The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-27-2007 Planning Commission Packet"004 'C1 i r O O N N C." ti CITY OF SARATOGA REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION NAME Z?av a elu ADDRESS 4--r�4124) y SUBJECT S.oiur ofl44) AGENDA ITEM NO. 0 DATE 6 -2 -v `j TELEPHONE NO. g%G 7- 6 27 TIME OF DAY CARD IS FILLED OUT G,'sb P c -;o -v'7 (Please read instructions on reverse side) ANY PERSON DESIRING TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Please approach the rostrum and, after receiving recognition from the Chair, state your name and address and process to comment upon the agenda item you wish to discuss No member of the audience will be called upon to address the Commission on any subject during the time that the members are discussing the item. Following discussion, and prior to a vote, the Chair will recognize any member of the audience who wishes to speak on the subject. Speakers will be recognized in the order these cards are filled out. You are welcome to attend all Planning Commission meetings, and your interest in the conduct of public business is appreciated. J CITY OF SARAT REQUEST 'I` Ten DRESS THE PL ' NING CCMIISSS'ION u ►�A �%-k -� -1, :_m �' SUBJE - ° \ ca— AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE TE EPHONE NO. V TIME OF DAY CARD IS FILLED OUT ' (Please read instructions on reverse side) ANY PERSON DESIRING TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Please approach the rostrum and, after receiving recognition from the Chair, state your name and address and process to comment upon the agenda item you wish to discuss No member of the audience will be called upon to address the Commission on any subject during the time that the members are discussing the item. Following discussion, and prior to a vote, the Chair will recognize any member of the audience who wishes to speak on the subject. Speakers will be recognized in the order these cards are filled out. You are welcome to attend all Planning Commission meetings, and your interest in the conduct of public business is appreciated. CITY OF SARATOGA REQUEST TO ,ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS //! &�el SUBJECT lJ y-!�? AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE_ TIME OF DAY CARD IS FILLED OUT TELEPHONE NO. 5;� -7- w j (Please read instructions on reverse side) ANY PERSON DESIRING TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Please approach the rostrum and, after receiving recognition from the Chair, state your name and address and process to comment upon the agenda item you wish to discuss No member of the audience will be called upon to address the Commission on any subject during the time that the members are discussing the item. Following discussion, and prior to a vote, the Chair will recognize any member of the audience who wishes to speak on the subject. Speakers will be recognized in the order these cards are filled out. You are welcome to attend all Planning Commission meetings, and your interest in the conduct of public business is appreciated. CITY OF SARA WA ADDRESS T ANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS t'1 b rN SUBJECT Y - I AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE b ` `� ^ TELEPHONE PO. _7 TIME OF DAY CARD IS- FILLED OUT a� �2, (Please read instructions on reverse side) ANY PERSON DESIRING TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Please approach the rostrum and, after receiving recognition from the Chair, state your name and address and process to comment upon the agenda item you wish to discuss No member of the audience will be called upon to address the Commission on any subject during the time that the members are discussing the item. Following discussion, and prior to a vote, the Chair will recognize any member of the audience who wishes to speak on the subject. Speakers will be recognized in the order these cards are filled out. You are welcome to attend all Planning Commission meetings, and your interest in the conduct of public business is appreciated. CITY OF SARATOGA REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ),/14 . � Z<0-' A44 u -e, SUBJECT 0 7 Z37 v AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE Z TELEPHONE NO. TL 7 TIME OF DAY CARD IS FILLED OUT (Please read instructions on reverse side) ANY PERSON DESIRING TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Please approach the rostrum and, after receiving recognition from the Chair, state your name and address and process to comment upon the agenda item you wish to discuss No member of the audience will be called upon to address the Commission on any subject during the time that the members are discussing the item. Following discussion, and prior to a vote, the Chair will recognize any member of the audience who wishes to speak on the subject. Speakers will be recognized in the order these cards are filled out. You are welcome to attend all Planning Commission meetings, and your interest in the conduct of public business is appreciated. • • DATE: PLACE: TYPE: ROLL CALL CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION SITE VISIT AGENDA Tuesday, June 26, 2007 — 3:30 p.m. City Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Site Visit Committee .. SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1. APPLICATION #07 -281 2. APPLICATION #07 -237 3. APPLICATION #07 -214 4. APPLICATION #07 -216 13601 Saratoga Avenue Saint Andrew's Parish 14407 Big Basin Way Metro PCS 14395 Big Basin Way Graff 12015 Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road Graff The Site Visit Committee is comprised of interested Planning Commission members. The committee conducts site visits to properties that are new items on the Planning Commission Agenda. The site visits are held on the Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing, between 3:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. It is encouraged that the applicant and/or owner to be present to answer any questions that may arise. Site visits are generally short (10 to 20 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the Public Hearing. During the Site Visit, the Planning Commission may only discuss items related to the project. The agenda does not allow any formal votes or motions on the proposed project or other matters. The Site Visit is a fact - finding meeting where the Commission may discuss the item and ask questions from or hear statements from members of the public attending the Visit. No comments made during the Site Visit by the Planning Commission are binding or required to be carried through to the formal public hearing where actions will be taken on the proposed project. RTC SITE VISITS \Site Visits\2007\SVA 062607.doc CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION 0 AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers /Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Manny Cappello, Rishi Kumar, Robert Kundtz, Susie Nagpal, Linda Rodgers, Yan Zhao and Chair Joyce Hlava PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of May 23, 2007 Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 13, 2007 ORAL COMMUNICATION: 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 staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staff. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION TO STAFF: REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on June 21, 2007. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS: If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application' with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15- 90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARINGS: All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants /Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. APPLICATION #07 -237 (503 -24 -079) METRO PCS, 14407 Big Basin Way — The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to install a wireless facility on the roof of the existing office building at the above location. The proposed facility includes panel antennas, a screen for the antennas, and an equipment cabinet. (Shweta Bhatt) 2. APPLICATION #07 -281 (393 -25 -028) Saint Andrews Parish, 13601 Saratoga Avenue; - The applicant requests Design Review Approval to install a 36 square foot illuminated monument sign. The proposed sign would be 4.5 feet tall and 8 feet wide and be located near the entry driveway. Zone District: R -1- 20,000. (Chris Riordan) PVC Agendas\2007\Agn 062707.doc 3. APPLICATION #06 -214 (503 -24 -034) Graff (Conoco Phillips/Tosco Marketing), 14395 Big Basin Way; - The applicant requests approval to replace the existing signs at the 76 gas station.. The project will include an illuminated free standing gasoline price sign. The site is located in the Commercial Historic (CH -1) zoning district. The project was continued from December 13, 2006. (Suzanne Thomas) 0 4. APPLICATION #07 -216 (366 -22 -023) Graff (Conoco Phillips/Tosco Marketing), 12015 Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road; - The applicant requests approval to replace the existing signs at the 76 gas station. The project will include a variance for two illuminated free standing gasoline price signs. The site is located in the Commercial - Neighborhood (CN) zoning district. (Suzanne Thomas) DIRECTORS ITEM: None COMMISSION ITEMS: None COMMUNICATIONS None ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Wednesday, July 11, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers /Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 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 ctclerk @saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102- 35.104 ADA Title II). Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on June 21, 2007 at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us If you would like to receive the Agenda's via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to planning @saratoga.ca.us NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us • PVC Agendas\20071Agn 062707.doc s q� MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 PLACE: Council Chambers /Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Rodgers called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cappello, Hlava, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao Absent: None Staff: Director John Livingstone, Contract Planner Heather Bradley, Associate Planner Shweta Bhatt and Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ELECTION OF NEW CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Chair Rodgers advised that it is time to select the new Chair and Vice Chair. Commissioner Nagpal said she wanted to take this opportunity to thank Chair Rodgers for her leadership as Chair over the last year as well as the service of Commissioner Cappello as Vice - Chair. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Cappello, the Planning Commission elected Commissioner Hlava to serve as the next Chair. (7 -0) Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hlava, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, the Planning Commission elected Commissioner Kundtz to serve as the next Vice - Chair. (7 -0) Outgoing Chair Rodgers handed over the gavel to incoming Chair Hlava. Chair Hlava: • Stated that she is honored to serve as Chair. • Explained that serving as Chair takes time and the fact that she is retired gives her the time necessary to fulfill the duties. • Added that she was on the Commission previously 30 years ago while still working. • Extended recognition to the other Commissioners for their time commitment given in service as members of this Planning Commission. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of May 9, 2007. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Kundtz, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of May 9, 2007, were adopted as submitted (6- 0 -0 -1; Chair Hlava abstained) ORAL COMMUNICATION There was no oral communication. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director John Livingstone announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on May 17, 2007. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Chair Hlava 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). CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar items. PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 1 APPLICATION #07 -028 (503 -25 -013) Sloan /Zambetti Family Trust, 14639 Big Basin Way: The applicant requests Design Review, Use Permit and Variance approval to construct a mixed -use development consisting of two residential apartment units in one building at the rear of the site and a separate two -story commercial building at the front of the site. Each apartment is a 1,250 square foot, two- bedroom unit and the commercial building is 2,348 square feet (with a 974 square foot basement). The maximum building coverage is 28.8 percent of the site. The maximum height of the proposed buildings is 26 feet. The lot gross size is 17,187 square feet and the site is zoned CH -2. The Variance application is necessary to allow an exception to the require 20 percent of net lot area dedicated to pedestrian open space coverage. Contract Planner Heather Bradley presented the staff report as follows: • Informed that items received late are being distributed to the Commissioners this evening. There are 18 notification. letters, 15 from people on Big Basin Way. Seventeen are in support of this application and one is opposing. The person in opposition is the adjacent property owner who expresses concerns over the size of this project, finding it to be too large in comparison to her building as well as too close to it. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 3 • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review, Use Permit and Variance approvals for a mixed -use development on a 17,187 square foot property located on the east end of Big Basin Way in a CH -2 zoning district. • Described the proposed development as consisting of two residential apartments of 1,250 square feet each; a commercial building at the front of the site that is 2,350 square feet with retail and office uses. Additionally, there is a three -car carport. • Explained that the lot coverage is 29 percent and the maximum height is 26 feet. • Added that the project incorporates an American Farmhouse architectural style that includes a metal roof and wood siding, windows and doors. While a metal roof is not common in the Village, staff has determined that it will be compatible in the proposed non - reflective finish. • Said that the Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the existing residence on the site and made the determination that the structure is not significant. They support the demolition of said structure. • Said that two trees would be removed from the site. One is just a stump that has no value. The other will be replaced with a tree of equal value. • Stated that an open space area would be established adjacent to the creek. The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) reviewed this aspect of the development and found that as this open space area is located further than 50 feet from the creek no additional permits are required from them. • Reported that this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA. • Suggested that the Planning Commission accept the proposed open space area near the creek that would render the Variance request unnecessary. • Recommended that the Commission grant the Design Review and Use Permit approvals. Commissioner Zhao asked Planner Heather Bradley to reiterate what percentage of dedicated open space is required. Planner Heather Bradley replied 20 percent. Commissioner Nagpal expressed confusion since the Plan Sheet A -2 reflects this area and still a Variance was advertised. Planner Heather Bradley explained that staff did not have this plan sheet at the time that the project was noticed so the Variance was included in the notice. Commissioner Nagpal asked for verification from Planner Heather Bradley that the Variance is not required now. Commissioner Kundtz asked if the 20 percent of required open space must be contiguous space. Planner Heather Bradley replied that the 20 percent of proposed open space for this project is not contiguous and that Code does not specify that it must be contiguous space. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer confirmed that this interpretation of Code is correct. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 4 Director John Livingstone said that the Commission does have the right to look at this proposed open space to see if it makes sense, to determine the practicality of that open space. Commissioner Zhao asked about an access, path from Big Basin Way to this proposed open space area. Planner Heather Bradley. advised that there is an access path that is located on the property to the west of this property that is a dedicated path to this area. There is signage on the sidewalk that identifies this as an access point. Chair Hlava said that there 'is an access that is a big and well- maintained stairway. There are benches in the existing open area. The open area will be made bigger and will include more benches. Commissioner Nagpal asked if requirements are met here.. Planner Heather Bradley replied yes. Commissioner Nagpal inquired if the metal roof would be a non- reflective, .matte -type finish. - Planner Heather Bradley replied yes. Chair Hlava opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Gene Zambetti, Applicant and Property Owner: • Said that he and his wife own this property. Informed that they originally submitted an application to the City of Saratoga in January 2006 • Added that their project was reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission as well as by three different staff planners, Historic Consultant Leslie Dill, a geologic engineer, a civil engineer and Arborist Barrie Coate. He said that his architect islom Sloan. Thanked staff and the.City Attorney for their assistance. • Added that it has been a long time since June 2005, when they first began developing the ideas for this project. . • Pointed out that these apartments will offer housing opportunities for professionals such as firefighters and /or teachers working in the community. Mr. Tom Sloan, Project Architect: • Said that this is the first true mixed -use project in Saratoga that combines retail, office and residential uses on one site. • Added that this could be considered a "pioneering" project that can inspire other projects in the future. • Opined that the Village needs an adrenaline shot right now. • Explained that while 60 percent coverage is allowed in this zoning, they are proposing only 28 percent coverage. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 5 • Reminded that 20 percent If the site consists of public open space with common areas that are open to pedestrians. • Added that the front yard setback counts as open space. • Reported that the open space provided exceeds the requirement by 94 square feet. • Assured that this is high quality and visual open space with an arbor that welcomes people onto it. There is an interior courtyard. The gateway arbor provides shade. • Informed that half of the property at the back will remain undeveloped, benches notwithstanding. • Said that artistic paving will be incorporated. • Advised that even though the side yard setback requirements are zero, they are providing between five and 18 -foot setbacks. • Said that their proposed location of the driveway allows the existing sidewalk to terminate gracefully and also preserves an oak tree. • Stated that they used the housing to the east as inspiration and that this project represents a village within a village with three uses on one site. • Explained that they are calling this the "Toll Gate Project' that includes a galvanized "cool' roof, a wraparound porch, off -white siding that respects the surrounding buildings. The carport provides covered parking for the residents in the evening and available customer parking during the day. Commissioner Rodgers asked the reasoning for the choice of a metal roof. Mr. Tom Sloan said that it is considered a "green" roof. He added that they wanted architecture that popped and gave a little personality. He reminded that they also provided a whole list of green features for this development. Commissioner Rodgers asked how this is a green roof. Mr. Tom Sloan replied that it keeps the temperatures in the house cooler during summer and cuts down on heat gain. Ms. Holly Davies, Big Basin Way: • Explained that she owns the building next door to the east. • Said that this proposed new building would be very different from her building. It would be massive and located only 10 feet away from her building. • Compared her building of 1,400 square feet to this new one that is 900 square feet larger. • Pointed out that the City required her to relocate her driveway when she developed her building. • Suggested that it would be best to have this property keep its driveway where it currently is located. • Stated that this building would dwarf her building and thus detract from her building. • Said that the appearance would be more attractive if the project could be mirror imaged to open to the east and not to the west. Commissioner Nagpal asked Ms. Holly Davies what she prefers. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 6 Ms. Holly Davies said that she prefers that the building sit on the west property line and not on the east property line and that the driveway stay where it is right now. Chair Hlava asked Ms. Holly Davies if her building is an office. Ms. Holly Davies replied yes. It was_constructed in 1991 as a-law office for her husband. Mr. Martin Fenster, Big Basin Way:. • Explained that he is a tenant in the law office. • Echoed the comments of Ms. Holly Davies. • Said that having a large building right next door would crowd and detract from the appearance on the street. The corridor between the two properties will be narrow. • Added that this proposal includes lots of square footage. • Said that he does endorse bringing more people to the Village. • Pointed out that the site would provide only three parking spaces. • Stated that he feels this project would look better if it were mirror imaged to the project on the other side. • Said that the story poles make this look like a big and massive development.. Commissioner Zhao asked Mr. Martin Fenster the height of his building. Mr. Martin Fenster replied 26-feet. Commissioner Zhao. pointed out that 26 feet is the same maximum height as is proposed with this project. _ Mr. Martin Fenster said that his building is smaller and has visual space on both sides. Commissioner Rodgers asked if it would help if the carport were more opened. Mr. Martin Fenster said that the retail /office building at the front is what appears massive. He added that a basement is going in here too. Commissioner Rodgers asked for verification from Mr. Martin Fenster that the carport is not an issue for him. Mr. Martin Fenster said that it would be better if the large office /retail building were to be moved to the other side of the lot. Commissioner Rodgers asked if Mr. Martin Fenster is concerned about impacts on his communications since there appears to be a satellite on his property. Mr. Martin Fenster replied no, not at all. Ms. Andrea McGhee, Big Basin Way: • Said that she too echoes the points made by Ms. Holly Davies. • Stated that the front building is massive and "on steroids." Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 7 • Said that the roof should be reconstructed. • Expressed concern over having apartments on this property. • Pointed out that the existing public open area near the creek already draws kids and reported that she recently saw teenagers making love in that area in sight of her window. Activities there include drugs.and more. • Added that developing impedes on the beauty and gracefulness of the creek. • Reiterated that this building is too massive. • Stated her concern over the metal roof as there is no other metal roofing in the Village and it is not fitting in this area. Ms. Mary Boscoe, Big Basin Way: • Stated that she was just recently made aware of this proposed development. • Said that while there are story poles up there was no mesh netting installed. • Advised that her property is on the other side of the Davies property. • Added that this building will cut off mountain views and light from her property. • Said that she didn't believe that this project is supposed to be so bulky. • Expressed concern over parking, saying that there is not much available. • Said that she does not understand why she was not made aware of this project until so late. Mr. Tom Sloan: • Said that he has heard the word "massive" used to describe this project several times this evening. • Reminded that Code allows up to 65 percent in coverage of the net site while they are covering only 25 percent of that with buildings. • Said that the retail /office building drew its inspiration from the adjacent office building. When completed, it will mirror the office building to the east with the exception of dormer projections. • Pointed out that their building has a footprint that is just 2,000 square feet total. • Said that they chose not to locate the building further to the west as it would have created safety hazards in that the driveway would be situated at the centerline of the crosswalk and would also require the cutting of an 18 -inch diameter oak tree. • Stated that their office building would be located next door to an office building with the same setback and building outline. He added that the upper floor of the office has quite a bit of area with a low plate line at six feet. • Assured that this is not a massive structure. • Said that while he loves to work out issues when he sees one, he does not know what he can possibly do here. • Advised that they would like to keep the roof over the carport. He said that exposed parking in lieu of covered parking is not a good idea. • Reiterated that these are not massive buildings but rather are pretty small and represent 25 percent coverage where 60 percent is allowed. • Commissioner Kumar said that flexibility on the carport might dissipate the issues of bulk. Mr. Gene Zambetti: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 8 • Stressed the importance of providing covered parking for the two apartments. • Pointed out that there is a metal roof on the Sam Cloud building. • Agreed that there are sometimes problems occurring down by the creek. • Reminded that a previous proposal had more square footage with underground parking. • Said that on November 10, 2006, a 500 -foot notification letter was sent._ __ • Explained that an interior designer was interested in relocating from another Village location to this new retail space. Commissioner Cappello asked about the current driveway. Mr. Gene Zambetti said that it on the far east side. Commissioner Cappello asked why a tree would be threatened if the existing driveway location were retained. Mr. Gene Zambetti said that the existing driveway is 13 -feet wide. It must be 16 -feet wide to meet current standards and thus would require the removal of a tree valued at $12,000. Commissioner Rodgers asked if the carport lines up with the attorneys' parking lot to the back of their building. Mr. Gene Zambetti replied yes. Commissioner Rodgers asked if the roof on The Basin is metal. Mr. Gene Zambetti replied no, it is tarpaper made to look.like metal. Commissioner Nagpal asked how much of the 2,300 square foot commercial building would consist of retail space. Planner Heather Bradley said that the first floor consists of 1,160 square feet, the second floor consists of 1,188 square feet and the basement is 974 square feet. Commissioner Nagpal asked what percent is represented by retail space. Planner Heather Bradley replied approximately 25 percent. The first floor is retail. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the designer who is interested in retail space. in this building would require a separate Use Permit. Planner Heather Bradley replied that retail is permitted there without a Use Permit. Commissioner Zhao asked if there are windows in this new development facing the Davies building. Tom Sloan said the bottom left corner of the retail /office building, Mr. To , behind that is the carport 9 and behind that are the apartments. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 9 0 Commissioner Zhao said that windows looking down when j Commis 9 just 10 feet apart are awfully close. Mr. Tom Sloan said that the setbacks for both properties are identical at five feet. The office building to the east is one -story at a 26 -foot height. Their proposed building is a two -story at a maximum height of 26 -feet. Commissioner Nagpal asked for clarification from staff that the adjoining building with office on the ground level would not be allowed today. Planner Heather Bradley replied that is correct. Commissioner Cappello asked Mr. Tom Sloan to elaborate on the proposed non - reflective metal roofing material. Mr. Tom Sloan said that it has a grainy surface rather than baked on paint so that it cuts down on the reflection. Commissioner Cappello asked if it is included on the color board. Mr. Tom Sloan replied yes. Chair Nagpal asked Mr. Tom Sloan if he has an actual material sample this evening. Mr. Tom Sloan replied no. Chair Hlava closed the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Rodgers: • Stated that she likes the concept of three separate structures. They look more historic and in -keeping with that part of the Village. • Added that she has no problem with the covered carports to serve the apartments in the back. • Said that the front building needs more discussion, particularly the rooflines that are massive and unbroken and will block light, sun and views. She said that she has a problem with that incredible expanse and is on the fence about it. • Recounted that when she lived in Oregon she had two neighbors with meal roofs. One roof looked nice and the other was awful. • Said that perhaps a slightly darker color for the metal roof could help. • Said that she likes the driveway where it is proposed and" said that she has no problem with two properties having back -to -back driveways on either side. Keeping the driveway in place would create issues with the crosswalk and result in the loss of an oak tree. • Said that she loves the way the house has a wraparound porch that helps create .atmosphere. • Added that she likes the fact that there is no picket fence. • Stated that her only concern is the metal roof and its proposed light color as well as the issue of bulk as it appears from the neighboring properties. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 10 Commissioner Kundtz: • Said that he has views that are consistent with Commissioner Rodgers'. • Added that he likes the mixed -use concept and has experience with saltbox designed .architecture. • Said that tampering with the roof is a trade off with the use of the building. • Agreed that the building has excessive bulk. Commissioner Kumar: • Agreed that Commissioner Rodgers summarized the issues well. The single -most issue is bulk. • Reminded that the project is being developed at one -third of what Code allows. • Added that a mixed -use project is helpful and beneficial to the community. • Concluded that he is okay with the project. Chair Hlava: • Said that she has issues including the driveway and the fact that the Davies were required to move their building location. • Said that it makes sense to have the driveway on the side where people are living. • Pointed out that the official policy of the Village is to encourage apartments. • Added that these look like lovely apartments that will draw high -level tenants. • Agreed that the 20- percent requirement for open space has been resolved. • Stated that the project is not much bigger than the one next door and is smaller than the condo project to the left. • Reiterated that this site could max out at 60 percent coverage and they are only proposing 28 percent. In fact, they are using so little of the lot. • Stated that she does.not think it will look too big, it will look fine. • Said that she is unsure about the metal roof but that Tom Sloan has done many buildings in Saratoga so she trusts his experience. Commissioner Cappello: Advised that he could make the Design Review findings as this project fits in very well. • Said that he is fine with the roofing materials as long as they are non - reflective. • Opined that the project is not massive in any way and is compatible with adjacent buildings. • Stressed the importance in preserving the oak tree. • Added that keeping the driveway in its present location would conflict with the crosswalk if it were to remain in use and be enlarged as required. • Said that he - appreciates the comments made and feels for the concerns raised but said that more issues would be created if the building placements were relocated. • Expressed support for this project. Commissioner Zhao: • Echoed the comments made by the other Commissioners. • Pointed out that the setback requirements have been met and the driveway as proposed is the best option in regards to safety. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 11 • Stated that the proposed architectural style is nice and will enhance the Village image and the other buildings in the Village. • Advised that she is not sure about the metal roofing and what makes it more "green" than another material. She said she would like to learn more about it. • Said that she will support this project. Commissioner Nagpal asked about the claimed loss of views of mountains. Commissioner Rodgers said that from the condos, as seen from Mary Boscoe's unit, there was a limited view of mountains. Commissioner Nagpal asked about the suggestion from the Heritage Preservation Commission regarding the reuse of windows and whether that provision is included in the conditions of approval. Planner Heather Bradley replied yes, those windows would be re -used inside of the building. Commissioner Nagpal said that she would like to see more retail in the Village. She added that the more people who live there, the more vibrant the Village would be. She said she will support the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review Approval and appreciates the fact that no Variance is now required. Commissioner Rodgers reminded that the 2002 Housing Element called for apartments in the Village rather than condominiums. Director John Livingstone reported that the last update of the Housing Element takes into consideration the City's "fair share" of housing. To meet that requirement, a mixed -use zoning designation was created that restricted the corresponding housing units to apartments and also set limits to the size of those apartments. This is housing that the City is required to facilitate in providing. Commissioner Nagpal said that the roofing material is hard to envision but said that she is willing to go with the general consensus. Commissioner Rodgers reiterated that she had two neighbors with metal roofing; one was a good example and the other a bad example. She said that the color proposed here matches the materials on the attorney's building next door. Chair Hlava said that she wanted to advise those watching from home this evening that a packet of letters was distributed to the Commission in support of this project. Commissioner Nagpal agreed and said that about 10 to 15 letters of support were provided. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer advised that Conditions 6 and 7 under Community Development Department should be amended to begin with the following text, "Prior to obtaining a Building permit, ..." Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 12 Commissioner Rodgers added that the Chair's name should be updated on the resolution. Commissioner Nagpal asked if just one resolution is required. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer replied correct: Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Rodgers, the Planning Commission granted Design Review and Use Permit Approvals (Application #07 -028) to construct a mixed -use development consisting of two residential apartment units in one building at' the rear of the site and a separate two -story commercial building at the front of the site on property located at 14630 Big Basin Way, with the modification to Conditions 6 and 7, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Hlava, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 2 APPLICATION #07 -231 (APN 397 -18 -105) Miller /Chien, 19600 Farwell Avenue: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct a new two -story , .single- family dwelling. The dwelling will consist of approximately 5,573 square feet of floor area. The existing accessory structure will remain on the parcel. The height of the structure will not exceed the 26 -foot height limitation. The lot size is approximately 43,068 square feet and the site is located in the R -1- 40,000 zoning district. Design Review approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15- 45.060. (Shweta Bhatt) Planner Shweta Bhatt presented the staff report as follows: • Explained that the applicant is seeking Design Review Approval to allow. the demolition of an existing two- story residence and construction. of a new two -story residence. A volleyball court will also be modified to create a sport court. • Described the proposed materials as beige stucco, dormer windows, carriage style garage door and a slate roof. • Said that several neighbor template letters were received in support. No additional comments have been received. • Reported that the arborist inventoried 18 trees. All are to remain and will be protected with fencing during construction. No landscape plan or additional planting is being required around the sports court due to existing mature screening landscaping. • . Said that the project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA and that required Design Review findings can be made in the affirmative. • Recommended the.adoption of a resolution approving this project. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 13 Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that one tree looked dead and another looked almost dead, which would create a gap in the screening landscaping around the sport court. She asked if there is any staff recommendation on that. Planner Shweta Bhatt said that staff noticed that condition at the site visit She added that the applicant is not proposing to remove these trees at this time but the Commission can require additional plantings. Chair Hlava opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. Park Miller, Project Architect: • Explained that his clients are out of town this week. • Said that his clients want to replace an existing two -story home. • Added that there is existing mature landscaping. • Pointed out that the new structure will appear as a single -story when seen from the front yard. The home will have a traditional feel utilizing quality materials and will fit in within the context of the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Rodgers asked about one of the accessory buildings and if it would be removed. Mr. Park Miller advised that the plan is for an interior remodel with the addition of a powder room and wet bar. Chair Hlava closed the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Kundtz said that this is a well- designed project. He said that he likes the existing home but can see that flow and lifestyle are driving this update more than anything. He pointed out that this is a wonderfully deep lot and said that he can make the required findings. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out condition 3 that requires proof of legality of the accessory structure or to obtain necessary permits. She asked about conditioning the improvements to the sport court screening. Director John Livingstone said that since the landscaping is existing and mature, he thinks that the landscaping is okay as it is. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer added that City Code already requires landscaping around sports courts to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Cappello, the Planning Commission granted Design Review Approval (Application #07 -231) to allow the construction of a new two -story single - family residence on property located at 19600 Farwell Avenue, by the following roll call vote: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 14 AYES: Cappello, Hlava, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 3 Chair Hlava advised that she must recuse herself from this item, as she is a stockholder in Comerica Bank. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that he too must recuse himself as he also has investments with this bank. Commissioner Kundtz assumed the gavel to preside as Acting Chair for Item No. 3. APPLICATION #07 -311 (APN 393 -02 -003) Polcyn, 13000 Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road: The applicant requests Design Review' Approval to add an external automated teller machine (ATM) and a nigh drop to an existing commercial building in the C -N district. (Susanne Thomas) Director John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows: • Explained that the applicant is seeking a minor design modification to the exterior of a building to allow a new ATM and deposit area as well as a few awnings. • Added that a major - upgrade of all the landscaping on site will be done to fill in the bare spots. • Distributed color boards, one depicting blue awnings and the other beige awnings. • Explained that the applicant prefers the use of the blue awnings while -staff is recommending use of the beige awnings. • Recommended approval of this application. Commissioner Cappello asked what color the awnings are currently. Director John Livingstone said there are none in place currently.- Acting Chair Kundtz opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 3.. Mr. Steve Polcyn, Project Architect: • Said that the reason for the ATM is that the bank is in the process of upgrading banking services to include 24 -hour access. • Assured that the new ATM and awnings should blend in seamlessly. • Added that there are no graphics proposed on these awnings'. • Said that they are prepared to install upgrades to the landscaping. . Commissioner Rodgers asked about security cameras and lighting in the parking lot that will not impact adjacent residential - properties. • • • Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 15 0 Mr. Steve Polcyn said that the cameras would be in place as well as security lighting. Commissioner Rodgers asked about additional lighting in the parking lot. Mr. Steve Polcyn said that there are no plans to upgrade the existing parking lot lighting. Commissioner Rodgers asked about the possibility of shielding lighting from the residential neighbor. Ms. Kimberly Smith, Applicant's Representative: • Advised that all banks must comply with AB244 compliance guidelines. Acting Chair Kundtz pointed out that there is an adjacent resident with concerns about existing building lights visible from her home. Mr. Steve Polcyn said that Comerica would be happy to replace that fixture of concern with one that will angle straight down. Mr. Anthony Morici, Property Owner's Representative, expressed full support for this project. Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Anthony Morici if the property owner is in charge of lighting or are the tenants. Mr. Anthony Morici said that shields are possible and they are willing to work to help alleviate the issue. Commissioner Nagpal asked if it is true that the ATM unit is blue. Mr. Anthony Morici said that the surround to the ATM is what is blue. Commissioner Nagpal asked if it would be possible for this surround to be beige. Ms. Kimberly Smith advised that the blue is the nationwide corporate identity color. She added that they hope to be able to use it here. However, if it must be changed, it could be. Chair Rodgers closed the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Commissioner Nagpal: • Said that she prefers the beige awning color. • Added that the fixtures on the east and south elevations should be shielded in such a way that they don't adversely impact the adjacent residential property to the rear. • Said that since the blue ATM surround is part of their logo and branding requirements, she can support it staying blue. Commissioner Zhao said that she is okay with the blue awnings, as they look nice. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page 16 Commissioner Cappello said that he likes the beige awning but is okay with the blue ATM surround. He suggested a condition to change out the light fixtures. Director John Livingstone suggested that the lighting be conditioned to. be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director to allow staff the opportunity to work with the concerned neighbor. Commissioner Kumar said he was okay with either.the blue or beige awnings. Acting Chair Kundtz said that he prefers the beige awnings, as the corporate blue is a bit much. He said that the more subtle tone works better. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rodgers, seconded by Commissioner Kumar, the Planning Commission granted Design Review Approval (Application #07 -311) to allow an external automated teller machine (ATM) and a night drop to an existing commercial building on property located at 13000 Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road, amending Condition 4 to require that the final landscape and lighting plans are subject to approval by the Community Development Director, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Hlava Chair Hlava returned to the Chambers. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS There were no Director's Items. COMMISSION ITEMS - Commissioner Rodgers reminded about the June 6th joint Study Session with Council Director John Livingstone said that the agenda is on "green" issues. Commissioner Zhao asked how long the Study Session would be. Director John Livingstone said he is not yet certain and cannot confirm this evening: Commissioner Nagpal said that Study Sessions tend to run an hour.. Commissioner Rodgers added that on June 6th, Council would consider the Update to the General Plan. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2007 Page. 17 0 COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communications Items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Kundtz, seconded by Commissioner Cappello, Chair Hlava adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:15 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of June 13, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • • O MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 PLACE: Council Chambers /Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Hlava called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cappello, Hlava, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers (arrived shortly after the roll call) and Zhao Absent: None Staff: Director John Livingstone, Senior Planner Chris Riordan and Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES — Regular Meeting of May 23, 2007. The correct set of minutes for the meeting of May 23, 2007, was not included in the packets so these minutes will be reviewed and adopted at the next regular meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATION There was no oral communication. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director John Livingstone announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on June 7, 2007. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Chair Hlava 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). CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar items. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 1 Application #07 -299 ' (366 -57 -003) Cheadle, 20865 Wardell Road, .Lot C: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct an approximately 6,800 square foot, two -story single- family residence with an attached garage. The maximum height of the proposed residence will not be higher than 26 feet. The net lot size of the parcel is approximately 1.4 acres and the site is zoned Hillside Residential. (Chris Riordan) Chair Hlava advised that Item No. 1 would be continued to a date uncertain. PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO.2 APPLICATION #07 -297 (517 -22 -024) Whitney, 15374 Madrone Hill Road: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct a new two -story single - family .dwelling. The dwelling will consist of approximately 5,124 square feet of gross floor area and a basement. The height of the structure will not exceed the 26 -foot height limitation. The gross lot size is approximately 2.acres and the site is located in the R -1- 40,000 zoning district. Design Review Approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15- 45.060. (Chris Riordan) Senior Planner Chris Riordan presented the staff report as follows: • Distributed a materials board to the Commission. • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review Approval to allow the demolition of an existing single- family residence and construction of a new two -story, single- family residence with an attached garage and basement. The parcel is zoned R -1- 40,000.. Explained that the existing pool and deck would remain. • Said that the parcel is accessed via a private drive that takes access from Madrone Hill Road. • Stated that dense vegetation exists and screens the parcel from the road. • Said that - traditional materials including. clay roof tiles, stained wood main and garage doors and red shutters will be incorporated. • Said that the project includes the removal of seven protected trees, three of which are redwoods and one oak tree. These trees have been appraised at a value of $10,060 and replacement trees of equal value will replace the removed trees. • Recommended approval: Commissioner Rodgers asked if the FAR exceeds that allowed. Senior Planner Chris Riordan replied no it is just under the maximum allowed FAR. Commissioner Zhao asked how the topmost height_ is. measured. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 3 Senior Planner Chris Riordan said that it is determined by averaging the lowest and highest existing grade on site. Chair Hlava opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. David Whitney, Project Applicant and Property Owner: • Said that they have followed the City's Residential Design Guidebook when designing this house. • Said that the natural hillside's contours are not changed and the new house will very much appear similar to the existing structure as the second story is pulled back. • Added that natural materials and colors would be used. • Said that little of the roofline is visible from the road and that precautions have been taken to avoid any privacy impacts. • Advised that they would utilize smaller trucks when clearing demolition materials to avoid any damage to Madrone Hill Road. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the use of smaller vehicles for removing demolished materials would be conditioned. Senior Planner Chris Riordan said that staff is not proposing that as a condition but that the issue was raised at the site visit and the applicant proposed this option as a solution to that concern. He said the Commission could elect to add this requirement to the conditions of approval if it chose to do so. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that the house includes several fireplaces and one of them is wood burning. She said that many people incorporate a wood - burning fireplace because they want the edifice of a wood - burning fireplace that might not be possible in a gas fireplace. She asked Mr. David Whitney if it might not be possible to put a gas fireplace in place of the proposed wood - burning one. Mr. David Whitney said that this fireplace is an architectural feature. He added that it is not anticipated that this wood - burning fireplace would be used for burning wood all that often but he is not sure if a gas fireplace would achieve the same edifice as a wood - burning one. Commissioner Cappello asked if the double doors depicted on the rear elevation mean that this house has a walkout basement. Mr. David Whitney replied correct. The elevation is within the 42- inches allowed for a basement at that point. Commissioner Cappello asked at what point a basement element becomes a story. Mr. David Whitney replied that the finish grade for a basement cannot exceed 42 inches to remain a basement versus a floor or story. Commissioner Kumar asked Mr. David Whitney f he had considered building around the trees Y 9 proposed for removal. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 4 Mr. David Whitney replied that they had tried to do so. However, due to the proximity to the structure and the foundation design, it brings the basement close to these trees. He added that the structure in the back as well as the elimination of a porch means that the oak tree in the back might be preserved, if possible. Chair Hlava pointed out that the oak tree is indicated for removal. She asked for clarification that the plan is to try and keep that tree. Is that correct? Mr. David Whitney replied yes Chair Hlava closed the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Chair. Hlava pointed out that a number of letters of support from surrounding neighbors have been provided in the packets. Commissioner Nagpal added that one neighbor came to the site visit to express full support of this .project. Commissioner Rodgers said that she can make all findings and is happy to support this project. Commissioner Kundtz said that he can make the findings as well. He thanked Mr. David Whitney for voluntarily putting up story poles and said that this new home would be a dramatic improvement over the existing structure. Commissioner Cappello expressed appreciation for the summary of energy conserving features planned for this home. Commissioner Nagpal pointed out that the two- dimensional drawing does not do justice to how nicely this home would actually fit onto the site. She added that she would not suggest conditioning the use of smaller trucks to remove demolition debris from the site. She, suggested adding a condition that calls for the effort to save Tree #19 if at all possible. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Cappello, the Planning Commission granted Design Review Approval (Application #07 -297) to construct a new two -story single - family residence on property located at 15374 Madrone Hill Road with the added condition that attempts be made to preserve Tree #19 (oak) if at all possible, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Hlava, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 5 ! PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO.3 APPLICATION #07 -384 (397 -01 -012) St. Archangel Michael Serbian Eastern Orthodox Church, 18870 Allendale Avenue: The Planning Commissioner has scheduled a Use Permit Modification and /or Revocation Hearing regarding Use Permits 29 and 147 applicable to St. Archangel Michael Serbian Eastern Orthodox Church, which is currently the subject of allegations of violation of those Use Permits issued in 1961 and 1968 respectively. Use Permit 29 authorized the St. Michaels Archangel Serbian Orthodox Church Center. Use Permit 147 authorized a parish residence, classroom addition and future sanctuary. City Code Section 15- 06.540 defines a Religious Institution as a use providing facilities for organized religious worship and religious education and other activities incidental thereto. City Code Section 15- 55.100 authorizes the Planning Commission to modify or delete any conditions of a use permit or impose any new conditions if the Commission makes certain determinations. City Code. Section 15- 55.110 authorizes the Planning Commission to revoke a use permit upon a determination that the holder of such use permit has failed to comply with any condition thereof or has violated any applicable provision of the City Zoning Regulations. The Planning Commission will consider whether or not to modify or revoke Use Permits. 29 and /or 147. (Jonathan Wittwer) Chair Hlava provided an overview of how discussion of this item would be conducted this evening as follows: • Explained that this is a City- initiated action so there is not specific applicant and /or appellant. • Said that a neighborhood representative would be given 10 minutes to make its presentation. Someone from the church would subsequently be given 10 minutes to provide its position. • Added that following both sides' presentations, the public hearing would be opened up for comments from the public, with three minutes available to all interested speakers. • Suggested that if members of the audience agree with points made by a previous speaker, they should state that fact without completely restating that point that has already been made. • Stated that at the end of public commentary, both sides. would be given five minutes for rebuttal comments. • Asked that all present be kind and fair. • Stated that there shall be no shouting out comments, yelling, booing and /or clapping. Demeanor shall be as professional and business -like as possible. • Suggested that if others in the room agree with a particular point being made, they can raise their hands to demonstrate that support. • Stated that what this Commission is seeking is a clear understanding of what is allowed on this property and to clarify what uses the Use Permits would allow. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer presented the staff report as follows: • Said that the City Attorney's Office prepared the report for this item, as there are lots of legal issues to be considered. • Advised that a lot of emails and other communications have been received and distributed to the members of the Commission. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 6 • Cautioned that many may believe that tonight's action is about the church's proposed new sanctuary for which story poles are currently displayed. However, the staff and environmental review for that project are not yet complete. • Clarified that this evening's hearing is about two Use Permits issued for this church. One was issued in 1961 and the other in 1968. • Reminded that properties are zoned for specific. uses. This property is-zoned for single - family residential uses. - Single- family residences are allowed in this zoning designation with a Use Permit. Other uses are allowed in single - family zoning districts with issuance of a Use Permit. Such other uses include religious institutions, nursing homes, Police stations and Fire stations. For such other uses, City Code requires issuance of a Conditional Use Permit whereby conditions are imposed on that use. • Advised that the two Use Permits issued for this property did not include conditions of approval. The Use Permit in 1961 allowed for a church center. It was not defined any more than that and no conditions were imposed. The Use Permit in 1968 was for a classroom addition, home for the father and a new sanctuary. However, the new sanctuary was never built. Only two conditions were imposed. One was to limit members to 100 and the other was to require issuance of a Design Review. Permit. • Explained that a Use Permit brings certain rights regarding the start and continuation of a use. Normally a City cannot take rights away, unless a modification or revocation of said Use Permit is processed. • Added that the Planning Commission has continuing jurisdiction and can modify Use Permits as well as revoking them. • Pointed out that this staff report is recommending modifications and not revocation. A revocation is harsh and usually only occurs after several attempts to correct problems and achieve compliance has occurred. • Stated that staff has not found violations that rise to the level where revocation is warranted. Pretty strong evidence is required to support a revocation. • Said that modifications attempt to take care of problems and clear up any lack of clarity for a Use Permit without sufficient conditions. • Said that a definition of a religious institution can vary. It can include religious worship and /or education as well as incidental uses to that. • Added that.there are divergent views on what uses are incidental on both sides (the neighbors and the church). Specific areas of divergent viewpoints are what must be focused upon. • Recommended combining the Use Permits and making them clearer including clarifying what is incidental uses versus what is not considered an incidental use to a church. Typically, it would be an activity that can be directly related to the church; would not involve rental to the public; would not involve catering for .public events; must be intrinsically religious; directly related to religious activities (i.e. fellowship meetings); and predominately fundraising for the church itself. • Said that in 1968, the City informed the church on what activities would be considered directly related to the operations of the church. • Advised that in 1998 and 2001, the City advised the church not to involve rental of its facilities to the public. • Added that the church has, indicated that they understood that and would comply.. They may have crossed the line in some cases in that respect. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 7 • Said that this evening's staff report has been made public. • Informed that Federal law requires that in land use decisions concerning religious use that there be recognition of religious practices and to provide equal treatment. • Stated the issues: • Operating a restaurant by virtue of the sale of food with--a County restaurant permit. Added that one website lists this church as a restaurant although the church has no power over that listing but rather it is simply based on the fact that they have the restaurant permit. He reminded that per City Code one cannot have a restaurant in a single - family district but can have a church but pointed out that many churches have food service for its members. One has to evaluate if this food service is open to the public or if it is simply an incidental use for a church. He said that he believes this is incidental but that fact should be made clear in the Use Permit so that line is not crossed. • Allegation of the sale of alcoholic beverages. He said that the church does have an ABC (Alcohol Beverage Control) permit to serve alcohol. • Allegation of the operation of a catering business as part of the ABC licensing process. The licensing process is required to allow service to members and /or guests of the church for service of food and /or alcohol on site. • Allegation of the operation of a public dance hall and conduction of public dances. He said that this church considers the dances to be a part of their orthodox religion. They may have gone over the line sometimes because their dances have included country dancing. o Allegations of parking concerns and the fact that the adjacent property, also owned by this church, is being used for church overflow parking. • Allegations of operating a bookstore without a permit. This can be seen as an incidental use of the church as the "bookstore" is a kind of closet that is primarily stocked with religious books. He recommended that this not be found to be a bookstore. • Allegations on signage on site. One is a structure that consists of two posts with a piece of plywood attached that shows a depiction of the proposed new church facilities. This is something the City encourages to demonstrate to neighbors what construction is proposed. This is a proper feature. Additionally there is a cross and identification sign, both of which are illuminated. Neither has a permit. The cross could be considered a sign or not a sign. A freestanding sign is not allowed without a permit. He recommended that the church be given 60 days to produce the permit it believes was issued, get a new permit or remove the sign. • Allegations of noise and disturbances to the neighborhood and inappropriate hours of operation. He advised that the City was called out and did not find a violation of the Noise Ordinance with a sound reading that was taken. He recommended limiting the hours on site, including how long would be allowed for wedding preparations on site and only for members of this church. Hours should be imposed for activities on site including limits on how early events /activities can start and how late they can last. Chair Hlava asked about special services such as an early- morning Easter service or late isnight Christmas service. She asked if it would be possible to specify such events in the conditions of approval. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 8. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer replied yes. Commissioner Nagpal asked what the ramifications might be if conditions imposed for a Use Permit are not met. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that there are a number of possible ramifications. That is the benefit of a Use Permit. It is much easier to enforce a use if there are conditions of approval. Types of ,enforcement available include a citation (criminal); notice of nuisance; a civil lawsuit and /or bringing the Use Permit back to the Planning Commission for possible .revocation. Commissioner Nagpal asked if it is possible to require compliance monitoring to bring a use back for review. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer replied yes. Commissioner Nagpal asked for clarification about the recommendations to deal with the parking issue. She asked if one option is to change the residential parcel into a quasi - public parcel. Director John Livingstone advised that the General Plan states that a quasi - public land use designation - is required for a church use. One option might be to make the adjacent residential parcel belonging to the church into a part of the church property. This . would require a change in the General Plan land use designation from residential to quasi- public. Commissioner Nagpal sought verification that the Use Permit under discussion is for the church site and not the adjoining residential property owned by the church. Director John Livingstone replied yes. Commissioner Rodgers asked if a Measure G election would be required prior to processing an amendment to the General Plan to change the land use designation . of the residential parcel to quasi - public use. Director John Livingstone replied yes. Chair Hlava: • Pointed out that the issue of overflow parking was raised during the site visit. • Asked if there is a condition proposed for the Use Permit on overflow parking. • Stated that no church in Saratoga has a sufficient number of parking spaces for all of its .large events. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that the application pending for the new church sanctuary does not show the residential parcel being used for parking. The plan does appear to show adequate parking. He added that the Commission could require.a plan to be developed for dealing with overflow parking. 0 Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 9 Commissioner Rodgers said that fences may not solve the problems raised and she asked what kind of fence is proposed. Director John Livingstone: • Said that the condition requiring a fence is intended to solve the problem of the adjacent residential property owned by the church being used on a regular basis for church parking. • Pointed out that there is a considerable amount of parking available on the church property at the rear. • Added that the fence is not designed as security fencing but rather just to keep the two properties separate. • Said that most parking lots are left open for convenience rather than having gates that are less convenient. Commissioner Rodgers thanked City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer for his wonderful report. Commissioner Zhao asked if it is a violation if the owner of the second parcel, a residential property, is willing to allow parking on their property. Director John Livingstone said that if that adjacent parcel is actively used for church uses, it should function as such and be reviewed as such. That adjacent residential property is owned by the church but functions as a single - family residence. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer pointed out that the City Code for single - family residential zoning has a list of allowable accessory uses. That list does not mention use of a residential property as a parking lot. Commissioner Kumar asked how one defines religious events, activities and fundraising. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer: • Said that the Planning Commission can go into more detail. • Added that the numbers and types of religious events and activities are infinitive. • Advised that staff has tried to come up with four identifiers as to what is incidental or not. Commissioner Kumar asked about the list of activities provided by the church and the fact that the neighbors don't believe that list is complete. Commissioner Zhao asked how many violations have been reported since this church's priest sent out a 2001 letter to the neighbors. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that an email from a neighbor identified 32 that they felt were violations. He added that one event, a model railroad program, was listed but did not actually occur. Commissioner Kumar said that public dances occurred in the church. The church considers these dances to be church related orthodox dances. He questioned whether it could be supported to.have alcohol served at such dances. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 10 City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that decision would be based on whether such a use is determined to be incidental or not. Commissioner Kumar said that fine - tuning is required on the issue of service of alcohol. Commissioner Rodgers said that she wanted to put on the record the fact that she has spoken to a number of - people regarding this situation. She said that she has received numerous emails, calls and faxes. She has. spoken with neighbors as well as parishioners. She said that she also visited the parking lot as well as one of the church dances. Chair Hlava said that all of the Commissioners have gotten hundreds of emails both for and against the church Use Permit. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that if any Commissioner learned anything from these communications that is not included in -the record but would be important to the decision - making process, that information should be disclosed now. Commissioner Rodgers .said that the County offers a free mediation service to which she referred the neighbors and the church. She said that she spoke with the mediator regarding the mediation process but did not participate in the. mediation. Commissioner Kundtz said that many of the - independent communications received dealt with the proposed Design Review for-the new church that will be reviewed in the future. There was nothing that is "relevant to tonight's discussion of the Use Permit. .Commissioner Nagpal asked about a list of churches in Saratoga with liquor and food service. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that -he believes that there is no other church that has an ABC (Alcohol Beverage Control) liquor and restaurant permit. Chain Hlava said that other churches have commercial kitchens and asked what the difference is." City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that per City Code a restaurant permit from the County is required." That is the smallest level permit that one can get in order to be able to, serve food to others. Director John Livingstone: • Explained that the City requires that social halls and other such ,gathering places to have a commercial kitchen, which in turn requires that the County issue a restaurant permit. • Said that such a kitchen is required whenever food is sold and/or served free to others.. • Advised that a commercial grade kitchen permit is called a restaurant permit. .Chair Hlav"a opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Mr. Bernie Mills, Neighborhood Representative and Resident on Sara Oaks Court- Advised " • Advised that he has resided in Saratoga since 1999. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 11 • Said that there are concerns that the draft resolution does not go far enough. • Reported that so far the City hasn't been able to do much in response to complaints. • Added that the neighborhood is not against the church whatsoever. • Pointed out that he has personally been involved in churches since the day he was born and was a member of a church in Southern California that had 10,000 members. • Assured that this is not an "us versus them" situation. • Added that he wants the church to be able to practice as they see fit. • Said that the neighborhood has specific requests and that additional requests will be made directly from members of the neighborhood. • Said that neighbors would like to be involved in the Use Permit process together with the City and the church to come up with something that works for everybody. • Listed some items desired by the neighborhood as follows: o Maintain the limitation of a 150 seat maximum. o Cease all non - religious activities on the property. o Require the church to surrender its alcohol and restaurant catering licenses. o Prohibit on -site catering. o Prohibit food sales. o Prohibit the sale of liquor. o Specify exactly how many and what specific functions are permitted and no more than two special events a year that end at 8 p.m., which must be of a religious nature. o Adhere to the City Code Article 4- 15.010(c) 3 that clearly states that only two dance functions are allowed per year. o Require adequate paved parking so that no overflow parking occurs outside of the church property and that includes 18390 Allendale Avenue, along with any of the surrounding neighborhood streets. o Variances should not be allowed to extend the allowable impervious coverage. If any Variances occur, they should be more restrictive and not less. o Require that a sound wall be installed around the property to protect the adjoining residential properties from noise, litter and vandalism problems. o Enter into discussions with the church, City and neighbors to craft a Use Permit. • Stated that even today many neighbors were unaware that this hearing was going to occur. • Said that this Commission is going to be hearing from neighbors, including some emotion. • Asked that the Planning Commissioner please hear their comments and not just the emotion. • Stressed the importance of considering the impacts on the neighbors as a result of this church use. • Agreed that fairness on what is happening from church to church should be considered. • Said that he has five children and must practice fairness between each of his five children. • Asked that this matter be looked at and taken very seriously. • Suggested that the City implement the requirements they have raised. • Expressed appreciation that the consideration of the new building has been discontinued until this issue of the Use Permit can be resolved. Commissioner Cappello asked Mr. Bernie Mills if he has a written list of the items he has raised this evening. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 12 Mr. Bernie Mills replied yes. Commissioner Kundtz asked Mr. Bernie Mills if he could offer a definition of what is a non - religious activity. Mr. Bernie Mills: • Said that other neighbors can speak to this better than he can. • Suggested that dance. classes with participants from outside of the church become more of a class and less of a religious activity. • Said that non - religious activities are those activities offered to folks from outside the church community. • Agreed that this becomes an issue of judgment. Commissioner Kundtz agreed that the fact this is a judgment issue is what has brought this matter before the Commission tonight. He asked Mr. Bernie Mills if he could offer any other types of activities that might not be considered religious. Mr. Bernie Mills again said he would defer to other neighbors. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Bernie Mills if he has seen the conditions proposed, including for dances. She.said that she thinks this addresses what he has said but asked if he agreed: Mr. Bernie Mills said that some issues are not adequately addressed but admitted that he did not yet have sufficient time to do a point -by -point comparison. Commissioner Nagpal pointed out that the condition limiting seating to 150 maximum seats was imposed for a sanctuary that was never built so does not apply. Mr. Bernie Mills said that the concern is that anything larger than that is going to have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. Cormissioner Rodgers: • Reminded that the proposed new sanctuary is an issue that will come up at a future hearing and will consider size, location and other facts. However, that issue is not before the Commission right now. • Said that people from a large number of religions feel that dancing should be prohibited While others think that dancing is an integral part of the worship service. Still others think it is part of a cultural heritage that is important to their religious exercise. • Stated that this church appears to consider dance to be cultural but not part of the religious service. • Asked Mr. Bernie Mills if he considers that as exceeding the boundaries of religious activity for him personally or-for the neighborhood? Mr. Bernie Mills: • Replied yes, he would personally say it does, speaking for himself. is • Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 13 • Added that he came from a church that had two dances a year that were more social than religious events. They also had dances outside of the church facility. • Said that from his perspective and the way he understands this church, dances are more cultural than religious. Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Bernie Mills if he prefers not to allow cultural types of dances. Mr. Bernie Mills said that he is not saying that but would suggest a limit. Commissioner Kumar: • Thanked Mr. Bernie Mills for his suggestions. • Advised that the City is trying to work with all parties involved. • Added that some of the conditions proposed by the neighbors seem drastic. Mr. Bernie Mills: • Pointed out that alcohol and restaurant licenses are not typical of churches. • Questioned what happens when there is alcohol around? • Added that the issue is equity for the church as well as with neighbor concerns. • Said that limiting the number of functions helps creates equity with other churches in the area. Ms. Jolie Houston, Berliner, Cohen, Attorney for St. Archangel Michael. Serbian Eastern Orthodox Church: • Thanked staff and especially the City Attorney. • Advised that they have submitted letters to answer as many questions as they could and cooperated as much as possible including providing documents requested. • Said that this has been a thorough process for the church. • Stated that they support the staff report and conditions of approval proposed. • Pointed out that staff has concluded that there are no current violations. • Assured that they would comply with the City's recommendations regarding the use of the adjacent lot. • Added that a pending Use Permit request for a new sanctuary will address parking in the future. • Said that the focus tonight is any current violations and not past violations. • Reported that in 2006 there were no calls and in 2007 there has been just one. • Said that what is proposed here is an enforceable Use Permit. • Reminded that many allegations have been made but have not been proven and that the City has determined there are no use violations at this time. • Informed that there are many parishioners present this evening in support of the church but most will not speak this evening. She asked those present in support of the church to raise their hands to give the Commission an idea of the number. • Said that some restrictions proposed by the neighbors would impair the church's ability to function and would be against State law. Father, St. Archangel Michael Serbian Eastern Orthodox Church: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 14 • Reported that their church is a part of the family of Eastern Orthodox churches. . • Explained that they use wine for Eucharistic purposes. • Described their church is a Christ center, which shows its love for God and love for one another. Their church includes prayers and services for our country and government, even City government, as well as neighbors, every human being and the armed forces. • Said that when the, City needed a temporary library location, they offered their help although another temporary solution was found. • Explained' that one benefit of a church is to respond to need in the community including homeless, orphans and those who are victims of natural disasters. • Added that they have a long- lasting tradition of brotherly and sisterly fellowship and said that in addition to their Eucharistic celebrations, they have Sunday fellowship luncheons and special occasion events such as Christmas and Easter. • Assured that they try to be good neighbors. • Admitted that some of their noise generated might reach their nearest neighbors and he asks forgiveness for any such noise impacts. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich, Board President for St. Archangel Michael Serbian Eastern Orthodox Church: • Thanked the City for its diligence and time in reviewing the church's application. • Said that their church is a diverse parish with different social and cultural backgrounds. • Added that this church was established 40 years ago. Commissioner Kundtz asked Mr.: Radmillo Brozinovich for the current number of parishioners that are annual givers to this church. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich replied that there are approximately 100 active families. Commissioner Kundtz asked. what the percentage of the church's annual revenue is represented by the sale of food and alcohol. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich replied that this is a minor source of income. Commissioner Kundtz asked if it could be considered an incidental amount. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich explained that the service of food and alcohol is a matter of fellowship and being together. They don't make money on their Sunday luncheons but rather they probably lose money,'as they don't turn anyone away if they can't pay for their meal. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich how many of the church's parishioners . are Saratoga residents. She asked if the church is able to adequately park its parishioners on their church property for daily operations. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that their biggest events occur on Christmas and Easter. He. added that this past Easter he took special care and saw to it that no one parked on the adjacent church -owned residential lot. Everyone parked on legitimate parking spots on the , Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 15 church parcel and no one parked on the street. He said that this provides conclusive proof that they can accommodate their parishioners on their property. Commissioner Nagpal asked if this is a condition that the church can live with. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich replied in a sense, yes. He added that in a practical sense there might be an occasional need for overflow parking. Mr. Jerry DeYoung, Planning Consultant for St. Archangel Michael Serbian Eastern Orthodox Church: • Explained that a traffic report was prepared by Higgins & Associates in May 2007 and has been presented to the City as part of the package for the church's upcoming Use Permit for a new sanctuary. • Advised that this report indicates that there were 180 vehicles on Easter and that all were on the church site and the adjacent residential parcel and not in the neighborhood. • Added that only about once a year would the parking demand exceed parking available on site. • Said that the study by Higgins & Associates counted 112 people in a peak period on Sunday. That requires 65 parking spaces based upon an average number of people per car ranging between 1.2 to 2.3 persons. • Reported that the plan on file for the pending sanctuary indicates that 128 spaces would be made available to serve the church, which does not count any parking occurring on the adjacent residential church -owned property. • Reiterated that for the vast majority of events on site, there is adequate parking. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the church would be willing to put in the parking soon if this Use Permit is approved. Mr. Jerry DeYoung said that the parking that occurs on the adjacent residential parcel is a matter of convenience rather than need or demand. Commissioner Nagpal asked if there are parking spots on site to support the existing use. Mr. Jerry DeYoung said that one option to optimize parking on site could be the use of valet style parking. This is possible since all people arrive at the same time and parking could be directed. Commissioner Kumar said that he heard at the site visit that there is quite a bit of spillover parking onto the side streets. Mr. Jerry DeYoung disagreed and said that he saw no off -site parking on the day of the study. He said that on the other hand he did see people parking on church property to visit a residence across the street. 0 Commissioner Nagpal asked if parking is illegal on Allendale. Director John Livingstone replied that street parking is allowed. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 16 Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Jerry DeYoun to describe the role of dancing and how it 9 rY 9 9 relates to religious activities. Ms. Jolie Houston, Attorney for the church: • Said that the dancing involves dancing in circles and holding hands. It is not social pairs dancing but rather cultural group dancing. • Added that a parishioner is teaching youth dancing. • Said that this dancing is not Parents without Partners but rather is a part of the culture and religious practices of this church community. Snacks are shared and donations are requested. However, no one is turned away if they cannot pay. The dances are open to the public, which is a common practice of a church. • Reported that the circle of the dance is a symbol and that this dancing is very much tied to their religion. Commissioner Kundtz pointed out that neighbors have indicated what they believe are an acceptable number of events. He added that his own church keeps a 12 -month calendar of projected activities and asked if the church can show how many activities are calendared for the balance of the year. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer advised that Commission that he was distributing a 2006/2007 calendar that the church provided to staff. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that every Sunday there are activities after the worship service. Commissioner Kundtz asked if this could be considered a pretty active campus. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that most of the time not much is happening. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich if he could identify the most common hours of activities and when most of those activities are over. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that most regular events are done by .11 p.m. on weekends, 10 p.m. or sooner on weeknights. Dance events end by 11 p.m. Commissioner Nagpal asked the end time on Sundays. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that nothing occurs beyond afternoon or starts before 10 a.m. Commissioner Nagpal asked about the alcohol. Is it wine only or all types of alcohol ?. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich: • Said that they are licensed to serve all types of alcohol. • Added that this may be a more intense type of ABC license than is necessary as the church is functioning these days. • Advised that other liquor license options will be explored that may cost the church less each year. - Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 17 • Informed that they usually only serve beer and wine but that occasionally something else is served. Assured that this is not a public bar but rather the service of alcohol is simply a part of the church's fellowship activities. Commissioner Nagpal asked what the lesser version of an alcohol license might allow. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that one such ABC license is issued on an event basis. Commissioner Nagpal said that she is interested in hearing more about that option if it is available over a general liquor license. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that the option needs to be evaluated and revisited with the Church's Board and representatives from ABC. There would be a per event fee charged. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich if the church is willing to contemplate such a license. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that they would contemplate that option and try to switch if it works for the church's operations. Commissioner Kumar said that he has respect for alcohol used as part of religious dictate. He '40 asked what days of the week the dances are held at which alcohol is sold. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that wine and beer are served at the fellowship luncheons. At dance classes no alcohol is served. At the fundraising dances some food and drinks are served, both alcoholic and non - alcoholic beverages. Commissioner Kumar asked if wine is one type of alcohol that is imperative for a church to be able to serve. Mr. Radmillo Brozinovich said that they are entitled to serve it and should continue to be entitled to serve it. Rabbi Daniel Pressman: • Advised that he is the Senior Rabbi for Congregation Beth David located on Prospect. • Said that there is a breadth of activities that can be considered incidental for any faith community. • Added that faith communities worship, study, share social activities as well as cultural activities. They are houses of worship and schools of learning.. • Pointed out that faith communities do a lot for the community and help form the foundation of American life. They are an irreplaceable part of what makes Saratoga a good place to live. • Joked that his own faith cannot do anything without including food except for Yom Kippur. Commissioner Kundtz asked Rabbi Pressman if his q temple has a liquor license. P Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007. Page 18. Rabbi Pressman replied no. He added that they do have a commercial grade kitchen. They are more of a food -based than liver -based culture and never serve more than wine with meals.. Commissioner Zhao asked Rabbi Pressman if they have plans to get a restaurant license. Rabbi Pressman said that they have the necessary licensing to serve food from their commercial grade kitchen. He assured that none of the faith communities .is a restaurant like Denny's. Commissioner Nagpal asked Rabbi Pressman if they have no license for alcohol service. Rabbi Pressman said that they do not have a full liquor license. Commissioner Nagpal pointed out that either all faith communities must need such licensing or perhaps none do. Rabbi Pressman said that each faith -based community does its best to do what is required. He assured that they are not in violation in their food service safety, as they want to be good and law - abiding -neighbors. Mr. Dick Wheeler, Resident on Chester Avenue: • Said that his home is located about one -tenth of a mile from the church and that he is an 18 year resident of Saratoga. • Stated that he is against having a bar and restaurant located in his residential neighborhood. o Added that he intends no disrespect to this church, as he has been a member of St. . Andrews for the last 18 years. • : Said that he is against this Use Permit. Mr. Alex Pance, Resident on Williams Avenue: • Said that he moved into the neighborhood in 1999. He and his wife are professionals who are highly educated and raising two children. • Advised that his son will graduate from Saratoga High School tomorrow. • Stated that this is a. great community.: • Said that he wanted to be close to his Serbian church. • Added that he understands what the Planning Commission is trying to do. They are trying to reach accommodation for both sides.. • Cautioned against crossing the line and going into defining what a religious activity is supposed,to be. That is unacceptable. • Assured that they are trying as a community to address the issues being raised here. • Pointed out that he passes by five different churches each Sunday on his way to this one. Ms. Brooks Szozyga, Member of St. Nicholas Orthodox. Church: • Said that she belongs to another orthodox church in the community, St. Nicholas. She has resided in Saratoga since 1987. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 19 • Advised that her priest asked her to read his statement into the record. His comments said that the church is a meeting place for many occasions including feast days, baptisms, weddings,. funerals, memorials, and for special needs and regular services. It is the center and heart of the Orthodox Christian community. He said that he prays for the realization of St. Michael's dream. Ms. Sonja Cvitanich, Resident on Devon Avenue: • Said that she is a resident of Saratoga who is not a member of this church but who does attend services. • Stated that the church is a place for people to come together. • Added that the dances are cultural and traditional. • Said that they need to be allowed to have a place to gather. • Asked that the City not place so many restrictions that they cannot function. Mr. Bernie Mills pointed out that he had Assyrian line dancing at his wedding. Ms. Diane Drewke, Resident on Serra Oaks Court: • Said that her home is located quite close to this church. • Quoted that those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. • Pointed out that there have been problems with this church as neighbors. • Recounted that in 1998 a letter was sent from the church to adjacent neighbor Mrs. Wong. • Added that the Wongs were so impacted by the church that they moved out. • Assured that she is not against this church or religion but the neighborhood has the right to live in a quiet neighborhood. • Listed events that occur at the church site including a European Train event, Serbian panel and Remembering Home banquet. • Asked for assurances on the enforcement of any Use Permit approved. She asked what vehicle there would be for complaints and what the consequences of non - compliance would be. • Reiterated that she is not against any church. • Advised that the City has an Ordinance that limits public dances to two. These dances create problems for the neighborhood. • Reported that the reason the neighbors want to see the seating limited to 150 is because Council established that number in 1968 due to the parking situation. Commissioner Nagpal said that she has questions about violations. She pointed out that there haven't been as many in recent years. She added that the mechanism for enforcement is with the conditions of approval that will be imposed with this updated Use Permit. Ms. Diane Drewke said that the question remains how that enforcement is generated. Commissioner Nagpal said that it is based on calls received. 40 Ms. Diane Drewke said that quite a number of complaint calls have been received and Director Livingstone can verify that since he supervises the Code Enforcement staff. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 20 Commissioner Nagpal cautioned that complaints are not necessary violations. Ms. Diane Drewke said that she does not know how to get a violation. Commissioner Nagpal said that it appears that in recent years things have gotten better. However, at the present time there is no Use Permit that is sufficient to enforce. She asked Ms. Diane Drewke if there are any issues that are not addressed in the draft resolution for this Use Permit. Ms. Diane Drewke said that neighbors would describe their experiences with the church. Commissioner Rodgers said that this is an updated Use Permit for this existing church that had a lot of complaints in the past. The Commission will try to address those issues it can. She added that she is not hearing from anyone that there should not be a Use Permit issued. She said that she wants to hear from the. neighbors what they want to put forward. Ms. Diane Drewke said that the City already has an Ordinance that is explicit about only allowing two dances per year. She added that they are not allowed in a residential zone only commercial. Chair Hlava pointed out that that particular Ordinance is directed to a public dance. The _issue is whether dance lessons are considered public dance. Commissioner Nagpal said that Condition 9 deals with the dances. Mr. Danny Wong, Property Owner on Allendale Avenue: • Said that he is here tonight with his wife., • Advised that they moved to Allendale Avenue in 1986 and stayed in that house until early 2002. • . Explained that part of the reason they moved was that they could not live with the environment crated by activities of the church. • Added that there was a lack of effective management. • Said that they had to live with morning catering truck deliveries as early as 6 a.m., before they wanted to wake up in the morning. • Said that they reported this situation to the City's Code Enforcement. Added that some of the evening dances lasted beyond midnight. • Said that he kept the Sheriffs and Code Enforcement numbers on the refrigerator and they didn't deserve that. • Said that apologies and promises of better behavior were offered 'by letter in 1998 and again in 2001. At the 2007 mediation meeting apologies were again made by the current President of the church. • Asked how many apologies they are expected to accept. Said he seeks fairness to the neighbors. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Danny Wong to specify hours of operation he felt were reasonable for a church. • Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 21 0 Mr. Danny Wong said simply reasonable hours. Commissioner Nagpal said that she is asking for his direct input on operational hours since his home is located right next door to the church. She asked if 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. is acceptable. Mr. Danny Wong said that on weeknights he would prefer activities conclude before 10 p.m. Commissioner Nagpal asked about hours to 11 p.m. on Saturdays. Mr. Danny Wong said that this is too late from his standpoint. He added that there is lots of room for improvement on the City's complaint form and the enforcement process. Dr. Robert Barr, Resident on Camino Barco: • Said that some of what he intended to say has already been covered. • Advised that things have escalated including having peeping toms on the church property looking into his yard and pool area to the discomfort of his wife and daughter. • Said that his house has been egged and trash has been dumped on his front yard. Someone threw dirt on his daughter as she rode her bicycle in the backyard. • Reported that he added three extra feet of plywood to his back fence to protect his family. • Stated that alcohol service causes and /or escalates problems. • Suggested that this church be allowed only the same uses as are allowed at the other 15 churches located in Saratoga. • Pointed out that his church has potluck events with food cooked off site. • Said that he has three things that he would like to see the City do and handed a list to staff. Chair Hlava called for a break at 10:08 p.m. Chair Hlava reconvened the meeting at 10:18 p.m. Mr. Darryl Huff, Resident on Harleigh Drive: • Pointed out that this church has known for years that they were not supposed to allow church parking on their adjacent residential property. • Suggested the following parking conditions: • Parking is not allowed on the adjacent church residential property. • Build and maintain a permanent fence on the property line adjacent within 30 days of issuance of a new permit. • Provide sufficient church parking on the church property. • Provide shuttle service if necessary. • Include a monitoring and compliance program with penalties for lack of compliance with the conditions of the Use Permit. • Stated that the Use Permit must state what is allowed and what is not allowed. • Said that a painted line delineating the two separate properties is not sufficient since the church has a long- standing lack of compliance and years of consistent violations. • Added that the Use Permit must address the concerns of the surrounding neighbors. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 22 Ms. Rhonda Huff, Resident on Harleigh Drive: • Said that her home is located two- tenths of a mile from the church. • Said that neither liquor nor restaurant permits are permitted or conditioned uses in a residential neighborhood. It is unacceptable to excuse those uses in a residential .neighborhood. • Asked why this church is receiving special consideration when there are obvious public safety concerns. • Pointed out that no other church in Saratoga.has either a liquor or restaurant license. • Said. that. no preferential treatment should be given a religious organization over regular residents. • Said that the law should be followed and that this church no longer should be allowed to sell food or liquor in our neighborhood. Ms. Virginia King, Resident on Serra Oaks Court: • Said that dance lessons are held every Thursday and she believes they are public events and not religious events. • Pointed out that folk dancers are meeting there. • Reminded that the City Code limits no more than two dances a year at a church. • Reiterated that this is not part of a religious service. • Advised that there were five no -host bar parties that lasted until 10 p.m. • Added that. there are fundraising activities for the church held weekly. Mr. Nikola Milo Miljevich, Resident on Miljevich Drive: • Reported that he is hard of hearing. • Said that he had thought that this would be a meeting about a building permit for a new church. • Said that banquets have been held at this church for 47 years and all of the.sudden there is still discussion about food and liquor. • Reported that he was the President of the church when the social hall was constructed. A bar was put in place to raise money to pay the mortgage. Sometimes they made $4,000 a night... • Asked if he was against liquor and responded no, he has consumed a lot in his life. • Added that he does expect liquor to be controlled and that he is against a mobile bar. • Opined that this is not a Serbian church any more but more a Serbian social club. Chair Hlava pointed out that lots of Serbian families were part of the founding of Saratoga as evidenced by street names honoring those families such as Mr. Miljevich's. Mr. Steve Schwartzkopf, Resident of Camino Barco: • Said that he had heard rumors of neighborhood problems with this church when he first moved in. • Added that he sent emails and left voicemails at the City to learn more but there was a failure to respond. • Said that this appears to exemplify the way the City has dealt with this situation in the past. • Stated that the only logical remedy is to start this with a clean slate— a new Use Permit. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 23 • Said that the church should be afforded the same rights as other churches in Saratoga as well as the same restrictions. That way the rights of the neighborhood and church are protected. • Said the City should develop the conditions for the operation of this church with participation by the church and neighbors. • Advised that there is a lack of trust that has been fostered by the City's neglect in the past, which has caused a rift in this neighborhood. Ms. Muriel Mahrer, Resident of Myren Drive: Stated that this is her third house in Saratoga. • Added that she has been a Saratoga resident for over 50 years and raised seven children here. • Informed that she is not a member of this church but she has attended functions there including folk dance classes, which are a community event. • Cautioned against restrictions against this and other churches. • Pointed out that she has been to similar activities at other churches in Saratoga. • Said that she has left early from folk dance classes at this church and found that one cannot hear any noise from that activity outside of the building. The classes run from 7:30 P.M. to 10 P.M. • Suggested that members of the Commission come to class to see what happens. It includes both church and non - church participants. • Urged careful consideration on restrictions placed on this church. Jody Tatro, Resident on Chester Avenue: • Stated thanks for what the Commission does for the City as volunteers. • Suggested that all act as good neighbors. • Said that there should be limits to what can occur in a single - family area. • Added that they should be treated fairly. • Reported that St. Andrews has one big function a year that goes to 10 p.m. • Added that this church does not have to stop being a church but it has to be kept in check. Ms. Cheriel Jensen, Resident on Quito Road: • Said that there are landscaping and setback issues. • Said that this Serbian church is ragged and unfinished. Nothing there is planned. • Added that this is not a big enough property for the kind of uses being talked about. This land does not meet a Saratoga level of developed land. The physical environment needs to be addressed. • Added that it is not set back far enough from its neighbors. Mr. Arvin Engelson, Resident on Seagull Way: • Said that he is with Saratoga Federated Church as well as a Saratoga resident. • Reported that the two earliest faith communities in Saratoga were formed in 1872 and 1878 and were later merged to become Federated Church. • Stressed the need to "love your neighbor." • Pointed out that there are no social services provided by the City. Instead churches provide such services. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 24 • Said that in addition to religious activities, churches serve the community. If restricted to serving only its members, core convictions are overlooked. Added that 20 percent of those served by his church are not a part of the community. Commissioner Hlava asked if other issues embodied in this Use Permit's conditions are not workable for a church to function. Mr. Arvin Engelson: • Replied yes. • Added that one that limitation that causes concern is the restriction limiting the raising of funds only for operations of the church. Advised that their church raises and gives away more than its annual operational budget each year. • Said that both regional and global giving is encouraged. Good causes can be invented or found. • Added that they have a comm_ ercial grade.kitchen but is not sure what type of County license they have. • Said that with the aging of the population there is also a change of volunteerism. • Advised that if this Use Permit is too tightly conditioned it will create problems not embraced by any faith community in town. • Pointed out that' elementary schools don't even have enough parking for its events. •. Reported that Federated completed two major projects in the last couple of years. • Added that their project's design was improved by this body (Planning Commission) and our neighbors. Chair Hlava said that she belongs to the Foothill Club and Federated Church helps by providing- overflow parking. Mr. Charles Walton, Resident on Allendale Avenue: • Said that he is representing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. • Asked that the Commission consider how the activities of faith -based communities benefit the community. • Advised'-that his church does not charge for the use of its facilities. They allow the use of their field for sports such as soccer. They have a full -sized basketball court and indoor stage that they make available for community groups including Eastfield Ming Quong, Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, youth dances, Red Cross blood drives, 12 -step programs and emergency preparedness training. : They have a donation trailer and sponsor a humanitarian project where hygiene -kits are assembled. • Said that such activities benefit the whole community. Ms. Lisa Kurasch, Resident on Ravenwood Drive: • Said that she is not a parish member but is, a member of the neighborhood. • Stated that she has never heard noise from their activities. She has never seen a problem with street use or circulation or noticed any disorderly conduct at all. • Expressed her support for the renewal of this Use Permit. • Stated that she concurs with the conclusions of the staff report. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 25 • Said that social events help fund church objectives. • Pointed out that few conditions were imposed on St. Andrews. They are allowed Code exemptions, as should be St. Michaels. If uses were negated on one church site, they would have to be negated on others. • Said that it is wonderful to have exposure to other cultures. • Advised that St. Andrews is open to friends, neighbors and family members of parishioners. Mr. Robert Adzich, Resident of Cupertino: • Said that he has been a member of this church since he was born. • Advised that he is married with three small children. • Stated that churches are a vital part of our nation's communities. • Described how church has impacted his life over the years. • Explained that this church welcomed his parents into the community before he was even born. • Added that the church helped his father to find employment and helped build his parents' home in which they still live today. • Said that the church has had a powerful impact. • Recounted that his grandmother used to make the Eucharist bread weekly. Informed that while the church could not accommodate his wedding celebration, he was able to hold the reception for 400 people there with no disturbance. • Said that his children were baptized there and his grandmother's 100th birthday party was held at the church. At age 105, his grandmother passed. In her last years, she took great comfort in the daily visits from the priest of this church. • Concluded by saying this is a brief insight on the wonderful impact this church has held in his life. Mr. Tomo Galeb, Resident of Seagull Way: • Explained that he was watching this hearing on television and felt the need to come here to speak. • Added that it felt like an inquisition was going on here. • Said that St. Michaels holds both cultural and funding raising events. There is a lot of Serbians that need help. Over the years, money has been sent back to the old country instead of into the church building. • Suggested that when someone buys a house next to a church, it goes with the territory that activities will occur at that church. He compared this to the fact that -he lives next to a train track so he deals with trains. • Said that one person who placed restrictions on religious freedom was Hitler. Mr. William Brooks, Resident of Merrick Drive: • Said that he is not a member but rather belongs to another church. • Added that he is also not a neighbor to this church. • Said that a magnificent job was done on the staff report and he is impressed. • Stated that the report gives the tools, needed to deal with the concerns raised by the neighbors. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 26 • Pointed out that on page 6 it is clear that City Code provides that problems with a Use Permit can be brought back to the Planning Commission. • Suggested that this church be given the opportunity to prove itself. • Said that the modified Use Permit should be adopted with conditions. Any problems can be brought back to see if tighter restrictions are needed at that time. • Said that churches do more for the community at large and not just for their members. • Added that-if the church is willing to go with these conditions, they should be adopted. Mr. John Ivancovich, Resident of Hollister: • Said that he is a member of this church as are his parents. • Said that it has been tough to hear-the criticism. • Added that they have done their best and met with a mediator and the neighbors. • Stated that the issue is "beyond me" and he is not sure where it is coming from. • Assured that the church does not operate as a bar. A bar was constructed in the building decades ago but was also torn down years ago. • Stated that everything made by God is good. • Said that dance for children and adults is a good thing. • Said that they are trying to be good neighbors and provide the services that God asks us to provide. • Expressed hope that when they build their beautiful new church that all will feel welcome to come there on Sunday. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer read a letter into the record from Claire Ann Johnson who lives on Johnson Drive. She explained in her letter that she has lived in Saratoga since 1981 and wants strict controls on this church. She adds that she does not support their liquor and restaurant uses. A neighborhood representative presented the rebuttal comments as follows: • Said that Diane's banker box of information on this situation is helpful in demonstrating how the church's activities are implemented and resulted in noise, litter and damage. • Said that it is important to.be a good citizen and communicate.. • Stated that Code Enforcement will need to make sure that the community is facilitated. Added that imposing conditions that are successful in controlling activities will help heal the rift that has developed in this neighborhood with this church. • Opined that no church needs to serve hard liquor. It is an out and out bad idea. • Reminded that no one has said anything about not wanting to have the church there. • Said that what is`desired is a cooperative relationship with everyone getting along. Ms. Jolie Houston, Attorney for the church: • Said that many emotional statements have been made. • Stated that the focus needs to be on uses allowed included incidental uses and to determine what are church- related uses. • Said that every church is different and the focus needs to be on this church's needs and beliefs. • Added that it should be based on hours of operation as well as limits on the number of special events each year. I—] C� Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 27 • • Asked that dance lessons and fundraisers not be limited. • Pointed out that there are disputes about past activities. • Said that the focus needs to be on the conditions agreed to by the church. • Expressed the hours of operation as being 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. weekdays; 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. on Saturday; and 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Sundays. • Said that faith -based practices should be allowed. • Reminded that there are enforcement mechanisms available to the City. • Suggested a one -year review. • Reminded that another Use Permit application would soon come forward before this Commission for a new church building. Chair Hlava closed the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Chair Hlava explained to those in attendance that this is now the time for this Commission to deliberate. They will ask the City Attorney questions and make a decision after reviewing the conditions one by one. Commissioner Nagpal said that there might be an opportunity to lump a few of the conditions together. Chair Hlava: • Said that Condition 1 states that this new Use Permit under consideration this evening will supersede the two previous Use Permits. • Explained that Condition 2 clarifies that the updated Use Permit pertains to the existing facilities. • Said that Condition 3 offers a definition of the operation of a religious institution and religious activities. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer explained that the intent is not to say that the church could not have fundraising events for another cause just that the church itself sponsor the event. It prevents other groups not related to the church for doing so. He added that it is better if the church sponsors any fundraiser and is the recipient of the funds even if the funds are later to be given over to another charity by the church. Chair Hlava suggested that the language would be clearer if it states that predominately fundraising should be for the church or its purposes. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer asked if it should be limited just to the church's religious purposes. Commissioner Nagpal said that she thought the existing language covers that fundraising would be specific to the church's function, which is appropriate under this definition. Commissioner Cappello said that the fundraising for the church could be for whatever purpose and not just for the building. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 28 Commissioner Kundtz agreed as long as the church sponsors it. The church must sponsor the event and the proceeds go to the church for its programs. Chair Hlava said that from the point of view of the neighbors there would be concern, as this would okay virtually anyone from using this facility. That's exactly what the neighbors don't want. Commissioner Cappello said that the neighbors simply want operations managed so as not to be a hindrance to them. Commissioner Nagpal pointed out that Condition 4 lists uses that are incidental to worship and religious purposes of the church. Chair Hlava asked if this would allow a Boy Scout troop to be formed at the church. Commissioner Kundtz said that the funds generated could be used to the benefit of the community. He said that he thought Condition 4 contains pretty good language. Chair Rodgers said that a lot of churches get involved in outside activities and suggested that the focus be on the impacts on the community. Commissioner Kundtz said that he wants it to be more open ended. Commissioner Rodgers said that the neighbors are looking at church- related activities. Commissioner Kundtz said that is best handled through limits on hours and parking. .Commissioner Rodgers said that instead of listing what they can do it would be better to list what they cannot do. Commissioner Nagpal said that the activities should be geared to the purpose of the church. Chair Hlava said that they should be directly. related to the core values of the church. Commissioner Kumar said that they should meet the religious objectives. Commissioner Nagpal asked about Condition 6. Chair Hlava: • Reviewed Condition 5 as relating to continuing jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. o Said that Condition 6 states that the. church must have the proper license . for the preparation and service of food and alcohol with church events. This is not a restaurant and is not to be advertised as a restaurant that is open to the public. Commissioner Rodgers said that they should be able to provide food to the underprivileged. Commissioner Nagpal added that they should be able to feed guests to the church. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 29 Commissioner Rodgers questioned the text that reads, "...only if incidental to the church's...." Commissioner Nagpal stated that the list includes, "worship, education and objectives." City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that the intent is to allow objectives to. be carried out. Commissioner Nagpal stressed that this is not a restaurant but rather that it is just a health permit category known as a restaurant permit. Commissioner Rodgers said that she does not want to prohibit churches from doing charitable work. Church encompasses more than just their worship services. Chair Hlava said that the allowed uses are related to objectives. Commissioner Nagpal said that they include community, social services and all that. She stated that churches are faith communities and we want them in our neighborhoods and to be good neighbors. Commissioner Kundtz asked whether the language is specific enough to be enforceable or does it represent a new level of vagary. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that it is a specific as we can get without adding a long list. Commissioner Nagpal said as long as impacts are mitigated. Chair Hlava said it appears the general consensus on Condition 6 has been reached. She asked if the same standard applies to alcohol and Condition 7. Commissioner Kundtz said that alcohol is an integral part of the activities and events of the church. He added that he is of the mind to reduce from a full liquor license. He suggested that the church be required to apply to ABC for just a beer and wine license within the next 60 days. Commissioner Nagpal said that this condition is the one she had the most trouble with as a result of the impacts raised by neighbors. Commissioner Rodgers reminded that some beverages are a cultural part of a religious group. She added that as for bottles being thrown over a fence, she is not sure that a cause and effect can be made here. That may not even be a part of the church activities. Commissioner Kundtz said one solution would be a keg in the bar instead of bottles. Commissioner Rodgers said that she is not sure the problem is related to the liquor license for the church. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 30 Commissioner Nagpal said that it is important to respect the heritage of the church members. She said that it confuses her that none. of the other churches appears to have a license to serve alcohol: She said that she is not sure if it is not required or whether all churches do need such a license. Commissioner Cappello said that liquor is not proposed for restriction from a license standpoint but more a question of whether alcohol should be allowed on church grounds at all. He added that wine has always been involved in church activities and said that he is not sure exactly how to address this issue. Commissioner Kumar asked how this Use Permit might affect other churches in Saratoga. Is it setting precedent? Commissioner Zhao said she has the same question and said it is important to find out if a liquor license is needed for a church to serve.wine. Chair Hlava said that her mother was a Methodist where no wine was included in church activities. Her son attended Bellermine where wine was included at all events. The LDS church allows no alcohol. It is such an individual thing that is based on what a specific church currently does. Commissioner Nagpal reiterated her preference that within the next six months an effort be made to tone down the type of liquor license for this church. Commissioner Kundtz said there` must be .delineation between wine used as part of the sacrament versus social drinking. He added that churches have fundraisers with open bars. He said that the type of liquor license spawns a discussion. Commissioner Rodgers said that a little common sense has to come into play on this issue. Chair Hlava asked if there are any changes needed for Condition 7. Commissioner Cappello said he. likes the wording very much. It is very carefully crafted and well put. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer suggested adding the words, "...and objectives" to the text. Commissioner Nagpal asked for comments from the Commission on the idea of having the church evaluate the possible reduction of its type of liquor license within the next 60 days or so. - Commissioner Cappello said that this may not do much for us as it may be determined that the license must remain, as it is necessary to serve the needs of the church's activities. Chair Hlava reminded that this Commission would be looking at the whole issue of this church again when the next Use Permit comes up within the next 60 to 90 days for the proposed new Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 31 sanctuary. She suggested that this recommendation for an evaluation to consider the reduction in type of liquor license be done in conjunction with that Use Permit. Commissioner Rodgers suggested that this issue be reported back to the Commission. Commissioner Zhao questioned what drove the church to apply for a liquor license. She asked for clarification as to whether this means that every church needs such a license in order to serve any alcohol. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that the City does not have any control over ABC licensing at all. The City can change the allowed uses of a site but not the liquor license category that is applicable for those uses. Commissioner Nagpal stressed the need for the church to evaluate the frequency of alcohol use and the applicability of the licensing for liquor service. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer: • Said that he spoke with someone at ABC. • Advised that legally a license is required for alcohol service but there are different types of licenses. One is a per -event license. • Added that ABC is aware that not everyone complies with the requirement to have a license from ABC to serve alcohol. • Stated that some churches do have the licensing and others do not. Chair Hlava: • Said that this raises an important question if a lot of churches should have ABC licenses but do not. • Pointed out that this church has gone out and gotten the necessary license from ABC. • Reminded that this church used to rent out its hall so perhaps that license was more necessary when that rental activity was occurring. Commissioner Kundtz reminded that one member of the church mentioned that the hall used to be rented out in order to pay the mortgage. Chair Hlava said that the easiest thing for the church to do might be to simply renew their existing license, which is why they have likely continued to do so each year. Commissioner Cappello asked what if they want to reduce their use. Commissioner Nagpal said that the existing use would have to be reviewed. Commissioner Cappello questioned whether an event -based license is practical for this church. Commissioner Rodgers reminded that the definitions of the licensing are ABC's. She reminded that they simply represent a category that encompasses a lot of organizations. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 32 Chair Hlava asked who wants the liquor use and ABC licensing to be evaluated. Commissioner Zhao pointed out that a lot of the neighbors have concern about alcohol while she does not have such a concern. She added that there should be measures to manage events where alcohol is served. Commissioner Rodgers said that might include a need for security but that requirement might have to be imposed on other churches as well. Chair Hlava asked for a sentence to complete the text for Condition 7 that accomplishes the goals of the Commission on the issue of service of alcohol. Commissioner Nagpal suggested, "Require the applicant to evaluate the frequency and type of alcohol use for a per event license versus their existing ABC license within 120 days or when the new Use Permit is processed." Director John Livingstone said he is looking for structure of how to implement this requirement. He asked if it is the Commission's intention to have the. church come back and speak under Oral Communications. Does the Commission want to see the Use Permit modified again once the research is done through ABC on licensing options for this church?. Commissioner Kundtz said that the language in Condition 7 should stay as it is. A condition can be included that indicates that a new building is proposed which will be evaluated and conditioned through the issuance of a new Use Permit. Director John Livingstone reiterated that he needs direction to understand what forum and /or action this Commission wants to use to bring the updated information back. Commissioner Kundtz said that it would be sufficient under Oral Communications. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer cautioned that an item would have to be on an agenda in order for the Commission to give direction to the applicant. Director John Livingstone_ added that the applicant would have to pay a filing fee.. It is a real structured process. Commissioner Nagpal asked staff when the application for the new sanctuary would be brought before the Commissioner. Director John Livingstone said he does not know. The environmental review is not complete. It is a long process. Commissioner Nagpal supported bringing the issue under Oral Communication. Commissioner Rodgers suggested working something more specific out this evening perhaps the text, "...shall not serve anything but wine." Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 33 0 Commissioner Nagpal said she has trouble with that restriction. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that there is a disturbance condition that has not yet been discussed that includes enforcement options. Commissioner Nagpal pointed out that there is a lack of trust and a bad history between the neighbors and church that needs to heal. She stressed the need for some mechanism to allow for communication, some sort of monitoring. She suggested conditioning a review in the next six to 12 months. Chair Hlava reminded that this Commission has continuing jurisdiction. She asked staff if a monitoring review could be conditioned in six months. Commissioner Nagpal suggested that such a review would not require that the applicant file a new application. Commissioner Kundtz said that the President of the church board has said he would look into the alternate liquor licensing options. Commissioner Nagpal said that there is an opportunity to condition a review in a year. She added that it would be her hope that the review would reveal a success story. Chair Hlava suggested letting this issue sit for a moment and go on with the review of the other conditions. Commissioner Kumar said that wine is relevant with religions but other use of alcohol at events may fall outside of religious activities. While wine use may be imperative, all other uses of alcohol are probably not relevant for this church. Chair Hlava raised the issue of Condition 8 that applies. to on -site catering that includes weddings and banquets as well the issue of.delivery hours. She reminded that Mr. Wong has specific objections to these deliveries but he was okay with delivery hours after 9 a.m. He also felt that 11 p.m. was too late for any activity on site including catering clean up. She asked if there is any way to restrict trucks at the back near the Wong property. Commissioner Kumar said the Commission needs to delineate between weekdays and weekends. Commissioner Nagpal said that defining Condition 10 would help with Condition 8. Chair Hlava asked for suggested hours of operation. Commissioner Nagpal said 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. Chair Hlava asked about allowing 8 a.m. on weekends as church services often start earlier than 9 a.m. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 34 Commissioner Kumar suggested that 10 p.m. might be a drastic closing time on weekdays and pointed out that his own kids are in bed at 8 p.m. Commissioner Nagpal asked for the hours for the dance classes. Commissioner Rodgers replied 7:30 to 10 p.m. Chair Hlava added that there are a couple of dinners that last to 11 p.m. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that the Mountain Winery events end at 10 p.m. Chair Hlava pointed out that two -hour shows are all they do there. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the hours should be less than 11 p.m. on Sundays. Chair Hlava suggested 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays; 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays and 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays. Commissioner Nagpal said that these hours would not include Christmas and Easter. She suggested specifying the number of special events. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that a fair number of church meetings occur on Sunday evenings. Chair Hlava suggested modifying Sunday hours to 8 a.m. to 9 p.m Commissioner Nagpal asked how these hours impact catering trucks and deliveries. Commissioner Cappello said the hours are fine but no activities can occur beyond those times including deliveries that are a hindrance to nearby neighbors. All activities occurring on site during the week can start at 9 a.m. and must end by 10 p.m. On Friday and. Saturday, activity can start at 8 a.m. but must conclude by 10 p.m. Chair Hlava asked if the church ever has early morning services and it appears they do not based on. comments from the audience. She restated the suggested hours as being between 9 a.m. and 10 p.m. weekdays, 8 a.m.- to 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday and from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on Sunday. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that this is a small parcel and the neighbors are very close. Commissioner Hlava said that deliveries could only occur during allowed operational hours. She brought up Condition 9 that prohibits public dances. Commissioner Nagpal. said that Condition 9 is worked quite well. She added that the existing dance lessons are not public dances but rather activities related to the church. • IF- L-1 Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 35 n Commissioner Rodgers reminded that people are invited beyond p arishioners. Commissioner Cappello asked if Israeli dances would be allowed as the text reads or if the term "orthodox" dancing might be too restrictive. Commissioner Kundtz agreed that the dance lessons reflect many different folk cultures. City Attorney Jonathan wanted it added to the record that community outreach is okay but advertising to the public is not. Chair Hlava mentioned that Condition 11 requires the church to obey the regulations of the Noise Ordinance. Condition 13 deals with applicable Codes on parking. Commissioner Nagpal said that she has a problem with how Condition 13 is worded. Chair Hlava said the problem is with the first sentence that states, "the church shall primarily utilize the main lot for parking." The condition goes on to provide what actions would need to be done to use the residential church parcel. Commissioner Kundtz said that he envisions poles with chains. The chains can be dropped for overflow parking on Christmas and Easter. All other times the church would be required to use proper parking and the property line would be cordoned off. Commissioner Nagpal questioned whether the second parcel should be allowed to be used for certain circumstances for parking. Chair Hlava said that the intent of the Condition 13 is to require all parking on church property. Any mention of the residential lot for overflow is inappropriate. Commissioner Nagpal asked what about for Christmas and Easter. Commissioner Kumar said that the church should have an overflow lot somewhere Director John Livingstone: • Said that he likes things to be black and white. • Added that the residential parcel is either a part of the church parcel or it is not. • Reminded that there is no provision in the residential zoning to allow a parking lot on a residential lot. • Said that the residential lot is not a part of this project. • Stressed the importance of putting in a fence to effectively separate the two parcels so it is clear that no parking can occur on the church's residential parcel. The fence should be put up and kept in place. . Chair Hlava said that it must be clear that only the church lot can provide parking. She brought up Condition 14 on signs. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 36 Commissioner Rodgers suggested that some landscaping might be added and would be a good way to do outreach to neighbors. She suggested that the story poles be taken down as they are unattractive and block some available parking spaces. Chair Hlava said that.this is a timing thing. It is difficult to require that money be spent on landscaping when the whole site will change when the pending new sanctuary application is processed. She added that story poles are helpful but that she could support putting in a time period by which the new sanctuary plans must be before this Commission. If that does not happen, some landscaping could be required in the interim. Commissioner Rodgers said that landscaping on the borders could be installed. Commissioner Nagpal agreed that this could serve as a sound barrier. She suggested some dialog between neighbors and the church. Commissioner Rodgers reminded that mediation was tried already. Commissioner Cappello said that landscaping doesn't make sense with a new proposal pending. Commissioner Nagpal said she supports a time line. Director John Livingstone advised that the project, for the sanctuary is undergoing the CEQA review process. It is moving forward and could be before this Commission within three to four months or it could take six months or longer. Chair Hlava asked if it -would be inside of a year. Director John Livingstone said he cannot control that answer. He added that after tonight the church could decide they don't want to go forward with that project. Chair Hlava suggested a review by this Commission one year from today. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer suggested that a letter be solicited by the church and neighbors in one year to.see if issues have come up that require review by the Commission. Director John Livingstone: • Said he prefers that the .Planning Commission make that decision for review now. Added that the Commission could decide to impose a landscaping requirement along the shared borders with neighbors: Said- that the alcohol issue is between beer 'and wine and a broader license. If the Commission prefers no -hard liquor be allowed that is up for discussion but some hard alcohol is very much a part of ceremonies and /or traditions. Commissioner Nagpal said that she likes the idea of a one -year review and suggested the addition of Condition 15 that requires a status letter from the applicant and neighbors after a Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 37 is year. She added that landscaping is not that expensive and adding some landscaping along the Wong property might serve as some kind of privacy barrier. Commissioner Cappello pointed out that the Commission did not hear any complaints about aesthetics. Chair Hlava asked what landscaping would be taller than a fence. Commissioner Nagpal suggested trees. Chair Hlava said that trees also take time. Director John Livingstone added that trees are not that effective for sound attenuation but just aesthetics. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that the Wong fence's heights and gaps provide an inadequate barrier. She suggested that temporary fencing be put in place that is higher than permitted under the Fence Ordinance to offer adequate privacy. Chair Hlava said the Commission couldn't approve that. The owners would have to apply for a height exception. Commissioner Rodgers said that she wants to do something regarding noise and nuisance issues. Chair Hlava asked if there is agreement on the proposed one -year review. Commissioner Cappello said if it helps the project move forward he is in agreement with the one -year review. Director John Livingstone said that the Condition for a one -year review should include the recommendation that each side send a letter to the Commission one year from now. Chair Hlava asked for comments on the issues of landscaping and fences. Commissioner Zhao said that she can support that idea but questioned how easy a Variance would be to process. Director John Livingstone clarified that Code only allows a six -foot high fence. The Commission cannot condition a Variance finding. The applicant would have to apply for a Variance. Chair Hlava asked if there is support for adding the text, religious worship, education or objectives" Commissioner Cappello replied yes. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 38 Commissioner Rodgers said that she feels better with a one -year review. _ • Commissioner Cappello said that any problems would generate a complaint that would bring this Use Permit back to the Commission. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer asked if the Commission wants to allow the church to retain the ability to charge for alcohol served at weddings. Chair Hlava said that this is a good idea. If people pay for drinks they don't drink as much as they do with an open bar. Commissioner Rodgers said that she is nervous telling churches what they can and cannot do. She added that the City might be initiating an avalanche of Use'Permits.for churches. Chair Hlava summarized the edits to the conditions as. follows: • Condition #A — must be directly related to religious objectives.. • Condition 6 - organized worship, education and objectives. • Condition 7 - same addition as Condition 6. • Condition 8 — delivery times consistent with hours of operation listed in Condition 10.- • Condition 9 — corrected type from "and" to "any." Condition 10 — Weekday hours from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m.; Friday and Saturday hours from 8 a-.m. to 11 p.m:; Sunday hours from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., excluding Christmas and Easter. • Condition 11 - no .change. , • Condition 12 - no change. • Condition 13 only park on the church lot and fence off the adjacent church -owned _residential property. • Condition 17.— add a requirement for a one -year review with status letters to be provided by neighbors and the church. • Condition 18 — previously was numbered as Condition 17. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer suggested an addition to Condition 4 to add religious objectives. He asked that staff be allowed to add to Condition 7 and /or 8 the provision to allow1he church to charge for alcohol served at weddings. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Cappello, seconded by Commissioner Kundtz, the _ Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (Application #07 -384) for St. Archangel Michael Serbian Eastern Orthodox Church located at 18870 Allendale Avenue, with conditions of approval as modified by the Commission, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Hlava, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Hlava said that she hopes this new Use. Permit offers enough specificity to be clear and enforceable. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for June 13, 2007 Page 39 • DIRECTOR'S ITEMS There were no Director's Items. COMMISSION ITEMS There were no Commission Items. COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communications Items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Cappello, seconded by Commissioner Zhao, Chair Hlava adjourned the meeting at approximately 1 a.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of June 27, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • • • • Item I REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 07-237; 14407 Big Basin Way Type of Application: Conditional Use Permit Applicant/Owner: metro PCS / Cunningham Staff Planner: Shweta Bhatt, Assistant Planner 'A4r-�/C- APAV7-� Meeting Date: June 27, 2007 APN: 503-24-079 Department Hea John I �Livingstone, AICP .Subject: 14407 Big Basin Way 4 APN: 503-24-079 500' Radius ;al.tal PC - - ---------- W 45 2 Ix STREET Cm OF 14407 Big Basin Way, metroPCS CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete: Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 01/29/07 06/06/07 07/13/07 06/09/07 06/21/07 The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to install a wireless facility on the roof of the existing office building. The proposal includes panel antennas and an equipment cabinet. The site is zoned CH -1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Conditional Use Permit application with conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. C7 • CUP 07 -237; 14407 Big Basin Way; Metro PCS PROJECT DATA ZONING: CH -1 District. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: The General Plan designates this area as CR — Commercial Retail MEASURE G: Not applicable. PARCEL SIZE: Not applicable. AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Average slope of lot is less than 10% GRADING REQUIRED: The applicant proposes no changes to the grade. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project which includes installation of equipment cabinets and panel antennas is categorically exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction of limited small new facilities; installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures. PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND COLORS: The applicant proposes to paint the 40 antenna and equipment green to match the hillside in the background. • CUP 07 -237; 14407 Big Basin Way; Metro PCS PROJECT DISCUSSION Site Description The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to install panel antennas and associated equipment on the rooftop of an existing building. The site is located near the intersection of Big Basin Way and Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road and is surrounded by office buildings, a gas station, and a creek. A Nextel wireless facility currently exists on the rooftop. Location and Alternative Sites As indicated by the existing and proposed coverage maps (Attachment 6), the location for the antenna facility will improve the wireless coverage metroPCS provides within the Village. The. applicant has looked into several options and has concluded that this location best fits the needs of metroPCS. Staff finds this location to be appropriate, given that there is a wireless facility on the same building. Project Description A total of three panel antennas are proposed to be located on the northeast area of the building's rooftop. The applicant's initial proposal was to screen the antennas in a faux chimney painted to match the existing building. Photo simulations of this proposal are Attachment 9 of this staff report. In response to neighbor comments, however, the applicant has modified the proposal to unscreened antennas, painted green to match the hillside in the background (Attachment 8). The unscreened antennas appear to be less visible, from a distance, particularly from the viewpoints shown in photographs submitted by a nearby property owner. The antennas enclosed in, the faux chimney will be less obtrusive when viewed up close. The existing building is approximately twenty -six (26) feet high and the antennas will be an additional five (5) feet high. The height of the antennas will be consistent with the height of the existing Nextel antenna panels. The proposed equipment cabinet will also be located on the rooftop, but will be situated on the southwestern corner. The equipment cabinet will be - approximately two (2) feet taller than the existing parapet and will also be painted green. The applicant has stated that this is the lowest possible height for the cabinet. Staff requested the applicant investigate alternative locations for the equipment cabinet. One option would be to locate the equipment inside the office building. The applicant has spoken to the property owner and has concluded that the building is fully occupied and thus no space is available that would allow metroPCS 24 -hour access to the equipment. Since the site is heavily screened with mature landscaping along the creek, the building is setback from both Big Basin Way and Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road, and the equipment cabinet will be located behind the existing Nextel system, the roof- mounted equipment appears appropriate for this project. Public Health and Safety Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has exclusive jurisdiction over RF emissions from personal wireless antenna facilities. Pursuant to its authority under federal law, the FCC has established rules to regulate the safety of emissions from these facilities. CUP 07 -237; 14407 Big Basin Way; Metro PCS The applicant has secured the services of Hammett and Edison, Inc to prepare a report for cumulative RF exposure. The report concludes that the project "will comply with the prevailing standards for limiting public exposure to radio frequency energy." Neighbor Comments The applicant has contacted the owner of an office building located across Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road. The neighbor has submitted several written comments in the form of emails and photo attachments (attached to this report). The applicant has modified the project to address the neighbor comments, as the proposed antennas are not screened. Staff has not received any further comments as of the writing of this staff report. Conditional Use Permit Findings Staff believes the proposed project is consistent with Conditional Use Permit findings stated in City Code Section 15- 55.070 and furthermore believes they can be made in the affirmative. The text and follow -up discussion regarding each finding is below. (a) The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the site is located. The project meets this finding in that the proposed antennas and ancillary equipment will improve the quality of service provided by the wireless carrier. The location for the project is appropriate, as it is surrounded by primarily commercial uses. The project will be located on a site where another wireless facility exists. (b) The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed wireless facility will not be detrimental to the public health, as it has been conditioned to meet all applicable codes. The facility will be operated under restrictions imposed by the FCC to insure safety with respect to limiting human exposure to radio frequency energy. This finding may be made in the affirmative. (c) The proposed establishment will comply with all applicable provisions of the Saratoga Municipal Code. Pursuant to the Saratoga City Code, a conditional use permit is required to establish a wireless facility. Approval and adoption of the resolution for this application would satisfy this requirement. This finding may be made in the affirmative. (d) The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. The project meets this finding in that the proposed wireless facility will not adversely affect immediate uses and properties in the vicinity, as it will be located on a site that has an CUP 07 -237; 14407 Big Basin Way; Metro PCS existing wireless facility. The proposed antennas and equipment will be located on the roof and therefore no tenant spaces within the existing building will be vacated. Furthermore, the applicant has attempted to address neighbor comment regarding the appearance of the antennas by leaving them unexposed and painting them a green color to match the hillside in the background. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed wireless facility (Application 07 -237) by making all required Conditional Use Permit findings in the affirmative and adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMIENTS 1. Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit 07 -237 2. Affidavit of mailing noticies, public hearing notice, mailing labels, and newspaper publication 3. Neighbor.Notification Templates 4. Neighbor emails (Don Whetstone, dated June 4, 2007, June 6, 2007, and June 7, 2007) 5. Radio Frequency Exposure Report (Hammett & Edison, Inc dated January 24, 2007) 6. Coverage Maps 7. Vicinity Map/Existing Photos 8. Photosimulations (Exposed antennas) 9. Photosimulations (Antennas enclosed in faux chimney) 10. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A" �_J • Attachment 1 • RESOLUTION NO. _ Application No. 07 -237 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA metroPCS 14407 Big Basin Way Antenna panel and equipment cabinet WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a wireless facility on the rooftop of an existing commercial building. The system is comprised of three panel antennas and an equipment cabinet. The site is located in a Commercial Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the proposed project consisting of the includes installation of equipment cabinets and panel antennas is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures ", Class 3 of the Public Resources Code (CEQA); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that all of the findings for approval required within Article 15 -55 of the City Code can be made in the affirmative. The following is a discussion of each of the findings:. (a) The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the site is located. The project meets this finding in that the proposed antennas and ancillary equipment will improve the quality of service provided by the wireless carrier. The location for the project is appropriate, as it is surrounded by primarily commercial uses. The project will be located on a site where another wireless facility exists. (b) The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed wireless facility will not be detrimental to the public health, as it has been conditioned to meet all applicable codes. The facility will be operated under restrictions imposed by the FCC to insure safety with respect to limiting human exposure to radio frequency energy. This finding may be made in the affirmative. CUP 07 -237; 14407 Big Basin Way; Metro PCS (c) The proposed establishment will comply with all applicable provisions of the Saratoga Municipal Code. . Pursuant to the Saratoga City Code, , a conditional use permit is required to establish a wireless facility. Approval and adoption of the resolution for this application would satisfy this requirement. This finding may be made.in the affirmative. (d) The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. The project meets this finding in that the proposed wireless facility will not adversely affect immediate uses and properties in the vicinity, as it will be located on a site that has an existing wireless facility. The proposed antennas and equipment will be located on the roof and therefore no tenant spaces within the existing building will be vacated. Furthermore, the applicant has attempted to address neighbor comment regarding the appearance of the antennas by leaving them unexposed and painting them a green color to match the hillside in the background. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the proposed use and exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application for a Conditional Use Permit approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: PLANNING 1. The Planning Commission shall_ retain continuing jurisdiction over the Conditional Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete or impose any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 2. Any intensification of this use shall require approval of an amended Conditional Use Permit. 3. If the subject . site is decommissioned in the future, all antennas and related equipment shall be removed within thirty (30) days of cessation of operation. 4. The proposed panel antennas, equipment cabinet and associated members that will be mounted on the rooftop shall be painted green, (per color specification). The paint shall be maintained in perpetuity and the site /rooftop shall. not be cluttered with cabling, connection hardware, or other components. 5. All conduits on exterior faeade of building shall be painted to match exterior of building. The paint shall be maintained in perpetuity and the exterior. of the building shall not be cluttered with cabling, connection hardware, or other components. CUP 07 -237; 14407 Big Basin Way; Metro PCS • 6. The height of the equipment cabinet shall be as low as possible and shall not exceed two (2) feet above the parapet wall as shown on Exhibit "A." 7. The service light proposed near the equipment cabinet shall remain off until needed. When utilized, the light shall be screened with appropriate cover so as to reduce glare to tenants, vehicular traffic, and/or pedestrians. 8. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, detailed construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division for Zoning Clearance to verify consistency with the approved Exhibit "A" plans. The construction drawings shall incorporate a signed copy of this Resolution as a separate plan page. 9. The proposed use shall at all times operate in compliance with all regulations of the City and/or other agencies having jurisdictional authority over the use pertaining to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 10. Applicant shall comply with all Saratoga Fire District requirements. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 11. No new overhead lines are permitted. CITY ATTORNEY 12. 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 with 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 or business operations commenced within thirty-six (36) 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- 55.080 and 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 27th day of June 2006 by the following roll call vote: • CUP 07 -237; 14407 Big Basin Way; Metro PCS AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Joyce Hlava Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: John F. Livingstone, AICP 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 acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date • r � L_J • 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 27th day of June 2007, at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held in the City Hall theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. The public hearing agenda item is stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m: Please consult the City website at www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures. APPLICATION /ADDRESS: UP / DR 07 -237 —14407 Big Basin Way APPLICANT: Metro PCS APN: 503 -24 -079 DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Conditional Use/Design Review approval to, a • wireless facility on the roof of the existing office building at the above location. The proposal includes panel antennas and an equipment cabinet. 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 Monday, June 18, 2007. A site visit will be held on the day preceding the hearing date listed above as part of the standard Site Visit. Committee agenda. Site visits occur between 3:30 and 5:00 p.m. The site visit is open to the public. The Site Visit Committee will convene at the City Hall parking lot at 3 :30 p.m. on the day preceding the hearing and visit the site listed above and may visit other sites as well. For more information please contact the Community Development Department at (408) 868 -1222 or review. the Site Visit Agenda on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. 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. Shweta Bhatt, Assistant Planner, (408) 868 -1266 Subject: 14407 Big Basin Way , r ? 1 ' , >F /0 a, APN: 503724 -079 M s / 500' Ra(ilus - -.w•" s �aS f p o C6 p t ��r�ati•ES�t. t6j4c "off 8 g `sc 'q oC6?,a scEetaN a°'0 �P 6j QOJ I~ `oar �� .U.7j.•y\ �• InS.% 16411' •� N.�f' �'.t'�n 0.. '11-7 JF W�.f .`4\ Or 1 -7IER•IC,'•f 4.1 �.3 71.a7 Sf 09 11 Zo,, . G �� y, . )) �AcAr L 7jf- 101.!! Ja '�i�y Q \'S' . y TY ' N,f,•�S n. * e• < 8 `I � 'ai °$ � / IfP . / ..v.•rte^.°:°.° —o- 1 "V�p "°'y �m \ �r • t - j MRA 'ewi 1 -0464C.NEt t. .,�.a r .�. 4.'R _ < i `B f ♦ Oil -656 i f PCLT )'^ � '•'dt C� ror• r / .. .09t AC N 6. wp�V :. / �.� � b i.Cr f zz fts o, Q/ G .w�� aTa�A 71T t ) r, - r.r.r f [rrz p .A f FA n: Y, rrrt ••! pyW O r. r S °1 ✓ /� \ \• - Jay .�+ ..� -4"� . 0. 17 K y ^ 76 •µ. -.f, • • , ..� Ep -- ..�,�� .r,, .. •r "s4V� �1 G IT Y. r.udf`. Y:S �' a Ve•e y aaa - `• +' /� �Yt4 , fJ K 56i . � 1 v y iLj3 t `C:F AE sq i s .e, , aP -T M --'T" I,,,,yk;�, us11L. p •—t»� y Tp}.� P e Tic i ' 1 �) .7 . I ► K }' 11•; 6 .;p v} = k .J-� . I P.Y. • ........... FU -SY' _ :: ..^ d• - j i - .. _ - •• ' f $ u L Y 1�' �R 6ty. 1 �d 4 p=.. t O Ih Y ' r s,6uma° � �{ ...- .I,ar_...: •x « .I: = t� 6.. C t ,'�, 0 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES I, Denise Kaspar , being duly sworn, deposes and says: that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on the 9`h day of June , 2007, that I deposited 173 notices in the United States Post Office, a NOTICE OF HEARING, a copy of which is attached hereto, with postage thereon prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses shown, to -wit: (See list attached hereto and made part hereof) that said persons are the owners of said property who are entitled to a Notice of Hearing pursuant to Section 15- 45.060(b) of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga in that said persons and their addresses are those shown on the most recent equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property described as: APN: 503 -24 -079 Address: 14407 Big Basin. Way that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. Denise Kaspar Advanced Listing Services ine 9, 2007 )0' Ownership Listing repared for: )3 -24 -079 [etro PCS 4407 Big Basin Way aratoga 95070 397 -22 -020 CALIFORNIA STATE OF SARATOGA CA 95070 397 -22 -066 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV 395 OYSTER POINT BLVD 225 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CA 94080 -1930 397 -27 -010 LOTUS F SHIN 1120 N 10TH ST SAN JOSE CA 95112 -4409 397 -27 -013 MICHAEL M SHADMAN OR CURRENT OWNER 14190 VICTOR PL , SARATOGA CA 95070 -5425 397 -27 -018 CYNTHIA KERR OR CURRENT OWNER 14160 VICTOR PL SARATOGA CA 95070 -5425 397 -27 -025 - G ROVER B & MARYANN STEELE OR CURRENT OWNER 20410 WALNUT AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 -5447 397 -27 -030 DAVID J & TERRI MORRISON 18805 COX AVE 210 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6616 397 -27 -033 LIN SHEN OR CURRENT OWNER 20520 ARBELECHE'LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5464 0 '397 -22 -018 397 -27 -001,•007 503- 24 -016, 018, 026, 97 -22 -015, _067 035, 036, 047, 074, 076 517- 09 -078, 083 ARATOGA FIRE DIST SCC CITY OF SARATOGA O BOX 279 13777 FRUITVALE AVE fountain View -CA 94042 SARATOGA CA 95070 97 -22 -021 ARATOGA FEDERATED CHURCH INC 397 -22 -027 RICHARD B SINGLETARY ►R CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 4370 SARATOGA AVE 20363.PARK PL SARATOGA CA 95070 -5936 ARATOGA CA 95070 -5953 97 -27 -008;, 397 -27 -009. JOHN MARSHALL AWED :UMERANI 09 SAN FELICIA WAY PO BOX 1696 OS ALTOS CA 94022- 1755 LOS.GATOS CA 95031 -1696 97 -27 -011_ - ;AJIV. & MINAKSHI MATHUR 397 -27 -012 DANIEL KAYPAGHIAN )R. CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER - 4185 VICTOR PL. 14200 VICTOR PL SARATOGA CA 95070 -5425 ; ARATOGA CA' 95070 -5425 97 -27, -014 397 -27 -.017 -AUL S CLARKE M L BREWER OR CURRENT OWNER )R CURRENT OWNER 14.170 VICTOR PL 4180 VICTOR PL. ; ARATOGA CA 95070 -5425. SARATOGA CA 95070 -5425 97 -27 -019 397 -27- 020.. ERIK FRIEDBERG ' :HIEN LIU )R CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 4158 VICTOR PL 20434 WALNUT AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 -5447 ;ARATOGA. CA 95070 -5425 _ - 397 =27 -029 .. 497 -27 -028 EZAT .LOUKZADEH )AN W & GWEN NEALE OR CURRENT OWNER :29 WHITNEY AVE 20440 ARBELECHE LN .OS GATOS CA 95030 -6233 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5439 497 -27 -031 :XECUTNE TOWNHOMES OF SARATOG 397 -27 -032 THOMAS: LINDSAY 10480 BLAUER DR A 230 MOUNT HERMON RD 204 'ARATOGA CA 95070 -4371 SCOTTS VALLEY CA 95066 -4034 397 -22 -020 CALIFORNIA STATE OF SARATOGA CA 95070 397 -22 -066 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV 395 OYSTER POINT BLVD 225 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CA 94080 -1930 397 -27 -010 LOTUS F SHIN 1120 N 10TH ST SAN JOSE CA 95112 -4409 397 -27 -013 MICHAEL M SHADMAN OR CURRENT OWNER 14190 VICTOR PL , SARATOGA CA 95070 -5425 397 -27 -018 CYNTHIA KERR OR CURRENT OWNER 14160 VICTOR PL SARATOGA CA 95070 -5425 397 -27 -025 - G ROVER B & MARYANN STEELE OR CURRENT OWNER 20410 WALNUT AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 -5447 397 -27 -030 DAVID J & TERRI MORRISON 18805 COX AVE 210 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6616 397 -27 -033 LIN SHEN OR CURRENT OWNER 20520 ARBELECHE'LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5464 0 97 -31 -003 397 -31 -004 397 -31 -008 :OLLIN E & VIRGINIA BUCKMAN ROBIN MATHIAS DAVID L & SONJA GUNN IR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 700 S BERNARDO AVE 101 4285 SARATOGA AVE 14301 SARATOGA AVE SUNNYVALE CA 94087 -1099 ARATOGA CA 95070 -5930 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5994 97 -31 -011' 397 -31 -020 397 -33 -001 3 & G MCCANDLESS PROPS LLC ENGINEERING INFORMATION SYSTEMS JOSEPH & SUSAN LONG 'O BOX 1962 PO BOX 25 PO BOX 2095 ,OS ALTOS CA 94023 -1962 SARATOGA CA 95071 -0025 SARATOGA CA 95070 -0095 ;97 -33 -002 397 -27 -035 397 -27 -036 JASON C & KATHLI(N HUNTER 97 -27 -034 LEO E &JUDITH CHAVEZ OR CURRENT OWNER HANH VANHOGE OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER DUBLIN CANYON RD 20580 ARBELECHE LN 20890 ARBELECHE LN SANTON CA 94588 -2803 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5464 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5464 )ATRICIA I CHUI DR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 397 -31- 001, 002. 97 -27 -037 397 -27 -038 WILLYS I & BETTY PECK UAD & SUSANNAH AHMAD MICHAEL L & CAROL MAULDIN OR CURRENT OWNER )R CURRENT OWNER 15345 BOHLMAN RD 14275 SARATOGA AVE 0850 ARBELECHE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6356 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5930 ARATOGA CA 95070 -5464 19646 VIA GRANDE DR 1432 CERRO VERDE. 97 -31 -003 397 -31 -004 397 -31 -008 :OLLIN E & VIRGINIA BUCKMAN ROBIN MATHIAS DAVID L & SONJA GUNN IR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 700 S BERNARDO AVE 101 4285 SARATOGA AVE 14301 SARATOGA AVE SUNNYVALE CA 94087 -1099 ARATOGA CA 95070 -5930 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5994 97 -31 -011' 397 -31 -020 397 -33 -001 3 & G MCCANDLESS PROPS LLC ENGINEERING INFORMATION SYSTEMS JOSEPH & SUSAN LONG 'O BOX 1962 PO BOX 25 PO BOX 2095 ,OS ALTOS CA 94023 -1962 SARATOGA CA 95071 -0025 SARATOGA CA 95070 -0095 ;97 -33 -002 397 -33 -003 GRACE S HSU 397 -33 -004 KAIMENG HUANG sVELYN DUGGAN )R CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER C SARATOGA AVE C .4347, O 14347 SARATOGA AVE B 14349 SARATOGA AVE A SARATOGA CA 95070 -5949 TOGA 95070E SARATOGA CA 95070 -5945 X97 -33 -005 397 -33 -006 ROPP LIVING TRUST 397 -33 -007 BRUCE J & JAIME BARCLAY )ATRICIA I CHUI DR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 14349 SARATOGA AVE B 14349 SARATOGA AVE C SARATOGA OGA CA 9 AVE 9 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5950 ' ARATOGA CA 95070 -5949 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5949 397 -33 -008 397 -33 -009 397 -33 -010 DENNIS W KING THOMAS & CHRISTINE CSUBAK ROBERT W PENNELL DR CURRENT OWNER 19646 VIA GRANDE DR 1432 CERRO VERDE. 14351 SARATOGA AVE B SARATOGA CA 95070 -4452 SAN JOSE CA 95120 -4909 3ARATOGA CA 95070 -5950 397 -33 -013 397 -33 -011 397 -33 -012 LENA PONTIER WANDA KATHARY MARK H PIERCE OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 15070 BECKY LN 14353 SARATOGA AVE C 14353 SARATOGA AVE D MONTE SERENO CA 95030 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5964 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5965 397 -33 -016 397 -33 -014 397 -33 -015 ANTHONY J & MARGARET MORTON S & GERALDINE MANN SHOKY MALEKSALEHI CANNIZZARO 19986 MALLORY CT PO BOX 110955 19540 REDBERRY DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4437 CAMPBELL CA 95011 -0955 LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2931 03-017 397 -33 -018 397 -33 -019 JONATHAN W MULHOLLAND KAREN E BURGNER J J PERSICO OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 14355 SARATOGA AVE C 14357 SARATOGA AVE A 14357 SARATOGA AVE D SARATOGA CA 95070 -5951 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5952 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5952 397 -33 -022 97 -33 -020 397- 33 -021 CRAIGIE EARLE J )OLLIE. LEY DAVID A JOHNSON OR CURRENT OWNER 9944 CHARTERS AVE 18403 PURDUE DR 14359 SARATOGA AVE A ARATOGA CA 95070 - 44'12. SARATOGA CA 950704712 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5947 • 97 -33 -023 ' . iIARJORIE BUENROSTRO . 503 -23 -006 IVAN BURGOS 503 -23 -007 MELVA M IRVINE )R CURRENT OWNER 14682 STONERIDGE DR 1005 LIVE OAK DR SANTA CLARA CA 950514711 4359 SARATOGA AVE B SARATOGA CA_950,70 -5745. ' ; ARATOGA CA 95070 75947 503 -23 -010 503 -23- 011,012 ;03 -23 =008, 009 DONALD K & MAYA BERNARDO HOWARD ALLEN )OROTHY M STAMPER OR CURRENT. OWNER 20520 MARION RD . . .0562 MARION RD 20544 MARION RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5816 '- ; ARATOGA CA 95070 -5816 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5816 503 -23 -015 ;03 -23 -013 503 -23 -014 ALDO & HEIDI OLIVERI OHN R & PHYLLIS FEEMSTER NEALE FAMILY LLC OR CURRENT OWNER 00 TEN ACRES RD 188 TEN 230 MOUNT HERMON RD 204 14225 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE RD . 3A 00 CA 95070 - 5.664 SCOTTS VALLEY CA 95066 -4034 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5822 503 -23 -020 503723-017,018 503 -23 -019 CHICH -HSING & HSIAO -JEN TSAO MARGARET SEAGRAVES ` GORDON A& HELEN DUNCAN OR CURRENT OWNER 13371 SARATOGA AVE 316 NICHOLSON AVE 20567 BROOKWOOD LN 3ARATOGA CA 95070-4535'- LOS.GATOS CA 95030 -7254 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5868 503 -23 -022 503-23-023. 503 -23 -021 IAN & HELEN WHITING EVELYN JOHNSTON OR CURRENT OWNER YUAN =HAI MEI OR CURRENT OWNER 20611 BROOKWOOD LN 1162 LITTLEOAK CIR 20601 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5831 SAN JOSE CA 95129 -3137 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5831 503-23-027,1028 503 -23 -024 503 -23 -025 WILLIAM L & VIRGINIA HIGGINS . SARANGAN RANGACHARI EVELYN JOHNS_ TON OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER PO BOX 53 20550 BROOKWOOD LN 20613- BROOKWOOD 'LN SARATOGA CA 95071 -0053 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5800 SARATOGA CA 05070 - 5831 - ' 503 -23 -030 503 -23 -033 503 -23 -029 HUGH A & GLORIA JACOBS MEYER & ZINK D & E HORN :. OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 14320 SPRINGER AVE 20646 MARION RD 20510 BROOKWOOD LN. SARATOGA CA 95070 -5824 SARATOGA CA 95070-5832. SARATOGA CA 95070 -5800 503 -23 -034 - 503 -23 -035 .,SONNY C NG 503-23-037 , KURT & B VOESTER JAMES P RENALDS OR CURRENT OWNER - OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 20650 MARION RD 14251 BURNS WAY 20640 MARION RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5832 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5804 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5832 503 -23 -041 503 -23 -042 503 -23 -040 RICHARD & MARCY LOTTI : MEHDI SHAHBAZI WAYNE LIU OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER, OR CURRENT OWNER 14231 BURNS WAY 14256 SPRINGER AVE 20636 MARION RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5804 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5824 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5832 03 -23 -043 503 -23 -044 503 -23 -045 OHN R KETTMANN CHANDER & ANUPAMA SARNA DAVID A & JANICE BELSHAW )R CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 0 SPRINGER AVE 14224 SPRINGER AVE 14240 SPRINGER AVE ,TOGA CA 95070 -5824 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5824 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5824 03 -23 -046 MICHAEL & KYMBERLEY 503 -23 -047 HOWARD F & CATHERINE EARHART 503 -23 -048 DAVID S & SANDRA WILSON MORGANSTERN OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 20678 MARION RD )R CURRENT OWNER 20680 MARION RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5832 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5832 .4242 SPRINGER AVE ; ARATOGA CA 95070 -5824 ;03 -23 -049 503 -23 -052 PATRICK BROCKETT 503 -23 -053 DAVID S JOHNSTON JANCY E KESSLER OR CURRENT OWNER CURRENT OWNER )R CURRENT OWNER 20620 BROOKWOOD LN 20 BROOKWOOD LN '0626 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5831 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5831 SARATOGA CA S AR ' ARATOGA CA 95070 -5831 303 -23 -054 503 -23 -055 JOHN R & ROZ FAZIO 503 -23 -056 JANICE & JOEL CHAFFIN 2LJ LLC .DR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 18880 TERRACE CT ' 18800 TERRACE CT 18820 TERRACE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5864 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5864 iARATOGA CA 95070 -5864 , 503 -23 -057 WILSON FAMILY TRUST 503 -24 -008 RLJ LLC. 503 -24 -009 ROBERT & SHIRLEY CANCELLIERI OR CURRENT OWNER 19510 GLEN UNA DR 14860 CODY LN 18815 TERRACE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6018 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6018 S TOGA CA 95070 -5864 503 -24 -020 503 -24 -023 503 -24 -027 RUTH LONG CHARLES J & ELSBETH STAUSS MITCH & TRACY CUTLER PO BOX N PO BOX 1848 14480 OAK PL SARATOGA CA 95070 -0095 LOS GATOS CA 95031 -1848 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5929 503 -24 -030 503 -24 -034 503 -24 -029 MAHNAZ KHAZEN RONALD W & BARBARA WORDEN GLEN A & BRADFORD YOUNG OR CURRENT OWNER 1232 PARK ST 300 1027 LUCOT WAY 14519 BIG BASIN WAY PASO ROBLES CA 93446 -7236 CAMPBELL CA 95008 -6408 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6052 503 -24 -038 397 -27 -022, 026 503 -24 -046 503 -24- 049,050 397 -31 -005, 017 INN AT SARATOGA INC GEORGE PAYNE S C V W D OR CURRENT OWNER 15940 ROCHIN TR 5750 Almaden Exp 20645 4TH ST LOS GATOS CA 95032 San Jose CA 95118 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5867 503 -24 -057 503 -24 -051 503 -24 -054 DOWNEY SAVINGS & LOAN YVES G & ANNETTE CASABONNE TONY A & JULIET JARRAMI ASSOCIATIO PO BOX 247 30 OAK GROVE AVE PO BOX 6000 EL VERANO CA 95433 -0247 LOS GATOS CA 95030 -7021 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 -6000 24- 058,60,61 503 -24 -059 503 -24 -062 OXHAM LOUELLA M SULLIVAN BERNARD A WALLACE 4010 MOORPARK AVE 111 20570 CANYON VIEW DR PO BOX 1060 SAN JOSE CA 95117-1804 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5876 DISCOVERY BAY CA 94514 -7060 )3 -24 -063 NY PROPERTIES INC. 2504 SARATOGA AVE ARATOGA CA 95070 -4145 503 -24 -064 SOO G LEE 1138 NORVAL WAY SAN JOSE CA 95125 =3434 03 -24 -067, 080, 081 503 -24 -070, 072 AMES I & ARLENE ROSENFELD JOSEPH & HELEN BROZDA 4219 OKANOGAN DR 235 LINDEN ST, ARATOGA CA 95070 - 5549 SANTA CRUZ CA.95062 -1019 03 -24 -073 OSEPH & HELEN BROZDA 503 -24 -078 SUSAN K CUNNINGHAM •75 W SAN CARLOS ST 10101 PO 23 AN JOSE CA 95110 -2633 CA 95015 -2230 17 =09 -011 517 -09 -012 UCHARD SERMONE MARTE FORMICO 4620 BIG BASIN WAY 14480 BIG BASIN WAY ; ARATOGA CA 95070 -2446. SARATOGA CA 95070 -6095 .17 -09 =014; 015, 046, 047 517 -09 -017 ` ?RANK BURRELL ELIZABETH KLEAR 4010 MOORPARK AVE 111 20387 THELMA AVE iAN,JOSE CA 95117-1804, SARATOGA CA 95070 -4946 517 -09 -020 kNTHONY J & GEORGIA 517 -09 -021 MAHNAZ KHAZEN " 3LLENIKIOTIS OR CURRENT OWNER .20490 SARATOGA LOS GATOS RD 14451- CHESTER AVE . SARATOGA CA" 95070- 5624 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5911 517- 09-025 511 -09 -026 (AVID J' SALEHIEH . RICKY & RUBINA RATRA DR CURRENT OWNER 1597 TURRIFF WAY .14501 OAK ST SAN JOSE CA 95132 -2351 3ARATOGA CA 95070 -6025 517 -09 -031 - 517 -09 -032 RICHARD J &LAUREL HESS GIOVANNA R SCHENINI OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 14563 OAK ST 20576 3RD ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6053 SARATOGA.CA 95070 -6027 517 -09 -051 517 -09 -045 MIHAI T & MIHAE POPESCU- BONREALTY COMPANY INC STANESTI 12591 SARATOGA CREEK DR." OR CURRENT OWNER SARATOGA CA 95070 -3538 14613 OAK ST SARATOGA CA-95070 -6015 517 -09 -054 -:- ' 517-09-053. MAGDALENE LAVINE JACQUELYN GLASS OR CURRENT OWNER '14110 SQUIRREL HOLLOW LN 14607. OAK ST. SARATOGA CA.95070 -5418 SARATOGA CA 95070.6015 503 -24 -066 JOSEPH C & MICHELLE MASEK OR CURRENT OWNER 14467 BIG BASIN WAY, SARATOGA CA 95070 -6093 503 -24 -071 SAM CLOUD BARN 85 SARATOGA AVE 100 . SANTA CLARA CA 95051 -7,300 503.24 -079 DENNIS M CUNNINGHAM PO BOX 7 SARATOGA CA.95071 -0007 517 -09 -013 BKOFAMERNT &SA PO BOX 2818 ALPHARETTA GA 30023 -2818 517-00-018,44, 44 ATOGA LLC 4367 CLEAR VALLEY DR .ENCINO CA 91436 -3317 I. 517 -09 -024 DAVID L SORENSEN OR CURRENT OWNER 14493 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6025 517 -09 -027 THANH LUONG OR CURRENT OWNER 14515 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6025 • 517 -09 -042 JOUNG S & YOUNG KIM 7221 SILVER LODE LN SAN.JOSE CA 95120 -3356 517 -09 -052 LEXIE A SMITH OR CURRENT OWNER 14611 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6015 .517 -09 -055 JOSEPH A FITZPATRICK • OR CURRENT OWNER 14605 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6015 17 -09 -056 "ONY & SHARON CHANG )R CURRENT OWNER 4603 OAK ST OATOGA CA 95070 -6015 ;17 -09 -060 'ATRICK KIRK .546 MONTALBAN DR ;AN JOSE CA 95120 -4829 i17 -09 -064 3TEVEN L MICHELI -)R CURRENT OWNER 14465 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6025 517 -09 -068 :'ALI INVESTMENTS 14510 BIG BASIN WAY 3ARATOGA CA 95070 -6090 517 -09 -072 JAMES B SCHREMPP OR CURRENT OWNER 14587 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6075 *09-075 GARY D ALFORD OR CURRENT OWNER 14593 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6075 517 -09 -080 RICHARD & ANGELA JOHNSON OR CURRENT OWNER 20578 3RD ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6053 517 -09 -085 DERALD R KENOYER OR CURRENT OWNER 20661 5TH ST 2 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6803 517 -09 -088 MICHAEL J & ALINA MORETTI 530 IRVEN CT PALO ALTO CA 94306 -3950 u 517 -09 -058 GREG L TYLER 459 TROY LN SONOMA CA 95476 517 -09 -061 PETER LA BARBERA PO BOX 26190 SAN JOSE CA 95159 -6190 517 -09 -065 TED A & PEGGY MCKIBBEN OR CURRENT OWNER 14463 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6025 517 -09 -069 POLLACK PROPERTIES II LL' C 14500 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6076 517 -09 -073 RAY D REDMON OR CURRENT OWNER 14589 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6075 517 -09 -076 JAMES P LALLY 68 -1050 MAUNA LANI POINT D D304 KAMUELA HI 96743 -9781 517 -09 -081 TIONG C & CANDICE ONG OR CURRENT OWNER 20582 3RD ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6053 517 -09 -086 CHARLES M & DIANE SKINNER OR CURRENT OWNER 20661 5TH ST 3 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6803 CITY OF SARATOGA ATTN: SHWETA BHATT 13777 FRUITVALE Avenue SARATOGA CA 95070 517 -09 -059 P P & E KIRK , PO BOX 2080 GILROY CA 95021 -2080 517 -09 -063 DALTON OR CURRENT OWNER 14467 OAK ST . SARATOGA CA 95070 -6025 517 -09 -066 ROBERT K & LISA BUSSE OR CURRENT OWNER 14461 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6025 517 -09 -071 EUGENE ZAMBETTI PO BOX 34 SARATOGA CA 95071 -0034 517 -09 -0.74 WALTER MILLER OR CURRENT OWNER 14591 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6075 517 -09 -077 PATRICK MCGILL OR CURRENT OWNER 14597 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6075 517 -09 -084 WILLIAM & LORRAINE WRIGHT OR CURRENT OWNER 20661 5TH ST 1 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6803 517 -09 -087 DAVID SHEN OR CURRENT OWNER 20661 5TH ST 4 SARATOGA CA 95070 -6803 Advanced Listing Services P.O. Box 2593 Dana Point CA 92624 LegalAdvertisingC5FublicNotices ,� r GET INVOLVED!! . ' The City of Saratoga encourages people to become involved in their community. One way to do so is to .a serve in an advisory capacity on one of the City's ua5 various commissions. The. City is. now accepting �lr 1 applications to fill one position on the Traffic Safety . Commission Applications are available from the City of Saratoga 13777. ' 9507 FrWrv2le d cane, Saratoga; tied TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION 95070 and can be downloaded from the City's wcbsite, - - - www.santoga.m.us The Traffic Safety Commission meets the second Thursday every other Applications for the TtaffrcSafety month. .. - Commission, which include a There is a change to the normal meeting schedule in June required supplement question- due to scheduling conflicts. nairc, must be submired.ro the Nat Meeting is scheduled for aria 7. 2007 City Clerk's Of6a by 5p.m. on g J July 11, 2007. - The meetings start at 6:30 p.m. and are held in the Administrative The City Council will conduct Conference Room, 13777 Fruirvale Avenuc interviews for this position on July 18, 2007. The Traffic Safety Commission is comprised of seven voluntar resi- dents of the City of Saratoga. The Commission investigates, reviews, To qualify for the Commission and analyzes traffic safety issues raised by the Community members bacaucics applicants most: - and Public Safety Agencies. It provides a venue for the public to • Be a resident of the City of impress concerns regarding traffic safety issues. The Traffic Safety Santora. Commission makes recommendations to the City Council re din • Be a registered voter of the Ciry. .. of Saratoga. traffic safety. As an advisory agency the Commission is not aut prize • Prior to being interviewed for to stt City policy. ' appointment to a Commission, have attended at last one mat - The Traffic Safety Commission's Mission Statement is to support the frig of the Commission to which City in ice endeavor to provide safe streets for the dtiiens of Saratoga appointment u being sought. and to promote education in the Community regarding traffic, bicycle • Not hold any elected public . and pedestrian safety. - - of8cc in any jurisdiction, any - place or position of employment Members are required by the City's Conflict of Interest Code to file as with the City of Sanroga. annual Statement of Economic Interest' (Form 700) with the Fair For more information Political Practice Commission. _.. . please contact: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk For more information regarding Form 700 go to www.fppc.ca.gov- (408) 868 -1269 ' etderk@s2muNta:a.us - (pub SN 6/13/2007) 62 SARATOGA NEWS JUNE 13,2007 ested person files an objec- tion to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority. A HEARING on the petition will be held on JULY 6, 2007, 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 15 located at 191 North First St., San - lose, CA 95113. IF YOU OBJECT to the granti- ng of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attomey. IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the deceased, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal repre- sentative .appointed by the court within four months from the date of first issuance of letters as provid- ed in section 9100 of the California Probate Code. The time for filing claims will not expire before four months from the hearing date noticed above. YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a formal Request for Special Notice of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any peti- tion or account as provided in section 1250 of the California Probate Code. A Request for Special Notice forth is avail- able from the court clerk. Attorney for petitioner: TAMARA K. LOPEZ, DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL 373 WEST JULIAN STREET, SUITE 300 SAN JOSE, CA 95110.2335 408. 491.4200 (Pub SN 6/13, 6/20, 6/27) SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA NOTICE OF SALE OF REAL PROPERTY CASE NO. 1-07-PR-160M In re the Estate of Sharon Falk Hedden aka Sharon F. Hedden, Sharon L.F. Hedden and Sharon Hedden Deceased Date: June 20, 2007 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept: 15 Notice is given that SmdyLou Hedden Nevins, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Sharon Falk Hedden, deceased, will sell at private sale subject to confirmation . by the Superior Court, on or after June 20, 2007, at Superior Court of California, 191 N. First Street San lose, CA 95113, the following real property of the estate: Re- sidential Real Property locat- ed at: 20820 Canyon View Drive, Saratoga, California and described as: All of Lot 1, in Block 2, as shown upon that certain Map entitled, "tract No. 1277 Saratoga Orchards ", which Map was filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, on March 22,1954 in Book 48 of Maps at Pages 26 and 27. Excepting therefrom the underground water without rights of surface entry, as granted in the Deed from Armstrong Realty Investment Co., a California corporation, to San lose Water Works, a California corporation, to San Jose Water Works, a California Corporation, dated July 26, 1954, recorded July 26,1954 in Book 2924 Office of the Recorder, page 35. APN: 503 -22 -042 The terms and conditions of sale are: 1. The property Is sold "AS IS ", WITHOUT WARRANTY. Buyer is to acknowledge and agree that the 'Property is being sold in as "As Is" con- dition and that Seller, makes absolutely no representa- tions or warranties of any kind concerning the condi- tion or operability of the Property and it shall be the sole responsibility of Buyer to investigate the same to the Buyer's satisfaction. 2. Seller is exempt from the requirement to provide Buyer with a Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement. California Civil Code Section 1102.2(1). 3. At least ten percent (10%) of the amount bid must be paid with the offer and the balance must be paid on close of escrow after confir- mation of sale by the Court. 4. The purchase price must be paid in all cash, or part cash and part credit, the terms and conditions of cred- it as are acceptable to the Special Administrator and the Court Bids or offers for this property must be made in writing and directed to the Special Administrator, in case of her attorney, Leslie Yarnes Sugai, at the above address or may be filed with the clerk of the Superior Court at any time after publication of this notice and before the sale. The Special Administrator reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Dated: May 22, 2007 Is/s in dy Lou Hedden Nevins / Special Administrator /s /Leslie Yames Sugai/ Attorney for Special Administrator (Pub SN 6/13/07) RESOLUTION NO. 1179 A RESOLUTION FDUNG TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING ON REPORT ON RATES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICE AND FACILITIES FURNISHED BY THE DISTRICTFOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2007.2008 AND PRO - VIDING FOR NOTICE THEREOF CUPERTINO SANITARY DIS- TRICT RESOLVED, by the Sanitary Board of the Cupertino Sanitary District, Santa Clara County, California, that WHEREAS, this District has elected to have certain rates and charges for services and facilities furnished by It which have become delin- quent and the rates and charges for services and fadl- ities furnished by the District for the fiscal year 2007 -2008 collected on the tax roll of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, pursuant to Sections 5470 through 5473.11 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, pursuant thereto, a report on said rates and charges will be filed with the Secretary of this District prior to July 18, 2007; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Wednesday, the 18th day of July 2007, at the hour of 8:00 o'clock P.M" at the regular meeting place of said Board, Stevens Creek Office Center, 20833 Stevens Creek, Suite Important Information: No refunds a6" submission. Canceled ads will naive credit for future adwrtis;ng, nun a refund. Ads must be carded before dad - line for that issue. Adrertisetuents are accepted upon the representation, char the advertiser and/or its agency Gave the rot to publish the contents thereof. In consideration of such publication, advertiser ad its agency agree to indemnify and hold the publisher hundess against any expense or bras by reason of any claims arising oar of puWka-' tion. The publisher reserves the right to.ed;r alt", unit, or refuse any advertising submitted. For policies concerning specific categories, please refer in the parr graph at the beginning of the category or call m in 408.200.1025 or email m at dassifeds @cmmwnby- newspapeu.oum• 104, Cupertino, California, are hereby fixed as the time and place for hearing on the report on rates and chargges for services and facilities fur- nished by the District filed with the Secretary of this District, pursuant to law, and the Secretary shall publish notice of said hearing and of the filing of said report, once a week for two successive weeks prior to the date set for said hearing, in the Cupertino Courier and Saratoga News, a newspaper of general circulation pub- lished in the District I hereby certify that the fore- going Is a full, true and cor- rect copy of a resolution duly and regularly passed and adopted by the Sanitary Board of the Cupertino Sanitary District, at a meet- ing thereof held on the 6th day of June 2007, by the fol- lowing vote: AYES, and in favor thereof, Members: Harrison, - Andrews, Gatto, Bosworth and Ken. NOES, Members: NONE ABSTAIN, Members: NONE ABSENT, Members: NONE /s/ Stephen C. Andrews Secretary, Cupertino Sanitary District APPROVED: /s/ Curtis B. Harrison President 6/27,7/4,7/11) 6/13, 6120, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CUPERTINO SANITARY DISTRICT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to Sections 5473 through 5473a of the Health and Safety, Code of the State of California, the Sanitary Board of the Cupertino Sanitary District has, by reso- lution, elected to collect cer- tain rates and charges for services and fatalities fur- nished by it which have become delinquent and Its rates and charges for ser- vices and facilities furnished by the District for the fiscal year 2007 -2008, on the tax roll. In the same manner as general taxes, and has caused to be filed with Its Secretary a written report containing a description of each parcel of real property receiving such services and facilities from said District and the amount of the charge for each such parcel. NOTICE 15 HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that on Wednesday, the 18th day of July 2007, at the hour of 8:00 P.M. at the regular meeting place of said Board, Stevens Creek Office Center, 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Suite 104, Cupertino, California, said Board will hear and consider' all protests and objections to said report NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that said District will exercise its right to continue to Issue direct bills for such rates and charges to owners of real property whose rates .and charges cannot conve- nhently be. collected on the tax roll By order of the Sanita fyBoard of the Cupertino Sanitary District Dated: June 6, 2007 /s/ Steve Andrews Secretary, Cupertino Sanitary District (PUB SN 6/6, 6/13,'6/20, 6/27, 7/4, 7/11) Sllicon Valley Community Newspapers accepts m Ila- bility for its failure, for any came, to insert an advertise- ment. Liability for any error appearing In an advertisement Is limited to the cost of the space actually occupied. No allowance, however, will be granted for an enor that does not materially affect the value of the advertisement. To gW11- fy for an adjustment, any error must be reported within 15 days of publication date. Credit for errors is limited to first insertion. �yj City Lag .5.1 NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SARATOGA' PLANNING COMMISSIO IO announces the following Public hearings on Wednesday, the 27th day of June at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details and plans are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department,. Monday through Thursday, 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. If you have ques- lions, Planners are available at the public counter between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 12:00 noon. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pur- suant 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 notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Com- mission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's Information packets, written communka- lions should be filed on or before the Tuesday, a week before the meeting. A sate vlsh will be held on the day preceding the hearing date listed above as part of the standard Site Visit Com- mittee agenda. Site visits occur between 3:30 and 5:00 p.m. The site visit is open to the public. The Site Visit Committee will convene at the City Hall parking lot at 3:30 p.m. on the day preced- ing the hearing and visit the site listed above and may visit other sites as well. F more information plea contact the Communi-W Development Department at 408 868 -1222 or review the Site Visit Agenda on the City Website at wwwsarato- ga.ca.us. APPLICATION #07.237 (503- 24.079) METRO PCS, 14407 Big Basin Way — The appli- cant requests a Conditional Use Permit to Install a wire - less facility onthe roof of the existing office building at the above location. The pro- posed facility includes panel antennas, a screen for the antennas, and an equipment cabinet. APPLICATION #07.281 (393- 25.028) Saint Andrews Parish, 13601 Saratoga Avenue; - The applicant requests Design Review Approval to Install a 36 . square foot illuminated mon- ument sign. The proposed sign would be 4.5 feet tall and 8 feet wide and be locat- ed near the entry driveway. Zone District: R -1. 20,000. APPLICATION #06 -214 (503- 24 -034) Graff - (Conoco Phillips /Tosco Marketing), 14395 Big Basin Way; - The applicant requests approval to replace the existing signs at the 76 gas station. The project will include an illumi- nated free standing gasoline price sign. The she is located In the Commercial Historic (CH -1) zoning district. The project was continued from December 13: 2006. APPLICATION #07.216 (366- 22.023) Graff (Conoco Road; . The applicant requests approval to replace the existing signs at the 76 will gas station. The projel will include a variance two illuminated free stand: gasoline price signs. The site is located in the Commercial- Neighborhood (CN) zoning district. (Pub SN 6113107) SUPERIOR COURT OF THE of Estates Act. (This author:- tion or account as provided STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, ty will allow the personal rep- resentative to lake many in section 1250 of the California Probate Code. A 4114101 Q`�IWS LIMITED CML)URISDICTION actions without obtaining Request for Special Notice STATEMENT OF DAMAGE court approval. Before tak- form is available from the AM ENDED Case No:106CV072730 ing .certain very important court clerk. ORDERED SHOW CAUSE BRIAN H. SONG, ESQ. PWntlIF . actions, however, the person- al representative will be Attorney for petitioner: WILLIAM 1. SOUTHAM FOR CHANGE OF NAME' CASE NO. 107EV082835 K' - required to give notice to LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS W. SUPERIOR COURT OF CAU- SANG DUK LEE and UN S. LEE Defendants interested persons unless they have waived notice or DAVIES 14625 BIG BASIN WAY FORMA, COUNTY OF SANTA FORN[A 191 NORTH SANTA , CLARA, H NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN - consented to the proposed SARATOGA, CA 95070 5113 STREET, SAN JOSE, 95113 THAT in the present action the plaintiff claims a damage action.) The independent administration authority will 408.867.9900 (Pub SN 6/13, 6/20,6/27) - IN THE MATTER OFTHE TI THE ATTER O. HODGES of $18,797, interest thereon be granted unless an inter• AMENDED THE COURT FINDS that at 10 percent per year born June 19, 2006: the cost of ested person files'an objet- tion to the petition and NOTICE OF PETITION TO Petitioner(s) ACACIA EVE suit herein incurred; and shows good cause why the ADMINISTER ESTATE OF HODGES has filed for such other and further relief court should no[ gran[ the TAKASHI YOSHIOKA decree changing name(s) as as the court may deem prop- authori CASE NO. 1-07-PR-161331 follows: Present namie: ec - - The amount of the damages A HEARING on the petition will held on 5, 2007, To all. heirs, beneficiaries; creditors, contingent credi- a ACACIA EVE HODGES aka ACACIA EVE HODGES-SHIM' claimed is equal to the total unpaid amount, determined 9;00 a.m. in Dept. 15 located tors, and persons who may otherwise pbe interested In MELata as of lane 19, 2006, owed to at 191 North first SL, San lose, CA 95113. the will or estate, or both of A. EVE HODGES•SHIMMEL aka A EVE HODGES the plaintiff by the named IF YOU OBJECT to the graffiti- TAKASHI YOSHIOKA A PETITION has been filed by Proposed Do defendants in connection with the legal service•ren- Fig of the petition. you should appear at the hearing and ROBERT D. CECIL, SANTA a ALISON EVE HODGES THE COURT ORDERS that all tiered by the plaintiff. objections state sir ab'ectians or file CLARA COUNTY PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR in the persons Interested in this before Dated- May 23, 2007 /s /Brian H. Song /Plaintiff writ with the court before the hearing: Superior Court of California, County Santa Clara. matter shall appear this court at the hearing ends- (pub SN 5/30, 6/6, 6/13, 6/20) - Your appearance may be in of THE PETITION requests that rated below to show cause, if person or by your attomey. ROBERT D. CECIL, SANTA any, why the petition for .NOTICE OF PETITION TO IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a CLARA COUNTY PUBLIC change of name should not ADMINISTER ESTATE OF contingent creditor of the ADMINISTRATOR be appoint- be granted. DOROTHY A BURGER deceased, you must file your ed as personal representa- Notice of Hearing on JULY 10. CASE NO. 1-07-PR-161497 claim with the court and mail tive to administer the estate 2007 at 8:45 a.m. in ROOM To all heirs, beneficiaries, . a copy to the personal repre- of the decedent. " 107 located at 191 North creditors, contingent credi- sentative appointed by the THE PETITION requests First Street, San lose, CA tors, and persons who may court within four months authority to administer the 95113. otherwise be interested In from the date - of first estate under the Independent A COPY of this order to the will or estate, or both of issuance of letters as provid- Administration of Estates Act. show cause shall be pub- DOROTHY A. BURGER ' ed in section 9100 of the (This authority will allow the lished at least once each A PETITION has been filed by California Probate Code. The personal representative to week for four successive WILLIAM 1. SOUTHAM in the time for filing claims will not take many actions without weeks prior to the date set Superior Court of California, expire before four months obtaining court approval. for hearing on the petition in . County of Santa Clara.. from the hearing date Before taking certain very the following newspaper of THE PETITION requests that noticed above. - important actions, however, general circulation, SARATO- WILLIAM J. SOUTHAM be YOU MAY EXAMINE the file the personal representative' GA NEWS, printed In the appointed as personal repre- kept by the court. If you are a will be required to give notice County of Santa Clara. sentative to administer the person interested in the to interested persons unless Dated: JUNE 8. 2007 estate of the decedent estate, you may file with the they have waived notice or /Eugene M. Hyman / THE PETITION requests court a formal Request for consented to the proposed judge of the Superior Court authority to administer Special Notice of the filing of action.) The independent (Pub SN 6/13, 6/20, 6/27, the estate under the an inventory and appraisal of administration authority will 7/4) Independent Administration estate assets or of any peti- be granted unless an inter- ,� r GET INVOLVED!! . ' The City of Saratoga encourages people to become involved in their community. One way to do so is to .a serve in an advisory capacity on one of the City's ua5 various commissions. The. City is. now accepting �lr 1 applications to fill one position on the Traffic Safety . Commission Applications are available from the City of Saratoga 13777. ' 9507 FrWrv2le d cane, Saratoga; tied TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION 95070 and can be downloaded from the City's wcbsite, - - - www.santoga.m.us The Traffic Safety Commission meets the second Thursday every other Applications for the TtaffrcSafety month. .. - Commission, which include a There is a change to the normal meeting schedule in June required supplement question- due to scheduling conflicts. nairc, must be submired.ro the Nat Meeting is scheduled for aria 7. 2007 City Clerk's Of6a by 5p.m. on g J July 11, 2007. - The meetings start at 6:30 p.m. and are held in the Administrative The City Council will conduct Conference Room, 13777 Fruirvale Avenuc interviews for this position on July 18, 2007. The Traffic Safety Commission is comprised of seven voluntar resi- dents of the City of Saratoga. The Commission investigates, reviews, To qualify for the Commission and analyzes traffic safety issues raised by the Community members bacaucics applicants most: - and Public Safety Agencies. It provides a venue for the public to • Be a resident of the City of impress concerns regarding traffic safety issues. The Traffic Safety Santora. Commission makes recommendations to the City Council re din • Be a registered voter of the Ciry. .. of Saratoga. traffic safety. As an advisory agency the Commission is not aut prize • Prior to being interviewed for to stt City policy. ' appointment to a Commission, have attended at last one mat - The Traffic Safety Commission's Mission Statement is to support the frig of the Commission to which City in ice endeavor to provide safe streets for the dtiiens of Saratoga appointment u being sought. and to promote education in the Community regarding traffic, bicycle • Not hold any elected public . and pedestrian safety. - - of8cc in any jurisdiction, any - place or position of employment Members are required by the City's Conflict of Interest Code to file as with the City of Sanroga. annual Statement of Economic Interest' (Form 700) with the Fair For more information Political Practice Commission. _.. . please contact: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk For more information regarding Form 700 go to www.fppc.ca.gov- (408) 868 -1269 ' etderk@s2muNta:a.us - (pub SN 6/13/2007) 62 SARATOGA NEWS JUNE 13,2007 ested person files an objec- tion to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority. A HEARING on the petition will be held on JULY 6, 2007, 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 15 located at 191 North First St., San - lose, CA 95113. IF YOU OBJECT to the granti- ng of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attomey. IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the deceased, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal repre- sentative .appointed by the court within four months from the date of first issuance of letters as provid- ed in section 9100 of the California Probate Code. The time for filing claims will not expire before four months from the hearing date noticed above. YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a formal Request for Special Notice of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any peti- tion or account as provided in section 1250 of the California Probate Code. A Request for Special Notice forth is avail- able from the court clerk. Attorney for petitioner: TAMARA K. LOPEZ, DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL 373 WEST JULIAN STREET, SUITE 300 SAN JOSE, CA 95110.2335 408. 491.4200 (Pub SN 6/13, 6/20, 6/27) SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA NOTICE OF SALE OF REAL PROPERTY CASE NO. 1-07-PR-160M In re the Estate of Sharon Falk Hedden aka Sharon F. Hedden, Sharon L.F. Hedden and Sharon Hedden Deceased Date: June 20, 2007 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept: 15 Notice is given that SmdyLou Hedden Nevins, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Sharon Falk Hedden, deceased, will sell at private sale subject to confirmation . by the Superior Court, on or after June 20, 2007, at Superior Court of California, 191 N. First Street San lose, CA 95113, the following real property of the estate: Re- sidential Real Property locat- ed at: 20820 Canyon View Drive, Saratoga, California and described as: All of Lot 1, in Block 2, as shown upon that certain Map entitled, "tract No. 1277 Saratoga Orchards ", which Map was filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, on March 22,1954 in Book 48 of Maps at Pages 26 and 27. Excepting therefrom the underground water without rights of surface entry, as granted in the Deed from Armstrong Realty Investment Co., a California corporation, to San lose Water Works, a California corporation, to San Jose Water Works, a California Corporation, dated July 26, 1954, recorded July 26,1954 in Book 2924 Office of the Recorder, page 35. APN: 503 -22 -042 The terms and conditions of sale are: 1. The property Is sold "AS IS ", WITHOUT WARRANTY. Buyer is to acknowledge and agree that the 'Property is being sold in as "As Is" con- dition and that Seller, makes absolutely no representa- tions or warranties of any kind concerning the condi- tion or operability of the Property and it shall be the sole responsibility of Buyer to investigate the same to the Buyer's satisfaction. 2. Seller is exempt from the requirement to provide Buyer with a Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement. California Civil Code Section 1102.2(1). 3. At least ten percent (10%) of the amount bid must be paid with the offer and the balance must be paid on close of escrow after confir- mation of sale by the Court. 4. The purchase price must be paid in all cash, or part cash and part credit, the terms and conditions of cred- it as are acceptable to the Special Administrator and the Court Bids or offers for this property must be made in writing and directed to the Special Administrator, in case of her attorney, Leslie Yarnes Sugai, at the above address or may be filed with the clerk of the Superior Court at any time after publication of this notice and before the sale. The Special Administrator reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Dated: May 22, 2007 Is/s in dy Lou Hedden Nevins / Special Administrator /s /Leslie Yames Sugai/ Attorney for Special Administrator (Pub SN 6/13/07) RESOLUTION NO. 1179 A RESOLUTION FDUNG TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING ON REPORT ON RATES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICE AND FACILITIES FURNISHED BY THE DISTRICTFOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2007.2008 AND PRO -