HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-10-1990 (2) City Council Minutes Mfb~UTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCr*L
!'i!'~'[E 'FuesdaN. Jul:., t0. !990
F~AC~K: Senior C~nter, 19655 Allendale Avenue
TYPE: Workshop with Parks and Recreation Commission, P!annin;f Commiss ion~
Heritage Preservation Commission, and Finsnee Advisory Committee to:
Review the Open Space Survey and its Relevance to Nelson Gardens
i. WELCOMING REMARKS
Th,t mee~,in~ was oal!ed to order at e:00 p.m. Councilmembers Anderson.
ClovenSet, Monia and Vice Hayor Koh!er were present. Vice Mayor [(ohler
welcomed and thanked everyone far their attendance.
2. INTRODUCTION OF STAFF Abed CONSULTANTS
PauK Rookwo{3d of ~allace Robarts & Todd and Carolyn Verheyen of Moore
faceforte ,iBo~%srfian were present.
o SELF~INTRODUCTION OF PART!CiPAb~TS
Commissioners Ansnes, Bur~er, Caldwell, Davis, Franklin., Gitman, Hilton,
Jameson, Heron,' Peck, Sabin, Sounders, Siegfried, Swan, and Tucker were
present. Staff members Adar, Emslie, Peacock, Shriver and Toppal were also
present.
Cc~ E. T. Barco of Saratoga addressed the Council and stated his opinion
that this meet. in~ violates the Brown Act. He felt that the meeting was not
f :!ly publicized.
~r. Hal Toppal, City Attorney, said he was unable to address Col. Bareo's
complaint because the complaint was nat specific. ~r. Toppal reported that
this meeting was properly posted and noticed.
4. INTRODUCTORY REHARKS - ~EETING PURPOSE
~r. Harry Peacock, City ~an~er, stated the intention of this meeting is to
address issues of open space by bringing together those individuals who will
play a ma.jor role in the development of a new comprehensive plan for open
space and recreation for Saratoga, to present prepared documentation so that
ever'~;one will have a common basis with which to address the issues, and to
faci'~itate the start of a process for open space policy.
A, PRESENTATION OF OPEN SPACE STUDY
Hr. Steve Ems!ie. Planning Director, reported that an informational packet
was distributed to Commissioners and he referred to a memorandum from that
packet which included an overview of the issue of providing a comprehensive
open space policy for the City, and a suummarX of implementation policies and
techniques of other cities and jurisdictions. ~aps depietin~ the City's
inventory of open space, the City's existing master plan for trails linked
with the pedestrian and equestrian trails and a map of the City's sphere of
influence were displayed.
~r. Emslie reported that although Sarato~a's' open space policies are sound
and recognize the high value which open space provides to the character of
Saratcga~ it is felt that ~:ome of the implementation measures fall short of
an aggressive open space policy regardin~ acquisition and is an area which
needs input and discussion.
~s. Carolyn Verheyen of Hoore lacafano Gallsman presented 40 slides
summarizing the major findings of the open space assessment survey. The firm
worked with the City in formu!atin~ and conductin~ the door-to~daor survey
in February and Hatch 1990. The survey was conducted to identify open space
needs, assess the willingness of residents to pay far acquisition and
iu~provements, and to determine receptivity to various methods of obtainin~
~orbshop Minutes T/'iO/90 P:age
fund ;. Interviews of arlDl'~-.'z~-t=]~' 10-20 minutes were cenducted with
Sara~to~a residents sele,z't, ed at random. The-. survey was str'uctured
ques~tions ef residet~t's perception of open spao, e, potential plannin~
poll~cles, fundln~ sour.~Ees, restdenZ' s l~se o~ o~en spaoe~ and soolal and
dem,>~raphio data. The silr'vey respol~derits were selected at ralldom from target
[}tii~izin~ the slides. Ms. Verheyen reviewed. in detail. the survey questions
and ,the findings of the survey. She pointed cut that the survey sample was
comp?ised ~f & representative cross-section of Saratoga residents, 50~ men
r4r. ~iegfried asked if, it is possible the survey could be distorted because
respbr,ients w~re eneou>aS'ged to give two responses to the questions "~ghat do
Zhe [~'ords cp~n s~ace mean to ?rcu?" and "How would yo[l describe the character
of ex~stin~ open space in Saratoga?" ~s'. Verheyen stated that each resDens~
was coded, content analyzed and sorted into categories which the firm felt
wo,_:!~l capture the esse~ce of the respondent's thoughts.
~esp ~n,~ents were asked to rank, in order of importance, eight open space
-~_ments Findings showed respondonto ranked natural undisturbed hillsides
as most irnDartant. fo]lowed by neighborhood marks and recreation parks.
Unde~'eiope~ laGc~ ~as r~nked as fourth rr~est i~portant. .
The next portion of t.h& survey dealt with potential planning p,~licies for
ut ~ .. . Some of the findings were shown as
Acquisition of ~few areas for !ow usage: 54% very desirable. 35% somewhat
des~'abIe; seehie preservation: 62% very desirable. 26% somewhat desirable;
ac:cuisitior~ of active ~:~se Barks: 34~ verX desirable, 48% somewhat desirable:
aoquisit. ion of several smaller parks instead of one large community park:
very] desirable 38~ somewhat desirable and acquisition of closed schools for
recreation facil:ities: 38% very desirable 35% somewhat desirable..
.,
Findings 'regarding utilization of available areas were shown as follows:
· Joint Use School Parks; 55% very desirable, 32% somewhat desirable;
utilj~zatiOn of' present water courses for trails: 45~ very desirable 28%
some~hat desirable utilization of railroad lands for trails: 35~ very
desm_ab_e 34% somewhat desirable; and existing d'edicated private property
easements for trails: 28% very desirable, 34% somewhat desirable. - .~
In r&~ponse to ~r. Jef~ Schwartz of Saratoga, and ~rs. TuCker, ~s. Verheyen
said~the findings are fairly conclusive there is support for these policies.
A!th~,ugh exact calculations have not yet been made, she believes the
confidence level is greater than 95~ with a possible margin of error of 2 or
~-rding ~o~icies for development standards and annexations. findings were
as fSllcws: Estab. lishing stricter controls of private property: 39% very
d
· -_s table, 26% somewhat desirable; and annexation of County lands: 31% very
desirable, 3Z~ somewhat desirable.
I .
Read
~ ~-~ ~n~-.support of o~en space acquisition: 8~% ver~ willing. 12~ somewhat
wi!t~ng; appr~ximately256~ indicated they use open space areas in and around
the City once a month. Or more frequently, 44~ indicated they use it less
f qQently or '.nO or. Regardin~ private, corporate or organizational
money for parksi r~creation open space and improvements:. 37~ strongly agreed
36~ ~'omewhat a~eed; park user fees: 36~ strongly a~reed, 30~ somewhat
a~r _.&d: .res
~ . ident~tax t~rou~h a bond measure: 22~ strongly a~reed, 44X
s,. e~hat S~reed'i
1-' ','
Re~d
~aF i~ g wi:llin~ness to pay for open space and park improvements, 38~ very
wi!lin~ tO pay 65./per year for the acquisition and maintenance of one acre
of markland~ 3~ somewhat willing; 100/year for two acres: 2S~ very willing,
~' ,.~' 150/'year three.acres: 14% very willin~. 23%
:':';2g ~crn.what Willing; and for
~ omewh at wi.! ! i
;
,.
~4r:r-kshop MirA' tea 7 ~ ~ -) ' !)%~ Page 3
' f I m ~I,'s Gi! ,an, Eros explained that the
RespcTu~ing to a question rD .... m Mr. lie
~ ~ :~"~ ~.'ere based on average real estate costs in Saratoga. In response ~,-'
a ~-'{~as: ~<,t~ from Mr. Siegfried, Ms. verheyen said her firm ._~ to perform
' a ~tivitie
~=~,~+]v re_lard!rig appro::xmately ~ recreation facilities and s
~'~i ~-~ ~ were asked if they atrong!y supported or somewhat supported
~uDt]vities S,r~,~e of the responses ino!uded walki. n~' or h~k~n~ trails:
-'~ ..... ~ - ~' ,~ ~ ~ +ies for teens: 67% very strongly support;
2,Dmmunity aollvltles: ,..,.~ very strongly support; playgrounds: D:3% very
;trc.aj~'~,' support; running and ,jogging trails: 49% very strongly support; bike
~ '-'-, = ........... ~ ~"~'
~.4.n~J.b a[ic _~J : strongly support; family oionio areas: very
s;trengly suppers: and ecological preserve: 36% very strongly support.
~ ~ , diseuesion ensued regarding the way the survey questions pertaining
Some ,3f t. h3se pr'esent felt, that the question of how much money the residents
wc, u]d be wii iin~ to s~end should have been asked before the question of what.
residents wanted thaz money to be sperxt
M~' ~'Uum Reddiek, ~ Larchmont Avenue spoke in behalf of the retired senior
, . '2389
?esSdents ~n Sara%aga. ~e ~oS~e6 ou% ~ha% manX ~Sve o~ a fi:¢e6 ~noome
*-~,* even a:l '-~'~'~ .......... of 10 .%0 month can ~reatly affect them.
vi~'e M.r,-or [<oh!or felt. that the findings of the survey show at least 50%
th~ - .....;'--.~:- said it
........... was very desirable to retain undeveloped land in open
space arid a desir~bility for walking and bike trails.'
Cnunf [Im'~nbjr Ar:derson expressed concern re~arding there being a
lack nf a cross-tie between the question of what residents want vs. what they
are wi fling to pay for.
?{r's. Burger felt that consideration must be given to establishing a City
poLiey around the data and that thought must be given to whom the open space
ms to be acquired from.
In response to Mr, Jeff Schwartz, Mrs. Verheyen said a test pilot, of the
surve ........ conducted among approximately 20 persons. Mr. Schwartz questioned
tke wording of the multiple choices for the questions regarding respondent's
willingness to pay.
Mr. Reddick asked if the City of Saratoga must annex the hillsides to protect
them.
Mrs. Caldwell asked what the survey indicates regarding policies other than
acquisition such as zoning and other land use policies. Mr. Emslie reported
that support for stricter development control was very high.
B. PARKS AND TRAILS MASTER PLAN
Mr. Peacock reported that because it has not been updated for more than ten
years. it was recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission and decided
by the Council that the City's Parks and Trails Master Plan would be updated
as part of the open space issue. The City h'as retained the firm of Wallace
Robert. s & Todd to undertake a master plan amendment and redevelopmerit program
:~r. Paul Rookwood of Wallace Roberrs & Todd reviewed an outline of the tasks
and work layout which will be followed in this endeavor. The open space
iscussions and decisions will be incorporated into that plan. He
distributed copies of the Scope of Work.
The initial phase, beginning this eveniag. will be a survey and analysis tc
understand the issues of the City. The remainder of the survey and analysis
work will focus on review of the current inventory of the City's open space,
and specific plannin{ context of the City which will
L~or! .',~hop Minutes 7 .,"] 0./90 Page 4
fcrm oomponents of the s*.,~,- an lmportan't D;lrt Of t¼iS Phase '~zill be to
C,i=r~CL~Ct a :series of co.mmunitl~ work:shops t, hrou~'hout the planning process to
=ocus ,nr~ specifio issu'~s ~ather' m_lblie r'~D~'~n$~ d~v~t~~ ~o~],s and
c,i,.jj.t tl]_s, st:an{lards and alternative o!a;~:~' for direeti~sns the Cite,' may move.
A a-C/s~ ,.~ the -City's~ finaneia] capability and other strategies for.
accu~is!.tion Will form 'fin important component ~nf the' plannir~g pr'bc. ess.
!i~h~t' el-that, ~ prog'ram will be developed into a s~ries of orioritized
acti3or~s related tc the' C. ity~ s capabi 1 ities and wi 1 ! h~ phased over time.
The Joroeess w,i] i be completed with a series of meetings with Commissioas and
the"'~:cuneil. ' The firm will be involved in an findirect dialogue of feedback
~ L . ~ '~' ' of
.tom, ideas d~e]qoeu,. Th_. SDeCI~IC scheduling v;erkshops will he dove!once
and ',-de~iuat. e mubl ic notice will be ~iven.
C. .iTHE NEE'SON PBDFERTY
M~. Pesic, o~.k reported that the Nelson property issue was the ~'enesis for this
open ~' space issue. He gave a brief history cf this oreperry ~nd 'pointed out
Acqu sit~on Of the property was considered and a Committee was ~ormed by the
~..,_unc~l w~n.~f re,mowed the Nelson property and subsequently pr'epared a report
'~ ~ '~ ~.0ncluded that~ in the
.ounrz.~ absenee of establishing an overall philosophy
olt fo~' ~utu~e ~cquisitlen of open space~ it would not be consistent
,i~h[eurreut. City pollgy to identlfy a particular property for lrnmediate
n,t~r'chase. ,Therefore. Counci! declared that ~he open space policy shou!d be
k~.ec~:sc; :m~e, b(e=sor: property was placed on the estate market for sale.
the 'tlity'Qas eb~cerned it may lose a future opportunity to acquire that
prop]~rty= Cou~eii auth'erized staff t,o obtain an appraisal to tierermine the
fai~"]~arket value in t0day's market. The appraisal has been obtained and
c_nf,ldential until _.he' Clty decid_s whether or not it will enter into
negotiations fo~ purchise of the property.
..[ j-' .
The key 'qhe~tion as the Clty moves through the open space process is how this
type[ of:-p~opert~- fits knto the overall City' priorities. Mr. Peacock reported
ther~ was much-discussion and favorable comment that the City should create a
..~uc~ .zonal experienE~e~.
M~. 'Don Macrae 6f Saratoga presented a letter dated July 7 1990 expressing
suppbr~ bf the purchas~ of the Nelson property and which included a potential
map/,layout of the Nelson Garden whlch be believes all of Saratoga will
benefit' from., f ::
Mr. Reddick questioned. why the City spent 2~00 for the appraisal of this
property' whlch is in the Wl!liamson Act.
Di. se~sQion ensued regarding' whether other- properties had been considered for
a;qu~ms~tlon. Counc. mlmember Anderson stated that the ~eachers in the area
Swan re~orted that in one year the attehdance of the Saratoga Community
Gardens '~a~ indreased from 750 to 6,000 school chlldren wbich shows there
Vice-Mayor-Kphl~r stated that tonlght marks the beginning of development of
the list e~,priorities. for acquisition of properties such as Nelson Gardens
Workshop Minutes 7/10/90 Page 5
8. DISCUSSING A PLAN FOR ACTION
A. REVISING THE CITY'S OPEN SPACE PHILOSOPHY - HIERARCHY OF DECISIONS -
PHILOSOPHY, GOALS, POLICIES, OBJECTIVES, STRATEGIES, ACTION PLANS,
AND IMPLEMENTATION
Mr. Peacock reported that he and' the Planning Director have spent much time
considering options regarding the open space acquisition issue. He said he
I hoped no one would feel constrained by the issue of financing. There are
certain circumstances under which the City will purchase property but it is
also true there are other circumstances where City money may not be
required for acquisition. Mr. Peacock briefly reviewed options other than a
parcel tax.
Mr. Emslie reviewed a chart summarizing the issues which staff believes
forms the framework for discussions: defining open space; prioritizing open
space for acquisition; discussing visual asthetic open space vs. recreational
use open space; Williamson Act lands; school sites; sphere of influence and
green belt; tools and implementation; private easements; developing
standards; clustering; and other techniques for land use policy; financing;
private land trusts; public financing (assessment district financing, general
obligation bonds, higher construction taxes); transfer development rights;
dedication of open space through imposition of zoning requirements; park
dedication fees; rezoning of school property; acquisition of school sites;
use of agreements with school districts, public utilities; private open
space; comprehensive trails and paths plan; and implementation of how
clustering would occur.
Mr. Emslie explained the sphere of influence and the current annexation
policy. He stated that staff is preparing a study to analyze extending the
City's sphere of influence beyond its current boundaries.
__Councilmember Monia dicussed his concerns regarding the many changes which
may occur with policy changes.
Mr. Peacock stated that this endeavor to revise the City's open space
philosophy and policies must begin with an understanding and consensus of
what that future policy should be. Emphasis will concern the hillside areas
and the matter of what should be included in the future sphere of influence
must be focused on. Once the policy framework is in place, staff will be
able to implement those policies. Mr. Peacock said he would like to see a
policy created which will encompass all the issues of open space, parks and
recreation, and conservation so there is a comprehensive scheme to achieve
those objectives.
There was CONSENSUS TO SET THE NEXT PLENARY SESSION ON OPEN SPACE FOR
JULY 31, 1990 AT 6:00 P.M. AND THAT THE MEETING WILL BE NOTICED EXTENSIVELY
FOR COMMUNITY INPUT.
The City Council adjourned to its regular meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Minutes Clerk