Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-19-1985 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTS
AGENDA BILL NO. 002. DATE: 5 -21 -85 (6- 19 -85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development SUBJECT: Speed Zone McCoy Avenue Issue Summary City of San Jose has made a traffic study on McCoy Avenue, the results of which are that the speed limit on McCoy must be increased from 25 MPH to 30 MPH to qualify for radar enforcement. In as much as half of McCoy is in the City of Saratoga, it is appropriate to have similar speed zoning on Saratoga's half. Recommendation Enact Ordinance No. establishing the prima facia speed limit on McCoy Avenue in the City of Saratoga at 30 MPH. Fiscal Impacts N.A. Exhibits /Attachir ents 1. Ordinance 2. Staff Review 3. City of San Jose Request Council Action 7/3: Introduced ordinance. 7/17: Adopted Ordinance 38.135. CITY OF SARATOGA Initial: Dept. Hd. Prima Facia Rate To subsection (b): 30 MPH AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: .CITY CLERK ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF.SARATOGA AMENDING THE SARATOGA CITY CODE, AND SPECIFICALLY REPEALING AND ESTABLISHING PRIMA FACIA SPEED LIMIT FOR MOTOR VEHICLES ON McCOY AVENUE, BETWEEN QUITO ROAD AND VILLANOVA ROAD, BASED ON AN ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY CONDUCTED WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS The City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1: The following portion of Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 9 of the Saratoga City Code of wit: Prima Facia Name of Description Rate Street From its intersection Subsection (a): 25 MPH McCoy Avenue with Quito Road to its intersection with Villanova Road is hereby amended, in order to more accurately conform with and to the engineering and traffic study, to read as follows: Name of Street McCoy Avenue Description From its inter- section with Quito Road to intersection with Villanova Road Section 2: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held by a court of the competent jurisdiction to be invalid as the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more section, subsection, sentences, clauses or phrases be held invalid or unconstitutional. Section 3: This ordinance will take effect and be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage and adoption. The above and foregoing ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law, was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the day of 1985 by the following vote: MAYOR 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 5/3/85 FROM: ERMAN DORSEY, SR. ENGR. TECH. SUBJECT: CITY OF SAN JOSE'S REQUEST TO RAISE THE SPEED LIMIT ON McCOY AVE. EASTERLY OF QUITO ROAD. We have been requested by the City of San Jose to concur with them in raising the speed limit on McCoy Ave., easterly of Quito Rd. from 25 MPH to 30 MPH. The reason for this request is to enable enforcement by use of radar. Their speed study backs up the request for a 30 MPH limit (the bottom of the 10 MPH pace is 30 MPH). They received a petition from two thirds of San Jose households on Mc- Coy Ave. requesting that a radar enforceable speed limit be established on their street. Attached is a copy of the City of San Jose's letter along with their Engineering and Traffic Survey (Speed Zoning Study). From a traffic engineering viewpoint, I have to concur with their pro- posal based on their study results, if an enforceable speed limit is to be used on McCoy Ave. Erman Dorsey, Sr. Engr. Tech. DEPARTMENT OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS JOSEPH F. BASS. DIRECTOR Dear Mr. Shook: CITY OF SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 801 NORTH FIRST STREET SAN JOSE, CA 95110 (408) 277.4000 Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RECEIVED November 30, 1984 DEC 0 5 1984 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: Speed Zoning McCoy Avenue, Quito Road to Neville Avenue We recently received a petition signed by two thirds of San Jose households on McCoy Avenue requesting that we establish a radar enforceable speed limit on their street. Our latest engineering and traffic survey shows that in order to qualify for radar enforcement, McCoy Avenue should have a 30 mph speed limit. Since a portion of McCoy Avenue between Quito Road and Villanova Road is in Saratoga jurisdiction, we solicit your concurrence in changing the speed limit. We are attaching a copy of our survey for your review. Please direct your comments to Wayne Tanda, Deputy City Traffic Engineer (277- 5341). Thank you for your cooperation. JFB :JJB :tf Attachment Very ruly your 1 JOSEP F. BASS, Dir to Depar ment of Traffic Operations AGENDA BILL NO. & DATE: 6/10/85 (6/19/85) CITY OF SARATOGA Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. DEPARTMENT:_ Community Development C. Mg. -------------- Bi�t�trig -�i�G ------------------- --- - -- --------------- -- - -- SUBJECT. Finales Approval for SDR -1597 - Sobey Road' Cox Avenue Professional (1 lot) Issue Sumer y 1. SDR -1597 is ready for final approval. 2. All street improvements were completed under Tract 5995. 3. All requirements for City Departments and other agencies have been met. Recommendation Adopt resolution No. 1597 -02 attached, approving final map of SDR -1597. Fiscal Impacts NONE Exhibits /Attachr-ents 1. Resolution 1597 -02; 2. Report to Planning Commission. 3. Status Report for Building Site. 4. Location Pap. Council Action �. ?L(: Approved. RESOLUTION NO. 1597 -02 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING BUILDING SITE OF Cox Avenue Professional The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1: The 0.943 acre Parcel as.shown as Parcel "A "'on the amended Parcel Map recorded in Book 331 of maps at page 39 in the County of Santa Clara, and submitted of the City of Saratoga, be approved as one (1) individual building site. .The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro- duced and passed by the City Council of Saratoga at a regular i • meeting held on the day of. 19 , by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: is CITY CLERK MAYOR ' r City of APPROVED DY :. DATE: INiTiALS: It HOW, idlihill 11111 Wfs , ralA\ 121 , 1 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION n.tv DATE: 4/30/85 COMMISSION MEETING: 5/8/85 APN: 397 -7- 86(339 -39 -A) APPLICANT: Cox Ave Professional Center. Inc. REPLICATION NQ. &_LGCATION: SDR -1597. A -1083: 14965 Sobev Road ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTIOIJ REQUESTED:, Tentative Building Site and Design Review Aooroval for a new. two -story single familv dwellino over the 6200 so. ft, size guideline: OTHER APPROVALS RE UR IRED•: Final Buildino Site Agoroval and Buildino Permits reouired. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A Neoative Declaration has been oreoared. ZONING_ R -1- 40.000 GENERAL FLAN DESIGNATION: Residential Very Low Densitv Single Familv EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: Single Family Residential PARCEL SIZE: 41.077 so. ft. NATURAL FEATURES & VEGETATION: Small oaks and other trees on site. AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 14.92% SLOPE AT BUILDING SITE: 4.3% GRADING REQUIRED: Cut: 360 Cu. Yds. Out Deoth: 5 Ft. Max. Fill: i;u. Yds. Fill Deoth: 2 Ft. Max. i Reoort to the Planning. Commission 4/30/65 SDR -1597: A -1063. 14965 Sobey Road Page 2 EXISTING SETBACKS: Front: 33 Ft. Rear: 57 Ft. Left Side: 42.5 Ft. Right Side: .25 Ft. HEIGHT: 27 Ft. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: 15.9% Per Aoolicant: SIZE OF STRUCTURE: First Floor (Including Garaoe): 5243 so. ft. Second Floor: V 1220 so. ft. TOTAL: 6463 so. ft. ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE: The oro_iect does not meet all the requirements and standards of the zonino. ordinance in that it maintains a 57 ft. rear vard where 60 ft. is required. The design of the structure can be altered to maintain a 60 ft. rear vard. MATERIALS & COLORS: Exterior: Horizontal lag siding.- French Blue3 Brick Veneers Wood Trim - White. Roof: Heavy wood shakes BUILDING SITE ISSUES: This site was created by a two lot subdivision under SDR -991 but it had not received buildino site aooroval at that time. Staff has no major concerns with the Tentative Buildino. Site. It should be noted that a breezeway crosses the sanitation district easement but the district has no Problem with this as lono. a a "soft" surface is used underneath the breezeway. PROJECT STATUS: Said Project complies with all objectives of the General Plan:_ and all requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the Citv of Saratoga. The housing. needs of the reoion have been considered and have been balanced against the Public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. A Neoative Declaration was oreoared and will be filed with the-County of Santa Clara Recorder's Office relative to the environmental impact of this Pro,i.ect.. if aooroved under this aoPlication. Said determination dated: The Staff Reoort recommends aooroval of the tentative ma for SDR -1597 (Exhibit "B" filed March 21. 1965) subject to the following_ conditions: Aoril 25. 1965 Reoort to the Plannino Commission 4/30/85 SOR -1597_ A -1083 Paae 3 I. GENERAL CONDITIONS Aoolicant shall comply with all applicable Provisions of Ordinance No. 60. including without limitation: the submission of a Record of Survev or parcel ma o; Pavment of storm drainaae fee and park:. and recreation fee as established by Ordinance in effect at the time of final aooroval; submission of engineered improvement Plans for anv street work. and compliance with applicable Health Department reoulations and applicable Flood Control regulations and requirements of the Fire Department. Reference is herebv made to said Ordinance for further Particulars. Site approval in no way excuses compliance with Saratoaa °s Zonino and Buildino Ordiances,_ nor with anv other Ordinance of the Citv. In addition thereto,_ applicant shall comply with the following Specific Section 23.1 of Ordinance No. 60. 11. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A. Pav Storm Drainaoe Fee in effect at the time of obtainin_a Final Approval. B. Submit "Parcel Mao" to City for checkino and recordation (Pav required checking and recordation fees), (If oarcel is shown on existing maP of record, submit three (3) to -scale Prints). C. Submit "Irrevocable Offer of Dedication" to provide for a 30 ft. Half- Street on Sobev Road. DIA D. Improve Sobev Road to City Standards. including the following: 1. Desio.ned Structural Section 20 ft. between centerline and flowline. 2. Asohalt Concrete Berm. 3. Underoroundina Existina Overhead Utilities. E. Construct Storm Drainage Svstem as shown on the "Master Drainage Plan" and as directed by the Citv Enoineer: as needed to convev storm runoff to street, Storm Sewer or Watercourse including_. at a minimum the following: 1. Storm drain inlets, outlets:. channels_ etc. F. Construct Standard Driveway Approaches. G. Provide adequate sight distance and remove obstructions of view as required at driveway and access road intersections. H. Watercourses must be kept free of obstacles which will chana_e_. retard or Prevent flow. n Reoort to the Plannin_o. Commission 4/30/85 SDR -1597. A -1083 Paae 4 I. Obtain Encroachment Permit from the DePt of Community Development for driveway aooroaches or Pioe crossings of city street. DIA J. Engineered Improvement Plans required for: 1. Street Improvements. 2. Storm Drain Construction. DIA K. Pav Plan Check. and Insoecti.on Fees as determined from Improvement Plans. DIA L. Enter into Improvement Aoreement for required improvements to be completed within one (1) year of receiving Final AOProval, M. Enter into "Deferred Improvement Agreement" for the required improvements marked "D.I.A." DIA N. Post bond to guarantee completion of the required improvements. III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - DIVISION OF INSPECTION SERVICES A. Geotechnical investioation and report by licensed Professional 1. Soils 2. Foundation B. Plans to be reviewed by g.eotechnical consultant orior to building Permit being issued. C. Detailed on -site improvement Plans showing: 1. Grading (limits of cuts: fills; slopes, cross - sections, existing. and Proposed elevations, earthwork quantities) 2. Drainage details (conduit type,_ slope; outfail, location,_ etc.) 3. Retainino.structures including. desio.n by A.I.A. or R.C.E. for walls 3 feet or hioher. 4. Erosion control measures 5. Standard information to include titleblock.._ plot olan usino.record data, location mao,_ north arrow: sheet nos., owner's name_ etc. IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 4 A. Aoolicant to submit enumerated fees to County Sanitation District No. 4 in accordance with letter dated 4/2/85 Prior to issuance of 4 Reoort to the P'lannino.Commission 4/30/65 SDR -1597. A -1063 Page S Permits. B. Anv surface over the sanitary sewer easement shall be of a "soft" tvpe rather than concrete or other "hard" material. V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT A. A sanitary sewer connection is required. B. Domestic water to be Provided by San Jose Water Works. VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT A. Apolicant shall,.. prior to Final Mao Approval: submit olans showina . the location and intended use of any existin_o wells to the SCVWD for review,.. certification: and reoistration. Wells shall be maintained or abandoned in accordance with District Standards. VII. SPECIFC CONDITIONS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT A. Desion Review Approval reouired on oroJect prior to issuance of Permits. B. Prior to issuance of buildino.oermits individual structures shall be reviewed by the Plannino Department to evaluate the Potential for solar accessibility. The developer shall provide_ to the extent feasible.. for future Passive or natural heating or coolino 0000rtunities on /in the subdivision /buildino site. C. Tree removal orohibited unless in accord with aoolicable Citv Ordinances. D. Erosion control landscaoing.plans for oraded areas shall be submitted for staff review and aooroval prior to issuance of buildino Permits. Landscaping. shall be installed Prior to final inspection /occupancy. E. The developer shall comply with the conditions listed in the Citv Geologist's letter dated April 6. 1965. DESIGN REVIEW ANALYSIS & CONCERNS: The oroject complies with all ordinance requirements with the exception of the 57 ft. rear yard where 60 ft. is required. This can be rectified by reducino the size of the four car oaraoe and /or by moving the garage closer to the sanitation district easement. The location of the structure in a small deoression will reduce its visual impact. However:. the or000sed second story deck and windows alono. the southern elevation of the Proposed structure could have an adverse effect on the privacy of the adjacent property to the south. These Potential impacts 5 Reoort to the Planning COmmisssion SQR -1597. A -1083 4/30/85 Page 6 can be mitioated if the alternative elevation shown on sheet 8 of the exhibits is used and a lattice or other similar screen used alono the southernmost edge of the second story deck.. Although some Iandscaoing is already located on site. additional landscaoino. should be installed to further enhance Privacy. It should be noted that the existing dwelling to the south has second story balconies that will look directly into the .0001 area of the site so landscaoino would be of mutual benefit. It is staff's understanding that the second -story balconies of the adi.acent site to the south will eventuallv be removed. The french doors are to be reolaced by windows usino ooaoue or obsurino__ glass which would reduce the Potential Privacy impact. The or000sed structure,. according to the aoolicant, is only 263 so. ft. above the 6200 so.. ft. size guideline in the R -1- 40_.000 district. It should be noted that these figures do not describe the actual bulk: of the structure since there are two -story open areas over the living room and foyer not included in the size calculation. However: the second - story Portion is relatively small and the overall mass of the structure is broken uo by varied roof articulation and three separate winos. The structure is comparable in size with other recent construction in the R- 1- 40.000 district. The main structure and accessory structures on the ad_.iacent .0rooerty to the south total about 8.600 so. ft. FINDINGS: I. Unreasonable Interference with Views or Privacv: The heioht: elevation and Placement of the oroJect on the site does not unreasonably interfere with views of the surrounding_ residences in that the structure is located in a small depression and is oartiall_v screened by existing.t000graohy. The Project will not unreasonably interfere with the privacy of the surrounding residences in that the rear elevation alternative (shown on sheet 8 of the exhibits) used in conjunction with a lattice. or other screen,_ along. the southern edge of the Proposed deck will adequately Protect Privacv. Additional landscaping will also enhance Privacy. 2. Preservation of Natural Landscaoe: The natural landscaoe is beino preserved by minimizing tree removal. soil removal, and oracle changes in that no trees will be removed_ the site has been disturbed by previous development and the bulk- --of the structure has been located on the flatest Portion of the site. 3. Perceotion of Excessive Bulk..: The proi.ect will minimize the Perception of excessive bulk in relation to the immediate neighborhood in that the second story portion of the structure is relatively small and the mass of the structure is broken uo by varied roof articulation. I Report to the Plannino. Commission 4/30/65 SDR -1597: A -i0B3 Page 7 4. Comoatible Bulk:. and Heioht: The oroi.ect is comoatiable in terms of bulk; and height with those homes within 500 feet of the site and in the same zoning district in that it is comparable in size and height with the most recent construction in the area. The oroi.ect will not interfere with the light_ air: and solar access of adjacent orooerties in that adequate setbacks are Provided and shading will be to the north and away from other residences. S. Grading and Erosion Control Standards: The plan does incorporate current Saratooa oradino. and erosion control standards in that orading on site will be nearly balanced and oraded areas will be required to be contoured and treated with erosion control materials. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends aoproval oer the Staff Resort dated 4/30/65 and Exhibits "B & C ", subject to the followino condtions: 1. Prior to issuance of building. oermits_ submit the followino items for staff review and aooroval: A. Revised site Plan showing a minimum 60 ft. rear yard. B. Revised elevations using the alternative elevation on sheet. 6 of the exhibits. C. Revised elevations and details showino a lattice work. or comparable type of screening along the southernmost edge of the deck; to Protect the orivacv of the adiacent Property to the south. D. Landscaoinn plans showino how the orivacv of the site to the south will be Preserved. Plans must specify plant tyoe_ sizes and location. Landscaoinn shall be installed prior to final inspection /occupancy. E. Landscaoinn. Plans for erosion control materials to be used on exposed cut or fill slooes. F. Detailed grading. Plans showing contour grading and slooes no greater than 3:1 unless aporoved by the Communitv Develooment Director. APPROVED:_ Michael Flores Associate Planner MF /b is P.C. Agenda S/8/SS 7 \N' I`� 41 MEMORANDUM CITY OF SARATOGA TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: Status Report for Building Site Approval All conditions for Building Site Approval SDR - 1597,, Cox Avenue (have) elt&re -itet7) been met as approved by the Planning Commission on May 8, 1985. Listed below are the amounts, dates and City receipt numbers for all required items: Offer of Dedication yes Record of Survey or Parcel Map N/A Storm Drainage Fee 1100.00 Date Submitted All Required Improvement Bonds N/A Date All Required Inspection Fees. 1100.00 Date Building Site Approval Agreement N/A Date Park and Recreation Fee $1300.00 Date Date Submitted Date Submitted 6 -13 -85 Receipt Submitted - - -- Submitted 6-13-85 Signed - - -- Submitted 6 -13 -8 6 -7 -85 # 7620 Receipt#.--- - Receipt #-7-67-0 Receipt# 7620 It is, therefore, the Community Development Department recommendation that (trc (Final) Building Site Approval. for Cox Avenue Professional SDR- be granted. If Conditional Building Site Approval is recommended, it shall become un- conditional upon compliance with the following conditions: Condition(s) Reason for Non - Compliance Director of Community Development 41.` L,.NCA6TRA 00. O 7-1-57 - - - - - -- - 1 CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. V DATE: 6/10/85 (6/19/85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. ------------------ - - - - -- ---------- - - - - -- --- ---- -- SUBJE,T: Conditional Final Map Approval SDR- 1462- -Cox Avenue, Donald Schaffer ( 2 lots ) --------------------------------------------=---------------------------- - - - - -- Issue Summary 1. The SDR -1462 is ready for conditional final approval 2. All bonds and agreements have been submitted to the City. - 3. All requirement for City Departments and other agencies have been met except clearance letter from Cupertino Sanitation District and letter for existing house to bring up to existing code: Recommendation Adopt resolution No. 14.62 -02. attached approving.conditional. final map of SDR -1462 and authorize.:• execution of contract improvement agreement. Fiscal Impacts NONE Exhibits /Attachments 1. Resolution No. 1462 -02 2. Report to Planning Commission 3. Status Report for Building Site 4. Location Map Council Action 6/19: Approved. • RESOLUTION NO. 1462 -02 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING /BUILDING SITE OF Donald Schaffer •CONDITLONAL The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1: The 0.409 acre and 0.479 acres parcels as shown on the final map Parcel A and B and submitted to the City Engineer, City of Saratoga, be approved as two (2) individual building sites. The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro- duced and passed by the City Council of Saratoga at a regular • meeting held on the day of. 19 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: C7 CITY CLERK MAYOR ( CITY. OF SARATOGA EXHIBIT "A" r= June 30, 1980 STAFF REPORT * rev. July 3, 1980 SDR -1462 Mr. & Mrs. Schaffer, Cox Ave., Tentative Building Site Approval - 2 Lots PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests tentative building site approval for a lot split in the R- 1- 12,500 zoning district on Cox Avenue across from Cumberland. The site is surrounded by residential uses. The Southern Pacific right -of -way runs to the north of the property, while a 75' P. G. & E. and a 30' Santa Clara Valley Water District easement (with a 54" underground pipe) run through the property. Several large trees and many smaller trees exist on the site. A small house and carport to the rear are to remain on Parcel A. They are con- ditioned to be brought up to code. The existing residence adjacent to them has a pad level 4' -5' higher. The dry shed area on Parcel B is proposed to be removed. A large P. G. & E. tower is on the.property to the east, but its view is somewhat blocked by existing vegetation. Access for the site is proposed to remain onto Cox Avenue. The residences are conditioned to hook up to the sanitary sewer system and the existing septic tank backfilled. Prior to final approval of the map, a drainage plan for on and off site improvements will be required for approval by the Public Works and Inspection Services Department. PROJECT STATUS: Said project complies with all objectives of the 1974 General Plan, and all requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the City of Saratoga. A Negative Declaration was prepared and will be filed with the County of Santa Clara Recorder's Office relative to the environmental impact of this project, if approved under this application. Said determination date: June 9, 1980. The Staff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SDR -1462 (Exhibit "B" filed May 15, 1980) subject to the following conditions: I. GENERAL CONDITIONS rri. Applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of Ordinance No. 60, including without limitation, the submission of a Record of Survey or Parcel Map; payment of storm drainage fee and park and recreation fee as establish - ed by ordinance in effect at the time of final approval; submission of engineered improvement plans for any street work; and compliance with applicable Health Department regulations and applicable Flood Control reg- ulations and requirements of the Fire Department. Reference is hereby made to said ordinance for further particulars. Site approval in no way excuses compliance with Saratoga's Zoning and Building Ordinances, nor with any other Ordinance of the City. In addition thereto, applicant shall comply with the following Specific Conditions which are hereby required and set:_ forth in accord with Section 23.1 of Ordinance No. 60. II. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS A. Pay Storm Drainage Fee in effect at the time of obtaining Final Approval. B. Submit "parcel map" to City for Checking and Recordation (Pay required Checking & Recordation Fees). (If parcel is shown on existing map of record, submit three (3) to -scale prints) * C. Submit "Irrevocable Offer of Dedication" to provide for a 30 ft. half - street on Cox Avenue and a pedestrian access easement. D. Submit " Irrevacable Offer of Dedication" to provide easement as needed. 4 s '7. •,b -Staff Report � � 6/30/80 SDR -1462 Page 2 E. Improve Cox Avenue to City Standards, including the following: 1. Designed Structural Section 20 ft. between centerline and flowline. 2. P.C. Concrete Curb and Gutter (V -24). 3. Pedestrian Walkway (4 ft. P.C.C.) 4. Undergrounding Existing Overhead Utilities. F. Construct Storm Drainage System as shown on the "Master Drainage Plan" and as directed by the Director of Public Works, as needed to convey storm runoff to Street, Storm Sewer or Watercourse, including the following: 1. Storm Sewer Laterals with necessary manholes. 2. Storm Drain Inlets, Outlets, Channels, etc. G. Construct Standard Driveway Approach. H. Engineered Improvement Plans required for: 1. Street Improvements 2. Storm Drain Construction I. Pay Plan Check and Inspection Fees as determined from Improvement Plans. J. Enter into Improvement Agreement for required improvements to be completed within one (1) year of receiving Final Approval. K. Post bond to guarantee completion of the required improvements. III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTION SERVICES A. All existing above and below ground structures to be brought to code _ or removed. Applicant shall have licensed engineer, architect or contractors evaluate structures for code conformance and submit report of findings to City. All corrections must be made or bond posted prior to Final Approval. B. Provide drainage analysis of property prior to Final Map Approval. C. Pad elevations for new structures to be compatible with existing adjacent structures and Cox Avenue as approved by City. IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - CUPERTINO SANITARY DISTRICT A. Sanitary sewers to be provided and fees paid in accordance with = requirements of Sanitation District No. 4 as outlined in letter dated -June 10, 1980. B. Annex to Cupertino Sanitary District prior to Final Approval. V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS_- SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT A. Sewage disposal to be provided by sanitary sewers installed and connected by the developer to one of the existing trunk sewers of the C== Cupertino Sanitary District. Prior to final approval, an adequate bond shall be posted with said district to assure completion of sewers as planned. B. Existing septic tank must be pumped and backfilled in accordance with Environmental Health Standards. A bond in the amount of $400 should be posted with the City to insure completion of work. Contact the district sanitarian for final inspection upon completion. U-1707111 4•�.: Staff Report \ 6/30/80 SDR -1462 Paae 3 VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS _ SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT A. Any improvements (including landscaping) within District right -o£ -way requires District permit and approval prior to issuance of building permits. VII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT A. Building and grading plans to be approved by Planning Department prior to issuance of permits. Individual house designs to be evaluated on the basis of compatibility with the neighborhood environment. Complete plans for all on -site grading to be included in evaluation. (NOTE: Project determinations are appealable through the Design Review Process) VIII. COMMENTS: * A. No trees of- ordinance size shall be removed prior to final map approval. Kathy Ke rdus, Assistant Planner KK /clh LDC Agenda: 7/3/80 MEMORANDUM CITY OF SARATOGA TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: Status Report for Building Site Approval All conditions for Building Site Approval SDR- 1462.. Donald Schaffer (have) (have not) been met as approved by the Planning Commission on July 3, 198( Listed below are the amounts, dates and City recei�t numbers for all required items: Offer of Dedication yes ft�gacxxm Parcel Map yes Storm Drainage Fee 1300.00 Date Submitted All Required Improvement Bonds 3,000 Date All Required Inspection Fees 7_, 880 Date Building Site Approval.Agreemen.t yes Date Park and Recreation Fee 2,600 Date Date Submitted Date Submitted 6/7/85 Receipt Submitted 6/7/85 Submitted 6177'85 Signed 6/7/85 Submitted 675 6/7/85 6/7585 Receipt Receipt #75U5__— Receipt #7585 It is, therefore, the Community Development Department recommendation that (Conditional) gkkma) Building Site Approval for Donald Schaffer , SDR -1462 be granted. If Conditional Building Site Approval is recommended, it shall become un- conditional upon compliance with the following conditions: Condition(s) Reason for Non - Compliance 1. Provide clearance letter from Cupertino Sanitation District. 2. Provide letter to bring existing house up to present building code. Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development r0l►KA �♦ O V Y soG F Q fglc 4Cip�C q41 CO. W 1 ( Z J • 0 O O O t O J Pit•.HG\ O. LOCATION M A P SDR 1462 [TA � � - NORTHAMf`T ON 1 p u O • O 5C ULLr AJ� 3 U u Y NAN TOG M[ CT It cOTL O GARNt Tf • [ U Z r 0 Y _ V U NAt[Ai [ � a W � I d N C 4RDONAUt CHAtlAU I t c1 u O S 1I1/ W NILL• WAY ' F 'J 2 i� r O 1 i DRIV 41 C T J' O P� l l OOLL JRCM[GT ✓ L / s ��j ,. ti1EMOO RANDt1M 09TT @:T O&M&U00Z 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 TO: City Manager DATE: 6/10/85 FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Release of Monument Bond for Tract 6665 Name & Location: Parnas Corporation, Saratoga Heights All public street monuments for Tract 6665 , have been in- stalled, verified in writing by the engineer or surveyor and are acceptable to us. The engineer or surveyor has also verified he has received payment for placing the monuments. Therefore, I recommend the City Council approve the release of the monument bond posted by the - developer. The following information is submitted for your use: 1. Developer: The INSCO /DICO group (Parnas Corporation) Address: 3468 Mt. Diablo Blvd, Suite 203 P.O. Box 1519, Lafayette 2. Bond Type: Monument Bond 3. 4. 5. Bond Amount : $12,200 Bond, Certificate X=XRXXXXkpt #: 103339 Issuing Company • Casa Grande Acquisition Corp Address: 6. Special Remarks: Robert S. Shook RSS /dsm n • • CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. Ob DATE: 6/10 -85 (6/19%85) WEPARTMENT: Community Development Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. SUBJECT: Release of Monument Bond Tract 6665, Parnas Corporation, Saratoga Heights Issue Summary Monuments of above tract have been checked and found to be acceptable. On November 7, 1984 all street improvements for above tract were accepted for construction only. Recomendation Release monument bond number 103339. Fiscal Impacts None Exhibits /Attachimnts 1. Memorandum Council Action . 6%19: Approved. CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. 861 DATE: 6 %11/85 (6/19/85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development Initial: Dept. lid. lg& C. Atty. C. Mgr. SUB, =. : Approval to Amend the CC &R's Regarding Fencing in the Parnas Subdivision (Tracts 6665, 5928 & SDR -1426) Issue Summary 1. The applicant wishes to amend the CC &R's in the Parnas subdivision to allow by Planning Commission review (Variance Approval) the fencing of an area greater tha rr 4,000 sq. ft. 2. The Planning Commission' has reviewed the request and recommends approval. 3. The amendment to the CC &R's does not change the requirements in the zoning ordinance but allows a property owner to request variance approval to enclose an area_ of more than 4,000 sq. ft. 4.' The CC& R's for the McBain & Gibbs subdivision were recently amended to allow a property owner to� request variance approval to enclose an area of more than 4,000 sq. ft. 'Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. approving an amendment to the CC& R's for the Parnas subdivision. Fiscal Impacts None Exhibits /Attachrmnts 1. Resolution No. 2. Correspondence 3. Minutes dated 5/8/85 Council Action 6/19: Approved Resolution 2245. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COVENANTS,CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR TRACT #6665, 5928 AND SDR -1426 WHEREAS, the City has approved certain Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Tracts #6665, 5928 and SDR -1426 imposed upon all lots within said Tracts and minor subdivision. WHEREAS, said Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions may not be amended without prior approval by the City; and WHEREAS, said Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions contained wording which restricted the amount of area that shall be enclosed by fencing; and WHEREAS, the developer of said tract and a property owner within said tract wish to amend the CC & R's to allow Planning Commission consideration of a variance for fencing that encloses an area greater than 4,000 square feet, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Saratoga: 1. The Amendment to Section 10.06 of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions previously approved by the City of Saratoga in connection with Tracts 6665, 5928 and SDR -1426 is hereby approved in the form of Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. The applicant shall submit to the City an endorsed copy of the amendment to the CC & R's after the same has been recorded. I hereby certify the foregoing to be true, full and correct copy of a resolution duly passed and adopted by the City Council of ,the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 19th day of June 1985, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: DEPUTY CITY CLERK 1 MAYOR EXHIBIT "A" DECLARATION OF AMENDMENT OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS SARATOGA HEIGHTS I WHEREAS, on May 23, 1982, a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions was recorded in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, bearing document number 7307823. WHEREAS, the declarant that owns 25 of the 37 lots in Saratoga Heights I desires to amend a provision of the subject Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Saratoga Heights I in order to comply with the directions of the Saratoga Planning Department and obtain a variance with reference to fences, walls and hedges; NOW, THEREFORE, the majority of the owners of all the property in Saratoga Heights I, that being Parnas Corporation, a California Corporation, amend the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Saratoga Heights I at paragraph 10 -06 to read as follows: "Fences, walls and hedges are permitted only if they comply with the City of Saratoga's zoning regulations applicable to the district. All such fences and walls shall be located so as not to enclose or encompass an area in excess of four thousand (4,000) square feet unless variance approval is granted by the City." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being an authorized corporate officer, does execute this amendment on �� ��_ ,F — , 1985 at San Jose, California. CSR AS CORPORATION By: JENNINGS - WDERMOTT - HEISS, INC. JMH SUITE 200 286 -4555 925 REGENT STREET —SAN JOSE, CA. 95110 Civil Engineering Mr. Robert Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Bob: Land Planning May 17, 1985 REC rveying " tAAY 1'71985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Re: Our 412280- Saratoga Heights Last week, the Planning Commission recommended approval for an amendment to the C.C.& R.'s for Saratoga Heights. As you recall, the amendment was to permit areas in excess of 4,000 s.f. to be fenced providing the City issued a variance. Using the amendment form you provided me at the meeting, a declaration of amendment has been prepared for the Saratoga Heights project. Enclosed is the original executed declaration for submittal to the City Council. I would appreciate anything you could do to permit this matter to be heard by the City Council as soon as practical. Is it possible that this would be agendized for the June 5, 1985 Council Meeting? If you need any other documents, please let me know. Thank you again for all your past help in this amendment. Very truly yours, i/� WILLI /E.`//�- c.c. Parnas Corporation WEH /nr encl. 61 j"MH', JENNINGS - McDERMOTT - HEISS, INC. SUITE 200 286 -4555 925 REGENT STREET—SAN JOSE, CA. 95110 V/ Civil Engineering Land Planning Land Surveying April 22, 1985 Mr. Robert Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Saratoga Heights Our #2280 Dear Mr. Shook: Parnas Corporation has asked that I direct a request to the City of Saratoga to amend a portion of the C.C.& R.'s for Saratoga Heights. The section in question is 10.06. It is requested that the last sentence of said section be deleted. This sentence states that no fencing shall exceed 4,000 square feet. This particular provision is a carry over from the old HCRD Ordinance. In this particular case, the wording of the NHR Ordinance is more realistic and appropriate. The NHR Ordinance speaks to limiting opaque fencing while having no specific limitation regarding open type fencing. The original HCRD limitation was based upon the premise of reducing visual impact from fencing. In the case of Saratoga Heights, it's relationship to adjacent lands is such that there is very little visual contact between existing Saratoga residents and the future homesites within Saratoga Heights. It is felt that the wording of the NHR Ordinance would be more appropriate for the Saratoga Heights area. It further seems more appropriate that each individual lot be weighed on it's own,merit as to the extent of fencing allowed along with the type of fencing. There are some instances where it would be very desirable to have more fencing from a security and from aesthetic point of view. We understand there is a proposal before you for a wrought iron fence on Vintage Lane which certainly would have great aesthetic curb side appeal. We further understand that the adjacent McBain and Gibbs subdivision was allowed to amend their C.C.& R.'s for similar reasons. The Saratoga Heights subdivision is even less visable than the McBain and Gibbs subdivision, hence, we feel it is reasonable to delete this provision from the Saratoga Heights C.C.& R.'s. Please advise this office if you should need any other correspondence in order to agendize this C.C.& R. amendment. Thank you very much for your consideration. Very tr y. yoiyrs, ISS C.C. Parnas Corporation RECEIVED APR 2 9 1985 WEH /nr COMMUNITY DEVEIOWNT ' Planning Commission Page 7 Minutes - Meeting 5/8/85 V -697 more inter ting. She stated that, had the applicant known the setback before, the uilding would have been moved back. There is no foundation footprint fo it, so it overhangs much the same way as an eave. She added that she has rked with these setbacks a long time, and in her mind it was 20 ft. She co ented that she can see where a planner or a checker could also have made n honest error in the 20 ft.; therefore she could justify the findings. S e moved to approve V -697. Commissioner Burger stated that the fact that a ors were made on both sides should also be added to Finding #1, becaus it does represent a practical difficulty at this point. It was clarifie that this pertains to the existing bay window. Commissioner Burge seconded the motion, which was carried 4 -2, with Commissioners.J. Har is and McGoldrick dissenting. Commissioner McGold 'ck explained that she would have voted for the variance if it had co red the bay window before the 6" were added by the applicant, because the she would have felt it was the fault of the City. Commissioner J. Harris stated that she does not like the Commission to accept a variance based n work that has been done. 13. A -1085 - DNS Devel ment, Request for Design Review Approval to allow a ne , 27 ft. high, two -story residence on a hillside 1 in the NHR zoning district at 12273 Vista Arroyo Cour Staff explained the project, recommending approval. They indicated that the it is Staff's opinion that the stakes placed for the on -site visit were not properly located, and the uilding site would be situated to the south of the actual site. They adde that in one location, the staircase, the structure is in fact three stori s and is in conflict with the ordinances. Commissioner McGoldrick gave a nd Use Committee report, indicating that the house is most visible to the homes on Prospect Road. She noted the steepness of the site and suggest d that the item be continued to a study session. The public hearing was opened at 9 Kurt Anderson, the architect, ga describing the site. He discussed t that it is a stepped two -story house. p.m. a presentation on the project, grading and the design, indicating Sam Espeseth, from DNS, discussed the st \king of the home site . There was a consensus to have the actual ootprint of the house staked and to have another on -site visit, and contin e the matter to a study session. Concerns cited by the Commission were 1 three stories, 2) height, 3) location, 4) slope and 5) grading. Another n -site visit was scheduled for May 11, 1985 at 9:30 a.m., and the apple ant was asked to stake the footprint. After further discussion it was directed that this matter be continued to a Regular Adjourned Meeting on M 28, 1985. 14. V -694 - Marie Rose Gaspar, Request for ariance Approval to allow a 10 ft., 4 in. fence whe 3 ft. are allowed along Vintage Lane and Pierce Ro to allow an opaque fence exceeding 60 ft. in length, nd to enclose an area greater than 4,000 sq. ft., at 147 Pierce Road in the NHR zoning district MISCELLANEOUS D5- Discussion of Amendment to.CC &Rs for Tracts 6665 and 5928 and SDR -1426, Parnas Corporation, Relative to Fencing - 7 - Planning Commission Page 8 Minutes - Meeting 5/8/85 V -694 and Parnas CC &Rs The above two items were discussed simultaneously. Staff explained the request for variance, indicating that if the variance were granted it could not be implemented until the CC &Rs are amended for that subdivision. They commented that they were unable to make the findings for the variance and recommend denial. They added that if the Commission wishes to recommend to the City Council that the CC &Rs be amended, they would suggest that they be similar to those recently approved for the McBain & Gibbs subdivision, which allows for an additional area to be fenced only if a variance is approved by the City. Commissioner McGoldrick gave a Land Use Committee report, describing the site and the location of the proposed fence. She added that the Thomas fence which was recently approved blends with the background. She indicated that she has been able to make the findings for the height and enclosure of the 4,000 square feet, but is not able to make the findings for the pillars. The public hearing was opened at 9:30 P.M. Bill Heiss, engineer, discussed the location and proposal for fencing. He showed a scaled rendering of the pillars and addressed the findings for the pillars. He stated that they feel that the pillar and the gate design is an asset to the entrance. He commented that the.property is a significant historic property and they feel that a proportion of the gate is an appropriate part of the whole fence. Commissioner McGoldrick asked Mr. Heiss to think about the Practical Difficulty or Unnecessary Hardship finding, since she was having trouble making that finding. Mr. Heiss commented that something is needed to hold the gate up, so that is practical. He added that certainly the pillars have to be as high as the gate, and he feels that lighting in this case is appropriate as a safety feature and identification feature. He commented that the few inches of material from the top of the fence to where the lighting begins is practical because it is a logical and appropriate design. Commissioner McGoldrick added that, as people come down the Masson slope, if someone were to go extremely fast and crash into this site, you would need something very tall and very strong. Comm issioner J. Harris stated that in her mind the important aspect of this is the historic value, and she feels it is difficult to set this off as a beautiful spot to be proud of in our Saratoga heritage without having attractive gates. Commissioner Burger added that it is all part of the attempt to preserve the history and culture of Saratoga. Commissioner McGoldrick stated that she was also basing her findings on an agricultural, open space feature. Mrs. Gaspar could have developed a home on that other parcel and is choosing to leave it to open space and agricultural use. Mr. Heiss added that this property is unique and exceptional because of its agricultural character. Commissioner Schaefer stated that she agreed with the findings, but was concerned about having all of the homes in the area fenced because of the wildlife. It was clarified that if the CC &Rs are amended as those for McBain & Gibbs, it would be on a case by case basis, and the Commission would have control. Mr. Heiss added that this is an unusual situation again, because Lot 5 is zoned NHR and it is also not part of the CC &Rs, so it does not have that limitation. He stated that that sets this up as unique and special because of that and does not create a precedent. Faber Johnston, attorney, described the site and the proposal. He commented that this is part of the old Paul Masson Vineyards and his parents were good friends of Paul Masson. He indicated that his mother told him that she remembers the gates of the original Paul Masson being - 8 - i ' Planning Commission Page 9 Minutes - Meeting 5/8/85 V -694 and Parnas CC &Rs high on both sides of Pierce Road. He added that.Mrs. Gaspar is recreating a historical gate that in fact did exist. Mr. Johnston stated that he did not feel that the CC &Rs have to be changed because they say that the fencing shall be in accord with the HCRD regulations, and they permit variances. Dan Gears, of Congress Springs Winery, addressed the historical importance and the heritage value of the property. He stressed the importance of having a fence around the vineyard for.protection from deers. Mrs. Gaspar, the applicant, discussed the proposal, stating that she feels the proposal will be an asset to the community and will preserve the heritage of the City. Commissioner McGoldrick moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner J. Harris seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner McGoldrick moved to approve V -694, making the following findings: #1 - The vineyards are a unique historical heritage. To lose one -third of your plants to deer is a practical difficulty and an unnecessary hardship. A fence is the most practical and efficient method of protection from deer and there is expert testimony to back this. #2 - This is an agricultural use with soil conditions unique for vineyards. Therefore this is exceptional in that decorative landscaping is not what is being protected. The slope is unique and requires a higher fence over which deer cannot leap. It is an extraordinary circumstance when an owner is willing to put money into planting the property, thereby preserving open space. #3 - It is a common privilege to protect your property and investments from marauders, even four legged ones and agricultural property should be allowed to protect its crops. The fact that we have two parcels here united causes the 40,000 sq. ft. #4 - It is a common privilege, therefore it is not a special, privilege. She would be happy to grant the same to anyone who is going to plant vineyards. As far as the board fence, #1 - It is a practical difficulty to look down on your neighbor's back yard and feel like you are intruding on them, as well as to be subject to whatever they have stored in their back yard. #2 - The exceptional circumstances are that this opaque fence cannot be seen by anybody but that neighbor. The intent of the non - opaque fences was so that they would not close in visually the hillsides, and to give an open space feeling. This particular board fence is so situated that that will not happen. #3 - Privacy is a common privilege and the extension of more than 60 ft. is due to the layout and the size on these particular parcels. #4 = If it is a common privilege it is not special. Regarding the pillars, the finding for practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship is that an extraordinary strong fence or pillars will be needed in case of an accident. #2 - The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances for a fence here are that this vineyards entrance is opposite the Paul Masson property. The public use of that facility gives this site almost a tourist kind of attraction setting, and a French chateau entrance gate would be very appropriate at this crossroads and does something for the character of Saratoga. An ordinary neighborhood type gate would not be appropriate. #3 - It is a common privilege in that we have set precedence for such gates before, and #4 Therefore it is not a special privilege. Staff noted that Condition #3 should be amended to read 185. Discussion followed on Condition #1 of the Staff Report. The City Attorney stated that, regarding the amendment of the CC &Rs, the McBain & Gibbs' CC &Rs provided that no fencing shall enclose an area in excess of 4,000 sq. ft. He commented that the modification there was to allow fencing subject to the zoning regulations of the City or the granting of a variance. He added that procedurally here we are talking about the City consenting to an amendment to the Parnas CC &Rs. Mr. Heiss stated that the portion of the CC &Rs for Parnas does not reference back to the zoning; it specifically states that there be no - 9 - Planning Commission Page 10 Minutes - Meeting 5/8/85 V -694 and Parnas CC &Rs fencing in excess of 4,000 sq. ft. He explained that it should have read enclosing an area in excess of 4,000 sq. ft. is not allowed. The City Attorney recommended that the language be retained and add "No fencing shall enclose the area unless Variance Approval is granted by the City." The vote was taken on the motion to approve V -694, per the conditions of the Staff Report, as amended. The motion was carried unanimously 6 -0. Commissioner McGoldrick moved to recommend to the City Council that the CC &Rs for Parnas be amended to allow that the fencing be increased if there is a variance granted by the City. Commissioner Burger seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 6 -0. 16. SDR -1533 - Johnson and Foley, Monte Vista Drive, Emergency Access Gate Staff explained the request, sta ing that they have noted no objection to this gate; however, the minute reflect concern over the type of gate installed. They suggested that the Commission may wish to approve it subject to approval of the neighbo Jim Foley stated that he had discus kd this with the Central Fire District, and he submitted copies of the approlpd plan. Commissioner McGoldrick moved to appr ve the emergency access gate for SDR- 1533 per the submitted sketch, subj ct to the written approval of the neighbors within seven days. Commis Toner Burger seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 6 -0. COMMUNICATIONS Written 1. Letter Requesting Reconsidera 'on of A -1080, Allyn Becker, 12264 Farr'Ranch Road. Commissioner J. arris moved to reconsider the application. Commissioner McGoldrick econded the motion, which was carried unanimously 6 -0. It was directed t at this matter be agendized for a study session on May 28, 1985. 2. Letter from Mark Rapport regardin A -1052. Staff explained the request. Mark Rapport, the applicant, stated that they were not aware that the stairways and open upper areas are counteV twice in the square footage. Commissioner McGoldrick stated that she feels his is a very sensitive area and is not disposed to increase the square foo age. Discussion followed on possible reduction of square footage and the e 'sting square footage of the structure. Commissioner Burger stated tha .she considers this as a modification to the design review and would no require a public hearing, understanding that the difference is an addi 'on of 470 sq. ft., but no change in the plans approved. Staff stated that 'f the Planning Commission is going to approve this, they suggest that the Commission consider strongly how Staff is to measure square foo ge. The City Attorney commented that he has a problem if this is called modification, without a public hearing. Discussion followed on the re uirements for a public hearing. Commissioner Peterson asked if an except 'on could be made on the basis that there are circumstances that indicate th t the applicant did not understand the double counting. Commissioner J. Harris moved to stick with the on nal number of 6930 sq. ft. and not make the determination that this additi ' al square footage was within the scope of the original Design Review Ap roval. Commissioner McGoldrick seconded the motion, which was carried 5 1, with Commissioner Peterson dissenting. It was suggested that the app icant work with Staff to determine if the square footage can be reduced. - 10 - I ns��6 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 887 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager DATE: 6/10/85 FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Release of Monument Bond for Tract 6665 Name & Location: Parnas Corporation, Saratoga Heights All public street monuments for Tract 6665 , have been in- stalled, verified in writing by the engineer or surveyor and are acceptable to us. The engineer or surveyor has also verified he has received payment for placing the monuments. Therefore, I recommend the City Council approve the release of the monument bond posted by the developer. The following information is submitted for your use: 1. Developer: The INSCO /DICO group (Parnas Corporation) Address: 3468 Mt. Diablo Blvd, Suite 203 P.O. Box 1519, Lafayette 2. 3. 4. 5. Bond Type: Monument Bond Bond Amount: $12,200 Bond, Certificate ){XR&x 0Li7)t #: 103339 Issuing Company • Casa Grande Acquisition Corp Address: 6. Special Remarks: Robert S. Shook RSS /dsm CITY OF si1R Ica% A=,TDA BILL N0. 670 DATE: _ 6114185 DEPA'' 7 : CommunitU Services Initial: / Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. SUBJECT: Award of Contract - 4th Street Reconstruction Issue Summary The City received three. bids on June 11, 1985, for the Reconstruction -of 4th Street. This project was approved in the 1984 -85 Capital Improvement Budget. The low bid was submitted by Duran & Venables..Inc.,.of San Jose for $72,212.00. The Engineer's estimate for this work was $62,620.00. The current fund balance for this project is $69,685.00. Recc=,endation o Award contract for reconstruction of 4th Street to the low bidder, Duran & Venables, Inc. o Reprogram $6,000.00 ($2,527. deficit over Engineer's estimate, $500.00 staking, $1,500.00 inspection fee, $500.00 engineering staff time., and $973.00 miscellaneous)_ from Quito,Ar-ea Curb and Gutter to 4th -Street Reconstruction. Fiscal Imoacts This project is HCDA funded E- hibiis /Attachments Bid Summary Appropriations Resolution Council Action 6/19: Awarded Contract and approved Resolution 2151.21. Ui ty of 5a r atoga Community Development Department DATE_ June ll�g 85 -BID S ��_ TIME: 2: 00 .M. PROJECT 4th Street of _ Engineer's Est. _,Ql ran VenablE s Houcre UniTrman Amount L.S 9290.0 Pia wit Arrioun t ten Descri tion P Quantity it nit I'ric ut Amount Amount Unit Prj(P za ons Amount 1 Clear & Grub L.S. L.S 000. 3,000.00 3670 3670.0 L.S 15,500.0 2 Road Way Grading 17,446 S . F 0.5C 8,723.00 0.5 8723.0 0.87 15,181.0 1.50 26, 169.0 3 Install Aggreqate Base Class II 650 ton 17. 11, 050. 00 17.3 11,277.50 16.4C 10,669.0 12.0 7,800.0 4 Install Asphalt 14,437.50 54.8 15,081.0 40.0 11,000.0 Concrete type B 275 ton 45. 12, 37.5.00 52.5 5 __Install 18" R'.'C. P. 278 L. F 28 . ( -. 7, 784 . 00 39.2 10 911.50 45.7 `12,721.28 54.0 15, 012.0 6 Install 12" R.C.P. 37 L.F.25. 925.00 33.81) 1,250.60 39.16 1,693.12 51.0 1,887.0 7 Construct Curb Dron Inlet 3 ea. 00. 2,700..00 L035 3,105.0 1393 1,393.0 1100 3,300.0 _8 Construct Junction ox ea 000 'l, 000.00 905 905.0 1193,5 1,193.50 3500 3,500.0 9 Remove existing Flat Grate and Construct Curb Drop Inlet I ea '1800 )1,800.00 1,253 1,253.0 715. u 715.0 1200 1,200.0 10 Construct Asphalt Concrete Curb 118 L.F. .7. 0 8, 288. 00 8.90 10,537.60 L1. 78 13,947.50 5.0 5,920:0 1 Way 66 S.F. 1.0 668.00 1.0 668.0 1.75 1,169.0 1.0 668.0 Construct Asphalt ive Way 942 S.F 3.0 2,826.00 2.5C 2,355.0 2.0 1,884.0 2.0 1,884.0 R E!mo ve- Concrete - Wa s 401-S. F 1.0- 40. OC 4.0 160.0 5.0 200.0 3. 0 120.0 DATE: Jurie11, ,198j TIME: ? : 00 .M. ui ty of 5a r atoga Community Development Department -BID SUMMARY ' "D Ile ec_of PROJECT 4th Street _ Eng. Estimate nit Pric Amount Duran & -Venabl nit Amount sNorman Houge Unit Amount iazza Const i t Amount to Descri tion p Quantity it (lit pil(P Amount 14. Construct Concrete Walkways 22 S. F. 3. 0, 66.( 506.0 25.0 550.0 15.0 330.0 15 Construct Manhole 1 ea 1000 1,000.( 1363 1363.0 1050 1050.0 1100 1100.0 16 Adjust Manholes & _ Valves 5 ea: 75.0: 375. 218 1090.0 275. 1375.0 100.0 500.0 TOTAL: 62,626.0 72,212.70 90,925.42 95,890.0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS AND AMENDING THE 1984/85 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET WHEREAS, it is recommended that the following adjustment be made increasing the present budget appropriations: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the budget of the City of Saratoga adopted by Resolution 2151. and 2151.1 be amended as follows: Transfer: $6,000.00 from general ledger account 35- 953 -4521 general fund reserve for appropriations increases, to general ledger account 35- 949 -4522, general fund appropriations. Subsidiary: Fund 35 HCDA Program 949 Fourth Street Reconstruction Purpose: To increase appropriations to provide funds necessary to accommodate • payment to low bidder (low bid in excess of engineer's estimate).and related additional costs. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 19th day of June, 1985, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Deputy City clerk • Mayor N CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. 972-- DATE: 6/14/85 (6/19/85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. SUBJECT: PAMELA WAY STORM DRAIN Issue Su nr ary In order to eliminate a long standing drainage problem, the existing, deteriorated storm drain system at the end of Pamela Way has to be replaced., Bids on this project were opened on Friday, June 14,-1985 with a low bid of $12,947.50, submitted by Glage Underground Construc- tion; Inc. of Campbell. Only one bid was submitted. The Engineer's estimate for this project is $11,625.00. Reconnnendation Award the contract for the Pamela Way Storm Drain to Glage Underground for the bid amount of $12,947.50. An additional $947.50 will have to be appropriated. Fiscal Impacts The amount of $12,947.50 is to be funded by the Capital Improvement Budget (Storm Drain) 87- 4521 - 951 -72. $12,000.00 was budgeted under FY 1984 -85. budget. Exhibits /Attachments I. Itemized Bid Summary 2. Resolution to Appropriate Funds Council Action 649: Approved contract and Resolution 2151'..22. Citv of Saratoga _Community Development Denartment DATE :.,/,,/,,-7e 141985 TIME 2 :GID p M BID SNHAVIlk U - Sheet -.o f'L PROJECT PAMELA WA y STORM ORA /it/ En ms's. Description Quantity it ict Amount it Amount Ri., nit Amount t mount it Amount 12"Rey rceo, pe 17 L. f. 35 6125.00 SD, 837 - - — -- 77, 3lC2Q0 ' nlpi -ee 0 fI%roi� Hr 6"P.HLP. 30 L.F. 75 2,2 50. 3Q�, 9Cb. June lion poxes 3 Ea. 2 2 5-0, ic TO TA L ,4MOUNT OF BID a5o 11,625. /2,947. S • •) RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS AND AMENDING THE 1984/85 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET WHEREAS, it is recommended that the following adjustment be made increasing the present budget appropriations: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the budget of the City of Saratoga adopted by Resolution 2151. and 2151.1 be amended as follows: Transfers: $950.00 from general ledger account 35- 953 -4521 general fund reserve for appropriations increases, to Capital Improvement Budget 87- 4521 - 951 -72, Storm Drain, Capital Improvement. Subsidiary: Fund: 87 Program: 951- Pamela Way Storm Drain Purpose: To increase appropriations to provide funds necessary to accommodate payment to low bidder (low bid in excess of $12,000 budget amount). The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 19th day of June, 1985, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: DEPUTY CITY CLERK 1 MAYOR CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. 8.73 DATE: 6/1.2/85 (6/19/85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. GPA 85 -1 -s David Morrison, 20661 5th St &7TUTT —Mar ree " SUBJECT: Amend General Plan from Multi - Family Residential to Retail Commercial Issue Summary 1. At its meeting of May 8, 1985 the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending that the General Plan Designation for the Site at 20661 Fifth St. be changed from Multi- Family Residential to Re- tail Commercial but Not the site at 14644 Oak St.(portion). 2. To allow this amendment, Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2 must also be amended'to allow additional commercial land uses to be added. 3. The applicant has indicated that he intends to build a storage facility • on the site. 4. The applicant must eventually file rezoning, use permit, building site approval, and design review applications. Recommendation 1. Staff recommended approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment for LU.4.2 and the land use designation for 20661 Fifth St. 2. The Council should open the public hearing, take testimony, and close the public hearing before deciding on the amendment. 3. If the Council wishes to approve this�r amendment;_,. it must first approv( the negative declaration for this project. 4. Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2 must be amended prior to changing any land use.designation. Fiscal Impacts Small increase in property tax revenues when site improved. If event- ually-used for retail use sales tax revenues could increase. The change in use will not substantially affect the City's ability to pro- vide services. Exhibits /Attachments Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Negative Declaration City Council Resolution Amending the General Plan Planning Commission Resolution GPA-85 -1 Staff Report dated 5/2/85 Planning Commission minutes dated 5/8/85 Correspondence related to this application Council Action 6/19: to 7/3. 1/7: Denied without prejudice 4 -0 -1. 7/3 :• Continued for 90 days. 10/2: Continued for 90 days. EIA -4 C File No: GPA 85 -1 Saratoga DECLARATION THAT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NOT REQUIRED (Negative Declaration) Environmental Quality Act of 1970 The undersigned, Director of Planning and Environmental Control of the CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal Corporation, after study and evaluation has determined, and does hereby determine, pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Sections 15063 through 15065 and Section 15070 of the California Administrative Code,,and.Resolu- tion 653- of the City of Saratoga, that the following described•project will have no•significant effect. (no substantial.adverse impact) on the-environment within the terms and meaning of said Act. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Amend the General Plan designation of 12,000 sq. ft. parcel at 20661 Fifth St. and 14644 Oak St. (small portion) from Residential - Multi - Family to Retail Commercial. The applicant intends to build a neigh- borhood storage building on the site. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT David Morrison 19590 Juna Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 REASON FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION The proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environ- ment since the site has already been disturbed.by existing development and the impacts associated with new construction can be mitigated by existing City Codes and Ordinances. Executed at Saratoga, California this -25 day of 19 ROBERT S. SHOOK DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DIRECTOR'S AUTHORIZED STAFF MEMBER C C RESOLUTION NO. GPA 85 -1 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT POLICY AND MAP FOR A SMALLER THAN 1 ACRE SITE AT 20661 FIFTH.STREET -------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga received an application from David Morrision to amend the General Plan Land Use Element Designation of a 12,000 sq. ft. +/- parcel (APN 519 -9 -37 and a portion of 519 -9 -45) from Residential - Multi- Family to Retail Commercial; and, WHEREAS, Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2 must be amended prior to any action on the above request; and, WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission at a regular meeting in accord with Government Code Section 65353, held a public hearing on May 8, 1985, and reviewed the proposed amendments to the Land Use Element; and, WHEREAS, The City of Saratoga Planning Commission reviewed the draft negative declaration and the findings attached as Exhibit "B "; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga: That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council amend Land Use Element policy LU.4.2 to read as follows: LU.4.2 "Non- residential development shall be confined to sites presently designated on the General Plan for non - residential uses with the exception that residential sites continguous to existing non - residentially designated sites in the Village (Area J) may be designated for non - residential uses. Existing non - residential zoning shall not be expanded nor new non - residential zoning districts added unless the General Plan is amended in conformance with the statement above." Amend the Land Use Element Designation of a 8,467 sq. ft. parcel at 20661 Fifth Street (APN: 519 -9 -37) from Residential Multi- Family to Retail Commercial as shown on Exhibit "C ", based on the ability to make the findings as stated in Exhibit "B ". C f The above and foregoing resolution was regularly introduced and thereafter passed and adopted by the Saratoga Planning Commission on the 8th day of May, 1985, by the following vote: AYES: Commiss.ioners.Burger, B. Harris, J. Harris, McGoldrick, Peterson and Schaefer NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Siegfried ABSTAINED: ATTEST: Secretary Chair'an, Planning Commission GPA 85 -1 EXHIBIT "B" FINDINGS f 1. The proposed General Plan amendment will maintain the residential character of adjacent residential neighborhoods by proper separation and will have no adverse impact on the surrounding area. 2. The proposed amendments will encourage the economic viability of the City and will be compatible with adjacent commercial development and activities. 3. The proposed General Plan amendment will not adversely affect the public safety, health and welfare or be materially injurious to adjacent properties or improvements. � r d $Q,�('�' C��� gelQ &MZU(QX5e& REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 5/27 /85 COMMISSION MEETING: 5/8/85 APN: 519 -9 -37, 4S (Portion) APPLICANT: David & Terry Morrison OWNER: Same APPLICATION NO. & LOCATION: GPA 85 -1; 20661 Fifth St. & 14644 Oak St. (Portion) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- - ACTION REQUESTED: Change General Plan Designation from Residential - Multi- Family to Retail Commercial. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: Rezoning, Lot Line Adjustment, Building Site Approval, Variance, Use Permit and Design Review required. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A Negative Declaration has been prepared.. ZONING: R -M -3000 GENERAL PLAN Residential - DESIGNATION: Multi - Family EXISTING LAND USE: Single Family Residential SURROUNDING LAND USES: Parking (commercial); commercial and multi family residential to the east. PARCEL SIZE: 519 -9 -37: 8,467 sq. 519 -9 -4S: 3,000 sq. 11,467 sq. District No. to north and west - family residential to the south; multi - ft. ft. + or - ft. + or - NATURAL FEATURES & VEGETATION: Level site with ornamental vegetation. PROJECT HISTORY: At its meetings of October 24, 1984 and November 14, 1984, the Planning Commission considered the applicant's request to add neighborhood public storage to the list of conditional uses allowed in the C -C district. The applicant indicated he intended to remove the dwelling on the Fifth Street site and replace it with a two -story storage structure. The Commission indicated that the concept of the use appeared feasible and that the applicant should apply for a General Plan Amendment (public hearing) to get public input on the project. c � Report to Planning Commission GPA 85 -1, Morrison, Fifth St. & Oak St. ANALYSIS:._ This proposed General Plan Amendment is process which could lead the applicant's goal of storage use on the site. However, a larger Gene governs all future commercial development in the considered. Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2 states the following: S/2/85 Page 2 the first step in a placing a commercial -al Plan policy which City must first be LU.4.2 "Non- residential development shall be confined to sites presently designated on the General Plan for non - residential uses. Existing non - residential zoning shall not be expanded nor new non - residential zoning districts added." Since the current General Plan designates the site for multi - family residential uses, this policy clearly prohibits the proposed change in designation to retail commercial use. This policy must be modified if the site is to be designated for commercial use. As in most General Plan policies, this policy was meant as a broad guideline that does not take into account the particular circumstances of individual sites. In this case, the Fifth Street site (the largest portion of the proposed amendment) is bordered on three sides by existing commercial development and zoning. This includes Parking District No. 2 and the trash receptacles that serve the shops in that district. The fourth (east) side of this site is bordered by a condominium development. The rapid change in slope of this site effectively separates the condominiums from the commercial uses below it. The applicant also desires to designate as retail commercial a 1S ft. wide strip of what he defines as "surplus property" from this condominium site. These circumstances indicate that the site could be better used as a commercial site rather than a residential site impacted by existing commercial uses in terms of noise, lights (from cars in parking district), and refuse disposal. The use of the site for commercial storage could also benefit Village merchants and residents by providing a service not currently available in the Village. Commercial use of the site will generate more traffic than the existing residential use or any future multi - family residential use of the site. However, if commercial storage is the use ultimately allowed on the site, staff anticipates traffic impacts, due to the nature of storage operations_ will be minimal and will not significantly affect adjacent residential areas. If a higher intensity commercial use were allowed on the site, traffic impacts would still be limited due to the location and size of the site. Since the site is over 170 ft, away from Big Basin Way and screened by existing commercial development, staff does not anticipate a high intensity commercial use would be attracted to the site if the commercial storage project does not go forward. C Report to Planning Commission 5/2/85 GPA 85 -1, Morrison, Fifth St. & Oak St. Page 3 OPTIONS: -- The Planning Commission can recommend that the City Council exercise one of the following options: 1. Uphold the present wording of Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2 and deny the proposed General Plan Amendment. 2. Modify the wording of LU.4.2 to allow new commercial sites in certain circumstances and /or only in certain areas of the City (e.g.,. the Village). :3. Eliminate LU.4.2 to allow greater flexibility in determining the future extent of commercial uses. If options #2 or #3 are used, then the Commission needs to recommend one of the following sub - options to the Council: A. Change the designation of the Fifth Street site and a 15 ft. wide portion along the western side of the Oak Street site from Residential Multi- Family to Retail Commercial. B. Change the designation of the Fifth Street site only from Residential Multi - Family to Retail Commercial. Of the options listed above, staff would recommend that Option #2 be used since Option #1 does not address the specific circumstances of this site and Option #3 is too great a departure from the decisions made and discussed at great length by the citizens, Commission, and Council during the last General Plan Review. The following rewording of LU.4.2 is suggested: LU.4.2 "Non - residential development shall be confined to sites presently designated on the General Plan for non - residential uses with the exception that residential sites contiguous to existing non - residentially designated sites in the Village (Area J) may be designated for non - residential uses. Existing non - residential zoning shall not be expanded nor new non- residential zoning districts added unless the General Plan is amended in conformance with the statement above." Staff anticipates this amended wording would also allow greater flexibility in implementing the findings of the Mayor's Village Task Force Committee which will be tentatively recommending commercial designations west of Fifth Street. Staff would also recommend that sub - option B be recommended to the City Council. This would avoid requiring a variance and lot line adjustment for the Oak Street parcel which currently maintains a non - conforming depth of 1 06.45 ft. where 115 ft. is required. If another 15 ft. were taken from this site for the proposed commercial use, lot depth would be 91.45 ft. or C � Report to Planning Commission 5/2/85 GPA 85 -1, Morrison, Fifth St. & Oak St. Page 4 only-80% of the standard required. The Commission would, in essence, be approving a variance and eventual lot line adjustment by recommending approval of this General Plan Amendment as requested by the applicant. The 15 ft, strip of the western portion of the Oak Street site is not needed by the applicant to create a standard commercial site in the C -C district since the Fifth Street site exceeds the site area (5,000 sq. ft.) and dimension (50 ft. x 100 ft.) requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending that the City Council amend General Plan Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2 as shown under the "Options" section of this report and change the land use designation of 20661 Fith Street from Residential Multi - Family to Retail Commercial. APPROVED: i'• Mic ael Flores Planner P.C. Agenda:_ 5/8/85 MF /dsc I� • &I I ON as bad, its PIP p VI, Vii MIT 1 1 Planning Commission Page 3 Minutes - Meeting 5/8/85 A -1082 consistent with theXway all proposals are measured. Commissioner J. Harr s seconded the motion. The following findings were made: #1 - By sett; the structure back it no longer interferes with potential privacy. 3 - It has been reduced in size and the height is being reduced, which wi 1 help the bulkiness, and it is being set back. #4 - By reducing it down t 26 ft, the homes in the area will gradually become larger, and this is compromise and in keeping with the trend of development in that area Commissioner Schaefer expressed a little concern about the 12 ft. setbac on the side and stated that she would prefer to have it larger; however she feels that the reduction to 26 ft. mitigates that. The vote was taken, and the motion was carried 5 -1, with Commissioner McGoldrick dissenting. The appeal period was noted. GPA 85 -1 - David Morrison, Consider Amending the General Plan Des- ignation of the property at 20661 Fifth Street and a portion of the property at 14644 Oak Street from Resi- dential- Multi- Family to Retail Commercial. The Commis- sion may also consider amending Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2 which reads as follows: "Non- residential devel- opment shall be confined to sites presently designated on the General Plan for non - residential uses. Existing non - residential zoning shall not be expanded nor new non - residential zoning districts added. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Staff explained the request. At Commissioner McGoldrick's inquiry, Staff explained that the applicant wanted to annex the subject piece of Oak Street to the proposed commercial piece on Fifth Street. They commented that the existing Fifth Street site would be more than sufficient in terms of size for a commercial property and is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance requirements in terms of minimum dimensions. They clarified that the Fifth Street site has independent access. Discussion followed on the 15 ft. strip of land and the proposed wording of Land Use Element Policy LU.4.2. Commissioner Schaefer commented that, during the General Plan meetings, the people in the Village indicated that they did not want any expansion whatsoever of commercial uses there on any lots because of the noise. Therefore, she feels that the intention was not to increase any commercial space downtown. She added that she cannot see how the General Plan amendment is in conformance with what the intention was, or any recent input she has received from the people who live down there. Commissioner Peterson commented that he felt storage use is an excellent use near the Duke of Wellington. Commissioner J. Harris stated that she shares Commissioner Schaefer's concern for expanding commercialism, but at the same time we keep hearing from the Village people that they want to deal with it in their own way. Ther.efore,.she feels somewhat confused. She added that she feels comfortable with the way the proposed amendment is worded. The public hearing was opened at 8:02 p.m. Mr. Bonn, Camina Avenue, asked about the application relative to Oak Street. Chairman Peterson pointed out the parcel of land on Oak Street, and it was clarified that Staff has recommended that the General Plan designation not be amended relative to the Oak Street portion. Dave Morrison, the applicant, described the property in question, describing the lot. He stated that he feels that public storage would be beneficial to the Village. He discussed the use and the traffic. Chairman Peterson commented that the Commission is only concerned with the General Plan amendment this evening; the use and design review will be discussed later. - 3 - Planning Commission Page 4 Minutes - Meeting 5/8/85 GPA 85 -1 Commissioner McGoldrick moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Burger seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner McGoldrick moved to adopt the resolution recommending that the City Council amend the L.U.4.2 and designate the Fifth Street site as Retail- Commercial, per the Staff Report dated May 2, 1985. Commissioner Burger seconded the motion, which was carried 5 -1, with Commissioner Schaefer dissenting. Commissioner Schaefer stated that she sees this change as being the precedent in expanding commercial in the downtown area site by site, which was not the intention of the people in that area during the General Plan discussions. 8a. UP -580 - Mr. and A S. William Benson, Request for Use Permit 8b. A -1084 - Approval o construct a cabana in the required rear yard setback a a 25 ft. from the rear property line and 15 ft. from t e side property line, and Design Review Approval to exceed the 6,200 sq. ft. allowable floor area standatV at 20433 Montalvo Road in the R -1- 40,000 zoning distr ct The application was explaine by Staff. They indicated that they cannot make the findings and recomme denial of the design review. They stated that they could make the findin s for the use permit and recommend approval with conditions, such as res ricting the height to 12 ft., having the impervious coverage reduced, Ind reducing the structure to 250 sq. ft. Commissioner McGoldrick gave .a and Use Committee report, stating that the applicant had indicated he woul move the side yard setback to 20 ft. and the height to 12 ft., but prefer to cut off the roof instead of changing the pitch. She added that he fel that reducing the size would change the architectural style of the struct re. The public hearing was opened at 8111 P.M. Mr. Benson, the applicant, gavl a presentation on the project. He submitted a petition from the neig ors in support. He indicated that he had no problem with reducing the hei ht. Commissioner McGoldrick commented that she was having a hard time maki g Finding #3 and asked Mr. Benson to help make that finding. Mr. Benson ated that from the street level only 6 ft. of the structure would be seen He commented that the landscaping will mitigate it even further. He discussed the trees that will be planted. Commissioner Peterson commented that, h garding Finding #3, it is not the bulk of the cabana; it is the fact th t we are exceeding 6200 sq. ft. total square footage on the lot. Mr. B son commented that the people who would directly be affected by that do n t consider that to be a problem. He noted that similar situations have ex sted on Ashley .Way and Via Tesoro Court. John Scott, View Oak Drive, indicated thathe plans to build sometime this year. He spoke in support of the proje commenting that he was the neighbor most affected. Don Call, 14930 Montalvo Road, indicated th t he had been President of the Montalvo Homeowners Association for the past two years and during the time when there had been a great deal of chan a in the character of that neighborhood. He reviewed the projects tha had resulted in this change and spoke in opposition to this project. Jack Christian, current President of the Mont \He Homeowners Association, gave the history of the Butler subdivision in area, and indicated that Mr. Butler had asked fora variance on this lo it had been turned down by the City Council. He commented that they d continue to oppose any homes over 6200 sq. ft. because of precedent. submitted a letter from - 4 - David and Terri Morrison 19590 Juna Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 408 354 -6759 March 22, 1985 Planning Commission City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitdale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Commission Members: I hereby request a modification of the General Plan which would change the current zoning of RM -3000 to Community Commercial on a 12,000 square foot parcel I own at the end of Fifth Street in the Village of Saratoga. The sole purpose of the zoning change would be to allow construction of a two story, central hall, neighborhood public storage structure. This proposed structure would provide secure public storage primarily for village merchants and nearby residents of apartments and condominiums. The "land use element" section of the General Plan section LU.4.2 states: LU.4.2 Non - residential development shall be confined to sites presently designated on the General Plan for non- residen- tial uses. Existing non - residential zoning shall not be expanded nor new non - residential zoning districts added. This is a very specific statement, however, my parcel is unique in that it adjoins a dead end street to the south, the parking district to the west, the dumpsters and tallow barrels of village merchants to the north as well as the parking district to the north, and a ten foot high concrete wall to the east. Current zoning of RM -3000 allows apartment or condominium use, however, unlike all condominiums and apartments along Oak Street, my parcel does not have a view, but is at the same grade as Big Basin and looks into the rear of commercial development along Big Basin. I have considered apartment or condominium development, but due to.adjoining - commercial use, residential use would not be desireable. I have also considered office or commercial use for the site, but again it's location is poorly located for these uses. The site adjoins public uses (street or parking district) on three sides and I own the five unit apartment to the east so the proposed use would not have an adverse effect on existing adjoining land use. There appears to be local neighborhood demand for public storage in the Village Area. Page 2 March 22, 1985 Planning Commission I would propose construction of an interior hall storage locker building with exterior ranch style architechture similar to the adjoining five unit apartment building which we have owned since 1966. I feel neighborhood public storage would be appropriate for this lot since it adjoins commercial parking to two sides, a public dead end street on one side and a paved driveway leading to a five unit apartment, which I own, on the fourth side. Attached are the following: Application for change of zoning (information only). Authorization for public noticing. Environmental impact questionaire. Ownership deeds. Tentative building elevations. Tentative building floor plan. Two plot plans. 10- reduction of plot plans. Demand survey. Security and fire protection provisions. Please send staff report to David or Terri Morrison. Vey DaN r (View FizoM tAO�elSUrf, cal �l � �+i3v�.t�UGo G EN T2Ac_ FU 5L! L F I ZE T- EZATE*D 5 41O.-KE4 S TUG/-U �AeK�N U 5 rµ 5 T 50' Iry i DE W ll� M U d 5 7:-H 577, 1�� �I C 1 doge r-�vv GENrAL PA" L E AT I U N _ 5 _ (�Uf`�LIG �iTDeAla t.. VIc\q Ffzom '5IPE L.vT- EL-EV ATIDN - L- VIEW rZunn 1=ir--rj4 5reC-Er �j ECUf -► TY 900 R. sTLi -� 5 TU C,Lo 7-7- 10 14 10i4 to to J — J Q 14 14 to I 10 14- (4 IO 14 IU Q t 0 f Q N E 14 1v l4 1 ENTIZ Y FLOO P-- FLP��O r--i-ooel, =z ELI i3LLL � 77/Q -/�►GC 04 S-ro0AG t ►, DEMAND SURVEY- Mr. Ernie Kraule, Saratoga Fire Chief, state he would welcome neighborhood public storage since it would provide safe storage for items which are currently stored in residential garages and, in many cases, is a fire hazard. Mr. Don Eagleston, President of the Saratoga Merchants Association, stated he felt the location was well suited for neighborhood public storage and that a large number of village merchants would be interested. He felt currently there is retail space used for storage in the village and that public storage would allow the merchants to more efficiently use their retail space. Mr. Mike Sunderland, President of the Gatehouse Homeowners Asso- ciation, a 130 unit condominium development on Fourth Street, felt demand for additional storage by Gatehouse condo owners would be 10% to 15% of the owners since the builder included good size and extra storage lockers. He felt possibly some of the smaller condo developments in the Village Area might have more demand for storage. Mr. Frank Behnke and family, who own the six unit apartment and two cottages across Fifth Street from the proposed storage building, as well as the eight unit apartment building on Big Basin at Fifth Street, thought the lot was well suited for public storage and would be interested in renting a couple spaces. Considering this survey, it appears there is a strong demand for neighborhood public storage within the Village Area of Saratoga. SECURITY AND FIRE PROTECTION- A central hall public storage building contains individual storage lockers with individual locks. Access to the building is by a front security door which is locked. Access to the building is ;,y key held by individuals with lockers. The main door is locked to everyone from 8:00 pm until 8:10 am. There are no other doors or windows, therefore interior security is very good. Construction would involve 20 year treated fire retardant shake roof. Each locker would have a heat sensitive sprinkler. And overall construction would be of one or two hour fire resistance as required by Saratoga Fire Chief Mr. Ernie Kraule. PQ Box 725 Saratoa,U 95071 To: Saratoga City Council July 2, 1985 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 From: Saratoga Village Association Village Task Force Review Committee Dear City Council: The Village Association has reviewed two items from the Mayor's Task Force. These item are boundaries of the Village and land use in the Village. The review committee agrees with the boundaries of the Village recommended by the Task Force. The committee would like to recommend the including of the Congress Springs Condominiums on 6th and Big Basin Way. The committee agrees with item no.8. This item recommends all non retail on Big Basin Way be allowed only as a conditional use. This does not — include office or non retail e immediate street frontage. Zoning recommendations are as follows: j 1. Big Basin Way from Fifth Street to the turn at Fitzsimmons property should be zoned C -V. This would require rezoning the end lot from RM to C -V. This would also require zoning the "Caldwell Home from PA to C -V. 2. All of Fourth Street and Fifth Street up to the property line on Oak St. Should be zoned C -V. 3. Fourth Street.from Big Basin Way to Wildwood Park / should be zoned C -V. .A. Sixth Street zoning should remain as is. In order to assist the'Village and the City in both sales and housing we would recommend zoning the areas around Wildwood park( including Springer, Paul, Elva, Fourth Street, and Wildwood Way) from R -1- 10,000 to R -M 3,000. Thank you for taking the time gSinc der our recommendations rel Lee Mitchell President, Saratoga Village Association t . David and Terri Morrison 19590 Juna Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 408 354 -6759 June 10, 1985 City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitdale.Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear .City Council Member: I hereby request a modification of the General Plan which would change the current zoning of RM -3000 to Community Commercial on a 12,000 square foot parcel I own at the end of Fifth Street in the Village of Saratoga. The sole purpose of the zoning change would be to allow construction of a two story, central hall, neighborhood public storage structure. This proposed structure would provide secure public storage primarily for village merchants and nearby residents of apartments and condominiums. The "land use element" section of the General Plan section LU.4.2 states: LU.4.2 Non - residential development shall be confined to sites presently designated on the General Plan for non- residen- tial uses. Existing non - residential zoning shall not be expanded nor new non - residential zoning districts added. This is a very specific statement, however, my parcel is unique in that it adjoins a dead end street to the south, the parking district to the west, the dumpsters and tallow barrels of village.merchants to the north as well as the parking district to the north, and a ten foot high concrete wall to the east. Current zoning of RM -3000 allows apartment or condominium use, however, unlike all condominiums and apartments along Oak Street, my parcel does not have a view, but is at the same grade as Big Basin and looks into the rear of commercial development along Big Basin. I have considered apartment or condominium development, but due to adjoining commercial use, residential use would not be desireable. I have also considered office or commercial use for the site, but again it's location is poorly located for these uses. The site adjoins public uses (street or parking district) on three sides and I own the five unit apartment to the east so the proposed use would not have an adverse effect on existing adjoining land use. There appears to be local neighborhood demand for public storage in the Village Area. Page 2 June 10, 1985 City Council I would propose construction of an interior hall storage locker building with exterior ranch style architechture similar to the adjoining five unit apartment building which we have owned since 1966. I feel neighborhood public storage would be appropriate for this lot since it adjoins commercial parking to two sides, a public dead end street on one side and a paved driveway leading to a five unit apartment, which I own, on the fourth side. Attached are the following: Plot plan. Demand survey. Security and fire protection provisions. Very truly Da 0 DEMAND SURVEY- Mr. Ernie Kraule, Saratoga Fire Chief, statedhe would welcome neighborhood public storage since it would provide safe storage for items which are currently stored in residential garages and, in many cases, is a fire hazard. Mr. Don Eagleston, President of the Saratoga Merchants Association, stated he felt the location was well suited for neighborhood public storage and that a large number of village merchants would be interested. He felt currently there is retail space used for storage in the village and that public storage would allow the merchants to more efficiently use their retail space. Mr. Mike Sunderland, President of the Gatehouse Homeowners Asso- ciation, a 130 unit condominium development on Fourth Street, felt demand for additional storage by Gatehouse condo owners would be 10% to 15% of the owners since the builder included good size and extra storage lockers. He felt possibly some of the smaller condo developments in the Village Area might have more demand for storage. Mr. Frank Behnke and family, who own the six unit apartment and two cottages across Fifth Street from the proposed storage building, as well as the eight unit apartment building on Big Basin at Fifth Street, thought the lot was well suited for public storage and would be interested in renting a couple spaces. Considering this survey, it appears there is a strong demand for neighborhood public storage within the Village Area of Saratoga. SECURITY AND FIRE PROTECTION- A central hall public storage building contains individual storage lockers with individual locks. Access to the building is by a front security door which is locked. Access to the building is uy key held by individuals with lockers. The main door is locked to everyone from 8 :00 pm until 8 :00 am. There are no other doors or windows, therefore interior security is very good. Construction would involve 20 year treated fire retardant shake roof. Each locker would have a heat sensitive sprinkler. And overall construction would be of one or two hour fire resistance as required by Saratoga Fire Chief Mr. Ernie Kraule. W Isis f4 O M - -- - - -T - 84 M W -. •---h----- ----- ---------- --------------- - - - - " - - - -- �'-- - - - -.. a �o� ` � Wo q• a I� a w Z a Q ,ff fd l7 cy, {� ED �I en r =�$ w� 4' HIVnO3 w d O Sp, !j LoCA i IO tJ Imo-- -v - V�LAt G�N,TeIaL �I�LL Pu (3Ll (- 'e77Ve -Vn � ' I„r 3AV' VNIWON I 1, F- Y Q O I • C] • City Council Saratoga, CA 95070 Ladies and Gentlemen: As a resident of the area affected by plan, I would like to advise you of my and offer some alternatives. June 13, 1955 the proposed amendment to the general opposition to the proposed amendment, Presently, the general plan-does-not allow commercial use of land already zoned residential within the boundaries of dsea J (Village). It is easy to see that the present plan works a hardship on applicant 11 "orrison, as the Fifth St. property is surrounded by commercial uses, thereby making a residential use unfeasable there. The proposed amendment would give Morrison the opportunity to petition the city:for a commercial use of the lot, and most likely would result in a more reasonable use of the lot than residential construction. However, it would also open the door to commercial development on Oak St., which presently is almost totally single and multi- family residential. The proposed amendment says that a residential lot which is contiguous to a non - residential lot within.area J (Village) may be zoned commercial. Of course, the amendment provides that such zoning change would be considered on a case -by -case basis, allowing for hearings before the planning commission, city council, etc. Assuming that area residents (including the future purchasers of the new condominiums on Oak St.) do not want commercial development on Oak St., does this case -by -case review procedure adequately protect their interests? Unfortunately, it does not... The word contiguous carries a definate "meaning in real estate law. It describes a physical curcumstance (placement of lot). In the absence of other requirements for granting a zoning change, the issue of contiguity assumes primary importance in this amendment. Once contiguity is established (a relatively easy task of checking the maps), the burden :... effectively shifts to the city to prove why a rezoning should not be granted. Traditionally, and reasonably so, the party who is requesting the zoning change has the burden of showing why the change is necessary. There is no reason why an established residential neighborhood (such as Oak, Komina, Lomita, Aloha etc.) should have to prove that a commercial use should not be in the neighborhood. Indeed, zoning ordinances were enacted in the first place-to protect the integrity of neighborhoods. I would suggest two alternatives which address both the interests of applicant Morrison and the residents in the area. First, the criteria for granting a zoning change could be spelled out in such detail as to effectively limit the application of the amendment to I"orrison's lot on Fifth St.. Second, language could be inserted into the amendment as it presently reads which would remove certain neighborhoods within area J (Village) from the provisions of the amendment (for example, everything south and west of and including Oak and St. Charles Sts.). • p. 2 I urge the council to refer this matter back to the planning commission for study. It might be added that the commission itself stated its opposition to commercial development on Oak St. by denying 114orrison's original request to rezone part of his Oak St. commercial. A redesign of the language of this amendment which addresses the interests of residents of area.J'.(Village) would assure citizens that the city intends to follow the goal;af.'.maihtaining, a good quality of life in Saratoga, as set forth in the general plan. Respectfully, atan �ogosian, 20630 Lomita V. Saratoga, CA 95070 © L� �J REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: 12/30/85 COUNCIL MEETING: 1/7/86 SUBJECT: GPA 85 -1 -B, David Morrisoh,�, 20661 5th Street & 14644 Oak Street Amendment of General Plan The matter was continued from October 2, 1985 with the agreement of the applicant, to this meeting in order to review the proposed amendment of Land Use Policy LU.4.2 at.-the time the Village Plan was considered. The Village Task Force Study has been submitted. However, work has not yet begun on the Village Plan. Under tate Law it could be argued that this matter is a "development project" since eventually a permit will need to be issued. As of 1985, if a negative declaration is adopted, "the development project shall be approved or disapproved within six months from the date on which an application requesting approval of the project has been received and accepted as being complete by the agency ", (Title 7., Section 65950). "The time limit established by Sections 65950, 65950.1 and 65952 may be extended once for a period not to exceed 90 days upon consent of the public agency and the applicant." (Section 65957) The application was complete as of April 11, 1985. It was continued for 90 days on October 2, 1985. If the matter is assumed to be a development project there are no possibilities for an extension. The Staff recommends that the item be denied without prejudice. This would allow the applicant to submit a similar application as soon as he desired. The Council may also wish to consider -a waiver of fees on this future application. t S. Shook Director of Community Development RSS /kk /kah Attachments 3- 6/19/85 paragraph 3 to the resolution which would specify that the proceeds were to be used for the improvements. CALLOW"'lOYLES i•?OVED TO ADOPT RESSOLUTION 2246 AS AMENDED. Passed 4 -0. D. New Business from Councilmembers Mavor Fanelli introduced Mr. Shook as the Acting City Manager, and Steve Baird as the Acting City Attorney. E. Action Referral Log - No comments. Because of apparent problems with the public address system, Mayor Fanelli recessed the meeting from 7:45 to 7:53 p.m. The problem having been solved, she then returned to Public Hearings on the agenda. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Second Unit Appeal- Beach (continued from 2/20) Mayor Fanelli noted that staff had recommended continuance of the public hearing to a date when the second unit ordinance should be prepared. She asked if anyone had appeared to speak. Since no one rose to speak, the public hearing was continued to September 18. Mayor Fanelli then stated that she would abstain from voting from t'.e next item, since she rented office space from Mr. '4orriscn. She left her seat and took a seat with the audience. Mayor Pro Tem Clevenger for presided this portic. ^. of the meeting. B. Amendment of General Plan Designation of property at 20661 Fifth St. and portion of the property at 14644 Oak St. from Residential- Multi- Family to Retail Commercial. (Applicant, D. Morrison) (GPA 85 -1) / �a Staff explained the proposed General Plan amendment and the related Land Use Element amendment. In answer to Councilmember Callon, staff replied that the Village Task Force had not made specific recommendations for the subject parcel. Mayor Pro Tem Clevenger expressed concern that two residences across the street from the site would be affected by the proposed change. Staff replied that if they were in the subject zone they would considered for commercial use on a case -by -case oasis, not changed automatically. The public hearing was opened at 8:05 p.m. Stan Bogosian, 20630 Lomita Ave., stated that the residents of the area were concerned about the proposal. He presented a petition signed by twenty residents with that viewpoint, and he stated that some neighbors had not received notice of the hearing. The main concern, he said, was preserving the integrity of the neigh- borhood by keeping it residential. Gladys Hernandez, 14626 Big Basin 4Hay, stated that the two cottages which Councilmember Clevenger had mentioned do not front on St. Charles. Peggy Corr, 19224 DeHavilland Dr., encouraged the Council to delay any decision until after further study of the Village Plan. Dave Morrison, the applicant, stated that the lot at the end of Fifth Street is unusual, and no uses other than commercial would be appropriate. He also felt it would benefit the other commercial uses in the area. Ccuncilmembers discussed the issues. There was consensus to bifurcate the issues of the General Plan amendment and the Land Use Element policy, which would allow tdavor Fanelli to vote on the latter. The public hearing was continued to July 3. Maycr Fanelli then returned to her seat as Mayor. C. Appeal of Tentative Map Approval for a 9 -lot Subdivision on 4.27 Acres in the R- 1- 10,000 Zoning District at 13744 Quito ltd. (Applicant, J. Chu- appellant, D. Drumm) (SDR 1596) f( Staff answered various questions from Counci.lmemt� rs, and the public hearing was opened at 8:33 p.m. Dale Drumm, the appellant, rose to state that many people were present to protest the subdivision; a number of people raised their hands in response. Ile said that f 3- 7/3/85 Councilmember Hlava stated that the intent of the Task Force was to have commercial uses on Big Basin Way; she did not wish to change the General Plan yet. Councilmember Clevenger felt the proposed change was not a good one for the site, and she did not wish to change the Land Use Element. CLEVENGER /HLAVA ?LOVED TO TABLE THE MATTER FOR RECONSIDERATION WHEN THE VILLAGE PLAN IS CONSIDERED. Passed 5 -0. B. Amendment of General Plan Designation of property at 20661 Fifth St. and portion of Property at 14644 Oak St. from Residential - Multi- Family to Retail Commercial (Applicant, D. Morrison) (CPA -85-1) (continued from 6/19) City Attorney noted that the amendment depended upon the change in the Land Use Element of the General Plan; the Council could deny the application, he said, or, with the consent of the applicant, continue it for consideration with the Land Use Element. Councilmember Hlava noted that if the application were denied the applicant would have to pay fees again if it were considered at a later time; she wished to continue it. Mr. Morrison rose to say that he would agree to continuance. CONSENSUS TO CONTINUE THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO A CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN APPROXI`:ATELY 90 DAYS. (Clerk's note: The meeting nearest to 90 days away would be the first meeting in October, October 2.) Mayor Fanelli then called a recess from 8:42 to 8:58 p.m. C. Design Review Approval to Construct a Two -Story Residence on a Substandard Lot at 14466 Oak Place (A -1069) (continued from 6/5) 1. Appeal of Above Approval (Appellant, W. and A. Coughlan) 2. Appeal of Condition of Above Approval to Limit Size of Residence to 2,380 sq. ft. (Applicant /appellant, L. and E. Protiva) Senior Planner Rerdus explained the appeals, and the public hearing was opened at 9:00 P.M. Althea Coughlan,. 14474 Oak, spoke as an appellant opposing the approval. She felt that although concessions had been made, the problems with the setbacks remained. She also felt that the house would have great bulk and a massive appearance in a restricted space, and she raised questions about inconsistencies in the maps. Norm Matteoni then spoke on behalf of the Protivas, pointing out that Lot 10 had building site approval.' Although the house was still larger than the Planning Commission recommended, he said, there were aesthetic reasons for that. In response to Mayor Fanelli, he stated that the square footage included the garage area. Linda Protiva spoke as the applicant. She said that they had addressed alf the Points brought up by the Council, including reducing the height, turning the house on the lot, and reducing the square footage. She compared the proposed house to the Coughlans' house, saying that the Coughlan house was larger in proportion to the size of the lot than the proposed house. She then stated that the entrance had been improved in appearance and attractive architectural features added. Greg Grodhaus expressed concern about the inconsistency of the maps but stated that the main point should be development of a total plan for all the lots in the area. John Saunders, 14570 Aloha, stated that he was in the sphere of influence of the project. He warned the Council that there was a danger for all property owners if some property owners were not allowed to exercise their rights. He believed the project would enhance the neighborhood. Suzanne `.1oreno Lorshbough, 14475 Oak Place, felt that the project would destroy the historical ambience of the area. She reviewed the historical significance of various houses in the area and expressed the belief that the density, composition flavor and conformity to historical standards were most important, and a long -range plan should be developed to protect the neighborhood. Holly Davies, 14x78 Oak Place, expressed objections to the particular plan and to the general effect. She requested that the Council draft a memo stating that the existing Protiva residence on Lot 12 is too large for the lot and was not designed for it. She feared that whatever was approved for Lot 10 would also be built on Lot Il 3- 10/2/85 J 1/ City Manager submitted report on deferred pavement maintenance for certain streets. D. New Business from Councilmembers Hlava - reported that the Saratoga Sheriff's substation personnel would not fingerprint residents and asked that staff determine why. Hlava - reported on Paratransit Coordinating Council. Callon - reported on hearing to be held by Planning Commission for public input on use of Paul Masson property. E. Action Referral Log - No comments. Since the Council had completed all business except public hearings, Mayor Clevenger returned to that item on the agenda, taking up those for which little input was expected first. V. PUBLIC HEARING A. Amendment of General Plan Designation of Property at 20661 Fifth St. and portion of property at 14644 Oak St. from Residential - Multi - Family to Retail Ccmercial (Applicant, D. Morrison) (GPA 85 -1) (continued from 7/3) Community Development Director explained that the Planning Commission was not yet ready to make recommendations on the Village; he recommended continuing the item. The public hearing was opened at 7:35 p.m. No one appearing to speak, it was continued for 90 days. B. Ordinances granting Historical Resource designations to the Saratoga Historical Museum, Saratoga Village Library at 14410 Oak St., and McWilliams House (Office of the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce) (first reading) 7 / The public hearing was opened at 7:40 p.m. No one appearing to speak, it was closed at 7:41 p.m. HLAVA / CALLON MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE GRANTING HISTORICAL RESOURCE DESIGNATION TO THE SARATOGA HISTORICAL MUSEUM BY TITLE ONLY. Passed 3 -0. HLAVA /CLEVENGER MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE GRANTING HISTORICAL RESOURCE DESIGNATION TO THE SARATOGA VILLAGE LIBRARY BY TITLE ONLY. Passed 3 -0. HLAVA /GALLON MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE GRANTING HISTORICAL RESOURCE DESIGNATION TO THE MCWILLIAMS HOUSE BY TITLE ONLY. Passed 3 -0. �-- — C. Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to include regulations for satellite dish antennas (first reading) In response to Councilmember Hlava, City Attorney stated that the ordinance exempted the cable television franchisee from regulation. He further explained that at the time the ordinance was drafted the franchise, as well as the antenna, had been o%,ned by Saratoga Cable Television; the franchise, but apparently not the antenna, had since passed to Hearst Cablevision. Councilmember Hlava wished to provide for a hardship exemption in the ordinance. Councilmember Callon expressed concern about owners of existing installations being required to go through City processes and perhaps to move their antennas. She felt the prohibition against placing antennas in the setbacks might be unjustified if the antenna were lower than the fence. City Attorney stated the accessory structure ordinance could be changed to include these antennas. He explained other liberalizations which could be made, such as extending the time period for relocation, grandfathering in certain installations, or lengthening the amortization period. The public hearing was opened at 7:52 p.m. Charles Gors rose to speak as a seller and installer of satellite dish antennas. He informed the Council about the necessary size of antennas and type of installaticn for various levels of reception, saying that the proposed ordinance would eliminate the most effective types of antennas for this area. �y Don Jones, 18850 Ten Acres Rd., spoke as a resident of Saratoga, saving the - ordinance should be liberalized with respect to existing installations. _ zl- ' 00& (170MUCE 01 O&M)2&19 REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: 9 -26 -85 COUNCIL MEETING: 10 -2 -85 SUBJECT: CGA 8 5 -1 -,DAVID MORRISON, 20661 5th STREET AND 44 OAK STREET, AMENDMENT OF GENERAL PLAN ------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- This matter was continued to this meeting in order to review the proposed amendment of Land Use Policy LU.4.2 at the time the Village Plan was considered. The Village Merchants Association report on the Village Plan has been promised to be delivered on September 27, 1985. Therefore, we would recommend that this matter be continued for another 90 days. R rt S. Shook Director of Community Development RSS:cd CITY OF SARATOGA ' 4 AGENDA BILL NO. 8 6/11/85 Initial: Dept. lid. DATE: C. Atty. DEPARTMENT: Community Development C. Mgr. SDR -1596, John Chu, 13744 Quito Road, Appeal of Planning Commission Decision SUB�7L�C`1': Approving a 9 Lot Subdivision, Dale & Monique Drumm - Appellants Issue Su Tra y 1. The applicant requested approval of a 10 lot subdivision on 4.27 acres in the R -1- 10,000 zoning district. 2. At its meeting of May 22,1985, the Planning Commission conditionally approved only a nine (9) lot subdivision of the site because of development,constraints associated with SCVWD easements on the site and to improve the arrangement of the lots'. 3. The major concerns of the appellants are; 1) Increased traffic and parking; 2) Allowing only one story dwellings of restricted size; 3) Tree preservation and landscaping; and, 4) Repairs to Montpere Way. 'Recomyrendation 1. Staff recommended approval of the subdivision subject to conditions. 2. The Council should open the public hearing, take testimony, and close the public hearing prior to determining the merits of the appeal. 3. The Council can approve, deny or modify the approval of the proposed subdivision. 4. If the Council approves the subdivision, it must first approve the Negative Declaration. Fiscal Impacts 1. Over the short term, the City will benefit from increased property taxes due to increased property value upon completion and sale of new dwellings. There will be long term costs associated with residential development in terms of City services including pavement main- tenance. Exhibits /Attachmcnts 1. Appeal Letter 2. Staff Report dated 5/16/85 and Negative Declaration 3. Resolution No. SD- 1596 -1 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated 5/22/85 5. Exhibits Council Action 6. Correspondence received on project. 6/19:. Consensus for developer to return with alternative plan July 17. 7/17: Granted appeal subject to :conditions and staff report 5 -0. A. Name of Appellant: APPEAL APPLICATION Dale M. Drumm Date Received: Hearing Date: Fee ,�ITY USE LONLY -. Address: 18395 Montpere Way, Saratoga, CA 95070 Telephone: hm: (408)370 -6387. wk: (408)374 -2500 Name of Applicant: Project File No.: John Chu SDR =1596 Project Address: 13744 Quito Road: Project Description: Subdivision of 4.27 acre parcel into 10 single family lots. Decision Being Appealed: Approval by Planning Commission, 5 -22 -85 Grounds for the Appeal (Letter may be attached): See attached letter. RECEIVED MAY 3 01985 COMMUNITY DUaOP_MENT * e lant's Signa *Please 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 WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE DECISION. •Al t i Monique & Dale Drumm 18395 Montpere Way Saratoga, CA 95070 (408)370 -6387 Saratoga City Council City of Saratoga RE: Tentative 9 lot APN 403 -24 -5, 6 File #SD -1596 Dear Council Members: subdivision & 7. May 29, 1985 p_CEtV ED �Am 3 01985 COwajnL �0 ?Mw As one of the adjacent property owners, and on behalf of our.surrounding neighbors along Montpere Way, we wish to appeal the Planning Commission's recent recommendation for approval of the nine lot subdivision adjacent to Quito Road and connecting to Montpere Way. It is our feeling that the Planning Commission did not adequately consider the impact that this subdivision would have on our 30 year old single -story subdivision. We feel the tentative map should be denied or modified, beyond what the Planning Commission recommended, for the fol- lowing reasons: 1. We feel the project is too dense. Nine houses will in- crease traffic along Montpere Way by at least 18 cars a day. Montpere Way is a very narrow street and when cars are parked on either side two cars cannot pass each other; one must pull to the side. We feel the increased congestion will ruin the tranquil country atmosphere that now characterizes our neighborhood. The previous proposal for this site was four lots, which was accep- tacle, nine lots are far too many when the subdivision's only access is Montpere Way. 2. We feel that only one -story homes should be allowed to go in adjacent to our existing single -story subdivision. This will allow the new and the old subdivisions to blend together and become a more cohesive and compatible neighborhood. We feel that the site is large enough to provide lots which could permit one - story houses of substantial size, whose value would not be dimi- nished by the homes being one -story and this would still provide us with the privacy that we live in Saratoga for. Additionally we feel these homes should be restricted to a size compatible with our 1600 to 2000 sq. ft. homes, approximately 2500 to 3000 sq.ft. in size. Page 2 of 2 3. Several of the larger trees and many of the smaller trees will have to be removed to accomodate this proposed development. If the density could be reduced and the access road and cul -de -sac shortened, many of these trees could be saved. Additionally we feel that a condition should be imposed requiring the developer to install adequate landscaping along the south property line as well as along Quito Road. 4. We would also like to know why the developer was not required to make repairs to the existing strip of Montpere Way (which is already in need of repair) to prepare it for the increased traffic caused by this proposed developemnt. In no way is this appeal an attempt to stop the developemnt of this property, as we all knew it would occur in due time. Our only request is that what is ultimately built on this property be the right development for the property and be compatible to our existing neighborhood and homes. It is our feeling and belief that this development as approved by the Planning Commissi6n:..is not the right developemnt, unless some of our concerns are satisfied. We are the citizens of Saratoga that will have to live with the developemnt on a daily basis and who have already invested in Saratoga as a place to bring up our families. This letter will be followed by a petition, signed by the residents of Montpere Way, which is currently being circulated. cerely, v Monique & Dale Drumm 18395 Montpere Way _ r (408)370 -6387 EIA -4 Saratoga DECLARATION THAT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NOT REQUIRED (Negative Declaration) Environmental Quality Act of 1970 File No: SD -1596 The undersigned, Director of Planning and Environmental Control of the CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal Corporation, after study and evaluation has determined, and does hereby determine, pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Sections 15063 through 15065 and Section 15070 of the California Administrative Code,.and.Resolu- tion 653- of the'City of Saratoga, that the following described project wil: have no significant effect (no substantial adverse impact) on the•environmei within the terms and meaning of said Act. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Subdivision of a 4.27 acre parcel with an average slope of 4.4% into 10 Single Family Residential lots at 13774 Quito Road. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT John Chu 1160 Dawson Drive Los Altos _Hills, CA 94022 REASON FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION The proposed project will not have a significant- effect on the environment in that it is an infill project which will not require the significant extension of urban services and the impacts associ- ated with the construction of the project will be mitigated by appli- cation of existing City codes and ordinances and by the conditions created during the Building Site Approval Process. - Executed at Saratoga, California this '4` c� day of i'�! 19 B.f ROBERT S. SHOOK DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DIRECTOR'S AUTHORIZED STAFF.MEMBER it O�T Min G REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION APN: 403 -24 -S, 6 & 7 City of Saratogo *Revised: 5 /29 /85aPPROVED BY: C Date: 5/16/83ATE:_ 12 oya'8,Y Commission Meeting: 5/22/%T1A1 S: qy�. APPLICATION NO. & LOCATION: SDR -1596, 13744 Quito Road APPLICANT: John Chu OWNER: The Sumitomo Bank of California ACTION REQUESTED: Grant Tentative Map Approval for a 10 lot subdivision OTHER APPROVALS RECEIVED /REQUIRED: Final Map Approval, Design Review and Building Permits required. Reversion to acreage of previously approved map. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. ZONING: R -1- 10,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential - Medium Density- Single Family (M -10) EXISTING LAND USE: One single family dwelling and accessory structures (vacant). SURROUNDING LAND USES: Single Family Residential to the south and west; P.G.& E. easement and S.P.R.R. to the northeast. PARCEL SIZE: 4.27 Acres SLOPE AT BUILDING SITE: Gentle AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 4.423% NATURAL FEATURES & VEGETATION: The site is bordered by Wildcat Creek along the western edge of the property. Oak, maple and fruit and nut trees on site. PROJECT HISTORY: The City Council granted-Final Map Approval (SDR -1342) for a three (3) lot subdivison on the site at its meeting of November 22, 1978. The owner of the site at that time never pursued the project and has since sold it. This existing map must be reverted to acreage prior to recordation of any new final map. At the time of that previous map recordation, the easements for Santa Clara Valley Water District (S.C.V.W.D.) were established on the site. it Report to Planning Commission 5/16/85 SDR -1596; Chu(Sumitomo Bank), Quito Rd. Page 2 SUBDIVISION ISSUES: The lots proposed in this subdivsion meet minimum standards for lot width, depth and size. Five of these lots (lots 5 through 9) will be substantially constrained in development by existing and proposed S.C.V.W.D. easements. According to S.C.V.W.D., 75% of Lot 5 is covered by their easement which is not correctly shown on the map. Unless this easement is changed, Lot 5 will not be a buildable site and will have to be deleted from the map. S.C.V.W.D. has also required that the proposed cul -de -sac be located entirely outside of the easement along Wildcat Creek. The cul -de -sac will have to be shortened and this will affect the access to Lots 4 and 5. This problem could be dealt with by having these lots share a common access and driveway. Total cul -de -sac length is over 690 ft. (measured to centerline of Ravenwood Drive) so an emergency or secondary access is required. The applicant proposes an emergency access using the S.C.V.W.D. and Sanitation District easement to connect the end of the cul -de -sac to Quito Road through Lot S. S.C.V.W.D, has proposed a potential requirement that the 30 ft, wide high pressure pipeline easement running through Lots 6 through 10 be expanded to prevent excessive loads on this pipeline. ,This could make Lot 8 difficult to develop since it is a very narrow building site. However, even with this easement expansion, an over 3,000 sq. ft, single story structure could be built on the site. Lot 6 has an unusual shape and will probably require an equally unusual building design. A large almond and a large walnut tree will have to be removed to accomodate the proposed cul -de -sac. Since the cul -de -sac must be. shortened to stay out of the S.C.V.W.D. easement, a 20" oak originally in the bulb of the proposed cul -de -sac can be preserved. The remaining trees on the site can be preserved. The 18" oak. on Lot 5 can be preserved if Lots 4 and 5 share a common driveway and the emergency access road also uses this driveway. Lots 1, 2 and 10 have the potential to create the greatest impact on the adjacent residents to the south. Staff has recommended restrictions on pad elevations and structure heights to prevent adverse impacts. PROJECT STATUS: Said project complies with all objectives of the General Plan, and all requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the City of Saratoga. The housing needs of the region have been considered and have been balanced against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. It Report to Planning Commission 5/16/85 SD -1596; Chu(Sumitomo Bank), Quito Rd. Page 3 A Negative Declaration was prepared and will be filed with the County of Santa Clara Recorder's Office relative to the environmental impact of this project, if approved under this application. Said determination date: 5/8/85. The Staff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SD -1596 (Exhibit "B" filed 4/8/85) subject to the following conditions: I. GENERAL CONDITIONS Applicant shall comply with.all applicable provisions of Ordinance No. 60, including without limitation, the submission of a Record of Survey or parcel map; payment of storm drainage fee and park and recreation fee as established by Ordinance in effect at the time of final approval; submission of engineered improvement plans for any street work; and compliance with applicable Health Department regu- lations and applicable Flood Control regulations and requirements of the Fire Department. Reference is hereby made to said Ordinance for further particulars. Site approval in no way excuses compliance with Saratoga's Zoning and Building Ordinances, nor with any other Ordinance of the City. In addition thereto, applicant shall comply with the following Specific Conditions which are hereby required and set forth in accord with Section 23.1 of Ordinance No. 60. II. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A. Pay Storm Drainage Fee in effect at the time of obtaining Final Approval. B. Submit "Tract Map" to City for checking and recordation (Pay required checking & recordation fees). C. Submit "Irrevocable Offer of Dedication" to provide for a 25 ft. Half- Street on Montpere Way. D. Submit "Irrevocable Offer of Dedication" to provide easements, as required. E. Improve Montpere Way to City Standards including the following: 1. Designed Structural Section 15 ft. between centerline and flowline. Z. P.C. Concrete curb and gutter (V -24). 3. Undergrounding Existing Overhead Utilities. F. Submit "Irrevocable Offer of Dedication" to provide for a 50 ft. Half- Street on Quito Road. t'4 c c� Report to Planning Commission 5/16/85 SD -1596; Chu(Sumitomo Bank), Quito Rd. Page 4 DIA G. Improve Quito Road to City Standards, including the following: DIA 1. Designed structural section 40 ft. between centerline and flowline. DIA 2. P.C. Concrete curb and gutter (V -24). H. Construct Storm Drainage System as shown on the "Master Drainage Plan" and as directed by the City Engineer, as needed to convey storm runoff to Street, Storm Sewer or Watercourse, including the following: 1. Storm sewer trunks with necessary manholes. 2. Storm sewer laterals with necessary manholes. 3. Storm drain inlets, outlets, channels, etc. I. Construct access road 18 ft. wide plus 1 ft. shoulders using double seal coat oil and screenings or better on 6 in. aggregate base from Quito Road to Montpere Way. Note: a) The minimum inside curve radius shall be 42 ft. b) The minimum vertical clearance above road surface shall be 1S ft. c) Bridges and other roadway structures shall be de- signed to sustain 35,000 lbs. dynamic loading. d) Storm runoff shall be controlled through the use of culverts and roadside ditches. J. Construct Standard Driveway Approaches. K. Provide adequate sight distance and remove obstructions of view as required at driveway and access road intersections. L. Watercourses must be kept free of obstacles which will change, retard or prevent flow. M. No direct access allowed on Quito Road from lots. N. Protective planting required on roadside cuts and fills. 0. Engineered Improvement Plans required for: 1. Street Improvements 2. Storm Drain Construction 3. Access Road Construction c Report to Planning Commission S/16/85 SD -1596; Chu(Sumitomo Bank), Quito Rd. Page S P. Pay Plan Check and Inspection Fees as determined from Improve - - ment Plans. Q. Enter into Improvement Agreement for required improvements to be completed within one (1) year of receiving Final Approval. R. Enter into "Deferred.Improvement Agreement" for the required improvements marked "DIA ". S. Post bond to guarantee completion of the required improvements. III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - DIVISION OF INSPECTION SERVICES A. Geotechnical investigation and report by licensed professional for: 1. Soils 2. Foundation B. Plans to be reviewed by geotechnical consultant prior to build- ing permit being issued. C. Detailed on -site improvement plans showing: 1. Grading (limits of cuts, fills; slopes, cross - sections, existing and proposed elevations, earthwork. quantities) 2. Drainage details (conduit type, slope, outfall, location, etc.) 3. Retaining structures including design by A.I.A. or R.C.E. for walls 3 ft. or higher. 4. All existing structures, with notes as to remain or be removed. 5. Erosion control measures. 6. Standard information to include titleblock, plot plan using record data, location map, north arrow, sheet nos., owner's name, etc. IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 4 A. Sanitary sewers to be provided and fees paid in accordance with requirements of County Sanitation Dist. No. 4 as outlined in letter dated 4/25/85. B. Improvement plans to be submitted to the district for review and approval. � C Report to Planning Commission 5/16/85 SD -1596; Chu(Sumitomo), Quito Road Page 6 V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - CENTRAL FIRE DISTRICT A. A fire hydrant shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of any building permit. Contact should be made with the water company as soon as possible to eliminate engineering delays. B. Provide overhead clearance of 15 ft. over the road or driveway. All tree limbs, wires, etc., shall be removed. C. Emergency access road shall be provided because cul -de -sac is longer than 400 ft. VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT A. A sanitary sewer connection will be required. B. Domestic water to be provided by San Jose Water Company. VII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT A. The proposed cul -de -sac shall not encroach into any portion of any district right -of -way. B. No structures, pools, fences, gates, or major landscaping shall be contained in the S.C.V.W.D. 30 ft. easement along the northern portion of the site. Minor landscaping may be permitted if approved by the district through its permit process. C. The exact location of the 84 inch high pressure west pipeline centerline shall be located in the field and shown on the Tentative Map. * D.1._.The structures on Lots 5 (Lot 6, Exhibit "B ") through 9 (Lot 10, Exhibit "B ") shall be setback. from 7 to 16 feet from the SCVWD easement line as shown on the plan attached to the district's letter dated May 8, 1985. An easement covering this area shall be transferred to the district. rem * 2. Deep building foundations shall be designed so that no loads are transferred to the 84 inch pipe and no damage would occur to the buildings if the pipe is repaired for those portions of the structure within the additional easement in D.1. above. Foundation plans must be submitted for SCVWD review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. E. The tentative and final map shall note that an 84 inch high pressure pipeline is located in the easement and that no structures of any kind, fences, gates or any other blockage can W 1 Report to Planning Commission SD -1596; Chu(Sumitomo Bank); Quito Road C 5/16/85 Page 7 be allowed in this easement. This information shall also be recorded on deeds so that future owners are aware of these requirements. VIII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - PLANNING DIVISION A. Design Review Approval required on project prior to issuance of permits. B. Prior to issuance of building permits, individual structures Shall be reviewed by the Planning Division to evaluate the potential for solar accessibility. The developer shall pro- vide, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities on /in the subdivision/build- ing site. * C. Tree removal prohibited unless in accord with applicable City Ordinances. The existing healthy pepper trees located near the southern boundary line of the subdivision shall be preserved. D. Applicant shall file a reversion to acreage for the existing three (3) lot subdivision prior to Final Map Approval. E. The finished pad elevations for lots adjacent to the subdivision to the south shall be at the same level or lower than those existing finished pads. F. All trees that will remain on site shall be protected during construction. Tree protection methodology shall be reviewed and approved by the City tree specialist prior to issuance of building permits. In general, no impervious surface shall be allowed closer than 8 -10 ft. from an existing tree. * 67 Eots 4 end 5-theft use a common driveway to preserve the tB" oak -on Eot 5. * H. An emergency access road shall connect the cul -de -sac to Quito Road using the easement on Ect 5 and common driveweq for Eots 4 and 57 Treatment of the emergency access road and gates shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to Final Map Approval. * I. The existing S.C.V.W.D. easement on Lot 4 (previously Lot 5 on Exhibit "B ") shall be altered as shown on the Tentative Map prior to Final Map Approval. Failing this, the applicant must remove Lot 4 from the map with map alterations subject to Planning Commission review and approval. Adequate access to, and building area for, Lot 4 must be proven prior to Final Map Approval. * J. The applicant shall establish CC &R's, to be recorded with the Final Map, covering the following: 0 Report to Planning Commission 5/16/85 SD -1596; Chu(Sumitomo Bank), Quito Rd. Page 8 * 1. No structures, pools, fences, gates or major landscaping shall be placed within the Santa Clara Valley District (S.C.V.W.D.) easements particularly on Lots 5 (Lot 6, Exhibit "B ") through 9. 2. All landscaping plans for the areas within S.C.V.W.D. easements shall be reviewed and approved by S.C.V.W.D. prior to installation or issuance of a S.C.V.W.D. permit. * 3. Lots 1, 2, and 9 (Lot 10, Exhibit "B ") shall be limited to single story structures no higher than 18 ft.. * 4. Structures on Lots 5 (Lot 6, Exhibit "B ") through 9 (Lot 10, Exhibit "B ") shall comply with Condition VII.D. of this staff report. * S. Lots 3 and 4 shall be single story or single story in appearance when viewed from the rear (south). K. The CC &R's listed above shall be recorded on the deed for each lot and each homeowner shall be informed of these CC &R's prior to any purchase. These CC &R's shall be reviewed and approved by Staff prior to Final Map Approval. L. Replacement trees, in addition to the street trees required by the Subdivision Ordinance, shall be installed to replace those trees over 12" in diameter that will be removed as a result of construction. Landscaping plans showing these trees and the street trees shall be submitted for Staff review and approval prior to issuance of any building permits. Landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection /occupancy. * M. Lots 1 through 5 as shown on Exhibit "B ", shall be reduced to four (4) lots for a total of 9 lots in the subdivision. Map - revisions showing this shall be submitted for staff review and approval prior to Final Map Approval. APPROVED: Michael Flores Planner MF /dsc P.C. Agenda: 5/22/85 a I%pv ,Ilk b2 ZW 64S- h1% ago Niglio III oil V REc� MON N0. SD -1 RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP OF John Chu WHEREAS, application has been made to the Advisory Agency under the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and un- der the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Saratoga, for tenta- tive map approval of a lot, site or subdivisions of _9 lots, all as more particularly set forth in File No. SD-1596-of this City, and WHEREAS, this Advisory Agency hereby finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and im- provement, is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan and with all specific plans relating thereto, and the proposed subdivision and land use is compatible with the objectives, policies and gen- eral land use and programs specified in such General Plan, refer- ence to the approved Staff Report dated may 16 1985 being hereby made for futher particulars, an WHEREAS, this body has heretofor received and considered the (FZ:i) (Negative Declaration) prepared for this project in accord with the currently applicable provisions of CEQA, and WHEREAS, none of the conditions set forth in Subsections (a) through (g) of Government Code Section 66474 exist with respect to said subdivision, and tentative approval should be granted in accord with conditions as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the tentative map for the hereinafter described subdivision, which map is dated the 8th day of April , 19 8 5 and is marked Exhibit " B" in the hereinabovereferred to file, be and the same is hereby conditionally approved. The conditions of said approval are as more particularly set forth on Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference. The above and foregoing resolution was duly passed and adop- ted by the Planning Commission at a meeting thereof held on the 22nd day of May , 198 5, at which a quorum was present, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Burger, B. Harris, J. Harris, Peterson, Schaefer and Siegfried NOES: None . /I J I ot LOM04. Dk i59� Plannin on Page 9 M2a. u s� eeting 22/85 � Negative De ation - SD -1596 -.John Chu . 13b. SD-1596 - Jo Chu, Request for Tentative Map Approval for a -lot subdivision on 4.27 acres in the R -1- 10,000 zoning district at 13744 Quito Road aff explained the project, stating that Lot #5 is the most difficult lot to develop in the subdivision because of the Water District easements, and if the cul -de -sac is pulled further back access to this lot would essentially be eliminated, at least in terms of complying with ordinance standards. They indicated that if that is the case, then Lot #5 would have to be eliminated from the subdivision. They stated that they need to get further details from the Water District to see if their requirements can be met. They noted correspondence received from the neighboring property owners, expressing concern relative to the project. Commissioner J. Harris gave a Land Use Committee report, stating that their main concern was with the property line along the southern portion, which adjoins to an existing neighborhood. She noted that Lots #2 and #3 are about 6 ft. lower than the pads behind them, and Lots #4 and #5 about 8 -10 ft. lower. She described the pepper trees on the site. Commissioner Schaefer commented that, relative to Lots #1 -5, although the backyards look like they are 25 ft., the hill is very steep and takes up between 8 -10 ft. of depth, so there is really a backyard of about 15 ft. She stated that if those five lots were combined into four, it would make two -story homes much more logical to be put on Lots #3 and #4. The public hearing was opened at 10:20 p.m. Maurey Nelson, civil engineer, gave a presentation on the project, _ discussing the Water District easements. He stated that they would like to leave the cul -de -sac bulb where it is on the plan and have the right - of -way come right up to the oak tree. He addressed the access for the subdivision. He noted that there is a fire hydrant within 300 ft. of lots #1 and #10, and the applicant would like to be able to begin construction on these lots and at the same time do the off -site improvements. He requested that two - stories be allowed on Lots #1, #2 and #10, explaining that Lot #2 is lower than adjacent lots, and homes on Lots #1 and #10 could be designed so as to not impact the privacy of the neighbors. He also proposed that they post a bond for the landscaping. Dale Drumm, 18395 Montpere Way, spoke in opposition to the project, noting that it is too dense. He also expressed concern about a two - story structure behind his house. He requested that, if the subdivision is approved, that there be a retaining wall so he can use his property, because of the drainage. Mr. Drumm also asked that the trees be preserved. Don Adsac, 18383 Montpere, spoke in opposition, addressing the drainage and traffic circulation. He expressed concern about the privacy impact from two - stories. Mr. Nelson addressed the engineering of the drainage system. He also noted the lot sizes and the width of the proposed street. Al Woolworth, one of the developers, addressed the design of the proposed two- stories, to mitigate privacy impacts. Commissioner Burger moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Harris seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner Schaefer stated that she would favor combining Lots #1 -5 because of the particular slope that they have in the back yard, and ` because of the configuration of the land, it gives the impression that those lots would be very tight. Commissioner Burger agreed, stating that 4 lots, rather than 5, is preferable. Commissioner Peterson agreed, stating that he would like to see single -story homes on Lots #1 Planning Commission Page 16 Minutes - Meeting 5/22/85 _ SD -1596 through #4. Discussion followed on the siting of two- stories and the size of the lots in the subdivision. Commissioner Burger moved to approve the Negative Declaration for SD- 1596. Commissioner Siegfried seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 6 -0. Commissioner Burger moved to approve SD -1596, per Staff Report dated May 16, 1985, making the following changes: Lots #1, #2, #3, #4 and #5 be changed into four lots, with Staff approval; deleting specific condition G, changing the language in condition H relative to the access road, changing Condition J -5 to read that Lots #3 and #4 shall be single story or single story in appearance when viewed from the south property line, changing the numbers in the Staff Report to reflect the changes, and adding a condition that the healthy pepper trees be preserved. Commissioner B. Harris seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 6 -0. The appeal period was noted. (Commissioner Siegfried left the meeting at 10:55 p.m.) 14. V -698 - ernie and Nancy Sun, Request for Variance Approval to low an addition to maintain a 10 ft. exterior side Y rd setback where 25 ft. is required at 12541 Sara- t a- Sunnyvale Road, in the R -1- 12,500 zoning district Staff described Jhe application, stating they were unable to make the findings because here are other areas on the site where this addition could be made, and therefore recommend denial. Commissioner Burg r gave a Land Use Committee report, noting that the addition will be ery close to the street. She stated that from the existing reside n a on around the bulb, there is no fencing or landscaping. She tated that the first impression would be that the addition could be m ved farther into the back yard; however, the logical family room additi An would be off the dining room. Therefore, the committee felt that rhaps there could be some shift in the placement of the bath and the Xtorage area. The public hearing wa% opened at 10:58 p.m. Mr. Sun, the applican , stated that the proposed location was the only place where it would b feasible to have the addition of a family room. Commissioner B. Harris sked Mr. Sun why he could not extend the living room so it is flush wi h the two -car garage, and put the dining room where the back part of e living room now is and eliminate this family room, and call the dini g room the new family room. Mr. Sun commented that it would be expen ive and not feasible. He added that he is hesitant to add anything urther towards Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road. Commissioner Burger moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner J. Harris seconded the motion which was carried unanimously. Commissioner J. Harris com ented that she did not think she could make the findings; however, she ould be able to make them for a compromise if the applicant were will ng to move the patio area more towards the north and have the bath and torage someplace else. She added that she would also like to see some landscaping go up around the turnaround to screen it. She noted that here are only two homes served by the access. Commissioner Burger commented hat the major point that Commissione- ` Harris made is the fact that this is a road that serves two ho. Commissioner J. Harris explaine that she feels that is an exceptional circumstance, in that it is no the typical corner lot that is being viewed by into their neighborhood. Commissioner Peterson added that - 10 - 11 1^ nEL3�cn lEnc- inErc:unc CIVIL ENGINEERING SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION 21601 STEVENS CREEK BLVD, SUITE 7 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 (408) 257 -6452 422 SAN BENITO ST. HOLLISTER, CA 95023 (408) 637 -2682 Mr. William Carlson Santa Clara Valley Water District 5750 Almaden Expressway San Jose, Calif. 95118 May 17, 1985 Subject: Quito Road Estates, John Chu, Saratoga Number SD -1596 Dear Mr. Carlson: I am in receipt of the copy of your letter that was addressed to Ms. Kathy Kerdus regarding the subject project. Per our subsequent discussions we are aware that your agency has an easement that currently passes through the proposed lot 5. I have shown the easement on the revised tentative map and have enclosed a copy for your records. Since the proposed subdivision will extend Montpiere Way as a public road, the Santa Clara Valley Water District ( SCVWD) will have access to the Wild Cat Creek easement through this new road. I understand that SCVWD will Quit Claim upon recordation of the final tract map, the right of way that is southerly of the 20 ft. wide sewer easement as it passes through the proposed lot 5. The location of the cul —de —sac bulb as it is shown on the attached tentative map is at least 25 feet from the southerly toe of the bank of Wild Cat Creek. This distance represents the 2:1 side slope plus 15 feet criteria as discussed in your letter addressed to Ms. Kerdus. I understand, therefore, that the Location of the proposed cul —de —sac is acceptable to you. If the bulb is Located completely out of the SCVWD easement, the access to lot 5 will have to be eliminated. With regards to the 84 —inch high pressure West Pipeline, Mr. Chu has elected to design the foundations for the buildings of lot's 7, 8, 9, and 10 with a pier and grade beam foundation if the buildings come within the -restricted — area as indicated in your letter. The piers can be placed at a sufficient depth to avoid transmitting building loads on the pipe. In the event that the buildings are placed within the restricted area, the foundation will locally incorporate a cut off wall so as to preclude the possibility of structural damage in the event of an excavation within the easement. r �• I appreciate your cooperation to date regarding this project and hope that the above diiscussion will satisfy your agency's concerns. Please contact me if you have any questions or additional comments regarding this matter. cc: Mr. John Chu Mr. Michael Flores Very truly yours, Ov6- uw� //r t- Marius E. Nelsen President, M. E. Nelsen Engineering and Construction, Inc. Cal. Lic. RCE 20597 0 1 JUN a 1985 <2 fl A ---i C-/l Goa si I - Donald and Linda Collins 18407 Montpere Wy. Saratoga, CA. 95070 378 -2729 Saratoga City Council Sub:Nine lot subdivision APN 403 -24 -5, 6, 7 Dear Virginia Laden Fanelli, June 1, 1985 This letter is to inform you of our objection to the planning commision's recommendation of approval of the proposed nine lot subdivision(file no. SD -1596) adjacent to my home. We feel that this project, as it is proposed will have a significant negative impact on our neighborhood. The two factors having the greatest impact on the existing neighborhood are the project's density and it's incorporation of two story homes into the project. Adding nine homes to Montpere Way will cause a 60% increase in traffic through our neighborhood. As it is now, with no sidewalks on Montpere, we have to carefully watch for cars when whenever our children are riding their bikes or walking to school. The property to be developed is currently divided into four parcels. We think this is a reasonable density. Since all the existing homes in the neighborhoods surrounding the project are single story, building the proposed two story structures would greatly degrade the privacy of the families now living on Montpere Way. Also, since the proposed lots are at least one third larger than that of adjacent homes, adequately sized single story homes of the 2,500 to 3,000 sq. ft. type could be built. We are deeply concerned about- this development and would appreciate anything you can do to help us with this matter. Yours truly, Donald and Linda Collins 18407 Montpere Way Saratoga @Cq REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: 7/11/85 COUNCIL MEETING: 7/17/85 SUBJECT: SD -1596 - John Chu, 13744 Quito Road Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Approving a 9 -Lot Subdivision ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At its meeting of June 19, 1985, the City Council held a public hearing on the above referenced item. As a result of that hearing, the Council requested that the applicant prepare alternate subdivision layout and circulation patterns to address the concerns expressed by area residents. The applicant has prepared four (4) possible subdivision and circulation layouts. All four (4) configurations will allow a 9 -lot subdivision of the site. Configuration "A" is the original 9 -lot subdivision proposal with the extension of Montpere Way as a cul -de -sac. Configuration "B" is the layout suggested by the City Council which extends Montpere Way to Quito Road which would provide greater through circulation for the Montpere Way /Ravenwood Drive area. This option, as expressed by the Council, would also entail the closure of the eastern intersection of Montpere Way and Quito Road. Configuration "C" would have a cul -de -sac connecting the lots with Quito Road rather than providing access via Montpere Way. Configuration "D" is a mix of a cul -de -sac connecting 3 lots to Quito Road with another cul -de -sac connecting Montpere Way providing access to six (6) lots. ANALYSIS Staff has concerns with each of the three (3) new configurations (B, C and D) proposed by the applicant. All three (3) new configurations would violate Section 13.3 -12 of the Subdivision Ordinance which requires that streets entering on opposite sides of the same street be directly opposite each other or offset by at least 250 feet. The Quito Road access to the site would be only 162 ft. north (measured from centerline to centerline) from the western intersection of Montpere Way and Quito Road. It should be 1 Report to Mayor and City Council 7/11/85 SD -1596, John Chu, Quito Road Page 2 noted that eastern and western intersections of Montpere Way and Quito Road are offset by about 25 ft. In addition to this problem, Configuration "B" would require the taking of some property from 4 existing lots at or near the existing eastern intersection of Montpere Way to create an adequate cul -de -sac closure of Montpere Way. This could impact the existing use and setbacks of these properties. If these property owners do not voluntarily dedicate or sell portions of their property for the needed right -of -way, then the City may, at its discretion, use its powers of eminent domain to take the required portions, however, this is unlikely. Configuration "B" would also allow more traffic to pass by certain existing lots near the eastern terminus of Montpere Way as well as through the proposed subdivision itself. This violates Section 13.3 -15 of the Subdivision Ordinance which states that street arrangements shall discourage through traffic within the subdivision unless the street is designated by the General Plan as an arterial or collector street. Montpere Way is not so designated. Configuration "C" violates the General Plan policy which limits cul -de -sac length to 500 ft. unless an emergency access is provided. Configuration "A" is also longer than 500 ft. but an emergency access was provided consistent with the requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance. Configuration "C" would create no new traffic on Montpere Way but would provide an additional access point onto Quito Road which staff feels should be avoided to minimize potential traffic conflicts. In general, access points onto arterial roads should be limited. It should be noted that the adjacent property to the north will eventually be developed and will probably require access onto Quito Road. This could create three (3) intersections on the same side of Quito Road within arelatively short distance. Both Configurations "B and C" would require more of the site area to be taken up by impervious surface (street improvements) than the original proposal. Both could also require the removal of at least 3, and maybe 4, additional trees over 12" in diameter. Two (2) of these trees are oak trees which both the Planning Commission and staff worked to save. These configurations also severely limit the building envelope of Lot 4 to a narrow triangular shape which will make development of this lot difficult. Configuration "D" appears to be a compromise layout with access to both Montpere Way and Quito Road. New traffic (about two - thirds of the original proposal) would access onto Montpere Way. The reduction in traffic impacts on Montpere Way would not really be significant considering the limited size of the development. This configuration also jeopardizes the preservation of two (2) additional ordinance sized trees when compared to the original proposal. Lot 4 would also be difficult to develop because of its narrow triangular shape. K Report to Mayor & City Council SD -1596, John Chu, Quito Road RECOMMENDATION 7/11/85 Page 3 Considering the factors listed above, and the fact that the project will generate only about 11 trips during the peak traffic hour, staff would recommend that the original proposal of Configuration "A" be approved. Approved:_ 3 Michael Flores Planner • • LANDS OF .p Y I GRAVES , his. w' E tle.3a i N' EXIST MA LE YPt8, SIX Si -46.57 SCALE; t" = SO' r J i _ANDS Of 5RAVES I h 39• F•6' E\ ` FylSJ A p CCt 1 F 8•• F• EfTF9fy, E,' E�4 °� 0 1` (r:,CCA� CREE, I 1 N a6. 36'E '� ♦' (! 60 0 TA 53, 8� • _ I 26.25 LOT b OT 6 i I I N 261521E / �, /� I C` �� ♦��~' EySJ I I .r7c.• :Ni• E. .. 69.47 °r'6 ! C '4, IEASEMENTr �'' / N ! i I LO N eYT AO' _ ��` 0 95 6° O _ ANiEN-iI: .:A._ I �h 48A01'E 1 \. © 5B" A.. E i 69.88 %N� ( • 1 I i \/ / `� i 2 95 - z LOT 8 FFFR- -ONT SEi CK, TTV. -t' �` �� \ ` / _ ��• {� / r T.\ F1 F \ i... 1+0% 1I' v / !`cE LOT 4 1 / 3 I 2 _ _ -iOT 1 ,o �`F SAN i0nA5 J \ ' - STA 5U, y 2 I lA" • - _ 8.. , . LOT 9 25' REAR SE TEiAC[, 1TP, _ '45 1ti. • �__ r — --- _ -- - tt0 ='` ._��� ._..Li' aE, "rR,- __ - - _ __ _. - s 8A't0'Y 719_ TT7 _ANDS ,f A 1 F�..�EIIOCAiEOM '- hD_ 7F I - . I I _INI`� - LARDS OF . S,C•!SU L NF ANSCI[ EIROrLES LANDS OF 1 a c 1 LANDS OF F _ ;EANDRES o - I ALLEN EIE:. nF "S = 7 I - c 8_ . TRACT 110. is" CONFIGURATION A. EASEMENT TO E 1 LANDS OF N _ GRAVES \ N W 40-E 116. o . • �- EXIST. PLUME WiA, STA 5346.57 t � � fir• / LANDS OF . GRAVES F4( ,�F S N 39' 1 WE _ Od.• .. fF f ' 4 a 30.21 / I fr�Ai Syr D .D 0 o za.zs f�f?16''� LOT 5 LOT 6/ �! F EXISTING S.C.Y.V.D. 6Q.47 25' SETBACK, Trc -. 4— 6. i EASEMENT LOT 7�'. ' Q 79.07 A _ 1g" g---) 8°01' C h 16 X59.88 ! 168.00 -• ' �/ _- ` LOT 8 - - J 168" c 85.00 I' T" Qt . A � .. T 0' PM i 10' SETBACK T @ - irV. 6 v // � 7r � 12' P . �/ ► I LOT x (_ -� LOT 1 \ E QUITC�AIME� _ e- lOT 3 ,a••. _ �: .� \ LOT 9 I j la„ LOT 4 I f —ZS' SETBACK IYR. - L E_ _ 135.00 _ -278 - FENCEILOCATION J I LANDS OF LANDS OF LANDS OF LANDS OF LANDS OF LANDS OF LANDS 0; vii_ LANDS 91 MEEK SUCHSLAND COLLINS DRUW ANSOK BROYLES LEANDRES o� - A�iac :I ELEVATION OF LOTS : 278 • 1 TRACT NO. 1866 C®NFIGURATIOU B l i 0' S, Q12" EASEMENT TO 4 O I LANDS OF GRAY Iot \ \ GRAVES ' \ M WE 1 \ EXIST. NA7MOLE YPK8, S7At6.57 SCALE: 7" 50' i ��\JJJytNR:J/yyy\ yf LANDS OF ..J ; �`. ` �,'\ \ \ c �E GRAVES -.� �' ,j ` , . \\ /•F7, f4�E� J . Jr. 9� �y M 39'46'1 30.21 io �'� N 46' 36'E .. o! 26.25 _ �= j LOT 6 LOT 6/ EXISTING S.C.V.Y.D. 6,47 /- / 25, SETEMCK� TTPjj V / \F'sv� •� _ Af�7 �f EASEMENT �' 1 t 15 LOT 7./t .•\ ♦° Or_ - ^�' NE aC•' :!!A. 7ATER _INF N 62.46 • E `, , / . / . _ \ i / ` `. ` ��• �o N La'01'E 79.02 �.' / .' 20" a" A lg« • �.��` v / •\`� �� `.�, . i J\ � '1E «.o F - 4e.00 -; a'• __ -� � � \ LOT 8 (� ; �r � 1 , / 10' SETH11C14 ., ' ^ �O ' •,�', / /i 6.. P G -LO ( II \� Q C SAN 'ONES 12' P T �.1, LOT 1 � I � � Aa�� ?no caEc. QUIT Ai�t - - - - -� r- AILOT 31 la' —� _ �! LOT -9 r \ 1 LOT 41 �� —�` I " 2S' SETBACK TTP. �� 1.E, `�� j -- I '•�� . — y " FENCE LOCATION i LAIEDS OF I LANDS OF I LANDS OF I LAWS OF LANDS OF _ LANDS OF LANDS OF n ' LANDS Oi MEEK SUCNSLAND j COLLINS DRUIMI I ANSOK I BROTLES LEANORES =I ALLEN ELEVATION OF LOTS= 279 - CURVE DATA TRACT NO. 1866 CURVE R CONFIGURATION C EASEMENT TO 4 LANDS Of GRAVES E►ISI. K"o-otE WPN?t, Sill ��,16.57 SC -Arc: LANDS OF GRAVES S • 39*46*E " 30.21 4Z eC zt, LOT TRACT NO. 1866 CONFIGURATION D 26.25 I LOT 5 . x I.. 26V* 52 E 69.47 j EASEMENT- MI- QLOT 7 N, A .t *4 lAr 4 6e 46, E 7 A ol E 201, pp koD, LOT 8 6 M olo 00olo. 6- p > P SOT 2 2- F I LOT I QUITO A'IME'&,, LOT 4 I LOT LO T 9 25, SE78AC a, P. J--- MAD ---------- so, 60. - F 10% LANDS Of LANDS Of LANDS Of LANDS Of LANDS OF LANDS OF A LANDS OF Mai i LANDS OF REEK SUCHSLAND COLLINS DRLFMM ANSM BROYLES LFANDRES ALLEN ELEVATION Of LOTS TRACT NO. 1866 CONFIGURATION D 7/16/85 To the Saratoga City Council: The attached articles relate to the problem of electromagnetic waves produced by power lines. Attached are two that have direct relation to electrical wiring and cancer and are the most recent articles available in the field. Both show a direct correlation. Out of 40 citations in the most recent article, only one study does not show a correlation; all the rest do. This would not seem to be a controversial issue. These studies provide the basis to require wide setbacks frcam the Power lines. There is a basis for 129' setbacks from the very high currents which are running through these wires. I am sorry I did not participate in the hearings on the other issues; I did not realize they were going on. Cheriel Jensen rjernational Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 11, No. 4 0,ford University Press 1982 Printed in Great Britain Adult Cancer Related to Electrical Wires Near the Home NANCY WERTHEIMER• AND ED LEEPER Wertheimer N (Department of Preventative Medicine and Community Health, Box C -245, University of Colorado Medical Center, 4200 East Ninth Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80262, USA) and Leeper E. Adult Cancer Related to Electrical Wires Near the Home. International Journal of Epidemiology 1982.11: 345 -355. Like childhood cancer, adult cancer was found to be associated with high- current electrical wiring configurations IHCCs) near the patients residence. Such wiring can expose occupants of the residence to alternating magnetic fields (AMFs) at a level which, though very low, may produce physiological effects. Several patterns in the data suggest that HCCs and cancer may be causally linked: (t) a dose - relationship was found. (2) The association did not appear to be an artefact of age, urbanicity, neighbourhood, or socioeconomic level. (3) The association was most clearly demonstrable where cancer caused by urban/industrial factors was least apt to obscure the effect. (4) A distinct pattern of latency between first exposure to the HCC and cancer diagnosis was seen, which is consistent with a hypothesis of cancer promotion produced by AMF exposure. In earlier work we found that children with cancer were more likely than control children to live in homes near hieh- current electric wires (homes with High Current Configurations, or HCCs).' One possible explanation of this finding is that the low level, alternating magnetic fields (AMFs) produced by such wires influence the development of cancer. Electric wiring inside the home ordinari.y does not contribute to AMF exposure because the supply and return currents run in two wires wrapped closely to- gether, so the AMFs produced by those currents cancel each other. There is a similar balancing of currents in the distribution wires outside the home, but the AMFs ire only partially cancelled because these distribution wires are often separated in space. More importantly, some of the current supplied usually returns through alternative ground paths (such as the plumbing), so supply and return currents are unbalanced, and a measurable AMF results. In our experience, household AMFs from nearby dis, tribution wires rarely exceed a few milligauss (see Table 2B). That field is weak in comparison, for instance, with the earth's DC (direct current) magnetic field of about 0.5 gauss, but it is strong in comparison with naturally occurring 60 Hz AC (alternating current) fields (about I" gauss=): At power line frequencies, magnetic fields (unlike the more frequently studied electric fields) penetrate build - ings and 'human bodies readily. Furthermore, AC fields Department of Preventative Medicine and Community Health. Box 6245, University of Colorado Medical Center, 4200 East Ninth Avenue. Denver, Colorado 80262. USA. F 345 (unlike DC fields) can induce currents in static human tissue. Depending on the resistivity of the tissue and the size of the tissue loop assumed, eddy current densities of 500 pA /cm2 or more may be induced (and maintained for long periods) in the bodies of some people living in HCC homes. Currents not too different from these (or tissue voltage gradients which could produce such currents) have been associated with a number of physio- logical effects,' including cellular dedifferentiation4 and nervous system effects.` Stronger (but still very small) currents have been shown to affect growth and re- generation processes.9 Thus it appears that AMFs of extremely low fre- quency and intensity can produce physiological effects. Our epidemiological work suggests that prolonged exposure to such fields may influence the development of cancer. PROCEDURE The Samples In four separate field samples the wiring observed near the homes of adult cancer cases'and matched controls was coded according to criteria developed in our child- hood study.' For two of these field samples, represent- ing the Colorado towns of Boulder and Longmont, respectively, data from all cancer death certificates for town residents from 1967 through 1975 were collected, and a control bank consisting of the next three death certificates from the same town, but due to a nor. - cancer cause, was assembled. From this bank a control was chosen for each case, matched for sex, for age and year of death (within five years), and (in almost all cases) for 346 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY socioeconomic level.' These cases and controls were then traced in old phone books and city directories to determine their address history over the 10 years pre- ceding diagnosis of cancer in the case. We also used cancer survivors in our samples. These were cancer cases listed in the Colorado Cancer Registry as having a life - threatening form of cancer, diagnosed five or more years previously, who were living and without known recurrence in 1979. (A cancer was defined as life- threatening if over half of the, cancer registry patients listed with the same type and stage of cancer had died within five years of diagnosis.) There were few such survivors in our Longmont and Boulder samples, however, because hospitals in these towns have supplied data to the cancer registry only very recently. Controls for these few survivors were taken from a random sample of living subjects (who were respon- dents in a random telephone survey conducted in Boulder and Longmont for an unrelated research project), and were matched for age, sex, and socio- economic level of residential census tract. Two other samples were gathered representing (1) residents of the city of Denver and (2) residents of the Denver suburbs. Cancer death certificates for 1977 from these areas were sampled as follows: All cancer cases dying through the (arbitrarily chosen) age of 62 were included, except those dying of lung cancer, where only every other certificate was used in the sample and every other case dying after age 62 was included, except that only every fourth such lung cancer case was included. The reduced representation of older cancer cases and lung cancer cases kept the sample to a manageable size, while still yielding an adequate sample of older cancers and lung cancers. Since cancer sur- vivors tend to be young, and rarely have lung cancer, we included all of the survivors (selected, as above) in our samples. In each of our four samples only cases whose address history could be traced in the sampling area for at least four years prior to cancer diagnosis were retained, and the address at which the case had spent most of the period from three to ten years prior to diagnosis was the address coded and used in our analyses. Control ' Socioeconomic levels were determined from census tract data, using a scoring method baseJ on income, education, and household crowd- ing developed by Morton.10 For 47 (9%) of the Boulder and Longmont case - control pairs the I>est match available paired a moderate socio- economic level home with a high or low socioeconomic level home, with case homes overall being insignificantly higher in socioeconomic level than control homes. Since lower socioeconomic level homes tended to show HCC:: somewhat more often than higher socio- economic level homes, this slight mismatching might have worked against our overall fincing of more HCCs in cases than controls. However, we were unable to detect any important bias resulting from such mismatching in any of our analyses. addresses for the Boulder and Longmont samples were chosen in the same manner. For the Denver and Suburban samples, no random sample of living subjects with known age and sex was available to us, and since there were many cancer sur- vivors in these samples (for whom non - cancer death certificates could not be considered an appropriate control group), we had to generate the controls in another way. For these two samples a neighbourhood control address was chosen for each address. These control addresses were taken from the 1970 city directory, chosen randomly from those addresses within two blocks in each direction of the case address. Apartment house case addresses were matched with apartment house control addresses.t This gave us a dis- tribution of control homes which should, by and large, represent the same kind of homes as those occupied by the cancer cases. In fact, these control addresses were often constrained, by their nearness to the case address, to share a number of characteristics with the respective case address: In such a small area, any three -phase primary line which runs near the case home is also apt to be present (or branch lines of it) near the control address as well; also backyard length (which in our area generally represents the distance to the wires) is apt to be similar for most houses within a neighbourhood; and any remarkable feature such as a sub - station in the area virtually guarantees that most nearby homes will be near the large -gauge primary lines that disperse in all directions from the sub - station. These constraints on the controls, tending to make them `artefactually' similar to the cases, will tend to decrease the probability of demonstrating case - control differences. To help counteract this problem, the cate- gorizing of wiring configurations used in this study was refined somewhat over that used in our previous work (see Coding of wires, below). Because of differences in availability of data and in sampling procedures, our samples differed in age dis- tribution and in the proportion of cancer survivors. Table l shows these distributions. Coding of wires In coding high and low current configurations, five major classes of distribution wires were considered: Class ! Multiple (six or more non - grounded wires) or t It is probably worth noting that, for the 76 large (over 10 units) apartment buildings in our entire sample, no association was observed beta een cancer and the wiring running past the apartment being code J. In future studies we feel it would be wise to omit apartment house addresses, since localized exposure to AMFs in ipartrncrlt buildings is often dominated by unbalanced current running in di" trtbutiun cables (serving other apartments in the building) which arc hidden in the walls and ceilings —and are therefore uncodable. � f i. CANCER AND ELECTRIC WIRES TABLE I Distribution ojcaneer cases in jour samples Sample Age at diagnosis i <55 55 -69 70+ Total Grand t Alive Dead Alive Dead Alive Dead Alive Dead Total Longmont 2 33 6 59 3 91 11 183 194 Boulder 5 47 10 114 2 143 17 304 321 Denver Suburbs 48 60 30 79 5 33 83 172 255 Central Denver 63 43 65 103 36 99 164 245 409 Total 118 183 111 355 46 366 275 904 1179 !hi,.k three -phase primary or high tension wires, which tic generally installed wherever a high current flow is CtiFected. (Wires were coded as 'thick' if they were dcarly thicker than the standard secondary wires which, in our area, are commonly available for com- parison.) Class 2 Thin three -phase primary wires, which do not have as high a current - carrying capacity as thick or multiple wires. Class? First -span secondary wires, by which we mean that span of secondary wires running between the pole with a transformer and the first service drops 'downstream' that are not attached at (or very close to) the transformer pole. (In our area these first down - rream service drops typically are taken off the next power pole downstream from the transformer pole.)' Class 4(a) Second -span secondary wires, defined as a flan of secondaries separated from any transformer by at least one intervening service drop beyond those drops Liken off the transformer pole. (The first span of secon- daries served by the transformer will carry more current than this second span because the first span must carry current for all the drops that mark its distal end, plus whatever current the second span requires.) (b) 'Short' first -span secondary wires, defined as any first -span wires which serve no more than two single - family homes, on the average. (This class will include usy span of secondary wires coming from a trans - 'ormer which serves only two homes; also, where two transformers send first -span wires to a cluster of four single - family service drops situated between the two transformers, each transformer is assumed to serve an average of two single -family homes, and the two spans Of wires between the cluster of four drops and the trans - formers on either side are each coded as 'short' first - tFan wires.) Class S End -pole situations. This classification refers t,) the case where a house is situated beyond the end- ' Since PCBs tPolychlorinamd biphenyls) are carcinogens and were ;Ki in se ne transformers, we should point out that they are not a '+sible factor in our HCC- cancer association. In our area PCBs were 'per used in pole - mounted transformers. 347 pole of the distribution line, and it is considered the extreme example of a low current configuration because no distribution lines at all run past the house (except for an occasional thin, single -phase primary line). It should be noted that thin single -phase primaries (which are ubiquitous in our area) were ignored through- out our coding. Unlike secondary wires or the three - phase primary wires, they characteristically carry very low currents and produce little magnetic field. In general it is possible to say that the greatest (and probably also the most continuous) current flow is to be expected in the wires described in Class 1, with pro- gressively diminishing expected current levels in the suc- ceeding classes of wires. Field readings taken beneath many characteristic examples of electric wires confirm the expected ordering (see Table 2A). In our original study we generally distinguished only two categories of wiring configurations: High Current Configurations (HCCs) and Low Current Configura- tions (LCCs). To facilitate the pair- comparisons used in the present study, we have distinguished four categories of wiring configurations: Very high current configurations (VHCCs): this category includes homes which have Class 1 wires running past them at a distance (measured perpendicu- larly to the wires) of less than 15 m (50 feet)t, and /or Class 2 wires running past them at a distance of less than 7.5 m (25 feet). Ordinary high current configurations (OtfCCs): this category includes all other homes with wiring con- figurations coded as HCCs in our original work. That is: homes with Class l wires within '15-39.5-m (50 -129 feet); homes with Class 2 wires within 7.5 -19.5 m (25 -64 feet); or homes with Class 3 wires within 0-15 m (0-50 feet). Ordinary low current configurations (OLCCs): this category includes homes with all other configurations except end -pole configurations; that is, all homes classed t The distances specified for each type of wire were chosen before the coding began, and were guided by a rough estimate of what the median field would be at a given distance from each type of wire (see Table 2B for approximate median values, as measured). 348 as LCCs in our original study except for the end -pole homes. The end pole situation (End - poles): this category includes the homes situated beyond the end -pole of a distribution line. Wires more than 40 m (130 feet) from the house being coded were ignored. Pair comparisons We determined which member of a case - control pair had the higher current configuration as follows: (1) if the wiring near the two homes was classed into two different categories (VHCC, OHCC, OLCC, End - pole), then the home in the highest category was con- sidered to have the higher current configuration. (2) if both homes were classed in the same category, then: (a) the house with the highest current class of wires nearby (thick primaries, thin primaries, etc.) was considered to have the higher current configuration, pro- vided it was at least as close to the pertinent wires as the house with the lower current wires. (Distances differing by only 10% or less were considered equivalent.) (b) if both homes had- the same class of wires running past them, then the house closest to those wires was considered to have the higher current con- figuration. (c) if the first home had higher current wires running past it than the second, but was farther from those wires than the second home was from its lower current wires, the distance factor and the current flow factor were presumed to cancel each other out, and the two homes were considered equivalent in current con- figuration, as were two homes where the same class of wires ran at the same distance (within 10 %) of each home. In the relatively rare instances where more than one distribution line ran within 40 m of the house, only the line providing the highest current configuration poten- tial was considered in the comparison. Field strength In our work we have used %bring configurations rather than direct AMF measurements as an index to prob- able AMt• exposure, for three reasons: (1) It would be very difficult to gain access to the homes of interest in order to take measurements there. (2) Large hourly, seasonal, and long -term variations in current use occur, making any one measurement of AMFs taken in the present a poor index of the typical field to be expected from a given residential situation — especially since we are interested in historical exposures. And (3), since we believe that relatively continuous exposure to AMFs (even at quite low levels) may be more effective than relatively brief but strong exposures, it is not clear that field strength measurements give us the information we really want; wiring configurations give clues to expected continuity of exposure as well as to strength of field. Nonetheless, measurements taken in homes would be of interest. We have approximated such measurements by taking readings just outside a number of representa- tive houses which were accessible because they were next to a side street. (None of these side streets used for access had distribution lines running along them.) Since houses are essentially transparent to AMFs, measure- ments taken just outside a house generally approximate the ambient field within the house. We have also taken measurements inside about 2 homes, and these measurements agree well with the much more numerous measurements presented in Table 2B. Both sources indicate that, in most of the area of the house, ambient AMF level is largely due to fields generated by the distribution lines running past the house, especially where those lines show an HCC. Indoor wiring, as explained previously, contri u c negligibly. Some household appliances do prod ANIFs. but these sources usually act essentially as dipoles, with the fields falling off very quickly (approxi- mately as the cube of the distance from the source (see Table 2C)). Fields due to the distribution wires. in contrast, fall off more slowly: that component due to separation of the wires falls off roughly as the square of the distance to the wires. and that due to an unbalanced current flow falls off only as the first power of distance to the wires. The differences in attenuation WILO distance of these three types of fail-off is dramatic. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY TABLE 2A Daytime 60 Hz magnetic field measurements (in gauss) 75 cm above ground, under wires) (Fields measured about High Thick Thin Second- 'Short' Single - tension 3 -phase 3 -phase First -span span secondaries secondaries first -span secondaries phase primaries wires primaries primaries (N =51) (N =84) (N =73) (N =42) (N =45) (N =40) (N =64) Maximum 0.027 0.035 0.008 0.005 0.004 0.6A 0.0035 O.4.8 0.002 0 Median 0.006 0.007 0.0022 0.0017 10.1 6 8 0.0 % > 0.003 gauss 723 73.4 353 as LCCs in our original study except for the end -pole homes. The end pole situation (End - poles): this category includes the homes situated beyond the end -pole of a distribution line. Wires more than 40 m (130 feet) from the house being coded were ignored. Pair comparisons We determined which member of a case - control pair had the higher current configuration as follows: (1) if the wiring near the two homes was classed into two different categories (VHCC, OHCC, OLCC, End - pole), then the home in the highest category was con- sidered to have the higher current configuration. (2) if both homes were classed in the same category, then: (a) the house with the highest current class of wires nearby (thick primaries, thin primaries, etc.) was considered to have the higher current configuration, pro- vided it was at least as close to the pertinent wires as the house with the lower current wires. (Distances differing by only 10% or less were considered equivalent.) (b) if both homes had- the same class of wires running past them, then the house closest to those wires was considered to have the higher current con- figuration. (c) if the first home had higher current wires running past it than the second, but was farther from those wires than the second home was from its lower current wires, the distance factor and the current flow factor were presumed to cancel each other out, and the two homes were considered equivalent in current con- figuration, as were two homes where the same class of wires ran at the same distance (within 10 %) of each home. In the relatively rare instances where more than one distribution line ran within 40 m of the house, only the line providing the highest current configuration poten- tial was considered in the comparison. Field strength In our work we have used %bring configurations rather than direct AMF measurements as an index to prob- able AMt• exposure, for three reasons: (1) It would be very difficult to gain access to the homes of interest in order to take measurements there. (2) Large hourly, seasonal, and long -term variations in current use occur, making any one measurement of AMFs taken in the present a poor index of the typical field to be expected from a given residential situation — especially since we are interested in historical exposures. And (3), since we believe that relatively continuous exposure to AMFs (even at quite low levels) may be more effective than relatively brief but strong exposures, it is not clear that field strength measurements give us the information we really want; wiring configurations give clues to expected continuity of exposure as well as to strength of field. Nonetheless, measurements taken in homes would be of interest. We have approximated such measurements by taking readings just outside a number of representa- tive houses which were accessible because they were next to a side street. (None of these side streets used for access had distribution lines running along them.) Since houses are essentially transparent to AMFs, measure- ments taken just outside a house generally approximate the ambient field within the house. We have also taken measurements inside about 2 homes, and these measurements agree well with the much more numerous measurements presented in Table 2B. Both sources indicate that, in most of the area of the house, ambient AMF level is largely due to fields generated by the distribution lines running past the house, especially where those lines show an HCC. Indoor wiring, as explained previously, contri u c negligibly. Some household appliances do prod ANIFs. but these sources usually act essentially as dipoles, with the fields falling off very quickly (approxi- mately as the cube of the distance from the source (see Table 2C)). Fields due to the distribution wires. in contrast, fall off more slowly: that component due to separation of the wires falls off roughly as the square of the distance to the wires. and that due to an unbalanced current flow falls off only as the first power of distance to the wires. The differences in attenuation WILO distance of these three types of fail-off is dramatic. CANCER AND ELECTRIC w'IRES TABLE 2B Daytime 60 Hz magnetic fields measured next to the part of the house nearest to the distribution wires' VHCC house OHCC house OLCC house End -pole house (N =56) (N =134) (N =186) (N =41) Maximum G.01 0.008 0.003 0.0014 Median 0.0025 0.0012 < 0.0005t < 0.0005t % > 0.003 gauss 28.6 10.4 1.1 0.0 These fields will generally approximate the ambient field inside the part of the house nearest the wires. t The lowest measurement we regularly used was '< 0.0005'. VHCC = Very high current configuration; OHCC = Ordinary high current configuration; OLCC = Ordinary low current configuration. Thus, except for some small areas close to energized appliances (and some areas around plumbing which may be carrying a small unbalanced current), the ambient level of AMF exposure experienced by a house- hold resident will usually depend on current patterns in the distribution wires running near his house even though they are considerably more distant than sources in the house. Fields from distribution wires will gener- ally provide the major source of any prolonged exposure. Blind coding While waiting for funding, one of us (N.W.) coded all the addresses while aware of which were cases and 349 which controls, hoping to gain new ideas about what aspects of the general environment and the wiring were associated with cancer. We planned additional 'blind' coding of all addresses, but our funding expectations were overoptimistic. We were only able to find funds for blind recoding of 140 of our 1179 case - control pairs (35 pairs from each of our four samples). We chose these pairs randomly from the pairs with cancer diagnosis before age 55, since it was in such pairs that the strong HCC- cancer association we wished to verify occurred. Fortunately, in most instances the coding appeared to be quite unambiguous. For 120 (85.7%) of the 140 pairs the same case - control relationship was found by the blind and the not -blind coders. For 12 pairs (8.6 %) the TABLE 2C Examples of 60 H: magnetic fields from some indoor sources Major source of field Maximum field next to at I m at 1.5 m casing (3 feet) (5 feet) Transformers: radio 0.9 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 fluorescent light 1.4 0.0005 < 0.0005 colour TV 0.1 0.0008 < 0.0005 Motors: electric drill 25.0 0.002 < 0.0005 table fan 4.5 0.0015 0.0005 large window fan 0.4 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 hair drver 3.4 0.0005 < 0.0005 Heating elements: = broiler 0.14 < 0.0005 ` < 0.0005' portable heaters: 300 watt 0.13 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 3000 watt .0.38 0.002 0.0005' 5600 watt 0.75 0.004 0.001 electric blanket 2.5' 0.0005 < 0.0005 Unbalance current: house plumbing (median of 332 examplest) 0.2t 0.002t 0.0013 • The electric blanket field, directly against the blanket, measured 2.5 gauss when maximized for a I cm coil. 0.01.`, gauss when maximized for a 15 cm coil. (Each coil averages the field in the encircled area.) t Current generally runs in the house plumbing only from the point at which the house ground -wire is attached to the plumbing to the point where the plumbing enters the house. That current continues in the outside plumbing. rela,ively unchanged, to the point where the house supply -pipe joins the main street plumbing. Our readings were takt n a little over 60 cm above ground, over the supply -pipes to 332 houses (about 1.5 m from most supply pipes). The median field at this distance indicated a median current -flow in the pipes of about 1 ampere. The fields next to the pipe and at I m were calculated from this value. 350 INTERNATIONAL JOUI blind coding called for a shift that would have streng- thened the observed HCC -cancer association. and for i pairs (5.7 %) the shift would have weakened the associa- tion. All shifts but one involved changing a pair from `equivalent' to `case- higher' or `case - lower', or the reverse. Only one pair shifted all the way from `case - lower' to `case- higher' when coded blind, and none shifted all the way in the opposite direction. Our 140 blind -coded pairs showed 72 `case- higher' pairs, 28 `case- lower' pairs, and 40 `equivalent' pairs, yielding a HCC -cancer association significant beyond the 0.001 level by sign test. The same pairs in the original coding showed 72 'case- higher' pairs, 33 `case- lower' pairs, and 35 `equivalent' pairs, also significant at about the 0.001 level. The blind coding did not differ significantly from the not -blind coding (Chi- square 0.5, p = 0.48), so we used our original, not -blind coding in all analyses, as it would presumably be the most consistent with coding of all other pairs. RESULTS In Table 3 we present the distribution of current con- figurations as well as a configuration -ratio (C- ratio) for each sample. The C -ratio is calculated by dividing the number of matched pairs in which the case shows a higher current configuration than the control by the number of matched pairs in which the reverse is true, and multiplying by 100 to avoid decimals. It provides an index to the degree of association between HCCs and cancer for any given group of cases and matched tNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY controls. Significance values were computed, using the sign test.9 Dose relationship We see in Table 3 that the homes of cancer patients out. numbered control homes most clearly in the VHCC category, with the proportion of cancer homes diminish. ing over succeeding categories (VHCCs > OHCCs > OLCCs > End - poles). This suggests that a dose - relationship may exist between AMF exposures in this range and cancer. Age at onset In Table 4 we see that the association between HCCs and cancer is quite clear and highly significant for cancer occurring in adults before age 55, but is much less impressive for cancers occurring at older ages. Survivors In each sample the survivors showed a somewhat stronger HCC- cancer association than the non - survivors. However, this difference did not reach statis- tical significance for any sample or overall. It seems to be largely due to the fact that our survivors were younger at diagnosis than our non - survivors (see Table 0. Subtype of cancer Significantly high C -ratios were observed for four sub- types of cancer: cancer of the nervous system, uterus, TABLE 3 Wiring configurations at the homes of cancer cases and controls Pairs where the case and control had equivalent configurations were simply o:nitted from the pair - comparison data. VHCC = Very high current configuration; OHCC = Ordinary high current con iguration; OLCC = Ordinary low current configuration; End -pole = End -pole configuration. VHCC Type of configuration OHCC OLCC End -pole Pair comparisons' Higher current configuration in: C -ratio A. cases B. controls (A /B) Longmont Cases 17 40 105 32 95 58 164 p < 0.005 Controls 12 28 114 40 % Cases 58.6 58.8 47.9 44.4 Boulder Cases 37 106 157 21 146 102 143 p < 0.01 Controls 19 101 173 28 % Cases 66.1 51.2 47.6 42.9 Denver Suburbs Cases 19 69 150 17 102 70 146 p = 0.02 Controls 12 57 147 39 % Cases 61.3 54.8 50.5 30.4 Central Denver Cases 35 115 230 29 166 137 121 p:= 0.11 Controls 31 112 225 41 % Cases 53.0 50.7 50.5 41.4 Total Cases 108 330 642 99 509 367 139 p < 0.(7001 Control, 74 298 659 148 %Cases 59.3 52.6 493 40.0 Pairs where the case and control had equivalent configurations were simply o:nitted from the pair - comparison data. VHCC = Very high current configuration; OHCC = Ordinary high current con iguration; OLCC = Ordinary low current configuration; End -pole = End -pole configuration. CANCER AND ELECTRIC WIRES TABLE 4 C- ratios related to age at cancer diagnosis The values entered are C- ratios, which are calculated by dividing ie num'xr of matched pairs where the case address shows a higher -arc tt configuration than the control address by the number of pairs xbere tha-. reverse is we, and multiplying by 100. Equivalent pairs are yopped .'rom consideration. The numbers in parentheses indicate the mmber cf non - equivalent pairs in a given group. Superscripts indicate significance values as follows: 140.001;b <0.01.c <0.05:d<0.10. Ind breast, and lymphomas. C -ratios for cancer of the ;ancreas, bladder, kidney, and prostate were also high (over 150), but were not significant. We plan to expand an the relationship between cancer subtypes and AMF aposure in a future publication. sex Males and females show no striking or significant differ - aces in the degree of association between cancer and HCCs for any of the samples except the suburban umple. For that sample the females show a significant asociation between cancer and HCCs (C -ratio 194, p < 0.01) but the males do not (C -ratio 103, not significant). This difference is significant by Chi -square at the 0.05 lrvel, and increases to a significance level of 0.01 when illy pairs with cancer diagnosis before age 70 are con- : lidered. This male- female difference in the suburban popula- 351 tion may reflect the fact that suburban males under age 70 commonly are (or recently have been) employed in central Denver, where exposure to urban carcinogens and urban sources of AMF exposure may well override any effect of wiring near the home. Suburban females are less often employed in Denver, which may explain why they show the stronger association between resi- dential wiring configurations and cancer which typifies our other samples with low urban exposure (eg, residents of our two smaller towns (see Table 5)). Urban exposure In Table 5 we have distinguished two groups: (1) subjects who are highly exposed to central city influ- ences at the residence (male and female central- Denver residents) or in the work -place (suburban males, ages 19-69, who commonly work—or have recently worked —in central Denver); and (2) subjects less apt to be exposed to the central city, including all residents of our two smaller towns, all suburban females, and sub- urban males past retirement age (70 +). We see that, for each age group, the HCC -cancer association is most clearly demonstrable in those subjects who have least exposure to central Denver (with its high potential for exposure to urban- industrial carcinogens, as well as to high ambient AMFs). Socioeconomic level In Table 6 we see that, overall, the strongest HCC- cancer association is found among members of the highest socioeconomic level group. The difference between socioeconomic levels does not reach statistical significance for the total sample, or for the urban - exposed group. However, in the group not highly urban- exposed, the highest socioeconomic group shows sig- TABLES C- ratios related to degree of urban exposure 19-54 Age at cancer diagnosis 55-69 70+ LXb om nt 170 (27) 220° (48) 136 (78) 'box 264b (40) 129 (96) 129 (112) i&wbs 200 °(69) 97(77) 225d(26) )ca„a 188`(72) 91 (132) 130(99) r JW 201'(208) 114(353) 137b(315) The values entered are C- ratios, which are calculated by dividing ie num'xr of matched pairs where the case address shows a higher -arc tt configuration than the control address by the number of pairs xbere tha-. reverse is we, and multiplying by 100. Equivalent pairs are yopped .'rom consideration. The numbers in parentheses indicate the mmber cf non - equivalent pairs in a given group. Superscripts indicate significance values as follows: 140.001;b <0.01.c <0.05:d<0.10. Ind breast, and lymphomas. C -ratios for cancer of the ;ancreas, bladder, kidney, and prostate were also high (over 150), but were not significant. We plan to expand an the relationship between cancer subtypes and AMF aposure in a future publication. sex Males and females show no striking or significant differ - aces in the degree of association between cancer and HCCs for any of the samples except the suburban umple. For that sample the females show a significant asociation between cancer and HCCs (C -ratio 194, p < 0.01) but the males do not (C -ratio 103, not significant). This difference is significant by Chi -square at the 0.05 lrvel, and increases to a significance level of 0.01 when illy pairs with cancer diagnosis before age 70 are con- : lidered. This male- female difference in the suburban popula- 351 tion may reflect the fact that suburban males under age 70 commonly are (or recently have been) employed in central Denver, where exposure to urban carcinogens and urban sources of AMF exposure may well override any effect of wiring near the home. Suburban females are less often employed in Denver, which may explain why they show the stronger association between resi- dential wiring configurations and cancer which typifies our other samples with low urban exposure (eg, residents of our two smaller towns (see Table 5)). Urban exposure In Table 5 we have distinguished two groups: (1) subjects who are highly exposed to central city influ- ences at the residence (male and female central- Denver residents) or in the work -place (suburban males, ages 19-69, who commonly work—or have recently worked —in central Denver); and (2) subjects less apt to be exposed to the central city, including all residents of our two smaller towns, all suburban females, and sub- urban males past retirement age (70 +). We see that, for each age group, the HCC -cancer association is most clearly demonstrable in those subjects who have least exposure to central Denver (with its high potential for exposure to urban- industrial carcinogens, as well as to high ambient AMFs). Socioeconomic level In Table 6 we see that, overall, the strongest HCC- cancer association is found among members of the highest socioeconomic level group. The difference between socioeconomic levels does not reach statistical significance for the total sample, or for the urban - exposed group. However, in the group not highly urban- exposed, the highest socioeconomic group shows sig- TABLES C- ratios related to degree of urban exposure Age at diagnosis 19 -54 55-669 70+ Total High urban exposure Central Denver residents 188° (73) 91 (132) 130 (99) - IIId (303) Male suburban residents aged 19-69 117 (26) 64 (41) — 81 (67) Total 165 °(98) 84 (173) 130(99) 113 (370) Low urban exposure Male suburban residents aged 70+ — — 500e (12) 500c (12) Female suburban residents 29 lb (43) 157 (36) 80 (14) 1941(93) Town residents '- 19b(67) 153`(144) 132d(190) 151'(401) Total 244x(110) 154b(180) 140 °(204) 162'(506) The values entered are C- ratios, which are calculated by dividing the number of matched pairs where the case address shows a higher current configuration than the control address by the number of pairs where the reverse is t,ue, and multiplying by 100. Equivalent pairs are dropped from consideration. The numbers in parentheses indicate tl c numDer of nun - equivalent pairs in a given group. Superscripts indicate significance values as follows: a < 0.001: b < 0.01: c < 0.05: d < 0.10. 0 352 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY TABLE 6 C- ratios related to socioeconomic level Total 134 °(213) 131b(485) 1711(168) • Socioeconomic levels wire determined for census tract of residence, using a scoring method based on income, education, and household crowding developed by Morton et al.11 The high socioeconomic level included scores of 0-39; roderate, 40-59; low, 60 and over. The values entered are C- ratios, which are calculated by dividing the number of matched pairs where the case address shows a higher current configuration than the control address by the number of pairs where the reverse is we, and multiplying by 100. Equivalent pairs are dropped from consideration. The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of non - equivalent pairs in a given group. Superscripts indicate significance values as follows: a _< 0.001;b_< 0.01 ;c<0- 05;d<0.10. nificantly more HCC -cancer association than the two lower socioeconomic groups. Exposure - manifestation interval In Table 7 data are presented on the time interval between first occupancy of the coded residence and diagnosis of cancer. In addition to our basic ten -year residential history, we checked back in old directories I and located those coded residences which had already t been occupied by our subject at least 20 years before cancer diagnosis, giving us a group with known 20 -ye occupancy at the coded residence.' In the top section of the table, two interesting trends can be seen: (1) No HCC- cancer association was demonstrable for subjects who left the coded residence three or more years before diagnosis of cancer (this' could mean that any effect of HCC exposure is revers- ible, disappearing almost completely within three years); (2) The strongest HCC- cancer association appears six ` to nine years after first occupancy of the coded residence, suggesting a rather short latency between HCC exposure and cancer manifestation. DISCUSSION In this study, adult cancer was found to be associated with residence at an HCC address. Although the • Table 7 is based on case - control pairs assigned according to the duration of residence of the case. In the Denver and Suburban samples no duration of residence could be assigned to the controls, since an address rather than a person constituted the control. For the Boulder and Longmont samples the control did not always show the samc duration of residence as its matched case, but an analysis of case and control groups, matched for duration of residence as well as for urbar► exposure and age, showed the same patterns as the case- contrd matched -pair data displayed in the Table. TABLE 7 C- ratios related to interval between first exposure at the coded residence and cancer diagnosis Socioeconomic level- Years at coded residence before diagnosis: low moderate high Low urban 4 -5 exposure 148d(77) 1464(334) 262•(94) High urban Total exposure 127(136) 105(160) 106(74) Total 134 °(213) 131b(485) 1711(168) • Socioeconomic levels wire determined for census tract of residence, using a scoring method based on income, education, and household crowding developed by Morton et al.11 The high socioeconomic level included scores of 0-39; roderate, 40-59; low, 60 and over. The values entered are C- ratios, which are calculated by dividing the number of matched pairs where the case address shows a higher current configuration than the control address by the number of pairs where the reverse is we, and multiplying by 100. Equivalent pairs are dropped from consideration. The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of non - equivalent pairs in a given group. Superscripts indicate significance values as follows: a _< 0.001;b_< 0.01 ;c<0- 05;d<0.10. nificantly more HCC -cancer association than the two lower socioeconomic groups. Exposure - manifestation interval In Table 7 data are presented on the time interval between first occupancy of the coded residence and diagnosis of cancer. In addition to our basic ten -year residential history, we checked back in old directories I and located those coded residences which had already t been occupied by our subject at least 20 years before cancer diagnosis, giving us a group with known 20 -ye occupancy at the coded residence.' In the top section of the table, two interesting trends can be seen: (1) No HCC- cancer association was demonstrable for subjects who left the coded residence three or more years before diagnosis of cancer (this' could mean that any effect of HCC exposure is revers- ible, disappearing almost completely within three years); (2) The strongest HCC- cancer association appears six ` to nine years after first occupancy of the coded residence, suggesting a rather short latency between HCC exposure and cancer manifestation. DISCUSSION In this study, adult cancer was found to be associated with residence at an HCC address. Although the • Table 7 is based on case - control pairs assigned according to the duration of residence of the case. In the Denver and Suburban samples no duration of residence could be assigned to the controls, since an address rather than a person constituted the control. For the Boulder and Longmont samples the control did not always show the samc duration of residence as its matched case, but an analysis of case and control groups, matched for duration of residence as well as for urbar► exposure and age, showed the same patterns as the case- contrd matched -pair data displayed in the Table. TABLE 7 C- ratios related to interval between first exposure at the coded residence and cancer diagnosis The - values entered are C- ratios, which are calculated by dividing the number of matched pairs where the case address shows a higher current contigurauon than the control address by the number of pairs where the reverse is true, and multiplying by 100. Equivalent pairs are dropped from consideration. The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of non - equivalent pairs in a given group. Superscripts indicate significance values as follows: a < 0.001: b < 0.01: c < 0.05: d < 0.10. • C -ratio based on less than 10 subjects. Years at coded residence before diagnosis: 4 -5 6 -9 10-19 20+ Total (A) Left coded residence 3 or more years before diagnosis 100• 94 96 83 94 (99) (B) Still at coded residence within < 3 years of diagnosis 1444 253' 133c 115 146' ( 177) Total 1414 211' 127' 113 139'(876) Breakdown of cases in (B) above: 1. Subgroups where latent cancer was presumably low when residency period began: Non - urban - exposed, aged 19 -54 170 383' 289b 100• 2521(95) Urban - exposed, aged 19 -54 157 400b 210" 233 229'(79) Non-urban-exposed, aged 55-69 113 191 135 208c 155b(166) Total 148 2864 1754 200` 193'(340) I1. Subgroups where latent cancer was presumably high when residency period began: Urban-exposed, aged 55 -69 50• 173 77 79 89 (153) Non- urbancxposed, aged 70+ 233 260c 126 91 136= (196) Urban exposed, aged 70+ 100• 300 125 140 144 "(88) Total 136 2251 106 96 119' (437) The - values entered are C- ratios, which are calculated by dividing the number of matched pairs where the case address shows a higher current contigurauon than the control address by the number of pairs where the reverse is true, and multiplying by 100. Equivalent pairs are dropped from consideration. The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of non - equivalent pairs in a given group. Superscripts indicate significance values as follows: a < 0.001: b < 0.01: c < 0.05: d < 0.10. • C -ratio based on less than 10 subjects. CANCER AN � iation was highly significant, it was considerably ,aker than the similar association we observed for yldhood cancer.' This does not necessarily mean that LMFs affect adults less than they do children; rather, it `arras likely that, in adults, the years of exposure to ovironmental carcinogens, as well as to AMFs from ,uious sources, all may affect cancer rates so strongly Sat the effect of residential HCCs is frequently :bscured. In general, a small increment in cancer, occurring 1gainst a relatively high overall cancer rate, is difficult to imonstrate. Where the background cancer rate is low, bwever, that same increment will be more visible." ,,bus if there is a modest increase in cancer rate due to HCCs, it should be most visible in children, where :Incer is generally rare; and it should also be more risible in young adults, where cancer is still relatively mcommon, than in older adults where cancer is iequent. This is essentially what we observed. Similarly, in Tables 4, 5 and 6 we saw that the HCC - =cer association was most easily demonstrated in 3ose populations where the competing effects of irban/industrial carcinogens were probably minimal: -l) those too young for urban /industrial cancer to be maximally manifest; (2) those who work and live in ueas not highly urbanized; and (3) those whose high W v a ¢ w t v z Z I D ¢ N O H Q V R D ELECTRIC WIRES 353 socioeconomic status tends to minimize urban /indus- trial exposures. The strong HCC -cancer association we observed in children is approximated for those adults whose overall cancer rates are least likely to be influ- enced by exposure to urban /industrial carcinogens. Turning to the patterns of latency observed between exposure to HCC, and cancer manifestation (Table 7 and Figure 1), we have already noted patterns which suggest a short interval between HCC exposure and cancer manifestation, as well as an apparent reN er- sibility of the HCC effect. Such characteristics seem more consistent with the idea of cancer promotion" than with cancer initiation. Further speculation is invited by the curves seen in Figure 1: If we suppose that AMFs act largely by promoting cancers that have already reached a certain stage of latency, then subjects with latent cancer who moved into HCC homes would often have their latent cancers pro- moted, and so might tend to manifest those cancers soon after the HCC residency began. But similar subjects with latent cancers who moved into LCC homes would experience no such cancer promotion, and so should generally manifest their latent cancers much later. Therefore, by the tme their respective residencies had persisted for 20 years or more, any remaining cancer excess in HCC residents would tend to be 4 5 S T B 9 10-19 20+ YEARS BETWEEN FIRST OCCUPANCY OF THE CODED RESIDENCE AND CANCER DIAGNOSIS " U412 1 C- ratios related to the interval between first occupancy of the coded residence and cencer diagnosis. t 44h C-ratio indicates a strong association between nigh- current wires near the residence and cancer. This association peaks seven pears ajter �'m'upcncp of the specified residence. It then drops off to no association (C -ratio = 100) in the group where cancer already present in latent ^' at first known occ-- ,panty is presumed to be high tall cases aged 70+ at diagnosis, and urcan- exposed cases aged 55 -69). shown by the solii " The association drops offonly moderatelv and remains quite high in the eroup where cancer alreadv present at first ocru.cancy is presumed tv raw (c!1 cases aged 19 -54 at diagnosis, and non - urban - exposed cases aged 55-0 9), shown by t e broken iine. 354 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY balanced (or perhaps even reversed) by delayed manifestations in LCC residents. Note, however, that such a pattern would be expected only for latent cancers already present at the beginning of the residency period— providing a possible explana- tion for the difference between the two curves presented in Figure 1: The two curves in Figure I can be understood by con- sidering whether the number of people in a population who already had latent cancer when residency began was high - or low in comparison with the number developing latent cancer in succeeding years. On the one hand, we might expect a high initial level of latent cancer in the population over age 69, as well as in the urban - exposed population aged 55 -69, because of their age and /or prolonged urban exposure. There would, of course, be some members of these groups in whom latent cancer was first initiated only after the residency period began; but such instances would presumably be relatively rare, compared to the numerous latent cancers already present when the residency period began, so their impact on the manifestation rate would be minor. For these older, more urban -exposed groups, then, latent cancer already present when the residency period began would largely determine the exposure - manifestation pattern, so the pattern outlined above (an early peak in HCC- cancer association, dropping to no association within 20 years) would prevail. This pattern is seen, as expected, in the bottom section of Table 7 and the solid fine in Figure 1. On the other hand, for the young (19 -54 at diag- nosis) and for the somewhat older (55 -69) group that was not urban - exposed, we might expect a relatively low initial level of latent cancer. Therefore, for these groups, latent cancers acquired after residency began would, by comparison, be numerous, and so would play a more major role in determining the exposure- manifestation pattern. The HCC- cancer association should still peak around seven years after occupation of the coded residence (reflecting those latencies that were present initially), but it should not disappear as completely in later years (due to the relatively numerous continuing latencies). In later years the LCC residents would, as before, show an upsurge of late (unpromoted) manifesta- tion of those latent cancers that were already present when the residency period began. But because such initial cancers were few, their delayed manifestation in LCC residents would be insufficient to entirely cancel the accelerated rate at which HCC residents would now be manifesting the relatively numerous new latent cancers, initiated after residency began. For the younger, less urban - exposed group we do see just such a pattern —an initial peak, dropping off only moderately to a level of association which remains quite high for many years (see the middle pan of Table 7 and the broken line in Figure 1). These patterns, then, are consistent with the idea that AMFs may have a promoting effect on latent cancer which is demonstrable within seven years of relatively continuous exposure to the kind of AMFs produced by HCC wiring near the home. This hypothesis of cancer promotion directs attention to certain kinds of physic. logical effects which might conceivably mediate the AMF -cancer association: (1) AMFs may alter normal healing processes, including, perhaps, normal removal or repair of cells with damaged DNA. (2) They may alter nervous system functioning, and so affect cancer through some secondary effect of stress or hormone release. (3) They may work epigenetically," by altering the electrical concomitants of cellular growth and differentiation. 14,15 It is always possible that an epidemiologically estab. lished association is artefactual rather than causal in nature. However, several aspects of our data suggest that the HCC - cancer association observed here may actually represent a causal fink: (1) a dose - relationship was observed; (2) two different control procedures yielded essentially similar results: (3) the strength of the associations observed in different age, urbanicity and socioeconomic groups was consistent with a causal interpretation; (4) a distinct pattern of latency between first exposure to the HCC and cancer diagnosis was seen, which is consistent with a hypothesis of cancer promotion produced by AMF exposure. REFERENCES ' Wertheimer N, Leeper E. Electrical wiring configurations and child hood cancer.,4m!Epidemio! 1979; 109:273 -84. ' Polk C. Sources, propagation, amplitude and temporal variation b( extremely low frequency (0- 100Hx) electromagnetic fieids.It Biological and Clinical Effects of Low Frequency Map- - and Electric Fields. Llaurado 1 G. Sances Jr A, Battoc!em I (eds). Springfield, Illinois, Charles C. Thomas. 197 pp 21-48. s Adey W R. Frequency and power windowing in tissue interactiem with weak electromagnetic fields. Proceedings ojthe lnstit.r ojElectrical and Electronics Engineers 1980; 68: 1 19 - -25. Becker R O, Murray D G. The electrical control system rcgulaum fracture healing in amphibians. Clin orthop 1970; 73: i 69-9& s Galvalas- Medici R. Day- Magdaleno S R. Extremely low frequeW.1, weak electric fields affect schedule - controlled behavior y monkeys. Nature 1976; 261: 256 -9. "Baw'in S tit, Adey W R. Sensitivity of calcium binding in cereory tissue to weak environmental electric fields oscillating at k+ frequency. Proc iNatl Acad Sci 1976; 73: 1999 -2003. Sisken B F, Smith S D. The effects of minute direct e!ectrk'O currents on cultured chick embryo trigemmal ;angle- ' Embrvol Exp ,tilorphol 1975: 33: ' -9 -41. s Liboff A R. Rinaldi R A (eds). Electrically Mediated Grol"► Mechanisms in Living Systems. :4rtn .NY'.4cad Sci 1974; 2J1 pp 593. ° Siegel S. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. `e• York, McGraw -Hill. 1956, pp o8 -75. CANCER ANC a Norton W I:, Horton H B, Baker H W. Effects of socioeconomic status on incidence of three sexually transmitted diseases. Sex Transm Dis 1979; 6: 206 -10. afytd C E. Estimating cancer risks from low doses of ionizing radiation. Science 1980; 209: 1197 -1203. a Ryser H 1 -P. Chemical carcinogenisis. ,Y Engl J ,Ned 1971; 285: 721 -34. ELECTRIC WIRES 355 i 11 Sherbet G G (ed). Neoplasia and Cell Differentiation. Basel, S Karger, 1974. " Szent- Gyorgyi A. Electronic Biology and Cancer: A New Theory of Cancer. New York, Marcel Dekker Inc, 1976. 11 Cone C D Jr. Unified theory on the basic mechanism of normal mitotic control and oncogenesis. J Theor Bio! 1971; 30: 151 -81. (Revised version received March 1982) AxsatcA27 JOURNAL or EpimmxOLooY Vol. 109, No. 3 Copyright cc 1979 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health Printed in U.SA. All rights reserved Original Contributions ELECTRICAL WIRING CONFIGURATIONS AND CHILDHOOD CANCER NANCY WERTHEIMER' AND ED LEEPER Wertheimer, N. (Dept. of Preventive Medicine, U. of Colorado Medical Center, Box C -245, Denver, CO 80262), and E. Leeper. Electrical wiring config- urations and childhood cancer. Am J Epidemiol 109:273 -284, 1979. An excess of electrical wiring configurations suggestive of high current -flow was noted in Colorado in 1976 -1977 near the homes of children who de- veloped cancer, as compared to the homes of control children. The finding was strongest for children who had spent their entire lives at the same ad- dress, and it appeared to be dose - related. It did not seem to be an artifact of neighborhood, street congestion, social class, or family structure. The reason for the correlation is uncertain; possible effects of current in the water pipes or of AC magnetic fields are suggested. electricity; electromagnetic fields; leukemia; neoplasms Electrical power came into use many years before environmental impact studies were common, and today our domestic power lines are taken for granted and generally assumed to be harmless. However, this assumption has never been adequately tested. Low level harmful effects could be missed, yet they might be important for the population as a whole, since electric lines are so ubiquitous. In 1976 -1977 we did a field study in the greater Denver area which suggested that, in fact, the homes of chil- dren who developed cancer were found unduly often near electric lines carrying high currents. In our modern power delivery systems, high- tension wires carrying current at Received for publication May 11, 1978. Abbreviations: AC, alternating current; HCC, high- current configuration; Hz, hertz; LCC, low current configuration. ' Department of Preventive Medicine and Com- munity Health, Box C -245, University of Colorado Medical Center, 4200 East Ninth Avenue, Denver, CO 80262. (Reprint requests to Dr. Wertheimer.) The authors thank the Colorado Department of Vital Statistics and Dr. John Cobb of the Universitv of Colorado Preventive Medicine Department for their facilitation of this research. M voltages up to several hundred kilovolts (kv) deliver power to distribution substa- tions where the voltage is stepped down, resulting in proportionately higher cur- rent in the medium - voltage (usually 13 kv, wire -to -wire) primary lines. These lat- ter radiate out from the substation to dis- tribute power through a neighborhood. Then, at the local transformer, the volt- age of the primaries is stepped down once more to produce the 240 volt current which is carried along the secondary wires to service drops which bring the power to the customer's house. The cur- rent flow will always be greatest in the wires directly issuing from the substation or the transformer. At these points the voltage has been stepped down and "transformed" into current. And it was particularly homes close to these trans- forming points that were over- repre- sented among our cancer cases. Because our findings appeared to relate to high current rather than voltage, we looked into the magnetic fields induced by current flow. Magnetic fields penetrate the human body (and buildings, etc.) readily. They are not easily shie!Jed. but 274 n t\ a ti rn C v 0 U c m a a b H m. b O O C a a; a h b E E A m d �E O vv 7 t � 3 gEE � m d E a) o n m Q �o z }m w �3 a d = a� a� LEn E t o N 00'^ N C II d� m `L WERTHEIMER AND LEEPER they can be cancelled by balancing the currents that produce them. Si►ch cancel- ; lation occurs in electric wires, where the o v return current tends to balance the sup - 0 0° ply current. However, the cancellation is imperfect because the wires are often separated in space and, more importantly, C because some of the return current does not flow through the wires at all, but re- ° N turns instead through the ground, and 0 C:' N o particularly through the plumbing sys- tem to which most urban electrical sys- -E terns are grounded at each house. This results in a locally imbalanced current, both in the distribution wires 0 0 o and in the plumbing. That imbalanced current produces a 60 hertz (Hz) magnetic field which, though small (table 1), is nonetheless orders of magnitude larg- er than .the 60 Hz field found in nature N (about 10-8 gauss (1)). The ground -current 0 o N � flows not only in the street plumbing, but ralso through the pipes in the house. Cur- ti rent which enters the plumbing at one b house can flow through several home-; be- CO N � g fore it returns to the distribution wires, o M a because the plumbing provides a continu- ous, low- resistance path between houses. The ground- current produces a magnet- CO 0 ic field within the house (localized near CO 0 0 the plumbing) which appears to be related w � roughly to the types of wiring configura- W CO tions nearby (see table 1). This relation - ship between wires and plumbing is to be 71 � m o expected because, other things being 0 o h o equal, the greatest unbalanced current tends to occur where the total current in d� CO v the wires is greatest, and the unbalanced y o portion of the current must detour v y through ground paths such as the nearby v a earth and plumbing. P r A number of household appliances and CO o ti v power tools also produce magnetic fields, E o r a D but in comparing the fields from ap- o II pliances with those from power lines, it � v n Z is important to note that most appliances E :E w present approximately a magnetic dipole source, with fields falling off roughly as the inverse cube of the distance, while a i i ELECTRICAL WIRING AND CHILDHOOD CANCER wire with unbalanced current will have a field falling off only as the inverse of the distance. For instance: 1 cm Electrical drill 13 gauss Electrical range (4 burners 1 gauss on high) Wire carrying 15 amperes 3 gauss In the literature there are listings of 60 Hz magnetic fields produced by appliances which appear quite high. These should not be misinterpreted: They are apparently due to the use of mea- surements taken "as close as possible" to the appliance. Our measurements indi- cate that magnetic -field exposure to the whole body from normal use of household appliances rarely exceeds .001 to .002 gauss for any extended period, while the ambient fields in a house due to nearby distribution wires or plumbing may some- times reach those levels, or more, for hours or days at a time. If magnetic -field exposure is responsible for our finding, it may be that, above some minimum threshold, duration of continuous expo- sure is more important than strength of exposure per se. There is some precedent for such a threshold effect in the litera- ture on direct current (DC) magnetic fields (2). Our field measurements showed that, on the average, those types of wires as- sociated with cancer in' our study exhib- ited high magnetic fields (compare ta- bles 1 and 3). However, the readings var- ied considerably over time; and because our observations were all made in good weather and during work -day hours when domestic current is minimal, because current -flow had most probably altered since the time of our subjects' .residency, and because it was rarely feasible to go close to the house to take a measure- ment, no attempt was made to take sys- tematic measurements at our study homes. Rather this studv is based on the potential current flow suggested by differ- 0 275 iffer- 275 ent wiring configurations (nearness and size of wires, closeness to origin of cur- rent, etc.). 15 cm lm 3m 30m .12 .001 <.0001 <.0001 .04 .0015 <.0001 <.0001 .2 .03 .01 .001 Experimental work on physiologic ef- fects of low- level, extremely low fre- quency magnetic fields is limited. It has been recently reviewed (3). Among the positive reports are decreased mitosis in slime molds (4), decreased growth of seedlings (5) and chicks (6), decreased in vitro growth of embryonic tissue cells (7), and a' number of behavioral and phys- iologic changes in rats (8). All these results are for fields considerably higher (.5 -30 gauss) than the 60 Hz fields gen- erally found near power lines; however, the findings reported often appear to be unrelated to dose over the range studied. Prolonged exposure to the .001 —.1 gauss range most pertinent to wiring effects has not been explored experimentally. Two studies suggest that a relatively strong AC (alternating current) field may interfere with growth of implanted tumors in animals (9, 10) except where the tumor tissue is exposed to the field before implantation. In this latter condi- tion, tumor "takes" were increased (9). To explore occupational exposure to AC magnetic fields, we analyzed data from a USPH publication on occupation by cause of death (11). All those occupational categories which seemed likely to include men frequently exposed to AC magnetic Fields were grouped together and found to have, as a group, a cancer rate signifi- cantly higher than the total population. The "exposed" categories included: power station operators; stationary engineers; linemen and servicemen, telephone, tele- graph and power; motor -men, street, subway and elevated railway; electri- cians; and welders and flame cutters. The 276 WERTHEIMER AND LEEPER standard mortality ratio for cancer for these categories combined was 115, a sig- nificant increase over the ratio of 100 for all occupations ()(= = 24.5, p < .0001). For other "natural causes" of death this same group showed a standard mortality ratio of 102 (X= = 1.8, not significant). While this crude analysis in itself proves noth- ing, it underlines the fact that the harm- lessness of AC magnetic fields is still unproven. METHODS Our cases consisted of persons dying of cancer in Colorado before age 19 in the years 1950 -1973, who also had a Col- orado birth certificate. Only subjects with addresses occupied. from 1946 -1973 in the greater Denver area were used. Con- trols for these cases consisted of next Denver -area birth certificates, chosen both from the files organized by birth - month and county (file 1 controls), and from the alphabetical search - listings, which list all Colorado births alphabeti- cally within several wide spans of years: 1939 -1958, 1959 -1969, and 1970 -1974. These latter were called fir`e 2 controls. If the next birth certificate was that of a sibling it was skipped. Birth addresses were those listed on the birth certificates. "Death" addresses were obtained for both cases and controls by searching for parents in city directories for the two years just prior to diagnosis of the case. For cases who could not be traced, the address on the death certifi- cate was used. For controls, if the file 1 control could not be traced, the file 2 con- trol with most similar birth date who could be traced was used. There were no significant differences in the proportion of "high- current configurations" (HCC's as defined below) shown by the file 1 controls used (21 per cent HCC), the file 2 controls used (23 per cent HCC) and the unused extra controls (25 per cent HCC), so it seems unlikely that our method of select- ing controls biased our findings. In all, 344 cases met our criteria. Thirty -nine of these were born before 1946, and 33 had a birth address which was lost because it had been demolished or was not adequately specified. Only death addresses were analvzed for these 72 cases and their respective controls. Similarly, 16 cases had no usable death address, so only birth addresses were used for these cases and their controls. Table 2 gives a summary of how many persons and how many addresses were available for cases and controls. The procedure was simply to visit the birth and "death" addresses of each case and each control, and to draw a small map of the electrical wires and transformers in the vicinity. Primary (13 kv) wires were categorized as either "large- gauge" (built TABLE 2 Distribution of persons and addresses available for analysis, for cases and controls, in a study of electrical wiring configurations and childhood cancer in Colorado in 1976 -1977 Residential status Cases Controls Persons' Stable Moved, birth and death addresses available Only birth address Only death address Totals Addresses' 109 109 147 294 16 16 72 72 344 491 Persons 128 128 16 72 344 Addresses 128 256 16 72 472 " Tables 3, 4, and 9 present data on total addresses, tables 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 present data on total persons. Tables presenting data on persons are generally broken into total persons with an available birth address (N = 272) and totals with an available death address (N = 328). i r ELECTRICAL WIRING AND CHILDHOOD CANCER to carry high currents) or "thin" depend- ing on whether they were clearly larger than the secondary wires. Distances were measured from the part of the house nearest the wires to the wires, with a rol- latape. Three types of homes, because of their proximity to high- current wires, were considered to have "high- current config- urations" (HCC's): 1) homes less than 40 meters from large -gauge primaries or an array of six or more thin primaries; 2) homes less than 20 meters from an array of 3 -5 thin primaries or from high - tension (50 -230 kv) wires; and 3) homes less than 15 meters from "first span" sec- ondary (240 volt) wires. First span second- aries were defined as those secondaries which issued directly from the trans- former and had not yet lost any current through a service drop occurring beyond the transformer pole. The span of second- ary wires separated from any trans- former by at least one intervening service drop (ignoring those drops directly at- tached to the transformer pole) were called second span secondaries. First span wires will have more current running through them than second span wires be- cause the first span must carry current for all the drops that mark its distal end plus whatever current the second span re- quires. All other configurations were consid- ered "low- current configurations" (LCC's). In addition, where first span wires could be seen to be carrying current to no more than two single family homes, on the average (on both sides of the block), those wires were called short first span wires and, because they carried current for so few homes, they were always con- sidered LCC's, regardless of distance. Houses situated beyond the pole at the end of a Secondary line ( "end poles" in to bles 3 and 4) were considered the extreme example of LCC homes, because they had no distribution wires at all running past them. 277 Since the Denver area has been grow- ing fast, many new primary wires have been installed to accommodate increased power demands. Many of these new in- stallations are of a style easily distin- guished from older wires. For addresses occupied before 1956 (20 years prior to our field work) we noted that only 59 per cent of the primary wires found near our study homes were of the "old fashioned" types which had been in use at the time of our subjects' occupancy. (Actually 71 per cent of the primary wires observed near pre - 1956 case addresses were "old fashioned," but only 49 per cent of the wires near pre -1956 control addresses were of the older types that could have been in use in those early years.) Where the more mod- ern wiring was observed, we could not tell whether it represented new installations or replacement wiring, but we did know that it could not have been there in its present form in the pre -1956 years. Therefore, we decided to treat all primary wires seen near homes occupied before 1956 as unreliable, and to code such homes strictly according to their more sta- ble secondary -wire configurations. This adjustment did not critically affect our findings. Proximity to primary wires was most strongly associated with cancer for recent addresses, and the association (as expected) was weaker in the older data. But the association was still sig- nificant when all years were considered and no adjustments made: For birth ad- dresses, 31 per cent of the 272 cases and 22 per cent of the 272 controls had homes near (unadjusted) primaries, a difference significant beyond the .025 level by Chi - square. For death addresses the figures were 29 per cent of 328 cases and 19 per cent of 328 controls, significant beyond the .01 level. RESULTS General configurations. Table 3 shows how many cancer and control homes exhibited the various wiring configura- 278 WERTHEIMER AND LEEPER tions. It can be seen that the most striking difference between cases and controls was found for subjects who had on:y one ad- dress from birth to death. This might be because, for subjects who moved, the ef- fects of configurations at one address were diluted by effects of configurations at other addresses. Table 4 indicates that the greater the exposure to current expected from a given wiring configuration, the greater the ex- cess of cancer found in homes where that configuration was observed. Type of cancer. The breakdown accord- ing to type of cancer (table 5) shows a fairly similar excess of HCC's in cancer cases for all categories but one, the death addresses of cases with "other tumors." Such a wide association with different types of cancer is not characteristic of known carcinogens such as ionizing radi- ation; thus the broad association observed here suggests that the HCC- cancer rela- tionship may not be a causal one. The most likely alternatives are that it is due to some artifact, or that it reflects some effect of HCC's on the body's general abil- ity to resist cancer. Onset age. As table 6 shows, the HCC - cancer relationship was observed in both young and older subjects. The fact that the relationship held for the birth as well as the death addresses of older subjects would seem to suggest that the effects of HCC exposure can be long delayed. How- ever, a closer look at the data showed that TABLE 3 Wiring configurations at the homes of cancer cases and controls, Colorado, 1976 -1977 Stable residence: Moved residence: Type of configuration• Birth address Death address Substation <150 mt Large primaries <40 m High tension <20 m Thin primaries <20 in 1st span secondaries <15 m Total HCC's 1st span secondaries >15 m "Short" first span wires Second span secondaries End poles Total LCC's Case Control Case 2 14 0 13 19 48 33 6 20 2 61 0 6 0 10 10 26 2 14 0 11 26 53 Control 0 13 1 4 11 29 Case 2 38 1 17 23 81 Control 0 17 0 11 20 48 43 53 57 66 51 11 9 4 11 19 33 40 40 51 66 15 8 14 10 16 102 110 115 138 152 (9c HCC) (44.0) (20.3) (32.5) (20.1) (37.0) (24.0) X= =14.4 X= =5.4 x= =7.6 p <.001 p =.02 p<.01 t All six cases within 150 m of a substation were also less than 40 m from large primaries. • HCC = high- (.urrent configuration; LCC = low- current configuration. TABLE 4 Cancer related to the amount of current expected from different wiring configurations, Colorado, 1976 -1977 Wiring configuration Expected current Case Total addresses: Control % cases Substation Very high 6 0 100.0 Other HCC High 176 103 63.1 LCC except end poles Low 289 324 47.1 End poles Very low 20 45 30.8 ( ,f ice► � ' . "_''��,. .' � "� - r W q t F ELECTRICAL WIRING AND CHILDHOOD CANCER 279 23 (66 per cent) of the 35 older cases born at HCC's were also living at a HCC (usu- ally the same address) within two years of their cancer onset. Only three (20 per cent) of the 15 older controls born at a HCC's were living at a HCC within two �I years of the "death" date. Thus the HCC- relationship observed in the birth N cancer addresses of older subjects can be largely to a HCC residence near the attributed time of cancer onset, and there is no need Y. (M 00 posit a long- delaved effect of HCC's. N ,� 'a N Urban- suburban differences. Since E I cancer may show a different incidence in urban and non -urban areas, it seemed I� important to rule out the possibility that N o ao N "' "' a difference in urbanization between zl cases and controls was the significant vari- able in this study, and simply carried the o o HCC differences with it, spuriously. This UM N CD seemed unlikely, intuitively, because the Ufield work was done one neighborhood at i a time, and on none of the 22 days of field a did the individual day's results fail d � m O •.+ a0 O N work to show a preponderance of HCC's in the v case addresses. ro : A more formal survey shows that, al- though there was a slight excess of subur- N C G O .-n N N GO V N ban addresses in the controls, it was no o d e significant. Furthermore, the statistically cases showed more HCC's than the con- N CD o trols independently in three areas: in of m N d' M N 00 �° CD °' Denver, in the more recently developed a .Z Denver areas (as estimated from a plan- ning department publication (12)), and in o the Denver suburbs (see table 7). m. Socioeconomic class. The literature re- 3 ports an excess of leukemia in families of v higher socioeconomic class (13). Our G data, dealing with all types of childhood show only an insignificant trend cancer, in this direction. It seemed possible that our method of choosing controls might .m v have biased our control group against lower -class controls, since only controls y x who could ba traced in directories were used. However, a check on the discarded Q controls showed that upper and lower ME WERTHEIMER AND LEEPER class controls were discarded equally of- ten, while Class III controls were some- what disproportionately retained. There was no significant difference in the per cent of discarded and retained controls showing a HCC and, as table 8 shows, the association between HCC's and cancer was observed within each social -class group. It therefore seems unlikely that some spurious relationship to social class explains our findings. Family pattern. The literature reports an excess of first siblings and older mothers among children with leukemia (14). In our total sample of childhood cancer cases, a trend towards both more first siblings and older mothers was noted, but neither was statistically sig- nificant. Furthermore, the HCC- cancer relationship holds to approximately the same degree within each maternal -age and sibling -order category tested, so we see no clue in these variables as to why the relationship between HCC's and cancer should exist. Traffic congestion. A recent report (15) suggests that cancer may occur unduly often near heavy - traffic routes. Our data did show a mild excess of case - addresses near such routes; case - addresses were more likely than control- addresses to be found within 40 meters of streets having a daily traffic count of 5000 vehicles or more on the 1960 Department of High- ways traffic map. However, once again, a significant excess of HCC's in cancer cases was found independently for addresses on heavy - traffic routes and for other address- es. (For heavy - traffic routes, 53 per cent of 74 case - addresses showed HCC's against 30 per cent of 48 control - addresses; for other locations, 35 per cent TABLE 6 Wiring configurations and cancer onset age, Colorado, 1976 -1977' Type of wiring Cancer onset 0 -5 years Onset 6 -18 years Residence configurationt Case Control Case Control 66 40 35 15 HCC Birth address LCC 103 129 68 88 (% HCC) (39.1) (23.7) (34.0) (14.6) Death address HCC 68 37 61 37 LCC 105 136 94 118 (% HCC) (39.3) (21.4) (39.4) (23.9) * Case- control differences are significant by Chi - square (p < .01) for each category in the table. t HCC = high - current configuration; LCC = low- current configuration. TABLE 7 Wiring configurations in different neighborhoods of cancer cases and controls in Colorado in 1976 -1977* Old Denver Newer Denver Suburban Type of wiring Residence configurationt Case Control Case Control Case Control Birth address HCC 42 26 27 9 32 20 LCC 77 91 40 44 54 82 (% HCC) (35.2) (22.2) (40.3) (17.0) (37.2) (19.6) Death address HCC 49 24 35 19 45 31 LCC 62 77 49 55 88 122 (% HCC) (44.1) (23.8) (41.7) (25.7) (33.8) (20.3) * Case - control differences are significant by X` (p < .05 or better) for each category in the table. t HCC = high- current configuration; LCC = low- current configuration. M ELECTRICAL WIRING AND CHILDHOOD CANCER TABLE 8 Father's occupational class* at subject's birth, related to wiring configurations at birth resicences of cancer cases and controls, Colorado, 1976 -1977 M Type of wiring Classes I and 1I Class III Classes IV and V configuration? Case Control Case Control Case Control HCC 19 9 49 30 33 16 LCC 34 41 98 111 39 65 (% HCC) (35.8) (18.0) (33.3) (21.3) (45.8) (19.8) X' =3.2 X =4.7 X =10.3 D<.10 n <.05 p` =.0C1 * Class categories follow the schema provided in "Mortality by Occupation Level and Cause of Death," Vital Statistics Special Reports 53, #5, 1963, and are as follows: Class I: Professional. Class II: "technical, Administrative and Managerial. Class III: Clerical, Sales, and Skilled Workers. Class IV: Semi - skilled Workers. Class V: Laborers. t HCC = high - current configuration; LCC = low - current configuration. TABLE 9 Increase of cancer cases within 40 meters of heavy - traffic routes, as related to the presence or absence of nearby* primaries, Colorado, 1976 -1977 Near primary wires Not near primaries Type of subject Traf iic routes Other locations Traffic routes Other locations Cases 32 84 42 333 Controls 9 53 39 371 ("'c cases) (78.0) (61.3) (51.9) (47.3) X " =3.3 X' =0.4 .05 <" D < .10 Not significant * "Nearby" primaries here means that the primaries were near enough to the house to qualify it as a high - current configuration (HCC). of 417 case - addresses showed HCC's against 21 per cent of 424 control - addresses). In fact, the excess cancer we found on heavy- traffic routes seems to be related to the frequent presence on such routes of primary wires carrying especially high currents. Table 9 shows that the excess of cancer cases on high - traffic routes occur- red to a significant extent only where primary wires were nearby. Sex distribution. Many cancers, includ- ing leukemia, occur more frequently in males than females. This is reflected in our data where 57 per cent of our cases were males, as compared to 49 per cent of the controls. The excess of HCC's among cases was significant for both males and females when the sexes were analyzed separately, but the trend was stronger in the males; 51 per cent of the 197 male cases had a HCC at their birth- or death - address, or both, while 45 per cent of the 147 female cases had such an address. This compares with only 28 per cent of the 168 control males and also 28 per cent of the 176 control females. It is interesting that significant male excess among our cancer cases appeared to be confined to two categories: 1) cases whose birth address had a lower current configuration than the death address, and 2) cases with stable address who de- veloped cancer after at least one year of postnatal life at a residence situated near primary wires (table 10). Because these two categories were cho- sen from a number of ways we might have categorized the data, they must remain suspect until a replication co:.�firnis or If 282 WERTHEIMER AND LEEPER TABLE 10 Sex distribution of cancer cases in a study of electrical wiring configurations and childhood cancer in Colorado in 1976 -1977 Type of address Stales Females % male Significance* Birth address had lower current 28 14 66.7 Xt = 4.0, p < .05 configuration than death address Stable residence at HCCt involving 22 4 84.6 Xz = 11.1,p < .001 primary wires Other cases with any HCC address 56 48 53.8 X' = 0.5, not significant Other cases with no HCC address 91 81 52.9 X2 = 0.5, not significant " An expected value of 50 per cent male was used to calculate the chi - squares. t HCC = high - current configuration. disputes them. However, we chose these categories for a reason: We hypothesized that males might be excessively suscepti- ble to HCC's at all ages, including pre- natally. (It is of interest here that male rats appear especially susceptible to ex- perimental magnetic fields (8, p. 182) (16), as do embryos (17).) If males are more susceptible, they might frequently be aborted when pregnancy occurs at a HCC, but pregnancy at a LCC would allow the most susceptible males to be born and then to develop cancer later when exposed to a situation with higher current nearby. This hypothesis is consis- tent with the male excess in category 1 above. Category 2 is presumed to provide a po- tentially similar situation: Where prima- ry wires are found running near a house (in 1976), it is always possible. that these wires were first installed or were "beefed up" at some time after the subject's birth. Or if they were present all along, the cur- rent they carry may sometimes have in- creased with time. If any of these things happens, the postnatal current flow near the house will be increased over the pre- natal flow, even without a change in resi- dence. Should this happen, the suscepti- ble male who escaped abortion during pregnancy rnight develop cancer, and this would explain the male excess in cate- gory 2. Substations. Power carried at higher voltage is stepped down to produce in- creased current at two points in our elec- trical distribution system: at the distri- bution substation, and again at the neighborhood transformers. As indicated cancer cases were found in excess close to the "first span" wires issuing from the transformers. An even stronger trend was found for substations. None of the 702 control addresses vis- ited (including our unused extra controls) was within 150 meters of a substation. This is to be expected since Drobablv less than one home in 1000 in the Denver area is that near a substation. What is surpris- ing is that six of 491 case addresses were found within 150 meters of a substation and, in each case, less than 40 meters from the large primary wires issuing from that substation. These six are shown in table 3. Each cancer case had lived at the substation address within three years or less of his illness. Although these num- bers are small, they are striking. Blind studies. It should be noted that our Denver -area study, being exploratory, was not done blind. This could lead to er- ror, although our observations were reasonably unambiguous. To check just how reliable our coding was, an assistant observed and coded 70 case and 70 control addresses randomly chosen from those previously coded by the principal inves- ELECTRICAL WIRING AND CHILDHOOD CANCER tigator. The assistant did . not know the case - control status of the addresses she coded. Her coding agreed with ours in 128 (91 per cent) of the 140 instances. In five of the 12 instances of disagreement, the assistant's judgment favored the hy- pothesis of a HCC- cancer correlation, while ours did not. In seven instances, the reverse was true. Also, a blind study was done (for birth addresses only) in Colorado Springs and Pueblo. This study showed the same cor- relation as the Denver study, similar in degree but less significant due to the smaller numbers; 32 per cent of the 65 cases and 18 per cent of the 65 controls showed HCC's. The correlation was strongest for cases with onset before six years of age, possibly because many of the older cases had been gone from their birth addresses for many years before their cancer onset. DISCUSSION It is not clear how residence near a HCC might affect the development of cancer, but several possibilities should be considered: 1) Some association of both cancer and HCC's with a third factor may spuriously account for our correlation. Although we found no indication of such a third factor in our analyses of social class, neighbor- hood, congested streets, or family make- up, the possibilities have not been exhausted. 2) The magnetic fields produced, by wire currents may somehow directly "cause" cancer. There is, however, no independent evidence or theoretical understanding which seems to support this possibility. The evidence concerning mutagenic ef- fects of extremely low frequency magnetic fields, for instance, is ambiguous, but probably negative (18). 3) Carcinogenic activity may be as- sociated with some indirect effect of the HCC's. For example, fields around power 283 lines might change the distribution of some ambient environmental carcinogen, such as particles which emit ionizing radiation. (However, the fields near domestic wires are too weak to make this seem probable.) Or the increased current flowing in the plumbing might locally af- fect the drinking water. (There is often a small amount of lead in copper water pipes, for instance, due to imperfect sol- dering. And lead in the water supply is correlated with cancer, at least geo- graphically (19). However, it is not clear that AC current in pipes could affect this small amount of lead enough to make a difference.) 4) AC magnetic fields might affect the development of cancer indirectly, through some effect on physiologic processes. It is conceivable, for instance, that contact -_ inhibition of cellular growth, or the basic immune reaction of recognizing "self" from "not self," involves electrical poten- tials occurring at cell surfaces. Against an electromagnetic background different from that provided during evolution, any such' cell mechanism might be altered. Whatever the basis for our observed correlation, it should be emphasized that, although the risk of cancer appears to be increased for children living near HCC's, it is rarely increased by a factor of more than two or three. Therefore, if in the general population one child in 1000 is likely to get cancer before age 19, no more than two or three in 1000 living near a HCC would be expected to get it. The practical significance of the correlation, if any, lies in the high prevalence of HCC's, not in any very high risk posed by most HCC's. REFERENCES 1. Polk C: Sources, propagation, amplitude and temporal variation of extremely low frequency (0 -100 Hz) electromagnetic fields. In Biological and Clinical Effects of Low Frequency Magnetic and Electric Fields. Edited by JG Llaurado, A Sances Jr. Springfield, IL, Charles C Thomas, 1974. pp 21-48 284 WERTHEIbiER AND LEEPER 2. Cook ES, Fardon JC, Nutini LG: Effects of magnetic fields on cellular respiration. In Biological Effects of Magnetic Fields. Edited by MF Barnothy. New York, Pienum Press, 1969, - Pp 67 -78 3. Sheppard AR, Eisenbud M: Biological Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields of Extremely Low Frequency. New York, New York University Press, 1977 4. Goodman EM, Greenebaum B, Marron MT: Ef- fects of extremely low frequency fields on growth and differentiation of physarum polycephalum. Naval Electronic Stystems Command, Technical Report Phase I, April 1975. Available from NTIS as ADA 010187 5. Coate WB: Seed germination and early growth study. In Project Sanguine Biological Effects Test Program Pilot Studies, Naval Electronics Svstems Command, Final Report, November 1970, pp H -1 to H -10. Available from NTIS as ADA 717409 6. Krueger WF, Giarola AJ, Bradley JW, et al: In- fluence of low level electric and magnetic fields on the growth of young chicks. Biomed Sci In- strum 9:183 -186, 1972 7. Yates VJ, Chang PW, Chen HJ, et al: Influence of ELF magnetic and electric fields upon the in vitro growth rate of chicken embryo cells. In Naval Electronics Systems Command, Techni- cal Report Phase I, March 1975, pp 60 -99. Available from NTIS as ADA 007578 8. Persinger MA, Lafreniere GF, Ossenkoff K: Be- havioral, physiological and histological changes in rats exposed during various developmental stages to ELF magnetic fields. In ELF and VLF Electromagnetic Field Effects. Edited by MA Persinger. New York, Plenum Press, 1974, pp 177 -225 9. Lenzi M: A report of a few recent experiments on the biologic effects of magnetic fields. Radiology 35:307 -314, 1940 10. Batkin S, Tabrah FL: Effects of alternatinz magnetic field (12 gauss) on transplanted neuroblastoma. Res Commun Chem Pharmacol 16:351 -362, 1977 11. Guralnick L: Mortality by occupation and cause of death among men 20 to 64 years of age: United States, 1950. Vital Statistical Special Re- ports 53. #3, 1963 12. Denver Regional Council of Governments, Of- fice of Data Services: Profile of the Denver Re- gion, 1960 -1970. May, 1973 13. Fasal E, Jackson EW, Klauber MR: Birth characteristics and leukemia in childhood. J Nat] Cancer Inst 47:501 -509. 1971 14. MacMahon B, Newill VA: Birth characteristic of children dying of malignant neoplasms. J Natl Cancer Inst 28:231 -244, 1962 15. Blumer M, Blumer W, Reich T: Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soils of a moun- tain valley: Correlation with highway traffic and cancer incidence. Environ Sci Tech 11:1082 -1086, 1977 16. Barnothy JM: Development of young mice. In Biological Effects of Magnetic Fields. Edited by MF Barnothy. New York, Plenum Press, 1964, pp 93 -99 17. Reno VR, Nutini LG: Tissue respiration. In Biological Effects of Magnetic Fields. Edited by MF Barnothy. New York, Plenum Press, 1964, pp 211 -217 18. Naval Electronics Systems Command: Navy - sponsored extremely low frequency biological and ecological research summary (update). May 1976, pp 44 -53. Available from NTIS as ADA 02761 19. Berg JW, Burbank F: Correlations between carcinogenic trace metals in the water supply - and cancer mortality. Ann NY Acad Sci 199:249 -264, 1972 Reprinted from Journal of Occupational Medicine Volume 27, No. 6, June 1985 Occupational Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields and the Occurrence of Brain Tumors An Analysis of Possible Associations Ruey S. Lin, M.D., Dr.P.H.; Patricia C. Dischinger, Ph.D.; Jose Conde, M.D., M.P.H.; and Katherine P. Farrell, M.D., M.P.H. To explore the association between occupation and the occurrence of brain tumor, an epidemiologic study was conducted using data from the death certificates of 951 adult white male Maryland residents who died of brain tumor during the period 1969 through 1982. Compared with the controls, men employed in electricity- related occu- pations, such as electrician, electric or electronic engineer, and utility company serviceman, were found to experience a significantly higher proportion of primary brain tumors. An increase in the odds ratio for brain tumor was found to be positively related to electromagnetic (EM) field ex- posure levels. Furthermore, the mean age at death was found to be significantly younger among cases in the pre- sumed high EM— exposure group. These findings suggest that EM exposure may be associated with the pathogenesis of brain tumors, particularly in the promoting stage. n recent years several epidemiologic studies have sug- gested that environmental factors may be related to the occurrence of brain tumors. Specifically, concern has been raised regarding the possibility of increased risk of brain tumor among employees in the petrochemical industry., .2 A few studies of refinery workers suggest that petrochem- ical compounds may be responsible for the increase. — However, other studies have shown no significant in- From the Science and Health Advisory Group, Office of Environ- mental Programs, Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (Drs. Lin, Dischinger, and Farrell); and The Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health (Dr. Conde), Baltimore. Presented at 1984 annual meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis Knoxville, Tenn., Oct. 1 -3, 1984. Address correspondence to the Science and Health Advisory Group, Office of Environmental Programs, Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 201 W. Preston St., Baltimore, MD 21201 (Dr. Lin). crease in the numbers of brain tumor deaths among pe- trochemical industry employees.6-8 The current study, utilizing vital records in the state of Maryland for the period 1969 through 1982, was con- ducted to explore further the association between occu- pation and brain tumor mortality. Materials and Methods Death certificates of white male Maryland residents, aged 20 years or over, were collected from the following inter- national Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for review: ICD -8th ICD -9th Revision Revision (1969 -1978) (1979 -1982) Type of Tumor 191 191.0 -191.9 Malignant neoplasm of brain 192.9 ... Malignant neoplasm of other part of nervous system, site unspecified 225.0 225.0 Benign neoplasm of brain 238.1 239.6 Neoplasm of unspecified nature, brain All females and black males were excluded because of the relative lack of occupational information on their death certificates. From the total of 1,043 death certificates collected, 92 were excluded. Causes of death on the excluded certifi- cates were metastatic tumors from other sites (68) and rare brain tumors such as melanoma, lymphoma, medullob- lastoma, and ventricular tumor (24). Rare brain tumors were excluded because of their different histopathology and natural history, which could introduce a bias in a study of gliomas." As a result, 951 brain tumor cases were included in this study: 370 classified as glioma or glioblastoma multiforme, 149 as astrocytoma, and 432 as brain tumors, histologic type not specified. It is suspected that some of the non - specified brain tumors may have been secondary tumors Journal of Occupational MedicineNol. 27, No. 6 /June 1985 413 or other rare types of brain tumors. Table 1 shows the distribution of cases by type and by ICD code on the cer- tificates. Because of the overlap between the ICD codes and different histologic types of brain tumors, subsequent analyses were based on the histologic type recorded on the death certificate and not on the ICD code. Gliomas and astrocytomas were grouped together as a single cat- egory of primary brain tumor. Brain tumors with histologic type not specified were treated as a separate category in the analysis. Occupations recorded on death certificates of brain tu- mor patients were compared with those of a control group of white adult male Maryland residents with causes of death other than malignant neoplasms. Case and control sub- jects were matched on age ( ±1 year) and date of death (as closely as possible); controls were selected from a 10% computer- randomized roster of Maryland decedents. Statistical significance was assessed using a X' test on the distribution of various occupations, the t test on age distribution, as well as 95% confidence intervals around the odds ratios using the logit method.'° Results The age distribution of the 951 white males who died of brain tumors is shown by histologic type in Table 2. For Table 1 - Distribution of Brain Tumors by Type and ICD Code, as Recorded on Death Certificates, Among 951 White Male Decedents in Maryland, 1969 Through 1982 ICD Code Glioma/ Astrocytoma No. % Brain Tumor (Nonspecified) No. % No. Total % 191 388 74.7 129 29.8 517 54.3 192.9 127 24.5 0 0.0 127 13.4 225.0 0 0.0 2 0.5 2 0.2 238.1 4 0.8 301 - 69.7 305 32.1 or 40 -49 63 17.0 24 16.1 239.6 50 -59 98 26.5 37 24.8 Total 519 100.0 432 100.0 951 100.0 all three types of brain tumors, the peak is in the 60 to 69 year age group. The mean age at death is similar for the glioma and astrocytoma groups. However, it is higher for the nonspecified brain tumor group, which may be a re- sult of the inclusion of secondary brain tumor cases in that category. Preliminary analysis of the case data disclosed a dispro- portionate representation of workers employed in occu- pations associated with electricity or electromagnetic (EM) fields. In Table 3, the number of deaths observed in each of these occupational groups is compared with the num- ber expected, based on the proportion of these occupa- tions surveyed and reported in the 1970 Maryland population census. Greater - than - expected numbers of brain tumor deaths were observed in all of these occupational groups, and especially in the glioma /astrocytoma group. These data, however, may be biased because they rep- resent the prevalence of these occupations at one point in time (1970 census), whereas the mortality data span a 14 -year period. Also there is no adjustment for age. In addition, some differences may be attributable to occu- pation recording practices for the census as compared with death certificates. To overcome this possible bias, a case - control study was conducted. Death certificates were obtained for a control group of white adult Maryland residents who died of causes other than malignancy and who were matched with the case subjects for age and date of death. Table 4 presents the case /control comparison of occupational distribution for several occupational groups. Occupations related to electricity or. to apparent exposure to EM fields showed an excess representation among the glioma /astrocytoma patients as compared with the controls, but no significant differences were noted between the case and control sub- jects in the nonspecified brain tumor group. No signifi- cant excess of brain tumor deaths was found among petrochemical industry workers, although the numbers were small. Only 12 cases were observed in this job cat- egory, as compared with 10 subjects among controls. On the basis of these preliminary findings, occupations were grouped according to level of possible exposure to EM fields - i.e., definite, probable, possible, or no ex- Table 2 - Distribution by Age and by Type of Brain Tumor of 951 White Male Decedents in Maryland, 1969 Through 1982 Brain Tumors Gliomas Astrocytomas (Nonspecified) Age, yr No. % No. % No. % 20 -29 11 3.0 5 3.4 10 2.3 30 -39 25 6.8 14 9.4 28 6.5 40 -49 63 17.0 24 16.1 57 13.2 50 -59 98 26.5 37 24.8 102 23.6 60 -69 116 31.3 55 36.9 129 29.9 70 -79 44 11.9 12 8.1 84 19.4 -_80 13 3.5 2 1.3 22 5.1 Total 370 100.0 149 100.0 432 100.0 Mean Age (yrs) 57.6 ... 56.2 ... 60.0 ... SD 13.2 ... 12.7 ... 13.5 ... 414 Brain Tumors /Lin et al a Table 3 — Observed Numbers of Electricity- Related Occupations Among White Male Brain Tumor Decedents in Maryland, 1969 Through 1982, as Compared With Expected Numbers From 1970 Maryland Census Data, by Type of Tumor 19 1970 Maryland Census 8 8 employees White Male Employees Glioma and Brain Tumor Aged ,20 yr Astroc oma yt (Nonspecified) 14 No. of Observed Expected" Observed Expected' Occupation Employees % No. No. No. No. Electrician 9,300 1.15. 13t 5.7 8 4.7 Electric or 5 4 7 electronic engineer and Physician, lawyer, 24 17 technician 11,600 1.43 18t 7.2 12t 5.8 Utility (electric and Farmer telephone) line- 12 15 9 man, serviceman 8,400 1.04 19t 5.1 8 4.2 3 Occupations Other occupations 347 381 together 29,300 3.62 50t 18.0 28t 14.7 Total 809,600 100.0 499* 499.0 407$ 407.0 rxpected numoers caicuiatea according to 1910 census white male employees occupation proportional distribution t P <.01 t Numbers with unknown occupations excluded Table 4 — Comparison of Occupation Distributions of Brain Tumor and Control Subjects Glioma and Brain Tumor Astrocytoma (Nonspecified) No. of No. of No. of No. of Occupation Cases Controls Cases Controls Electrician 13 10 8 8 Electric or 18` 6 12 9 electronic engineer and technician Utility company 19 11 8 8 employees Carpenter _ 15 13 14 17 Mechanic, machinist, 33 27 21 22 or repairman Petrochemical industry 5 4 7 6 Physician, lawyer, 24 17 18 18 or other professional Farmer 14 12 15 9 Navy personnel 11 4 8 3 Other occupations 347 381 296 314 Unknown 20 34 25 18 Total 519 519 432 432 p<.05 posure. The exposure category for each occupation was determined in consultation with an industrial hygienist, an occupational physician, and a radiation physicist. Since no data on duration of occupational exposure are avail- able from death certificates, the categories of EM field exposure are based simply on job title and industry entry (Table 5). Case and control subjects were assigned to cat- egories independently by two persons blinded as to their Journal of Occupational MedicineNol. 27, No. 6 /June 1985 Table 5 — Category of Occupation According to Assumed EM Field Exposure Category A (definite exposure to EM field) Electric and telephone company: serviceman, lineman, fore- man, and engineer Railroad and telecommunication: engineer Electrician, electric and electronic engineer in industry Category B (probable exposure to EM field) Electrician, nonspecified, retail Dispatcher, highway patrolman Engineer (nonspecified) in electric, electronic, aerospace, and telecommunication industries Repairman in appliance (e.g., television radio, electronic de- vice) and telecommunication industries Welder Category C (possible exposure to EM field) Policeman, security guard., airline pilot Employee (nonspecified) in utility company (telephone and electric) railroad, and telecommunication industries Mechanic, machinist, repairman, maintenance man, station- ary engineer, boilermaker Steelworker, tool maker, plumber, pipefitter, carpenter Engineer (nonspecified) in other industries Officer (nonspecified) in Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard Category D (no exposure to EM field) All occupations other than those specified in the preceding categories status. Any discrepancies in ranking were solved by a third opinion. Table 6 shows an analysis of case /control differences based on these exposure categories for glioma and astro- cytoma. There are 27 cases as compared with 14 controls in category A (definite EM exposure), and 21 cases v 12 415 Table 6 — Comparison of Occupation Distributions of Primary Brain Tumor (Glioma and Astrocytoma) and Control Subjects, by Category of EM Field Exposure Category of 95% Occupation - No. of Odds 95% According to No. of No. of Odds Confidence EM Exposure Cases Controls Ratio Intervals A (definite EM exposure) 27 14 2.15 1.10 -4.06 B (probable EM exposure) 21 12 1.95 0.94 -3.91 C (possible EM exposure) 128 99 1.44 1.06 -1.95 D (no EM exposure) 323 360 1.00 .. . Unknown occupation 20 34 ... • • • Total 519 519 ... • • . controls in category B (probable EM exposure), a signifi- cant difference. The odds ratios for these two exposure groups are 2.15 and 1.95, respectively. There is an increase in the odds ratio positively related to EM exposure levels. However, only categories A and C have 95% confidence intervals above 1.0. Table 7 presents the same analysis for nonspecified brain tumors. Although there are more cases than controls in both categories A and B, none of them has an odds ratio significantly different from 1.0. Table 8 shows the mean age at death of the case subjects by EM exposure category. Glioma /astrocytoma patients in the "definite EM exposure" category died at significantly younger ages than those with no EM exposure (mean age, 52.8 v57.9, respectively; t = 2.23; p <0.05). Thirteen (48 %) of 27 case subjects in this category died before age of 50. However, there are no significant differences in mean age at death, by EM exposure levels, among those with non- specified brain tumors. Discussion Weaknesses of death certificate data as material for ep- idemiologic studies are widely acknowledged." However, as a source for generating hypotheses regarding occupa- tional or industrial hazards associated with specific types of cancer, such data can be quite valuable. The difficulty with the small numbers of cancer cases often met in ret- rospective and prospective epidemiologic studies can be overcome in mortality statistics studies by combining re- lated occupational categories and by analyzing data from a larger time period. In the present study, there were two possible sources of error: (1) misdiagnosis or misclassification of cause of death and (2) misclassification of occupation. The first type of error is probably less common for brain tumors than for other cancers, since both malignant and benign brain tumors usually result in death.1, In a study of the accuracy of death certificates, mortality rates for brain tumors were judged to be among the most accurate, based on both detection and confirmation." Two measures were taken to reduce error in including secondary brain tumor cases. First, all death certificates collected were reviewed by two of the authors (R.L. and P.D.). Any death certificates that indicated that the brain tumor was due to metastasis were removed from the analysis. Second, cases were classified according to histologic type, i.e., glioma or glioblastoma multiforme, astrocytoma, and nonspecified "brain can- cer" or "brain tumor." Gliomas and astrocytomas, diag- nosed either by biopsy or autopsy, were considered as primary brain tumors. Analyses were performed sepa- rately for the group of nonspecified brain tumors. Errors stemming from occupational misclassification may come from several sources: inaccuracies as a result of lack of knowledge of next -of -kin, or incomplete information. The underlying assumption of the study was that the re- corded occupation was the principal job and that the du- ration of exposure was sufficient to cause an effect on the decedent's health. However, since the information on oc- cupation of controls was also obtained from death certif- icates, the potential for error should be equal for case and control subjects." Table 7 — Comparison of Occupation Distributions of Brain Tumor ( Nonspecified) and Control Subjects, by Category of EM Field Exposure Category of 95% Occupation According No. of No. of Odds Confidence to EM Exposure Cases Controls Ratio Intervals A (definite EM exposure) 15 10 1.54 0.68 -3.38 B (probable EM exposure) 19 15 1.30 0.60 -2.78 C (possible EM exposure) 87 95 0.94 0.68 -1.31 D (no EM exposure) 286 294 1.00 .. . Unknown occupation 25 18 ... • • • Total 432 432 .. . 416 Brain Tumors /Lin et al e Table 8 —Mean Age at Death and SD, by Category of EM Exposure and Type of Tumor Glioma and Brain Tumor Astrocytoma (nonspecified) -- Mean Age Mean Age Category of at Death ± SD, at Death ± SD, EM Exposure No. of Cases yr No. of Cases yr A (definite EM 27 52.8' ± 11.1 15 59.1 ± 17.2 exposure) B (probable EM 21 61.2 ± 13.5 19 60.8 ± 11.1 exposure) C (possible EM 128 56.2 ± 12.5 87 60.9 ± 13.1 exposure) D (no EM exposure) 323 57.9 ± 13.1 286 59.6 ± 13.6 Unknown occupation 20 54.4 ± 16.9 25 61.5 ± 13.7 Total 519 57.2 ± 13.0 432 60.0 ± 13.5 p <.05, as compared age distribution in group with no EM exposure Mortality data from the state of Maryland show an as- sociation between primary brain tumor and employment in occupations with exposures to potentially high EM fields. Several studies in the literature have also mentioned a higher risk of brain tumor among electrical and mainte- nance workers, but the majority of such findings have been reported as part of a study of a particular industry, such as the petrochemical industry. Generally, research- ers concentrated on hypotheses linking brain tumors to chemical exposures. In a study in Los Angeles, Preston - Martin and co-workers 14 found a significant increase in brain tumors among electricians and engineers, particu- larly those- who were aircraft employees. The authors, however, concluded that the data "fail to implicate any specific exposures within the (aircraft) industry that might be important etiologically, since the majority of workers were classified at diagnosis as engineers or some other type of white collar worker." -_ In an epidemiologic study of CNS tumors conducted among industrial workers in Ohio, Mancuso- also ob- served that individuals working with electrical machinery had the highest CNS tumor mortality rate. Nicholson et al'° reported an excess of brain tumors among operating engineers in chemical and petrochemical industries in Texas and Louisiana. The category of operating engineers in- cluded stationary engineers, stationary firemen, and con- struction engineers who were engaged in the operation and maintenance of heavy equipment. Alexander et ale reported an apparent increased preva- lence of brain tumors among employees of a Texas petro- chemical plant. Examination of the work histories of the 20 affected employees 'revealed no common chemical ex- posures or work assignments; among them were seven maintenance workers, one boilermaker, one machinist, and one operator in energy systems. All of these workers would be classified, according to the ranking category used in the present study in risk category C (possible EM field exposure). In addition, Seidman et al," in a study of brain tumor mortality among asbestos insulation workers in the United States and Canada, observed that the excess of brain tu- Journal of Occupational MedicineNol. 27, No. 6 /June 1985 mors among insulators was concentrated among the younger employees (those under 50) and during the early period after onset of work (15 to 24 years) in contrast with the age distribution and latency observed for other as- bestos- associated neoplasms. The authors concluded that "this may have relevance to theoretical concerns about questions of initiation and promotion in the etiology of cancer, particularly with regard to brain tumors." Since insulators or pipefitters frequently work in close proximity to electrical wiring, these occupations would also be ranked in risk category C in the present study. Bond et al 18 conducted a case - control study of brain tu- mor deaths among employees at a large chemical manu- facturing plant and found an association between risk of brain tumor and employment in a magnesium production department, particularly among the workers assigned to this department for a short period (one to five years). Al- though the authors stated that some exposure to EM fields could be expected in both chlorine and magnesium pro- duction, they discounted this possibility because of a lack of other epidemiologic support and because the odds ra- tios tended to decrease with an increasing duration of employment in this department. Another industry that utilizes high levels of electricity is aluminum production; Milham19 found a significant in- crease of mortality from benign brain tumors (five ob- served v 0.7 expected) among aluminum reduction plant workers, particularly those in occupations categorized as nonexposed to chemicals, such as mechanics, electrical maintenance, and metal products production. In a follow -up study of U.S. enlisted naval personnel exposed to microwave radiation during the Korean War period,"' subjects' military occupations were categorized as either high exposure (electronic technician, fire control technician or aviation electronics technician) or low ex- posure (radioman, radarman, and aviation electrician mate). No significant differences in the incidences of brain tu- mors were noted between the two exposure groups. However, there were 16 deaths from eye, brain, and other nervous system malignancies (ICD codes 190 -192), rep- resenting 7.9% of all malignant deaths (16 of 202) as com- 417 pared with a 3.8% proportional mortality ratio of brain tumors to all malignancies among U.S. males, aged 20 to 64 years, in 197021 (p <0.01). Both groups of veterans were exposed to EM fields and would be classified in risk cat- egories A or B in the current study. It is of interest that there were more navy personnel among case than among control subjects in the present study (11 v four in the glioma /astrocytoma group, and eight v three in the brain tumor nonspecified group, see Table 4). Wertheimer and Leepert2 have reported an increase in the incidence of all cancers among adults in Colorado who live near wires that carry high -flow alternating electric cur- rent. Among types found to be most significantly associ- ated with current wire configuration are cancers of the nervous system, uterus, breast, and lymphoma. In addi- tion, the authors observed that the strongest high- current wire configuration— cancer association appeared after six to nine years of exposure, suggesting a rather short la- tency between alternating magnetic field exposure and cancer manifestation. In a similar study, they also found an association between electrical wire configuration and childhood cancer incidence.27 On the other hand, a study from Rhode Island did not show an association between childhood leukemia and electric wire configurations .14 A recent report from Sweden, however, is compatible with the study by Wertheimer and Leeper, showing an asso- ciation between proximity to high- tension wires and the occurrence of childhood tumors.15 Several reports have already shown an increased risk of leukemia among electricians and other workers regularly exposed to EM fields .26-29 Electrical and magnetic fields surround us, emanating from high- tension wires, radio transmitters, and house- hold appliances. This form of nonionizing radiation ex- tends from infrared to microwaves and radiowaves and to emissions from alternating electrical currents, which have extremely low frequencies and long wavelengths. All ex- cept infrared rays readily penetrate the body; however, the amount of absorption varies depending on frequency of waves and type of tissue. Systems of the body that are particularly vulnerable to EM waves include the CNS, the hematopoietic- immunologic system, and the cardiovas- cular and the endocrine system .30 The knowledge that pulsing EM fields can induce weak electric current in bone and stimulate osteogenesis has been well applied in the treatment of ununited fractures .31 Experimental animal studies have also shown a prolifera- tion reaction of the microglia in the brain (gliosis) follow- ing exposure to EM fields in various ranges of frequencies .12 Several investigators have reported the effects of EM fields on the efflux of calcium ion in biological system, princi- pally brain tissue .33-31 Changes in calcium binding in ce- rebral tissue of the chicken and the cat have been demonstrated even with exposure to weak environmental electric fields oscillating at low frequency.33.- Calcium ions play a prominent role in maintaining cellular membrane integrity and function. A large number of experimental observations suggest that a significant correlation may ex- ist between the level of the electrical transmembrane po- tential difference in somatic cells and the intensity of their mitotic activity. On. the basis of experimental findings, Cone", has postulated a unified theory of mitosis control t ' and oncogenesis associated with membrane potential dif- ference. In fact, recent laboratory studies have demon- strated that weak pulsing EM fields can modify biological processes and induce RNA transcription .17 Easterly}° has hypothesized a mechanism for a relation- ship between exposure to magnetic fields and the induc- tion of cancer: alternations in the mitotic processes caused by exposure to magnetic fields can provide a proliferative stimulus to latent tumor cells, thereby leading to the expression of malignant neoplasia. Wertheimer and Leeper22 considered their findings of a distinct pattern of latency between exposure to high- current wires and cancer di- agnosis in Colorado cancer cases to be consistent with the hypothesis of cancer promotion produced by EM field exposure. Findings from the present study, that glioma patients whose occupations were more likely to have ex- posed them to EM fields developed and died of brain tu- mors at significantly younger ages than did those who were not occupationally exposed to EM fields, also strongly support the theory of nonionizing radiation as a promot- ing agent. The observation of Seidman and co-workers 17 that the excess of brain tumors among insulation workers was concentrated among the younger ages and during the early period after exposure can also be explained by this hypothesis. Furthermore, recent experimental animal studies indicate that nonionizing radiation may promote the development of several types of cancer, spontaneous or induced, in mice." If oncogenic effects on nonionizing radiation are limited only to the facilitation of the proliferation of tumor cells but not to the initiation of the malignant transformation of normal cells, then one may expect the promoting ef- fects of EM field exposure to be more apparent with re- spect to the mortality from certain types of tumor such as brain tumors and leukemia. These conditions usually re- sult in death even without metastasis because of their vital location or their incessant proliferative capacity. Indeed, to date, epidemiologic evidence shows only brain tumors and leukemia mortality to be associated with EM field ex- posure. In recent decades there has been a rapid increase in the use of radio- frequency in industry, military, and civilian settings. During the same period of time (1940 to 1977), the mortality rate for brain tumors in the U.S. population has risen from 3.80 to 5.80 among whites and from 2.15 to 3.85 among nonwhites per 100,000 person S.40 Although it is not known whether this reflects an actual increase in the incidence of brain tumors or a difference in reporting and coding practices over time, if the data from the pres- ent study reflect a causal relationship between brain tu- mors and some characteristics of exposure to nonionizing radiation, such a trend would be expected. Despite this accumulation of epidemiologic evidence, the interpretation remains uncertain. It is not known whether the increased risk of brain tumors and leukemia observed among electrical workers is due to the magnetic or electric fields themselves or possibly to a common chemical exposure, for example, to polychlorinated bi- phenyls, organic solvents, or metal fumes, in these oc- cupations. Well- designed epidemiologic and experimental studies are needed to further explore the relationship be- tween EM field exposure and tumorigenesis. 418 Brain Tumors /Lin et al Acknowledgment ' Ann Segelkan assisted in collecting death certificates for this study References 1. Lewin R: Government/industry dispute brain tumor risk. Sci- ence 210:996 -997, 1980. 2. Alexander V, Leffingwell SS, Lloyd JW, et al: Investigation of an apparent increased prevalence of brain tumors in a U.S. petrochem- ical plant. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:97 -107, 1982. 3. Theriault G, Goulet L: A mortality study of oil refinery workers. I Occup Med 21:367 -370, 1979. 4. Thomas TL, Decoufle P, Moure -Eraso R: Mortality among work- ers employed in petrochemical refining and petrochemical plants. I Occup Med 22:97 -103, 1980. 5. Thomas TL, Waxweiler RJ, Moure -Eraso R: Mortality patterns among workers in three Texas oil refineries. I Occup Med 24:135 -141, 1982 6. Wen CP, Tsai SP, McClellan WA, et al: Long -term mortality study of oil refinery workers: 1. Mortality of hourly and salaried workers. Am I Epidemiol 118:526 -541, 1983. 7. Hanis M, Holmes VM, Shallenberger LD, et al: Epidemiologic study of refinery and chemical plant workers. / Occup Med 24:203- 212,1982. 8. Alderson M, Rushton L: Mortality patterns in eight U.K. oil re- fineries. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:139 -145, 1982. 9. Schoenberg BS, Christine BW, Whisnant JP: The descriptive ep- idemiology of primary intracranial neoplasms: The Connecticut ex- perience. Am I Epidemiol 104:499-510, 1976. 10. Grant JJ, Thomas DG: The performance of three approximate confidence limit methods for the odds ratio. Am I Epidemiol 115:453- 470, 1982. 11. Percy C, Stanek E, Gloeckler L: Accuracy of cancer death cer- tificates and its effect on cancer mortality statistics. Am I Public Health 71:242 -250, 1981. 12. Cancer Patient Survival, report No. 5, DHEW publication (NIH) 77 -992. Bethesda, Md.: National Cancer Institute, 1976. 13. Gordis L: Should dead cases be matched to dead controls? Am 1 Epidemiol 115:1 -5, 1982. 14. Preston - Martin S, Henderson BE, Peters J: Descriptive epide- miology of central nervous system neoplasms in Los Angeles County. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:202 -208, 1982. 15. Mancuso TF: Epidemiological study of tumors of the central nervous system in Ohio. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:17 -39, 1982. 16. Nicholson WJ, Seidman H, Selikoff IJ, et al: Brain tumors among operating engineers in the chemical and petrochemical industry in Texas and Louisiana. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:172 -180, 1982. 17. Seidman H, Selikoff IJ, Hammond EC: Mortality of brain tumors among asbestos insulation workers in the United States and Canada. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:160 -171, 1982. 18. Bond GG, Cook RR: Case - control study of brain tumore deaths among employees at a chemical manufacturing plant. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:73 -82, 1982. 19. Milham S: Mortality in aluminum reduction plant workers. I Occup Med 21:475-480,1979. 20. Robinette CD, Silverman C, Jablon S: Effects upon health of occupational exposure to microwave radiation (radar). Am I Epidemiol 112:39 -53, 1980. 21. Vital Statistics of the United States, 1970, vol 2, Mortality, DHEW publication (HRA) 74 -1102. Rockville, Md.: National Center for Health Statistics, 1974. 22. Wertheimer N, Leeper E: Adult cancer related to electrical wires near the home. Int I Epidemiol 11:345 -355, 1982. 23. Wertheimer N, Leeper E: Electrical wiring configurations and childhood cancer. Am I Epidemiol 109:273 -284, 1979. 24. Fulton JF, Cobb S, Preble L, et al: Electrical wiring configurations and childhood leukemia in Rhode Island. Am I Epidemiol 111:292- 296, 1980. 25. Tomenius L, Hellstrom L, Enander B: Electrical constructions and 50HZ magnetic field at the dwellings of tumor cases (0 -18 years of age) in the county of Stockholm. Presented in International Sym- posium on Occupational Health and Safety in Mining and Tunnelling, Prague, June 21 -25, 1982. 26. Milham S: Mortality from leukemia in workers exposed to elec- trical and magnetic fields. N Engl I Med 307:249, 1982. 27. Wright WE, Peter JM, Mack TM: Leukemia in workers exposed to electrical and magnetic fields. Lancet 2:1160 -1161, 1982. 28. McDowall ME: Leukemia mortality in electrical workers in En- gland and Wales. Lancet 1:246, 1983. 29. Coleman M, Bell J, Skeet R: Leukemia incidence in electrical workers. Lancet 1:982 -983, 1983. 30. Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Waves, DHEW publication (FDA) 77 -8010. Rockville, Md.: Food and Drug Administration, 1977. 31. Bassett CAL, Mitchell SN, Graston SW: Pulsing electromagnetic field treatment in ununited fractures and failed arthrodeses. /AMA 247:623 -628, 1982. 32. Kholodov YA: The Effects of Electromagnetic and Magnetic Fields on the Central Nervous System, NASA technical translation, 1967. Moscow: Academy of Science USSR, 1966. 33. Bawin SM, Adey WR: Sensitivity of calcium binding in cerebral tissue to weak environmental electric fields oscillation at low fre- quency. Proc Nat/ Acad Sci 73:1999 -2003, 1976. 34. Blackman CF, Elder JA, Weil CM, et al: Induction of calcium - ion efflux from brain tissue by radiofrequency radiation: Effects of modulation frequency and field strength. Radio Sci 14(6S):93 -98, 1979. 35. Adey WR, Bawin SM: Binding and release of brain calcium by low -level electromagnetic fields: A review. Radio Sci 17(55):149 -157, 1982. 36. Cone CD: Unified theory on the basis mechanism of normal mitotic control and oncogenesis. I Theor Biol 30:151 -181, 1971. 37. Goodman R, Bassett CAL, Henderson AS: Pulsing electromag- netic fields induce cellular transcription. Science 220:1283 -1285, 1983. 38. Easterly CE: Cancer link to magnetic field exposure: A hypoth- esis. Am I Epidemiol 114:169 -174, 1981. 39. Szmigielski S, Szudzinski A, Pietraszek A, et al: Accelerated de- velopment of spontaneous and benzopyrene- induce skin cancer in mice exposed to 2450 -MHZ microwave radiation. Bioelectromagnetics 3:179 - 191,1982. 40. Garfinkel L, Sarokhan B: Trends in brain cancer tumor mortality and morbidity in the United States. Ann NY Acad Sci 381:1 -5, 1982. Journal of Occupational MedicineNol. 27, No. 6 /June 1985 419 July 16, 1985 To: Saratoga City Council City of Saratoga From: John Chu Subject: Traffic Observations on Montpere way and Ravenwood regarding SDR 1595 Following the City Council meeting of 6/19/85, I have conducted a traffic study in the neighborhoods of Montpere Way and Ravenwood. The following is my data: DATE TIME OBSERVATIONS - - - - - -- ------ 7/10/85 5:00 - - - - - -- -------------------------------- 6:30p.m.: @7:35 1 05:06 1 car leaving Ravenwood onto Quito @5:12 1 car entering Ravenwood, return car leaving home. @7:52 @5:28 1 car returning home, entering 1 from Ravenwood. @5:35 1 car coming out of neighborhood. @5:45 1 car returning home. 05 :50 1 car returning home. @5:57 1 car returning home. @6:03 1 car returning home. @6:17 1 car leaving neighborhood. @6:20 1 car leaving onto Quito. @6:25 2 cars. 1 car returning home the other leaving home. total flow: 12 cars in 1.5 hrs. 7/11/85 7:00 - 8:00a.m.: @7:35 1 car leaving home. @7:44 1 car leaving home. @7:47 1 car leaving home. @7:52 1 car leaving home. total flow: 4 cars in 1.0 hr. 7/11/85 5:00 - 6:15p.m.: @5:06 1 car returning home. @5:12 1 car leaving home onto Quito. @5:19 1 car returning home. @5:27 1 car returning home. @5:36 1 car returning home. @5:40 1 car leaving home. @5:47 2 cars. one returning home and the other leaving the neighborhood. @6:02 1 car returning home. @6:12 1 car returning home. total flow: 10 cars in 1.25 hra. T 7/12/85 7:00 - 8:00a.m.: 07:05 1 car leaving home. @7:20 1 car leaving home. @7:34 1 car leaving home. @7:40 1 car leaving home. @7:45 1 car leaving home. _ @7:52 1 car entering neighborhood home. 07:59 1 car leaving home. total flow: 7 cars in one hr. Summary of my observation: 1. Total traffic flow were 33 car in 4.75 hours. or an average of about 7 care per hours. 2. There is no loop around traffic through Ravenwood. 3. It is a quiet neighborhood and there is no traffic problems. DALE M. DRUMM 18395 MONTPERE WAY SARATOGA,-CA 95070 June 17, 1985 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Nine lot subdivision 13744 Quito Road Dear Ladies & Gentlemen: 51) - /6- q , RECEIVED JUN 171985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Please find enclosed a copy of a petition which has been signed by -the residents of the Montpere Ways - Ravenwood and Ravenwood Court subdivision protesting the - approval by the planning commision of the proposed nine lot subdivision to connect into Montpere -Way. We were — successful in obtaining support from all the homes within our neighborhood. We sincerely request that -you consider our concerns when voting on this issue. We feel that the impact of this-subdivision with its access on to existing Montpere Way is far-to great and therefore we urge you to deny or reduce the number of homes allowed in this development. Sincerely,, Dale M. Drumm cc: Saratoga City Council Members /mam PETITION Saratoga City Council May 31, 1985 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: Tentative 9 lot subdivision APN 403 -24 -5 6 & 7 File #SDR -1596 Dear Council Members: We, the residents of Montpere Way and Ravenwood Drive, would like the Saratoga City Council to reconsider the Planning Commission's recent approval of a nine lot subdivision adjacent to Quito Road and connecting to Montpere Way. It is our feeling that the Planning Commission did not adequately con- sider the impact that this proposed subdivision would have on our 30 year old single -story subdivision. We feel that the tentative map should be denied or modified, beyond what the Planning Commission recommended, for the following reasons. 1. We feel that the project is too dense. Nine homes will increase traffic along Montpere Way by at least 18 cars a day. Montpere Way is a very narrow street and when cars are parked on both sides two cars cannot pass each other; one must pull to the side. We feel the increased congestion will ruin the tranquil country atmosphere that now characterizes our neighbor- hood. The previous proposal for this site was four lots, which was accep- table, nine lots are far too many when the subdivision's only access is Mont - pere Way. The configuration of the proposed new strip of Montpere Way, a long narrow road that ends in a cul -de -sac, will aggravate our newly congested road by leading cars and garbage trucks into a dead -end. 2. Several of the larger trees and many of the smaller trees will have to be removed to accomodate this proposed development. If the density could be reduced and the new strip of Montpere Way with it's cul -de -sac shortened, many of these trees could be saved. 3. We would also like to know why the developer was not required to make repairs to the existing strip of Montpere Way (which is already in need of repair) to prepare it for the increased traffic caused by this proposed development. We feel that this upgrading or repairs should be completed by the developer if the project is approved. , 4. Most importantly, we feel that only one -story homes should be allowed to go in adjacent to our existing single -story subdivision. This will allow the new and the old subdivisions to blend together and become a more cohesive and compatible neighborhood. We feel that the site is large enough to provide lots for one -story houses of substantial size, whose value would not be dimi- nished by the homes being one - story. This would also provide us with the privacy that we live in Saratoga for. Additionally, we feel that these homes should be restricted to a size that is compatible with our 1600 to 2000 sq. ft. homes, which would be approximately 2500 to 3000 sq. ft. in size. tit Page 2 .of .4 5. The south property line of the proposed development has a drainage easement for the run -off water from our adjacent subdivision, which is quite heavy during the rainy season. We feel that a retaining wall should be built along the south property line to prevent damage to the new development from erosion due to run -off water. The people that buy these new houses will be our neighbors for years to come. It is important that the subsequent relationship that developes between us be friendly. If our run -off water and soil washes into their houses this friendly relationship is not possible. 6. We feel that the power lines along the south property line should be buried underground as a condition of development of this subdivision. We understand that upgrading the utilities surrounding a new development is nor- mally required. 7. A condition should be imposed requiring the developer to install adequate landscaping along the south property line as will as along Quito Road, for both visual and sound control reasons. 8. We feel that the impact of Hwy 85 on this proposed subdivision should be examined closely. For example: Will any of these expensive homes have to be torn down later on to make way for Hwy 85 it'self or any on /off ramps? We feel this issue should not be ignored due to the fact that Hwy 85 has been funded and is now a reality. In no way is this petition an attempt to stop the development of this property, as we all knew it would occur in due time. Our only request is that what is ultimately built on this property be the right development for the property and be:-compatible to our existing neighborhood and homes. It is our opinion that this development, as approved by the Planning :..._ Commission, is not the right development for this site, unless some of our concerns are satisfied. We are the citizens of Saratoga that will have to live with the development on a day to day basis and we are the people who have invested in Saratoga as a place to reside and bring up our families. We therefore request that this application be denied or modified reflecting our concerns. NAME ADDRESS 65 .. MI: 70 71 72 73 74 75 CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. SAS DATE: 6/11/85 (6/19/85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development Initial: Dept. Iid. C. Atty. C. Mgr. V -699 - Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision to Deny Variance to Permit SUB a Restaurant Use in a Shopping Center which does not meet Rgquired Parking Ratio Standards Issue Summary The applicant has been before the City Council previously to appeal the Planning Commission's denial of a business license to operate a pizza parlor. The business license had been denied as the shopping center in which the business was to be located did not meet zoning ordinance parking ratio standards. Before the Council hearing, the applicant changed his restaurant concept to a Greek - Italian Family Style Restaurant. The Council directed the applicant to return to the Planning Commission to clarify the change in the type of restaurant and to apply for a variance. The Commission reviewed the variance on Max 22, 1985 and denied the request. Recommendation 1. Determine the merits of the,appeaT & :approve or deny Variance V -699, making the necessary findings. 2. Staff recommended denial of Variance V -699. Fiscal Impacts N/A Exhibits /Attachments 1. Appeal letter 2. Staff Report for V -699 3. Resolution No. V -699 -1 4. Minutes dated 5/22/85 Council Action 6/19: Granted appeal. 5. Exhibit B 6. Correspondence Date Received: 'z Hearing Date: - /�- Fee : p{ CITY USE ONLY APPEAL APPLICATION Name of Appellant: ,--�nGHQ�� `G�1CA S Address: ds • 3 SG �a�e�,_�1, Telephone: Name of Applicant: Project File No.: V 6 9 1 Project Address: C` S r10 i �1 �ef1 Q r Project Description: ve Q G Decision Being Appealed: Oq A ��r. \4 UG,C;G�ee- 1POC, G aQ-,C. iG►Jr�G� Grounds for the Appeal (Letter may be attached): T Ve- e ) 5 V CSC % Gf-% Q.Q dv e �o �Cc.Q,� 4n2. S�oPP�C *Please 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 WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF THl: DTrE OF THE DECISIO,IN. S� 4 rF 0 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION APN: 391 -03 -268 I City of Saratoga � BY: 1/ , CAI E: }� INITIALS: DATE: 5/15/85 COMMISSION MEETING: 5/22/85 APPLICANT: Angelo Karavaras OWNER: Phillip Sanfilippo APPLICATION NO. & LOCATION: V -699; 12940 Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road Argonaut Shopping Center ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION REQUESTED: Variance Approval to permit a restaurant use in a shopping center which does not meet required parking standards as defined in the Zoning Ordinance. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: Business License and Building Permits required. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Categorically Exempt ZONING: C -N GENERAL_ PLAN DESIGNATION: Retail Commercial EXISTING LAND USE: Retail Commercial SURROUNDING LAND USES: Service station and office uses to the south; a vacant parcel lies to the north; single family residential uses surround all other sides. PARCEL SIZE: 8.628 Acres NATURAL FEATURES 8 VEGETATION: The lot is level and is presently developed with retail, office and service uses. AVFR66E SITE c1L.OPE: 27 COW" Report to Planning Commission S /15/85 V -699; Karavaras(Sanfilippo), Saratoga - Sunnyvale Page-2 SIZE OF PROPOSED RESTAURANT: 2,172 sq. ft. ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE: The project does not meet all the requirements and standards of the zoning ordinance in that the off - street parking provided by the shopping center does not meet zoning ordinance requirements. PROJECT BACKGROUNO: In March, 1985, Mr. Karavaras applied for a business license to operate a pizza parlor out of a 2,172 sq. ft. space at the Argonaut Shopping Center. Despite the fact that restaurants are permitted uses in this zoning district, staff denied the license because the shopping center does not meet current zoning ordinance requirements for parking. Staff's denial was appealed to the Planning Commission at the Regular Meeting on 3/27/85, and the appeal was denied. The applicant then appealed the Commission's decision to the City Council. However, the applicant changed the proposal from a pizza parlor to a Greek- Italian family style restaurant. At the City Council meeting on 4/17/85, the matter was referred back to the Planning Commission so that the applicant could clarify the change in the type of restaurant and apply for a variance. ANALYSIS AND CONCERNS: An on -site visit parking spaces in the shopping center. completed in early 1982, it was determined required for the uses on site. To obtain for retail uses was used for the entire shot area). This also includes one (1) space deficit of 39 spaces presently exists. reve In that this iping per aled that there are 42S the last parking survey a total of 464 spaces were figure, the parking ratio center (excluding storage employee. Therefore, a The area under consideration for the restaurant is used currently as an office and storage area for the liquor store, on site. Nine (9) parking spaces would be needed for this use according to the parking ratio standards for office uses. For a retail use, approximately 13 spaces would be required. With the new restaurant, the required number of parking spaces would increase to 2S. As the Planning Commission and City Council have noted, the parking lot at Argonaut is not generally filled to capacity. The applicant has also stated that his business will be conducted at times when other uses at the shopping center are closed. However, the need for the parking fluctuates as uses change in the shopping center. Staff feels that granting this variance would mean that a further intensification of use may result. Also, variance findings are difficult to make. The Commission may consider changing the ordinance to take into account parking situations unique to shopping centers. FINDINGS: 1. Practical Difficulty or Unnecessary Physical Hardship The strict interpretation of the ordinance would serve to reduce further intensification of use in the shopping center. This would riot Report to Planning Commission 5/15/85 V -699; Karavaras(Sanfilippo ), Saratoga /Sunnyvale Page 3 mean that the property owner would be precluded from renting out any area within the center. Also, the applicant may choose another location for his business. It is the City's right to restrict business uses in accordance with the zoning ordinance. Lastly, re- striping the parking area to allow for compact spaces may be done to increase the number of spaces available. Therefore, no practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship exists. 2. Exceptional or Extraordinary Circumstances There does seem to be exceptional circumstances in this case in that the parking facilities on site do appear to be adequate for the present uses. In the area where the restaurant is proposed, there is no automobile access to residential streets. Therefore, parking overflows on to public streets would not be a major concern. 3. Common Privilene The strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance would not deprive the property owner of a right to rent out spaces within the shopping center. Nor would the applicant be deprived of relocating his business to another suitable location. Although restaurants are permitted uses in this zoning district, adequate parking has been a constant consideration in determining whether a business license is approved. 4. Special Privilege Because there is no practical difficulty associated with the project, granting the variance would be considered a special privilege. Therefore, this finding cannot be made. S. Public Health. Safety and Welfare The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or detrimental to properties or improvements in the vicinity. G. Present or Future Traffic Volume It would not appear that future or present traffic volumes would be significantly effected by the restaurant use. There is no auto access from the area of the shopping center where the restaurant is proposed to residential streets. And, the size of the restaurant.is not such that significant additional traffic may result. 7. Parking or Loading of Vehicles on Public Streets Again, because of the location of the proposed restaurant, the potential for parking overflows to public streets does not appear to be an issue. No direct access to public streets exists in this section of the shopping center. Report to Planning Commission S /1S /8S V -699; Karavaras(Sanfilippo), Saratoga - Sunnyvale Page 4 8. Safety Hazard Granting the variance will not result in an obvious safety hazard. Use of residential streets or on- street parking will not be impacted by the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the variance having been unable to make Findings #1, 3, & 4. If the Planning Commission can make these findings per Exhibit "B ", staff has the following conditions:. 1. A business license to operate the restaurant and building permits for interior remodeling shall be required. 2. Any proposed signs shall meet the requirements of the sign ordinance. APPROVED: Diana Lewis Planner P.C. Agenda: S/22/8S DL /dsc VARIANCE ZSEXPXMWff RESOLUTION NO. V -699 -1 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILE NO: V -699 WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received the application of Phillip Sanfilipo for a Variance to perm a restaurant use in the Argonaut Shopping Center, when the- amount of parkim at the shopping center aoes not m Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road and WHEREAS, the applicant (M:§4 (has not) met the burden of proof required to support his said application; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for the Variance be, and the same is here- by ( (denied) subject to the following conditions: per the Staff Report dated May 15, 1985 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that (t7��n�r±rra_aael�ed_ hereto -_ lie- approved - aid- adopted) (the Planning Commission could not make all the requisite findings), and the Secretary be, and is hereby directed to notify the parties affected by this decision. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 22nd day of following roll call vote: May 19 85 by the AYES: Commissioners Burger, J. Harris, B.,Harris and Peterson NOES: None / ABSENT: Commissioners Schaefer and Si gfried 1 ATTEST: - U 4r- Planning Commission _ Page 11 Minutes - Meeting 5/22/85 V -698 there really isn't a other logical place to put the family room. Commissioner J. Harris a ded that another exceptional circumstance would be that the applicant i so close to Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road, with all the noise. Commissioner J. Harris mo ed to approve V -698, adding the condition that the new addition termina a at the point that is flush with the dining room wall, making the s thern setback off of the turnaround 16 ft., instead of 10 ft., and aking the findings previously discussed. Commissioner Burger seco ded the motion, which was carried 4 -1, with Commissioner B. Harris di senting. It was clarified to Mr. Sun that, since this is a corner to and he only has a 10 ft. rear yard setback, there should be no problem in flipping the bathroom addition over to the other side of the additi Mr. Sun was asked to work with Staff in determining the correct 1acement. (Commissioner Schaefer left the me 'ng at 11:10 p.m.) 15. -699 - Phillip Sanfilipo, Request for Variance Approval to per- mit a restaurant use in the Argonaut Shopping Center, when the amount of parking at the shopping center does not meet zoning ordinance requirements at 12940 Sara- toga- Sunnyvale Road in the CN zoning district ------------------------------------------------------------------- Staff explained the application, giving the history of the matter. They discussed the parking on site. They commented that they are unable to make the findings and recommend denial. The public hearing was opened at 11:12 p.m. Angelo Karavaras, the applicant, stated that he had nothing further to say on the issue at this time. Commissioner J. Harris moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Burger seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner J. Harris stated that the Commission has been so concerned about the parking, and she could not make finding #4, since she believes it would be a special privilege. Regarding finding #7, she shares concern that if the parking were to overflow, there is no place for it to go. She noted that there is going to be a stop light at Blauer and it is going to be a very busy street; therefore, the parking would have to be in back of the center and she would hate to see the residents in that area bear the burden. She moved to deny V -699, per the Staff Report dated May 15, 1985, being unable to make the findings. Commissioner Burger seconded the motion, which was carried 4 -0. The appeal period was noted. 16. C -220 - City of Sa atoga, Consider Amending the text of the Sign Ordin ce regarding: 1) The types and sizes of signs needi g Design Review or Sign Permits; 2) Increas- ing the agg egate sign area permitted in commercial dis- tricts; 3) ding Definitions; 4) Adding criteria for Sign Review; 5) New regulations for freestanding signs; and 6) Other mendments clarifying or creating more flexibility i the ordinance per Ordinance NS -3 (to be continued to une 12, 1985) ` ------------------------ ----------------------------------------- It was directed that this matt r be continued to June 12, 1985. 17. C -221 City of Sarato , Consider Amending the text of the Non- conforming Uses and Structures Ordinance regarding: 1) The continuatio maintenance, expansion and replacement of existing nonc nforming uses and structures; 2) Elimi- nation of noncon orming uses and structures after lapse of time; 3) Nonc forming sites; and 4) Other amendments to clarify the o inance per Ordinance NS -3 (to be con- tinued to June 12 1985) %�� .*+ k� ----------------------------I-------------------------------------- ANGELO KARAVARAS 125 36th Avenue San Mateo, CA 94403 (415) 341 -1804 April 22, 1985 1. According to the ordinance, the unit could only be leased to a warehouse; however, the shopping center restricts warehouse use. Besides the fact, in reality rental will prohibit any prospective renters to rent the unit for this purpose. 2. The prospective unit available is at the north end of the shopping center where the traffic flow is very limited. Most of the traffic and conges- tion is between Safeway and Longs which is on the opposite end of the unit. Consequently, the parking is north of the end unit in question which is not used most of the time; thus, it attracts undersirables. By allowing the proposed business the benefits for the shopping center and the community will increase, hence, adding more revenue for the city. 3. The Argonaut merchants expressed a much needed demand for a restaurant in the shopping center which will serve the employees of the center as well as the community of Saratoga. I feel that denial of a license for the proposed restaurant will deprive the community of Saratoga a needed ser- vice as well as depriving myself from serving the community with a well managed and fine dining restaurant. 4. The granting of the variance will not be a special privilege because the unit available is permissible for restaurant use. There are restaurants in the shopping center which do not pose a parking problem. 5. The same regulations and limitations that are currently applied to the Chinese restaurant and the delicatessen, both located in the Argonaut shopping center, will apply to the proposed restaurant. By approving the licenses for these restaurants, the commission acknowledges that they are not detrimental to the public's health, safety or welfare. V-bgq We the merchants of the Argonaut Shopping Center feel the new proposed restaurant of Mr. Angelo Karavaras will indeed benefit the whole shopping center and community. We do not feel there is a parking problem in the shopping center. There is always a great deal of excessive parking. Even if the proposed business is established, primarily, the majority of the business proposed would be done in the evening when the businesses of the shopping center have closed. Therefore, the entire shopping center's parking lot will be primarily empty. We the merchants of Argonaut Shopping Center encourage the restaurant proposed to come into effect. We don't agree the unit should not be rented to Angelo Karavaras when in reality there is not a parking ,problem, nor shortage. FIRM NAME Va 2 t,_4 4. CENTRE COURT Z�4 6. 7. TITLE n A"- U- SIGNATYR 8. . . . . . ................ 9. ARGOXX DRY CLEANERS 10. 13. crt 17ZI We the homeowners of Saratoga, feel there is not a parking shortage in the Argonaut Shopping Center when in reality the parking lot on a day -to -day basis has excessive parking. We do not understand why he should not use the.unit as a restaurant when, in fact, it is permissible for restaurant use and the unit is available. It would be understandable if the shopping center had a parking problem; how- ever, it does not. We do not feel that under these circumstances Angelo Karavaras should be denied opening a new business in Sara- toga. HOMEOWNER NAME 1. 2. ��rL��LaC /EPIC 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Y / P_� 1�.,: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. V_&1_14' i'� vii � 1- <�°a. � �C�- �"'x -° • + `-��� -fit, ��..� We the homeowners of Saratoga, feel there is not a parking shortage in the Argonaut Shopping Center when in reality the parking lot on a day -to -day basis has excessive parking. We do not understand why he should not use the unit as a restaurant when, in fact, it is permissible for restaurant use and the unit is available. It would be understandable if the shopping center had a parking problem; how- ever, it does not. We do not feel that under these circumstances Angelo Karavaras should be denied opening a new business in Sara- toga. /�bDRESS I 8. 9.. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. I x-0'1 G 20 - -1--r ? i A /1 � HOMEOWNER NAME 7?r� I�it r?�< e (7Z 2. l (`v /:�r L� �t a_i�i U L/. d/�I�C.C� ! / ��/ G�C.CJ � C/U �— UZI 4_1 3. 5. �� ;; "� /, / /�- � � Cl ll � � . �r•E' Q' %CSC/ 6. a�r� .2 6cj� a.Y 7. 8. 9.. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. I x-0'1 G 20 - -1--r ? i A /1 � CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. g? DATE: 6/11/85 (6/19/85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development Initial: Dept. Iid. C. Atty. C. Mgr. DH -1 - Ronald TroyonTRh fYrsS ,7Appeaf o7 -P7a5-n nng- Commiission---- - ~ -- -- -- SLBJI`CT: Denial of a Dance Hall License Issue Summary 1. At its meeting of May 22, 1985, the Planning Commission denied a request for a Dance Hall License for an existing establishment known as Rhett's after a lengthy public hearing. 2. The major concerns of the•public were; 1) Excessive noise (loud music); 2) Disturbances (fights) created by patrons; 3) Damage to property; 4) Privacy impacts; 5) Abusive language of patrons; 6) Litter; 7) Loss of tenants; 8) Traffic and parking .problems; 9) Outdoor urinating; and, 10) General incompatibility of the use with the Village. 3. The existing operation of the use violates portions of the.General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Housing Ordinance and other codes. 'Recomrnndation 1. Staff recommended that the Commission deny the application for a Dance Hall License. 2. The Council should open the public hearing,.take testimony and close the public hearing prior to determining the merits of the appeal. 3. The Council can approve, uphold the denial of, or, conditional approve the Dance Half �Licens-e..- 4. If the Council determines that the Dance Hall License should be granted, it must make the necessary findings per Section 4 -40 of the Municipal Code. Fiscal Impacts It is possible that continued disturbances will require increased expenditures for police protection and time spent by City CSO's. A considerable amount of staff time has been expended recording complaints. Exhibits /Attachments 1. Appeal letter 2. Staff Report dated 5/16/85 3. Resolution No. DH -1 -1 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated 5/22/85 5. Exhibits Council Action Ir 6/19: Denied appeal. 6. Correspondence & other information received on this project. MAC 31 195 UN ►j�. D���PMENS �pMM APPEAL APPLICATION Date Received: Hearing Date: 5 Fee : CITY USE ONLY Name of Appellant: 5,464-70 �4 4210 C/ *-'7eS Address: Telephone: ?4// — /D00 61- J3,f /LEI Name of Applicant f�on�!}�� --T-,90y ,4A( Project File No.: / Project Address: Z7 B,4SiN 4 S, Project Description: Decision Being Appealed: Grounds for the Appeal (Letter may be attached): Ap ell Signat re *Please 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 {VITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF 'rHtE DATE OF THE DECISION. y (� t: • 0 I 11 vyCall, 110 r REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION �hxr *1 Sara BYY C DATE: INITIALS:__ DATE: S/16/BS COMMISSION MEETING: 5/22/85 APN: 503 -2S -08 APPLICANT: Saratoqa Assoc., Inc. PROPERTY OWNER: Paul Flanagan APPLICATION NO. & LOCATION: DH -1; 14577 Biq Basin Way ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of application for a Dance Hall License. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: License to be obtained from City Manager. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Categorically Exempt ZONING: C -C GENERAL PLAN 'DESIGNATION: Retail Commercial EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial SURROUNDING LAND USES: Commercial; Residential PARCEL SIZE: 3,330 sq. ft. (per applicant) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF STRUCTURE: 15t Floor 1915 sq. ft. (per applicant) 2nd Floor 1995 SQ. ft. Total 3910 sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF DANCE FLOOR: 264 sq. ft. PARKING TO BE PROVIDED: Parkinq District .# 1, 170 parking spaces total, out of which the property owner pays for approximately 7. azF'C� . a Report to the Planning Commission 5/16/85 DH -1, 14577 Big Basin Way PaQe 2. HOURS OF DANCE HALL OPERATION: Wednesday - Thursday, 9 -12 P.M. Friday - Saturday, 9 P.M. -1:30 A.M. ANTICIPATED NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS IN DANCE HALL AT ONE TIME: 75 -100 persons BACKGROUND In March, 1984 Rhett's applied for a dance hall permit from the City Council. R provisional license was granted in May, and renewed in November, 1984, pending revision by the Council of the Ordinance regulating dance halls. Subsequently, Ordiance 38.123 was adopted, requiring that approval of dance hall licenses be granted by the Planning Commission prior to issuance by the City Manager. The subiect o1= this Staff. Report is Rhett's application for approval of a dance hall license pursuant to the new ordinance. The purpose of the Planning Commission review of dance hall license applications is to ascertain whether the proposed use complies with the requirements of Ordinance 38.123, the Zoning Ordinance, and other applicable codes and statutes, and whether it can be conducted without detriment to the public health, safety, or welfare. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The dance hall license would permit continued operation of a bar with amplified music and a dance floor on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday evenings. The applicant estimates that 75 -100 patrons occupy the bar at one time, and states he currently stations an employee at the door to requl'ate the flow of traffic into the building. The dance floor is approximately 11 ft, by 24 ft., or 264 sq. ft. in size. The square footage of the bar is approximately 1915 sq. ft. The restaurant on the second floor of the building is approximately 1995 sq. ft. No modifications are proposed to the building at this time. The site is served by Parking District 41, ,in which 170 parking spaces are available. Of the 170 space, approximately 7 are paid for by Mr. Flanagan. ANALYSIS & CONCERNS: The dance hall license is sought for a use within the C -C Zoning district, as required by Ordinance 38.123. The use does generate some sale tax revenues which benefit the City as a whole. However, staff has several concerns specific to this application. Although Rhett's is located within a commercial district, many of the surroundinq properties are residential in use. The residential areas are close enouqh to be subject to spillover nuisance impacts from the dance hall. These include noise and disturbances from patrons entering and Leaving the establishment,and from the music, parking violations, lettering, and vandalism. Late night socializing can carry. over into park.inq areas as individuals leave the establishment or while outside awaiting entry, resulting in a nuisance to adjoining residences and L Report to the Planning Commission DH -1, 14577 Big Basin Way requiring additional policing costs 8 hibit "D ". 5/16/80 Page 3 (Please see attached letters in There are other establishments in the Commericial District along Big Basin Way which have combined restaurant /bar facilities. However, in Staff's view the dance hall function at Rhatt's is separate from the restaurant, catering primarily to a young clientele seekinq late night entertainment, and less to the restaurant operation. The importance of this distinction is the greater potential for nuisance type problems associated with the dance hall use. Two other nuisance as of the dance hall application are garbage and the restroom situation. The dumpsters for Rhett's are located on the riqht side of the building in an alley currently open to pedestrian traffic. It is unclear to staff at this'time whether they are located on Mr. Flanagan's property. A more precise site plan has been reguested from the applicant and will be available at the time for the hearing. In any case, the dumpsters are visible from the street and from the left side windows of. the adjacent property. It appears there are no reasonable options in terms of dumpster location, but staff believes the applicant should be responsible for, screening the dumpsters from view and maintaining_ cleanliness in the area. In terms of restrooms, the dance hall currently contains only two stalls with no available waiting room. Considering the capacity of the bar, the restrooms are extremely inadequate. Complaints received of bar patrons relieving themselves outside the premises illustrate this problem. Additional restrooms would be one of the items necessary to make the dance hall use viable at the given location. The lack of restrooms is also a code violation.-as will be discussed in another section of this report. Another concern relates to traffic generated by the dance hall use. There is increased traffic along Big Basin Way, and more cars needing parking space. Although parking is available in parking district lots, letters from citizens indicate the lots are full to capacity on weekends. In staff's opinion, it is also possible that patrons of Rhett's seek street parking as an alternative to walking the distance from parking lots. Complaints have been received regarding illegal parking (block:inq driveways, etc.) and pedestrian traffic movinq heedlessly into vehicle lanes. These situations do not exist solely because of the dance hall at Rhett's. However, the dance hall use tends to generate more traffic and parking problems than previous restaurant /bar uses on the same premises, since more people and cars are arriving at and leaving 'the establishment during the course of an evening. In this regard, it should be noted that section 4- 40(b)(2) of Ordinance 38.123 authorizes the Commission to require on -site parking spaces for a dance hall in excess of the requirements normally imposed. Noise from the dance hall is a concern because of code and guideline inconsistency as well as because of the nuisance as It is staff's opinion that. the noise problems make the dance hall use inconsistent with the City's General Plan. e Report to the Planninq_ Commission DH -1, 14577 Big Basin Way Policy N.1.0 of the Noise Element States: from e:•:eessive noise ". Area 1 Policy #15 states: 5/16/85. Page 4 "Protect Saratoga residents "Development in the Village shall be designed to minimize noise and other disruptive influence ". With regard to amplified music, Article V of the City Code, dealing with noise control, contains these sections which staff believes are violated by the current operation: 1. Section 8.83: This section prohibits noise levels more than 8 dBa above the local ambient at any point outside the property plane of properties in commercial or industrial districts. Section 8- 87(b): This section requires filing of a registration statement with the City containing information regarding the proposed amplification (hours of operation, sound producing power of the equipment, volume of sound to be produced, distance sound will be audible, etc.). To staff's knowledge, no such registration is currently on file. 3. Section 8- 87(f)(2): Operation of amplification equipment in commercial districts shall, occur between 7:30 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. The current hours of operation at Rhett's extend to 1:00 or 1:30 A.M. 4. Section 8- 87(f)(5): Volume and hours to be "so controlled that the sound will not be unreasonably loud, raucous, tarring, disturbing, or a nuisance to reasonable persons of normal sensitiveness within the area of audibility ". The letters of complaint received by the City suggest that this condition is not being met. S. Section 8 -90: "Notwithinstanding any other provisions of this chapter, and in addition thereto, it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully make or continue or cause to be made or continued, any loud, unnecessary or unusual noise which disturbs the peace or quiet of any neighborhood or which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable Person of normal sensitiveness residinq in the area. The standards which shall be considered in determining whether a violation of this section exists shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (a) The level of the noise; (b) The intensity of the noise; (c) Whether the nature of the noise is unusual; (d) Whether the origin of the noise is natural or unnatural; 4 0 0 Report to the Planning Commission 5/16/85 DH -1, 14577 Biq Basin Way Page 5 (e) The level and intensity of the background noise, if any; (f) The proximity of the noise to residential sleeping facilities; (g) The nature and zoning of the area within which the noise emanates; (h) The density of the inhabitation of the area within which the noise emanates; (i) The time of the day or of the night noise occurs; ( j ) The duration of the noise; M. Whether the noise is recurrent, intermittent or constant; and (1) Whether the noise is produced by a commercial or noncommercial activity ". There are some additional code compliance problems currently existing on the dance hall site: 1. Plumbing Code: The Uniform Plumbing Code requires two water closets and a urinal in the rien's restroom, and two water closets in the women's restroom for a bar with the number of patrons accomodated at Rhett's. 2. Zoning Ordinance: The signage on the site is over 8 sq ft. and should have gone through design review. Also, the restaurant operation has outdoor dining without benefit of a use permit. 3. State Highway Code: The awninq over the main entrance to Rhett's encroaches into the right -of -way for Highway 9. It is staff's understandinq that this encroachment requires a permit from CALTRANS. SUMMARY It is staff's belief that a dance hall use is inappropriate at the given I n n i inn, A hatter, lnr_.a.tinn wni{lri h nnA i.jhara ni {i.ganr.N Problems could be mnr-ra AffACtivAly he i5nlat.ed from rRRirlanti,3) ArAAF Anrl nther nnmmArnial ;_e•S The niiiSanr. A nrnhlemy relative t.o this Fnranifir gitA n_A_narAlly Stam from t. he i ntAr f _i r. P. �hAtl.leen t he commercial anti re5 i rient. i A l I I R A F; i n A ralAt.ivaly small araa, Tripal 1 �i rlanr_.e+. hal l Shniilrl be Fituatgd where A nrivAt.A iirity f r r_.A rniil ri he rPniiirPrl to minimi7A n1ri gannA imnart.�. In addition to the nu i ganrA ni_iASt. i nnc thr rA Ara node nmmn 1 i ant( _n ;rnh 1 N.mg nn this citejahinh _nrPvent Staff frnm mak•inq nee. of the nece -S- ry findinnR, T t. Should be. noted that no eSt.rablishment with am ,plified mu5ir cnul_d rmm�ly i.iith the nniFr rnntrn1 nrHinanne if music. were planned beyond 8:00 P,M: If the. rommi55ion wishe.5 to consider approval of dance halls with amplifiRd music you may wish to recommend appropriate changes in the Ordinance to the City Council, Repert the Planning Commission OH-11' 14q77 Big Basin Way 1. 5/|G/85 Page G Staff cannot make. this finding due to non-conplianoe with the Zoning Ordinance, the Plumbing Code' and the Noise Control Ordinance, as discussed in the analysis section of this report. 2. Consistency With Zoning Ordinance Objective,.' Although the applicant 1s within an appropr1ate zone:. the location of the ProQosed use is not beneficial to other existing uo�a' in that they are subject to nuisance and traff10 impaota. Therefore, staff cannot. �eke-- thif, findinn, 3. Public Health, Safety and Welfare: The nroPcoP.d i ise iu dstr1nental to tho,. publ10 heA- lth` safety end welfare., -i n that th�r� �r� nuiaa�ce and traffic impaots to �dj�oent properties, and in that additional 1 a enforcement is required. Hdditionelly' there has been v8ndaliam to property and disturbance of the occunants thereof. Therefore, staff cannot make this finding. RECOMMENDATION 'teff recommends denial of the dance hall license application, having been unablc to make any of the findinQ5. If the Ccmmi s5ion wt -hes to approve th �P�l!o�tinn they must ��k� the ���ropr�ut� f1�d���s' and 5taff recommends the folloy1ng conditions: i i u! tho' ). The. Ocmmo�cn sh�d r�c six subject to fulfillment of all other cond1t1cna. License should be renewable for one year if all conditions continue to be net. 2. The Commission should recommend to the City Council an amendment to the Noise Cnntrol Ordinance such that dance halls with amplified music can operate in compliance with City Code. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide rcatrooms in compliance with the Plumbing Code prior to issuance of the license. The restroona should be designed so that there. is Waiting room available and that entry doors can remain unlocked. 4. Des 1�n Re�i�u ��Pro��l i� reguired for oig�o�e on the �itc pr1cr to issuance of the license by the City Manager, 5. 8pIQl-ioant shall comply with all requirements of the 8u1ld1ng and PlumbinQ Codes, and of the 8u1ld1nq In5Peot1on Department prior to issuance of the 1 1oense. G 0 Report to the Planning Com.Miss1on 5/lG/8s DH-1, 14S77 Bin R;;-in Way P�g� 7 G. Hpplicant shall provide adequate 5oreeninQ for Qarbage dumpsters and .shall maintain cleanliness in the area. The screening shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission Pricr to issuance of the license. 7. Hpplioant oh�ll submit evidence. that. sufficient. parking' as defined by th� Plann1nQ Commission. 1 rod use. If there � pp is not sufficient parking available, the owner of the subject property shall nrovidf� the City of Saratoga with evidence of a written agreement to lease additional park1ng space m1thin 300 ft. of the dance holl' Pr1cr to 1nauanoe of the license. 8. During all hours of the public dance, the employee at the door of the establishment to the public not to blook the entry way or nideualk in front of Rhett'a. The entranoe all times except to a! low entry and axit. 8PPROUEO: SL/bjo P.C. Agenda 5/22/85 applicant shall post an maintain order and advise congregate on the public door shall remain closed at Sally Logothet+_i�' Planner FILE NO: DH -1 RESOLUTION NO. DH -1 -1 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received the application of Rhett's for a Dance Hall License for an existing establishment at 14577 Big Basin Way, in the C -C Zontaq- Gr and WHEREAS, the applicant { .4) (has not) met the burden of proof required to support his said application; .NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after careful consideration .of maps, facts, exhibits and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for the Dance Hall Licence be, and the same is here- by (.�rx�4) (denied) subject to the following conditions: per the Staff Report dated May 16, 1985 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that (the - Report- be- mod'- Iat�cd) (the Planning Commission could not make all the requisite findings), and the Secretary be, and is hereby directed to notify the parties affected by this decision. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 22nd day of May 1985 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Siegfried, Burger, J. Harris, Peterson, & Schaefer bt NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: 2ZM44J :3 Sccru Lai y Chairman. Planninr. Sol Planning Commission Minutes - Meeting 5/22/85 Page. 4..,. 8. A -1052 - Mark Rapport, Request for Design Review Modification Mod. - Approval to further exceed the 6,200 sq. ft. allowable floor area standard by increasing the size of the recent- ly approved two -story residence from 6,930 sq. ft. to 7,429 sq. ft. on Lot #4, Tract 6732, Montalvo Heights Drive (to be withdrawn) ------------------------------------------------------------------ This application was withdrawn by the applicant. 9. DH -1 - Rhett's, Request Approval of a Dance Hall License for an existing establishment at 14577 Big Basin,Way, in the C -C zoning district ---------------------------------------- -------------------- - - - - -- Commissioner B. Harris abstained from the discussion and voting on this matter. Staff explained that, the ordinance requires that the Planning Commission review this application before a dance hall license can be granted. They described the location and operation of Rhett's and gave the history of the complaints lodged against them. They noted that, in addition, there are problems relative to traffic, parking and lack of restroom facilities. Staff stated that they have determined that the use is inappropriate for the area and are unable to make the findings and recommend that the Commission recommend that the City not issue this license. The correspondence received in opposition was noted. The public hearing was opened at 8:26 p.m. Ron Troyan, president of Saratoga Associates, which owns and operates Rhett's, commented that, after reading the Staff Report, he wondered ) he had gotten himself in this situation. He explained that in t original formation of Rhett's he invested as a limited partner, and because of some management problems it was decided that he should take over the management and operation of this facility, and he has done this to the best of his ability. He submitted a list of names and addresses of' clients of Rhett's who would like to see it continue, noting that quite a few of the names are local residents of Saratoga. He addressed the noise nuisance noted in the Staff Report, and indicated that inside they had just added curtains across the front windows, which will mitigate the noise. He added that they have required their sound equipment operator to keep the noise level below 8 decibels above the local ambient, and have instructed them to keep it in the range of 4. Mr. Troyan commented that they are suggesting to clients waiting in line to go to other local establishments. He explained that he had discussed the noise problem with the Sheriff's Department and submitted a letter he had sent to them. He noted that Lt. Wilson has indicated that he has received no complaints within the last three months about any individuals who participate in the activities of Rhett's. He added that Lt. Wilson had commented that he has no more trouble with Rhett's than anyone else in the area, and he has the area patrolled heavily. Mr. Troyan commented that he had asked Lt. Wilson how they might help, and he had suggested a sign on the exit door, asking patrons to leave the area quickly and quietly. He indicated that they were going to follow that suggestion. He commented that they were trying to work the problems out and be a good neighbor in the area. He addressed the restrooms, noting that there were also restrooms upstairs. He also indicated that they keep their noise level relative to amplified sound below the standards. Mr. Troyan commented that they had not known the awning and signage were in violation and will correct them. , He concluded that he has tried to conduct a good business and comply with all the known codes and laws. Lynn Gilmartin Lindsey, of the Stone Pine Homeowners Association, submitted a letter in opposition to the application. She commented tv Rhett's primary customer base is that of surrounding college stude and advertising appears in all the college newspapers, promoting lc...- cost alcoholic beverages and entertainment appealing to the age group of college students. She indicated that this has resulted in a nightly 1 Planning Commission Minutes - Meeting 5/22/85 DH -1 Page 5 influx into the Village of large groups of college students who do not respect the rights of the surrounding personal residences as to peace and quiet, private parking areas, disposal of drinking containers and related debris. She added that groups of patrons congregate outdoors and create disturbances within the area by the level of noise. She indicated that, as a general rule, the patrons have been unresponsive to requests to move on or lower the level of communication. She commented that they have spoken to the patrolmen and the Sheriff's Department has increased their trafficing of the area as a direct result of Rhett's. She indicated that they could clearly hear the music in their area. She added that the Village has had a unique atmosphere of quaintness, serenity and peacefulness, and this has been adversely affected by the influx of students. She stated that the City has a responsibility to the community to protect the residents from actions of others which violate the private residents' rights to peace and quiet, protection of private property and privacy. Frank Benke, owner of property at 14590 and 14573 Big Basin Way, and 14655 Oak Street, spoke in opposition to the license. He stated that he lost three out of six tenants in an apartment building located across the street from Rhett's, due to noise from loud and abrusive language, music from car stereos and racing cars. He pointed out the trash which litters the front lawns after a weekend and the illegal parking. He also noted that they stored trash in his easement, which he believes to be a health hazard. Mr. Benke also noted the number of male customers he has observed using the walkway and side of his building as an outhouse. He urged that everyone work together to keep the Village beautiful, instead of letting one desirable element ruin it for everyone. Mary Boscoe, of Stone Pines condominiums, noted that there had been bloody man on her patio who had been in a fight. Jeanine Lapanier, manager of the Saratoga Motel at 14626 Big Basin Way, spoke in opposition. She addressed the fights and the urinating. Carol Resner, 14611 Big Basin Way, indicated that the problems outlined tonight started 1 -1/2 years ago. She commented that there have also been patrons of Rhett's having sexual intercourse in their front yard. She also pointed out illegal parking on her property and parts of their fence have been removed. She added that these people are often quite drunk and very hostile. She commented that the people in the neighborhood have no recourse and are innocent victims. Gladys Hernandez, owner of the Saratoga Motel, noted that their driveway is blocked, property destroyed, and vile language used. She also pointed out that there were fights outside their motel. Doris Benke, 14655 Oak Street, stated that she has had a lot of complaints from her tenants regarding Rhett's. She addressed the noise coming from the establishment. Leanne Hernandez, 14626 Big Basin Way, stated that in the thirty years she has lived in Saratoga she has never seen anything so out of keeping with the character of the Village of Saratoga. The owner of Rhett's cafe stated that he would like to have the privilege to stay on with any decision that is made. Commissioner Siegfried moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner J. Harris seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner Burger commented as follows: Because of the number and nature of complaints that were received in the packet, I made a site visit to Rhett's, accompanied by my husband on Saturday night and Sunday morning. We arrived in the Village at 12:45 and departed at 2:00 a.m. Between 12:45 and 1:15 we sat in the Duke of Wellington. We left there at 1:15 and spent about 15 minutes walking up Big Basin Way towards.the - 5 - Planning Commission Minutes - Meeting 5/22/85 DH -1 Page residential area, crossing the street and coming back down, passing the front of Rhett's, and then recrossing the street. From 1:30 until 2:00 a.m. we stood directly outside the Duke of Wellington on the corner and observed what happened for half an hour. I will report exactly what I saw. Bathroom facilities apparently are inadequate.. The males relieved themselves outside. Females came across the street to use the facilities at the Duke of Wellington with no objection from the management at the Duke of Wellington. As far as nuisance,. noise and traffic are concerned, I observed between 1:30 and 2:00 a.m. high decibel music when the door of Rhett's opened, loitering outside Rhett's, drinking outside Rhett's, yelling and screaming in the streets, excessive use of foul language, prolonged honking of horns, reving motors, racing around corners, use of Big Basin Way in front of Rhett's to double park, back up, turn around, drive down the wrong side of the street, patrons of Rhett's standing in or running across Big Basin Way, necking and petting along the sidewalks on both sides of the street. a lot of parking up Big Basin Way adjacent to residences, with no attempt by the patrons of Rhett's to quiet down as they entered the residential area. There was an employee stationed outside the front door of Rhett's. He was totally useless. He made no attempt to regulate noise, foot traffic, auto congestion or loitering. The dumpster next door to Rhett's was open and almost full. Between 1:30 and 2:00 I observed the Sheriff's car ride by once, shortly before closing time. There was little or no disturbance outside Rhett's at that time; people had not yet spilled out on the streets. There was no evidence of a Sheriff's patrol during the peak time of disturbance. Commissioner Siegfried noted that he had observed many of the same things pointed out by Commissioner Burger. Commissioner Peterr•n commented that this is a use that is frankly incompatible with Village; it is too close to residential; it takes up parking; it _S noisey, and he certainly cannot support it. Commissioner Siegfried pointed out that, on the petitions signed by customers in support, approximately 20 out of 100 live in Saratoga. Commissioner Burger moved to recommend denial of DH -1, per the Staff Report dated May 16, 1985. Commissioner Siegfried seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 5 -0. The appeal period was noted. The City Attorney stated that if there is no appeal, or if there is an appeal and if the decision is affirmed, the decision becomes effective at that time. In other words, if there is no appeal, 10 days from now the dancing should cease. If there is an appeal, then it would wait until the decision by the City Council. if the City Council affirms the decision on appeal, the dancing should cease on that date. 10a. GPA 85 -2 Joseph Kennedy and Karen Mayers, Consider Amending the 10b. C -219 - General Plan and Zoning Designations of the northern - 10c. LLA 47 - most 1.525 acres of a 5.485 acre site from Residential - Hillside Conservation Single Family /HC-RD (maximum \Are) sity of .5 DU /Acre) to Residential -Very Low Density gle Family /R -1- 40,000 (maximum density of 1.09 DU/ at 15480 Peach Hill Road and Grant Approval for Line Adjustment Staff explained th application and the history of the site. They indicated. that th were recommending that there be a change to the General Plan an the zoning, but that it be to the existing lot, rather than the area o be attached to that lot, and the change be from R -1- 40,000 to HCRD, w ich would preclude any further subdivision of the property. They adde that, with that provision, they would recommend approval of the lot li a adjustment. Discussion followed o�the options. The public hearing was opene- 9:07 p.m. John Carey, who is planXiing to purchase the property, described the 6 WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. .fie s- I cc I_cU� Ave-__ '5� Jost- q 5 l 2S� I y3yo 4c4i4Y bde;UP #0 �,,�,� ,t osc , c✓� . M2 7 12 GU i S.. WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. alil� • I • ►i �► -T" S7 O �V7 r ���56 S "IGNr i�e.►�6� �tiv .� iv 14 5--47 13 /r— gaol —s ztv L n— Y WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. lsa � t3 v" 1 v �3 2 M • I C�if��[ r r • 211 6.4 c. C I� ��/� >> 3'7 0 - 0 3 a c� WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR PROVIDED BELOW. i NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE • v WOO, ANN 5 S ( e..-,....` i dV /6 -u 'i Zoe f��n�s�ea. ae- I •v i J // C1�.t.Wr� w�J1'h.Qii/L Ct .SU`�gf CCA GS k 2y /,ice /^/42�2 t /�•� /� lcc/ I Ao-e' WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PR_IVI_L.E_GES_ ?._ IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. d� � 40 s lq)el- C WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. 817,9 roc s('4",uNyv,�c, Vq- m/r, � I R.- A) clUuA" � V 1 56 � i Ei -9 WOM RAN WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. tr -�, SW.Kror, A 6 A 9 So"7 _ G f4 'tyf -JSS -7131 :��VQ 0o`, r� L1' o 'vlezvAo (�6 H ug3 - s- -�z s ka2y -L ,� , v,4 �5O i WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. V C n r 1 'I ` _ MAIN r - '�_ly Z ,L,• _ ' i G fir WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN.THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. /�- f� W a,4 .� AgRi A-✓ASff 135- 3 -7 Rr(/6 A bt• I c,. G47vs r. .,, 2l' o3� -N1CSS 2, �J vpaA Lr AILI I ci ) I loc rj 320 sTFv� -lc b C'�. Q D SH L^ D2& (L�1)%u� i /a�� Mims WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN.THE SPACE PRUIDED BELOW. . — Mrs.— I I . I'd, I E, 30" Jp s 5-ct P K"2 t� c) tx 5 �.6� �► ('�. ACS 0-70 a.) , /J2 SAe.►� e)o %mo o 1 -5s-q? �°►a -m � g�-u cis- � s �� �r'�ir�M /mom r WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MAINTAIN OUR DANCING PRIVILEGES? IF SO PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. �IMG�✓`� �� �?-y75 /s8v 6x- aa� s (w. 9y06� �6-7 /406 o b, i�Vo' het of Saratoga Saratoga Associates, Inc, April 1, 1985 Mr. Joseph Long, Jr. Chairman, Public Safety Commission City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitdale Avenue T. Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Long, Thank you for your letter of March 151 1985 regarding a citizens complaint. I am planning corrective measures to eliminate the source of these complaints and I need your help. Regarding your letter, please send me the following information: 1) Name and phone number of person or persons who have logged the complaint. 2) Names of people who were causing the problem "and said they were from Rhett's. This is important to us in that there are other facilities offering, live, entertainment in the immediate vicinity,"and we must know for'sure that the problem is coming from Rhett's exclusively, r 3) What measures does Lt. Wilson plan to put in place to handle the problem? How may we help him? .We monitor the guests of our•establishment while,,they are in our place, but we are not able to do so outside our establishment. Thank you-for your cooperation. Sincerely, RONALD J. TROYAtT RHETT'S OF SARATOGA RJT /ha I r of Saratoga Saratoga Associates, Inc, June 6, 1985 Ms. Ellen Attaberry San Jose Professional Security Service 1660 McKee Road San Jose, CA Dear Ms. Attaberry, w .,. �r This will confirm our understanding of your responsibilities for providing security services for Rhetts at 14577 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, CA. You will provide an officer to patrol the premises and related parking areas on Friday and Saturday evenings for -the purposes of: 1) Crowd control of people waiting to get into Rhetts. No more than 15 to 20 people should be allowed to wait in line at one time. 2) Crowd control of patrons leaving the establish- ment. specifically you will see to it that there is no inappropriate behaviour, no loitering and no loud, disturbing noise at any time. 3) The security patrol is to conduct themselves in a professional way and will not carry weapons. They will carry portable radios with which to call the Sheriff's Department if they deem the situation warrants. I have enclosed a copy of a letter by Mr. Long, Chairman of the Public Safety Commission, and a copy of my response,to that letter. Please note the complaints of Mr. Long's letter and be guided accordingly. You will begin your service on Friday, June 7, 1985,�and contact me with any questions or suggestions you have. Sir � R ' TROYAN RHETT'S OF SARATOGA 14577 Big Basin Way • Saratoga, CA 95070 0 (408) 741 -1000 of Saratoga Saratoga ASSOCIates, Inc. Copies sent to: Lt. Robert Wilson, Commander, Sheriff's Substation Mr. Joseph Long, Chairman, Public Safety Commission Mr. Todd W. Argow, Community Services Director 14577 Big Basin Way m Saratoga, CA 95070 • (408) 741 -1000 STONEPINE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 14611 F BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA. PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA. CALIF. 95070 SUBJECT: DH -1 RHETT'S - - 14577 BIG BASIN WAY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION: THE MEMBERS OF THE STONEPINE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION REQUEST THE COMMISSION TO DENY THE APPLICATION FOR A DANCE HALL LICENSE TO RHETT'S LOCATED AT 14577 BIG BASIN WAY, SARATOGA. RHETT'S IS LOCATED IN THE VILLAGE OF SARATOGA AND IS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. THE SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS IN THE ASSOCIATION'S REQUEST FOR DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1. RHETT'S PRIMARY CUSTOMER BASE IS THAT OF SURROUNDING COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS. ADVERTISING APPEARS IN ALL LOCAL COLLEGE NEWSPAPERS; PROMOTING LOW COST ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND ENTERTAINMENT APPEALING TO THE AGE GROUP OF COLLEGE STUDENTS. (SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO). THE RESULT OF THE PRIMARY THRUST OF THE BUSINESS'S ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN HAS BEEN A NIGHTLY INFLUX INTO THE VILLAGE OF LARGE GROUPS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS . THE COLLEGE STUDENTS DO NOT RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF THE SURROUNDING PERSONAL RESIDENCES AS TO PEACE AND QUIET; PRIVATE PARKING AREAS: AND DISPOSAL OF DRINKING CONTAINERS.AND RELATED DEBRIS. 2. GROUPS OF RHETT'S PATRONS CONGREGATE OUTDOORS AND CREATE DISDURBANCES WITHIN THE AREA BY THE LEVEL OF NOISE . THE NOISE LEVEL RISES AS THE HOUR OF THE EVENING ADVANCES . AS A GENERAL RULE THE PATRONS ARE UNRESPONSIVE TO HOMEOWNERS REQUEST TO MOVE ON OR TO LOWER THE LEVEL OF COMMUNICATION. 3. GROUPS OF STUDENTS THROW EMPTY DRINKING CONTAINERS AND RELATED DEBRIS ONTO THE PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WHICH MUST BE CLEANED UP REGULARLY BY THE HOMEOWNERS. ( SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT B ). 4. THE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT IS REGULARLY SEEN IN THE VILLAGE AT RHETT'S ATTEMPTING TO CONTROL THE DISTURBANCES CREATED BY THE OVERFLOWING PATRONS OF THE BUSINESS. 5. THE LEVEL OF NOISE CREATED BY THE MUSIC WITHIN RHETT'S CAN BE HEARD CLEARLY BY THE RESIDENCES OF THE THE STONEPINE CONDOMINIUM . THE VILLAGE OF SARATOGA , WITH IT'S MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, HAS HAD A UNIQUE ATMOSPHERE OF QUAINTNESS. SERENITY, AND PEACEFULLNESS. THE QUALITIES WHICH HAS ATTRACTED PAGE TWO HOMEOWNERS INTO THE VILLAGE HAVE BEEN ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE INFLUX INTO THE VILLAGE OF STUDENTS WITH NO RESPONSIBILITY TO THEIR BEHAVIOUR IN THE VILLAGE. THE CITY HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO THE COMMUNITY TO PROTECT THE RESIDENCES FROM ACTIONS OF OTHERS WHICH VIOLATE THE PRIVATE RESIDENCES RIGHTS TO PEACE AND QUIET, PROTECTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY , AND PRIVACY. THE ASSOCIATION STRONGLY RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION INVESTIGATE WITH THE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT TO CONFIRM THE HIGH VOLUME OF CALLS AND - VEHICLE PATROLS TO THE RHETT'S BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENT . THE STONEPINE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HOPES THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL USE GOOD JUDGMENT IN THE CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION FOR A DANCE HALL LICENSE TO RHETT'S; WITH STRONG CONSIDERATION OF THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE RESIDENCES ADJOINING THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. SINCERELY, THE STONEPINE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION cc: ROBERT SHOOK DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT '.. EXHIBIT A ee ra e. with us. Every Relax with Wednesday: JESSE Acoustical Guitarist Every Week $1 Drink Specials .8-11 pm ; Tues: Tequilla Tuesday Marguarita Shooters Wed: Kamikasi Night Thurs: Lady's Night All Well Drinks $1 to the Ladies of Saratoga DANCING! �* Thursday, Friday, Saturday with D.J. Tom Gomez KWSS Radio Personality * Nightclub & Bar 14577 Big Basin Way Saratoga 741 -1000 E X H I B I T a r. The PCumedi-forse A 7ra.diri on In 97 nz Dining AM, Dear Planning Commissioner! I would like to express my discontent about the type of clientele the Rhett's establishment is attracting. Customers of The Plumed Horse, while waiting for their cars on the sidewalk, have been called names, have been insulted and even spit at. Beside that, the urinating in all corners, empty beer bottles in bushes and gutters, as well as the mutilation of shrubs and trees is something any of us can easily do without. Stpcerely, Klaus Pache 14555 'Sig '8cLr'fM WCLY, 5cu-ato9a, CA 95070 (408) 867-4711 Qq 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 Vq MEMORANDUM 6Y `4` g'-F a TO: Planning Commission DATE: May 7, 1985 FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Rhett's Application for Public Dance Hall License Ordinance 38.123, adopted November 7, 1984, by the City Council, requires that the City Manager make an investi- gation of any application for a public dance hall license, and report to the Planning Commission. Rhett's of Saratoga has submitted an application as required. Rhett's has been operating with a public dance hall license first issued in March, 1984, prior to the adoption of Ordi- nance 38.123. My office conducted a thorough investigation at that time. Rhett's initial application was reviewed by the County Sheriff, the County Health Department, Saratoga Fire District, and the City Building Inspection Division. These agencies were again contacted in the fall of 1984 be- fore Rhett's license was renewed. Copies of these most re- cent responses are attached, along with a status report. There have been no changes to report since that time. Wa e Dernetz jm Attachments 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager DATE: October 12, 1984 FROM: Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Status Report - Rhett's Restaurant In March 1984, Rhett's Restaurant on Big Basin Way applied for a dance hall permit. A 30 -day license was issued by the City Manager's office and appropriate agencies were asked to respond regarding Rhett's compliance with all applicable codes and regulations. In addition, the applicant was asked to submit an engineer's report on, sound impact. She City Council, at their May 2nd meeting, directed that Rhett's be granted a six month license (copy attached) subject to specific conditions. Prior to the November 10th expiration of the six month permit, agencies were again contacted for a status report. The City's Building Inspection Department, the County Health Department, and the Saratoga Fire District report they are unaware of any complaints or current code violations. Sgt. Stambaugh of the Sheriff's Department reports that there have only been a few incidents involving Rhett's or their patrons that have required intervention. Sgt. Stambaugh recommended that Rhett's be required to supervise outside their premises, specifically patrons waiting in line to get in, and monitor the pedestrian traffic which tends to be heedless of vehicles on Big Basin. The City Community Service Officers have been involved in handling complaints about _ odor, litter and obstruction stemming from the placement of dumpsters and garbage cans in the alley adjacent to Rhett's.. The CSO's report that the new management has been maintaining cleanliness in the area, although the dumpsters are still visible from Big Basin and unsightly. Attached is a copy of a letter received October 11th complaining about the activities of the clientele at Rhett's. Also attached are copies of letters and petitions which have been directed to the City Council previously. Over the last six months, there have been several phone calls to City Hall from adjacent residents and /or property owners with complaints about noise, congestion, and disregard of traffic as a result of crowds congregating outside of Rhett's during the hours of the dance hall operation. "Carolyn K' g lmc COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 14380 SARATOGA AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIF. 95070 Telephone: (408) 867 -9001 October 1, 1984 Carolyn King, Administrative Assistant ,� 1994 City of Saratoga 13777 Frui tvale Av ��ANAGER Saratoga, Ca 950701�i Subject: Rhett's 14577 Big Basin Way Dear Ms King: There have been no complaints or problems regarding Rhett's dance hall operation received by the Saratoga Fire District. There have been complaints by a neighboring business about the trash area next to the building. The Community Services Officer is aware of the problem. If I can be of any more help please let me know. Truly yours, Steve Sporleder Fire Marshal cc: fi le memorandum FROM Lt, V-il.spn Sgt. Stambaugh EJECT DATE Rhett ",s permit renewal 1 g-,19.,7-84 see no problem with renewing Rhettk`s permit to operate a dance - hall. There have been only a few incidents involving Rhett's or their patrons that have required our intervention, My only recommendation would be that Rhett�'s be required to supervise outside their premises. Specifically, they need to supervise patrons waiting in line to get in, and also monitor the pedestrian traffic that tends to be unaware of the cars on Big Basin. R[ORDCR p 963074 Q26 -A REV 9/83 4 N SANTA CLARA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES LAND DEVELOPMENT REPORT TO: Cl U �ia /z/L fc1�A Date 0-o c� Owner /Applicant o"27�5 /?, S&1z-a,�- File No: Location / L/57*7 C/ U n The application is no approved for the following reason(s): Er The application is approved subject to the following conditions: A sanitary sewer connection will be required. No sewers are available, therefore, in order to determine the amount of drainfield required for a septic tank system, percolation tests will be necessary. Individual sewage disposal requirements have been determined for this site. A septic tank permit will be issued for construction of a system which must then be built in conformance with Bulletin "A" or local ordinance. lineal feet of subsurface leaching line with room for 100% expansion and .a gallon capacity tank will be required. Existing septic tank(s) must be pumped and backfilled in accordance with Environmental Health standards. A bond in the amount of $ should be posted with to ensure completion of work. Contact the district Sanitarian for final inspection upon completion. Domestic water shall be supplied by an approved water system or by individual well(s) installed to Environmental Health standards. Domestic water shall be supplied by Seal well in accordance with county standards. A bond in the amount of $ should be posted with to ensure completion of work. Provide water agreement for existing well. Submit revised plot plan to scale (1" = 20') showing house, driveway, appurtenant structures and required drainfield to contour. Leach lines must be at least 50 feet from any swale or from any cut bank over 3 feet and must be at least 100 feet from any existing or proposed wells. _ Additional Comments 1412PR -o'-e C'/i01� h ho X� r (� Conditioned by: (1,�;,aSh+��1 Approved by: ��`GG -� District! ❑ First Class Mail ❑ Inter - Office CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA. CA 95070 ( 408) 887 -3438 TO CA P o4Y1.1 �. i rl �, DATE SUBJECT I'VE 7T7T 'S MESSAGE REPLY -/, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission DATE: 5/17/85 FROM: Fran Curtis, Building Inspector SUBJECT: Rhett's as a Dance Hall --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On May 17, 1985, an inspection was made at 14577 Big Basin Way by the Building Inspection Division to determine the extent of code violations if any. It should be noted that the restroom facilities are not in accordance with the recommendations of Section 910 and Appendix C of the Uniform Plumbing Code, but that no vilations to any of the Uniform Codes were observed at this inspection. F Curtis ilding Inspector March 25, 1985 •f � TOO�� 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 Mr. Ronald J. Troyan, President Saratoga Associates, Inc. dba Rhett's 14577 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Troyan: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Linda Callon Martha Clevenger Virginia Laden Fanelli Joyce Hlava David Moyles The enclosed letter was drafted at the request of the Saratoga Public Safety Commission at their regular March meeting, and is provided for your information. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions, or would like an opportunity to appear before the Commission. Very truly yours, Todd W. Argotic Community Services Director jm Enclosure l �..:7 � Qo 0 Zoo& 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE . SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Linda Callon March 15, 1985 Martha Clevenger Virginia Laden Fanelli Joyce Hlava David Moyles Lt. Robert Wilson Commander, Sheriff's Substation Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department 14374.Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Lt. Wilson: The Public Safety Commission has recently received a complaint from the owner of the apartment building across from Rhett's Bar on Big Basin Way. The complaint, in general, was about excessive noise and rowdiness by patrons of Rhett's during the evening hours. This occurs in approximately a block radius of the bar. The most specific complaint was about patrons' behavior at closing time. Apparently yelling, drinking, loud stereos, throwing of beer bottles, and occasionally, sexual relations in the neighbor's shrubbery is occurring. The Commission wanted to bring this complaint to your attention for whatever action is appropriate. S' cerel , Joseph P. Long, Jr. - Chairman, Public Safety Commission jm cc: City Council Planning Commission f April 16, 1984 ^4 City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave.. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 To whom it may concern, As the owners of the apartment building at 14590 Big Basin Way, we would like to make the council aware of some of the problems and complaints we have had as a result of Rhett's bar and restruant which is located across the street from our property. Our main concern is the noise problem. Two of our tenants who have lived in the building for several years are planning to move as they are unable to sleep at night due to the loud music which Rhett's plays. They are especially concerned that the problem will be much worse as we go into the summer months and they will be unable to keep their windows open due to the excessive noise, late at night. One of these tenants, Mr. Sandy Rudnick has been approached by Rhett's with an offer to pay him to move which may be a simple solution for Rhett's but causes difficulties for us and we are EXTREMELY ANGRY over their offer. Not only are we losing a valued tenant, but we must now go through the work and.expense of finding another person to rent his unit and feel if the noise problem is not settled we will have dificulty finding anyone who is willing to put up with the noise from Rhett's. We have also had a problem with trash in our yard on Saturday and Sunday mornings, incidents of vandalism ( plants torn out of the ground, sprinklers broken),:�unathorized cars parked in the driveway and in several cases, cars blocking the driveway totaly making it impossible for our tenants to either enter or exit from the carport area, and in two seperate incidences, someone has been observed relieving themselves on our property. One of our tenants was threatened when he went over the Rhett's to complain about the noise. We know Rhett's can't be held personally for these things, but having owned the building for five years and never having these problems and complaints before, we feel they are indirectly responsible. We are not trying to hinder or controll Rhett's ability to operate a succesfu_l business. A thriving downtown economy is to the benefit of all citizens of Saratoga. But we do take exception to a business which has an adverse effect on our- property and other businesses in the surrounding area. After all, isn't it the responsiblilty of Rhett's to adapt itself to our community instead of the City of Saratoga changing ordinances and zoning laws to adapt to them? Your consideration of this will be greatly-.appreciated. Sincerely, �AAa, Frank Behnke & Paula Adams 20 Glen Ridge Ave. Los Gatos, Ca. 95030 395 -7821 6/ ice' / >�-� --_=� �9�-�° �` -..'� J '� "'"`�"�"� G�.c° ems, ��✓�� J Ile .70 vb Gv-e- a'�-e- - � G��cG�aeL /l�hs - �tadt./C.._. l / :7r- - I kyvr May 2, 1984 To: City Councilmembers From: Carolyn King The attached petitions which were presented at the Planning Commission hearing on Rhetts were brought to our attention today. We were not aware of them previously. They are being distributed to you tonight at the request of Lynn Belanger. February 3, 1984 RHETT'S OF SARATOGA 14577 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA We are applying to the Saratoga Planning Commission for a conditional use permit to allow us to have dancing from 9 p.m. to 1:30 a.m. The Planning Commission would like us to have approval from our immediate surrounding neighbors to show that we are not disturbing them and to show that they support our concept and business. If you approve please sign your name. Name and Business Address: ��►AMn , X157.3 / ) 1-1 -/-.) z24,g-A &.)tq aorky Ltj Z7 qs -� �� N G �o�� z� 75 Jim t a p �11 t -2c 56 S -9- (" % I s-s-'7 � - Ski Q- E) 1 -33 r���� �,�� ZZ G�Js�Gr�n 91/ �_Y ,/'�� ,✓ i�L !vim r r-cJ+t ,,�2—U C �✓" /I�I_ti ti�r� 12� -0 -r j /U �c C4 -4's-! a 3 tit S c4A C, 5-( 2 - O- "Cl'� of S ( X ol� ����� # C::4>4 c) s 6—a- Fs 7 - y� ov a4s Ru, j2- �a� 4r c�vm��� Ju�e l�wurr r �� ro /'-'/ Z7d ,C , j /4 77a 71 121S Ili t7: Alk �Ql �7 :5 Si � � L2 6733 &2 us" aC 42 � e 2,6� o ? 7 Q� 1757c) 415-L 1 4,A ��e�45 12,161 0, Z�,�AAcl� �tl Z- / lz'c w d, la,.,j I � CL&Lz/z Z, bad � �+, F,,7L ��� ECG (Aa A7, I-S, jc6 KI�2 �r��eu`.cc& I (Aa A7, I-S, jc6 KI�2 , IV cro Cl- ze, 3j jiv�r 9,tl—?14 8 9 s GL �r p � le r ' �D Z� '2 —7 9�3 wAn- AP-TwWON 4� �C I c. 2i95 Pie��S er 20,s G�l`cs lu &a4t-e-, �3 6c ve 2-:�. 611d jrnvy�& ;-/. -OlvV4 . 44 eyCc Az R c�-- K cA vi COI GA-tos, cA Y l� ' ocll-v�,f Ic -7 -2 ,21 c -2 l t7`fw ,; I li -�i�b Y�q� -Fo2�;W WY� �4@7 VV79-i P-1 C)P 2 so 6 J �S Vio13 5 rr 6erl c �v 7 SO 7 -J % V C) C I I 7� RIILI -Q I � 5' 5�A-Ta-64 - nmt tp 15-31 � 1 Sb P(L-C"a & Z---2, t � o (04, K)IL G / --L/L 4 01-i lS� 7 4r s�� ��. 7 k. 3f �v � 0I I 1p,_ Lip- 33 r 12 On 6..-27 L :�57 `l��lk"�'t� IBC, /� 3 S ��� Q5 -71 e-.-), e, 3 7/1 Z1,11 1711 --o ail ey 1'723� /0-30 E-Z z 93 74T ��n �,�� -Y cz e.�-C Z-6_S ol as O.0 ol as vvin- 12 0 y S) e-cl,ge —zit Lo->, c� 15wp L� ��ntiL fJliQCe� 11 vv /V 3SI-i -'71 2, U 14� 247 North Third Street, San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 292- 7841/2 V V � U6 sN b � 6 1 4) - all WS&'PNKVt ctar�c� WL vim, a gobd „wtws cw R�61 ua�l � "� C4 a4 6N �vtS �iWCbb?b( v�tat.�avt�l�f� �t1t� Fitt �t;�t� Ikc�i° busv�uss . {fit rit!ac�, Duke of Wellington 14572 Big Basin LWay . Saratoga, CA 95070 Duke of Edinburgh 10801 N. \Volfe Road . _Cupertino. CA 95014 August 20, 1984 I am protesting the public nuisance from the operation of "Rhetts Lounge" at 14577 Big Basin Way, Saratoga. In recent months Rhetts has been allowed by the City of Saratoga to have dancing in their cocktail lounge. This has resulted in excessive noise, traffic and parking pro- blems. In addition patrons shout and use obnoxious language until 2:00 A.M. outside of Rhetts and in the parking lot across Big Basin adjacent to my home. I own the property at: - 14649 Oak Street, Directly opposite Rhetts Lounge. I strongly encourage you to revoke Rhetts dancing permit immediately and consider other action to stop this public nuisance to Saratoga residents. Very tru1. yours, David J.Morrison 0 t • sectwily':--ratn Ssa le op is N San Jose .Police Chief Joseph McNa- And in Campbell, Capt. John Butler said ..summer of 1982 to 39 ,:states By Cathie Calvert : - 1 have handle on sc. . Staff wdeer, mara, whose crime prevention book "Sate ;_,coin aring the city to. Saratoga% unfair. , ,. fee they a g " `' and Sane" just went on the market,'reiter- ; }ri r"Just look at a map;' declared the vet- the most crime -free communities I[ you're looking for a community area some longstanding criticism of FBI an officer. "Saratoga is isolated. There's " United S are not all the safe towns where crime,is a.rather rare thing and it's statistics used by authors David and 'no through traffic to speak of. There's United States, by any means;' F safe to walk.,the streets, look no further Holly Franke`as the basis for their list of _ ,.very little commercial or industrial Bevel- said. "We were just looking for 'a than Saratoga. safe communities. He maintained the fig-"'."op ment and the night life is practically nice ones:' the Fr ., Tr ' ' The book is a sequel to -At least,' ihat's the opinion of the ures are meaningless to the average citi r The Frankel — who live in &nnecticut original "Safe Places which wa: authors of the newly published book, "Safe zen.' '; It lished in 1972 and emphasized " Places for the '80s." Needless to say, the "The theme of my book is that you don't ; • town of Ridgefield, a rela gvely safe coin towns and rural town fathers of Saratoga are delighted — have to go out and buy two Germagshep munity but not safe enou h to: make the ;That was the beginning of the b. but officials th nearby communities that herds and, a:imachine gun and move to •`;list — don't claim to have 'written the `' to were left off the list *are something less Saratoga to'be safe. There are common=:' definitive guide to finding a safe place study- = thecountry'movement. which cam than pleased and say the statistics used mdse precautions for safety McNamara ►ng FBI crime statistics and But ding te Continued on Pr, are somewhat deceptive.,, t K raOga net a � � urge:, .. lion- Ve 0 �l..safe place' t® hve °recrlational facilities, and other Continied from Pape 1B arnejlities. The book describes Sar= lots of riots in cities; Franke said• ato a as "Northern California liv- t "This time we changed direc- _ in tits finest.': ; ,,•, �_ iitlB�B0 report " lion. R'e'still have small towns ...... , g (but) in. mostly suburbs near metro All of which is met with g appioval by Steve Peterson, (: •: folio items represent a areas where crime rates are high- : �: imps 0(�CrimeS reported are,"..he said.: "We figured that fina�ICe director and deputy' city N ;::; :: would be most valuable, because i'manager of Saratoga. "We're obvi- Saratoga last Week. ] ouszy very pleased :' he said. '' most people need to find jobs near t `'_ = " A MAN WAS the victim of a bat - metropolitan areas." he other California cities that, tery oD Big Basin Way atla.m:Aug. l The list of 110 cities with popula made the "safe" list are Palos u sheriffs deputies report The I tions of 1Q000 or more contains ; Ve des Estates, ,Rancho Palos. t. victim and witnesses had just left Verdes, Sierra Madre, Yorba Rhett's Bar on Big Basin Way and �,' •' nine ; in. California, with Hillsbor -.:. t A:!:.;l.... J ougti the only other Bay Area com Lir{da, Belvedere, Moraga and St. 1 munity to rate with the Frankes, , He ena.' ,:w, 4;_ _ )!fifth Street, and were walking And finding those . "nice ones in ' �he Frankel .hst also, includes southbound just behind the three suspects. According to the report....: California was particularly dif6 the victim "nudged" one of the sus-.; cult, Franke said in a telephone ,. LABAMA: Mountain Brook'Veslavia " � which seemed to Inftlrla FII ARIYON A: Oro Vallev, Sierra Vista. W interview. him. Words were exchanged and 1 I V ley, Pal er Lake. Pagosa springs, another Suspect began fighting 1 ;.Franke said he and wife used as eq OIt merry Hills Village, Columbine With a` cutoff point 4,000 crimes per "Pebosa. couNEcTIcuT: BetneL Simsbury, ',the victim. After reportedly (mock -c' 100,000 people. The information.... B6y Harbor islands, a' Beath, Arlan- _.' him down, the suspect kicked Ilij Cam Coral, Bclleair Bluffs, Valparaiso. came from the FBI's statistics in him in the face. The three suspects' -q Seven, major crime Categories['` GEORGIA: Avondale Espies. IDAHO: Al robbery, aggravated Salmon. ILLINOIS: Hinsdale, Lake' Forest.B fled the scene. The VlCtlm SIIS murder, rape, y, aggravated -Nees. Paw: Heights: •INDIANA: Carmel tained a Concussion and a small Cut_ . Assault, burglary, y T�i}omsas. IGeoroa orwnnelMAINE: Ken eeonk under his eye. and motor vehicle,theft. ROCkoort. MARYLAND: ocwrd, Glenarden, ' Any'city••dhat -exceeded that .• SdmerselI Pooles Win MASSACHUSETTS: ratio missed the cutoff. : �: Wet lie . cover, N VOO Buren Townnw. ., "There were 244 California com -. AIiIHNEsOTA: Apple Valley. MISSISSIPPI: munilies with a population' ofd;. Ocean Springs, MONTANA: Red Lodge 10,000 or more and only 17 of them ` ?.'.I NEVADA: Boulder Clly. NEW . HAMP their CrImC' SHIRE: Kingston, Hampstead, pelerborougn qualified. because, of NEW JERSEY: Dumont, Cliliside park. Franke said• "We found the . River Vale, Summit, New Providence, fates, Cerkeley Heights. NEW MEXICO: Los Ata- chme rate in California very high :.inns, Cmarron. NEW YORK: Malver.. and very pervasive throughout the .•, senslnoton. Llovd Heroor. Se,, Harbor, "' :jE aSlCheiler, Irvington, Brie f[litl Manor. slate." .',NORTH CAROLINA: c5rv. ONTO: Seven In the 1981 FBI crime 00 repo , ,.,'HOMAB YykonleSlillwa er'gornery N: We Saratoga, population 29, Inn, Bandon. PENNSYLVANIA: Newtown 1,038 crimes - ..That projected to a Townsnio, Haverford, Lower Moreland, 585 crimes per 100,000 •.'yyndenau, Fo• e..el: Terre Hitt. SOUTH rate of 3, bAKOTA: Vermillion.• TENNESSEE: Ger- people, he said. memown; Hendersonville: TEXAS: niiv niwt Villages. Friondswood, Westover Hills, In contrast, San Jose's rate Was Deer park, `De Solo, bell's 10,739, fPlace� Fredericksburg, Alpine. 8.252 and Camp Holly ood Park, Provo. VER- Franke sala"' 'UTAN: Cedar COY, Lngan, Cities that made the . grade on sMONo'. DLex" V'R WpSHIHGTON:e CIYde Hill WEST VIRGINIA. Sheoherdslown. 1pW crime SIatIStICS were then WISCONSIN: Whitefish Bar. WYOMING: evaluated by the writers on the basis of quality of educational and Bullalo. 1 .. L. xT 14� 'AUG 3.6.1984 77- 4t �✓ '`� / �� �� ��.� /tom � � ���� ^ C ell- ' IC r� G�1 Wit, 0 �r f t Pi cl P.O Box 725 Sarato0a,CA.95071 Wayne Dernetz City Manager 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 The following report outlines the observation the Saratoga Village Association has conducted regarding dancehalls in Saratoga. Although the information collected directly reflects observations regarding Rhetts as a Dancing and Drinking establishment, it is recommended that the findings be applied to the City as a whole. As per your request, the following observations have been made: 1. Noise levels do infact carry well into residential areas. 2. Increased noise levels occure during the times the door is opened and closed. 3• During nights when the dancehall is operating,waiting lines are formed on the street. Open containers of alcohol ( not from Rhetts) have been seen accomodating these people in line. 4• Beer bottles and wine bottles have been reported and observed in the streets and in the yards of surrounding merchants following nights when Rhetts operates as a dancehall. 5. Strong odors of garbage and scattered garbage have been observed after nights Rhetts operates as a'dancbhal.l. - 6,. Due to the large amount of people attending dancehalls, the traffic-and parking congestion has greatly increased. 7. During dancehall nights, especially when lines of people are waiting on the streets, "Cruising" has started on Big Basin Way. r; Jy 8. Surrounding parking lots have become oversaturated during A., dancehall nights. Owners of private property have attempted to chain off their private parking areas. 9. Oversaturation of private parking areas have resulted in cars parking so close to buildings as to tear an conditioner off a surrounding building. 10. Noise level from boisterous crowds and "Hot Rodding" increase at the time of closing. 11. Vandalism has increased in the Plaza del Roble area according to merchants. 12. Sunbathing has been observed on the roof of Rhetts . This includes furniture on the roof. 13. Reports of two employees engaging in romantic activity while reclining on the couch in the front window have been reported.(Reported on a Sunday when Rhetts was closed) # We have no adverse reports to make while Rhetts is operating as a restaurant and bar. OTHER OBSERVATIONS 1. Signage well exceeds standard set forth by the sign ordanance. 2. Fish nets have been placed over the area used for outdoor dining. The ledge over the sidewalk has been observed to be used as a resting spot for beer bottles and wine glasses. THE FOLLOWING ARE PORTIONS OF OUR ZONING REGULATIONS AND GENERAL PLAN WHICH WE HAVE FOUND RHETTS IN VIOLATION OF. Article 1. In General. Sec. 1. 1. Obiectives of the zoning ordinance. 44 The zoning ordinance is adopted to protect and to promote the public health, safety, peace, co convenience, prosperity and general welfare. More specifically, the zoning ordinance is adopted in order to achieve the following objectives: a. To provide a precise guide for the physical development of the city in such a manner as to reserve_it_. essenti e tial community with a rural atmosphere, and to achieve progressively the arrangeme-n—to-TTand uses depicted in the general plan adopted by the city council. I b. To foster a harmonious - convenient, workable relationship amon1 land . - - C. To promote the stablility of existing land uses which conform with the general plan, and to protect themfrom inharmonious influences and harmful in- trusions. d. To ensure that public and private lands ultimately are used for the pur- poses which are most appropriate and most beneficial from the standpoint of the city as a whole. e. To prevent population densities in excess of those prescribed in the general plan, and to maintain a suitable balance between structures and open spaces on each site. f. To facilitate the appropriate location of community facilities and in- stitutions. To promote a safe, effective traffic circulation system. h. _ To foster the provision of adequate off - street parking and truck - loading facilities. i. To facilita- te._orderP;,.- attractive development of commercial facilities intended primarily to serve-.residents of t he city. j. To exclude new industrial development in order to preserve the essen- tail rPCiriPntial r}hprPotar of the (-,itv. AS THE VILLAGE IS A MIXED USE OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL WE FIND VIOLATIONS IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: Article 5. R -M Multi- Family Resi- dential Districts. Sec. 5. 1. Purposes. In addition to the objectives prescribed in section 1. 1, the R -N11 multi- family residential districts are included in the zoning ordinance to achieve the following purposes: a. To reserve appropriately located areas for family living. in a variety of types of dwellings, at a reasonable range of population densities consistent with sound standards of public health and safety. b. To preserve as many of the desirable characteristics of one - family residential districts as possible, while permitting higher population densities. c. To ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling unit. d. To provide space for community facilities needed to complement urban residential areas and for institutions which require a residential environment. e. _ To minimize traffic congestion and to avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the land around them. f. To provide necessary space for off- street parking of automobiles and, where appropriate, for off- street loading of trucks. 4j - g. To iirotect residential properties_ from the hazards, noise and congestion '\ .created.by commercial traffic. h. To protect residential properties from noise, illumination, unsightliness, o_ o dots, dust, dirt, smoke, vibration, heat, glare and other objectionable influences. i. To protect residential properties from fire, explosion, noxious fumes and other hazards. . THIS AREA OF THE VILLAGE IS ALSO ZONED P -A. 'P -A IS ALSO AN ALLOWED CONDITIONAL USE IN C -N AND C -V. Article 6. P -A Professional and Ad- ministrative Office District. Sec. 6. 1. Purposes. f. To minimize traffic congestion and to avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the amount of land around them. r g. To protect professional and administrative offices from the noise, disturbance, traffic hazards, safety and other objectionable influences incidental to commercial uses. `7 Article 7. C Commercial Districts. c. To promote stable, attractive commercial development which will afford a pleasant shopping environment and will complement the essential resi- dential character of the cites., d. To provide space for community facilities which may be appropriate- ly located in commercial areas. e. To provide adequate space to meet the needs of modern commercial development, including off - street parking end truck - loading areas. f. Tn minimi7a traffic rnngpstion and to avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the areas of their sites. g. To protect commercial properties from noise, odor, dust, dirt, smoke, vibration, heat, glare, heavy traffic and other objectionable influences, and from fire, explosion, noxious fumes and other hazards. Sec. 7.6. Required conditions. No use shall be permitted which emits air_ pollutants, solid or liquid wastes or dangerous radioactivity, or which creates odor, noise: vibration, glare or electrical disturbance detectable beyond the boundaries of the site, or which in- volves any hazard of fire or explosion. Sec. 7. 12. Nonconforming uses _Whenever a site in a C district is occupied by a nonconforming use use shall be established on the site unless the nonconforming use shall b discontinued. Whenever a site in a C district is occupied by a nonconforming commercial use, no alteration or addition shall be permitted except and until the use shall comply with the requirements of section 7 5. _ Sec. 7, 13. Signs. No sign, outdoor advertising structure or display of any character shall be permitted except as prescribed in article 10. Article 10. Signs. Sec. 10.1. Purzoses. In order to preserve the natural beauty .of the city's site, to maintain the orderliness of the com- munity's appearance,, to conserve its essential residential character, and to protect the public safety, the location, size, illumination and design of signs are regulated. (a) No illuminated signs and-no sign with an area areater than eight .�quare feet shall be erected or displayed unless a sign permit has been issued by the zoning administra- tor. (b) All illuminated signs and all signs more than eight square feet in area, including temporary subdivision signs, shall be subject to design review as prescribed in article 13. (c) No permit; for an illuminated sign, nor for a sign more than eight square feet in area shall be issued until th design of the sign has-been approved by the city lanning .._commission or the city council. No sign shall be illuminated so that the primary source of light is visible from off the property. THE FOLLOWING REFERS TO NOISE EVEN IN A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE: Sec. 9. 5. Required conditions. C. Noise. No use shall be permitted which creates nois iuman senses without the aid of instruments bevond the bot THE FOLLOWING REFERS TO REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR ADDITIONS TO CONDITIONAL USES. Article 14.•General Provisions and Exceptions Sec. 14.1. Addition of permitted uses. e b, the Upon application or on its own initiative, the city planning commission may add one or more uses to the list of permitted uses prescribed in sections 4A.3, 6.2a, 7.2a(1), 7.2b(2) and 7.2c or one or more conditional uses to the uses set forth in sections 6.3 and 7.3(a), (b) and (c) if the commission makes the following findings: (a) That the addition of the use to the list of permitted uses will _be in accord with the purposes of the district in which the use is proposed. (b) That the use will be an appropriate addition to the list of per- mitted uses because the use has the same basic characteristics as the. uses permitted in the district. (c) That the use reasonably can be expected to conform with the re- _nijirp(i rnndi tions--prescri bed for the district. (d) That the use will not be detrimental to the public heatlh, safety _or welfam, �((e) That the use will not adversely affect the character of any district in which it is proposed to be permitted. (f) That the use will not create more vehicular traffic than the volume normally created by any of.the uses permitted in the district. (g) That the use will not create odor, dust, dirt, smoke, noise, vibra- tion illumination, glare, _unsightliness or any other objectionable influence. Article 16 . Conditional Uses. Sec. 16.1. Purposes. In order to give the district use regulations of this ordinance the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of the zoning ordinance, in certain districts, conditional uses are permitted, subject to the granting of a use permit. Because of their unusual characteristics, conditional uses require special consideration so that they may be located properly with respect to the objectives of the zoning ordinance and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties-. In order to achieve these purposes, the city planning commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for use permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of use permits, subject to review by the city council. Sec . 16. 1-1. Status of conditional uses . A conditional usp i � not a matter or right_ and the planning commission may deny a use permit for a use listed as conditional use if it finds that reason- able regulations would still not prevent the use from adversely affecting exist-- uses in the immediate neighborhood, or would not prevent the use from adversely affecting surrounding property and its inhabitants or its anticipated permi to use or uses. Sec. 16.6 Action by City Planning Commission. The city planning commission may grant an application for a use permit as the use permit was applied for or in modified form, if on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the commission m�?a<es the following findings:_ (a) That the proposed location of the conditional use is an accord with the objectives of the zoning ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located- Ni (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the con- ditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious.to properties or improvements in the vicinity(. (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the a _ =i.cab e__provisions of this ordinance. A use permit may be revocable, may be granted for a limited time period or may be granted subject to such conditions as the commission may prescribe. The commission may deny an application for a use permit. Sec. 16.6.1 Planning Commission to Retain Jurisdiction over Use Permits. Without limiting the powers hereinablve set forth in Section 16.6, the planning commission shall, in all cases, retain continuing jurisdiction over each use permit to, from time to time, modify, delete or make additions to any or all of the conditions thereof, either on its own motion or on the ap- :�lication of the owner of the property, where it is necessary to do so in order to p�rr�� ve a substantial right o applicant or to preserve the health, safety, _ lmorals or welfare of erson • residin or working in -surrounding areas, or to y preserve existing or prospective values or propert and improvements in sur- rounding areas, or to preserve the enjoyment of such property and improvements, or to prevent the creation of a public nuisance._ The above retention of continuing jurisdiction shall apply in all cases, regardless of whether or not such retention of .jurisdiction is actually embodied within the terms of any such use permit.. (Ord. No. NS -3.3, S 3.) THE FOLLOWING SUGGESTS THAT THE CITY ORDANANCES OVERRIDE ANY PERMIT. THE GRANTING" OF A PERMIT CANNOT VIOLATE AN ORDALNANCE Article 20. Enforcement. lSec. 20. 1. Permits, certificates and licenses All officials, departments and employees of the City of Saratoga vested with the authority or duty to issue permits, certificates or licenses shall com- _ply with the provisions of this ordinance . and shall issue no permit, certificate or license which conflicts with the provisions of this ordinance. Any permit, certificate or license issued in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall be void. Sec. 20. 2. Duties of zoning administrator. The zoning administrator shall be the official responsible for the enforce- ment of this ordinance. In the discharge of this duty, the zoning administrator shall have the -right to enter on any site or to enter any structure for the pur- pose of investigation and inspection; provided, that the right of entry shall be exercised only at reasonable hours, and that, in no case, shall any structure be entered in the absence of the owner or tenant without the written order of a court of competent jurisdiction. The zoning administrator may serve notice requiring the removal of any structure or use in violation of this ordinance on the owner or his authorized agent, on a tenant, or on an architect, builder, cantractor or other person who commits or participates in any violation. The zoning administrator may call upon the city attorney to institute necessary, legal proceedings to en orce the provisions of this ordinance, and the city at- tarn ev hereby is authorized to institute appropriate actions to that end. The -zoning administrator may call upon the chief of police and his authorized agents to assist in the enforcement o is or finance. Sec. 20. 3. Violations; penalties. Any person, firm, corporation or organization violating any provision of this ordinance shall be gui ty o a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof," shall be punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars and by im- prisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or by both a fine and impri- sonment. A person, firm, co ration or organization shall be deemed -uil of a separate offense for each day during any portion of which a violation of_ this ordinance is committed, continued or permitted by the person, firm, cor- poration or organization and shall be punishable as herein provided. THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE TAKEN FROM THE GENERAL PLAN: LU.4.0 Encourage the economic viability of Saratoga's existing commercial areas and their accessibility by residents, keeping in mind the impact on the surroun s.ng rest en iai areas LU.6.0 Relate new development and its land uses to presently planned street capacities so as to avoid excessive noise, traffic, and public safety hazards. If it is determined, that existing streets need to be improved to accommodate a pro3ec , such improvements shall be in place or bonded for prior to issuance of-building permits. LU.6.2 Proposed land uses and development proposals shall be evaluated against ordinance standards to assure that the related traffic, noise, light, appearance and intensity of use have limit= a vers i ac on the area. ISE (N) A noise element which shall the Office of Noise Control the Health and Safety Code, community noise environment tours for both near and lonc traffic activity. recognize guidelines adopted by pursuant to Section 46050.1 of and which quantifies the in terms of noise exposure con- -term levels of growth and N.1.0 Protect Saratoga residents rom excessive noise.. N.1.1 The City s a maintain and enforce the noise standards specified in the City's noise ordinance. N.1.1 (Imp) Review existing Noise Ordinance and determine if it needs to be modified. N.1.2 The City shall work.with the appropriate agencies to develop and implement a plan to protect residential areas that are located adjacent to the West Valley Corridor right -of -way from excessive noise. N.1.2 (Imp) (The policy is specific and does not require an implementation measure.) MIXED USES ALLOWED IN VILLAGE Commercial Commercial land use is broken down into four subcategories. The first two are traditional commercial categories that allow typical retail commercial and office uses. These facilities serve the community and /or their immediate neighborhood. They are not regional in orientation and tend to be located in relatively small-complexes. The fourth subcategory allows a mix of residential and commercial uses upon receipt of a use permit. The four s categories and the density and intensity of the uses permitted in these subcategories are as follows: i THE NOISE ELEMENT The purpose of the Noise Element is to define ambient noise levels for the various land uses in Saratoga in order that the quiet residential atmosphere of the City will be maintained. The Noise Element evaluates existing and potential sources of noise to deb termine their contribution to neighborhood.quality.,_and, when found to be detrimental, prescribes measures to reduce the dis- comfort of the noise produced. Noise Noise may be defined as any sound that is annoying or which has.a detrimental effect on a person's physiological and /or sycholo ig cal, processes. The degree of harm or annoyance produced by noise re- lates to the duration and intensity of sound. Noises_ occurring_ intermittently are often more annoying than a steady sound of great( inntensity, because one grows accustomed to a continuous sound. How- ever, getting used to noise is often an indication of temporary hearing loss, and the effects of noise on the psyche may be quite serious. Noise interferes with sleep, __often without awakening the sleeper, but by lifting a person from:deep sleep to shallow sleep, which is less restful. At other times, _noise will actually awakeq the sleeper and make it difficult for him to get to sleep. Noise is _a signal of danger to the human body and results in physiological responses such as an increased heart rate and flow of adrenalin. Repetition of these responses can result in stress and fatigue over a period of time. Noise can be reduced by distance from the source and by placing barriers between the source.and the recipient. In some cases the noise source can be altered to produce less noise. Noise Standards for Saratoga In single family and multifamily residential neighborhoods single event noise levels should not rise more than 6 dBA above the local ambient noise level. In commercial and industrial areas single event noise levels should not rise more than 8 dBA above the local ambient noise level. A maximum single event noise level of 86 dBA is the maximum which should be tolerated for construction projects authorized by permits. The ambient noise level in residential areas should not exceed 45 dBA and 65 dBA in industrial and commercial uses. Ambient Noise Levels Table shows ambient noise levels in various Saratoga neighbor- hoods and commercial areas traversed by major thoroughfares. These areas represent a sampling of the noisiest areas of Saratoga. The readings indicate a neighborhood ambient noise level well below 65 dBA in all instances. However, during the college commute hour, the ambient noise level at Saratoga Avenue and Bucknall was 72 dBA with I� Noise Problems There are a variety of noise- generating problems in all communities. These usually include trucks, airplanes, lawn mowers and other power equipment, music, noise generated.within the home and emergency `;iehicles . Noise Control in Limited Industrial Districts Appendix B Sec. 9.5c of the zoning ordinance specifies that "no use shall be permitted which creates noise detectable by the human senses .tg thout the aid of instruments beyond the boundaries of the site." Although the intent of the ordinance -is to protect the people in neighborhoods adjacent to industries, there are no enforcement ,provisions specified. AREA J, THE VILLAGE The Village is the historical center of Saratoga. Over time its function has changed, but the historic significance of the land- marks within it lend a rustic character and sense of the past of all of Saratoga. The Village area extends from Saratoga Creek on the north to Aloha Avenue and Madronia Cemetery on the south. Its eastern boundary is Saratoga -Los Gatos Road. The western boundary is Madronia Cemetery, extended to the rear lot lines at the end of Pamela Way and across Congress Springs Road to Saratoga Creek. As the historical center of Saratoga, the Village contains many important landmarks of the past: Saratoga School, King Residence (Caldwell) on Big Basin Way, Henry Residence at 6th and Big Basin Way, the clapboard summer cottages on Oak Stree, the Village Library, the old Garden City Bank on Big Basin Way, and the McCarthy Block (Kocher). More recent commercial development and uses sometimes overwhelm these important cornerstones, but the personality they lend remains. Today the Village area includes the Village branch of the County Library, the.Saratoga Fire District's Main Fire Station, the Saratoga School on Oak Street and the adjacent playgrounds, a convalesce hospital, several new commercial buildings since the last General Plan review, and a variety of densities ofiresidential landfuses,- from single family residences through apartments and condominiums. Three of the-7—our possible parking assessment districts have been formed on both sides of Big Basin Way, and a fourth parking assessment district is contemplated between the shops and the creek. Greater automobile dependence, residential development and increased recreation orientation have also increased the traffic volumes on Big Basin Way and Saratoga -Los Gatos Road. Residential land uses in the Village range from R -1- 10,000 through multi-family developments of R -M -3,000 and R -M -4 000. There are also apartments over and adjacent to shops on Biq Basin Wa The strip behind the commercial area, facing onto Oak Street and St. Charles St. was designated for higher density residential uses in previous General Plans, and consideration for greater density for this area and at the end of Big Basin Way should be involved in this General Plan. Currently, this strip is occupied by old summer c- ntt -aRPq At its eastern end, the existing commercial - professional uses on the west side of Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road from Brookwood Drive ex- tended to Oak Place should not be permitted to extend further.- In addition, the mix of residential and commercial, with apartments_ over shops and condominiums, should be encouraged in the Village to stimulate community activity and provide a unique housing market for people who enjoy living close to the commercial and community center, and with a pedestrian focus along Big Basin Way. 15. Development in the Village shall be designed to minimize noise and other disruptive influences. 18. Encourage a mixed use of residential above commercial use as a possible solution for multiple housing and with this process_. by use permit procedure. SARATOGA VILLAGE ASSOCIATION HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS 1• The village is a mixed residential- commercial community and should in the final analysis adhere to the regulations of R -M as well as commercial.. 2. Noise, odor, crowds, intensification of use,morals,type of people attracted to specific uses, vandalism, cruising, property damage, littering of alcohol bottles, hot rodding, excessive signage, visual impacts and lack of parking should all be considered in evaluating the conditional use of dancehalls in the City of Saratoga. 3. Dancehalls ..could be included in the City Ordanances only as a conditional use. Dancehalls should be carefully looked at as a conditional use in residential, residential - commercial, C -V and C -N. Perhaps a conditional use in our Light Industrial zoning would be more appropriate 4. The effects of dancehalls are not found to be conducive to the character of the village area. As per the Ordanances of the City of Saratoga. SARATOGA VILLAGE ASSOCIATION MAKES THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS TO ALLOW RHETTS TO OPERATE: 1. ( provide parking requirements at least equal to the requirements for outdoor dining.) 2. ( eliminate the mixed.use of a dancehall in conjunction with an establishment designed for the consumption of alcoholic beverages.) 3. ( move the location of the establishment to an area that is not surrounded by residents.) 4. ( conform to sign regulations and visual impact regulations) ie. remove furniture from roof, remove fish netting, remove carpet from windows, clean up bottles from in front of buildings, confine trash to trash bins. Saratoga Village Association welcomes Rhetts as a bar and a restaurant. We are unable to make any findings that would be detrimental to the villge or residents under a restaurant /bar use. Condition uses or a-'2-uses for dancehalls while serving alcohol should be examined carefully, r2 Sec. 4 -38. Same -- Grounds for denial; notice to applicant upon denial. Upon receipt of an application for a permit under this division, the license collector shall investigate the facts connected with the application, and the premises for which the permit is sought., and deny the- application if: (a) The applicant is not of good moral character or the premises in respect to which the permit is to be issued do not comply with the provisions of this article; or (b) The conducting of a public dance "in the premises for which a permit is sought will be injurious to the public health, safety, welfare or morals of the people of the city. In passing upon this phase of the matter, the license col- lector shall take into consideration the location of the premises for which a permit is sou <zht with reference to proximity to schools, residences and other structures, the occupants and users of which may be disturbed or iniuriously affected by the conductin(z of a dance upon such premises or by the persons in attendance at such dance: or (c) The applicant has had a permit under the provisions of this division revoked; or (d) The premises for which such permit is sought for the proposed conduc- ting of a public dance therein violates any building, zoning, fire, health or safety or other regulation of the city. or any law of the state or of the United States. In all cases where a permit has been denied, the license collector shall notify the applicant in writing of the grounds for denial, and the applicant shall have the right to appeal to the city council from the denial by the license col- lector of a permit. Such appeal shall be made by filing a written notice of ap- peal with the city council within ten days after denial by the license collector. (Ord. No. 4A, § i. 1.) G SZ7.24"Nor . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rK Saratoga City Council We the undersigned customers, tenants, and merchants are annoyed about - _* ccans�u� bi�s��n� '.p� and Bestaraot in the eaoemen� uetwep: �beic establishment and the Greenleaf Gallery, It is dirty, smells obu'xcinuo and attracts bee, wasps, flya and rats. It is an eyesore in our du°otowu area. . 7l/ mz�[ 14 A . we feel the town of Saratoga should require Bbett`a to use the trash facilities in the parking lot as the rest of us are required to do. l. %' 3' 4. , 5' 6. 7. ' ~� 8. 9. lO "gan - 17. 18. t 19. 20. Saratoga City Council We the undersigned customers, tenants, and merchants are annoyed about the garbage cans and bins which are stored and used by Rhett's Bare. and Restarant in the easement between their establishment and the Greenleaf Gallery. It is dirty, smells obnoxious and attracts bee, wasps, flys and rats. It is an eyesore in our downtown area. We feel the town of Saratoga should require Rhett's to use the trash facilities in the parking lot as the rest of us are required to do. 0019101-0 M101-1914 B. 10. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Saratoga City Council We the undersigned customers, tenants, and merchants are annoyed about the garbage cans and bins which are stored and used by Rhett's Bar and Restarant in the easement between their establishment and the Greenleaf Gallery. It is dirty, smells obnoxious and attracts bee, wasps, flys and rats. It is an eyesore in our downtown area. We feel the town of Saratoga should require Rhett's to use the trash facilities in the parking lot as the'-rest of us are required to do. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 0 Dave Lapic Community Service Officer The Saratoga City Council will be reviewing the status of a six -month license issued last May to Rhett's Restaurant to operate a dance hall at 14577 Big Basin Way, Saratoga. Please respond to me with a brief written statement by your agency as to whether or not problems or com- plaints have been brought to your attention concerning the dance hall operation and the nature of any problems. Please have this information to me by October 10. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at 867 -3438. Sincerely, /i Carolyn King Administrative Assistant jm y`- r ��. .....,: 1. GR z ;'1;, 1 {\':11.1', :1\ V X t 1 1,1}'�.)iiXI:N !1:)070 ('01"N H, MENIIiI HS: Of f ice: City Manager ! Inn,t callof" °✓1Fir h,r� Clevenger September 13, 1984 v;Q,na F.rine;n JO hn All;0101), DiivO V4ov!os Dave Lapic Community Service Officer The Saratoga City Council will be reviewing the status of a six -month license issued last May to Rhett's Restaurant to operate a dance hall at 14577 Big Basin Way, Saratoga. Please respond to me with a brief written statement by your agency as to whether or not problems or com- plaints have been brought to your attention concerning the dance hall operation and the nature of any problems. Please have this information to me by October 10. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at 867 -3438. Sincerely, /i Carolyn King Administrative Assistant jm y`- o U09& OMTU o� 13777 FRUIT -VALE AVF:tiL'I- - SA}3A'1'0GA. CALIFORNIA 93070 0023) 867- 3.138 INCIDENT REPORT Type of Incident % Name r / DOB Original _ Supplement - - - n ress Work phone IVS77 �/l /J1IS�•u C� �/�R9��9 Home phone To City Attorney - - Follow -up Required - - - Na �e - 7I vi%L �,vivc° DOB Date / Time Reported Address Work phone Home phone Date tme Occurred Name 't'1119RtCl /4' DOB , Report source Address Work phone / y C SS Ol 5-7- 5,W,,7b,, Home phone Sl7 - Data Entry lame DOB i Address Work phone Home phone LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: 1-1 /S7 -7 7�/G' A/1S /N FORMAT Suspect status Statements Narrative Follow -up Physical Evidence Case Status S73 f/G lf151A wY Gv./a S e-, 7- 7X1,17' T�til- T��f. Utv�vC� Of Ti�l C.P «.v C C T //l /4ri /��sS. /�CLf C-v ,.�uTE� T�� %NUw / F i'� /•�Ey7S / /h'l' /�'�7P'`7/ S.fl� iu 7W17 7- 71 -45- N/�57 «'T OF7c�.v �Ca�D yiS�T /�GZ Ti /-Y SioGFwti'Ck - u/' �iPl -�7�Fn /� G1G�'� �^i/� �y /�if��CC�✓J S/ �i5�ic/l� Gv/�! LcJO G/.�1/JS7l�l ,v Ti�E 42L �/yc/S �i5'F lUl�c( ��AiuST T� /E c�xyisPio� zz"44 C O F AP /,/c�T1S %3Lo �ti' 7i /qL CFY Ti�'Fy Gul/°F Report by:�� ate Time written Report number �y- c. �j� /c // S/'/s'(f /� --•� /i �7/r 7i�� f /llivgC y.�� 7c� /�C ; c f- �l•.n ✓� 7.Pi/;�,v i ��� i C � r9/' /mss 1 Tl' GC -T 7G c7i /�-� �/l�.vfrsf % Th%J .0c -'yam 17 ro . F.v/� /i/G GTE /C•n .�9/r�F/,� �VfA/� »!- �ci�C/liv . . . ��ti�T >�>°s , / 12i/� u ✓> 7l� %�.e> yo > ✓E �/�o� >>5if /'FSiqu>P.4u7' // T TiS�il TiHE" �Oti 7/dG7l 7//� /�LAi ✓�V /�c/G f�Gf%i/�T.�,7 To 4:Erc,C..+��uF T //i97 i T Cu/�s ti /' iuQ lo5Wc -4 l7?�o�ic.gt� Y /�N/'ivC IyVE. A�f7 {. GUi 7/� 71/F ex 25 r. d/ -'G.� iv 7 / /cr C/��� -►'9Fl l/rvl w f�c� u�v lo��G�l/J �.v /CDC) 171' j �`� �� 'cE /�i��lE GcJ//u �qS•��� .�sF >c. OPT - /.v S/JrC� I� ?xj/ll /'✓,9p �!' /lLe�J F/�o -� /7 Report No. 1 -/ rf/litJ .�1i9/�F lG.t�7i°C7 Gu /7h/ 7i%.� �, A/� <- lF� �i��� ill r�� -•�/.� �� << T��C /�'�ST,,u��ti� �/�i�� l- cJ��PE lai ✓l //.�� M [/N If uyi9sS�".yl- / �/�i�� l- cJ��PE lai ✓l //.�� y //lam!' LC/��is' lc�u�v7�l 1�l/✓7 l> F %ilia t T/-/ uF "sy > c Ti /E- ;-91pr �4 olou /. " el�2F /Wuill 7 /e/Zl'> Awe-( / oe1 -5 mil- %'CF /�l�Sa.c�s Gv //o /.mil crli F�I�J %y/� -,;' i /S/l Y G(jc ,';r/ MrJ T�9i v/ti l Ti�� GG�i wig C G � ivE /�ri/�alt f E ' i'sv �icll�D G; / G�V F,/✓C�� U''C� 7��,t� �-��' T,yl' G 74W. ,v PRE �PG Fl, 11J 7i /E 14� S E ' i'sv �icll�D G; / G�V F,/✓C�� U''C� 7��,t� �-��' T,yl' G 74W. ,v PRE �PG Fl, , -mil° �,} J ., '•.ti��f� 1. , i iii 1�•:d� ��'JOIR� .._ =1719'1 /VVO Ws- CO, o� o o�OC�o 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 City Manager September 20, 1984 Mr. Dale Swanholt Rhett's Restaurant 14577 Big Basin way Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Sw-anholt: The attached letter concerning Rhett's was received by the Saratoga City Council at their September 19, 1984, meeting. The Council directed that a copy of this letter be forwarded to you. Sincerely, Carolyn icing Administrative Assistant jm Enclosure Lea Ann Hernandez 14626 Big Basin Way Saratoga, Ca. 95070 September 10, 1984 City Council City of Saratoga City Hall Saratoga, Ca. Honorable Council Members: As a resident of Saratoga since .1955, I would like to voice my disgust with the situation now prevailing in the once quiet village of Saratoga. The litter and vandalism that occur after a now typical Friday night in the village are an abomination. The peace in the village on weekends is now obliterated with loud, abusive language and fighting. It is practically impossible for a patron of the more exclusive restaurants to find a convenient parking place. I'm quite convinced the patrons of such establishments as the Plumed Horse are the purpatrators of the ensuing litter, vandalism and abusive language which are now commonplace in the village. Rhett's and its attraction of a less gentile clientele than has previously patronized village establishments is the root cause of the disruption. A young person looking for "acti'on" no longer must travel further than Saratoga to revel and carouse. I find it dismaying that the city's elected such items as .retributive action against a his residence without prior blessings while paradoxical an establishment in the village to the general character of the town is not public trust. officials can devote time to party who installed a balcony on letting Rhett's operate so of Saratoga. Such.inattention proper stewardship of the I urge the.counci'l and planning commission to take prompt action in removing this blight from the village for the good of all Saratogans. Sincerely, O Hern G.�- — ea Ann andez 4 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 �5 0 (408) 867 -3438 s ..... December 26, 1984 Mr. Ronald G. Troyan Saratoga Associates, Inc. dba Rhett's 14577 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Troyan: The attached letter concerning Rhett's was received by the Saratoga City Council at their December 18, 1984, meeting. The Council directod that a copy of this letter be for- warded to you. Sincerely, Carolyn King Administrative Assistant jm Enclosure y., PO Box 725 Saraios a,CA.95071 Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 , Dear City Council: J� Dec. 2, 1984 Q\ The problems rising from a dancehall in the Village, are greater than we had ever expected. The four lots located next to the disco are now zoned in this order: 1. C -V. 2. P -A. 3. R -M in a C -V 4. C -V The area where the disco was allowed is dominantly residential. Because of the desired mixed use in the Village, the neighbors around the disco are finding it very difficult to cope with the City's decisions regarding land use. Dancehalls and residential communities do not mix. Please inform us of the,exact,times and dates of any public hearings regarding Discos in the Village. We believe this mistake in land use needs to be corrected. Saratoga Village Association would also like to bring your attention 'to* "Miscellaneous Offenses" from the' City's zoning ordanances. As well as the .disco being filled to capacity, the overflow is loitering on the streets. Additional parking should be required for events of this size. After all... Restaurants are required one space for only three chairs when utilized as outdoor dining. Please inform the Sheriff's Dept. of section 10 -6 in regard to loitering on the sidewalks. After all, the merchants are not even allowed to put.revenue producing merchandise in front of their stores. The land use decision to allow a disco in a residential area has failed. Sincerely Donald F Zagleston Lafreniere 1¢626 Big Basin 'Way _ Saratoga CA yso ?o �o -9= ky 10 tkL C14 95-PIO =t P67- 330 7 DAVID J. MOR1tISON,INC David J. Morrison M.A.I. Real Estate Appraiser & Consultant 1 175 Saratoga Ave., Suite 4 San Jose, Calif. 95129 ( 408) 996-0872 May 10, 1985 Kathy McGoldrick City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Ms. McGoldrick, 14 -' RECEIVED MAY 13 1985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I strongly oppose granting a "Dance Hall License" to Rhett's at 14577 Big Basin Way. I own the cottage at 5th Street which is within 150' of Rhett's and I own, for the past 18 years, the 5 unit apartment at 14649 Oak Street which overlooks Rhett's and is within 200'. Rhett's had dancing in the bar last year. It resulted in extra traffic, a fight in the street, and drunks shouting outside and in the parking lots until 2:00 in the morning. Dancing and the bar operation at Rhett's is a public nuisance and invasion of the privacy of residents of homes, apartments and condominiums around or near Big Basisn. The bar with dancing is -not compatible with the character of the Village of Saratoga. Fortunately the village does not have the drinking, dancing, loitering and cruising found in Los Gatos. I have talked to the owner of Rhett's and he feels a doorman could control the problems. He had a doorman last year and we still had problems outside Rhett's. The owner does not live in Saratoga. He has extensive real estate investments outside of Saratoga. I feel anyone should be able to operate a business, however, when business profits are obtained at the expense of the local residents and property owners it is not fair, reasonable or justifiable. I urge you to vote against issuing a "Dance Hall License" to Rhett's. mm Very t David J. Morrison D4447,1 n (;ongress Springs glace "HonjeowiLer AssliL. RECEIVED 14648 Big Basin Way Saratoga, Calif. 95070 MAY 16 1985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IM, "�.� �v /.SS41i0 The P Cttme cf }fo rs e_ 14555 'gig BaSin'W", 5M- atoga, GA 95070 (408).5057--+711 I J� RusSELL G. PERRY ATTORNEY AT LAW 14531 BIG BASIN WAY POST OFFICE BOX 2486 SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 741 -1401 May 16, 1985 Planning Commission City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: Opposition to Rhett's Public Dance Hall License Dear Members of the Commission: I am an attorney retained by Mr. Frank Behnke, and other parties who oppose a Public Dance Hall License as applied for by Saratoga Associates, Inc., dba.:.Rhett's. The undersigned has reviewed the application for Public Dance Hall License, identified as License No. DH #1, and on behalf of my client, objects to the granting of said license for the following reasons. 1. The bathroom facilities for the premises in question appear to be extremely inadequate. Comment: My client, Mr. Behnke, owns the building adjacent _ to the subject premises, at 14573 Big Basin Way and another property which is an apartment house located at 14590 Big Basin Way, across"Big Basin from Rhett's. As detailed in his letter dated May 14, 1985, submitted herewith, he and his tenants have noted numerous instances of Rhett's patrons urinating on his building, and elsewhere on private and public property near Rhett's. Such indecent and unhealthful activity would indicate per se that the restroom facilities at Rhett's are inadequate, and possibly inconveniently located. Such activity not only shocks the conscience of residents and peaceable citizens, but constitutes a serious health hazard. Recommendation: If a dance hall permit is granted, that the number of allowed patrons be drastically limited, or that the tenant be required to install adequate, and conveniently located, restroom facilities. Planning Commission May 16, 1985 Page 2 2. Patrons of the establishment exhibit disorderly, and often, drunken misconduct. Comment: It appears that some patrons of Rhett's leave the premises in an intoxicated state, and thereafter exhibit loud and obnoxious behavior, such as use of foul language, exhibitionist driving, littering, loitering, playing loud music from autos and general rowdyism. Recommendation: If the dance hall permit is granted, Rhett's be required to have a uniformed security guard present during the hours dancing is permitted, and for one -half to one -hour beyond closing to discourage such aforementioned conduct, and to immediately notify law enforcement authorities of any penal code violations. 3. Parking is inadequate to support a dance hall use for the subject premises. Comment: Neighboring residents and property owners have noted numerous occassions of blocked driveways, use of private property for parking without consent of the owner or tenant, and other instances of parking abuses. Recommendation: If a dance hall permit is granted, that the licensee be required to provide for additional.parking, or provide valet parking to an authorized parking lot. 4. Use of the premises as a dance hall is incompatible with the mixed uses allowed in C -C and C -V Zoning. Comment: The subject premises are located in, or contiguous with C -V Zoning, which allows mixed business and residential use. As presently constituted, the buildings on Big Basin Way between Fifth and Sixth streets, are approximately one -half, utilized for residential or transient residential (motel) purposes. Allowance of a dance hall in such close approximation to residences creates or contributes greatly to undue disturbance of the peace, noise, trespass, vandalism and general disrupution of the neighborhood, during the hours of operation of the dance hall. Planning Commission May 16,1985 Page 3 Recommendation: That the dance hall permit not be issued as an incompatible use. If said permit is issued, that the hours of dance hall operation be restricted to closing by no later than 12:00 a.m. on any night of the week. Additionally that the licensee be required to post a bond in an as yet undetermined amount, to provide a fund for recovery of damages from injured parties for non - insured injury or damage, particularly property damage. Also, that the licensee certify, at regular intervals, during the term of the license, that the noise level from the dance hall complies with the city ordinance regarding acceptable noise levels. OVERALL RECOMMENDATION: The Public Dance Hall permit should not be granted to this applicant, for.the reasons stated above. It appears that under City of Saratoga Ordinance No. 38.123, enacted November 7, 1984, the Planning Commission would be unable to make the findings as required by Sec. 4- 40(a)(1),(2)and(3) of said ordinance. If a license is granted, we respectfully request that the recommendations listed above be considered as conditions under Sec. 4 -40 (b) of Ordinance 38.123, and that the license be initially granted for a period not to exceed thirty to forty -five days, pursuant to Sec. 4 -42 (a) of said ordinance. Also it is urged that the licensee certify at regular intervals under Sec. 4 -42 (c) of said ordinance that the public dance is being conducted by the named licensee. Respectfully submitted, AP04 RUSSELL G. PERRY RGP:smb cc: Mr. Frank Behnke May 14, 1985 To: Planning Commission I am writing to you as a owner of property on Oak St., St. Charles St., Fifth Street and Big Basin Way all of which are adjacent to or across;: the street from Rhett's bar. After numerous complaints from my tenants and neighboring merchants I decided to get a first hand look at the problems I had been hearing about now for several years. I would like to describe my experience in downtown Saratoga last Saturday night, May 11, 1985 in the vicinity of of the dance hall. At Approximately 10:00 I was showing our recently refurbished building at `. 14573 Big Basin Way to a friend and business associate. The dance hall was almost empty as it had been Monday thru Thursday during the day and night. At 11:00 we left our building and found three men urinating in our walkway between the two buildings. I ask them why they weren't using the restroom in Rhett's and their response was that it was to crowded and they had to wait to long. They had--;beer bottles in their posession apparently purchased at Rhett's. After complaining to the bartender and manager I had hoped it would not happen again. While in Rhett's I discovered it was wall to wall people making me believe the 99 person capacity was either not being complied with or the capacity should definitely be reduced. I continued to watch at least twenty male customers go down the walkway to relieve themselves even when the restroom was empty. Apparently it is easier to urinate on our newly refurbished building than to fight the crowd or wait in line. It was very obvious the restroom facilities are inadquate. I stood across the street and observed customers carrying beer bottles up to the door and then leaving the empty ones in the street, sidewalk or porch before entering. They were sitting the the cars drinking and the discarding — their bottles on our front yards of 20650 -20656 Fifth, St. and 14590 Big Basin Way. A car ran over a bottle left in the gutter and caused it to explode and shoot glass across the sidewalk and leaving broken glass all over the street. I stopped a sheriff and pointed out a man walking around the corner in order to urinated on our building and he said there was nothing he could do—The cars kept arriving after 1:00 parking in our driveway of 14590 Big Basin Way because they could not find any other place to park. It was impossible for the doorman to keep asking for two dollars and keep the door closed, consequently music was blasting out into the street. Customers began lining up in fromt of the door waiting to get in. The doorman seemed to be preoccupied with the young ladies in line more than remembering to keep the door closed. Customers began leaving at 2:00. The majority are single and appear to still be looking for that special someone. It reminded me of an after hours bar in Tahoe or San Francisco. Almost all appeared to be heavily under the influence of alcohol and many under age. The car engines start gunning, radios blasting, horns honking, tire screeching and the foul language becomes very loud. The way some people race up and down Big Basin way its a miracle someone has not been hit trying to cross the street. According to my tenants it is when the bar closes isF.the noisiest time. After my observations of that terrible night in our Village I can easily agree with any complaints that I have heard. Most of the vandalism on our properties seem to be explained as well as the litter and part of the parking problem. I appreciat your taking the time and reading my observatiQssuaud hope you agree that dancing at Rhett's does not conform with the Saratoga Village. The village is a nice place to live and work. We have always felt the mixed use between residential and business has many advantages. However the the dance hall is endangering our charming village as.we know it. Taking a person from out of town to dinner in the village is becoming an-experience that we may not be proud of. Please put an end to this problem before it is to late. Thank you, Frank Behnke 14573 Big Basin Way Saratoga, Ca. 95070 741 -0720 -Df4-( May 14, 1985 To the Planning Commission RE: Rhett's Bar To whom it may concern: I own a brand new business in the Saratoga Village,located at 14573 Big Basin Way. To own my own business, especially in such a beautiful area as Saratoga is like a dream come true for me. But after much hard work and expense I am seeing my dream tarnished by the establishment next door known as Rhett's. Their total disregard for my needs has-been extreamly frustrating __.. and I am turning to you with hopes you can help me remedy some of the problems I am having with them. My first complaint deals with their trash. They keep two trash bins in an easement which is designed for ingress and egress only and they refuse to move it. Not only are they blocking my walkway, the smell, insects it attracts and general mess are hazzardous and intolerable. After they have had a busy Friday or' Saturday night I come to my store.and find broken bottles, food and trash littering the walkway and front of my store. They leave hoses, broken chairs, empty boxes and cartons everywhere making an unsightly mess which has a negative impact on my potential customers. The second problem which distresses me even more has to deal with the customers who frequent the bar at night. Apparently, there is a shortage of bathroom facilities inside resulting in the walkway and walls of my building being used as an "outhouse ",.` Many times we have ovserved Rhett's customers _ leaving the bar and walking down the side to relieve themselves then returnig to Rhett's. And this isn't just the occasional cutomer which.is made obvious by the numerous splash marks --all along the wall. Being the "new kid on the block" I feel it is important for me to conform tb::the nature of the Village and do my part in keeping downtown Saratoga the desireable place it is. I feel very badly to be having such problems but am compelled to write to you and make you aware of things which are having a negative impact on our Village. Your consideration and help in this matter will be greatly appreciated. Thank you,, Paula Adams Vive La France 14573 Big Basin Way Saratoga, Ca. 95070 741 -1192 J14 —'° May 13, 1985 Mrs.:Janeen Lafreniere 14,626 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 To Whom It May Concern: And,:l.it should concern a lot of people. I an writing this letter, my second one this year, to voice my concern regarding the events that take place here on Big Basin Way every Friday and Saturday night involving customers of a bar named Rhetts. I have been managing the Saratoga Motel since February, 1983 and cannot believe the difference that has taken place since Rhetts has been working with a dance permit. I have nothing against the owners of Rhetts nor the idea of music and drinking. The thing that I am concerned with is the clientele that frequents Rhetts only because they have dancing. These people would not be hanging around disturbing the whold neighborhood if all they could do was sit, drink, and enjoy other people's company. Instead, they get all wired up with the frenzy of dancing and all hell lets loose. The Saratoga Motel is not a "no- tell" motel, one that doesn't care what goes on as long as we rent out rooms. We are as choosey about renting out our rooms as you are about, choosing a motel. Our clientele is mainly businessmen who stay here because it is quiet and has no bar on the premises. Another big part of our clientele are people that are relocating and relatives and friends of local families. We feel that this is in keeping with the Saratoga atmosphere. The customers of the Crazy Horse Saloon, The Bank Club and the Duke of Wellington do not come down the street acting like a bunch of animals----- - they do not have a dance permit. I invite anyone on the City Council to come into my home at the Saratoga Motel on either a Friday or Saturday night and just witness what takes place. It starts about 10 :30 pm and goes until about 1 :30 am. You would hear screaming of language the likes you have never heard before, see young men urinating on our property, people turning around in our parking lot barely missing our customers' cars, beer bottles and cans being thrown all over, and our planters and flowers being stolen and broken. These people do not live in Saratoga, they come here to dance. We have one unit next to the street that is a one - bedroom cottage. It was rented to a man who commuted to Tahoe and who only lived here during the week. Needless to say, that unit is unoccupied until we can find someone who can only live there during the week. W.e..have had to get contract towing in order to stand up for our rights with our parking problem because the people that park here to go and dance know that we cannot touch their cars once they park here. In one month, two of our signs on our property have been ripped out and busted into pieces. Do you really think this is being done by people that live in Saratoga? Is it being done by people who come into town to have a nice quiet dinner? I understand that the Sheriff's department is very busy especially on weekends but part of their job should be to patrol B;g Basin Way. This would be right up their alley. There is a lot of speeding, exhibition driving and drunk driving taking place here on weekends that should be stopped. Maybe if Big Basin Way was patroled better, these people might not act the way they do. But then again, that would only last so long and we would be back to square one. We have three children still at home, ages 4, 12, and 15. Our four -year old sleeps in our room on weekends and our fifteen -year old sleeps in her brother's room. All this, so they can get a good night's sleep. And the language -- -they might hear it at school but they will not hear it at home if I can help it. I am not against a person being in business to make money, after all that is what we all want, but when it interferes with so many lives, I am against it. I am very sorry if Rhetts cannot make it without having dancing but if that'is the case, then it is their problem. There are plenty •�,of other bars in town that are doing fine without bringing in the crummy clientele that a dance permit brings. Janeen Lafreniere i a -- 0 I m -D R- I EW'S BATH AND CANDLES F R 14567 BIG BASIN WAY _ o SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 M PHONE (408) 867 -5335 SUBJECT DATE. : :r MESSAGE //�� i /1i tea_ �✓ .'�.� .0 e ���Is, �+ Vath ACCess0tles candles � e + gifts DATE TS 1 AND 3 WITH CARBON INTACT - ►OO P"(50 SFAS) 107 14567 iii i3asin 3 WILL BE RETURNED WITH REPLY. 9 � pk 408 -867 -5335 Sarat094 Calif 95070 Evelyn & Ruben parker ; . May 16, 1985 To Whom it may Concern, W6 have been residents of Saratoga most of our lives. Upon graduation from University, we had the opportunity to return to Saratoga -- we now live in the Village. Its charm, elegance, and European ambiance brought us back. The first Friday night in our new apartment was a big disappoint- ment. Oh, our aprartment was lovely but the racket outside kept us awake into the wee hours. The raucous was centered around Rhettl °s Seafood Bar and Cafe, directly across the street. Young people spilled out into the street screaming "Happy Birth- day" at the top of their lungs, the loud music from the bar was, at times, highly audible, and the.Rhett's clientele, upon de- parture, did not hesitate to honk the horns despite the late hour. Since then, we have discovered that this is not at all unusual for a Friday or Saturday night. We too are young people and like to have fun, but the behavior of.,. Rhett's clientele is excessive and quite simply, they are disturbing the peace of the neighborhood. Rhett's is not an appropriate night spot for Saratoga Village; it does not blend in well with the atmosphere here. In short, it is a tacky joint and sticks out like a sore thumb... it has got to go. Thank you for the opportunity to speak candidly. As residents, we feel it is our responsibility to be involved in maintaining the quality of life here in the Village. Sincerely, Two Concerned Residents Bruce & Velita Behnke 13691 Beaumont Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 May 16, 1985 Saratoga Planning Commission Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Planning Commission: The purpose of this letter is to express our dissatisfaction with a serious problem in downtown Saratoga. We have been residents and property owners in Saratoga for the past eight years. We currently are part owners and manage two residences in the downtown Saratoga area (20660 & 20656 5th St.). We are disturbed with the apparent attempt of the city planners to change the image of the downtown area by allowing live music, dancing, and a-general nightclub atmosphere in many restaurants to attract more business. In our view this is not keeping in tune with the Saratoga image. To be specific, Rhett's Restaurant and Bar has been operating for almost two years and has caused numerous problems to local residents, merchants and customers patronizing other businesses. We have heard complaints of urinating on buildings, offensive language at 2:00 a.m., and trespassing on private property. This is a direct result of the clientel a nightclub such as Rhett's attracts. If Rhett's is allowed to have live entertain- ment and dancing the problem will continue to increase. We do not believe the people of Saratoga want this type of activity or want our Sheriff's Department spending their time monitoring this situation. Therefore, we are requesting that the Planning Commission reject Rhett's proposed dance hall in downtown Saratoga. Concerned residents of Saratoga. SNkkll_� ?�/C& BB /VB /km N-- _----- -------- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- -... - -- -.�C1' -tom -- - ,''�'t' - _- _----------------- - - - - -- mod_... - - - -- .- _ -. ------- �*-�-- r- v------ '�'za�o -z.� -- �o�y�� -. -4e -mew It - aze.Q._ >_ -• �- �- - - -_�! -ate? - - - - -- - - - -- -- - - -/— - - -- ^ , --------------------'--- &/' ---' ----'- ' � ^ � ---------'------- - -- ' - �-� -----'---�r ---' ---------���� ---------------''----' - ' ' -°- - - -&� ------�--- ' -----� ������^'�-------�� �-------- _-_-- - -- --__- ---_--_ ---_-_-_ -_ - '-----'_-_ ___ . ~ ° VV J i I� It - -- - — - -- - -- Uwe - --�:- -- 'Q-� -- - - -� -- - - - - -- - - -- - O ..--- - - - - -- - �r!�.c,�--------- - - - - -- - - ---------- /_---- - - - - -- _ a-. emu. _.__ - - - -- -- . t elm• We, the undersigned ask the City Planning commission to NOT renew the conditional dance permit presently held by Rhett's Bar located at Big Basin Way, Saratoga. We feel that their disregards for ordinances, pubic opinion and saftey. make their presence detrimental to the nature of our Village. NAME ADRESS DATE 'ET51 7S- v v 5 -73 �► pia v�1 f��it S /.���5 3 � o CD f'� 1 fit ?C Cl /oJ C� t72SE .1' fir• it ' ORDINANCE NO. 38.123 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING DIVISION 4 OF ARTICLE 4 CHAPTER 4 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC DANCES AND DANCE HALLS The City Council of the City of Saratoga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Division 4 of Article I, Chapter 4 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 4 -34.. Definitions and exclusions As used in this Division, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed-to them by this section: (a) Public Dance. Any dance to which the general public is admitted upon the payment of any fee or charge of admission whatever, or for which tickets, invitations or other admission devices are sold or offered for sale to the general public, or which is given or conducted in connection with the sale of food or beverages in restaurants, taverns, cafes, hotels or any other business establishment to which the general public is admitted, or conducted in connection with the operation for profit of any other amusement or entertainment activity to which the general public is admitted. (b) Public Dance Hall. Any hall, room or place in which a public dance is conducted. (c) Exclusions. For the purposes of this Division, the terms "public dance" and "public dance hall" shall not include or apply to any of the following: (1) A dance conducted upon or within any building, facility, park, plaza or other property owned by the city where such dance is conducted by or with the permission of the city. Rev. 10/18/84 DC "Division 4. Public Dances and Dance Halls 4 -34. Definitions 4 -35. Location 4 -36. License Required 4 -37. Application for License 4 -38. Investigation by City Manager and Referral to Planning Commission 4 -39. Public Hearing by Planning Commission 4-40. Action by Planning Commission; Findings Required; Conditions 4-41. Action by City Manager 4-42. Duration, Renewal and Transferability of License 4-43. C 4-44. Exclusion of Intoxicated or Disorderly Persons Modification or Revocation License 4 -44.1. of Appeal to City Council 4 -44.2. Infraction Offense Sec. 4 -34.. Definitions and exclusions As used in this Division, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed-to them by this section: (a) Public Dance. Any dance to which the general public is admitted upon the payment of any fee or charge of admission whatever, or for which tickets, invitations or other admission devices are sold or offered for sale to the general public, or which is given or conducted in connection with the sale of food or beverages in restaurants, taverns, cafes, hotels or any other business establishment to which the general public is admitted, or conducted in connection with the operation for profit of any other amusement or entertainment activity to which the general public is admitted. (b) Public Dance Hall. Any hall, room or place in which a public dance is conducted. (c) Exclusions. For the purposes of this Division, the terms "public dance" and "public dance hall" shall not include or apply to any of the following: (1) A dance conducted upon or within any building, facility, park, plaza or other property owned by the city where such dance is conducted by or with the permission of the city. Rev. 10/18/84 DC (2) A dance conducted by and within the premises of any school, college or other educational institution. " (3) A dance conducted by any nonprofit social, fraternal, religious, educational or charitable organization, provided such dance is not conducted on a regular basis. A dance shall be deemed to be conducted on a regular basis if held more frequently than twice a year. Sec. 4-35. _ Location No public dance shall be conducted and no ublic dance hall shall be operated at any locatfon in a city except within the C -C or C -V Zoning Districts... Sec. 4 -36. License required No person shall conduct a public dance or operate a public dance hall in the city without first obtaining a license pursuant to this Division. Sec. 4 -37. Application for license (a) Application for a license shall be made to the City Manager on such form as he may prescribe, which shall include the following data: - (1) Name and address of the applicant. (2) ` Name and address of the owner of the property on which the public dance will be conducted, if other than the applicant. (3) Address or other description of the property on which the " public dance will be conducted. (4) The dates, days or frequency and times of day when public - dancing will be conducted. (5). The anticipated number of people attending the public dance. (6) Whether alcoholic beverages of any kind will be served at the premises. (7) Whether music will be provided by live entertainers or recording devices or any combination thereof. (b) The application shall be accompanied by the following: (1) An accurate scale drawing of the property on which the public dance will be conducted and the surrounding area for a distance of at least five hundred feet from each boundary of the site, showing the location of streets and property lines and the names and last known addresses of the recorded legal owners of all properties shown on the drawings. Rev. 10/18/84 VA N "r (2) An accurate description of the building or structure to be utilized for the public dance, including a scale drawing of the floor plan. (3) A description and scale drawing of any alterations, additions or improvements the applicant desires to construct or install prior to the conduct of the public dance. c (4) Payment of a fee to the city for processing the application, in an amount equal to the fee then charged on applications for use permits under Article M of the Zoning Ordinance. Sec. 4 -38. Investigation by City Manager and referral to Planning Commission Upon receipt of the application and other documents and the fee as required in Section 4 -37, the City Manager shall make an investigation of the application and submit a report thereon to the Planning Commission. In connection with such investigation, the City Manager shall have the application reviewed by such departments and agencies as he deems appropriate, including, but not limited to, the following: (a) The County Sheriff, for determination as to moral character and background of the applicant. (b) The County Health Department, for determination as to the sanitary condition of the premises. (c) The city Department of Community Development, for determination as to compliance of the premises with building codes, zoning requirements and other rules, regulations and ordinances. (d) The city Community Service Officers for determination of any potential code enforcement problems from issuance of the requested license. Sec. 4 -39. Public hearing by Planning Commission (a) The city Planning Commission shall conduct at least one publi hearing on the application. Notice of the hearing shall be -given not less than five days nor more than thirty days prior to the date of the hearing by mailing, postage prepaid, a notice of the time and place of the hearing to all persons whose names appear on the latest available tax roll of Santa Clara County as owning property within five hundred feet of the boundaries of the property on which the public dance will be conducted. A notice of the hearing shall also be conspicuously posted upon the property and published at least once in a newspaper having general circulation in the city. (b) At the public hearing, the Planning Commission shall review the application and accompanying documents, the report from the City Manager and other departments or agencies, and shall receive evidence from the applicant and any other interested persons concerning the proposed license and any conditions pertaining thereto. Sec. 4 -40. Action by Planning Commission; findings required; conditions (a) The Planning Commission may grant the application for a Rev. 10/18/84 -3- license as applied for or in modified or conditional form if, on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the Planning Commission makes all of the following findings: r (1) The property on which the public dance will be conducted and the operation thereof as a public dance hall complies with all building, zoning, fire, health and safety codes and any other applicable statutes, ordinances, rules or f regulations. _ - r (2) The proposed location of the public dance is in accord with the objectives of the zoning ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. (3) The public dance and the conditions under which it will be conducted will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to properties in the vicinity or disturbing to the occupants thereof. (b). The Planning Commission shall have authority to impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to be satisfied for issuance or continuation of a license, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) Modification of the premises, including structural changes. (2) On -site parking requirements in excess of the requirement prescribed in the zoning ordinance, if it appears additional parking is needed to accommodate the number of persons expected to attend the public dance. (3) Limitation on days of the week and time of day during which public dancing may be conducted. (4) Limitation on maximum number of people in attendance at each public dance.. . (5) Limitation on level of noise and use of sound amplifying equipment. (6) Requirements with respect to crowd control, including control of persons outside of the premises awaiting entry. (c) The Planning Commission may grant the application on a provisional basis whereby a further hearing will be conducted by the Commission after a specified period of time to determine whether the applicant has complied with all of the conditions of the license and whether the findings set forth in Paragraph (a) above can still be made. Sec. 4-41. Action by City Manager If the application is granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 4 -40, the application shall then be returned to the City Manager together with a record of the proceedings conducted by the Commission. After full compliance by Rev. 10/18/84 -4- C A AN the applicant with all conditions imposed by the Planning Commission for issuance of the license and provided no appeal has been filed from the decision of the Planning Commission and the period .for such appeal has expired, the City Manager shall issue the license. Sec. 4-42. Duration, renewal and transferability of license (a) A license issued pursuant to this Division shall remain in effect for such initial period as specified by the Planning Commission, not to exceed one year. (b) A license may be renewed upon application to the City Manager, received prior to the expiration date of the license, accompanied by such documents as the City Manager may require and a renewal fee in such amount as established by resolution of the City Council. The City Manager shall have authority to renew the license for a period not exceeding one year if the City Manager determines that all of the findings set forth in Subsection 4 -40(a) can still be made and the applicant has fully complied with all of the conditions of the license. The City Manager may, in his discretion, refer the renewal application to the Planning Commission for the conduct of a public hearing and a decision on the renewal application. . (c) 'A license issued pursuant to this Division shall not be assignable or transferable and shall automatically terminate upon any sale or transfer of the property, if the license was issued to the owner thereof, or upon any termination or assignment of the lease or other right of possession, if the license was issued to the occupant of the property, or if, by reason of any other circumstance, the public dance is being conducted by a person other than the named licensee. Sec. 4-43. Exclusion of intoxicated or disorderly persons It shall be the duty of every licensee, and their agents and employees to exclude from their public dance hall any person who is intoxicated or engaged in loud, boisterous, disorderly or other improper conduct. Sec. 4 -44. Modification or revocation of license (a) Any license issued pursuant to this Division may be modified or revoked at any time upon a determination that: (1) The licensee has failed to comply with any condition of the license; or (2) Any of the findings required under Subsection 4 -40(a) can no longer be made; or (3) The licensee has violated any provision of this Division. (b) If the City Manager determines that any of the circumstances described in Subsection 4 -44(a) exist, the City Manager may, in lieu of revocation proceedings or in connection with the renewal of a license, modify any existing conditions of the license and impose any new conditions as the City Manager deems necessary to correct the situation, including, but not limited to, any or all of the conditions described in Subsection 4- 40(b). Rev. 10/18/84 -5- f • t. C' (c) At the request of the City :Manager or upon its own initiative, the Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing in accordance with the procedure prescribed in Section 4 -39 to determine whether the license should be modified or revoked. The Planning Commission shall transmit its decision to the City Manager who shall take such action as may be directed therein. Sec. 4 -441. Appeal to City Council (a) Any decision by the City Manager or the Planning Commission under this Division may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant or any interested person. (b) The appeal shall be made by filing a notice thereof with the City Clerk, signed by the appellant, clearly identifying the decision from which the appeal has been taken and the grounds for the appeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a filing fee in the same amount as charged for appeals to the City Council under the Zoning Ordinance. The notice of appeal, together with the filing fee, must be received by the City Clerk not later than ten days following the date of the action from which the appeal has been taken.. The appeal shall be scheduled for hearing by the City Council at its next available regular meeting. (c) All appeals hereunder shall be heard by the City Council on a de novo basis. In cases where a license is granted and the appeal relates only to a condition of such license, the City Council may review and act upon all matters pertaining to the license, including the granting thereof and any other conditions which may have been imposed. (d) The City Council may affirm, reverse or modify the decision, and may refer the matter back to the City Manager or the Planning Commission for such further action as may be directed by the City Council. All decisions reviewed by the City Council and affirmed or modified on appeal shall become effective on the date the City Council renders its decision.. Sec. 4 -44.2. Infraction offense The violation of any provision contained in this Division or the violation of any condition of a license issued hereunder, is hereby declared to be unlawful and shall constitute an infraction and a public nuisance, subject to the _ penalties as prescribed in Chapter 2.5 of the City Code. Each violation shall constitute a separate offense. The enforcement of this Section shall be in addition to any proceedings conducted under Section 4 -44 to amend or revoke the license by reason of the same violation." SECTION 2: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases may be held invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. Rev. 10/18/84 -6- 4r t The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law, was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 7th day of November , 1984, by the following vote: AYES: Counci] members Callon and Moyles and Mayor Pro Tern Hlava NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Clevenger and Mayor Fanelli ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: City Clerk Rev. 10/18/84 -7- - r 13 x CA5 15 OF 15E41TW65' 77C b� cl.N-- r59V'E d Nc crirkr /x of Cos....voy brhr_en l0urrli S.hnr/ or+C TifM Shx/ cs a..k S.Q.Y. .lc-/, .o book ,61 M pr o! So Sh+�b Gov fovnry fdrors :, ,.or e. r/.e Asir or bror:+pr Ax �,; svr..y. f LEGEN/J . . o Y '/ o 40' A—Rpw re! o- or rro4d 3uRyeYoR7 CER7717CA7f 77M, mop �yMCMY momsenh o a "y —L. 6- . � u+�hr �y of A'>c Lar+d Su6-monc� .!h Nrc /ajVi /erne sYo'r -4/ / Ms rsyue!! d .bu/ L. /1ona.gon m �kJrrh /9cB. tlmerN 6 %ngt /o, 'eft. .,-b ifYJ COL/N7Y SURVEYOR'S CERn /iCa. ^E � /hir .nap /ns b..n a :o .ned 6 <o..'aroce .•.M �� //l T /z�✓' fMe I-e S -y- his �I� aiy or /9cf # 33f3zof R COROERY CERl7F /GATE fke IA, 21 a o! Arcic - ;sqqe o/ / /r3 AY in 9004 23S of .L %OOr o/ x.,•. 1 SL ' /be /ryaxs/ o! E/ e: Sf 9Gd qe/0 NOTIC9 THIS M.AP MAY OR MAY NOT BE A SURVEY OF THE LAND M PICTED HEREON. IT IS NOT TO BE RELIED UPON FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN ORIENTATING ONE'S SELF AS TO THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PARCEL OR PARCELS OF INTEREST. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR IDSS OR OAMAAE RESIIITING FROM REIIANCE THf.R►ML RECORD OF SURVEY OF THE LAN/JS OF PAUL L. FLANAG4N ETUX ANO ANN PARKER V4L K, BE /NG LOTS G f- 7, BLOCKS, 7Z7--/// 0,- ,fKC�RT'rJV /L L E S4RA 7aGA , CAL rrLwN1A . CREEGA/V 4 /X4,VGELO CL'T•S(/[>'rnu (NG /N(ERS }Cats• /• -p' sfARCM, /VGI i I 2/ I 1 �Xf� 113 T 31r iIC��IUt5 S�I�ISi 9 (The PCunudiforse A TractttWn In Tin Dining lka? /.F 4K er- Dear Planning Commissioner! I would like to express my discontent about the type of clientele the Rhett's establishment is attracting. Customers of The Plumed Horse, while waiting for their cars on the sidewalk, have been called names, have been insulted and even spit at. Beside that, the urinating in all corners, empty beer bottles in bushes and gutters, as well as the mutilation of shrubs and trees is something any of us can easily do without. S cerely, Klaus Pache 14555 'F ig 'Sct6UL Way, Saratoga, GA 95070 (408) 867-4711 Raymond M Johnson . 20810 Fourth Street #4 Saratoga, CA 95070 6/11/85 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. ' Saratoga CA 95070 Re: Notice of hearing Wednesday the 19th of June. APPEAL OF DENIAL OF DANCE HALL LICENSE REQUEST. (APPEL,LANT /APPLICANT, R. TROYAN) (RHETTS -S - 14588 BIG BASIN WAY) (DH -1) We are unable to appear personally due to a trip out ,of town on the date of the meeting, but we would like to voice our objection to the granting of the license. We live in the Gatehouse Condominium and are often disturbed by music from the direction of Los Robles Shopping -- Center where- RHETTS'S is located -. The-addition of the sound of music and the coming and going of late night crowds will cause us much: discomfort. Saratoga has been a peaceful place and should remain so. The Dance Hall aspect will detract much from the reputation of Saratoga as a Family City. Thank you for considering our statement. Respectfully, V� Raym nd M Johns. n 6'.a VJ Bernice R John on DAVID). MORRISON INC David J. Morrison M.A.I. Real Estate Appraiser & Consultant 1 175 Saratoga Ave., Suite 4 San Jose, Calif. 95129 (408) 996 -0872 June 12, 1985 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Ms. Fanelli, I strongly oppose granting a "Dance Hall License "'to Rhett's at 14577 Big Basin Way. I own the cottage at 5th Street which is within 150' of Rhett's and I have owned, for the past 18 years, the 5 unit apartment at 14649 Oak Street which overlooks Rhett's and is within 200'. Rhett's had dancing in the bar last year. It resulted in extra traffic, a fight in the street, and drunks shouting outside and in the parking lots until 2:00 in the morning. My tenants must close all their windows to sleep on Friday and Saturday, but are still kept awake by drunks from Rhett's. Dancing and the bar operation at Rhett's is a public nuisance and invasion of the privacy of residents of homes, apartments and condominiums around or near Big Basin. The bar with dancing is not compatible with the character of the Village of Saratoga. Fortunately the village does not have the drinking, dancing, loitering and cruising problems found in Los Gatos. I have talked to the owner of Rhett's and he feels a doorman could control the problems. He had a doorman last year and we still had problems outside Rhett's. The owner does not live in Saratoga. He has extensive real estate investments outside of Saratoga. I feel anyone should be able to operate a business, however, when business profits are obtained at the expense of the local residents and property owners it is not fair, reasonable or justifiable. I urge you to vote against issuing a do "Dance Hall L' ense" to Rh Very tru y o rs, David J. Morrison t, s. CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. $' Initial: ` A Dept. Hd. A DATE: 6/24/85 (7/3/85) C. Att . DEPARTMENT:_ Community Development - Engineering C. Mgr. SUBJECT: Allendale AVenue - Acceptance of Offer of Dedication Issue Surnnary In conjunction with the recent street improvements of Allendale Avenue at the westerly side of Fruitvale Avenue., we had-requested offers of dedication from both the Saratoga Union School District and the U.S. Postal Service. The Saratoga .Union School District's offer has been received, accepted (Resolution No. 2225) and recorded. The U.S. Postal Services offer has now been received, therefore, it should be accepted and recorded. Recommendation Approve Resolution Accepting Dedication of Right -of -Way from the United States Postal Service for a portion of Allendale Avenue in conjunction with the Allendale Avenue Improvement Project. The approved resolution along with the original offer of dediCat-io-n - ._._.__, shall be sent to the Santa Clara County Recorder for Recordation. Fiscal Impacts `. None Exhibits /Attachments 1. Resolution Accepting Dedication of Right -of -Way 2. Exhibit "A" - Offer of Dedication Council Action 1 :7/3: Adopted Resolution 2249. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF RIGHT -OF -WAY .The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1: Reference is hereby made to the following offer of Dedication to the City of Saratoga covering right -of -way over a portion of Allendale Avenue. a.) That certain offer executed by R. W. Chapman for the United States Postal Service which is attached as Exhibit "A" SECTION 2: The aforesaid portion of Offer of Dedication is hereby accepted by the City of Saratoga and the above portion of said street covered thereby and hereby declared to be a public street of the City of Saratoga. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on� the 3rd day of Jul AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY CLERIC , 1985, by the following vote: MAYOR SARATOGA, CA - MPO ®� EXA/ / B / T "A " OFFER TO DEDICATE PROPERTY FOR STREET PURPOSES For valuable consideration, the undersigned owners of the here- inafter described real property, hereby warranting that they j constitute all of the owners thereof, for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Saratoga, a Municipal Corporation, an easement and right -of -way for a public city street (including all trees or growth presently growing or as may be grown within said right -of -way) upon, under, over and across that certain real property situated in the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State.of California, and more particularly described as follows:, Beginning at the point of intersection of the center line of Fruitvale Avenue with the northerly line of the 20.82 acre parcel of land shown on that certain "Record of Sur- . vey for Board of Trustees of Saratoga Grammar School Dis- trict" recorded on the 19th day January, 1951 in Book 29 of.Maps at Page 35, Santa Clara County Records; thence running along said northerly line of that 20.82 acre parcel of land South 81 042'00" West 204.40 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence from said True Point of Beginning run- ning South 89030100" East 54.44 feet; thence South 0005' 07" West 18.86 feet to a point which is 27.00 feet, measured at right angles, southerly of the previously described northerly line of that 20.82 acre parcel of land; thence, running parallel with and 27.00.-feet southerly of that north- erly line, South 81042'00" West 355.30 feet; thence North 0041'33" West 27.24 feet to a point located on that pre- viously described northerly line; thence running North 81042100" East 300.64 feet along that northerly line to TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.215 Acxe, more or less. The undersigned understand that the within offer can only be accepte, by resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 1806 of the State of California. and recordation of this instrument shall not and will rD t constitute acceptance of the within offer to dedicate. This offer shall be irrevocable and shall be binding upon our heirs, personal representa. tives, successors and assigns. The plural as used herein shall in- clude the singular, and the singular include the plural. Executed this 7th day of June 1985 UNITED-STATES POSTAI.7SERVICE R. W. Chapman,,Acting Regional Director Real Estate and Buildings Department San Bruno, CA 94099 -0300 (All Signatures must be acknowledged before Notary Public - attach either Corporate, individual ot partnership notary form.) T The undersigned understand that the within offer can only be accepte, by resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 1806 of the State of California. and recordation of this instrument shall not and will rD t constitute acceptance of the within offer to dedicate. This offer shall be irrevocable and shall be binding upon our heirs, personal representa. tives, successors and assigns. The plural as used herein shall in- clude the singular, and the singular include the plural. Executed this 7th day of June 1985 UNITED-STATES POSTAI.7SERVICE R. W. Chapman,,Acting Regional Director Real Estate and Buildings Department San Bruno, CA 94099 -0300 (All Signatures must be acknowledged before Notary Public - attach either Corporate, individual ot partnership notary form.) r, i _ OFFER OF DEDI CAT/ ON M o ° 41 ' 93 "W 27.24' FOR \ STREET PURF�OSES U. S. P057-AL SERViCI I SCA L E : / a So ' p O w ` V t- 77.ettl Ito b ' D Q \A , A •0 � o V 0 N o �. 4 44. =�' 91 v RAID V ♦ Vo�� .. Ra 327 �0' as yo ' 30 °y R S3 E.YiJe'rs9 Q�7° J R F4 3D Rs Dp Ac'R �. IV U. UN i AGENDA BILL NO. ?� DATE: June 20, 1985 (7/3/85). CITY OF SARATOGA Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. DEPARTMENT: Community Development-Engineering C. Mgr. SUBJECT: ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY PROJECT Issue Summary On September 5, 1984, the City Council awarded the Contract for above project to O'Grady Paving, Inc. for the total bid amount of $282,278.00. At its meeting of November 7, 1984 the City Council authorized an additional amount of $37,850.00 to cover an added area on Sarat.o- gaAvenue. The project was slow getting under way due to weather. The project was finally completed; including corrections, on May 1, 1985. Reco=i-- ndation Approve the final acceptance on the above project and file the Notice of Completion. Fiscal Impacts $328,925.02 from Gas Tax under the 1984 -85 Capital Improvement Budget. Exhibits /Attachrmnts 1. Copy of final progress payment. 2. Notice of Completion. Council Action 7/3: Approved.. f EST. NO. j.crv�{gai4�tAWRV41=�i�: "�{� AMOUNT Tm"�Al!i I �:' 1213184 63,000,00 2 / 2 ,185 77,394-.49. 3 220 8S 153 424. 84 CHECKED 1- 296 032. 5Z ACCT. # 4SZZ DATE TOTAL PAYMENT: APPROVED PROGRESS PAY ESTIMATE ' z 93, 819, 33 PROJECT: Asoh,ALT CONngsre O✓ERLAy pRDircr City of Saratoga 944 CONTRACTOR: O'Grady �Olr %N9 lily; DATE: fine 20�(98S EST. NO. 4 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA.' 95070 f Community Development Date �r� [ tL ADDRESS: 2613' SA FROM: /�3//8S TO: S� /�8 - DIVISION # 72 /Wy4HG/olle All ///Cwt CO. 94043 PHONE: (4 15 ) 966- / 9Z6 ' UNIT WORK DONE CORK DONE TOTAL WORK ITEM DES PIPTION QUANTITY7. . UNIT. PRICE TOTAL. PREVIOUS ESI THIS EST. WORK DONE -TOTAL DUE- DONE REMARKS Aepa /i of Fpi /ed.4reas 40, 000 S.F. /.75 70,000.0 520000 - U - 52Co 9(O IX2oo /3o / \ If dd ons rue on orrY! , na c�e aHi S, 2 of R. R. 7 -racks /9,4000 5. F. 0.50 7,500.00 6,030 - o - 6,030 3, 015.00 40 3 Wed e Cuf /5,000 L.F. 0.65 9 750 !9,000 -o - /9,000 12, 350.00 12-7 ienfe due & addeda�ea 4 49-4000 A ha/l //,000 6a4 1.30 143Aa 00 10,324 -0- 10,3Z4 13, 421.20 94 S FO6riG MOL 36,500 S. Y. 0.50 19 250. 45,138 -O- 45,138 Z2, 569. 117 ,crease due /o addedQieO 6 / %2 "// C. aperlay 4,600 70 33,00 151,94000 5,28584 59.70 5, -345, 54 / 76, 407.82 I / S Ixreose due Eo adde�Qie4 7 4 "AMleSAI, ArleSfnoe /7,000 L. F, 0.09 1,530.0 /7,000 -o- 17;000 /,530.00100 8 6"Wh Bike Zdne Sfripe 16000 L.F. 0.13 Z 080.00 1.-,000 -0- 16,000 Z080.010 100 9 &1u le Ye/ %w 41,00 L.F. 0.26 /,066.0 4,1oo -0— 4,100 1,066.00 100 !O 8 "'S01 a1 e SfriPe Z 700 L. F D. Z6 702.00 1,700 - o - 2,700 702.00 /QO l / Tro ��': c eye s Markir7 s Xwa/ riaw L!/m Sur•, Z- S. Z 500, 10090 - v - / 00ia 2,s-00.00 1000 !Z Re{ /ec orize Pa// ar/«/ S 600 EQ 3.cb /,800.00, 600 163 763 2,289. 00 pu z" y ose o»• 127 .ila� e7�Gawxt ZF3Z Z7$328 TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: RECORD OF PREVIOUS PAYMENT -_ TOTAL DUE: 925 OZ P.O.# 16477 EST. NO. DATE AMOUNT 1 1213184 63,000,00 2 / 2 ,185 77,394-.49. 3 220 8S 153 424. 84 CHECKED BY:� � 296 032. 5Z MADE B 1' /ZU �S 32,892.50 FUND # 45 \ DATE LESS 10% RETENTION: CHECKED BY:� � 296 032. 5Z ACCT. # 4SZZ DATE TOTAL PAYMENT: APPROVED B ' ' z 93, 819, 33 . PROGRAM # 944 LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS: Director f Community Development Date PAYMENT DUE THIS EST. 2/3• /9 DIVISION # 72 TOTAL 2 93 819 .3 3 SHEET 1 OF . NOTE: eomieacf 4"ounf c.aas inereQS�d by 24e Cif, Council of ifs maefin9 o-' Nov. 7 /984, ih f/,e aw4i4&7 < oie 37,850 brin9ii�9 f.�e Eofa/ fo 43,-0 12'9 if WITtirr is hereby given that ............. 1 ..... . ...... the ioidcrsigned, Robert S.Shook . . ........................... . .. . ............... . .. . .......... . ...... . . . .. . . . .................... . agent of j* the ow;ter.... . ...... of th.___.._ccrtaia lot -piece—., or Parcel of land situated in the .......... gj�ty . i 8i ....................... . ... ..............._— County q ' r ' a o parcel......... Clara ................................... _State of California, and described asjollozvs, to-wit: ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY PROJECT That_.__qL1LY_6_.f_.Sar a to F a _.L.-I - - -__ - ------------------_-_ as ounzer -of said land, did, oaf tile 2 7 th day o September 19_ 14 enter into a contract tract 'Grady Co upon the land above described, which contract was filed in the office of the county recorder of the________.Coli;lty of-.---... - - - -------- _7 State of California, on the---. -__...day of .................... . ....... ......... the said contract or work of iin roveiiient, as a whole, was actually conipleted by the said dy That the name___ and address___-of all the oTviter -of said property are as follows: City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 and the nature to said property is--.- -- .._...._...--- •----- •- •-- - - - - -- - City of Sarato zoizer...._ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. Bi .............. ............ . ............... ......... .. . ......... Agent County of .................... . .... . .. ............ .................................................. Robert S. Shook ..................... ..................................................... ......... ...... .. . .............. ........ . ....................... ....................... ...... ........... . ........... beingduly sw orn....._ ................ .- ......... . ......... .......... ----- --------------------- ys: I . ......... . [ the agent of the owiter....- of the propert,, described in the foregoing not ice. I have read the forcgobig notice aid k;iow the coWritts thereof. and the same is true of mj- o"Vit knowledge. Subscribed aid s-zvorit tc before me this ......................................... ...................... . ............. . ........... .............. --..----..day of ............ . . ....... . ...... 19 .............. . .................. . .... ...................... . ... ................. ........ words in brackets if _- CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. 7� Initial: Dept. lid. DATE: July 3, 1985 C. Atty. DEPARTMENT: Community Development C. Mgr. SUBJECT: Approve Assessment Segregation for Tract 7578 - Oak Street Issue Spry In 1984 Floyd F. Gaines subdivided his property into six condominiums, therefore, Village Parking District No. 4 Assessments has been redistributed per attached letter from Bond Council. 'Reconezdaticn 1, Approve redistribution of Assessments to the six newly created parcels. Fiscal Impacts None Exhibits /AttacYumnts 1.. Letter from Bond Council Council Action 7/3: Approved without Bond Council letter, which was unavailable. CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. DATE: 5 -21 -85 (6- 19 -85) DEPARTMENT: Community Development SUBJECT: Speed Zone - McCoy Avenue Issue Sun nary Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. City of San Jose has made a traffic study on McCoy Avenue, the results of which are that the speed limit on McCoy must be increased from 25 MPH to 30 MPH to qualify for radar enforcement. In as much. as half of McCoy is in*the City of Saratoga, it is appropriate to have similar speed zoning on Saratoga's half. RecomTendation Enact Ordinance No. establishing the prima facia speed limit on McCoy Avenue in the City of Saratoga at 30 MPH. Fiscal Impacts N. A. Exhibits /Attachrmnts 1. Ordinance 2. Staff Review 3. City of San Jose Request Council Action 7/3: Introduced Ordinance. 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: DIRECTOR OF COPMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 5/3/85 FROM: ERMAN DORSEY, SR. ENGR. TECH. SUBJECT: CITY OF SAN JOSE'S REQUEST TO RAISE THE SPEED LIMIT ON McCOY AVE. EASTERLY OF QUITO ROAD. We have been requested by the City of.San Jose to concur with them in raising the speed limit on McCoy Ave., easterly of Quito Rd. from 25 MPH to 30 MPH. The reason for this request is to enable enforcement by use of radar. Their speed study backs up the request for a 30 MPH limit (the bottom of the 10 MPH pace is 30 MPH). They received a petition from two - thirds of San Jose households on Mc- Coy Ave. requesting that a radar enforceable speed limit be established on their street. Attached is a copy of the City of San Jose's letter along with their Engineering and Traffic Survey (Speed Zoning Study). From a traffic engineering viewpoint, I have to concur with their pro- posal based on their study results, if an enforceable speed limit is to be used on McCoy Ave. Erman Dorsey, Sr. Engr. Tech. CITY OF SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 801 NORTH FIRST STREET SAN JOSE, CA 95110 (408) 277.4000 DEPARTMENT OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS JOSEPH F. BASS, DIRECTOR November 30, 1984 Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Shook: RECEIVED DEC 05 1984 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: Speed Zoning - McCoy Avenue, Quito Road to Neville Avenue We recently received a petition signed by two - thirds of San Jose households on McCoy Avenue requesting that we establish a radar enforceable speed limit on their street. Our latest engineering and traffic survey shows that in order to qualify for radar enforcement, McCoy Avenue should have a 30 mph speed limit. Since a portion of McCoy Avenue between Quito Road and Villanova Road is in Saratoga jurisdiction, we solicit your concurrence in changing the speed limit. We are attaching a copy comments to Wayne Tanda, for your cooperation. JFB:JJB :tf Attachment of our survey for your review. Please direct your Deputy City Traffic Engineer (277- 5341). Thank you Very ruly your JOSFp F. BASS, Direfcto Depar ment of Traffic Operations