HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-04-2009 Supplemental Council AgendaCommunity Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, Califomia 95070
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: February 4, 2009
TO: City Council
FROM: Community Development Department
SUBJECT: Revised Ordinance and Resolution to Adopt a Negative Declaration
The resolution attached to the staff report included the Negative Declaration and the Fence
Ordinance text changes in one document. These two items have been reformatted as follows:
The Ordinance was reformatted with no substantive changes and the amendment text was
included as Attachment A.
A separate City Council Resolution was prepared adopting the Negative Declaration.
Please refer to these two documents during the discussion.
RESOLUTION No.
Application No. ZOA 07 -001
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
An Ordinance Amending the Saratoga Municipal Code to amend and clarify
existing provisions of the City Code regarding fences, walls, and hedges
The City of Saratoga City Council finds and determines as follows with respect to the proposed
Negative Declaration regarding the Project described below:
I. Project Summary
The City of Saratoga City Council is considering an ordinance amending the Saratoga Municipal
Code to amend and clarify existing provisions of the City Code regarding fences, walls, and
hedges in Articles 15 -06 and 15 -29. The foregoing work is described as the "Project" in this
Resolution.
II. Environmental Review
1. An Initial Study (IS) and Negative Declaration (ND) were prepared for the Project by the
City of Saratoga, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA, Public Resources Code sections 21000- 21177), CEQA Guidelines (14 California
Code of Regulations sections 15000- 15387), and any other applicable requirements.
2,
The IS and a notice of intent to adopt a ND were duly noticed and circulated for a 30 -day
public review period from December 3, 2007 through January 3, 2008 and no comments
were received.
3. All Interested Parties desiring to comment on the ND were given the opportunity to submit
written and oral comments on the adequacy of the MND at various Planning Commission
meetings (including the Public Hearing before the Planning Commission on November 12,
2008) and the Public Hearing before the City Council on February 4, 2009.
4. The IS and ND represents the City's independent judgment and analysis.
5. On February 4, 2009 the City Council conducted a Public Hearing on the Project, during
which opportunity was given to address the adequacy of the ND. All comments on the IS
and MND raised during the public and agency comment period and at the Public
Hearing(s) on the Project were considered by the City Council.
1
6. The City Council was presented with and/or had opportunity to review all of the
information in the administrative record; and
7. After the conclusion of such Public Hearing, the City Council considered all oral and
written comments and a staff recommendation for approval of the ND and reviewed and
considered the information in the IS and ND, public and agency comments on the IS and
ND, the administrative record, and the staff report for completeness and compliance with
CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and any and all other applicable requirements.
8. The City Council has considered the information contained in the ND and the record in
considering the Project and related actions.
9. The documents constituting the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based
are located in the City of Saratoga Department of Community Development and are
maintained by the Director of that Department.
10. Pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds on the basis of, and after
review of, the whole record before it (including the Initial Study, the Negative Declaration,
any and all comments received, and in light of expert and other evidence submitted), that
there is no credible, substantial evidence that the Project as revised and mitigated may have
a significant effect on the environment as to any issue raised.
III. Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration
After careful consideration of the matter, the City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration
for the Project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, this 4th day of
February, 2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RECUSED:
Chuck Page, Mayor Ann Sullivan, City Clerk
2
Attest:
ORDINANCE
An Ordinance Amending the Saratoga Municipal Code to amend and clarify existing
provisions of the City Code regarding fences, walls, and hedges
Findings
1. The City of Saratoga wishes to update the rules and standards applicable to fences,
retaining walls, and similar structures in the City of Saratoga.
The Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga considered a range of amendments to
the City Code, conducted four public meetings including a noticed public hearing at
which public testimony and all written materials were considered, and on November 12,
2008 recommended that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration and the proposed
amendments to the City Code.
3. The City Council has adopted a resolution pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) adopting a Negative Declaration and finding no evidence that the
amendments contained in this ordinance may have a significant adverse effect on the
environment.
Therefore, the City Council hereby ordains as follows:
Section 1. Adoption.
Articles 15 -06 and 15 -29 of the Saratoga City Code are hereby amended as set forth in
Attachment A. Words shown in bold underlined text (example) are added to the code and words
shown in strikeout (example) are added to the code. Words in standard font are unchanged from
the existing Code. Sections within an Article that are not included in Attachment A are
unchanged from the existing Code.
Section 2. Severance Clause.
The City Council declares that each section, sub section, paragraph, sub paragraph, sentence, clause
and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub- section
paragaph, sub paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance. If any section, sub section,
paragaph, sub paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held invalid, the City
Council declares that it would have adopted the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective
of the portion held invalid, and further declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this
ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated.
Section 3. Publication.
This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be published in a newspaper of
general circulation of the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption.
1
The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Saratoga held on the 4 day of February, 2009, and was adopted by the following
vote following a second reading on the l8 day of February, 2009:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED: ATTEST:
Chuck Page, Ann Sullivan,
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CLERK OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard Taylor, CITY ATTORNEY
2
Article 15 -06 DEFINITIONS
Attachment A
Amendments to Saratoga City Code Articles 15 -06 and 15 -29
15- 06.261 Fence.
"Fence" means any structural device, forming a physical barrier
by means of glass, wood, masonry, metal, chain, brick, stake, plastic, concrete block. wrought
iron. wire. or other similar materials. A wall. other than a wall of a building or a retaining
wall, is considered a fence.
15- 06.341 Height of fence s, walls and hedges.
"Height of fences, walla andh�e" means a vertical line from the highest point of the fence
(including lattice or similar materiall, er—la-edge to a point directly below at either the
natural grade or the finished grade, at the owners choice. whichever grade is lower. \\There a
fence is constructed upon, or approximately parallel to and within two feet of the top of a
fence to thc bottom of thc retaining wall in thc manner prescribed herein. Where there are
differences in grade between ad_acen a r.. erries the fen e he' i t is mea ured from the
property with the higher ade unless a different easure ent to i dard a s .lies rsuant
to another section of this Code.
Property A r 1
(grade)
2' lattice
6 fence
Property B
(grade)
15- 06.xxx Hedge.
"Hedge" means a series of trees or other natural landscaping planted in a linear and
uninterru ted I attern such that a boundary is created. he natural landsca 'n must be
able to stand on its own and shall not require supports upon maturity. A hedge is not a
fence.
15- 06.xxx Height of retaining wall.
"Height of retaining wall" means a vertical line from the highest point of the retaining wall
to a point directly below the lowest natural grade unless a different measurement standard
applies pursuant to another section of this Code.
15- 06.xxx Retaining Wall. "Retaining Wall" means a structural device constructed and
erected to resist lateral pressure from earth or to retain soil.
-End of Amendments to Article 1-06-
Article 15 -29 FENCES, WALLS AND HEDGES
15- 29.010 Height restrictions.
(a) General regulations.Gencral regulation. Except as otherwise specified in this Article, no
fence or wall shall exceed six fcct in height. A building permit shall be required for any
fence more than six feet in height (including lattice or similar material). Height maximums
and permitted materials for fences shall be as follows:
(1) Solid fences. Except as otherwise specified in this Article, no solid fence shall exceed
six feet in height. However. up to two feet of Lattice (or similar material) that is at
least twenty -five percent open to the passage of light and air may be added to the
top of a solid fence. A solid fence taller than six feet shall not be permitted unless
approved by the Planning Commission through the exce ti I Ices detailed in 15-
29.080, or approved by the Community Development Director pursuant to sections
15- 29.030. 15- 29.040. or 15- 29.050 of this Chapter.
(2) Open fences. Except as otherwise specified in this Article. open fencing, such as
wrought iron, wire material, split rail. chain link, or other similar fencing shall not
exceed eight feet in height. With the exception of chain link fencing, open fencing
hall ay •.e ssuffic'enttia •w the uu., structed'assa eofas.ser• having a
diameter of four inches, For chain link fencing, the opening shall be two inches at
minimum and no slats are allowed in any opening.
LW Front setback area, No fence located within any required front setback area shall exceed
three feet in height.
(c) an-el eExterior side setback area of reversed corner lots. No fence or wall located within any
required exterior side setback area of a reversed corner lot shall exceed three feet in height.
(d) The height Iimitations do not apply to the following circumstance Exceptions to these
height limitations arc as follows:
(-1-) A fence or wall lawfully constructed prior to March 20, 1987, may extend to a height not
or bicycle traffic and docs not obstruct the safe acccss to or from adjacent propertics; provided,
however, that upon the
(2) (1) Wrought iron entrance gates within the front setback area, designed with openings to
peimit visibility through the same, may extend to a height not exceeding five feet. and shall be
Located a minimum of twenty feet from the edge of street pavement.
2
(2) Safety railings that are required by the Uniform California Building Code shall be
excluded from the height requirements of this Section.
(3) Pedestrian entrvwav elements, such as arbors and trellises. when attached to a fence
within a front setback area or within an exterior side setback area, may e permitted to a
maximum height of eight feet, a maximum width of five feet. and a maximum depth of five
feet.
(4) On any lot where the front setback area, or a portion thereof, of the subject property:
(1) does not have street frontage as defined by Article 15- 06.290 and (2) the front lot line, or
a portion thereof. of the subject property abuts the side or rear setback area of an adjacent
property, the maximum permitted fence height for a side or rear setback area shall be
permitted within the front setback area of the subject property where it abuts the side or
rear setback area of an adjacent property.
O (e) Street intersections. No fence, wall or compact, hedge, retaining wall, entryway
element, pilaster. gate. or other similar element located within a triangle having sides fifty
feet in length from a street intersection, as measured from intersecting curblines or intersecting
edges of the street pavement where no curb exists, shall exceed three feet in height above the
established grade of the adjoining street.
(f) Drivewav Intersections. No fence, hedge. retaining wall, entrvway element, pilaster.
gate. or other similar element located within a triangle having sides twelve feet in length
from either side of a driveway where it intersects with edge of pavement shall exceed three
feet in height above the established grade of the adjoining street. Protected trees described
in section 15- 50.050 of this Code are not subject to this requirement.
3
Property Line
Edge of pavement
(g) Vehicular Obstructions. No fence. hedge. retaining wall, entryway element, or any
other similar element shall constitute an obstruction as provided for in City Code Section
10- 05,030.
(h) Recreational courts. Fencing around recreational courts shall comply with the regulations
contained in Section 15- 80.030(c) of this Chapter.
Ee Pilasters. Pilasters constituting a part of a fence, in reasonable numbers and scale in
relationship to the nature and style of the fence, may extend to a height of not more than two feet
above the height limit applicable to the fence containing such pilasters, but in no case shall the
height of pilasters exceed eight feet. If pilasters within the front setback area are attached
to a wrought iron entrance gate, the pilasters are permitted to a maximum height of seven
feet.
(1) (f) Light fixtures. The height of a fence shall not include light fixtures mounted thereon at the
entrance of driveways and sidewalks leading into a site. Not more than two such light fixtures
shall be installed at each driveway and sidewalk entrance.
(k) Swimming Pool Fences. Fences required for swimming pools are governed by City
Code Sections 16- 75.010 and 15- 29.020(0.
Eg Retaining walls. No retaining wall shall exceed five feet in height. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, no retaining wall located in a front or exterior side setback area shall exceed three feet
in height.
(h) Fencing adjaccnt to commercial districts. The Community Development Director may issue a
special permit to allow a fence up to eight feet in height where such fence is installed along a
district. The Community Development Director may impose such conditions deemed appropriate
to mitigate any visual or other adverse impacts of thc fence, including, but not limited to,
Development Director on such form as he shall prescribe, and shall be accompanied by a
processing fee in such amount as established from to time by thc City Council.
15- 29.020 Fencing within hillside districts.
In addition to the regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of this Article, fences and walls
located within an BR or R -OS district shall comply with the following regulations:
(a) (e) Area of Enclosure. Except for fencing which constitutes part of a corral, no fencing
on a single site shall encompass or enclose an area in excess of six thousand square feet or
15 percent of the gross site area, whichever is greater. unless approved by the Planning
Commission. The fencing shall meet the requirements stipulated in 15- 29.010 of this
Article. "Encompass and enclose," as used in this section. shall mean to surround an area
with a continuous fence or a fence.
(b) Fencing Outside Area of Enclosure. Except for fencing which constitutes part of a
corral or fencing required by the Building Code for swimming pools, fencing outside the
area of enclosure shall not exceed three feet in height, and shall be split rail fencing, stone
wall. or stucco.
4
(a) Lcngth of solid fences and walls. Solid fences and •,valls, having no opening: to permit
street or adjacent property. This restriction shall not apply to retaining walls.
(c) (la) Parallel retaining fences and walls. Parallel retaining fences and walls shall be separated
by a horizontal distance of not less than five feet. Where two or more fences or retaining walls
are approximately parallel to each other and separated by a horizontal distance of thirty feet or
less, the combined height of such fences or walls shall not exceed ten feet.
(d) Wildlife trails. No fence shall unreasonably impede the movement of wildlife animals
utilizing an established trail or migratory route which crosses the site.
(c) Arca of enclosure. Except for fencing around recreational courts and fencing which
constitutes part of a corral, no fencing on a single site shall encompass or enclose an area in
Planning Commission, which approval may bc granted in any of the following cases:
public strccts and adjacent propertics will substantially bc reduced by thc topography,
landscaping or other features of the sitc.
Planning Commission for a "designated neighborhood ar a," as hereinafter defined, in response
conduct a public hearing on thc petition, with notice thereof sent by mail at 1 st ten days prior to
the date of thc h g to all persons owning property located within the designated
of this Section, means a geographic portion of a hillside zoning district, as designated by thc
Planning Commission, consisting of not lest than ten lots which are contiguous to ch other.
Lots which arc separated only by a strcct shall be considered contiguous. If a petition for
exemption is presented by owners of any lots shown on a recorded subdivision or tract map, the
included within thc designated neighborhood ar Additional contiguous lots may be annexed to
by the Planning Director, based upon his detcrmina
topography, visibility, or othcr f tures shared by the lots within the designated neighborhood
5
(d) Wildlife trails. No fence shall unreasonably impede the movement of wildlife animals
utilizing an established trail or migratory route which crosses thc site.
permitted only if the space between the wire is sufficient to allow the unobstructed passage of a
the terrain. Chain link fencing shall be permitted only for recreational courts and shall similarly
be colored to blend with thc terrain. No barbed wire fencing shall be allowed except as permitted
e
(e) Swimming Pool Fences within hillside districts. When a fence already encompasses or
encloses six thousand square feet or more on a single site, and a swimming pool fence is
required for a swimming pool that is not located within the area of enclosure as described
in Article 15- 29.020(a), an additional area around the swimming pool may be enclosed with
a fence, provided the swimming pool fence follows the contour of the pool with no more
than ten feet of distance located between the fence and edge of water.
(f) The provisions of this Section shall not apply to any property located within and constituting
a part of Tract 7763, as shown on the subdivision map thereof recorded in the office of the
County Recorder.
(g) Any property located within and constituting a part of Tracts 6526 and 6528 (Parker
Ranch Subdivision), as shown on the subdivision map thereof recorded in the office of the
County Recorder shall meet the regulations stipulated in Resolution FE -90 -001 or
successor amendments,
00 15- 29.030 Fencing adjacent to commercial districts. The Community Development
Director may issue a special permit to allow a solid fence, or other type of fence permitted by
this Chapter, ice up to a maximum of eight feet in height where such fence is installed along
a rear setback area or interior side setback area of a residential site which abuts a commercial
district. The Community Development Director may impose such conditions deemed appropriate
to mitigate any visual or other adverse impacts of the fence, including, but not limited to,
requirements with respect to the design and materials of the fence and landscape screening.
Applications for a special permit under this subsection shall be filed with the Community
Development Director on such form as he shall prescribe, and shall be accompanied by a
processing fee in such amount as established from time to time by the City Council.
15 29.03015- 29.040 Fencing to mitigate noise from certain arterial streets.
(a) For the purpose of noise mitigation, a solid fence, or other type of fence permitted by this
Article, exceeding the height otherwise prescribed in this Article as the limit for such fence may
be located within any required setback area abutting Prospect Road, Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road,
Quito Road, the portion of Saratoga Avenue between Fruitvale Avenue and Lawrence
Expressway or the portion of Cox Avenue between Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga
Avenue, upon the issuance by the Community Development Director of a fence penult and
subject to the following provisions:
6
(1) Where the fence is located within an exterior side setback area or rear setback area abutting
one of the arterial streets specified herein, the fence shall not exceed eight feet in height at the
property line, plus one additional foot in height for each additional five feet of setback from the
property line, up to a maximum height of ten feet if the fence is still located within a required
setback area.
(2) Where the fence is located within a front setback area abutting one of the arterial streets
specified herein, the fence may be located no closer than ten feet from the front property line and
shall not exceed eight feet in height, plus one additional foot in height for each additional five
feet of setback from the front property line in excess of ten feet, up to a maximum height of ten
feet if the fence is still located within the required front setback area.
(3) Where a street line is located within a site, the location and setback of the fence as specified
in subsections (a)(1) and (2) of this Section shall be determined by the street line rather than the
property line.
(4) The applicant shall landscape and pennianently maintain an area parallel to and along the
entire exterior side of the fence facing the street, in accordance with a landscape plan approved
by the Community Development Director. All or any portion of such area may be located within
the public right -of -way, subject to approval by the Community Development Director. The
landscaped area required herein shall be not less than five feet in width, except that where the
available space between the fence and the interior edge of the sidewalk, or the edge of the street
pavement where no sidewalk exists, is less than five feet, the Community Development Director
may approve a landscape area of not less than two feet. Prior to issuance of the fence pellnit, a
landscape maintenance agreement shall be executed by the applicant and recorded in the office
of the County Recorder, which agreement shall constitute a covenant running with the land.
(5) The design of the fence shall be subject to approval by the Community Development
Director, based upon a finding that the fence is compatible with existing or proposed structures
on the site and upon neighboring properties.
(6) No permit shall be issued if the Community Development Director fords that the fence will
constitute a hazard for vehicular or pedestrian traffic or will otherwise be detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare.
(b) Applications for a fence permit under this Section shall be filed with the Community
Development Director on such form as he shall prescribe, and shall be accompanied by a
processing fee in such amount as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council.
15 29.010 15- 29.050 Fencing adjacent to scenic highways.
In addition to the regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of this Article, fences adjacent to
State designated scenic highways shall comply with the following requirements:
(a) Fence permit. No person shall construct any fence or wall which faces and is located within
one hundred feet from the right -of -way of a State designated scenic highway without first
obtaining a fence pelniit from the Planning Director. Application for such permit shall be
submitted to the Planning Director on such form as he shall prescribe, and shall be accompanied
by a processing fee in such amount as established from time to time by resolution of the City
Council.
7
(b) Setback. No fence or wall shall be constructed within fifteen feet from the property line
abutting the right -of -way of a scenic highway. The Planning Director may require this minimum
setback to be increased to a maximum of one hundred feet if he determines that such increased
setback is necessary to preserve the scenic qualities of the highway.
(c) Color, material and design. Fences or walls adjacent to scenic highways may be constructed
of wood, stone, stucco, masonry, wrought iron or similar material, but no chain link, plastic or
wire fencing shall be pennitted. The design, color and materials of the fence or wall shall be
subject to approval by the Planning Director, based upon a finding that the fence or wall will not
adversely affect the scenic qualities of the highway and will be compatible with the natural
terrain.
(d) Landscape screening. The applicant shall landscape and permanently maintain an area
parallel to and along the entire length of the exterior side of the fence or wall facing the scenic
highway, in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the Planning Director. Such
landscape plan shall provide for the planting of trees and vegetation that are native to the area,
fast growing, and require little or no maintenance. The Planning Director shall not approve the
landscape plan unless he finds that the proposed landscaping will effectively screen the fence
from public view and enhance the visual appearance of the scenic highway. Prior to issuance of
the fence permit, a landscape maintenance agreement shall be executed by the applicant and
recorded in the office of the County Recorder, which agreement shall constitute a covenant
running with the land.
(e) Height. The height of any fence or wall adjacent to a scenic highway shall comply with the
regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of this Article; provided, however, where the applicant
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that his property is subjected to greater
noise impacts from the scenic highway as compared generally with other properties located
adjacent to such highway, the Planning Director may approve a fence or wall not exceeding eight
feet in height. As a condition of such approval, the Planning Director may require increased
setbacks and landscaping to mitigate the visual impact of the higher fence or wall.
1987, if such fence docs not create a safcty hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and
Section.
15 29.05015- 29.060 Barbed wire and electrified wire prohibited.
No fence or wall constructed or installed within the City shall contain barbed or electrified wire
unless approved by the Planning Commission, based upon a finding that the barbed or
electrified wire is necessary for security purposes and that measures will be taken, when
appropriate, to mitigate any adverse impacts of such wire.
15 29.06015- 29.070 Fences adjacent to heritage lanes.
8
In addition to the regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of this Article, fences adjacent to a
designated heritage lane shall comply with the following. requirements:
(a) Fence peituit. No person shall construct any fence or wall which faces and is located within
fifty feet from the right -of -way of a designated heritage lane, and which exceeds three feet in
height, without first obtaining a fence permit from the Community Development Director.
Application for such permit shall be submitted and processed in the manner provided in Article
13 -20 of the City Code. If the Heritage Commission recommends issuance, the Community
Development Director shall issue the permit in accordance with those recommendations and any
condition related but not limited to the design standards set forth in subsections (c), (d), (e) and
(f) of this Section and pursuant to the process prescribed in Article 13 -20.
(b) Supporting data. The level of detail of the supporting data required by Section 13- 20.030
shall be determined by the Community Development Director to allow adequate review of the
proposed fence or wall.
(c) Setback. No fence or wall which exceeds three feet in height shall be constructed within the
required setback area fronting a heritage lane. This minimum setback may be required to be
increased to a maximum of fifty feet upon the finding that such increased setback is necessary to
preserve the historic qualities of the heritage lane.
(d) Color, material and design. Fences or walls adjacent to a the heritage lane may be constructed
of wood, stone, masonry, wrought iron or similar material. The design, color and materials of the
fence or wall shall be approved based upon a finding that the fence or wall will not adversely
affect the historic qualities of the lane and will be compatible with the design and materials of
existing buildings on the site and structures on adjacent properties.
(e) Height. The height of any fence or wall adjacent to the a heritage lane shall comply with the
regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of the City Code.
(f) Landscaping. The applicant shall landscape and maintain an area within the right -of -way,
parallel to and along the entire length of the exterior side of a fence or wall in excess of three feet
in height and facing the heritage lane, in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the
Community Development Director. Such landscape plan shall provide for the planting of trees
and vegetation that are native to the area and require little or no maintenance. The landscape plan
may be approved by the Community Development Director upon the finding that the proposed
landscaping will effectively blend the fence with its environment and enhance the visual
appearance of the lane.
fence, any replacement fcncc shall comply with the permit requirement and restrictions specified
in this Scction.
9
15- 29.080 Exemption for Agricultural Uses. Fencing around the immediate perimeter of an
orc ard. vineyard e. u rian faci 'tv or simila aaricu tura u e is e em t from this
Article. This exemption applies to raising of fruit and nut trees, vegetables and
horticultural specialties. but does not include nurseries, greenhouses or storage of
landscaping equipment. products or supplies for commercial uses.
15- 29.090 Fence Exceptions.
(a) The owner(s) of a fence, or proposed fence. including any gates or pilasters attached
th eto m uest t. at the P1 u s in C. missio. rant an exce tion t. the reaulati ns
regarding fences. The Planning Commission may grant this exception if all of the following
findings are made:
(1) The sub_ •ct fel c• will se coms ati.le w' s oth similar tructu e in the
neighborhood;
(2) The entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high
quality. exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable;
(3) The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood
in which the fence is located;
(4) T u e nti i o the exce t'. n will not b detr' ,j ental
u. ect
n .a
(1)
the hearing.
r
the following findings:
tv a. acent
Fo e ce.t'.n .ro.osed
ran thee. e.ti. i i ma
he visibility
th e
su s tantial v be educed
�e a
hay
a
ic.t'.n.
e
.tice o
circ Iatio
hb
r 'm. rovements
district in which the property is located: and,
ranti. o t e ce. n will n. t c eate a safe 7 azard or vehi ular
pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from
adjacent properties.
'tion to t
e findi
the ence ro
or R-
the to
site; and,
(2) The fence does not unreasonably impede the movement of wildlife animals
utilizing an established trail or migratory route which crosses the site and,
(3) In the event the exception is to increase the area of enclosure pursuant to Section,
15- 29.020(a). the increased area of enclosure is required for safety reasons.
.0 ear'na .n a.. 'c. or -.ce.tio a..rov. under ts's Ar e seal be
required. Notice of the u. 'c he. ring hall e ',yen not less than ten days .1 more t u an
thirty days r to t. e d e f i e earina v j ailing ostaa re a'd to t, a a..licant
and to all persons whose names appear on the latest available assessment roll of the County
as owning r.. e wit._ u ve i u dred e of th undar'es f the arc w. ich is t e
e u lic hea 'n
the C'tv o
10
dist •cts the la n' C.. mis n av
made i. sub
ara. v la
u.lic tre•ts and ad•ace.t
t r th
e tion a
d ca. ina ot er features of the
ha
al
to
ub
uri u t. he
gene a vicinity a d
t a_so
a, es a 1 of
erties will
'she.
o the dat
na
(d) A decision or determination made by the Planning Commission under this Article may
be appealed to the City Council in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 15 -90
of this Chapter.
15- 29.100 Existing Legal Non Conforming Fences. Pilasters. Entryway Trellises.
This Article shall not require any modification to anv fence. pilaster. entryway. or trellis
that was in compliance with the City Code at the time it was built (for the purposes of this
Article, a "Legal Non- Conforming Fence Upon destruction or removal of more than
one -half length of a Legal Non- conforming Fence or any element thereof anv new fence or
element shall be constructed to meet height requirements as prescribed in this Article or be
approved by an exception process described in section 15- 29.080 of this Article.
15- 80.030 Special rules for accessory uses and structures in residential districts.
(c) Recreational courts. Subject to approval by the Community Development Director,
recreational courts may be allowed, provided that such recreational courts shall comply with all
of the following restrictions, standards and requirements:
(1) The recreational court shall not exceed seven thousand two hundred square feet in area.
(2) The recreational court shall not be illuminated by exterior lighting.
(3) No direct opaque screening shall be utilized around any portion of the recreational court.
(4) No fencing for a recreational court shall exceed ten feet in height.
(5) No recreational court shall be located in a required front or side setback area. Such courts
may be located within a required rear setback area, but no closer than fifteen feet from any
property line.
(6) The natural grade of the area to be covered by the recreational court shall not exceed an
average slope of ten percent, unless a variance is granted pursuant to Article 15 -70 of this
Chapter.
(7) The recreational court shall be landscaped, in accordance with a landscape plan approved by
the Community Development Director, so as to create a complete landscaping buffer from
adjoining properties within two years from installation. In addition, a bond, letter of credit or
other security, in such amount as deteimined by the Community Development Director, shall be
furnished to the City to guaranty the installation of the landscaping improvements in accordance
with the approved landscaping plan.
(8) The recreational court shall be designed and located to minimize adverse impacts upon trees,
natural vegetation and topographical features and to avoid damage as a result of drainage,
erosion or earth movement.
(9) The recreational court shall be designed to preserve the open space qualities of hillsides,
creeks, public paths, trails and rights -of -way on or in the vicinity of the site.
End of amendments to Article 15 -29
11
I. Project Summary
II. Environmental Review
2.
RESOLUTION No.
Application No. ZOA 07 -001
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
An Ordinance Amending the Saratoga Municipal Code to amend and clarify
existing provisions of the City Code regarding fences, walls, and hedges
The City of Saratoga City Council fmds and determines as follows with respect to the proposed
Negative Declaration regarding the Project described below:
The City of Saratoga City Council is considering an ordinance amending the Saratoga Municipal
Code to amend and clarify existing provisions of the City Code regarding fences, walls, and
hedges in Articles 15 -06 and 15 -29. The foregoing work is described as the "Project" in this
Resolution.
1. An Initial Study (IS) and Negative Declaration (ND) were prepared for the Project by the
City of Saratoga, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA, Public Resources Code sections 21000- 21177), CEQA Guidelines (14 California
Code of Regulations sections 15000- 15387), and any other applicable requirements.
The IS and a notice of intent to adopt a ND were duly noticed and circulated for a 30 -day
public review period from December 3, 2007 through January 3, 2008 and no comments
were received.
3. All Interested Parties desiring to comment on the ND were given the opportunity to submit
written and oral comments on the adequacy of the MND at various Planning Commission
meetings (including the Public Hearing before the Planning Commission on November 12,
2008) and the Public Hearing before the City Council on February 4, 2009.
4. The IS and ND represents the City's independent judgment and analysis.
5. On February 4, 2009 the City Council conducted a Public Hearing on the Project, during
which opportunity was given to address the adequacy of the ND. All comments on the IS
and MND raised during the public and agency comment period and at the Public
Hearing(s) on the Project were considered by the City Council.
1
6. The City Council was presented with and/or had opportunity to review all of the
information in the administrative record; and
7. After the conclusion of such Public Hearing, the City Council considered all oral and
written comments and a staff recommendation for approval of the ND and reviewed and
considered the information in the IS and ND, public and agency comments on the IS and
ND, the administrative record, and the staff report for completeness and compliance with
CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and any and all other applicable requirements.
8. The City Council has considered the information contained in the ND and the record in
considering the Project and related actions.
9. The documents constituting the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based
are located in the City of Saratoga Depaltinent of Community Development and are
maintained by the Director of that Department.
10. Pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds on the basis of, and after
review of, the whole record before it (including the Initial Study, the Negative Declaration,
any and all comments received, and in light of expert and other evidence submitted), that
there is no credible, substantial evidence that the Project as revised and mitigated may have
a significant effect on the environment as to any issue raised.
III. Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration
After careful consideration of the matter, the City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration
for the Project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, this 4th day of
February, 2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RECUSED:
2
Attest:
Chuck Page, Mayor Ann Sullivan, City Clerk
To: Saratoga City Council and Planning Commission
From: Steve de Keczer. 13415 Pierce Road. Saratoga. CA 95070
de keczerre4comcast.net H (408) 867 -4131 W (650) 855 -6217
Date: 4 Feb 2009
RE: Saratoga Fence Ordinance
Ten Suggestions
1. Keep it simple. Paraphrasing an old philosophy: "The best solution is the simplest solution
The general population of Saratoga is highly intelligent and diverse. A one page guide to desired fencing
would be much more appropriate, than "one law fits all" forced legislation.
2. Do not legislate against freedom of expression. Each fence makes a statement and is as diverse as its
owner. That is the way it should be.
3. Do not legislate something that you can not enforce. If someone wants to call six or sixty plastic
plants an orchard and wants to put a fence around it...let them, they own the property.
4. The hillsides are very different from the City proper, treat them that way as the Specific Plan for the
Hillsides specifies.
5. Don't encourage wild animals to wander freely in the city. Besides the real possibility of auto
accidents by swerving to miss animals, do we want our children to watch coyotes eat Bambies, or pets in
our front yards? Not every property needs to have an animal trail... the animals can go the long way around
like humans do.
6. The Exception Process is a brilliant idea. It will allow a work around for the many problems that are
sure to develop if this ordinance is passed in its present form. Keep the Exception Process simple.
7. Use a line item veto for each Council member and Commissioner; then compare notes and eliminate
all but the essentials. In its present form there are about twice as many additions as deletions from the
original Ordinance.
8. Specific suggestions can be pointed out from a list during the permit process, but should be left to
the owner's discretion. For example: Spiked fences may on unlikely occasions pose a hazard to deer.
9. Do not legislate your sense of esthetics on the rest of us.
To one person a wrought iron fence says freedom and openness, while to the other it resembles bars in a jail
cell.
To one person a three foot high fence is attractive and allows open views, while to another, it looks as
though the owner couldn't afford a real fence.
To one person a six foot high fence allows privacy, while to another it blocks the view.
10. Don't try to rush the ordinance through. Quoting a proverb: "No one will remember how long it
took to do it, only how well it was done."
A personal note: Take a drive down Pierce Road, only two fences of 55 for the mile between my house and
Saratoga Sunnyvale Road will be legal under the new ordinance. Most fences are less than one foot from
the pavement, and their gates are "too grand My house is 20 feet from my fence; a 12 foot setback for the
gate will put the gate under my window with no room for a car.
To: Saratoga City Council and Planning Commission
From: Steve de Keczer. 13415 Pierce Road. Saratoga. CA 95070
de keczerrii?comcast.net H (408) 867 -4131 W (650) 855 -6217
Date: 4 Feb 2009
RE: Saratoga Fence Ordinance
Ten Suggestions
1. Keep it simple. Paraphrasing an old philosophy: "The best solution is the simplest solution
The general population of Saratoga is highly intelligent and diverse. A one page guide to desired fencing
would be much more appropriate, than "one law fits all" forced legislation.
2. Do not legislate against freedom of expression. Each fence makes a statement and is as diverse as its
owner. That is the way it should be.
3. Do not legislate something that you can not enforce. If someone wants to call six or sixty plastic
plants an orchard and wants to put a fence around it...let them, they own the property.
4. The hillsides are very different from the City proper, treat them that way as the Specific Plan for the
Hillsides specifies.
5. Don't encourage wild animals to wander freely in the city. Besides the real possibility of auto
accidents by swerving to miss animals, do we want our children to watch coyotes eat Bambies, or pets in
our front yards? Not every property needs to have an animal trail... the animals can go the long way around
like humans do.
6. The Exception Process is a brilliant idea. It will allow a work around for the many problems that are
sure to develop if this ordinance is passed in its present form Keep the Exception Process simple.
7. Use a line item veto for each Council member and Commissioner; then compare notes and eliminate
all but the essentials. In its present form there are about twice as many additions as deletions from the
original Ordinance.
8. Specific suggestions can be pointed out from a list during the permit process, but should be left to
the owner's discretion. For example: Spiked fences may on unlikely occasions pose a hazard to deer.
9. Do not legislate your sense of esthetics on the rest of us.
To one person a wrought iron fence says freedom and openness, while to the other it resembles bars in a jail
cell.
To one person a three foot high fence is attractive and allows open views, while to another, it looks as
though the owner couldn't afford a real fence.
To one person a six foot high fence allows privacy, while to another it blocks the view.
10. Don't try to rush the ordinance through. Quoting a proverb: "No one will remember how long it
took to do it, only how well it was done."
A personal note: Take a drive down Pierce Road, only two fences of 55 for the mile between my house and
Saratoga Sunnyvale Road will be legal under the new ordinance. Most fences are less than one foot from
the pavement, and their gates are "too grand My house is 20 feet from my fence; a 12 foot setback for the
gate will put the gate under my window with no room for a car.
Memo
To: Mayor and City Councilmembers
From: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk
Date: February 4, 2009
City of Saratoga
City Clerk's Office
Re: Agenda Item 5 Ordinance Amending the Regulations Related
to Fences, Walls, and Hedges Negative Declaration
Attached is copy of an email the City received regarding Agenda Item #5.
City Clerk
From: Bruce [flymeez @comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 7:37 PM
To: Aileen Kao; Ann Waltonsmith; Chuck Page; Kathleen King; Jill Hunter
Cc: Dave Anderson; City Clerk; Rishi Kumar; robert_kundtz @yahoo.com;
susievnl @hotmail.com; Linda Rodgers; jhlavaogden @Comcast.net;
yanniezhao @yahoo.com; manny.cappello @att.net; Shweta Bhatt
Subject: Proposed Fencing Ordinance Changes
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Red
10/28/2008
Page 1 of 2
October 27, 2008
Commissioners and Council Members:
I strongly urge you to vote against the current pending changes to the city fencing ordinance
when it comes before you for your vote in November.
This ordinance as proposed is extreme in nature and unreasonably restrictive particularly to
the private property owner interests of the residents currently residing in the "Hillside Districts."
This proposed ordinance change will not resolve anything nor will it benefit anyone in the long
range planning of creating solid workable rules that residents can and will voluntarily follow.
While you may think that the additionally proposed exception process leaves the door open for
residents who have special or complex situations; all that it really does is place undue
additional burdens on those who may attempt to use the process while unreasonably
subjecting them to the whims and further opinions of often easily disgruntled owners of
adjacent or surrounding properties and the future commissions notions of how to interpret what
you are now creating.
There are two completely distinct and different sets of needs for those residents living in the
areas with flat topography and those residing in the hillsides.
The unreasonably stubborn insistence of this commission and council to address those
differences with the continuation of one combined patched up inconsistent and somewhat
incoherent set of rules; simply makes no sense whatsoever.
While the duration of the Planning Commissions deliberations in these matters is
commendable the core outreach to the Hillside Residents has been and continues to be
negligible at its best for over one year now.
Simply not enough input or involvement from the potentially affected residents in the Hillsides
has been solicited by this commission.
This is by far too important and complex an issue to race it to the finish line as it is now
proposed while remaining in a semi unresolved and difficult to interpret, state.
Page 2 of 2
Voting for this ordinance will only assure a continuation of the issues involved for many years
to come; rather than resolving any of those issues in the short term.
What exactly is your purpose in rushing this process to a conclusion? Are you not elected and
appointed to serve the interests and the agenda of all of the residents of the City of Saratoga?
Sincerely,
Bruce La Fountain
Pierce Road
Saratoga, Ca.
10/28/2008
City Clerk [Ann Sullivan]
From: Bruce [flymeez @comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 1:40 PM
To: Howard Miller; Susie Nagpal; Chuck Page; Kathleen King; Jill Hunter
Cc: Dave Anderson; City Clerk [Ann Sullivan]
Subject: Item: Amendment to the Fencing, Walls and Hedges Regulation
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
5. Ordinance Amending the Regulations Related to Fences, Walls, and
Hedges Negative Declaration:
Recommended action:
Staff recommends City Council open the public hearing, accept public
testimony, close the public hearing, approve the attached ordinance,
waive the First Reading and direct staff to schedule this item for a Second
Reading for adoption on the consent calendar at the next regularly
scheduled City Council meeting.
Dear City Council Members:
Page 1 of 3
I strongly urge you to vote against adopting the above mentioned pending
regulation.
Although the planning commission has spent an inordinate amount of time
related to developing these proposed changes they have unfortunately left
the process unfinished.
As proposed these pending changes will once again leave a large portion
of the residents living in the "Hillside Districts unfairly disadvantaged over
those who reside in the flatter or nearly flat areas of the city terrain.
Hillside residents are being unreasonably and unnecessarily penalized by
having additional restriction on the area of their property that they may
enclose with fencing while those residents who may have the very same or
larger property areas in the near flat terrain portions of the city have no
restriction or limitation in this area whatsoever.
2/4/2009
That is patently unfair and unquestionably unreasonable.
They are being further unfairly restricted in the height of potential
perimeter fencing by placing unreasonable limitation on the height at the
perimeter to a 3 foot maximum.
Such a restriction would be totally useless in most areas of the hillsides.
why would we be singled out for any more or less restriction
any other property owner in our city?
Are we not entitled to beautify, secure and make safe our property
investment in a similar manner that any other resident of the city may
choose to do?
Page 2 of 3
Property owners in the hillsides pay taxes just like everyone else in the city
We have the same legitimate threats as any other resident does such as
intrusion by often dangerous destructive wild animals, criminal vandals
and needs of child safety.
2/4/2009
than
The planning commission has continuously attempted to force this entire
proposed amendment to the regulations into a one size fits all for the entire
city and no reasonable plea to separate the needs of those living in the
hillsides from the regulation of Band -Aids they have patched together here;
for the entire city has ever been considered.
Since you have clearly adopted a hillside plan that indicates that you view
our properties in a different light then why force us to adhere to an entirely
different set of standards that were primarily developed for the flat terrain
of the city?
As an added insult to the unfair differential treatment of this proposal it then
assumes that we each have the time and money to waste when addressing
our special needs by forcing us into the further nonsensical public driven
time consuming exception process.
Further the inflexibility of certain members of your non- elected planning
commission has unfairly influenced these proposals and they do not
represent the views of a broad base of the cities residents.
Having reviewed and participated in their deliberations over more than
Page 3 of 3
one year it was clear that certain members had made up their minds and
would never listen to any differing or opposing points of view.
In addition these amendments have not been well thought out or aired
clearly enough to the hillside residents that it will effect.
Please vote against these pending changes in their current form.
Also please enter my comments into the public record as I will be out of
town at your next meeting on Wednesday Feb 4 as you consider this vote
and can not make my comments to you all in person.
Sincerely,
Bruce La Fountain
Pierce Road
Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3819
(20090202)
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
2/4/2009