 |
|
|
|
|
Councilmembers Become Umpires In Batting Cage Argument
Costly battle went first to Planning Commission
Restrictions are agreeable
By Kara Chalmers
A dispute between two Sobey Road neighbors over a batting cage erected on one of the neighbors' properties made it all the way to the City Council for resolution.
Council members on Nov. 3 unanimously agreed to overturn the Planning Commission's denial of a permit for David and Cindy Wright to use the batting cage/bocce ball court that they installed on their property. Ann Waltonsmith excused herself from the vote because she served on the Planning Commission when the case first came before it.
Council member Evan Baker said that, although he does not want the council to get in the habit of overturning Planning Commission decisions, he doesn't think the issue ever should have gone as far as the Planning Commission in the first place.
"I don't think it's a Planning Commission issue. I don't think it's a city council issue," Baker said at the Nov. 3 public hearing. "I think it's a gripe between two neighbors that couldn't be settled amicably, and you are intruding on the public servant citizens in bringing it to us."
The Wrights built the cage/court, which is a set of steel poles that supports see-through mesh netting, in May. Their immediate neighbors, Jim and Carol Lynn Grellas, whose property is about 30 feet from the cage/court, brought a complaint to the planning department soon after. In June, the Wrights obtained an accessory structure permit because the batting cage met minimum zoning ordinance requirements, and the city found there was no other acceptable location on the Wright's property for the court. But the Grellases appealed the permit, and the Wrights had to plead their case in front of the Planning Commission in July. The commission visited the property and voted 5-1 to deny the permit and directed the Wrights to remove or relocate the batting cage. The Wrights appealed the denial to the City Council.
Continuations, postponements and the expenditure of money for consultants and lawyers on both sides led up to the Nov. 3 public hearing.
"The history of this batting cage kind of reminds me of a modern-day Hatfields and McCoys, but instead of firing shots at each other, they are firing attorneys, sound engineers, real-estate appraisers and consultants," Councilmember Nick Streit said at the council meeting. "Rather than working out a solution among themselves as neighbors, they've spent a lot of money trying to convince this city council to make a decision one way or another."
Initially, the council was deadlocked 2-2, with Evan Baker and Stan Bogosian voting to uphold the Wright's appeal and Nick Streit and John Mehaffey voting to uphold the planning commission's denial of approval. But after much discussion with the two neighbors and among themselves, council members suggested a solution that proved agreeable to both sides.
Council members voted unanimously to uphold the Wright's appeal with the following conditions: The court is to be used only from noon to 6 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays, and from 3 to 6 p.m. Mondays through Fridays and for no more than a two-hour stretch. In addition: the batting cage's height is to be lowered to conform with the city code; no more than four youngsters are to use the cage at once; the bats used are to be taped wooden bats; the balls are to be pitching-machine rubber-coated balls and the cage's steel poles must be padded.
Council members, as well as the Grellases, were concerned with the new trees visible from the Grellases' kitchen window, planted by the Wrights to help shield the court. Councilman Baker said they would grow to heights that would block the Grellases' views for years to come. The Wrights agreed to remove them.
The council agreed to revisit this issue in nine months if there are any problems.
The Wrights were quick to agree to the restrictions imposed on them.
"I hate this right now," said Cindy Wright to the council. "I don't even want to live there. My front door opens to their property, and it's been horrible since all this started, and it doesn't stop tonight. "We can make it work. There's tons of things that can be done."
According to the Wrights, they first decided to build the court so they wouldn't have to drive their three sons, who range in age from 7 to 15, to a batting cage in Campbell, the nearest location. They said they wanted to keep their children active after school, in a location where Cindy Wright could supervise their activities.
"I grew up in a neighborhood where kids were allowed to be kids," said David Wright at the hearing. "We do respect the neighbors. We are just interested in making this a better place for our kids."
The Grellases said they didn't plan on a batting cage so near their property or they would never have bought their house, which was constructed after the Wright's house was.
Technically, batting cages are legal under Saratoga's ordinance for sports courts. However, the cage in question is higher than the legal limit of 10 feet.
When the planning commissioners denied the Wright's request, they said the batting cage's use is more intensive than, for example, a tennis court, and that would considerably affect the neighbors. They said there is another viable location for the structure on the Wright's property that would be farther away from the Grellases.
According to the Wrights, the other area gets wet during certain times of the year and would be difficult to build on. Furthermore, Mayor pro tem Stan Bogosian suggested at the meeting Nov. 3 that the damp area may be a natural habitat for some animals and vegetation and maybe should not be disturbed.
The sound consultants for both sides agree that the noise level at the batting cage recorded by the consultant the Wrights hired, is within the legal limits of Saratoga's noise ordinance. But the consultant the Grellases hired, Derek Watry, noted that just because the decibel level is legal, the sound could still be extremely annoying to neighbors, as a drippy faucet would be over time.
While the Grellases noted that kids yelling during play could contribute significantly to the noise problem, the Wright's attorney, Ronald Rossi, said that when children are concentrating at hitting balls in a batting cage, there is typically no yelling, as there would be if an actual game of some sort were going on.
The Grellases were afraid the structure would cause the property value of their house to decrease, as Alain Pinel real-estate agent Brenda Duchesne-Miller suggested it would in her letter to the Planning Commission dated July 14. However, a real estate appraiser, Roger Miller of Taketa, Miller & Associates said it would not negatively affect property values in a letter to Rossi dated Oct. 27.
|
|
|
|
Saratoga, California Since 1955
