Loading...
07-12-1999 Park and Recreation Commission Agendas�1�� Saratoga Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting City Hall Administrative Offices 13 7 7 7 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga Monday, July 12, 1999 7:30pm AGENDA OrQanization A) Roll Call: Alberts, Clabeaux, Friedrich, Ioannou, Olsen, Swan, Whitney B) Report on Posting of the Agenda: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2 the agenda was properly posted on July 9, 1999 C) Approval of June 7, 1999 Minutes II. Administration A) Park Development Fund Finance Department Repoi t III. Oral Written Communication (This section is for the public to speak on any item not on the agenda) Azule Park Neighborhood Association letter IV. Old Business A) Kevin Moran/Gardiner Park Play Equipment Status report B) Restrooms at Wildwood Park Status Report C) Joint Meeting with Council (June 8th) D) Trails: Mount Eden Estates Correspondence V. New Business A) Joint Meeting with Council (July 13th) VI. Commissioner Staff Renorts A) Commissioner Reports B) City Hall Update Irene Jacobs C) Recreation Department Status Report Joan Pisani VII. Adiournment r t MemOrandum a To: Parks Recreation Commission l From: Irene Jacobs, Staff Liaison to the Parks Recreation Com issi �n Date: July 7, 1999 Re: Horse Trail Easements through Mt. Eden Estates- Staff Memo In the following memo, I have tried to respond to the questions directed to the Parks and Recreation Commission at its last meeting on June 7,1999 by several neighbors who live in the Mount Eden Estates subdivision. I will address the questions as they were outlined in the memorandum addressed to the Commission. 1. Has the City of Saratoga accepted the horse trail easements through Mt. Eden Estates? The City has accepted the horse easements through Mt. Eden Estates. Therefore, these should be treated as public property, not private property. 2. What liability issues exist and who is ultimately responsible? As a public trail, the city would be responsible to review any claims that were filed against the ciry for incidents that occurred on the city's trail systenl. I have attached a letter that was prepared by the City Attorney regarding liability issues as they relate to city trails for your review. 3. The esthetic appearance of the two portions of the trail recently mandated by the Parks and Kecreation Department is unacceptable in a natural hillside environment. Trials, if they must exist through our neighborhood, should be natural dirt pathways such as you would find at Garrod Farms. The Parks and Recreation Commission used the guidelines set forth by the Parks and Trials Master Plan to construct these trials. The Parks and Trails Master Plan was accepted and adopted by the City in 1991 and has been using it as a guide for Parks and Trials issues since that time. I have attached that portion of the Parks and Trails Master Plan for your review that specifically outlines how trails should be constructed and with what materials. (Attachment C) In addition, when the Trails sub-committee met with homeowners from the most recent developments, the sub-committee provided homeowners with trial July 9, 1999 guideline options of the materials to be used on the trail. Copies of the most recent set of letters have also been attached for your r`eview. (Attachment A) It is within the Commission's purview to make modifications to trial requirements outlined in the Parks and Trails Master Plan if it so wishes. For example, the Commission allowed Lot 18, to be constructed with asphalt chips rather than the preferred decomposed granite material, because the then owner, complained to the Trial Sub-committee about the high cost of the decomposed granite. They tried to be reasonable with the homeowner while still trying to achieve the ultimate goal which is to have the trail developed. 4. Should there not be better coordination of the placement of the horse trail easements with regard to the placement of homes? Many of the current trial system throughout the Saratoga Hills outdate the existing homes by many years. When a new development goes through the planning stages, the City's Planning Department makes the developer or applicant aware of the location of the trails and their responsibility to developing the trail. The City's Planning Department is thorough in its processes as they relate to trails and the placement of new homes. All applicants who submit an application for development are made aware of the location of the trails and their responsibilities associated with them. I have attached several memos regarding this particular subdivision from the early nineties pertaining to the materials that were recommended for construction of the trails in order to make it a all-weather trail and the responsibilities of the developer in regards to the trails. (Attachments B) 5. Who will be responsible for future maintenance of the horse trial system. (Several times the trials have been referred to as horse trials but, it should be pointed out that these trials are designated for hikers as well.) The Commission has developed and implemented the Trail Grant Program in which Park Development Funds are granted to trial advocates who are willing to volunteer their time to the improving the trail throughout the Saratoga Trial system. The Public Works Department as well as our Personnel Department also work with volunteers who are willing to coordinate general clean-up efforts on the trials by volunteers. 6. In weighing the issue of cost to the City as well as the individual homeowners of Mt. Eden Estates and the issues of privacy and esthetic appearance, how many residents of the City of Saratoga does the planned elaborate "sidewalk" type horse trial truly serve? The city does not currently track statistics on the use of trials within Saratoga. As the Commission knows, the trail system is not constructed for the use of any one group of Saratogans but rather for all of Saratoga and all those who choose to come to Saratoga by making use of the trials system. The City would like to 2 July 9, 1999 keep the trails for all current users and for future trail users. The Commission heard from various residents in support of the development of the trials earlier this year. If trails are not developed during the development period of a property, the City will loose its opportuniry to request that the property owner develop that portion of the trail. That is why the Commission is natified by the Planning Department of any developments that occur in an area where a trail easement is affected. 3 Saratoga Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Administrative Offices, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga June 7, 1999 7:30 p.m. Action Minutes Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. II. Roll Call Commissioners Present: Alberts, Clabeai.ix, Ioannou, Olsen, Whitney Commissioners Absent: Friedrich, Swan Others Present: Joan Pisani, David Mooney, Irene Jacobs III. Report on Postinst of the Minutes: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2 the agenda was properly posted on June 4, 1999. IV. Atitiroval of Minutes of Mav 3. 1999 MeetinQ: Commissioner Whitney made a motion to approve the minutes of May 3, 1999 with the following corrections. Item 7B should read, Dave Mooney stated that if the field was altered for cricket use at Quito, it would become unsafe for other uses." Item 7e should read Rosemary Woodward and Item 7I should read PG& E rather than PI&E. Commissioner Alberts seconded the motion and the motion carried. (4/0) Administration: Dave Mooney of the Public Works Department disti ibuted a revised i on the Parks after having prioritized the projects as had been requested by the Commission. A financial report compiled by the Administrative Services Director, Mary Jo Walker, was distributed to Commissioners for clarification on the status of the Park Development Fund. There had been some question recently from Al Roten, of the Finance Advisory Commission and member of the Azule Neighborhood Association, as to the time frame in which the City was able to spend the funds. In essence, the report showed that the City was not in any danger of loosing any of the funding at this time. Oral Written Communication: All written communications were included in the packet. No oral communications at this time. VI. Old Business: Commissioner Clabeaux made a presentation to the rest of the Commission regarding the process that she and her colleague, Commissioner Ioannou had taken to assist in the selection of a vendor for the play equipment at Kevin Moran and Gardiner Parks. She reported that the equipment would cost the city $115,330 for both sites and that the cost for the surfacing materials that would consist of both "pour in Place" and a sand combination was being quoted as costing $27, 325 for both sites. Commissioners Clabeaux and Ioannou reviewed the visual displays of the equipment for the project with the Commission. There was discussion among the Commission regarding the project. Commissioner Alberts made a motion to accept the proposed plans and the proposed vendor. Staff should be instructed to request proposals from vendors for the architectural designs of the project prior to receiving input form the surrounding neighbors. Commissioner Whitney seconded the motion and the motion carried. (4/0) There was discussion regarding the Kestrooms at Wildwood Park and the progress regarding the project. Staff reported to the Commission that the Public Works Department had gone to bid for the construction of the restrooms at the park but that the bids for the installation of the restrooms had come in higher than expected. The City's former Parks Superintendent had proposed that the ciry utilize a turn-key vendors for the replacement of the restrooms. It was decided at that time that this process would be taken because it would be the most cost affective way. What was discovered once the bids were received one week prior to the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, was that the bids were higher than expected because normally the only profit that is accounted for in the bid is that if the contractor. With a turn-key operation, both the vendor and the contractor are accounting for their profits in the bid price. As a result, the Public Works staff and the City Manager had recommended to explore other opportunities. Their rational was that if the turn-key opportunities that had been explored earlier in order to reduce costs were not going to achieve that goal, then the city might as well look into traditional architectural designs and construction if the restrooms were going to cost the city the same amount of money. This way, the city would not have to settle for a less attractive product as would have been the case with the turn-key operation. 'The Commission was disappointed with the delay of the progress of the project and the increased costs associated with the project. Several Commissioners also voiced their anger and disappointment that City staff had decided to explore other opportunities without receiving the permission of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Staff reminded the Commission of their role as an advisory board and staff s role as implementing the project. Some Commissioners still voiced their disappointment and felt that the situation had been handled very poorly. VII. New Business: A. Commissioner Olsen recused herself from the discussion regarding the playfields. Commissioner Whitney was asked to chair the meeting. There was discussion among the Commission regarding the upcoming meeting with the City Council on the 8th of June where the civic hub idea would be discussed. The general consensus from Commissioners was that regardless of what happened with the civic hub, something needed to be done regarding the playfields situation and that it should not be delayed for any project. Commissioner Ioannou made a motion to recommend to the City Council to continue to allocate the original figure of one million dollars to playfield renovation. Commissioner Clabeaux seconded and the motion carried. (4/0) B. Commissioner Whitney then stepped down from her role as chair of the meeting and Commissioner Olsen �esumed her role. The commission then heard from some residents who reside in the Mt. Eden Estates development area who were present at the meeting to share some concerns they had concerning the trails in the area. The neighbors present at the meeting submitted a memo to the Commission with several questions related to the trails. The majority of the neighbor's concerns revolved around the esthetic appearance of the trails and liability regarding the use o� the trails. It was decided that staff return to the Commission with answers to some of the questions that had been asked by the residents since several of the individuals involved with trail work from the Commission and from staff were not present at the meeting. VIII. Renorts: Citv Hall Ut�date: The City Manager's Office will be recruiting for two new analysts to fill the posirions that have been vacant for some time. We hope to get some new staff on board by late August or early September. Recreat�on Denartment Status Report: Joan gives update on various Recreation activities. In addition she had just received a cost analysis from Anderson Brule regarding the Community Center. The costs had come back much higher than expected. IX. Adiournment Commissioner Whitney made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Alberts seconded the motion. The motion carried and the meeting was adjourned at 10:35(4/0) Prepared By: �lrene M. Jacobs �City Staff Liaiso��/ ti U C��`�'� O� ��`�'OO C�� 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 9�070 •(=�OS) 8G8-1'L00 Incorpor�tt�ctY4ct�i�qr �6 Steven Benzing Warren Heid Associates 14630 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Benzing: cou�� b1EDiE3ERS: Evan Balier Stan Bogosian John MehaHey Jim Shaw Nick Streil The City is interested in replacing the Play Equipment at Kevin Moran Park and Gardiner Parks in Saratoga. In order to move forward on this project, the City is contacting several firms who might be interested in submitting a proposal for the work outlined below. I have provide a specific breakdown of the areas where the City is requesting assistance with this projeet. As part of your proposal, please include a itemized list of assoeiated costs. 1. Site Plan Play Structure Layout A.D.A. compliance benches pathways 2. Grading Drainage Plan Existing structure and conerete removal Existing and proposed contour lines Drainage Proposed retaining walls (cross-sections); no taller than 5ft. 3. Detail Sheet Drainage Retaining Walls Footings other relevant items 4. General Specifieations and Technical Specifications (for installation of equipment) 5. Attendance at one Public Meeting; (not faeilitation of the meeting) If your firm is interested and would provide us with a proposal on the work outlined below as soon as possible, it would be appreeiated. If you or your staff have any questions related to the information above, please feel free to call me. Thank you for your interest in this project. Sincerely, Ir e M. Jacobs Senior Administr ive Analyst Printed on recycled paper. S,A R 9 l' O C� ����Yl�-.�v���.� C I Y o f=.. A O GA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 •(=�08) 8G8-1`�00 Incorporated October 22, 1956 June 11, 1999 Jaye Beals The Beals Group Two North Market, Fifth Floor San Jose, CA 95113 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan 8ake� Stan Bogosian John Mehafley J�m Shaw Nick Strer� Dear Mr. eals: In our last conversation, you expressed an interest in submitting a proposal for the Kevin Moran Park and Gardiner Park Play Equipment replacement project. Below, I have provide a specific breakdown of the specific areas where the City is requesting assistance with this project. As part of your proposal, please include a itemized list of associated costs. 1. Site Plan Play Structure Layout A.D.A. compliance benches pathways 2. Grading Drainage Plan Existing structure and concrete removal Existing and proposed contour lines Drainage Proposed retaining walls (cross no taller than 5ft. 3. Detail Sheet Drainage Retaining Walls Footings other relevant items 4. General Specifications and Technical Specifications (for installation of equipment) 5. Attendance at one Public Meeting; (not facilitation) If your firm could provide us with a proposal on the work outlined below as soon as possible, it would be appreciated. If you or your staff have any questions related to the information above, please feel free to call me. Hope to hear from you soon. Sin ely, Ire M. Jacobs Seruor Administrative Analyst Printed on recycled paper. r S ��c Page 1 of 2 dlo`�` r Main Identity N From: City of Saratoga <saratoga@statenet.com> To: <g-ctyweb@inreach.com> t�s Sent: Thursday, June 10, 1999 3:56 PM Attach: BDY.TXT Subject: FW: Player Distribution by School and by City (fwd) Forwarded message Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 09:28:47 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <r �streit(a�cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker(a�aol.com>, Stan Bogosian <sboqosian(a�aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim Shaw <jimboshaw(cr�aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoqa c(�.STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Player Distribution b y School and by City Susan and Gentlemen Last night I asked Mark Linsky form AYSO if they had stats on how many kids from Saratoga play in AYSO. The 1998 stats are attached in a file. 1999 registration is not complete and won't be until Sept. 99. Any questions please contact Mark Thanks Nick Streit -----Original Message----- From: MARK LINSKY(a�hp-santaclara-om3.om.hp.com [mailto:MARK LINSKY(a�hp-santaclara-om3.om.hp.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 7:50 AM To: nstreit.�cpa-online.com Subject: P ayer Distribution by School and by City Nick, My version of the database from last year had 1090 players although we ended up closer to 1200. The statistics by zipcode and by school were as follows: ZIPCODES 86% Saratoga 7% Los Gatos/Monte Sereno 7% Other SCHOOLS 92% Saratoga 1 Los Gatos/Monte Sereno 7% Other Regards, 06/11 /1999 Page 2 of 2 _r Mark L. Hewlett-Packard Network Server Division Platform Systems Engineering 10955 Tantau Avenue, MS-45SUE Cupertino, CA 95014 Phone: (408) 873-5960 Page: (408) 322-7916 FAX: (408) 447-8038 06/11 /1999 v i Not everyone happy with parks decision I have spent these last few days trying to put a handle on the deep sense of loss I have felt since hearing that the City Council is no longer considering working with the school district and sports user groups to develop a park at Blue Hills SchooUAzule Park. My feeling of loss goes far deeper than what one feels when a project of five J years is rejected, because now I realize that everyone involved loses: The Blue Hills schoolchildren lose because they will not get upgraded fields. ideas for compromise were ever iv Ttiey will continue to sprain,ankles, do chance to be heard. We leave ne �r hav- their long runs on uneven surfaces, etc. ing ever gotten to the bar ainin ta The Blue Hills children also lose g ble. We because they continue to be stuck with a leave our children noting that if you com- traffic and parking pattern that is excep- plain loud and hard enough, you'll never tionally dangerous. The upgrade plan have to consider difficult compromises. would have moved more parking off the This was a one-time opportunity. The street and out of the too-small main park- school district was willing to cooperate, ing lot, and would have allowed for a way the user groups were willing to maintain, to protect bike traffic from cars. and there was recreation money avail- Theschooldistrictlosesbecauseitcannot able to upgrade. The money will now be affordtoupgradetheexistingfieldormain- shifted to othei• sites and other neigh- tainanupgradedfieldtothelevelnecessary. borhoodsasrequested. The surrounding neighborhood loses Hopefully, there will be new fieldssome- because it will not get a heautiful park at �'here by the time ourelementary children Azule. A small neighborhood park does not graduate from high school. Hopefully our fit into the city's recreational priorities, and little community will come back together and mend. without sports fields, there will be no funds to maintain a newlydeveloped park if it did. DE�eie Li��o The soccer families from Saratoga lose `�J Krisiy Lanc because there are not enough fields for iheir children to play. More and more Saratoga children will be playingsoccer in surrounding cities, where they continue to e more generous to our children. The two leagues will have to battle for existing field space, and there wi(I be no fields to use dur- ing upgrade of Congress Springs. All of us who have put so many hours fighting for fields lose because we have given up pi•ecious family time [o tight a fruitless battle. Wc leave empty-handed, without satisfaction of knowing that our 14 SARATOGA I�'G1�'S JUR'E '>.3, 1999 �i� fie�ds dum ed for `hub' �ei hborhood g p By STEVE ENDERS S aratoga's City Council and Parks and Rccrcation Commission ditched onc long-running effort and replaced it with what's surc to bc anothcr June 8, voting to abandon the contentious playfields issue and instead agrecing to plow ahead with Nick Stre- it's recently retiurrected city "hub" idea. Thc unanimous votc won applause aftcr dis- cussion with parks commissioncrs could offer no other sofution to the stalcmate with neigh- bors. Most in the gallery were from two large ncighborhood organizations that rallicd to help defcat the idea that began ncarly 10 years ago. With thc council's votc, the city will no longcr sc�k to reconsU�uct new playfields at Blue Hills F:lcmcntary School/Arulc Park, Marshall Lane Elcmcntary or Foothill Elcmcntaryschools. It will, howevcr, kccp Congress Springs Park on its list of possiblc ficld improvcmcnts. Aftcn c�aring from city staff that thc parks �lcvclopmcnt moncy—$22 million has becn carm��rked for the project—can safely remain in the bank, the council took testimony and hoard idcas from residcnts on pursuing thc "central hub," proposed as an alternative last month by Councilmember Nick Streit. Thc idca for a central sports/community complex was originally pitched in 1996 by the Parks and Rccrcation Commission's task force that set out to explore options to spend available parks money. Thc idea was then placcd as a Icsscr priority than neighborhood playficlds. But thc "hub" also came with a pro- vision to develop those fieids for residential acccssibility, according to resident Jenny Crot- ty, who spoke at the meeting and congra W lat- cd Nick Strcit for resurfacing her idca. After two hours of sometimes wacky idca sharing—including one to place mirrors on trces to crcate an arbor-like illusion—the council directed city s[aff to jumpstart the process by rescarching areas that may be suit- able for such a complex other than the Her- itage Orchard, cven though the 20 acres is probably one of the best in the city. The senior and community centers, library, theater and City Hall are all located there and come with plcnty of parking. It's also not locat- ed in a dense, residential neighborhood. The idea, it appears, has won cautious praise from residenis. Those in the neighborhoods of s ..Y r :Y C 4 1 i��K 4 ..r-� ;r 'r -r. £4: Y )i'.;% .1,,. A Photograph hy Georg� Sakkestad Councilmembcr Nick Streit has brought back the idea of creating a`central hub,' possibly on some of the land wherc the Hcritage Orchard is planted. Bluc Hills and Marshall Lane, where they con- tended additional playfields would have threatencd the quality of life, pledged support for thc projcct. The new hub idca sounds threatening to some, who told councilmembers that they don't support bulldozing the trees in the orchard for socccr ficlds. Otlle�s warncd, ancl thc council agrecd, that it will takc a lot of cffort to see the idea through instead of watching it fall on its face as the playfields issue has so far. "I hope that on this go-round we develop a process to get the consensus of the communi- ty," Councilmcmber Stan Bogosian said. "I'd much rather go slow and do �t r�ght than go fast and have false starts and make mistakes." The city-owned Heritage Orchard and sur- rounding land is just one of a few possible sites for such a complex. Former Saratoga mayor and current West Valley-Mission Col- Iege District board member pon Wolfe told the council he's willing to bring the city and district togeth'er to talk about using some of the college's land for ficld development. Another possible site mentioned was thc lot southwest of the intersection of Cox and Saratoga avenucs. For now, many morc yucstions rcmain than answcrs as to how the City Council and Parks Commission intend to finally settle thc issuc. Thc fact that the city has spent morc than $66,000 on thc playfields proccss so far rilcd a fcw on thc council and in the audicncc, cvcn ihough thcrc was some agrcement that all hasn'� becn lost. The city, it said, has learned that it nceds to go to grcat lengths to seek input from residcnts from the beginning, unlike its previous effort. The Parks Commission maintains it has prop- erly noticed residents of hearings and discus- sions, howevcr. To get input, residents told the city they'd bc willing to help, possibly by canvassing affect- ed areas or even the city as a whole. Email or a website may be another way to inform peoplc. Another issue surely to surface will bc how the city intends to pay for such a complex or park. LETTERS Save Azule Park, develop central hub We are relatively new residents of Saratoga and the Bay Area. We have a family with young kids and found the Saratoga area outstanding with its beauty, great academics and quiet lifestyles." After moving into Azule Park neighbor- hood, we reaGzed that the neglected orchard at Arule Park is a proposed site for a soccer complex. We were shocked because the nar- ro�v roads with sharp curves that lead to the site are risky even for neighborhood traffic. It is apparent that Azule Park site and the neighborhood were not designed to hand(e high traffic soccer compleaes. We all have to pay the price of develop- ment and the Arule Park neighborhood does pay its dues by supporting Blue Hills elementary school and the soccer group use of the school field on weekdays and weekends. For anybody who is around the neighborhood on aftcrnoons and morn- ings of soccer games, it will be apparent that the area is already at the limits with support of one soccer field. So we request our fellow Saratogans to investigate other options with us. Maybe we should better utilize the 24 small and large 6elds we have in Saratoga. The maintenance funding offered by the vol- unteer playgroups could be used to improve existingsites. Nick Streit's idea of the central hub is a great way to go as well. Heritage orchard is an expensive piece of heritage to maintain. His idea of using this city asset [o teach children about orchards is good use of a heritage symbol. By the same token a her- itage symbol could be adapted for meeting other burgeoning city needs. Most of alt it is clear that Saratogans have great ideas, convictions and commitment to manage growth. So let us do it together. VIBHA GOEL Goleta Ave Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 09:15:27 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Central Hub Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character setJ [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] -----Original Message----- From: Marcia Fariss [mailto:Marcia@Gizmology.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 11:12 AM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: Central Hub Nick, I very much like your idea of a Central Hub for various activities, including athletic fields. It certainly will provide an opportunity for our citizens to become better acquainted and perhaps more cohesive. It might even assist those residents who think that those of us residing "on the other side of Hwy 85" are outcasts, to realize that we have the same interests as they!! Surprise! I have only one question regarding a Central Hub at this point: where????? There are very few available sites in Saratoga but I do note one or two empty lots which could be viable. The same traffic congestion, parking, noise, etc.concerns will need to be addressed with a Central Hub, so careful choices will need to be made; however, in general, I think it's a good idea. Keep investigating the possibility. Marcia (Fariss) r Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 09:19:22 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: city council meeting Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set� [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] -----Original Message----- From: Sofia Poullada [mailto:sofiahafiza@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 12:11 AM To: Nicholas G. Streit Subject: RE: city council meeting dear nick: i was so glad to see there was so much support tonight for the city central hub idea. i wonder if there is some way to tie in that concept with the need for more business/traffic directed towards the businesses in saratoga village? perhaps (free?) shuttle buses from sporting and theatre events? one way to deal with the almost inevitable increase in traffic. i've walked from warner hutton house to the village. there are still some sections where there is no really safe pedestrian access. i do hope that the orchard will be treated very gently in any plans as they develop. i liked the comment one speaker made about using mirrors. the orchard around the los altos public library does not compare at all with saratoga's. when we moved to saratoga 13 years ago, there was still a major vineyard along saratoga avenue. in that exact stretch of saratoga ave. there is now very close to gridlock several times a day. perhaps 13 years from now the saratoga orchard will be truly a 1' rarity! i was planning to come over and introduce myself properly, but truth to tell the meeting ran later than i'd expected and also for those of us without jackets it was "freezing" in the council room! thanks again for your time and attention. best wishes, sofia poullada Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com 1 Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 09:11:51 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Information gathering re: support or no for Hub [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] Susan and Larry Copy of a E-mail sent to council Nick -----Original Message----- From: dora grens [mailto:dgrensmarcom@webtv.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 11:43 PM To: evansbaker@aol.com; JIMBOSHAW@aol.com; mehaf@gedanken.com; nstreit@cpa-online.com; Sbogosian@aol.com Subject: Information gathering re: support or no for Hub At the risk of being teased about living in the past, may I share how we quite effectively, we thought gathered information for the General Plan (1980-81 version)? As you probably know, the CC appointed reps for each area of town (areas A-K, I think perhaps I have the total wrong, but I think there were 11 areas). We had a sub-committee draft the city-wide questions for the communications that went to every household. We then organized area meetings and, again, notified each household about the meetings. In addition, the Saratoga News was VERY cooperative in covering the whole process. The meetings were held mostly in the schools at night (schedules announced well ahead in the Saratoga News), with wonderful cooperation from them. Each resident was asked to fill out his/her questionnaire and turn it in at the area meeting. At each meeting, the rep. asked for a forum- type discussion of important issues in that area. Reps from adjacent areas were note-takers N for example, Ian Web from Area B took the notes for my Area A meetings) there was, therefore, a true and honest reporting of the inputs. Each Rep. was responsible for collating (1) consensus on responses to questionnaires (copies of all questionnaires were handed in along w/reports) and (2) consensus on how residents felt area problems should be handled. The residents' opinions for each Area are appendices to the GP. This may sound complicated, but since we had decided on the process and it was followed methodically everything went relatively smoothly. Since there was so much interaction, there were no accusations of skewing results. In fact, we would have been done in record time had we not had a staff person who decided her wording and goals were better than the residents' and ours. Each meetings' work (as I've said) had to be corrected redone as it was originally intended! If you can find a way to work by area then collate all of the inputs to reach a conclusion I think you might want to consider doing it. With cooperation on all fronts, it works!!! D. P.S. The inventory could serve as one of the bases of your structure. Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 16:34:43 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: feedback for Saratoga Hub Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: pchang@prodigy.net [mailto:pchang@prodigy.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 5:27 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: feedback for Saratoga Hub Nick: Here's my inputs regarding the subject matter: the idea of the hub for the city sounds great we need a bigger library. It's so overcrowded now. definitely need to keep a certain size of the heritage orchard in current location. The best is to mix it well with the library. Los Altos Main Library is sitting in the middle of the orchard. The library's large picture windows provide library users with the feel and view connecting to the orchard a symbolic reminder of what this valley used to be. I believe you will hear a lot of citizens cared about this. It's great that you are initiating a discussion about this topic Whish you have a good beginning on this subject A separate note, Nick, we are all very puzzled about "43" schools this city's kids attending. You must have included all schools in Campbell/Fremont Union High/Cupertino to get this high numbers. I just want to bring up a point for you to consider: please do not let this number to prevent the City Council to work closer with the schools located in this city. Good schools bring a lot f of value to the city. Good luck in kicking off "Saratoga Central Hub" Regards, Ching-Li Chang Sent using MailStart.com http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere! C� L� Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 16:34:43 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: feedback for Saratoga Hub Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: pchang@prodigy.net [mailto:pchang@prodigy.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 5:27 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: feedback for Saratoga Hub Nick: Here's my inputs regarding the subject matter: the idea of the hub for the city sounds great we need a bigger library. It's so overcrowded now. definitely need to keep a certain size of the heritage orchard in current location. The best is to mix it well with the library. Los Altos Main Library is sitting in the middle of the orchard. The library's large picture windows provide library users with the feel and view connecting to the orchard a symbolic reminder of what this valley used to be. I believe you will hear a lot of citizens cared about this. It's great that you are initiating a discussion about this topic Whish you have a good beginning on this subject A separate note, Nick, we are all very puzzled about "43" schools this city's kids attending. You must have included all schools in Campbell/Fremont Union High/Cupertino to get this high numbers. I just want to bring up a point for you to consider: please do not let this number to prevent the City Council to work closer with the schools located in this city. Good schools bring a lot of value to the city. Good luck in kicking off "Saratoqa Central Hub" Regards, Ching-Li Chang Sent using MailStart.com http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere! c c� �r �-L.,�� k Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 14:18:02 -0700 From: Dale Leuthold <dleuthold@prodigy.net> To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Cc: Sbogosian@aol.com, saratoga@statenet.com Subject: Central Hub Community Center [The following text is in the "Windows-1252" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] Dear Mr. Streit: Thank you for presenting a creative alternative to the playfield development proposal. I believe that a multi-use central hub community center would be an asset to the city of Saratoga. We can be thankful that the Heritage Orchard land was set aside to make this possible, instead of being developed for housing or commercial uses. This hub should include an appropriate balance of uses, including some youth athletic facilities. That should end the controversy about playfield development, which has reached an impasse. I am confident that there is enough creative energy in Saratoga to plan and develop a really first-class facility that will serve all of us now and into the future. I am sure that objections will be raised that we can't afford to carry out such an ambitious plan, but that seems ludicrous coming from one of the most affluent communities in the area. I would personally vote for bonds to finance the development of a central hub community center. As for the playfield development proposals still on the table, let's kill them once and for all. Such uses of school sites are incompatible with the neighborhoods. We should re-direct the Parks and Recreation comission toward planning a central hub facility. Dale Leuthold 18522 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 408-866-1939 [Part 2, Text/HTML (charset: Unknown "Windows-1252") 53 lines] [Unable to print this part] ��.�:.i�; ,I Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 22:37:53 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>; Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Saratoga Central Hub Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display.is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: Mary F Driggs [mailto:marydriggs@juno.com] Sent: Monday, June 07, 1999 9:53 PM To: Nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: Saratoga Central Hub I think the Central Hub idea is great. I have lived in Saratoga for 53 years and sadly watched our orchards disappear and I wouldn't like ripping out the last of our trees. But as it stands now, the trees are just standing there and I've never seen anyone out there. Now if we had the Central Hub as you suggest, people of all ages could actually enj oy the Heritage Orchard and we'd have a place to show our children that fruit really does come from trees not Safeway! And it would help solve the problem of the play fields too. Saratoga and Fruitvale Avenues are better able to handle the traffic, there would be more room for parking, and it's not located in the middle of a residential area. Play fields aside, I think having a Central Hub for all of Saratoga to enjoy would be very beneficial to the community. Mary Driggs 18525 Marshall Lane C� �CZt,� �C.�l ;.t�� Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 22:34:15 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the '�iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set) [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: Ronald J Knapp [mailto:r-knapp@juno.com) Sent: Monday, June 07, 1999 8:47 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subj ect To: Nick Streit, Saratoga Councilman June 7, 1999 >From Ron and Patricia Knapp Subject: Saratoga Central Hub concept Thanks Nick for your presentation at Saturday's Good Government Group brunch. Your letter in the Saratoga News also did a good job of describing the "Central Hub" concept and reasons to reconsider this 1996 idea. We encourage the Council to pursue this concept; it's an idea whose time has come. This project will have something in it for everyone if planned properly. It could be a long-term plan without heavy expenditure in any one year. We feel the Heritage Orchard, although a great idea, contains land too� valuable to the residents of Saratoga to be used solely for orchard preservation. A much smaller orchard would suffice for preserving this bit of our past, and the remainder of this acreage could meet the needs of so many more of our citizens if used for trails, parks, playgrounds, family activities, and the like. Whereas Hakone is unique and beautiful, it isn't the kind of park that meets the playground, picnic, and family activity needs of our community. Such a diverse park as your concept describes would serve this purpose and be an asset for all. In the process it would tie together our civic center/theater/senior center complex with our library, giving better cohesiveness to Saratoga. Obviously such a plan will not come free to the city (and it's residents). We should consider seeking corporate grants to minimize the impact. Also, as noted above, the development could be staged in various phases over several years. We thank you for your forward-looking idea, and we endorse Council action to explore the plan in more detail. Ron and Patricia Knapp 20885 Wardell Rd, Saratoga 867-9501 C� ��z�c,�,��_�' �Q Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 00:51:50 EDT From: SLKURASCH@aol.com To: JIMBOSHAW@aol.com, Sbogosian@aol.com, Evansbaker@aol.com, mehaf@gedanken.com, nstreit@cpa-online.com, saratoga@statenet.com Subject: Lisa Kurasch Short Playfields Process Letter Members of the City Council; I wanted to speak personally, not as part of any group, about the fields process to date and my reaction to it. I am beginning to see the difficult job of being a, commissioner, so I don't want to be too critical, but it seems the result of this process has been the advocacy of one particular outcome. In this way it has become a personal, not objective, mission, grounded in an emotional tug of war with many parties. The public's concerns have been answered by the sports groups as well as the Parks &Rec. Commission, as I have observed at times, with, "learn to live with it"; "what's the big deal-you already have traffic"; "development is going to come, regardless of dissent" (Task Force meeting, pg 7, 19 Jan. 1999). This has helped set up an alienating attitude that has become an insurmountable barrier to mutual trust. It has also fed the greatest fear that even if fields are just replaced to fix them, sports groups will come back on their own and intensify use in the fields anyway, without respect to their impacts; then the neighborhoods will be stuck with even more problems. What neighborhoods want is to resolve current traffic problems (or even see if that is possible!) before accepting more. What the P&RC says is the only way they can do this is if the public accepts their proposals first, setting up a contentious battle of frustration. All this without a single public discussion of the physical suitability to the site that is proposed, and this is what has resulted. I feel competitive fields do not belong in neighborhoods that are not equipped to handle the traffic congestion, noise, and security problems inherent with that use. Instead I am in favor of changing direction of P&R efforts-which could still allow for some fields to be developed in a number of ways (prioritized by simplicity): -Broaden the scope to expand the search for sites beyond elementary schools (smallest sites) to those based on physical suitability AND maintenance money. What are realistic sites- if maintenance money is not there f rom the school districts, who will be able to pay for increased costs-about triple current levels for competitive fields? When fields degrade again where will the kids be then? I support a call for full accounting- including complete intended schedules. What are the physical limits to fields use-taking the recommendations of the Beals consultants seriously, including parking maximums, just as codes must consider maximum, not minimum, loads in building design safety. -As a regional approach: If this is for the greater community, then what are other communities bringing to the table? How are facilities, needs and burdens shared? What needs can be met on a regional level or local level to balance the uses between parties? -Proposal of expanded venues such as a community hub. In concept this may be easier to accomplish, but a location where residents could participate in many functions would free up facilities for other players. It could also unify the community, as funds would benefit all residents, seniors, children, and adults. For one site or more, where can funds be raised-assessment districts, parcel or utility tax, donations? A long-term benefit to the community if it can be sensitively designed to respect past park preservation efforts. Lisa Kurasch-18665 Ravenwood Drive-Saratoga 6/7/99 i C��� jZ['iL�'C k L Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 17:39:07 -0700 From: Brenda Westcott <brenda@Synopsys.COM> To: jimboshaw@aol.com, saratoga@statenet.com, nstreit@cpa-online.com, EvanBaker@SaratogaCouncil.org, mehaf@gedanken.com Cc: brenda@Synopsys.COM Subject: Saratoga City Council Agenda Item #S.B. and #5.C. June 8, 1999 To: Mayor Jim Shaw, Vice Mayor Stan Bogosian, Councilman John Mehaffey, Councilman•Nick Streit, Councilman Evan Baker I am a writing regarding the Saratoga City Council's agenda items #5.B. and #5.C., scheduled for Tuesday, June 8, 1999. As a taxpayer, resident, and participant in the Marshall Lane Neighborhood Homeowners Association, I would like to address each of these items. Item #5.B.: The playfields project has been underway for a considerable amount of time, much longer than it should probably have taken the Parks Rec. Committee to develop and determine viable recommendations. Unfortunately, what they have come up with so far appears to be very short-sighted, unresearched, unworkable solutions to their original charter for this project. Whether the Parks Rec. Commission is unable to self-govern themselves efficiently, the City Council has failed to manage this commission well is another issue, but ultimately impacted the small residential neighborhoods being considered for a competitive sports complex and to or if it has large us it looks like the Parks Rec. is in collaboration with the users groups. This brings up the question of just which locations started out being under consideration? A list of some of the locations included several sites that were more centrally located and already College. Why isn't West Valley solution? Is it had existing fields such as West Valley still being considered as an alternative o, because the users groups would have to pay a rental fee? Redwood School was another site listed at one time. It is much more centrally located and has more surrounding parking available than either Marshall Lane or Blue Hills. Why is it no longer being considered? I'd like to see a full accounting from the Parks Rec. on funds spent to-date on the playfield project, the current status and recommendations for all locations, and an update on who has committed to what (i.e. school district maintenance issues) A letter from the BealsGroup outlining the projected funds that would be needed to maintain the fields makes it very clear that the costs would be extremely prohibitive for the upkeep. If the current fields are in such poor shape now, what makes the Parks Rec. think the schools will maintain them in the future? I think everyone needs to take a step back and see if we can't refocus on a solution that will better benefit the community again to Vice Mayor Bogosian and Councilman Baker for realizing approach to a as a whole. Kudos that the current playfields solution was not going to accomplish a thing. Which leads me to the next item. Item #S.C.: I think Councilman Streit's idea of a Civic Center Hub concept is a good one that would benefit the entire community a segmented few. A centrally located hub that included playfields tremendous not just would be a benefit to everyone. Playfields included as part of this proposal would allow year-round use, for the young, seniors, families, groups and organizations, AS WELL AS the sports user groups. Parking, accessibility, and the noise impact would conceivably be minimal. Of course there are many issues to work out regarding the transformation of the area, it is a project of much greater magnitude than just installing playfields, but it is something that would be much more lasting and useful for years to come. This also sounds like the right direction to take in regards to the original Parks Rec. charter from 1996. In conclusion, myself and many others from the Marshall Lane Neighborhood Homeowners Association feel that Councilman Streit's proposal has much more merit than just continuing the sparring matches between the users groups, the affected neighborhoods, and the misdirected Parks Rec. Commission. To continue to go f rom neighborhood to neighborhood, exhausting these small sites, is of no use. It is time to scrap this tired approach and move forward to investigating a regional solution that will benefit the entire community. Bravo Councilman Streit! Thank you for your time and attention to these matters. Sincerely, Brenda Westcott 18640 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 374-5964 w Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 16:34:43 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: feedback for Saratoga Hub �j Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: pchang@prodigy.net [mailto:pchang@prodigy.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 5:27 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: feedback for Saratoga Hub Nick: Here's my inputs regarding the subject matter: the idea of the hub for the city sounds great we need a bigger library. It's so overcrowded now. definitely need to keep a certain size of the heritage orchard in current location. The best is to mix it well with the library. Los Altos Main Library is sitting in the middle of the orchard. The library's large picture windows provide library users with the feel and view connecting to the orchard a symbolic reminder of what this valley used to be. I believe you will hear a lot of citizens cared about this. It's great that you are initiating a discussion about this topic Whish you have a good beginning on this subject A separate note, Nick, we are all very puzzled about "43" schools this city's kids attending. You must have included all schools in Campbell/Fremont Union High/Cupertino to get this high numbers. I just want to bring up a point for you to consider: please do not let this number to prevent the City Council to work closer with the schools located in this city. Good schools bring a lot of value to the city. Good luck in kicking off "Saratoga Central Hub" Regards, Ching-Li Chang Sent using MailStart.com http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere! Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 15:38:47 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Stan Bogosian <sbogosian@aol.com>, <evanbaker@aol.com>, John MeHaffey «qehaf@gedanken.com>, <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Central Hub Community Center Evan Baker Jim Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character setJ [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: Dale Leuthold [mailto:dleuthold@prodigy.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 2:18 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Cc: Sbogosian@aol.com; saratoga@statenet.com Subject: Central Hub Community Center Dear Mr. Streit: Thank you for presenting a creative alternative to the playfield development proposal. I believe that a multi-use central hub community center would be an asset to the city of Saratoga. We can be thankful that the Heritage Orchard land was set aside to make this possible, instead of being developed for housing or commercial uses. This hub should include an appropriate balance of uses, including some youth athletic facilities. That should end the controversy about playfield development, which has reached an impasse. I am confident that there is enough creative energy in Saratoga to plan and develop a really first-class facility that will serve all of us now and into the future. I am sure that objections will be raised that we can't afford to carry out such an ambitious plan, but that seems ludicrous coming from one of the most affluent communities in the area. I would personally vote for bonds to finance the development of a central hub community center. r Z As for the playfield development proposals still on the table, let's kill them once and for all. Such uses of school sites are incompatible with the neighborhoods. We should re-direct the Parks and Recreation comission toward planning a central hub facility. Dale Leuthold 18522 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 408-866-1939 [Part 2, Text/HTML (charset: ISO "Latin 1") 70 lines] [Unable to print this part] Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 21:05:19 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Susan Ramos <saratoga@statenet.com>, Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@statenet.com> Subject: FW: Saratoga City Council Agenda Item #S.B. and #5.C. June 8, 1999 [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] -----Original Message----- From: Brenda Westcott [mailto:brenda@Synopsys.COM] Sent: Monday, June 07, 1999 5:39 PM To: jimboshaw@aol.com; saratoga@statenet.com; nstreit@cpa-online.com; EvanBaker@SaratogaCouncil.org; mehaf@gedanken.com Cc: brenda@Synopsys.COM Subject: Saratoga City Council Agenda Item #5.B. and #5.C. June 8, 1999 Importance: High To: Mayor Jim Shaw, Vice Mayor Stan Bogosian, Councilman John Mehaffey, Councilman Nick Streit, Councilman Evan Baker I am a writing regarding the Saratoga City Council's agenda items #S.B. and #5.C., scheduled for Tuesday, June 8, 1999. As a taxpayer, resident, and participant in the Marshall Lane Neighborhood Homeowners Association, I would like to address each of these items. Item #S.B.: The playfields project has been underway for a considerable amount of time, much longer than it should probably have taken the Parks Rec. Committee to develop and determine viable recommendations. Unfortunately, what they have come up with so far appears to be very short-sighted, unresearched, unworkable solutions to their original charter for this project. Whether the Parks Rec. Commission is unable to self-govern themselves efficiently, or if the City Council has failed to manage this commission well is another issue, but ultimately it has impacted the small residential neighborhoods competitive sports complex and to us it looks like the Parks Rec, users groups. being considered for a large is in collaboration with the This brings up the question of just which locations started out being under consideration? A list of some of the locations included several sites that were more centrally located and already had existing fields such as West Valley College. Why isn't West Valley still being considered as an alternative solution? Is it because the users groups would have to pay a rental fee? Redwood School was another site listed at one time. It is much more centrally located and has more surrounding parking available than either Marshall Lane or Blue Hills. Why is it no longer being considered? I'd like to see a full accounting from the Parks Rec. on funds spent to-date on the playfield project, the current status and recommendations for all locations, and an update on who has committed to what (i.e. school district maintenance issues) A letter from the BealsGroup outlining the projected funds that would be needed to maintain the fields makes it very clear that the costs would be extremely prohibitive for the upkeep. If the current fields are in such poor shape now, what makes the Parks Rec. think the schools will maintain them in the future? I think everyone needs to take a step back and see if we can't refocus on a solution that will better benefit the community as a whole. Kudos again to Vice Mayor Bogosian and Councilman Baker for realizing that the current approach to a playfields solution was not going to accomplish a thing. Which leads me to the next item. Item #5.C.: I think Councilman Streit's idea of a Civic Center Hub concept is a good one that would benefit the entire community not just a segmented few. A centrally located hub that included playfields would be a tremendous benefit to everyone. Playfields included as part of this proposal would allow year-round use, for the young, seniors, families, groups and organizations, AS WELL AS the sports user groups. Parking, accessibility, and the noise impact would conceivably be minimal. Of course there are many issues to work out regarding the transformation of the area, it is a project of much greater magnitude than just installing playfields, but it is something that would be much more lasting and useful for years to come. This also sounds like the right direction to take in regards to the original Parks Rec. charter from 1996. In conclusion, myself and many others from the Marshall Lane Neighborhood Homeowners Association feel that Councilman Streit's proposal has much more merit than just continuing the sparring matches between the users groups, the affected neighborhoods, and the misdirected Parks Rec. Commission. To continue to go from neighborhood to neighborhood, exhausting these small sites, is of no use. It is time to scrap this tired approach and move forward to investigating a regional solution that will benefit the entire community. Bravo Councilman Streit! Thank you for your time and attention to these matters. Sincerely, Brenda Westcott 18640 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 374-5964 �cy�:<<���� June 6, 1999 Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 9507Q Subject: Saratoga Cenval Hub Gentlemen: The purpose of this memo is to embrace and support the concept outlined in Nick Streit's letter to the Saratoga News of June 2, Pages 14 1 S. By resurrecting the recommendation of the 1996 Parks and Recreatior� Commission's community-wid� w�orkshop Nick has raised to a higher level the prospective usage of the present Heritage Orchard and the proposals for adding more sports fields ir. our City. Previously, I have opposed the suggestions that any r.ew sports fields be located in the Heritage Orchard without an overall plan for future usage of the Heritage Orchard. The Grand Plan of a Saratoga Central Hub proposed in 1996, allays my concern that otherwise, the Heritage Orchard mi�ht be piece-mealed to death. In order to eliminate the need for a bond issue votf� to get the Central Hub concept accepted and started, I strongly recommend that the Central Hub be envisioned in phases, with Phase One to be defined as that which can be paid for with presently available funds. The Centrat Hub concept might be accepted by th4 City before a firm definition of Phase One is made. Hopefully, Phase One would include some new sports fields, if in fact they are needed, and eliminate the present efforts to squeeze multi-field sports complexes into quiet neighborhoods w�hich already have traffic problems. The concept of a Central Hub presents an exciting chailenge to the City of Saratoga, and may we rise to this challenge, beginning with the June 8 joint meeting of the City C.ouncil and the Parks and Recreation Committee! ��t:��� �William E. Estes DeSanka Avenue Saratoga bill.estes@uscsw.com J un e/, 1 y y y ��,,,,x� �<L,�:.�c� To: Saratoga City Council Before launching into Nick Streit's "hub", the Council should clean up some of the other problems which are eminent. The Council created a stir concerning traffic. at Oak Street School (Sarato�a) and Fruitvale School (Redwood); both have been in existence longer than City Hall. Would the "hub" create an even greater traffic problem? These city problems need to be addressed first. The Council risks fracturing the city even more if it considers Mr. Streit's "hub" before spending thinking time in preparation for the onslaught of opinions that will come. There need to be some answers. First we are opposed to the destruction of Heritage Orchard, other than what will be required for the library expansion. Next, has Mr. Streit investigated what will happen to the trees in the Orchard?..... 1. If fruit trees are not cultivated, sprayed, pruned and harvested? 2. If grass is planted in the Orchard? 3. If the fruit drops, ripens, attracts yellow jackets and makes a sticky mess, will those trees be removed? 4. If children climb the trees, break the branches, even fall and injure themselves, is the city insured? 5. If people object to spraying and trees get bugs, are those trees removed? 6. Is Mr. Streit's vision of his Shangri-la void of trees in the Orchard which the Heritage Committee created?.....a committee appointed by the city. According to the information the city started with funds for soccer fields which are needed, but the funds have grown. The "hub" would be composed of new community/senior/teen centers, a renovated theater.....do the funds cover all of this, or will we need to go to the poils? Even now one can see a play at the community theater in addition to many performances at West Valley College. Mr. Streit as representative to the Senior Center must be aware that the seniors are already learning Internet. Is the funding adequate for a huge new building and renovation of others? hTill funding support all of these programs? Only a few months back, the city eliminated custodians due to lacic of funds. It doesn't require an in-depth study to realize that Mr. Streit needs to explore his "hub" further. Until then, we are opposed to the "hub" in Heritage Orchard. This "bit of history'�is important. It could be important to our children if we took the time to tell them. Concerned Saratoga Citizens, Maxine McGinnis, Dorothy Stamper l cc Saratoga News C��j�� 1"ri� c� t.._�r GHTA Greenbrier homeow�ers and Taxpayers Association Saratoga, CA 95070 President: Sally Johnson Organized 1973 City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mayor and City Council Members, June 2, 1999 We are very much in favor of the "City Hub" initiative put forth by Councilman Nick Streit. We urge you to endorse this recommendation and pursue planning for this item which was determined to be of highest priority by the 1996 Community Workshop. Planning for most effective use of city owned and/or controlled properties should be of paramount importance and high priority. Effective use of the City Hall Complex, Central Park, and Library properties could become an uniting influence and rallying point for the community. This could resolve many of the current Playing Field issues as well as providing appropriate facility upgrades or replacements within the Civic Center Complex. Funding options must also be considered. A bond issue may be the appropriate answer; however, funding may more readily be made available through a property tax assessment. We believe that Saratogans would support funding a plan that makes sense and fulfills needs that are perceived as important to a broad segment of residents. We are pleased with the work being accomplished by the current Council. Thank you for your efforts on our behalf. Sincerely, �C. Sally John 19997 Sea ciull Way Saratoga, CA 95070 (408)257-6475 `-t`r=-, •2` '...T ^:37.. C- l, ��ti� /9 9 y .lz� r -c� ---a��� ����r-u-c� .r' ,�Lx� –rc��' �t�� .��^r __�"s -��--x��-- �ys -�;��i—�.,�..�--,��..�- ��-a-� --,�i- �o� -a�- .�i �o �.G�-�� �e5l�.r�, ,�,c.e� �,c.t.� �Q,G� .�xa�- --:X�-��- ..fL ��-!�-�r/— �?�-y J'�—��i+�t/ y�%�-C,� W �c� i i I _l 1. 1�. ii a f _..i -i.• i �i i .i i i. i i i.ii i f i i /f i_i f I i/. -J. r i i /_��.i i i i.i l i� /J I �.i i i i i r/�-P�i' rc-A� .�,��a l/,. 1 �v1 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 10:06:24 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: City hub 1�c�� r��I Bogosian �il� Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: b29@ix.netcom.com [mailto:b29@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 7:30 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: City hub Dear Nick, I'll be out of town June 8, so can't attend the council meeting. The city hub is an idea that I supported and pushed back in 1996. Harry Peacock and Larry and I had serious discussions about the prospects. My idea was to move the corporate yard, tear down and rebuild the rec center and create a massive central park from Redwood's fields all the way to the library. I also wanted a sort of living museum at the orchard. Well, back in '96, funding was quite impossible. It still is. Need a bond issue and we had no support for that. Remember, even the library bond couldn't get any support. But there's another problem: the corp yard. Where will you move it to? Who will agree to THAT in their neighborhood? And since the yard dates back to the 60's there's the problem and expense of toxic removal from the soil. The yard was a problem for which we had no solution. Good luck! w By the way, don't fall victim to the nimby's who insist that the orchard should be turned into playing fields. Every time someone doesn't want something in their partof town, they offer up the orchard as sacrifice. Remember the storm created by the tree issue at Saratoga School? Well, the orchard is the last one we've got and many consider it sacred. The storm at Saratoga School will be like a windstorm compared to a hurricane if the council decides to tear out the orchard. That would really upset a lot of folks who aren't generally very vocal. Paul Jacobs Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 22:24:18 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Future Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI Nick -----Original Message----- From: EEFOUGHT@aol.com [mailto:EEFOUGHT@aol.com] Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 2:34 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: Future Dear Mr. Streit, We agree with you that Saratoga needs some direction. Up until now no one has stopped to think about the furture. Playgrounds are not the answer-short term perhaps, but in future years as our population increases even more, then what? Our citzens already know that the schools do not keep the playfields in good condition. Your idea of a hub sounds wonderful! We know that the play fields commission has worked hard on the problem, but the idea is like putting a band aide on to hide the real problem. We need to look ahead, not backwards. Thank you for your consideration. Elmer and Euna Fought 18591 Marshall Ln. Saratoga, CA 95070 379-7049 Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 13:33:56 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Stan Bogosian <sbogosian@aol.com>, <evanbaker@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Central Hub--Yes! Evan Baker Jim Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: Neil Holland [mailto:neil holland@mindspring.com� Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 3:40 PM To: NSTREIT@cpa-online.com Subject: Central Hub--Yes! Mr. Streit, I just now got around to reading this week's Saratoga News, and I am glad I did. I very much agree with your vision of revisiting the idea of a Central Hub for Saratoga. As a Saratoga resident with three young children, the oldest just finishing kindergarten in the Cupertino district, I already am aware of the artificial boundaries existing in our city. I would love a welcoming, open, common area to enjoy with fellow residents and friends. A community area could be interesting to and representative of all Saratoga residents, not just those with children on the playing fields. Thanks again for your letter in Speak Out, bringing this to my attention. I certainly was not aware of the history of the playing fields development, though of course I have been aware of the tensions on both sides of that issue. Joan and Neil Holland Saratoga (741-4847) Dear Council member/Park Commisioner: We would like to thank the city council and the park and recreation commiUee for hearing our voices on the pla�eld issues. We appreciate your aclrnowledgement of our concerns. The moaon to take all three school sites from immediate consideration implies an understanding Wat our problems were not unique to Blue Hills and almost any neighborhood in Saratoga would be equally affected by similar issues. Now we want to work with city council and the park and recreation committee to develop Azule Park into a neighborhood park. This park will enhance lifestyles of surrounding communities. T'he number one issue for us continues to be a cost sensitive proposal that is unique for the city of Saratoga as well. We are willing to put in time; effort and even share funds required to design and maintain this park. So we want to learn from you about what may be the best approach to work together. Ditz Crane builders donated Azule Park to the city when GreenBriar development was made. Today Azule Pazk is a minimally maintained orc6ard with many fruidess trees and dead rrees. We would like to maintain Azule Park as an open parcel of land that reflects the area's past in a user friendly way. List of Objectives for Azule Park Development Maintain the na[ural habitat of Azule Park: Minimal neighborhood impact in terms of traffic and safety Enhances quality of life for surrounding neighborhoods by: meeting recreational needs of many age groups reducing noise in schooUneighborhood from highway 85 offering a serene spot for relaxation Offers educational value to residents New concept in Saratoga Low cost of development Low cost of maintenance Basic Concept The basic concept is to maintain the na[ural habitat in Azule Park. We can keep what we have and enhance it with hardy California nadves that thrive in our climate and soil. We would like to add a broad vact of evergreen trees just along the highway wall to cut the noise to surrounding neighborhoods. We could add lots of jogging and walking �rails through the hardy plant "garden". There could be benches along the trails or in the gardens for relaxation. The periphery of the park can have a paveci pad� appropriate for biking or roller blading. We could also add a par course along the periphery for surrounding resident use. We are open to other suggestions to increase usabiliry and appeal to a lot more than just adjacent communities. Here is how we feel the park plan meets the objectives. Enhances quality of life for surrounding neighborhoods upto a few miles away The neighborhoods would like to have a quiet park for enjoying nature while jogging, svolling, biking or roller blading. T'his minimizes the increase in number of cars coming into U�e neighborhood for using the park. Approach by bikes allows a lot of individuals who live within a couple of miles to enjoy the park. The benc6es allow tired parents to rest and seniors to relax. Azule Park is home to hundreds of birds. The plan allows neighbors to enjoy them in their natural habitat. As toddlers and their parents and caretakers are heavy park users, some residents feel that a small area for toddler play would be great. Some study plastic toys in a sandy area would probably be sufficent for this age group. The trees and plants help reduce the noise from the freeway. This is an important component of Azule Pazk. Educational Value Placards with basic plant information and environmental requirements are inexpensive tools to educate residents about options for their own gardens. These placards would contain na�s, ftowering season if any, type of plant and environmental requirements. Multiple plant islands could be built to illustrate different plant landscapes in California like forest (along the &eeway wall), orchards (we have a strip along the scliool boundary), mix of flowering plants and shrubs that grow well naturally around re�►aining trees. City gardners could then spend some time at Azule giving lectures and tours. Yet another innovadve use is to have plant patches for kids to grow little vegetable gardens. We can have school projects where kids from neighboring sc600l visit at least once a week to take care of their plants. The harvest could taken home or sent to the area soup kitchens. Our teens could help in maintaining the gardens under superviision of experienced landscapers. helping people with their quesdons/concers. to introduce the hardy plant and trees at Azule. Maintain Natural habitallValue to Saratoga These form the basis of a natural park with minimum cost of development and maintenance. We can keep what we have and put in a lot of plants that would thrive in the climate and soil. The animals and birds at Azule Park can stay there and be observed. In this way, the open parcels of lands reflect the area past in a more user friendly setting. Low cost of development Maintain almost all living trees in the park. The land between the trees can be dotted wit6 nadve California ground cover, bus6es and shrubs and winding paths. (The winding paths would maximize jogging trails through a low cost hardy garden. The periphery can be in concrete to allow biking and roller blading.) Maintain the existing paved path and bushes along the long end of the park. This path connects Azule Park to Kevin Moran Park increasing access to joggers, bikers and skaters &om adjacent communities. A plan to develop the park in stages. We can come up with a multi-year plan to suit city finances. Neighbors doing a lot of legwork for cost effective proposals. T'he legwork could include getting neighborhood consensus through surveys, planning for the park, drawing on support from citizens experienced in landscaping and willing to help. Low cost of maintenance Hardy plants and trees with existing landscaping minimizes the maintenance cost Some responsibility to maintain can be taken by neighborhoods. Neighbors will invest in surveys to work out a maintenance plan. Our objecuve is to minimize the impacts on city budget for Azule Park. What next? Neighbors who would like to contribute ro this effort would like to Irnow how to get started. Can a working group with park and recreation committee be formed'? Can a small budget be assigned for it in 1999? Looking forward to a constructive relationsliip, Regards, �L� Pazk Commitee Azule Park Neighborh ssociation C G �a,e,'`�E' Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Joint meeting with Parks Commission- 13 July Dear City Councilmen: The time is right for Azule Park to be developed as a neighborhood park The neighborhood interest is high and the city has money available in. the Park Development Fund Due to the traffic safet}�. noise, and schoolchildren's security ooncerns, the best use of this land is for a low tr�a�c neighborhood park for people of all ages and interests to enjny. I would like to see Azule developed if for no other reason than to discourage it from continuing as a teen hangout for drinldng, and haven homeless visitors as reportedly by my neighbors. I am the first to say that Azule development is not nearly as important as the City Hub or even the Saratoga Higfi School Swimming pool project, since it does not benefit as many citizens. However. it should certainly be tugher in importance than 1he appmx. �180K in the Parks and Rec budget for new playstructures at Kevin Moran and Gardinier Parks. I would estimate that half or more of Azule could be developed for $ISOK!) For nearly 30 years, Azule has been low priority due to the reasoning that nearby Kevin Moran park is sufficiently close for this neighborhood. If we continue to use that reasoning then Azule will never be developed It is time to give Azule an appropriate priority. group supported by Uruversity of Calif'oriva, who would be happy to help us wfth advice. contacts and organizational sldlls, once a decision is made to develop a park In the small amount of time I've looked at j his, I have found a tremendous amount of resowces available for the asking. `l y k� ,�t;_ However,1here is no point in planning Azule, if there is no interest or funding avaitable. We nced to ��w la latow if the city is interested and willing to spend funds on Azule. And if so we need to find a wa to y participate together to accomplish this goal in an inexpensive way. I urge you to help the city and the neighborhood work together in this matter and to allow sufficient fundin for Azule to be n�develo ment. g p d �.,.,,,:f, (���.r, ir 0 6 July 1999 Our neighborhood is eager to volunteer time to plan an attractive low cost perk. We think an 'alternative' style of park would fit here nicely, In consideration of ciry finances, ow neighborhood has suggested several ideas for reducing the costs, including: using California Native plants, wildflowers, gravel paths, saving current trees and animal habitats, and purchasing younger shrubs and trees that will fill in over time. Large amounts of expensive lawn area are not needed since it is adjacent 10 the schoolyazd. And because of the school, some type of educadonal science garden might be particularly appealing to the community. We feel that individual sports activities, perhaps such as roller blading or tennis, might also be a good fit for this neighborhood park. Due to highway 85 noise, landscaping to reduce noise would enhance the general area, and allow for a restful park. To make it easy on the ciry budget, AzWe could be developed in phases, as money becomes available in the Park Development Fund. And we could make good use of the initial site studies completed by J. Beals for ihe playfields projects. There are many volunteer gardening groups. I have personally cantacted the 'Master Gardeners Program', a volunteer Sincerely, ���(�C�G"'"`"�"�`'�1 Katie Alexander 12340 Goleta Ave. Saratoga, Ca 9507U 257-6692 lti.�� C��l,t f i. i ,i S y ��i,l:. k� �'b�� 1/j,riir( V�lLQ...� (.1, �j(, l� 1 �"t "Y l� r �7 r 1. I Y� Ur%'- S j S`,;��, f J i �i J !/L-�%Vt l I v 1 I�' l 1 y� 'i vl,c,f r._ C (�4��;� �e i Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 09:44:42 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Saratoga Central Hub Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: john h bellicitti [mailto:grapeguy@juno.com] Sent: Sunday, June 06, 1999 8:12 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Subject: Saratoga Central Hub Councilman Streit, I applaud your vision to see that things are getting out of hand in regard to the play field plans of the Parks and Recreation Commission. This one item is causing a riff in the community that can only get worse. I am in full support of the Saratoga Central Hub. I truly believe that this proposal can resolve many issues for the present and future of Saratoga. If there is anything that I can do to help further the development of this concept please let me know. I will be attending the meeting on June 8th as well as any other meeting that pertains to this subject. In case you didn't know I am a representative of the Marshall Lane Neighborhood Homeowners. I am one of five people as requested by the Parks and Recreation Commission. As you know already, my family has been in this area since 1898 and I am hoping that my children will also enjoy the same, if not better, life that I have right now in this community. When my son starts working on this farm, he will be the fourth generation to work this property, I don't know of many who can say that now. This is i �'1� why I have become so active in these latest issues. So please contact me if you have any questions or comments. Send an email, call me at home or stop by some afternoon, I am home most all the time. Sincerely, John Bellicitti 18500 Marshall Lane 374-1742 You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 14:07:59 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: saratoga heritage orchard Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] FYI -----Original Message----- From: Sofia Poullada [mailto:sofiahafiza@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, June 07, 1999 1:30 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Cc: hmckay@st-andrews.org Subject: saratoga heritage orchard dear mr. nick streit first i want to thank you for the open letter in the saratoga paper to all members of the saratoga community regarding future plans for a possible city "hub" and regarding the "fate" of the heritage orchard. i feel saratoga is lucky to have a city council member who so genuinely and wholeheartedly wants to have an open line of communication with all the members of the community. along those lines i am wondering if the city council has also extended an invitation to both sacred heart and st. andrew's schools regarding the city council meeting on june 8th? surely both of those schools, which are longtime members of the saratoga community, will be impacted or at the very least affected by baseball or other playing fields being built in the orchard! i participated in the parks and recreation commission community workshops in 1996, which you mention in your letter. as you noted: at that time there was a consensus which first floated the concept of bringing the city activities to within a walking distance zone ti hopefully getting more of us out of our cars by creating a saratoga central hub. as you have said in your letter, let us preserve the beauty that is so much a part of the spirit of saratoga. i am most concerned that the heritage orchard not be slowly "nibbled" away at. it is truly as much a part of the history of saratoga as would an historic indian village be. not all of saratoga should be "manicured" and tailored to "human" usage! once the orchard is built over, it will be very difficult and unlikely that it will every be restored to what it once was, a quiet place for reflection with a wide expanse of sky and mountains! in looking at options for the planning of the saratoga central hub, has the city council looked into the possibilty of acquiring the novakovitch's land farther up fruitvale avenue? in its location near to redwood jr. high, i would think it an ideal direction in which to expand, especially if their is a will to create a living farm/school hands-on learning center for all the school children of this area. i am hoping to attend the tuesday city council meeting, but in any case i will stay in touch with you on these issues. thank you so much for your time and efforts in working on this vision of what the saratoga of the future will be like! most sincerely, sofia poullada RYCH.A��D E. IaEN�T�S 20835 Russell Laine Telephone (408) 867-1391 SarAtoga, CA 95070 Fax (408) 867-4337 Redennis(g�ix.netcome.com May 29, �999 Saratoga City Council Re: Saratoga Central Hub �r�� �r� I am very much in favor of Councilnnan Nick Su�it's promotion of a Saratoga Central �Iub. We have the land, the need and we should now investigate the costs. With the aging of our City buildir�gs, we wilt have to upgrade the facilities au�d it makes sense to use these costs for new facilities if possible. Now is a good time to bring this concept to fruition. Please vote in favor of a Saratoga Centxal Hub Study. FROM Allen T Roten �ii�G�le �Yi FAX N0. 408 252 3084 Jun. 01 1999 09:42PM P1 Al Roten 19812 Veroaica Dr. Saratoga, CA 95070-3947 Phone: (408)252-0131 FAX: (408)252-3084 E-mail: at-�oten(a�iuno.com A FAXUAL MESSAGE FROIVI AL ROTEN To: C�ty of Saratoga City Council City Manager At: 13?77 Fruitvale Sar$toga, CA 95070 FAX 868-] 280 Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Larry Perlin, Date: June 1, 1999 Page 1 of 1 I applaud Nick Streit's initiative to reconsider ptanning toward a"City Hub". Please give serious consideration to this recommendation. Our C�ty needs a centra� focus for activities. It seems to be timely to develop a�lan for modernization and consolidation of activity eenters for Saratoga. Sincerely, llen T. Ro n Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 15:15:29 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Stan Bogosian <sbogosian@aol.com>, <evanbaker@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga@STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: Central Hub idea Evan Baker Jim Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] E�`�� -----Original Message----- From: PETER BOULTON@HP-MountainView-oml.om.hp.com [mailto:PETER BOULTON@HP-MountainView-oml.om.hp.com] Sent: Tuesday, June O1, 1999 10:39 AM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com Cc: katie@alexander.org; mbeam@informix.com Subject: Central Hub idea Nick, Your Central Hub proposal seems like a sensible approach. I'm a member of the Azule Neighborhood Park Association and live across from Blue Hills Elementary School at 12335 De Sanka Ave. I have participated in what has become a struggle between the "good of the whole" vs "over loading of a few local neighborhoods" to accommodate additional playing fields. Along the way I have wondered if there was any way to create a central solution. Accordingly, I was very pleased to see your proposal. Expanding upon the existing services and facilities at the city center to provide an integrating force for community is even better than I had hoped for. This would be great since the opposite has been happening through our current process. People are being pitted against each other such that it will leave bitterness within our community j'. no matter who wins the war of the playing fields. If we could produce a solution that was a win-win and provide an integrating force into the future that would be terrific. I hope your proposal gets due consideration. Peter Boulton Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 17:34:31 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan Bogosian <sbogosian@aol.com>, Jim Shaw <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Susan Ramos <saratoga@statenet.com>, Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@statenet.com> Subject: FW: Nice letter for City Hub/How can I help? [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] Susan Gentlemen I hope the first of many e-mail's, regarding the Saratoga Central Hub, I plan on sending all e-mails to each of you for your review and response if you feel the need. I plan on responding to all E-mails I receive. Thanks Nick -----Original Message----- From: Katie Alexander [mailto:katie@alexander.orgJ Sent: Friday, May 28, 1999 4:26 PM To: nstreit@cpa-online.com; katie@alexander.org Subject: Nice letter for City Hub/How can I help? Hi Nick, I received a copy of your letter to the editor asking for support of the city hub from A1 Roten. I think it was very well written and sensitive to everyone's point of view. I hope you do not mind that I've distributed it to most of our APNA members. I am very much in favor of this idea and so are several of the APNA members. However, as of last week our group was divided on it. Those that opposed an approval of it, basically thought we should keep our focus on keeping an athletic complex our of anyone's neighborhood, rather than take a broader stand. There was much concern over whether a bond issue could pass. It is hard to get people out of a defensive mode. I'll ask again for a group endorsement-opinions may be changing since the newspaper article came out. This is a much better and more appealing project than just developing playfields. Does this mean that playfields (a.ka.competive athletic center) would not be included in the City Hub idea? Are playfields off the table?Or exactly how would we determine what goes into the City Hub? I would like to suggest that rather than have a 'top down' planning process like for the playfields project, that we use an interactive 'bottom up' approach. Perhaps the city could hold meetings at neighborhoods, organized civic groups, and so on, to get everyone involved in the description phase of what the City Hub would entail. It could be a sort of giant brainstorming session with some realistic feedback from a planner/architect. It would need to be an iterative process. By doing this early in the process, the city would have a good idea of whether support for a bond issue was there, and the types of things the citizens really wanted there. Whomever held the meetings would need to have an open attitude about the outcome, a real experienced project manager. Since this would be a broader issue than just Parks and Recreation, I would suggest some city wide task force. This sounds like a difficult method, but actually it is the method HP uses for developing concensus before building a new facility. It does take time, but the result is a well planned project with cooperation from all participants and few cost overruns. Unless the athletic groups attack our neighborhood at the June 8 meeting, I plan on speaking in favor of your idea. My only problem is that I feel some obligation to my neighborhood to ask for Azule as a neighborhood park. Maybe we could designate Azule as a neighborhood park and do some low cost development like trees along the soundwall. Do it in phases??? n Anyway if there is anything I can do to further this idea, please let me know. If you'd like, give me a call next week. (257-6692) Katie Alexander f r I i 1 /K/" I Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 19:56:24 EDT From: JIMBOSHAW@aol.com To: Evansbaker@aol.com, Sbogosian@aol.com, Mehaf@gedanken.com, nstreit@cpa-online.com, saratoga@statenet.com Subject: Fwd: Parks and Central hub Saratoga City addressee: L. Perlin Part 2: "Included Message" Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 17:39:07 -0700 From: Tony Marsh <tmarsh@mffmlaw.com> To: jimboshaw@aol.com Subject: Parks and Central hub I am a resident of Saratoga, having lived here for 20 years. I have 4 children, all active in sports and all students in Saratoga. I watched part of the City council meeting last night and submit my thoughts to you�as mayor. I believe we need as many playing fields as possible at all of Saratoga's schools and in as many parks as can accomodate the use. I also think we need parks for other purposes. The city hub sounds like a nice idea, but the city has nowhere to build it except at the Heritage Orchard. I would hate to see the Heritage Orchard destroyed or altered. Not every square foot of Saratoga needs to be developed. The orchard represents a unique heritage of what was once this valley. If we tear down part of the orchard, level the ground, and build playing fields, there will be lots of new problems to face. A substantial portion will have to be paved and turned into a parking lot--there is no adjacent street parking and the library lot is always full on weekends.� (Sacred Heart and St. Andrews probably would not like people parking in their lots; use of the St Andrews lot would encourage jaywalking across Saratoga Avenue and endanger children). Noisy games could make the library unusable and affect use of the Senior Citizen facilities. Traffic is bad enough on Saratoga and Fruitvale avenues--would it become worse? Azule Park can be developed. I understand why the neighbors do not want the park because of some increased traffic and noise. But they bought their property knowing that a park would be built there. They should share both�the benefits and the burdens of having a park near them. Every property owner who lives near a school or park in Saratoga has a similar experience. Use of Azule could be limited so that it is not a full time athletic field, ie. use it for practices and occasional games instead of as a sports hub, which we already have in Congress Springs Park. Similarly, Marshall Lane School should be available for sports activities, without turning it into a primary sports center. As a parent, I think it is far better to live near a park or a school than to ,have to be driving distance away. They give our children a place to play--it is certainly better than playing on the streets, or not playing at all. Tony Marsh, 13676 Ronnie Way, Saratoga. 1 Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 12:55:24 -0700 From: "Nicholas G. Streit" <nstreit@cpa-online.com> To: Evan Baker <evanbaker@aol.com>, Stan <sbogosian@aol.com>, John MeHaffey <mehaf@gedanken.com>, Jim <jimboshaw@aol.com> Cc: Larry Perlin <SARATOGA@STATENET.COM>, Susan Ramos <saratoga�STATENET.COM> Subject: FW: The Hub Bogosian Shaw [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display.is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] -----Original Message----- From: Sally Wieder [mailto:wieder@svpal.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 11:01 AM To: N. Streit Subject: The Hub At last, a solution that addresses the right question-- not which neighborhoods to tear apart for the narrow interests of the soccer crowd, but how to create a community park/recreation complex that has something for everyone. If designed properly it could be A Plan for All Seasons' and for all ages. And if part of it includes play fields, why not more versatile fields that allow for softball and touch football, as well? The less professional looking, the better. Natural fields would fit right in with picnic tables, walking paths and even with what remains of the for their parents. happens to be a informally with kids, not under the supervision of parents, coaches, or any other adults, but just for the fun of it. But maybe that's too radical a concept Heritage Orchard, not to mention an idea that personal favorite-- that kids might actually enjoy playing other Whatever form the hub finally takes, its ultimate design and especially its implementation can't be rushed. Nanoseconds are for computers, not s/ for plans such as this. Future generations will thank us for taking the long view. There are four voters at this address who are behind the hub idea all the way. Harold Wieder [and family] r�a' c� u�. ovr+ .►emc� ..o� r MemOran�urrl ,n To: Marianne, Parks and Rec. Commission, Trail Sub-Committee James Walgren, Irene Jacobs� From: Teri Lynn Baton, Saratoga Trail Enthusiasts 741-0954 Date: 6-15-99 Re: I.ot 18, Mt. Eden Estates, Mansour Safai While riding this trail segment yesterday, 1 noticed that someone has apparently vandalized or stolen public property. They have removed the two trai) sign posts on ihis properry leaving a h�le which my horse almost stepped in. [n addition to this, they have placed two signs on a stake in the middle of the entrance to the public trail rcading "No Trespassing" and "Private Property". By posting these signs, they have effectively taken public property and caused an obstruction and public nuisance in the middle of the trail. I have taken photographs of these conditions. The homeowner has encroached on the trail easement by planting grass and putting sprinklers in. The Parks and Trail Master Plan cleazly states that no one shall encroach on a trai) easement by placing anything within the easement_ 1 would appreciate you looking into this as soon as possible. Thank you, Teri Baron z r 1 T- ��;ITY OF SJ4Ra�'O�� 13777 FRUITVl�LE AVENUE SARATOGA, CA 95070 (408� �8�7�3438 memo-I¢tter To: r��� f c ,v��� �n '��v1�a �S S DATF SUBJECT: %IJ� _T v'` ?/'�r�; jN G f7 ��r�t— c v�� �i �r��� 1/'►�1,�/'v� �.�L1. �������r�; �ti�r°r� jj t, r a. I _I Y r a I� T l c i �_�r t-�.,=�i I I .1- ';__f l. i v� May 21 99 10:05p James Baron 408 867-6100 P• SARATQGA TRAIL ENTHUSIASTS 19830 Via Escuela Dr. Saratoga, CA 95470 408 741-0954 fax 408 867-6100 e-mall tlbaron(a�aol.com June 14, 1999 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 A�tn: lrene Jacobs, staff liaison for Parks and Recreation Commission RE: Mt. Eden Estates Subdivision, Villa Oaks and Deer Trail Ln. Dear irene: Tl�is (etter is in response to the homeowners that attended the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of 6-7-99. nur group represents approximately 50 Saratoga residents and is growing everyday. I understand that there was discussion regarding several issues of tl�e Pedestrian and Equestrian easement that runs through this property. Hopefully we can all work together to resolve these issues for tiie homeowners. This trail has been planned ever since the subdivision was first started in approximately 1980. lt was a requiremcnt that the trail be listed on the tentative map by the planning commission, This was done as hikers and horses I�ad used this trail for approximately 30 years and �naybe more. The trail piacement took into consideration where existing trails were and where houses were to be located. Over the years and through the development proccss the trait feIl into �lisrepair and has been almost unusable for many reasons. Since the parts of the trail have now been completed to the standards as listed in the Parks and Trails Master Plan, it is much more usable and 1 have had many residents really excited to be able to use the trail again. Most of these are hikers that are residents that Iive ncar6y and would 4ike to be able to get to Garrods and Fremont Older �pen Space again through a nice all-weather trail. I understand that the recent trail system completion througl� lots 18 and 23 were done by the homeowners themselves and that they were given certain criteria to follow to complete the trail per the Parks and Trails Master Plan. 1 have attached a copy of the Trail design standards and details for surface construction from the Master Plan. It appears that while the homeowner has put in the trail accordin� to the criteria, the wood headers should have been placed at grade level with the interior of the trail dug out in which to place the trail surface inaterial. I think if this was done, it would certainly look better from an aesthetic point of view. I understand I�owever that these owners left tlle trail to do at the last minute a��d probably did not have the time to realfy plan it well. Just like the planning department, you are given standard criteria to follow, but it is up to the individual homeowner to make tl�eir home look nice. A really nice trail segment exists at 21789 Mt. Eden Rd. tliat was put in with a more natural looking material, decomposed granite. Siizce my group was formed to hclp the city maintaiii tt�e �rail system through the use of volunteers, I would be happy to get my group together to make these trail sections a little more pleasing t.o the eye. As f�r as thc issue of liability gues, page 4.3-2 in the Parks and Trails Master Plan addresses this issue. I hope this helps to address some concerns. Since�l Te i Lynn Baron Coordinator May 21 99 10:O5p James Baron FfQure 8 Surfaee Constructlon Detaiis 2 x 4 x 18 stakes, 16" o.c. 9096 compacted subgrade Decomposed Granite/Wood Chips Materials: 2" asphalt concrete 29b slope to drain 4" compacted decomposed granite. Use native soil where it is determined by soil engineer that it can support load at 9096 relative compaction. 9096 compacted subgrade Asphalt C�ncrete 408 867-6100 p.2 3.7 Trail Design Standards and Details /J-� ���(l!'�-5� i �J M 5� O .�1,�'�" .7 i p� Materials: 296 slope to drain 4" layer decomposed granite 2 x 4 redwood header at trail edges where required 3.7-2 Rpr 28 99 11:35p James Baron 408 867-6100 p.l �e171�I~dY1C�l�I11 To: Marianne CC: From: Teri Lynn Baron, Saratogu Trai] Enthusiasts Date: 5-22-yy Re: Tmil info, Orchard Meadow Estutcs, Trail littk bclween Mt. Eden trail ant! Stevens Coultty Park Hi Marianne.lust wanted to give you some information I have been working on. Attached is a leuer to and owner of a lot in the above mentioned subdivision. So much has happened in the last two weeks.t6at 1 can hardly believe it. Some conncctions look liko they a��e g�Llg tu cume together. Too mueh to tell you here, but give me a call wl�eri you have a minute and I wi1[ update you. have also been clearing the bushes around Teerlinks properly, which is segment 13. I am waiting for rock [o ftnish Lot 1 on Mt. Eden Estates, but most of it is donc!! Thanks, Teri z s �,��;�r•a::-=:: o•��'::� .._v_..��, �i:s:�a:..;�— '�i!. ;..:xa- .r�n..,�.r;_;.;: c:.,... t. :;�tL:� ��::�uw: r.��. v ::."3'�' .:.�.:::..:.::r '�YI"�.�..... I ...:i�'i _.....uaoJx:1',`,'_.."I^ ..........:.:r��:....�.... �.s:. u��^t'::::: d:.".'. I_...... ye'r.:. c�... ._:i��..._.. _..r...�.l�ir.a...�. t:..:j:u::...:y.. .....r ..::....i>:.:.:..i.�:.. .,w��y .........:......�.....,,,.-.�r�uu......�; :r.aun_:..,,r,�,_�...t:.'.;.2�.,;���.. ��.��:r. n:a.:::v...._........ ...t. ..o.::-..:..... ...._k.ia.a� .......r ..auid�iCt9 ym:u:ncnnapn���ai:i;_� i:.,..., n�..i.... .u; r:... u�.i..,�....n: n ::�5�;:..•-• 3 �n:., _�;..,-..�.....,�;,:.:a; _..__...u.7......._. :;is. �r•�i .::................p•..:.:.._...:••:-....i �xEii�.;!i�;;',c.�:�:..:�...ic::;r;��:.v:: t.n k{+'�Id:<t� r. r::� iuiiin�d�b:l. i S�F v1 1 n�.:�� n•.r�...�.: i •L'...� �nn,.,�nu::!.^.��!':%�ra•�:�n:. L, !i: "'�9Y.��m: v j .�il.Nc��: �sl., !�f�, i,';�{y;�.... `m a.._. s;t� untwCPg';•:..� :i'.m�ftii:..d_::l?'�t R';:;i::'3�7 i..:: h% :...,x�.:�_. �f z �^."s::!'h'^u^ ,m!::-:uc :::.:_:.-�u.•n.;...� 'f: n...�.... n_c......ia•r::.:._ r ...:^a.:.:.: �:ms_.:..:.c:.::vvn�:.:...... PAGE 1 Rpr 28 99 11:35p James Baron 408 867-6100 p.2 SARATOGA TRAIL ENTHUSUI,STS 19830 Via Escuela Dr. Saratoga, CA 95070 408 741-0954 fax 408 86?-6100 C-mall dbaron(c�.aol.com May 20, 1999 Mr. James Rogers P.O. Box 620352 Woodside, CA 44062 RE: Lot 7, Orchard Meadow Estale�, Saratoga, CA Parcel#503 Dear Mr. Rogers: As you may be aware, a trail easement runs across a portion of your property. I have contacted the Coturty of Santa Clara, Parks Recreation Department as to the status of this trail. The County haS informed me that the trail still needs to be cleared, marked and built according to the agreements signed by the developer, Irish Tradewinds Development Group, Inc., Patrick J. Dougherty, President. A dacument entided "Irrevocable Offer of Trail Easement" delineates the agreements and requirements for trail construction. This document should be Iisted on your title insurance as affecting your prorerty. My group is workin� to �et the trail system completed in Saratoga. The trail et�.sement on your property is an important link. The current trail easement is 17.5 feet wide. The agreement requires a four foot trail somewhere within this corridor. We intend to provide the County with a map of the proposed trail alignment. The County hus requested us to flag the route so they can visualize the proposed trail prior to approval. My group will be out within the next couple of weeks tu ilag the property and clear any brush in order to place the flags. Please let me know if you hdve any questions or concerns. Sincerely, 'i'eri Lynn Baron Coordinatur C:c: County of Santa Clara, Lisa Killough, Parks Rec. Dept. �City of Saratoga, Parks and Rec. Dept. Dennis Paboojitin Rpr 20 99 09:34p James Baron 408 867-6100 p,l SARATOGA TRAIL ENTFIUSIA.STS 19830 Via Escuela Ur. Saratoga, CA 95070 408 741-0954 fax 408 867-6100 e-mail Nharonna aol.com May 13, 1999 Mr_ 8c. Mrs. De Nicolo 14171 Teerlink Way Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: Trail Maintenance, Trail Secti�n 13, Pazks and Trails Master Plan T}ear Mr Mrs. De Nicolo: As you know, part of thc City of Saratoga Trail network runs on the side of yoi�r property. 'I'his trail segment is in need of maintenance to fix the washou� and cut wccds. We will be installing another bridge over the washout before wintcr, but in the meantime, we wi11 bG �i,�iPly sloping the edges of the washout area so that in the meantime, hikers and eguestrians ean get through. Our group of volunteers will be out to conduct this muintenance sometime witlun the next couple of weeks. We have registered with the City of Saratoga Volunteer Coordinator for insurance liability purposes. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Tha�ik you, Teri Lynn Baron Courctinalur Cc: David Mooney, Public Works DePt. Marianne Swan, Parks and Recreation Commissioner, Trail committee Rpr 20 99 05:39a James Baron 408 967-6100 p,l SARATOGA TRAIL �NTHUSIASTS 19830 Via Escuela Dr. Saratoga, CA 95070 408 741-0954 fax 408 867-6100 e-mall Nbaron(��aol.com May 13, 1999 Mr. Mrs. Ti Teerlink 21810 Mt. Eden Rd. Saratoga, CA 95070 RE� Trail Maintenance, Trail Section 13, Parks and Trails Master Plan Dear Mr Mrs. Teerlink: As you know, part of the City of Sazato�a Trail network runs around your property. This trail segment is in need of maintenance as your bushes have encroached upon the trail. We will be trimming these bushes to clear a path for hikcr� anci equestrians using the trail. Our group of volunteers will be out to conduct this maintenance sometime within the next couple of weeks. We have registered with tl�e City of Saratoga Volunteer Coordinator for insurance liability purposes. If you have ar�y questions, please give me a call. Thank you, 'i'eri Lynn Baron Coordinator Cc: David Mooney Works De�t„___._. Marianne Swan, Parks and Recreation Commissioner, Trail committee M. Safai 18211 Saratoga Los Gatos Road Monte Sereno, Ca 95030 Tel. 408-888-4738 March 30, 1999 James C. Walgren 13777 Fruifirale Ave. Saratoga, Ca 95070 Re.: 21789 Villa Oaks Lane (Lot #18 Parcel 2) Horse Trail Dear Mr. Walgren, Based on our conversation today at your office, please find attached two exhibits, made by Westfall Engineers, describing the location of the proposed equestrian easement. The first exhibit provides the legal description of the easement, and the second is a drawing of the horse trail relative to the current easement and property line. Please also note that the location of the original easement has been confirmed by Westfall Engineers to be right on top of the PGE and other utilities access, and goes right into a large tree, making it impossible for a horse to actually gain access to the hills, unless it went outside the easement to go around the tree. We would like to request the easement to be moved to the location as described in the attached exhibits. We are also contacting the Park and Recreation committee for getting their okay as well. 1 M. �afai