenger and Moyles opposed.
9. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS:
A. Reports from Individual Councilmembers
1. Mayor Hlava - Nominees for Senior Hall of Fame
Mayor Hlava nominated Mr. Bert Toevs and Ms. Phyllis Dolloff for Senior Hall of Faro?.
2. Councilmember Anderson - Transportation Commission Request to Support
Increased Funding at State Level to Match Local Taxing Efforts
/ Councilmember Anderson conveyed the request of Mr. JimBe~Ll~o send a representative to
speak on behalf of this proposal. Mayor Hlava supported the above proposal and will send a
letter to this effect. In addition, MrBb_a12 asked support for the Federal Reauthorization of the
Transportation Legislation; letter to be ser~c addressing this issue.
Councilmember Anderson - Support for SB 433
The City Manager noted that information expected from the County had not been received,
namely, a copy of the opinion of the Court; consensus reached that better information was
needed. Letter to be sent in support of SB 433.
· - Councilmember Clevenger relayed a request from Friends of the Saratoga Library that the
15 parIcing limit in front'of the Library be changed to a 1 hour limit.
She reported on the HCD project of Clarence Neal~wherein SHARP funding had been
used
10' 'CLOSED SESSION. on Litigation - Linda Clevenger vsSaratoga to be placed on
agenda of the March 18, 1987, Meeting of the City Council.
The meeting of the City Council was adjourned at 12:09 A.M. to 3:00 P.M., March 6, 1987
Respectfully sub ' ,
Carol A. Probst-Caughey
Recordh~g Secretary