Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-06-1990 COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORTS (2)A . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. C) k' AGENDA ITEM: Ir r�� MEETING DATE:6 /24/90 ORIGINATING DEPT.:Planning CITY. MGR. APPROVAL ' Appeal of Planning Commission Modification to Brookside SUBJECT: Swim Club Use Permit; Appellant: Mrs. Dee Askew Location: 19127 Cox Avenue Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission action modifying the use permit to delete the prohibition of alcohol consumption and its finding that the Club is in compliance with all use permit conditions. Report Summary: Because of recent code enforcement at the Brookside Club, the Planning Commission conducted a review of their use permit. The Planning Commission found that the social use of alcohol was occurring but concluded that the use permit condition prohibiting alcohol at the Club was not effective as a means to reduce noise. The Planning Commission ultimately deleted this condition and found the Club in conformance with all other previously stated condi- tions. The appeal was made on the grounds that neighbors have relied upon the alcohol ban as an essential measure to ensure the safety and serenity of this community. Fiscal Impacts: None Attachments: 1. Previous Staff Reports 2. Sound Study 3. Planning Commission minutes and Study Session Reports 4. Correspondence Motion and Vote: SARRATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 102"4' AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: June 6, 1990 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager's Office SUBJECT: Approve appointment of Joe Eskeldson to HCD CAC Recommended Motion: Approve appointment of Joe Eskeldson to HCD CAC. Report Summary: The Citizens Advisory Committee is the policy- recommending body to the HCD Council Committee in the Urban County Community Devel- opment Block Grant Program. Members of the CAC are selected by City Councils of the participating cities and the County Board of Supervisors, and are responsible for reviewing program materials and developing funding recommendations from a county -wide per- spective. Mayor Martha Clevenger and staff HCD Coordinator Carolyn King interviewed two applicants for the position and recommend the appointment of Joe Eskeldson. Mr. Eskeldson is active in SASCC and is on the board of Transit Assist. Fiscal Impacts: None Attachments: None Motion and Vote: 0l� APPEAL APPLICATION Date Received,: (0 Hearing Date: Z Fee : I IN / /SIc`a CITY USE ON) Name of Appellant: Address: Telephone 4 � : o�So?— 8"S�l _ Name of Applicant: Project File No.: () _6-41 Project Address: Project Description: Decision Being Appealed: Grounds for the Appeal (Letter may be-/ attached): i / E / OX.Ad / / / / CP *Please do not sign this application until it is presented at the City offices. If you.wish specific people to be notified of this appeal please list them on a separate sheet. THIS APPT,TC,%TT0 %T MUST BF SUBMITTED IVTTIIIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF 1`l {L D,1 "fL Ut fli _ED LC 5I0,:. �y('0� '��C4 Qq 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor & City Council DATE: 7/24/90 FROM: Stephen Emslie, Planning Director SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Modification to Brookside Swim Club Use Permit. Appellant: Mrs. Dee Askew; Location: 19127 Cox Ave. Recommended Motion Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Com- mission's action modifying the Use Permit to delete the prohibi- tion of alcohol consumption and its finding that the Club is in compliance with all Use Permit conditions. Overview As a result of code enforcement activity, the Planning Commission conducted a review of the Brookside Use Permit on April 25, 1990. The Planning Commission discovered that on March 23, 1990, the Community Service Officer responded to a neighborhood complaint that club members were consuming alcoholic beverages in violation of their use permit conditions. Upon investigation by the offi- cers, alcohol use was observed but no action taken since no noise disturbance was detected. Because the Planning Commission re- tains continuing jurisdiction, it conducted a review of the use permit conditions and ultimately acted to eliminate the ban on alcohol consumption. The Brookside Club was established in 1958 by the issuance of a use permit to construct a swim and tennis club. In the original Use Permit, conditions were established to prohibit consumption of alcoholic beverages. Over the years, several modifications were approved to allow various changes to the facilities and operations. The permit history reads as follows: June, 1958: Original Use Permit Granted by Saratoga Planning Commission Conditions established regarding club membership size, hours of operation and architectural controls. This permit also prohibit- ed the use of alcohol. 1 January, 1960 UP -14 - Modification to Use Permit to Allow Construction of a Clubhouse and to Modify Hours of Operation The City permitted the construction of a clubhouse but reduced the hours of operation and the size of the membership. June, 1974 UP -207 - Modification to Allow the Construction of Two Additional Tennis Courts The City allowed the club to expand its tennis facilities after the club obtained an adjacent undeveloped parcel. All other conditions remained in effect as established in the previous modification. February, 1985 UP -574 - Modification to the Hours of Operation to Allow Adult Swimming from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. weekdays Although the club requested modification to allow 4 Saturday swim meets to begin at 9:00 a.m. rather than at 10:00 a.m., the Plan- ning Commission denied this request and modified only the adult swimming hours. January, 1990 UP -574.1 - Modification to the Operating Hours to Allow Three Saturday Swim Meets to Begin at 9:00 a.m. After extensive review and public input, the Planning Commission modified the use permit conditions to allow three (3) Saturday swim meets to begin at 9:00 a.m. By taking this action, the Planning Commission established conditions requiring the club to repair the creekside wood fence, plant additional landscaping, eliminate the use of a tennis rebound wall and basketball stand- ard, and remove debris accumulated along the creek bank. June, 1990 UP -574.2 - Modification to the Use Permit elimin- ating prohibition of alcohol. The Club was found to be in compliance with all other conditions of previous Use Permits granted by the City. In amending the Use Permit to allow the earlier starting time for the summer swim meets, the Planning Commission requested the Club to conduct a sound study to quantify noise levels and identify noise sources. The study was conducted on behalf of the Club by an acoustical engineer. In general the Club was found to be in compliance with the City Noise Ordinance with certain exceptions. Swim meets, weekend activities and the tennis practice wall /bas- ketball standards were found to exceed the noise standard. In response to these findings, the Planning Commission required repair of the perimeter fence to form barrier between the Club and residents across the creek, removal of the basketball stand- ard, and elimination of use of the tennis practice wall. Addi- tionally, the Planning Commission required additional landscaping to visually screen the Club from the residents across the creek. 2 The Planning Commission determined the Club to be in compliance with these conditions on June 13, 1990, provided the Club removed the basketball hoop from the Standard. Analysis Staff feels the purview of the City Council and Planning Commis- sion includes regulating land use to insure compatibility with surrounding uses. The imposition of the prohibition of alcohol was initially imposed to promote the compatibility with surround- ing neighbors. The Planning Commission, who initially granted this Use Permit, opined that this condition was imposed to ensure a reduction in noise generated at the Club. Essentially, the alcohol prohibition was an attempt to establish a noise standard to protect the serenity of the neighborhood. Since the adoption of the original Use Permit, the City has expanded its involvement in noise reduction through its enforcement of a comprehensive noise ordinance. Staff feels that noise levels are most effi- ciently controlled through enforcement of noise standards rather than regulating Club behavior. Staff does not recommend the continuation of the alcohol prohibi- tion and cites the following issues supporting this conclusion: 1. The enforcement of the alcohol prohibition is difficult and time consuming which detracts from staff's ability to serve the community. The issue is not whether liquor is being consumed but the noise levels at adjoining properties. Staff feels that it would be more productive if enforcement officers would respond to noise complaints rather than allegations of alcohol consumption. 2. The City maintains restrictive residential noise levels that are encorceable on the Brookside Club which were not in place when the Use Permit was initially granted. If noise levels out of character for a residential neighborhood are noted, corrective action can be taken regardless of whether alcohol is being consumed. 3. The prohibition of alcohol does not ensure noise levels will remain compatible with the residential neighborhood. In the latest incident where alcohol was noted, the City's Communi- ty Service Officer found no noise violation. Alcohol con- sumption does not create excessive noise; it is its irre- sponsible use by individuals that results in uninhibited or boisterous behavior. TEPHO EMSLIX, Planning Director D: \ws5 \Steve \memocc \brookside 3 PREVIOUS STAFF REPORTS Printed on recycled paper.