HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-12-1999 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