Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Agenda Packet 03062007 Study Session Attachment 7
Attachment 7 Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: Maureen Hill and Trish Cypher DATE: December 11, 2006 SUBJECT: Comments on General Plan Update The following are comments related to the review of the General Plan. Comments are presented as general and specific to the update. General Comments: 1. There has been no public participation in the establishment of the General Plan goals policies and implementation 2. Take existing OS/CE should incorporate wholly the hillside development plan. Have a separate element, make up optional element called "design". This element would incorporate the village plan, set forth the design and development criteria for each of the City's area plans. Could incorporate second story overlay, etc. 3. All other elements need to be reviewed and updated with respect the updated Land Use element. Each element stands alone in the area it covers. The LUE is the element that sets forth the vision of the City to 2020. All other elements implement the goals of the LUE element. While each element is separate, combined they are the general plan. Elements had been updated separately not as a complete GP document. Needs to be integrated. Specific Comments: Introduction 1. Need to make a digital copy of the City logo for an updated complete computerized copy of the General Plan. 2. Agree on a planning horizon, Previous GP says 5 to 10 years. I would suggest 10 years. Add text including language on revision of GP Revised 2007. 3. Discuss previous GP amendments in report. Include previous amendments in appendix to GP? At the very least, list all GP amendments? 4. Format introductory pages to include new title "General Plan and Environmental Impact Report", City of Saratoga, General Plan Citizens Advisory Committees, names, etc. See format of existing GP. 5. Include City Council Resolution adopting the GP. Include a map of the GP area in the resolution. See existing GP for language and formatting. Do the same for certification of EIR. Provide background on the process. 6. Table of Contents: Chapter 1 History of Land Use Planning in Saratoga Introduction to GP Summary of EIR Summary of Citizen participation Chapter 2 Goals, Policies and Implementation of each element Land Use, Circulation/Scenic Highway, Open Space, Conservation, Safety, Noise, Housing, Air Quality. May want to include Matrix (see GP) and issues statement and policies. Chapter 3 General Plan elements in their totality. Include year of completion here. Chapter 4 Area Plans Appendices List of tables and figures Body of Report Introduction: Discuss purpose of GP, Planning area, City and SOI, assumptions of GP, general community goals, background for planning, description of Saratoga, Demographics. (Can use some text from Land Use element write up) Existing GP intro, some language still good. Citizen participation: Format still good, see if issues are still relevant, revise for current GP update meetings. include use of web and e-mail. Review survey from existing GP and keep enduring issues. See what was discussed previously and if these changes have been made. Consolidate history of Saratoga, See Appendix A of existing GP. Take some of LUE history out of LUE and put in GP intro. Add census data on demographics, revise section. Check housing text with housing element. Sort out demographics from housing data, do this for all elements. Have one section of GP that is demographics data. Address redundancy in appendix A and all elements. Get the number of parcels in the City from the County. Update this data. Get revised assessed value of property in City. Discuss percent build out of city. Determine what this is. Look at zoning map. Look at Northwest Hill specific plan with respect to annexation. incorporate in general plan and or area plans. Where are the plates for the 1974 geotech report? Still using this data? Needs to be updated? Update goals and policies matrix. Status, issues, element which deals with that issue. Check and see if issues are still relevant or revision of data is required. Issue statements and policies: take language from existing GP, incorporate public comments from hearings, etc to apply to appropriate element and issue. Issues are housing, schools (get current status of schools sites and use), traffic, improve village, revenue producing land use, open space, annexation, character of City. Chapter 2 Collect all Goals, policies and implementations from all elements and compile them into this chapter as was originally formatted. (Trish has done this already and will provide to you if requested. Need to review all goals, policies and implementation for consistency from element to element. Take generic information out of elements and put in GP introduction section. Land Use: Review existing language, revise. Check current element for accuracy of data in each section. Compare with other elements for consistency of data and goals, policies and implementation. Incorporate LUE update into existing plan. Land use map revised? Circulation/Scenic Highway: Remove "superseded". Obtain electronic copy of Fehr circulation report. Copy Goals, policies and implementation for inclusion into Chapter 2. Edit this element and revise all headers and footers to conform to agreed on text format for all GP for consistency. Maintain map of Trails and Pathways? See figure 2. Make a comparison of superseded text with revised text. Cursory look shows exclusion of key items in old GP. Put appendix and data elsewhere, maybe appendix. Select and adopt one of two circulation elements. Review circulation element goals from Fehr report and superceded goals. Lack of figures in circulation element. Open Space: Keep current GP text. Have committee and public review and comment on existing policy revise as needed. Conservation: Need info on Robinson Bill AB 207. Revise Williamson Act. Make a list of "good trees". Bring current GP Goals, policies and implementation to committee/public for review, revise as necessary. Check other water supply legislation for new development. Evergreen Resource Conservation District is now called Guadalupe/Coyote Resource Conservation District. NHR ordinance meaning? Write out acronym. Saratoga school on Oak street is still there, state this. Take survey out of element. Check Open Space and Williamson Act language make consistent with Land Use element. Update language with land use update for Williamson Act. Ad watershed language from revised land use element to this element. Why are sections x'd out? For example Air Resources. Put in Air Quality element? Safety: Put this element in digital format. Format this element like the other sections. See current GP. This safety element includes Land instability, seismic, flood, fire and emergency preparedness. This element needs to be reviewed and revised to include today's emergency issues, terrorism, CERT, evacuation and shelter in place. Noise: Put this element in digital format. See GP element comments in text. There is no appendix where it looks like there should be one. Element needs revision. Housing: See GP element comments in text. See if this format is the best one for the City. Plan for update in the next few years. Air Quality: Put this element in digital format. Format this element like the other sections. See current GP. Write policies for wood burning stove emissions into plan. Be consistent with BAAQMD plan. Need to reference BAAQMD plan and how City compliance and implementation of goals. http://www.baagmd.gov/p1n/plans/clean_air_plan/2000/index.htm Issues 1. Need to understand if 1983 goals and policies incorporated into the GP to mitigate environmental effects are still relevant. Pg 2, Res. 430.2. Have we done any of the things we said we would do? See page 2, a 1, 2, 3. 2. Put together summary of due/legal public notice requirements? (Check with Cathleen) 3. Maintain exhibits A&B (Area Plans) and a -f under resolution 430.2 4. Nine elements need a review and understanding of current legal requirements of preparation for GP update. 5. Appendices: Basic data, north west hillside summary specific plan, study associated with safety element, sphere of influence plan, environmental assessment, comments on draft EIR with responses, Hazard overlay map. 6. Revise area plan map. Incorporate those areas in city which were annexed after area plans were put in place. Absorb these areas into existing areas with similar guidelines for development. 7. Get public participation plan together. Advertise on KSAR, Saratoga news. Check with Cathleen. 9. Where are environmental approvals for previous element updates? 10. Is there an EIR for the Hillside specific plan? 11. Prepare a questionnaire for Public Meetings. 12. Consolidate LUE and OS/C element committees into one GP update committee. 13. Interview previous committee members from LUE and OS/C and previous GP update efforts. 14. Compare previous citizen comments with new comments and understand if any changes are present. 15. Make a list of all documents mentioned in the GP. Establish standards for new facilities, landscaping and undergrounding. Address annexation and urban service boundary Prepare wireless communication master plan Policy on telecommunications Semi rural environment neighborhood compatibility enhance historical buildings minimize traffic generation increase revenue better business prospects gateway project good design greater ped/bike activity Increase park space review school, fire service Evaluate evolution of two story homes October 11, 2006 TO: Honorable Members of the Saratoga Planning Commission Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California FROM: Alan and Meg Giberson 15561 Glen Una Drive Saratoga Sphere of Influence Los Gatos, CA RE: EIR required for Proposed amendments and modifications to the General Plan Land Use Element DRAr1 LAND USE ELEMENT ("DLUE") Further study under the California Environmental Quality Act, including an EIR, should be required before this document can be accepted by the City Council. The proposed DRAF1 LAND USE ELEMENT ("DLUE") is so lacking in detail—and in some cases, so erroneous—that it cannot function as a useful "central framework for the entire General Plan and as a guide to planners, the general public and decision makers as to the desired pattern of development for Saratoga"—which is its stated goal. Specific comments follow that demonstrate some, but not all, instances illustrating these failures. 1) Map of Specific Plan Areas in Draft Land Use Element (Exhibit LU -3, online page 11 of 33, online) does not clearly indicate the actual boundaries of the individual specific plans (with streets, etc.), making it useless for citizens attempting to determine affected properties. The boundaries of these areas should be shown with sufficient references to identified streets, or other specifics, to enable use by the intended general public and decision makers. 2) Non-specific language includes: "main goals of the Saratoga Village Specific Plan are aimed at". COMMENT: "Aimed at" is so vague as to be unenforceable; it lacks language that would provide specific mandatory application. This goal should be made more specific. 3) Some vision goals are: "Where the common good prevails" "Where neighbors work for the common good;" COMMENT: The "common good" lacks definition, making the statements meaninglessly vague. 4) No Land Use Map is included as Exhibit LU -5, although the DLUE states that "All properties within the Saratoga Planning Area have been grouped into land use categories, as shown on the Land Use Map, which is included as an integral part of the Land Use Element as Exhibit LU -5." (DLUE, page 11). COMMENT: In place of a usable draft Land Use Map, there is a statement that one will be included once approved by the City Council. Lacking the important up-to-date map Land Use Map, citizen review of the land use categories cannot occur. As the DLUE notes, the Map should be an integral part of the LUE; it is not. Further study and inclusion of the new map for citizen review and comment must precede any action by the City on the Land Use Element. 5) "net area is generally defined"(DLUE, page 11) COMMENT: A "general" definition does not give sufficient certainty to the "net area" meaning. Any exceptions or exclusions should be noted and discussed. 6) "Impervious coverage is defined as any structure constructed surface that disrupts the aesthetics of the landscape." COMMENT: What is a "structure constructed surface"? Again, the definition provided is not workable because it is incomprehensible. 7) Site coverage and densities for Medium Density Residential (4.35 to 2.90 DU/net acre, with 50-60% maximum intensity of building and impervious surface coverage) and Multi -family (density 14.5 DU/net acre with maximum 40% site coverage) appear reversed. An explanation should address the differences. 8) Allowing up to 100% building coverage of the net site area in the downtown Village area would increase intensity beyond what has been traditionally accepted and valued in that area. (DLUE, page 13) This does not preserve the historic "Victorian village look" treasured by Saratogans. Study and an EIR should precede acceptance of this value, as of the other changes and additions. 9) The DLUE incorrectly asserts (at page 15): "Private Ownership (OS -P) The Saratoga Country Club Golf Course is currently the only site that falls under this designation." COMMENT: There is privately -owned open space other than the Country Club. As the City of Saratoga should know, and as it has been notified (as recently as March 3, 2005, by a letter to Saratoga Planning and Building, Attn: Planning Director), a private open space grant was made by landowners D. John Carey and Teresa R. Carey and accepted by City in 1956-86, affecting APN 517- 22-112. Evidence of the City decisions which memorialized the City's acceptance of that open space (Lot Line 7, GPA 85-2, Re -zoning -C-219) may be found recorded at J663 page 1563, et seq.; J484 page 990-996. A recorded map showing the "Open Space Easement" may be found at Book 550 page 32, which shows "Exhibit A" as described in Book J663 page 1567. 2 January 24, 2007 TO: Honorable Members of the Saratoga Planning Commission Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California FROM: Alan and Meg Giberson 15561 Glen Una Drive Saratoga Sphere of Influence j CA 95030 RE: Proposed amendments and modifications to the General Plan Land Use Element and Open Space/Conservation Element, both dated 1/16/07 for the Commission hearing of 1/24/07 As before, insufficient time has been allowed for public review of these documents (over 200 pages of draft elements plus attachments)—which documents reference additional documents, map(s) and pages that are not physically included and which must be located for comparison and comment. Notice was only issued on Friday, January 19, allowing less than one week for document review. Since the Council cannot have the benefit of the Planning Commission's and public's considered review in this abbreviated time frame, we respectfully request that additional time be provided for public review of this information before consideration by the City Planning Commission or Council. Since a number of concerns we previously raised—some of which have been mischaracterized— recur with this iteration of the Draft Land Use Element, ("DLUE" or DLUE.1.24.07"), we attach a copy of our October 11, 2006, comment memo (two pages, to the Planning Commission, labeled "RE: EIR required for Proposed amendments and modifications to the General Plan Land Use Element") regarding the previously -proposed Draft Land Use Element.' We include below the comments we have to date regarding the proposals before you. DLUE ELEMENT 1) The DLUE states: "Saratoga low density residential land use pattern is well- established and unlikely to change." (Introduction, page 1) - The DLUE language should, instead, indicate the City's intent to keep it from changing. Since our previous concerns were misquoted and thus misaddressed, we re -submit those previous comments for application to the current DLUE. City reference to those concerns is found on page six of Attachment 3 in the City's Response to Comments,i3 pended to the current 1/24/07 DLUE. Among other items improperly addressed by the City, our concerripat the map of Specific Plan Areas in the DLUE (Exhibit LU 3) does not clearly indicate the actual boundaries of the specific plans 2) "Saratoga's Planning Area consists of all properties located within the incorporated boundary of the City, as well as lands within the City's Sphere of Influence." (DLUE, p.2) The Sphere of Influence (SOI) consists of approx 4 sq. mi. -The DLUE should clarify the City's ability to plan in the SOI: it can pre-zone, but cannot generally effectuate its zoning and other regulations until the parcel(s) in question have been annexed to the City. 3) Measure A 1980 initiative (p.6) and " Hillside Specific Plan ("HSP") are "to conserve the City's natural rural character". The Hillside Specific Plan ("HSP")—originally adopted as the Northwestern Hillside Specific Plan in 1981, and reviewed, updated and expanded by the Saratoga City Council in 1994—was designed to meet the requirements of the Measure A initiative and state law, but "its more important purpose is to set up guidelines for the development of the northwestern hillside, including policies and action programs with land use maps that are more detailed than the General Plan." (DLUE.1.24.07, p.6) -There is no adequate mention in the text that defines the extended application of the HSP to an area beyond the original NW Hillside area that was included by City Council amendment adopted on 6/15/94. Expanded area(s) of the Hillside Specific Plan are not adequately labeled on MAP L-U 3. The DLUE acknowledges this lack, noting that Exhibit LU 3 shows only the general boundaries of the Hillside Specific Plan. Exhibit LU 3 is therefore insufficiently accurate as to included land areas. Streets, parcels, etc., need to be delineated clearly. The 6/94 map appended to the version of the HSP adopted by the City Council on 6/15/94, and made available to the public, is also not clear as to the boundaries of the areas newly covered by the HSP. -Failure adequately to define area of expanded applicability frustrates one or more of the adopted intentions of the Hillside Specific Plan, which states that the HSP "gives guidelines to affected property owners in the Specific Plan boundary area on land use options." (HSP, page 5.) Without clearly defined HSP boundaries, property owners cannot ascertain their inclusion in, or exclusion from, the HSP, and are thus unable to avail themselves of the guidance found within the HSP. This matter was insufficiently analyzed, if at all, in the Negative Declaration proposed for the project. An EIR, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), should be prepared that deals with this insufficiency. -Not just the NW hillsides that are covered by the Hillside Specific Plan. The HSP was expanded in 1994 so that it includes the western hillsides. This should be made clear in the DLUE. -No L-U Appendix section was available online or in the paper copy supplied by staff before PC hearing on 1/24/07 2 DRAFT OPEN SPACE/CONSERVATION ELEMENT -Needs to show/list privately -held open space easement and conservation easements. Staff has previously claimed it was too inconvenient to do. Not having a list or map that can be consulted by the public insufficiently protects these resources and the intent of the underlying grants. -Proposed language (for Land Use and Open Space/Conservation Elements) fails to conform to goals and policies enunciated in the Santa Clara County (County) General Plan (GP)—and effective for County lands within the Saratoga Sphere of Influence (SOI)— regarding riparian protection, grading, water quality, erosion protection, etc. As an example, the County GP emphasizes "the importance of monitoring in general, and especially for resources such as water quality...." It notes that "the alteration of vegetative cover, natural contours and drainage courses tends to increase and concentrate runoff, with possible impacts on stream environments and siltation ...." Of further concern, the County GP warns about "increased erosion along stream banks and reduced water quality of flowing streams and the waters of San Francisco Bay... [and] higher nutrient concentrations in streams ...leading to algae increases and degraded water quality, [along with] decreased percolation capability for groundwater recharge." Failure to meet this, and other, language with equally stringent protective measures cannot be dealt with through the proposed Negative Declaration. Further protective language is needed throughout the proposed General Plan elements in order to maintain and enhance City and SOI lands. 3 • • DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT To the reader: The enclosed document includes existing and proposed text, shown as follows: Normal text = Language contained in existing Element that is proposed to be incorporated in Update. Stfikethcough-text = Existing Element text to be removed Underlined normal text = Proposed new text (as included in August 25, 2006 Draft) Bold/underlined text = New text as proposed to address Planning Commission direction given during public hearings and study sessions. NOVEMBER 1, 2006 REVISED: JANUARY 16, 2007 PREPARED BY: DEBORAH UNGO-MCCORMICK UNGO-MCCORMICK CONSULTING JERRY HAAG, URBAN PLANNER Table of Contents Draft Land Use Element 1 INTRODUCTION 2 BACKGROUND 11 LAND USE PLAN 18 LAND USE ISSUES ADMINISTERING AND IMPLEMENTING THE LAND USE ELEMENT 21 GOALS, POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 23 LIST OF TABLES LU -1 Land Use Categories LIST OF EXHIBITS LU -1 Regional Location LU -2 Saratoga Planning Area LU -3 Specific Plan Areas LU -4 Flooding Potential LU -5 Land Use Map LU -6 Saratoga Woods Neighborhood APPENDIX Measure G Hillside Specific Plan Saratoga Village Specific Plan Saratoga Village Design Guidelines Gateway Area Design Guidelines Joint planning principles for West Valley Hillsides Saratoga General Plan 17 3 4 9 10 16 19 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 New -47 -2006 - August -257-2006 o 4 -2006- Ptg#-25;-2886 • • • Draft Land Use Element INTRODUCTION Purpose Saratoga's low density residential land use pat- tern is well-established and unlikely to change. This Element describes the history of land use planning in Saratoga, discusses the major issues that face the City, and presents the goals and policies that will determine how land use and growth will be managed in Saratoga over the next 20 to 25 years. Consistent with State Law, this Land Use Ele- ment describes the general location and extent of land uses within Saratoga for housing, business, open spaces, civic and other uses. It also in- cludes standards for population density and land use intensity for the various types of land uses encompassed in the Element. This Element is intended to serve as a central framework for the entire General Plan and as a guide to planners, the general public and decision makers as to the desired pattern of development for Saratoga. Element. Alternatively, the other Elements en- sure that infrastructure, utilities and public facili- ties are available to accommodate planned land uses, and that the unique qualities of Saratoga are safeguarded and enhanced. Finally, a circula- tion plan is established in the Circulation Ele- ment to accommodate increased traffic from planned uses in accordance with the Land Use Element. Relationship to Other Elements According to State Planning Law, each Element is distinct and all the Elements together com- prise the General Plan. All Elements of the Gen- eral Plan are interrelated to a degree, and certain goals and policies of each Element may also ad- dress issues that are the primary subjects of other Elements. The integration of overlapping issues throughout the Elements provides a strong basis for implementation of plans and programs, and achievement of community goals. This Ele- ment establishes theplanned land use pattern for Saratoga based on historic development and the community's vision for the future. Land use planning takes into consideration housing needs identified in the Housing Element, natural and manmade hazards and development constraints identified in the Safety Element, and the open space and conservation goals and policies that are outlined in the Open Space/Conservation Saratoga General Plan 1 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -26;20W BACKGROUND Regional Settine The Ci of Sarato : a is located in the westerl r�'on of Santa Clara Coun ust southwest of the ma o litan co um of San Jose rru es an Fran - end of • 0 or metro .roximatel 35 1 south of S • a is found at the southerl • and a Si cisco. Sarato the San Francisco eninsula. The north south and easterl ortion of the communi is sited on an historic alluvial lain shared with the ad'acent communities of Cu - tino San Jose The westerl hills of the Santa Cruz Mountains and is ad'a- cent to uninco •orated •ro•erties within Santa Clara County• Ma or re!. onal access to the communi is vided b State Route 85 SR -85 a six -lane freewa linkin . to US 280 in Cu • ertino and US 101 to the north in Mountain View US 101 south in San Jose and to SR 17 to north San Jose and southwest to Santa Cruz County Local • • • • er os Gatos and Monte Sereno. es low -1 ortion occu • n foo O roadwa munities include Sarato hwa s linkin ! Sarato a to surroundin com a- os Gatos Road Sarato Sunnyvale Road. Fi ure LU 1 shows the re ' onal settin of Sara- toga. a Avenue Hi 9 and Sarato a- Sarato a's Piannn�_Area Sarato .a's Planning Area consists of al ties located within the inco orated bounda of the Ci as well as lands within the City's S Influence. As of 2006 lands within X2.8 • ro • e .here of uence. C linvts consists of a uare miles The S •here of f a roximatel 4 s • uare miles of uninco i • ated ultimatel to be the s • O rated lands that are antic annexed by the Ci •• roximatel Influence consists •• • O- Fi ure LU 2 de • icts Sarato a's Plannin Area. Saratoga General Plan Draft Land Use Element 2 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov -O August -2674006 • 1 Draft Land Use Element Exhibit LU -1 REGIONAL LOCATION lo 20 40ro mv5 Saratoga General Plan 3 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Draft Land Use Element SOURCE: City of Saratoga. July 2006. Exhibit LU -2 SARATOGA PLANNING AREA City Limit Sphere of influence Boundary Urban Services Boundary © rg 1i2 I mile 4 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nev-1�� Saratoga General Plan ���' �� Draft Land Use Element Historical Overview of Saratoga The City of Saratoga was incorporated in 1956. The town had its beginning more than a century earlier, in 1848, when William Campbell built a sawmill about 2.5 miles above and west of the present village, along what is now Highway 9. The area's earliest inhabitants had been Indians, building homes near the mouth of the canyon at what an early map noted as Campbell's Gap. Saratoga is situated at the entrance to a historic pass in the redwood forested Santa Cruz Moun- tains. Artifacts have been found along Saratoga Creek where the Ohlone Indians camped while on their way through the pass to the ocean be - In 1850-51, Martin McCarty, who had leased the sawmill, built a toll road connecting it to the vil- lage, to expedite the hauling of lumber. McCarty also had a survey made, laying out the town of McCartysville and a ost office was established under that name in 1855. The town's brief industrial production, a short- lived furniture factory, grist mill, tannery, paper and pasteboard mills, was commemorated in the post office name of Bank Mills in 1863. The discovery of mineral springs with a content simi- lar to that of Congress Spring at Saratoga Springs, New York, led to the renaming of the town to Saratoga in 1865. Pacific Congress Springs inspired the construction of an elaborate resort hotel, which flourished for almost forty years (about two miles above the village), until it was destroyed by fire in 1903. The resort image lingered through succeeding years, even as agriculture became the dominant industry in Saratoga and the Santa Clara Valley. Vineyards and a few scattered orchards remain as a reminder of this era, which was brought to a close with the valley's rapid urbanization follow- ing World War II. Saratoga's first "master plan" was adopted in 1969 and a new General Plan was adopted in 1974. The City Council updated and adopted a new General Plan in 1983. Local Planning Initiatives Several provisions have become part of Sara - toga's planning practice through the initiative process. Initiative powers are guaranteed in the Califor- nia constitution and permit citizens to place any legislative matter on the ballot by gathering sig- natures. Measure G: In March 1996, the voters of the City of Saratoga approved an initiative, known as Measure G, to change the text of the Land Use Element of the 1983 General Plan to require that certain amendments to the Land Use Ele- ment may only be made by a vote of the people. On April 23, 1996, the City Council certified the results of the March 26, 1996 election and adopted a resolution incorporating the Measure G amendments in the Land Use Element. These land use policies were set forth to protect the character of Saratoga's residential neighbor- hoods. This initiative provides assurance by giving greater stability to the City's General Plan, to protect the residential and recreational open space areas in the City. The initiative requires, with certain exceptions, a vote of the people to permit General Plan amendments that: (1) redes- ignate residential lands to commercial, industrial or other land use designations, (2) increase den- sities or intensities of residential land use, or (3) redesignate recreational open space lands to other land use designations. This initiative does not affect the City's existing regulations that authorize the creation of second dwelling units, nor does the initiative interfere with the City's obligation, under State Law, to revise the Hous- ing Element every five years. Saratoga General Plan 5 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 s inco orated The text of Measure his reference andiis inthe Land Use Element cluded in the A • • endix Section. Measure A. In Aril 1980 the citizens of Sara - to a ado ted an initiative directin • •re • aration t of a s.ecific .lan for and ad'acentsCounlsidean� of the Ci of Sarato _ in accordance • pbthe i ative a ectivesof the 1974 General mum Plamnd the Com- m�_ Plan. • The .rima oal of the initiative was "to con- serve the Ci ' natural rural character" b co 1- trollin the dens i of develo areas and allowin ment in an environ- mentall sensitive manner. S ment •roblems were noted such as street slo tential landslide and difficult access. Citizen uired at all sta es. s • ment in the hi develo • • ecial develo • • es tici • ation was re In accordance with the re Lurements Council deli ated an f Measure A in June 1980 the Ci 1 -member Citizens Adviso Committee. The committee be • • • o - a 26 980 elated C ns • an bi-monthl ud documents and meetin encies ectin and e tion of the Hillside S ecific Plan. Stadium Initiative: In 1977 the voters of . Cou • the S meetin Area . s on June evie erts from es onsible a . with various and land use consultants which led to the ado • Saratoa ado ,ted an rohibitin stadiums of an size or an other facilities with a ti similar ordinance in an zonin• rovided for district. Themment for cultural initiative ordinance • em • ora • events on an vote of vote - i 0 • ublic hearin table e w track or field u v Council after a duly that the disturbin or seconda • and a findin lar event will not be undul Ci schools • on two-thirds noticed • articu- to the Facilities at elementa acilities built • or ofit outh-oriented or the Little Lea _ ue b • rivate non- anizations such as or American Youth Soccer Saratoga General Pian ment oft e northwest- ern and action Specific Plans: Hillside S•eci tc Plan: The Hillside S ecific Plan was •re•aredt ario vie and State Laweet the re eHownts f the Measure A In ose is to set u • How - eve its more im • ortant h orthwest- uidelines for the develo ro- ern hillsides includin l • • ams with land use ma s that are more detailed than the General Plan. It is intended to better link the Sarato • a General Planwitht bein alvision e a site- ecific Plan Draft Land Use Element or anizations are exem t from these limita- tions. • • • u • • • d zo in e ation mens an j The S s was reviewed and •dated b the Sarato a Ci The S • ecific Plan is into • Council in 1994. erence in the Land Use Element and endix Section. ecific develo . • lan • • u 0 rated b is included in the A a Villa•e S e • • • ec Sarato is Plan: The Sarato Villa.e area has been identified for man ears as an area of on oin co um interest be - environmental cause of itss.eciare to build uistoric don these assets assets and the desi tomaintain, and 1enhance te eneral Plan conta ned The Saratoan T_ ado ted Sarato - a Vilalaea Di'San. The le as 83 General Plan desi _ the areas Area 7 a • Plannin and included a one of to develo aye elve • lannm for the Sara vious Sara Sarato a a e Tas kF ceRe o fAreaJ 0 Ci 0 • otic a Vi a Villa Council ado • e • as • ecific tm . the • lan • e Inco ora Plan In Ma 1988 the Vil- 1or • the re . ort 's Citizen Adviso Commi l tee. In 1987 a ro- eted and wlas ,the basisin P for the e S •ecific Plan which was a Ci Council in Ma • • ed the Sarato • a 470111 ort and the comments from am was com Villa Sarato ado • a ed b 1988. The main Plan are aimed at: • • he Sarato . oals of the Sarato a Villa e S 6 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 i -4 ecific Draft Land Use Element 1. Preserving and enhancing the small-scale, pedestrian character of the Village to make the area more inviting to potential shoppers and dinners; 2. Preserving and enhancing the architectural and landscape character of the area; 3. Improving parking and circulation; 4. Encouraging a traditional town center mix of specialty shops, restaurants, conven- ience shops, services and residences; and 5. Conserving historic structures. The Saratoga Village Specific Plan establishes land use, zoning circulation, parking and design policies and implementation programs that are aimed at implementing these goals in the preser- vation and improvement of the small-scale, pe- destrian character of the Village. The rezonings, design guidelines and parking circulation pro- grams are intended only for the commercial ar- eas along Big Basin Way, Highway 9 and Sara- toga Avenue. The Saratoga Village Plan is in- cluded in the Appendix Section. Exhibit LU 3 shows the general boundaries of the Hillside Specific Plan and Saratoga Village Specific Plan. The specific boundaries of each area are described within the each document. Saratoga -Sunnyvale Gateway District. The Saratoga -Sunnyvale Gateway District com- prises the commercially designated properties on Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road between Pros- pect Road and the railroad tracks. In 20031 the City Council adopted the Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road Gateway Improvement Mas- ter Plan to guide improvements within the public street right-of-way within the District. In addition, the City Council adopted Guide- lines to provide direction for the design of mixed-use projects that include commercial and residential uses, as provided for in the General Plan Housing Element. The Gate- way Design Guidelines are included in the Appendix Section. Existing Land Uses The predominant land use in Saratoga is residen- tial, most of which is low density, single-family on individual lots. Medium density residential uses, comprised primarily of smaller apartment and condominium units, are found near the in- tersections of Saratoga Avenue and State Route 85, Prospect Road and Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road, and adjacent to the downtown "Saratoga Village". Major commercial and shopping areas include the downtown "Saratoga Village" located along Big Basin Way, at the intersection of Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga -Los Gatos Road and Saratoga Avenue. The downtown area includes a range of restaurants, specialty retail, professional offices and personal services. Smaller commer- cial areas are located along Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road between Prospect Road and the railroad tracks, Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road south of Cox Avenue, near the intersection of Saratoga Road and Cox Avenue and west of Saratoga Avenue south on Prospect Road. There are no sites within Saratoga which are use or industrial purposes. Other major land uses ii 'the community include the Saratoga Civic Center, located on the west side of Fruitvale Avenue and the Saratoga Community Library, located on Saratoga Ave- nue near its intersection with Fruitvale Avenue. Saratoga is generally served by four elementary school districts, three high school districts and two community college districts. Only one of the elementary school districts, Saratoga Union School District, is located entirely within the city. All other elementary school districts over- lay other cities. The schools and community col- lege located within the City limits are listed be- low: U� Saratoga General Plan Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -251-2006 Draft Land Use Element Saratoga Union School District • Argonaut School • Foothill School • Saratoga School • Redwood Middle School Cupertino Union School District (serves northern Saratoga) • Blue Hills School • Christa McAuli/ S Los Gatds- aratoga Hi • Saratoga High School West Valley College Current▪ ly, in audition to the public schools listed above, there are three private elementary fl( -8) schools, and several nursery schools and daycare centers serving the Saratoga commu- nity. The number of private schools, nurseries and daycare centers may increase or decrease based on demand. All of these uses required discretionary approval by the Planning Commission. chool District Saratoga is served by - - • = land devoted to parks and natural areas that are free and open t,__ o the public for recreational use. These lands are located both within the city - limits and in the adjacent unincorporated hillside areas of the Sphere of Influence. They include city -owned parks and open spaces, as well as public lands that are owned and operated by Santa Clara County Parks and the Mid -Peninsula Open Space District. With the exception of the hillside areas and Wil- liamson Act properties, Saratoga is almost built out. There are approximately 900 acres of vacant land in the Saratoga, Of these, approximately 700 acres are in hillside areas and 109 acres are under Williamson Act contracts. Lands within the hillside areas are generally subject to signifi- cant constraints such as steep slopes and unsta- ble soils. Saratoga is located in the North Central Flood Zone of the Santa Clara County Water District. The creeks in the City that are under District jurisdiction are Calabazas, Rodeo, Saratoga., --' Wildcat, and San Tomas Creeks. In general, ,ir'flooding from these creeks has been confined to the relatively narrow flood plain directly adja- cent to the creeks. - Saratoga General Plan Exhibit LU -4 shows the location and extent of the 100 -year flood plain as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 8 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -25,2006 Draft Land Use Element Hillside Specific Plan Area 1 (1 of 6 pans) SOURCE: City of Saratoga. July 2006. Exhibit LU -3 SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS 1111111111111111111111111MMIIIIIIIIIIIM City Limit Sphere of Influence Urban Services Specific Plan Boundary 0 1'4 1/2 1 mile Saratoga General Plan 9 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Draft Land Use Element • 501114CE: FEMA. Flood Insurance Hate Map, City of Saratoga, 3 July 1997. Exhibit LU -4 FLOODING POTENTIAL WON 011111/0 010101% 14 IF City Limit Sphere of Influence 100 -year Flood Plain (approx.) 0 1/4 1t2 1u11 Saratoga General Plan 10 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -257-2006 Draft Land Use Element LAND USE PLAN A Vision for Saratoga q al d_an4 Pf=il General Plan_nee. s• pro- vida common goal to which the community strives. This vision then becomes the touchstone by which future decisions concerning land use and other factors are made. Consistent with the Land Use Element goals and Policies, the City's vision of Saratoga is ex- pressed in the following statements: Saratogans value: • The natural beauty of the City and its hill- sides. Development must be environmentally sound and preserve the city's natural beauty. • , , , • • , • , • i ' Historic assets • throughout the city shsu# be preserved and protected Saratoga was developed as a city with low density housing. Its residents value quality educational facilities, neighborhood parks for recreation and cultural opportunities for community involvement for all ages. Saratoga Village- The Saratoga Village is both an historic asset and the economic cen- ter of the City. It is important to protect both the economic viability and the historic impor- tance of the Village and other commercial outlying areas. Land Use Categories if the sited is designated PD residential and upon density and intensity-ef uses permitted in these subcategories are as follows: The Land Use Plan identifies the land use com- position throughout the Saratoga Planning Area to achieve the desired community character as expressed in this vision. All properties within the Saratoga Planning Area have been grouped into land use categories as shown on the Land Use Map, which is included as an integral part of the Land Use Element as Exhibit LU -5. Listed on the following pages are the land use categories that appear on the Land Use Map, along with the type and intensity of use allowed in each category. Land use densities are per net area, and net area is generally defined as the re- maining portion of the gross site area after de- ducting portions within the right-of-way of ex- isting or future public streets private streets, easements, quarries or areas which are classified by the City Geologist at "Md" or "Mrf '. Imper- vious coverage limitations are intended to mini- mize runoff resulting from development of the parcel. Impervious coverage is defined as any structure or constructed surface that disrupts the aesthetics of the landscape, Residential Residential land use is broken down into 6 sub- categories. The first 4 categories allow single- family dwellings, horticultural and agricultural use, and accessory uses compatible with single- family dwellings. The fifth category allows multi -family dwellings, single-family dwellings, horticultural and agricultural use, and accessory uses compatible with residential use. In residen- tial areas, it is understood that other uses such as Saratoga General Plan 11 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Draft Land Use Element schools can be permitted. The sixth category allows multi -family densities in various zoning districts if the site is designated P -D residential and upon receipt of a use permit. Flexibility in terms of density and development would be allowed in the area if a project furthered the goals of the Housing Element. The six sub- categories and the density and intensity of uses permitted in these subcategories are as follows: A. Residential Hillside Conservation. Maxi- mum density of 0.5 DU/net acre (du/ac) or 1.55 people/acre. Maximum intensity of build- ing and impervious surface coverage: 15,000 square feet or 25 percent of site area, which- ever is less. B. Very Low Density Single Family. Maximum density of 1.09 du/ac or 3.38 people/acre. Maximum intensity of building and impervious surface coverage: 35 percent of net site area. C. Residential Low Density Single -Family. Maximum density of 2.18 DU/net acre or 6.76 people/acre. Maximum intensity of building and impervious surface coverage: 45 percent of net site. D. Medium Density Residential (MIO, M12, I15). li-h� - ;10'54) 1. M -10 -maximum density of 4.35 DU/net acre /acre or 13.5 people/acre. 2. M -12.5 -maximum density of 3.48 DU/net acre -or 10.8 people/acre. 3. M -15 -maximum density of 2.90 DU/net acre or 9.0 people/acre. In all cases above, the maximum intensity of building and impervious surface coverage is: 50% - 60% of site area. E. Multi family — Maximum density of 14.5 DU/net acre or 27-45 people/acre. Maximum intensity of building coverage: 40% of site area. F. P -D (Planned Development) Residential: 4.35 to 12.45 DU/net acre or 13.5 to 38.6 peo- ple per acre. Maximum intensity of building coverage: 25% - 35% of site area. All projects proposed on sites with this designation shall require use permit approval �provided for in Article 16 of the Zoning Ordinance. - It should be noted that any discussion of the number of people per acre is not meant to act as a limit to family size or maximum number of people that would be permitted to live on a site. The population densities given are meant only to act as a guide to the average number of people likely to occupy a given area. Commercial/Office Commercial land is broken into few two general subcategories. The first two are traditional hood. They are not regional in orientation and tend to be located in relatively small complexes. mit. The four subcategories and the Densities and intensities of uses permitted in these sub- categories are as follows: • Retail Commercial Retail (CR): 1.35 to 8.7 27 45 people per acre. There are five main commercial areas in the City with this des- ignation. The main commercial areas in- clude Downtown Big Basin Way (including Neale's Hollow), Argonaut Shopping Cen- ter, the Gateway, Quito Shopping Center and the Center at Prospect and Lawrence (including nearby Big Tree Center). These commercial areas serve the community and/or their immediate neighborhood. They are not regional in orientation and tend to be located in relatively small complexes. Saratoga General Plan 12 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 • Draft Land Use Element Maximum intensity of building coverage is 60% of net site area, except as regulated by an applicable specific plan with—up—to d�1e�a�n- Vile Commercial uses in the downtown Village Area are regulated by the Village Specific Plan (adopted in 1988 and as may be re- vised by City Council from time to time)~ including building coverage and height. Where a new commercial development is to be located adjacent to or across from an es- tablished single-family or multi -family resi- dential use a. •ro.riate landsca.e buffers shall be required that are at least equal to the setbacks of the adjacent residential district. No single tenant of said development shall exceed 15,000 square feet of floor area. • Professional Administrative (PA): 3.63 corn The profes- sional administrative office designation gener- ally serves as a transition zone between com- mercial areas and residential areas in the City. The maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and intensity of building coverage for this designa- tion is 0.30 8.39 -of net site area. This desig- nation may conditionally allow small scale rofessional schools and simil . r uses. permit approval as provided of the Zoning Ordinance. In 2004, the City implemented a residential mixed-use ordinance, which establishes stan- dards for mixed use development. Mixed uses are allowed by use permit in commercial and office zones within the City of Saratoga. Mixed use is defined as the development of a lot or building with two or more different land uses, such as residential, commercial, office or public. The purpose of the mixed use development stan- dards is to further accommodate the City's fair share of the regional housing need and to im- plement the policies of the Housing Element of the General Plan, adopted in 2002, in a consis- tent manner throughout the various commercial and office zoned districts of the City. It is further the goal of these standards to protect existing and future commercial development by estab- lishing standards to ensure compatibility of ad- joining commercial and residential uses. The maximum net base density allowed is 20 dwell- ing units per acre, excluding density bonuses for very low-income, low-income, or senior hous- ing. The residential portion of a mixed use build- ing shall not exceed 50% of the total floor area, and shall range from 850 square feet for a one - bedroom unit to 1,250 square feet for a two- bedroom unit. An increase of 10% of the total floor area is permitted for the site, for projects that provide below -market -rate housing. Total site coverage may also be increased by 10% for a project containing below market -rate housing. ineheArial Light Industrial (LI): This designation per Saratoga General Plan 13 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Community Facilities Sites seriibed-below, All institutional, public and quasi -public uses fall into this category. Educational uses such as: • .. - , .. _ ). Ele- mentary schools, junior high schools, high schools, and the West Valley Community College are the uses that make up this sub- category. The open space and recreation ar- eas of these sites are part of the City's open space inventory and help supplement city park use. Only school facilities or uses com- patible with those facilities and adjacent uses are allowed in this land use category mit process. • Public Fae itp-(42:—Public facilities, such as, the Civic Center, the Community Li- brary, and two fire stations and public schools and institutions (i.e. West Valley College) are also included in this category. They are institutional uses under govern- ment control (other than school districts) that provide a public service. Buffing- r- Quas' Public Faeilit s (OPF). This desig- nation also includes private institutional uses, including but not limited to, religious uses (churches, synagogues, religious schools and the novitiate), convalescent homes, private schools, the cemetery, the electrical substation, and the Odd Fellows Home. These are institutional uses that pro- vide a public service but are not controlled by a publicly elected governing board. A1 - Draft Land Use Element• expansions are evaluated through the use • All uses or their expansions, including building intensity, are evaluated through the use permit process and must comply with criteria indicating their compatibility with adjacent uses P6r -gait-- - public uses, a master plan may be required for all structures, changes of use, and improvements in the quasi -public designation. If required, the master plan shall be approved before approval of '7-/ 1/4-e any buildings and other improvements. Open Space/Resource Protection Open space land use is broken down into six four subcategories. The first four are taken from ment. The Hillside Open Space subcategory was government -eek The density and intensity of the uses permitted in these subcategories are as follows: • Natural Resource Preservation (OS NR). • Managed Resource Production (OS -MR). This designation consists primarily of the orchard lands, water reservoirs and lands that are under Williamson Act Contracts Saratoga General Plan 14 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 • Draft Land Use Element within the City. Single-family dwellings as- sociated with agricultural uses are permitted at a max um densitypf, 1 dwelling unit per 4Lec t 4-16-et:4berry s ru6tffiet"certify related to the maintenance of these open space uses are permitted on the sites within this desig- nation. 1 6r 0 u d or Recreation (OS -OR). This subcate- gory consists of City or County parks o lands designated for those uses. Only recrea- tional facilities (i.e. playground equipment, recreational courts, etc.), structures neces- sary to support the parks or structures of par- ticular ariticular historic value are permitted in these areas. These sites are considered to be of particular value for recreational purposes. Some parks, such as Hakone Gardens and Villa Montalvo County Park, preserve sig- nificant vegetation features. on a slope density formula subject to strin- gent criteria. These criteria will become part of the apply to the Sphere of Influence por- tion of the General Plan. • Private Ownership (OS -P). The Saratoga Country Club Golf Course is currently the only site that falls under this designation. This site includes a significant amount of vete open space totaling 1000 acres. preserve natural ieseurcec such as stream and geologic features created by faults and landslide3. •—Hillside Open Space (OS -H). This designa- tion covers all areas within Saratoga's Sphere of Influence that are not designated as parks or OS -MR. This designation allows uses which support and enhance a rural character, promote the wise use of natural resources and avoid natural hazards. Uses include agriculture, mineral extraction, parks and low intensity recreational facilities, land in its natural state, wildlife refuges anelveryy • . .. Other support uses related to the uses already listed may also be permitted. Allowed resi- dential is between 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres to 1 dwelling unit per 160 acres based • Public Use Corridor (PUC). The PUC des - 17i % ignation is applied to the former railroad 6 (7tcorridor extending through the northerly -portion of Saratoga in a northwest to south- / east direction. This designation allows pub- j#jie multi -use recreational trails. Overall Heijiht Limit No structures in Saratoga shall be over two stories in height/except ter that the m .. um height of structures locate s ithin th . _ aratoga Village Area bou ,r (as de- fined the Saratoga Vil e Area Plan, (adopted 88)), shall • regulated by the development and . ds of said Plan, as may be revised , City Council from time to time. In Villag-, - * cture height will On sites sed for q Iasi -public use , a three- story structureitjAberevitled the slope underneath the three-story area is 10% or more and a stepped pad is used. (Resolu- tion 2285 adopted 11/7/85) (� N b6eiti alt/77/,1,/(7 /Ai 7p5 j76 Saratoga General Plan 15 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Exhibit LU -5 — Land Use Map Draft Land Use Element (Land Use Map to be inserted upon approval by City Council of the Land Use Element and related Map amendments. Copies of the current Land Use Map are available in the Saratoga Community Development Department) Saratoga General Plan 16 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006. August 25, 2006 • • Draft Land Use Element Table LU -1 LAND USE MAXIMUM DU/ACRE OR PEO- PLE PER ACRE MAXIMUM ALLOW- ABLE COVERAGE SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF USE RESIDENTIAL LAND USES Residential Hillside Con- 0.5 du/ac or 1.55 people/acre 25% of site area, or 15,000 s.f, whichever is less Single-family dwellings servation Residential Very Low Density 1.09 du/ac or 3.38 people/acre 35% of site area Single-family dwellings Residential Low Density 2.18 du/net acre or 6.76 people/acre 45% of site area Single-family dwellings. Medium Density M-10 M-12.5 M-15 4.35 du/net acre or 13 5 people/acre 3.48 du/net acre or 10 8 people/acre 2.90 du/net acre or 13 5 people/acre Single-family homes Residential Multi -Family 14.5 du/ac or 27-24 people/acre 40% of site area Detached and attached single-family homes, condominiums, duplexes and apartments Planned Development Residential 4.35 - 12.45 du/acre or 13.5 - 38.6 peo- ple/acre 25-35% of site area Mix of single-family and multi -family densities and housing types. COMMERCIAL LAND USES Commercial Retail ** 60% of net site area, except as regulated by an applicable specific plan. Commercial uses/centers serving community and/or neighborhood; not regional in orientation. Refer to Saratoga Village Specific Plan for uses, height and lot coverage per - mitted in Specific Plan area. Professional Office ** 30% of site area Professional offices uses permitted; serves as transition zone between commercial and residential areas. AND QUASI -PUBLIC FACILITIES LAND USES PUBLIC varies r varies Public, civic and quasi -public (private institutional uses, in - eluding but not limited to, religious uses (churches, syna- gogues, religious schools and the novitiate), convalescent homes, private schools, the cemetery, the electrical substation, and the Odd Fellows Home. Community Facilities Sites / [[[ I-17 t i -c 2(0 tL OPEN SPACE LAND USES Open Space — Outdoor Recreation 1 du/ 4 acres N/A City or County parks or lands designated for those uses. Only recreational facilities (i.e. playground equipment, recreational courts, etc.), structures necessary to support the parks or struc- tures of particular historic value are permitted in these areas. These sites are considered to be of particular value for recrea- tional purposes. Open Space - Private N/A Consists of open space resources under private ownership (i.e. Saratoga Country Club Golf Course) Open Space — Managed Resources N/A Consists primarily of orchard lands, water reservoirs and lands that are under Williamson Act Contract. Only single-family dwell- ings or structures directly associated with agricultural use are permitted. Hillside Open Space 1 du/20 acres to 1 du/160 acres (based on a slope density formula subject to stringent criteria) 25% or 12,000 square feet whichever is less Covers all areas within Saratoga's Sphere of Influence (SOI) not designated as parks or OS -MR. Uses include agricultural, mineral extraction, parks and low intensity recreational facili- ties, land in its natural state, wildlife refuges and very low intensity residential development and support uses of those listed above. These criteria apply to the SOI portion of the General Plan Public Use Corridor N/A N/A Applies to former railroad corridor and allows multi -use trails • Overall Height Limit. No structure permitted over two stories in height except for structures located within the Saratoga Village boundary (as defined by the Saratoga Village Area Plan, (1988) which shall be regulated by the "Village Plan", or for quasi -public uses, a three-story structure is allowed provided the slope underneath the three-story area is 10% or more and a stepped pad is used. — Mixed residential/Commercial uses are permitted in all commercial lands, with a maximum of 20 dwelling units per acre excluding density bonuses for very low-income, low-income, or senior housing. The residential portion shall not exceed 50% of the total floor area, ( 850 sq. ft. for a one -bedroom unit -1,250 sq. ft for a two-bedroom unit), with an increase of 10% of the total floor area permitted for the site, for projects that provide below -market -rate housing. Total site coverage may also be increased by 10% fora project containing below market -rate housing. Saratoga General Plan 17 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Draft Land Use Element LAND USE ISSUES The following land use conditions also apply to special situations within Saratoga. Height Limitations In 2002, at the request of the Saratoga Woods Neighborhood, the City Council established a single -story limitation for residences in the Sara- toga Woods Neighborhood. This neighborhood is generally bordered or' Cox Avenue to the south, Saratoga Avenue: to the east, Saratoga Creek to the west and Prospect High School to the north. This restriction precludes any new second story additions. € The existing second story dwellings are exemibt from this restriction. oods Neighborhood ermined but no single-family xceed twenty-six feet in height Outside of the Sarato a 1�n tories dwelling sh without a use permit. The Saratoga Woods Neighborhood is shown in Figure LU 6. 3`econdary Dwellings Within the residential designation, secondary residential dwelling units are allowed as a per- mitted use. The structure itself may require De- sign Review approval if required by the Zoning Ordinance. A second dwelling unit is defined as an attached or detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete living facilities includ- ing permanent provisions for living, cooking, sleeping and sanitation. In conjunction with the Housin Element if the .ro. a owner records an affordability covenant restricting rental occu- pancy of their second unit to very low or low- income households at affordable levels, the property owner may exceed both the maximum total allowable floor area and the maximum al- lowable site coverage for the site by 10%. Historic Resources In recognition of the historic character of Sara- toga, the City has adopted an Historic Preserva- tion Ordinance to protect its irreplaceable heri- tage resources. In 1982 the Heritage Preservation Commission was established by the City Council to assist with and encourage the preservation of Sara - toga's heritage resources, inventory historic re- sources, recommend to the City Council specific resources that should have historic designations, and act as an advisory body to the City Council, Planning Commission, and other agencies as to the impact of proposed new development on historic resources. In addition to several local historic structures, features and sites, the City Council has desig- nated two heritage lanes as local landmarks. The City Council has designated the brick portion of Austin Way west of Highway 9 as a Heritage Lane. The bricks of Austin Way were laid around 1904 when the railway ran alongside Austin Way. The trolley line connected Saratoga to San Jose and was in operation until 1933. The Saratoga segment of Austin Way is one of the very few remaining sections of brick highway paving to be found. A permit and discretionary review are required, pursuant to the Zoning Or- dinance, for encroachments or excavations in the City right-of-way. In addition, the City Council has designated Saratoga Avenue between Fruit - vale Avenue and 14301 Saratoga Avenue as a Heritage Lane. Saratoga Avenue from Fruitvale to the Village continues to be, as it was in the past, one of the most important entrances to the City and a route leading to the heart of the vil- lage. The street is characterized by two traffic lanes lined by mature trees and several historic residences. Fencing, walls, and development applications for residences located along this Heritage Lane require discretionary review pur- suant to the Zoning Ordinance. A list of local historic landmarks and heritage lanes is available in the City's Community De- velopment Department. Saratoga General Plan 18 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 • • • Draft Land Use Element ! e 1 tri I •a x SOURCE: City arSar4iog4, July 2006. Saratoga General Plan Exhibit LU -6 SARATOGA WOODS OVERLAY AREA City Limit SWIM • • MOO** • •••••• • Sphere of Influence Boundary Subdivision Boundary 0 1/4 12 1 mile 19 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1,2006 August -257-2006 Draft Land Use Element The following historic resources, which are listed on the National and State of California Register, are located within the Saratoga Plan- ning Area: • The Warner Hutton House, located at 1377 Fruitvale Avenue. • Paul Masson Mountain Winery, located on Pierce Road. • Miller-Melone Ranch, located at 12795 Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road. • The Saratoga Foothill Club, located at 20399 Park Place. • The Saratoga Toll Road,_generally located at the beginning of Third Street and Big Basin Way. • Villa Montalvo, located at 14800 Montalvo Road. • The Welch -Hurst Building, located at 15800 Sanborn Road. Mineral Resources Mineral resources in the Saratoga vicinity are limited primarily to sandstone and shale. Cur- rently, there are no mines or quarries known to be operating in Saratoga or its Sphere of Influ- ence. Timber Production Section 65302 (a) (1) of the California Govern- ment Code requires that General Plans address timber production in their land use elements. There are no timber production areas in the Saratoga Planning Area that would be affected by the Land Use Element. The City regulates all tree removal operations through its Tree Ordinance. Military Facilities Section 65302 (a) (2) of the California Govern- ment Code requires that land use elements of General Plans address military facilities. There are no military facilities in or adjacent to the Saratoga Planning Area that would be affected by the Land Use Element, Solid and Liquid Waste Disposal Provision Solid and liquid waste material is treated and disposed of outside of the Saratoga planning area. Population Trends Saratoga has not experienced substantial popula- tion growth for several decades. By 1979, most of the vacant, developable land was built upon. Most population growth since 1980 has been largely due to changes in household size within existing dwellings. Because Saratoga is nearly built out, except for hillside areas, there has been little new housing construction over the past 25 years, other than demolition and replacement of existing housing stock. According to the State of California Department of Finance, Saratoga's population as of January 2005 was 30,850. This figure does not include residents within the city's unincorporated Sphere of Influence. Population projections prepared by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) show that the City can anticipate a total population of 31,700 in 2010, 32,400 in 2015 and 33,300 in 2020. These are only projections and actual population may change somewhat due to local economic and other conditions or ) �7 constraints. • • Employment Trends Saratoga's predominant low-density residential pattern provides limited employment opportuni- ties. There are no industrial or manufacturing 014 -- plants, 'plants, large-scale research and development facilities, or "big box" commercial structures. The largest employers are Safeway. Longs, Gene's Market, West Valley Community Col- lege, schools and the City Government Center. This trend is not expected to change. /(9&- .0- E4- D N Saratoga General Plan 20 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 Draft Land Use Element ADMINISTERING AND IMPLEMENTING THE LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element, similar to all other Ele- ments, is not a static document. State Law al- lows the City to approve amendments to the Land Use Element up to four times per calendar vear. The Land Use Element is implemented through a variety of methods, including the Saratoga Zoning Ordinance, specific plans, an- nexation policies and the City's Capital Im- provement Budget. These are described below. Zoning Ordinance Saratoga has adopted a Zoning Ordinance as part of the larger Municipal Code. The Zon- ing Ordinance classifies properties within the community into a series of zoning dis- tricts, each containing a list of permitted and conditionally -permitted land uses, develop- ment regulations, and provides for review of individual development applications to en- sure consistency with the and Zoning Ordi- nance. Specific Plans California Government Code allows cities and counties to adopt Specific Plans for por- tions of a community that provide a mid- level land use regulation for lands governed by the Specific Plan. Currently, the City has adopted a Specific Plan for the Northwest Hillside area and a Specific Plan for the downtown business district, known as The Saratoga Village Specific Plan. Design Guidelines Saratoga has adopted Design Guidelines for The Saratoga Village Specific Plan area and for commercial properties in the Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road Gateway District located along Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road between Prospect Road and the railroad tracks. The purpose of these Guidelines is to guide new and redeveloped uses and new development or property redevelopment in a manner that enhances the unique character of each area. Additionally, the Gateway District Guide- lines provide direction for the design of mixed-use projects that introduce a compo- nent of residential uses within the Gateway District, as provided for in the General Plan Housing Element. In recognition of the city's unique charac- ter and the desire to protect the residen- tial characteristics of its neighborhoods. the City Council has adopted the Residen- tial Design Handbook. This handbook serves to guide the homeowner, archi- tects, developers and builders in design- ing new single-family homes or remodel- ing of existing homes, in a manner that is compatible with surrounding properties. In addition, it serves as the guide to staff, Planning Commission and City Council in the single-family design review process. Area Plans Twelve Area Plans have been adopted to address development, infrastructure and other issues within distinct sub -areas of Saratoga. These Area Plans are separate from the Land Use Element and are found in Chapter 4 of the General Plan. Annexations The City of Saratoga may annex properties within the unincorporated portion of Santa Clara County into the City of Saratoga. To be considered for annexation, properties must be located within the boundaries of the adopted Saratoga Sphere of Influence. Upon annexation, the City may extend urban ser- vices to these areas, and the properties an- nexed are subject to zoning requirements and all other land use regulations adopted by the City of Saratoga. Annexations must be approved by the Santa Clara County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). Saratoga General Plan 21 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Draft Land Use Element Capital Improvement Program The City of Saratoga has adopted a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that establishes priorities for the maintenance, rehabilitation, expansion or construction of new capital fa- cilities within the community. Typically this includes parks, public buildings, infrastruc- ture and similar facilities. By State Law, the City must find that the CIP is consistent with the General Plan prior to the adoption of the CIP. Saratoga General Plan 22 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 • • • Draft Land Use Element GOALS AND POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES ors: cncc Plan Policy 1 isting residents. Policy 2 merce, and vitality. Policy 3 The City shall encourage the designation of maintenance, and enhancement by the provi To be implemented by the Heritage Prescrva tion Ordinance and the Heritage Preservation Commission. Goal 4: Economic Viability Encourage the econemic viability of Saratoga') rounding residential areas. Policy 4 buffered from -ether uses by method3 such as Review the Design Review and Limited In dustrial Ordinances to determine if increased Policy 5 residential uses. Existing non residential zon ing shall not be expanded nor new non residential zoning districts added. Policy 6 The City shall revise the Zoning Ordinance to conditional uses in eemmercial or residential viously been permitted and where such users The City shall use the design review process to thereto are compatible with the site and adjacent surroundings: presently planned street capacities so as to avoid excessive noise, traffic, and public safety hoz ards. If it is determined that existing streets need to be improved to -eeeonunodate a project, such prior to issuance of building permits. Saratoga General Plan 23 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -257-20W Draft Land Use Element than 30 persons. heavy traffic. Policy 10 be encouraged. Policy 11 Policy 12 Saratoga General Plan velopment and to insure implementation of this-: Goal 8: dominantly a community of single family de tached residences. Policy 13 Existing non developed sites zoncd single designated. Policy 11 to existing sites. The following goals, policies and implemen- tation measures have been adopted to ensure that the vision of Saratoga can be achieved. The term "goal" designates a desired end state which the Land Use Element attempts to achieve. A policy is a specific statement that guides decision making. It indicates a com- mitment of the agency to a particular course of action. The term "Implementation Measure" describes specific methods or ac- tions that the City can take to achieve each goal and related policies. Residential Land Use Goal LU 1: Maintain the predominantly semi - rural residential character of Saratoga. Policy LU 1.1: Affirm that the city shall continue to be predominately a community of single-family detached residences. (Exist- ing LU 8.1) Policy LU 1.2: Continue to review all resi- dential development proposals to ensure consistency with Land Use Element goals and Policies. Policy LU 1.3: Ensure that existing unde- veloped sites zoned single-family detached residential should -remain so designated. (Ex- isting Policy 8.1) 24 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 • Draft Land Use Element Policy LU 1.4: Review and update Area Plans on a periodic basis to ensure that they reflect the desires and needs of each neighborhood. Policy LU 1.5: Ensure that all development proposals are consistent with the spirit and requirements established by Measure G. Implementation: LU 1. a. The City shall continue to utilize the Residential Design Handbook and design re- view process to ensure consistency with Resi- dential Land Use Goals and Policies. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/Planning Commission Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5 LU.1.b. The City Council shall initiate the update of the Area Plans as part of the up- date process. Responsible Agencv: Communitv Development Department Funding Source: Fees Time Frame: TBD Related Policies: 1.4 General Plan Commercial, Office ndu-siial and Public Land Use Goal LU 2: Encourage the economic viability of Saratoga's existing commercial and office areas and their accessibility by residents, taking into account the impact on surrounding residential areas. (Existing LU 4.0) Policy LU 2.1: Non-residential development shall be confined to sites presently desig- nated on the General Plan Map for non- residential uses. Existing non-residential zoning shall not be expanded nor new non- residential zoning districts added. (Existing LU 4.2) Policy LU 2.2: Non-residential and industri al uses shall be buffered from other uses by methods such as setbacks, landscaping, berms, and soundwalls as determined through the Design Review process. (Exist- ingLU4.1) Policy LU 2.3: The City shall revise the zoning ordinance to allow bed and breakfast establishm s as conditional uses in com- mercial or. ` ' zoning districts where such uses have not previously been permit- ted and where such uses would be appropri- ate. (Existing LU 4.3) (Zoning Ordinance currently provides for bed and breakfast establishments as conditional uses in commercial and professional office dis- tricts) Policy LU 2.4: The City shall work with commercial property owners and merchants to encourage appropriate upgrading of retail establishments consistent with the historic character of the community to provide pleasant shopping experiences. Policy LU 2.5: The City shall monitor Zon- ing Ordinance standards to ensure that non- residential parking standards are adequate to minimize spill-over of parking into adjacent neighborhoods. Implementation: LU.2.a. When considering applications for non-residential developments, the City shall continue to utilize the design review process to ensure consistency with Commercial and Office Land Use Goals and Policies. Saratoga General Plan 25 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 Draft Land Use Element Responsible Agency: Community Devel- opment Department/Planning Commis- sion Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5 Goal LU 3: Promote the long-term fiscal sound- ness of the City of Saratoga through careful analysis of land use decisions and fiscal prac- tices. (Existing LU 7.0) Policy LU 3.1: The City shall consider the economic impact of all land use decisions on the City budget through the preparation of fiscal impact analyses for major develop- ment proposals. (Existing LU 7.1) Policy LU 3.2: The City shall adopt regula- tions authorizing exactions in the form of improvements or fees required from devel- opers to compensate the City for their fair share of direct and indirect economic effects that arise from proposed development and to insure implementation of the General Plan. (Existing Policy LU 7.2) Implementation: LU.3.a. Revise the Municipal Code to include requirement for a fiscal analysis for maior development proposals as part of the subdivi- sion and conditional use permit process. Responsible Agency: Planning Commission/City Council Funding Source: General Fund Time Frame: FY 2007-2008 Related Policies: LU 3.1, Implementation: LU.3.b. Continue to update the fees schedule on a yearly basis to compensate the City for fj economic effects of development. Responsible Agency: Commission/City Council Funding Source: Time Frame: Related Policies: Planning General Fund Yearly LU 3.2 1 Goal LU 4: Provide sufficient land uses for pub- lic, quasi -public and similar land uses in Sara- toga. Policy LU 4.1: Periodically monitor the amount and type of land needed for City public uses and facilities and report to City Council through the annual City budg- etary process and Capital Improvement Pro- Imp ementa ion: P5 ✓ / LU.4.a. Update the City -owned Properties Ve6, Report (2003) and gather public input on status and use of properties for report to City ,,/ N Council to help set priorities and determine funding for improvements at facilities. Responsible Agency: Public Works/City Council Funding Source: Capital Im- provement Budget Time Frame: FY 2009-2010 TO 4( . Related Policies: LU 4.1 /-19/2/ 77°"` 0 Neighborhood Protection Goal LU 5: Relate development proposals to existing and planned street capacities to avoid excessive noise, traffic, and other public safety hazards so as to protect neighborhoods. If it is determined that existing streets need to be im- proved to accommodate a project, such im- provements shall be in place or bonded for prior to issuance of building permits. (Existing LU 6.0) Policy LU 5.1: Prior to initial approval, the e- decision making body shall consider the cumulative traffic impacts of single-family residential projects of 4 or more lots, multi- family residential projects of eight or more Saratoga General Plan 26 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 • Draft Land Use Element units, and commercial projects designed for an occupancy load of more than 30 persons. This may be accomplished through the com- pletion of traffic impact analyses prepared by qualified traffic engineers or transporta- tion planners. (Existing LU 6.1)) Policy LU 5.2: Development proposals shall be evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light, appearance, and intensity of the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be fully mitigated (Existing LU 6.2 – revised) Policy LU 5.3: The capacity of existing— streets shall be recognized prior tointative building site or subdivision approval of any project. New development shall be designed to minimize disruption to the area caused by an increase in through or heavy traffic. (Ex- isting LU 6.4) Policy LU 5.4: Through the development review process, ensure that adioinin neighborhoods are protected from ase, light, glare and other impacts resulting from new or expanded non-residential develop- ments. e inter -school events or other spectator - oriented events of any kind are held. (b) Temporary portable equipment for cultural events (other than sports events or rock concerts) may be util- ized on any track or field upon a two- thirds vote of the City Council after a duly noticed public hearing and a finding that the particular event will not be unduly disturbing to the City. his • olic shall not a . . l to facilities ementary and secondary (junior d senior high) schools or facilities built by private, nonprofit, youth - oriented organizations such as Little League or the American Youth Soccer organization ( Policy 5.5: Consistent with the initiative ordinance adopted by the City in 1977, stadium uses in Saratoga shall be limited as follows: (a) Neither a stadium of any size nor any other facility with a similar use but different name shall be permitted in any zoning district. A "stadium" is a track and/or field which has any one or more of the following: permanent or portable seating (other than field - level seating for participating ath- letes), permanent or portable lighting, permanent or portable sound system, press box, scoreboard, restrooms or concession stands, and on which any \(5/1' • This policy is specific and does not re- quire an implementation measure. Ymplementation: LU.5.a. Through the design review and sub- division review process, the City shall require that all major development projects include traffic and environmental review to ensure adherence with Neighborhood Protection Goals and Policies. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 5.1– LU 5.4 Environmental and Resource Protection Goal LU 6: Protect natural resources and ameni- ties through appropriate land use and related programs. Policy LU 6.1: Incorporate specific stan- dards and requirements into the Zoning Or- dinance to preserve and protect sensitive wa- tershed areas on hillsides within the com- munity. Saratoga General Plan 27 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 ct 2acv, Aucji06 Draft Land Use Element Policy LU 6.2: Development proposals shall incorporate stormwater quality features, in- cluding but not limited to grassy bio-swales, to protect surface and subsurface water qual- ity. Policy LU 6.3: Continue to implement the City's Construction Materials Recycling Pro am to reduce the . uanti of construc- tion debris in local landfills. Policy LU 6.4: The General Plan shall continue to enforce and implement exist - n • tree i rotection • olicies es . eciall regards to native trees. Implementation: Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 6.4 Williamson Act Contracts and Agricultural Protection Goal LU 7: Protect existing agricultural re- sources and encourage expansion of this use. Policy LU 7.1: Encourage renewal and dis- courage cancellation of Williamson Act con- tracts to preserve agricultural lands. Policy LU 7.2: Allew Encourage agricul- tural and open space landowners to voluntar- ily protect their land. Policy LU 7.3: Encourage agricultural use on suitable land with protection for nearby residences as appropriate. LU.6.a. Amend the Zoning Ordinance and standard conditions of approval to require that development applications conform to stormwater pollution prevention best man- agement practices. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department Funding Source: General Fund Time Frame: FY 2008-2009 Related Policies: LU 6.1, 6.2 LU.6.b. Continue to distribute information regarding the Citv's Construction Materials Recycling Program during the building per- mitting process. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department Funding Source: General Fund Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 6.3 LU.6.c. Continue to require arborist review for all development projects in accordance with the City's Tree Ordinance. Responsible Agency: Community Development Dept/Planning Commission Funding Source: Development Fees Implementation: LU.7.a. When processing cancellations of Williamson Act contracts, the City shall only support cancellation if it can verify consis- tency with General Plan policies and De- partment of Conservation requirements for cancellations. Responsible Agency: Community Development Dept/Planning Commis- sion/City Council Funding Source: Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 7.1 Development LU.7.b. Continue to utilize the design review process to ensure appropriate buffers are provided where residential properties are ad- jacent to agriculturally designated lands. Responsible Agency: Community Development Dept/Planning Commission Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 7.3 Saratoga General Plan 28 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 • Draft L- nd Use Element Hillside Development Goal LU 8: The natural beauty of the West Val- ley hillsides area shall be maintained and pro- tected for its contribution to the overall quality of life of current and future generations. Policy LU 8.1: Development proposals shall minimize impacts to ridgelines, significant natural hillside features, including but not limited to steep topography, major stands of vegetation, especially native vegetation and oak trees, and watercourses. Policy LU8.2: Adhere to the Northwestern Hillside Specific Plan which is incorporated herein by this reference. (Existing LU 2.0) Implementation: LU.8.a. Continue to utilize the design review process for all development in the western hillsides and ensure adherence the city's Hill- side Specific Plan. Responsible Agency: Community De- velopment Department/Planning Com- mission Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 8.1, 8.2 Goal LU 9: Preserve the rural nature of the hills by limiting incompatible development. Policy LU 9.1: Limit Expansion of Urban Development in the hillside areas. Policy LU 9.2: Limit the amount of grading within hillside areas to the minimum amount needed for dwellings and access. Implementation: LU.9.a. Ensu by desi where they ar onsi s ered more appropriate. Parks in the hills i may be permitted pro- vided they are pl • n .. in a manner that is compatible with e rura Lure of the area. Res s onsible enc ommunit De- velo mission Fundin Source] Develo • ment Fees Time Frame: Related Po ' ies: 9.1 LU.9.b. Require that all development appli- cations in the hillsides include a grading plan, that cut and fill quantities be provided, and access roads and dwelling size be consistent with the objective of minimizing grading. Responsible Agency: Community De- velopment Dept/Planning Commission Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 9.2 Goal LU 10: Minimize the visual impacts of hillside development, especially on ridgetops. Policy LU 10.1: Require development pro- posals in hillside areas to undertake visual analyses and mitigate significant visual im- pacts. Implementation: LU.10.a. Continue to adhere to the Residen- tial Design Handbook during design review for residential developments in the hillside areas. otection of th hi side areas Responsible Agency: Community De- velopment Department/Planning Com- mission Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 10.1 residential Saratoga General Plan sed Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 ,2006 Draft Land Use Element Goal LU 11: Foster closer interjurisdictional cooperation and coordination concerning land use aq development issues. Polic LU 11.1: Adhere to Joint Hillside Land Us Objectives that % 1 assure basic consistency hillside d use policies among the West •1 , jurisdictions. The West Valley Cities .n. he County should work together to : chieve th hared goal of preserving th natural beauty o he West Valley Hillsides. / Policy LU 11.2: Continues o work within / the adopted Joi pig Objectives and Land Use principles _.r West Valley Hill- sides Areas to re i .rce e 'ng policies. Plann Implementation: LU.11.a. kontinue to coordinate with West Valley Cities t4 work toward e preservation of the West Val Hillsides Responsible Ag u cv: Community Development Depa ent Funding Source: De : opment Fees Time Frame: / • ngoing Related Polities: L .2 Historic Character/Cultural Resources Goal LU 12: Recognize the heritage of the City by seeking to protect historic and cultural re- sources, where feasible. Policy LU 12.1: Enhance the visual charac- ter of the City by encouraging compatibility of architectural styles that reflect established architectural traditions. Policy LU 12.2: Develop zoning and other incentives for property owners to preserve historic resources and seek out historic des - i ations for their res. ective .ro.erties. Policy LU 12.3: In order to create an incen- tive for the protection of historic structures, modify the Zoning Ordinance to allow the Planning Commission to have the authority to modify any of the development regula- tions in the Ordinance, if the subject of the application is a structure which has been designated as an historic landmark. Policy LU 12.4: The City shall continue to participate in the Mills Act program which allows property owners of historic resi- dences a reduction of their property tax. Policy LU 12.5: Encourage public knowl- edge, understanding and appreciation of the City's past and foster civic and neighbor- hood pride and sense of identity based upon the recognition and use of the City's heritage resources. Policy LU 12.6: The Heritage Preservation Commission shall regularly update the City's Historic Resources Inventory. Policy LU 12.7: Development proposals impacting any of the City's heritage land and/or any historic resources listed on any local or state inventory shall be re- viewed by Heritage Preservation Com- mission and the Planning Commission, as required. Policy LU 12.8: For any project develop- ment affecting structures that are 50 years of age or older, conduct an historic review. Policy LU 12.9: Conduct reconnaissance - level analyses of new development projects to ensure that no significant archeological, prehistoric, paleontological Native Ameri- can resources would be disturbed. If such re- sources are found, appropriate steps shall be taken, consistent with CEOA requirements to protect these resources. Implementation: Saratoga General Plan 30 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -267-2006 410 Draft Land Use Element LU.12.a. Continue to utilize the design review process and Historic Preservation Ordinance to ensure preservation of significant cultural resources. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/Heritage Pres- ervation Commission Funding Source: General Fund Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 12.1, 12.3, 12.7, 12.8, 12.9 LU.12.b. Continue to allow owners of desig- nated historic landmarks to participate in the Mills Act. Responsible Agency: Community De- velopment Department/Planning Com- mission/City Council Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 12.2, 12.4, LU.12.c. Update Historic Resources Inven- tory and Landmark List, and publish on the City Website information regarding incen- tives for preservation of heritage properties. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/Heritage Pres- ervation Commission Funding Source: General Fund Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU12.5, 12.6 Desien Review Goal LU 13: The City shall use the design re- view process to assure that new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. (Existing LU 5.0) Policy LU 13.1: Utilize the design review process and the California Environmental Quality Act in the review of proposed resi- dential and non-residential projects to pro- mote high quality design, to ensure compli- Saratoga General Plan ance with applicable regulations, to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties and use, and to minimize environmental im- pacts. Special attention shall be given to en- suring compatibility between residential and non-residential uses (e.g., land use buffer- ing). LU 13.2: When considering development proposals, including new construction, re- modeling and/or additions to existing build- ings, the city shall adhere to applicable adopted design guidelines, such as, but not limited to, the Residential Design Handbook. the Village Plan Design Guidelines and the Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road Gateway Guide- lines, as may be adopted and revised by City Council from time to time. Implementation: LU.13.a. Continue to use the design review process for all development applications and ensure that all projects adhere to applicable design guidelines (i.e. Residential Design Handbook, Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road Gate- way Area Design Guidelines and Village Plan Design Guidelines). Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/Heritage Pres- ervation/Planning Commission Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 13.1, 13.2 Annexations Goal LU 14: Seek to achieve appropriate and contiguous City boundaries to provide for the efficient delivery of public services and to create a greater sense of community. Policy LU 14.1: Land shall not be annexed to Saratoga unless it is contiguous to the ex- isting city limits, within the Sphere of Influ- ence, and it is determined by the city that public services can be provided without un - 31 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -257-2006 Draft Land Use Element reasonable cost to the City and dilution of services to existing residents. (Existing LU 1.1) Policy LU 14.2: The City shall evaluate its designated unincorporated Urban Service Areas to determine if the areas are com- patible with the County's Local Agency Formation Commission Policies and are appropriate for annexation and urban development. (Existing LU.1.2) Policy LU 14.3: The City shall periodi- cally review annexation policies and pro- cedures to ensure compliance with most current land use changes. Implementation: LU.14.a. Coordinate all applications for an- nexations with LAFCO to insure that annexa- tions are consistent with current LAFCO policies. Responsible Agency: Community De- velopment Dept/Planning Commission Funding Source: Development Fees Time Frame: Ongoing Related Policies: LU 14.2, 14.3 Air Quality Goal LU 15: Improve local and regional air quality by ensuring all development projects incorporate all feible measures to reduce air 2,0 pollutants. Policy LU 15.1: Requii% development pro- jects to comply with Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) measures to reduce fugitive dust emissions due to grading and construction activities. Policy LU 15.2: Encourage use of trip de- mand measures as part of major commercial and office development projects to reduce dependence on auto use. Policy LU 15.3: Discourage the use of wood burning fireplaces by limiting to one per residence, including out- door/patio fireplaces. Imp emen ation: v,,� ;�� � / LU.15.a. Amend the standard conditions of approval for all new development projects to��r-1� require that all projects comply with Bav�� Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) dust emission reduction meas- ures and to encourage trip demand measures for major non-residential projects. • Responsible Agency: Community De- velopment Dept/Planning Commission Funding Source: General Plan Fund Time Frame: FY 2007-2008 Related Policies: LU 15.1, 15.2 Zoning Ordinance Review And Amendment Goal LU 16: Review and amend (as needed) the Zoning Ordinance to provide consistency with the General Plan updates, new state legislation and court decisions. Policy LU 16.1: Consider Zoning Ordinance amendments that implement the use and de- velopment of goals, policies, and plan objec- tives identified in the adopted 2006 Land Use Element and Land Use Map of the Gen- eral Plan. Implementation: LU.16.a. Amend the Zoning Ordinance and/or Zoning Map, as needed, to ensure con- sistency with the Goals and Policies of the General Plan Land Use Element Update. Responsible Agency: Community De- velopment Dept/Planning Commis- sion/City Council Funding Source: General Plan Fund Time Frame: FY 2007-2008 Related Policies: LU 15.3, 16.1 Saratoga General Plan 32 Revised Jan. 16, 2007 Nov. 1, 2006 August -257-20N •