Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-01-1993 CITY COUNCIL AGENDASARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 2 �> F6, AGENDA ITEM: MEETING DATE: December 1, 1993 CITY MGR. ORIGINATING DEPT.: Community Development APPROVAL SUBJECT: Appeal of a Conditional Us:_, Permit approval which allows the establishment of a deli /bistro and the on- and off -sale of beer and wine at 14480 Big Basin Way. Recommended Motion: Uphold the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal. Report Summary: On October 27, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved a Conditional Use Permit which would allow the operation of the Big Basin Bistro. The proposed establishment would include a wine and beer bar, that also serves food, and a retail wine and beer shop. The Planning Commission accepted staff's analysis, opened the public hearing to t ke testimony and then deliberated on the request. As the attached minutes from the meeting indicate, several individuals presented public testimony regarding paik ,.y issues and the number of existing uses within the village permitted to sell alcohol. After discussing the parking issues and consulting with staff, a majority of the Commissioners stated that they felt the proposed use was unique and is consistent with the Village Specific Business Plan and the Design Plan. They stated that the applicant should not be denied Use Permit approval due to the lack of parking in the Village. The Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit 5 -1 (Jacobs opposed). Appeal: The appellants are appealing the decision of the Planning Commission for the following reasons (see attached correspondence, dated 11/9/93): 1. Inability of applicant to provide an adequate number of off - street parking spaces per the City Code requirement of one space per each 75 square feet of floor area for restaurant uses. 2. Equitable grounds - the appellants feel the applicant should be required to participate in a parking district if adequate off - street parking cannot be provided. 3. Existence of too many establishments in the Village area that are already permitted to sell beer and wine; and the need for more retail and professional businesses. Staff's Analysis: Since the Planning Commission took action on the subject application, new information has been submitted by Warren Lampshire,,the property owner's and applicant's representative (see attached letter, dated November 22, 1993). This information includes an analysis of the properties within the Village that do not participate in a parking district assessment.` Staff has reviewed the parking statistics submitted and they appear to be representative of the current situation. A plan to restripe the parking lot of the Big Basin Bistro and Margherita di Roma was also submitted. The plan provides eleven parking spaces, which equals a parking ratio of one space for each 380 square feet of gross floor area. This ratio is equal to and /or greater than the ratios at which three of the four districts are developed. Section 15- 19.050 of the City Code states when a site is located within a Parking District, the off - street parking requirement for each district shall be as follows, regardless of the use: Parking District #1 1 space /473.5 square feet Parking District #2 1 space /380 square feet Parking District #3 1 space /350 square feet Parking District #4 1 space /380 square feet If the properties that are not within.`a parking district were required to conform with the parking standards prescribed in Section 15- 35.020 of the City Code when a new use occupied a tenant space, many tenant spaces would be forced to remain vacant. For example since Margherita di Roma requires 29 spaces under current ordinance (1 space for each 75 square feet of floor area), the parking for that subject property is deficient by 18 spaces. ,Therefore, if the code was applied literally, no use could occupy the adjoining tenant space without providing a significant number of additional parking spaces. - Section 15.55.030 allows conditional uses to be approved with different develpoment standards (such as parking and setbacks) than listed for unconditional permitted uses .through the use Permit process. Correspondence Received: The appellants submitted a letter dated 11/9/93, which included signatures of various individuals associated with the Village. It has been brought to staff's attention that the signature on line six is not a signature of a Downey Savings employee (see attached correspondence from Downey Savings). File No. UP -93 -006; 14480 Big Basin Way In addition, the letters submitted to the Planning Commission are attached for review. Planning Commission Request: At the November 10, 1993. Planning Commission meeting, the Commission made a separate motion requesting the City Council to look at options to address the parking problems in the Village. Fiscal Impacts: None Attachments: 1. Appeal application letter dated 11/9/93 2. Correspondence from Warren Lampshire dated 11/2/93 3. Correspondence from Downey Savings dated 11/17/93. 4. Correspondence from Cancellieri dated 11/21/93 5. Correspondence from Casabonne dated 11/23/93 6. Planning Commission Resolution UP -93 -006 7. Planning Commission Minutes dated.10 /27/93 8. Planning staff report and exhibits dated 10/27/93 9. Correspondence submitted.to the Planning Commission 10. Petition opposing Bistro 11. Letter opposing Bistro from Dr. and Mrs. Brozda dated 11/12/93 NOTE: FOR 1/5 MEETING PREVIOUS ATTACHMENTS ARE NOT INCLUDED- -_ONLY NEW ATTACHMENTS (STAFF REPORT ON PARKING AND LAMPSHIRE QUESTIONNAIRE). E, OTTE o O&ME1900Z C� 9090 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 867 -3438 �4 � �f 01 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson Ann Marie Burger Willem Kohler M E M O R A N D U M victor Monia Karen Tucker TO: Saratoga City Council FROM: Paul L. Curtis, Community Development Director DATE: January 5, 1994 SUBJECT: Village Parking Study Appeal of UP -93 -006, 14480 Big Basin Way (Stark) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the appeal of UP -93 -006 be denied and that the Planning Commission approval be upheld. This recommendation is based on the conclusions found in the following parking study which indicate that there is parking available in the Village area and that the proposed Big Basin Bistro will not create a parking damand that will impact the Village area. In addition, the subject property provides 5 on -site parking spaces, which is comparable to the parking being provided by other land uses in the Village. Background On October 27, 1993, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of the Big Basin Bistro, a 2,050 sq.ft. retail /restaurant use consisting of the on and off -site sale of wine and beer and seating for approximately 40 customers in both fixed and non -fixed seating areas. On December 1, 1993, the City Council considered an appeal of the Planning Commission approval. At that public hearing, the Council directed staff to prepare a parking study of the Village. The following are the general purposes of the study: • Evaluate the existing parking and land use mix. • Determine the availability of parking spaces (where and when). • What is the "holding capacity" of the Village? • Determine if there is a parking problem in the Village. Printed on recycled paper. Page 2, January 5, 1994 Village Parking Study 'UP -93 -006, Big Basin Bistro (Stark) It should be noted that a parking study of this type typically requires substantial time and staff resources. Neither was available in this case because of the current application process dictating the short response time requested by the City Council and the holiday schedule affecting both available staff and calendar working days. Methodoloav of Stud Land Use Analvsis The boundaries of the study area contain all of the properties zoned CH -1 and CH -2 generally located along Big Basin Way between Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road and 6th Street. The PA zoned area fronting Saratoga Ave. "east" of Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road and the multiple - family zoned properties along Oak St. were not included in that it appears that these areas do not impact the parking demand or its availability in the Village area. Specifically, the following input was used in the study: • Assessor tax rolls were used to determine leasable floor area for each parcel in the study area. • A walking survey was conducted to identify land use square footage for each APN parcel (in the case of mixed uses, an estimate was made as to the breakdown of each use). • Land uses were evaluated in four categories: - Restaurant - Retail - Office (e.g. attorney, architect, etc.) - Service (e.g. cleaners, travel agent, etc.) Parking Analysis The total number of parking spaces available in the study area were determined from Parking District information, Street Engineering information and previous parking analysis completed as part of other studies. Actual on -site counts were taken at various times of the day to determine the number of available parking spaces. A total of 20 counts were taken at various times of the day including 2 counts at night between December 20 - 29. Staff received mixed reactions from discussions with some Village merchants as to whether parking counts during this time period Page 3, January 5, 1994 Village Parking Study UP -93 -006, Big Basin Bistro (Stark) (i.e. the holiday season) would be considered "typical." Some felt that customers do. most of their holiday- shopping at the mall, while others felt that the Village restaurants and specialty shops offered unique shopping and dining that the malls do not provide. The short time - period for the study did not allow for the in -depth analysis needed to answer this question. Study Conclusions The following are specific findings resulting from the study: • Leasable Floor Area = 268,742 sq.ft. - Restaurant = 61,360 sq.ft. (22.8 %) - Retail = 73,143 sq.ft. (27.2 %) - Office = 49,804 sq.ft. (18.5 %) - Service = 84,435 sq.ft. (31.4 %) • Parking Spaces = 778 (approx.) - Parking District= 492 - On- street = 166 (approx.) - Private Lots = 120 (approx.) • Parking Counts: - In excess of 200 spaces available during "peak" periods of noon and evening dinner hours - In excess of 400 spaces available during morning and mid - afternoon hours - On- street spaces generally not availble during- -the day and evening - Parking spaces heavily used in central core area - Parking District Lots 2 & 4 fill up faster than District Lots 1 & 3 - Spaces can "easily" be found at the east end of District 3 and on the street beyond 6th Street Evaluation of Parking and Land Use Mix: As a "quick" study, there seems to be a fairly equal mix of the four land use categories.. The parking ratio for the entire Village study area is 1 space per 345 sq.ft. of leasable floor area. This compares to the parking requirement for uses within Parking District areas of 1 space per 350 - 473.5 sq.ft., regardless of land use type. Generally, land uses tend to be grouped with service and office uses located on either end of the study area and the more intensive restaurant and retail uses located in the central core. This creates a higher parking demand in certain locations. Page 4, January 5, 1994 Village Parking Study UP -93 -006, Big Basin Bistro (Stark) Availability of Parking Spaces: An evaluation of the 20 "formal" parking space counts..and. several. "informal" observations indicated that peak use consistently occurs around the noon lunch hour and during evening dinner time. During those peak times, a minimum of 200 parking spaces were available in the Village study area. On- street spaces were extremely difficult to find and District Lots 2 and 4 seemed to be used first. The east end of District 3 almost always had several spaces available. Mid - morning and mid - afternoon counts indicated that as many as 400.spaces were available throughout the study area. Holding Capacity of the Village: The holding capacity is the amount of leasable floor area that can be added or the amount of existing floor area whose current uses can be intensified (e.g. a retail use to a restaurant use) while still having parking spaces available. The worst case scenario would be when uses create a parking demand resulting in no parking spaces being available... If, during the peak demand periods of noon and evening, there are a minimum of 200 spaces available, leasable floor area can be increased or intensified to a point where those 200 spaces are no longer available. Using different parking requirements for the Village, irrespective of overall code requirements, the following leasable floor area could be increased or intensified: if 1 space /75 sq.ft. (restaurant) = 15,000 sq.ft. increase; if 1 space /200 sq.ft. (retail /office) = 40,000 sq.ft.; if 1 space /345 sq.ft. (current Village demand) = 69,000 sq.ft. ...or any combination, thereof. This intensification of the leasable floor area (total elimination of the holding capacity) requires the acceptance of a built -out Village where there are no parking spaces available during peak demand periods. It has been suggested that the 1 space /75 sq.ft. of floor area is too great a parking requirement in the Village because of the extensive joint use of parking areas and multiple- destination vehicle trips. If the 1 space /200 sq.ft. (general retail) or the 1 space/ 345 sq.ft. (current Village use) is acceptable, then 40,000 - 69,000 sq.ft. of leasable floor area could be added or intensified. It should be noted that for properties within Parking Districts, intensification of uses is permitted without adding new parking. That is, all non - restaurant floor area could be converted to restaurant floor area without providing additional parking. While the current code would technically allow this intensity, the Page 5, January 5, 1994 Village Parking Study UP -93 -006, Big Basin Bistro (Stark) Conditional Use Permit requirement for restaurants allows the City to evaluate the parking demand on a case by case basis and require, by condition, parking improvements as needed. This is exactly the case with the Big Basin Bistro application. Is There a Parking Problem in the Village? It has been said that perception is reality. There are always parking spaces available "somewhere" in the Village study area. They may not always be in the exact location where the customer (or the retailer) desires. However, if there are no spaces in close proximity to where the customer wants to be, their perception may be that there is a parking problem when, in fact, there are spaces available within a short walking distance. In January 1991, the City Council considered a request to expand an existing restaurant by adding outdoor seating. During that discussion, the question was raised as to the impact outdoor seating has on parking and is there sufficient parking in the Village area to accomodate the increase in seating. The Council directed staff and Planning Commission to continue to process Use Permit requests for outdoor seating without requiring additional parking while analysis of its impact is reviewed by staff. As a result of the current parking study, it appears that the use of outdoor seating does not significantly impact parking. This is typically the result of customers requesting outdoor seating in lieu of indoor seating and during inclement weather, outdoor seating not being used. conclusion Generally speaking, the study found that there is consistently parking available in the "fringe" areas of the Village. The heavy use of on- street and central core parking areas give the perception that there is no parking. Attachments: 1. Exhibit "A" (Saratoga Village and Vicinity) 2. Exhibit "B" (Study Area Map) 3. City Council Minutes, December 1, 1993 4. Letter from C.D. Start, dated December 23, 1993 City Council Minutes 5 December 1, 1993 The motion died due to lack of a second. KOHLER /BURGER MOVED TO DENY THE APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION, BUT SUPPLY TRAINING FOR THE'CROSSING GUARD._ Councilmember Anderson 'stated that the City has offered to purchase software for implementing car pools and will still stand by this offer. She encouraged Mrs. Foust to bring this back to the PTA and School Board. Vice Mayor Burger stated it is not pleasant to deny this request, but the City is facing financial hardships and believes the school can provide the crossing guard. - The above motion was carried 2 -1 -2 (Anderson No, Tucker, Monia absent). Vice Mayor Burger moved to the public hearings at 8:35 p.m. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Appeal of Use Permit Approval to allow Establishment of a Deli - Bistro and the Sale of Beer and Wine at 14480 Big Basin Way within an existing commercial space in the Saratoga Village which is zoned Commercial- Historic (CH -1) (UP93 -006) (Applicant, Stark; appellant, Masek) Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal, upholding the Planning Commission's decision. City Manager Peacock stated additional written communication was received from: Otto Crawford, Joseph Masek, Marcelle Bloxham, Carolyn Holm, Tracy Hill, Tom VandenHoogen. Vice Mayor Burger noted she had conversations with Mr. Crawford, Mr. Cancellieri, Mr. Masek and Mr. Rankin. Councilmember Anderson stated she also had conversations with the above, except Mr. Masek. Planning Director Curtis presented the staff report dated December 1, 1993. He stated after conducting a public hearing, ;the Planning Commission felt that the land use was appropriate at this site and it did meet the objectives of the Village Plan in terms of providing a commercial business in an existing facility. He stated there was extensive discussion regarding the parking situation and noted this particular building is not part of a parking district, but has its own parking lot. Mr. Curtis reviewed the parking available and noted the Commission felt there was sufficient parking for this type of use and felt this property owner could not resolve the overall parking problem in the Village area. Mr. Curtis stated the Planning Commission unanimously recommended to the City Council that the overall parking situation in the Village area be studied. In response to Councilmember Kohler's question, Mr. Curtis stated the previous occupant was a music store. In response to Councilmember Anderson's question, Mr. urtis stated basically most buildings in the Village area'are substandard in the commercial parking standards. Vice Mayor Burger opened the public hearing at 8:45 p.m. Mr. J. Masek,. 14467 Big Basin Way, Appellant, stated that 12 people signed the appeal and noted the concern is parking and not the Deli. He stated several years ago he was denied a project because of lack of parking and had to redesign his project. Mr. Masek stated the parking report prepared by Mr. Lampshire is incorrect. He requested that the City look into the parking situation before any permits are issued. Mr. Lampshire,.15055 Park Drive, stated he is representing the owner of the. building and the applicant, Dan Stark, is also here to speak. City Council Minutes 6 December 1, 1993 Mr. Lampshire stated he did a study of some 50,000 sq. ft. of building on the south side of Big Basin which is not in a parking:district and some have parking spaces, such as the Hillview Shopping Center. He noted staff has' indicated that this building meets the City's requirements for operating as a Bistro /Deli.' He stated the property will conform to the requirements of parking districts two and four. Mr. Lampshire reviewed the surrounding buildings ands the parking required and noted no tenant can meet the parking requirements of the ordinance. Mr. Lampshire reviewed the appeal petition. He stated the applicant will restripe the parki -ng lot and.a trash enclosure will be put into place. Mr. Lampshire stated he has tried for over a year to bring in new tenants into this building. He noted if the use is denied it will penalize one building owner. Mr. Lampshire added that improvements have been -made to the interior of the building as well as replacing the sewer line. He urged the City Council to deiny.the appeal on the basis that there is no clear way to change it from what it is today. Mr. Dan Stark addressed: his comments dated November 23, addressed to the City Council. He stated parking is not an issue and;he has never had any trouble finding parking in the Village area. He pointed out that the tenant does not have control over the parking and the use proposed is a very positive use for this space and will bring customers to the downtown area. Ms. Bette Crawford, 12471 Green Meadows Ln., stated all merchants and business owners signed the petition after reading it. She stated there was an interior decorator in this building prior to the music store and they sold furniture. She added they were in business for several years. Mr. Otto Crawford, 12471 Green Meadows Ln., stated they are protesting this use because this is maximizing the utilization of the building with very little parking. He stated they have never objected to any retail use, but are protesting the lack of parking. He stated all parking districts cannot be combined as all, the bonds are different. Mr. Crawford addressed his letter dated November 29, 1993 and asked the City Council to disregard everything after the words ".!.for similar types of businesses." Mr. Crawford read the following statement from his letter, "How can the Council say yes to a Bistro -Deli- Restaurant when over 90% of the businesses say no - because of parking shortages. Why make Stark and Lampshire happy and make the other merchants unhappy. If approved the City is breaking new ground, permitting a new restaurant /deli /bistro where there has never been one." Mr. Larry Tyler, 13611 Saratoga Vista Ave., stated he had a master lease on the building for 25 years, but at the time of the lease the parking requirements were different. He stated it. is his understanding that the use and ownership of a building can change, as king as it does not increase the need for parking. Mr. Tyler reviewed the parking code that affected the legal non - conforming uses. He also added that the analysis done by Mr. Lampshire is incorrect as it is not based on the parking ordinance for the City. Mr. Tyler noted in 1975 10 new parking spaces were put in as he received an easement from an adjoining property owner. He stated this easement can be canceled'at any time. Mr. Alden Bloxham, Big Basin Way, asked the City Council to support the petition opposing this use, and noted he does this on behallf of parking district three as his wife owns property within that district. He stated the parking which exists has been established in tie form of an ordinance which was passed approximately 10 years ago. iHe stated if this ordinance was applied to this use it would result.in a shortfall of 48 parking spaces. He stated the merchants of parking district 3 are paying 50 cents per square foot, per month for the; privilege of parking in district 3 and expressed concern about businesses coming in and paying nothing. He urged the Council to deny the Bistro /Deli. Councilmember Monia arrived at 9:20 p.m. Councilmember Anderson asked how many parking spaces Mr. Bloxham had for his building before parking district 3. Mr. Bloxhamiresponded he city council Minutes 7 December 1, 1993 had 86 spaces. Councilmember Anderson pointed out that when the parkingdistrict was formed the parking district, through the City, purchased those 86 spaces and he received a lump sum. Mr. Bloxham stated they received payment for an easement and then the City charged them for a construction bond. He stated they are entitled to a return on an investment. Ms. Tracy Hill, Bank of America, stated she is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the parking lot at the Saratoga branch. Ms. Hill reiterated the comments made in her letter addressed to the City Council dated November- 23, 1993. She stated if the Bistro is app'oved, people will park in their lot and repair will be more frequent and costly. She stated the parking is inadequate as is. In response to Councilmember Kohler's question regarding the .public using the parking lot after bank hours, Ms. Hill stated this will still infringe on the maintenance upkeep. Mr. Leonard Sullivan, 14421 Big Basin Way, property owner, expressed concern about the parking. He stated he paid to put the lot in, and pays for the maintenance. Ms. C.J. Tomaino, 20603, 20605 Third Street, stated the parking lot for her business is also shared by several other businesses. She stated she is entitled to four parking spaces, but receives complaints from customers regarding.lack of parking. She added that delivery trucks park in the parking lot blocking parking spaces and if there was another establishment this would cause more problems. She stated she is not against the Bistro, but is very concerned about the parking. Ms. Annette Casabonne, 20120 Herriman Ave., stated they own property in the Village area which is in parking district 3. She stated business and competition is good for Saratoga, but what is not good is a business being able to open without adequate parking. She stated the requirements for off - street parking spaces should be upheld and the City must be consistent. She added that the members of parking district 3 are providing parking for employees, owners and customers of businesses outside the district. She stated it will be many more .years before a parking district will be formed and something needs, and must be done before this.. She stated if parking requirements!on the south side of Big Basin way cannot be met, a parking distric needs to be formed. Ms. Casabonne read from the minutes of the Planni g. Commission regarding this issue. She reviewed other possible ubes for this building. Ms. Poppy Brozda, 24501 Big Basin Way, stated in 1990 the City assessed her $330,000 for parking fees, another $5,000 per year for picking up trash and expressed concern about future tax assessments. She stated Mr. Stark will be allowed to operate the Bistro jwithout any assessments. She stated the Village area does not !need another restaurant. Mr. Miles Rankin, 14506 Big Basin Way, believes there ;is a parking problem in Saratoga especially between the hours of 11:30';a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and also 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. He stated when the use is changed there are new rules to follow. He stated he can not believe the Planning Commission did not notify the applicant that there would be a parking problem. He stated there has to be a solution to the parking problem and would not recommend that a restaurant be allowed in this building as it will make the parking situation worse. He also expressed concern about the number of establishments serving alcohol in ;Saratoga and stated Saratoga will have to address this in the future. i Mr. Gene Zambetti, 14575 Oak Street, stated the expansio of the non- conforming use would greatly intensify a non - conforming uT e. He stated there is already a deficiency of 29 parking spaces and the; proposed use will increase the deficiency by another 29. He believesithe Planning Commission made an error in, not conditioning the application to either I city council Minutes B December 1, 1993 enter into or form another parking district. He stated the Planning Commission also did not condition the applicant to enter into a lighting district. Mr. Zambetti reviewed his tax bill regarding the maintenance of five parking spaces within the City. He added they would like to see some. use in this building, but there is a need to form another parking district. He stated a cash bond should be posted by the applicant or purchase parking rights from parking district three or the City. He also noted that a cash bond should be:posted for a landscaping and lighting district. Mr. Zambetti stated a trash enclosure should be •built prior to occupancy. He added that circulation of traffic.is a problem and parking district 6 would solve this problem. He stated this allowed change will greatly increase the parking needs. Mr. Jim O'Rourke, 20121 Rancho Bella Vista, stated he has never had any problems with parking in Saratoga. He read from a letterlfrom Mr. Dan Stark and noted this is not a change in use, as part ofIthe facility will be retail. Mr. O'Rourke believes there is a fear of competition and other retailers are jealous. He noted if there is a parking problem, it is the City's responsibility. Mr. Sami Asfour,.Planning Commissioner, encouraged the City Council to approve the'application as recommended by the Planning Commission. He stated, as stated by staff and also discussed extensively at the Planning Commission, no viable business can occupy this I building and meet the parking requirements. He believes if this is denied the tenant will be held hostage. Mr. Asfour suggested that the City establish one parking district and all landlords contribute to this parking district. Mr. Robert Cancellieri, property owner, stated all the property'owners did sign the appeal. He noted people will park at the Bank of America and go to the Bistro. He expressed concern about the parking issue. He noted restaurants are acceptable, and competition is good, but parking must be provided. He urged the City Council to deny this application. Vice Mayor Burger closed the public hearing at 9:50 p.m.; she re- opener it at 9:51 p.m. Mr. Lampshire stated he has great compassion for the people paying into the parking district. He stated the problem Bank of America has with parking will not go away and needs to be controlled. He stated the property owner or applicant can not be held responsible for the parking problems in Saratoga. He stated there is rear parking and there will be rear access after renovation. Mr. Lampshire stated the easement, after a period of time, can not be taken away. Mr. Masek addressed the easement and stated this is only an addendum to the grant deed. He stated the parking is chained off every year around July 4th. Vice Mayor Burger closed the public hearing at 9:55 p.m. Councilmember Anderson questioned excess parking spaces in parking district 3. City Manager Peacock stated there are more parking spaces in parking district three than are required for the existing squa a footage of building. He noted there is no restriction on use i any parking district. In response to Councilmember Anderson's question, Mr. Curtis stated there would be a deficit of parking spaces based on 1 space per 200 sq. ft. He stated there is a special calculation used for the Village area. Councilmember Anderson asked if this was approved can they condition the applicant to purchase additional parking spaces. City Manager Peacock stated they would have to rent spaces that are City Council Minutes 9 December 1, 1993 available. He stated the City limited the purchase oJs es in parking district 3 to the properties within that distrtated the spaces could be rented out if they have a surpluacock stated the spaces are owned by the City and the prop own building rights, not parking spaces. Vice Mayor Burger stated in order for joint par both parties need to be in agreement and enforcement would be a problem. In response to Councilmember Monia's question Mr. Peacock istated if the parking ratio in the code is applied to the Village area he believes there would be a shortfall of 125 spaces. Mr. Curtis sued it-is staff'$ opiniorn that :x parking is sufficient within walkin distance. He stated the proposed use will not create a significant parking problem in the Village area. He noted the use proposed does not require the same parking as a restaurant. City Attorney Riback stated the City can require the applicant to meet the parking standards. In response to Councilmember Anderson's question, Mr. Peacock stated the Village Plan contemplates the creation of a 5th and 6th parking district in the future which would improve circulation. He stated it would be appropriate for the City Council to require the owner to waive the right to protest in the event a district is formed. In response to Councilmember Monia's question, Mr. Curtis stated staff never anticipated customers of the Bistro using private parking spaces. Councilmember Kohler stated there are many problems with the parking in the Village area. He stated there is an inequitable financial situation and noted this problem will get worse if not resolved. He agrees that everyone should pay into the parking districts. He added he is willing to support this application, if there was fair parking for everyone. He spoke in favor of upholding the appeal and work hard to get a different parking formula. Councilmember Monia stated he will not vote for this item as he missed the opening arguments. He suggested continuing this item and staff come back with a report regarding the parking deficit in the Village area. He noted the City Council can then decide how much more will be allowed. Councilmember Anderson stated no one wants vacant buildings. She addressed a seminar she attended on how to revitalize a downtown. She noted people from the Village area were asked to participate, but they got very little response. She asked the property owners to meet with the facilitator and discuss a plan for the Village area. She spoke in support of a condition that the applicant must lease a certain number of parking spaces and must waive the right to protest. She stated she would like to get the merchants together and formulate aiplan. Vice Mayor Burger stated there are three options for the Council: 1. Continue and receive staff analysis regarding pa king in the Village area; i 2. Denial until a Village wide parking district is established; 3. Approval with the conditions as addressed by Councilmember Anderson. Councilmember Kohler stated the City'should not ask the merchants to go to seminars and believes it is the City's responsibility to come up with a plan. Councilmember Anderson stated it is her belief that if the merchants come up with a plan it will work. Vice Mayor Burger expressed concern about vacant buildings in the Village area as well as the parking problems. She suggested that this be continued and ask staff to report back on the parking problem and where they would draw the line. City Council Minutes 10 December 1, 1993 City Manager requested this be continued to January 5, 1994 as field work will be required. KOHLER /ANDERSON MOVED TO REOPEN THE HEARING AND CONTINUE THIS UNTIL JANUARY 5, 1994. PASSED 4 -0 -1 (Tucker absent). B. Resolution Ordering Abatement of a Public Nuisance by Removal of Hazardous Weeds Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution. City Manager Peacock presented the staff report dated December 1, 1993 and noted this represents the second step in the weed abatement proc 'Bss for this season. _ Vice Mayor Burger opened the public hearing at 10:45 p.m.; she closed it at 10:45 p.m. MONIA /ANDERSON MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 93 -057 ORDERING ABATEMENT. PASSED 4 -0 -1 (Tucker absent). City Manager Peacock stated that there is a meeting scheduled with both fire districts to discuss their winter program. 6. OLD BUSINESS A. Ordinance Prezoning Map for Sphere of Influenced Pursuant to the adoption of the Residential Open Space Zoning District (ROS) , the City Council will consider a Prezoning map identifying the boundaries of said zoning district. (first reading and introduction) Staff recommends that the City Council introduce the ordinance by title only, waiving further reading. City Manager Peacock stated in order to identify every parcel they have listed the assessor parcel number. MONIA /ANDERSON MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVING FURTHER READING. PASSED 4 -0 -1 (Tucker absent). 7. NEW BUSINESS . A. Informational meeting on business license rates and regulations City Manager Peacock reviewed the changes requested by t e Council at a previous meeting as reflected in the ordinance. MONIA /ANDERSON MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO CONTINUE WITH THE PROCESS. PASSED 4 -0 -1 (Tucker absent). B. Memo Authorizing Publicity for Upcoming Hearings Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the ;!Publicity as recommended. ANDERSON / KOHLER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE PUBLICITY FOR UPCOMING HEARINGS. PASSED 4 -0 -1 (Tucker absent). 9. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS A. Oral Communications (continued) and instructions to staff regarding actions on current oral communications Councilmember Monia asked about a letter from Mr. Whetstone concerning the analysis by the City Attorney regarding the PUC Order 159. City Attorney Riback stated that Mr. Whetstone faxed to h' a statement and a request that he respond. He noted it is the Councils policy not to respond in that respect. December 23, 1992 Vice Mayor Burger c/o City of Saratoga 13777:Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Dear Vice Mayor Burger: RECEIVED DEC `2 8 1983 P Mlvllv(_ DEPT As the Applicant approved by the Planning Commission for UP 93 -006, the following information is made available for your consideration of Mr. Masek's Appeal of my permit. I hope to arrange at least a brief meeting to discuss this item. The action of the Council is important for me as well as other businesses considering the Village as a potential location. I hope to hear fram you and will be in Saratoga December 27, 29 and January 3, 5. We selected the Saratoga Village location as the best site for Big Basin Bistro and Tasting Roam for a number of reasons; past customers, building location and construction and the match of the Bistro to guidelines of the Council, Commission and Village Plan. Beginning last Spring discussions with the building owner involved many agencies and recommendations. Both the Landlord and I have incurred expenses, made adjustments and commitments relying on the requests and needs of the following agencies. California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control City of Saratoga Building Department City of Saratoga Planning Department City of Saratoga Planning Commission Saratoga Fire Department Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health West Valley Sanitation District Permits have been approved and will be issued by the following agencies, upon denial of the Masek appeal: California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control City of Saratoga Planning Department Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health West Valley Sanitation District Ewen though not a part of the normal approval process I specifically requested input from several Council Members about this specific venture. The operation was described then as it was submitted to Planning, with recommended changes, and we were encouraged to proceed. Comments froti Planning Commissioners, City Council Members and Staff centered on the following items: 1) The building is CURRERMY zoned restaurant ocmTercial requiring no change in zoning, only issuance of a conditional use permit. 2) The use is pedestrian friendly. 3) The use canplements existing businesses, (clientele will be similar to those already attracted to the Village promoting multiple stops and longer visits per visitor). 1) The use generates new customers Village businesses. i) The use generates substantial sales tax revenue to the City, i) The establishment will attract "high -end" consumers maximizing .evenue per visitor. Regional agency and City Staff had a number of recommendations to which the building owner and I.agreed,. many have already been implemented. This has been a cooperative process relying heavily on my willingness to adjust my operation to the requests presented to me. The options considered are compared below: Big Basin Bistro(Appx. 1900 Sq.Ft. non - common area)Maximan Use 1 -4 Staff 5 and more 1 -49 Occupancy 1 -99 1 -38 Seating # 1 -88 +/ -550 Seating Space +/ -875 1/3 floor space Retail Display -10%.-floor space loam -llpn* hours of operation 8am -lam * Later closing.five selected nights and'earlier opening during the Regional Winery event weekends for map pick -up winery set -up,. etc. Construction of trash bin and re- stripping to create 11 parking spaces, additional handicapped toilet construction and 100 feet of new 4 inch sewer line were agreed to by the owner. The Council should recognize that the .City of Saratoga HAS policies regarding new businesses, sanitation, parking , Village use, etc. The documentation indicates that regional agency and City Staff accurately presented these to us. We have complied as required, AND as requested. When a business relies on existing governmental policies, codes and recommendations that is NOT a risk of doing business. Our application and the ensuing expenses have relied on this information. Retro- active revision of such codes and policies is risky and destructive. It is politics, not policy. The worst possible action for this City Council would be to over -turn the 5 -1 Planning Commission decision, one which INCLUDED a parking study and other conditions in a staff report and recommendation. The effect would be to change, in January 1994, policies on which Mr. Flory and I have relied since August 1993. If the Council makes changes in use and parking policy or guidelines such changes must apply to FUIVRE applicants allowing the Planning Commission and City Development staff the opportunity to comment on these changes and inform applicants they are under review or have been changed. A refund of City fees would NOT cover direct, related expenses. Please do not hesitate to contact me. I am at your disposal. Sincerely, C. D. Stark, Ap icant - (408) 662 -9556 Big Basin Bistro & Tasting Roan 14480 Big Basin Way Saratoga, Ca. 95070 V'4 r7 :,� il., WARREN LAMPSHIRE C CIAL REAL ESTATE December 24, 1993 7 jar, 1`r" �, • �;, (aJ 1 Mr. Harry Peacock" " 1993 Saratoga City Manager c j ._ Art `; A 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Re: January 5, 1994 OI''�° "-== 'U TICE C;,y Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Council Meeting & Appeal UP 93 -006 Dear Harry: I am enclosing a questionnaire which I developed relating to the parking issues and their impact from (III points of view, including the Appellant's who have appealed the conditional use permit UP 93 -006. Also, I have sent this questionnaire to each of the Council members for their review, and am enclosing two extra copies, one for Paul Curtis, and Mike Riback. During the month of December, and since the December 1, 1993 Council meeting, I have made a study of the on and off street parking in the Village. It is extremely surprising, but real. During 27 different time periods, from December 2, through December 24, 1 actually counted an average of 120.8 free and open spaces to park in daily, throughout the Village from Saratoga Los Gatos Road to Big Basin & Sixth streets. Near my office, the average was 32 available parking spaces during this time frame, daily. The time periods varied from 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM, and from 4:15 PM to 6:30 PM, Monday through Saturday. This includes all retail commercial buildings from the Fat Robin at one end of town to Pacific Western Bank at the other end, both sides of Big Basin and all parking districts. This count was obviously taken during a peak month, Christmas time. In January or February etc., I am sure the available parking could easily double. We have plenty of parking for all shoppers and people patronizing the Village of Saratoga. There is a lot of short term parking, creating many changes during - day. I hope you find the questionnaire helpful, fair, and realistic. As I have offered in my cover letter to the City Council members, if the City chooses to establish a task force or a committee to study the parking issues, I will be pleased to contribute my time and help if I am called upon. Thanks Harry, and I hope your Christmas Season is great, and my best wishes for a wonderful New Year. Sincerely, Warren ampshire 14457 BIG BASIN WAY • SARATOGA, CA 95070 • 408 - 867 -2582 • FAX: 408 - 867 -6357 SARATOGA VILLAGE QUESTIONS & ANSWERS IS IT FAIR TO ALL CONCERNED? WILL IT BE BENEFICIAL TO ALL CONCERNED? YES NO PARKING DISTRICTS- (Section 15- 35.035) 1. Were property owners paid fairly for the property for the parking districts under the eminent domain process? X 2. Are the Assessments for the Parking Districts fair? X 3. Do the parking districts benefit all concerned? X 4. Do shoppers park in parking districts where they shop? X X 5. Does it benefit owners who pay for parking districts to allow shoppers to park & shop other than in their buildings? X 6. Should business owners prevent shoppers from parking in their district unless they shop in their building? X 7. Are the parking district costs, & the lighting district costs, fair to all concerned in the Village? X 8. Should the property owners recogonize that they were in fact paid the fair market value for their property to form the Parking Districts? X 9 Did they set aside the proceeds to enable them to conveniently pay the assessment annually? Probably Not 10. Is there any detrimental effect caused by people parking in any and all districts, whether they shop in the district they park in or not? X 11. Would it be fair to ask all Village businesses & building owners to contribute to the expenses of the Parking Districts? X 12. Will the City research this possibility to benefit all concerned? Hopefully YES NO PRIVATE PARKING LOTS: 1. Is it fair to allow for private parking lots? X 2. ShouId: the. owner, of. private parkin&control, his, lot? X 3. Would it be fair to force an owner of private parking into an existing Parking District? X 4. Should one owner be forced to sign a "waiver of future protest" to be in a parking district? X 5. Would it benefit all concerned and fair, to ask all who are not in a parking district to sign a "waiver of protest "? X 6. Is it fair for anyone to park in private parking lots? X 7. Do shoppers in the Village park in private parking lots and shop elsewhere? X 8. Is this fair? X 9. Should the owner prohibit shoppers from parking in his private lot? His choice PARKING ORDINANCE (Section 15-35,030) 1. Should all building owners who have non conforming uses, thereby not meeting the Parking Ordinance when they have a vacancy, be required to pay into or contribute to an existing Parking District? X 2. Would it be fair to force ail building owners to . comply with the current Parking Ordinance? X 3. Is it fair to force ONE building owner to comply with the Parking Ordinance? X 4. Should the City of Saratoga attempt to provide an equitable solution to a perceived parking issue? X 5. Should the City "hold up" approval of the Big Basin Bistro while they research solutions? X 6. Is it fair to all concerned to accept an applicant's YES NO money for a conditional use permit, when the City is aware that the subject building cannot comply with the Parking Ordinance. X 7. When an applicant files for a Conditional Use Permit, which is approved by the Planning Commission, and the applicant is assured that the zoning of the subject building is approved for his use; is it fair for the City to invoke new and unwritten rules of parking restrict- ions just for that one applicant? X The bottom line is: The Village of Saratoga has adequate parking both for ALL non conforming users as well as conforming users! The issue of the Appeal does not raise questions about the use, only about parking - but we don't have a parking problem. In fact several of the Appellants state, "they do not object to the use ". We may have a fairness problem relating to the costs of the Parking and Lighting Districts. The Appellants clearly want some adjustment of their costs of the Parking and Lighting Districts. Everyone in the Village needs the City of Saratoga to review the costs, and more fairly distribute the costs over the total commercial square footage. IS THIS FAIR TO ALL CONCERNED, AND WILL IT BE BENEFICIAL TO ALL CONCERNED? Par>- %Ang Districts 1, 2, .3, and 4'.liave :al.ready fulfilled- the. 'parking requirements._ Page ' 5. Conclusion: . "Generally speaking, th.e study finds that thercr is corrsistent'ly parking` . availeb1_e ',in the fringe' areas of .the :Vill age .. -� The heavy use .of. on- street °: end central "core:. parking area give tie perc`e'ption that there..'. is,no� parking. "• - . - -,, if this ap-I>Iication w�ts_-.for a fringe area and not'.in the core, I° would not. be ;here in :opposi-ti.on... 1 agree `With the staff' 'comme:nt- that perception. i& �r eali.ty. Who is .going, to ask a Iad:y', with_ hig4`heeled ,shoes to p �:rk down by the service. , station'.and walk up Bip Basin Way to La Mouton Moir. I would hope that.--you would use your.; _'discretionary powers, to protect ,the. care :area and the hldR. rights.,- of. the property owners, in, the i'arking ...istri,cts..., SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 23 AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: December 1, 1993 CITY MGR. ORIGINATING DEPT. City Manager W SUBJECT: Request from Public Safety Commission to Approve Funding of Additional Crossing Guard Position Recommended Motions: Authorize Additional Crossing Guard Position and Approve Appropriation Resolution in the Amount of $1,700 for f 93/94. Report Summary: The Public Safety Commission is recommending that Council appropriate additional funds and authorize a crossing guard position at the corner of Herriman and Saratoga Avenue. Saratoga Union School District is supportive of this request, and has indicated that they can probably find a guard to hire for approxi- mately two hours per day, on a split shift. Therefore, this appropriation request is for $1,700 to cover the remainder of this school year. The cost for the full school year for 94/95 will be approximately $3,000. Two years ago the Commission conducted a public hearing on residents' request for a traffic signal at Herriman and Saratoga. In discussion of traffic safety issues at that location, the Commission concluded then that it would be desirable to have a crossing guard at the location. However, the District wasn't able to hire an additional guard at that time. Although the volume of school related pedestrian /bike traffic at Herriman and Saratoga is low, it is anticipated that more parents would allow their children to use this intersection if a guard were present, and this could result in a decrease in the number of cars around Redwood school. Staff is not able to identify any funds budgeted for public safety which may be transferred from another program to cover the $1,700. Therefore, to grant this request it will be necessary for Council to agree to suspend your reserve policy in this instance. Council may also wish to consider the fact that new legislation goes into effect January 1, 1994, which repeals the provision in the State Education Code requiring cities to fund school crossing guards. The City no longer has a mandated responsibility to reimburse the schools for crossing guards. Currently there are four authorized crossing guard positions which the city is funding: two at Saratoga Avenue and Fruitvale /Scotland; one at Fruitvale and Allendale; and one at Quito and Pollard. The budgeted crossing guard allocation is $21,685 for both 93/94 and 94%95. Fiscal Impacts: This request would make the budget allocation $23,385'for the remainder of this year, and $24,685 for 94/95. Funding would need to come from the City's reserves. Follow Up Actions: If the school district is able to hire a guard, city staff will revise the crossing guard agreement with the district to include an additional authorized position, and will provide equipment and training for the new guard. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: The crossing guard program would remain as is. Attachments: 1. Petition from Redwood School PTA requesting crossing guard 2. Appropriation Resolution September 21, 1993 OCT 16 1993 Saratoga Public Safety Committee 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Saratoga Public Safety Committee: We are concerned parents who support having a crossing guard at the intersection of Saratoga Avenue and Herriman Avenue for students attending Redwood Middle School. A school crosswalk currently exists at this intersection and provides access to a short trail that leads into the back of Redwood However, the heavy tragic at this intersection combined with cars driving faster than the posted speed limit and which typically do not yield the right -of -way to children results in a very dangerous situation. Many parents currently drive their children to Redwood because they feel it is not safe for their children to cross at this intersection A crossing guard would not only make more parents feel secure about allowing their children to walk to Redwood but would also make his intersection safe for the children now using it. Sincerely, 7 I CZ 7y,��-/ V SARAGTOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. (�/ AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: December 1, 1993 CITY MGR. ORIGINATING DEPT. City Clerk SUBJECT: Resolution Ordering Abatement of a Public Nuisance by Removal of Hazardous Weeds Recommended Motion: Adopt resolution ordering abatement. Report Summary: The attached resolution represents the second step in the weed abatement process for this season. The County has senti the owners of the parcels requiring weed abatement notices informing them that the weeds must be abated, either by the owners or by the County. The notice also informed them that they may present objections at tonight's public hearing. Follow -up Actions: The final steps take place next summer, when the County presents the Council with a list of properties whose abatement bills have not been paid, and the Council, after hearing any objections, passes a resolution declaring liens on those properties. Fiscal Impacts: None to City. County recovers costs from administrative portion of fee charged. I Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: Weed abatement could not be performed by the County. It would be necessary to depend upon property owners to take care of their own abatement. Attachments: Resolution. I (List of parcels requiring weed abatement is available at City Clerk's office.) 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 1 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APT OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE Zlf 11995 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -023 VU MUU AND LE VAN TRUSTEE 11995 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6515 12023 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -024 CHANG YEN C AND LINA W 12023 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6515 327 A UNIVERSITY AV 366 -05 -026 DE LA CRUZ MICHAEL 327 A UNIVERSITY AV LOS GATOS CA 95030 20963 BOWHILL CT 366 -05 -030 LEWIN ROBERT E AND JANICE D 20963 BOWHILL CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6522 20960 BOWHILL CT 366 -05 -031 GOULD BONNIE AND ROBERT 20960 BOWHILL CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6522 BOWHILL CT 366 -05 -033 SARATOGA CITY OF BOWHILL CT SARATOGA CA 95070 12247 CRAYSIDE LN 366-05 -034 LEE JAE K AND IN S 12247 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6525 12307 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -036 LIN TED T AND CYNTHIA S TRUSTEE 12307 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6525 12333 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -037 CHEN ABRAHAM D AND SHIRLEY S 12333 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6525 12479 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -040 FAZELI SAID TRUSTEE 12479 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6525 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -041 LIN FRANK C TRUSTEE & ET AL 21640 RAINBOW CT CUPERTINO CA 95014 -4829 12480 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -042 REIMAN LELAND AND KATHERINE 12480 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6526 12452 CRAYSIDE.LN 366 -05 -043 BEACH FRANCINE M AND GARY L 12452 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 12412 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -044 WANG YIN -JIE AND MEI -HUEI 12412 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6526 12366 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -045 YU TONNY K AND SHEILA S 12366 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6526 12342 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -046 PUETTE ROBERT L AND J P 12342 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6526 12308 CRAYSIDE LN 366 -05 -047 RODRIGUEZ EDWIN A AND PAMELA R 12308 CRAYSIDE LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6526 12305 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -048 YANG I-CHU AND CHUN -HSI ET AL 12305 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6519 12393 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -051 SZE KONNIE H AND SHELLY L 12393 BEAUCHAMPS LN -SARATOGA CA 95070 -6519 12423 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -052 WONG ANTHONY Y AND LOUISA M 12423 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6519 12457 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -053 WONG THOMAS H AND MEI H 12457 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6519 20876 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -055 TAN CHUAN -CHIEH AND MAY -INN 20876 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6513 20840 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -057 OAKLEY MARTIN AND LEIGH V 20840 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6513 12502 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -060 NI PEI -PEI 11121 CLARKSTON AV CUPERTINO CA 95014 -4707 12476 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -061 SHEU SHEY -PING AND HON -WEI 12476 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6518 12446 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -062 TRUFYN NICHOLAS ET AL 12446 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6518 12390 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -064 CHAN ESTELLA C AND KWAN H PO BOX 303 CUPERTINO CA 95015 -0303 12362 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -065 WANG GUANG S AND ZU -FENG Y 12362 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6518 UCHAMPS LN I 366 -05 -073 GU CHEE -LIANG ET AL 12134 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6514 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CA 95070 -6514 CA FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA CA SITU SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY 12106 BEAUCHAMPS LN 366 -05 -074 NIVAS YOGESH AND BINA 12106 BEAUCHAMPS LN SARATOGA SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD 366 -12 -004 SHUFFLE E B AND CYNTHIA M 20811 NORADA CT SARATOGA 12341 366 -12 -065 ALAMEDA CATHERINE AND ALAN A 600 S 2ND ST SAN JOSE 12297 366 -12 -067 PENINSULA TOWNHOMES ASSOCIATES PO BOX 27508 SAN FRANCISCO 20801 VERDE MOOR CT 366 -14 -031 HELMREICH MARTHA M AND GRAF W A 20801 VERDE MOOR CT SARATOGA 21166 MARIA LN 366 -21 -015 CARROLL SYLVIA J 21166 MARIA LN SARATOGA 12029 366 -22 -022 CASHIN EMMET J JR AND DOROTHY C ET 12029 SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD SARATOGA 20570 PROSPECT RD 366 -22 -030 YOSHIOKA TAKASHI 20570 PROSPECT RD CUPERTINO 12531 ARROYO DE 366 -25 -002 CHANG SZU -CHI AND CHUNG -LAN L 12531 ARROYO DE ARGUELLO SARATOGA 20811 NORADA CT 366 -27 -004 SHUFFLE CYNTHIA M AND E B 20811 NORADA CT SARATOGA 12147 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -43 -006 EAST PAMELA 12147 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA 12161 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -43 -007 WU TSUNG -CHING AND CHEN YUH -NING 12161 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA PARKER RANCH RD 366 -43 -008 ARIMA RONALD H AND MASAYE L 1018 LEITH AV SANTA CLARA 12218 FARR RANCH RD 366 -43 -012 CHOY BENEDICT C AND LOUISA L 12218 FARR RANCH RD SARATOGA 12164 FARR RANCH RD 366 -43 -013 KO ROBERT J AND TRUDE -CHEA 12164 FARR RANCH RD SARATOGA 12148 FARR RANCH RD 366 -43 -014 PEISKER URSULA AND HANS 12148 FARR RANCH RD SARATOGA 12048 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -43 -018 SINSLEY BETTY R AND GROVER C 12048 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA 12057 PARKER RANCH 366 -43 -019 FLIGHTCRAFT, INC. 7505 NE AIRPORT WY PORTLAND 12091 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -43 -020 WILLS RICHARD AND DONNA 12091 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA PROSPECT RD 366 -44 -001 PARKER RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASSOC PO BOX 3077 SARATOGA FARR RANCH RD 366 -44 -003 PARKER RANCH HOMEOWNERS PO BOX 3077 SARATOGA 12264 FARR RANCH RD 366 -44 -004 ZITMAN SHELDON A AND DIANA 12264 FARR RANCH RD SARATOGA 12496 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -48 -001 SINSLEY KRISTINE M AND DOUGLAS E 1512 JARVIS CT SAN JOSE 12468 PARKER RANCH CT 366 -48 -002 HEINDEL JOHN H AND NOLA C PO BOX 3452 SARATOGA 12356 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -48 -003 SARASWAT KRISHNA C AND SONIA 12356 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA 12217 VISTA ARROYO CT 366 -48 -004 EDWARDS JOHN D AND LYNN M 12217 VISTA ARROYO CT SARATOGA 12245 ARROYO VISTA CT 366 -48 -005 GAMBILL HAROLD AND LORETTA E 12245 ARROYO VISTA CT SARATOGA 12273 VISTA ARROYO CT 366 -48 -006 HERTERICH FRANK W AND LOIS M 12273 VISTA ARROYO CT SARATOGA 12206 VISTA ARROYO CT 366 -48 -011 SCHINELLA RICHARD D AND MARIE D 12206 VISTA ARROYO CT SARATOGA Page- 2 STATE ZIP CA 95070 -6514 CA 95070 -3018 CA 95112 CA 94127 CA 95070 -3715 CA 95070 -6532 CA 95070 -3022 CA 95014 CA 95070 -3010 CA 95070 -.3018 CA 95070 -6536 CA 95070 -6536 CA 95054 -1952 CA 95070 -6528 CA 95070 -6528 CA 95070 -6528 CA 95070 -6533 OR 97218 - CA 95070 -6534 CA 95070 CA 95070 CA 95070 -6528 CA 95118 -1639 CA 95070 CA 95070 -6537 CA 95070 -6547 CA 95070 CA 95070 -6547 CA 95070 -6547 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 3 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 12413 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -48 -022 MURANO ANN F AND KATSUYOSHI 12413 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6538 12385 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -48 -023 FARA JOHN W AND CAROL J TRUSTEE 12385 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6538 12357 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -48 -024 HAY RONALD S AND LESLIE J 12357 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6538 12301 VISTA ARROYO CT 366 -48 -025 NAGGIAR MICHEL AND DIANE 12301 VISTA ARROYO CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6547 12329 VISTA ARROYO CT 366 -48 -026 DEWEY ROBERT W 12329 VISTA ARROYO CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6547 12637 STAR RIDGE CT 366 -49 -001 EAGLE MICHAEL L AND JUANITA K 12637 STAR RIDGE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6510 12467 PARKER RANCH RD 366 -49 -006 GOEL AJIT AND RANJANA TRUSTEE 12467 PARKER RANCH RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6538 12525 PARKER RANCH CT 366 -49 -009 DITTMANN MANFRED K AND INGRID H 12525 PARKER RANCH CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6502 12532 PARKER RANCH CT 366 -49 -010 LIN EDWARD S AND ROSE S 851 KEVENAIRE DR MILPITAS CA 95035 -3337 12502 PARKER RANCH CT 366 -49 -011 SUN KAI C AND LINDA S 12502 PARKER RANCH CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6503 21415 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -012 SYMONDS JOHN R AND ELIZABETH A 21415 CONTINENTAL CIRCLE SARATOGA CA 95070 -6505 21427 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -013 KAPURIA ANIL AND SUCHETA 21427 CONTINENTAL CIRCLE SARATOGA CA 95070 -6505 21439 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -014 YAMAUCHI ALAN ET AL 1266 MANDENN DR SUNNYVALE CA 94087 21451 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -015 KLEIN THOMAS AND SUSAN TRUSTEE 20824 HILLMOOR DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3002 21463 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -016 TAM ANDREW C AND EUGENIA Y 21463 CONTINENTAL CL SARATOGA CA 95070 -6505 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -022 VALLEY TITLE CO 125 E SUNNYOAKS AV UNIT 108 CAMPBELL CA 95008 12375 FARR RANCH RD 366 -49 -027 WELLS - LAWSON MARCIA AND LAWSON 12375 FARR RANCH RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6531 21471 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -046 ROBICHAUX PAUL R TRUSTEE & ET AL 21471 CONTINENTAL CL SARATOGA CA 95070 -6505 CONTINENTAL CL 366 -49 -047 ROBICHAUX PAUL R TRUSTEE & ET AL 21471 CONTINENTAL CL SARATOGA CA 95070 -6505 21245 COMER DR 366 -50 -001 SMART JOHN L AND CHERYL L 21245 COMER DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3709 21329 DIAMOND OAKS CT 366 -50 -004 LOWRY ROBERT C AND SALLY U 12610 ARROYO DE ARGUELLO SARATOGA CA 95070 -3703 DIAMOND OAK CT 366 -50 -005 BLACKWELL CHRISTOPHER D AND 1359 PIERCE RANCH RD SAN JOSE CA 95120 -4566 21356 DIAMOND OAKS CT 366 -50 -006 MORRISS ROBERT H AND CYNTHIA S 21356 DIAMOND OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6509 12805 PICEA CT 366 -50 -021 CHEN CHARLES T AND HEDY 12805 PICEA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6548 12693 STAR RIDGE CT 366 =50 -031 CAMPBELL DAVID V 12693 STAR RIDGE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6510 12721 STAR RIDGE CT 366 -50 -032 VIALE GARY L AND PAMELA H ET AL 12721 STAR RIDGE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6510 12749 STAR RIDGE CT 366 -50 -033 CHANG EDWARD C AND MARGARET C 12749 STAR RIDGE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6510 12777 PICEA CT 366 -50 -034 CAVALLI.NI BIAGO AND MARIA G 26000 RANCHO MANUELLA LN LOS ALTOS HILLS CA 94022 -2034 12846.STARR RIDGE CT 366 -50 -037 MANGALICK DINESH C AND KUSUM 12846 STARR RIDGE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6511 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 4 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 12888 CHIQUITA CT 366 -50 -040 STERNBERG KENNETH J AND ILENA 12888 CHIQUITA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6507 11941 BROOKGLEN DR 378 -24 -002 SANJIDEH SHAHRDAD AND ZOHREH 11941 BROOKGLEN DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3403 11995 WALBROOK DR 378 -25 -021 CLAYTON MARILYN C 11995 WALBROOK DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3450 11980 BROOKGLEN DR 378 -25 -023 WILLIAMSON LEE M AND SHIRLEY A 11980 BROOKGLEN DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3402 12523 SCULLY AV 386 -04 -019 WANG PAUL J AND CHI -MEI 12523 SCULLY AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -3907 12624 PASEO FLORES 386 -12 -040 KLINE ROGER G AND PEGGY S 12624 PASEO FLORES SARATOGA CA 95070 -4117 12619 PASEO OLIVOS 386 -12 -054 PALLONE THOMAS G AND FONDA L 12619 PASEO OLIVOS SARATOGA CA 95070 -4150 12625 PASEO OLIVOS 386 -12 -055 LOMAN MILDRED K 12625 PASEO OLIVOS SARATOGA CA 95070 -4150 12618 PASEO OLIVOS 386 -12 -067 GRISWOLD DAVID C AND TERESA R 12618 PASEO OLIVOS SARATOGA CA 95070 -4151 12623 QUITO RD 386 -12 -068 BRAUN WAYNE D AND LINDA 12623 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3628 12639 QUITO RD 386 -12 -069 TAN TJWAN B AND DHIAM G 814 HUMEWICH WY SUNNYVALE CA 94087 18533 PASEO TIERRA 386 -13 -011 KULLICK STEVEN E AND CARY L 18533 PASEO TIERRA SARATOGA CA 95070 -4128 18580 PASEO TIERRA 386 -13 -026 TOM PAUL K AND DORA L 18580 PASEO TIERRA SARATOGA CA 95070 -4129 12785 QUITO RD 386 -13 -030 FOGARTY WILLIAM E SR 2464 EL CAMINO REAL UNIT 123 SANTA CLARA CA 95050 12861 QUITO RD 386 -13 -053 SAUTTER J R ET AL 21308 MISSION BL HAYWARD CA 94541 12885 QUITO RD 386 -13 -054 SZUCS ELIZABETH B 12701 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4173 12360 RADOYKA DR 386 -18 -020 FIXLER HERBERT B AND DOROTHY M 12360 RADOYKA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3525 19910 SARAGLEN CT 386 -26 -065 PERRY CAROL L 19910 SARAGLEN CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3217 19332 MELINDA CL 386 -28 -014 ARNOLD KENNETH F AND OLGA S 19332 MELINDA CL SARATOGA CA 95070 19404 MELINDA CL 386 -28 -030 TELFORD LYNN K 19404 MELINDA CL SARATOGA CA 95070 19466 MILLER CT 386 -29 -0150 MURRAY LEROY E PO BOX 3212 SARATOGA CA 95070 19566 BROCKTON LN 386 -31 -048 JAMESON SCOTT K AND CHRISTIE A 19566 BROCKTON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -3928 19544 BROCKTON LN 386 -31 -049 YANG CHIN F AND SHIRLEY P 19544 BROCKTON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -3928 19522 BROCKTON LN 386 -31 -050 GROSS TWOANA M TRUSTEE' 19522 BROCKTON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -3928 19488 BROCKTON LN 386 -31 -052 CHAVEZ ANDREW L AND NOELI PO BOX 3143 SARATOGA CA 95070 19468 BROCKTON LN 386 -40 -028 TAI SHUNG - CHIANG AND CHANG L 13477 BRIAR CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5012 12799 MILLER AV 386 -40 -031 STAMOS CONSTANTINE AND MICHELLE 12799 MILLER AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4028 20015 COX AV 386 -44 -042 MC BRIDE MARILYN AND ROBERT 20015 COX AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -3824 12451 QUITO RD 386 -46 -018 DE BAR LESTER D AND ETHEL M ET AL 12451 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3626 11/16/93- 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APT OWNER ADDRESS CITY 12475 QUITO RD 386 -46 -019 NG KENNETH Y AND MONICA 19051 DAGMAR DR SARATOGA 12799 BACH CT 386 -47 -005 GIOMI GENE TRUSTEE 12799 BACH CT SARATOGA 12796 BACH CT 386 -47 -006 MOGANNAM EASA G AND EVELYN E 12796 BACH CT SARATOGA 12795 RODONI CT 386 -47 -013 LEISTER INGRID L 12795 RODONI CT SARATOGA 12792 RODONI CT 386 -47 -014 CONROY FRANCIS P AND PATRICIA J 12792 RODONI CT SARATOGA 12790 HOMES DR 386 -47 -024 FEDELI NICHOLAS C JR AND KATHLEEN 12790 HOMES DR SARATOGA 12799 BROOKGLEN CT 386 -47 -034 PEARSON FREDERICK H JR AND LOIS J 12799 BROOKGLEN CT SARATOGA 19161 COX AV 386 -47 -035 COX WILLIAM E ET AL 4412 VENICE WY SAN JOSE TED AV 386 -53 -027 GALEB SLOBODAN ET AL 12340 SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD SARATOGA 12370 TED AV 386 -54 -007 HU FU -KING AND TERRY 1024 GEDDY WY FREMONT DE SANKA AV 386 -54 -017 BENJAMIN VIOLET AND DANIEL 20199 GUAVA CT SARATOGA 20190 CHERRY LN 386 -54 -023 BLOOM STEVEN G AND MARIE H 20190 CHERRY LN SARATOGA 12428 DE SANKA AV 386 -54 -046 CHEN HSIN -CHANG AND HSIN -LIN 21134 LAURETTA DR CUPERTINO SARATOGA CREEK DR 389 -06 -1602 STURLA WARREN A PO BOX 1234 SARATOGA VILLAGE DR 389 -06 -006 ABRAMS ISAAC N PO BOX 2067 SARATOGA VILLAGE DR 389 -06 -008 MEDICAL VILLAGE OF SARATOGA PO BOX 2067 SARATOGA SARATOGA AV 389 -06 -016 MEDICAL VILLAGE OF SARATOGA PO BOX 2067 SARATOGA 13025 SARATOGA AV 389 -06 -017 MVS CO PO BOX 2067 SARATOGA SARATOGA AV 389 -10 -005 VINEYARDS OF SARATOGA PO BOX 906 CAMPBELL SARATOGA AV 389 -10 -006 VINEYARDS OF SARATOGA PO BOX 906 CAMPBELL 13150 SARATOGA AV. 389 -11 -012 DIVIDEND DEVELOPMENT 3600 PRUNERIDGE AV SANTA CLARA SARATOGA AV 389 -11 -013 DIVIDEND DEVELOPMENT 3600 PRUNERIDGE AV SANTA CLARA SARATOGA AV 389 -11 -014 DIVIDEND DEVELOPMENT 3600 PRUNERIDGE AV SANTA CLARA 13005 PASEO PRESADA 389 -12 -001 BEEBE IRVIN J AND MARY W 16201 CAMINO DEL SOL LOS GATOS 18761 DEVON AV 389 -12 -003 MOFFETT MICHAEL J AND PATRICIA L 18837 ASPESI DR SARATOGA 18955 MC FARLAND AV 389 -12 -016 HONDA MARYANN Y ET AL 18955 MC FARLAND AV SARATOGA 12965 QUITO RD 389 -13 -014 SMITH ELIZABETH L TRUSTEE 12965 QUITO RD SARATOGA 18533 PASEO LADO 389 -13 -015 VAN WINGERDEN ROBERT S TRUSTEE 18533 PASEO LADO . SARATOGA 13005 QUITO RD 389 -13 -041 ROTHERHAM MICHAEL E AND ROSE P 13005 QUITO RD SARATOGA STATE ZIP CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA Page 5 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 6 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 18645 MC FARLAND AV 389 -14 -015 ENGEL ADNA L 18645 MC FARLAND AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4623 18677 MC FARLAND AV 389 -14 -017 LLEWELLYN GEORGE AND LOANN L 18677 MC FARLAND AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4623 18692 MC FARLAND AV 389 -14 -023 CALL DAVID D 18692 MC FARLAND AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4622 18580 MARTHA AV 389 -14 -057 WAN MICHAEL W ET AL 18580 MARTHA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4615 18566 MARTHA AV 389 -14 -058 MCCARTHY PHILIP J AND PAULA A 18566 MARTHA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4615 18552 MARTHA AV 389 -14 -059 KARJA RAMO N AND HAJRIJE 18552 MARTHA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4615 13135 QUITO RD 389 -14 -060 YFANTIS SHIRLEY C AND JOHN A 13135 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -4727 18529 MC COY AV 389 -14 -063 ZHANG DALUN AND JEAN W 13177 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070- 18859 MC FARLAND AV 389 -15 -021 DONALDSON JUDITH A ET AL 18859 MC FARLAND.AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4625 13166 HEATH ST 389 -15 -026 UZZARDO MARY 13166 HEATH ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -4611 18746 MC FARLAND AV 389 -15 -040 PARINEH POOROUSHASB 505 W OLIVE AV UNIT 415 SUNNYVALE CA. 94086 18960 MC FARLAND AV 389 -16 -001 SEAGRAM JOSEPH E & SONS INC 800 THIRD AV NEW YORK NY 10022 13159 HEATH ST 389 -16 -037 CAMERON BRUCE A 119 WENDOVER CIRCLE OAKRIDGE TN 37830 13253 MC CULLOCH AV 389 -18 -006 LEVY MARTIN J AND NANSEA A 13253 MC CULLOCH AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4634 13281 MC CULLOCH AV 389 -18 -008 AMERICAN GENERAL FINANCE INC 1717 N CALIFORNIA BL UNIT #21) WALNUT CREEK CA 94596 13366 MC CULLOCH AV 389 -18 -011 WHEELER AARON JR AND MARIAN 13366 MC CULLOCH AV J - SARATOGA CA 95070 -4655 QUITO RD 389 -19 -006 ARNDT BYRON C TRUSTEE & ET AL 2744 S BASCOM AV SAN.JOSE CA 95124 QUITO RD 389 -19 -015 SLADE ROLF AND JUNE M 13501 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 13501 SOUSA LN 389 -19 -017 CUENCA HENRY R 10113 ORIOLE LN PALO CEDRO CA 96673 18885 BONNET WY 389 -21 -040 GIBBS RODMAN N AND KATHRYN G 18885 BONNET WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -5214 18873 BONNET WY 389 -21 -041 LI JAN -KWEI J AND LIU -MEI R 18873 BONNET WY SARATOGA CA -95070-5214 18733 METLER CT 389 -23 -006 AMSTUTZ GAIL AND ALLEN G 18733 METLER CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5227 18737 ASPESI DR 389 -23 -007 CARDONA CARL C AND JACQUELINE M 18737 ASPESI DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5207 19010 PORTOS DR 389 -30 -002 FALCONI OSCAR 19010 PORTOS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5121 13761 DOLPHIN DR 389 -30 -014 STEIN ANN K ET AL 13761 DOLPHIN DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5240 19387 ALLENDALE AV 389 -33 -017 CAVIGLIA ALBERT L JR AND MARIAN K 19387 ALLENDALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5138 13480 SARATOGA AV 389 -34 -003 FITZSIMMONS ANN V AND JOSEPH J 13480 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4538 13434 WARD WY 389 -37 -009 DU STERLING S DII ET AL 1055 LOMA VERDE AV PALO ALTO CA 94303 -4032 13464 HOLIDAY DR 389 -37 -027 HILDEBRAND EDITH 13464 HOLIDAY DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5112 11/16/93 ITU 13491 MYREN DR 13464 MYREN DR 13435 WARD WY 19170 DAGMAR DR 19375 PORTOS CT 19376 PORTOS CT 13030 19900 COX AV 19705 BRAEMAR DR 19886 BONNIE RIDGE WAY 20490 GLASGOW DR 13385 ARGONNE DR 20446 MILJEVICH DR 20472 GLASGOW DR 13361 ARGONNE DR 13409 ARGONNE DR 13421 ARGONNE DR 13443 ARGONNE DR 13465 ARGONNE DR 13487 ARGONNE DR 14001 CHESTER AV 18930 ALLENDALE AV 14171 CHESTER AV 14131 TEN ACRES CT 14153 TEN ACRES CT 14175 TEN ACRES CT 14195 CHESTER AV 14024 CAMINO BARCO 14101 MARILYN LN 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 7 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA APB OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 389 -37 -028 HUI SHERMAN K AND JOSEPHINE S 13491 MYREN DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5113 389 -37 -044 VAN TRAN DZUNG AND MUON 1895 PALO SANTO DR CAMPBELL CA 95008 -1542 389 -38 -051 LEVANTE JAMES ET AL 923 PRIMROSE AV SUNNYVALE CA 94086 389 -41 -018 MACIEL CHARLES AND MARY L 124 VALLEY VIEW AV SAN JOSE CA 95127 389 -41 -043 JOHNSON ROBERT R AND EVELYN J 19375 PORTOS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5119 389 -41 -044 SANTANA GEORGE R AND ADRIENNE C 19376 PORTOS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5119 393 -02 -003 SANFILIPPO PHILIP S TRUSTEE 18200 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SAN JOSE CA 95120 393 -17 -001 LOYST SHIRLEY ET AL 19900 COX AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -3846 393 -26 -034 GREEN GREGORY AND ANN 19705 BRAEMAR DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5003 393 -27 -049 NELSON JOSEPH AND LISA 19886 BONNIE RIDGE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 393 -32 -001 CONSTAN TINE PERRY TRUSTEE & ET AL 20490 GLASGOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4326 393 -32 -003 LEUNG KAI C AND ALICE T TRUSTEE 13385 ARGONNE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4910 393 -32 -026 GACANICH MARY TRUSTEE 20446 MILJEVICH DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4349 393 -32 -035 WACHTER JOSEPH P AND ELIZABETH S 20472 GLASGOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4326 393 -32 -036 BERRY STEPHEN A SR AND JOANN 13361 ARGONNE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4910 393 -33 -017 CAMERON CHRISTOPHER P AND JOANN 13409 ARGONNE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4910 393 -33 -018 SONG YONG S AND HYE K 13421 ARGONNE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4910 393 -33 -019 LAVELLE MICHAEL G AND CAROL A 13443 ARGONNE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4910 393 -33 -020 ROHRBOUGH EVAN 13465 ARGONNE DR, SARATOGA CA 95070 -4910 393 -33 -021 BARRY LEE R 13487 ARGONNE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4910 397 -01 -007 BELLICITTI HARRY ET AL 14001 CHESTER LN SARATOGA CA 95070 397 -01 -012 MALISIC MILADIN AND DARINKA ET AL 22360 PALM AV CUPERTINO CA 95014 -2710 397 -01 -050 O'ROURKE THOMAS J AND MARJORIE I 14045 APRICOT HILL SARATOGA CA 95070 -5614 397 -01 -053 WORTHINGTON J R AND BARBARA A 14131 TEN ACRES CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5637 397 -01 -054 KOURETAS PETE AND BESSE 14153 TEN ACRES CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5637 397 -01 -055 JOHANSEN KIM A AND PATRICIA L 14175 TEN ACRES CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5637 397 -01 -057 SALCEDO ALFREDO L AND MARILYN V PO BOX 3445 PIKEVILLE KY 41502- 397 -01 -069 KRPATA CHARLES E AND BRENDA S 14024 CAMINO BARCO SARATOGA CA. 95070 -5661 397 -02 -030 PELLICCIOTTI LEO AND VIRGINIA 14101 MARILYN LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5644 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 8 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITU SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIE 18610 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -031 MURPHY THOMAS R ET AL 18610 MARSHALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5658 18570 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -032 PAC TR COMP TTEE BELLI EMMA TR 1245 S WINCHESTER BL SAN JOSE CA 95128 18530 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -033 BURKHART HOWARD N JR AND MARCIA 18530 MARSHALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5658 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -035 BELLICITTI HARRY L 18500 MARSHALL .LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5658 18525 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -036 BELLICITTI HARRY L 14001 CHESTER AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5619 18561 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -037 PETERSON EUNICE C 18561 MARSHALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5647 18591 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -038 FOUGHT ELMER C AND EUNA TRUSTEE 18591 MARSHALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5647 18505 MARSHALL LN 397 -02 -070 PUBLICOVER MARK W AND VALERIE A 18505 MARSHALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5647 18630 ALLENDALE AV 397 -02 -109 BUEHNER OLIVER W TRUSTEE 18650 ALLENDALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5237 QUITO RD 397 -02 -110 BELLICITTI HARRY L ET AL 18500 MARSHALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5658 SOBEY RD 397 -03 -004 GIAMMONA JOSEPH V TRUSTEE & ET AL 14251 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5605 14451 SOBEY RD 397 -03 -012 FARROW MICHAEL M AND VICKY M 14451 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5607 14471 SOBEY RD 397 -03 -014 BARNES NANCY J 14471.SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5608 14475 SOBEY RD 397 -03 -015 HOOVER REX W AND JANIS L 14475 SOBEY RD SARATOGA- CA 95070 -5608 14231 HILLTOP WY 397 -03 -024 RHEE DAVID Y AND YOONHEE P O BOX 9895 SAN JOSE CA 95157 18843 TEN ACRES RD 397 03 -029 BENNETT JANICE J TRUSTEE 18843 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5621 18908 TEN -ACRES RD 397 -03 -032 GAUDREAU DANIEL A AND NASRIN 18908 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5604 18801 TEN ACRES RD 397 -03 -039 FERA PETER P AND SUSAN E 18801 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5638 14469 OMEGA LN 397 -03 -046 CHMIEL JOHN A 14469 OMEGA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5655 14437 LELAND CL 397 -03 -066 KINDER FREDERICK 14437 LELAND CL SARATOGA CA 95070 14528 CHESTER AV 397 -03 -072 YAUGER VICKI M AND HARRY B 14528 CHESTER AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5660 14510 SOBEY RD 397 -03 -074 KENDALL GERALD H TRUSTEE & ET AL 98 IDLEWOOD RD KENTFIELD CA 94904 14507 CHESTER AV 397 -03 -076 SCOTT WALLACE M 14507 CHESTER AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5665 18840 TEN ACRES RD 397 -03 -080 SCHALLER KEVIN D AND KATHRYN J 1860 S BASCOM AV CAMPBELL CA 95008 -2358 18928 TEN ACRES -4415 397 -03 -081 PEIMANI FARROKH ET AL 18928 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5604 14427 EMERALD HILLS CT 397 -03 -082 LAMORTE ANTHONY AND RAY 14858 GYPSY HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6100 14451 EMERALD HILLS CT 397 -03 -083 WU JERWIN AND CATHERINE L 14451 EMERALD HILL SARATOGA CA 95070- 14489 EMERALD HILLS 397 -03 -084 JAYAKUMAR NAGAB AND ASHA 14489 EMERALD HILLS SARATOGA CA 95070 -5674 14482 EMERALD HILLS CT 397 -03 -085 HUANG SU C AND LIN M 20673 GREENLEAF DR CUPERTINO CA 95014 -1907 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 9 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITU SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP LELAND CL 397 -03 -091 BORRIONE JOHN P AND LYNNE A ET AL 19717 SOLANA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3943 LELAND CL 397 -03 -092 BORRIONE JOHN P AND LYNNE A ET AL 19717 SOLANA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3943 14475 LELAND CL 397 -03 -093 LELAND VENTURE 2155 S BASCOM AV CAMPBELL CA 95008 -3272 14478 SOBEY RD 397 -04 -022 CHAU ROSSANA B AND EUGENE Y 6719 ELWOOD RD SAN JOSE CA 95120 -5401 SPRINGBROOK LN 397 -04 -086 GERA MARKO AND KLARA 19136 SPRING BROOK LN SARATOGA CA 95070 14659 CHESTER AV 397 -04 -095 BRISCOE W C AND NANCY J 14659 CHESTER AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5670 14671 CHESTER AV 397 -04 -096 MAC DONELL GREGORY S AND 14671 CHESTER AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5670 14594 SOBEY OAKS CT 397 -04 -098 EVAN THOMAS J AND DANA L 14594 SOBEY OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6143 SOBEY OAKS CT 397 -04 -100 SLOAN DANIEL AND ELLA E 864 RENETTA CT LOS ALTOS CA 94024 -4627 14671 SOBEY OAKS CT 397 -04 -101 MUHAWI GEORGE J 275 HOSPITAL PARKWAY UNIT 860 SAN JOSE CA 95119 SOBEY OAKS CT 397 -04 -102 TSANG SIU K AND SUSAN S 4089 CRANFORD CL SAN JOSE CA 95124 -3304 14520 CHESTER AV 397 -04 -103 TSANG YIN K AND SOOK S 4089 CRANFORD CL SAN JOSE CA 95124 -3304 14564 CHESTER AV 397 -04 -104 TASHJIAN ZAVEN AND NINA 14564 CHESTER AV SARATOGA CA 95070- 14751 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -04 -105 NYSTROM RAYMOND E AND DONNA M 14751 GYPSY HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6141 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -04 -109 SOBEY OAKS ASSOCIATES 2021 THE ALAMEDA UNIT 145 SAN JOSE CA 95126 14904 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -04 -110 TAO MICHAEL H AND DONNA T P O BOX 62226 SUNNYVALE CA 94086 14858 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -04 -111 LA MORTE ANTHONY J AND RAY R 14858 GYPSY HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6100 14812 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -04 -112 DION C N TRUSTEE & ET AL PO BOX 20512 LAS VEGAS CA 89112 - GYPSY HILL RD 397 -04 -113 KWOK PATRICK S AND SUSAN C .19403 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4529 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -04 -114 SOBEY OAKS ASSOCIATES 2021 THE ALAMEDA UNIT 145 SAN JOSE CA 95126 14660 CHESTER AV 397 -04 -117 VALERO FRANCISCO P AND ANA M 14660 CHESTER AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5669 18530 SOBEY RD 397 -05 -006 WOODHULL ROBERT B 18530 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5600 SOBEY RD 397 -05 -009 CHRISTENSEN WILLIAM P AND NONA H 18510 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5610 14521 QUITO RD 397 -05 -028 HINZ ETHEL J P O BOX 97 SANTA CLARA CA 95052 18545 VESSING RD 397 -05 -031 GURNEE THOMAS H ET AL 987 HIGHLANDS CL LOS ALTOS CA 94024 -7012 18579 VESSING RD 397 -05 -039 BUCKENDAHL DALE E AND PATRICIA E 18579. VESSING RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5613 18557 VESSING RD 397 -05 -041 PIRAMOON ABE AND MAUREEN A 18557 VESSING RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5613 14270 OLD WOOD RD 397 -05 -049 SHIOTA PHILIP AND EVELYN 14270 OLD WOOD RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5632 14307 OLD WOOD RD 397 -05 -053 SHAHABI SAIID AND ROGHIEH 14307 OLD WOOD RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5631 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 10 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP SOBEY RD 397 -05 -066 KIRKHAM NEAL P AND LILLIAN 18630 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5662 14463 EVANS LN 397 -05 -073 IKOLA ARTHUR L AND NANCY K 14463 EVANS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5601 14501 EVANS LN 397 -05 -074 ESTEVERENA ROLANDO C AND MARTA 14501 EVANS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5601 18653 VESSING RD 397 -05 -085 MCKENZIE STEPHEN R AND BARBARA A 18653 VESSING RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5613 18681 VESSING CT 397 7-05 -086 MC KENZIE DONALD E AND BARBARA G 18680 VESSING CT SARATOGA CA 95070 18691 VESSING RD 397 -05 -087 MOORE STEPHEN A AND SANDRA S 18691 VESSING RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5613 SOBEY RD 397 -05 -091 BOLIN ANITA K 11274 ROLLING HILLS DR EL CAJON CA 92020 18620 VESSING RD 397 -06 -048 LINDSETH CLINTON O AND LOIS M 18620 VESSING RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5656 18632 VESSING CT 397 -06 -108 TATE MARLENE L AND JAMES A 18632 VESSING CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5666 15095 QUITO RD 397 -07 -005 COWARD JOHN H AND DENISE E 15095 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6263 15131 EL QUITO WY 397 -07 -011 MILLETT IAN A AND URSULA A 15131 EL QUITO WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6209 15161 ORIOLE WY 397 -07 -013 LANE -SMITH MARTIN G AND RITA C 15161 ORIOLE WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6264 15199 ORIOLE WY 397 -07 -014 KANAZAWA RICHARD M AND JUNE 15199 ORIOLE WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6264 15160 ORIOLE WY 397 -07 -016 ROFFMANN CAROL B TRUSTEE 15160 ORIOLE WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6264 15160 SOBEY RD 397 -07 -025 NELSON JON AND BETH 15160 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6237 15161 SOBEY RD 397 -07 -036 MILOGLAV MATO AND MARE 15161 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6238 15070 SPERRY .LN 397 -07 -092 ROLIZ INC 15466 LOS GATOS BL UNIT 109114 LOS GATOS CA 95030 15134 SPERRY LN 397 -07 -094 LEPOSAVIC WAYNE 15466 LOS GATOS BLVD STE UNIT LOS GATOS CA 95030 15146 SPERRY LN 397 -07 -095 FARR HASHEM M AND NASRIN M 15146 SPERRY LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6262 15250 SOBEY RD 397 -07 -105 TATE LINDA AND RONALD M TRUSTEE 851 E HAMILTON AV UNIT #120 CAMPBELL CA 95008 15227 QUITO RD 397 -07 -108 SINSLEY CONSTRUCTION INC 12280 FARR RANCH RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6528 15229 QUITO RD 397 -07 -109 SINSLEY CONSTRUCTION INC 12280 FARR RANCH RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6528 15231 QUITO RD 397 -07 -110 BOYLE R D AND LAUREN R 15231 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6228 15185 QUITO RD 397 -07 -111 ROMANCHAK WINIFRED ET AL 2211 SW FIRST AV UNIT #403 PORTLAND OR 97201 15471 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -012 YOUNG STEPHEN C AND ROBERTA 15471 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6216 19075 SUNNYSIDE DR 397 -08 -021 LEACH DONALD P 19075 SUNNYSIDE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6242 15430 EL CAMINO GRANDE 397 -08 -023 BEATON COLIN 15430 EL CAMINO GRANDE SARATOGA CA 95070 -6258 15400 EL CAMINO GRANDE 397 -08 -024 DAY PATRICIA M AND JAMES W 15400 EL CAMINO GRANDE SARATOGA CA 95070 -6258 19020 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -025 SMITH CHARLES C AND DOLORES C 811 CASTRO ST FOSTER CITY CA 94404- 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 11 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 18974 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -026 EMERSON R C 18974 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6201 18975 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 =031 HOLMES ROBERT F AND DONNA G 18975 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6202 15350 EL CAMINO GRANDE 397 -08 -033 PELIO W L 1733 DELL AV CAMPBELL CA 95008- 15300 EL CAMINO GRANDE 397 -08 -034 CASE GORDON T AND JEANNE W 15300 EL CAMINO GRANDE SARATOGA CA 95070 -6259 18755 MONTEWOOD DR 397 -08 -045 LOHR CAROL W AND JEROME J 18755 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6221 15475 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -051 MANSUBI FRED AND MARY 2577 SAMARITAN DR UNIT 860 SAN JOSE CA 95124 15474 MONTE VISTA DR 397- 0E -''56 WALSH GWENDOLYN M TRUSTEE PO BOX 291 GLENBROOK NV 89413 - MONTA VISTA DR 397 -08 -057 O DONNELL DANIEL B AND JOANNE T 19135 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6217 18634 MONTEWOOD DR 397 -08 -065 ODINEAL CHARLES N AND DORIS D 18634 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6222 15187 BLUE GUM CT 397 -08 -081 GUPTA RAM P AND SAROJ K 12613 LIDO WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -3139 15209 BLUE GUM CT 397 -08 -082 HORVATH FRANK J AND DAGMAR M 15209 BLUE GUM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6268 15225 BLUE GUM CT 397 -08 -083 LUEBBERS MARSHA L AND SCOTT S 15225 BLUE GUM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6268 19110 SUNNYSIDE DR 397 -08 -084 GIES ROBERTA P TRUSTEE 19110 SUNNYSIDE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6242 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -093 FOLEY MARY S JR AND JAMES W 18630 ASPESI CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5202 18642 MONTEWOOD DR — 397 -08 -098 GANTAYAT AKHILA N AND BIJOYA L 852 LAS LOMAS DR MILPITAS CA 95035 -4527 15425 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -099 BEAM RICHARD B AND THERESA M 16300 HILOW RD LOS GATOS CA 95032 -4604 15425 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -100 WOOLWORTH A R AND CAROL J ET AL 167 S SAN ANTONIO RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -101 GREGORIAN ROUBIK AND AGNES 1431 GRAYWOOD DR SAN JOSE CA 95129 -4778 MONTE VISTA DR 397 -08 -102 WOOLWORTH A R AND CAROL J ET AL 167 S SAN ANTONIO RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 19106 PANORAMA DR 397 -09 -021 BARKER FLORENCE S 19106 PANORAMA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6225 19101 PANORAMA DR 397 -09 -022 LOUWENAAR KEITH E AND MARILYN R 19101 PANORAMA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6224 14500 FRUITVALE AV 397 -12 -012 GRAND LODGE OF THE IOOF STATE OF P O BOX 2669 SARATOGA CA 95070 14500 FRUITVALE AV 397 -12 -016 CALIFORNIA ODD FELLOWS 14520 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 14500 FRUITVALE AV 397 -12 -019 ODD FELLOWS HOME OF CALIF P O BOX 2669 SARATOGA CA 95070 14211 CHESTER AV 397 -13 -031 CHU KE- CHIANG AND CHI C PO BOX 2893 SARATOGA CA 95070 -0893. 19100 ALLENDALE AV. 397 -15 -014 CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER 50 E NORTH TEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84150 ALLENDALE AV 397 -15 -016 CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER 50 E NORTH TEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84150 19516 DOUG LASS LN 397 -17 -005 LAHANN GERALD TRUSTEE 19516 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA CA, 95070 -5518 14431 FRUITVALE AV 397 -17 -006 EDELSTEIN VIRGINIA ET AL 14431 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5642 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 12 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA ITU APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 14475 FRUITVALE AV 397 -17 -008 BARRINGER JAMES A AND LYNN H 14475 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5642 14581 FRUITVALE AV. 397 -17 -010 PESTANA ERNEST E AND IRENE 1431 ATTEBERRY LN SAN JOSE CA 95131 -1409 14545 FRUITVALE AV 397 -17 -070 PITTMAN KATHRYN W TRUSTEE 14545 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6134 19550 FARWELL AV 397 -18 -022 THORPE LOUIS M AND SANDRA R 19550 FARWELL AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5507 19520 FARWELL AV 397 -18 -023 BLACK REXFORD E AND DIXIE L 19520 FARWELL AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5507 14711 FRUITVALE AV 397 -18 -024 DRINKER HENRY R JR TRUSTEE & ET AL 14711 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6136 14890 BARANGA LN 397 -18 -034 MEREDITH GENE A AND FRANCES V 14890 BARANGA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5501 14870 BARANGA LN 397 -18 -035 WON SU S AND SUSAN 14870 BARANGA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5501 14835 BARANGA LN 397 -18 -037 GUEST ROBERT W AND SHIRLEY J 14835 BARANGA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5501 14855 BARANGA LN 397 -18 -038 LIN ROBERT K AND CAFNIE C 14855 BARANGA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5501 19731 THREE OAKS WY 397 -18 -042 PAL GEORGE S AND NORMA E 19731 THREE OAKS WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6441 14765 FRUITVALE AV 397 -18 -075 MILLER HENRY W AND SONDRA M 14765 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6136 14815 THREE OAKS CT 397 -18 -101 BREGANTE RICHARD J AND JUDY P 14815 THREE OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5975 14861 THREE OAKS CT 397 -18 -102 LEBOWITZ EDWARD A AND CHARLENE J 14861 THREE OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5500 19720 THREE OAKS WY 397 -19 -001 GARFIELD FRANK M AND ADRIENNE L 19720 THREE OAKS WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6442 19670 THREE OAKS WY 397 -19 -002 ROBINSON KARL W AND THERESA L 19670 THREE OAKS WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6442 19654 THREE OAKS WY 397 -19 -003 HOCKER MILDRED E. PO BOX 3 SARATOGA CA 95070 19610 THREE OAKS WY 397 -19 -007 YIN JANE AND PAUL 19610 THREE OAKS WY SARATOGA. CA 95070 -6440 19770 THREE OAKS WY 397 -19 -021 SZETO FRANK K AND PAULINE L 19770 THREE OAKS WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6442 15013 FRUITVALE AV 397 -19 -025 ZADWICK KENNETH A AND DOLORES E 15013 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6270 HORSESHOE CT 397 -20 -094 FOSTER GERALDINE G 14552 HORSESHOE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5919 LUTHERIA WY 397 -24 -022 MOORE ELLEN D TRUSTEE 1089 S DANIEL WY SAN JOSE CA 95128 -3124 20405 WILLIAMS AV 397 -28 -035 PARKER RUBEN C AND EVELYN G 20405 WILLIAMS AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5427 14100 397 -28 -044 HIGGINS DORIS M 1887 WILLOW ST SAN JOSE CA 95125 -5237 20485 WILLIAMS AV 397 -28 -050 LEUNG SAVIO T ET AL 431 27TH AV SAN FRANCISCO CA 94121 13810 SARATOGA AV 397 -30 -062 COMBELLICK THOMAS A AND EUNICE J 13810 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -0000 13966 SARATOGA AV 397 -34 -013 CRAIG LINDA J AND ROBERT A 13966 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5436 14801 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -001 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14777 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -002 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 13 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CI'T'Y STATE ZIP 14747 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -003 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14699 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -004 VALDEZ BERT AND ADRENA 120 TWIN OAKS DR LOS GATOS CA 95030 14649 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -005 ROGERS AND BROOK; INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -006 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. .2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 CRISP AV 397 -40 -007 EPES RAYMOND E TRUSTEE & ET AL 20394 MANOA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -4909 CRISP AV 397 -40 -008 DURAN EDDON AND TRUDY L TRUSTEE 14784 LA RINCONADA DR LOS GATOS CA 95030 -1725 CRISP AV 397 -40 -009 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251. GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 CRISP AV 397 -40 -012 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 CRISP AV 397 -40 -013 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 19188 CRISP AV 397 -40 -014 SPADAFORA SAMUEL T AND CHERYL M 19188 CRISP AV SARATOGA CA 95070 CRISP AV 397 -40 -015 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14628 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -016 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14636 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -017 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14640 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -018 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -019 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA. 94022 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -020 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14969 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -021 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14977 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -022 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14985 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -023 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14991 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -024 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14996 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -025 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14984 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -026 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 14982 VIA DE MARCOS 397 -40 -027 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -40 -028 ROGERS AND BROOK, INC. 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS . CA 94022 GYPSY HILL RD 397 -40 -029 SARATOGA CITY OF 2251 GRANT RD LOS ALTOS CA 94022 13960 RAVENWOOD DR 403 -23 -001 SORTINO ANTHONY T AND VIRGINIA L 13960 RAVENWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4741 RAVENWOOD DR 403 -23 -066 AJLUNI ANDREW 515 CLEARVIEW DR LOS GATOS CA 95030 -1742 RAVENWOOD DR 403 -23 -067 CITY OF SARATOGA 515 CLEARVIEW DR LOS GATOS CA 95030 -1742 RAVENWOOD DR 403 -23 -068 SANDOVAL ELADIA 101 PLAZOLETA LOS GATOS CA 95030 -1129 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 14 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP QUITO RD 403 -24 -001 FRANKLIN CARL AND JUDITH 1979 23850 STAR CT AUBURN CA 95602- 15470 QUITO RD 410 -36 -009 RAYNES RICK 15470 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6230 22100 MT EDEN RD 503 -09 -005 FRATER MARK AND LINDA 22100 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -9730 MT EDEN RD 503 -09 -006 M E V CORP 22020 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 22060 MT EDEN RD 503 -09 -021 MUILENBURG MICHAEL S 22060 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 MT EDEN RD 503 -09 -022 SVOBODA WILLIAM A AND DARRYL L 15345 BOHLMAN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 EDENCREST LN 503 -12 -034 STELLA INVESTMENT CO L P 21060 RAINBOW DR CUPERTINO CA 95014 21777 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -021 ZABIELSKI BRUCE ET AL 4960 EMERALD ST CAPITOLA CA 95010 EDENCREST LN 503 -13 -033 HORVATH FRANK AND DAGMAR 15209 BLUE GUM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6268 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -039 HORVATH FRANK AND DAGMAR 15209 BLUE GUM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6268 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -059 HORVATH FRANK J AND DAGMAR M 15209 BLUE GUM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6268 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -067 PECK RUTH D TRUSTEE PO BOX 626 SARATOGA CA 95071 22122 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -115 HORVATH FRANK J AND DAGMAR M 15209 BLUE GUM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6268 22551 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -117 JAVID AHMED AND SAFOORA TRUSTEE 7179 WOODED LAKE DR SAN JOSE CA 95120 -5601 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -127 IRANY FRED Z AND CHRIS ET AL 13937 VISTA REGINA SARATOGA CA 95070 -4865 21789 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -131 WEI YI -HEN ET AL 21789 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -9723 MT EDEN RD 503 -13 -133 IRANY FRED Z AND CHRIS ET AL 13937 VISTA REGINA SARATOGA CA 95070 -4865 13570 PIERCE RD 503 -14 -022 BINKLEY THAD C TRUSTEE 7246 SHARON DR UNIT J SAN JOSE CA 95129 - COMER DR 503 -15 -002 WONG LUN AND CHUN 2644 EL CAMINO REAL BANTA CLARA CA 95051 CHADWICK CT 503 -15 -040 HONG HENRY Y AND MARGARET J ET AL 22459 PALM AV CUPERTINO CA 95014 -2711 CHADWICK CT 503 -15 -041 CHADWICK ALLEN L AND BARBARA 305 LARKIN RIDGE DR WATSONVILLE CA 95076 - CHADWICK CT 503 -15 -042 BREGANTE RICHARD AND JUDY 14815 THREE OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5975 21215 CHADWICK CT 503 -15 -043 PANCHOLY RANJEET K AND VIJAY 21603 CASTLETON ST CUPERTINO CA 95014 -4702 OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -044 KHAN IMDAD H AND SITARA A 21169 MARIA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6532 OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -045 KHAN IMDAD H AND SITARA A 21169 MARIA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6532 OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -052 COCCIARDI CAROL 22631 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -9708 OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -059 COCCIARDI CAROL 22631 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -9708 21272 CHIGUITA WY 503 -15 -060 WILLIAMS PHILIP C AND DEBORAH L 21272 CHIGUITA WY SARATOGA CA 95070 CHADWICK CT 503 -15 -061 CAMPBELL DON H AND LYNDA G 2392 RUPERT DR SAN JOSE CA 95124 -2607 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 15 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -062 COCCIARDI CAROL 22631 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA, 95070 -9708 OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -063 COCCIARDI CAROL 22631 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -9708 OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -064 COCCIARDI CAROL 22631 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -9708 OLD OAK WY 503 -15 -065 TEERLINK HEBER N 1915 A ALUN ROCK AV SAN JOSE CA 95116 13385 SURREY LN 503 -16 -001 FIREMAN KAY K AND PAUL L 13385 SURREY LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -4243 13405 SURREY LN 503 -16 -002 TAN KEN -SUE AND HI -NIANG 13405 SURREY LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -4243 13425 SURREY LN 503 -16 -003 LAWRENCE FRANKLIN B AND MARIE E 13425 SURREY LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -4243 13010 PIERCE RD 503 -16 -043 WORRELL FLORENCE ET AL 13010 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3744 13091 PIERCE RD 503 -16 -051 GLENNON 1987 LIVING TRUST UTD 137 WANISH PALM DESERT CA 92260 - 13145 PIERCE. RD 503 -16 -052 SMITH SCOTT K 13145 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -4211 13251 PIERCE RD 503 -16 -053 FERLA LOREE A ET AL 75 MARIPOSA AV LOS GATOS CA 95030 20975 COMER DR 503 -16 -072 GONZALEZ FERNANDO J AND ESTHER O 20975 COMER DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3709 20940 COMER DR 503 -16 -076 MCSWEENEY WILLIAM AND PATRICIA 20940 COMER DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3710 20937 COMER DR 503 -16 -077 TONGE KENNETH TRUSTEE & ET AL 20937 COMER DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -3708 20880 WARDELL RD 503 -17 -002 PECSAR STEVE J AND HILDEGARDE C 20880 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3722 21225 COMER DR 503 -17 -026 EVANS JAMES W AND JUDITH K 930 OAKDELL PL SAN JOSE CA 95117 -2538 ARROYO DE ARGUELLO 503 -17 -029 GUICHARD CHARLES P AND MARGARET "21130 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3722 WARDELL RD 503 -17 -049 HALL MARSHALL S AND HELEN U 20865 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3722 12925 ARROYO DE 503 -17 -057 BAZLEN PATRICIA A 12925 ARROYO DE ARGUELLO DR SARATOGA CA 95070 12947 ARROYO DE 503 -17 -058 CARPENTER ARTHUR W AND DOROTHY 12947 ARROYO DE ARGUELLO SARATOGA' CA 95070 -3707 21116 COMER DR 503 -17 -066 WHERCO INC 235 MONTGOMERY ST UNIT 1012 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104 21097 COMER DR 503 -17 -067 RUEHLE WILLIAM J AND JUDI A 10220 STONYDALE DR CUPERTINO CA 95014 -1030 12943 PIERCE RD 503 -18 -062 LIU HYACINTHA AND I R 12943 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3713 12929 PIERCE RD 503 -18 -069 HAM LEWIS H JR AND ANNE M 12929 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3713 12795 503 -18 -091 KOCIR MARY B AND JEROME ET AL 12795 SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3732 PIERCE RD 503 -18 -105 MARKLEY DEAN 3350 SCOTT BL BLDG #45 SANTA CLARA CA 95054 20720 LEONARD RD 503 -19 -036 MOSTAAN PARVIZ AND FARZANEH O 20720 LEONARD RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -4205 PARAMONT DR 503 -19 -048 MATHIS KATHRYN K 13180 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -4212 PARAMONT DR 503 -19 -067 TOUGAS DORIS G AND BERNARD E 20604 WARDELL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3719 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 16 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 13090 PARAMOUNT DR 503 -19 -068 HATHAWAY TAYLOR AND PEGGY R 13090 PARAMOUNT DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4210 12908 PIERCE RD 503 -19 -097 BARRIE KATHLEEN C 12900 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -3714 14071 503 -22 -068 TERRELL PAUL J ET AL 14071 SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5834 20731 MARION RD 503 -22 -102 CAMPBELL GARY L PO BOX 5046 BLGD. A SAN RAMON CA 94583 503 -23 -008 STAMPER DONALD E TRUSTEE & ET AL 20562 MARION RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5816 14221 503 -23 -016 KAHLE JOHN R 20601 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5831 14251 503-23-n%17 SEAGRAVES MARGARET TRUSTEE 13371 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4535 BROOKWOOD LN 503 -23 -028 HIGGINS WILLIAM L AND VIRGINIA B 20550 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5831 14351 ELVA AV 503 -27 -011 SPEARS ALBERT AND ROSALEEN. 14351 ELVA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5813 ELVA AV 503 -27 -081 ISIDORO FRANK W AND MERNA L 15041 PARK DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6421 14291 ELVA AV 503 -27 -090 DENNIS MICHAEL W 14291 ELVA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5811 14305 PAUL AV 503 -27 -108 SLAVIN BEVERLY A ET AL 14305 PAUL AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -5820 20895 CANYON VIEW DR 503 -28 -004 WOROBEY ANN M 20895 CANYON VIEW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5763 20905 SULLIVAN WY 503 -28 -005 GIUSTI MARY 20905 SULLIVAN WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -5723 20915 SULLIVAN WY 503 -28 -006 SWAIN SWAIN B TRUSTEE 20915 SULLIVAN WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -5723 20931 CANYON VIEW DR 503 -28 -007 KIM TAEJA 20931 CANYON VIEW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5809 CANYON VIEW DR 503 -28 -008 MEHRANY M ET AL 105 DOVER CT LOS GATOS CA 95032 -3816 21280 GLENMONT DR 503 -28 -055 BYERS FRANCES M TRUSTEE 21280 GLENMONT DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5722 20851 CANYON VIEW DR 503 -28 -075 TANG WAN -I G AND YAW -SHING 20851 CANYON VIEW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5809 20867 CANYON VIEW DR 503 -28 -089 LAW EDWIN S AND VICKY P 20867 CANYON VIEW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5809 14435 DEER CANYON 503 -28 -112 CHOU CHUEN PU J AND JUI -YU C 14435 DEER CANYON SARATOGA CA 95070 -5731 DEER SPRING CT 503 -28 -117 DICAR INVESTMENTS INCORPORATED PO BOX 2849 SARATOGA CA 95070 -0849 DEER SPRING CT 503 -28 -118 DICAR INVESTMENTS INCORPORATED PO BOX 2849 SARATOGA CA 95070 -0849 14598 DEER SPRINGS CT 503 -28 -120 BLUM SHELDON R 311 WOODLAND PARK LN MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94043 -4676 14590 DEER SPRING CT 503 -28 -121 HUANG JIEH -REN AND MING -CHU 14590 DEER SPRING CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5700 21425 TOLL GATE RD 503 -28 -122 ACHKAR GOUBRAN M AND THERESE 525 THE PRUNEYARD CAMPBELL CA 95008 TOLL GATE RD _ 503 -28 -123 NGAI -PESIC KATHERINE 1802 CHENEY DR SAN JOSE CA 95128 -3608 21441 TOLL GATE RD 503 -28 -124 CHEN CHANG Y 631 S MILPITAS BL MILPITAS CA 95035 -7700 14447 DEER CANYON RD 503 -28 -128 POLITI SANDRA L AND JOE E 14447 DEER CANYON RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5731 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 17 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN ER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 21320 SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -29 -028 SALDANIA F V TRUSTEE 19020 COX AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4156 21300 SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -29 -029 SCHROEDER BERTRAM N 21300 SARATOGA HILLS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5306 21037 DORSEY WY 503 -29 -055 SHEN ANN P AND LAWRENCE Y 21037 DORSEY WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -5336 SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -29 -078 ALLISON ENIDE 4250 STEVENS CREEK BL SAN JOSE CA 95129 -1336 21107 MICHAELS DR 503 -29 -114 BENZING JEFFREY C AND JANET M 21107 MICHAELS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5319 . SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -29 -124 MCGREGOR SCOTT A AND GIRAND 308 CASITAS BULEVAR LOS GATOS CA 95030 -1120 SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -29 -125 ALLISON ENIDE 4250 STEVENS CREEK. BL SAN JOSE CA 95129 -1336 20700 SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -29 -127 ALLISON ENIDE 4250 STEVENS CREEK SAN JOSE CA 95129 PIERCE RD 503 -30 -002 WALKER THOMAS E AND SUSAN 1134 LITTLEOAK CL SAN JOSE CA 95129 SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -30 -010 POLITI JOSEPH E AND SANDRA 14447 DEER CANYON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 14220 PIKE RD 503 -30 -022 LUSTENDADER THOMAS G AND CAROL 14220 PIKE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5357 14550 PIKE RD 503 -30 -023 CEPPOS JEROME M AND KAREN - 14550 PIKE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5359 14124 PIKE RD 503 -30 -030 BOHN ROBERT H AND GAY M 14124 PIKE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5304 14100 PIKE RD 503 -30 -031 LEE DANA M 14100 PIKE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5304 14440 PIKE RD 503 -30 -038 BERGNA LOUIS P AND PATRICIA A 14420 PIKE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5358 503 -30 -056 ATWOOD STANFORD H JR ET AL 14684 PIKE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 14440 PIKE RD 503 -30 -075 MILLER JACK R TRUSTEE & ET AL PO BOX 60189 SUNNYVALE CA 94088 14150 DORENE CT 503 -31 -054 ROY NEELAM AND KUNAL K 14150 DORENE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9727. DORENE CT 503 -31 -055 BROWN JOHN P AND JACQUELINE 14372 OLD WOOD RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5633 14152 DORENE CT 503 -31 -056 SMITH DAVID M AND LORI A TRUSTEE 14152 DORENE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9727 14142 DORENE CT 503 -31 -057 SEVILLA ALBERTO AND WELGE LYNN 14142 DORENE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9727 14134 DORENE CT 503 -31 -058 ROSENBERG GERALD R AND BARRIE R 14134 DORENE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9727 14124 DORENE CT 503 -31 -059 MCNEISH JAMES W AND ELIZABETH A 14124 DORENE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9727 14170 TEERLINK WY 503 -31 -060 MORRISON HUGH C AND RUTH A 14170 TEERLINK WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -9734 TEERLINK WY 503 -31 -061 TEERLINK ERMA TRUSTEE 1821 HOLLY OAK DR MODESTO CA 95354 HEBER WY 503 -31 -065 SHENG NIN -CHUN AND ROUNDA PO BOX 20011 SAN JOSE CA 95160- 21791 HEBER WY 503 -31 7066 SHENG NIN -CHUN AND ROUNDA PO BOX 20011 SAN JOSE CA 95160 - HEBER WY 503 -31 -067 VINTNER INVESTMENTS 14900 VINTNER CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9712 21800 HEBER WY 503 -31 -068 REKHI MUNINDER P SING AND 460 CHENAB CT FREMONT CA 94539- 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 18 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APT OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 21790 HERBER WY 503 -31 -069 KUNDTZ ROBERT A AND NANCY J 21790 HERBER WY SARATOGA CA 95070 14161 TEERLINK WY 503 -31 -074 AVENI DAVID J AND CINDY M 14161 TEERLINK WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -9735 14171 TEERLINK WY 503 -31 -075 KREVANKO DAVID J AND TERESA A 14171 TEERLINK WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -9735 14185 TEERLINK 503 -31 -076 ALFF WILLIAM H AND DENNY V 14185 TEERLINK SARATOGA CA 95070 -9735 21800 MT EDEN RD 503 -31 -077 LEE TING PIE ET AL 21800 MT EDEN RD _ SARATOGA CA 95070 -9722 21810 MT EDEN RD 503 -31 -078 TEERLINK HEBER J 21810 MT EDEN RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -9722 13946 DAMON LN 503 -31 -079 MOON WILLIAM G AND ANNETTE C 13946 DAMON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9721 13970 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -080 NAROG YVETTE TRUSTEE 13970 ALBAR CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9718 13977 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -085 MOLLARD ROY S TRUSTEE & ET AL PO BOX 1235 SARATOGA CA 95071 13967 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -086 SOMOGYI CHRISTOPHER P AND ANIKO 6429 NE 224TH AV REDMOND WA 98053 13957 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -087 MALANCZUK WILLIAM T AND DORENE 13957 ALBAR CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9718 13947 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -088 HWANG LILY L AND JOSEPH J 13966 ALBAR CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9718 13937 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -089 HALADUS ZBIGNIEW 13937 ALBAR CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9718 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -090 NAROG KIM AND LESLIE A 1580 LARKIN ST SAN JOSE CA 95129 13935 DAMON LN 503 -31 -097 GREENSPAN STEPHEN B AND ANN 13935 DAMON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9726 13921 DAMON LN 503 -31 -098 LEMPERT DAVID E AND EYA LESLIE A 13921 DAMON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9720 21761 HEBER WY 503 -31 -100 PALMER WILLIAM AND CHARLENE 21761 HEBER WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -9700 21771 HERBER WY 503 -31 -101 MCCAMMON JAMES D AND MARY E 21771 HERBER WY SARATOGA CA 95070 21781 HEBER WY 503 -31 -102 ZEID JAMAL F AND BEVERLY A 21781 HEBER WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -9700 21770 HEBER WY 503 -31 -103 DENTON RICHARD AND SHERRIE 21770 HEBER WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -9700 HEBER WY 503 -31 -105 LUTHRA VIRENDER K AND TRIPTA 14151 TEERLINK WY STE'B SARATOGA CA 95070- 13966 ALBAR CT 503 -31 -107 HWANG LILY L AND JOSEPH J 13966 ALBAR CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9718 13941 DAMON LN 503 -31 -108 BLOSK ROBERT T AND DALE C 13941 DAMON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9726 13951 DAMON LN 503 -31 -109 BRAUCHLER ROLF ET AL 13951 DAMON LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9726 PIERCE.RD 503 -47 -007 THE MOUNTAIN WINERY INC. 1515 WALSH AV SANTA CLARA CA 95050 -2616 TRINITY AV 503 -49 -041 FLORENCE NELSON FOUNDATION THE 120 MONTGOMERY STREET STE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104 20851 SARATOGA HILLS RD 503 -49 -042 FLORENCE NELSON FOUNDATION THE 120 MONTGOMERY STREET STE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104 UPPER HILL DR 503 -50 -019 CUPERTINO NATIONAL BANK 20230 STEVENS CREEK BL CUPERTINO CA 95015 CHALET CLOTILDE DR 503 -51 -002 LEVIN EDWARD N AND LORETTA 13481 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -4214 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 19 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS AP j OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 503 -51 -003 PERASSO CLOTILDE M TRUSTEE 1724 LYON SAN FRANCISCO CA 94115- 13502 PIERCE RD. 503 -51 -012 GODDARD PAUL AND JACQUELINE 13502 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 13436 PIERCE RD. 503 -51 -013 OSBORNE JOHN E AND SUSAN D 13436 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 PIERCE RD 503 -51 -014 SULLIVAN GODFREY R AND SUZANNE M 20344 MILJEVICH DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4349 21298 SARAHILLS DR 503 -53 -010 GOFF BOB E AND DONNA L TRUSTEE 21298 SARAHILLS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4838 21266 SARAHILLS DR 503 -53 -011 MEIER WILFORD M AND CAROL A 21266 SARAHILLS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4838 20956 SARAHILLS DR 503 753 -022 MOGANNAM ABID N AND MUNA 20956 SARAHILLS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4838 SARAHILLS DR 503 -53 -061 DHAKA VIR A AND MOHINI 580 ARASTRADERO RD UNIT 105 PALO ALTO CA 94306 SARAHILLS DR. 503 -53 -064 PONTIER LENA PO BOX 212 VILLAGE STA SARATOGA CA 95071 21216 BANK MILL RD 503 -55 -005 PARK CHUL AND CHYON S 21194 BANK HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 21194 BANK MILL RD 503 -55 -006 PARK CHUL AND CHYON S 21194 BANK MILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5705 21243 DEEPWELL CT 503 -55 -039 LIKOSKY WILLIAM H TRUSTEE & ET AL 21243 DEEPWELL CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5709 21328 LUMBERTOWN LN 503 -55 -044 ARELLANO JOSEPH G. 21328 LUMBERTOWN LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5712 21201 LUMBERTOWN LN 503 -55 -045 VAJDIC BRANISLAV AND MIRJANA 21201 LUMBERTOWN LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5712 21197 HAYMEADOW DR 503 -55 -046 RICHARDS ELIZABETH M TRUSTEE 21197 HAYMEADOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5710 21185 HAYMEADOW DR 503 -55 -047 JACOBS BARBARA 21185 HAYMEADOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5710 21127 BANK MILL RD 503 -55 -049 JONES CECIL R AND GUDRUN T TRUSTEE 21127 BANK MILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5706 21182 HAYMEADOW DR 503 -55 -052 MARIAN VAUGHN R AND DOROTHY R 21182 HAYMEADOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5710 TOLL GATE RD 503 -55 -053 BLAIR JEROME C AND ARLENE 3549 MAURICIA AV SANTA CLARA CA 95051 -6617 21216 HAYMEADOW DR 503 -55 -054 WEISER RICHARD A AND ABBY N 21216 HAYMEADOW DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5710 21175 BANK MILL RD 503 -55 -064 KIM YOUNG C AND KI Y 21175 BANK MILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5706 21333 LUMBERTOWN LN 503 -55 -075 WALL JOHN J TRUSTEE 21333 LUMBERTOWN LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5712 21359 TOLL GATE RD 503 -62 -001 MORLEY JAMES S PO BOX 9706 SAN JOSE CA 95157 14728 BOUGAINVILLEA CT 503 -62 -002 MOMROW JUDITH C AND EDWARD 14728 BOUGAINVILLEA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5708 14696 BOUGAINVILLEA CT 503 -62 -003 HELLER MEYER AND MARGO 14696 BOUGAINVILLEA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5708 14664 BOUGAINVILLEA CT 503 -62 -004 CAMPBELL BRUCE S 14664 BOUGAINVILLEA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5708 14632 BOUGAINVILLEA CT 503 -62 -005 CHIN BENNY AND WINIFRED W 14632 BOUGAINVILLEA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5708 14600 BOUGAINVILLEA CT 503 -62 -006 STEINBACK DONALD L AND JOSEPHINE 14600 BOUGAINVILLEA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5708 14605 BOUGAINVILLEA CT 503 -62 -007 SPRAGUE ROBERT A AND SUE E 14605 BOUGAINVILLEA CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5708 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA . Page 20 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP TOLL GATE RD 503 -62 -017 LIU VINCENT ET AL 14760 MASSON CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9715 21417 TOLL GATE RD 503 -62 -018 INGLE ROBERT D AND SANDRA R 21417 TOLLGATE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5769 21432 TOLL GATE RD 503 -62 -023 ATKINS JAMES D AND BETSY S 6950 SUNRISE DR CORAL GABLES FL 33133 21424 TOLL GATE RD 503 -62 -024 MCCORMICK ROBERT V AND JANIS K 21424 TOLLGATE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -5770 TOLL GATE RD 503 -62 -026 KWEI LONG AND HUEY -LIN 20532 DEERPARK CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5308 TOLL GATE RD 503 -62 -027 GADDIS STEPHEN B 115 MT HAMILTON AV LOS ALTOS CA 94022 -2236 21200 CHIQUITA WY 503 -66 -010 CHANG MU T AND LIN M 21200 CHIQUITA WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -4203 21142 CHIQUITA WY 503 -66 -011 LEE MUN K 21142 CHIQUITA WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -4203 14190 PALAMINO WY 503 -68 -002 STOHL CHRISTINA TRUSTEE & ET AL PO BOX 2802 ARNOLD CA 95223- 14780 MASSON CT 503 -72 -007 SZE ROBERT M AND MABEL K 3242 KNIGHTSWOOD WY SAN JOSE CA 95148 -3137 14760 MASSON CT 503 -72 -008 LIU VINCENT L AND MEI CHEN Y 14760 MASSON CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9715 21650 VINTAGE LN 503 -72 -011 OZAWA SPENCER TRUSTEE & ET AL 1620 WEST CLIFF DR SANTA CRUZ CA 95060 VINTAGE LN 503 -72 -012 SAFFARIAN JALIL 21757 CONGRESS HALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 MASSON CT 503 -72 -014 MIAU MATTHEW F AND AHCHEN H 6 -F 75 MING, SHENG E RD SEC 3 TAIPEI TAIWAN 14575 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -017 VERDI WILLIAM P AND ELLEN E 14575 SARATOGA HEIGHTS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5756' 14581 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -018 KWONG JONATHAN C AND KATHY W 3254 KNIGHTSWOOD WY SAN JOSE CA. 95148 -3137 14580 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -019 YI JIN H AND TONG M 14580 SARATOGA HEIGHTS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -5756 21536 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -020 MATSUURA RONALD T AND SANDRA N 21536 SARATOGA HEIGHTS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 21530 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -021 PAGE JOHN 21530 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA • 95070 -5757 21518 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -022 HAMAOUI HALFON ET AL 21518 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR . SARATOGA CA 95070 -5757 21502 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -024 - SUDLOW WILLIAM J AND BARBARA S 21502 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5757 21503 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -025 TANIGUCHI BEN T AND SACHIKO 21503 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5758 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR 503 -72 -027 SAFFARIAN JALIL 21757 CONGRESS HALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 21531 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -028 FERRAN DAVID E AND DIANE M 21531 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -5758 503 -72 -032 GASPAR MARIE R PO BOX 898 SARATOGA CA 95071 14754 PIERCE RD 503 -72 -033 GASPAR MARIE R PO BOX 898 SARATOGA CA 95070 21775 CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -72 -034 HSU FU -CHIEH AND CHENG -YIH 21775 CONGRESS HALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 21789 CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -72 -035 RUBIN M HARVEY TRUSTEE 21789 CONGRESS HALL LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 21537 SARATOGA HEIGHTS 503 -72 -036 THAKUR NEELAM AND SARVAJIT 21537 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS 21700 VINTAGE LN 503 -72 -037 BEDARD CHARLES J AND KAREN 21750 VINTAGE LN 21542 -21550 SARATOGA 503 -72 -038 LEE BRIAN P AND TSO -HUEI 21550 SARATOGA HEIGHTS DR 21779 CONGRESS SPRINGS LN 503 -75 -001 MC VAY JOHN E AND EVA L TRUSTEE 21779 CONGRESS SPRINGS LN 21787 CONGRESS SPRINGS LN 503 -75 -002 CHID CHUN -DEH AND KAREN C 21787 CONGRESS SPRINGS LN 14900 VINTNER CT 503 -75 -007 SHENG STEVEN N AND ROUNDA 14900 VINTNER CT 21770 CONGRESS HALL LN . 503 -75 -008 DAVIS ISHBEL AND ANTHONY M 21770 CONGRESS HALL LN 21764 CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -75 -009 LALLY JAMES AND LYNN Y 21764 CONGRESS HALL LN 21756 CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -75 -010 DELIZONNA HARRY 960 W HEDDING ST STE 180 21751 CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -75 -011 PAGE JAMES S ET AL 21751 CONGRESS HALL LN 21757 CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -75 -012 SAFFARIAN JALIL 21757 CONGRESS HALL LN CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -75 -016 LUTHRA VIRENDER K AND TRIPTA 14151 TEERLINK WY STE B 21771 CONGRESS HALL LN 503 -75 -017 HOWE FREDERICK AND MARY S 21771 CONGRESS HALL LN 14930 VINTNER CT 503 -75 -018 FARSIO SHAHNAZ AND ALI 14930 VINTNER CT 21793 CONGRESS SPRINGS LN 503 -75 -019 ASHER JAMES H AND JANE 21793 CONGRESS SPRINGS LN 21801 CONGRESS SPRINGS LN 503 -75 -020 SHENG GRACE ET AL PO BOX 20011 21720 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -001 NG BENG K AND HELEN C 21720 VILLA OAKS LN 21778 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -002 LEVERETT MICHELLE L AND RANDALL 4917 ESTHER DR 21836 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -003 RIDING KENNETH L AND MARILYN G 21836 VILLA OAKS LN 21894 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -004 CHAO KEITH AND VIOLETN J ET AL 719 BRADMOOR DR 21952 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -005 NGUYEN NGUYEN H AND HANG L 21952 VILLA OAKS LN 22010 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -006 YAM LAP M AND TO ROSA W TRUSTEE 10475 ALBERTSWORTH LN 22068 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -007 GAULT ROBERT G AND PATRICIA L 5186 COUNTRY LN 22126 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -008 BILKEY DANIEL J AND PAZ Q 22126 VILLA OAKS LN 22188 QUARRY RD 503 -78 -009 HOMECRAFT BUILDERS INC 4085 ORME ST 13625 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -012 MASON JOHN L AND NORA M 13625 DEER TRAIL CT QUARRY RD 503 -78 -013 BURKE THOMAS E TRUSTEE 691 N MATHILDA AV 13575 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -014 BURKE THOMAS E TRUSTEE 691 N MATHILDA AV 13475 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -015 PAPPANASTOS PETE E AND VICTORIA G 13475 DEER TRAIL CT 21903 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -016 JUE JIMMY AND EILEEN B 21903 VILLA OAKS LN Page 21 CITY STATE ZIP SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 -5759 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9725 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9725 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9712 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 SAN JOSE CA 95126 - SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714. SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 SARATOGA CA 95070 - SARATOGA CA 95070 -9714 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9712 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9725 SAN JOSE CA 95160 - SARATOGA CA 95070 SAN JOSE CA 95124 -5412 SARATOGA CA 95070 .SAN JOSE CA 95129 SARATOGA CA 95070 LOS ALTOS HILLS CA 94024 SAN JOSE CA 95129 -4219 SARATOGA CA 95070 -9743 PALO ALTO CA 94306 -3137 SARATOGA CA 95070 SUNNYVALE CA 94086 -3509 SUNNYVALE CA 94086 -3509 SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 22 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 21847 VILLA OAKS LN 503 -78 -017 FORQUER JAMES AND GWENDOLYN 21847 VILLA OAKS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 QUARRY RD 503 -78 -018 BURKE THOMAS E TRUSTEE 691 N MATHILDA AV SUNNYVALE CA 94086 -3509 13506 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -019 ROSENDIN MICHAEL ,L AND STELLA D 16184 CAMINO DEL SOL LOS GATOS CA 95030 13536 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -020 ROBBY GUY M AND NANCY D TRUSTEE 13536 DEER TRAIL CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9737 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -021 YAN JOSEPH W AND ANNA M 782 LONDON DR MILPITAS CA 95035 -7517 13596 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -022 KILLIAN LUTHER E AND LYNNE E 13596 DEER TRAIL CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -9737 DEER TRAIL CT 503 -78 -023 WANG PAI H AND SHUN J 13019 SARATOGA /SUNNYVALE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 QUARRY RD 503 -78 -026 UPPAL INDERJIT S AND PARAMJIT K 655 IDLEBROOK CT SAN JOSE CA 95120 QUARRY RD 503 -78 -029 SCHAAF ROGER L AND YEE C 1626 EAGLE DR SUNNYVALE CA 94087 -4635 GLEN UNA DR 510 -05 -034 LORINCZ ALBERT B AND ANN M 18816 DEVON AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -4606 19489 RUE DE GLEN UNA 510 -05 -038 DUNCAN E P AND ALICE P PO BOX 2824 SARATOGA CA 95071 RUE DE GLEN UNA 510 -05 -039 DUNCAN E P AND ALICE P PO BOX 2824 SARATOGA CA 95071 GLEN UNA DR 510 -06 -002 NOONAN MARGARET J ET AL 19651 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA .95070 -6411 GLEN UNA DR 510 -06 -028 THOMAS MAUREEN A ET AL 19651 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6411 15839 HIDDEN HILL RD 510 -24 -019 VELINSKY IRA L AND MAYUMI 15839 HIDDEN HILL RD LOS GATOS CA 95030 20820 BIG BASIN WY 517 -07 -007 DUTRO MARION F SR TRUSTEE & ET AL 20825 PAMELA WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6031 20825 PAMELA WY 517 -07 -014 DUTRO MARION F SR AND MARY LYNN 20825 PAMELA WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6031 14596 BIG BASIN WY 517 -08 -009 HILLBLOM WALTER AND CONNIE L 15131 ALONDRA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6446 06TH ST 517 -08 -023 KINNIER LINDA A 14234 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE RD SARATOGA CA 95070 14771 ALOHA AV 517 -08 -035 WHALEN THADDEUS J AND JULIA P 14771 ALOHA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6006 14661 VICKERY AV 517 -11 -072 KROLL HARVEY V AND KATHY G 14661 VICKERY AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6034 14700 OAK ST 517 -12 -006 QUICKERT GENIEVA M 14700 OAK ST SARATOGA CA 95070 -6058 20602 LOMITA AV 517 -12 -033 GREGORY JAMES L AND SHIRLEY M 5189 ELMWOOD DR SAN JOSE CA 95130 -1816 20600 LOMITA AV 517 -12 -034 INGSTER MICHAEL C. 20600 LOMITA AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6024 15244 MONTALVO HEIGHTS 517 -18 -046 ROBBINS HARRY S AND SUSAN K 15244 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 15222 MONTALVO HEIGHTS 517 -18 -047 HULME PAUL L TRUSTEE & ET AL 15222 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA 95070 20400 HILL AV 517 48 -048 ARATA DAVID S JR AND ALMA R PO BOX 2206 SARATOGA CA 95070 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR . 517 -18 -050 GUGLIELMI JOSEPH M AND BARBARA 20440 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA' CA 95070 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR 517 -18 -051 SCOTT JOHN C AND MARY E 235 CATALPA DR ATHERTON CA 94027 11116/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 23 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SITUS APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR 517 -18 -054 SAN JOSE WATER WORKS 374 W SANTA CLARA ST SAN JOSE CA 95196 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR 517 -18 -055 SAN JOSE WATER WORKS 374 W SANTA CLARA ST SAN JOSE CA 95196 15156 VICKERY AV 517 -18 -061 OLAVARRI MIKE AND JOSEPHINE PO BOX 591 SARATOGA CA 95070 14800 MONTALVO RD 517 -20 -005 DUTRA JANICE D PO BOX 156 SARATOGA CA 95071 20201 HILL AV 517 -20 -017 DENNIS MARGARET F TRUSTEE 20201 HILL AV SARATOGA CA 95070 -6310 14840 MONTALVO RD 517 -20 -029 MUELLER KEITH J AND SUSAN B 14840 MONTALVO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6059 MENDELSOHN LN 517 -21 -012 MENDELSOHN LANE DEVELOPMENT 50 W SAN FERNANDO ST STE 320 SAN JOSE CA 95113 - MENDELSOHN LN 517 -21 -013 MENDELSOHN LANE DEVELOPMENT 50 W SAN FERNANDO ST STE 320 SAN JOSE CA 95113 - MENDELSOHN LN 517 -21 -014 MENDELSOHN LANE DEVELOPMENT 50 W SAN FERNANDO ST STE 320 SAN JOSE CA 95113 - RANCHO BELLA VISTA 517 -21 -019 LIN ERIC C AND YEH FU F 20170 RANCHO BELLA VISTA SARATOGA CA 95070 RANCHO BELLA VISTA 517 -21 -021 MENDELSOHN LANE DEVELOPMENT 50 W SAN FERNANDO ST STE 320 SAN JOSE CA 95113- 20130 RANCHO BELLA VISTA 517 -21 -022 GALLO VENTURES INC 20130 RANCHO BELLA VISTA SARATOGA CA 95070 -5958 20151 RANCHO BELLA VISTA 517 -21 -026 MENDELSOHN LANE DEVELOPMENT 50 W SAN FERNANDO ST STE 320 SAN JOSE CA 95113- 20161 RANCHO BELLA VISTA 517 -21 -027 HARPER JAMES A AND ZO P 20161 RANCHO BELLA VISTA SARATOGA CA 95070 -5958 PIEDMONT RD 517 -22 -037 KOCHER GEORGE S TRUSTEE & ET AL 15139 PARK DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6421 15164 MONTALVO RD 517 -22 -103 FULDE WALTER J AND CATHERINE D 15164 MONTALVO RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6327 BOHLMAN RD 517 -36 -001 PEARCE DAVID B AND SHARON A 20932 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6344 �BOHLMAN RD 517 -36 -002 SILBERSTEIN PETER S AND ANNA C 20972 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6344 20972 HIDDEN VIEW LN 517 -36 -003 SILBERSTEIN PETER S AND ANNA C 20972 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6344 20932 HIDDEN VIEW LN 517 -36 -004 PEARCE SHARON A AND DAVID B 20932 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6344 20915 HIDDEN VIEW LN 517 -36 -006 HIDDEN VIEW PARTNERS 970 CHEHALIS DR SUNNYVALE CA 94087 20959 HIDDEN VIEW LN 517 -36 -007 CRAIK JAMES K AND JUDI 20959 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6344 11/16/93 1993 WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS BY THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Page 1 FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA SBE PARCELS SITUS APIA OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD 366 -12 -069 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD 366 -12 -071 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD 366 -20 -033 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125. COX AV 386 -44 -038 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 COX AV 386 -44 -040 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 LEUTAR CT 386 -53 -017 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 LEUTAR CT 386 -53 -018 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE RD 386 -53 -019 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 GLEN BRAE DR 389 O1 -021 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 GLEN BRAE AV 389 -01 -022 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 GLEN BRAE AV 389 -01 =023 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 GLEN BRAE AV 389 -03 -001 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 SARATOGA AV 389 -10 -009 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 SARATOGA AV 389 -11 -016 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 QUITO RD 389 -19 -027 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 BONNET WY 389 -20 -001 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 ASPESI DR 389 -25 -001 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 COX AV 393 -17 -003 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 65 CAHILL SAN JOSE CA 95110 COX AV 393 -17 -004 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 COX AV 393 -17 -005 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 COX AV 393 -17 -006 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 SARATOGA AV 393 -21 -003 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 SARATOGA AV 393 -21 -006 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 111 ALMADEN BL SAN JOSE CA 95125 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO, 2 3 q 3 MEETING DATE: December 1, 1993 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Public Works AGENDA ITEM CITY MGR. YAeWl_ SUBJECT: Leonard Road Assessment District, Capital Project No. 9308 - Award of Construction Contract Recommended Motion(s) : Move to: 1) Declare Duran and Venables, Inc. of Santa Clara to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project, 2) Award a construction contract with Duran and Venables, Inc. for an amount of $86,776, and 3) Authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to an amount of $7,500. Report Summary: Sealed bids for the Leonard Road Assessment District, Capital Project No. 9308 were opened on Wednesday, October 20. A total of ten contractors submitted bids for the work and a summary of the bids received is attached. Duran and Venables, Inc. of Santa Clara submitted the lowest bid of $88,976 which is 18.6 percent below the Engineer's Estimate of $109,360: Staff has carefully checked the low bid, along with several of the references supplied by the contractor, and has determined that the bid is responsive to the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids dated September 22. Also attached is a letter from Duran and Venables, Inc. dated October 27 indicating their willingness to extend their bid from thirty to forty -five days to allow the City ample time to award the construction contract. Consequently, it is recommended that the Council declare Duran and Venables, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project and award the attached construction contract to this firm for an amount of $86,776. (The'$2,200 difference between the recommended contract amount and the bid amount is due to the deletion of Item No. 18 - Pavement Striping and Markings. Instead, the City's own crew can perform this work for approximately $200, saving the property owners the extra $2,000.) Additionally, it is recommended that the Council authorize staff to execute change orders to the construction contract up to an amount of $7,500 in order to cover any unforeseen circumstances which might arise during the construction. Fiscal Impacts: Of the $86,776 recommended contract amount, $73,203 represents the cost of construction required to improve the private portions of Leonard Road to minimum City standards so the City may then accept the entire street as a public street. This cost, plus the cost of any extra work, will be recovered from the thirteen property owners within the Assessment District via the assessments. The remaining $13,573 represents the cost of performing work on the portion of Leonard Road which is already accepted as a public street. Sufficient funds to cover this cost, plus any additional costs, are contained in Program No. 31 (Street Maintenance), Account No. 4530, in the current adopted budget. Follow Up Actions: The contract documents will be executed by the City and the contractor and weather permitting, the City will authorize the contractor to proceed with the work. Construction should be complete within four weeks from after it begins. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: The construction contract must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. If the Council determines that Duran and Venables, Inc. is not: a "responsible" bidder, then it is not necessary to award the construction contract to this firm even though they submitted the lowest bid. In that event, the Council may declare another bidder to be the lowest responsible bidder and award the construction contract to that firm or reject all of the bids and order the project to be re -bid. ii CITY OF SARATOGA BID SUMMARY LEONARD ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CAPITAL PROJECT NO. 981 BID DATE: October 20,. 1993 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE DURAN a VENABLES, INC. ITEM ------------------------------------------------------------•-----------------------------------......---------------------------------- NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS - $1,500.00 - $1,960.00 2 EARTHWORK 500 CY $20.00 $10,000.00 58.15 $4,075.00 3 ROADWAY EXCAVATION 250 CY S30.00 57,500.00 $33.50 $8,375.00 4 SUGRADE PREPARATION 8,000 SF $1.00 $8,000.00 $0.45 $3,600.00 5 AGGREGATE BASE - CLASS If 425 TON 520.00 58,500.00 $18.40 $7,820.00 6 2 1/2" A.C. 160 TON 540.00 $6,400.00 541.60 56,656.00 7 P.C.C. CURB 8 GUTTER 950 LF $15.00 $14,250.00 516.80 $15,960.00 8 P.C.C. VALLEY GUTTER 70 LF S15.00 $1,050.00 515.60 51,092.00 9 P.C.C. SWALE 210 LF $10.00 $2,100.00 $15.70 $3,297.00 10 REMOVE EX. P.C.C. CURB If GUTTER 80 LF $7.00 $560.00 $21.70 $1,736.00 11 RECONSTRUCT EX. DI TO STORM MR AND INSTA 1 LS - $4,000.00 - $2,750.00 NEW DI. CONNECT MH TO DI w/12" RCP 12 DRIVEWAY CONFORMS 9 EA 51,500.00 513,500.00 $219.00 51,971.00 . 13 WEDGE CUT 2,000 LF $2.00 $4,000.00 $2.25 54,500.00 14 PAVEMENT FABRIC 3,500 SY $1.50 $5,250.00 $1.10 $3,850.00 15 1 1/3" A.C. OVERLAY 400 TON 540.00 $16,000.00 541.60 516,640.00 16 ADJUST MH /MON /VALVE TO GRADE 11 EA 5500.00 55,500.00 $154.00 51,694.00 17 FINISH ROADWAY 1 LS - $1,000.00 - S800.00 18 PAVEMENT STRIPING 8 MARKINGS 1 LS - $250.00 - S2,200.00 GRAND TOTAL 5109,360.00 GRAND TOTAL 588,976.00. .j G. BORTOLOTTO 8 CO. O'GRADY PAVING, INC. MERIDIAN GRADING 8 PAVING, INC. C.F. ARCHIBALD PAVING, INC. UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - $2,375.00 - $7,000.00 - $1,000.00 - $7,000.00 $14.78 $7,390.00 $5.00 $2,500.00 $16.50 $8,250.00 $14.00 $7,000.00 $19.41 $4,852.50 $5.00 $1,250.00 $16.50 $4,125.00 $20.00 $5,000.00 $0.19 $1,520.00 $0.60 $4,800.00 $0.33 $2,640.00 $0.40 $3,200.00 $18.00 $7,650.00 $16.00 $6,800.00 $26.00 $11,050.00 $22.50 $9,562.50 $43.41 $6,945.60 $39.00 $6,240.00 $42.00 S6,720.00 $39.00 S6,240.00 $14.63 $13,898.50 $15.00 $14,250.00 $14.50 $13,775.00 $9.50 $9,025.00 $34.10 $2,387.00 $17.00 51,190.00 $16.50 $1,155.00 $28.00 $1,960.00 $6.50 $1,365.00 S9.00 $1,890.00 $9.00 $1,890.00 $14.00 $2,940.00 $7.00 $560.00 $10.00. $800.00 $32.00 $2,560.00 $5.00 $400.00 - $2,250.00 - $5,000.00 - $4,690.00 - $4,000.00 $900.00 $8,100.00 $700.00 56,300.00 $660.00 $5,940.00 5808.00 $7,272.00 $1.73 $3,460.00 $2.00 54,000.00 $2.75 $5,500.00 $2.30 $4,600.00 $0.91 $3,185.00 $1.10 $3,850.00 $1.05 $3,675.00 $1,162.50 $3,500.00 $42.29 S16,916.00 S51.50 $20,600.00 $42.00 $16,800.00 $39.00 $15,600.00 $210.00 $2,310.00 $200.00 52,200.00 S245.00 $2,695.00 $225.00 $2,475.00 - $2,100.69 - $100.00 - $500.00 - $3,000.00 - $3,733.00 - $4,000.00 - S1,000.00 - $3,250.00 ------- ------------- GRAND TOTAL - - - - -- $90,998.29 GRAND TOTAL ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- $92,770.00 GRAND TOTAL ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- $93,965.00 GRAND TOTAL ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- S96,024.50 STEVENS CREEK QUARRY GRADETECH INC. MX CONSTRUCTION CUSHMAN CONSTRUCTION CO. PROGRESSIVE PACIFIC UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT. PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - $8,500.00 - $11,000.00 - $839.00 - $1,794.00 - $6,000.00 $11.00 $5,500.00 $4.00 $2,000.00 $9.36 $4,680.00 $22.41 $11,205.00 $25.00 $12,500.00 $11.00 $2,750.00 $25.00 $6,250.00 $13.49 $3,372.50 $25.54 $6,385.00 $30.00 $7,500.00 $0.20 $1,600.00 $1.64 $13,120.00 $1.89 $15,120.00 $0.54 $4,320.00 $1.00 $8,000.00 $17.00 $7,225.00 115.00 $6,375.00 $18.00 $7,650.00 $27.19 511,555.75 $50.00 $21,250.00 $46.00 $7,360.00 535.00 $5,600.00 $58.50 $9,360.00 562.46 $9,993.60 $100.00 $16,000.00 515.00 $14,250.00 $15.00 $14,250.00 511.37 $10,801.50 $24.15 522,942.50 520.00 $19,000.00 $16.00 $1,120.00 $15.00 $1,050.00 $12.75 $892.50 $20.40 $1,428.00 $15.00 $1,050.00 $14.00 $2,940.00 $10.00 $2,100.00 $9.75 $2,047.50 $21.75 $4,567.50 $15.00 $3,150.00 $13.00 $1,040.00 $20.00 $1,600.00 $6.75 $540.00 $8.00 $640.00 $15.00 $1,200.00 - $3,500.00 - $3,500.00 - $9,750.00 - $5,500.00 - $2,000.00 $860.00 $7,740.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 $1,175.00 $10,575.00 $952.22 $8,569.98 $800.00 $7,200.00 $2.50 $5,000.00 $1.50 $3,000.00 $0.75 $1,500.00 $2.50 $5,000.00 $1.50 $3,000.00 50.90 $3,150.00 $0.95 53,325.00 $1.85 $6,475.00 $1.26 $4,410.00 $1.50 $5,250.00 546.00 $18,400.00 $35.00 $14,000.00 $58.50 $23,400.00 $45.75 $18,300.00 $120.00 $48,000.00 $260.00 $2,860.00 $200.00 $2,200.00 $728.00 $8,008.00 $364.00 $4,004.00 $250.00 $2,750.00 - $1,000.00 - $500.00 - 9875.00 - $1,204.00 - 11,800.00 - $3,800.00 - $3,500.00 - $1,975.00 - $225.00 - $3,000.00 GRAND TOTAL ------- - - - - -- $97,735.00 GRAND TOTAL ------- - - - - -- $98,770.00 GRAND TOTAL ------- - - - - -- $117,861.00 ------- - - - - -- GRAND TOTAL $122,044.33 GRAND TOTAL ------- - - - - -- $168,650.00 DURAN& VENABLES, INC. GENERAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS October 27, 1993 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 RE: LEONARD ROAD IMPROVEMENT PRIJECT C +PLTAL PROJECT 26'1' %). 33C8 To whom it may concern: As requested Duran & Venables, Inc. will extend our bid for 45 days in lieu of 30 days. Please let us know at your earliest convenience when we will be able to start this project. Regards, Mar J. Petersen Chief Estimator DURAN & VENABLES INCORPORATED 2700 SCOTT BLVD.. P.O. BOX 640 . SANTA CLARA, CA 95052 -0640 (408) 727 -2046 9 CA. LIC. 375068 A CITY OF SARATOGA SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION LEONARD ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT THIS CONTRACT, made this 1 day of December, 1993, by.and between the City of Saratoga, a Municipal Corporation, -in Santa Clara County, California, hereinafter called the City, and DURAN & VENABLES, INC. hereinafter called the Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City has caused to be prepared in the manner prescribed by law, plans, specifications and other contract documents, for the work herein described and shown and has approved and adopted these contract documents, specifications and plans and has caused to be published in the manner and for the time required by law, a Notice Inviting Sealed Bids for doing the work in accordance with the terms of this Contract, and WHEREAS, the Contractor in response to said Notice has submitted to the City a sealed bid proposal accompanied by a bid guaranty in an amount not less than ten percent (10 %) of the amount bid for the construction of all of the proposed work in accordance with the terms of this Contract, and WHEREAS, the City, in the manner prescribed by law, has publicly opened, examined and canvassed the bids submitted and as a result has determined and declared the Contractor to be the lowest responsible bidder and has duly awarded to the Contractor a contract for all of the work and for the sum or sums named in the bid proposal and in this Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I. WORK TO BE DONE: That the Contractor shall provide all necessary labor, machinery, tools, apparatus and other means of construction; shall furnish all materials, superintendence and overhead expenses of whatever nature necessary to construct all of the improvements for the City of Saratoga in conformity with the plans, specifications and other contract documents and according to such instructions as may be given by the Saratoga Director of Public Works or his authorized agent. 15 ARTICLE II. CONTRACT PRICES Except as provided in Section IV B of the Specifications ( "Changes and Extra Work "), the City shall pay the Contractor according to the prices stated in the bid proposal submitted by the Contractor, which shall include all applicable taxes, for complete performance of the work. The Contractor hereby agrees to accept such payment as full compensation for all materials and appliances necessary to complete the work; for all loss or damage arising from the work or from action of the elements, or from.any unforeseen obstruction or difficulties which may be encountered in the prosecution of the work; incurred in and in consequence of the suspension or discontinuance of the work; as hereby specified; for all liabili- ties and other insurance; for all fees or royalties or other'ex- penses on account of any patent or patents; for all overhead and other expenses incident to the work and expected profits; and for well and faithfully performing and completing the work within the time frame specified in the Notice to Proceed, all according to the contract plans and specifications, the details and instructions, and the requirements of the City. ARTICLE III. PARTS OF THE CONTRACT: That the complete contract document consists of the following: 1. Notice Inviting Sealed Bids 6. Performance Bond 2. Bid Proposal 7. Labor and Material Bond 3. Bidder's Bond or Bid Guaranty 8. Plans 4. Contract for Public Works 9. Specifications Construction 10. Insurance Certificates 5. Hold Harmless Clause 11. Prevailing Wage Rate In case of any conflict between this Contract and any other part of the contract, this Contract shall be binding. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused its corporate name to be hereunto subscribed and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed by its City Manager and its City Clerk thereunto duly authorized and the Contractor has executed these presents the day and year hereinabove written. 16 AWARDED BY CITY COUNCIL: Date December 1, 1993 ATTEST: City Clerk The foregoing Contract is approved as to form.this day of , 19 City Attorney 17 CITY OF SARATOGA: CONTRACTOR: QI Title License No. Tax ID or SSN Date Received: Hearing .Date: Fee: ICJ APPEAL APPLICATION, Name of Appellant: iJ U tz 1 --1 Telephone: T C —IC)� Name of Applicant (if different from Appellant: f Project File No.: `? G — "1 —' 0 6� Project Address: Ott 4G �, J ; �;�,� N `� A7 Decision Being Appealed: t' L :1 �►'� �' G , (� �n tv� 1 ti Grounds for Appeal (Letter may be attached): Appellalt's Signature *Pleased do not sign this application until it is presented at the City offices. If you wish specific people to be notified of this appeal, please list them on a separate sheet. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED BY 5:00 P.M. WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE DECISION. APPEAL OF PLANNING COAMSSION APPROVAL OF UP -93 -006 November 9, 1993 The Undersigned hereby appeal the decision of the City of Saratoga Planning Commission to approve the application of C. D. Stark for Big Basin Bistro, UP -93 -006 (14480 Big Basin Way). The reasons upon which the appeal is based are as follows: 1. There is no authority anywhere in the City Ordinances permitting the City of Saratoga to ignore its requirement that operation of a restaurant requires one off - street parking space per 75 square feet of floor area (58 spaces for the Applicant's building as a whole, 29 spaces for this Applicant) pursuant to Section 15- 35.030. There are only 10 spaces for the 4,000 s.f. building as a whole. Therefore, the subject building is 24 spaces short for the Applicant alone. While Section 15- 35.020(h) permits such parking to be non- adjacent, it must nevertheless be within 300 feet of the subject, building. No such parking, except for District parking, is available. While Section 15- 19.050 (CH District Regulations) provides for regulations of structures and parking in the CH District, subsection (k) is the only provision which addresses off - street parking. This Section is applicable only where the subject property is in one of the four City Parking Districts. The proposed Big Basin Bistro is CH zoned, but is in none of these Districts. Therefore, the e� regulations ations cited in Section 1519.050 must apply. Since the Applicant requires an additional 24 spaces, as does the existing adjacent restaurant (per the Planning Commission's Staff Report), there is an astonishing shortfall. 2. The undersigned also appeal on equitable grounds. It is patently unfair fora business severely deficient in parking spaces to have that requirement waived on the theory that its customers can use existing parking district spaces paid for by its competitors. Those spaces cost in excess of $11,000.00 each. If a business is 24 spaces short, that equates to $264,000.00. Capitalized at 10.0 %, this represents annual savings of at least $26,400.00 per year ($2,200.00 per month). The Applicant has a 2,000 s.f. establishment. By bootlegging his deficient 24 spaces on the wallets of his competitors, he has a $1.10 per s.f. per month cost advantage. Worse yet, those 24 customers for which the Bistro will not be providing parking, will be parking in the District and crowding, out the customers of the other businesses whose landlords have paid to obtain the proper parking. This cannot be and is not fair. 3. The Saratoga Village Plan encourages a traditional town center mix of specialty shops, restaurants, convenience shops, services, and residential uses. The existing twenty -four restaurants have licenses to sell beer and wine on premises. (This Applicant is applying to sell both on and off premises.) The need is for more retail and professional establishments. C Based on the foregoing, the undersigned urge you to overrule the Planning Commissions' approval in this matter. Sincerely, 3 0 i� /V J• f . i�,�st 6L 0 VN.&1 Mel -:14_► November 22,1993 LAMPSHIRE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Mayor Karen Tucker City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Re: Appeal dated Nov. 9, 1993 Saratoga, Ca. 95070 of Conditional Use Permit UP 93 006 Dear Karen: As the representative under contract to Mr. Stephen D. Flory, owner of the commercial building located at 14480 -14482 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, I am submitting to you and the other Council members, my report and studies regarding the above referenced Appeal for a Conditional Use Permit, which has been approved by the Planning Commission on a five to one vote. It is apparent that the Appellant and their supporters strenuously object to competition in the Village of Saratoga. They have however claimed that the City of Saratoga Parking Ordinances are In violation, and that the ONE percieved violator should be made to join a Parking District or meet the Restaurant Parking Ordinance. In effect, what the Appellant is attempting to do, is hold ONE building owner, Mr. Stephen Flory, as a hostage to their demands. The facts are, including Mr. Flory's building, there is a total of approximate 50,273 square feet of buildings on the south side of Big Basin Way. None of these were Included in the Parking District, (Section 15. 35.035) nor do they comply with the Intensive retail, or Restaurant (Section 15- 35.030) off street parking ordinance. The clear point is that these buildings including 14480.14482 Big Basin, were pre - existing to the Parking District Ordinances. My conclusion Is that the Appellant (s) clearly wish to use the Parking Ordinances as an excuse to file an Appeal in an effort to prevent a new unique business from locating in the Village of Saratoga. This new business is truly unsual, it is not a liquor store, but it is a Gourmet Deli with service and sales of Premium Regional Wine and Micro Brewed Beer. Karen, I will appreciate your very careful consideration of the Issues, and In behalf of Mr. Flory, the Big Basin Bistro, as well as myself, I urge you to vote on December 1, 1993 to deny the Appeal. Thank you. Sincerel Warren L pshire —� cc: Mr. Stephen Flory 14457 BIG BASIN WAY • SARATOGA, CA 95070 • 408 - 867 -2582 • FAX: 408 - 867 -6357 WARREN LAMPSHIRE November 22, 1993 COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Mr. Harry Peacock City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Frultvale Avenue Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Dear Harry: Re: Appeal dated November 9, 1993 of Conditional Use Permit UP 93 006 My firm is the exclusive agent and Property Manager under contract with Mr. Stephen Flory who Is the owner of the commercial building located at 14480114482 Big Basin Way. The above referenced Appeal is scheduled for Council consideration on December 1, 1993. As you may know the Planning Commission voted five to one approving the Conditional Use Permit. The Appeal as filed by Mr. Joseph Masek raises questions with reference to the City Parking Ordinances. 1 have conducted an In depth study of the Planning Commission October 27,1993 minutes; the content of the Appeal; as well as the Parking Ordinances, Article 15.35, Sections 15- 35.050 and 15. 35.035. The results of that study are attached. Upon review of some of the signatures on the Appeal, I have found at least one signature to be false, and I understand the Community Development Director has been so advised in writing. The Appellant has claimed that the Issues and their objections are motivated by the Parking Ordinances. My studies have revealed that approximately 50,273 square feet of pre - existing retail buildings and restaurant locations on the south side of Big Basin Way, (Exhibit "A ") do not meet the current Ordinances. The claimed Issues of the Parking Ordinances have singled out ONE owner, Mr. Stephen D. Flory, requiring that he conform to a Parking Ordinance. No mention Is made of pre - existing buildings_ and owners who do not and cannot conform to the Parking Ordinances. Hence, I believe the Appellants claim to be discriminatory. Their main thrust is an attempt to eliminate competition. We believe with the modifications to our on site parking as designed by Warren Held, that we now are In compliance with Section 15. 35.035. We therefore, at Mr. Flory's expense, have met the Appellants demands. Barry, please pass the enclosed packets to each of the Council members for advance review. Thank you for your assistance, and If you have ny questions, please let me know. Sincerely Warren La pshire 14457 BIG BASIN WAY • SARATOGA, CA 95070 • 408 - 867 -2582 • FAX: 408 - 867 -6357 EXHIBIT "A" COMPARATIVE PROPERTY PARKING ANALYSIS 14416 BIG BASIN WAY TO 14488 BIG BASIN WAY, SARATOGA BIG BASIN ON SITE PARKING DIST. 14416 CORINTHIAN 12,000 8 SPACES 32 REQUIRED 14424 VILLAGE RENDEZVOUS REST. 2,500 NONE 7 REQUIRED 14426 TWO R 1 RESIDENCES UIK NONE (garages req'd) 14428 WELLS FARGO BANK 4,000 NONE 11 REQUIRED 14440 HILLVIEW CENTER 16,500 43 SPACES 43 REQUIRED 14456 ANDREJ BEAUTY SALON 1,200 NONE 3 REQUIRED 14458 FRANCISCO JEWELRY 1,200 NONE 3 REQUIRED 14462 PAPER FUNALIA 1,100 NONE 3 REQUIRED 14470 BANK OF AMERICA 4,000 PRIVATE PKG 0 REQUIRED 14480 BIG BASIN BISTRO 2,000 5.5 SPACES 5.5 REQUIRED 14482 MARGHERITA DI ROMA 2,000 5.5 SPACES 5.5 REQUIRED 14486 TO BIKE SHOP, FRAME SHOP 14488 RESTAURANT BEAUTY SALON TOTALS: big basin 11117 9.423 10 SPACES 12 REQUIRED 51,273 72 125 REQUIRED .. ■ UP -93 -006 USE PERMIT 14480 BIG BASIN WAY DAN STARK dba BIG BASIN BISTRO MINUTES OF THE 10/27/93 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SOURCE FOR THIS REPORT: 1. I have provided the Planning Staff prior to the 10/27/93 meeting a document which was recorded September 11, 1975, pursant to Section 813 of the Civil Code, which provides "the right of the public or any person to make any use whatsoever of the (below) described land or any portion therof'.(copy attached) In addition the land in question has been used since the original construction, approximately in 1954, for access and parking for the businesses who have occupied premises of 14480 -14482 Big Basin Way, creating a Perscriptive Easement for almost thirty years. 2. LEONARD SULLIVAN: Owner of Bank Bar Liquor sales Mr. Sullivan claims parking is an issue, however the real reason is that he he supports the theory of NO COMPETITION no growth in the Village. 3. TOM VANDENHOOGEN: Owner of Little Amsterdam Restaurant Mr. VandenHoogen has stated he does not want ANY business in the subject property! Mr. VandenHoogen's claims that he represents the owner of the property in which his restaurant is located, however he is unaware of the recorded easement document in paragraph 1. Mr. VandenHoogen has not complained prior to the current application, about the previous restaurant La Mere Michelle, who was a tenant in the 14482 Big Basin property for 15 years. 4. SAEED SANJROEH: Owner of Viennna Woods Deli This Deli is almost two full blocks from the Big Basin Bistro. Rearranging employee parking does not seem a solution for a business so remote to another? Mr. Sanjroeh supports no competition no growth in the Village. 5. BETTY CRAWFORD: Partner of Otto Crawford, owner of the building 14429 Big. Basin Way Mrs. Crawford claims parking to be the issue, however Mr. & Mrs. Crawford who are the owners of the building which is leased to the only liquor store in the Village, clearly demonstrates that NO COMPETITION and no growth in the area of their kind of business is the reason for their comments. 6. HARRY LULLA: Suggests a new business will not survive. Mr. Lulla holds an ABC license and operates the only liquor store in the Village.Mr. Lulla notably and historically has been vehemetly opposed to any one who applies for an ABC Conditional Use approval by the City of Saratoga. Mr. Lulla flatly does not want any competition! Regarding the subject of MIXED USE: Big Basin Bistro will be not be a liquor store, and they will promote business for other merchants by generating walking traffic. The Big Basin Bistro business will be Premium Regional Wine Tasting and Micro Brewed Beer Tasting, and sales. Additionally, Gourmet deli foods will be served which will be complimented by service of Premium Regional Wine or Micro Brewed Beer. Planning Chairperson, Gillian Moran stated "the proposed use is unique and will generate business for other establishments in the area ". Commissioner Asfour stated "the Planning Commission should not hold the Applicant hostage......" ( additionally the Owner of the building should not be held hostage.) Asfour further states "the proposed business is of a unique nature." 7. GENE ZAMBETTI: Owner of an office building, and states he has no objection to the use. He just wants everyone to PAY into the parking district. We presently have 50,273 .square feet of retail and some restaurant spaces which do not pay into any parking district. (see Exhibit A). 8. JOSEPH MASEK: Owner of La Mere Michelle, welcomed the new Big Basin Bistro. However, Mr. Masek claims parking is the issue. The enclosed Exhibits demonstrate that Parking is not the issue. 9.OTTO CRAWFORD: Although Big Basin Bistro is only planning to sell Premium Regional Wine, and Micro brewed Beer, along with gourmet deli foods, Mr. Crawford fiercly wants the complete restriction of any other ABC license user in the Village of Saratoga. Parking is the disguise of his basic issue - NO COMPETITION, no growth in the Village. FIVE OF SIX Planning Commissioners basically felt that parking issues are not the issue for their consideration, but rather the use was UNIQUE, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIFIC BUSINESS PLAN, DIRECTOR CURTIS STATED "THE USE IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING CODE." THERE IS A PERCIEVED AND IMAGINED LACK OF PARKING IN THE VILLAGE. OF SARATOGA. AFTER CAREFUL STUDY, THE FACTS ARE, WE HAVE PLENTY OF PARKING IN THE VILLAGE. ON RARE OCCASIONS ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR THE PARKING IS STRAINED. Commissioner Kaplan stated ..... "why one side of the street (Big Basin Way) did not join the parking district 20 years ago is not the issue (tonight)." After a study of the retail and restaurant buildings on the 'one side" of Big Basin, the enclosed EXHIBIT "A" was developed. 0 EXHIBIT "C" RESPONSE TO APPELLANT JOSEPH MASER APPEAL OF UP- 93.006 APPROVED USE FOR BIG'IASIN BISTRO 1. If Section 15- 35.030 were to be enforced by the City of Saratoga, and I quote from the Ordinance: Intensive Retail establishments One space for each two hundred square feet of gross floor area, Restaurants One space for each seventy five square feet of gross floor area, then the pre - existing retail and restaurant buildings as shown on Exhibit A attached, must meet the following parking space Ordinance requirements based on approximately 51,273 square feet of gross floor area. None of the buildings as shown in EXHIBIT "A ", are in any of the four parking districts. PARKING REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 15- 35.030 244 CURRENTLY AVAILABLE PARKING 72 (see exhibit "A ") If the same 51,273 square feet of gross floor area were to be applied to the formula of the City of Saratoga Parking District Regulations Section 15.35.035 the following spaces would be required: District 1 One space for each District 2 One space for each District 3 One space for each District 4 One space for each Using the formula based on 380 sq. ft. of gro parking required would be 125 spaces. 473.5 380 350 380 ss floor are sq. ft. of gross floor area sq. ft. of gross floor area sq. ft. of gross floor area sq. ft. of gross floor area a, as shown on EXHIBIT "A" the 2. The Appellant states they are appealing on "equitable grounds." The question then, is it equitable for the City of Saratoga to enforce any multple of the Parking Ordinances on pre - existing buildings and their owners, which as shown on EXHIBIT "A ". Obviously most buildings in EXHIBIT "A" do not conform, nor could they conform to any Parking Ordinance. Therefore, would the Appellant's demands be "equitable ?" Would each owner of those buildings agree with the Appellant that the Appellant's demand is "equitable ?" In response to the Appellant's statement that Page 1. Page 2. "It is patently unfair fora business deficient in parking spaces to have that requirement waived on the theory that its customers can use exist- ing parking district spaces paid for by its competitors." While this condition of using parking district spaces (as well as all other parking spaces as needed) for all shoppers and patrons of Saratoga Village is common place for many businesses. We believe It is PATENTLY UNFAIR, DISCRIMINATORY, and designed to single out one owner for :attack and hold not only the building owner HOSTAGE to the Appellants demands, but the appeal is designed to limit, eliminate, discourage growth, as well as to prevent competition in the Village of Saratoga. We have completed a lengthy study of the parking conditions in the Village of Saratoga. The Village categorically does not have a lack of parking. On no day, (except the Open House night, and the annual Street A'ffaire) of the year is their a need for additional parking. On any day of the year, other than the exceptions, you may easily park in the Village. Admittedly, a patron may not always be able to park at the front door of the business that a shopper or a customer wishes to enter, but isn't that a wonderful, and the best of all worlds, business environment. In an effort to conform as near as possible to the Appellants demands of meeting Parking District requirements and therefore avoid being "patently unfair ", we have contracted with Warren Held Architectural firm, to redesign our parking lot, adjusting for compact cars and handicap parking. In so doing we now have eleven (11) parking spaces on site, and in accordance with the Parking District regulations, of 380 square feet of gross floor area x 4000 square feet, the parking spaces required are 10.52 spaces. We therefore have met the Appellants demands relating to parking. 14480 -14482 Big Basin Way complies with Parking District Ratios. In addition, by redesigning the parking lot, the owner is prepared to meet the City of Saratoga Dumpster enclosure Ordinance, by installing the enclosure WITHOUT a sacrifice of one parking space. Mr. Warren Heid's design is included herewith as EXHIBIT "D ". Based on these statistics, ratios, and factual information detailed in this report, and the supporting EXHIBITS, we as the representative and Property Manager for the owner of the property at 14480 14482 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, I urge the City Council to deny the Appeal of the Conditional Use Permit UP- 93.006, as approved 5 to 1 by the Planning Commission. Thank you. Sincerely, Warren Lampshire Property Manager for Stephen D. Flory, Owner �I �L425� L4 r4 i ExqIBIT "D" 6r- 51 I- No tp r Itil O Arrim v S RL p� s�fo p AMs ALL -VY of ARkaG Rv�t'.� ,��s�u.�.s►�T' ao .1�lS7"Xo flj,e Dr ��lER iGf� il I� W Z �1 b b� ,C b � of ARkaG Rv�t'.� ,��s�u.�.s►�T' ao .1�lS7"Xo flj,e Dr ��lER iGf� il I� W Z �1 O DOWNEY SAVINGS I November 17, 1993 RECEIVED NOV 19 1993 PLANNING DEPT. Paul Curtis City of Saratoga Conmunity Development Director 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. Dear Mr. Curtis: Today it was brought to my attention, that someone from the Downey Savings Saratoga Branch had signed an appeal to over- rule the Planning Cor ission's approval of UP -93 -006. The signature on line six does not belong to a Downey employee here at this Branch, as the Manager has been on a medical leave. If I were to sign such an appeal, I would first have it approved by our Regional office. I would appreciate it if you would disregard the entry on line six on the appeal dated November 9, 1993. Sincerely, Vicki Groce Acting Branch Manager DOWNEY SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION 14411 Big Basin Way - Saratoga, California 95070 - (408) 867 -7000 RECEIVED - NOV 23 1993 NOV -2 °21443 PLANNING DEPT. Xi,� -��G� ",0000,0,0,00,0,,,��/ Aze ism.) G o% Ci�G %�i ' GU'✓�L' e?�ZG%%tc- 'lam 1411� �-�° � ��✓� O e � �rrr2�� �+arr�r�f `��2,�`✓ I S _ I JL.1 I U I• �Vi 1 J l VIOL �ti ±iORL City Council Members City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear,Council Memberes 11 -�J' iiJ i • G7 U i b0- ]U04L, �UOOG i ����10 • c November 23, 1993 Sub ject s Bistro at 1180 Big Basin Way Appeal of Planning Commission t;p - 93 -- 006 Where are the parking spaces for employees and customers for this prepesed oatabli©hment7 We as members of parking District #3 are providing parkin; for employees, owners, and customers of, businessee outside the District. These people are getting the same benefits as though thoy were- part of the District but are not assessed any of the costs. Is this fairy In this economy our assessment costs cannot be passed onto our tenants, so something should be done to make things more equitable. Perhaps having the businesses on the south aide of Big Basin, Way that dent bejcng to a Parking District join #3 and share in the assessments. When preliminary meetings were held prior to the formation of District 0, the question of those south side businesses being included was raised. - The answer was that another District was to be formed. Wouldn't it just be e whole lot easier and faster (no negotiations for land, construction delays, disruption of business, lees costly, etc.) to include these properties now in District #3? Between now end the formation of a new District will be years and in the mean time we as property owners are drowning. We do encourage new businesses in the Village but should we (District #3) be the ones to supply parking, pay for the parking, and hsve others who are truly benefitting not pay for any of this. Our tenants and customers are being squeezed out of parking spaces we are paying for. Legs be fair. Sincerely, r Annette E. Cassbonne Property Owners -JA�35 & 14445 Big Basin Way P.O. Box RA8 Saratoga, CA 95071 RESOLUTION NO. UP -93 -006 A RESOLUTION OF THE SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SARATOGA, APPROVING USE PERMIT Stark; 14480 Big Basin Way WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Use Permit approval to operate a restaurant and sell beer and wi-ie for both on .F nd off premise consumption within the Commercial Historic Zoning Uistrict; and WHEREAS, the. Planning Commission has conducted a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS,-the Planning Commission finds: a. That the proposed bar /restaurant is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. That the proposed bar /restaurant and the condritions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.. c. That the proposed bar /restaurant will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the floor plan, and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Stark for Use Permit approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The bar /restaurant shall operate as proposed and as represented on the floor plan marked Exhibit "A ". Any intensification of this use shall require an amended Use Permit.and Planning Commission approval. 2. Prior to issuance of a zone clearance for the proposed tenant improvements, the owner /applicant shall submit verification from the West Valley Sanitation District to the Community Development Department for the following: . a. Compliance with the District's sanitary sewer permit requirement. Applicant shall contact Jonathan Lee of the Sanitation District at (408) 378 -2407. b. Approval of proposed facilities by the District's industrial waste inspector. Applicant shall submit a UP -93 -006; 14480 Big Basin way copy of the plan for approval to Ms. Karen, McDonough, SJ /SC Water Pollution Control Plant, 700 Los Esteros Road, San Jose, CA 95134. 3. The proposed use shall at all times operate in compliance with all regulations of the City and /or other agencies having jurisdictional authority over the use pertaining to; but not limited to; health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. 4. The establishment shall not be opened or operated in any form prior to 7:00 a.m. or after 11:00 p.m. on a daily basis. On not more than five days per each calendar year, the establishment may remain open until 1 a. a. for special events. Prior to each special event, written notice.must be submitted to the Community Development.Department. 5. The applicant shall apply for. review of this Use Permit within one year from the date of approval to the Community Development Director. The permit will be reviewed by the Community Development Director to determine if the approved hours of operation continue to be appropriate and to address any other complaints or problems which may arise associated with the business operation. 6. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance, the applicant shall submit an improvement plan to the Community Development Director indicating how the garbage bins and parking spaces can most efficiently be arranged to maximize the number of on- site parking spaces. It shall then be required that these improvements be constructed and /or implemented prior to the opening of the bar /restaurant for business.. 7. Applicant agrees to hold the City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. 8. Non- compliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossi- ble to estimate damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City-per each day of the violation. Section 2. Applicant shall sign the agreement to these conditions within thirty (30) days of the passage of this resolu- tion or said resolution shall be void. UP -93 -006; 14480 Big Basin Nap Section 3. Conditions of this Use Permit must be completed within twenty -four (24) months or approval will expire.. Section 4. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other governmental entities must be met. Section S. Unless appealed pu:suant to ths -requirements cf Article 15 -90 of the Saratoga City Code, this resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commis- sion, State -of California, this 27th day of October 1993, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Moran, Asfour, Murakami, Kaplan and Wolfe NOES: Commissioner Jacobs ABSENT: Commissioner Caldwell ATTEST: C/ Secretary, Planning Commission The fore5a�ng con ,4tions &r hereby accepted: Signature Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 27, 1993 Page 17 Planner Walgren stated that the requirements for roofing materials will apply regardless when the plans are submitted for building permit inspection. He noted that the material board is primarily for aesthetics. Planner Walgren stated that he thought that either of those selections could be upgraded to "Class A ". THE MOTION PASSED 6 -0. 6. UP -93 -006 - Stark; 14480 Big Basin Way, request for Use Permit approval to allow the establishment of a deli /bistro and the sale of beer and wine per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The restaurant /bar is proposed within an existing commercial space in the Saratoga Village and zoned Commercial- Historic (CH -1) Planner Walgren presented the Report dated October 27, 1993 and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the existing parking, the standard parking formula, the established parking districts, the formula used for the assessments to parking district participants, the limited types of business that could utilize the subject space and meet the parking standard, previous occupants of the subject space, the number of businesses in the village area that meet current parking regulations, the responsible parry for meeting use permit conditions, and the body governing the alcohol beverage license. Chairperson Moran noted the receipt of letters from Mr. Tyler, Mr. Van Den Hoogen, Dr. and Mrs Smith, Steve Cali, Carolyn Holm, Gene Zambetti, Mr. and Mrs. Crawford, and Mr. Tomaino. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:40 P.M. Dan Stark, applicant, stated that he has been in contact with the building owner, but is not his appointed representative. Mr. Stark spoke in favor of the use permit application. He explained that discussions regarding the opening of the proposed business began in May. He stated that through these discussions with the City, the City had indicated that the restrooms would need to be brought up to Code. He explained that the building owner has been cooperative through out the process and has .agreed to bring the bathrooms up to code. With regard to the parking issues brought up in the letters, Mr. Stark stated that the lack of sufficient parking in the area is an existing condition. He noted that he would be willing to work with the City to try to mitigate the problem, but that there may be little anyone can do. He stated that with regard to a comment made in the letter from Carolyn Holm stating that there is no legal access to the parking lot behind the building at 14480 Big Basin Way he does not believe this comment is true. In response to Commissioner Jacobs's question of whether Mr. Stark knew if the building owner Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 27, 1993 Page 18 would be willing to contribute to the parking district, Mr. Stark stated that he did not know if the owner would be willing to contribute. Mr. Stark noted that a contribution by the building owner to the parking district may involve a renegotiation of the tenant leases in the building. Leonard Sullivan, 14421 Big Basin Way, owner of The Bank, spoke in opposition to the application because of the insufficient parking in the area. He stated that the businesses on the north side of the street have contributed to the parking districts and are assessed annually for parking. He stated that the businesses on the south side of the street do not participate in the parking districts and are not assessed a' charge, but they benefit by their customers' use of the parking areas. He stated that he felt this practice was unfair. He stated that the businesses that contribute to the parking districts are losing business because their customers have no where to park. He stated that the City should not allow a use /business in the subject site that would generate a lot of vehicles needing parking. He stated that the space should be utilized by a business with minimal parking needs. Commissioner Jacobs stated that it is not beneficial to the City nor the existing merchants to have an empty space in the village area. Commissioner Wolfe asked if Mr. Sullivan had. any suggestions for a solution to the parking problem. Mr. Sullivan stated that he has already brought the issue up to the City Council and has suggested that the businesses on the south side be assessed for parking. Tom Van Den Hoogen, 14490 Big Basin Way, Little Amsterdam Restaurant, expressed concern with the use of and damage to the parking lot by garbage and delivery trucks for the proposed business. He noted that there are only 8 parking spaces in this parking lot. Mr. Van Den Hoogen stated that his landlord and owner of the parking loi should be entitled to some compensation if the proposed business is going to use the parking lot. Commissioner Wolfe asked if Mr. Van Den Hoogen had any suggestions for a solution other than compensation with regard to the reported parking problems and the use of the parking lot. Mr. Van Den Hoogen stated that he felt that there were other types of businesses requiring less parking that could go into the subject space. Saeed Sanjroeh, owner of the Vienna Woods Restaurant, 14567 Big Basin Way, expressed concern with the lack of available parking in the area. He stated that he has lost customers because of the existing parking situation. He noted that eating Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 27, 1993 Page 19 places have a concentrated service during limited hours and the parking situation just gets worse during these hours. He suggested that another use which would require less parking be considered for this space. He stated that the village area does not need another eating place that brings business during the eating hours, but needs a busin: - -;ss to bring people during the other hours of the day. He stated that this business would only aggravate the current parking situation. In response to Commissioner Wolfe's inquiry for a solution to the parking, should the use permit be granted, Mr. Sanjroeh explained that rearranging the employee parking may possibly help. Betty Crawford, 14429 Big Basin Way, stated that a restaurant requires a good amount of parking. She noted that many of the other businesses in the village area are paying for parking and inquired why this business would be given a "free ride" since it will not be contributing to the parking districts. Harry Lulla, 19099 Austin Way, owner of Saratoga Wine And Spirits, stated that this proposed business does not meet the business plan for the village in that it would not provide a new service to the area. He noted that the Village area already has a bar and a deli. He stated that the business would be a non - conforming business and would probably not survive - it will only take business away from the already established businesses. He- stated that the business plan calls for a mix of businesses and not a concentration of the same types of businesses. Commissioner Kaplan asked about the Business Plan referenced by Mr. Lulla. Planner Walgren handed Commissioner Kaplan a copy of the Business Plan. Mr. Lulla reiterated his concern that the proposed business would not survive and that it was not in keeping with the goals of the business plan. Gene Zambetti, 14575 Oak Street, stated that his business contributed to parking district #4. He pointed out that his. letters expressed no problem with the proposed use. He stated that the parking situation is the problem. Mr. Zambetti explained to the Commission that his business contributes to the parking district and also pays a . lighting assessment. He expressed concern with the use of some of the parking spaces his business is paying for by the customers and /or employees of the new business. Mr. Zambetti explained that his business pays a fee for the parking spaces . and then the business is assessed an amount (lighting assessment) for maintenance of the parking lots. He discussed the annual amounts paid by his business for parking. Mr. Zambetti suggested that the new business pay their fair share of the lighting assessment and parking assessment /bond or those businesses paying these fees should be compensated or their assessment decreased appropriately. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 27, 1993 Page 20 Mr. Zambetti also answered general questions with regard to the parking situation and the fees /assessments paid by the merchants for the parking districts. In response to Commissioner Wolfe's question regarding a solution, Mr. Zambetti suggested that the new bu ►iness be required to post a cash bond for the purpose of contributing toward a fund toward the purchase of land and the construction of another parking facility. Mr. Zambetti also discussed the possibility of forming a Business Improvement District where the merchants could vote on an assessment formula and whether or not to participate in a parking district. Mr. Zambetti stated that he is not in favor of an empty space in the village. Chairperson Moran. inquired if Mr. Zambetti knew of other merchants on the south side of the road that were contributing to the parking district and /or the lighting assessment. Mr. Zambetti stated that he was unsure who paid into the lighting assessment or the parking district. Mr. Zambetti clarified that the Parking bond was for the purchase of parking spaces and that the lighting assessments were for maintenance of the parking areas. Joseph Masek, 14467 Big Basin Way, welcomed the new venture. He expressed concern with regard to the parking situation. He noted that the 2 hour parking spaces are used by vehicles that park all day long. He stated that he had reported this to the City, but that the 2 hour limit is still not enforced. He stated that enforcement of the 2 hour limit may help with some of the parking problems. Mr. Masek expressed frustration with the fact that he contributes to the parking, but doesn't seem to get anything for his money. Mr. Masek also provided the Commission with an occupancy history of the subject space. In response to Commissioner Wolfe's invitation for an equitable solution to the parking situation, Mr. Masek suggested that the 2 hour parking restriction be enforce. He also suggested the construction of a parking deck over district 3 and the installation of parking meters to regulate parking (deter all day parking by commuters who park in the area and ride to work with someone else) and to help generate money toward additional parking facilities. Mr. Crawford, 14429 Big Basin Way, reiterated many of the comments made by the previous speakers. Mr. Crawford suggested that the City look at a parking permit program. He stated that he, as a property owner in the downtown area, resents having to pay for parking while other businesses' employees and customers use the parking with no charge at all. He stated that he felt that the proposed use was too intensive for the location and that there is insufficient parking to support such a business. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 27, 1993 Page 21 Mr. Stark, applicant, explained that he has a similar establishment in Aptos. He reported that this business tends to have customers through out the day. He stated that a significant amount of the space is retail and the business would carry approximately 200 regional wines. He noted that the only beers that Would be offered are prem.l im ales and beer from micro breweries. With regard to the reported parking problem, Mr. Stark stated that there is not much he can do about the situation' but expressed his willingness to work with the City in this regard. He noted that he did not think that the rear parking lot was properly striped and that re- striping may help. He stated that the proposed business is expected to be an integral part of the community. In response to Commissioner Wolfe's inquiry regarding any suggestions toward a solution to the parking situation, Mr. Stark stated that the employee parking could be designated in a location so as not to add to the current parking dilemma. He also suggested that the back lot be re- striped and the garbage bin relocated so it would take up less room and perhaps open a space for parking. There was no one else wishing to speak. KAPLAN /JACOBS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:39 P.M. PASSED 6 -0. Commissioner Murakami asked if the business plan specifically calls out certain uses and if limits are placed on how many or what percentage of certain types of businesses can exist in the area. Planner Walgren explained that the business plan calls for a mix of pedestrian friendly businesses, but it does not limit the number or percentage of a certain type of business that can exist in the area. He further explained that this use is in conformance with both the Specific Business Plan and.the Design Plan. Commissioner Jacobs expressed the opinion that the Commission could limit the number of similar uses and at what point is there no longer an adequate mix of uses. He stated that if every time an application is reviewed the Commission takes the position that they cannot limit the (type of) use, theoretically the downtown area could be filled with all the same use. He stated that he thinks the Code has some provisions with regard to expanded uses and wondered what should and should not be done. He stated that the parking situation downtown is critical in two respects - 1) some merchants have to pay quite a bit and some pay nothing; and 2) there is not enough parking.. Even if everyone paid, Commissioner Jacobs explained, there would still not be enough parking. He stated that when the Commission talks about mixes, it needs to discuss mixes not only in terms of types of businesses /uses, but also in terms of operation times and parking needs. He stated this that categorization will not only provide a mixture of uses, but will also ameliorate the parking situation. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of. October 27, 1993 Page 22 Commissioner Jacobs stated that he was not ready to pass this request without further solutions to the parking situation. He stated that the City needs to solve the parking problem before it allows intensification of the use of this particular parcel. Commissioner Kaplan stated that she felt that the issue of competition is one factor that played into the comments made. She stated that with regard to Commissioner Jacobs' position, this option would leave a space in the downtown area and not generating income which is not a solution to the parking problem. She stated that the City does need to deal with. the parking problem and find a solution. She stated that she is willing to support the application -and allow the business to take its chances for either failure or success as long as this type of business is not prohibited by the zoning regulations. Commissioner Kaplan stated that why one side of the street did not join the parking district 20 years ago is not the issue tonight. She spoke in favor of a vehicle to bring these businesses into a parking district or the creation of a new parking district. She encouraged the Commission not to delay the proposed business and /or the applicant. Commissioner Asfour stated that many issues have arisen as a result of this application. He stated that some of these issues can not be dealt with by the Planning Commission. He noted that almost any business that moves into the subject space will face the same parking situation. Therefore, he stated, the Planning Commission should not hold the applicant hostage because of the existing parking situation. Commissioner Asfour stated that it is not the job of the Commission to call out the type of tenant for the space. He stated that. he would be voting in favor of the use permit. Commissioner Murakami concurred with the comments made by Commissioner Asfour. He stated that there is no clear solution to the parking problem and that applicant should not be denied occupancy based on the type of business proposed. Commissioner Murakami stated that he would be voting in favor of the use permit and he expressed his desire for the City to move on finding a solution to the parking problem in the downtown area. Commissioner Wolfe asked if there was anything the Planning Commission could do to put a vehicle in motion with regard to finding a solution to the reported parking problems. Community Development Director Curtis explained that as Mr. Sullivan mentioned earlier, the City Council had been informed of the problems and discussions are taking place with regard to exploration of parking solutions. Director Curtis stated that he would inquire about the progress of these discussions and report back to the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 27, 1993 Page 23 Commissioner Jacobs stated that the proposed use does not comply with the City Code. Director Curtis explained that the use is considered a permitted use (a legal use) and the requirement for a use permit is only to provide the City an opportunity to impose certain conditions to mitigate any potential impacts. He stated that the use is in compliance with the zoning code. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he does not feel that the issue of insufficient parking has been addressed. Commissioner Asfour stated that he feels the proposed business is of a unique nature. He pointed out that it is not really a deli or restaurant. He stated that he likes the idea of being able to taste a certain wine before purchasing it. He noted that there is no where else in the village that this can be done. Commissioner Wolfe stated that he feels that the discussion regarding the parking situation clearly points out the need for a parking solution and hopes that this message is received and appropriate action is taken. . Chairperson Moran stated that she feels the proposed use is unique and will generate business for other establishments in the area. She stated that she finds the application to be in compliance with the Specific Business Plan as it will be a pedestrian friendly use. She stated that she hopes that the City will move toward a solution to. the reported parking problems. KAPLAN /ASFOUR MOVED TO APPROVE UP -93 -006 PER THE STAFF REPORT. Community Development Director Curtis suggested that the language in Condition #5 be modified and that the condition read as follows: 5. The applicant shall apply for review of this Use Permit within one year from the date of approval to the Community Development Director. The permit will be reviewed by the Community Development Director to determine if the approved hours of operation continue to be appropriate and to address any other complaints or problems which may arise associated with the business operation. Chairperson Moran inquired if review of the parking situation should be explicitly included in Condition #5 Several of the Commissioners indicated that they were not in favor of including parking issues in with Condition #5. Director Curtis agreed that it would not be appropriate to include parking issues in Condition #5. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 27, 1993 Page 24 Chairperson Moran asked if a condition which requires the installation of a garbage bin, re- striping of the parking lot and restricting and enforcing employee parking to a designated area should be added. Director Curtis stated that installation of a garbage bin and re- striping of 'he parking lot to maximize parking can easily be added as Condition #8, but the enforcement of restricting employee parking may be difficult. THE MODIFICATIONS (AS NOTED ABOVE) WERE ACCEPTED BY BOTH THE MAKER AND SECONDER OF THE MOTION AND THE MOTION PASSED 5 -1 (JACOBS OPPOSED). 7. UP -93 -005 - Vallancy; 12580 Paseo Cerro, request for Use V -93 -016 - Permit approval to convert an existing 740 sq. ft. carport that is within the required rear yard into a fully enclosed garage and shop and change the flat roof to a pitched roof per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The applicant is also requesting Variance approval since the structure is located within the required side yard. The subject property is approximately 10,720 sq. ft. and is located within an R -1- 10,000 zone district (cont. from 9/22/93; application expires 1/20/94). ---------------------------------------- - - - - -- Planner Walgren presented the Report dated October 27, 1993 and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the project and with regard to the City regulations regarding second living units. Commissioner Kaplan stated that she had visited the site and concluded that its intended use may have been as a second living unit. She stated that she would be in favor of requiring that the bathroom be removed. Commissioner Asfour inquired if the planning Commission could require removal of the bathroom. Planner Walgren explained that the Commission could base approval of the project on the removal of the bathroom. AT 11;:07 P.M. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING. Scott Cunningham, 14375 Saratoga Avenue, explained that the structure was an existing structure and submitted before and after photos of the structure depicting the various modifications the applicant has made to the structure. Mr. Cunningham also submitted photos of similar structures on neighboring properties. Mr. Cunningham explained that the City had been contacted by the applicant and his brother with regard to the regulations. He further explained that the owner's REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION -Application No./Location:, UP -93 -006; 14480 Big Basin Way Applicant /Owner: Stark Staff Planner: Lynette Dias Date: oct. 27, 1993 APN: 517 =09 -017 Director Approval: • 14480 BIG BASIN WAY UP -93 -006; 14480 Big Basin.way EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 08/31/93 Application complete: 08/31/93 Notice published: 10/13/93 Mailing completed: 10/14/93 Posting completed: 10/07/93 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for Use Permit approval to allow the establishment of a deli /bistro and the sale of beer and wine per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The restaurant /bar and retail establishment is proposed within an existing commercial space in the Saratoga Village and zoned Commercial- Historic (CH -1.). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the application by adopting Resolution UP -93 -006. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Analysis 2. Resolution-UP-93-006 3. Correspondence 4. Plans, Exhibit "A" UP -93 -006; 14480 Big Basin Way STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: CH -1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Retail Commercial Building Area: 2,050 sq. ft. PROJECT DISCUSSION: Proposal: The applicant is requesting approval to establish the Big Basin Bistro. The establishment is proposed to include a wine and beer bar, which also serves food, and a retail wine and beer shop (see attached correspondence from applicant). Per Section 15- 19.020 of the City Code, any restaurant and /or any establishment engaged in the sale of alcoholic beverages must obtain a conditional Use Permit. Therefore, the applicant is requesting Use Permit approval to allow the on- and off -sale of beer and wine and to establish a restaurant. The subject property is located on the south side of Big Basin Way adjacent to the Bank America parking lot. The property is occupied by one building with two tenant spaces. The subject tenant space was previously occupied by Big Basin Music and is adjacent to Margherita di Roma. There is a small parking lot with ten spaces located to the rear of the property that abuts a multi - family residential development. Hours of Operation: The bistro is proposed to be open from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily, closing seasonally one day per week. The applicant is also requesting approval to remain open until 1 a.m. five evenings per year for special events and to occasionally open earlier for wine event weekends. Staff has included a condition of approval that limits the hours of operation, including kitchen facilities, janitorial maintenance. and the operation .of exhaust fans that do not have to be in constant operation, from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.--daily with a provision allowing them to stay open until 1 a.m. five nights each calendar year. Staff feels this will allow the bar /restaurant adequate flexibility and is consistent with other recent restaurant Use Permit approvals in the Village. Staff has included a condition which requires the Use Permit to be reviewed by the Community Development Director in one year. At that time, staff will assess whether or not the approved hours of operation are appropriate. In addition, Section 15 -55 of the City Code states that the Planning Commission retains continuing jurisdiction of each Use Permit and may at any time modify or delete any conditions. Parking: The City has received correspondence from Mr. Larry Tyler objecting to allowing this use to establish without providing UP -93 -006; 14480 Big Basin Way additional off - street parking. Specifically, he has cited section 15- 35.020 of the parking ordinance which states that a change in use would necessitate a reassessment of required parking spaces. While this is. correct, there are exceptions. For example, newer commercial developments in Saratoga may have additional parking allowances or restrictions based on Use Permit agreements made at the time the development was approved. Conversely, older structures, suer as this one within the City's historic district, may have little or no available off - street parking. In the past, the City has allowed these existing these older structures to be operated with less than current parking requirements, if appropriate, through the granting of a Use Permit. There are four public parking districts /lots within the Saratoga Village. The subject property is not within a parking district (and was not required to contribute to paying for the district improvements) , but their patrons are allowed to use the public parking facilities. The only on -site parking for the proposed bistro is located at the rear of.the property. The bistro would share 10 spaces.with the adjacent tenant, Margherita di Roma. Since Margherita di Roma would require 29 spaces under current ordinances, the parking is already deficient by 19 spaces; technically, no use could ever occupy the - adjoining space without providing a significant number of additional spaces. Sicnage: An eight square foot wood sign is proposed to be mounted on the mansard roof. Since the sign is less than 10 square feet, it is exempt from permit requirements. The sign is consistent with the Village Plan design guidelines. Trash Enclosure: Currently there is no trash enclosure for the subject property. Staff has contacted the property owner and he has agreed to comply with the City's requirement and install a trash enclosure on the property within 60 days. Since the trash enclosure is more the responsibility of the property owner, versus the applicant, staff will follow -up on this requirement independent of this Use Permit application..If the enclosure is not provided within 60 days, the property owner will be cited for a violation. Summary: With the conditions contained in the Resolution; staff believes that all of the. required findings can be made in that the use meets the objectives of the C -H zoning district and the provisions of the Village Plan by encouraging the establishment of small scale, pedestrian oriented businesses in.the Village core. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the application by adopting Resolution UP -93 -006. Uctober 16, 1993 City.of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale avenue Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Attention: 1'la -uning Commission Ae: lase eerr..it for a bistro at 14480 iii, basin Wad- - Lear Planning Commission i-ersons: I alit wrl* -Lino ka is letter because 1. will 1) Uui, 4)j, bUw.i 3 Gtj IeI' 27th wlien, 1 u,iderstand, you will be co::sideriug a Esc l:er..:i t for a bistro at 14488 Jig Basin Way. 1 wish to point out the following: (1). ARTICLL 15- 19.020 states t.iat restaura.,ts, markets, .d - icatessens aid establishments en-aoed in the sale of alcoholic heverages are not allowed in comiiercial zones without being granted a use rermit. (2) a j-' CLL 15- 35.0,20 states 't::at at the ticae of alteration, or enlar,ement. there shall be provided off- street parking in accordance with the..off- street parkin schedule. iiLl'l:i�rli 1 U:� ��i _ 1:.:uA.�� i:_ ii :JT S::b _ . � a:� A ChANtih OF l;SZ UR AN. *..&i).L,iTiO WATCH Wti ;U'LD 1:%CH_ASr_ 1:_L NX:•L il"11 V. 11AA,tlli-i7 SPACES A:3u vl I'd ToTAL n., ;; CI IL :L !?AI (JA TO SL Cii C_ a.,.ui: uii (3) AitTiC"_ 15- 35.030 - SCr; :Dli�L_OF_OFF- STiE"ET iAAKI:�G T:e use, prior to Jan. 1, 1993, at 14430 Pik iiasin Way was classified as extensive retail, requiring one parking space for each 500 sq. ft. or 5 spaces for 2250 sq. ft. Tie proposed use would require one syace for each 75 sq. f;,. of building (2250 sq. ft. divided by 75 equals 30 spaces.) T11 Ae building at 14480 -82 .3ig Basin Way is 50x90 or 4500 s4. ft. Une half is occupied by Margherita de Roma's rests. -rant -- V: a other half is proposed to be for a bistro. This one b.,ilding, if t,e use perrait is issued, will have a deficieucey of 60 spaces. (4) Behind the bui.1ding there is unmarked, sub - standard sur- facin: for.9 autos and a Barba €e bin. Access to this are4 is through private property and such access could be re- voked at any time. To grant the bistro a use perwit would be to ignore Article 15- 35.020 requiring that parking be provided if tine new use would require riore j)arki.ig than the nevious use. it also would exacerbate the critical parking situation in that part of the Village and w,;.:ld be grossly unfair to ?ar..i..g .ljistricts 12 21 3 and 4, who are paying dearly for t:ieir parking. : *Ost, if not all, of the merchants on the same side of :3ig .3asiu Way as the proposed bistro require their em- ployees to park'An the District Parldi.a Spaces so as to leave parking for their customers. These merchants and la:idowners pay uothino for District Parki:.g. Granting a use permit for the bistro would surly worsen this situation. Sincerely,. �s y Tyler 3611 Saratoga Vista Ave. Saratoga, Ca. Phone: .867 -1144 GC T ED 1 C+ li H t:t rJE F 1 l 1 Fax Transmittal Sheet TO: i� SUBJECT: FROM: PHONE (408) 662 -9556/ FAX- 662 -9590 Bay Re- Insurance And Risk Services P.O. Draver 219, Aptos, Ca. 95001 PAGES TO FOLLOW; The simple tapas -such as 'ehorizo C N E T:` sausage; stewed.- oll►►es -. or °anchovy' and 0 76 Potato salad and others may be prc- 5.�1el�i��N 0•� of dl�i tt`t `t� �•��aih • The more exotic and complicated tapas are .deafly suited for special or celebratory occasions Men presented as a main course. Bacon - wrapped ;rawns with sour cream, lobster and chicken iroehettes, stuffed quail or the empanadas — the tatter is a showstopper on arrival at the table.. 9 pared in advance and refrigerated, to be served as a snack in between meals, with a glass of wine in the _early evening or as a late suppei. One of the more popular uses for tapas Is as an appetizer before a main meal. -Serve the marinated anchovies, the deep fried squid or goat's cheese in tarragon and garlic and these highly flavoured dishes' will stimulate the. palate while still leaving the room for something more substantial. FAX Submissi— , expanded operations discri -tion. for COMMUNITY DE .OPMENT, CITY OF SARATOGA, FOR USE IN PREPARATION FOR PLANNING COMMISSION Attention Lynette Dias Big Basin Bistro Food Service (Pre- liminary discussions completed. Final discussions entered but not complete pending planning hearing on this phase) Food limited to Deli operation, speciality Tapas and /or Oyster Bar, to compliment fire wines and ales or beers. Plus Section of super \premium Cheese and Sausages accompany tastings and for off - sale. - Per request, Tapas Bar description attached. Food served during all hours of operation. Speciality dishes available for take -out, all hours of operation. Off sale and tasting room, primarily as regional wineries facility. Generally offering by the glass and tastings, depending on whether feature is winery or varietal, of up to 10 reds and 10 whites. Weekly tastings usually presenting local winemakers: Example, Kathryn Kennedy release party, 1990 Cabernet planned in December in Saratoga at BBB. Sunrise Winery plans next release of Arata Cabernet at our establishment. Both are Saratoga Vineyards. Dr. David Bruce has done his annual vertical tasting of Cabernets and Pinot Noirs at our establishment for two years. Alternate tastings feature local chefs for food /wine pairings or Brewmasters. Breweries: Award winning regional Microbreweries such as Seabright and San Andreas will be represented regularly, plus quality Seasonal events. Example, comparative tasting of Christmas /Winter ales as first event in November conducted by award winning brewmaster Richard Young. Off Sale - featuring North American micro - breweries, Belgian Monastery ales and other super - premiums. Hours of Operation may vary according to ultimate traffic and season. The intent was to be open for the Holiday business, 'however that As now impossible. Generally, we expect to be open as follows: 7 days per week, closing Seasonally one day per week or alternately for several weeks if indicated. Open 11 to 1.1 most days. Perhaps opening later on weekdays, earlier on Wine Event weekends, and closing at l,Km five special evenings per year. In no instances will we be open outside. ABC allowable hours for on sale establishments. Hours of operation may be reduced if sales are not sufficient to maintain a staff of 1 -3 employees during hours of operation. No mid -day closing is anticipated. C. D. Stark Mailing address: P.O. Drawer 219 Proprietor Big Basin i, Aptos, Ca. 95001 14480 Big Basin Way, Saratoga Phone (408)662 -9556 r— U U 79 �U r L d b• %o u =x t l� F pjur 0 mll U= tip,, prhr�� T�b�p 7 e$ /P CA14I' �vrn� Jt Qr, Otto M. Crawford 12471. Green Meadow Lane Saratoga, California 95070 (408)253 -6395 October 27, 1993 Dear Planning Commissioners: RE: UP -93 -006, Application for Bistro Article 15 -65 (Nonconforming uses) Article 15- 65.010 (Purpose of Article) Article 15- 65.065a (Nonconforming use may not be intensified) Copies of these articles are enclosed for your consideration. They oppose intensification for nonconforming uses. Also, approval of this application would create an overflow of cars into public parking districts that are over crowded now. Each parking space ' in the parking districts is costing property owners and business owners as much as $12,000. This is bonded and is being paid annually. In addition, we are being assessed annually for maintenance of the parking districts which averages approximately $1,200 for each of us. This is unequitable and "conditional use permits" should not be allowed until there is some solution to the equitableness. There should not be a cost -free ride for businesses that do not have required parking and also need "conditional use permits." Thank you for considering our concerns, tto rawford P.S. I have discussed with the City Manager a possible solution to this problem. "".030 shall impose such reasonable conditions as arctzmssances MAY requiM including, but not limited oo, the following; (1) A nefimdabie clean -up deposit, in such amount as may be appropriate. (2) Limicrtion on the length of tiw . the days of the weds. and the hours of Ike day during which the activity may be conducted. (3) Approval by the County Health Department if food is to be sold in connection with the activity. (4) Approval by the chid of the fin district is which the activity will )e conducted if such aetivir►-mvaves my risk of fire, explosion. or other similar hbrard. (5) Approval by the SheiiTs department if the aarviry requires any ,mu%c or crowd contra or involves any Potential threat CO the public safety. (6) Provision for sanitary facilities. Cn 1 imitaoao on the sin. n mbw.1006M and duration Of temporary signs advatising the activity. (b) The Pia=gDiectorortbe Phm=g Ca®ission May deny MY application wbWh is detimenttl to the public health, safety or welfam or which is in conflict with the objectives of this Chapter. Approval for the ideaticai usi by the same appticaat shall not be given more than once in a twelvemonth period. 1S- 60.040 Applicability of oiler Code provisions. Notwithstanding the pmvisious Of this Article, any fair, amusement pant, direr. carnival or other similar activity for which a permit is required under Section 410.010 of this Code, or any special event for which a permit a required under Article 10-10 of this Code, or my tae: of a public park, for which a special permit is required under . Article 11 -10 of this Code, shall be governed by such other Provisions of this Code and no separate ore permit therefor shall be required punsuant to this Article. 1540.060 Appeals. Any detaminaaon or decision by the Plu=g Dim= or the Plsnniag Commission under this Article may be appealed to the City Council accordance with the prom . dare set forth m Article 15-90 of this Chapter. 15. 60.050 Addition of to berm Uuu of age. �r7' area. 15- 65.110 Aurt6oeisatbn of ooneontorrniog Upon application or its own initiative. the Planning uaas and strteel f by me Commission may add other tratporary ores m the list permit or rariaoes., thereof set forth in Subsection 15.60.010(b), so long as iSA5.iS0 Unsafe bulldinga. such additional uses fall within the definition of-020porwy 15 5.160 Noneonfor miog sites. use" as set forth in SubM0cti00 15- 60.0100, and upon a finding that each use will not be detrimental to the public 15-65.010 Purpaass of Ardele. an healtb. safety or welfare d will not advemely affect the This Article is intended to limit Ike numberand enfant character of the district in which it will be conducted, and of ntncooforming noes and'ssucum by prohibiting their will not create odm dust, dirt, smoioe, noise, vibration, aftcabmdon. �• 8�•tiinesa, haz$d of foe or atpiosioq meat our restoration after destruction and regmrmg their traffic congestion or other objectionable influence, termination afoot reasonable periods of time. This Article is further intended to albw - P, 000caafacm. 9 uses '--\ structures to remain when suck uses or sn x=m do 362 K,. ONCONFORbMG USES AND STRUCTURES Seetiow 15-65.010 Petposs of ArddL 1S.6L= Condneadom in general. 1S45.030 F.iempdon of nonconforming - [amity and mold- family 1S4L040 R ananee -, limit"Wn an repairs. L54LM Change of nee. 1.i65.060 F.spamsion of 000eneormiog user. 13 5.070 Espaaeion Of noncmforming strsrtst+es. 1S45.M Termination of 00000etorMing ens and tttr or" oruby abandonment 1545.090 Replacement of damaged or IS -6LI00 Replacement of damaged or destroyed noa�onformitrg struetetro. 1S- 65.110 Elimi isdon of noacm foctrtio; eras and structures after lapse of rim.. 1S- 6S.11A Demotion of value. 15.65130 De 15. 60.050 Addition of to berm Uuu of age. �r7' area. 15- 65.110 Aurt6oeisatbn of ooneontorrniog Upon application or its own initiative. the Planning uaas and strteel f by me Commission may add other tratporary ores m the list permit or rariaoes., thereof set forth in Subsection 15.60.010(b), so long as iSA5.iS0 Unsafe bulldinga. such additional uses fall within the definition of-020porwy 15 5.160 Noneonfor miog sites. use" as set forth in SubM0cti00 15- 60.0100, and upon a finding that each use will not be detrimental to the public 15-65.010 Purpaass of Ardele. an healtb. safety or welfare d will not advemely affect the This Article is intended to limit Ike numberand enfant character of the district in which it will be conducted, and of ntncooforming noes and'ssucum by prohibiting their will not create odm dust, dirt, smoioe, noise, vibration, aftcabmdon. �• 8�•tiinesa, haz$d of foe or atpiosioq meat our restoration after destruction and regmrmg their traffic congestion or other objectionable influence, termination afoot reasonable periods of time. This Article is further intended to albw - P, 000caafacm. 9 uses '--\ structures to remain when suck uses or sn x=m do 362 K,. not conflict with the objectives of this Cbapoer std the Purposes of the zoning district in which they are looted. 15-fiLOW Candonadw in geaKal. (a) Noacca a®mg roes and a000ao5atmmg structures. lawfully established Prior to the enactment of the renooin& r='Usificzdon w change of szgulationn mahiag the same nonconforming, may be Cootimsed only in Cmfismuy with. and only so tang as permitted by, the provisions of this Article. (b) In each of the following cases: (1) Upon the P mcu mg of an application for a an pemtir. varianoe or design review approval or an appiica m for a building permit to Construct or modify any improve. meats upon a sine, it is determined that an existing main Of acc mwfy SM11C a which is not the subject of the application does not cahrply win the appticabg aetbndt: regulation; or (2) Upon the processing of an application fwalot spot or buildmg site approval Pursumt to the Subdivision Ordinance. it is determined that an atisting main soucrure or detached garage or capon does not comply with tfw appGcabie setback regulations, sheen no variaaoe shag be requited as a condition for approval of such applicstioq OW shall removal of the n0000nfoe I ing sm x=c be:a quieted as a condition fw such approval. if the qq icaat establishes to the sa ddactioo of the approving allftlky that the noocooforming atrucare was legacy creased., . hetem shal prevent te approv- ing uboty �Posini any requice:tnena with respect to the nonconforming structrre which may otherwise be imposed as a condition for approval of the application. 15- 65.030 Fsemptlota of noeeouf� dweUbWL (a) This Article shd not apply m a kwa&yesabliahed single family dwelling coostittting amain structure {oared within any A. R -1, HC-RD or NHR district or a lawfully established multi family dwelling located within any R M drsacrct; Mvided, howeva . my alteration, modi8com w 09=3110101 of such nonconfoming atrocare shall Comply with the regulatiooa of this C3 q= or a variance must be obtained for such ahaatiorq modification or egmd Pursuant to Article 13-70 of this C bqw. (b) Nonacoforar1 second units we not esempt'ed from thin Article and mot be discontinued in amordaaoe with Section 15-65.110 unless a use permit for the second unit is tmted P =Mt to Article 15-36 of this Chapter. 1S.6S.ON Roatioa omiobwoce; limifatlous an r"Mini. (a) Subject to the previsions of this Section. routine 363 15- 65,060 maiaoenance and rVairs may be performed upon a non - °0°ftnmtg structure or facility for the Purpose of pmmvmg its existing Condition. =M'Wg cW Cr � � and UW Cc PbYZCM depreciation. meats of law. (b) luddeatal ahmmdcns m a nonconforming structure w hcibly may be P=te, provided such aloeradom do not iaaease the degree of non - compliance w otherwise increase the discrepancy between existing conditions and the recptitemma of min Cbapw. (C) SMCM'2l alte:adons on a nonoonfocmiag facility may be Pmmdmd only to aco®modne a confirming use a when made to comply with the =quit=== of law. (d) SmM rai alsetafWW to a noocnnf%An structure may be Permitted when necessary to comply with tba ItcluircDCRICS Of law, cr to acmetmodaoe a conforming use when such abomm do not morose the degree of noncom_ plianoe, a athnwim increase the discrepancy between wag Conditions and the MPAmlents of this Chaparr, a do net effectively extend or perpetuate the useful life of any pactigarlar feaaae a portion of the structure which is WOMA of6 ing, Ia = case fta the valve of the structural ahmatiam patotmed during toy toe year Pam d exceed tea peireat of the MPlaeemeat cost of the building Prior to such alteration, unless such building is changed to a Conforming structure. MEMO Cliaaoga of oat. (a) A nonconforming use of a structure or site shall not be changed to or replaced by soother nonconforming US& (b) A nonconforming use which is changed to or roPlamd by a conforming; use sban not be reestablished. and any Patian of a savetire or site, the use of which Changes fromanooconfacmmg to aconforming use, shall OM thereafEer be used euxpt to aocammodate a conforming use. aa o156500 oeooforuft uses. (a) A noncan arening use may not be altrled. enlarged, agakbd or iatensi5red. Tprohibition his pr shall include any a Motion. enlargement. expansion or intensification of a nonconforming me which; (1) Incrtaaes the site ant or flow area occupied by such noomon6ormigg use on the sa®e Of any additional site; or (2) Increases the number of structires or size of any seructum horning such noocanfocming toe or any Potion thereof. or (3) Incr+easa the ama ntL volume. ' w intensity of a nooeoat, . btoiaess use. or the machinery, equipment, 15-65-060. trade fixtures or other personal property utilized in the conduct of such use: or (4) Displaces any eodatmmg we occupying a s x=m or site. (b) A nooaouzfoanmg hCOkY shad not be moved. ahm& or enlarged it such way as to permit the eaiarMacat of the space oacpied by the naocoofocmiag use. 15- 61.070 Egnwion of ooneonfoeming structure& A nottconformiag strtrcnae shall not be moved. atoQed. enlarged, or expanded so as to increase the disampaacy between existing conditions and the nquire seem of this Chapter. This prohibition shall not apply if a vatmnae for the aUer dm enksgemetu or mmmsion is granted pumaang to Article 15-70 of this Chapter 15.65080 Tert ubmA n of naoeaoioeusioR tws and struetores by abandoomeat, (a) Whenever a use has been abandoned, discontinued or aged to a conforming use for a period of ninety consecutive days or longer. such tae shall not be resumed. te- esabbbed or continued and ad subsequent uses of the site and the structures thereon shad conform to the requirements of this Chapter. (b) Whenever a nonooafaanmg Wumn has bees abao- doped for a continues period of out year or longer, the scum= shall be removed from the site or shall be changed to a conforming structum (c) Discontinuance of a nooceoformiog use for a period of ninety consecutive days or non= of a nonconforming structure for a continuous period of one year, shall cunclu. sivdy be presumed an abandonment of such use or e under the tams of this Section; provided, however, a disoommusoa of use m either of the following mac. es shall ant be conidered an abandonment hereunder: (1) Any discontinuance of use in connection with a pending sale or other traasf- d ownership or managemeat of a nonconformmg use or structure to a designated person and the discontinuance of use is sot * for the purpose of accomplishing the sale or traoafer. (2) Any discoatmuaoce of use during the period of reconstruction or replacement of a damaged or destro* DOn=fOMM 8 &C&y or MM P, where such recaostruc. tim or replacement is pertained under the provisions of Section 15- 65.090 or Section 15- 65.100. 1545.090 Replacement of damaged or (a) as extra se wft &h• Except provided in Paragraph (b) of this Section. a nonconforming facility which is damaged or destroyed may be reconstructed or replaced for Continued 364 by the use or uses previously conducted tbaein. subject oo the following lmmitatioos; (1) The extent of 00000nformity, or the intensity of activity, or the sine area or floor area, occupied by the nencoafoxvn�ng use subsequent to reconstruction or re- Plaa'mmto[the facility shall ant exceed that existing per to the damage or destruction of the facility. (2) Reeontrtretion orreplacemim of the facility shall be subjaa o all 2001kmble laws, regulations and pro ede= otherwise governing coattraction on be site at,the tine such construction is undertaken. (3) The tecooaotttction or replacement wort shall be commented withm one year firm the date of damage or destruction and pr+oaecamed diligently w coutpiction. (4) Any remouracoim crnoaeemeatpermitted under this Section dull not enead or otherwise modify the regttiried termination date for the noocanforming use as establisbed by Section 15. 65.110 and applied to such noao I forming use prior to the recoosa =Oa or replace- ment: Said termination dace shall apply in aU portions of the sine or strucaae occupied by the aooconfarmiag me. iadudmg those Portions teoontrtresed or replaced. (b) In the evmt the damage or destruction of a mocon- formft facility causes a pairtdl or total disoontinasoce Of the nooconformiag use for a period in excess of ninety days and such damage or destruction cocoas during the last one-tbicd of the Mrsum ion period applicable to lurch n00000formmg use under the provision of Section 15- 65.110, sock use. orportion thereof which has been discoo- tinned sball not be resumed or te.establisbed within the ao°eoofacmiag faOW, mespective of whether such faoiity is reconstructed or replaced. 1545,100 Replacement of damaged or desu oyed soocoofoemiog stroctura. . (a) A 000000formiug strectu a which is damaged or destroyed may not be reconstructed or replaced, except as follow:: (1) When the cadre snrcare is re000struresod or teplaced as a conforming strucurC or (2) When the damage or destruction affects only a portion of a norconformmg structure, which portion does not caasumse or contribute to the moo - — Hance, such pordon may be retonstrncopd or replaced to its previous n2tkm* or (3) When the damage or destruction affects only a pardon of a na0000farating str xmm which portion coast} toted or contributed to the pFiance and does not exceed fifty I - , at of the gross. floor area of the entire srucnre. such portion may be mcoosnnaed or replaced to 0 previous configuration. In no case shall such re con- smuaion or replacement =at. cause or increase any noncompliance with the regttaemeaa of this Chapter. (4) Any reconstruction or replacement permitted under this Section shall not extend or otherwise modify the required terminatiea dace for the nonconforming smu ct ue as established by Section 3- 65.110 and applied to such nonconforming structure prier to the reconstruction or replacement. (b) Except as otherwise provided in this Section with regard oo er replacement of a portion of a structure to its previats n0000nfacm- g couditkx4 all recaosMxdW or zepiacemeatshall be subject to all apglica. ble laws. regulations and procedures otherwise governing consmvction on the site at the time such eonsummoo a undertaken Tbe:ecm mauction orreplacemeet woricsball be commenced withm one year from the dare of damage or destruction and prvmcmd diligently tD compietim 15.65.110 Elimioatlon of nonconforming area and samctures after lapse of time. Except as otherwise provided in Section 15. 65.140, notuoonfotminS uses and nonconforming structures Shan be discontinued and eliminated cram the sine, or portion tberccC on which they are located or shall be converted to a conforming ere or smttaure. in accordance with the following. (a) A nonconforming we conducted upon a site having no. improvements thereon or improvements which am utilized in cam ion wit the operation of such use having a value not exceeding Two ibousmd Dollars. shall be trsminated within one year from the date sucbuse became nonconforming. . (b) A nonconforming use which is not subject to Pan. graph (a) of this Section. shall be terminated within five_ years from the date such use became nonconformim& (c) A nonconforming smjm= a xcludmg sign, having a value not exceeding Two Mmmead Dollars. shall be removed from its sine within one year from the dace it became nonconforming, unless within said period of time the structure a attered so as to comply with the regulations of the district in which it is Irate& (d) A 00000afomming strtrctua , exchyfing sib, having a value of Two lboumd Domars or greater. shall eitba be alined so as b CM30Y with the n:;uletiom of the duttict in which a is located or sball be removed tram its site by the time the structure reaches the age sex forth in Patagtapb (e) of this Section: provided, bowev= no such conversion or removal shall be required within ten years from the date the structure became nonconforming. (e) The following schedule shall govern removal of nonconforming MuCt ues steed in Paragraph (d) of this section; 365 15 -65,120 Type of Construction Age of Structure As Defined by Uniform Computed From Date Building Code of won Type 1 25 years Type H 20 yew Type M 15 years Type IV 10 years Type V 10 years (f) A nonconforming sign. inciadws its supporting ==MM shall either be made to comply with the regula- dom of the ftrict in which it is located or sball be dism� tied and removed by the time the sign teaches the age set feeth in Paragraph (g) of this Section; provided, however, no such conversion a removal shall be required within three YC8M from the date the sign became 000conformin& (9) The following sole shall govern the removal Of nonconforming signs specified in Paragraph (f) of this Section Age of Sign Compacted From Value of Sign Date of Inetalletion Undo 52,000 1 yew 52.000 m $3.999 3 yew $4,000 to 55.999 5 years 56400 to 57.999 7 years 58.000 0D 59.999 9 years S10.000 and over 10 years (h) Nothing contained in this Section shall extend or otbm*w modify my termination date provided by any previously existing ordinance of the Cory for any use or strtaure which beanie -xx= farming render such orth nance and such termination dates for such previously existing noocoaformmg uses and smucmres at iacarpotated in this: Section and shall remain in effect 15- 65.120 Det u=imtbn of value. Value, as used in this Article with respect to the value Of a smuctuue, a the value of improvements to a sine. or the value of re000strucuoo or replweruent. means the cuureatcost of constructim or the current cost of replace- meat in hind of rusting smucnues or improvementt, exdodmg contidemon of the value of land. Fstmoam or deterni aaoas of such cost for purposes of this Article shall be made by or shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director, who is authorized to retain the services of appraisers a eaataltaats for such es>mmates or daerminations and charge the coat thereof to the owner a operator of the nonconforming structure. R E C E I V ED October 22,1993 OCT 2 5 1993 t'LHNNING DEPT. City of Saratoga Planning Commission Saratoga, CA 95070 Subject: Use Permit at 14480 Big Basin Way Bistro / Deli Dear Members Planning Commission: I am writing as the owner and operator of Little Amsterdam Restaurant. I have been the owner and operator for the last twenty years. I am also representing the land owners of this property. There is a tremendous amount of traffic generated by °Margarita the Roma Restaurant ". Their customers, tenants, supply trucks, etc. all use our paved parking lot. The heavier traffic from another Bistro / Deli could result in more damage to our lot. This will result in confrontations. We request the applicant of this Bistro / Deli to look for an alternative for their customer parking, employee parking, supply truck deliveries, etc.. Sincerely, Tom VandenHoogen Little Amsterdam 14490 Big Basin Way cc: Planning Commission OL- ZAMBETTI and PRICER LAND USE CONSULTANTS .JUDGE FOSTER BUILDING TEL (408) 741 -0332 14510 BIG BASIN WAY, SUITE 2 FAX (408)741 -0312 SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 RECEIVED OCT 2 6 1993 October 26, 1993 t'LHIVJVIIVIi .UtPl. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ,RE: UP-93006 14480 Big Basin Way Commissioners as you consider this Use Premit realize the approval will bring about a. deficiency of additional nineteen parking spaces. This would be grossly unfair to my property and to other property owners that are in Parking Districts. Presently for the Judge Foster Building (1800 sq.ft) the tax payments on a.yearly basis are $6,149.50 for Bonds on District #4, plus $1,132.42 for Lighting District Zone 21 for five (5) parking spaces. Which is $1,456.38 per year per parking space. The owner or owners of the subject building should be required to pay their fair share; therefore conditioned to.share the same burden that other's have carried. S erely, i , e Zambe'tt 4575 Oak" St' ifSaratoga' �', 95070 1 ALL IM 14510 BIG BASIN WAY • SARATOGA, CA 95070 October 26, 1993 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Ca. 95070 'r TS RECEiVED OCT 2 6 1999 ruumi uvb ULPL Attention: Planning Commission Re: Use Permit for a Bistro at 14480 Big Basin Way Dear Planning Commission, (408) 741-0140 Our Tenants of the Village Square Shopping Center have been paying on a bond for Parking District-#4 for 13 years now. This Bond has an annual cost, of 81,306.00 per space including maintenance and a life time cost of $19,590.00 per space. Far-kinq District-#4 has enough parking spaces for the existing amount of square footage in its district. Therefore to allow this business to. operate with 19 insufficient parking spaces is extremely unfair. In order for the. Village Square to maintain its current square footage Cali investments, at its sole cost, had to bring parking district #4 up to code by restriping and creating an extra space. Who is going to pay for these extra spaces that do not exist ?, is the City of Saratoga going to allow parking for this Bistro in district #4 when each parking space is already accounted for by the existing square footage around this district ?, and after all, lets stay consistent with the codes for use permits regarding parking, Cali Investments has, so why not this Bistro. ESicerely, A. Steve Cali AROL YN V. HOLH sit CA STOR STREET FOSTM CITTTO CA 944 04 October 20, 1993 City of Saratoga Pianning Commission Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Property at Third Avenue and Big Basin Way, Saratoga To Whom It May Concern: It has been brought to our attention that a new deli will be starting up business in the near future next to our property. We have a great concern and objection to this establishment using our parking lot. Our lot is to be used exclusively for the Richard Jones Hair Salon, the Mitre Box, Little Amsterdam Restaurant and the Saratoga Bike Shop. One of our concerns is the property damage which may ensue as a result of the deli's patrons driving through our lot. Mr. Tom Van Den Hoogen will be present at the October 27th meeting. He will not only be representing himself, but Dr. and Mrs. Smith and myself, property owners of the building at Third Avenue and Big Basin Way as well. It is our wish that some reasonable compromise can be worked out in regards to this potential problem. Please contact me at (415)345 -6960 in order for the appropriate persons involved to set -up a meeting, if necessary. Mr. Van Den Hoogen will be in touch with me and will update me on the results of the October 27th meeting. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carolyn V. Holm for Dr. and Mrs. Smith /cvh cc: Tom Van Den Hoogen Little Amsterdam Restaurant RECEI1v LD 27 October- 199' OCT 27 1993 ru IVIVI vG DEPT, Planning Commission City of Saratoga Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, California Subject: Bistro occupying Bldg. adjacent to Bank: of America on Bit Basin Way in Saratoga Village. To the Member -s'of the City of Saratoga,PIanning Commission: As a merchant located in the vicinity_ of the subject building /business, 1 would lire to express my concern the impact this new business would nave on the parking or should I say lack.of parking in that immediate area. Currently, my business has a private lot located due east of our building. This lot is shared with three other businesses and, in theory, affords my customers two (2) and one half (1/2) parking spaces. In reality, my customers rarely are able to use the lot as other businesses and their employees use it. I am frequently told by my customers that they have to give up and go home when they come to my shop, to use my services, because there are no parking spaces.in the area. I am also aware that we need more merchants in the Village and the last thing I want to do is discourage new businesses. However, I'm very concerned that the subject business would generate a larger parking problem due to the nature of the business. It is my hope that the Commission, will take the aforementioned parking problem into consideration and disapprove of any business that will heighten the existing parking problem. Tha.nking you in advance for your consideration in this matter, I am... Sincerely Yours, C ° • Gil% C.1 Tomaino, Owner Mitre Box, Custom Picture Framing_ 20605 Third .Street Saratoga Village (408)867-4102 • CAROLYN V..' HOLM 811 CASTOR TREET FOSTER CITY, CA 94404 (415)345 -6960 November 22, 1993 Saratoga City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Property at Third Avenue and Big Basin `Nay, Saratoga Permit Approval of a Deli- Bistro at 14480 Big Basin Way, Saratoga City Council Members of Saratoga: This letter is to reiterate our concerns regarding the extra use of our parking lot that was expressed in our letter of October 20, 1993 addressed to the Saratoga Planning Commission. The parking problem in Saratoga is obviously of great concern to thc, local businesses. Our lot is to be available for our tenants and their customers of the above- mentioned property. With the approval of the Deli- Bistro, there will be an increased problem of availability of parking for our customers and there will be a great deal more wear and tear on our lot. Because of this, we want our objections to be.known in regards to approving the Use Permit for the Deli- Bistro. Obviously, it would be preferable for a business with less traffic to go into that space. Mr. Tom Van Den Hoogen, owner of the Little Amsterdam Restaurant (14490 Big Basin Way), will be representing himself as well as ourselves at the council meeting on December 1, 1993. Icvh Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, zz Carolyn V. Holm Agent for Dr. and Mrs. Smith �.y SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 2 3 70 MEETING DATE: December 1, 1993 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Public Works AGENDA ITEM 3 CITY MGR. SUBJECT: Summary Vacation of Certain Easements Within Tract No. 2502 (Forrest Hills Drive) Recommended Motion (s) Move to adopt the attached Resolution of Vacation. Report Summary: The owners of the property at 20491 Forrest Hills Drive, Lot 6 of Tract No. 2502, have written the attached letter dated October 15 in which they are requesting that the City abandon two easements on their property. Specifically, the easements they would like abandoned are 1) the 30 foot wide easement for future road purposes along the southerly boundary of the property, and 2) the 10 foot wide drainage easement along the westerly boundary of the property. Staff has evaluated the request and recommends that the Council abandon both easements by using the procedures for summary vacation contained in Streets and Highways Code section 8330 et. seq. To do this, you merely need to adopt the attached Resolution of Vacation which sets forth the various findings you need to make to do'a summary vacation. The easement for future road purposes appears to have been acquired at a time when another street connection between Aloha Ave. and Oak St. was under consideration. However, ensuing development of the surrounding neighborhood, plus the proximity to the Saratoga Elementary School, makes this scenario obsolete. As for the drainage easement, a survey of the property fails to reveal any definable public purpose for its existence. Fiscal Impacts: None. The resolution will be recorded by the Deputy City Clerk at no cost to the City. Follow Up Actions: The Deputy City Clerk will record the Resolution of Vacation. Conseguences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: The easement(s) will not be abandoned. Q ��J Z.5�, 1993 S l !la . /� r i AWAYCM q o t -- -_ - This is not a Survey of the lan'c] but is compiled for information from data sho n by the official records by Title Insurance and Trust Company, - /IlJ /v` QAl S /O 2-994-1 /!9 40 a� `"jai /0 1f dro ooye eosesea/ 3000 eoseser/ for h v S 1,20,4Z' e= 4e.00 ., i dl d °!/•7#'!S' .�• d =97•Z9'i7.' 250o I e =0000 r�..r: r.4x4o • t�Y,,. Lii S.'rp G• /irs •- c °seas ' h .e::o 00 ,. . 00 N 4f /o' E /Z4.69 D =Is1 49 .J 1.4q�,o _ 8 L=/B34c4 l� N4S3S /U c" �� 4F371 ��{S.. (Q fed 2rZ fO 0. o L7'J /949t�4iCE rl.x �e '= � �Ivr n V . ? =1000 7JG 1 5 !Y 17SJS Z -10 441. �I h zrf IOU, (No/ o por/ of ffis sedVirIsioe) , . — S 43' 04 '/0 kv /39 BO I"1 I oD33. W 0 0 h Ie /0 NW 0 0 "411 sAwdj�(,kr h ti S _ O ti � l �l h V Z rr. PuE. It . \ I �;Z ��a � I I p• I /3990 c 8 � � 0 olj��, 1 I Zarb 1fGb e•e�•iv oo•� Q= 1o.ct� O >• •iR 09 izo. e7 `, -- N 4S' /09444 - /t r "'"'r a g1�� .44 OAM AVENUE f 7P,4CT NO 2399 I"1 I oD33. W 0 0 h Ie /0 NW 0 0 "411 sAwdj�(,kr h ti S _ O ti � l �l h V APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF UP -93 -006 November 9, 1993 The Undersigned hereby appeal the decision of the City of Saratoga Planning Commission to approve the application of C. D. Stark for Big Basin Bistro, UP -93 -006 (14480 Big Basin Way). The reasons upon which the appeal is based are as follows: 1. There is no authority anywhere in the City Ordinances permitting the City of Saratoga to ignore its requirement that operation of a restaurant requires one off - street parking space per 75 square feet of floor area (58 spaces for the Applicant's building as a whole, 29 spaces for this Applicant) pursuant to Section 15- 35.030. There are only 10 spaces for the 4,000 s.f. building as a whole. Therefore, the subject building is 24 spaces short for the Applicant alone. While Section 15- 35.020(h) permits such parking to be non - adjacent, it must nevertheless be within 300 feet of the subject building. No such parking, except for District parking, is available. While Section 15- 19.050 (CH District Regulations) provides for regulations of structures and parking in the CH District, subsection (k) is the only provision which addresses off - street parking. This Section is applicable only where the subject property is in one of the four City Parking Districts. The proposed Big Basin Bistro is CH zoned, but is in none of these Districts. Therefore, the eg neral regulations ations cited in Section 1519.050 must apply. Since the Applicant requires an additional 24 spaces, as does the existing adjacent restaurant (per the Planning Commission's Staff Report), there is an astonishing shortfall. 2. The undersigned also appeal on equitable grounds. It is patently unfair for a business severely deficient in parking spaces to have that requirement waived on the theory that its customers can use existing parking district spaces paid for by its competitors. Those spaces cost in excess of $11,000.00 each. If a business is 24 spaces short, that equates to $264,000.00. Capitalized at 10.0 %, this represents annual savings of at least $26,400.00 per year ($2,200.00 per month). The Applicant has a 2,000 s.f. establishment. By bootlegging his deficient 24 spaces on the wallets of his competitors, he has a $1.10 per s.f. per month cost advantage. Worse yet, those 24 customers for which the Bistro will not be providing parking, will be parking in the District and crowding out the customers of the other businesses whose landlords have paid to obtain the proper parking. This cannot be and is not fair. 3. The Saratoga Village Plan encourages a traditional town center mix of specialty shops, restaurants, convenience shops, services, and residential uses. The existing twenty -four restaurants have licenses to sell beer and wine on premises. (This Applicant is applying to sell both on and off premises.) The need is for more retail and professional establishments. Based on the foregoing, the undersigned urge you to overrule the Planning Commissions' approval in this matter. Sincerely, � . C L/ 4 10 C -Da L- A. FN L-F, I�OSL�.1 ��LD NOTICE: READ BEFORE YOU SIGN PETITION OPPOSING BISTRO, UP -93 -006 The undersigned Business Owners oppose the establishment of a Deli/Bistro and the sale of beer and wine at 14480 Big Basin Way. We oppose for the following reasons: 1. Parking. There is inadequate parking in the Village, particularly at this location. The Bistro will share ten spaces with adjacent tenant, Margherita di Roma. The two restaurants need fifty -eight spaces. They have ten. 2. Parking. The shortage of parking prevents our customers and others from shopping and dining in the Village. 3. Parking. Sometimes we notice cars circling around looking for a place to park. Our customers have complained about lack of parking. 4. Parking. A Deli/Bistro requires a parking space for every 75 square feet. This is the maximum intensity allowed by City Ordinance for any type of business. If this is approved, the Use Permit is out the window and anything goes. - 5. Parking. We believe the applicant must provide parking by purchasing or leasing the only available spaces in Parking District No. 3. Petition Form attached. Name Signature M/ / WRIN � L/ [WEAM 91,10mal 'W�AMAJWZIRMIA � VIT MOM - rW*4W1'-- PA 1- A Wdl low, MUM Name and Address of Business ,fV ,V3 O1q ,6A51A( MAY SAS ZO 70 �/,1- c?el /S e I've T�� Ca'l1E VI�� i y y ycic{�i�-�3ASw /ifv � � 4 / Name 14A LL.N Signature I Name and Address of Business 5P1P- 1)TOGA VQkt—A gsF 14- t4--n54 e--�. t�7v (?) X51 N y�A• c` L.4-P d -M (,)-A t-14 l TP,1� —g�-(�J C P Lame_ Signature Name and Address of Business ;;R- G, r/ ./ ._' ell, ^- 060/ l� �!�✓ iti V i Gc.GL X—C(, p � 2 T ` k rla- • �..._ 1451 6aO(h ILOA 1_ KRj4kV f' �r Al 5Z4 /f - - C N'l�ex /LCD /�V �,• e / /� iI N r r-A z o 5 r o 'Sol � r C)Sd-1 �. w %`� \ _ r 2 lrq+ u 9 66 ,� " I lae Ileyr© m orIN Ail, �rd1N J Signature Name and Address of Business p 2/c • �3.r✓ qj 1 —C— L-S �c . S l C, C U Po �1 Name Signature 0 r "WE's ni= JA .� it �/ ,M M�� Nov 12, 1993 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Saratoga City Council, Q E�lrFs p V If, Nov 1 5 1993 s. I t , , CI'T'Y MAMA GIE 'S GpF'ICy Dr. and Mrs Brozda, property owners of 14501, 14503, 14505 Big Basin Way, wish to strongly oppose Mr. Stark's Bistro. It will be against the City Plan, which encourages a better mix of shops, restaurants, services, and residences. It will increase the parking congestion, which is unfair to all the other businesses which require parking (and incidentally provide and pay for the required parking). Sincerely, 74471� XA��� Otto M. Crawford 12471 Green Meadow Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 408 - 253 -6395 November 29,1993 To the Honorobale Mayor and the City Council 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Sirs and Madams: Here is an hypothetical question: Would your spouse appeal to the City Council if they owned a building that was appraised at $445,000 in 1984 and produced a rental income for 1992 of $54,840 and taxes and assessment for $22,351.80, which is 40.8% of gross rental income, not counting mortgage payments. The same situation: The building is in Public Parking District No. 3, which was built and designed for buildings located in the District. Your spouse has been reluctant to increase rents due to the economy and vacancies in the Village. An applicant has applied for a "Conditional Use Permit" for a Bistro /Deli. Article 15 -35, Section 15- 35.020 (P) requires one parking space for each seventy -five square feet. The City staff states that they need twenty eight parking spaces and they have only five. Despite the shortage, the City staff recommends approval of the Deli /Bistro. Would your spouse say this was inequitable? Now, back to reality. All property owners in Public Parking District No. 3 have similar problems and they all signed the appeal except Mr. Wallace, who lives in Turlock, CA and was not available, and Mr. George Payne, who didn't want to cause waves. They all contributed to the costs of the appeal, except Mr. Wallace. There are two stores in the Village that sell all types of alcoholic beverages, Saratoga Wine and Spirits, and Buy and Save Market, and not one, as Council woman Kaplan said. Both stores are having financial problems. For the record, there are three other stores in Saratoga that sell all types of alcoholic beverages, and that is more than sufficient, especially considering all of the stores surrounding Saratoga. Staff's analysis is basically Lampshire's study. Lampshire, in his letter dated 11/22, third paragraph down and last sentence, states: "Upon review of some of the signatures on the appeal, I have found at least one signature to be false." See letter from Downey Savings on last page of Staff's report. The letter is written by Acting Branch Manager, Vickie Groce. I find this very disturbing for lack of study by Lampshire. Mr. Mark Aspluni, Branch Manager, Los Altos, did sign on line 6. This may cost Ms. Groce her job. She refused to sign my petition opposing the Bistro /Deli saying that she didn't have the authority and later wrote this letter for Lampshire. Mr. Lampshire persuaded Groce to write the letter, which proves Mr. Lampshire's determination to win and insensitivity to Ms. Groce's position. I believe Mr. Lampshire to be a very astute business man and he should have known that asking for a letter from the 'Acting Branch Manager" was an imposition upon her. Under the circumstances, I probably will not file a complaint to Downy Management; but Mr. Aspluni is an employee of Downey, contrary to Mr. Lampshire's statement. I believe staff should do their own studies of the parking conditions in the Village. I also believe the Planning Commission should do likewise. I will never understand why the City staff bend the ordinances and seemingly interpret them to permit the absolute most intensive use for this business that requires a "Conditional Use Permit ". By approving, anything goes - the City will never be able to prevent abuse of the "Conditional Use Permit" for similar types of businesses..► Sincerely, Otto Crawf rd 0 / - #-f fl V t,v C, f I�t, T-z:> M V t. Pcs� C.- Nor j vv C L1 ! 1 ! C C Li �/ T'c� 1 S °f r 2 v — NJ T r,v l � C_ :%,c U V c.:2. di n Y F"A �L ,� �1 1✓ M r(I j. -► n y ; M7 •'1 uc- TEr� G� t��fr Mrzetii,'lN S ZI\JF1Ap` /. - J ► _�...i l � C r r 7 ` rJ � + .� � r,� � � F� �2 v 1J A.c -4, - L I­ L-1 IV <__ - II November 24, 1993 Saratoga City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga CA 95070 Re: Planning Commission # UP -93 -006 Deli / Bistro Dear City Council Members, I would like to make an appeal regarding the Saratoga Planning Commission's decision on item # UP -93 -006 Deli / Bistro. The rear parking lot of Margarita di Roma only has ten compact parking spaces. A new Deli / Bistro Restaurant will definitely increase traffic in our lot. The addition of more customer, employee, delivery truck and garbage truck traffic will damage our lot. The Deli I Bistro and Margarita di Roma do not have easement to our lot recorded on our property deed. For legal purposes, we close the parking lot for twenty -four hours a year. Mr. Stark, the applicant, stated that his Deli / Bistro is not really a restaurant; Although, he applied to the county for a Restaurant Health Permit? We request the applicant to get an alternative for his employee and customer parking as well as his delivery and garbage truck routes. Sincerely, /-;:- 0'r, - � Tom VandenHoogen Little Amsterdam 14490 Big Basin Way 1 CAROLYN V. HOLM 811 CASTOR STREET FOSTER CITY, CA 94404 (415)345 -6960 November 22, 1993 Saratoga City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Property at Third Avenue and Big Basin Way, Saratoga Permit Approval of a Deli- Bistro at 14480 Big Basin Way, Saratoga City Council Members of Saratoga: This letter is to reiterate our concerns regarding the extra use of our parking lot that was expressed in our letter of October 20, 1993 addressed to the Saratoga Planning Commission. The parking problem in Saratoga is obviously of great concern to the local businesses. Our lot is to be available for our tenants and their customers of the above- mentioned property. With the approval of the Deli- Bistro, there will be an increased problem of availability of parking for our customers and there will be a great deal more wear and tear on our lot. Because of this, we want our objections to be known in regards to approving the Use Permit for the Deli- Bistro. Obviously, it would be preferable for a business with less traffic to go into that space. Mr. Tom Van Den Hoogen, owner of the Little Amsterdam Restaurant (14490 Big Basin Way), will be representing himself as well as ourselves at the council meeting on December 1, 1993. Thank you for your consideration. /cvh Sincerely, Carolyn V. Holm Agent for Dr. and Mrs. Smith 01 TWA- fi'7 • _a..�3t`�.:��' ��i�J-a..''�s�� i j'1�9.k+ +�1'rli�''.r! �i.)�'t.:Wl iti ovetnbc s 11993 :,:ii , ap ca th e d c-i iil tile C•i ly Gl f Saratoga p lx?tyim 9 . O)IT13niSS1,631, :0 :,r p , zpp actor: ti �.. Stark fur Big Bashi Aslyd•, UP -9... 006 . `3�IJ Big, Basin } °1 : )., ;'h.,e i'E:asosas apor; ��it]ielt tl�cj: +{�etil is bt5' id are s zoil!iws; ...-]Ic"l i]G!TittSi ij'4` a.wyti;'i1Sii t97 the f'tt' , nr�q 1 y rdI'lla:t,•~.•„ fit i7iiitting th0 City of 53; z3tCa �i To ignore its : ClEa r.ment -that opm- #t on of a restai- Artist r �: t1WICS ;3ne Off- Straux -t , {)C•Tkilylg soaCe per 75 sqaro fee; of floor area i 8 $pauCs'1{: the :Applkant's building as A.' whole, ` SI:B'�es foa this rr: ;:,Hcar.+%! pars Fart to Se ct i; }i; 't55- 3f,.O. 'I"ilive ita "e only 10 Sr1a ces for t e 4,006 SAr bui- Cil.lj' as a whole:. Therefor--, rho. - .;,object WE ii g ;3 � %Laces. n:'3 o_t. •TOi :. dw Applicant al -me. While Section :.S- 35.02OCh;� Verrnit� such pmtrkh g to � n nora- adjacent, it .t bt nl-ATr.. Ciw,S iS4 'r1'lthin 300 feet of the subiect buiird'`iq. No such pa.rl irg, except for - Disti icr j3a0zing, ifi available. prveides or rogWations o€ sir,aGti�Tes ±?-; irking h) title CH DistricI s:i�'sertin:� is tic: • only •' � , . �. .� w4. (I.} g .0I.or:slon •which rtZr +:asses caff -:, ±? ee: ,li r;E. ?; 'ibis ActioP is applicable' only wipere, tht suiaiccrr properiy is i c th '• f ,Jr .r rn a 1?3 .. rl�... i , is �. ; .�:t� � {ll]g t?1S'�T1c ps, n- C. wGPOSe i fbig Basin -Distr u. -i i CH 'L:�;l€ d, bift . SS ]i7.':t7rJf of t±t;S': mtrsC1S. rfKreri'-fore, the, y'�,R'•[ai:aa� 7_c)— f7r•1ij cited in Se�3t7i! 1519.050 rem :wq appiv, Sine the ApphCant ,'C- quires an additional 24 tiF39wc s, as A e -the eitisruyg .:4.Cijiicent tGsS 134Sl': i1't i Ocr tits 'joTi�l lLl ',a!!JI 1�sl�]fly5. ixtlf Report), jT!JYr�, r :i�'TE is F Ii fEiStGiAiS iF19, sltox•;fal i. 2. 3"ilS.• iti' dersigrmil. itjso api #e�C C1i� w�L'.itabl� �;!'S)tJ11CYS. It is' •� at'Ontl yt +i))' fi]r $ i?Will 1�:S3 $ 1i�!' Jy''r' ' f 'tt' �'- r y ;�s.£cita.� ;., p� : :l�irl, spaces to have that r;:r Ldrement v zdved on the thwaury `11--hat its l`+utorner$ can use. extting parking district spaces paid foi• i ±y its col.' petitors..77hose spaces cos, it, exc-SX oi` S :I1,000.00 each. If a business is 2d. = laaecs 'sh rt, that equates to ,$264,0 !O.M. tapitabzyd at 10.0 �o, this epresenzs annual s4rv'ings a I a $26,40 x.00 per yctiir f,1 'Of , G peer rriottth }.• TIC Appi,ca,pt has a 2,000 s-f, establishment.' Uy b6o e! Ting i?is dcficicnt ''A ' spaczs c.n t<he wallers «.: hj14 competitors, he lost a $1.10.p r s.f.,.O_er -nio * cost'advantage, . vet, .txyse 4 cos .,onlers.for whim the Bistro ;viii .€sct,(yc prc3vtdini; parking, ;.•ili'oe narlLrtg in the District `nd cruwding out the �]storners :) thw ��tlrnr htsirsess =.s vrh-ose ' i�Mdjords i avo iliaid to aUwfr. tho. p +'open a �'• { '�•. d ti '1 ,^ t fsih ! ++ pl�3lktr. :¢: Frl. C, ^a'ti�l, }, t "and ly a1.i _ L,S. ete Salrato' Sa V.ii.lago Man `em.kOur�lges n f • ; r .. n n T - ,.. • tis � at � • i t:f :t]tYi :t�s; Y: � . x.•11 :.+r ]� 'tf..;vY Of �.' ' ... ,• ,3�•'a'-i� , .ems...' :�._- ,+,: .. ,-r }.- -' ... 4 - �titL .. -.s `ti..-- - '- - - - ...__..� _ - _ _.- . , .. -- -- - ...�..._,._ .... J.'.- ... e''_,w� _ #.:.=- +!?•A -• - s� � � _ . ,... ... ,._ :iw,rai�'._.z �1�Ik'al�Cla' :.y':�.i.l� •.1,..•• Fw F rom -Des. 01. 1=353 10:48 A."1 p - ;k..'.. •; • {+iL y }CJ�'i1 ;J Cjl hl' 7. ILIr +• t5 ;1 +w• r7 '' ' ,, , . Mraiccw, �.►.c. r%iiL;.A,Ci.iE liSS. Cxlst ng i.ICisi'J$'��` t �� �:•:s �. f'3 Vie,• -,,,r 3ilij t.:irw tit, Premises. (Tlhi:3 pl' ^ � is ,lic:�,re •, I.1 r h u i- 4 1 girl of rP n S. v. r r� °sir, 1� ���!! ���• is 7? ., �� , r � } �- .tl 1:7 f •ft r s s •• ,.•..j tiztt �,..c:�l�.iS ic�r �!�L�rc t.�Y�9_! aY�ci �:€`i:1t;5�3Gr3�1 u ti.�iti�.elli!y. +:li7it �•l.r:. ,' �' Bases, J-Jri tilt.' Loregoini •'' r i� ., l. i :ii Est i �3ecI uric } r1p to overrule tlx: Planning 11 is- itins' apAprt val it) ilii ruat.c;I.. i I • • .. ... .... - . • .._ .. _ .. _ : .. _ r - �15:. �� •:<. c.. ii�a.i'.��i: ...- c.aY'ifSR�':.,,fy'e'�: �`. -x d. Joseph C. Masek 14467 Big Basin Way Sartatoga, Ca. 95070. Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. 95070. Nov 2 4 1993 Do Irl _ CITY OF SARATOGA OYFIXE November 22nd 1993. RE: UP -93 -006 Approval of Use Permit for Restaurant at 14480 Big Basin Way Honorable Mayor and Members. of the City Council : I am writing to you in reference to the upcoming hearing of an appeal filed by several property owners of Parking District # 3 to be heard on the 1 st of December 1993. My personal objections to the granting of the use permit are based on the following facts: 1. The Planning commissions approval is in a direct contradiction of present City Code Articles 15- 35.020 (d) and (p), Article 15- 65.010 and Article 15 - 65.060 (a) 2. Personally, as stated by me at the October 27th . hearing. - I do not object to Mr. Starks proposed bistro, however my concern is in regards to non- existing parking at that location. 3. In the past few years I have been in similar predicament about the question of parking , where the then City_ Council together with the City_ Engineer have denied me the appoval of the proposed structure with underground parking for 22 automobiles just because we were short only some one-hundred-forty square feet !! The cost to me because of their denial at that time amounted to some $ 28.00O.00 in architectual fees plus some 10.00O.00 dollars in filing fees, appraisal fees etc. It also forced me to abandon the first project and hire another architect to design our present bui ing with additional costs of some $ 30,000.00 Therefore, I find it only fair to demand that the City Council should reject the proposed Use Permit for the above mentioned operation. 4. It would be discriminatory to all property owners who contributed to the formation of Parking District # 3. Obviously, 1 have complied with ail the City Ordinances ever since the time when I purchased the former Arco lot from the City, up to and including the formation of Parking District #3, , which was expected to be a blessing to all , but turned out into disastrous effect on our business. I sincerely hope that you will take the appropriate steps in this matter, and thanking you for your attention, I remain I Marcelle Bloxham Saratoga Village Properties Post Office Box 120 Los Gatos, California 95031 (408) 867 -3777 (14413, 14315A, 14415B, 14417A, 14417B, 14417C, 14419 Big Basin Way) November 23, 1993 Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Bistro/Deli UP -93 -006 - Petition Opposing Dear Members of the City Council: You all should be aware of the severe financial burdens placed upon me as a property owner in Parking District #3. Since I am paying huge bills to support the Saratoga City Government, it seems totally unbelievable that the Council would vote to invite a new business into a location that has insufficient parking and expect the parking areas in District #3 to be used to qualify the new business for parking. I understand that the City Ordinance governing UP -93 -006 requires a parking space for every seventy -five square feet of floor space, and that the City is prepared to grant a Conditional Use Permit for the Bistro/Deli at 14480 Big Basin Way. This location is across the street from my property on Big Basin Way, and requires fifty -eight spaces for the Bistro/Deli and the Margherita Di Roma Restaurant combined. Since they only have ten spaces available and need fifty- eight, there is a shortfall under the ordinance of forty -eight spaces. This is such a severe lack of parking under the City Ordinance that your approval of this occupancy would result in the complete destruction of any meaningful parking ordinance in Saratoga Village for the foreseeable future. I am attempting to recover from the financial burden of a $50,000.00 annual cost for the Parking District assessment plus $3,178.00 annual cost for Landscape and Lighting District, (both burdened by the City of Saratoga) plus County taxes amounting to over $5,560.00, plus hundreds of thousands of dollars in earthquake retrofit (where the building suffered NO damage in the Loma Prieta Earthquake). VAAO rncv C oC I am paying to the City and County over $0.51 per square foot of rentable space per month and the debt will not be paid for the next ten years. My stores conform with the City Parking Ordinance. If the City should decide to ignore the parking requirements of the existing ordinance and grant a permit for the Bistro/Deli with insufficient parking on that side of the street, I am Saratoga City Council November 23, 1993 Page 2 prepared to ask the City to refund to me that portion of the parking assessment equivalent to the Bistro/Deli shortfall so that I do not pay for the next ten years while the Bistro/Deli pays nothing. It is quite possible that the City will continue to add burden to the Parking District #3 property owners until tenants will be forced to vacate stores due to increased costs passed on to the tenants, under net - net -net leases now in effect. I do not see how you, the City Council, can expect property owners and tenants in Parking District #3 to survive when these City costs are passed on to tenants. As a property owner I do not see how basic rent can be adjusted upward to account for even a modest cost of living increase. The merchants are having a difficult time, as is all of Silicon Valley. I ask you not to approve UP -93 -006 on account of a parking shortfall under the existing City Ordinance. I ask you to reduce City costs and to recognize that the City cannot continue to increase fees and assessments to make up for Proposition #13 cut -backs to the City. Our Village cannot survive the increased financial burden demanded by the City. Vote to deny the Bistro/Deli UP -93 -006. Yours very truly, Marcelle Bloxham Owner, Commercial Property on Big Basin Way, Parking District #3 NOV 2 9 1993 November 24, 1993 Saratoga City Council City of Saratoga 1.3777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga CA 95070 Re: Planning Commission # UP -93 =006 Deli / Bistro Dear City Council Members, I would like to make an appeal regarding the Saratoga Planning Commission's decision. on item # UP -93 -006 Deli / Bistro. 1 2 The rear parking lot of Margarita di Roma only has ten compact parking spaces. A new Deli / Bistro Restaurant will definitely increase traffic in our lot. The .addition of more customer, employee, delivery truck and garbage truck traffic will damage our lot. The Deli / Bistro and Margarita di Roma do not have easement to our lot recorded on our property deed. For legal purposes, we close the parking lot for twenty -four hours a year. Mr. Stark, the applicant, stated that his Deli / Bistro is not really a restaurant; Although, he applied to the county for Restaurant Health Permit? We request the applicant to get an alternative for his employee and customer parking. as well as his delivery and garbage truck - routes. Sincerely, Tom VandenHoogen Little Amsterdam. 14490 Big Basin Way un Bank of America Corporate Real Estate November 23, 1993 CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF UP -93 -006 Dear Council Members: D E U s 'N4 E JT 2 y 1993 NOV CITY MANAGER'S GEM'S OY EICE Bank of America, located at 14476 Big Basin Way, has been established in the community since 1953. During a meeting with other concerned property owners in Parking District #3, Zone 20, it was brought to our attention that Big Basin Bistro's application for a Use Permit had been approved. The proposed Big Basin Bistro is located adjacent to our parking lot. Our parking consists of 22 spaces, 10 of which are used by employees, leaving 12 spaces for our customers. Big Basin Bistro has no parking from the street. Their parking is located in the back of the Bistro in a lot consisting of only 16 spaces which are shared by 5 other businesses. We already have difficulty with non -Bank of America customers from surrounding businesses parking in our lot, a problem which will be exacerbated by the proposed Bistro. We would support the Bistro's application if it provided for proper parking. However, as the application currently stands, the Bistro's customers will naturally park in neighboring lots to the detriment of other businesses and property owners who have paid proper parking assessments and borne the costs of maintaining and upgrading their respective lots. We do not wish to infringe on the Bistro's right to do business but we appeal the approval of UP- 93 -006 on the basis of their inadequate parking which will be harmful to our business. If there are any questions, concerns or comments, I can be contacted at the number listed below. Sincerely, ` Tracy M. ill Senior Building Manager (415) 622 -0993 cc: David Juillerat Maggie Porter, Manager Steve Yotter, District Manager a1th042.doc Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association 560 Davis Street San Francisco, California 94111 415/953 -0500 Fax 415/622 -2387