Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-24-2002 Planning Commission Packet,, CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES DATE. Wednesday, April 24, 2002 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE Council Chambers/Civic Theater,13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE. Regular Meeting ROLL CALL. Commissioners Garakani, Jackman, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe, Zutslu and Chair Barry Absent: Cominissioner Roupe and Chair Barry Staff. Planners Livingstone, Vasudevan, and Welsh, Director Sullivan, and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of April 10, 2002 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of thePubhcwill be allowed to address thePlamm~gCommission forup to three minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Plamm~g-Commission~om discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staf f REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on Apn118, 2002. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15- 90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Monday, a week before the meeting. 1. Application #02-021 (CITYWIDE) - SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION; -The proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create standards to permit small wind ,' energy conversion systems in (APPROVED 5-0) 2 3 Application #02-058 (CITYWIDE) - Zoning Ordinance Amendment regardi proposed Zoning Ordinance Amend "basement"; provide a definition of "ligl and specify planning review requireme (APPROVED TO CONTINUE 5-0 TO T Application #02-042 (397-25-060) Request for Design Review and Vari existing first floor of the house and addition would add 795 square feet to existing attached 440 square foot gara would be 2,739 square feet. The maxi square feet; therefore, the applicant (LIVINGSTONE) (APPROVED 5-0) DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Clarification of the Planning Commis property owners in the Saratoga Woods NEW BUSINESS - None COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner's sub-committee reports COMMUNICATIONS Written -Minutes from Regular City March 12, 2002 ADJOURNMENT AT 8:15 PM TO NEXT MEE' - Wednesday, May 8, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA with State Assembly Bill 1207. (WELSH) ~RATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION; - development standards for basements. The nt will include: a revised definition of yell"; specify setback and size requirements; for proposed basements. (VASUDEVAN) Y 8, 2002) SANQUINI, 14087 Loma Rio Drive; - e approval to add 294 square feet to the square feet for a new second floor. The existing 1,504 square foot residence with an The total proposed house size with garage n allowed floor area for this parcel is 2,444 applying fora 295 square foot Variance. 's direction regarding the re-polling of Brookview Neighborhoods. Meetings of February 12, 2002 and Council Chambers/Civic Theater If you would hke to receive this Agenda via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to plar~rung@sarato ag ca us CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION LAND USE AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 - 300 p.m. PLACE: Ciry Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Land Use Committee SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2'~, 2002 ~>> ~ . ~~ ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA -- 1. Application #02-042 - SANQUINI 14087 Loma Rio Drive Item 3 LAND USE COMMITTEE The Land Use Committee is comprised of interested Planning Commission members. The committee conducts site visits to properties which are new items on the Planning Commission agenda. The site visits are held Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing between 3.00 and 5:00 p.m. It is not necessary for the applicant to be present, but you are invited to jom the Committee at the site visit to answer any questions which may apse. Site visits are generally short (5 to 10 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the public heanng. Please contact staff Tuesday morning for an estimated time of the site visit. • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE Wednesday, Apri124, 2002 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater,13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE' Regular Meeting ROLL CALL Commissioners Garakani, Jackman, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe, Zutshi and Chair Barry PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES. Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of April 10, 2002 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of thePublic will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The law generally prohibits the Plamm~g Commission from discussing or tahing action on such items. However, the Plamm~g Commission may Instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Commumcanons under Plamm~g Commission direction to Staff. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on Apri118, 2002. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15- 90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Monday, a week before the meeting. 1. Application #02-021 (CITYWIDE) - SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION; -The proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create standards to permit small wind energy conversion systems in accordance with State Assembly Bill 1207. 2. Application #02-058 (CITYWIDE) - SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION; - Zoning Ordinance Amendment regarding development standards for basements. The _ proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will include: a revised definition of "basement"; provide a definition of °hghtwell"; specify setback and size requirements; and specify planning review requirements for proposed basements. Application #02-042 (397-25-060) - SANQUINI, 14087 Loma Rio Drive; - Request for Design Review and Variance approval to add 294 square feet to the existing first floor of the house and 501 square feet for a new second floor. The addition would add 795 square feet to the existing 1,504 square foot residence with an existing attached 440 square foot garage. The total proposed house size with garage would be 2,739 square feet. The maximum allowed floor area for this parcel is 2,444 square feet; therefore, the applicant is applying fora 295 square foot Variance. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS - Clarification of the Planning Commission's direction regarding the re-polling of property owners in the Saratoga Woods and Brookview Neighborhoods. NEW BUSINESS - None • COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner's sub-committee reports COMMUNICATIONS - Written -Minutes from Regular City Council Meetings of February 12, 2002 and March 12, 2002 ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, May 8, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA • If you would like to receive this Agenda via a-mail, please send your a-mail address to planning@sarato a ~~ m 1 • • MINUTES ~ o SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ~'U DATE: Wednesda Aril 10 2002 Y~ p PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Barry called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m RnT,T, (AT.T, Present: Commissioners Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman and Roupe Absent: Commissioners Kurasch and Zutshi Staff: Director Tom Sullivan and Planner Ann Welsh PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of March 27, 2002. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Jackman, the regular Planning Commission minutes of March 27, 2002, were approved as submitted with one correction to page 11. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman and Roupe NOES: None ABSENT: Kurasch and Zutshi ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Tom Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on Apri14, 2002. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Director Tom Sullivan announced that appeals are possible for any decision made on this Agenda by filing an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15.90.050(b). • Saratoga Planning Commissio~r Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar Items. -- *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 • DR-O1-021, BSA-Ol-002 & V-O1-012 (517-14-080) - HUSTED, Kittrid~e Road: Request for Design Review and Building Site Approval to construct atwo-story craftsman style, single-family residence on a vacant lot. The floor area of the proposed residence and attached two-car garage is 4,810 square feet. The maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The site is zoned Hillside Residential. A Variance is requested in order to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet. An exception is also requested to exceed one thousand cubic yards of cut and fill. (OOSTERHOUS) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that he has distributed an email from the Samsels and a Kittridge area map, which demonstrates where the Samsel property is located and identifies where Variances for retaining wall heights have been granted in the immediate area. • Stated that the applicants seek Design Review for a new residence, Building Site Approval for constructing on a vacant lot older that 15 years and a Variance required for retaining walls exceeding five feet in height. • Reminded that this is the second hearing of the Planning Commission for this project. Additionally, the Commission held a workshop last week with the applicants and their design team. The purpose of the workshop was to discuss the retaining walls in depth. An alternative design was proposed, a double wall with five-foot separations for planting screening landscaping. Also, an option for three walls was raised and the applicant will be presenting exhibits with this concept this evening. • Added that the overall height of the structure has been reduced by two feet, from the previous 26 feet to 24 feet. • Said that discussions are underway to consider eliminating the need for the fire turnaround with its necessary tall retaining wall by utilizing the turnaround on the adjacent property that could serve both sites. • Asked the Commission for the latitude to work with Fire and the neighbors, the Martin-Roses. • Stated that with the area and its topography, staff is able to make the necessary three findings of support for this application, Special Conditions, Special Privilege and Health & Safety. The topography represents a Special Condition. The fact that other Variances for retaining wall heights have been granted demonstrates that this approval would not be a Special Privilege. As for Heath & Safety, the geotechnical report and Fire requirements support this necessary finding. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Roupe asked if it is possible to leave open as a Condition, the requirement to have staff work with the applicant, the Martin-Roses and Fire on the possibility of doing away with the on-site fire truck turnaround altogether with the understanding that the turnaround on the adjacent Martin-Rose property would serve both properties in order to not require the very tall retaining wall at the fire turnaround. -- Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 3 Director Sullivan replied yes. -He suggested that the requirement be left as proposed and that the Commission gives direction to staff. Commissioner Garakani expressed support to have staff work with Fire and the other property owner. He added that another possibility is to work out another alternative in case it does not work out. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that one of the other retaining walls in the area at 19 feet high was approved only after appeal to Council. Director Sullivan advised that the biggest issue was drainage and that the Martin-Roses and Samsels have worked out the drainage issues. He added that another retaining wall is 18 feet tall and the remainder he was not sure of the heights other than above five feet in height. Chair Barry asked if these were for road retention. Director Sullivan replied that the 19-foot high wall is located behind the house. Commissioner Hunter advised that she drove up Bohlman and Tollgate Roads and found the story poles on this project site to be very evident. Inquired whether staff went beyond the immediate area to assess the impact of these proposed walls from a distance. Director Sullivan replied~yes. Commissioner Hunter stated that these walls would impact the neighbors below, particularly the fire turnaround wall. Chair Barry questioned how the fire trucks would maneuver, whether they would go up Kittridge Road. Director Sullivan said that they would go to the Martin-Rose property and turn around, depending on the size of the vehicle the Fire Department sends. Chair Barry suggested an alternative of approving this project with the Condition that the Fire turnaround is eliminated. If Fire does not approve this, there would be no approval of this project. Director Sullivan said that he couldn't recall such a situation in past experience. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Chuck Husted, Applicant: • Stated that they have done a quality job and brought in professionals with relevant experience. • Said that it is not unusual to need retaining walls in excess of five feet when constructed within a Hillside district. • Assured that the walls will blend into the hillside and appear like natural rock formations. • Said that they have addressed all Planning Commission conditions and are willing to split the walls into two or three, whichever the Commission prefers. _ • Stated that they have agreed to a Conservation Easement and reduced the height of their new home by two feet. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 4 Chair B asked Mr. Husted if he is a eeable to recordin a Hold Harmless A eement. ~'Y ~' g ~' Mr. Chuck Husted replied yes. Mr. Larry Kahle, Project Architect: • Distributed two drawings. One demonstrates the reduction in roof pitch to lower the house height and the other demonstrates the retaining wall as split into three. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that the retaining wall for the fire truck turnaround is not depicted in this new drawing. - Mr. Larry Kahle said that was correct. Chair Barry asked who would plant the trees on the property owned by the Martin-Roses. Mr. Chuck Husted replied that there is enough of his property available to plant a row of screening trees near the fire turnaround. Mr. Mark Helton, Civil Engineer: • Discussed splitting retaining walls from one long wall to two shorter walls. Doing so would reduce the maximum height from 20 feet to two 10-foot walls. • Added that it is also feasible to split the wall into three walls. This would result in a maximum height of approximately seven feet, each section separated by five feet for planting. • Said that drainage has been dealt with in a way that protects the Samsel's driveway. Said that it is possible to put in a catch basin and get that drainage fora 100-year flood into an adjacent Swale. • Said that the original submittal included a Fire Department turnaround with a retaining wall. A deck turnaround was also discussed earlier in the project. With a deck, one would not see walls but rather columns. Chair Barry pointed out that the exhibit distributed this evening of the retaining walls depicts manicured cement finish. Additionally, it does not give an example of a contour wall and is therefore not very accurate of what was described. Mr. Mark Helton said that they are proposing short vertical walls. Vertical walls minimize the height required. Sloped walls increase the necessary height. Chair Barry sought assurance that the two or three wall configuration would also incorporate shot-crete formation. Mr. Mark Helton replied yes. Commissioner Jackman asked if the material will match the soil. Mr. Mark Helton replied yes. __ Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 5 Commissioner Garakani asked if the contour wall would be used if the wall were constructed in one piece. Mr. Mark Helton said that they could slope back the wall if the Commission so desires. However, this will increase the necessary height of the wall. Commissioner Roupe said that he is assuming that the retaining walls would be vertical since the walls would need to be taller if they follow the contours of the hill. Commissioner Garakani said that it would look more natural if it follows the contours. Mr. Mark Helton again said that if that is what the Commission wants, they can do it. Commissioner Garakani said that pockets could be used for planting, which is an advantage of a contour wall. Commissioner Hunter reminded that cut can be placed behind the wall if it is slanted. Mr. Mark Helton agreed but cautioned that it would be a negligible amount. Commissioner Garakani asked whether with the deck fire turnaround the necessary retaining wall could be cut into two pieces. Mr. Mark Helton replied yes. It would represent two 14-foot high walls. - Commissioner Garakani suggested a pocket of dirt to plant screening landscaping. Mr. Mark Helton said that they are trying to follow staff's direction to make the retaining walls as low as possible. Commissioner Roupe said that there is not much distance between the turnaround area and the adjacent property line. Said that this might encroach into the planting area if two walls are utilized. Asked if it is feasible to stay on this property with the screening landscaping with the retaining wall split into two. Commissioner Hunter inquired whether tiu-ee seven-foot walls are as strong as one big wall. Mr. Mark Helton replied yes. Commissioner Hunter asked if the Planning Commission could be held liable if something were to go wrong as a result of retaining wall failure. Chair Barry reminded that one Condition of Approval is the processing of a Hold Harmless Agreement. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that in her experience on the School Board, they are sued personally. Ms. Heather Rose, 604 Wellsbury Court, Palo Alto: ` • Advised that $40,00 is the bond amount for residential road bonds. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 6 • Stated that she spoke with Jerry Quilici at the County Planning Office, (408) 299-5731, regarding extending Subdivision requirements to allow road bonds. - _ Commissioner Roupe advised Ms. Rose that an alternative to having a fire turnaround on this project site eliminated and having shared use of her property turnaround has been discussed as a means of eliminating the need for one particularly tall retaining wall. Said that coming to any kind of an agreement would be between her, the applicant and the Fire Department. Ms. Heather Rose questioned when her fire turnaround would have to be completed since the Husted project might actually get built before hers is built. She has to address a landslide area on her property ~ - - prior to installation of her fire turnaround. - Commissioner Garakani asked Ms. Rose for the heights of her retaining walls. Ms. Heather Rose replied between five feet and 11 feet. The tallest wall is located behind her house and will not be visible. Added that she plans to plant more trees on her property including around the location where the Husted turnaround would be located. ' Mr. Chuck Husted: • Said that the walls will be as limited as possible and will be natural in appearance and not visible from a distance. • Said that he will do everything possible to mitigate the retaining walls from the surrounding area. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 8:00 p.m. Commissioner Hunter: • Expressed appreciation for the applicant's congeniality. • Said that she has no problem with using three seven-foot walls. • Cautioned that the 23-foot high wall for the fire turnaround would be visible across the valley. • Stated that the design of this home is very handsome. • Reminded that she was not on the Commission when the other Variances for retaining walls were approved. • Said that in the event that she supports this project, she will also support the road bond. • Said that she could not support the fire turnaround retaining wall. Commissioner Garakani: • Said that the wall in the area is now visible from the neighbor below. , • Expressed support for a contour wall. ~ ' • Supported the deck style fire turnaround. ___ • Said that he would also support putting vegetation within pockets on the wall. • Stated that he would support a Condition that staff works with Fire to eliminate the need for a fire turnaround on this site. However, if Fire does not agree and the turnaround must be installed, he could support either the retaining walls or the deck design fire turnaround. -- Commissioner Jackman: • Supported the use of either two or three part retaining walls around the house. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 7 -- • Said that the Fire Department would not likely change their requirement for this turnaround. • Said that she does not like the turnaround but if this project is approved it is likely to be necessary. • Said that this building site was pre-graded long ago and is a building site. • Expressed support for the Conservation Easement. - • Stated that the proposed house looks good and she appreciates that the house has been lowered in height by two feet. • Said that everyone is doing the best they can to make this as invisible as possible. Commissioner Roupe: - • Said that he supports this project. • Added he is comfortable with the design of the home, particularly with the reduction in height by two feet. • Said that he could support the retaining wall in any configuration, be it one large wall, two ten-foot walls or three seven-foot walls. Any option is acceptable. • Said that the retaining wall causing the most concern in the fire turnaround retaining wall. • Suggested that a pier and beam deck is one option. • Supported giving staff the option to work out this best option for the fire turnaround with the applicant, the neighbor and the Fire Department. ---- • Reiterated that he is fully supportive of this project. Chair Barry: • Said that she has struggled with this proposal and its retaining walls. • Stated that an historic drainage problem in this area will be improved by this project which weighs heavily for her. • Expressed appreciation for the work that has gone into developing this proposal. • Supported the lowering of the roof height by two feet. • Stated that the back retaining wall would be located behind the house and drive and would not be seen by anyone. • Suggested that a contour wall would look natural and supported the use of three walls with two separations for screening vegetation. • Said that she would not like to see this project fail simply due to the requirement for the fire turnaround. • Cautioned that the 23 foot high retaining wall for the fire turnaround would take years, if ever, to be screened by landscaping. • Expressed hope that the Fire Chief would agree to the alternative plan to share the turnaround on the Martin-Rose property and would leave this issue to be worked out by staff with Fire. Commissioner Roupe: • Stated that a maximum for the turnaround wall should be called out. The wall should be a split rock simulated wall with screening planting. Additionally, the pier alternative can be investigated so that the best alternative can be worked out. Chair Barry agreed. Commissioner Hunter asked for more information on the trees that would be lost with the installation of these retaining walls. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 ~ Page 8 Commissioner Roupe pointed out on the plans that three or four redwood trees with a diameter of 12 inches would be lost. Chair Barry said that while these trees are not that large in diameter they are 30 feet high and effectively screen a third to half of where the turnaround is going to be. Commissioner Roupe said that either solution results in those trees being removed. Commissioner Hunter said that she could not support the removal of those trees or a deck turnaround out of consideration for the neighbor. - Commissioner Garakani pointed out that someone else is looking at the neighbor's 23-foot high home. Commissioner Roupe cautioned that the project cannot be approved without some accommodation for Fire Department access. Commissioner Jackman said that the Commission needs to hear from the Fire Chief. She said that she is happy with everything except the turnaround. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission approved the project on Kittridge Road (APN 517-14-080) as proposed with the following changes and/or additions: 1. A two-foot reduction in the height of the residence; 2. Use of a three-part retaining wall on the uphill side with intermittent planting for screening; 3. Staff to look into an alternative to the fire truck turnaround, including the use a deck pier or the total elimination of the turnaround on this property with the proposed turnaround on the adjacent Martin-Rose property to also serve this site; 4. Issuance of a road maintenance bond, at an amount to be determined by staff, as part of the Building Site Approval; 5. Include vegetation to screen the retaining walls; 6. Process a Hold Harmless Agreement to be recorded with the deed, holding the City harmless in the event that failure on this property causes any damage to adjacent parcels and/or the public right-of--way; 7. Process an Open Space Scenic Easement; and 8. Enter into a lower road drainage agreement. . AYES: Barry, Garakani, Jackman and Roupe NOES: Hunter ABSENT: Kurasch and Zutshi ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that if Director Sullivan is not-satisfied with the resolution of the turnaround issue, he would bring the matter back to the Commission. Director Sullivan added that as much significant planting as possible will be used to provide screening. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 9 Commissioner Garakani said that one can see slide activity in the turnaround area. This project will improve that situation. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.2 Application #02-049 (397-06-069) -BUSH, 18627 Ambleside Lane: Request for Design Review and Variance Approval to replace a detached garage, which was destroyed by fire. A setback variance is requested to replace the 13 foot high, 693 square foot garage within the rear and side yard setbacks. The garage is to be located within 10 feet of the rear and side yard boundaries, which is nonconforming since the required setbacks are 20 feet for the side yard and 50 feet for the rear yard. The property is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (WELSH) Planner Ann Welsh presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicants seek Design Review and Variance approvals to allow the reconstruction of a 693 square foot garage that was destroyed by fire in October 2001. The project site is a 1.3- acre property located on Ambleside Lane. The zoning is R-1-40,000. • Said that this Variance is required due to non-conforming setbacks at 10 feet from the rear and side property lines. The proposed height of the reconstructed garage would be 13 feet, 2 inches, which is the same as before. This height is required to accommodate a workshop area. There are no view or privacy impacts. • Described the findings to support this Variance request as being a Special Circumstance due to the destruction by fire of the former garage. Additionally the slope of the lot and the location of existing structures further support this request. Therefore, this Variance would not represent a Special Privilege. - • Recommended approval as the necessary findings of support can be met. Mr. Charles Bush, Applicant and Owner, 18627 Ambleside Lane, Saratoga: • Said that he has been a resident of Saratoga for 19 years. • Declared his surprise at having to appear before the Commission in order to secure approval to simply rebuild his garage, which was originally constructed in 1957. • Advised that his adjacent side nerghbor, whose property is closest to this proposed rebuilt garage, does not object to its reconstruction. • Stated that he just wants to rebuild his garage and workshop. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 8:43 p.m. Mr. and Mrs. Dan Banerje, 18594 Vessing Road, Saratoga: • Said that their home is located just behind this site. • Expressed opposition for this Variance for four reasons. • The hillside location and the fact that the fire that destroyed this garage also set trees in their yard on fire. Only because there was no wind that day prevented the fire from spreading to their home. • Stated that the location of this garage offers poor fire truck access. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 10 • Electrical poles run close to the garage location, which adds to the fire hazard. • There is 30 feet of space between the house and detached garage. The one-acre plus lot offers alternatives to this non-conforming placement of the rebuilt garage. Proposed that an alternative placement of the rebuilt garage be found -so that it is not so close to the shared_property line. - Pointed out that most household fires start in garages. Advised that when the Fire Department arrived, they accessed this fire from their home, located behind the subject site. Commissioner Roupe asked for clarification as to the location of the Banerje home. Mr. Dan Benerje replied directly behind the garage. Commissioner Roupe sought clarification that the Fire Department accessed through their property. He added that since there were trees engulfed on their property, the Fire Department had to access from their property in order to put out the fire in their trees and prevent the spread to their home. Commissioner Garakani asked the Benerjes if they understand why a Variance is required in this situation. Mrs. Benerje replied due to insufficient setbacks. Planner Ann Welsh: • Clarified that the Variance is required to allow a garage height greater that is allowed with the available setback. A nine-foot high garage is permitted at 10 feet from the property line. A garage greater than 12 feet in height requires a 50-foot -rear setback and 20-foot side setback. Any accessory structure greater than 12 feet in height must meet setbacks. • Added that an eight foot high structure is permitted at six feet from the property line and an additional three feet in setbacks is required for every additional foot in height. Mr. Benerje sought clarification that the applicant could have anine-foot high garage at a ,nine-foot setback. Planner Ann Welsh: • Said that this would be permitted without a Variance. The only reason this Variance is required is _ because of the proposed 13-foot height of the structure. Chair Barry added that a 12-foot setback would be required fora 10-foot high garage while the applicants are seeking approval fora 13-foot, two-inch high garage with a 10-foot setback. The alternative would be to bring the garage forward on the property by two feet. Planner Ann Welsh said that there is room to do so but the pad from the previous garage is already in position. Commissioner Hunter asked how this fire started. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 11 Mr. Charles Bush said that the cause was undetermined. He added that the only reason the Fire Department first responded at the Benerje's home was because they had poor maps. Afire truck was easily driven down his driveway when they finally amved on his street. Commissioner Roupe said that the Commission avoids Variances when it can. Asked Mr. Bush if he is willing to consider a flat roofed nine to 10 foot tall garage. Mr. Charles Bush stated that he is not trying to change what the property was before. He just wants to rebuild what was originally built on the property in 1957. Commissioner Hunter said that she believes that a garage should match a home's architecture. Mrs. Bush, 18627 Ambleside Lane, Saratoga: • Said that she too would love not to have electrical poles in her yard. • Stated that they should be allowed to have back what they previously had. Commissioner Roupe stated his support for the project as proposed due to historical and architectural compatibility. This is the right thing to do. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that the Fire Department is now aware of this property's location and that a new garage will not burn as readily. Chair Barry asked whether this new garage would need to have fire sprinklers. Planner Ann Welsh replied that there were no such requirements from Fire. Director Tom Sullivan advised that a requirement for sprinklers is based upon the size of the structure. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 9:00 p.m. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jackman, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission granted a Design Review and Variance approval to allow the reconstruction of a garage on property located at 18627 Ambleside Lane, as presented. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman and Roupe NOES: None ABSENT: Kurasch and Zutshi ABSTAIN: None *** NEW BUSINESS Discussion and direction regarding the polling results for single-story overlay in the Saratoga Woods and Brookview Neighborhoods. (SULLIVAN) ` Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 12 • Advised that Council adopted a Resolution that directed staff to conduct polls of two neighborhoods, Saratoga Woods and Brookview, to consider the adoption of a zoning overlay_ to restrict homes to one story. • Described the results of the polls as follows: • Brookview Neighborhood: The poll was sent to 328 homes in the Brookview Neighborhood. Of that, 221 responses were received. From the responses, 116 (51 percent) were supportive of the overlay zoning and 105 (46 percent) were in opposition. Of the total polls sent out to the Brookview Neighborhood property owners, the rate of return was 35 percent in support and 32 percent in opposition for a total response rate of 67 percent. -- . • Saratoga Woods Neighborhood: The poll was sent to 401 homes in the Saratoga Woods Neighborhood. Of that, 176 (66 percent) were in support of an overlay zone and 82 (30 percent) were in opposition of the overlay zone. This represents a 65 percent response rate. • Stated that the Planning Commission needs to determine whether it feels this response is significant enough to move forward with the drafting of the Ordinance to create the single-story overlay zone and conduct public hearings. Commissioner Roupe sought clarification that Council took action to conduct this poll of the neighborhoods to determine the level of interest in having the single-story overlay zoning. Director Tom Sullivan added that Council also directed the Planning Commission to review the results of this poll and make the determination as to whether the results warrant the preparation of a draft Ordinance and the conducting of public hearings. Commissioner Hunter in uired whether an o tion was included on the oll res onse card for "Don't q p P p care." Director Tom Sullivan replied no. Commissioner Hunter suggested that perhaps a second mailing should be done to those in the Brookview Neighborhood that did not respond to the poll. Director Tom Sullivan advised that some polls came back with no vote marked while others had both support and opposed boxes marked therefore nullifying that response. Commissioner Roupe advised that public hearings will allow all interested parties to have their say. Commissioner Hunter asked staff if they can identify which property owners did not respond. She added that public hearings like this can get ugly and turn neighbor against neighbor. ,' Director Tom Sullivan advised that staff does know which households did not respond. Commissioner Garakani said that he does not feel that public hearings are an evil thing. In fact, he sees the public hearing as a positive event. Commissioner Roupe said there is no reason not to go forward with the process. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 13 _ Chair Barry asked staff if it would be a big expense to have another poll sent to those property owners who did not respond to the first poll. _ Director Tom Sullivan said that staff could send a second request to those who did not respond. Commissioner Roupe asked staff if there is any reason not to go ahead with the process. Director Tom Sullivan replied that the only downside is the large crowd drawn to a public hearing. Chair Barry pointed out that there have been many very contentious projects in the Brookview Neighborhood in the past. Commissioner Jackman added that people do not always bother to come to public hearings. Commissioner Roupe said that this depends on how sensitive the issue. Chair Barry said that she supports a second mailing although she does not feel that a 66 to 67 percent rate of poll return is bad at all. Commissioner Hunter said it is important to solicit input from the impacted residents since the overlay zoning will affect what can be done with these properties. Commissioner Roupe said that going forward is not a definitive vote on the final outcome. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for the New Business Item on single-story overlay zone at 9:16 p.m. Mr. Ronald Schoengold, 19000 Saratoga Glen Place, Saratoga: • Identified himself as a representative of the Saratoga Woods Homeowners Association, which has roughly 390 homes. • Stated support for the process for implementing asingle-story overlay restriction. • Said that their Association did a lot of advance publicity on this issue, which may be a reason for such a good response to the City's survey. • Added that even with asingle-story overlay zone, should a credible plan be brought forward with compelling reasons to allow a second story, the Planning Commission would still have the option of granting a Variance. • Urged the Commission to move forward with this process. Commissioner Garakani asked what the advantage is to having Variances. Mr. Ronald Schoengold replied that the Variance process is more deliberate and requires more justification and puts the burden on the homeowner to substantiate the second story. Commissioner Roupe agreed that the Variance is a higher hurdle as there are legally required findings necessary to grant a Variance. He added that second stories are typically not additions to existing homes but rather represent tear down and rebuild projects. h' Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 14 Commissioner Jackman stated that she thought imposing asingle-story overlay zone would outright prohibit second stories. Director Tom Sullivan advised that the City is required to have a process to allow exceptions. Chair Barry asked if the process would be for an Exception or Variance. Director Tom Sullivan replied Variance. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Schoengold to identify the boundaries for Saratoga Woods. Mr. Ronald Schoengold said that the neighborhood is closer to Prospect Avenue and is bounded-by Cox to Saratoga Avenue. The Saratoga Woods Neighborhood includes more than 300 houses. Mr. Steve Blanton, 345 S. San Antonio Road, Los Altos: • Identified himself as a representative of the Silicon Valley Association of Realtors. • Said that they have seen such overlay districts and typically a supermajority has been required. • Stated that the City should be proud of the response rate it received to its poll. That is an achievement in and of itself. • Agreed that a Variance is a different category of review. • Suggested that this maybe more of a two-story Variance area than asingle-story overly zone. • Added that this overlay may create more issues than it resolves. Commissioner Rou a asked Mr. Blanton if he has seen a situation where overly s have faced P Y opposition in court. Mr. Steve Blanton said not to his knowledge. He added that sometimes opinions change and the overlay zone maybe less desirable. Commissioner Roupe agreed that such an overlay would greatly change the potential use of a property. Suggested that staff obtain the written legal opinion of the City Attorney. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Blanton which communities he is aware of that have single-story overlay zones. Mr. Steve Blanton replied that their organization encompasses 15 cities. Of those, Los Altos, Mountain View and Palo Alto have such single-story overlay districts. Commissioner Roupe asked whether in those cities the decision was reached by a vote of the people or through the actions of the respective City Councils. Mr. Steve Blanton advised that they utilized a similar process as is being considered here with mail ballots and public hearings to allow public participation. Director Tom Sullivan advised that two cities for which he was previously affiliated use overlays extensively to control heights in order to preserve views. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 15 . Commissioner Roupe asked how-long these overlays were in effect ad how well they worked. Director Tom Sullivan replied that they worked very well. Chair Barry asked if there has been court challenge. Director Tom Sullivan said there has been none. Commissioner Jackman asked if there is an impact on home sales as the result of the imposition of an overlay zone. Mr. Steve Blanton replied that it is difficult to determine. Commissioner Jackman asked how new buyers are advised of such an overlay zone during the purchase of a home. Mr. Steve Blanton advised that there are disclosure forms prepared by agents at the time of the home sale. - Councilmember Evan Baker, 12324 Obrad Drive, Saratoga: • Stated that he is present to speak as a private citizen regarding Saratoga Woods, where he has resided for 25 years including having served in the past as President of its Homeowners Association. • Said that the response to this poll is high, second highest only to the library bond poll, to his recollection. • Said that most of the parcels in the Saratoga Woods Neighborhood are about 10,000 square feet and mostly square. Every home would look down on a minimum of four backyards if a second story were to be constructed. • Said that there have been fewer than nine second-story additions to homes in the entire neighborhood and every one of those intrudes on the privacy of their adjacent neighbors' homes. On the other hand, approximately 12 two-story homes were built by Lohr in such a manner that there was no privacy intrusion. • Stated that he would be recused from voting on this issue when it comes before the Council. • Encouraged the Commission to move forward with hearings. • Declared that the majority of homeowners in Saratoga Woods opposes two-story homes. • Thanked the Commission and made himself available for questions. Chair Barry asked Councilmember Baker for more information on the overlay process. Councilmember Baker advised that few neighborhoods are applicable for asingle-story overlay district. Homes have to be on rather small lots to require single-story overlay zones. Larger lots with a second story offer less intrusion on adjacent properties due to greater distances between structures. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that CC&Rs are fairly restrictive and run with the land. Councilmember Baker cautioned that while the Plannin Commission ma take into advisement the g Y requirements from CC&Rs, they are not required to follow them. The CC&Rs are only as good as their Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 16 enforcement by the Homeowners' Association. Added that the last two-story addition in the Saratoga Woods Neighborhood occurred about 15 to 16 years ago. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for the New Business Item on single-story overlay zone at 9:40 p.m. Chair Barry suggested moving forward to public hearings and going back to those property owners who did not respond to the first polls. Commissioner Roupe: • Supported both actions and stated that the 65 percent return was pretty good. It would only take postage and a little effort to conduct a second mailing. • Stated that there is already a good enough showing to warrant the drafting of the Ordinance and going forward with public hearings. • Said he feels most strongly about the community support from the Saratoga Woods Neighborhood and less strongly for the support of the Brookview Neighborhood. Director Tom Sullivan suggested that the neighborhoods be handled separately. Commissioner Roupe concurred and suggested started with Saratoga Woods, see how it goes and then go forward with Brookview. Chair Barry wondered if the criteria for Variances should also be reviewed. Director Tom Sullivan stated that the Variance criteria, with its three mandatory findings, are set by law. -- Commissioner Garakani asked if•it is possible not to allow Variances in an overlay zone. Director Tom Sullivan advised that the City must have a process in place to allow someone to ask for a Variance. Chair Barry pointed out that the process for Variances is much clearer than it used to be. She added that in the future, should the overlay zone be less desirable, citizens can come back to request public hearings to consider the removal of the overlay zone. Commissioner Roupe supported the use of Variance over Exceptions since they are more restrictive and uniform. ' Commissioner Garakani said that this would be a good example for other areas. Commissioner Hunter cautioned that some public hearings get ugly. Commissioner Roupe said that the focus should first be on Saratoga Woods and sending second post cards to the Brookview Neighborhood. _ Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2002 Page 17 Chair Barry disagreed, saying that the second mailing for Brookview should be delayed until the processing of the overlay for Saratoga Woods is further along. She thanked people for their attendance and input on this matter. Director Tom Sullivan advised that he would have this item scheduled as soon as time allows. COMMISSION ITEMS -- Ordinance Review -Review of the initial topical areas that the Subcommittee will address (SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan: • Advised that he has distributed a memo with four bullet points: • Building Site Approval Process: Said that this process should be brought out of the Subdivision Ordinance and put into Zoning. Added that this item is number one on the City Attorney's list. • Variation from Standards: Said that this allows variation of standards-without being a Variance, which is an unusual provision. Suggested either establishing limits or doing away with this. • Administrative Hearing Process: Said this is currently done by staff with noticing only to 10 closest neighbors. Suggested setting this up as an actual hearing with the Community Development Director serving as the Hearing Officer. Staff would make reports and neighbors are allowed an opportunity to be a part of a formal hearing process. This action will move the bar up a bit. • Establish a Notification Process for Tree Removal Permit Process: Advised that currently a 10- day appear period is in place but there is no provision for the notification of neighbors of the decision to allow a tree removal permit that might generate an appeal. Commissioner Roupe said that it is a good idea to look for situations where current practices are not based upon written policies. Chair Barry said that she likes the idea of Administrative Hearings. Commissioner Garakani suggested the participation of one Planning Commissioner. Director Tom Sullivan said that with the involvement of a Commissioner, the hearing would no longer be considered an Administrative Hearing. Commissioner Hunter asked what the reasoning is for an Administrative Hearing process. Director Tom Sullivan replied that they offer better participation by the neighborhood and formalizes that participation. Commissioner Roupe stated that neighbors will be more at ease with the results following an Administrative Hearing. Director Tom Sullivan said that he wants his staff to include the same level of Conditions of Approval for Administrative Hearing Items as are currently included in Planning Commission Resolutions. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2G02 Page 18 Commissioner Hunter asked Director Sullivan what percentage of all applications come to the Planning Commission for action. - Director Tom Sullivan replied approximately 20 percent. About 80 percent of all residential applications are dealt with by planners and/or the Building Department. Commercial and Multi-Family projects go straight to the Building Department or to the Planning Commission. COMMUNICATIONS Chair Barry asked staff to follow up on the letter from Mr. Robert Chin regarding a Condition of Approval that has not been satisfied. - Director Tom Sullivan advised that he had not seen this letter and would direct his staff to follow up. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Chair Barry adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m. to the next regular meeting set for Wednesday, April 24, 2002, to begin at 7 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • • ITEM 1 • • • REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No. #02 - 021- Resolution Amending the Zoning Ordinance to Permit Small Wind Energy Systems Location Hillside Residential and Agricultural Districts Apphcant/Owner: Saratoga Planning Commission Staff Planner. Ann Welsh, Assistant Planner, AICP ~~ Date: April 24, 2002 APN: N/A Discussion This report supplements the information that was presented to the Planning Commission on February 27, 2002 regarding Assembly Bill 1207 which was intended to ensure that municipalities enact zoning measures which provide for small wind energy systems (windmills) for on-site home, farm or small commercial use As was discussed at the February meeting, the Legislature and State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission are promoting this technology to help achieve the goal of increased in-state electricity generation and reduced demand on the state electric grid. The intent of the legislature is ~ to ensure that local ordinances regulating small wind energy systems have zoning provisions that do not unreasonably restrict the ability of homeowners, farms and small businesses to install small wind energy systems. The state policy is to encourage the use of these systems and limit obstacles to their use. In order to encourage Cities to enact their own regulations regarding these systems the state has unposed a July 1, 2002 deadline on enacting regulations addressing this use. If the City does not enact an ordinance within that time frame, Assembly Bill 1207 overrides any local zoning that is in effect. This state regulation provides a more relaxed standard than the Ciry may enact if they adopt their own ordinance. A comparison of the differences between the state imposed regulations and the city standards is provided in Table 1 below. 000001 Table 1 Comparison of Existing, Proposed and Required Regulations for Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems to Illustrate the Benefits of Adopting a City Ordinance Addressing the Use Existing Proposed State Regs. after Regulation Zoning City Windmill (7/1/02) --- Ordinance Process Height Variance Conditional Use Permitted Use Zoning Amendment -- Design Review Public Heating Yes Yes No Public Notice Yes Yes No Max Height 26 ft 65 ft. on parcels >_ 1 ac. s 5 ac 80 ft on parcels >_ 1 ac < 5 ac 80 ft /on parcels > 5 ac. No height limit on >5 ac lot Min. Setback Front 30 ft. Equal to height of windmill 30 ft Side 20 ft. Equal to height of windmill 30 ft Rear 60 ft Equal to height of windmill 30 ft Noise 50 dBa/daytime 60 dBa/ daytime 60 dBa/ daytime Est evening 50 dBa/evening 50 dBa/evening 45 dBa/nighttime Description of Table In terms of process, Assembly Bill 1207 would allow windmills as a permitted use with no public hearing or public notice. Whereas, if the Ciry adopts their own ordinance, windmills may be permitted as a Conditional Use requiring public hearing and public notice. Thus, adopting a Ciry Windmill Ordinance by July 1, 2002 allows greater public input into the planning process. Under the state imposed ordinance public input is not required since windmills are a permitted use and only a building permit would be required. • • In terms of height limitations, the state mandated ordinance allow windmills up to 80 feet on one acre parcels and places no height limits for windmills on parcels greater than 0~00~2 5 acres. If the City adopts their own ordinance, the height limit would parcels 1 to 5 acres in size and 80 feet for parcels greater than 5 acres. ordmance allows much higher structures than would be permitted Windmill Ordinance. be 65 feet for Thus the state under a Ciry In terms of setbacks, the state ordinance requires a setback of only 30 feet regardless of the height of the windmill. The city ordinance allows the setback to be equal to the height of the structure. So, for a 65 foot high windmill the setback could be 65 feet under a City ordinance, while the state regulations would allow the same wuidmill within 30 feet. The advantage of adopr_ing the city regulations is clear in this regard. Much less restrictive setbacks would be allowed under the state mandate resulting in the potential for windmills to be located very close to adjoining structures. In term of noise, the state ordinance allows 60 dBa regardless of the time of day. If the City imposes their own ordinance the limit is 60 dBa in the day and 50 dBa in the evening. Thus a slightly more restrictive noise regulation is allowed under the City regulations. In conclusion, the Ciry is at an advantage if they adopt their own ordinance within the ___ guidelines of the state regulations by the July 1, 2002 deadline. Without action on this issue, less restrictive standards will override local zoning and allow taller, noisier windmills on much smaller lots without public input into the process. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of this ordinance in order to comply with the state mandate that municipalities do not unduly restrict installation of small wind energy conversion systems. If the City does not adopt an ordinance addressing this issue by the July 1, 2002 deadline any applicant who complies with the minimum guidelines established by the bill shall be granted the use by right. Thus, it is in the cities interest to develop their own regulations for this use in order to control the conditions under which these structures can be constructed. • 000003 • THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • 000004 • _ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING CHAPTER 15 OF THE SARATOGA CITY CODE RELATING TO SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Article 15-52 is hereby added to the Saratoga City Code to read as follows: "ARTICLE 15-52 SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS • __15 -52.010 Purpose In response to the state's electricity supply shortage, the State of California has adopted California Government Code Section 65892.13 to encourage local governmental agencies to adopt zoning standards which enable construction of small wind energy conversion systems for on-site home, farm and small commercial use. The purpose of this Ordinance is to adopt such zoning standards. 15-52.020 Definitions (a) "Small Wind Energy System" means a wind energy conversion system consisting of a wind turbine, a tower and associated control or conversion electronics, which has a rated capacity that does not exceed the allowable rated capacity under the Emerging Renewables Fund of the Renewables Investment Plan administered by the California Energy Commission and which will be used primarily to reduce on-site consumption of utility dower. (b) "Tower Height" means the height above grade of the fixed portion of the tower, excluding the wind turbine. 15-52.030 Requirement for Conditional Use Permit A Small Wind Energy System shall require Conditional Use Permit approval in compliance with Article 15-55 (Conditional Use Permits), and a Building Permit. • 15-52.040 Application Requirements A Conditional Use Permit application for a Small Wind Energy ®00005 System shall include all information and materials required by Section 15- - 55.040, and the following. _ (a) Standard drawings and an engineering analysis of the system's tower, showing compliance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and certification by aCalifornia-licensed professional mechanical, structural, or civil engineer. A "wet stamp" shall not be required on the drawings and analysis if the application demonstrates that the system is designed to meet the most stringent wind requirements (UBC wind exposure D), the requirements for the worst seismic class (UBC Seismic 4), and the weakest soil class, with a soil strength of not more than 1,000 pounds per square foot. (b) Aline drawing of the electrical components of the system in sufficient detail to allow for a determination that the manner of installation conforms to the National Electric Code. (c) Information demonstrating that the system will be used primarily to reduce on-site consumption of electricity. (d) Evidence that the provider of electric utility service to the site has been informed of the applicant's intent to install an interconnected customer-owned electricity generator, unless the applicant intends, and so states in the application, that system will not be connected to _ the electricity grid. y_ (e) Evidence that the proposed height of the windmill tower does not , exceed the height recommended by the manufacturer or distributor of the system. 15-52.050 Location of Small Wind Energy Systems A Small Wind Energy System maybe located in a Hi'.lside Residential zoning district or an Agricultural District and only outside an "urbanized area" as defined in California Government Code Section 21080.7(b)(2) to mean a central city and surrounding closely settled territory, as defined by the United States Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census in the Federal Register, Volume 39, Number 85, for - Wednesday, May 1, 1974, at pages 15202 and 15203, and as periodically updated. A windmill shall not be located on a parcel that is: (a) Within a scenic corridor identified by the Open Space Element of the City General Plan or a scenic highway comdor designated~ursuant to Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 260) of Chapter 2 of 000006 Division 1 of the Streets and Highways Code; (b) Within a Special Studies Zone established in compliance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Public Resources Code Section 2621 and following); (c) Subject to a conservation easement established in compliance with Civil Code Section 815 and following, that does not specifically authorize wind energy conversion systems; (d) Subject to an open space easement established in compliance with Government Code Section 51070 and following, that does not specifically authorize wind energy conversion systems; (e) Subject to an agricultural conservation easement established in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 10200 and following, that does not specifically authorize wind energy conversion systems; (f) Subject to a Williamson Act contract easement established in compliance with Government Code Section 51200 and following, that does not specifically authorize wind energy conversion systems; or (g) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places, or the California Register of Historic Resources, in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, or contains a structure that is so listed. 15-52.060 Noticed Public Hearing The Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the application for a Conditional Use Permit for a Small Wind Energy System in accordance with Section 15-55.060, except that the notice for the public hearing need only be provided to property owners within 300 feet of the property on which the Small Wind Energy System is to be located; and provided, further, that the Community Development Director may choose to also provide additional notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Saratoga, if the Director determines that this notice is necessary due to circumstances specific to the proposed installation. 15-52.070 Minimum Parcel Size A Small Wind Energy System shall only be located on a parcel that, at minimum, is one acre in size. ~~i0~~"~ ~-. 15-52.080 Standards A Small Wind Energy System shall comply with the following standards: (a) Setback requirements. A windmill shall not be located closer to a property line than the height of the tower; provided that it also complies with any applicable fire setback requirements pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 4290 (30 feet for ---structures and related mechanical equipment at the effective date of this Ordinance). (b) Height limit. A Small Wind Energy System tower shall not exceed a maximum height of 65 feet on a parcel less than five acres, or a maximum height of 80 feet on a parcel of five acres or more; provided that, in all cases, the system shall comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements, including Subpart B (commencing with Section 77.11) of Part 77 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations regarding installations close to airports, and the State Aeronautics Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section 21001) of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code). (c) Turbine. The turbine proposed for the system shall have been approved by the California Energy Commission (CEC) as qualifying under the Emerging Renewables Fund of the CEC's Renewables Investment Plan, or certified by a national program recognized and approved by the CEC. (d) Noise. Except during short-term events including utility outages and severe wind storms, a Small Wind Energy System shall be designed, installed, and operated so that noise generated by the system shall not exceed the 60 decibels (dBA), as measured at the closest neighboring inhabited dwelling, or the maximum noise levels established by Sections 7-30.040 and 7-30.050 for the applicable zoning district, whichever is the strictest requirement. 15-52.090 Abandonment of Use A Small Wind Energy System which is not used for twelve successive months shall be deemed abandoned and shall be dismantled and removed from the property at the expense of the property owner." SECTION 2. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA" -Public Resources Code Section 21000 and following) and the ~"OCr'0008 regulations promulgated pursuant to CEQA ("the State CEQA Guidelines"), the City Council hereby approves the Negative Declaration prepared for the adoption of this Ordinance and finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and thereafter passed and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the Day of , 2002, by the following vote: AYES; NOS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk • 000009 • THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • OOOOi0 - ITEM 3 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION • • Application No./Location: 14087 Loma Rio Drive/App. No. 02-042 Design-Review/Variance Applicant/Owner: Dick and Anne Sanquini n _ Staff Planner: John F. Livingstone, Associate Planner ~1~~ Date: Apri124, 2002 v~ APN: - 397-25-060 Department Head• 17V0/ L,Ullld IGLU 1JL~1 Ve 000001 STAFF ANALYSIS -- ZONING: R-1-12,500 (Single Family Residential) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: M12.5 (Residential Medium Density) MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 7,039 sq. ft. gross, 5,483 sq. ft. net AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 2% GRADING REQUIRED: The applicant is proposing only minimal grading for the first floor addition. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project consisting of construction of an addition to an existing house is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. CASE HISTORY Application filed: 8/22/01 Application complete: 3/27/02 Notice published: 4/10/02 Mailing completed: 4/10/02 Posting completed: - 4/04/02 MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED The proposed exterior finish will be light gray color to match the existing color. The trim will be white and the windows will be green. The roof will be a dark gray color. PROJECT DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting Design Review and Variance approval to add 294 square feet to the existing first floor of the house and 501 squaze foot for a new second floor. The addition would add 795 square feet to the existing 1,504 square foot residence with an existing attached 440 squaze foot gazage. The total proposed house size with gazage would be 2,739 square feet. The maximum allowed floor azea for this pazcel is 2,444 squaze feet, therefore the applicant is applying for a Variance for 295 square feet. ___ 000002 ~~ • C7 J Appl. No. 02-042;14087Loma Rio Drive Proposal Lot Coverage: Floor Area: Setbacks: Buildings Footprints Driveways, walkways TOTAL (Impervious Surface) First Floor Existing Garage Proposed addition to First Floor Second Floor TOTAL Front Rear Left Side Right Side Height: Residence Design Review ls` Floor 2nd Floor ls` Floor 2nd F100T ls` Floor 2nd FlOOr _ ls` Floor 2nd FlOOr Approx 40.5% Code Requirements Maxim_ um Allowable 55% 2,238 sq. ft. 440 sq. ft. 2,678 sq. ft. 1,504 sq. ft. 440 sq. ft. 294 sq. ft. 501 sq. ft. 2,739 sq. ft. 25 ft. 38 ft. 44 ft. 59 ft. 6 ft. 18 ft. 6 ft. 9.5 ft. 21 ft. 3,015 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable 2,444 sq. ft. Minimum Requirement 28 ft. 28 ft. 38 ft. 38 ft. 6 ft. 6 ft. 6 ft. 6 ft. Maximum Allowable 26 ft. The proposed project implements the following Residential Design Guidelines policies. • Policy 1,"Minimize Perception of Bulh" The project meets this policy in that the proposed house will have varying rooflines that will break up the elevation of the building. The project is also proposing the use of horizontal wood siding that acts to m;nimi~e building height and blend in with the original building design. • Policy 2,"Integrate Structures with the Environment" The proposed addition meets this policy in that the applicant has chosen a natural earth tone gray color which will help the proposed structure blend in with the trees around the site. • Policy 3, "Avoid Interference with Privacy" The proposed second floor addition has increased setbacks and minunal windows that will reduce negative impacts on the C \MyDocuments\John L\Loma ILo Dr 14087 SRdoc 000003 Appl. No. 02-042;14087Loma Rio Drive neighbors privacy. The applicant has also modified the original design removing a second floor balcony in response to a neighbors concern. • Policy 4, "Preserve Views and Access to Views" The proposed addition is not in a view corridor and will not have an adverse affect on neighbors views. Policy 5, "Design for Energy Efficiency" The existing addition will meet the State Energy Guidelines. The proposed project also meets the Design Review Findings as stated in Section 15-45.080 of the Zoning Code as follows: - 1. "Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy" The proposed addition is not located in a view corridor and should not have any negative impacts on the neighbors privacy. 2 "Preserve the natural landscape" All existing trees on the site will be maintained and protected during the construction as recommended in the attached Arborist Report. 3. "Minimize perception of excessive bulk" The addition will have a varying roof pitch and front elevation that will act to reduce the bulk of the structure. 4. "Compatible bulk and height" The proposed addition will be compatible to the other homes in the neighborhood in height and bulk. 5. "Currentgradingand erosion control techniques" The applicant is proposing only minimal grading for the new foundation for the first floor addition. Variance In order to approve a variance application the Planning Commission must make all of the required variance findings in the affirmative. If any one of the findings cannot be made the request must be denied. The following is review of each of the required fLndLngs for a variance 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the lot is unique in both size and topography. The lot has unique topography in that it has a creek running along the rear property line with an easement from the Water District encompassing approximately one fourth of the lot. The Water District easement reduces the lot size, which reduces the allowed floor area. The lot is also unique due to its small size. The zoning requires a C \MyDocuments\John LU..oma ILo Dr 14067 sRdoc - 000004 Appl. No. 02-042;14087Loma Rio Drive minimum lot size of 12,500 square feet. The gross lot size of the applicant's parcel is 7,039 squaze feet and the net lot size due to the easement reduction is 5,483 squaze feet which is less than half of that required for the district. Due to the unique topography and lot size the applicant is restricted in the amount of floor area allowed when compazed to other property owners on the street. The strict enforcement of this regulation would deprive the - applicant additional square footage as enjoyed by the other owners on the street. 2. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. - This finding can be made in the affirmative in that there are other homes on the same side of the street with the same easement that exceed the allowed floor area. There is also one other home that has received an approved floor azea variance due to the Water District easement. The granting of this variance would not constitute a special privilege based on the neighboring home sizes and prior variance approval. 3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding 'can be made LZ the affirmative in that the proposed addition will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. Discussion of [variance Findings The City of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance defines the net site area as that portion of the gross site area remaining after deducting right-of-way and access easements, certain lots classified with a geological hazazd, and any portion of a site within an easement to the Santa Clara Valley Water District. There is also a floor area reduction for sloped lots. Staff is recommending this variance for approval not because of the easement, but because of the special circumstance as it relates to the existing floor area of the nearby homes. Staff does not feel that this particular variance sets a precedence for approving variances due to the constraint of an easement. Trees All existing trees on the site will be retained The Ciry Arborist Report contains recommendations for the protection of existing trees on the site. All of the Arborist ~~ recommendations in the report dated October S, 2001 have been made a condition of project approval. Correspondence The applicant has provided a letter to the City stating that each neighbor has reviewed the proposed plans and is recommending approval of the proposed addition. _ C \MyL)ocuments\John L\Loma Rto Dr 14087 SRdoc cc O~OOOJ Appl. No. 02-042;14G87Loma Rio Drive Conclusion The project meets the findings required for a Variance and the proposed addition is designed to conform to the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook and to satisfy all of the findings required within Section 15-45.080 of the City Code. The addition does not interfere with views or privacy, preserves the natural landscape to the extent feasible, and will m;nimi7e the perception of bulk so that it is compatible with the neighborhood. The proposal further satisfies all other zoning regulations in terms of allowable, setbacks, maximum height and impervious coverage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Design Review and Variance application with conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution with conditions 2. City Arborist Report 3. Applicant package and Plans, Exhibit "A° • • C \MyDocumcnts\John L\I.oma Rio Dr 14087 SRdoc ~+ 000006 ~4~, Attachment 1 APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. APPLICATION N0.02-042 &~ DR-O1-037 CI_T_Y OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Dick and Anne Sanquini;14087 Loma Rio Drive WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for a Design Review and Variance approval to add 294 square feet to the existing first floor of the house and 501 square foot for a new second floor. The addition would add 795 square feet to the existing 1,504 square foot residence with an existing attached 440 square foot garage. The total proposed house size with garage would be 2,739 square feet. The maximum allowed floor area for this parcel is 2,444 square feet, therefore the applicant is applying for a Variance for 295 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all Interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence, and Whereas the proposed project consisting of an addition to an existing single-family residence is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA) This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences; and - WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Review approval, and the following findings have been determined: • Policy 1,"Minimize Perception of Bulh" The project meets this policy in that the proposed house will have varying rooflines that will break up the elevation of the building The project is also proposing the use of horizontal wood siding that acts to ininunize building height and blend in with the original building design. • Policy 2,"Integrate Structures with the Environment" The proposed addition meets this policy in that the applicant has chosen a natural earth tone gray color which will help the proposed structure blend in with the trees around the site • Polity 3, "Avoid Interference with Prtvary" The proposed second floor addition has increased setbacks and minimal windows that will reduce negative unpacts on the neighbors privacy. The applicant has also modified the original design removing a second floor balcony in response to a neighbors concern. • Policy 4, "Preserve Views and Access to Views" The proposed addition is not in a view corridor _ and will not have an adverse affect on neighbors views. • Policy 5, "Design for Energy Efficiency" The- existing addition will meet the State Energy Guidelines. t ~Q~0~0~ WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Section 15-45.080 of the Zoning Code asfollows: 1. "Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privary" The proposed addition is not located in a view corridor and should not have any negative impacts on -the neighbors privacy. 2 "Preserve the natural landscape" All existing trees on the site will be maintained and protected during the construction as recommended in the attached Arborist Report 3 "Mintmize perception of excessive bulk" The will have a varying roof pitch and front elevation that will act to reduce the bulk of the structure. 4. "Compatible bulk and height" The proposed addition will be compatible to the other homes in the neighborhood in height and bulk. 5. "Current grading and erosion control techniQiies" The applicant is proposing only minimal grading for the new foundation for the first floor addition. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Variance approval, and the following findings have been determined. • 1 That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinit~~ and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the lot is unique in both size and topography The lot has unique topography in that it has a creek running along the rear property line with an easement from the Water District encompassing approximately one fourth of the lot. The Water District easement reduces the lot size, which reduces the allowed floor area. The lot is also unique due to its small size. The- zoning requires a minimum lot size of 12,500 square feet. The gross lot size of the applicant's parcel is 7,039 square feet and the net lot size due to the easement reduction is 5,483 square feet which is less than half of that required for the district. Due to the umque topography and lot size the applicant is restricted in the amount of floor area allowed when compared to other property owners on the street. The strict enforcement of this regulation would deprive the applicant additional square footage as enjoyed by the other owners on the street. 2 That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that there are other homes on the same side of __ the street with the same easement that exceed the allowed floor area. There is also one other home that has received an approved floor area variance due to the Water District easement. ~d~~08 y~M The granting of this variance would riot constitute a special privilege based on the ~' neighboring home saes and prior variance approval. 3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. - This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed addition will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Dave and Anne Sanquini for Design Review and Variance approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" incorporated by reference. 2 The following shall be included on the plans submitted to the Building Division for the building permit plan check review process: a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page and containing the following revisions: b A maximum of ane wood-burning fireplace is perrrutted and it shall be equipped with a gas starter. All other fireplaces shall be gas burning. c The site plan shall be stamped and signed b_y a Licensed Land Surveyor and identify the construction staging area on the plan. d The site plan shall contain a note with the following language "Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the RCE or LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans." 3- The final landscape plan submitted during the building permit plan check review will , need to meet all of the requirements outlined in Section 15-47 of the City Zoning' Ordinance. __ PUBllC WORKS 4. The applicant or its designated representative shall apply for and secure a grading permit if deemed necessary. t 000009 ~~ CITY ARBORIST 5. All recommendations in the City Arboi-ist's Report dated October 5, 2001 shall be followed and incorporated into the plans. This includes, but is not limited to: a. The Arborist Report shall be incorporated, as a separate plan page, to the construction plan set and the grading- plan set and all applicable measures noted on the site and grading plans. b. Five (5) ft. chain link tree protective fencing shall be shown on the site plan as recommended by the Arborist with a note "to remain in place throughout construction." The fencing shall be inspected by staff prior to issuance of a Building Permit. c. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction ec{uipment or pnvate vehicles shall park or be stored within the dripline of any ordinance protected trees on the site. - - 6. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit to the City, in a form acceptable to the Community Development Director, security in the amount recommended by the City Arborist to guarantee the maintenance and preservation of trees on the subject site. 7 Prior to Final Occupancy approval, the City Arbonst shall inspect the site to verily compliance with tree protective measures Upon a favorable site inspection by the Arborist and, any replacement trees having been planted, the bond shall be released FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 8 The roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class "A" prepared or built-up roofing. (Reference Uniform Fire Code Appendix 3, City of Saratoga Code 16- 20:210). SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 9 The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Santa Clara Valley Water District prior to the building permit being issued. CITY ATTORNEY 10. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. 11. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the ~~~0~~ violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to rthis City per each day of the violation. 12. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will expire. 13. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. 14 Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 24th day of Apri12002 by the following roll call vote: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. -- Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date 000011 • THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK , s 000012 -~ ' _ BARRIE D. COATS AND ASSOCIATES _ Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 -- Fax (408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 Attachment 2 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE SANQUINI PROPERTY --- 14087 LOMA RIO DRIVE SARATOGA - Prepared at the Request of: Community Planning Dept. City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 Site Visit by: Michael L. Bench Consulting Arborist Job # 08-01-188 Plan Received: 8-27-01 Site Visit: 08-28-01 Report Due: 9-27-01 Report Prepared: October 5, 2001 • OCT 1 1 2001 CITY OF SARATUGA f,UMMUNITY DfVr•I® IQi~013 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATIOn RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE SANOUINI PROPERTY, 14067 LOMA RIO DRNE, SARATC:GA _ Assignment At the request of the Community Planning Department, City of Saratoga this report reviews the proposal to construct an addition (including a family room and - two bedrooms with a balcony} to an existing residence in the context of potential damage to or the removal of existing trees. This report further provides information about the health and structure of the trees on site, and makes recommendations by which damage to them can be restricted to prevent significant decline. Comments and suggestions contained in this report presume that the locations of trees in relation to proposed construction are accurately presented on the plans provided. ' Summary This proposal exposes two trees to some level of risk by construction. No trees are to be removed by this design, and no trees would be severely damaged provided all of the mitigation suggestions are complied with. A bond equal to 50% the value of the two retained trees is suggested in accordance with the levels of the expected risks. Observations ' There is one tree on this site and one tree on the neighboring property that is at risk of damage by proposed construction. The attached map shows the locations of these trees and their approximate canopy dimensions. Each tree has been tagged with a metallic label indicating its assigned number. The two trees are classified as follows: Tree #1 Monterey pine (Pious radiata) Tree #2 evergreen ash (Frdxinus uhdei) The health and structure of each specimen is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (Excellent -Poor) on the data sheets that follow this text. Please note that each trees structure is distinguished ftom health. The structure rating is a visual evaluation of each tree's ability to remain standing and to maintain its branching without breaking or splitting apart. Damage of this nature can occur despite exceptional health. Also, structure is not an aesthetic focus. A tree that has an excellent structure may not necessarily be aesthetically pleasing. Because the various combinations of health and structure sometimes require _ interpretation, the combination of health and structure ratings for the tares are converted to individual descriptive ratings as follows: __ PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST OCTOBER 5, 2001 000014 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATIQN RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE SANOUINI PROPERTY, 14087 LOMA RIO DRNE, SARATOGA • Fine S ecimens Fair S imens 2 1 Fine specimens must be retained if possible but without major design revisions. Mitigation procedures recommended here are intended to limit damage within accepted horticultural standards in order to prevent deGine. Fair specimens are worth retaining but again without major design revisions. Mitigation must prevent further decline. Tree #2 is located on the adjacent property toward the west. I recommend that tree #2 be treated as exceptional regardless of condition. Impacts of Construction ,Access is the primary problem at this site. Tree #1 could suffer moderate root damage if construction access were to be allowed on the east side of the residence. However, the natural access appears -- to be on the west side of the residence in any case. Tree #2 may be at risk of branch breakage if a crane, a tractor lift, or some other large equipment were to be used to lift materials to the second floor from the driveway. If any new underground utilities or underground utility upgrade is required, both trees #1 and 2 may be subjected to significant root damage. Because of the locations of the existing utilities (on the east side of the residence), it appears that tree #1 would be the tree at risk. In this event, the installation of utilities would have to be installed in a tunnel if tree #1 is expected to survive. __ Trees #1 and 2 would suffer minimal damage with the protection of construction period fencing. Recommendations The following mitigation suggestions are intended to reduce the extent of construction damage to acceptable levels, so that retained trees can reasonably be assured of survival without decline. If any changes to these plans occur during construction, the following may require alteration. 1. I suggest that construction period fencing be provided and located as noted on the attached map. Fencing must be of chainlink, a minimum height of 5 feet, mounted on steel posts driven 18-inches into the ground. Fencing must be in place prior to the arrival of any other materials or equipment and must remain in place until all construction is completed and given final approval. z_ PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST OCTOBER 5, 2001 OdU015 TREE SURVEY AND PRESER"ATION RECOMMENDATIONS AT j THE SANOUINI PROPERTY, 14087 LOMA RIO DRIVE, SARATOGA The protective fencing must not be temporarily moved during construction. Fencing must be located exactly as shown on the attached map. 2. If any underground utilities (gas, water, telephone, TV cable, etc.) must be installed this would require tunneling instead of an open trench installation: In this event, the receiver pits must be beyond the driplines as shown on the attached map. The tunnel would have to be a minimum depth of 4 feet. 3. Any pruning must be done by an International Society of Arboricultural certified arborist and according to ISA Western Chapter Standards, 1988. 4. Materials or equipment must not be stored, stockpiled, dumped under the driplines of trees, or buried on site. Any excess materials (including mortar, concrete, paint products, etc.) must be removed from site. Value Assessment _ The value of the trees are addressed according to ISA Standards, Seventh Edition, 1992. The combined value of trees #1 and 2 is $2,905. I suggest a bond equal to 50% of their total value of the trees that will be retained to assure protection. Respectfully su ed, ::,~,. '~ I~llichael L. Benc , ssociate Ba D. Coate, nncipat MLB/sl Enclosures: Glossary of Terms Tree Data Accumulation Charts Tree Protection Before, During and After Construction Protective Fencing Map • PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST OCTOBER 5, 2001 f)f~f3~if i ~. 4 _. ~I~ ~~ _ ~ ', _ - ~ ,a Ifl i ~ ~s Q . 1~-; ~~ ~I ~q _~~~ ~? • `~ - -- ~u v .: +; ~` 1 1 1 ~~ < ~ a ~ s 8 . ~ ~ ~ U o H C CS < ~ N N ~ T ~ >`Y y ~ ~ y V Q ~ F p ~ J ~ N h ~ ~ R ( ~ O ~ ~ ./ ~T ~s ~° ~~~ o~ E~~~B ~< mpg„~ ..+ s ~z ~ N _ 2 ~u 0 V c 0 Q ~ _ ~- s. t~ ~ c u v . Q a .~ °' ~ ; ~, v ~ Ha ~ z • o UZ'1~ ~w A ~, ~ ~O U a ---b~- 00001'7 ---_-i --~ -- J OC PSI ~o~ O ,~ O I^ kD 4..1 O e+s O n 0 eM 'vi "~ Q O ~-, .~ .~ C5' F'' ~~ Irt1 u~aolad ~vnow3a - E IMAOMl3a ON3MIr11003a o ~ ~ a3Zlllla3d S033N ,~ ~ .~ ~ (S-L) a31MM S033N " (S-L) 3St13S10 atl1700100a o 0 a m (S-L) O3a3A00 aV1100100a ~ _ ~ ~ a x x 0 a` (S-t)Ab'030 ~Nflal ~ a a (S-t) OOOM Otl30 ~ ~ 0 .- ~' a (S-t) 3SV3SI0 NMOaO 33a1 " '~- (S-L) S103SNI " (S-L) AllaOlad °JNINfiad h c ~ m e a i103033N S318~10 v v °' - 8 0 1HJI3M-ON3 3/10W3a X X c a ~JNISIVa NMOaO U NOIlVaO1S3a NMOaO ~ ~ ~ a ~JNINNIHl NMOaO ~ N ~i N °JNINb'3l0 NMOaO " (s-e) ~JNIlb2! OaVZVH a (OL-Z) ~JNIlb21 NOIlI0N00 '~ ~ v c v (S-L) 3af110f1a1S ~ ~ X X (S-L) Hlltl3H N 0`d3adS °a ~ m co+~ m 1H~JI3H m N ~ ~ N ~ 133 Z~ a313WV10 ~ a N ~~ m E c c_ A H80 ~ n 4 01 ~ H90 w N - N ~ X X W31SAS-Illf1W x epe~6 anoge ,Z/L-4 ®H90 o N v ~ o ~ ~ n c c W H - ~~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ Z D ~ m ~ O ~ d o~ c a a E a a ~ ~ ~ 4 x ~ W x ~` ~ N Y E,., ~"' ~ o O '" N E- N ~ o N w o ~ Q y ~ h N ~ ~ r w eo ~ ~ [z-~ ~ ern ~ W O W (J h ~ a ~ 0 0 0 A. ~~ ~ A W ~+ t!1 N ~ n O(~0018 ~-- ': _ • SANQUINI RESIDENCE 14087 soma Rio Drive Saratoga CA 95070 Request for Design Review Approval and Variance s Richard and Anne Sanquini, Homeowners March 25, 2002 • OVER VIEW 1. Neighborhood a. Loma Rio Drive is down Seagraves, just off Saratoga Avenue. Squirrel Hollow and Loma Rio are the same street; most homes on the north side of the street have backyards which go to Saratoga Creep Net lot size and therefore buildable home square footage is signifacantly impacted by a Santa Clara Valley Water District Easement b. The average home size of our neighbors on this side of the Loma Rio, affected by the easement, is 3070 square feed We are designing an addition that would bring our home size to 2740 square feed 2. Home Design a. This design enhances the neighborhood and fits well with the existing homes It has lovely craftsman styling and as you can see from the drawings is an appealing, approachable design that also minimizes the current garage-dominated loop The second floor is backed off from the first floor on all four sides, enclosing the upper, floor within the main roof. b. Neighbors were consulted in the design. All five neighbors - on each side and across the street -have reviewed the plans and support the design. In discussion with our neighbor at 14081 Loma Rio (to the east of us), they expressed some concern about our proposed rear yard facing balcony. So, in the spirit of good neighbor relations we redesigned the back and eliminated the balcony. 3. Request for Variance a. Homes on this street are affected by the SCVWD Easement, resulting in structures that are an average of 669 square feet over their buildable area. We are requesting a variance for just 295 square feed b. The most recent variance approved on the street related to home square footage and the SCVWD easement was for 14191 Squirrel Hollow Lane, a copy of which is attached for your reference. • • VIGIN~TY ~; -_J~.,_ HERRIMAN AV_J I__.___) ~~ 5f~~,~Of~f~ Z Y Z ao ~~ ~ ~' ~ f Y~ SARATOGA i p ~/`~ .C7 ~T• i _ ~ r ~~ . W J Q ~~ ~ GERALD ZAPPELLI.CT . a .`P .~ J~5 WILLIAMS AV. l ~ ERRI a' Q 0~ ~O JJ~~ .~ i a~ S P'`P ~Q~ tiO! WAl NUT ~pJ~ ~ ' o AY. ~ J ~ a ~:~ P0.0 ~ l ~f ~N~ ~ / -` ', ~Q~ ~y C ~q ~y ~~~ , J~'~ PP O~ P~ A V~ ~~ r • V~cIN-T~ SHOwI~G EASEMENT • Santa Glare Ala 11~ a'~'ec X51; W ~ `f1 q 1 ~a~~N~ ~, 5~~~~~1 ~lollow ~4~p~? M -___T___„3~1 _ i.on~~ R~ a - 0 s ' '~ '' T 1 ~~• i9- roomy-• 1 S •~\ ? ~ / 'a~/ieso S C V W D- E5MT to k `14°p~ ~ ~1 ~ Fes` ,{- ^q ~~ n ~~ ? 3s s, ~ol~ s~~ ~I I zzAe3 =9 ~ s r c 3 ~ Mr•: '• ,."? ~~~` 1 ~ v-tiy-ot¢~,~ _1~ ~ ~~; a3~ -d ..•$. CY.41!D E'S ~-~' , ~., i ~ ~ \ re 33 II~ °~® C~ ,~" o . _ Idf 52... ~ •+-J^" •.« I~ I /1101 /I/D/ III[! I~ 77 'S "; )~. / / / / /o _ t ?q ~ t a a5 so AAaI aNt w •ti -^7 r ~ 5 R '~ ~ 7 so-~~v- SQUIRREL , > La - r . •'' 's::~, ~' 5;61 i 5a ~ 1 - ~ ~ + .4946 I O J •~1Z~ /1101 p A7~ to S1 141 [Ot + nb !bN S~ T• • I 5 ~ ~ 6 ,'I~I,I.,~~ d~~W W ~~ ee3s tI/I0 I S ,~~^ _ ~ ~ Wit, si,. ~ S~ L 1^. tlfe3 I ~-~"' T'I~~~CM~~ S4 .o v° ` I _ ~~ ~ ~ I Rio ~~ $ ~ v-rs-u~-5 ~Y i•a 60 i~ Ir 5701 Sb~i..u- I"•m e ~s c) ~s rylp 12 ~ ~ 1 2 ~,~ i~ 6l • ~ I ~ ~" `~I~ ~i •~~ ~I ct ' . c•a ,I 1 0 : `~ r~ nb2 ~ - .db~- I Y u ~ I ,eo, I , I b2~ l ' S2 ~) ~ fi lb sIp .N°° ~ 1~~ 1 °I I1 t----'-•_ '-._ ' :~ ~ ° _ n I 9~ ,• 52 I S1 5 Is79iJ--""^~--••• 1°st~ - --'~A93`=~~-~ 1 B~ Y 1*08/ JI073 /i068 MOi! IOOJ>' /4011 ` , nest o 8 a r::b '8!t 4+pg3 IgOS ~. PCL e ~ 13 ?e 14 ~1Q TR N° 1636 D R ~. ~ ~ SDR~ 123y PCL A ~ 1 '" hIA7/ a. ~Irlr woRO1R wr, ' ' $ `s I O ~ ~ /10 /1011 /IOdf KO W - W 1 i_ ~ yao _..--` - r v ' , l~ f9) 3 .92 90 I 104.6 ~~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~g ~ ___ _ ° . Z ~,n^ Js6df t q 15DR-104) 5-743 I SDA'~53 spR-1 ~ I ~R-981 5~~-9~.~ • j .I `' ~ SjdldrR r •~' ~~ o la ?9 r TR. N°- 3066 ~ I } I°' o• ' I L ~ Iw "s SQUIRREL Hi LI.OWI ,• 91 ;0 92 I~ 93 'e 94 •r i Q B 1 Ii)H J ~[8 I y b ?CL A nsl 1 PCL^ 3za ~'tis~ -. e[i- ts~' a~ ~y ~/ ,~, I i ( .~_~/~ /~/IDI I ~ /1[II IARAfOBA AY[ I ~[~ ,~. ~/• ~ ^ I r _-~_ O I wot°tR wr / i ~ .60 AC.Iw +"~'~ ~J 1~ _ I iYYI_ `_ _ ii ~ l ~ ~ Itn•ou u~s•h ,Sq ~ ~' __ .____..._.__ _. _. a~14S ~~ / ~~• 6/ ' PCL A ~P-oC -~' - m ^, •~`^-. i PP~E~ I ~R~1~3 r I Iz,i~ ` ~ srn-IAi~ t1P •(o~ • 6~ 5 / 1 ~ s~~z-~sy- UP - a3'1 3.039 Act -JEt. o a~ ,, I ~ _al~ 3636 Ac_ GR. -ice !~--~-L+.zs~__ s ;s ~~ - A- 644 °: - , ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ' HIOI lARArOIA AVt l PCL a J - sa 9• ^'s ' PCL 8 I ~ei9-~---C 1 /PCL C ~ __1 I^ SDtR:1' S ~ I 9.7 ~ _ .-PCL D ~'" „ ~ ,~~ ~GS.i. .m ~ I ~` SMtC- I~ 14 -/It1I wOROtM wY• ;~ b+ ~ w.~~N j~'!~ S ~~ 'q~-GIZ- ~4 : d f,~ I 95 0. ° G3 I ; '° ~ ~ g I I ~ c ' I ~Ixa•yy-u31 '~ I : ,Y ,.,II n ~ ! 3 PcL c "~ ~z1vt I ~zs'I R 0 S 193-M-14 co ~ oo % '~ 4~t•51 ^~-~,_~~ PM. 411•M•31 - _ AVENUE,/- "ugaH/I,t "'~ /4/os --~ • R.o•s• I~•M'sARATOGA -~ A ~- . ~ c Cow~PARA01.~ l,nT s~zE ~ ~Y NOME SIZE oN 401MR 1 .10 DR ~FFEGTEp 13 y 3Gvtap ~ASM'T • ~ ~ j - ---- - , I I j i I 1 - t j ~ _" I ~ j ~ ~ I j i i i i ~ I I ~ ~ ~ j ~ j. ~ i i - -_F-- ~ I ~ ~ I I I ~ ~RDSS' I I ~ ~ I i ~ I I 9 9 1 ! ! ~ ~ ~ i i i-~- GQGI - i ' ~ ~Pbss ~ i ' j , ' ,- ti I ~ i e ~ _ ~~. ,~~,.,~ , , ' /~ ~'lC7VAL _ r i _ - -- ~ --~- I ~ .~ooo I _ - ~ -. .~ } ~ ~ I i ~ :~ I I I 3~ I r- ~ `/~ ~ j ~ ~, ~~5~ o ©x~ c~vr~ ; ~ ~E"ccR~ s -' -~-- - - S uQSEG~' PIQ.oP~R"r~ • • AU,OWAl3LE vs. ALTJRIr NOME S1tE ON I.oMA RHO DR. AGFEctE~ ey Scvwp ~gsm'7 _;~ _~ __ ~; ~~ ~ i ~I ~ .~_~ ~ ~! ~ ~ j ;~ i ..._, ~ ~ ~ ~r-~i ~ f i - ~~~ i -' I - I I ~ ~ ! ~ ! -~~ I I ~ ± I ~ ~ I Gi21~f I G.-~-~- ' ~ , - ~ - - ~ r- ~ ~ T ~ i e ~ .~ ' ~ ACTUAL _iS' i ti,W t ° o --- ` e~° ~ e e~ ~ e"CY ~~f /~ - \~ ~ a° 1 e e e ai• , 0 ® ° ~ ~y (V - A I L 7 \~ . . ow, ~~ ~~. ~ I~ ~. . I ~~'~ ~ I f ' i . ..~E.~ ~~ ~ } 1 I , ' ' 7 ~ ! ~"~_ .~3~S~.Q O~ GDtJ/UTy~ /~tGo~R~ S • • • Qaaa-ir.~ -.-• --~. nr_a~ '~. o -~ /'~ r' J~ L a /= 1~ . ~ - ~. _ - - _ -===_=== RESIDENTIAL i- ~ -`} DESIGN ASSOCIATES ~~^---~` -' DESIGN ® PLANNING ,~ DRAFTING • ~= ~--~ -MATERIAL BOARD - SANQUINI RESIDENCE " ~ 14087 Loma Rio Drive Saratoga, CA 95,070 m PAINT COLORS: (MATCH EXISTING) _ • . BODY- KELLY MOORS - ~ - ETON GRAY KM705-L TRIM-~ KEL-LY MOSJRE ' " OPALESQUE WS45 SCREEN SASHES= KELLY MOORS -- ZAIRE AC66-N ROOFING:' PRESIDENTIAL SERIES _ COMP. ST-TINGLES BY CERTAINTEED. "SLATE • GRAY" ~. EXTERIOR FINISH: - e ' BODY- - TRIM- WINDOWS: ~IX8 D.F. SHIPLAP W/ 1X4 , CORNER TRIM. MATCH EX. MOULDED CASING TO MATCH EXISTII~TG. DUAL GLAZED IN VINYL CLAD , _ FRAMES AS MFR'D BY EAGLE OR EQUAL. PROVIDE MODIFIED DIVIDED - LITES AS_SHOWN, INSECT SCREENS AND, LOCKING HARDWARE. J r - D ~~~Od~ ~AUG222001 Cl (Y OF SARATOGA ~~~ - COMMUNITYDF.VELOPMENT 255 NORTH MARKET STREET, SUITE 275 ~ SAN JOSE, CA 95110 ~ 408 287.2104 • • SAN~~IINI I~~,~~1~~11i~CE - ~~IC~~3(?R ~'tIPP~?R T To the Saratoga Planning Con~rnissioti I have reviewed the proposed plans for the remodel of Anne and Dick Sanquini's home at 14087 Loma Rio Drive. We appreciate the opportunity to review this addition in advance, agree that they meet the objectives of adding living space while enhancing the neighborhood, and recommend that the Planning Commission approve these plans 1lj~I~I~~®R ~ .~., ADDRE~'-S I~ ~~ oC~~ G6~n~G ~ b ~ C~T~~ ,~ T~~s yre~1 ~C,~o~ ~"® ~v~' ea s ~l u~~C 5 /v Goy Ger~e~ a~ov~" lOrlv'Cl~y ~~e ~~"-o~onse~,bal~o~y ~o lie r'P~C~~ ~t~n~ ~1~e ~-~a'r ~1~e ~a~~o~y, s~~~e~ ~r-~~ ~~e rvea/; S~ ~y~p~ ~o®~. U~~ ~~ U APPENDIX Variance Findings u APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. V- 99-014 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Laffoon;14191 Squirrel Hollow Lane WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Variance approval for the addition of 223 square feet to the existing 3,438 square foot residence on a 17,206 square foot (gross size), 9,060 (net size) parcel; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Variance approval, and the following findings have been determined: ^ That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulations would cause undo hardship and deprive the applicant of privileges • enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. The special circumstance is that the property has a large easement dedicated to the Santa Clara Valley Water District, which affects the net lot size and the allowable floor area. Granting of the Variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same zoning district in that there are few if any other properties in the area that have such a large easement dedicated to the Santa Clara Valley Water District. ^ That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicuury in that the proposed addition is relatively small and does not adversely impact nearby properties. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the Ciry of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Polk and Anne Laffoon for Variance approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the . following conditions File No. V-99-014;141yi Squirrel Hollow Lane • PLANNING The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A", mcorporated by reference. 2 Prior to submittal for Building permits, the following shall be submitted to the Planning Division staff in order to issue a Zoning Clearance: a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page and containing the following revisions: i. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor. ii. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: "Prior to foundation inspection by the Ciry, the RCE or LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans." No ordinance size tree shall be removed without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit. 4. No fence or wall shall exceed six feet in height and no fence or wall located within any required front yard shall exceed three feet in height. • 5. No structure shall be permitted in any easement. 6. Five (5) ft. chain link tree protective fencing shall be shown on the site plan for trees in the front and right side yards with a note "to remain in place throughout construction." The fencing shall be inspected by staff prior to issuance of a Building Permit. CITY ATTORNEY 7. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred ry the City or held to be the liabihry of City m connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the Ciry's action with respect to the applicant's project. 8. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City per each day of the violation. Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will expire. :7 C Wty Documents~Enk~PC S[aHReportsUaHoon doc File No. V-99-014;14191 Squirrel Hollow Lane Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 12`h day of Apri12000 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Barry, Page, Roupe and Chair Bernald NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Jackman, Kurasch and Patrick ABSTAIN: None V~.~l i Chair, Commission ATTEST: ecre ary, Pl Commission C \My D«umenrs~Enk~PC Staff RepoitsUaffoortd« m p~ }, L( `16~ OllS8 tl0'3S Of Ntl8 0 = J 890Q g~• II ^C e~ 1~U~ oio7V ;ewes SCZ 31108 133 tl191371tltlW H1tl ON S98 'JNllitltl0 • 9NINNVid • N'J193a ~~~ ~ ~ J~~/ ~rJ I 0 ~ v • ~ 8 ~ • 8 O ~ ~61tl • 1tlN01SS330hJd - - ~ ~ o ani~p ou ewol 180b6 S31d13055V N91530 ~ 1 d I l N 3 a I S 3 d o~ 7 ~ 4 s ~ ss~iti 3Nidaa ~ ~ 3~N3aIS3211NIt1bNdS - o ~, o ~ N a ~. - 3i ~ ~~ a u xi,~ r ~ ~ way @i 'fyPo$ i ~ y O ~ ~z ~~r r' l }- .' ~~1~~d%~ B J j ` • ~ A °<v J8~ °°fa ~ `+w YN ` mr} y^ ¢wOUm. } z~ aa~Q a>3w Q^J~ NU$~ ~w3 Z O ozo: EaaFy "~'w,^° r,H ' ' W v i S , ~i F . - .~~`---~. ~~. - ~~ + $ ~~ ~' ~X ~J ~,$ "' ~ ,~nm C7 zaaa W~ poWC~ W~zWZ oF=7 ~a~~ Na NaLL~ U~=mw F-OUi 4 ~' 7 ~ '~ g=~m~ y my~ „ a, ~ . - _ . ~_ '- ,.fl~ o ~4 ~-G6~ ~ sa > ~0~~' ~~ ~Om S^ a~ 04a aaUJZ Ugaw~~ U ^ ~c~a3 W ~ ~ S `~ ~ 7 a W 1~ > >o Qz o: N d~ o _Qa'Zlll ,.,'~' f J O a Z ~ _ _ _ 4_ 'ryA. _,~ T ~ ~ '~.•-.>.,r x ! m>r! r y „. +~aaM ~ ,, xopft .~o s~ ^ aq ~Od LL Oa ¢~~U Z y~ fa~ J^1` UOW>Z JO-fD O: 1-20 Y W O^ W ~ a F O J 1' O O o! a r~ W ^UU'- V ¢F-2 >U f U tv~l y~ { _ `A ~ tF. {S ~ ` a~ N ^ ^m Z OQ ~¢ ~ LL-'O tljO ~ O O:~W~Z _ ^ ~ ~ ~~ Atl ~ tlU 3 ~3 a, YAi1fMi i ` ~ ~ __ Q ~ O 3WK~W a ¢ xo7 ^aN~ w7zm LLUa~ jUaf' 7 NW~ ztwilya~ No~Zy wWOYO ~ ~j ~'{ LI }'j +-1 ~ p ~T~ .~ ~~ ~i EE O } + 2 KU O:U r a ~a ~a ^ p W Z ~ O ~ O NN Oco^O- ~N °aorcN~ Y)O aZUO ^ a t ~ ~ }~ ~ "'° xi , ~ ~ ~~.~ '~ ]Ail no ~ a _ u~. ~ S } „ Z N 0: m K O:~m z z o~~a3 °xo ao°oN ow~~LLW 3~sao O ~ UKU LL2 U U> OW af- WF Wa'm (7 U' ' ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a= 8 Q _ ~ ~ L //~~ ~f~ JU ab Z ~ > a H F- ~ ('{' ~~ ~~ ~ ~ W 6'OWW W ~t~^! ~t1FNmy^ "" I p ,~J W~11 ~ -"'u' ~ 3. ~ O S ~~ ~" Wa f- > ¢U N Z>W^tll ~OZ ^ayhU KZ_U'~O mLLIZO:J ~ a ~ g73 ZU US UYV~ \ }'" ~ '1'" ~ ~ a o am °uai ° M K ~ $^ 2 N ~^ ~ °OFO~ v ~ ` ~~ ,f " ^v r xl i ~ _i ~ 000 Z o: OO K xWZrco: Og7 rc¢ai<w OW7W~ -ax WO 3 '~ "- ~ ~ iF 1L 4 ry tl, ' {L ~ a ¢a „m ~ t Yr , ~ ~ g p wmaaLL UW^ aaNNZ Ua^tn z~ulO:U gJ ~_ ~ .~ ° ~ C ~ , ~ ~ 'a F q `H ~ uwmB "a .i.. ~ .s~ $ "~ ... ^ 4 aM `" ~° ° ~~ ~ D '~ m & ~ e p ~ t a ! Z ~ '{~ ', "~ ~ /~ }+ z O W OC W ~ Z ~ ~. Y J ° ~ r~ '+n>o~ ' .3.`& / ~uOf J °~'` WI ~, cQ - ~~ v~~ni ~~ a I J ^ •~ ~ > ~ W Q 6 2 O NN a m ~ V ~ ~ , ~ \ ~ ~n li 4 ILL L ~ ~ V ~ W H N m p ~ a. U tll f~ N S ti a' W O O f~ ' 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ° b6 J~i ~ 'A ~ U i c~ 9 ybJ 4 Dona i L~~ ¢ ~ ^ LL ^ IL J ~( ~ ~.. Jl~ ~. X11 ~ 111 W a W ~ K ? fC a Z N Z 0^ Jp^p J a 2 2 ~ d ~ W N U QQ W 6 C O N ~_ • A N$- 1gtlY v3ou ~ y 3. ~ n ~ T _ bq- '~~ ~ C~'>e'ry+ •+ n ~~~ ~ /~~ W O a F - Q a a ~ wu mw ' c~' - . Sw i~ ~ ' ~ 0 ~q ,a. o 5 ~ d'~ ~ ~ m Q•/ ~ ^ ~ ^ ~ ^ ~ N ~ ''~ J d ~ - ; - F 1- {- ~ LL LL ~ LL "~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ N w ¢?~~ a N^ 1=W Z Z Z ~ ~ w ~ f 2 a fil ~~z0 w¢¢}~>O~w U m wJm ~- ~W ~ Yd~ ,,,~~ ZU'aH0 ~Zm O~O~U' ~'g ~U 1'=aOw~32 Fm ' ~ ~ 1Q ~ 4 a LL LL O O O Q O U O U N N N N m N N N U O o d m N N N Q~ JaV w rczm ~Z xm5~^ O¢O FZOfW W ~N'~ p OwxE ~ p jW('1 V-Q LL~W N~WF-- "U U2 C7>¢^JWO N~ ~ O NLL._d 7W OI U 7~ Z O JCiH~ a m Q OZS W N a..W a 2 w~mw ^ n 5 .Z~c7¢ zw-p O70 m wZ ~ ~ _ ~~. +t' ~ eY 91M O W lil dl t ~ ~~I - °~j_ ~ _ ~ _Q -' O O ~({~C11II---~- ~4 '~ V' T; ® ~ 4 ~ 1-I ~N ~C ~ _ m U Z LL L7 61-~ v-Z' O 7- ~~ zU woN Fml' w 3zzom OUmz ~Wa a ~ _ 7 -'-"'-a~J 7 Z U" ~_(g d•IUU O a'~01~2 J K m ~~V Q_~ tl) _ _.'~ ~ _ _ ~ z wa UamF_a wows pl afaa0 0^F }_-~~ N^ O fA wmu: c9- w2m} 1- a Uw^U^O pjwaUO FN UmJ 7 LQ ~>>OW`~ j J p aJ 3 ~ ¢ ~1S~ ~ ~~Z,A oUQU KO aoizw0 O Z _ ~ _._ `i"_ -_-~ __ ~.- _ _ 1 1 u. 3 ~ N } ~' N N NA N ~ ~ w f- UF- C1 UfN ~ ^m(A m- Wy N 7^O wQ Wj2 JW OJ ~l a U J FO DO 0:4 Or w 1- 0: SON UYwK UpC9000 W WZIi~ U Za ~ 1~ m JW F.LL zi~0 w LL1-~ ^O fLb >WKJSO y}W3q~~Oa J2maFJ Nm~ 06-w ~1uu W ~ p= QQO~SUO Z ~~21?WN >U~ ~~~ O mJKg J N ~ ^ ~ 1 11` ~7~ ~ 1~ fill 11~gh a~- ~ ~nq ~(~ ,!(y~~-xyu M ~ U4- ~ 1"il ~ ,. W ^W~ w~ ZU ZggO H N aQOmF w 2 Z ~ ~ fD ^Z^W W-ate 2 7UW2 O JU'0:02 OWN ~' GN~ a SOa OR WOOL- WF= N7JWJa 1" SmN W-N aam W- ma~~ V m~'m ~mpp a 0 ~~ ? - W ~ ~ [~-U'V' l4 U'~ .G t ~¢ ~ ~ 1~ 11F !L S C1 +- z z O W O ~ z ~ ~, w 111 O °~ zrpa iz C"a ~u Opvl ¢m O:aU_O 1-~z Uzi NNaaz ~ Z ~ - I i WwO O I ~WOrc ~wow UWZV1_a ^vlz OS~z 1=rcKKZa NZ3oWJJ ~ a-w ~1 j0000v1 Z aa Orl2- 0 ~7`J. ~a~zz^ p7ago:w¢~ ~ 3~w^~g t ~ ti f- O O U O q ~t~ tb ~L +tl lS` w 1 tl U O m0~ t7 O - rt/~^ ^ U1 ¢F ~ ~ J 7 U ~ ~ i UpWaW ~wv-zw Qd' a a ~ ZaN F> JOO O mU- F ~ ~,yq\~ O ,- ~ Z Q m O U a G: W y ^ W mn ~ rc 0 0: o y 4 ~ a' O w U w _ Z ~^ ZWK O~ KW Zm2 ~W ZQ 0 0 O > ttOg~ v q1 LL2F W~ N777 p Z _gOj Ng1-N t~N ~ a U^ ~-N7~ Z70~WN QOJ Z2a' Z~WW~^ WJ~¢Ja'q a, Vl WZa OOw xw gx~¢~O1-w O z a0a>71 Wwg zg ~ ~~ ~ v .n P. O O 41 W (Q~ Q` aW > W QX ~ Y/ _ U>U 000 ~^HUa _ - w Ua'K^rlr aN2U1-UOa U~w~~a NS OamNm UU OaY ~ lL ~~ „ ~jM{5{~d '~N a ~~VltD , ~ ~~w/~ Y/ 2 W LL 6' O Q W W W O Z W W 3 K C o a a N O a a QOQ K^ a ~^ ~ C W W 3 V' W > N O 7~ ~/ Q K ~ ~ ~ RY j~ ~ 1 N ~-{y ll O K CJ a ^ O ¢ ~ ~ O (~ y W a ~ O O a z ~ ~ z z V ^ O 6 ~ g~ t7 % a ~ 7 .~1~ z O W Ll ~ N O N U ~ ~ a ¢ O m m N = O W t7 = ( ~ .~L ~ ~ ~ V' LY !~l 1.I ~ ~"' ~ l`1 ~ aX. S ~ Ll~ ~ Lt ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ O 0 ~ X K C C O 7 +20 ~ O ~ ~ ~ w! ~ a s W 1 d O Ua z ~ _ _ ~ € ~ 11.. pt ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 6 w w a a 1- ~ ~ w u~ ~ ~ w a ~ g ~t ~ U ~ > 0 0 ~ '#-- 2 3 v col ? ¢ n a ~ ai X +~r .~ M. .-1 RC 3 a i y ~ 1 ^ n M ~~ m r m °" ~ ~ O O O O l.! \J O O O ~ ~C it V, * X' ~ ~ ,%-. ~ ~ ~ d. ~' 0 ` ~q ' ~ ~~ _ ~ 4:, ~ 4'~t.llMei.ll•t µ ~ ~?e. r y,'~r~a~s~ts.+.. ~ ~ -- / ~` ~ '- ~ - r' - - qi .ltst;-R==~~ ~1ti+isN1 .I- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 S Lo E31 ~ ~ •• w ~ " µ+ ~ I ~~ ~ •r~ '~ ba - ~ ~ ~ ' ~~ ~n i ~ ~ Y ~ ~ 1 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q k iJ .~~~. ~ s A'~- K ~ ~ ~ >I ~ ~ ~1 ~ ---~ ~eY ~ ~' I ' -- - l ~ -- ~ - - J _ i1e Uzi ~ ~=~ .. ~ -- - --~.-..~-~~_ . i _~.~ „ '~ v ~ ~ , ~ _ ~ ~ ~~ -- ~ ~ ~ f ,. ~ ' '?~p ~ ~~ +~~V!~~ ~~ ~/ -="_-°l ~S:91u 1 ® ~d.issi~~ 1 ,V~ ~ ~ ~ ~11~ 0'\ ~ ~ 11uY~ ~ r ~ I~ -~ ~l ~ 1 ~_ = "-, 'k~ t~ ~{ y i A ` .~ _~''~~.~~ .1 / ~ ~ -- -- -- _ y t \ ~ ' l ~ ~ ~~'` ~ r -1 ~ '~ , ~ - --- --~-_ ~' 1L*~G~I ~ t 1' i ~ ~ ~r > ~ „_, i > __ __r__- s ~ ~ J rid! s ]<!~ I i~ i 3 i i I --- - ' __ ~ ~j ~ ~ 9 u ~ g ., - ~ _ • . ~ k - » ~s~9-~SZ cgo~> ~d~ ~o~,lm~~~ b'I N ~ ~~ l~`d~ ``d~Olb'~Ib'S s Nouanatsrw~ 'V!~~~u~s~V~ p v + I~t I ~/ \~C7Q ~~ ©1~ ~l"f~~ ~5~~ 1~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ;~, JlNA3A2ff1S ~Nlb33NNJN3lIA1~ V~~1V -- INI(l~N`dS ~0 SaN`d-1 `d`dW ~IHdb~~Od01 ~~ - :~ !~ ~ `- 1 _ 'F f I ' '\ ~\ \` , \\\\ \ _ \ \`~ .\\ \ \ ,~ \ \ v\ ' \ ~ \~ :, ~ `\ `, `~~ \ \ v%' VAvv \~: \ \ ~\\ \~~\ \~ ~ ~ \~4 \, \ \~~ \ \\' f / / ~` \ .\; ~ .~~\ \\ } f l~ \ U OZ ~ O ~`\~` x~waw~ \~,\ i avraQatai \ o _ 1 c~ r z 3'[ ~~~~. °c3omw> `,\~~, pp=O~~ \~ \ ~ ~-z~nWOa apv~~ °z ~~;~ ~nmz TZ~p V1a J~jm ~~~\ ~ \ t=- O H w r r \ ~ \ Z W ~ E J dogoo \~ oaawzm ~Ea oaa \\ \ \ ~~~',\ \ \~~, ~ ~~ ~~. \ \ \'`\ } ~p ~, \ ! \ \ .,~V~~ C~ ~ )O ~ VA 1 '~ .v v ~ /'~\. ~ ~ ~ \ O ~b v> ,~y o ~ ~, . ..~ ~ <., ~~ ~ ~~~. \ `\ O ~ ~ w y~a \ \ ~ -~ m z a hI~~ \\ ,~ _ ~ i, tO ~' ~ Sap py`EC3'- »'2. ~, A'~~. ~ r I f t~+ I~~ .~~~ _ z~ !!!//////~~j I r' '~ r, ~ ,~ 0 0 ~ ' ~~ Ott ~ V /spat Y i~ / ` \ _ ~ 'h°'"~~'1~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ OF`~'v'lT' / Oy ~7jA ~i ~~ tiG ~,~-/ ~' ~ Y a ~ ~ N ; / M1• OyyO~•~ ~ w y . ~2 w ~ r NO ~ ~ ~` aw . \ awi a ~ ~ / O o cn ` ~- ~ i ~jA ~~ rrr g`q~F' Q ~~e0¢' ! ~ a ~, z w O » '* ~ i N do ~~ V~P~ ~'~ rte'--~~. , . r' i ~a'gri u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~`~~ /~ ~r=4 w3 ~ Q~ ~ ~' ~ ar-a,ri' ~ ~~ v~~ \ cw _ ~ o~ - ~OpO sr a w i n p'c~i o. 1 ; X a o ~ i ~ I r ~~" / ~ a o ~ \ o~ /lP\ o: •wnoa F I ~ a~~ F a0o ;' ` ~ ~~ ~ ,' ~ s ~ai';~. , r~6 , f ~ ; i ,~ ~1 ~~, ~ y ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~, , p ~ ~~ 1 t ,~ ~ O ~` I I ~ , '° m ni N ~ a \J . Win. .o a t r '~ i' v l i ,\~OZO rw- C a ~ s ~ t~ N~ ~ woo r~j', f t \, t / ~~ ~, ' 'r o -~ cs m a art - --- - a 10 \\ t ~ ~ _ -r F,; ~ t ZQ~ ~ ~" ~ ~ tea. a~ / io m V i a_~- ~ o< wr I ~ ~ ~"~'; i Y a z~ ~C a N ~ \ / , t,4, 1 ~ C ~} ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~, ~ JP , ~'y° r O t V `y! U ~~ 0 ui ~ ~*y y~J { Z ~ 'I ` ~ ~'r { o`ff' "-', '1 ~ a~ \ << ~~__~ ~ avia°~~ w ° .. ! c 4 a ~~ r Q -> ~ a s i v • ~t ~ / cpwaQ~ z i z ~ ~i'~9~ ~ ,i ~j ~ %p /~ -•-, a oc~o w 1~ w `~ ~ ~, - ~!-i-'- -- - -'-- ~ ~ ~Om~nw aW ' ~ j ~ / i ~ amw JF~o~ 3 ~~ V , 1 ~ i ' ~ ~ °j-oazza~ ,` k 1 i~ i / ~_,' °°oz~ ono m { ' II ~ Y ~ m Q Y J J a II I P ~ tt a~Z Otna z 3 ~p~ ' t ~ ~ f < ~ a t>z-im q ~ f~ j ~ I i 1 ~ a ~ - °f +~ ~ O X i z.- ~C~wcn~a '' I 1 ~ ~ I ~a (~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ i f ~ 1 y}, o o / , ~~ 11 ~ ~ ''~ ' ~ o r I, ~ n / ;; -~-~ ~ / ~` { 4 ~, ~ i J / a U i1 ' I ~ • ' > 1 ~. i a o<<ss vo '3sor Nrs n ~ 171su~8(~O $VY SLZ 311f15 '133tl1H 13NtltlW H~tl ON S6E y =° ~+ @3 `e6o BIBS ~Nllimtl0 • eNiNNVia • NH~s3o -_~ ~oBid ~ ~ ~~1SS3 OD'b , e A ~ ar OL056 ~ 531VI~OSSV N91S3fl' ' 4V an~~p oia ewol L80t+6 l b I 1 N 3 D I S 3 d -~~- S831a 3NIdFiHOI ~ `~ ~ ~ 3~N341S3211NIf1i9N~dS `~ s ~ ~I ~ ~, s m d y~- .iii O I ~+ Y -°'~ ~ ~- o ~ ~~ ~- ~ -+~ A ° ° `~ xN s d N~ ` ~ i ~~ s g • ~ N ~, -~ N N a ~-~ ~•~, v A d 5 x r h J [ 9 "~ J t " a" ~ ~ N~ o J o p p ~` ,~ + p , T. ~ ip ~ V' r ~ ~ ~~~M1 N N tj a ~y( y~ ~ ~ _1 } ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ ~ i i I ~ j 'R" + '~ _ _ _ _ ~ z fl Q W w w11 ~ ~ K ' ~g I ~x at f ~ , gx t ,A s "y~~ ' .~~ ! ~i n -~^'- ,~~ ;{ s .~ ~i. i Q~ ~. ~. .r .~ , w '^r: ~. ..w ` - ._ -~ II • ,-----T ~~ ~ ~~ F `V ~.. ~ N ~~ ^^ ~ r ° X ~ CH X ~ N ~ N ~~ '~r ~ LL IT __ x A m LSL6-898-80b OltSB tlD '3SOf Ntl8 (M~.. ; ~ ~ OLOS6 ea `eBo;eJes SCd 31If15 133 tl1S 1371N tlYl H180N $$Z tro / 9 • 1 07'eQi~ 9Nilitltltl • 9NINNtl1d • NSI530 ,~-^~~ p8ltl.ltlNOISS3~Dad S31tl1003SV N91330 `Y iw p T ~ ~ ~ - ~ BAIJ Ou ew0 P 1180bL l`dilN3o1S3a ~" SS31a 3Nldaao~ ~" ~ ~ ~s ~ 3~N3aIS3b iNttlt9NdS ~ _ O _ Of ~~ p ~ i g N O ~` II O O ~~ ~) +~ a +f +11 r Ida • .' ~ r ~f, .~ lA -tl~--~-- -~- ~ o ~ ~,~"I S b" ~ e`rt m LSL -8 8- SLZ 31ifIS '133tl19133MtlYW IIitlON S9y ' ' 9 80b fi 9 ` L 8 ~ 8 0 b ~N~1jVtl0 • 'JNIWNtlId . N'JIS30 b0 L ~ ~ ~ : e6~e~es OL056 ea , oeiv. ~vtvo~ss3~oad saivi~ossv Nsisao , 'r ~ t ~ ~ an~~p ou ewol L80i-6 l b I 1 N 3 0 I S 3 d ~~ 3S31d 3NI11NtI0l ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~N3a~s3a iNin~~ds o ~ o, ~ _ o a a -_ ,~ ~~ i i E 1 ~ ' 4' r _, i N ~ ~i. • ---- - ---- -- -- ~1 ;~ a-- _ _ '~ f L ~~ ' ~ : ~ __.___ - f Sfr L ~ ~ ' ~ , ~ _ ,~ , Q. -~_ , i -- ;' y. i i . ~ ~ w A ff4. L516~88 8 OLt98 YO '380f Ntl9 O ~ 3 0 VI 01096 e~ `eBO;ewes 518311(16133tli813MtlY~WH~ttl^D~'-N+8~5~Z ~yR~~•/p~•p~~ L v l I P ~ - z ~ a anlap o!a ewoi t8tW ~ efv. ~ ~NCI ISS3~ oad a S31tli3O3SV N9153~ ^ ~ ^ 1 ~' ~, ~ l ~ I 1 N 3 Q I S ~ d ~~~ SS~ta 3Ninaaoi ; ~ -~ ~ ~ 3~N3atS~2t INIt1~NdS .Q ~ o y o c9 ~ ~ a a I ' `,ICI 1~~~ ~~ ~~ i~l ~I ~' ~~11~~ U mxC1 ~3~ ~ `" aa Q WFW LL QN wmo ~ x ~Q<2 r0 ~LL ~X (~J 4 JJ mLL 8N~ ~ ~ od~Y ~~ Z~ ~Qz 4FW WLL Zf- x O U- ~EW p Wm O SWpU y U zma ~X 5?a ~ Ew °o~~ az g~ u~1~ OWF WtV 740 O K- > >O U4 O >pW F~W~ Wow Ua0? a ~~'- >~oa °w3 ~H Wo ~ z o c~ ~ ~o o~~ pwz>Q ~LLZ ~azFf Nw ~a wmLL~ 030 =ooW ~~z Q U a ~ ¢C G< F 4 `~OaFj ~3¢ 19304 ro~ ON ~FWW QNZ Q~= Wad ~ 505 .-WO w~3 x4 x- ~ xv, x-Q x--¢ ~--~ U¢fn°e hzm ~zma ~a ~'~ 0`33 ~u~n .-c~LL NaLL ~~ O dl ? ~ y,, ; ~ z rc m c7 W W m 1. ~ I l i i ~ I I, ~ ~ u o w u 3 ~ ~ > ' ~+ ,;~ m i(i ~ , r-i- '-~ -~ '- ` ~-~--I~ I - Q -------- --- - -- - - { -,-i- ~ _ .-. I _- ,I~ ~i -~ ~~ ~ ~) ~;--~ -- ~„ ~ ~I -~---~--~-- -~ ~~ t ~~ i~ y~T i II ~ ` -~-- i p• - - ' ' ? ~ ~ ~ ; ; ~ ~ ~~ I ! I --- - - - - ~ i i l ~ ~ f ~ ~ i f ~ ~I - - --- - -- - I i ~ ~ ~ i i ~i { 4 ~ r i i1I ~ ' I ~~ I ~ ~ G i n~-~~~ • .~ 0 ... a~ m 0 L v .~: ,~ ~I'~~ ___ , - , - ~~ I t~ .,.~ m ~~ ~u ,'vs V~ ~ r-- t - - °° Lc1<6'$9$ ' $ Q'~' o<<ssvo asor Nvs ~= w cc w QLQ~S g~~eW3eJ~~ SLZ 311f15 '133tl~513~ItltlW X1tlOM QSd }•01/~/8~'pOi• V {J L V Y ~ _a ~r +'k ~ Z° anup o1~ ewol 1801+6 9NNinW • `JNiNNatd • N`J153p salvloossv N~ISao'~! ae~b.-rvtvass3~oad ~ _~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ Q 3~N3aiS321 iNlflt~Nt/S 1tJ11N301S3li --~-* ~~ 3S31a 3(dlddti0l ~ a q ~ J o ~, o ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ .a -,1z ~ .. -_~ ~ ~ ~ - - --- _ ---- ----- - 1 1 -- ---- -- -- ;~ ~. -- ----- ,II , ~ =~= ~ ;;, ; ~II, '~ _ ____ f # I, ' 4 ~' '' - I ~ ~,h iil, i ! I~ 1, it-I ;;li . I ; +~ i1 ~ ~ ~I!I ! ~i~l I ~~III _ ~~ilf,~li I~~I ~ ,I I ] ~i,~ 'I~iI~,1l!1 I ~I'~ ! ~; ~ jl1!; - 11 ~~,;~,' ~,~ I f~~ Il,~l,~li, = - ~ ~' ! ; rv - - ° _ >~ ~ ~ J II I~ I ~I+~ i ~ ~ ~ _ _ I , ; (I;'' ~II}I~i ~ i j l ~ ~ !I j~----' I i I ~ ~~ ~l i{1 ~ I - ; ~f ,; tl ll~ ,, l i __--__- ' i ~ ~, ,, l,, ~ i!I~ ' 'ti!'~~ iii I t~~l;l ` __ _- i'~ f I I~ p Z 7 ! ~ ,;~~I~~; lififli ,~!1 l ; ! - _ - l ~' - -- '~,I'I _ _'_=ll'„ti ~ ~I~,Ij~,1,;~,I ~ ~ I P I _ ~ I { i. r 't I d ~ - ! { • - - ---- I ~ I ~ '- - { ~ ~ ~ -~__ ._~-__-_----.___ I J }~ _ _ l ~ i ~~ } ~ - - -' -- - I ,~_ a i IO ~ i t G --- ~ ~I ~' d~ [ f ; F@i ~ ~ 1 I I I ,t ~~ ~ i ~~€ ~ 'i j t ~ ~ I ~ i ~ ! k l i ~ ~ ~ I! I ~~ , -~--- `` pp to {' l ~~ I ~ ~ 4l' ~~ ~ ` _e _ ~ - 1 !~ i f t ~ I _ ~ _ i I I i i ~~ ~~' ~ I ' i I ! } I ~ i ~ !~ ~ µ ~ 1~rT' ~ ~~ I i ~~ - Q~ ` ~ , I ~~~ ~ i, 1 i~ I I { i 4 G' I ~I , Ili I! I i i' 1 I i` ~ ~ ~ F i~ j ~ ~ i ~ ; r ~ , ;; ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ j. ~ I I ! _ - }, N __ ~ -u. t ~+---" ~ I i ~ 4 ~ 1 j , ~ i I ' ~ I ~ i /~ _ ~;! i il '~ I~ I~ 1; I~ C ~ ~ ~ ` f ~1 .I ;~ 'IIi I ~~ ' I~ ~ll~ ~; ~ i ! ~ ~ ~ I' •w > I ! '~ ~ , , '~ , ! i i ~ I ! ~ ~ l I ~ ~ ~ ! ~ i i, ' i, ~ ! .I f ! i ~ ~ f ~ i I E ~" _- ~ r' - wo^ X51 _ - - ~ I ! ~ f ' ~' ;, r--, ' ~ s 1 ~ ~ , i i . i i 1 1 i I i I, . I l ' ~ ~, i I ~ ' i i i , f i l i i I~ I l i ~ -Q i j, --- -- ~; ~ , Il ; I~ ~ , ~ ~ - i I f ;~I , 'f! ~ ~II li''j' ~ ~ , ., ~ ~ --- ~. ~ : ~ n!! 1 I i i~ ~ ~ I , L l on off: ~~ i l+~' l I I~ ~ i I i~~~ ~ i i( ,qi ~, ~ ; ; ~ ~- ~', '` I I Ir i j ? ~ ~ ~ i ~ Q i i l ,,~ ~ ~ ~ ,1L~1 . I ~~ ~ ~ ~ j ' ~ i ~; ;! ~ ~ i I f I i ~ ~ ~ l' l i i1 I I ' I l -_- 4 -- ~ - - --_ - __ -`-~ r'~~'°I. ~'. _ _ I - I ! { I + I I I I . r ~~~I, ~,~I,, .I _ l I I ~ 4 I iI f~ ~' I I ~ i~ i I l i ~~ ' i{ I i ~ I ~ i M ,i~~' ~ ~ ` ! ~ ~, ~ t~ i ~ - ~ --- - -- ---- - ~ ~ i _ ` - 1~.1 a- --~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' -~, ~ .i ~ ! ~ ~~'- --I'_ ~~~ \ - -- F r ~ ~~ .. t • x~ MINUTES Saratoga City Council Adjourned Meeting/Joint Session Saratoga City Council Public Safety Commission Saratoga, Cupertino & Campbell __ Union School District St. Andrew's, Sacred Heart Los Gatos-Saratoga High School District FEBRUARY Y 12, 2002 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a scheduled Adjourned City Council Meeting on February 12, 2002 at the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue. Mayor Streit called the Adjourned City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and requested Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. Rni.i, CAi,i, PRESENT: Councihnembers Stan Bogosian, Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Evan Baker, Mayor Nick Streit ABSENT: Councilmember John Mehaffey ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Lori Tinfow, Assistant City Manager Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 12.2002 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of February 12, 2002 was properly posted on February 8, 2002. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC No one requested to speak at tonight's meeting. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF None JOINT MEETING WITH PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS Mayor Streit noted that the purpose of this meeting was to hear how the various schools have been working with Commissioner Ballingall to implement the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP), Safe Ride to School Program and the School Traffic Calming Program. ~l 1 INTRODUCTION Bridgett Ballingall, Public Safety Commissioner, explained the purpose of the School Task Force and noted all of the schools in Saratoga are represented. Commissioner Ballingall introduced the following representatives from the various school districts that serve the City of Saratoga: - - Harry McKay -Saint Andrew's Marybarbara Zorio -Saratoga School Dr. Malcolm Brodrick -West Valley College Jane Daigle -Sacred Heart School Tina Johnson -Argonaut School Tom Marantette -Foothill School Kevin Skelly -Principal, Saratoga High School Brain Zobel - Vice_ Principal, Redwood Middle School Commissioner Ballingall noted that the Task Force was formed about a year ago. The first half of the year, the Task Force identified common problems and came up with some short term solution for some of the more dramatic problems and the second part of the year the Task Force discussed how to go forward and tackle some of the common problems. Commissioner Ballingall noted that the Task Force wrote a School Traffic Calming Program. Commissioner Ballingall explained that in the beginning, the Task Force met once a month, but she hopes in that the future the Task Force would meet every two months and use peoples time more effectively by meeting at the different school sites. Commissioner Ballin all noted that the various school; re resentatives would like to g P inform the Council what their schools is doing to calm traffic and offer their suggestions on what the City can do to help. Harry McKay, St. Andrew's, thanked Commissioner Ballingall and the Public Safety Commission for all of their work and for forming the Task Force. Mr. McKay noted that St. Andrew's is forming a traffic committee. Mr. McKay noted that one possible solution is to stagger the start times of the various schools.. Jane Daigle, Sacred Heart School, noted that she feels the biggest issue is to look at the start and ending times of the schools. Ms. Daigle noted that only a few students at Sacred Heart walk to school because of the unsafe conditions of Saratoga Avenue. Ms. Daigle noted the Safe Routes to School program should help. Ms. Daigle noted that she looks forward to continuing working with the Task Force Vice Mayor Baker noted that he is concerned about the conditions on Saratoga Avenue and asked if she thought different traffic light control would help. Ms. Daigle responded that the crosswalk at Saratoga Avenue and Fruitvale Avenue is the only safe place to cross. Mr. McKay noted that the lack of sidewalks also contribute to unsafe_conditions on Saratoga Avenue. City Council Meeting 2 February 12, 2002 r,~' Mary Barbara Zorio, Saratoga School, explained that Sazatoga School has finished all of the renovations. Ms. Zoruio noted that last summer.Commissioner Ballingall met with a group of parents and the School Site Council and suggested that they work with the City's Traffic Engineer, Jim Jeffries. Ms. Zorio explained that Mr. Jeffries helped them with - crosswalks and walking paths. Ms. Zorio stated that the crosswalks and paths have helped tremendously. Ms. Zorio noted that their main problem is Highway 9. Ms. Zorio suggested that the City install a light at that intersection. Mayor Streit responded that along with the proposed Public Safety Center, on the corner- of Saratoga Avenue and Highway 9, a traffic study would be done to look at that area. Councilmember Bogosian noted that, as a neighbor of Sazatoga School, he has noticed a tremendous improvement. Councilmember Bogosian noted that there is inadequate space for cars to pass on Oak Street. Brian Zobel, Redwood Middle School, explained that he has been working to educate the parents, closed the left turn lane from the parking lot, increased signage on school property, and placed cross guazds at Allendale and Fruitvale. Mr. Zobel noted that he agrees that the lack of side is a problem. Mr. Zobel noted that they were still investigating other solutions such as utilizing their lower black top area for a drop off and pick off area. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if the pazents were notified not to park and cut through the City's parking lot. . Mr. Zobel responded that they put out several letters to the pazents. Kevin Skelly, Sazatoga High School, explained the steps taken to address traffic issues at and around the school: • Only allow junior and seniors to pazk on campus and leave during lunch. • Accelerate the construction of the West parking lot so we have enough parking. • Open basketball courts for pazking after re-stripping. • New pathways along Herriman Avenue -working with Director Cherbone to install. • Added extra set of classroom books for students do not have such heavy backpacks and are therefore more likely to walk or ride their bikes. • Used Principal's newsletter to promote carpooling. Councihnember Bogosian noted that he has seen some improvement of the drivers of the high school community. Tom Mazantette, Foothill School, noted that Foothill is in the middle of construction. Mr. Mazantette noted that when the construction is done there should be a better flow of traffic in the back and front drop off azeas. Mr. Mazantette noted that a lack of sidewalks on Reed Avenue forces the students to walk in the street. Tina Johnson, Argonaut School, noted that Argonaut is working on the drop off areas and utilizing student crossing guazds. Ms. Johnson noted one problem they have is that pazents use Charter Dnve as a drop off azea; unfortunately, it is anon-authorized drop off azea. City Council Meeting 3 February 12, 2002 i~ s Malcolm Brodrick, West Valley College, noted that the next September they would be going to a sixteen-week semester, the first class would be starting at 7:30 a.m. Mr. Brodrick noted that he fully supports the City's programs, but stated a lot of the issues -do not apply to the College. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if the bus system is utilized. Mr. Brodricjk noted that the College encourages the use of public transportation to the students and to the teachers by using ALTRANS. Councihnember Waltonsmith noted that she is proud of the effort from the various schools to mitigate the traffic problems. Mayor Streit noted that traffic is a priority to this Council and noted that they are committed to working with the schools to try and solve some of the issues. Vice Mayor Baker responded that construction of sidewalks probably would not be _ supported by the neighborhoods. Although he would support sidewalks on the main arterial streets. Vice Mayor Baker noted that some residents believe that curbs and sidewalks take away from the "rural" feeling. Commissioner Ballingall noted that a few strategically constructed sidewalks throughout the City might help reduce the number of cars on the streets. Vice Mayor Baker noted that perhaps the Public Safety Commission could look at the entire City and present to the Council their recommendations for sidewalks. Mayor Streit thanked Commissioner Ballingall,and the representatives from the various schools for attending tonight's meeting. Mayor Streit declared a recess at 7:45 p.m. Mayor Streit reconvened the meeting at 8:00 p.m. 2. ADOPT RESOLUTION OPPOSING MEASURE E STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-010 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OPPOSING MEASURE E - A BOND MEASURE PROPOSED BY THE WEST VALLEY-MISSION COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report. _ City Council Meeting t~ February 12, 2002 City Manager Anderson explained that at the City Council meeting of January 16, 2002 - a member of the public requested that the City take a position on the West Valley- Mission Community College District Bond Measure ("Measure E") that will be considered by the voters at the March 5, 2002 election. Staff to obtain information on Measure E and presented that information to the City Council at its meeting of February 6, 2002. The Council also accepted public testimony from supporters and opponents of the Measure at that meeting. Following public testimony Council members expressed concern with the Measure and staff was directed to prepare a resolution in opposition to the Measure for consideration at the next City Council meeting. BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION OPPOSING MEASURE E - A BOND MEASURE PROPOSED BY THE WEST VALLEY- MISSION COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT. MOTION PASSED 3-0-1-1 WITH MEHAFFEY ABSENT AND BOGOSIAN ABSTAINIlVG. - 4. SARATOGA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that on February 6, 2002 two Councilmembers requested staff to investigate the City's financial relationship with the Chamber of Commerce, the building lease, and the annual financial support and report back to Council. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that the Council has been supporting the Chamber of Commerce since 1968. In 1973, City was given the James McWilliams house. In March 1976, the City entered into an agreement that permitted the Chamber to use the house for payment of $1 per year. Over the years, the Chamber has also received funding from the City ranging from $3000 - $7000. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that in Spring 2000 the Chamber requested their cash allotment be increased to $10,000 per year to reflect the wide range of services they provide to others beyond their membership. The request for increased funding was no incorporated onto the 2000-02 budget. The City Council did not approve an agreement; therefore, the Chamber has been operating without an agreement for the past 19 months. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that the City has made three payments of $836.26 to the Chamber in FY 2000/01. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that she performed a survey of the City/Chamber support in nearby cities and briefly explained the results. City Council Meeting 5 February 12, 2002 Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that the City Council could take the following actions: • Alternative 1 -maker no changes to financial support at this time but take the Chamber's behavior, and the relationship between the Chamber and the City into consideration for next year's budget process. • Alternative 2 -Continue in-kind support only; withdraw cash funding. • Alternative 3 -Direct staff to reestablish agreement negotiations with the Chamber and bring revised agreement between the City and the Chamber back to Council by a set date; if no agreement is reached by set date, withdraw all financial support. . • Alternative 4 -Withdraw all City financial support fro the Chamber including termination of the license agreement, withdraw for cash subsidy, and withdraw of in-kind support for Celebrate Saratoga. _ _ Councilmember Bogosian asked if when the survey was done did each City provide a list of what services their Chambers provide. Assistant Cit y Manager Tinfow responded no, but most Chambers' provide relocation information, visitor information, business referrals, directory publications, and community events. Councilmember Bogosian asked if the City has ever received the $1.00 rent from the Chamber. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that she would look into that. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she counted 311 members in the Chamber's directory and out of that number 11 lthat were the following categories: • 94 non Saratoga address • 16 associations and clubs • 15 individual • 9 churches • 7 schools • 4 miscellaneous Councilmember Waltonsmith stated that this means there are only 160 Saratoga businesses that the Chamber supports. Councilmember Waltonsmith stated that in the year 2000 when the Chamber requested more money she did a survey of nearby City/Chamber relationships. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that the City of Palo Alto does not give their Chamber any money. The Town of Los Gatos cut off all ties to their Chamber for many years until a workable agreement was reached; now they have a 23-page agreement. • City Council Meeting ( February 12, 2002 David Hernandez, 5628 Park Crest Drive, noted that he is a former graduate of Saratoga High School and the recent President of the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Hernandez stated that the Board was very surprised at the actions of the City Council and want to know why. Mr. Hernandez described all of the events and services that the Chamber provides to the City and to the residents to promote and improve the business community in Saratoga. - - Councilmember Waltonsmith asked Mr. Hernandez if the Chamber's Board take polls of their members when they a political stand. Mr. Hernandez responded that he did not know. Councilmember Bogosian asked in five years how many Saratoga businesses have joined the Chamber. Mr. Hernandez said he did not know and would refer the question the Executive Director. Pat Andresen, 19952 Garnett, noted that she was a President of the Chamber of Commerce. Mrs. Andresen noted that the Chamber of Commerce is a very important part of the community. Mrs. Andresen noted that when she had her own business non- Saratoga residents and businesses were an asset to promote their business. Michael Fox, 14000 June Way, noted that he is the Chair Elect of the San Jose/Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Fox noted the actions of this Council in attempt to cancel contract, terminate the Chamber's lease, and cancel future support of Celebrate Saratoga, and to agendize that action immediately following the Chamber's endorsement to a ballot measure opposed by the Council is very disturbing. Mr. Fox stated that on behalf of the San Jose/Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce they are ready to do the following for the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce: • Find a home for the Saratoga Chamber to communicate with it's members • Provide administrative support • Provide support for Celebrate Saratoga - • Send a message to all Chambers in Santa Clara County to stand with them and support Saratoga Chamber Mr. Fox noted that all of this is avoidable by the Council's actions tonight. Mr. Fox stated that overt political punishment is not good government. John Palladimo, 14670 Quito Road, noted that he has been a resident for two years and the first thing he and his wife did was join the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Palladimo noted that he was surprised when Councilmember Bogosian requested top agendize cutting ties with the Chamber. Mr. Palladimo noted that all Chambers should have the support of the City even though they might not always agree. Mr. Palladimo noted that what is needed between the City and the Chamber is more communication lines. City Council Meeting '] February 12, 2002 Councilmember Bogosian asked Mr. Palladimo is he was a member of the Executive Committee when the issue surrounding the Mt. Winery. Mr. Palladimo responded yes he was a past Committee member but not durin the time g when the Mt. Winery was discussed. . __ Ray Friess, 20225 Ljepava Drive, noted that he has been a Chamber member for 12 years. Mr. Friess noted that he feels the Chamber is an asset to the City. Saratoga's business environment is unique, consists mostly small businesses. Mr. Freiss noted that he has been trying to get the business license data from the City but has been unsuccessful. Mr. Friess noted that the Chamber receives at least fifty calls a day. _ Herb Radding, 14050 Chester Avenue, noted that he has lived in Saratoga for 27 years. Mr. Radding stated that he questions if the members of the Chamber of Commerce agrees with the actions taken by the Board. Mr. Radding noted that he received the sample ballot in regards to Measure E and compared it to the project list for the College District and questioned how the money will be spent. Lea Ann Hernandez, 14626 Big Basin Way, noted that her family has owned the Saratoga Oaks Lodge for fifty-five years. Ms. Hernandez asked how the Chamber is suppose to increase their membership with Saratoga Businesses when the City will not let businesses come into the City. Ms. Hernandez noted that with the events of September 11 it has affected the business community in Saratoga. Dick Wood, 14694 Sycamore Drive, noted that he is retired, but still volunteers in a number of activities in Saratoga. Mr. Wood noted that he was the President of the Chamber in 1995. Mr. Wood noted that he was surprised with the Council's action to agendize terminating the financial ties with the Chamber. Mr. Wood stated that for many years the City and the Chamber had a good working relationship. Mr. Wood noted the Mayor in 1994 started the SBDC, which is still meets today. Cynthia Barry, 19281 San Marcos Road, noted that she has been a Saratoga resident for 27 years and was not speaking a s the Chair of the Planning Commission. Ms. Barry noted that the City Council has consistently and courageously made neighborhood interest top priority. Ms. Barry noted that this Council has also been very proactive in prompting business in Saratoga. Ms. Barry noted that the Chamber accepts public funds but closes their meetings to the public. Ms. Barry requested that the City discontinue supporting the Chamber of Commerce. Willys Peck, 14275 Saratoga Avenue, has been resident for 78 years and is an Associate member of the Chamber. Mr. Peck noted that he was here tonight to point out and emphasize that the Chamber of Commerce is a necessary element in this community. Mr. Peck noted that he feels the Chamber should not be moved from there Councilmember Bogosian asked as an Associate Member does he pay dues and was he polled by the Executive Committee as to whether he supported that position on the Mt. Winery _ City Council Meeting g February 12, 2002 Mr. Peck responded yes he pays dues and but cannot remember if he was polled. . Vic Monia, Granite Way, noted that if the Chamber was a success, why did the City have to hire Economic Development Coordinator. Mr. Monia stated that severing ties - with the Chamber did not come up because of Measure E; it has been an ongoing problem. Mr. Monia stated that past Council's were also dissatisfied with the services provided by the Chamber. Mr. Monia stated that he feels the Chamber is a poor investment for the City and the City's taxpayers have not been getting the service they deserve. Sheila Arthur, 509 Dipper Circle, San Jose, noted that she was the Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce from 1988-1999. Ms. Arthur pointed out that she worked with 3 City Managers and 11 Mayors during that time. In regards to the Chamber's storage unit at the Corporation yard, Ms. Arthur explained that the City allowed the Chamber to store it there in return the Chamber put City information on their website. Ms. Arthur stated the City's Chamber cannot be compared to nearby cities. Cheriel Jensen, 13737 Quito Road, pointed out that the City has always had problems with the Chamber. Ms. Jensen noted that the Chamber has never supported the neighborhoods in Saratoga. Gary Smith, PO Box 2682, noted that he owns a business in Saratoga since 1991 and has been a Chamber member ever since. Mr. Smith noted that he feels the Chamber provides good networking opportunities for small businesses. Mr. Smith noted that it is important to keep a good relationship with the Chamber. Dale Allen, 14426 Black Walnut Court, noted that the City has a right to stop funding to the Chamber because the City has not seen results. Mr. Allen pointed out the City Council invites the public to come to the meetings and participate whereas the Chamber holds closed meetings. Pearl Medeiros, 1045 Zarick Drive, San Jose, stated that she is not Saratoga resident but a member of the Chamber. Ms. Medeiros noted that City representatives, Mayor Streit and Councilmember Waltonsmith have attend the Chamber's Board meetings. Ms. Mederios stated that the Board did have one closed meeting last year when personnel issues were discussed. In regards to the vote by the Board of Director supporting Measure E, Ms. Medeiros stated that Dr. Marchelle Fox did not attend that meeting nor did she vote. Fran Andresen, 19952 Garnett Court, stated that the Chamber has a new Board of Directors and requested that the City Council should consider Alternative #1 and give the Chamber another chance. -- Jack Mallory, 12258 Kirkdale Drive, noted that he has been a Saratoga resident since 1967. Mr. Mallory stated that the Chamber should take a class in diplomacy. Mr. Mallory noted that he believes the Chamber is an important part of the community. City Council Meeting 9 February 12, 2002 Councilmember Bogosian noted that the Council has received approximately 40 emails and a packet of correspondences in regards to this issue. Councilmember Bogosian stated that after looking through all of the correspondences approximately 2/3 favoring some kind of sanction on the Chamber and 1/3 favoring urging no sanction. -- Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she pulled the Chamber's "Mission Statement" off of their website and stated, "The most basis of all Chamber activities is it's unifying influence". Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she agrees. Councilmember Waltonsmith read a few statements from City Councilmembers from other cities in regards to their Chambers. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that the Town of Los Gatos agreement with their Chamber states that they expect "service" and "cooperation", which in her mind is what the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce is missing - it has been divisive. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she agrees that the Chamber has done good projects but in addition they have been divisive and have taken stances that have not been good for the citizens of Saratoga. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she does not agree with the way the current Boazd of Directors have high jacked the Chamber and have focused on pet projects of Boazd members to the determent of Sazatoga business in general. Councilmember Bogosian stated that every person that comes before the Council has the person US constitutional guazanteed right to state their opinion over the yeazs on the Council he has heazd a lot of view in which he does not agree with. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he does not maintain and never has that an organization should agree with what Councilmembers or Councilmember, but however the question before us tonight is continuing the funding of the Chamber of Commerce of $30-40 thousand dollazs a year - is it a good business deal for the City. Councilmember Bogosian noted that tonight the Council has to make a business decision tonight. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he would like to point out a couple of issues for everyone to consider. Councilmember Bogosian stated that this Council has spend approximately $300,000 or more on legal fees to deal with three key issues 1. Development at Azule -The Chamber of Commerce took the position to favor a large proportion of residential building on the property -seems like a pro business decision - it just so happens that a family member of the property owners was a past president of the Chamber of Commerce. 2. Mountain Winery -The City has spent a lot of money on Attorney fees to develop conditions to guarantee the preservation of our neighborhoods in our city from the effects of traffic and noise from the Winery. The City fought with the County to be involved in the process. The Executive Director at the time, Abby Krimotot, came to a Planning Commission and stated that the City Council does not represent the people of Sazatoga. 3. Measure E -sheds light on the relationship between the Chamber and West Valley Board. The City has spent a lot of money to preserve the quality of life for the residents of Sazatoga. _ City Council Meeting 1 ~ February 12, 2002 Councilmember Bogosian noted that he does not believe it is a good business decision to - spend taxpayer money on an organization that has consisting and publicly opposes quality of life issues of our residents. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he would have no problem with the Chambers decision if we were not spending taxpayer money. Councilmember Bogosian stated that in order to keep the cash support and lease agreement with the Chamber the Council needs to prove to the people that it is a good business decision to continue. Councilmember Bogosian stated he supports cutting the cash and the lease. Vice Mayor Baker stated that there is a lot of evidence proves that this City Council is pro business. This Council has made decisions to promote and retain businesses: Vice Mayor Baker noted that he believes that no City should be without a Chamber, but agree with the Town of Los Gatos when they cut ties with their Chamber, when the Chamber became political advocates. This is not the role a chamber should have. Vice Mayor Baker noted that he doesn't agree think the Chamber and citizens should always agree with all the decisions this Council makes. Vice Mayor Baker asked if he thinks the City has a good working relationship with the Chamber, NO. Vice Mayor Baker noted a year ago he chaired the joint meeting with the Chamber, who at the time the Executive Director presented an outgoing multifaceted approach to improve the interaction with the city, however that program never happened nor did any serious negations take place between the City and the Chamber. Vice Mayor Baker noted that he knows it is to the benefit to every business, the City Council, and to the City of Saratoga to have a Chamber of Commerce. Vice Mayor Baker stated that he does not like any of the options presented tonight, he doesn't feel the Chamber should be cut off, nor does he agree with getting rid of Celebrate Saratoga. Vice mayor cautioned the Chamber Board not to become a political entity, it is not the Boards role, their role is to promote and encourage good business in Saratoga -every one reaps great benefits form that. Vice Mayor Baker noted that he would only support putting aside all of the negative comments and get to a cooperative discussion between the City and Chamber to come for the benefit of all. Mayor Streit concurred with Vice Mayor Baker, noting that one of his goals when he became Mayor was to build a cooperative nature with all the different groups in Saratoga. Mayor Streit noted that the Chamber of Commerce is an integral part of the community. Mayor Streit noted that some day the Chamber will be on its own, but this is not the time to cut them off. Mayor Streit noted it is the time to get an agreement together where the City can put down in writing what we expect for the City's funding. Mayor Streit noted the City has not proven that the Chamber has not does what the City has asked because we don't have an agreement. City Council Meeting 11 February 12, 2002 Mayor Streit stated that he is not willing to support any of the options. Mayor Streit J stated that in theory the vote is 2-2 and suggested that Council direct staff to do more research and come back March 6, 2002 if Council agrees. Councilmember Bogosian suggested that staff should go back to the record two yeazs ago when the City~rovided an agreement to the Chamber but never received it back signed. Councilmember Bogosian suggested that in three months Council should review this issue and see if we have made any process. Vice Mayor Baker suggested a Study Session between the Chamber Board and the City Council. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she-could support sitting down with the Chamber and discuss all the past and future issues. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she is willing to go forward to work out an agreement with the Chamber. A discussion took place in regards setting up another meeting with the Chamber - possibly May 7, 2002. City Manager Anderson was instructed to work with the Chamber to come up with a date. Mayor Streit thanked everyone for coming this evening. 3. PROPERTY CLAIM OF HAKONE GARDENS; CLAIM NO. GL-053582 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize payment of deductible. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, explained that on January 18, 2002 a small fire occurred in the Cultural Exchange Building on the Hakone Gardens property. The City leases this property to the Hakone Foundation. Under the lease agreement that was renewed in November 2000 the City is responsible for providing "fire and extended coverage insurance on all buildings and other insurable improvements located on the premises which are the property of the Landlord." City Clerk Boyer stated that the City's claims examiner met with Masako Hall the Director of Administration at Hakone Gazdens to assess the damage on January 23, 2002 and again of January 29, 2002 to investigate the incident. Full coverage is available on this loss subject to the $5,000 Property Program Deductible. City Clerk Boyer explained that in order to mitigate the smoke damage sustained throughout the Cultural Exchange Center, Four Staz Restoration was called and performed the necessary clean-up totally $10,856.71. Ms. Hall is currently obtaining estimates and invoices for the cost to repair the divider screen door, the floor framing and the replacement costs for the electric burner. So far the estimates total $4,066.64 Councilmember Bogosian requested that City staff follow up with Hakone that they install safety precautions. -- City Manager Anderson responded that staff would contact Hakone. City Council Meeting 1, 2 February 12, 2002 t - CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Waltonsmith referred to an article she read recentl in the New York Times. Y Councihnember Waltonsmith explained that Kabul University has reopened and is in need of books. Councilmember Waltonsmith explained that a professor at the University stated that their library was empty and would take donations. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if the City could coordinate some sort of collection efforts to help. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk City Council Meeting 13 February 12, 2002 ~~ M~ V. MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED MEETING JOINT SESSION SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL PARKS AND RECREATION MARCH 12, 2002 - The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in open session in the Administrative Conference Room at 6:10 p.m. to interview applicants for the Public Safety Commission and Heritage Preservation Commission. The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a scheduled Adjourned Council Meeting on March 12, 2002 at the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue. Mayor Streit called the Adjourned City Council meeting to order at 6:05-p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Evan Baker, Mayor Nick Streit ABSENT: None - ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT:_ Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk John Cherbone, Director of Public Works Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR MARCH 27, 2001. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of March 12, 2002 was properly posted on March 8, 2002. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC No one spoke at tonight's meeting. JOINT MEETING WITH SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL Mayor Streit welcomed Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council. ,~ ~, .~ 1. Sean O'Leary, Executive Director, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to meet with them and introduced Karen Lorenz, Administrative Director/Adult Day Care Center and the SASCC Board members. Director O'Leary took the opportunity to thank City Manager Dave Anderson, Recreation Director Joan Pisani, and Councihnember Waltonsmith for taking him under their wing and helping him in the first few months of his employment. Director O'Leary stated that tonight he would be presenting SASSC Annual Report, which would include the past, present, and future of SASCC and the organization finances. Director O'Leary noted that in May 2002 he was hired as the Executive Director of SASCC. On June 2002 the new Executive Board was installed and appointed Jo Trimble as President. Director O'Leary noted that SASCC has held seven fundraising events such as: • Auction • High Tea • Chinese Luncheon • Adult Day Care Center's Fashion Show • Director O'Leary noted that SASCC today offers programs that bring people together such as • Socialization -weekly lunches, coffee social, high tea, needle work, Monday night Football • Education -memoir writing, art history, acrylic painting, financial planning, managing life changes, computer training, driving safety class, money matters • Entertainment -matinees, card games • Health -aerobics, blood pressure, podiatry, yoga, square dancing, line dancing, golf Karen Lorenz, Administrative Director/Adult Day Care Center, noted that this past January the Adult Day Care Center celebrated their 14th anniversary. Director Lorenz noted that when the program first started in January 1988 the Center was only open two days a week. In 1994 the Center had to expand the program to five days a week and had 15-20 participants. Councilmember Bogosian asked there is more people wanting to participate in the program then there is space available Director Lorenz responded that there is only a waiting list for Friday. __ Vice Mayor Baker asked how the Center determines who gets accepted into the program. Director Lorenz stated it is a first come first serve basis. Vice Mayor Baker asked if there was a preference for Saratoga residents. - City Council Minutes 2 March 12, 2002 ~~. It Director Lorenz responded no there was no preference for residents; it would not be fair. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if other cities have programs similar to the Adult Day Care Center. Director Lorenz responded that most cities do not have a senior services. Director Lorenz stated the Cupertino and Los Gatos have senior programs. Director Lorenz she and Director O'Leary would be appearing before the Campbell City Council requesting funding since Campbell residents participate in the Center's programs. Director O'Leary stated the following future objectives for SASCC: • Implement new programs and services • Keep pace and remain innovative • Create interest and expand membership • Localized advertising • Public relations with community groups Director O'Leary noted that their net assets are approximately $1,219,000 with $725,000 of restricted endowment and an annual budget of $351,000. Director O'Leary noted that the $725,000 cannot be used for operations. Director O'Leary noted that this money has- been invested. In conclusion Director O'Leary stated that their program is innovated, proactive, a catalyst for community involvement and socialization though meaningful activities, boundless opportunities for individual experience and growth. The City Council thanked Director O'Leary and Directory Lorenz for their presentation. Mayor Streit adjourned the Joint City Council meeting with SASCC and requested afive-minute break at 8:00 p.m. Mayor Streit requested that the Council move to Item 3. Consensus of the City Council to move to Item 3. NEW ITEMS 3. RESOLUTION REQUESTING A STUDY AND REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH MIXED-USE OVERLAY ZONE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-015 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING A STUDY AND REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH AMIXED-USE OVERLAY ZONE City Council Minutes 3 March 12, 2002 Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan explained that the City's draft Housing Element contains several programs; one of th_e_programs amends the Zoning Code to implement aMixed-use Overlay Zone. Director Sullivan explained that on April 19, 2000, the City Council adopted an Interim Ordinance that was in place until the voters decided the fate of the moratorium on a ballot measure regarding multi-family development in the commercial_zones. The voters adopted Measure G on November 7, 2000. The Measure will expire on March 15, 2002. Director Sullivan explained that the proposed resolution would direct staff and the Planning Commission when reviewing development proposals. Once the draft Housing Element is adopted, it would provide additional policy direction. It is expected that the Planning Commission will report back to the City Council prior to the end of June, however, the proposed resolution sets a date of July 3, 2002 for them to report back. BOGOSIANBAKER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION REQUESTING A STUDY AND REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO ESTADLISH MIXED USE OVERLAY ZONE. MOTION PASSES 5-0. _ 4. LETTER OF SUPPORT - AB2863 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize Mayor to sing letter of support. Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan explained that Longville has introduced AB 2863 at the request of the League and CSAC. The introduced version of the legislation declares legislative intent regarding the development and adoption of local housing elements. In addition, the bill establishes a definition of "residential unit" and "substantial compliance" under law, and contains additional intent language that acknowledges some of the difficulties local governments face in promoting development of additional housing. BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SIGN LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR AB2863. MOTION PASSED 5-0. , • City Council Minutes 4 March ] 2, 2002 9 ADJOURNMENT TO JOINT MEETING PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Mayor Streit commenced the Joint Meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission at 8:05 p.m. 3. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst/ Staff liaison, introduced the following Parks and Recreation Commissioners: Elaine Clabeaux, Chair Logan Deimler Angela Frazier Nick Seroff Greg Gates Norbert Fronczak Due to a prior commitment, Analyst Bloomquist noted that Sandra Dodge was unable to attend tonight's meeting Elaine Clabeaux, Chair/Parks and Recreation Commission, noted that tonight she would be speaking on behalf of the Saratoga Parks and Recreation Commission. Chair Clabeaux took a moment to thank Vice Mayor Baker for serving as their Council liaison and Cary Bloomquist for serving as their staff liaison. Chair Clabeaux stated that she would be providing the Council with an overview of the Commission's past, present and future projects. Chair Clabeaux explained the Commission's accomplishments in the last 12 months, projects in the works and projects for the future: • Trail Maintenance -Upper Parker Ranch repair/rerouting in progress. Mt. Eden and Teerlink Way trail repairs scheduled. • Current new trail activities: Steve Haynes Trail realignment completed. • Master Trail Map Project: o Goal: list of parcels by number with matching owner name, property address etc.-and update of property database to include Trail Flag o Progress: property list generated (262 parcels) forwarded to City Staff o Next: review title easements, which is costly, determine from City how information is to be entered/maintained/coordinated • UPRR Trail - , " o Desire to set up UPRR corridor as open space to preserve from development o Investigate use of PG&E right-of--way for trail easement o Identify parcels adjacent/near UPRR corridor o Address neighboring homeowners concerns • Current Action Items: o The problem of illegal bicyclist use of Upper Parker Ranch T-rail -possible solution is to work with local advocacy group to repair damaged trail and neighbor relations. Determine approach to lessen future misuse City Council Minutes 5 March 12, 2002 o New community representatives to Trail Subcommittee to replace Teri ` Baron. -The PRC would like--to recruit a hiker, bicyclist and an equestrian. The PRC would like to submit a request to the Council to honor Teri Baron with a commendation form the City. • Potential Future Projects: o Promote Saratoga's trails. The PRC would like to sponsor a "Trail Day". __ _ _ o Investigate new Quito Rd/San Tomas Creek trail in conjunction with _ Santa Clara Valley Water District Chair Clabeaux explained the progress of the following Task Forces: El Quito Task Force • Survey generated by homeowners is to be sent to all homeowners -Commission did not approve this survey. - • A Community Park Survey is being completed by the PRC that will provide feedback to the City from all citizens and their desires for community parks. • A parking study is in the planning stage. Azule Park Task Force • The Task Force has met several times with MPA Design. A 25-50% drawing will be ready for the PRC meeting on April 1, 2002. • The PRC will review the design, make any recommendations, and approve the drawings for a public meeting to be held later in April. • A presentation of the completed park plan will be presented to the Council. Construction is scheduled to begin late June or early July with a goal of completion by the end of the year. Skateboard Task Force • Five locations were determined thus far to meet the criteria of restrooms, space, and availability. These are Congress Springs Park, the lower hardtop area at Redwood Middle School near the Corp Yard, and the three surrounding parking areas at City Hall. • Overview of recommendations: o Park would be staffed for the first~year o Equipment would be rotated for the first year o No fee o Age cut off: (under 10 years old with adult supervision) o Safety (all required to wear helmet, knee and elbow pads) o Identification (method still being researched) o Hours of operation: ^ Summer Mon-Sat 1 lam-6 pm ^ School years Hours Sat 11 am-Spm, Sunday 12 noon-Spm ^ Scholl Holidays and Special Events 90 hours Chair Clabeaux noted that it was recommended by one of the Youth Commissioners that an exit survey is given to the users to help in the analysis of the park. Chair Clabeaux noted that a demo of the skate park would be set up in Civic Center parking lot on April 2, 2002. - City Council Minutes (, March 12, 2002 - Creek Cleanup Chair Clabeaux explained that each year the Commission sponsors two creek cleanups. The first one this year will be held on May 18, 2002 at gam. The staging area will be in the parking lot between the Recreation Center and the Corp Yard. The Youth Commission has expressed interest in joining the PRC in this endeavor. Chair Clabeaux noted that this project is open to the public. Community Center/Gymnasium Chair Clabeaux noted that the Commissioners have attended City Council meetings and are eager to see this project go forward. Park Improvements A safety audit of the parks has been completed. All items identified as needing immediate attention have been corrected or completed. The commission presented a list for capitol improvements to the Council and was pleased to see them approved. Park Patrol - Chair Clabeaux noted that this is a brand new endeavor for the~ommission and is in the beginning stages. City Fees Research Project On March 11, 2002 the Recreation Department presented an in depth report on rentals and fee for city facilities to the PRC. The PRC will continue to gather data that will help the Commission to better understand the many facets of this subject. The PRC has scheduled aretreat/study session on May 17, 2002. AYSO Fees The PRC has deliberated and has a recommendation for the Council that will be presented at the meeting of March 20, 2002. Heritage Orchard The PRC would like to request that the Heritage Orchard be included in their list of facilities. The PRC would like to be involved with any and all issues concerning the Orchard. The PRC would like to invite a Heritage Preservation Commissioner to attend the PRC meetings and would be willing to send a PRC Commissioner to the Heritage meetings. Chair Clabeaux commented on the City owned park on the corner of Pollard and Quito Road. Chair Clabeaux noted that a landscape architect would be attending the next PRC meeting with some ideas on native landscaping designs for possible future development of this park. Chair Clabeaux noted that she and the rest of the Commissioners were available for questions. Councilmember Bogosian commended Chair Clabeaux on her presentation. Councilmember Bogosian stated that all neighbors impacted by the proposed UPR Trail be a part of the process from the beginning. City Council Minutes 7 Mazch 12, 2002 Vice Mayor Baker noted that the UPR Trail project is extremely expensive and Saratoga would bear the most costs. Vice Mayor Baker noted that the PRC and the Trails Subcommittee should be cautious that the process does not get out of hand. - In regards to the UPR Trail Project, Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that the Commission should proceed slowly, with continued Council support. Councilmember Waltonsmith-noted that she supports presenting a commendation to Teri Baron. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she supports having the various Commissions come up with different ways to promote the City such as the PRC's suggestion of "Trail Day". _- Albert Chang, 19937 Scotland Drive, noted that he would like to comment on the survey that was conducted at Redwood School in regards to the proposed mobile skate park. Mr. Chang noted that 900 students were surveyed at Redwood School. Mr. Chang stated the results as follows: • 690 students -skate park is a good idea • 393 students -would use the skate park • 522 students -supported no fee • 15 students willing to pay $25 season • 118 students willing to pay $50 a year • 179 students would make a donation Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if there were discussions on the Task Force in regards to special hours of operations for people who paid a fee. Mr. Chang noted that the Task Force did not discuss that possibility, but he would bring Councilmember Waltonsmith's suggestion back to the Task Force. Vice Mayor Baker expressed his concern that there was no minimum age cut off. Director Pisani noted that children under ten years old must have a parent present. Director Pisani noted that City Attorney Taylor stated this feeling is that if a person is under 13 years or younger they must have a parent present. Andy Miller, 18820 Aspesi Drive, noted that he supports a skate park in Saratoga. In regards to the age limit cut off, Mr. Miller stated that most kids do not start skating until they are about eight. Vice Mayor Baker commended the Skate Park Task Force and requested that the park be up and running by the beginning of summer. Vice Mayor Baker requested that a full summer calendar of locations of the park be posted on the City's website and the various schools. Consensus of the City Council to support Vice Mayor Baker's request. City Council Minutes $ March 12, 2002 Mayor Streit thanked the Parks and Recreation Commission for attending tonight's meeting. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Waltonsmith announced that the Taiko Drum Group, that has used Hakone Gardens for the past ten years to practice, has been asked to leave. Councilmember Waltonsmith stated that they are in need of storage space for their equipment. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if any citizen or community group had a space for the Group to use for storage please contact the City. , Councilmember Bogosian noted that on March 28, 2002 the League of Women Voters would be _ sponsoring a community forum at West Valley College asking the question "How can West Valley College serve the Community". Councilmember Bogosian encouraged the citizens of Saratoga to attend. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk • Crty Council Minutes 9 March 12, 2002 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED MEETING JOINT SESSION SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL PARKS AND RECREATION MARCH 12, 2002 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in open session in the Administrative Conference Room at 6:10 ~.m. to interview applicants for the Public Safety Commission and Heritage Preservation Commission. The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a scheduled Adjourned Council Meeting on March 12, 2002 at the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue. Mayor Streit called the Adjourned City Council meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. R(1T.T, f AT,T. PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Evan Baker, Mayor Nick Streit ABSENT: None ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk John Cherbone, Director of Public Works Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR MARCH 27, 2001. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of March 12, 2002 was properly posted on March 8, 2002. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC No one spoke at tonight's meeting. JOINT MEETING WITH SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL Mayor Streit welcomed Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council. • ' 1. Sean O'Leary, Executive Director, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to meet with them and introduced Karen Lorenz, Administrative Director/Adult Day Care Center and the SASCC Board members. -- Director O'Leary took the opportunity to thank City Manager Dave Anderson, Recreation Director Joan Pisani, and Councilmember Waltonsmith for taking him under their wing _ and helping him in the first few months of his employment. Director O'Leary stated that tonight he would be presenting SASCC Annual Report, which would include the past, present, and future of SASCC and the organization finances. Director O'Leary noted that in May 2002 he was hired as the Executive Director of SASCC. On June 2002 the new Executive Board was installed and appointed Jo Trimble as President. Director O'Leary noted that SASCC has held seven fundraising events such as: • Auction _ • High Tea • Chinese Luncheon • Adult Day Care Center's Fashion Show Director O'Leary noted :hat SASCC today offers programs that bring people together such as: • Socialization -weekly lunches, coffee social, high tea, needle work, Monday night Football • Education -memoir writing, art history, acrylic painting, financial planning, managing life changes, computer training, driving safety class, money matters • Entertainment -matinees, card games • Health -aerobics, blood pressure, podiatry, yoga, square dancing, line dancing, golf Karen Lorenz, Administrative Director/Adult Day Care Center, noted that this past January the Adult Day Care Center celebrated their 14th anniversary. Director Lorenz noted that when the program first started in January 1988 the Center was only open two days a week. In 1994 the Center had to expand the program to five days a week and had 15-20 participants. Councilmember Bogosian asked there is more people wanting to participate in the program then there is space available Director Lorenz responded that there is only a waiting list for Friday. Vice Mayor Baker asked how the Center determines who gets accepted into the program. Director Lorenz stated it is a first come first serve basis. Vice Mayor Baker asked if there was a preference for Saratoga residents. - Crty Council Minutes 2 March 12, 2002 Director Lorenz responded no there was no preference for residents; it would not be fair. Councihnember Waltonsmith asked if other cities have programs similar to the Adult Day Care Center. Director Lorenz responded that most cities do not have a senior services. Director Lorenz stated the Cupertino and Los Gatos have senior programs. Director Lorenz she and, Director O'Leary would be appearing before the Campbell City Council requesting funding since Campbell residents participate in the Center's programs. Director O'Leary stated the following future objectives for SASCC: • Implement new programs and services • Keep pace and remain innovative • Create interest and expand membership • Localized advertising • Public relations with community groups Director O'Leary noted that their net assets are approximately $1,219,000 with $725,000 of restricted endowment and an annual budget of $351,000. Director O'Leary noted that the $725,000 cannot be used for operations. Director O'Leary noted that this money has been invested. In conclusion Director O'Leary stated that their program is innovated, proactive, a catalyst for community involvement and socialization though meaningful activities, boundless opportunities for individual experience and growth. The City Council thanked Director O'Leary and Directory Lorenz for their presentation. Mayor Streit adjourned the Joint City Council meeting with SASCC and requested afive-minute break at 8:00 p.m. Mayor Streit requested that the Council move to Item 3. Consensus of the City Council to move to Item 3. NEW ITEMS 3. RESOLUTION REQUESTING A STUDY AND REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH MIXED-USE OVERLAY ZONE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-015 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING A STUDY AND REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH AMIXED-USE OVERLAY ZONE City Council Minutes 3 March 12, 2002 e Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan explained that the City's draft Housing Element contains several programs; one of the programs amends the Zoning Code to implement aMixed-use Overlay Zone. Director Sullivan explained that on April 19, 2000, the City Council adopted an Interim Ordinance that was in place until the voters decided the fate of the moratorium on a ballot measure regarding multi-family development in the commercial zones. The voters adopted Measure G on November 7, 2000. The Measure will expire on March 15, 2002. Director Sullivan explained that the proposed resolution would direct staff and the Planning Commission when reviewing development proposals. Once the draft Housing Element is adopted, it would provide additional policy direction. It is expected that the Planning Commission will report back to the City Council prior to the end of June, however, the proposed resolution sets a date of July 3, 2002 for them to report back. BOGOSIAN/BAKER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION REQUESTING A STUDY AND REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH MIXED USE OVERLAY ZONE. MOTION PASSES 5-0. 4. LETTER OF SUPPORT - AB2863 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize Mayor to sing letter of support. Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan explained that Longville has introduced AB 2863 at the request of the League and CSAC. The introduced version of the legislation declares legislative intent regarding the development and adoption of local housing elements. In addition, the bill establishes a definition of "residential unit" and "substantial compliance" under law, and contains additional intent language that acknowledges some of the difficulties local governments face in promoting development of additional housing. BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SIGN LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR AB2863. MOTION PASSED 5-0. • City Council Minutes 4 March 12, 2002 a ADJOURNMENT TO JOINT MEETING PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Mayor Streit commenced the Joint Meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission at 8:05 p.m. 3. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst/ Staff liaison, introduced the following Parks and Recreation Commissioners: Elaine Clabeaux, Chair Logan Deimler _. Angela Frazier Nick Seroff Greg Gates Norbert Fronczak Due to a prior commitment, Analyst Bloomquist noted that Sandra Dodge was unable to attend tonight's meeting Elaine Clabeaux, Chair/Parks and Recreation Commission, noted that tonight she would be speaking on behalf of the Saratoga Parks and Recreation Commission. Chair Clabeaux took a moment to thank Vice Mayor Baker for serving as their Council liaison and Cary Bloomquist for serving as their staff liaison. Chair Clabeaux stated that she would be providing the Council with an overview of the Commission's past, present and future projects. Chair Clabeaux explained the Commission's accomplishments in the last 12 months, projects in the works and projects for the future: • Trail Maintenance -Upper Parker Ranch repair/rerouting in progress. Mt. Eden and Teerlink Way trail repairs scheduled. • Current new trail activities: Steve Haynes Trail realignment completed. • Master Trail Map Project: o Goal: list of parcels by number with matching owner name, property address etc. and update of property database to include Trail Flag o Progress: property list generated (262 parcels) forwarded to City Staff o Next: review title easements, which is costly, determine from City how information is to be entered/maintained/coordinated , • UPRR Trail: , o Desire to set up UPRR corridor as open space to preserve from development o Investigate use of PG&E right-of--way for trail easement o Identify parcels adjacent/near UPRR corridor o Address neighboring homeowners concerns _ • Current Action Items: o The problem of illegal bicyclist use of Upper Parker Ranch Trail -possible solution is to work with local advocacy group to repair damaged trail and neighbor relations. Determine approach to lessen future misuse City Council Minutes rj March 12, 2002 o New community representatives to Trail Subcommittee to replace Teri Baron. The PRC would like to recruit a hiker, bicyclist and an equestrian. The PRC would like to submit a request to the Council to honor Teri Baron with a commendation form the City. • Potential Future Projects: o Promote Saratoga's trails. The PRC would like to sponsor a "Trail Day". o Investigate new Quito Rd/San Tomas Creek trail in conjunction with Santa Clara Valley Water District Chair Clabeaux explained the progress of the following Task Forces: El Quito Task Force • Survey generated by homeowners is to be sent to all homeowners -Commission did not approve this survey. • A Community Park Survey is being completed by the PRC that will provide feedback to the City from all citizens and their desires for community parks. • A parking study is in the planning stage. Azule Park Task Force • The Task Force has met several times with MPA Design. A 25-50% drawing will be ready for the PRC meeting on April 1, 2002. -- • The PRC will review the design, make any recommendations, and approve the drawings for a public meeting to be held later in April. • A presentation of the completed park plan will be presented to the Council. Construction is scheduled to begin late June or early July with a goal of completion by the end of the year. Skateboard Task Force • Five locations were determined thus far to meet the criteria of restrooms, space, and availability. These are Congress Springs Park, the lower hardtop area at Redwood Middle School near the Corp Yard, and the three surrounding parking areas at City Hall. • Overview of recommendations: o Park would be staffed for the first year o Equipment would be rotated for the first year o No fee o Age cut off: (under 10 years old with adult supervision) o Safety (all required to wear helmet, knee and elbow pads) o Identification (method still being researched) o Hours of operation: ^ Summer Mon-Sat llam-6 pm School years Hours Sat 11 am-Spm, Sunday 12 noon-Spm ^ Scholl Holidays and Special Events 90 hours Chair Clabeaux noted that it was recommended by one of the Youth Commissioners that an exit survey is given to the users to help in the analysis of the park. Chair Clabeaux noted that a demo of the skate park would be set up in Civic Center parking lot on April 2, 2002. City Council Minutes ( March 12, 2002 Creek Cleanup - Chair Clabeaux explained that each year the Commission sponsors two creek cleanups. The first one this year will be held on May 18, 2002 at gam. The staging area will be in the parking lot between the Recreation Center and the Corp Yard. The Youth Commission has expressed interest in joining the PRC in this endeavor. Chair Clabeaux noted that this project is open to the public. Community Center/Gymnasium Chair Clabeaux noted that the Commissioners have attended City Council meetings and are eager to see this project go forward. Park Improvements A safety audit of the parks has been completed. All items identified as needing immediate attention have been corrected or completed. The commission presented-a list for capitol improvements to the Council and was pleased to see them approved. Park Patrol Chair Clabeaux noted that this is a brand new endeavor for the Commission and is in the beginning stages. City Fees Research Project On March 11, 2002 the Recreation Department presented an in depth report on rentals and fee for city facilities to the PRC. The PRC will continue to gather data that will help the Commission to better understand the many facets of this subject. The PRC has scheduled aretreat/study session on May 17, 2002. AY~n Fees The PRC has deliberated and has a recommendation for the Council that will be presented at the meeting of March 20, 2002. Heritage Orchard The PRC would like to request that the Heritage Orchard be included in their list of facilities. The PRC would like to be involved with any and all issues concerning the Orchard. The PRC would like to invite a Heritage Preservation Commissioner to attend the PRC meetings and would be willing to send a PRC Commissioner to the Heritage meetings. Chair Clabeaux commented on the City owned park on the corner of Pollard and Quito Road. Chair Clabeaux noted that a landscape architect would be attending the next PRC meeting with some ideas on native landscaping designs for possible future development of this park. Chair Clabeaux noted that she and the rest of the Commissioners were available for questions. Councilmember Bogosian commended Chair Clabeaux on her presentation. Councilmember Bogosian stated that all neighbors impacted by the proposed UPR Trail be a part of the process from the beginning. City Council Minutes '7 March 12, 2002 ` Vice Mayor Baker noted that the UPR Trail project is extremely expensive and Saratoga would bear the most costs. Vice Mayor Baker noted that the PRC and the Trails Subcommittee should be cautious that the process does not get out of hand. In regards to the UPR Trail Project, Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that the Commission should proceed slowly, with continued Council support. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she supports presenting a commendation to Teri Baron. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she supports having the various Commissions come up with different ways to promote the City such as the PRC's suggestion of "Trail Day". Albert Chang, 19937 Scotland Drive, noted that he would like to comment on the survey that was conducted at Redwood School in regards to the proposed mobile- skate park. Mr. Chang noted that 900 students were surveyed at Redwood School. Mr. Chang stated the results as follows: __ • 690 students -skate park is a good idea • 393 students -would use the skate park • 522 students -supported no fee ,. • 15 students willing to pay $25 season ' ' • 118 students willing to pay $50 a year • 179_students would make a donation Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if there were discussions on the Task Force in regards to special hours of operations for people who paid a fee. Mr. Chang noted that the Task Force did not discuss that possibility, but he would bring Councilmember Waltonsmith's suggestion back to the Task Force. Vice Mayor Baker expressed his concern that there was no minimum age cut off. ~; Director Pisani noted that children under ten years old must have a parent present. Director Pisani noted that_City Attorney Taylor stated this feeling is that if a person is ~' under 13 years or younger they must have a parent present. '~ Andy Miller, 18820 Aspesi Drive, noted that he supports a skate park in Saratoga. In regards to the age limit cut off, Mr. Miller stated that most kids do not start skating until they are about eight. Vice Mayor Baker commended the Skate Park Task Force and requested that the park be up and running by the beginning of summer. Vice Mayor Baker requested that a full summer calendar of locations of the park be posted on the City's website and the various schools. Consensus of the City Council to support Vice Mayor Baker's request. City Council Minutes g March 12, 2002 Mayor Streit thanked the Parks and Recreation Commission for attending tonight's meeting. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS - Councilmember Waltonsmith announced that the Taiko Drum Group, that has used Hakone Gardens for the past ten years to practice, has been asked to leave. Councilmember Waltonsmith stated that they are in need of storage space for their equipment. Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if ariy citizen or community group had a space for the Group to use for storage please contact the City. Councilmember Bogosian noted that on March 28, 2002 the League of Women Voters would be sponsoring a community forum at West Valley College asking the question "How can West Valley College serve the Community". Councilmember Bogosian encouraged the citizens of Saratoga to attend. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT - None, ADJOURNMENT ~~ There being no further business, the Mayor declared _ a ;= ;~;. . _; t~ ~adj ourned at 9.30 p.m. = `-~ Respectfully submitted, _ ~ f~ ` ~~ ~ `~ _" --;athleen Boyer, CMC -~=-~; = ~ -~ ~~City Clerk ,~'``° n`-~~ I~ • .~ -~ a r? ~- - • City Council Minutes 9 March 12, 2002