HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-16-2002 City Council Agenda Packet
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 16, 2002
CALL MEETING TO ORDER - 5:30 P.M.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION - 5:30 P.M.
ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE.
Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov't Code 54957)
Title: City Attorney
Initiation of litigation (Gov't Code section 54956.9(c): (1 potential case).
Consideration of Liability Claims (Gov't Code 54957):
Claimant: Patrick Leung
Agency claimed against: City of Saratoga
Conference With Legal Counsel -Existing Litigation:
(Government Code section 54956.9(a))
Name of case: Sazatoga Fire Protection District v. City of Saratoga (Santa Claza
County Superior Court No. CV-803540)
REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 P.M. -CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE
MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA
(Pursuant to Gov't. Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on
January 11, 2002)
~IdO~ EAIH~2IV
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC
Oral Communications on Non-Agendized Items
Any member of the public will be allowed to address the City Council for up to three (3)
minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the council from
discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff
accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff.
Communications from Boards and Commissions
None
Written Communications
None
Oral Communications -Council Direction to Staff
Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications.
CEREMONIAL ITEMS
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Calendar contains routine items of business. Items in this section will be
acted in one motion, unless removed by the Mayor or a Council member. Any member of
the public may speak to an item on the Consent Calendar at this time, or request the
Mayor remove an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Public Speakers are
limited to three (3) minutes.
lA. Approve Council Meeting Minutes
Regular Meeting -November 7, 2001
Recommended action:
Approve minutes.
1B. Approve Council Meeting Minutes
Adjourned Meeting -December 11, 2001
Recommended action:
Approve minutes.
1C. Approve Council Meeting Minutes
Regulaz Meeting -December 19, 2001
Recommended action:
Approve minutes.
1D. Approve Council Meeting Minutes
Regulaz Meeting -January 2, 2002
Recommended action:
Approve minutes.
Agenda 2 January 16, 2001
1 E. Review of Check Register
Recommended action:
Approve check register.
1 F. Review Planning Commission Action Minutes -
January 9, 2002
Recommended action:
Note and file.
1 G. Commission Attendance Records
Recommended action:
Accept records.
1H. Adopt Resolution Supporting "Yes on 42"
Recommended action:
Adopt resolution.
lI. Claim of Saratoga Fire Protection District; Claim No. GL-053408
Recommended action:
Reject claim.
1J. Financial Reports for the Months Ending December 2001
Recommended action:
• Accept reports.
1K. Consider Joining Amicus Brief in Chapter Communication v. County of Santa
Cruz, C99-1874 WHA (N.D. Cal.) regarding Attorneys Fee Awards
Recommended action:
Approve request to join amicus brief.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Appeal of an Administrative Decision to Require Sound Mitigation
Dr. John Oliver, Property Owner 12240-12250 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
Recommended action:
Open public hearing; close public hearing; deny the appeal and uphold Resolution
91-03.
Use of City Parks for Recreational Sporting Events: Draft Parks and Recreation
Ordinance
Recommended action:
Conduct public hearing; waive the second reading; approve ordinance.
OLD BUSINESS
4. Claim of Patrick Leung; Claim No. GL-0053005
Recommended action:
Reject claim.
Agenda 3 January 16, 2001
NEW BUSINESS
Congress Springs Park - Approval of User Agreements and Discussion of User
Fees
Recommended action:
Adopt resolution and authorize City Manager to execute agreements.
6. Approval of Professional Services Agreement for Landscape Architecture Services
with MPA Design in connection with the Azule Park Improvement Project
Recommended action:
Authorize City Manager to execute agreement.
Consideration of Initiating a Study to Create a Single Story Zoning Overlay
Requirement for the Brookview and Saratoga Woods Neighborhoods
Recommended action:
Adopt resolution.
8. Economic Development Options
Recommended action:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
9. Commission Eligibility Requirements
Recommended action:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS
Arts Commission Waltonsmith
Planning Commission Mehaffey
Parks and Recreation Commission Baker
Finance Commission Baker
Library Commission Waltonsmith
Public Safety Cormission Streit
Heritage Preservation Commission Bogosian
Youth Commission Mehaffey
Gateway Task Force Streit
Library Expansion Committee Bogosian
CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
OTHER
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
Agenda 4 January 16, 2001
ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special
assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269.
Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title
II)
SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
i
January 22, 2002 Adjourned Meeting -Joint Session
Planning Commission/lleritage Preservation
Commission
Adult Day Care Center
19655 Allendale Avenue
Saratoga, California
February 6, 2002 Regular Meeting/Council Chambers
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California
February 12, 2002 Adjourned Meeting -Joint Session
Public Safety Commission, Saratoga Union
School District, Cupertino School District,
Campbell Union School District
Adult Day Care Center
19655 Allendale Avenue
Saratoga, California
February 20, 2002
Agenda
.Regular Meeting/Council Chambers
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California
7:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m.
January 16, 2001
I
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
ORIGINATING D T•
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM: I ~ ~_j~ ,
CITY MANAGER: O~//--~`'--_
DEPT HEAD:
SUBJECT: City Council Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve minutes as submitted for the following City Council Meeting:
Regular Meeting -November 7, 2001
REPORT SUMMARY:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A
FOLLOW UP ACTION:
Retain minutes for legislative history.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Minutes/November 7, 2001
MINUTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
NOVEMBER 7, 2001
The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Open Session in the Administrative
Conference Room at 4:25 p.m. to interview applicants for the Arts Commission.
The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session, Administrative
Conference Room. 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 6:45 p.m.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -INITIATION OF LITIGATION:
(Government Code section 54956.9(c)): (1 case)
MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:05 p.m.
Mayor Mehaffey reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken.
Mayor Mehaffey called the Re lug ar City Council meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. and
requested Councilmember Evan Baker, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councihnembers Evan Baker, Stan Bogosian,
Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor John Mehaffey
ABSENT: Vice Mayor Nick Streit
ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager
Richard Taylor, City Attorney
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director
Director of Admin. Services
John Cherbone, Director of Public Works
Danielle Surdin, Economic Development Coordinator
REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR NOVEMBER 7
2001.
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2,
the agenda for the meeting of November 7, 2001 was properly posted on November 2,
2001.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
The following people requested to speak at tonight's meeting:
~J
C~
City Council Minutes 1 November 7, 2001
Willys Peck, 14275 Saratoga Avenue, noted he was present tonight representing the
Saratoga Historical Foundation. Mr. Peck requested~that the City allow the Foundation to
apply for a Park Charter Fund Grant from Santa Clara County in order to expand the
Historical Museum located on Saratoga-Los Gatos Road. Mr. Peck explained that the
current building lacks storage space and an office.
john Keenan, 22215 Mt. Eden Road, thanked the Council for their ongoing support. Mr.
Keenan noted that although the F.A.C.T Committee members who were running for Fire
Commission did not win they would not loose focus on improving fire safety in the City
of Saratoga.
Ed Farrell, 20877 Kittridge Road, noted that the Fire Commission election was the best
hope for reform in the Saratoga Fire District. Mr. Farrell noted that the F.A.CT.
Committee candidates came up short on votes and the incumbent and a new
commissioner won. Mr. Farrell noted that F.A.C.T would continue to follow through
with the L.A.F.C.O. process. Mr. Farrell thanked the City Council for their ongoing
support.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None
COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF
Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that Mr. Peck's request should be agendized and
taken care of in a speedy manner.
Councilmember Waltonsmith thanked the members of the F.A.C.T. group for coming to
tonight's meeting.
Councilmember Bogosian noted that the Public Safety Center Complex is extremely
important what hangs in the balance is not just an efficient fire house but the long term
viability of the Sheriff s presence in the City of Saratoga. Councilmember Bogosian
requested that City staff move forward with the Public Safety Center and to work with
the new Fire Commissioners.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Mehaffey congratulated the newly elected Fire Commissioners Mr. Geddes and
Mr. Long.
. CEREMONIAL ITEMS
None
Consensus of the City Council to move to Item 3.
City Council Minutes 2 November 7, 2001
OLD BUSINESS
3. PRESENTATION BY VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY -
HIGHWAY 85
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Informational only.
Mike Evanhoe, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, noted that tonight
he and his colleague, Jeff Funk, would summarize the Highway 85 Noise
Mitigation Study and distribute a copy of the final draft of the Evaluation of
Noise Mitigation Alternatives for Route 85.
Mr. Evanhoe explained that three noise mitigation alternatives were compared
and studied:
1. Modify pavement; AC Overlay vs. PCC Grinding
Results of numerous studies indicate that asphalt concrete pavement is
quieter that PCC pavement in the initial phases of life span of these surfaces.
However, the asphalt pavements show a definite tendency to get noisier with
age; whereas, noise levels for the PCC seem to remain relatively constant over
time. Thus, when comparing using AC overlays vs. PCC grinding to reduce
noise, the AC overlay would have to be milled out and replaced about every 4-
6yeazs in order to maintain the initial noise benefit, compared to re-grinding
every 10 yeazs for PCC. The continual replacement significantly impacts the
life cycle cost for these options, despite similar noise benefits, with the AC
overlay options costing about twice as much as the PCC grinding. However,
both these options would benefit all the residences along the study limit.
2. Extend Noise Barriers: Wall Height Increases vs. Acoustical
Capping
Results of the analysis indicate that noise reductions from maximum possible
soundwall height increase or wall capping range between 1 and 2dBA for the
majority of the 4.2 miles study limit. This amount of noise reduction is
considered negligible. However, four locations, involving a total of
approximately 4500 feet of soundwall (approximately 20% of the study limit),
were identified where noise levels could be reduced by 3-4 dBA to the benefit
of approximately 63 nearby residences. Extension of these specific walls
would require strengthening of the foundations, as well as the walls, resulting
in significant construction impacts.
3. Add Absorptive Material: Metallic panels vs. Landscaping
The noise reductions associated with the installation of absorptive panels to the
soundwalls and retaining walls will be less that 2 dBA. Similar noise
reductions could be expected in azeas where additional landscaping, dense
shrubs and ivy, aze provided. When comparing the addition of absorptive
panels vs. landscaping, adding landscaping would probably be the preferred
because of its lower costs and more positive aesthetic qualities. Neither of
these alternatives would be considered as a stand-alone noise mitigation
City Council Minutes 3 November 7, 2001
option, since noise reductions of less than 3 dBA aze considered imperceptible.
However, these altematives could be considered in conjunction with other
mitigation altematives.
Mr. Evanhoe explained that after all the alternatives were studied, only
modifying the pavement and extending the noise barriers produce a perceptible
reduction in noise. Therefore, it is these altematives that aze recommended for
implementation. Specifically, PCC grinding is the option recommended for
modifying the pavement. PCC grinding is preferred over a AC overlay since it
provides a similaz noise benefit at a life-cycle cost about half the cost of the
AC overlay option. In addition, PC grinding of the surface results in a surface
with lower level of ongoing maintenance requirements, lessening the impacts
to the traveling public during maintenance activity, and reducing exposure of
maintenance workers to traffic. The expected life span of the noise benefit for
PCC grinding is greater than that for the AC overlay.
Mr. Evanhoe noted that soundwall height increase and/or acoustical capping
for specific soundwall locations is also recommended for implementation.
Increasing the soundwall height and acoustical capping have similar noise
reduction benefits and costs.
Mr. Evanhoe noted that two viable cost effective mitigation alternatives are
recommended for implementation. The next step is for the VTA to begin
developing these alternatives by initiating the project development process.
This process would include preliminary engineering, environmental approvals,
and design for tow projects.
Mr. Evanhoe noted that Project 1 (Grinding of the existing PCC) would be
based on utilizing standard diamond grinding. Mr. Evanhoe briefly explained
that diamond grinding is a concrete restoration technique that can be used to
correct a variety of surface problems. It provides a smooth riding surface with
desirable friction and noise chazacteristics. Grinding of the old PCC pavement
can eliminate the extra noise caused by cracks and uneven slabs as well as
reducing the tire and roadway interaction noise levels.
Mr. Evanhoe explained that the Santa Clara County 1996 Measure B
Transportation Improvement Program includes $9.3 million for noise
mitigation along Route 85 corridor from Interstate 280 to Route 87.
Implementing the two projects would cost approximately $7 million, including
engineering and construction costs, which is within the funding available.
Mr. Evanhoe noted that the proposal for grinding goes before the VTA Boazd
on January 10, 2002.
A discussion took place amongst the City Council whether or not
microgrinding would alleviate the noise on Highway 85.
Mr. Evanhoe stated that if he felt that microgrinding was not a sufficient
solution, he would not be recommending it to the Council tonight.
City Council Minutes 4 November 7, 2001
Mayor Mehaffey noted that the information on microgrinding is limited and he
is not willing to make any concrete decisions without more information.
Mr. Evanhoe suggested that perhaps the proposal for microgrinding before the
VTA Board in January be postponed to February and come back to Council in
January with more information on microgrinding.
Richard Lowenthal, City Councilmember/City of Cupertino, noted that the
City of Cupertino would like to partner with the City of Saratoga on any
decisions made on Highway 85.
Mr. Evanhoe suggested a Joint Study Session with the City of Sazatoga and
City of Cupertino. Mr. Evanhoe stated that he would be willing to facilitate
the meeting.
The City Council thanked Mr. Evanhoe and Mr. Funk for the presentation.
Mayor Mehaffey noted that it was not the appropriate time to begin the Public Hearings
and requested to move to Item 1C.
Consensus of the Council to move to Item 1 C.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1C. FISCAL YEAR ENDED NNE 30, 2001- COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept report.
Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director, presented staff report.
Director Baloca noted that tonight the City of Sazatoga's Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report (CAFR) for the yeaz ended June 30, 2001, is presented to the City
Council for approval. The CAFR is prepazed pursuant to applicable federal, state
and local statutes, that requires the City of Sazatoga annually report on its financial
position and activity and that this report be audited by an independent certified
public accounting firm.
Director Baloca noted that Gary Caporicci of Caporicci, Cropper, & Lazson LLP,
was present tonight and would give a brief overview of the City's CAFR.
Gary Caporicci, Senior Partner/Caporicci & Crawford, stated that the City of
Saratoga is in full compliance with GASB 33. Mr. Caprocci noted that the City is
in a wonderful financial condition in the General Fund. The unreserve fund is
approximately $9.5 million dollars, relevant to the City's expenditures and
ongoing operations. Mr. Caporicci noted that the City's retirement system is in
good sound condition and has over $4.7 million dollazs. Mr. Caporicci noted that
City Council Minutes 5 November 7, 2001
a future item is GASB 34, which is a brand new financial reporting model that was
issued in 1998. Mr. Caporicci noted that the City of Saratoga has akeady begun
the process to comply with this new report.
Mayor Mehaffey noted that it was the appropriate time to begin the Public Hearings and
requested to move to Item 2.
Consensus of the Council to move to Item 2.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT -14800 BOHLMAN
ROAD/14766 OAK STREET, APN'S 517-13-018, 517-13-019& 517-12-001
- SOBRATO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct Public Hearing and adopt resolution amending the General Plan Land
use Map.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-082
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE LAND
USE MAP OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA BY CHANGING THE LAND
DESIGNATION OF ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 517-13-018, 517-
13-019, & 517-12-001 FROM QUASI-PUBLIC FACILITIES TO VERY
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
Councilmember Bogosian recused himself from participating in the
discussions on this item due to the fact he received a Public Hearing Notice at
his residence.
Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director presented staff report.
Director Sullivan explained that the Planning Commission approved a
Tentative map for the subdivision of a 23.5 acre site into 11 lots ranging in size
from 40,913 squaze feet to 6.2 acres, this approval is still valid. Minor road
widening and the development of a pedestrian walkway along Bohhnan Road
have been approved as part of the Tentative map. Two acres will be transferred
to the Saratoga Cemetery District for the expansion of the Madronia Cemetery
upon recordation of the Final map. Use Pernvts approval was granted to
sanction the existing cemetery and to allow for the expansion of the cemetery.
Director Sullivan stated that the site is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning
district and the current General Plan designation is Quasi Public Facilities.
The Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending the City
Council amend the land Use Map from Quasi-Public facilities to Residential-
Very Low Density.
City Council Minutes 6 November 7, 2001
Director Sullivan noted that the Planning Commission determined that this site
is physically suitable for this type of development and the proposed density is
consistent with the General Plan guidelines and policies for Residential-Very
Low Density designation.
Director Sullivan noted that the proposed General Plan amendment is not
subject to Measure G. The City Council has the final authority to make the
amendment to the General plan. The Tentative Map has been conditioned so
that the City Council must act in the positive in order to validate the Tentative
Map.
Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she is hesitant to let go ofquasi-public
land uses. Councihnember Waltonsmith noted that Sazatoga needs other types
of buildings rather than very expensive homes.
Mayor Mehaffey opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. and invited public
comments.
There being no public comments Mayor Mehaffey closed the public hearing at
7:56 p.m.
BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA BY
CHANGING THE LAND DESIGNATION OF ASSESSOR PARCEL .
NUMBERS 517-13-018.517-13-019. & 517-12-001 FROM OUASI-
PUBLIC FACILITIES TO VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
MOTION PASSED 3-0-1-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT AND BOGOSIAN
ABSTAINING.
OLD BUSINESS
4. APPEAL OF DR-O1-007 &BSE-O1-011 (397-17-034)19751 VERSAILLES
WAY APPLICANT: CHEN /APPELLANT: HARI AND YVONNE PILLAI
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-081
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING AN APPEAL OF
THE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION DR-O1-007 &BSE-O1-011)19751
VERSAILLES
Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director presented staff report.
Director Sullivan reported that the City Council directed that this item be placed
on the November 7, 001 agenda to reconsider the previous action to refer the
project back to the Planning Cormission. The City Council further directed staff
to inform the neighbors that if they had issues to discuss regazding the project that
City Council Minutes '7 November 7, 2001
they should be at the November 7w meeting. A meeting was conducted at City
Hall on October 23, 2001, with the neighbors. The neighborhood representatives
were advised of the City Council's direction provided at the October 17, 2001
meeting regarding the importance of them attending the November 7s' meeting.
Director Sullivan explained that they were also informed of the Council's desire to
only address the setback issue as part of reconsideration. At the end of the
meeting with the neighbors, no cleaz consensus was reached with the neighbors
with respect to the setback issue.
Greg Kawahaza, Architect, 5466 Mollie Circle, Livermore, recapped all the steps
that have taken place in regards to this project. Mr. Kawahara noted that his client
has gone above and beyond the normal to accommodate the neighbors. Mr.
Kawahaza requested that the Council approve the 55 ft. setback.
Mary Doble, Doble & Sons Custom Homes Inc., 1233 Quarry Lane, Pleasanton,
noted that Mr. Chen feels he is being taken advantage by the neighbors and feels
there is an underlying reason for it. Mrs. Doble requested that the Council settle
this appeal tonight approving the 55 ft. setback.
Paul Doble, Doble & Sons Custom Homes Inc., 1233 Quarry Lane, Pleasanton,
thanked the City Council for their patience.
Cliff Moore/Attorney, 1567 English Drive, San-Jose, noted that he represents Mr.
Chen. Mr. Moore noted that Mr. Chen has worked diligently with the neighbors
trying to resolve their differences and feels that a decision and or compromise will
never be reached.
BOGOSIANBAKER MOVED TO UPHOLD THE PLANNING
COMMISSIONS DECISION BY DENYING APPEAL OF DESIGN
REVIEW APPLICATION DR-Oi-007 & BSE-O1-011 19752 VERSAILLES,
ADDING FOUR CONDITIONS AND APPROVING THE 55-FOOT
SETBACK. MOTION PASSED 3-0-1-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT AND
MEHAFFEY ABSTAINING.
Referring to letters submitted to Council by neighbors on Versailles protesting this
project, Councihnember Baker noted that he disagrees with every objection
presented by the neighbors. Councihnember Baker noted that in his opinion Mr.
Chen's house would not be out of character in the Versailles neighborhood.
Councihnember Baker noted that he has visited that neighborhood and cannot find
any consistencies amongst the existing houses in design, color, height, or design.
Councihnember Baker noted that several of the issues that came before the City
Council should have been resolved at the Planning Commission.
City Council Minutes g November 7, 2001
CONSENT CALENDAR
lA. APPROVE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING -SEPTEMBER 5, 2001
REGULAR MEETING -SEPTEMBER 19, 2001
STUDY SESSION -OCTOBER 9, 2001
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve minutes.
Councilmember Bogosian requested that the minutes of September 19, 2001 be
pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Councihnember requested that on page 9, 12`h pazagraph. The word "uneducated"
should be replaced with "not sufficiently informed".
Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that on page 10, 6`h paragraph "Sacramento"
should be replaced with "Oakland".
BOGOSIAN/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
SEPTEMBER 19.2001 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH
STREIT ABSENT.
BAKERBOGOSIAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 9.2001. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT.
The minutes of September 5, 2001 will be agendize on the December 5, 2001
agenda. Councilmember Waltonsmith and Councilmember Baker were absent at
that meeting and would have to abstain from voting, so it would be a 2-0-2-1 vote.
Vice Mayor Streit needs to be present in order for the minutes to be approved.
Mayor Mehaffey suggested that each set of City Council minutes be a separate
item on the agenda for approval.
1B. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve check register.
WALTONSMITHBOGOSIAN MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTER.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT.
1C. FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2001- COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: •
Accept report.
City Council Minutes 9 November 7, 2001
WALTONSMITH/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO ACCEPT THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDED JUNE 30, 2001- COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL
REPORT. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT.
1D. REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING -OCTOBER 24, 2001
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Note and file.
WALTONSMITH/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE PLANNING
ACTION MINUTES. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT.
lE. CONGRESS SPRINGS PARK- EXTENSION OF SAFETY NETTING
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize execution of agreement and approve change order.
WALTONSMITH/BOGOSIANMQVED TO APPROVE CONSTRUCTION
PROPOSAL FROM ACTION NETTING. INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$19,850.00 TO EXTEND THE SAFETY NETTING AT CONGRESS
SPRINGS PARK AND APPROVE AUTHORIZATION OF
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH
STREIT ABSENT.
1F. FINAL MAP APPROVAL FOR ELEVEN LOTS LOCATED AT 14800
BOHLMAN ROAD
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution granting final map approval and authorization to Mayor to
execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: SD-99-003
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE FINAL MAP
OF SD-99-003 14800 BOHLMAN ROAD
Councihnember Bogosian requested that Item 1 F be pulled from the Consent
Calendar.
Councihnember Bogosian stated that he has to recuse himself from participating in
the discussions on this item due to the fact he received a Public Hearing Notice at
his residence.
BAKBR/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION SD-99-003
GRANTING FINAL MAP APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED 3-1-1 WITH
STREIT ABSENT AND BOGOSIAN ABSTARJING.
City Council Minutes 1 ~ November 7, 2001
BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED .TO AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF
THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT. MOTION PASSED
3-1-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT AND BOGOSIAN ABSTAINING.
OLD BUSINESS
AUTHORIZATION TO CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AGREEMENT WITH SANTA CLARA COUNTY -PROPERTY TAX
SETTLEMENT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize execution of agreement.
Mayor Mehaffey removed Item 5 from the agenda and directed staff to
agendize it for the meeting of December 5, 2001.
At 8:20 p.m. Mayor Mehaffey announced that the City Council would take a ten minute
break
Mayor Mehaffey reconvened the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS
6. RELEASE OF DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SARATOGA AND THE RECTOR, WARDENS, AND
VESTRYMAN OF ST. ANDREW'S PARISH
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-080
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SATISFACTION AND
RELEASE OF
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report.
Director Cherbone explained that the City has been requested by the owners of
St. Andrews Church and School to release the "Deferred Improvements
Agreement" that was recorded in 1983. This agreement was recorded as a
condition of Use Permit UP-530. Per the agreement the owner agreed to
construct the following off-site improvements: street grading, base and paving,
curb and gutter, electroliers, and underground conduit with wiring and pull
boxes.
Director Cherbone noted that staff has reviewed the agreement and conducted a
site visit. All improvements required per the agreement have been completed
and accepted by the City.
City Council Minutes 11 November 7, 2001
BAKER/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION OF
SATISFACTION OF DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
WITH ST. ANDREWS PARISH. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH STREIT
ABSENT.
7. NORTON ROAD FIRE ACCESS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report.
Director Cherbone noted that at the April 18, City Council meeting, Beverly
Phipps, who lives at 15270 Norton Road, expressed his concerns regarding the
need for additional emergency fire access in the Bohlman Road hillside area.
Mr. Phipps suggested constructing a fire access road, which would connect
Norton Road to the access road presently being constructed for Villa Montalvo's
artist residency studios. The proposed connection would allow emergency
access from Norton Road through Montalvo and ultimately to Piedmont Road.
Director Cherbone explained that staff has been assisting Mr. Phipps on this
issue, and in June a meeting was facilitated with Villa Montalvo and interested
hillside residents. Villa Montalvo was receptive to the emergency access
proposal with the caveat that the unimproved Wildcat Road Right-of--Way be
improved: Villa Montalvo would like to use Wildcat as a second egress during
specific times of the year to facilitate their traffic circulation. They believe that
in an emergency their existing egress would be overly impacted if additional
vehicles were introduced without the construction of a secondary egress.
Director Cherbone noted that in order to gage interest for the emergency access
road, Mr. Phipps mailed approximately 1001etters of interest encompassing
properties that were believed would most directly benefit from the road. The
City received responses from 32 properties with 30 in favor and 2 against the
proposal.
Director Cherbone noted that the construction costs would be approximately
$75,000 to $100,000 for the upper road and approximately $400,000 to $700,000
for Wildcat Road. Director Cherbone stated that there are three available options
to fund this kind of project 1) Direct funding from the interested property owners
2) Assessment District encompassing benefited properties 3) City Funding.
Beverly Phipps, 15270 Norton Road, refemng to the Oakland Hills fire. Mr.
Phipps expressed his concern that the same tragic event could happen in his
neighborhood. Mr. Phipps explained that Bohhnan Road is very steep and
narrow and the vegetation is heavy. Mr. Phipps complimented City staff.
Ed Ferrell, 20877 Kittridge Road, stated that in an event of a fire it is impossible
for two fire engines to get up Bohhnan Road while residents are trying to get out
of the neighborhood.
City Council Minutes 12 November 7, 2001
Councihnember Bogosian requested that a time be arranged for the City Council
to walk the proposed route.
8.
Councilmember Baker concurred with Councihnember Bogosian that the
Council should walk the roads in that area. Councihnember Baker noted he
supports the road through Villa Montalvo. Councilmember Baker also noted that
he would like to direct staff to move forward with discussions with the Board of
Trustees of Villa Montalvo.
Mayor Mehaffey noted that he agrees with Villa Montalvo's request to use
Wildcat Road as an emergency road. In an event of an emergency they would
have a lot of people to get out.
Councihnember Waltonsmith noted she though Villa Montalvo stated they want
to use Wildcat Road all of the time, not just in an emergency.
Director Cherbone explained that on many occasions Villa Montalvo have
expressed their desire to use Wildcat Road whenever needed.
Councihnember Baker noted an emergency cannot be predicted and he does not
want to be on a Council that did not take the necessary steps to protect the
hillsides. Councihnember Baker stated this project should move forward with
diligence and speed.
Mayor Mehaffey suggested that two Councihnembers form a subcommittee to
investigate the proposal and meet with Villa Montalvo.
Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she supports a subcommittee.
BAKER/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO APPOINT COUNCILMEMBER BAKER
AND COUNCILMEMBER BOGOSIAN TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE FOR
THE NORTON ROAD FIRE ACCESS. MOTION PASSED 3-0-1 WITH
STREIT ABSENT.
CIVIC CENTER TRAFFIC AND PARKING CONCERNS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
Joan Pisani, Recreation Director, presented staff report.
Director Pisani explained that with the large number of people participating in
programs offered by the Community and Senior Centers, the constant flow of
traffic to the Post Office and the increase in the student population at Redwood
Middle School, there is increased traffic and pazking congestion azound the Civic
Center. There is a steady flow of traffic up and down Allendale Avenue all day
and at certain times it is very congested.
City Council Minutes 13 November ~, 2001
Director Pisani described some traffic and parking issues in regards to the Post
Office and Redwood Middle School Employees. Both groups park their cars in
spaces around the Community Center. As the spaces for City sponsored
programs became limited, the Postmaster and the Principal of Redwood School
were contacted to discuss the problem. Both stated that onsite pazking is
available for their employees. In August a campaign was mounted to inform
employees from the post office and the school to not use Civic Center parking
lots.
Director Pisani explained that another factor in the traffic and parking problem at
Civic Center is the Redwood Middle School drop off and pick up. This yeaz
more parents of Redwood School students are using Allendale Avenue for a drop
off and pick up location. Recently a morning count was taken and within a 20-
minuteperiod 106 cars passed the Community Center to drop students off in the
azea in fort of the Corporation Yard. It has been reported by many City
employees that some days it is impossible to get out of the Corporation Yard
because of all the traffic. Besides the Allendale Avenue area near the Corp yard,
many parents decide to not get to close to Redwood School so they pull into the
City hall parking lots to drop off their students. The Redwood afternoon pickup
has the biggest impact on programs at the Senior and Community Centers.
Director Pisani noted that Christopher Farmer, Principal of Redwood Middle
School, has been very receptive to working with City staff to correct the
problem. Director Pisani explained that Mr. Farmer has committed to sending
school staff to the City parking lots in the afternoon to talk to pazents and inform
them that they aze not to pick up or wait in city lots. He has also informed the
students hanging out in and by the Community Center that they will have to
move across the street and wait on school property until their pazents pick them
up. Mr. Farmer feels that he has no control over the use of Allendale Avenue,
but he will encourage pazents to use the turnaround in front of the school. Mr.
Farmer will also reinforce all of this information in the next parent Newsletter.
Stephanie Petrossi, 14688 Stoneridge Drive, noted that she is the SUSD Board
President. Mrs. Petrossi noted that the Board is aware of the parking and traffic
problems. Mrs. Petrossi noted that another member of the Board, John Waite,
ahs been an active participant of the Saratoga School Safety Task Force. Mrs.
Petrossi noted that they aze very open and interested in helping fmd solutions to
these problems. Referring to the Joint meeting last year between the SUSD and
the City Council, Mrs. Petrossi reminded the Council of the pilot-bussing
program they were starting. Unfortunately, the cost to parents would be $1000
per school yeaz, which explains why only five families signed up for the
program. Mrs. Petrossi explained that fortunately the company the district
contracted allowed them to break the contract without penalty.
Councilmember Baker asked how the caz-pooling program was going.
Mrs. Petrossi noted that the car-pooling program is not going as good as they
expected it to go.
City Council Minutes 14 November 7, 2001
Councihnember Waltonsmith suggested an elevated crosswalk over Allendale
Avenue from West Valley College to Redwood Middle School.
Brigitte Ballingall, Public Safety Commissioner, 13573 Ronnie Way, noted that
the school-bussing program is not going to happen without a bond or a parcel
tax. Commissioner Ballingall noted that more parents are aware of the fact they
have been impacting City Hall and will try and utilize the back parking lot of
Redwood Middle School. Commissioner Ballingall noted that the School Safety
Task Force has had discussions about the possibility of staggering the start times
with the two private schools on Saratoga Avenue and Redwood Middle School.
Commissioner Ballingall suggested the possibility of rewarding carpoolers.
Mayor Mehaffey asked Commissioner Ballingall why the increase in traffic.
Commissioner Ballingall noted that the increase in traffic is due to the growing
population of students.
Councilmember Bogosian personally thanked Commissioner Ballingall for her
dedication and motivation to finding solutions to the traffic caused by the
schools. Councihnember Bogosian also thanked Commissioner Ballingall on the
knowledge she has gained and has passed on to Council and staff.
Commissioner Ballingall thanked the Council for their continued support
Madeline Morrow, 13660 Via Rancho Drive, noted that she is a Redwood
Middle School parent and has been carpooling ever since she moved to Saratoga.
Mrs. Morrow noted-that she is a strong advocate for walking and biking to
school but unfortunately pazents aze fearful. Mrs. Morrow agrees with
Commissioner Ballingall that carpoolers should be rewarded in some way, Mrs.
Morrow noted that Saratoga does not have pedestrian friendly streets.
Mayor Mehaffey noted that there aze two problems, traffic and parking. Mayor
Mehaffey noted he likes the idea of working with West Valley College perhaps
use their parking lots as a staging azea for a bussing program. Mayor Mehaffey.
suggested more crossing guards at the corner of Allendale and Fruitvale Avenue.
Mayor Mehaffey noted that the cost of bussing is too expensive and alternative
means of funding the program should be investigated.
Councihnember Bogosian noted he would like to try the alternatives Director
Pisani proposed before sending the Sheriff to monitor the traffic.
Councilmember Baker noted that he is going to explore other school districts in
the area and see if they have the same problems.
Councilmember Bogosai requested that the Council revisit this issue on a future
date.
City Council Minutes 1$ November 7, 2001
Responding to Councilmember Bogosian's request, Commissioner Ballingall
noted that a recent conversation with Vice Mayor Streit, he told her that a joint
meeting with all the schools was scheduled in February.
Mayor Mehaffey thanked everyone for their comments on this issue.
9. VILLAGE PARKING STUDY RESULTS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
Danielle Surdin, Economic Development Coordinator, presented staff report.
Coordinator Surdin explained that a lack of adequate parking in the Village has
long been a topic of discussion within the Village business community.
Recently the Saratoga Business Development Committee raised the issue as part
of economic development discussions. To determine whether the lack of
adequate parking was a reality or a perception, staff hired Fehr & Peers Inc. to
gather analytical data and draw conclusions about pazking availability in the
Village.
Coordinator Surdin noted that unfortunately Fehr & Peers were unable to
conduct the study until after the September 11th attacks and those events most
likely skewed the data to some degree. Many business owners have reported
some decrease in revenue since the event.
Coordinator Surdin briefly explained the study conclusions:
Saturday
• Lots 1 & 4 fill first
• Lot 2 gets busy mid-afternoon and steadily fills up by 10 p.m.
• Lot 3 is least utilized; there aze spaces available all day Wednesday
• Lots 1 & 4 peak during lunch and dinner
• Lot 2 peaks at lunch and on this particulaz day also had a spike at 5 p.m.
• Lot 3 fills first in the morning between 9 a.m. and then drops off
Coordinator Surdin noted that on street pazking demand remains constant
regardless of day of the week with the exception of mid-day hours (roughly 2
p.m. to 5 p.m.) - on Saturday, more pazkers use on-street spaces.
Coordinator Surdin noted that the perception of inadequacy can be addressed
with parking management strategies including improved signage to alert drivers
of parking lots (especially Lot 3); incentives such as no time limit spaces in
azeas farther from destinations to encourage business owners and employees to
pazk in less used spaces; better enforcement of time limits on the premium
spaces neazest businesses; development of a pazking brochure that highlights all
pazking areas for distribution by businesses to their customers; broadcasting of
parking information over the TIS radio system.
City Council Minutes 16 November 7, 2001
Coordinator Surdin noted that pazking management strategies are fairly low cost
and could be covered by the Economic Development budget.
Councilmember Bogosian noted he likes the idea of advertising open parking on
the radio.
City Manager Anderson noted that staff is offering that next summer the City
perform another parking survey.
Councilmember Bogosain noted that Parking Lot #3 -down the bank of the
creek- is full of litter.
Responding to Councilmember Bogosian's statement, City Manager Anderson
noted that San Jose Water Company owns that particulaz piece of property and
will contact them immediately.
Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she supports improving the parking
signs throughout the Village.
Councihnember Baker noted that the Town of Los Gatos has a parking program
for the neighborhoods azound the downtown area, which prohibits anyone to
pazk there except residents on those particular streets.
Coordinator Surdin noted that the residential community and the business
owners would probably support some type of permit pazking.
Mayor Mehaffey stated that sometimes it is hard to get out on to Big Basin Road
from 4`h Street. Mayor Mehaffey noted that a delivery truck is constantly pazked
in the red zone on the corner, which prohibits you from seeing if it is cleaz to
turn.
Councilmember Baker noted that he does not support any type of paid pazking in
Sazatoga. Councihnember Baker suggested that business owners and employees
be encouraged to park in less convenient pazking areas so the more convenient
spots could be left for customers and implement a pazking program.
Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to implement the following in the
Village to help with the parking problems:
Improve pazking signs
Parking permits for business owners and employees
10.
• Announcements on the TIS radio system
OPTIONS FOR CITY LEGAL ASSISTANCE
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly. .
Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report.
City Council.Minutes 17 November 7, 2001
City Manager Anderson explained that the City currently contracts for all legal
and litigation services and typically spends approximately $300,000 each year.
At a recent Council meeting City Council requested staff investigate hiring a full
time City Attomey and report back to the Council.
City Manager Anderson noted that staff conducted a salary survey for Assistant
City Attorney and City Attorney positions in nearby cities. City Manager
Anderson briefly explained the salary survey results concluding that if the City
created a staff position it would cost about the same as is currently spent on
contract services.
Mayor Mehaffey noted that he requested that this item be placed on the agenda
because of some recent comments made in regards to some planning issues that
might have been avoided if the City had a full time attorney. Mayor Mehaffey
noted he wanted the Council to be awaze of all options available to the City.
Mayor Mehaffey noted that since the City now has a competent Community
Development Director he feels that such problems in the Planning Deparhnent
will be avoided in the future. Mayor Mehaffey stated that he is completely
satisfied with the City's current legal representation provided by Attomey Taylor
and Attorney Wittwer.
Councihnember Bogosian stated that he is also very satisfied with the services
provided by Attorney Taylor.
Consensus of the City Council to continue to contract legal services.
11. APPOINTMENT AND CONFIRMATION OF DEPARTMENT HEADS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolutions.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-075
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING THE
APPOINTMENT OF JESSE BALOCA, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
DIRECTOR
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-076
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING THE
APPOINTMENT OF JOHN CHERBONE, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-077
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING THE
APPOINTMENT OF JOAN PISANI, RECREATION DIRECTOR
City Council Minutes 1 g November 7, 2001
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-078
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING THE .
APPOINTMENT OF LORIE TINFOW, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-079
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING THE
APPOINTMENT OF TOM SULLIVAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR
City Manager Anderson reported that while reviewing the CAFR he discovered
that the Municipal Code section 2-20.050 requires City Council confirmation of
City Manager and appointment of department head level positions. Given the
language in the code the Council needs to take formal action on the confirmation
of each deparhnent head upon appointment by the City Manager.
BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTIONS OF
APPOINTMENT OF JESSE BALOCA, JOAN PISANI ,JOHN
CHERBONE, TOM SULLIVAN ,AND LORIE TINFOW. MOTION
PASSED 4-0-1 WITH STREIT ABSENT.
Mayor Mehaffey reported that the Finance Commission met Monday night and now has
five new Commissioners. Mayor Mehaffey noted that they discussed the CAFR.
Councilmember Waltonsmith had no reportable information.
Councihnember Baker had no reportable information.
Councihnember Bogosian noted that the Library Expansion Committee met and reported
that after the City of Saratoga requested that the County Library put buying furniture on
hold until after Phase II bids aze in they have retracted their commitment to provide the
funds for the moving costs. Councilmember $ogosian requested that staff investigate
what happened in Los Altos when they renovated their library, specifically what type of
agreement did they have with the County.
City Manager Anderson noted that he would follow up on his request and report back at a
future time.
CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Referring to a letter sent to Council by Teri Bazon/Trails Representative, Councihnember
Waltonsmith noted that Mrs. Bazon indicated that the Chadwick trail segment has been
built over.
City Manager Anderson noted he would investigate Ms. Bazon's comments and report
back at a future time.
City Council Minutes 19 November 7, 2001
Mayor Mehaffey requested an update on the Saratoga Creek Settlement Agreement.
City Manager Anderson noted that an update on the Creek Settlement would be
agendized a future agenda.
OTHER
None
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Anderson noted that Doug Sporleder, Chief/SCC Fire Department, recently
announced his retirement. Chief Sporleder's last day is November 29, 2001.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Mehaffey adjourned the meeting at 10:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cathleen Boyer, CMC
City Clerk
City Council Minutes 20 November 7, 2001
/inn Sullivan
Prom: Megrath, Rita [rita.megrath@ci.sj.ca.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:48 AM
'fo: ange.michalski@vta.org; asullivan@saratoga.ca.us; bernies@ci.campbell.ca.us;
citiesassoc@uncpu.com; davek@cupertino.org; dfigone@town,Ios-gatos.ca.us;
etewes@ch.morgan-hill.ca.gov; eugenel@abag.ca.gov; frank_benest@city.palo-alto.ca.us;
gbarbour@icam.org; Jay@ci.gilroy.ca.us; kevin.duggan@ci.mtnview.ca.us;
manager@ci.santa-clara.ca.us; mcassingham@losaltoshills.ca.gov;
michael.evanhoe@vta.org; msplan@aol.com; phil.rose@ci.los=altos.ca.us; Relo, Marcelo;
richard.Wittenberg@ceo.co.santa-clara.ca.us; rlasala@ci.sunnyvale.ca.us;
stanwil@scvwd.dst.ca.us; twilson@ci.milpitas.ca.gov; wesmcclure@webtv.net;
zimmera@cacities.org
Cc: 'pgarcia@town.los-gatos.ca.us ; 'PeggyE@abag.ca.gov'
Subject: February SCC/Cities Manager's Association meeting
Due to the LOCC City Manager's Department meeting in Coronodo on 2/ 13, the
February SCC/Cities Manager's Association meeting has been moved to 2/20.
Please adjust your calendars.
Thank you,
Jennifer (filling in for Rita)
277-5777
~~
r
°1
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM• ~~j~ _
CITY MANAGER: O~/`=~---
DEPT HEAD:
SUBJECT: City Council Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve minutes as submitted for the following City Council Meeting:
Regular Meeting -December 11, 2001
REPORT SUMMARY:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A
FOLLOW UP ACTION:
Retain minutes for legislative history.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Minutes/December 11, 2001
MINUTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 11, 2001
The City Council of the City of Sazatoga met in Closed Session, Administrative
Conference Room. 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 5:30 p.m. .
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - II~lITIATION OF LITIGATION:
(Government Code section 54956.9(c)): (1 case)
The City Council of the City of Saratoga adjourned to Open Session in the
Administrative Conference Room at 6:15 p.m. to interview an applicant for the Arts
Commission.
The City Council adjourned to the Adult Care Center - 19655 Allendale Avenue for the
Council Reorganization, Study Session, and Special Meeting.
MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 6:35 p.m.
Mayor Mehaffey reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken.
Mayor Mehaffey called the Special Citv Council meeting to order at 6:35p.m. and
requested Vice Mayor Streit to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. I
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Evan Baker, Stan Bogosian,
Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Nick Streit, Mayor John
Mehaffey
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager ',
Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager
Richazd Taylor, City Attorney
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director
Jesse Baloca, Director of Admin. Services
John Cherbone, Director of Public Works
Joan Pisani, Recreation Director
REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR DECEMBER 11,
2001.
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2,
the agenda for the meeting of December 11, 2001 was properly posted on December 7,
2001.
COUNCIL REORGANIZATION
REMARKS FROM OUTGOING MAYOR -JOHN MEHAFFEY
Mayor Mehaffey thanked the Council and staff for their support throughout the year.
2. REORGANIZATION OF CITY COUNCIL
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Elect Mayor and Vice Mayor.
1. City Manager declares the offices of Mayor and Vice Mayor to be vacant
2. Election of the Mayor
3. Election of the Vice Mayor
City Manager Anderson declared the office of Mayor vacant and asked for
nominations.
BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO NOMINATE VICE MAYOR STREIT TO
THE POSITION OF MAYOR. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
Mayor Streit declared the office of Vice Mayor vacant and asked for nominations.
BOGOSAIN/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO NOMINATE COUNCILMEMBER
BAKER TO THE POSITION OF VICE MAYOR. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO COUNCILMEMBERS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Administer Oath of Office.
City Clerk Boyer administered the Oath of Office to Mayor Streit and Vice Mayor
Baker.
4. REMARKS FROM NEW MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, AND
COUNCILMEMBERS
Mayor Streit thanked his fellow Councilmembers for appointing him Mayor. Mayor
Streit briefly described the accomplishments of this year including the Bay Keepers
lawsuit agreement, Measure G, Neighborhood Traffic Management Programs, and
safe route to schools program.
Mayor Streit commended staff for being the backbone of the City. Mayor Streit i
also pointed out some of the City's future endeavors, one being the development of a i
Civic Center Master Plan and Azule Park renovations. Mayor Streit noted that many
issues still need the Council's attention such as: re-vitalization of the Village and the
Gateway, the parks, the fight to overlay Highway 85, and most importantly to try and
unify the City. Mayor Streit noted that it is time to break the artificial barriers and
open the lines of communications between our 7 school districts, 2 fire districts, 2
sanitation districts, 3 Lighting and Landscaping Districts, several little league and
soccer groups. On a final noted Mayor Streit thanked his family for their support.
Vice Mayor Baker noted that he is honored to serve on this Council.
Councihnember Bogosian thanked his colleagues for another successful yeaz.
Councihnember Waltonsmith thanked her fellow colleagues for their continued
support.
Mayor Streit announced that the Council meeting would adjourn to a light reception
followed by the Civic Center Master Plan Study Session.
Due to a prior commitment Councilmember Bogosian excused himself from the rest of
the meeting.
ADJOURNMENT TO STUDY SESSION - 7:30 P.M.
ADULT CARE CENTER -19655 ALLENDALE AVENUE
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC
Communications from Boards and Commissions
None
Written Communications
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
STUDY SESSION
5. CIVIC CENTER MASTER PLAN
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept Report and direct staff accordingly.
Joan Pisani, Recreation Director, presented staff report.
Director Pisani explained that on October 9, 2001 Christopher Noll presented
six Civic Center site plans in conceptual form to the Council. Director Pisani
noted that Mr. Noll's presentation included four options using a combination
of existing and new buildings and two options of tearing down existing
buildings and building new facilities. After the presentation the Council
narrowed down the options. One of their requests was that a new
Senior/Community Center be placed near the Corporation Yard.
Director Pisani introduced Christopher Noll, Parlner/Noll & Tam and
Elizabeth McLeod, Architect, and explained that they would present three site
plans, the program and phasing summary for each option, and construction
costs.
As a result of October 9, 2001 City Council meeting Mr. Noll explained that he
and Ms. McLeod would present three site plans.
option 1
• Community/Senior Center would include apreschool -located near the
. Corporation Yard
• Gymnasium/Multipurpose room which would also include a Teen
Center
• Council Chambers would be added on to the existing City Hall
• Split-level parking garage would be built between the Community
Center and the Gymnasium
• Remodeled Civic Theater would share a lobby with the new Council
Chambers
• Drive thoroughfare around Civic Center to help alleviate traffic
congestion
Mr. Noll explained that Option I could be built in three phases with total
construction cost of approximately $25,474,280.
O tip on 2
• Gymnasium/Multipuxpose room which would also include a Teen
Center is located near the Corporation Yard
• Community/Senior Center would include apreschool -located next to
City Hall
• Parking Garage between Gymnasium and Community Center
• Council Chambers would be added on to the existing City Hall
• Remodeled Civic Theater would share lobby with the new Council
Chambers
4
Drive thoroughfare around Civic Center to help alleviate traffic S
congestion
Mr. Noll explained that Option 2 cannot be built in phases and a total
construction cost of approximately $25,435,944._
Option 3
• Community/Senior Center would include a preschool and a Teen
Center- located next to the Corporation yard
• No parking garage
• No gymnasium
• Drive thoroughfare around Civic Center to help alleviate traffic
congestion
• Remodeled Civic Theater would share lobby with the new Council
Chambers
Mr. Noll explained that Option 3 could be built in phases and a total
construction cost of approximately $19,190,192.
After Council discussion consensus was reached on the following issues:
1. Option 2 - find a way to build using construction phases.
2. Incorporate a close drop off area in front of the Community Center
Abhik Pramanik, 12667 Cheverly Court, noted that he is the Vice Chair of the
Youth Commission but tonight he is expressing his own opinion, none which
reflect the opinion of the Youth Commission. Mr. Pramanik explained that the
Wamer Hutton House has been a great Teen Center, but it is only 2000 sq. ft.
Mr. Pramanik explained that after school the WHH is packed with students.
Mr. Pramanik noted he fully supports Option 2, which includes a gymnasium,
and a new Teen Center.
Ed Sengstack, 190 South 151 Street, Campbell, noted that he is a Board Member
for the Saratoga Drama Group. Mr. Sengstack thanked the Council for
including both Theater groups to participate in the discussion for the Civic
Center Master Plan. Mr. Sengstack requested that if and when the Council
addresses renovations to the inside of the Civic Theater, the drama groups
would be invited to participate in the discussions. Mr. Sengstack suggested
that the Council be aware that the drama groups would benefit from an
orchestra pit and new acoustics.
Sean O'Lary, Executive Director SASCC, noted that, speaking on behalf of the
SASCC Board, Option 2 is their choice. Mr. O'Leary pointed out that the
Board would like to see the Community Center in the middle of the property as .
opposed to the rear of the property.
e
Mayor Streit asked Mr. O'Leary if he would be willing to relocate the Adult
Day Care Center off site during construction.
Mr. O'Leary responded that if relocating to a temporary location would
prevent them from going out of business, they would deal with it.
Consensus of the City Council that Option 2 would best meet the needs of City
Hall.
A discussion took place on how the Master Plan would be funded.
Councilmember Mehaffey stated that he could support a parcel tax that would
allow the city to pay for and build the new facilities in steady increments.
Councihnember Waltonsmith noted that she could support a bond.
Vice Mayor Baker requested that the three options presented to Council this
evening be displayed somewhere at City Hall and on the City's website for
public viewing.
The City Council expressed their gratitude to Noll & Tam for their hard work.
SPECIAL MEETING
OLD BUSINESS
6. SARATOGA CREEK SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT -STATUS
REPORT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Informational only,
John Cherborie, Public Works Director, presented staff report.
Director Cherbone briefly explained that the City of Saratoga is in compliance
with the settlement stipulations of the Mutual Release And Settlement
Agreement with the City, the San Francisco Bay Keepers and the Friends of
the Santa Clara Creeks.
Don Whetstone, 14768 Vickery Avenue, noted that the City and all
participating agencies have been diligently working to solve the problems
associated with faulty sewer lines throughout the City. Mr. Whetstone
commended City staff for their hard work and dedication to this project.
. In regards to Item G in the Settlement Agreement, Vice Mayor Baker noted
that West Valley Sanitation has found the primary cause of contamination at
the storm drain outfall at Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road.
6
~ ,
The City Council expressed their gratitude to Mr. Whetstone for all his efforts •
to help the City deal with this issue.
NEW BUSINESS
SEWER LATERAL ORDINANCE & ABATEMENT OPTIONS FOR
BELOW-GRADE SEPTIC SYSTEMS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
Richazd Taylor, City Attorney, presented staff report.
Attorney Taylor noted that as part of the City's ongoing effort to address
potential sources of contamination to Saratoga Creek, the City Council directed
staff to prepare an ordinance establishing an inspection program for sewer
laterals and requiring installation of sewer lateral improvements to facilitate
inspections. In addition, the Council directed staff to investigate options
available to property owners relying on septic systems because their property is
below grade relative to public sewer system.
Attorney Taylor noted that the draft sewer lateral ordinance seeks to build
upon existing provisions on the City Code authorizing the City to order repairs
to leaking sewer laterals. The draft ordinance requires properties to be
inspected for leaking laterals (1) upon sale or transfer, and (2) in connection
with any significant improvements to the plumbing system on the property. In
addition, the ordinance requires installation of sewer clean-out junctions in
order to facilitate the inspection process.
Attorney Taylor briefly described the existing code and a detailed description
of the draft ordinance. Attorney Taylor stated that the draft ordinance would
make three substantial amendments to the City Code:
1. Section 2.1 -requires lateral inspections and installation of a two-way
cleanout at the property line upon sale or transfer of all property and
upon commencing work on any major plumbing project.
2. Section 2.2 -amends the Plumbing Code to require atwo-way cleanout
at the property line for all new construction. ,
3. Section 2.3 -amends the Plumbing Code to specify that visual
inspections of sewer laterals with video cameras are permitted in the
discretion of the building inspector.
Attomey Taylor explained the concern with properties, which have below
grade exceptions. Attorney Taylor noted that it is generally believed that these
septic systems, which are generally near creeks, are contributing to the •
pollution problems. The most effective way to eliminate this source of
pollution is to require these properties to connect to the sewer system.
7
Attorney Taylor noted that the main concern with eliminating the below grade
exemption are additional costs to property owners beyond the "standard" septic
abatement and the problems associated with pump facilities.
Vice Mayor Baker expressed his concern regarding the cost of homeowners,
noting that most homes in Saratoga are at least 30 years old and not many of
those have two clean outs. Vice Mayor Baker Noted he could support
implementing the ordinance when the house changes ownership.
Councihnember Mehaffey concurred with Vice Mayor Baker that homeowners
do not need the extra financial burden of installing an additional clean out on
their property.
Mayor Streit noted his concerns are the triggers that would make homeowners
spend a lot of money to be in compliance.
Don Whetstone, 14768 Vickery Avenue, noted that the City should focus on
the properties near the creek. Mr. Whetstone noted that other Bay Area
Communities already have similar ordinances.
Mayor Streit suggested that the description of "remodels"' be clarified in the
draft ordinance.
• Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to prepare a revised draft of the
ordinance for further discussion. The revisions should (1) require inspection
and clean-out only on sale of the property or major remodeling projects (e.g.,
more than 50% of the structure), (2) limit the use of video testing, and (3)
require installation ofone-way stop-check valves at the property line at the
same time that clean-outs are installed. The revised ordinance should also
amend the City Code requirements governing septic system abatement to
remove the exemption for below-grade systems. Staff was directed to
investigate the costs of complying with the proposed ordinance and the
possibility of limiting the ordinance to properties within the vicinity of creeks.
The revised draft ordinance and additional information should be brought back
to the City Council for further discussion and public comment before the
ordinance is placed on the agenda for formal adoption.
8. AUTHORIZATION TO CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH ATI ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER DESIGN CONCEPT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize agreement and adopt resolution.
Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report.
i
City Manager Anderson noted that this item was continued from the December
5, 2001 City Council meeting due to the fact that the Sazatoga Fire District
filed a law suit against the City of Saratoga. City Manager Anderson
explained that Council directed him to ask the Fire District if they would still
be interested in participating in the Ad Hoc Committee. City Manager
Anderson noted that he recently talked to Commissioner Egan and confirmed
the future participation of the Commission on the Ad Hoc Committee.
Don Whetstone, 14768 Vickery Avenue, noted that he is a member of the
AdHoc Committee. Due to the recent lawsuit filed by the Saratoga Fire
District, Mr. Whetstone stated that he feels this project should be put on hold.
Arvin Engelson, 203814 Sea Gull Way, noted that he is a member of the
AdHoc Committee and noted that he disagrees with Mr. Whetstone. Mr.
Engelson noted that the project should move forward as planned.
MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH ATI
ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER
DESIGN CONCEPT. MOTION PASSED 4-01- WITH BOGOSIAN
ABSENT.
9. CONSIDER REQUESTS TO JOIN FRIENDS OF THE COURT BRIEFS
IN BONANNO V. CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT •
AUTHORITY
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve requests to join amicus briefs.
Richazd Taylor, City Attorney, presented staff report.
Attorney Taylor explained that the City's support was currently being sought
in Bonanno v: Central Contra Costa Transit Authority, a case of possible
concern to the City.
Attorney Taylor noted that Bonnano concerns public agency liability for
dangerous conditions in the vicinity of agency property. In Bonnano the
plaintiff was injured in a crosswalk leading to a bus stop maintained by the
Central Contra Costa Transit Authority. The plaintiff alleged that maintaining
a bus stop neaz a busy uncontrolled intersection constitutes a dangerous
condition of public property.
Attorney Taylor pointed out that the Court of Appeal agreed with the plaintiff
and held that the bus stop beckoned pedestrians to use the dangerous crosswalk
and could have been made safer by being removed altogether or relocated.
i
BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO APPROVE REQUEST TO JOIN
THE AMICUS BRIEF. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN
ABSENT.
10. REVIEW OF DRAFT COUNCIL MASTER MEETING CALENDAR
FOR 2002
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
Consensus of the City Council to accept Council Master meeting Calendar for
2002 with the addition of adding all the school districts to the City Council
meeting of June 25, 2001.
11. COUNCIL AGENCY ASSIGNMENTS AND COMMISSION LIAISONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Mayor to solicit preferred assignments form Councilmembers.
Mayor Streit requested that the Councilmembers submit their preferences to
him by Friday, December 14, 2001. Mayor Streit noted that continuity is
important on the various agencies so perhaps some liaison positions should
remain the same.
Mayor Streit noted that a resolution confirming the appointments would be
brought back to the Council for approval on December 19, 2001.
CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Councilmember Waltonsmith thanked City staff for organizing the reception this
evening.
Vice Mayor Baker referred to a letter sent to Council from Julie Barsumia. Vice Mayor
Baker asked if there has been any follow up to this letter.
City Manager Anderson noted he would follow up tomorrow and report back to Council.
OTHER
None
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Anderson reminded the Council that he would be on vacation from
December 19- January 2, 2002. City Manger Anderson noted that Assistant Manager
Tinfow would be Acting City Manager while he is gone.
10
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Streit adjourned the meeting at 10:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cathleen Boyer, CMC
City Clerk
`..J
11
I
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
,,:
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002 AGENDA ITEM: l ~ ~ _
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager CITY MANAGER: ~~/,c--.~---_
PREPARED BY: DEPT HEAD:
SUBJECT: City Council Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve minutes as submitted for the following City Council Meeting:
Regular Meeting -December 19, 2001
REPORT SUMMARY:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A
FOLLOW UP ACTION:-
Retain minutes for legislative history.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Minutes/December 19, 2001
Y
MINUTES i
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19, 2001.
The City Council of the City of Sazatoga met in Open Session in the Administrative
Conference Room at 6:00 p.m. to interview an applicant for the Finance Commission.
The City Council of the City of Sazatoga met in Closed Session, Administrative
Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 6:1 ~.m.
Conference With Legal Counsel -Existing Litigation:
(Government Code section 54956.9(a))
Name of case: Sazatoga Fire Protection District v. City of Saratoga (Santa Claza
County Superior Court No. CV-803540)
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b):
(1 potential case.)
MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Streit reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken.
Mayor Streit called the Re lug ar Cit~Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and requested
Richazd Taylor, City Attorney, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councihnembers John Mehaffey
Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Evan Baker,
Mayor Nick Streit
ABSENT: Councilmember Stan Bogosian
ALSO PRESENT: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager
Richazd Taylor, City Attorney
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director
John Cherbone, Director of Public Works
Ray Galindo, Accounting Supervisor
REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR DECEMBER 19,
2001.
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2,
the agenda for the meeting of December 19, 2001 was properly posted on December 14,
2001.
City Council Minutes 1 December 19, 2001
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
The following person requested to speak at tonight's meeting:
Ed Ferrell, 20877 Kittridge Road,
COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None
COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF
None
CEREMONIAL ITEMS
lA. APPOINTMENT AND OATH OF OFFICE OF ARTS COMMISSION
MEMBERS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution of Appointment.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-089
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTING FIVE MEMBERS
TO THE ARTS COMMISSION
BAKER/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPOINTING
FIVE MEMBERS TO THE ARTS COMMISSION. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1
WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
Mayor Streit noted that Betty Peck and Mary Lou Taylor were unable to attend
tonight's meeting and would make arrangements with the City Clerk to take the
Oath.
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, administered the Oath of Office to Leroy Murray,
Lisa Pointier de Maffei, and Mary Lou Henderson.
CONSENT CALENDAR
City Council Minutes 2 December 19, 2001
2A.
2B
2C.
2D.
REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve check register.
WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHECK
REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Note and file.
WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE
PLANNING ACTION MINUTES. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH
BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
APPROVE RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COUNCIL AGENCY AND
COMMISSION LIAISON APPOINTMENTS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-088
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTING COUNCIL
REPRESENTATIVES TO COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES
Vice Mayor Baker requested that Item 2C be pulled from the Consent
Calendar.
Vice Mayor Baker noted that due to a conflict in scheduling, he is unable to
serve on the Chamber of Commerce and the West Valley Sanitation District.
Vice Mayor Baker noted that Mayor Streit would now be the liaison to the
Chamber of Commerce and he would continue to be the liaison to the District.
WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AS
AMENDED APPOINTING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO
COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH
BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
APPROVE RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ABAG PLAN BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-090
City Council Minutes 3 December 19, 2001
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL CONFH2MING ABAG PLAN
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
CONFIRMING ABAG PLAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS. MOTION
PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
2E. FINAL MAP APPROVAL FOR FIVE LOTS LOCATED AT 14221
SARATOGA -SUNNYVALE ROAD
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution granting final map approval and authorization to Mayor to
execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: SD-00-003
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE FINAL
MAP OF SD-00-003 14221 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD
Councihnember Waltonsmith requested that Item 2E be pulled from the
Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Waltonsmith expressed concern that the City missed another
opportunity to incorporate below market rate housing in a new subdivision.
Attorney Taylor reminded Councilmember Waltonsmith that the City Council
cannot change the subdivision. The only action Council can do is determine
whether or not the developer has complied with all the conditions of approval.
Attorney Taylor suggested that when the Housing Element is adopted, the City
could implement some of the recommended housing programs.
Vice Mayor Baker asked if there was a way that the City Council could review
any proposed subdivision that goes before the planning Commission.
WALTONSMITH/BAKER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR SD-000-003 14221 SARATOGA-
SUNNYVALE ROAD. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN
ABSENT.
BAKER/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT.
MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
OLD BUSINESS
None
Mayor Streit noted that it was not the appropriate time to begin the public hearing so he
requested that Council move to Item 4.
City CouncIl Minutes 4 December 19, 2001
Consensus of the City Council to move to Item 4.
NEW BUSINESS ,
4. CITIZEN OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE REPORT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Informatiorial only.
Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report.
Assistant City Manager Tinfow reported that in October, total actual and projected
costs exceeded the $14.5 million budget set by the City Council by approximately
$85,000. The COC became concerned about the potential for overrumiing the
budget in the long term and asked staff to alert the Council of this potential.
Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that at the COC meetings on November
26th and December 12th, members continued to be concerned that
Councihnembers did not fully realize that large amount of the budgeted
contingency funds have been used. The two large impacts on the funds budgeted
are the cost of the temporary library and the variance between the actual Phase I
bid and estimate.
Assistant City Manager Tinfow pointed out that staff believes that there are two
pieces of information that might mitigate the COC's concerns. First, until Phase II
bids are received, there is no way to determine the accuracy of the estimate.
Second, there are several additional funding sources available.
Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that Susan Calderon, Chair/COC
Committee, was present tonight and would like to read the letter to the Council
from the COC.
On behalf of the COC Committee, Chair Calderon read a letter which expressed
the Committee's concerns.
Vice Mayor Baker thanked the COC for doing a great job. Vice Mayor Baker
stated that he is not willing to make any financial decisions in regards to the library
until Phase II bids are received.
Mayor Streit concurred with Vice Mayor Baker and added that he has no intention
of going over budget.
6. AMENDING THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AND TRUST
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-093
City Council Minutes g December 19, 2001
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE DEFERRED
COMPENSATION PLAN AND TRUST
Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director, presented staff report.
Director Baloca explained that the Economic Growth and Tax Relief and
Reconciliation Act of 2001 allows plan trustees to amend eligible 457 deferred
compensation plans to provide additional benefits to participants.
Councilmember Waltonsmith asked if other cities have this type of plan.
Director Baloca responded yes.
Councilmember Mehaffey requested that any time an agreement is amended he
would like to see the changes highlighted.
MEHAFFEY/BAKER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING
THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AND TRUST. MOTION
PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
Vice Mayor Streit noted that it was the appropriate time to begin the Public Hearings and
requested to move to Item 3.
. Consensus of the Council to move to Item 3.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
USE OF CITY PARKS FOR RECREATIONAL SPORTING EVENTS:
DRAFT PARKS AND RECREATION ORDINANCE
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce and waive first reading of ordinance.
Richard Taylor, City Attorney presented staff report.
Attomey Taylor explained as part of the City's effort to provide areas for
organized, recreational sporting events, the City Council at its meeting of
October 17, 2001 directed staff to prepare user agreements with the AYSO and
Little League Baseball for the use of City parks. These agreements will be
brought to Council in January 2002.
City Attorney Taylor explained that in order to protect against possible risks
associated with the inappropriate use of City parks, the Council also directed
staff to ensure that the City Code prohibits objects from being hit or thrown
into public rights of way near City parks.
i City Attorney Taylor explained that the draft ordinance would amend the City
Code as directed by the Council, would clarify the City's authority to enter into
seasonal-long agreements with AYSO, Little League, and other groups, subject
City Council Minutes ( December 19, 2001
b
to conditions imposed by the Director of Parks, and would make several
technical "clean-up" amendments to the Code.
City Attorney Taylor briefly discussed the proposed changes to each section of
the existing ordinance:
• 2.1-prohibits throwing, kicking, or hitting any ball, rock, or other
object into any public thoroughfare inside or outside the park
• 2.2 -clarifies pre-advertised use of parks. Any group of 25 or more
people must have permit
• 2.3 -clarifies group use permit process
• 2.4 -authorizes the Council to allow applications for group use permits
to be filed more than ninety days before the proposed use of a City pazk
• 2.5 -authorizes Council to revoke a group use permit at any time
Vice Mayor Baker asked if the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the
draft ordinance.
Director Cherbone responded that the Pazks and Recreation Commissions have
been reviewing park Policies but have not seen this proposed ordinance.
Mayor Streit opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. and invited public
comments.
Nick Seroff, 20040 Sea Gull Way, Chair/Pazks and Recreation Commission, •
stated that the Pazks and Recreation Commission have not. had an opportunity
to review the proposed draft ordinance.
Mayor Streit closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
Vice Mayor Baker noted he supports the ordnance with the exception of 2.2
and would like to send it to the Parks and Recreation Commission for review.
Consensus of the City Council to direct the Parks and Recreation Commission
to review the draft ordinance and report back to the Council before the second
reading of the ordinance on January 16, 2002.
NEW BUSINESS
5. 2001-2006 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN -APPROPRIATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolutions.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-094
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING A CAPITAL •
IMPROVEMENT PLAN FORT HE CITY
City Council Minutes 7 December 19, 2001
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 01-092
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE 2001-2002
BUDGET WHEREBY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUNDS ARE
ESTABLISHED AND AMOUNTS ARE APPROPRIATED FOR CAPITAL
PROJECTS, IN ACCORDANCE TO THE 2001-2006 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report.
Director Cherbone noted that in October 2001 the City Council approved the
2001-2006 CIP that consists of 38 projects. Director Cherbone explained that 26
projects aze funded and the remaining 12 are not funded at this time. The total
amount funded by existing funding sources is $6,246,350. The total cost of the
CIP as adopted is $8,571,350, which included funding from grants and other
sources totaling $2,325,000.
Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that it was the intention of this Council to
have the renovation of Azule Park started before they are no longer in office.
Director Cherbone noted that construction should start in July 2002.
Katie Alexander, 12340 Goleta Avenue, noted that the playground at Blue Hills
• School was recently closed because the equipment was not up to ADA standards.
Mrs. Alexander requested that the renovations at Azule Park be expedited.
MEHAFFEY/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
ADOPTING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. MOTION PASSED
4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
MEHAFFEY/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
APPROPRIATED FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS, IN ACCORDANCE TO
THE 2001-2006 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN. MOTION PASSED
4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
7. COUNTY SUPERVISOR'S REQUEST FOR COUNCIL APPOINTMENT
TO THE POLICY ADVISORY BOARD (PAB) FOR THE
COMPREHENSIVE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY PLANNING STUDY
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Appoint one Councihnember and an alternate to the PAB.
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report.
City Clerk Boyer stated that the County of Santa Clara County Boazd of
Supervisors sent the City of Saratoga a letter inviting our City to participate on the
City Council Minutes g December 19, 2001
PAB by appointing one Councilmember to serve as a regular member and one
Councilmember as an alternate.
City Clerk Boyer explained that the Comprehensive County Expressway Planning
Study will develop and document consensus on potential expressway
improvements of all types including capacity enhancements, grade separations,
pedestrian and bicycle facilities, sound walls, and landscaping. In addition, the
Study will develop funding requirements, financing scenarios, and
recommendations regarding issues such as maintenance support and traffic
enforcement.
MEHAFFEY/BAKER MOVED TO APPOINT COUNCILMEMBER
WALTONSMITH TO BE THE CITY'S REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PAB.
MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO APPOINT MAYOR STREIT AS
THE ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PAB. MOTION PASSED
4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSENT.
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS
Councilmember Mehaffey reported the following information:
• Finance Commission -attended their annual Holiday Party hosted by Chuck and
Mary Ann Swan.
• Gateway Task Force -presentation of the plans to the public on January 16, 2002.
Councilmember Mehaffey requested that staff make all of the plans available in
the Civic Theater lobby and on the City's website.
Councilmember Waltonsmith reported the following information:
• Heritage Preservation Commission -discussion on removing the oak trees at the
library. Arborist reports indicate only one tree could be removed and replanted;
the rest of them should be removed. HPC is working on designing a kiosk for the
proposed Adopt a Tree Program.
• Youth Commission -Commissioners are excited that the Civic Center Master
Plan consists of a new teen center.
Vice Mayor Baker had no reportable information.
Mayor Streit had reported the following information:
• Parks and Recreation Commission -approved user fees for Congress Springs
Park which will be coming before Council on January 16`h for approval.
--.J
u
•
City Council Minutes 9 December 19, 2001
Mayor Streit read the new Council liaisons to the City's commissions as follows:
Pl
i
i
i
ann
ng Comm
ss
on Mehaffey
Parks and Recreation Commission Baker
Finance Commission Baker
Library Commission Waltonsmith
Public Safety Commission Streit
Heritage Preservation Commission Bogosian
Youth Commission Mehaffey
Gateway Task Force Streit
Library Expansion Committee Bogosian
Arts Commission Waltonsmith
CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Vice Mayor Baker asked when the next hearing was in regards to West Valley College.
Attorney Taylor responded that the briefs were filed in July 2001 and the Court of
Appeals would probably make a decision in Apri12002.
Vice Mayor Baker questioned the pay back value of the caretaker's cottage at the Hakone
Gardens. Vice Mayor Baker referred to a copy of a letter the City received from Housing
and Community Development (HCD).
• Assistant City Manager Tinfow responded that the dollar amount has not been set.
Vice Mayor Baker referred tb several articles he recently has read regarding Housing and
Housing needs. Vice Mayor Baker suggested that his colleagues read them if they have
not already.
Councilmember Mehaffey expressed his concern regarding the recent AT&T outage.
Councilmember Mehaffey noted that he received many complaints from Saratoga
residents.
Councilmember Mehaffey noted that the recent stone left parts of Sazatoga without
power for several hours. Councilmember Mehaffey requested that staff contact PG& E
and invite them to a future Council meeting.
Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to contact PG & E and invite them to a
future City Council meeting.
Referring to an article he read in the Saratoga News regarding the eucalyptus tree at
Sazatoga School. Councihember Mehaffey requested that staff write a letter to the
Sazatoga Union School District Superintendent, SUSD Board, and the Principal at
Saratoga School reminding them of the City's tree removal process.
City Council Minutes 10 December 19, 2001
Councihnember Mehaffey noted that at the Hakone Foundation's Holiday party he met a
representative from PacBell who informed him that they recently installed DSL lines in
the Village.
Councihnember Mehaffey mentioned that Councilmember Bogosian was at the League
of California Cities Annual Convention representing Saratoga interests.
OTHER
None
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
None
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Streit adjourned the meeting at 8:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cathleen Boyer, CMC
City Clerk
•
City Council Minutes 11 December 19, 2001
SAP.ATOGA CITY COI7NCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
012IGINATING D Manager
PREPARED BY:
AGENDATTEM: ^/)~I~~6
CITY MANAGER• d/ ~G~-~~
DEPT HEAD:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve minutes as submitted for the following City Coiuicil Meeting:
Regulaz- Meeting -January 2, 2002
REPORT SUMMARY:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A
FOLLOW UP ACTION:
Retain minutes for legislative history.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attaclunent A -Minutes/January 2, 2002
SUBJECT: City Council Minutes
~.
MINUTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL j
JANUARY 2, 2002
The City Council of the City of Sazatoga met in Closed Session, Administrative
Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 6:00 p.m.
Conference With Legal Counsel -Existing Litigation:
(Government Code section 54956.9(a))
Name of case: Sazatoga Fire Protection District v. City of Saratoga (Santa Clara
County Superior Court No. CV-803540)
Name of case: Arnett v. California Public Employees' Retirement System
(PERS) (US District Court Northern District of California No. C-953022 CRB)
Name of case: Tsung-Chin Wu, Yuh-Ning Chen v. Parker Ranch Homeowners
Association
(Santa Clara County Superior Court No. CV-707015)
MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Streit reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken.
Mayor Streit called the Re¢ttlaz Ci Council meeting to order at 7:00 Vim. and requested
Dave Anderson, City Manager, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, John Mehaffey
Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Evan Baker,
Mayor Nick Streit
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager
Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager
Richazd Taylor, City Attorney
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director
John Cherbone; Director of Public Works
REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR JANUARY 2.2002
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, ',
the agenda for the meeting of January 2, 2002 was properly posted on December 28
2001.
City Council Minutes 1 January 2, 2001
V
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
The following person requested to speak at tonight's meeting:
Ed Ferrell, 20877 Kittridge Road, noted that at a recent Fire Commission meeting the
acquisition of the ladder truck that is mandated by the Boundary Drop Agreement is at
risk. Mr. Ferrell explained that because the ladder truck will not fit into the curr•ent$re
station, the truck would have to be bought and stored offsite. Because of this issue, Mr.
Ferrell stated, Commissioner Jay Geddes suggested that the Boundary Drop Agreement
be terminated.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
None
None
COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF
None
CEREMONIAL ITEMS
lA. OATH OF OFFICE OF ART COMMISSION MEMBER
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Administer Oath of Office
Mayor Streit invited Mary Lou Taylor to come forward and directed the City Clerk
to administer the Oath of Office.
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, administered the Oath of Office to Mary Lou Taylor.
CONSENT CALENDAR
2A. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve check register.
WALTONSMITH/MEIiAFFEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHECK
REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
City Council Minutes 2 January 2, 2001
2B. OCTOBER & NOVEMBER FINANCIAL REPORTS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept reports.
WALTONSMITH/MEHAFFEY MOVED TO ACCEPT OCTOBER &
NOVEMBER FINANCIAL REPORTS. MOTION PASSED 5-0
2C. CLAIM OF PATRICK LEUNG; CLAIM NO. GL-0053005
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Reject claim.
Councihnember Bogosian requested that Item 2C be pulled from the Consent
Calendar.
Councilmember Bogosian strongly stated that he would like to know what staff
member was responsible for this error and requested that this item be removed
from the Consent Calendar and continued to the meeting of January 16, 2002.
Councihnember Mehaffey concurred with Councilmember Bogosai to
continue this item to January 16, 2002. Councihnember Mehaffey requested
that staff explain how Mr. Leung incurred the $680.00.
r
Consensus of the City Council to continued the claim of Patrick Leung to
January 16, 2001.
OLD BUSINESS
None
Mayor Streit noted that it was not the appropriate time to begin the public hearing so he
requested that Council move to Item 4.
Consensus of the City Council to move to Item 4.
NEW BUSINESS
4. PROPOSAL FOR ON-CALL PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA'S NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND MUNICIPAL TRAFFIC
ENGINEERING
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve proposal from Fehr & Peers Associates and authorize City Manager to
execute a Professional Consulting Agreement.
John Cherbone, Director of Public Works, presented staff report.
Director Cherbone explained that the Neighborhood Traffic Management program
(NTMP) process was developed to identify strategies to mitigate negative traffic
impacts. The neighborhoods, Sheriff s Office staff, NTMP Traffic Engineer, and
City Council Minutes 3 January 2, 2001
city administrative staff will work together on solutions to traffic related issues.
Director Cherbone noted that a Request for Proposals (RFP) describing the City's
needs was sent to 27 Bay Area traffic Consulting firms and the City received four
responses from the following firms:
• Abrams Associates
• Fehr & Peers Associates
• CCS Planning and Engineering
• Higgins Associates
Director Cherbone noted that the deadline for submissions was on Friday,
December 7, 2001. The assistant City manager, a member of the Public Safety
Commission and the Public Works Director interviewed the firms on December
19, 2001.
Director Cherbone noted that staff recommends Fehr & Peers Associates be
approved as the City's on-call Traffic Consultant. Fehr & Peers thorough
knowledge of the traffic conditions in Saratoga and their strong ability to work
with the public makes them the ideal candidate for the NTMP process. The
successful completion of the update of the City's Circulation Element and the
numerous traffic studies they have prepared for Saratoga schools will enable them
to shorten their learning curve concerning Saratoga traffic issues. Additionally,
Sohrab Rashid will be the lead consultant to the City. Director Cherbone noted
that Mr. Rashid has a proven ability to work with the public and has an established
relationship with the City.
Councihnember Bogosian asked if Fehr & Peers Associates were ever employed
by the Mt. Winery.
Attorney Taylor responded that Fehr & Peers worked for the City of Saratoga
performing traffic studies in connection with the Mt. Winery.
Vice Mayor Baker noted that Fehr & Peers Associates submitted the highest bid.
Director Cherbone reiterated that staff and the Public Safety Commission thought
because of the delicate nature of the NTMP Program, the City should have the best
and most qualified traffic consultants to be dedicated to the NTMP process.
Director Cherbone noted that although their bid was higher, Sazatoga would save
money in the long run because of the familiarity of Sazatoga.
Mayor Streit noted he supports staff's recommendation.
Councilmember Mehaffey noted he has been very happy with the previous work
performed for the City by Fehr & Peers. Councilmember Mehaffey requested that
in the future all of the bidders ranges be made part of the report.
Councihnember Bogosian asked if all four consultants were interviewed.
City Council Minutes 4 January 2, 2001
Director Cherbone responded yes
r
Pricilla Ho, 12790 Woodmont Drive, questioned why Fehr & Peers is so much
more qualified than the other firms. Ms. Ho suggested that before the Council
approves the contract the Council should ask Fehr & Peers if they are willing to
negotiate their fees.
Preston Babb, 19923 Via Escuala, suggested that Fehr & Peers Associates be paid
per project not at an hourly fee.
City Manager Anderson explained that the NTMP comes into effect when a
resident contacts the Public Safety Commission with a specific safety concern in
their neighborhood. The issues and the size of the project vary; all neighborhoods
are different. For that reason the City and any consultant cannot set a standardize
price.
Sohrab Rashid, Project Manager/Fehr and Peers and Associates, commented that
during the interview process he was asked why Fehr & Peers rates were higher.
Mr. Rashid explained that Fehr & Peers retains quality people to do the technical
work while he does the neighborhood outreach and attends the Public Safety
Commission meetings. Mr. Rashid stated that he is willing to negotiate a lower
rate for his services.
Councihnember Bogosian noted that in the future the staff report should show why
we should select the highest bidder and what other firms fell short of compazed to
the preferred bidder.
Director Cherbone stated that Fehr & Peers is the top consultant for the NTMP,
particularly their staff who would be assigned to the City.
City Manager Anderson noted that Fehr & peers have proven themselves with the
City.
Director Cherbone noted that Fehr & Peers hourly rate may be higher but per
project they are lower. Director Cherbone sited the traffic signal project on
Seagull Avenue as an example.
BOGOSIAN/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO APPROVE PROPOSAL FROM
FEHR & PEERS ASSOCIATES FOR ON CALL TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
SERVICES. MOTION PASSED S-0.
BAKER/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH FEHR & PEERS.
MOTION PASSED S-0.
City Council Minutes $ January 2, 2001
Vice Mayor Streit noted that it was the appropriate time to begin the Public Hearings and
requested to move to Item 3.
Consensus of the Council to move to Item 3.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC
NUISANCE BY REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS WEEDS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Open Public Hearing; Close Public Hearing; Adopt Resolution.
TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 02-001
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ORDERING ABATEMENT
OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE BY REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS WEEDS
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report.
City Clerk Boyer stated that the resolution before the City Council tonight
represents the second step in Sazatoga's weed abatement program administered
by the County Fire Marshall. The County has sent owners of the parcels
requiring weed abatement notices infornung them that the weeds must be
abated, either by the owners or by the County. The notice also informed them
that they may present objections at tonight's public hearing. City Clerk Boyer
noted that Marty Hicks of the County Fire Mazshall's Office was present and
available to answer any questions Councilmembers may have on this topic.
Mayor Streit opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. and invited any public
comments.
Marty Hick, County Fire Mazshall's Office, noted that he had no comments but
was available to answer questions that the Council may have.
Councilmember Baker asked Mr. Hicks if property owners are responding
better to the County's notices and abating their weeds.
Mr. Hicks noted that the number of pazcels has decreased slightly. Mr. Hicks
noted that several of the parcels on the list aze pazcels owned by public utility
companies. Mr. Hicks explained that PG& E has requested to be on the
abatement list, it is easier for the County to abate their property.
Councihnember Waltonsmith asked if the County chazges less for abatement
than if the property hired a contractor.
Mr. Hicks responded that the County actually charges 60 % more due to the
fact that administrative fees need to be recovered.
City Council Minutes 6 January 2, 2001
r
Councilmember Mehaffey noted that he does not approve of PG& E passing
along the cost to abate their weeds to the taxpayers.
Mayor Streit closed the public hearing at 7:54 p.m.
MEHAFFEY/WALTONSMITH MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLTJTION
ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF WEEDS. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS
Councilmember Mehaffey had no reportable information.
Mayor Streit had no reportable information.
Vice Mayor Baker stated that he has seen a noticeable difference at KSAR since the new
Executive Director, Carolyn de los Santos, took over. Councilnember Baker noted that
the programs are more informative and less boring. The boazd and staff have many good
ideas and plans to improve the whole operation.
Councilmember Bogosian requested a current list of the KSAR Boazd be provided to the
Council.
Vice Mayor faker noted that due to the fact that Councilmember Bogosian was out of
town, he attended the recent Silicon Valley Animal Control JPA meeting. Vice Mayor
Baker stated that he was astonished by the progress they have made in just one year.
Vice Mayor Baker noted that the JPA formed the Silicon Valley Animal Control from the
ground up.
Councilmember Bogosian stated that Assistant City Manager Tinfow should be thanked
because she sits on the Technical Advisory Committee. Councilmember Bogosian noted
that the Animal JPA should be completely up and running in 2003.
Councilmember Waltonsmith reported the following information:
• Chamber of Commerce -2002 Directory is complete
Sister City -planning their trip to Italy
CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Councilmember Bogosian noted that he recently attended the League of California Cities
Annual Conference.
Councilmember Bogosian noted that he had lunch with the members of the League's
Peninsula division and had the opportunity to meet Sazatoga's Grassroots Network
Representative. Councilmember Bogosian suggested that. the City invite Sazatoga's
Grassroots Representative to a future City Council meeting.
City Council Minutes 'j January 2, 2001
Councilmember Waltonsmith expressed her concern with the excessive speeding through
the Village. Councilmember Waltonsmith requested~that the Public Safety Commission
investigate this issue.
Councihnember Mehaffey stated he supports Councilmember Waltonsmith request.
Councihnember Bogosian noted that not only is speeding a problem but also driving
under the influence.
OTHER
Mayor Streit announced that anAdjourned- Joint Meeting with the City Council, Youth
Commission and the Library Commission is scheduled d for January 8, 2002. Mayor
Streit briefly explained a few items that aze scheduled for the January 16`h City Council
meeting.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Anderson noted that he and his wife, Nita, had a wonderful vacation.
City Manager Anderson noted that the three City Center Master Plan alternatives were on
display in the Theater lobby.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Streit adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cathleen Boyer, CMC
City Clerk
City Council Minutes g January 2, 2001
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 15, 2002 AGENDA ITEM:
~~
ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: '/-/~~
PREPARED BY ~~~ DEPT HEAD:. ~'~ '_
SUBJECT: Check Register: 1/7/02
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Approve the Check Register.
REPORT SUMMARY:
Attached is the Check Register.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
None
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
None
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
None
FOLLOW UP ACTION(S):
None
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
None
ATTACHMENTS:
Check Register Certification.
f Fund# fund Name Date Manual Void Total
.1/7/02 Checks Checks
,4P CHECKS A87457-87552
1 GENERAL
100 COPS-SLESF
110 Traffic Safety
150 Streets & Roads
160 Transit Dev
170 Hillside Repair
180 LLA Districts
250 Dev Services
260 Environmental
270 Housing 8 Comm
290 Recreation
291 Teen Services
292 Facility Ops
293 Theatre Surcharge
300 State Park
310 Park Develpmt
320 Library Expansion
400 Library Debt
410 Civic Cntr COP
420 Leonard Creek
700 Quarry Creek
710 Heritage Prsvn
720 Cable TV
730 PD #2
740 PD #3
800 Deposit Agency
810 Deferred Comp
830 Payroll Agency
990 SPFA
79,032.22 12,358.91
62,662.61
450.00
15,001.14
9,398.87
7,575.24
500.34
281.00
19,316.25
101.89
261.18
305.13
17,660.00
212,545.87 12,358.91
PAYROLL CHECKS: 627431-27468
TOTAL
L_ J
.. W
a
m
N
w
c+
a
s
w
a
OF
F2
_ ?~
a
x
W
~. r
F
w
J
0
> N
o~
ao
40
m
FO
24
x
W
a °• °x
a
Ni
. a
q h
l
i 61 U x
°
° .x
>
~ ~
o
q
o
~
o
o
M (
. i y
,¢
~
of a'
>
U
D m m
u
°
o
d~ ~
.
x .
x
mO F~Zx
ag ;w
U,
O 00 O- m O O p p nn0 p O M n g q N N
VI mb p 0 0 0 0 0 0 n m q0 M q q m m q q M
p P O m M m m m N 1(1 m M m m q n n V1 m
N N N e1 M N n YI m m m m m
m m M N N N
O
F
m.N.
.E+u
G
x0
ux
a
m
O a
Xa
Uq
U
J • • U
yz .4] • p £ E 5 E.
4 5 F W O N O a O W 0 N w rv ~ O ~ O ~ O m 0 ~ 0
2 F .lH F„ F ~ F % F a F ~ZW\ F F F m F m F F
m a as a a a m a H a aa.. a a rFa a s a m a y a
u o off' o a o 0 0 o xx o m o a o„ 0 0
N~ NN g m g o g~~ g mWS ~~ 2 F g F g ~ g~ g
z o o > o~ a> ~> d~ o o a > a> a>~> m i m>
odr
m U4 a
a F ~ U U M a Z F a
m as o w ~ yam ~ 0 4 0 0
£ 3 m }
°o °o ° ~ Po oo °
o ~0 0 0 0 0 000 0 •' '{
P N N P p P N P p
pry n
N P N N P 111 N N M p M P
P m N YI YI 1(1 YI m P YI
P O 'i W 0 m ~ O N 111
O 00 O O O 000 O ~ m P °
P p w P m w .v vl °r w °
~ o .n In .n In ~ 0 0 ° ° '1 .1 0
O ON N O N 'I 000 m ~ O O q
N N O O N
U U
O 00 N N N N NNrv rv MN IXO p ly
ry Oo O o o O Ooo o O p
O 0] O
\ O\\ \ \ \ \ \\\ \ WN FN N N
x o F o 0 o M M ~ o a\ \ \
O O O OOO O ^~yl SN P N
M N 4 r\i e\1 N e\1 \ \ \'\'I r\i N (xi1 e\1 Z ti \ \
F° U°o O O o O o00 O O p p
'Jr]' Vi ~"' ~ o
fOp a ° „ a~q N V N
U N ° ~ O Fo w 0 0
1x-1 ~ZTgZj N ''!J~{~j 41 N '[J4+. N N N
aq `lMM Uei '1 ~ti ~O ~NNM FiN Fm '~JO n '~'q
ao0 MO M xp aM yMMM Nr1 mti O ri WO
a°o po o ~o ~° ap po o ao so '" ~o
000 o rlo ao o c9o
a ~ m m u m° ~ 7d o x
W £ Z fqa~~ ~ m u °w gym] M u F~
Q ~Nr1 a m m 0 mNN ~ u um u m
Op m
M O m n M m Ip m M ~~ q N M O N
0o n~\ pm N .~o nn IM1 m.miN oo ~~ rvo nom om
ON HNN tiVl ,y\ O\\O Om Ni.] OV q
O Or~e1 ON ON Or1 OO ONNN ON OnPI 00 OW Om
~ 00 p p O p
O O O O O O O O O O
Q
F
a
qyU~
4
w
a
O
E
U
N
0
N
^
m
O
m
m
M
m
a
M J ~
00££~
W4~
w
O
d
y
.] Z ~
rv O~
qo F~
O~ f£.la
ar FCC
a o 1-1 u
a\ w~
a.. o
~jmm
7a
O
~~
m
a01
U ~'
1 a 1
m
qm
Y4
U^
z
u
m 00
P az
m m
~wuz
.'l
N ~Z>
1°V a~a
~ao~a
~n Fqq ~W
oa f~£q£J a ~ >
4K01500
aor~Pz pzS
wnu~>~
N N
d P
m
N .~
00 Oo 00 Y1 O O ~OOO O 00 O m N m V N O
O 00 P O O N'1 V1 r NO r C m T O
r
' m w< ~ o o m ~ m m m.1r m do e~ m m r N o 0
1+1 Cm O „ „ M NNrN m ~~ m m YI N Om
V M O N N N N N V m
N N •• N N N F ei
E
w
Y
U
~ O O O O U O
m Y .•] 5 • • O • .1 .a .~ N • ~ ~ • U • N • ^ • .•.]
a K .] K {~. 0 ( 4(.. u~ wwmwm [R[.. ~~ 4 F~ y~ V 4 O 4
Zm O m w O k F• m O w O U I-1 •°+ 1°-1 O v1 O O N O O O 2 O ^ O
2 F uU F N F Z H »» F mZ F m F u F O H m F
~ m x: O aama ww F ~+ a
^ O CC 'aJ .'~] U 5 0 F 0 fw9NNN O 04 O m O P O U O m 0
s z ym z x °z ° Pz 2~ ~ ns ~~ a i o z .ma i oW. Z
O > F > m j m O m 2 S 2 Y m m 4 w O w m m m
q > q > VUUU > 55 > a > > > b >~,
mmmm oo w m ~ z
[u. w~ mw „ ~, HFHF a m ~ .
D w~ 4 f^0 F 0000 FE O U o Q
o ~~ o a a mmmm .+.+ 0 0 0
y U U b t>(9U0 UU a 4 N U
p0 00 N "I 000 „O C m m ~
r1 N O O N H r'I
o o~ o000 00 o n n c
p P d N N d P P P d d P Q
N N O O N N N N N N M N d
rl P P b N N P d d P N N N ti b
m mV1 II1 ry N w1I1NN 111 Y1 N VI VI
00 N O O O Y1
m rl N O O No N ry N '1 '1 V M o O
O 00 O O 000 00 O O o
d P P P P d N N N 10
1 OO N ei OOOO N•1 N N r1
O NN O1 O O Y1 N111m 00 00 O O O1
O NN N O O ryNNN 00 O O ry
U
N N N ry N Z N N N N NO No U N N NO N
O O O M o 0 o O „ O N O O
O 00 O o o OOOO Oo O m0 O O
N N ry N N N N N N N N N N N U N N N
\ \\ \ \ \ m \\\\ \\ m \ \ \ \
}io PP N r N FPPPP 1.1'1 mN ~d N I7
00 o rv mo aoooo 0o Uo Oo 0 0
`.~\ \\ z\ m\ \\\\ „\ \ m\ \ \
UNO NN ON MM U~'1NMM r'1 >'1 Wri e1
.oo ~~+ Fo Ooooo 0o ao ao 0 0
F W m 5
~ N ao F am~me ° °
p, c ^ O ~ mooo „ F
O o 0 0 ~ U
i ~ ^ N a a F N N N N Z O a M
i OP ryl'1 m0 Ve'1 rlN mmmmm Mmm Or'1 FP mN
{.w mtim mo .w am m m ao mm mo P
~m 0.1 5N mo N.v n.rn .-1 .+ ati Z•+ F•+ '1
0o aN Fm %m mmmn Foo aM ON HMO N
0 0 ,.~0 o koooo N mo Uo 0
mo ~oo ~o ggo Fo Nmooo Voo Fao mo UOO Fao
~ O 5 Z F 5
a. F ~ °s ~ ~ F > m ~ ~a
w o 0 0 0 o a a w
U U V U U U q ^ ^~ q ^ V
0
•1 O 'i ~ N N
No M N N V O P ID m N m P N N N o m N
PrC mm o 110000 O'1N NM O00 mn
0 o m m d N P m m m ~u .• m r r F o d
O\„ N N O O N N N~ O N N O O1 O N O NO 1
po Oei O O OONetl r1 OO NYI 00'1 OOa 00 od
1 O O O O O O O O
O
0
z
N
N
`J
J
w
a
w
w
w
N
W
aWa
F~
w°£
W4
a
x
w
0 0 00 o q P om m Pe+m N o o g q o q m mo m
0 0 oq m m N r P r P.+r N m m w v~ o o r r qr rv
a~ or ~ m m o o ugie ci ,.~o p m m rv ry o N m m ~n~ P
m OM m NNm N q q r r YI r r r
b m m r m H N 'i 'i '1 N ri N N r r 'i 'i r r p
N N „ fi N N r p N
•y N N
• ~ • UO w W r w • • w w
° i~ az w ~ ~ o °o
Yu a ~ ~ ~ i w ~ " " ~ ~ 4 a ~ °a i i a °' a > > a
n F F F .] E F ~~ ( W F F F F F m F W m F
m O aU O w O .] O OC7 O 3 O N O w O ~ O O O O
F Z F F''1 F d E d E ZZ F~ F a F d F a F Z F ~~ F
.H ~ ~ a KF a ad a~ a UU a ~W Zw SO 3 a N a W G aG C a UU a
>rv £a~.~ ~3 > Fu > u ~ V ~ ~~ ~. ~~~ m ~ > owwi > ~ ; ~ ~ ~~
o\ WN~.~ xa [: sNa. u u z as
do NUS U F.] j 4 ai W~~ E w U hN
a\ m a u w
ao o ~ ~ °wa •F, "a ww ~mm ~ a ~ o ~d
w a :~F a w as m.l .l W O a m .]~
v.
~O oo rv rv .goo
N H M N
g~ o0 0 ovo 0
~ P P P P P P P P P P N P P P
% N N N M N N N N N N ry N N N
W C ryN ~4NN M p NN
m m Ifl N m N Y1 1(1 m VI Y1
[y-. OO m V11(1 00~
J O B O O O O O O
O 2 ~ P q q i+l 1•I T q ri
U
U r• o o .~ 0 0 0 0
a 1(1 1/~ O N N m m m
N NN O O Net OMq O O N N Nri
U
W N „NN N N ryN NNN ry ry ry N NN
w w~ O O O O O O
\F ~ N •NN N ry NN NNN ry ry N N NN
Y a ~ \ a \\ \ \ \\ \\\ .\ \ \ \ \\
U w e P O P P O P P N N N U P p0 P P p
W o Foo 0 00 00o No 0 0 00
U n sUf((nN \ .~ Nei \Mn .i N N N W.i .4
o x(00 o wo 00 00o Wo 0 0 o Woo
m O O 1 P U ~ n e1 aH O O M N N
P wz ~ o .] o m o000 uo o w .n o00
N N N a a ryN WN ~N W Ue1 mNN
.. ~ W F ~ u ~ w a
a ~e1 ~ ';' n m ei m P m q O O N M m N ~•l o
q w F e (-~ m w w ti eri o ~Pa o .a o
YOI ei ei eGm OM U e1m~ Wet O SN NN
mU2 ~ mnn Pt n nm N am n SN ue~ t>Nn
'J NOO 00 ,,..~~ '~00 000 WO yy NO
o ~5> ~oo uo ~o ~oo 00o w0 Wo ~o ao Hoo
t>o a m a
u
o m o v F ~ w u ~ m a z ~ o N
F e z z z a w N w o .+ e+ .+ z z w
\n~iw O.v .~ ? vo > WPPP W ~ W a
o~ > c w o0 0o w w m w w P P m w m c~ u w c~
m~ N N P q q N
'w m \\ P °~
w w ~ ou Wet po~ ~n Pm m rvrrr no ~upi ,.~
a~ O~ Ti M N O m N b P„ o O N N N ~O q ry q O N O
aKK 00 ~ ~\ \\ qN •4 q0 0000 np e1M n
a I'!x ~ m~z ~ O~ ryN e'10 O e.1 ~p 111 0 ~ ~ i rIN Op N\ NO NMP
a s .F, ~ m« ei 00 N 00 m O m n O p p P O N O P 00 e1 00 O O R R
W OI U~ r7 ~ O O O O O O O O O O O
O
M
Za
e?
O
a
W
c~
z
Y
X
M
m
P
Q
W
a
N
W
W
U ![Tj~y
W ~ F
aW
F
g~
W
x
W
O
.-I ri
T 01
r r
m
m0 N b0 p O O ~N N N O 00 O 000 O 000 O 00
O O O O 01 P 00 O~ O O 01 O p O O 000 O 000 O O
m
H ry f•1 I.1 {fib O hP V O NA ~ O O N00N N g11r m O O
p p N P .m 1.1 m ~ N N N N f~ '1 F 00 O
m m N N m ,.a N N .~ .~ o N m P m ~- w o
v a N N w w n N ti n m N
a
u
u
O • 4. • O • H •~ o • O • N W N •
~
.]
R ~.]
4 a R Wa ~ ~ R W ~ N a a i uuu i x i m i
w F a F d F W F F F 3 F x F F »> E -' O [. \ F
O W O O 3w O ~ O O O O aaa O O .+ .
in ~ ~ F F ~ F Op F k F O ~ ~ NNN N F
q a m a a ZZm a t
.t a
~ q WQ z g ~
~i°o t:~ m w w w g u ~ ~ wa w ~z ~ g s m rxumw uuz z
£ W ~ a F a > F z > o > W > W > o > w
>
>
p\ W w ~ Z VI O U p G £ U U U U 6 W W N'
10 F V ~ 2 f F W bZ W www NN W
1 w i
()t O F a W
4
W HHF
i1\
~¢o N~
W ~ O
Y W
> q
CW W
W
W
~ W
££
2
~ 4
i
f
+.
4444 W
i C q
~5 w rv q
q
F U% a FF~ www a
X .. 4 .
aW
O o p C o o P .~ p M N
O N C
i
~ O O
~ O
., N
ea .i .y
ZQ O O 00 NO O 00 O O O00 000
~ P P pP O'i N PP N N PPP PCP
X N N N P O ,p C p O N N N N N N N
W I'1 ~•1 ~ N P b V b ,1 C M M M N '•1 P '1
_ N N N P N N N N N N N N N N N N
[y. N ~„ 00 O
~ o0
M O
O O
.i NNN
M M N NNO
N
O O i O 0 O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O o O o O
u~Jn ~ ~•1 TA CO 'P O P N1.1M M1.1P
U N n .~ o j :~ ,y O .~ ,y O
f{' O 0
0 N N 01q O N 000 p
N O
O •4 0
O Nm N ryN O N 000 0„
N O
W N N NN NN N NN •1 N NNN NNN N
a O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
[j W i O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
\ F~ N N N N N ry N N N N N N N ry N N N N
Y 4 ~ \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \\\ \\\ \
U O~ N o P P o o N N ~` M C M
W O OO O 00 ry O o o
O o 0 o O
.T• \ ~\ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \\\ \\\ \
U ,Z '1 U M ei M •4 ei N N'1 H „ N ri
~ N e1 'I
O O „ O O O O O O W O O O o
O O O O O
m
U Z
0
~ io nm K a n~~ N
w
0 ~ v VV i
.
P Z ~ W
o 0o W a o00 00 .n .-~
W (
.
' N F 000 00 O
~ O Iy
N ryry y Y~NNN /L' NN NN
W ip
mm NO Q
6'•1IIb [r
'LN . ~
a W 2N 00 ~0 "•
ONm
4mm
Ww 1
1
4 Wb1
m
Wbbb NPmh
Whhn >N
.iN
i WU2 ~ ON fNgN MM hmm „
"~
an UOO
N
. £N
m ~
ZZ W'I eiM £NN.4 Rrl
~£a
aoo
rho
o
00
00
0o
wo I
1
~oo ri
No IXm
Wo WNmm
hooo 4nron
hoo0 Nn
ZO
° Z> U b ~00 ho Uoo
F m o ,ooo Oo
U
N H a
\.] N i 0 Z w W W £
a
G N W 4
~ aq ~ ~ £
~
O O R~> 6 o S O ~ M w W a h y h
N i N V Y
^ W C
U
£
tK4 0~ZM m0 m
Nn Pm m N a
~ ry n `"~w
4 KKa
00 ~
.+\
p.y
on
P mNa m
F O
mo
a b
N~~~ M
W U > 'L ~ O ry N '1 O N N
N N\ ei ~~ o N\ H P N b ti N N ry H
W O F' Z
Z O rl O O o N 0
p O M O W W O O w O h n C O M M M O
a a w~ W w O p 0 O O O O O O
WW U~> 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O o O O
w
Y
Y
O
W
~jN
~J
b
N
N
O
Y
CJ
N
G
~.~
F
m
a
>' r
Wo
a\.
0
w
a ..
pEpO
24
m
q
m
m
W p00 N m O N O O 0 O O 0 NN O N O
F
O N N
N
N
O
O 0 p
° 0 N
ry ry p
O o
O o m
m o
O O
O
O
i NmP q m l~ N N N O m O p 1~hN h N O p b O
M J O~ 1~ O r1 m m P m b P N M m T P N O
Q
Z
~
a a N
N
m
,4 ri
.y
..y m m ei
N
N m
O
P
N N
N ry
m
Q
d ri ry ti M N p
x ^~
m
0
F
~y
~Fiu
o-
q0
Us
a
m
qW
Uq
u
m 00
dz
a
a, mu°z
q
o ~ ,Z ~
n m O ~ 0
oNF~2
\N ~w
o~ ~>
m~
z~o~gz°~
Id.IOF ~ °~Z
aau~>F
~ N
U Y e • • q
d a m ~ ~ ~ ~ °o ~ ~ a m ~ > ~ ~ ~ a ~'w
F a F m F F {.
F U H U O O 0 0 0 ~Atdi~N O N O m 0 O o O C
w m m ~ F % F F IX F .ry H H F a F w F o F \ F
w m m a z ~a a a m a a s a a a a N a a d
www o w o m o 0 0 m o :mmm o m o 0 0 0 o w
' aaa i~ a ~' ~~ m~ g m 'm .moo m a m> w~ m o m q
V'VF > a~ > O > O > w > 5 > 333 > ~ > a
> > .y] > Z
`d• C w, m >m u SSa WU U m U p N .] q m
t5Z O 5 ~ 4 V °~> ~ F Z d W
m m d u u dad. u a m a
F
0 0 N p O b b O N
o '
000 0 0 0 0 000 ~ p' °'
eaa a N a ava n .' N
bWP ~ N N N b MTV V N
N C V 1~1 O
N N V N N N N m N
N N N O m N N O N ~
O 00 o ti „ ° N o 0
0 0 o p° °
N a n m a .u a .i
i moo 0 0 0 0 .ioo m c ' rt
N O „ N „ O
i NNN O N N N N O N ry O m
i N N° N O O O O N N N N ry N N N N
° ° 0 0
000 o p~ 0 0 0 000 0 ° p
NNN N N N N ry ryNrv N N N N rv
\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \\\ \ \ \ \ \
N n o° o o n o 0 0°° o °o ^ ^ oN
~~\ \ \ ~ \ °O o 0
o00 0 \ on\ r ~\\i \ \
0 0 0 0 0 o u `~ '~ '"
x o 0 0 0
'~ N N N ~. q
„ N U P V m O r
p o 0 o m
U N O O O q
NNN MN de{
~eeti °a Hm ha ~o o Neim m uN a y am
U.i .irv Fo r yw m.°+ ONi ~nmm .i e°i vin ~~ k0„ 4n
x000 m0 (ap0 FM O
00o mo qo ao ~o jo 300o wo mN N hN
> ~ooo xo jo qo „o ~o
~y „ m m a
w a a u ° ~ ~ w
F ~G w 2 5Z w a 3 ~ .
°w °wa w 3 ° N
o .a. .wi u a ti s s £ ~
h x x x ~] .J O .]
H N ~ O
O mNN Hm M N T„ N,iNN Om m'1 NM1l
NI+INN NN ?ei 110 00~ m p000 mN O Nei hry myMj
N O^ N„ N\ O1~ Pm N\\\ h\ N\ Mi0 ~O
r'1 ei O O O Ory Op ONN„ .y~ Nm \ Oq
O o e OO ei e1 pO rl Oei 00
O O O O p O O ° O
Y
•
m
0 N m
m .+
"J
!q N
W O O
[G
t7
a m .-i ti
(L Z,
V
m
M '1
m m O m~mMm o m Ohm 1« O O O
0
0
0
a O i .
i N .
o e N o o m r r r o N .~ .~ 0 0 0
p «. {
z
Fr
b m
.yin
~u
M~
r
N rv
m.+~mv
i
m
m
v~nm
Nn1N
m
r o
o
Y p
.r m
m
o
O
o
b
w O~ m
N bO
N N m
N '1 '1 N
N N N r
m N 01 01 N N N N
Z ~
G ~ 1 F N N
'1 A
m Y
V
m
x
u
° s
aM m N
a m w w a rc
o . . . . « . w
a ~ a ~o ~ ~o ~ a ~ w : ~i ama ~ a a o ~ a
~ F as F N F ua F .
s
F w
m m ~ F F~ .XY% F N F W Q F
O
O m
~
O
xw
O
O
xA
O
O
m~-IW
O
OO O
~' ~ F gg F oN F mm F F rvN F 5 F mrcm F W F ~ F F
r 4
, z ~~ g ~ ~
ao F
~~ m ~ ~ ww ~ wwua.a .~ w . ~ ~.a~w g g >. g
> rv .
~ w l > w > m m > W W > m > . w -aa++ ,,QQ u m
"~ . > w
~/ - > ~ W ~m W
axx > . u >
z m >
w, _
r >
O\
ar W.+I
F.a~ £
w • W mw
ww a LZS2E
w mm 1 o a w m..
w ••. a zz x
x m auoa ~ u~u w a. o
o
.~ m EE .
, .
, . ~ w
a.. w ~ ~ wm
7m - ~ a amw
xm f
a ~n ..u au
u wu W
w a .
u w
o
m m a
a ~qa mm u .
'omXwm u ..
~-ama a z m
a
FO ~ MM •+ti o 00000 vow .~I r
'
O O o p p O N N N N N O N O N O
O N G
z`~ O o
e y O O O o O ~ o O o ~ O
a
r' rr a o aaaav vav
~:
X .
O N 1'l ri ri N „NP N ~
m '.I MM 'IH v N'1NN AI Nm N b
N rr J1m v bmNml(1 II1 Y1111 m m N
,
{¢~ O
O 00 NO
m I(1
O OOOmYI
O O
o m00
O N M O
'1 O
N
]
~ O O O 00 O O O O O O
~ mm •I rI .yNN M O~m N b O
U O .4 'i 'i e1 r1 '1 'i rl N N
a O pd 00 T 00
000 OOP P m
O r O O N 0
O O O O O O O N O N N
w N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
~ O O O O O O O O O O O O
O w e O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
F
~ \ ~~ `\ N N N rv N N N N N N N N N
Y
a w
m~ 000 00
W r
U UN
F~+ (~F.~I
oo aNti
woo
00~
e 2~
a
.m.
a
m iwu2~
~£J Z
N ~Z> m
rv 4 ~ a a
\PO~O
onEIZ F
\a £ ~ ~ > E
0c>m
m w
a40 I ZI+ O
4 aaa 00~ O
moH;g~z' o
z
°a
u
N
rv
4F
wo
00
4
2
T
N
0
0
U
~d or'
yo0
Fo0
W N N
TiNN
w.+..
NN
00
00
m
yoo
mm
O O
O ~ O
N
O O O
omm
0
u ~ '"
00
E00
i N N
anN
a~~
aZgoo
E
Z
v b r
mmm
N N N
°~~
°o
\\\\\ \ \\\ \ \ \ U
O N NNN N o N N N a N o Z
O O O O O O O O O O
"
'
\ \\\\\ \ \\\ \ ~ \ J
~
.4
e1 '1 N N ei rl L
O o
000 O O 000 O O O N
u z O
~ F u
m m N m F1 (9
a m W a m
ar mrmmo .+ mnv o wm a a
WO F.1w nN Fo ~„~ am m WO a
xrv a.. .+.. .~.. m
~
~d NNN oo
oM mo
mN mF
oN o
u
un
.i0 aNNNNn
mooooo Oo 0000 mo Wo Wo
zo
mooooo
uo
nooo
mo
~o o
y
U U W X N
M M N m m
x w ~ a
~
S
w
m~ ~
w q
O
o w o a W o
C
T q~iOr ~ NNN
rNN 11 e10N
O p N m N rl I\
bT01NmN m~ OmOm N m
o
r
~..N.~
o m O
b O
om mmm.rrF v.. \\\ o „ om
o
om obbabv N~ oN~„ o on
oN ommrmr o0 o O o om
o ° ° o °
0
0
0 o e
0
n
.~
p pm O O N 10 ~p O O m m O O m m 00 N O O Op
O m O M P P O O N N m m O m O
q O O N C• 1~ O b p P O i•1 [• O h l•
N m m n m p C m m N 1• ~ ~ N m O m N N V b
•1 '1 Ifl m N N N T N N m 10 V N N ei N m N
r r
P P
m o a x
'~ a a a a4 w 4 ° a ~ a ro ~ m~ a z '~ m a u a oa
E w F F `+ E m E - F o F W F ~ F 0 F ~ F F
0 0 o a o ` o m o .: o -0 0 0 o z o r o
F W E a F m F F W~~ F h F ~~ w F F o F m m F. F
w O a O w O N O i O >. O U O S O ~ O r. O U° .O 0 O
o °z o ~ s °z F z ° z a wz ~~. °z ; z z a g n ~ ~d ~ z F z
F W w W g W W W [v w m PI w > w W F V W a
C > 6 > O > qq > W > $ r> 'J. >.' S > > N > W '> M >.
z y V U U F ~ V a u F A~ zqw
rwi) w a aU N U U -' d m m .°i V U
P a o •+ 0 0
O N N NN '
O O O O '1 O OO O
P N P N' < Pd P
N N < N N N O P N
t•1 C M m ti N N ei
m m Yf m m P m N m m YI m
N ~ O o O O m m O
O N o N O N N
O O O O O O
/~ P N m
O O ti O
~ oo m m o 00 o m o 0
N N O O O N 00 ei
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N $N r]N N NN N
O~ O\ \ \ \ \ W\ O\ O\ \ \\ \
$ P U P o ON nl o U M M N K O N N N PO
0 0 o mo Fo F po 00
00 [[r~~ \ \ \ \ W\ „\ 2\ [FrY ~\ U\
2 •+ y .i ~o .+ S ri ti O r F N 2 .~
M O W o O o O £ o U O U e O O O o N O
lZ+ W$ O O m
W U m t7
U d r. Z [N~ O ~ 'yF n W .+ pam~' m
U' wN 'I; ,'L w m aN fuN "aN
am O•+ w ^F ~m ON Wm ON Nm x~p „~ Om
am Mm Wp Mm Um U~ m am WO mm •Yim
Or+ F.i O.i 3o m.. w do aN Wo m~ wn
uo an mN om WN aro N fn aN an n mN
Wo op ao Ye ,~qyq uo mp ap ao 0o ao
~o uo ~o oa W a ao ao >o mo 0o Uo
w w 3 W U O O ZO m ~ ~
.+ W of m n° a [°+ $E$O u N
o° o o u ~d ~ ~ a ~ a a W
wo L' w W W W W W W W 41 y
P C
T N
O h O O
NO N N p < V r1 m\ P m m O i b m Pm m
/•1 O P N P P I.1 H b O~ N U1
Om O P O 1•Im P PO P C NN
ON N N\ rim O~ Ory O NO N N OO
O V O O P O O N O O O l~
O O O O O
O O O„ O O O O O O O O O
0
w
W
W
W
°
a A
a ~
w
w
F5~
000
wed
a
x
w
F
m
.] 2 i
N O~
>'rv £Wi
D \ W
wo way
W\ W~
4 ~+ Wn i
N o
7W
FO
0 m
Z4
M
X
m
JO
02
U
a
m
7
OW
yF
U ~
U
00
WZ
ri
m m
~m;S
• °NO ~~do
~Z>
N aim
~a"~o
„nFiw
o~~~>
N ~
O W
~~0~5~
^>00
tpuOH~2>Z
aau~>~
X
z
H
w
rc
W
w
ri
m W NM
m n
m m m
m n n
n n
41
q1 ~ N N
O
r
O 00 m m O O 00 O 00 Ill O O O O O mm O O O Smd N 00 O
O O O O O n O O O N N OI Y1 1!I O O O YI n d O
'{~~i O O q A P O 00 O O m V IO ~ N mN P O1 m NNd T O
N i7 I N m OI ~ O m N YI m YI V O d d m n N ~ VI I(I
^ §O I N N N '1 '1 1'1 d d •I N N N I+I r'I N N N
m Fd I .. 'I N
M R
W 1G
w
U
.. ST. H m W W fP+]
3 ~ a y£j N NNM `
[[.. ¢m~ O w P P p
c O ~ S O U O W O £ ~ O'£ O p s EO m N N ~ ° FO
F F F F m F ~ F ~ F F w F m' F m F aaa F F
m ~ \ 2 m W m W ~ m O o 0 \
a a W as~p a a N a U amp~p ~ spa~p a amp~p w .l a~~p [M~[~++ amp~p aaa aqq app
Jo °'~ 3 Z F Z x Z d Z~ 2 41 Z 2 2 ~.z' hF.2 2 Z OO~ Z 3 Z
ao F I o m W m m m m W m z~~> a ~> ~w'wa u ~i uu~ ~ a. >
o~ wra. ~ v ~ u ~ m > ~ > 4 > m '. m „u~.u 4
u m a ' [,y. ~ mq mq pqw.
.mo Fu ~ a y ~ a ~ .E _ ,'
ao HG ~ % y d Q m r~ 6 ylqq-I F aa`a X
µ~ W u a 3 a ~ m~ 3 '~£Y d FFF m
a
FO O N .NN 00 O '
~ a N d d N N d M P N I"1 I'1 I'1 N
~( N rl N nl N nl V N'1 N M I'I ICI ri
m N n N P N P m II1N N mN111 I!I
N d I I I
~y yl p O YI O O O O I(1 N
do ° o o ao 0 00~
o f ~ rv r .... n n n
U N N 'I O N O N e1 r1 M O O O rl
a O O O O e'I O N N O O O N M ri O
~ N N N N N ~"~ N N NN N NNN N
O O O O O O O NOO O 000 O
(]m I~ O O O O O O O E00 O 000 O
\F I N N N N N N N N mNN N NNN N
ma I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ F\\ \ \\\ \
UC ~ 0 0 0 0 o n d N mNl'I N 3ddd ~
W N O O N O O O W O O D
Z \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N\~ N W..tMM fl
U o .0 0 0 0Ni o o aoo o ~oo0 0
w c>
m
p U'z ll m ~ W~ti F 'yN000
d O N y `1'NNN
N (FyI U '$Fj
m m rl q „ }O Wr1 znd d mmmn 0.~
m m m ao a m am FP t+mN ~m Fmmm
S O' ~ N O N ti N m M m O O'1 U m ~"~ N N "~
I~w=zl „o mm mn •~o ~o n xn qZn ~nn }nNn
y vv!! oo uo 0 00 }o aooo Fe a
o iZ> ZO yo qo ~yqo No wo po aoo 00 300o Zao
~ n ~qq' 1I ~W F PJ aa.`aJ 'f. = a taU W W F 5a 4 w
0~4 ~~ m m m m F F ? O ~mP ~ O 3 3
mI ~ b'1 OQm
a~O I ~61-I ION OIm IYm O01 m~ m '1O m mmm ti Nnl I~1N Nmo N
dRRIJ} 1 C>Z I P\ Nm '1N Ol~l OOI O do O NO'I '1 d OUNm 'i„ d
rZ~Z OM ON ON ON O OC 00 OI~I I'1 OONNN
wau>~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
•
c
~.
# + t t ~F ie
m
N
~]
N
O \
ao
a\+
am
'Fo
~~
W
h
(mgr
i
W
~^^ 5
2~
0.
X
W
O ~
F~
~ w i
M U ~
W .
w~
a
DO
oz
u
a
mm
n
ma
m o
N N
~a
N
P m m b M N N OO r
C m p C m
P m ri N n1 rl O O N
r r o o r r ,.~ ,y m In a
YI VI r r N N r'1 N 1(1
• I nl N
N
N
.~ p • W V • a . mo w
F ~ O U. O O ~ F apw ~
F F a F F d E ^^F
F O m O y O w O W 02•
g a ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~aa~°
>> (~r. 'yy [E4.
m Z o w a F c7
u w s s d
.~ o a
n a
0
N V N
N N
N .+ a
N m 1(1 N
In o 0 0
N O 111 rl
O O O
ri N O
N
0 0
O O O O N
0 0 0 0 0
z
o m
u ^
w N N N N N
,'J O O O O
^ w 1 O O O
\F ~ N N N N N
X a 1 \ \ \
U ~ 1 N N
m O O O
•Ti \ \ \ \ \
U M .1
00 ~ .. In m
a z~ w o U
d m O Z M
m w N O >
.. £ .. a
a In ~ H N W rv m
m ~ wu2 ~ m a. 1`w ~om m,i~n un
No iZ> oo .wlo 0o Uo Co
N a
a~^a^ o > m
onF ~ Z F F O ~ vi
q N W a w
\£a~> 3m 3 %b N
oV N
W i V p m
G w V N P n
W d ~ ou ml+l mlo om ron m
a~0 ~ z Nm mn erv am .Irv
dUN ~ Oj¢ 1 PO .y Ul CO Olo N\
a a M i W `FN O d O 10 O ri
ddUl> i O O O O O
p M N .- t1l .-
M d' O c- O~
O WN~rCO
~p~Ott~
N.-P-~M
w
N ~7 M r (V
F
~~
r~
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
DEPT: Community Development
PREPARED BY: Kristin Borel
AGENDA ITEM: I
CITY MANAGER: ~--~~G~~
DEPT HEAD:
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Actions, January 9, 2002
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Note and file.
REPORT SUMMARY:
Attached are the Planning Commission action minutes of January 9, 2002
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
N/A
FOLLOW UP ACTION(S):
N/A
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N{A
ATTACHMENTS:
Action Minutes - 5azatoga Planning Commission
,~.
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
ACTION MINUTES j
DATE: Wednesday, January 9, 2002 - 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regulaz Meeting
~ .
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Garakani, Jackman, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe, Zutshi and ChairBarry
-ABSENT: Commissioner Kurasch
STAFF: Planners Livingstone &t Vasudevan, Director Sullivan and Minutes Clerk Shinn
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
MINUTES : Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of December 12, 2001.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Anymemberof thePublicwillbeallowedto address thePlanningCommission forup tothree
minutes on matters no[ on this agenda The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking
action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Communications
underPlanningCommission direction toStaff.
REPORT OF POSIING AGENDA
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 3,
2002.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. GARROD FARMS, 22600 Mount Eden Road (503-10-028); -Request for General
Plan clarification to allow three new dwelling units on one parcel of land where two
dwelling units currently exist. The area is within the jurisdiction of Santa Clara
County and is prezoned Hillside Residential. The County requires the project be
consistent with the City of Saratoga's General Plan.. (LIVINGSTONE)
(CONTINUED FROM 11/14/01) (APPROVED BY CONSESUS)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a
decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited
to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this'
agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Sazatoga Planning Commission at, or
prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information
packets, written communication should be fffed on or before the Monday, a-week before thei
meeting.
2. DR-O1-021, V-010-012 &s BSA-Ol-002 RUSTED, Kittridge Road; -Request for
Design Review and Building Site Approval to construct atwo-story craftsman style,
single-family residence on a vacant lot. The floor area of the proposed residence and
attached two-car garage is 4,810 square feet. The maximum height of the residence
will be 26 feet.. The site is zoned Hillside Residential (H-R). A variance is requested
in order to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet. An exception is also
requested to exceed one thousand cubic yards of cut and fill allowed in the H-R Zone.
(OOSTERHOUS) THIS ITEM IS REQUESTED TO BE CONTINUED
(APPROVED TO CONTINUE 6-0)
3. UP-O1-018 (381-O1-026) AUGUST PARTNERS II, LLC; DR. KATHLEEN BAN,
DDS (tenant), 12132 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road; -Request for a Conditional Use
Permit approval to establish a dental office in an existing 1,440 square foot office
space in the Park Saratoga Center. The office space is located in the Visitor
Commercial (C-V) zoning district. (VASUDEVAN) (APPROVED 6-0)
4. DR-O1-031 &r UP-O1-017 (397-05-091) -SAN FILIPPO, Sobey Road; -Request for
Design Review approval to construct a new 4,981 square foot two- story residence
with a 608 square foot basement and 528 square foot cabana on a vacant lot. The Use
Permit approval is necessary to allow the cabana to be 15 feet in height. The
maximum height of the residence will be 26 feet. The site is 43,042 square feet and is
located within a R-1-40,000 zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) (APPROVED 6-0)
5. DR-O1-043 (397-28-005) - FITT, 20461 Walnut Avenue; -Request for Design
Review approval to add 360 square feet to the first floor, 334 square feet to the second
floor and 360 square feet to the basement of the existing 1,800 square foot dwelling.
Maximum height of the structure will be 24 feet. The 7,658 square foot parcel is
located in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. (SULLIVAN) (APPROVED 6-0)
DIRECTOR ITEMS
Planning Commission Mission Statement
COMMISSION ITEMS
Commissioner's sub-committee reports
COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT AT 9:55 P.M. TO NEXT MEETING
Wednesday, January 23, 2002, Council Chambers/Civic Theater
13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
r'
~~
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager
AGENDA ITEM: I L`1
CITY MANAGER: ~~~
DEPT HEAD:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT: Commission Attendance Records
ACTION: ,
Informational only.
REPORT SUMMARY:
Attendance reports for all Commissions aze submitted semi annually for periods January 1
through June 30 and July 1 through December 31.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A
FOLLOW UP ACTION:
N/A
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENT:
Attachment A -Commission Attendance Records 6/01-12/01
c
0
.y
N_
O
U o
m
R C N
O ~ L
++ C R
lL}
(p Of N
w oa
O .+ C
_T ~ m
UWU
m
.~
e
a
r
o
o ~
c
0
c
o~a~iaci~ya~ia~i
~'aa`n ¢¢a`a`
O y C
M ~ •-
m c E
U
m ~ ~
n U N
C d
V
r
O ( C C C C C C
r
\ N y N y N y N
`oa`aa`aa`aa`
0
c c c c c ~ c
'R N d N N N U N
r N' N N N N N
~ ~ ` N ~ d a N
aaa`aaaa
rnda~idya~iacia~i
ad~~ad~d
aaaaaaa
G
N N a N N y H W
M d Z N N d N N
a aaaan.
N N a 'd N N N N
~ N~ N N N N N
N N~ Z N d d N d
;; a a`aaa`a
a
O
~ m a~i a~i a~i a~i aci a~i
~ N a N N N N N
N~ ~ Z N d N~ N
m a a` a a` a a`
C C
O C L ~
N N N ~
NL m0 (0
UUUU cLit3
m` o~ari mU v
~? L O V N L
~ U ~ ~ N U
C C C C C C
N N N G1 N N
N N N N N N
d N N d N N
aa`a`aa`a`
C
d
7
U
m
C
o °~a y ~ c~a
~N ~ (p L L 3 C
N~~ ~OUty-
L T= U X
U ~ ~ ~ 7 d
O
O
c
f6
m
a
F
.~
1_J
s
m
d
~~ r
~ ~ O
~ O N
U ~
m
~ ~}
w ~ A
T > C
m
U ~ m
y U
Y
U
~ ~ ~~~~~~
N N N N N N O N
N
N N N N N ~ ~7
~ a d a a aa a
~ C ~ C C C C C
N N N
N
N
M p y
y
t
O ~ d N ~ N
~
~
~ .
a aaa`a¢a
0
c c ~ c~ ~ c
N N
N
N
N
N y f
A
y
~ d ~ ~ d ~ d
~
gy n. aaaa`Qa`
0
~na~i ma~ia~ia~i~a~i
r N N N N N y N
p d N d d N ,p d
~a a`aa`a`aa
o ~O
c
N N m y N ty/i N N a
~ N'N .n ~ ~~aZ
a`~aaa¢¢
°_ c c c ~ c c
0 o d~ m d d Q
N N N N N N N y
~ N N d N N N ~ Z
a`ada`aa`a
~ c ~ c c c ~~
C d d m a~ a~
(`') N N N N N N N
mm~~da.flz
a`a`aaaa¢
0
m aci aci aci m aci ~ aci Q
N N N N N N y N
N N~ N N N ,p N Z
d a`aa`a`a`aa`
..
o~~ c c c c c c ~
c rn d a~ a~ d d m a~
~i+ N N N N N N y
N~ N N~ N N N ~ Z
~ a`a`aa`a`aa
N
d
s
d 0 N O N d
d L C N '_y0 c N N
adn O 'O !n O) N O fn X
E~-° ~ ~Y c~-O¢
o~ E c m~ o m
E c m
00>`o_~=v~m
U~ W ZQfAmW Y
N
m
C7
C
t0
T
T
a
d
`m
a
d
a
z
COMMISSION MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORDS
Date: December 21, 2001
Commission: Heritage Preservation Commission
Period Covered: July -December 2001
Number of Scheduled Meetings: 6 Regular Meetings
Number of Special Meetings: 1 Special Meeting
Commissioner Number of Absences
Ballingall, Phyllis 0 (Term started 10/Ol)
King, Carolyn 1
Koepernik, Norman 0
Peck, Willys 1
Peepari, Robert 2
Wyman, Beth . 2
Submitted l
COMMISSION MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD
Date: December 27, 2001
Commission: Library
Period Covered: July -December 2001
Number of Scheduled Meetings: 3 Regular Meetings
2 Cancelled
December meeting not scheduled
Commissioner Number of Absences
Chair Manzo 0
Chandra 0
Cross 1
Foscato 1
Lipstein 2
Johnson 0
O'Donnell 0
Submitted by: 6~=~' ter." ~r ,C>i - ~ ~
Lori Burns
Staff Liaison to Library Commission
r
City Manager's Office
13777 Fruitvale Ave.
Saratoga, CA 945050
Tel: 408/868-1215
fax: 408/868-8559
Memo
To: City Clerk
-
From: ~~
Lorie Tinfov~~ J" ~
Date: 1 / 11 / 02
Re: Library Expansion Committee Meeting Absence
For the period July 2001-December 2001, we have met monthly plus one
special meeting to tour the construction site. The following represents the
record of absence for the committee members during that time:
Marcia Manzo: 1
Bill McDonnal: 1
Stan Bogosian: 1
Dave Anderson: 0
Ruchi Zutshi: 3
Julie Farnsworth 0
Mary Jeanne Fenn: 0
Ruth Lipstein: 1
Jack Grantham: 2
Bob Peepari: 5
Edwazd Sessler: 4
Fran Andreson: 0
Dolly Barnes: 0
Thanks.
r
Parks & Recreation Commission
Attendance Record
For the Period July 1, 2001-December 31, 2001
Commission Member Number of Meetings
Attended
Alberts, Judy* 3 of 7
Clabeaux, Elaine 6 of 7
Dodge, Sandra 7 of 7
Fronczak, Norbert 5 of 7
Ioannou, Sheila* 4 of 7
Olsen, Barbara* 2 of 7
Seroff, Nick 6 of 7
Angela Frazier 3 of 7 (10/O1)
Logan Deimler 3 of 7 (10/Ol)
Greg Gates 3 of 7 (10/O1)
*Term Expired-Last Meeting 09/01 (total of 4 possible meetings to attend)
n
s
COMMISSION MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD
Date: December 21, 2001
Commission: Planning Commission
Period Covered: July -December 2001
Number of Scheduled Meetings: 11 Regular Meetings
Number of Special Meetings: 0 Special Meetings
Commissioner Number of Absences
Barry, Cynthia 3
Garankani, Mike 1
Jackman, Erna 5
Kurash, Lisa 3
Roupe, George 3
Zutshi, Rutchi 0
Submitted by: "" ~ ~ " ~"- ~-~`
Thomas Sullivan, AICP
Secretary to the Planning Commission
Y
4
COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
DATE: January 8, 2001
COMMISSION: Public Safety Commission
PERIOD COVERED: July -December 2001
Number of Regular Meetings: 5 Special: 0 Joint: 0
Commissioner Number of Absences
Andreson 0
Ballingall 0
Biester 1
Galvin 0
Hexamer 2
Kane 0
Santana 0 (Since October 2001)
Submitted by:
Paula Reeve
Staff Liaison to the Public Safety Commission
{
7
COMMISSION MEETIl~TG ATTENDANCE RECORD •
Date: 7 January 2002
Commission: Youth
Period Covered: August 2001- December 2001
Number of Scheduled Meetings: 5
Commissioner Number of Absences
Atkin 0
Baker 0
Ballingall 0
Byrne 0
El-Diwany 0
Farnum 1
Levin 1
Luskey 0
Miller 1
Onn 0
Pramanik 0
Siadat 1
Schwartz 0
Wu 1
' '+~^'~
~ `
Respectfully submitted
y: ~
Lauren C. Merriman
Recreation Program Coordinator
•
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: I
ORIGINATING PT: City Ma er CITY MANAGER: ~~~~-
i
PREPARED B ~~~U~~~ DEPT HEAD: _ ___
SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting "Yes on 42"
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt resolution.
REPORT SUMMARY:
In December 2001, the League of California Cities sent a letter to all Local Government Officials
requesting that City Council join the League and support "Yes on 42". Proposition 42 is the
Transportation Congestion Improvement Act which will appear on the Mazch 5, 2002 statewide
ballot.
Proposition 42 would provide a much needed ongoing reliable source of funding for our street;.,
roads, and their local transportation projects, Proposition 42 is especially important now as
many local transportation sales tax measures are set expire over the next few years. Cities and
counties would receive 40 % of the Proposition 42 revenues. 20% of it will be earmazked for
cities for local street repairs and maintenance. Another 20% is provided to public transit
agencies, and the reminding. 40% goes to State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP),
which is primarily composed of locally identified projects.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES. OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A
FOLLOW UP ACTION:
City Clerk to mail a copy of the resolution to Christopher McKenzie, Executive Director, League
of California Cities.
t
ADVEBTISINO, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
~~.-..t-,_.
N%A~
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A -Resolution
Attachment B -Letter from Christopher McKenzie, Executive Director/League of California
Cities
U
RESOLUTION NO.02-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 42
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will help make our roads safer and reduce traffic without
higher taxes be requiring the gasoline sales taxes we already pay be used to improve mass transit,
highways and local roads, and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 is based on the principal that taxes paid at the gas pump
should be used for transportation purposes; and
WHEREAS, traffic is paralyzing travel with Los Angeles now ranked the number one
most congested urban area in the county, San Francisco/Oakland second, San Diego sixth and
Sacramento, San lose and San Bernardino/Riverside following close behind; and
WHEREAS, with our neglected transportation system needing attention, California has
the third worst deteriorated roads in the nation and more than 6,000 of our bridges and
overpasses are structurally deficient or no longer meet highway safety or design standards; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will provide a stable and ongoing source of transportation
funding that will make is possible to plan for our future transportation needs; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will guarantee funds to every city and county to help fix
potholes, repair dangerous road conditions and improve the safety of children walking or biking
to school; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will help speedup highway safety and traffic relief projects.,
and expand and improve mass transit systems; and
WHEREAS, all Proposition 42 projects will be subject to an annual audit and standard
accounting practices to ensure they are delivered on time and on budget; and
WHEREAS, by speeding up transportation projects thousands of new construction and
other jobs will be created, our economy will be stimulated and every dollar invested in our
highways will result in ahnost six times that in economic benefits.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does
hereby support Proposition 42.
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Sazatoga City Council at a
regular meeting held on the 16th day of January, 2002 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Nick Streit, Mayor
ATTEST:
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
Let's get
December 2001
Dear Local Government Official,
SAFER ROADS AND
TRAFFIC RELIEF
Please join the League of California Cities in supporting Proposition 42, the Transportation Congestion
Improvement Act, on the March 5, 2002 statewide ballot.
As you may already know, Proposition 42 would allocate a portion of the existing state sales tax on
gasoline to cities and counties to be used for transportation improvements.
Cities and counties combined will receive 40 percent of the Proposition 42 revenues. Twenty percent of will
be earmarked for cities for local street repairs and maintenance. Twenty percent of the revenue will be
earmarked for counties for local road repairs and maintenance. Another 20 percent is provided to public
transit agencies, and the remaining 40 percent goes to the State Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP), which is primarily composed of locally-identified projects.
Proposition 42 is an important measure for all cities and counties as it would provide a much needed on-
going reliable source of funding for our streets, roads and other local transportation projects. Proposition
42 is especially important now as many local transportation sales tax measures are set to expire over the
next few years.
I hope that you and your council will join the League of California Cities and the Yes on Proposition 42
campaign coalition of law enforcement and transportation officials, business, labor unions and taxpayers in
supporting this measure:
Enclosed please find a sample support form and resolution. If you have any questions, please feel free to
contact campaign coalition director Ted Green at (310) 996-2671 (tgreen@woodwardmcdowell.com) or
campaign internal education director Jason Barnett at (650) 340-0470 Qbamett@woodwardmcdowell.com).
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
7 ,~ `^' ~ t
~~
~~ ~,
• Christopher McKenzie
Executive Director, League of California Cities
TAXPAYERS FOR TRAFFIC RELIEF/YES ON 4Y ~ A COALITION OF TAXPAYERS, CONSTRUCTION, BUSINESS, LABOR, ENGINEERS AND COMMUTERS
11300 West Olympic Blvd. ri840 • Los Angeles, CA 90064.310/996-2671 • Fax 310/996-2673
111 Anza Blvd. F408 • Burlingame, CA 94010 •650/340.0470 • fax 650/340-1740 ~ r
..,n ~. ~i"o~ ~• ,., „ocnrnr "7 rnm . o mail infr voFO rn nG9 rnm
SAFER ROADS AND •
• ~ TRAFFIC RELIEF
I •
Let's get moving again!
SAFER ROADS -TRAFFIC RELIEF -WITHOUT NEW TAXES
Requires the gasoline sales tax-A TAX WEALREADY PAYAT THE PUMP- be used to improve
highways, local roads and mass transit. An annual audit of Prop. 42 funds will be required to help
guarantee transportation projects get delivered on time and on budget.
Improve Highway, Bridge and Street Safety
California's once safe and beautiful highways are now the third most deteriorated roadways in the nation, and
growing less safe by the day. More than 6000 California bridges and overpasses are structurally deficient or no
longer meet highway safety or design standards. Prop. 42 will provide desperately needed funds to help fix
potholes and repair dangerous roads, highways, bridges, intersections and school routes - in every city and
county in the state.
Speed Up Traffic Relief and Mass Transit Projects
Los Angeles has the most congested traffic in the country. San Francisco/Oakland is second, San Diego si~
and Sacramento, San Jose and San Bernardino/Riverside follow close behind. Prop. 42 guarantees gasoline
sales taxes -taxes we already pay -will be used for transportation improvements. It will help speed up the
delivery of planned traffic relief projects on highways and local roads, and expand local bus and commuter
services, such as VTA in San Jose, Sacramento light rail, MUNI, Green and Blue lines in L.A., the San Diego
trolley, BART, Caltrain, Capitol Corridor, Southern California's MetroLink, ACE, and the Coasters in San Diego.
Create Jobs and Stimulate the Economy
Speeding up transportation prdjects has the added benefit of creating thousands of new jobs in construction,
engineering and related services - at a time when we need them the most. Every dollar spent on highway
improvements generates about six times that amount in economic benefits.
Join California Highway Patrol Commissioner Dwight Helmick, the California Organization of Police and
Sheriffs (COPS), California Fire Chiefs Association, California Office of Emergency Services Director Dallas
Jones, California Taxpaye ~;' Association, California State Automobile Association-AAA, Automobile Club of
Southern California-AAA, California Transit Association, Transportation California, California Alliance for Jobs,
California Taxpayer Protection Committee, California State Association of Counties, League of California
Cities, California Chamber of Commerce, labor unions, seismic safety engineers, local and state
transportation officials, seniors, commuters, transit riders, parents and many others.
YES on PROP. 42
SAFER ROADS -TRAFFIC RELIEF -WITHOUT NEW TAXES
TAXPAYERS FOR TRAFFIC RELIEF/YES ON 4Y • A COALITION OF TAXPAYERS, CONSTRUCTION, BUSINESS, LABOR, ENGINEERS ANO COMMUTERS
11300 West Olympic Blvd. #840 • Los Angeles, CA 90064.310/996-2671 • Fax 310/996-2673
7214 111 Anza Blvd. 8406 • Burlingame, CA 94010. 650/340-0470 • Fax 650/340-1740
4 :•
Prop. 42 will help speed up highway, street and mass transit improvements. It also guarantees every city and coun
additional funds to repair and maintain local roads. Here's a few examples of regional projects awaiting com letion:
Alameda
Extending rail service to Livermore
Widening Rte. 84 from 4 to 6 lanes from Livermore to Sunol
• Westbound truck climbing lane over Altamont Pass
Adding train service across the Dumbarton Bridge
Widening of I-15 from Temecula to Corona
Construction of a new East-West corridor between Riversic
and Orange County
Interchange improvements along I-10 in Coachella Valley
Improvement of local bus services
Contra Costa
Extending rail service to Antioch
• Speeding up work on fourth bore for Caldecott Tunnel
• Expansion of 680/Route 4 interchange
• Improvements to State Route 4
Fresno
Extension of Highway 180 from Highway 33 to I-5
Improvements to Highway 99
Traffic improvements to and widening of Herndon Avenue
Expansion of public transit
Kern
• Widening and improving Highway 99
• Widening and improving State Route 58 in Bakersfield
Los Angeles
• Improving the San Diego Freeway (405) and the Ventura
Freeway (101) interchange and travel over Sepulveda Pass
Countywide freeway improvements including I-5, I-10, Route
~• 14, Route 60, and U.S.101
Expansion of Metro Rapid Bus service
• Expansion of rail service to Pasadena, East Los Angeles
and West Los Angeles
Construction of a Busway in the San Fernando Valley along
the Burbank/Chandler corridor
MarinlSonoma
• Speeding up widening of 101
• Expansion of ferry service
New 580/101 connecting ramps
NapalSolano
Widening/improving 801680/Route 12 interchange
• Widening 680 to 6 lanes north of the Benicia Bridge
• Expansion of Route 29 from Route 12 to Solano County
Orange County
• Fixing freeway bottlenecks on the 405 from Warner to
Beach Blvd., the 55 freeway, the 5 and the 91
• Expansion of MetroLink commuter rail service by doubling
existing Metrolnk during peak period operations and adding
new service from Fullerton to Laguna Niguel
Increasing "Bus Rapid Transit" service on Beach and
Harbor Blvds.
.Riverside
Railroad grade separation on major streets
.. Improving MefroLink Service
Improvements to I-215
Sacramento
Light rail from downtown to Sacramento International Airport
Improvements on Hwy. 50 and I-80 east of downtown
Improvements to local roads and local bus servia:
San Bernardino
Improvements to I-10
Widening of I-215 between San Bernardino and Riverside
Widening of I-15 in the Cajon Pass
Expansion of MetroLink commuter rail service
San Francisco
Improvements to Doyle Dr. approach to Golden Gate Bridge
Speeding up extension of light rail service underground into
Chinatown
Replacement for Transbay Terminal
San Diego
Widening of I-5 throughout the county
Widening of I-15 from Kearney Mesa to Escondido
Rail transit expansion and improvements
San Joaquin Valley
Widening and improvements to Highway 99
Expansion of ACE commuter rail service to Bay Area
Expansion of public transit system
San Luis Obispo
Widen Route 46 to four lanes from Paso Robles to Fresno
San Mateo
Speeding up interchange improvements along 101,.
including Willow Road, University Avenue and Broadway
Widening Route 92 from 4 to 6 lanes between 101 and 280
Speeding up electrification of Caltrain from SF to Gilroy
Santa Clara
Speeding up work on widening 101 from 6 to 8 lanes from
Metcalf Road to Cochrane Road ,
Widening 880 to 8 lanes from Route 237 to 101
Speeding up construction of BART from Warm Springs to
San Jose
Ventura
Widening Route 23 between Moorpark and Thousand Oaks
Widening 101 freeway from Johnson Drive in Ventura to
Vineyard Avenue in Oxnard
11/29
SAFER ROADS AND
TRAFFIC RELIEF
~ .. --
Who Supports Prop. 42 on the
March 5, 2002 Statewide Ballot?
(as of 12/13/01)
Police, Fire and Public Safety
California Highway Patrol Commissioner Dwight Helmick
California Highway Patrol Commissioner M. J. Hannigan (Retired)
California Highway Patrol Commissioner J.E. "Jim" Smith (Retired)
California State Office of Emergency Services Director Dallas Jones
California Fire Chiefs Association
California Organization of Police and Sheriffs (COPS)
Taxpayer Protection
California Taxpayers' Association
California Taxpayer Protection Committee
National Tax Limitation Committee
Butte County Citizens.for Better Government
Fullerton Association of Concerned Taxpayers
Kern County Taxpayers Association
Marin United Taxpayers Association
Orange County Taxpayers Association
Shasta County Taxpayers Association
United Californians for Tax Reform
Waste Watchers
Transportation and Highway Safety
Automobile Club of Southern California -AAA
California State Automobile Association -AAA
Structural Engineers Association of California
California Transit Association
California Commuters Alliance
California Association of Councils of Government •
California Rebuild America Coalition
TAXPAYERS FOR TRAFFIC RELIEF/YES ON 42 ~ A COALITION OF TAXPAYERS, CONSTRUCTION, BUSINESS, LABOR, ENGINEERS AND COMMUTERS
11300 West Olympic Blvd. +F840 • Los Angeles, CA 90064.310/996-2671 • Fax 310/996-2673
111 Anza Blvd. A406 • Burlingame, CA 94010. 6501340-0470 • Fax 650/340.1740
wnbsi*er ww~~, vo~ornr~a9.rnm • a-mail inf wesoro "~ com
California Association for Coordinated
Transportation "
Infrastructure Delivery Council
Rail Passenger Association of California
RAILV OTE
Self-Help Counties Coalition
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(Bay Area)
Amador County Transportation Commission
California Association of School
Transportation Officials, Chapter 1 (San
Bernardino County)
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
Council of Fresno County Governments
Fresno County Transportation Authority '~
Glenn County Transportation Commission ~
Livermore/Amador Valley Transit Authorirys'
Madera County Transportation Commission
Mendocino Council of Governments
Merced County Association of Governments
Modoc County Transportation Commission
Transportation Agency for Monterey Counryk
Napa County Transportation Planning
Agency
Nevada County Transportation Commission
Orange County Transportation Authority
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Sacramento Area Council of Governments
San Diego Association of Governments
San Joaquin Council of Governments
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation
Commission
Tulare County Association of Governments
Ventura County Transportation Commission
Transportation California
The Transit Coalition
Business, Labor, Local Government,
Education and Others
California Alliance for Jobs
California Chamber of Commerce
California State Association of Counties
League of California Cities
Marian Bergeson, Former Member, California
State Board of Education
Associated General Contractors of California
California Business Roundtable
California Conference of Carpenters
California State Council of Laborers
Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of~
California
International Union of Operating Engineers,
Local'Union3 (NorthernCaliforma)
International Union of Operating Engineers,
Local 12 (Southern California)
State $tiilding and Construction Trades
Council of California
County of Plumas ~
County of Siskiyou
County of Tuolumne
City of Brea
City of Clayton
City of Mazina
American Public Works Association,
Sacramento Chapter
Lake County/City Area Planning Council
Hon. Dan Donahue, Councilmember; City o:f
Vallejo and Board Member, Solano
Transportation Authority
Hon. Kevin R. Jenkins, School Board
Member, Hanford High School District
Hon. Vern D. Moss, Supervisor, Madera
County
Hon. Bill Overman, Supervisor, Siskiyou
County
Hon. Julie Pierce, Mayor, City of Clayton and
Commissioner, Contra Costa Transportation
Authority
Hon. Richard Shoemaker, Supervisor,
Mendocino County
Hon. Joan Smith, Supervisor, Siskiyou
County W
Chris Stampolis, Chair, Planning Commission,
City of Santa Clara
Dr. David Stine, President, San Bernardino
County School Board
Hon. Tom Stallazd, Supervisor, Yolo County
Amalgamated Transit Union, California
Conference Boazd
American Council of Engineering Companies
Asphalt Pavement Association
California Association for Local Economic:
Development
California Building Industry Association
California Business Alliance
California Business Properties Association
California Cast Metals Association
California Cement Promotion Council
California Dump Truck Owners Association
California Hotel & Lodging Association
California Moving and Storage Association
California State Association of Electrical
Workers
Construction Materials Association of
California
Engineering and Utility Contractors
Association ~
Engineering Contractors' Association
Flasher/Barricade Association
Laborers International Union
Regional Council of Rural Counties "
Northern California District Council of
Laborers
Southern California Contractors Association
Structural Engineers Association of Southern
California
Anaheim Chamber of Commerce
Apple Valley Chamber of Commerce
Associated General Contractors of California,
San Diego Chapter
Avignon Home Owners (Valencia)
Bay Area Council
Clovis Chamber of Commerce
Construction and General Laborers' Union,
Loca1291 (San Rafael)
Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of
California, Peninsula Chapter
Downey Chamber of Commerce
El Centro Chamber of Commerce and
Visitors Bureau
Escondido Chamber of Commerce
Fontana Chamber of Commerce
Greater Fresno Chamber of Commerce
Gilroy Chamber of Commerce
Hayward Chamber of Commerce
Imperial County Building and Construction
Trades Council
Industry Manufacturers Council
Inland Empire Economic Partnership
Laborers International Union, Loca1220
(Bakersfield)
Laborers International Union, Local 270
(Santa Cruz)
Laborers International Union, Loca1294
(Fresno)
Laborers International Union, Local 585
(Ventura)
Laborers International Union, Local 1082 (El
Monte)
Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce
Los Altos Chamber of Commerce '~
Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building &
Construction Trades Council s'
Marin Builders Exchange
Greater Merced Chamber of Commerce
Milpitas Chamber of Commerce
Nevada County Contractors' Association
Newport Harbor Area Chamber of
Commerce
North Coast Builders Exchange (Santa Rosa)
Ontario Chamber of Commerce
Orange Chamber of Commerce & Visitors
Bureau '~
Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce
Plumbers and Steamfitters Union, Loca162
(Castroville)
Redwood City/San Mateo County Chamber
of Commerce
Greater Redding Chamber of Commerce
Rialto Chamber of Commerce
Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce
Sacramento Builders' Exchange
San Diego Building and Construction Trades
Council
San Francisco Building and Construction
Trades Council
San Luis Obispo County Builders Exchange
San Rafael Chamber of Commerce
Santa Clara Chamber of Commerce
Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce
Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group
Solano Economic Development Corporation
South Lake Tahoe Chamber of Commerce
Sunnyvale Chamber of Commerce "
United Food and Commercial Workers
Union, Loca1839 (Salinas)
Ventura Chamber of Commerce
Victorville Chamber of Commerce
Visalia Chamber of Commerce
l~..J
- new listing
i Official Ballot Label for Proposition 42:
TRANSPORTATION CONGESTION IMPROVEMENT ACS.
ALLOCATION OF EXISTING MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL SALES AND
USE TAX REVENUES FOR TRANSPORTATION PURPOSES ONLY.
LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Requires, effective July .1, 2003, existing revenues resulting from-state
sales and use taxes on the sale of motor vehicle fuel be used for
transportation purposes as provided by law until June 30, 2008. Requires,
effective July 1, 2008, existing revenues resulting from state sales and use
taxes be used for public transit and mass transportation; city and county
street and road repairs and improvements; and state highway improvements.
Imposes the requirement for a two-thirds of the Legislature to suspend or
modify the percentage allocation of the revenues. Fiscal Impact: Starting in
2008-09, about 51.4 billion in state gasoline sales tax revenues, increasing
annually thereafter, would continue to be used for state and local
transportation purposes.
Proposition 42 Text:
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 4--A resolution to propose
to the people of the State of California an amendment to the
Constitution of the State, by adding Article XIXB thereto, relating
to transportation.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
ACA 9, Dutra. Transportation funding: sales and use tax
revenues.
The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes a tax on the gross receipts from
the sale in this state of, or the storage, use, or other consumption
in this state of, tangible personal property. That law requires
revenues derived from those taxes to be deposited in the Retail Sales
Tax Fund. Existing law requires the balance of that fund remaining
after various specified allocations to be allocated to the General
Fund.
This measure would, for the 2003-04 fiscal year and each fiscal
year thereafter, require all moneys that are collected during the
fiscal year under the Sales and Use Tax Law, with respect to the sale
or use of motor vehicle fuel, and that are required to be
transferred to the General Fund pursuant to that law, to instead be
transferred to the Transportation Investment Fund. This measure
would, for the 2003-09 to 2007-08 fiscal years, inclusive, require
moneys in that fund to be allocated for transportation purposes as ,
provided in a specified statute. This measure would, for the 2006-09
fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, require moneys in the
fund to be allocated only for transportation purposes specified by
this measure, and would specify the allowable percentage amount to be
allocated for each specified transportation purpose.
This measure would allow the Legislature to suspend or modify
these requirements under certain circumstances, if the act so
. providing is approved by 2/3 of the entire membership of each house
of the Legislature.
WHEREAS, California's continuing economic prosperity and quality
of life depend, in no small part, upon an expansive and efficient .
transportation system; and
WHEREAS, The need to maintain, expand, andimprove California's
multimodal transportation system increases as California continues to
grow; and
WHEREAS, Public investment in transportation has failed to keep
pace, with California's growth, and additional fiscal resources are
needed simply to maintain, much less expand, California's
transportation system; and
WHEREAS, The failure to address California's transportation
funding needs will drain economic vitality, compromise public safety,
and erode quality of life; and
WHEREAS, It is now necessary to address California's
transportation problems by providing additional state funding, in a
manner that protects existing constitutional guarantees set forth in
Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution, for the
funding of public education; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the
Legislature of the State of California at its 2001-02 Regular Session
commencing on the fourth day of December 2000, two-thirds of the
membership ofeachhouse concurring, hereby proposes to the people of
the State of California that the Constitution of the State be
amended by adding Article XIXB thereto, to read:
ARTICLE XIXB
MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL SALES TAX REVENUES AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
FUNDING
SECTION 1. (a) For the 2003-09 fiscal year and each fiscal year
thereafter, all moneys that are collected during the fiscal year from •
taxes under the Sales and Use Tax Law (Part 1 (commencing with
Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Co6e), or any
successor to that law, upon the sale, storage, use, or other
consumption in this State of motor vehicle fuel, and that are
deposited in the General Fund of the State pursuant to that law,
shall be transferred to the Transportation Investment .Fund, which is
hereby created in the State Treasury.
(b) (1) For the 2003-09 to 2007-08 fiscal years, inclusive, moneys
in the Transportation Investment Fund shall be allocated, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, in accordance with Section 7109 of
the Revenue and Taxation Code as that section read on the operative
date of this article.
(2) For~the 2008-09 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter,
moneys in the Transportation Investment Fund shall be allocated
solely for the following purposes:
(A) Public transit and mass transportation.
(B) Transportation capital improvement projects, subject to the
laws governing the State Transportation Improvement Program, or any
successor to that program.
(C) Street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, or storm damage repair conducted by cities, including
a city and county.
(D) Street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, or storm damage repair conducted by counties,
including a city and county.
(c) For the 2008-09 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter,
moneys in the Transportation Investment Fund shall be allocated, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, as follows:
(A) Twenty percent of the moneys for the purposes set forth in
subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(B) Forty percent of the moneys for the purposes set forth in
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(C) Twenty percent of the moneys for the purposes set forth in
subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(D) Twenty percent of the moneys for the purpose set forth in
subparagraph (D) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(d) The transfer of revenues from the General-Fund of the State to
the Transportation Investment Fund pursuant to subdivision (a) may
be suspended, in whole or in part, for a fiscal year if both of the
following conditions are met:
(1) The Governor has issued a proclamation that declares that the
transfer of revenues pursuant to subdivision (a) will result in a
significant negative fiscal impact on the range of functions of
government funded by the General Fund of the State.
(2) The Legislature enacts by statute, pursuant to a bill passed
in each house of the Legislature by rollcall vote entered in the
journal, two-thirds of the membership concurring, a suspension for
that fiscal year of the transfer of revenues pursuant to subdivision
(a), provided that the bill does not contain any other unrelated
provision.
(e) The Legislature may enact a statute that modifies the
percentage shares set forth in subdivision (c) by a bill passed in
each house of the Legislature by rollcall vote entered in the
journal, two-thirds of the membership concurring, provided that the
bill does not contain any other unrelated provision and that the
moneys described in subdivision (a) are expended solely for the
purposes set forth in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
SAFER ROADS AND
TRAFFIC RELIEF
r t ~
Support Form
I / We support Proposition 42 on the March 5, 2002 statewide ballot.
Proposition 42 wilt make our roads safer and reduce traffic without
higher taxes by requiring the gasoline sales taxes we already pay
be used to improve highways, local roads and mass transit.
You may add my/our name to your coalition list and may use it
publicly.
Organization Name Date
Authorized Signature Printed Name Title •
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip
Phone FAX
E-Mail Address
Organization Website
Please give us a quote on why you or your of ~anization supports Prop 42:
(optional)
Please FAX your completed form to Ted Green at (310) 996-2673.
THANK YOU!
„n<
TAXPAYERS FOP TRAFFIC RELIEF/YES ON 42 ~ A COALITION OF TAXPAYERS, CONSTRUCTION, BUSINESS, LABOR, ENGINEERS AND COMMUTERS
11300 West Olympic Blvd. 1840 • Los Angeles, CA 90064.310/996-2671 • Fax 310/996-2673
111 Anza Blvd. 1406 • Burlingame, CA 94010.650/340.0470 • Fax 650/340-1740
h .~ ^;
"SAMPLE RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSIi10N-42`~-
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will help make our roads safer and reduce traffic without higher taxes by requiring the
gasoline sales taxes we already pay be used to improve mass transit, highways and local roads; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 is based on the principle that taxes paid at the gas pump should be used for transportation
purposes; and
WHEREAS, traffic is paralyzing travel with Los Angeles now ranked the number one most congested urban area in the
country, San FranciscolOakland second, San Diego sixth and Sacramento, San Jose and San BemardinolRiversidefotlowing
close behind; and
WHEREAS, with our neglected transportation system needing attention, California has the third worst deteriorated roads
in the nation and more than 6000 of our bridges and overpasses are structurally deficient or no longer meet highway s:~fety or
design standards; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will provide a stable and ongoing source of transportation funding that will make it possible to
plan for our future transportation needs; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will guarantee funds to every city and county to help fix potholes, repairdangerou:> road
conditions and improve the safety of children walking or biking to school; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 42 will help speed up highway safety_and traffic relief projects, and expand and improve mass
transit systems; and
WHEREAS, all Proposition 42 projects will be subject to an annual audit and standard accounting practices to ensure
they are delivered on time and on budget; and
WHEREAS, by speeding up transportation projects thousands of new construction and other jobs will be created, our
economy will be stimulated and every dollar invested in our highways will result in almost six times that in economic benefits.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,
Organization Name
Authorized Signature
Mailing Address
E-Mail Address
•
izia
;;Printed Name
SUPPORTS Proposition 42.
Date
Title
City, State, Zip
Organization Website
Please fax to (310) 996.2673. Questions about Prop 42: Call (310) 996.2671.
i~
l~
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO.
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
_.__.
AGENDA ITEM
~_
CITY MANAGER: ~~--~~C.~=--~1 -
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Attorney PREPARED BY: Richard Taylor
SUBJECT: Claim of Saratoga Fire Protection District; Claim No. GL-053408
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize rejection of claim.
STAFF REPORT
On December 4, 2001 the Saratoga Fire Protection District ("claimant" or
"District") presented a claim for damages to property located at 14380 Saratoga Avenue
and 20473 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road resulting from the denial of the claimant's
application to construct a new fire station at 14380 Saratoga Avenue and to operate a
temporary fire station at 20473 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road during the construction period,
A copy of the claim is attached.
Claimant submitted its application to construct a new fire station on March 6,
2001. Claimant also requested a temporary use permit to relocate the existing fire station
to the adjacent property, which currently houses the Contempo Building. Claimant also
requested that the City adjust the property line of Claimant's property (a lot-line
adjustment) and that the City transfer 529 square feet of City-owned property, a portion
of the City's Heritage Plaza, to Claimant. The proposed firehouse would be 13,325
square feet with a height of 35 feet and would encompass the entire site proposed as the
location for Claimant's project. Claimant requested variances from the City's zoning
code which currently limits site coverage to 30 percent of the project site and requires
setbacks of 25 feet on all sides of a proposed project site. (Saratoga City Code §§ 15-
18.070, 15-18.080(a)).) In addition, the 35 foot height of Claimant's project would have
exceeded the 30 foot height limitation of the zoning district by five feet. ('Zoning Code §
15-18.090(a)).
The City Planning Commission held hearings on Claimant's application on •
June 13 and June 27, 2001. At these hearings, members of the public and the Planning
Commission expressed concern about the size of the proposed project, in particular, the i
fact that it would encompass the entire site and adversely impact Saratoga Avenue which
has been designated as a Heritage Lane in recognition of its historic importance. In
addition, members of the Saratoga firefighters appeared at the June 27 hearing and
suggested that the proposed project be redesigned /so that the administrative offices.
would be placed on the adjacent Contempo Building property and a smaller fire station '
could be rebuilt on the existing property.
On a 4 to 2 vote, the Planning Commission approved Claimant's project,
but recommended that the building's tower be redesigned to make it more compatible
with the Federated Church adjacent to Claimant's property. Two members of the public
appealed the Planning Commission's action to the City Council. On September 5, 2001, i
the City Council heard the appeal: After extensive discussion and testimony from the
public, the City Council voted to uphold the appeal and to deny Claimant's application.
Among the reasons cited in support of the denial were the fact that the excessive bulk of
the building was aggravated through the lack of setbacks and 100 percent site coverage
and that the project was not compatible with the neighborhood or consistent with the
existing zoning. Members of the City Council also indicated that a redesigned or
relocated fire station would be feasible. The City's denial was explicitly without
prejudice. Claimant remains free to return with a new application for construction of a
fire station on its property at any time rather than waiting one year as would typically be ~i
required following denial of a use permit application.
Because the claimant's proposed project did not conform to the City Code there
appears to be no basis for liability on the part of the city. Moreover, the following
Government Code sections would appear to preclude liability in this instance:
818.2. A public entity is not liable foi• an injury caused by
adopting or failing to adopt an enactment or by failing to enforce
any law.
818.4. A public entity is not liable for an injury caused by the
issuance, denial, suspension or revocation of, or by the failure or
refusal to issue, deny, suspend or revoke, any perYnit, license,
certificate, approval, order, or similar authorization where the
public entity or an employee of the public entity is authorized by
enactment to determine whether or not such authorization should be
issued, denied, suspended or revoked.
~~
1...J
2
821. A public employee is not liable for an injury caused by his
adoption of or failure to adopt an enactment or by his failure to
enforce an enactment.
821.2. A public employee is not liable for.an injury caused by his
issuance, denial, suspension or revocation of, or by his failure or
refusal to issue, deny, suspend or revoke, any permit, license,
certificate, approval, order, or similar authorization where he is
authorized by enactment to determine whether or not such
authorization should be issued, denied, suspended or revoked.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION:
The claim would be deemed rejected due to lack of a response from the City.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council could direct staff to further investigate the. matter or to settle the claim.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Notice for this meeting.
1
'~
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
_~'.
MEETING DATE: Jan 14, 2002 AGENDA ITEM: I v _
ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: ~'/~ -
PREPARED BY: ~~ DEPT HEAD: i-
SUBJECT: Financial Reports for the Months ending December 2001
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Accept the financial reports for year-to-date months ending December 2001 and the Treasurer's
report for the five months ending December 30, 2001.
REPORT SUMMARY:
The accompanying financial reports represent the revenues, expenditures and fund balances in a.il
City funds for the fiscal yeaz-to-date months ending December 31, 2001. The financial reports
include actual revenues and expenditures at mid-yeaz point. Projected June 30, 2002 summary
includes audited beginning fund balance as well as adopted revenues, expenditures, and transfers
that were amended from the original adopted budget.
In this report, recommended changes to your budget will be highlighted for future presentation
and approval on February 6, 2002. Changes will primazily consist of fund balance adjustmerrts
resulting from the .City's fiscal audit, revision to revenue projection that reflect more current
economic conditions; and expenditure program modifications.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Overall, the City remains in a strong fund balance condition. As you may recall, the year started
off with a surplus of $2,966,627, of which $1,649,542 was attributed to the General Funci.
General fund operations continue favorably with total revenues at 50.5% and expenditures :tt
48.5%. Although the City has experienced decline in some tax revenues, such as transfer,
construction, and transient occupancy, we have been fortunate to have other revenues such as
refunds/reimbursements, fines, and donations that offset. Most significant to the general fimd:~'
stability are the property taxes, sales taxes, and motor vehicle license fees, which make-up 58.3%
of the budget and remain as projected.
Special Revenue Fund revenue variance, 27.4%, primazily reflects grants -and reimbursement
revenues that are typically received after expenditures have been made and the timing of
recreation revenues which become significantly higher during the second half of the fiscal yeaz.!
Revenues in the development services fund are at 53.1%. Although the City has experienced a
significant decline in building and planning, we have been fortunate to .have geology and
engineering fees assist this vaziance as a result of the Sobrato project.
The City's mid-year review process will include a detailed review of all revenues and a close
look at expenditures to-date and the. changes or modifications we foresee as necessary between
now and fiscal year-end. The reassessment of revenues involves developing atwo-year history of,
major and other significant revenues, evaluating current conditions and anticipating future trends;
in an effort to develop reliable year-end totals. Expenditure analysis and review requires all'
departments to evaluate their programs and to communicate any unforeseeable conditions'
unknown during the last budget cycle. In addition, programs that may have a significant;
reduction in scope or a reduced need will be modified.
The February 6, 2002 budget adjustments will reflect significant changes that more accurately;
portray the City's anticipated resources and approved program expenditures.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
Discussed above.
CONSEQUENCES OFNOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
None.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
None.
FOLLOW UP ACTION(S):
Accept and file the reports.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Nothing additional.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Beginning fund balance analysis.
B. Summary of budget adjustments
C. Financial reports for December 31, 2001
D. Treasurer's report for December 31, 2001.
2of2
~J
1
ATTACHMENT A.
W
V
M~
W
}g
6'
~ ~
^ ~
n~
MW
W
N
d' '~
!.p Cfl
~- CO
~ M
O O
a0 r
N ti
O ~
1'~ r
O M
O r
O ~O
N
V K1 tt M Lf) .^ CO 1~ t0 ~7 O N O t0
C Cf
~ ~
r- i~
1~ O
ti o0 M
M ti
M O
M ~
C' ~
O tG
r r
N tD
t0
t
D~ M N M `-' 07 O 07 ~ 01
r N
~D
1C1 O
O 'cr
M N
M I~
r M
00 ~
Cfl O
O ~
tD N
N 1n
N
O N O M 00 ~ N O O Cf N ti
~
r 47
N LO
O ~
C4 ~
00 O
0p N
M N
~- O
O N
r r
tD r
M
~ !f 00 ~ M N 01 O O O W M
N O
r ~- ~ M ~ 'cY
r tp
r O
M
00
67 ~
CO O
~ O
~ M
O f~
M lF
O r-
1~ s7'
~ 1f1
~ M
00 r
N r
~
1~ ~ CO M r- ~ O lf) d' O N N M
~
ti r
N OD
M In
1.f) 0p (O
d' O
~ O
V' I+
~ f~
07 <O
r O
~ OO
O~
++ O ~-- h f~ N 00 O O G7 M N
Q N
r N ~ ~ ~ d'
r- tp
r M
M
y N N
~
~ l0
O R
O
U
.L
0 ~+
~
~
y
~
C ~+
~
^
''^ ''
^^
~~
V~+J ~ Q ~ V
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V
' ~ O
F
~~
LL W O L' 0
~ ~ W ~ Q
-
L _
R
' .N
~ _
N
> 0
.L
~
U
`
~ •• 0
r ~ ~
~ ~
r ~[
W
r
~
a
~ 01 V
O ~
(n ~ >
W Q' O ~a J N ..
i
tL C9 .
fn V O F-
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF SARATOGA
SUMMARY OF BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
GENERAL FUND
MIS REPLACEMENT FUND
PERS RETIREMENT FUND
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS:
100 COPS SUP. LAW ENFORCEMENT
110 TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF
150 STREETS&ROADS SRF
160 TRANS DEV ACT SRF-CAP PROJ
] 70 HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF
180 LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF
250 DEVELOPMENTSRF
260 ENVIRONMENTAL PRG SRF
270 HOUSING & COMM DEV SRF
290 RECREATION SRF
291 TEEN SERVICES SRF
292 FACILITY OPS SRF
293 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF
TOTAL SPECIAL REV. FUNDS
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS:
10 PARK DEVELOPMENT
ZO LIBRARY EXPANSION
Kx TOTAL CIP
TOTAL SPECIAL REV. FUNDS
DEBT SERVICE FUND:
LIBRARY BONDS DEBT SVC
AGENCY FUNDS*:
LEONARD ROAD DEBT SVC
C.A. TV TRUST FUND
PARKING DIST #2 DEBT SVC
PARKING DIST #3 DEBT SVC
DEPOSIT AGENCY FUND
SARATOGA PUBL FIN AGNCY
TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
AMENDMENTS TO ADOPTED BUDGET
REVENUE EXPENDITURE TRANSFERS
$177,198 $391,645 ($5,295,000)
$177,198 $391,645 ($5,295,000)
$2,056
1,460,148
8,411
125,838
1,200
4,881
$0 $1,602,534 $0
6,840,000 $410,110
13,086,350 ($951,350)
6,246,350
$6,840,000 $13,496,460 $5,295,000
$0 $0 $0
$7,017,198 $15,490,639 $0
L
ATTACHMENT C
C p N O O '~ [~ ~ O O
~
~ a N O 0 O
y M
q 0 ._. n W 0 N O O Q
r q r
~ O O r q Q O Q N Q M b r r Q Q y N r r 'h Q r O N
F. N y~ e{ O 'n y r N O~ N N N q vi n
b
M b O
. -
W O M b N V< `Q
' M N Q Q M
~
Lil M
~
yq v
- t
'1 ~ 6
9
N M ~
~ Q (A M y
O (z 6
9 h w w
Z
a .,
UJ M O B b Q r O '' r q v~ M Q O' O O O O '''' O O
~ 'D O V. M r N O Q N N~ Q W y 'h y O Y3 69 y yq
r O O~ W N Vl N r M M r O r O'J M M O
(Z N 'n Q V N N b N v N 'I~ ~p b O 'n O ~ d h
y P M M W Q
N
.
~-~
~ q N Q q
Z .
-. .
Yf
M `-'
.
`~ V~ q N N
W
( W M M me.. ~p Yl
A y Yi f5
~- F
V
C ~
Y M
N W
N N M Q O O r M M Q M vl
q O O O O O N O O O Q O O N N
i
Q
Q M N q M N O N N Q ~D
N q v
' O of b q M y Q
~ b N N N O~ N O b f
~ O Nl Q y r M O W
m E ? S Q v1 l~ - b 'Ii V b O M '/i vi y O O b b Q .~ r q T
M
'/1 M
V N vl O W r b N N r 'n O O W q q - b O
a Q I -
r N W r N g N N y g O O q V 69 M q
Gr7 W w vi N
}
a y y
q w
U
q q O O Q r O M O~ Q 0 0 0 0 O' O O N O'J O' Q
, r q
w = W
M y
M O O 'n N O N O x 0 0 0 0 V O O O q M O
l~ N lp
O M r O 'D M O r O O CO O O O y r N M ~D q t'
Z b ~D O M~ Q N N ~O M M M b '/~ vi M r O r y - Q r Q r q
~ Q
Q Q O~ vl q ~p M M b N r O Q Q q .-. b N O b
C vl b vl r
i
~ M
` N M
di O b 69 N r
{s~ oiN f9 -
N r b r N W M
y y N
N
N
rl
M
a
em
~~
o ~,
F U
0
a~
`~ Z
oz
>' W
F
U x
F
Z
0
X
vl O Q q r r 'h Q' M r ^' M O '' r W Q N b W N M N ' r M y
O O M M r r ~p O O M Q b M W r W G O O N Q Q M
.~ p o0 O o0 b o0 Q Q N r o0 Q b V 'D 'n N q 'n 'n 'n co 00 Q
¢m N BOO O O~ V O~ r .-. W P N h C ~ O ^ h O N- y r b T
N M b NQ 'h Q N M b^ ~ N r '/~ 'p O M M r y O
G M di - q b Q ti y (A v N y `O
Z_ N Vf M ~ ~ O
~ fi9 69 y W
~o
y O ' O O' W ' ' ~p M M Q O O O' O O O''''' O O
~ N N y P ~p VMi r b N N M y y y y y
G.7
N b ~p N ^ ~D
z
~ ~ ~ - %~
¢ F
~~ Q Q O' 00 " N~ co M N Q r O r M Q r O q'' Q'' M N
Q= q q M v1 q W b N g N W b W ~p Q r ~p O
O1 M b ~ q O N N W vl b O N Q N N O'
~D b r M O Q ~p b b^ Ci O ~-` b O V V W q ~ `D
~ F ~ ~ ~ V .N-. ~ N ^ Q q ~ ^ IOfI yQi r N r y en ry~
~ Z ~ ~ My fA .-. N Vi Yi q
} ~] y Vf
,~ a
¢ ~
F b b o Q oQ Mq o roo .cbQ o'n y o o vly r
V (z~ O M M 'n b~ r O b N r Vl i(~ .O r r Y~ (A O o Q
¢= y y O y r N M M '/~ Q O W Q Q N b GO y R
Z r r O g M W Q N W M b^ U M W M ~ Q Qy M
~ r_ ^ O Q r M y ~O q ~-' b N Q b b
N M N N O N Q
> Q Q y Cj ~ y ~O
Vi 69 iy by
M O Q r r h vt '' r^ P W' r b Q ^ M Q Q r N M N' N O
..~ 0 b O M q O vl b M Q Q O q O O r r Q O'J N O O Q Q N y
¢ N O~ O M r 'h O Q M b M b N r O '/~ Q O N r Q O N f~
m Q O q 'Y 1~ N b W~ Q N Q O O~ r r y W N Q M O W
r M ~D r M v N M M N r Q Q q M r Q q
Q cO O (A r r 00 q O q Vi IA N M N
~ ~ Vi W y ~ Yi K
~ ~y,
h~ d v, yi Z Vi Z U U U U (},J
G C ~ O > >
OZ ~ Z ~C ¢ "w7 y j y~ Z [_.. ~ ~ `>„ yNOVy
[Ti. ~ Gz O ~U y ~ W (7> GsF > C.am F mm~ ¢z
zFa ~z~y~~z`~a~ `d ~a ~~° a ~o ..o °z5oo~-~~-.~ o
~ 'Z ry~j ~ ~ > ¢`~,i'pQ uall~ Z Z Uv"y vmiY OOa¢. UZ Z ~ FFF Z.~Z f`~s~
~ ~¢~m y yv¢i ~[>i1Ca~~at0>OFy away ~m ma Ty.00¢¢r~j ~V]
C ¢ C ti7 ; ~ ~7 U F O ~ U O p z Q W E}.. t~i1 ~n F W Y U rn W} }~ F C7 C7 p. ~¢ ¢
CC a' yry ul ~n ~.y..l ~. (n (... .7 ¢ WK,r7 V)C~ U¢>ZZyF, rl .~
o w~a y¢ Vyu. Z~Om yn''a'Z,¢¢ ~~Q¢ F~ zZFy O¢ 6 ¢
Z ZyKF ~„~a¢¢y¢,Z»>U W Uw'E" o. FF m w0 t~~a y~F F
~ m-u~O yOcGFa ¢w Z0u~ ul¢x0 ¢¢m00 wm C7w ¢.¢¢w¢O O
W U~aF mUFv~FS~^ u~SCFaFE V a3t-F 0_l ¢.~Uaa Wv~F F
Z N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N M O O X O 0 0 0 0 0 0
'~ O O O O y b r W ~D r g q q q N X O N N M Q O q
~T" O O O ^ N N N N N N N M M M Q Q r r r W q
Y
s
C
9V
9
K
U
L
N
T
N
a
O
'E
e
c
o
~ ~
W
U ¢
CITY OF SARATOGA
REVENUES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT- AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET
TITLE BUDGET (Note 1) (if different)
REVENUE OVERVIEW BY FUND
001 GENERAL FUND $
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS:
100 COPS-SLESF FUND
110 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND
150 STREETS & ROADS SRF
160 TRANSPORT DEVELOP ACT SRF
170 HILLSIDE REPAIR FUND
180 LANDSCAPE & LIGHTING FUND
250 DEVELOPMENT FUND
260 ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM FUND
270 HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEV FUND
290 RECREATION FUND
291 TEEN SERVICES
292 FACILITY OPERATIONS FUND
293 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF
_
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS:
310 PARK DVLPMNT CAP PRJ FND
320 LIBRARY EXPANSION CAP PROD FUND
35x TOTAL CIP
TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS ,
DEBT SERVICE FUND:
400 LIBRARY BOND DEBT SRV FND `
- TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS
420 LEONARD RD DEBT SER FUND
720 CA TV TRUST FUND
730 PRK DST#2 DBT SR/AGNCY FD
740 PRK DST#3 DBT SR/AGNCY FD
800 DEPOSITS AGENCY FUND
990 SARATOGA PFA AGENCY FUND
TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS `
TOTAL ALL FUNDS $
12/31/01
ACTUAL
(Y"CD)
50% of Year
Expired
$ 8,446,3891 4.177.5161 50.5%
100,000 100,000 100.000 100.0%
148.500 148,500 49,534 33.4%
3,552,354 3.552,354 273,730 7.7%
54,727 54,727 38,254 69.9%
2,500 2,500 0.0%
192,593 192,593 54,363 28.2%
1,616.000 1,616,000 858.169 53.1%
563,613 563,613 268,370 47.6%
183,874 183,874 507 0.3%
733,000 733,000 293,468 40.0%
66,700 66,700 16,126 24.2%
135,000 135,000 61,076 45.2%
25,000 25,000 9,854 39.4%
207,000 207,000 248.400 120.0%
- - 163,275 -
- 6,840,000 6,840,000 -
207,000 7,047,000 - 411,675 198.9%
694,592 694,592 - -
11,738 11,738 - -
4,200 4,200 - 0.0%
167,314 167,314 -
24,675 24,675 4,805 19.5%
207,927 207,927 4,805 2.3%
o,.,.. n ~ t r, n ~n~
CITY OF SARATOGA
REVENUES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
i
(YTD)
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET
TITLE BUDGET (Note 1) (if different)
REVENUE DETAIL BY FUND
GENERAL FUND
001 PROP TAX SECURED/UNSECURED
TEA ALLOCATION
SALES TAX 1
SALES TAX PROP 172
TRANSFER TAX
CONSTRUCTION TAX
TRANS OCCUP TAX
FRANCHISE FEES - PG&E
FRANCHISE FEES-AT&T
FRANCHISE FEES - SJ WATER
FRANCHISE FEES -GREEN VALLEY
BUSINESS LICENSES
FEDERAL LAW BLOCK GRANT
MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE FEE
OFF HIGHWAY MV FEE
HOPTR
OTHER REFUNDS & REIMBURSE
FMES-FALSE ALARM
FORFEITURES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS (VESSING)
INTEREST
RENTALS-CELL PHONE
HAKONE RENT PASS THROUGH
SALE OF ASSETS
MISC.
VEHICLE ABATEMENT
DONATIONS/YOUTH SPORTS
ANIMAL LICENSES
FUEL SALES
GROUND MAINT
PARK RENTAL
PERMIT-ENCRMT.
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
$ 1,489,800
12/31/01 150% of Year
ACTUAL Expired .
$ 1,489,800 I $ 1,145,011
606.59R -
400,000
400,000
321,000
,121,000
242,500
182,000
99,200
299,600
- 16,698
1,572,500
600
15,700
1,888,400 14,698
118,827
18,000
45,000
295,366
400,000
58,200
15,000
10,000
13,000
- 160,500
12,500
]0,000
5,000
1
S 1
1,1
400,000
400,000
321,000
• 121,000
242,500
182,000
99,200
16,698
1,572.500
600
15,700
1,905,098
118,827
18,000
45,000
295,366
400,000
58,200
15,000
10,000
]3,000
160,500
12,500
10,000
5,000
556.964
41,552
598,516
102,035
166,749
133.852
141.658
275.510
874,007
282,282
16,100
]5,500
245,861
36,418
5,615
1,748
4,716
184,250
1,899
3,341
3,116
76.9%
0.0%
54.6% (2)
47.7%
43:7%
47.4%
25.5% (3)
41.7%
25.3% (4)
31.2%
0.0%
73.5%
0.0% (5)
44.1%
32.6%
55.6% (6)
0.0%
36.3%
51.9%
237.6% (7)
89.4%
34.4%
0.0%
61.5% (8)
62.6%
17.5%
36.3%
114.8% (9)
15.2%
33.4%
62.3%
52.1%
r\.-~-\r,+r- -,nn,•pC\/C~IIIC D.... 1/111--
CITY OF SARATOGA
REVENUES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
F[SCAL YEAR 2001-02
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET
TITLE BUDGET (Note I) (if different)
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND5:
COPS-SLESF SP REV FD
100 INTEREST
100 SUPPL LAW ENFORCE
TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF
110 CROSSING GUARD MATCH
110 FINES-VEHICLE CODE
110 TOTAL TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF
STREETS & ROADS SRF
150 REFUNDS & REIMB.
ST HIGHWAY USER 2107.5
ST HIGHWAY USER 2106
ST HIGHWAY USER 2107
ST FHWA REIMB.
ST 2105 S&:H CODE
TEA-21
CALTRANS-SARATOGA/SV RD.
TEA - CLEAN AIR GRANT (SIGNALS)
AB 434 CLEAN AIR GRANT
MEASURE B
TOTAL ST&RDSSRF
TRANSPORT DEVELOP ACT SRF-CAP PROJ
160 TOTAL TDA
HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF
170 INTEREST
HILLSIDE STREET REPAIR
TOTAL HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF
LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF
180 PROP. TAX
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
INTEREST
TOTAL LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF
DEVELOPMENT SRF
250 GEOLOGY REVIEW FEES
' ENGINEERING FEES
PLANNING FEES
ARBORIST FEE
DOCUMENT STRG FEES
PERMITS-BUILDING
12/31/01
ACTUAL
(Y1'D)
50% of Vear
Expired
loo,ooo loo,oo0 100,000 loo.o°r°
100,000
3.500 3.500 - 0.0%
145,000 145,000 49,534 34.2%
148,500 148,500 49,534 33.4%
259,700 259,700 3.883 1.5%
6,000 6,000 6,000 100.0%
149,550 149,550 59,780 40.0%
251,500 251,500 105,530 42.0%
1,342,000 1,342,000 0.0%
194,700 194,700 80,498 41.3%
252,705 252,705 0.0%
380,000 380.000 - 0.0%
338,947 338,947 18,039 5.3%
377.252 377,252 0.0%
3,552,354 3,552,354 273,730 7.7%
54,727 54,727 38,254 69.9%
2,500 2,500 - 0.0%
2,500 2,500 0.0%
89,404 89,404 54,363 60.8% (2)
101,189 101,189 0.0% (11)
2,000 2,000 0.0%
192,593 192,593 54,363 28.2%
65,000 65,000 71,318 109.7% S4)
60,000 60,000 221,408 369.0%
396,000 396,000 103,900 26.2% (12)
75,000 75,000 34,995 46.7%
13,000 13,000 4,015 30.9%
967,000 967,000 383.308 39.6%
o,-..~ ,nn~m
CITY OF SARATOGA
REVENUES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET
TITLE BUDGET (Note 1) (if different)
PERMITS-GRADING
INTEREST .
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SRF
ENVIRNMNTAL PRG SRF
260 ST REFUSE SURCHG AB939
260 ENVIRONMENTAL FEES
260 INTEREST
TOTAL ENVIRON PRG SRF
HOUSING&COMM DEV SRF
270 HCD/CDBG/SHARP GRANTS
INTEREST
TOTAL HOUSING/COMM DEV SRF
RECREATION SRF
290 FRIENDS OF WARNER HUTTON HOUSE
SPORTS LEAGUE FEES
CAMP FEES
EXCURSION FEES
CLASS/SPECIAL EVENT
REDWOOD SPORTS PRGM.
TOTAL RECREATION SRF
TEEN SERVICES SRF
291 TEEN SERVICES
TEEN SNACK BAR
WARNER HUTTON CONTRIBUTIONS
TOTAL TEEN SERVICES SRF
FACILITY OPS SRF
292 BUILDING RENT
TOTAL FACILITY OPS SRF
THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF
INTEREST
293 THEATER TCK SRCHG
TOTAL THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
PARK DVLPMNT CAP PRJ FND
310 PARK DEVELOPMENT
(YTD)
12/31/01 50% of Year
ACTUAL Expired
40,000 40,000 39,225 98.1% (13)
616,000 1,616,000 858,169 53.1%
30,000 30,000
533,613 533,613 15,632
252,738 52.1%
47.4%
180,874 180,874 0.0%
3,000 3,000 507 16.9%
183,874 183,874 507 0.3%
38,000 38.000 32,327 85.1%
150,000 150,000 16.575 ]I.I%
90.000 90,000 43,180 48.0%
425,000 425,000 184,051 43.3%
30,000 30,000 17,335 57.8%
733,000 733,000 293,468 40.0%
55,080 ~ 55,080 5,000 9.1%
1,620 1,620 11,126 686.8%
10,000 10,000 0.0%
66,700 66,700 16,126 24.2%
135,000 135,000 61;076 45.2%
135,000 135,000 61,076 45.2%
7,373,861
207,000 2,023,451
248,400 27.4%
120.0%
TITLE
FISCAL YEAR 2001-02 (YND)
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET 12/31/01 50%ofYear
BUDGET (Note 1) (if different) ACTUAL Expired ..
LIBRARY EXPANSION CAP PROJ FUND
320 LIBRARY BOND INTEREST 163,275 0.0% (14)
TOTAL CIP
35x TOTAL CIP RESOURCES -
TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 207,000
DEBT SERVICE FUND:
LIBRARY BOND DEBT SRV FND
400 PRINCIPAL 691,892
INTEREST
OTHER 2.
TOTAL LIBRARY BOND DEBT 694.
AGENCY FUNDS:
LEONARD RD DEBT SER FUND
420 SERVICES (ASSESS DISTRICTS) 11.
CA TV TRUST FUND
720 INTEREST INCOME 4.
PRK DST#2 DBT SR/AGNCY FD
730 SERVICES (ASSESS DISTRICTS)
PRK DST#3 DBT SR/AGNCY FD
740 SERVICES (ASSESS DISTRICTS) 167,
DEPOSITS AGENCY FUND
800 DEPOSITS
SARATOGA PFA AGENCY FUND
990 INTEREST INCOME 24,
~i TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 207,
GRAND TOTAL $ 16,752,
REVENUE NOTES
CITY OF SARATOGA
REVENUES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
4
167,314
- V~V %°
0_0%
- n not
738
7
691,892
11
41
- 0.0%
- 0.0%
0.0%
19.5%
S 7,017,198 S 23,769,769 $ 6,617,447 39.5
„-_, c n,rn--
CITY OF SARATOGA
REVENUES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
IZ J
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET 12/31/01
T[TLE BUDGET (Note 1) (if different) ACTUAL
(YTD)
50% ofYear
Expired
(1) Please see summary of budget adjustments.
(2) Property Taxes-Secured property taxes paid in December/January and April/May. In addition, TEA distributions will
no longer be a June lump sum but a distributed monthly with the secured/unsecured distributions.
(3) Property Transfer taxes are lower than originally budgeted due to the decline in real estate transactions.
(4) Occupancy fees from the Saratoga Inn & Saratoga Oaks Lodge. The Saratoga Inn remits monthly; the Oaks Lodge quarterly.
(5) Franchise Fees from PG&E and SJ Water received in February and April respectively.
(6) Motor Vehicle License fees are higher than originally budgeted.
(7) Other Refunds & Reimbursements- Law Enforcement refund $101,001 & ABAG Plan $43,160 received in July.
(g) Interest Income is higher than originally budgeted. Interest will be distributed to funds with earnings.
(9) Donations for Youth Sports Fund.
(10) TDA reimbursements of $17,644 & $20,610 received in September, 2001.
(11) Assessment Revenues-Paid in December/January and April/May.
(12) Planning fees are lower than originally budgeted due to decline in new planning applications.
(13) Develop.fees-Grading Permit fees remain higher than originally budgeted.
(14) Interest income earned from library bond proceeds in L.A.I.F. account.
i~
\REVENUE Page 7 1/] l/02
~ CITY OF SARATOGA
EXPENDITURES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (ifdiffereet) BUDGET 12/31/01 50°/~ofYear
TITLE BUDGET (Note 1) (if differeet) ACTUAL E:epired
EXPENDITURE OVERVIEW BY FUND
00] GENERAL FUND $ 6,142,783 $ 391,645 6,534,428 $ 3,166,394 48.5%
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
100 COPS SUP. LAW ENFORCEMENT 112,236 2,056 114,292 27,630 24.2%
110. TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 25,983 - 25,983 - 0.0%
150 STREETS&ROADS SRF 8,297,376 1,460,148 9,757,524 1,493,658 ]5.3%
] 60 TRANS DEV ACT SRF-CAP PROD - - 0 -
180 LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF .206,697 - 206,697 120,992 58.5%
250 DEVELOPMENT SRF 1,876,822 8,411 1,885,233 824,013 43.7%
260 ENVIRONMENTAL PRG SRF 648,385 125,838 774,223 286,288 37.0%
270 HOUSING & COMM DEV SRF 266,504 - 266,504 116,163 43.6%
290
291 RECREATION SRF
TEEN SERVICES SRF 919,725
223,223 1,200
- 920,925
223,223 476,222
91,894 51.7%
41.2%
292 FACII,ITY OPS SRF 275,041 - 275,041 133,527 48.5%
293 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF 50,784 4,881 55,665 ] 0,680 19.2%
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 12,902,776 1,602,534 14,505,310 3,581,067 24.7%
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS:
310 PARK DEVELOPMENT 500,000 410,]10 910,1]0 546,283 60.0%
320 LTBRARYEXPANSION 14,000,000 1,750,164 12.5%
35x TOTAL CIP - 13,086.350 13A86,350 0.0%
TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 14,500,000 13,496,460 27,996,460 2,296,447 8.2%
DEBT SERVICE FUND:
400 LIBRARY BONDS DEBT SVC 694,592 0 694,592 104,270 15.0%
TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS
_ 420 LEONARD ROAD DEBT SVC 11,738 11,738 8,219 70.0%
700 QUARRY CREEK PROJ ADM - _ _
720 C.A TV TRUST FUND - ~ _
730 PARKING DIST #2 DEBT SVC - _
740 PARKING DIST #3 DEBT SVC 167,314 167,314 149,964 89.6%
S00 DEPOSIT AGENCY FUND - _
990 SARATOGA PUBL FIN AGNCY - _
TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 179,052 179,052 158,183 88.3%
TOTAL ALL FUNDS 34,419,203 $ 15,490,639 $ 49,909,842 $ 9,306,362 18.6%
CITY OF SARATOGA
EXPENDITURES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
f
•
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET
TTTLE BUDGET (Note 1) (if different)
EXPENDITURE DETAIL BY FUND
001 GENERAL FUND
1005 CITY COUNCIL
1010 CONTINGENCY
1015 CITY COMMISSIONS
1020 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
1025 LEGAL SERVICES/RISK MNGT.
1030 CITY CLERK
1035 EQUIPMENT OPERATIONS
1040 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
1045 IIIJMAN RESOURCES
1050 GENERAL SERVICES
1060 FACII.ITIES MAINTENANCE
1065 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYS.
1070 PUBLIC INFORMATION
2005 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
2010 CODE ENFORCEMENT
2015 POLICE SERVICES
2025 ANIMAL CONTROL
3030 PARKS/OPEN SPACE
3035 GENERAL ENGINEERING
4005 ADVANCED PLANNING
7005 SENIOR SERVICES
7010 COMMUNITY SUPPORT
7020 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
7025 I-IAICONE GARDENS PARK
90]0 CAPTTALPROJECTS
SUBTOTAL
LESS OVERI4EAD
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
12/31/01 ~ 50% of Year
ACTUAL Expired.
$51,000 54,984 $105,984 $54,771 51.7%
200,000 (91,229) 108,771 - 0.0%
100,994 100,994 43,357 42.9%
345,209 345,209 188,669 54.7%
377,900 377,900 194,234 51.4%
87,420 87,420 4],049 47.0%
309,987 182,427 492,414 183,459 37.3% (15)
447,429 447,429 210,296 47.0%
167,277 14,100 181,377 78,282 43.2%
146,680 4,830 151,510 80,690 53.3%
469,184 469,184 257,930 55.0%
274,373 33,581 307,954 122,818 39.9%
26,162 26,162 6,600 25.2%
21,214 21,214 8,062 38.0%
48,281 28,000 76,281 20,858 27.3%
2,918,415 16:698 2,935,113 1,517,805 51.7°/a
202,899 202,899 103,686 51.1%
699,546 7,747 707,293 268,294 37.9%
260,239 9,000 269,239 136,444 50.7%
96,854 5,237 102,091 33,745 33.1%
41,035 41,035 16,047 39.1%
72,800 ~ 72,800 30,130 .41.4%
149,912 1,000 150,912 61,291 40.6%
160,747 160,747 36,878 22.9%
312,311 125,270 437,581 142,257 32.5% (16)
7,987,868 391,645 8,379,513 $3,837,652 45.8%
(1,845,085) (1,845,085) ($671,258 36.4%
$ 6,142.783 $ 391.645 $ 6.534.428 $ 3.166.394 48.5%
~ CITY OF SARATOGA
EXPENDITURES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
i
BUDGET .
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET 12/31/01 50°/° of Year
TITLE BUDGET (Note 1) (if different) ACTUAL Expired
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS:
100 2030 COPS SUP. LAW ENFORCEMENT 100,000 2,056 102,056 24,672 24.2%
PLUS OVERHEAD 12,236 12,236 $2,958 24.2% .
TOTAL COPS SRF 112,236 2,056 114,292 27,630 24.2%
110 2020 TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 25,100 25,100 0.0%
PLUS OVERHEAD 883 883 - 0.0%
TOTAL TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 25,983 0 25,983 0 0.0%
150 STREETS&ROADSSRF
3005 STREET MAINTENANCE 1,797,812 1,385,848 3,183,660 1,082,983 34.0% (17)
3010 SIDEWALKS AND TRAII,S 96,016 96,016 18,683 19.5% (18)
301> TRAFFIC CONTROL 236,198 12,300 248,498 79,251 31.9%
3020 FLOOD AND STORM DRAIN CONTROL 129,184 30,000 159,184 43,302 27.2%
3026 MEDIANS AND PARKWAYS 147,580 2,000 149,680 68,176 45.6%
5010 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT 360,621 350,621 27,957 8.0%
9010 CAPITAL PROJECTS 4,988,425 30,000 5,0]8,426 88,878 1.8%
SUBTOTAL 7,745,836 1,460,148 9,205,984 1,409,230 ]6.3%
PLUS OVERHEAD 551,540 651,540 $84,428 ] 6.3%
TOTAL STREETS&ROADS SRF 8,297,376 1,460,148 9,757,524 1,493,658 16.3%
160 9010 TRANS DEV ACT SRF-CAP PROJ 0 - 0 - -
180 3040 LAND5CAPE/LGTNG SRF 180,007 180,007 106,369 68.6%
PLUS OVERHEAD 26,690 26,690 $16,623 68.6%
TOTAL LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF 206,697 206,697 120,992 68.6%
250 DEVELOPMENT SRF
4010 ZONING ADMINSTRATION 672,698 4,984 677,682 249,378 43.2%
4016 INSPECTION SERVICES ~ 479,922 3,427 483,349 201,607 41.7%
4020 DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 191,238 191,238 96,423 50.4%
SUBTOTAL 1,243,758 8,411 1,252,169 547,308 43.7%
PLUS OVERHEAD 633,064 633,064 $276,706 43.7%
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SRF 1,876,822 8,411 1,885,233 824,013 43.7%
260 ENVIItONMENTAL PRG SRF
6006 TN'I'EGRATED WASTE MGMT 166,741 76,838 232,579 113,368 48.7%
6015 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 379,419 60,000 429,419 140,849 32.8%
9010 CAP PROJ(STREET STORM DR) 26,467 26,467 0.0%
SUBTOTAL 561,627 125,838 687,465 254,207 37.0%
r
CITY OF SARATOGA
EXPENDITURES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001
•
PLUS OVERHEAD
TOTAL ENVIItNMNTAL PRG SR
270 HOUSING&COMM DEV SRF
7015 HCDAADMII~IISTRATION
9010 CAP PROJECTS (SR CTR & ADA)
SUBTOTAL
PLUS OVERHEAD
TOTAL HOUSING&COMM DEV SRF
290 RECREATION SRF
6005 RECREATION
SUBTOTAL
PLUS OVERHEAD
TOTAL RECREATION SERVICES
29] TEEN SERVICES SRF
60]0 TEEN SERVICES
6010 TEEN SNACK BAR
60]0 WARNER HUTTON CONTRIBUTIONS
. PLUS OVERHEAD
TOTAL TEEN SERVICES SRF
292 6020 FACILITY OPS SRF
PLUS OVERHEAD
TOTAL FACILITY SRF
293 6015 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF
PLUS OVERHEAD
TOTAL THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET 12/31/01 50% of Year
BUDGET (Note 1) (if different) ACTUAL 'Expired
86.758 86.758 $32.081 37.0%
201,348 201,348 86,289 42.9%
50,000 - 50,000 23,268 46.5%
251,348 0 251,348 109,557 43.6%
15,156 15,156 $6,606 43.6%
266,504 0 266,504 116,163 43.6%
673,405
246,320 1,200 674,605
246,320 348,847
$127,375 51.7%
51.7%
919,725 1,200 920,925 476,222 51.7%
161,326
61,897 ]61,326
61,897 66,413
$25,481 41.2%
41.2%
223,223 0 223,223 91,894 41.2%
72,036
203,005 72,036.
203,005 34,972
$98,555 48.5%
48.5%
275,041 0 275,041 133,527 48.5%
43,248
7,536 4,881 48,129
7,536 9,234
$1,446 19.2%
19.2%
50,784 4,881 55,665 10,680 19.2%
12,902,776 1,602,534 14,505,310 3,581,067 24.7%
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
310 9010 PARK DEVELOPMENT
320 9010 LIBRARY EXPANSION
35x TOTAL CIP
TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
500,000 410,110 910,110 546,283
14,000,000 14,000,000 1,750,164
60.0% (19)
12.5% (20)
_~
8.2%
_.
~` CITY OF SARATOGA
EXPENDITURES AS OF DECEMBER 3~, 2001
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT AMENDED
ORIGINAL (if different) BUDGET 12/31/01 ~ SOA/° of Year
TITLE BUDGET (Nate 1) (if different) ACTUAL Eapired .
DEBT SERVICE FUND:
400 8015 LIBRARY BONDS DEBT SVC 694,592 - 694,592 104,270 15.0% (21)
AGENCY FUNDS:
420 8020 LEONARD ROAD DEBT SVC 11,738 11,738 8,219 70.0% (22)
720 1040 C.A. TV TRUST FUND - - -
730 8005 PARKING DIST #2 DEBT SVC - - - -
740 8010 PARKING DI5T #3 DEBT SVC 167,314 167,314 149,964 89.6% (22)
990 1040 SARATOGA PUBL FIN AGNCY - - - -
.TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 179,052 179,052 158,183 88.3%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 34,419,203 $ 15,490,639 $ 49,909,842 $ 9,306,362 18.6%
EXPENDTTURE NOTES
(15) Equipment replacement-Taz pot & Toro mower to be purchased this fiscal year.
(16) Capital projects to be completed this fiscal yeaz.
(17) Vaziance'primarilyreflectsprojecUtimin9delays.
(18) Variance primarily reflects timing delays for projects that aze seasonal in nature.
(19) Pazk development various locations.
(20) Library Expansion & Renovation Construction Phase I
(21) Debt service payments made in December and June.
(22) Debt service payments made in September and March
CJ
ATTACHMENT D
CITY OF SARATOGA
Cash and Investment Report
1 Balance as of December 31, 2001
ype Institution
Acquisition
Date
FDR"
Rating
Book
Value -
Market
Value
Par
Value
Yield
Maturity
Date Antiripated
Monthly
Term Earnings
Unrestricted Cash & Investments:
Cash:
DD Comerica Bank -Savings N/A AAA $241,002 $241,002 $241,002 2.000% Revolving 1 5402
CK Comerica Bank -SWEEP Account N/A AAA 48,970 48,970 48,970 0.000% Revolving I 0
CK Comerica Bank-Payroll Checking N/A AAA 22,413 22,413 ~ 22,413 0.000% Revolving I 0
Subtotal Cash 312,385 312,385 312,385 1.543% 1 402
L.A.I.F. & Investments: '
MF L.A.I.F. N/A N/A 17,711,872 17,793,220 a 17,711,872 3.526% Revolving 1 52,043
CD San Jose National Bank 07/03/99 AAA 300,000 500,000 500,000 3.700% 07/03/02 365 1,542
CD Heritage Bank of Commerce 10/14/98 AAA 636,542 636,542 636,342 3.080% 10/14/02 365 1.634
Subtotal CDs 1,136,542 1,136,542 1,136,542 3.353% 365 3.175
Subtotal L.A.LF. & Investment 18,848,414 18,931,762 18,848,414 3.516% 183 53,219
Subtotal UnrestrMed Cash&Investment - 19,160,799 19,244,147 19,160,799 3.483% 92 35,621
Restricted Cash & Investment: ,
S V San Jose National Bank -CDBG N/A AAA 80,499 80,499 80,499 1.600% Revolving 107
MF LA.LF.+Library Bond Proceeds N/A N/A 9,831,649 9,877,914 a 9,831,649 3.526% Revolving 1 28,889
CK Comerica Bank -Saratoga Youth Sports N/A AAA 192,068 192,068 192,068 0.000% Revolving 1 0
SV Money Market-Library Bond Proceeds N/A N/A 1,027,260 1,027,260 1,027,260 2.170% Revolving 1 I,83R
CK Wells Fargo Bank-CDBG N/A AAA 6,503 6;503 6,503 0.000% Revolving I 0
CK Wells Fargo Bank-CDBG N/A AAA 26,744 26,744 26,744 0.000% Revolving 1 0
Subtotal RestrMed Cash & Investment 11 164 723 11 210
988 11
164 723 3
303% 2 30
854
, , . ,
v
Total Cash and Invesnnent :$30,325,522 ~' 530,455,135 S303Y5,522 ~ 3.472°!° Avg Yield 46 586,474
Benchmark Yield Comparison as of 12/31/01 3 Month Treasury 1.54% 1 Year Treasury 2.02%
Schedule of Maturities: Reserve Analyst:
General Fund Reserve requirement adopted 4/3/00: $2,238,266
Immediate $29,188,980 General Fund Balance as of 6/30/Ol(AUDITED). $12,074,797
FY 2001-2002 (CDs) 1,136,542
Available Funds:
Total $30,325,522 Unrcsuicted Pooled Cash & Investmrnt available for current year expenses in all funds: $18,024,257
(Includes unrestricted funds maturing within the current fiscal yeaz)
NOTES:
DD -Direct Deposits CK -Checking Account MF -Mutual Fund SV -Savings Account ES -Escrow Account e-Market values for L.ALF provided by State Treasurer
• FDR =The Financial Directory rating is based on computer analysis of prime fmanciat reported quarterly by the institutions to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal
Home Loan Bank Board. Ratings based on information released July 1998.
This report reflects Pooled Cash, Investment and Restricted Cash which are available resources to fund operations, debt service and capital improvement. Other mtrest bearing
assets (notes receivable) are listed above. Debt service reserve funds held by tmstees are restricted pursuant to indenture covenant and have been excluded from this report
Pursuant to Government Code Section 33646, the City's investment portfolio is in compliance with the adopted investment policy and there are adequate resotues to meet
anticipated pool expenditure requirement forthe next six months.
0
1
Submitte by:
Ap~: 1/8/02
(Unaudited Result)
12-01REPO.x/s
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO.
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
AGENDA ITEM l
CITY MANAGER: ~'~~C~-f
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Attorney
PREPARED BY: Richard Taylor
SUBJECT: Consider Request to Join Friend of the Court Brief in Charter
Communications v. County of Santa Cruz.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize the City of Saratoga to join the friend of the court brief being prepared in
Charter Communications v. County of Santa Cruz.
REPORT SUMMARY:
The courts authorize amicus ("friend of the court") briefs in cases where the amici
have an interest in the case and would provide an additional perspective to that being
provided by the parties to the case. The City's support is currently being sought in
Charter Communications v. County of Santa Cruz, a case of possible concern to the City.
Charter Communications concerns whether attorneys' fees may be awarded to the
prevailing party in a case involving a dispute over a cable franchise agreement. The cable
company prevailed in this case and the judge ordered attorneys' fees against the county.
The fees were approximately $ 1 million, but after settlement and mediation were reduced
to $725,000. The county argued that the federal Cable Act precludes the awarding of
attorneys' fees. The county is appealing the award of attorneys' fees to the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals. The League of Cities Legal Advocacy Committee has recommended
that cities join the amicus brief which is being prepared without charge to participating
cities by the San Francisco City Attorneys office. The brief is due January 28, 2002.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
None. There is no cost to join the brief.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Notice for this meeting.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION:
The City would not join the amicus brief.
FOLLOW UP ACTIONS:
City Attorney will report on the decision of the court when issued.
~~
2
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
ORIGINATING DEPT: Community Development
PREPARED BY: Thomas Sullivan, AICP
AGENDA ITEM: ~ _
/J '7
CITY MANAGER: 0--/~~-
DEPT HEAD: ~
SUBJECT: Appeal of an Administrative Decision to Require Sound Mitigation
APPELLANT: Dr. John Oliver, Property Owner
LOCATION: 12240-12250 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and require the construction of an eight-
footmasonry sound wall along the rear property line of the appellant's property pursuant to
Resolution No. 91-03.
REPORT SUMMARY:
The appellant requests the City Council rescind Resolution No. 91-03 adopted on January 16,
1991. Resolution No. 91-03 requires the construction of an eight-foot masonry sound wall along
the rear property line between the subject commercial property (C-V) and the adjoining
residential district (R-1-10,000). The subject property is occupied by several businesses
including the Good Neighbor. Dog Boarding and Training, Saratoga Builders, Wagner Roofing,
Tom's Plumbing, Custom Countertops, and Builder's Tools.
The Planning Director or the Planning Commission may require the installation of a solid fencc:
or wall up to eight feet in height along any property line that abuts a residential district, upon a
determination that such fence or wall is necessary to mitigate noise or other adverse impacts of
the commercial activity upon the residential use pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-
19.020(f)(4).
In 1991, the Planning Director's decision to require aneight-foot masonry sound wall at the
subject commercial property was appealed to the City Council by the property owner. By
adopting Resolution 91-03, the City Council upheld the decision of the Planning Director;
however, the appellant has not constructed the sound wall to date.
In 2001, the appellant requested the Planning Director reconsider the requirement. The Planning
Director upheld Resolution 91-03 after determining that a sound wall is necessary to mitigate
noise generated by the usage of power tools, bazking dogs, and commercial vehiculaz traffic at
the rear of the site. As a result of this determination, the property owner has appealed the
requirement to the City Council for a second time.
An acoustical analysis of the noise generated by bazking dogs, was performed by Edward L.
Pack Associates, Inc. on November 17, 2000. The purpose of the acoustical analysis was to
determine the level of noise at the residential property line to the rear of the site generated by the;
barking dogs. The noise levels were evaluated against the standards of the City of Saratoga
Noise Ordinance.
The result of the acoustical analysis revealed that noise levels generated by the barking dogs
exceeds the limits of the noise ordinance. To achieve compliance with the City of Saratoga
Noise Ordinance, the following noise mitigation measure was recommended: Construct an
eight-foot high acoustically-effective barrier along the property line contiguous with the
residences to the east.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
None
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The subject property will be in violation of the City of Saratoga Noise Ordinance.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Not Applicable
FOLLOW UP ACTION:
Not Applicable
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
The public hearing has been advertised in the Saratoga News and notices were mailed to
property owners and posted at the City Hall Kiosk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Appeal Application
2. Acoustical Analysis, dated November 17, 2000
3. Resolution No. 91-03
4. Zoning and Vicinity Map
THIS BOX ~'O BE COMPLETED
BY THE CITY„~C ERI O
DATE RECEIVED: ~ `.~ 1 ~
HEARING DATE• i 1
FEE:
RECEIPT #
CITY OF SARATOGA
PLANNING COMMISSION- ;c~ `i i 2ob~
APPEAL APPLICATION
This two-part application must be submitted to the City Clerk, 13777
Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga CA 95070, by 5:00 p.m. within fifteen (15)
calendar days of the date of the decision.
Appellant Name: - `~f- Jc~y.'^. 0~: ~-cf' 1,.~ VV~:c~.~1 Q~.w~-
Address: 2vS°9 I,Cov.n;~,c~ {Q.,[ ~~~~~ f~;
Telephone #: `Iv~3 ~ 6S c~y6U yv~ Vzs~ 4':~~-, ~~ ~- S ~d"v`~~
Name of Applicant (If
different than Appellant):
Project file number and address: ~
Decision being appealed: ~ f''~~' ~-f U`^~°-~~""-C' ~'~ ~
Grounds for\e appeal ((letter maybe attached): 1n1
Appellant's Signature
/U -I/- 0 1
Date
(Please do not sign this application and the attached authorization until it is
present at City offices)
~'
( \
EDWARD L. PACK ASSOCIATES, INC.
21 i7 NORTHAMPTON DR.
SAN JOSE. CA 95124
\h-:.Iolm Oliver
P.O. BoX 729
~dendocino. CA 9460
Subject: Acoustical Analysis of Dog Barking I~toise, Good Neighbor Dog Training.
1220 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga
November 17.2000
Proiect I~'o. 22-133=_'
Ref. (a): City of Saratoga Municipal Code, Ordinance No. 71.92, Article 7-30, Sections
_ 7-30.010, 7-30.060, July, June 1991
Dear '~4r. Oliver:
This report will provide you with the results of au acoustical analysis of dog barking
noise at the Good NeighUor Dog Training facility at 12250 Saratoga-Sum~yvale Road in
Sarato<<=a. The purpose of-this analysis was to detemtine the levels of noise at the
residential property line to the rear of the site (east property line) generated by dog
barkin_ for an evaluation against the standards of the City of Saratoga Noise Ordinance.
Ref. (a). The results of the analysis reveal that the uoise levels generated by dog barking
exceed the limits of the Noise Ordinance. Mitigation measures. therefore, will be
required.
Sections I and II of this report contains a summary of our findings and recommendations,
respectively. Section III contains a description of the noise measurement methodologies.
L .Summary of I'indinas
Noise is measured using the decibel (dB) scale attd for environmental noise
conditions, a frequency weighting network (A-weighting) is incorporated into the sound
meters so that the meter "hears" noise the way a human would. Therefore, environmental
TEL: 408-723-8900
FAX: 408-723-8099
noise is described using A-weighted decibels, notated as dBA.
A1EP.iBER: ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
AUDIO E GINEERING SOCIETY
• ~. ~.
_ 7 _
The noise levels presented herein were evaluated against the standazds of the Cit}'
of Saratoga Noise Ordinance, which specifies a limit. of 6 dB above the ambient at the
residential land use. Because ambient leeel fluctuate tliroushout the day and aii~ht. the
\oise Ordinance specifes ambient levels for residential land use for the purpose of
evaluation. The Noise Ordinance specifies ambient levels of. 60 d$A daytime (7:00 a.m.
~e-.~.-.1 .m.), 50 dBA evening (7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.) and 4~ dBA nighttime (10:00
p.m. - 7:00 a.m.). Therefore, the noise levels limit applicable to this facility are 66 dB.A
daytime, 56 dBA evening and ~ 1 dBA nighttime. As doss may bark during the nighttime
hours, the more stringent nighttime limit is applied.
The noise levels at the most impacted residential property line to the east of the
facility were treasured to be 43-61 dBA. Thus, the noise levels are up to 10 dB in excess
of the limit of the City of Saratoga Noise Ordinance.
As the noise levels exceed the limits of the standards of the City of Saratoga
. Noise Ordinance, mitigation measures are required.
IT. Recommendations
To achieve compliance with the City of Saratoga Noise Ordinance, the followinn
noise mitigation measures are recommended:
• Construct an S fr. high acoustically-effective barrier along the
property line contiguous with the residences to the east. The
barrier height is in reference to the nearest Good Neighbor Dog
Trainins facility building pad elevation.
0
• r-. .-•
- ,.
-3-
To achieve an acoustically-effective barrier, it must be made air-tight, Le., without
cracks, gaps, or other openings and must provide for long-term durability. The barrier
can be constructed of wood. concrete. stucco. masonry. or a combination thereof and
must achieve a minimwn surface weight of 2.~ lbs. per sq. ft. If wood fencing is used.
homoeeneous sheet materials are preferable to conventional wood fencing as the latter
has a tendency to warp and form openings with age. However, high qualit}•, air-tight.
tongue-and-groove, sltiplap, or board and batten construction can be used. provided the
minimum surface weight requirement is met and the construction is air-tight. The noise
control barrier must be constructed so that all joints. including connections with posts or
pilasters are sealed air-tight and no openings are permitted between the upper barrier
- components and the ground.
III. Descriptions of the Noise ~4easurement Methodoloeies~
To determine the noise levels generated by dog barking, on-site noise level and
frequency measurements were made on I~lovember 9, ?000 at the property line fence of
the residences to the east. The measurements were made using aLarson-Davis S12
Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter for a period of approximately 30 minutes.
Eleven individual series of do, barks were measured. A sinele series of dog barks is
det7ned as one or more dogs barking at a time on one occasion. Varying series of dog
barks ranged from 4 seconds to ~}~ seconds. The levels of doe barks ranged within each
series and from series to series. Over the course of the 30 minute measurement period,
dug barks ranged from 43 dBA to 61 dBA, with a significant portion of the dog barks
over the i 1 dBA limit.
-~J
~ _ ,--
-4-
As shown above, dog bazking exceeds the 51 dBA limit of the Noise Ordinance.
\4itieation measures are required to comply with the Noise Ordinance.
This report presents the results of an acoustical analysis of dog bazkin~ noise at the Good
Neighbor Dog Training facility at 1220 Sazatoga-Sunnyvale Road in SazatoQa.
if you have any questions or would like an elaboration of this report, please call me.
Sincerely,
EDWARD L. PACK ASSOC., INC.
J free K. ack
• President
JKP:j
1tE9oLOTiOl1 liO. s 91-03 ~ •
RE8OLtTTIObT O! THE CITY COII1iCIL O! THE
CITY O! 871R11TOdA IIPHO:,DI2td 71lT ADllINi8TR11TIVE
DECZBION O! THE PL7INHINd DIRECTOR
12240 earatoga-Bunnyvai• IIoa4-John 11. olives
wHERE7-e, the City Council recently adapted an ordinance
(ordinance No 71.76) that rsquires owners of commercial property
to construct sound barriers up to 8 feet in height when property
lines adjoin residential uses and when, in the opinion oP the
Planning Director or the Planning Commission such sound barriers
are necessary to mitigate noise or other adverse impacts of the
commercial activity upon the adjoining residential uses; and
1lHEREAB, subsequent to the effective date of the ordinance,
fn response to complaints received regarding noise and other
adverse impacts emanating from the commercial property located at
12240 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (^subject property^) the Planning
Director did conduct an inspection of the subject property from
residential properties at :2258 and 12270 Kirkdale; and
NHEREl-s, as a result of such fnspection, the Planning
Director concluded that the level of noise and other adverse
impacts generated on the subject property Smpactefl adjoining
residential properties in a manner sufficient to determine that
the sound barrier up to 8 feet in height is necessary to
construct along the property line abutting the residential uses
in !^rder to mitigate the noise emanating from the commercial
acti-~ity on the subject property; and
NHEAEAB, the determination of the Planning Director was
transmitted to the owner of the subject property via letter from
the city attorney dated August 13, 1990; and
NBEREA6, John W. Oliver, the owner of the subject property
has appealed the decision of the Planning Director to the City
Council; and
IIHERE7U, on January 2, 1991, the City Council heard the
appeal, at which time any person interested in the matter was
given an opportunity to be heard; and
lI8ER8A8, the City Council reviewed and considered the report
of the Planning Direator relating to his administrative decision,
and the written and oral evidence presented to the City Council
in support of and in opposition to the appeal. .
nsu«~oi n~ 1
_~
• )iOlf, '1'H!RlfOAf, be it resolved by the City Council of the
city of Saratoga as follower
1. The appeal from the Planning Director is hereby denied ~
and the decision of the Planning Dfractor is affirmed,
to wit:
Noise Prom barking dogs and vehicles emanating from the
subject property are at a level sufficient to support a
determination that a sound barrier consisting o! a
masonry wall 8 feet in height is necessary to be
constructed along the entire length of the rear
property lino, dividing the subject property from a
residential district, in order to mitigate the
aforementioned noise and other advareo impacts of tt:e
commercial activities upon the adjoining residential)
uses, including but not limited to: adverse visual
impacts from the parking and loading of trucks and t:he
outdoor storage of materials, and; odor impacts from
fumes emanating from trucks and other vehicles parked
on the subject property.
2. It is understood that the requirement to construct an 8 ~
foot high masonry wall is in addition to any other
requirements which may be imposed upon the property
owner in order to achieve a noise level in conformance
with the existing noise standards as set forth in the
Code Of The City Of Saratoga, including, but not
limited to the complete enclosure of all outdoor
kennels.
AAA
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Saratoga held on the 16th day of January, 1991, iby
the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers, Anderson, Clevenger, Kohler, and Mon:la
NOES: Nona
ABSENT: Mayor Stutzman
AssTAIx: zone
xayar
A EST:
City Clerk
J ~`
2R\Ra\OL ivK
2
Zoning and Vicinity Map
12240-12250 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
Kirkmnn4 rlrivn
'a
O
a
a~
c
~o
0
m
co
C-V
C-V R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1
' R-1 R-1
Seagull Way ®Subject Property
o Sound Wall Location
Q C-V Commercial Visitor Zone District
N R-1 Residential Zone District
Memo
To: Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
Date: January 11, 2002
Re: AGENDA ITEM # 3 -12250 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
The attached correspondences were delivered to the City Clerk's Office after the
staff report was already completed. .
~...,,
~....J
01/09/02 18: a2 '!~'
BERLINER CO$EN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION$
TEN ALMAI)ENBOULEVARD
FSEVENTH FLOOR
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113.2233
TELEPHONE: (408)286-5800
FACSIMILE: (408) 998-5388
Facsimile Covear Sheet
Date: January 9, 2002
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE
h
~ 001/013
~~
rr JAN 002
i'... ~
~~1 ~~~~~Vt~ ~
. ~i.,l ~I(~~ V.p..~Grc.rv.
Lc.~ ~`~1:~/..Y„
Time:
The iltfottmtion contained in this fatshrole (fax) nessage is tegruy privileged and con9detltial infotnntion intatded Doty for the tlse of
the nseivc or fmn tuned below. Tf Oe nctda of this I~E'f is not the intended receives, you arc hereby noti0ed that any
d's-^~~~, distribution ar copy of this fax i5 stric8y Ptoh'bited. -If you have mewed this fax in amt. Pledge imnediatcly nrnity the
sends it the lelephene manba provided above and talon the odginal message to the sender at the address above via the United Stag
Pasrti Setvict- Thank you.
Sender: Jolie Houston File #:
Re: Request for Reconsideration -
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Pages: (Including Cover Sheet)
^ Receiver: City Clerk (Please distribute to Mayor, Councili
City Attorney Richard Taylor, and Community Development
Thomas Sullivan)
Firm: .City of Saratoga
Facsimile #: (408) 867-8559 Office #: (408)
Hard Copy Sent Via U.S. Mail: Yes X No
MESSAGE: Please distribute the attached and place in the City "
Council agenda packet for the January 16 meeting.
If all pages are not received, or if copies are illegible, contact the Copy Center at the
following direct dial number (408) 28b-5800 Ext. 8042; or if busy, contact Sender's
Secretary, Carol Millwood, at Ext.2423.
uNLS~seao.t _t_
OtA103D6342002
01/09/02 18: a2 '$
SANFDimAEEIS7lE'R' FRNRRU& u
NIDREW LFABER LMGAACKLON
W4WYJ. GDD~F3' JAIFS P. CA99NN
ROBHZTW. HUlBfiREYG ST•=Y@1 J. CASAD
Ra/.PH J.SWAN°AN NANCYJ.JOl4!$ON
PEGC1,'L $PRNGGAY JERgDARERON
JOSFRfEDWOiLUC ftlIBFRTLC1gRiDt
SPA4A3LFAR6 JONATHAN0.WOlF
ALAN J. PUBlB2 -KATHLEEN KSI%.E
KEVIN f.1H1.EY
'A P.dessaal Ca{~Cai
Rt~>~
SANJELJ. CDFESI
B.nc-OSn-~` CA
r~lroz/ola
BERLINER COHEN
AT70RNEYS AT LAW
A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING wLLW.I E.ADANS MARRYA LDPFL
NARK eRnwEV+ICZ JOHN F.OONWGUE
PROFESSIONAL CORPORA710N5 PAULA PEL09 $EfN1CONEN
. ~THONA4 P. IAlR/PHY 01RL4TINEH. LOIIG
TENAIM.4DENBOULEVARD TFfOLNSN.GROSS PATRICICUN
NADI\V.NOLOBER IOUSTIN GBIC
ELEVENTriFLOOR Naav.ISOIA aaRNw+O.cax~
' BRNN L.SNERQt DAVID0. WADE
SANJOSb,CAL1F'ORNL49i113-2233 JouEHOUSTDN BRMNKKFJ3EY
~
TELEPHONE: (488) 2BG-$HBO 71 P. KENNEDY
oLP
FACSIlNILE:(d08)998-5388 ~~0~ oPCairue.
www.beTliaeC COIII HUGH L RiOLA•
GfEVElLL FIALIC'~RIMSON
ERIC WON6
NANCY L EPANOT
awaESw.vaPE
PETALEwLSNW.ISEY
JatnLary 9, 2002
Mayor Streit and Members ofthe Saratoga City Council
City of Saratoga
I3 777 FnutvaIe Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
Re: Request for Reconsideration of Resolution 91-03
Property 7.ocated at 12250 Saratoga/Sunnyvaie Rd., Saratoga, California
Deartilayor Streit and Members ofthe City Council:
We represent Dr. and Mrs. John Oliver, the property owners of the property located at
12250 Saraioga/Sunnyvale Rd., Saratoga, California (the "Ptnpert}~'j. This letter is submitted on
their behalf concerning a request for reconsideration of City of Saratoga Resolution No. 91-03
(the "Resoltrtion'~.
We maintaaxt that the Resolution, as written, i5 unenforceable due to changed
circumstances at the Property and if strictly enforced would constitute an arbitrary and capricious
act by the City. The evidence that the City based its notice of violation and its determination that
noise miti~rion was necessary is no longer present to support enforcement of this Resolution.
Furthermore, due to the changes in the land uses associated with the Property, we maintain that
this Resolution is no longer necessary to mitigate the noise impacts that existed ten years ago.
According to Staff; since I9911here have been 3 complaints concerning the Property. They were
on March 2000, December 1997 and November 1994, and these complains were not related to
ketutel or dog noise. Therefore, as the Property currently exists, the City does not have evidence
to mandate a noise barrier at the level of mitigation, a masonry wall, which was ordered by the
Resolution.
In 1991, and in response to complaints received regarding noise and other adverse
impacts at the Property, the Planning Director conducted an inspection. As a result of that
inspection, the Planning Director concluded that the level of noise and other adverse impacts
ar-0iGSOS3asooz
01/09/02 16:32 '~'
Mayor Streit and Members of the Saratoga City Council
January 9, 2002
generated on the Property impacted the residential neighbor in a mariner sufficient to detettnine
that a sound barrier up to 8 feet in height was necessary to be constructed along the property line
in order to mitigate the noise emanating from the Property. The Planning birector's decision
was appealed to the City Council on January 2,1991. The City Council denied the appeal. The
City Council's resolution stated:
Noise from barking dogs and vehicles emanating from the subject property are at
a level sufficient to support a detemrination that a sound barrier consisting of a
masonry wall 8 feet in height is necessary to be constructed along the entire
length of the rear property line, dividing the subject property from a residential
district, in order to mitigate the aforementioned noise and other adverse impacts
of the commercial activities upon the adjoining residential uses, including but not
limited to: adverse visual impacts from the parking and loading of trucks and
the outdoor storage of materials, and; odor impacts from fumes emanating
from trucks and other vehicles parked on the subject property.
The Resolution was based on Ordinance No. 71.76, which amended Saratoga City Code
section IS-I9.020(f) concerning screening, landscaping and fencing. That section requires
owners of commercial properties to construct sound barriers ug to 8 feet in height when property
Imes adjoin residential uses and when, in the opinion of the Planning Director or the Planntng
Commission, such sound barriers are necessary to mitigate noise or other adverse impacts of
the commercial activity upon the adjoining residential uses.
"1'he requirement of a masonry wall is not necessary to mitigate the existing noise at the
Property due to the change circumstances. The changed circumstances regarding this Property
include that the impacts from parking and loading of trucks, the outdoor storage of materials, and
odor impacts from fumes emanating from trucks and other vehicles gazked on the Property.
These impacts are no longer an issue_ It is our understanding that a trash enclosure was
constructed at the rear of the site. It is also our understanding that the poking problems and
noise from trucks are no longer issues because the tenanf who created these impacts is no longer
at the site. Furthermore, the main complaint concerning the Property came from a pet clinic and
boarding facility which was surrounded by dog tuns. This facility was operated by a veterinarian
and had a total occupancy level of approximately 73 animals. The veterinarian vacated the
premises in March 1996.
in January 1999 the facility was leased to Mrs. Ann Peters of Good Neighbor Dags.
Mrs. Peters has pursued a "neighbor friendly" policy regazding how she maintains her facility,
which includes a sensitivity to the placement of the dogs in the runs and the selection of dogs she.
will accept as boarders. It is our understanding that the dogs are selected and placed in the tuns
between 6:30 and 7:00 a.m. on a rotating basis.. After approximately 15 mututes they are moved
back inside for feeding. At 8:30 am. (10:00 am. on Sundays) tltey are rotated unti15:30 p.m.
Between 8:30 p.m. (and occasionally up to 10:00 p.m.) the dogs are selected and closely
monitored to be allowed outside for brief periods of time. Mrs. Peters is very aware of the City
dB levels between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and conducts her
I~oo3loin
~J
u~ss9o.t -2-
ot-0toeos3a2oo2
•
•
01/09/02 16:33 $
Mayor Streit and Members of the Saratoga City Council
January 9, 2002
~ooa/ol3
business accordingly. The total number of dogs at the Property has been reduced from a
maximum of 73 animals to a maximum o£ 30. En addition, most of the dogs aze inside all of the
time, or for shoe periods of time aze outside only to relieve themselves is a quiet and secluded
gravel area Additionally, many of the outside nm walls have been demolished, creating a
smaller number of larger tuns. These larger run areas are used for puppy training sessions which
are very quiet and strictly controlled. These runs have also been provided with eovezs and
modified to reduce the noise significantly.
The January 2, 1991, Material Requirements for anAcoustically-Effective Barrier at the
Saratoga Pet Clinic, written by Jeffrey K. Pack of Edward L. Pack Associates, Inc., states that it
is possrble to construct a noise barrier out of wood, stucco, tttasonry, concrete, earth berm or a
combination these materials. Mr. Pack noted that of the various materials listed, no patticuiar
one will work better than any other as long as the construction is airtight and the minimum
surface weight requirement is met. Mr. Pack submitted a detail of a wood fence that would be
suitable to be considered a noise barrier. Ia Mr. Pack's February 4, 1991, letter, Mr. Pack
reviewed the current nighttime noise and recommended an eight-foot noise control barrier. He
reiterated that the type of material used in a noise barrier really does not matter as .long as the
three basic criteria aze met: (1)air-tightness of construction; (2) height; and (3) weight of the
material.
Over the last several months, Dr. Oliver's son, Michael Oliver, attempted to negotiates .
wood fence that would not only comply with the noise mitigation measures contained in the
City's Ordinance, but would also would match the fence that presently exists, which continues
far approximately 40 feet between Dr: Oliver's property and Mr. Mallory's. however,
Mr. Mallory has rejected the idea of continuing the wood fence and has requested a redwood
fence that would extend 105 feet, the entire length ofhis property. (Dr. Oliver's property Iine is
only 50 feat.} Mr. MaIIory has also requested that this fence be constructed out of "heart
redwoaL° This fence is estimated to be approximately $155 per lineal foot, which we believe is
excessive in cost and it is uncertain that it will meet the noise mitigation requirements. Farther,
a-e do not believe that there is any nexus for requiring the entire l0i feet of fence to be installed.
We respectfiilly request that the City Council review Resolution No, 91-03 and allow
Dr. Oliver to install the proposed wood noise barrier that will not only comply with the noise
mitigation measures, but will be visually compatible with the 40 feet of fence that is existing at
the Properly line.
Sincerely yours,
BERLINER COHEN
ST N
li-Mail: jhQberliner.com
UFt539690.7
ota~oeossazooz
-3-
01/09/02 16:34 _. '25' ____ f~1j005/013
Mayor Streit and Members of the Saratoga City Council
January 9, 3002 •
JIi:wp
cc: Dr. and Mrs. 3oha Oliver
Michael Oliver, Esq.
Richard Taylor, City Attorney
Thomas Sullivan, Community Development Director
urits3swo.~ .~
ai-0ioaos3azoo2
•~ 01/09/02 18: a4
1
i
'~
EDWARD L. PACKASSOC/ATES, /NC.
2777 7~tORTF'AMPTON OR_
SAN JOSE. CA 85124
i4L. John Oliver
RO.~Box 724
Mendocino, CA 95460
~jooeiois
TEl_' 408•Tp~8980
FAX;408.72SdO8p
Aecember Z0, 2001
Project No. 22-133-3
Subjert Dog Barking Noise Level Measurements, Good Neighbor Dog Training,
1?250 Saratoga-Suanyva[e Road,Satgtoga
Re£ ,a}: City of Saratoga Mwucipal Code, Ordinance No. 7I.92, Article 7-30,
Sections 7-?0.040, 7-30.050, July, June 1991
Rear 41r. OIiver
iris zr}ron ~c11i pmvide you with the results of noise levek measurements of dog barking
at tae Csood Neighbor Dog Training facility at 12230 Saratoga-Sunnyvsle Road in
. Saratoga. Tae'ptupose of these measuuements was to supplement the earlier studies as
those srtdies ffid not n¢clude noise measured in tht evening or tugattiate periods. The
prvious stttdy assumai that the dog bark anise IeveLs would be consistetrt from daytime
to niglt2'ume. Fros our corrversations, yon have asserted that the dog barks during U1e
rigitttime aze much less noisy and bazely audible at the resideatial property line
Therefotr, you regttested twat evening and nighttite noise measurements of dog barking
to oerFomd.
s::e -rsit was aaade on \*ovember 30, 2000 at approximateky 9:40 p.m. (evening). No
bar3dng occurr~k untik a few minutes past 14:00 p.m. (nighttime), thus, evening
mcasuremenu could not be tnrde. Doe barks occunted on three occasions from 10:00
p.m. to agpmximateIy 10:30 p.m..
MEhIaER: ACOU577C:.I.SOCIETI'OF PAIE~IGA 4UDI0 ENGINEERING SOCIETY
01/09/02 _ 16Y 34 ~ .......,..o ,i„~ , ,.,,., n rrw.~
~2-
~loo~/ola
r r.~+o uo/o.a
'l}ie dog lark noise Ievels were retarded at 57 dBA, 60 dl3A and 58 dBA measured at the
residentizl property liar (oa the kennel side) to the east.. The aloastueaknts were mach
using a Larson Davis 2900 Real Tune Analyzer. The analyzer conforms to ANS[ S1.4
for Type 1 instrnmems and was calibrated be:Fon and after the tests to assure aceiuacy. It
is evidcat that dog barks can reach 60 dBA daring the nighttime period. 'T'hus, the dog
bark noise level may be up to 9 dB in excess of ffie SI dBA nighttime limit of the City of
Saratoga IQaise Qrdiuante. Keeg is mmd that the tghttime limit of S l dBA is adjusted
up from the uormat 45 d8A limit duc to the high ambient wtldition ct+eated by Saratoga. .
Swmy~ale Road tt~c, as described is the previous reports.
We recommend as 8 £t. high property line noise control barber along the east property
lint aS ptevivasIy recommended. The designs amd specifications of the barrier have been
prov:dcd is earlier reports. If you have nay questions, please call me.
Sincerely,
EDGVARD L. PACKASSOC., INC.
effitiv K Pack
President
JKP:j
/
i
ovoaioz is: as ~ Cd oosiois
• ~ .~
EDWARD L. PACK ASSOCIATES, INC.
-~~• ~! --
7p3~ E. DUANE AVENUE SURE F ACOILSItCQI COIfS7tI(pR(S 7E1: dOB•73P:i571
SUNNNAL( CA BdOB6 FA%: ~0&73W~)7p2
January 2, 1991
Proiect No. 22-133-1
Mr. Bob Bloomfield
Bloomfield Custom Masonry
4059 Hastings Avenue
San Jose, CA 9511s
Subject: Material Requirements For an Acoustically-
- Effective sarrier at the Property Line of the
Saratoga Pet clinic, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road,
Saratoga
.r
Dear Mr. Bloomfield:
•
This letter will provide you with the material requirements to
achieve an acoustically-effective property line barrier at the
Saratoga Pet Clinic on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road in Sunnyvale.
Although a quantitative analysis of truck noise at Mz. John
Oliver's property has not been performed, the city of Saratoga
has required an 8 ft_ high masonry wall to be constructed
along the commercial/residential property line.
Three basic parameters comprise the attributes of a noise
control barrier. These are 1) height, 2) air-tight
construction and 3) weight of the barrier material.
P.n acoustically-effective barrier must be air-tight, i.e.,
no holes, cracks or gaps as the smallest air leak will allow
sound to travel right through. The height of the barrier
provides the desired amount of noise reduction and the weight
requirement of the material is mostly for structural
integrity, however, more massive barriers ar used when low
frequency sound (less than 2oU Hz) is intrusive.
n•pr.•a.e eC.;p+ra: ~C+r o'Ar~rnr<
n;4n, F.r~+eeCaruG RO:~t r
01/09/02 18:35 '$ I"~009/013
v
- 2 -
Gasoline and small diesel powered trucks produce noise from
I00 to 10,000 Hz, however, the major noise components are in
the 250 and 500 Hz octave bands. Therefore, an 8 ft. high
noise barrier designed to attenuate small truck noise must
have a minimum surface weight of 3.0 lbs./sq. ft. Railzoad
noise barriers require 4.5-5.0 lbs./sq. ft, surface weight as
rail traffic produces low frequency noise and vibration.
A noise barrier can be constructed of wood, stucco, masonry,
concrete, eazth berm or a combination thereof. 1/4" thick
Texan, plexiglass or safety glass can also be used as this
meets the minimum surface weight requirement.. '
.,
of the various materials lasted above, no particular one will
work better than any other as long as the construction is
air-tight and the minimum surface weight requirement is met.
If wood fencing is used, homogeneous sheet materials are
preferable over conventional wood fencing as the latter has al
tendency to warp and form openings with age. However,
air-tight tongue-and-grove, board-and-batten or shiplap can b
used. All connections with post and plasters must be sealed
air-tight and no openings are pezmitted between the upper
barrier components and the ground.
As a noise analysis for the noise barrier required by the City
was not performed, the amount of noise reduction provided by
the barrier cannot be determined.
2 would like to remind you that without a study to calculate
the height of a barrier that may be necessary to achieve the
City's goals, it is possible that an 8 ft. high barrier may
r
oiioaioz is:as ~
~ oioioia
- 3 -
,/~
not suffice. It is also very possible that it may be
overkill. Do not guarantee any performance.characteristics
other than that a new fence will perform better, acoustically,
than the existing fence.
If you have any question, or would like additional
information, please call me.
Sincerely,
EDWARD L. PACK ASSOCIATES, INC.
f~.Y K. ac
President
TxP:dn
cc: Mr. John Oliver
01/09/02 16:35 $~ f~011/013
L
R x (o t~b2D ~ 6~•'I`~~~
[ortE otZ go~ g~vrr.6~ -
x 4 f'~'....: _ .. ...
_ _ ~o sanm a~r-kr ~ .
:: :... , .. ..:.:. ETWlirf~'L:.P.'AC.K 'l{i?eA.~y:ridc; _ .
...i L .:..yy...'.i.l.. --~
v . ... ...
01/09/02 18:35 $
EDWARD L. PACK ASSOCIATES, INC.
I~ 012/013
t030 E OUANE AVENUE, SUITE F
SUNNriALE, CA 44686
Acousrrca! Co7j,571/raxts TEL• SOB-736;i57a
FAX 466736+7702
February 4, 1991
Project No. 22-133-2'
Mr. John Oliver
P.O. Box 729
Mendocino, CA 95460
subject: wood Sound Fence Detail
Dear Mr. Oliver:
Please find enclosed a detail of a wood fence suitable t
be considered a sound wall. As stated in our letter to
Mr_ Bab. Bloomfield of $loomfield Custom Masonry, the type of
material used in a noise barrier really does not matte ai-
long as the three basic criteria are met:
i) Air_-tightness of construction
2) Height
3) weight of the material
P_ir-tight construction is most critical. If you have any.
questions, please call me.
Sincerely,
EDWARD L. PACK ASSOCXATES, INC.
JKP:dn
MEMBER: ACOUSTICAL SOC4T'OF M4ERiCA
~~r .
J K. ack
re dent
AL10q ENG.4EEgMOSCCIEi~'
01/09/02 18:58 ~'
~ 013/013
..
%z P4~(N/ov~
I x (o ~bi2p ~ 6~T1'E~
(or1E o~2 ~1 6~vE4~ .
~ sar~aa aerki ~ .
. .. .... ... .... .......... `~`i.~.,1..--.r..._....
rryuc Gl
~~
Subj: Application of John Oliver, DVM to rescind Resolution '.-1-
t 03
Date: Wednesday, January 9, 2002 5:01:50 PM
To: Cityhall@5aratoga.Ca.US
fz,,.r ~ ~-¢ ~ ~ ~ ~'a City M 3ae~toga
n~ JAN 1 0 2D02
1,
~ c : e~r~w~~-
City Council v ~~ ~~
With respect to the above noted request for recision we wish to go on
record as being opposed to the recision. When 91-03 was adopted, i spoke
before the then Council as being against Mr. Oliver's "Appeal of an
administrative decision to require sound mitigation". As 1 wilt not be availat~le
on January 16th I thought it best to document in writing our opposition to leis
latest appeal.
For the record our property is located at 12270 Kirkdale Dr and is
immediately adjacent to that of MIM Mallory. We have been residents here
for over 35 years and have a familiarity with some of the problems that can
. and often do exist as between neighboring residential and commercial
properties as our home too backs up on commercial property.
In the case of Mr. Oliver over the years we have observed a number of
pollutions emanating from his property in the form of noise, fumes and
visual to name a few.
Currently, the noise from barking dogs is less than it was a few years back
but the noise, fumes and visual problems associated with the trucks of his
tenants parked virtually on the property line are no less today than they
were 7 0 years ago. In fact ,they are worse in that many of the Mr. Oliver's
mature pine trees adjacent to the fence between his property and that of
MIM Mallory have died and have not been replaced. Thus, the mitigation is
gone that these trees may have offerred with regard to privacy,
unsightliness of the trucks and their exhaust fumes and even as a butress
against the potential accidental incursion into the Mallorys' backyard by an
errant vehicle.
At a minimum Mr. Oliver should continue to be required to construct the
heretofore approved 8 foot masonry wall as between the two properties and
• 7/9/02 America Online : Bettybil162 Page 1
rra~t 02
..
~3
additionally should also be required to restore the landscaping to help buffer
the sound ,mask the vehicles and any other unsightedly conditions and filter
the fumes.
Ten years ago when 1 spoke before the Council, in addition to voicing my
opposition to the then "Appeal", I also pointed out the how well the 2-story
condo office project behind my property had turned out. I pointed out that
there was a lot of co-operation between the City Planning Department, the
developers and the adjacent homeowners (primarily the Benevento family).
We discussed our concerns and essentially arrived at a "model" development
that has worked out well over the years with few complaints. Among the
residential concerns addressed and incorporated into the final project were
the following:
1. An $ foot masonry tence to mitigate sound, safety, light and privacy
concerns;
2. Low level, low intensity parking lot lighting to mitigate light pollution
concerns;
3.A 20 foot heavily landscaped buffer between the parking lot and the
masonry wall
for not only sound and air pollution mitigation but also to "hide" the
commercial building
from the residential properties;
4. No windows on the back of the building so as to mitigate both privacy as
well as light
pollution issues;
5. Constructing the building as far forward on the property as practical so
as to make it
less visible to the residential properties to its rear.
A number of other concern were successfully addressed in a spirit of
cooperation which
seems to be somewhat lacking in the current situation. It's difficult to
understand how 10 years could have slipped by without Mr. Oliver's
compliance with the City's directive.
Sincerely,
r~
7/9/02 America Online : Bettybill62 Page 2
rH~t a3
_.' e
L
-r
Willi m R. an etty J. Benevento
12270 Kirkdale Dr.
Saratoga, Ca 95070
7 /9/02 America Oniine : Bettybill62 Page 3
JRN 10 2002 11:47RM SPETRUM RSTRO INC
Saratoga City Council,
Dear Members of the Council,
4805074675
January 10, 2002
I am temporarily living in Phoenix Arizona and own at house at 12236 Kirkdale
Drive and plan to return to my home in Saratoga.
I have received a copy of a notice of public hearing concerning the application of
John Oliver to rescind the City of Saratoga Resolution Number 91-03 requiring
the construction of an 8-foot masonry wall along the rear line of his property.
I am opposed to the rescinding of the resolution. I feel the reasons that
supported this resolution largely remain.
My tenant hears loud noises in the morning from the commercial trucks starting
and warming up each morning lasting for a half hour or more. He also hears
breaking glass and noises of metal being stored behind the fence. This is also
what I heard before i move to Phoenix. I could also hear intercom sounds all day
from the establishment behind me. Often I would find trash from the businesses
that would be wind swept over the fences. Also it is unpleasant to look out into
the back yard and see a barbed wire chain link fence sticking up higher than my
own wood fence.
We are not opposed to the commercial business but we feel the city should
require Dr. John Oliver to install a proper buffer between his business and our
homes. An 8-toot masonry fence is needed. Please have him comply with the
city council's decision and not continue to avoid his responsibilities.
Sincerely yours,
Yvonne Lazear
743 E Windmere Dr
Phoenix, AZ 85048
p.l
•
LJ
John ~. "Jack" !t~fattory
12358I4irkc3ale Drive, Saratoga, CA 9507ti
408.252 7447
Mallory5~,aol.com; Fay 4.08 252 &599
June 22,?001
.Dear Mr. Sullivan,
Welcome again to Saratoga. We are pleased you have accepted a position with
our city and hope you will build a strong stable staff to carry out your duties. It has been
disappointing in the past to see the turnover with the Toss of corporate memory on issues
within the city and we hope you will stay with us.
The issue with Mr. Oliver has been dragging on for several yeazs. We have found
him to be a poor neighbor. Perhaps, because he moved away many years ago, he seems
to have little. concern for maintaining a,good relatinnsh.ip. with the -neighbors to the rear of
his property.
We thought we had reached a solution to our problems in .199(1 when the-city
council through Resolution 91=03 directed Mr. Oliver to build aneight-foot masonry
fence botwccn our propcrtios. Consistent with his mannerof handling things, he did not
follow tTrrough and has dragged things out.
Last year with the sudden Ions of much of his landscaping trees between our
properties and the deterioration of our red wood fence between our properties as well as
continuing of the conditions that caused the city to require the building of a masonry
fence, we ask the city to require Mr. Oliver to finally build the Masonry wall they had
authorized.
Specifically;
l.Although-the dvg noises have been reduced, they remain.aprvblem. 3ust
this past Sunday while working in my backyard we could hear the dogs
barking.
2. Vehicles from Tom's Plumbing continue to be loud when starting up
early in the morning and trucks are parked directly behind the rear fence.
'T'here are gasoline odors and from time to time unloading and loading
directly behind the fence, as well s the breaking of glass, etc.
3. Adverse. visual. impacts have increased from our property with the loss.
of the large lvlonterey pines that have screened our property from his
eommeroial prnpetty and the..tenant trucks. Mr. Oliver had.done .nothing.to
snainfain the landscaping trees-aside from. cutting.ihe.branches when they
interfered with the parking of his tenant's trucks.
4. Security remains a problem afi the rear of his property. Any oneaan
drive to the rear of his property and park without being observed. At one
time the police arrested a rapist living in a truck in this area.
S. There is also a fire hazard from time to time behind his fence. There are
piles of pine needles,. tree trunks and other debris piled up against the
• fence for long periods.
In summary, therE remain continued problems avith tn~ek noise, security, and
increased adverse visual impact due to the loss of the pine trees, with somewhat Tess
noise from the-dogs.
~%e are not asking chat Nlr. Oliver curgai his ienanis business, just that he mitigate
the adverse impact of the commercial property as the city had advised him several years
ago. Our concerns are consistent with the city ordinances.
We do ask that the city council resolution be implemented with aneight-foot
masonry .fence similar.to.that raquired.and erected.behind my neighbor, Bi1LBenevento at
.12270 KirkdaleDrive..P.lease call.if youwish to visit the groperty.again.
~~
hn and Sue Maltory
n
LJ
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002 AGENDA ITEM: L' _
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager CITY MANAGER: O^~~_
PREPARED BY: Thomas Sullivan, AICP DEPT HEAD: _
SUBJECT: Claim of Patrick Leung; Claim No. GL-0053005
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize ABAG to reject claim.
REPORT SUMMARY:
On April 10, 2001, former Assistant Planner Kim Duncan approved the submittal of a single story,
3,361 squaze foot dwelling to be submitted for building permits without being subjected to
Administrative Design Review. The existing dwelling is 2.980 square feet on a 13,873 squaz~s
foot lot at 19621 Scotland Drive. Municipal Code Section I5-45.065 requires that the proposed
project needed Administrative Design Review. It was the former Staff's interpretation that if a
replacement house was less than 50% greater in size than the original dwe:ling that it was exempt
from Design Review. That is clearly not the case and is not how the Department is currently
operating.
It came to my attention that this project and about a dozen others of similar character had been
sent straight to the Building Department for permits. As I found these projects, I pulled them out
of the Building Department and processed them as Administrative Design Reviews, includin€;
noticing the neighbors. Often this notice would result. in some concern over the design features.
When this occurred, I facilitated a meeting between the applicant, the designer and the concerned
neighbors. This is what occurred with Mr. Leung's project. A meeting was held, very minor
adjustments to the proposed dwelling were agreed to and these changes were memorialized via
letters to all interested parties. The $680 of increased cost are charges his azchitect is chazginl;
him, it is not City Fees.
On August 20, 2001 the claimant presented a claim for damages regazding the property located at
19621 Scotland Drive. The claimant asserts that the City revoked its prior approval of
construction plans for a single story residence at 19621 Scotland Drive. The claimant reports that:
the City representatives had passed the plans along to the Building Department after indicating
that a planning review was not necessary. In July 2001 the City reversed this decision and
required the claimant to submit his plans for review. As a result of demands made by one:
neighbor, during the review process, the claimant asserts he incurred additional planning and copy
charges totaling $680.00 and is claiming damages in that amount.
i
The City's claims examiner reviewed all documents provided by the claimant and City staff, and
recommends that the City Council reject the claim.
FISCAL Il14PACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The claim will not be settled.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council could decide to settle the claim by paying damages.
FOLLOW UP ACTIONS
Process rejection notice.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A -Supplemental Claims Report from ABAG
o ,.fo
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
CITY MANAGER: ~'°'~-~-
DEPT HEAD: P}:.~G~l/-'"L
SUBJECT: Congress Springs Pazk -Approval of User Agreements and Discussion of User Fees
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
1. Discuss a use fee for Congress Pazk.
2. Approve Congress Springs Pazk User Agreement with Saratoga Little League and
authorize City Manager to execute the same.
3. Approve Congress Springs Park User Agreement with Saratoga Pony League and
i authorize City Manager to execute the same.
4. Waive payment of User Fees for Sazatoga Little League and Saratoga Pony League for three
years in consideration of donations made to the Saratoga Youth Sports Fund.
REPORT SUMMARY:
User Fee
Currently organized youth sports groups pay a lump sum User Fee of $1,500 a year for the use of
Congress Springs Park. The proposal before the Council is to separate. the User Fee charged to
organized sport groups into two separate fees, a maintenance fee and a use fee. Representatives
from American Youth Soccer Organization (AYSO), Saratoga Little League, and Sazatoga Pony
League participated in two public meetings with the Pazks and Recreation Commission to discuss
the amount of the User Fee.
Presently there is agreement among the sport user groups, the Pazks and Recreation Commission,
and staff on the respective dollar amounts for the maintenance fee. .However, there is still
disagreement on the dollar amount of the use fee.
The maintenance fee is based on the additional pazk maintenance that will be needed to keep
Congress Springs Pazk well maintained given the very high annual use it receives, and will be
reviewed on an annual basis. AYSO and Saratoga Little League each have different needs and
place different demands on the park's infrastructure, thus they have different maintenance fees
(see attached Maintenance Exhibits). The maintenance fee for AYSO and Saratoga Little league
are $12,306 and $8,211, respectively. The maintenance fee for Saratoga Pony League is included;
in Saratoga Little Leagues'; therefore this group would pay only a use fee if one were adopted.
The Saratoga Pazks and Recreation Commission recommends a use fee for the use of Congress;
Springs Pazk in the amount of $15 per person (resident) and $25 per person (nonresident). Their:'
recommendation is based in part on User Fees currently adopted in other cities. Representatives. .
of the Parks and Recreation Commission will be presenting additional supporting details of their;
recommendation at the City Council Meeting. Based on last seasons' reported numbers of players
in each youth sports group, the cost of the use fee would be as follows:
AYSO: 1000 players @ $15 = $15,000
Saratoga Little League: 450 players @ $15 = $6,750
Sarato a Pony League: 50 players @ $15 = $750
Saratoga Little League has indicated they could support a maximum use fee of $10 per person,i
while AYSO has yet to specify a dollar amount of the use fee, if any, they could support.
Staff has identified the following options, which are available to the City Council in regard to the':
use and maintenance fees:
1. The City Council could waive payment of both fees for Saratoga Little League and Saratoga!
Pony League for a period of three years in consideration of their donations to the Sazatoga Youth
Sport Fund. Currently Sazatoga Little League has donated $156,700 (includes $90,000 loan) and
Sazatoga Pony League has donated $60,000. Both baseball leagues support a 3 yeaz fee waiver'i
teen.
2. Since Parks and Recreation Commission will be working on a comprehensive examination of
all Park and Recreation fees in conjunction with the F.Y. 2002/03 budget, the City Council could
revisit the use fee at that time.
3. Develop a sinking fund for each sports group based on the amount each group donated to the''
Saratoga Youth Sports Fund. The sinking fund would then be withdrawn annually against the'i
amount of fees charged
User Agreements
Please find attached two user agreements between the City, Saratoga Little League and Sazatoga ~~I
Pony League, respectively. These agreements, once executed, will give these two groups the
rights to use of Congress Springs Pazk, per the stipulations of their agreements, during the time
frame of their respective "seasons". The agreements spell out the maintenance responsibility of ';
the each parry as well restrictions on the use of the park.
2of3
The Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Attorney have reviewed and approved the
agreements.
Because AYSO has requested additional time to review their user agreement, it will be placed on
a future City Council agenda for approval.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
Depends on the City Council's actions.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
The agreements would not be approved and the Saratoga Little League and Sazatoga Pony League
would not have dedicated use of Congress Springs Pazk.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
1. Defer the payment of User Fees, maintenance fees and use fees, for a period other then the
recommended 3 years.
FOLLOW UP ACTION(S):
The contracts will be executed.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Nothing additional.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Maintenance Exhibits.
2. User Agreements.
~~
3 of 3
Y
"Exhibit A"
Additional City Maintenance Tasks -Saratoga Little League Baseball
TASK: HOURS:
Pre-Season
• Replace clay infield area 16 hours
• Field conversion of fields 32 hours
• Replace clay in batter box and pitcher mounds 16 hours
• Scarify, roll, clean-up fields 2 hours
• Set up outfield fencing 64 hours
REGULAR SEASON (Approximately 10 weeks)
• Roll infield (3 times) 6 hours
• Mow (2 times weekly) 40 hours
• Fertilize (2 times) 2 hours
• Slit Aerate (3 times) 3 hours
• Clean cinder clay (weekly) 10 hours
• Misc. (ie-push clay back in batter box, clean dugouts, 20 hours
• push clay back on pitcher's mound) (weekly)
Field Prep (Drag fields, line infields) (weekly)
40 hours
• Dethatch (2 times) 8 hours
END OF SEASON
• Field Conversion (2 people, 2 days) 32 hours
TOTAL HOURS: 291
@ $21.00/HR: $6,111.00
MATERIALS:
• Cinder Clay $1,100.00
• Clay $ 500.00
• Resod Fields (contract out) $ 500.00 ,
TOTAL MATERIALS: $2,100.00
TOTAL ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE COST: $8,211.00
"Exhibit A"
Additional City Maintenance Tasks - AYSO Region 27 Soccer
TASK:
FIELD SET-UP
• Set Up
• Fertilize
• Thatch Field (debris box)
• Aerate Field & Plug Pick-Up
• Fertilize
• Roll Field
HOURS:
16 hours
1 hour
16 hours
16 hours
1 hour
4 hours
REGULAR SEASON (Approximately 10 Weeks)
• Slit Aerate (3 times)
• Mow (2 times per week)
• Overseed field (1 time)
• Dethatch (2 times)
POST SEASON
• Cut worn out turf areas
• Square-up area (goal out)
• Core areate & top dress
• Roll Field
TOTAL HOURS:
MATERIALS:
• Resod Area (assume 10,000 sf @ $0.75 sf)
• Top Soil
• Fertilizer
3 hours
40 hours
4 hours
8 hours
32 hours
16 hours
25 hours
4 hours
186
$3.906.00
$7,500.00
$ 500.00
$ 400.00
TOTAL MATERIALS: $8,400.00
TOTAL ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE COST: $12,306.00
AGREEMENT CONCERNING Little League •
USE OF CONGRESS SPRINGS PARK
THIS AGREEMENT, dated , by and between THE CITY
OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation ("Cit}~'), and SARATOGA LITTLE LEAGUE
BASEBALL, INC. ("Little League "), is made with reference to the following facts:
A. City is owner of a public pazk, located on Glen Brae Drive, known as Congress
Springs Pazk ("the Park"), in which City has constructed facilities, including multi-use fields, a
snack shack, and parking areas.
B. Little League has regularly utilized the Park for the conduct of games and
practices during its season and desires to continue such use.
C. Little League and American Youth Soccer Organization-Region 27 ("AYSO"),
jointly own equipment installed within the snack shack.
D. City and Little League desire to execute this Agreement to establish their
respective rights and obligations concerning the use and maintenance of the Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Term and Times of Use. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution
by the parties and shall terminate on December 31, 2002. During the term of this
Agreement Little League shall have the right to use the turf fields and snack shack
pursuant to this Agreement during the months of January through June ("Baseball
Season"). Each year, Little League shall inform City as to (a) the anticipated specific
starting and ending dates of its use of the turf fields and snack shack and (b) the schedule
for games and practices during the Baseball Season. Such notice shall be furnished to
City at least.thirty (30) days prior to the commencement of the Baseball Season. During
the Baseball Season Little League shall be entitled to the exclusive use of the turf fields
and snack shack during the conduct of its games and practices, provided, however, that
Little League shall not be entitled to exclusive use of the field designated by the Public
Works Director for use by the Pony League (Pony Field) which field shall be subject to
joint use by Little League and Pony League as directed by the Public Works Director. At
all other times, the snack shack shall be closed but the turf fields shall remain open for
use by the general public and organized activities as authorized by City. ,
2. Responsibilities of City. City shall be responsible for the following:
(a) Turf field set up and maintenance as follows:
i. Fertilization;
ii. True-up infield edges; •
iii. Replace Cinder Clay infield areas;
Page 1 of 9
. iv. Replace clay in batters box and on pitchers mound;
v. Scarify, roll, clean-up all turf fields;
vi. Roll infields;
vii. Slice and thatch turf fields;
viii. Broadleaf weed control;
ix. Weed azound perimeter and outfield fencing ;
x. Clean cinder clay off turf field edges;
xi. Field preparation including but not limited to dragging infields;
xii. Misc. cleanup, including but not limited to the following:
a. Push clay back into batters box;
b. Clean dugout areas; and
c. Push clay back onto pitchers mound;
xiii. Convert field for usage by AYSO, including but not limited to:
a. Conversions of fields 4 & 5;
b. Take down home run fencing;
c. Re-sod worn turf field areas;
d. Conversion of T-Ball fields;
e. Removal of goal posts; and
f. Resod base pads and pitching mounds (fields 4 & 5).
(b) Painting all baseball field lines and other markings.
(c) Providing utility services for the snack shack.
(d) Removal of trash from the trash containers in the Park.
(e) Maintenance of the Park restrooms including those in the snack shack.
(~ Changing the locks on the snack shack doors at the beginning and end of
every Baseball Season.
3. Responsibilities of Little League. Little League shall be responsible for the
following:
(a) Maintenance of the interior of the snack shack and repair of the equipment
within the snack shack owned by Little League and AYSO, together with
general custodial caze of the snack shack interior and general clean-up of the
restrooms and storage room within the snack shack building.
(b) Maintenance of electronic scoreboazds.
(c) Clean up of litter and debris after each game or practice and deposit of all
gazbage in the trash containers.
• (d) Ensuring the safety of all Little League activities including, but not limited to,
preventing baseballs from exiting the pazk onto Highway 85 during Little
Page 2 of 9
League practice or games. Little League shall immediately notify the Public
Works Director if a baseball exits the park onto Highway 85 during and Little
League practice or game. If it is determined that a ball is willfully hit or
thrown onto Highway 85 by any Little League member during the Baseball
Season, Little League's rights to use of the Park shall terminate for the
remainder of the Baseball Season and, if the event occurs in the second half of
the Baseball Season, for the following Baseball Season.
(d) Making arrangements with City for a preseason inspection of the turf fields at
least 30 days prior to the beginning of the Baseball Season, at which time
Little League shall advise the City of any objections to the condition of the
turf fields. During the Baseball Season Little League shall immediately notify
the City of any objections to the condition of the turf fields.
4. Payment. In consideration for the additional maintenance and other services
provided by City, as described in Exhibit A, Little League shall pay to the City the
amount of $ for each Baseball Season during the term of this Agreement. For
the use of the Park pursuant to this Agreement, Little League shall pay to the City the
amount of $ for each Baseball Season during the term of this Agreement.
Such payment shall be made no later than December ls` of each yeaz and shall be
delivered to the Director of the Deparhnent of Public Works.
5. Park Use Policy. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the
Public Works Director shall have full authority to regulate the use of the Park, including,
but not limited to, regulation of field layouts and imposing field "rest" periods during the
season, based upon the condition of the pazk and fields as determined by the Public
Works Director to ensure the long term health of the Park.
6. Rainy Day Policy. Little League shall cancel games or practices if it has rained in
the past 24 hours or if the field, as determined by the Public Works Director, is deemed to
be in an unplayable condition at game/practice time. During periods of
unstable/questionable weather conditions, the Public Works Director will determine
whether the fields at the Park are playable. If the fields aze closed due to the above
conditions, a sign will be posted at the park stating "Field Closed Today." This policy
shall be publicized by Little League and made available to all Little League field users.
7. Penalties for Field Use Violations. Any unauthorized use of the Pazk by Little
League and/or Little League members may result in a penalty, as determined by the
Director of Public Works. Unauthorized use includes, but is not limited to, any violation
of the Park Use Policy or Rainy Day Policy set forth above. Penalties shall be as follows:
1 S` Penalty during season: No use of Park for one week from the date the
penalty is imposed or payment of damages up to a maximum of $1000 as
determined by the Director of Public Works.
Page 3 of 9
. 2"a Penalty during season: No use of Park for one month from the date the
penalty is imposed or payment of damages up to a maximum of $5000 as
determined by the Director of Public Works.
3Ta Penalty during season: No use of Pazk for the remainder of season or
payment of damages up to a maximum of $10,000 as detennined by the
Director of Public Works.
8. Termination. Little League may cancel this Agreement by giving written notice
to City not less than sixty (60) days prior to the commencement of its season. City may
cancel this Agreement by giving written notice to Little League not less than one hundred.
twenty (120) days prior to the date on which the annual rental charge specified in
Paragraph 4 would otherwise be due and payable. Provided, however, if City determines
Little League is violating any terms of this agreement or in any way engaging in activities
that City determines are or may be harmful or hazardous to persons or property, City may
at its sole discretion cancel this Agreement if after giving of written notice to Little
League to correct the violation, within thirty (30) days, Little League has not made the
necessary correction. City may at its sole discretion suspend all use of the Pazk by Little
League pending the correction of any violation.
9. Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of
City by the Public Works Director or his or her designee. The Public Works Director has
complete authority to receive information, interpret and define City's policies consistent
with this Agreement, and communicate with. Little League concerning this Agreement.
All correspondence and other communications shall be directed to or through the Public
Works Director or his or her designee.
10. Notices. All notices or communication concerning a party's compliance with the
terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and maybe given either personally, by
certified mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight express carrier. The notice shall
be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered in person or the date
upon which the postal authority or ovemight express carrier indicates that the mailing
was delivered to the address of the receiving Party. The Parties shall make good faith
efforts to provide advance courtesy notice of any notices or communications hereunder
via telefacsimile. However, under no circumstances shall such courtesy notice satisfy the
notice requirements set forth above; nor shall lack of such courtesy notice affect the
validity of service pursuant to the notice requirement set forth above. Any Party hereto,
by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other, may designate any other address as
substitution of the address to which the notice or communication shall be given. Notices
or communications shall be given to the Parties at the addresses set forth below until
specified otherwise in writing:
•
Notices to Little League shall be sent to:
Page 4 of 9
Notices to City shall be sent to:
John Cherbone
Public Works Director
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
With a copy (which copy shall not constitute notice) to:
City Clerk
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Sazatoga, CA 95070
11. No Agency. Except as City may specify in writing, Little League shall have no
authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an
agent. Little League shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this
Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
12. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall observe and comply with all laws, •
policies, general rules and regulations established by City and shall comply with the
common law and all laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of all other governmental
agencies, (including federal, state, municipal and local governing bodies).
13. Drug-free Workplace. Little League and Little League's employees and
volunteers shall comply with the City's policy ofmaintaining adrug-free workplace.
Neither Little League nor Little League employees and volunteers shall unlawfully
manufacture, distribute, dispense, possess or use controlled substances, as defined in 21
U.S. Code Section 812, including marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and amphetamines, at the
Park. If Little League or any employee or volunteer of Little League is convicted or
pleads nolo contendere to a criminal drug statute violation occurring at the Pazk, then
Little League, within five days thereafter, shall notify the City.
14. Discrimination Prohibited. Little League assures and agrees that Little League
will comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other laws prohibiting
discrimination and that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, disability,
sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, religion, Vietnam era veteran's status,
political affiliation, or any other non-merit factors be excluded from participating in, be
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under this Agreement.
15. Indemnification of City. Little League and City agree that City, its employees,
agents and officials shall, to the fullest extent permitted bylaw, be fully protected from
Page 5 of 9
any loss, injury, damage, claim, lawsuit, cost, expense, attorneys fees, litigation costs,
defense costs, court costs or any other cost arising out of or in any way related to the
negligent acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Little League or conduct for
which the law imposes strict liability on Little League in connection with this Agreement.
Accordingly, the provisions of this indemnity provision are intended by the parties to be
interpreted and construed to provide the fullest protection possible under the law to the
City. Little League acknowledges that City would not enter into this agreement in the
absence of the commitment of Little League to indemnify and protect City as set forth "
below.
(a) To the fullest extent permitted bylaw, Little League shall defend,
indemnify and hold harmless City, its employees, agents and officials, from any
liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative
proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind
whatsoever without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a
consequence of or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or
impliedly, to the negligent acts, en•ors or omissions, or willful misconduct of the
Little League (including, but not limited to, damage or injury resulting directly or
indirectly from soccer balls exiting the Park onto Highway 85, during Little
League practice or games) or conduct for which the law imposes strict liability on
the Little League in the performance or failure to perform this Agreement. All
obligations under this provision are to be paid by Little League as they are
incurred by the City.
(b) Without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this agreement
or this section, Little League shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless
City as set forth above for liability attributable to the fault of City, provided such
fault is determined by agreement between the parties or the findings of a court of
competent jurisdiction. This exception will apply only in instances where and
only to the extent that the City is shown to have been at fault.
(c) The obligations of Little League under this or any other provision of this
Agreement will not be limited by the provisions of any workers' compensation act
or similar act. Little League expressly waives any statutory immunity under such
statutes or laws as to City, its employees and officials.
(e) Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no
additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights
hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth herein is
binding on the successors, assigns, or heirs of Little League and shall survive the
termination of this agreement or this section. By execution of this Agreement,
Little League acknowledges and agrees that it has read and understands the
provisions hereof and that this paragraph is a material element of consideration.
City approval of the insurance contracts required by this Agreement does not
relieve the Little League from liability under this paragraph.
Page 6 of 9
16. Insurance Requirements. Little League shall procure and maintain for the
duration of the Agreement "occurrence coverage" insurance as specified below against
claims for the injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in
connection with Little League's use and maintenance of the Park and the performance of
the obligations hereunder by Little League, its agents, representative or employees.
(a) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Little League shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage.
2. Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per
accident.
(b) Other Insurance Provisions. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the
'provisions:
General Liability Coverage.
a. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities
performed by or on behalf of Little League. The coverage shall
contain no special limitations on the scope of the protection afforded
to the City, its off cers, officials, employees or volunteers.
b. Little League's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the
City, its. officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance
orself-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers shall be excess of Little League's insurance
and shall not contribute with it.
c. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall
not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers.
d. Little League's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect
to the limits of the insurer's liability.
2. Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage.
The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the
City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses
arising from work performed by Little League for the City.
3. All Coverages.
Page 7 of 9
Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to
state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either
party, reduced in coverage or in its limits except after thirty (30)
days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested,
has been given to the City.
(c) Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a
Bests' rating of no less than A: VII.
(d) Verification of Coverage. Little League shall furnish City with
certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting
coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for
each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that
insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements
are to be received and approved by the City before Little League may
make use of the park, fields or snack shack. The City reserves the right to
require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any
time.
17. Parties In Interest. This Agreement is entered only for the benefit of the parties
executing this Agreement and not for the benefit of any other individual, entity or person.
18. Successors and assigns. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be:
binding upon the successors of the parties hereto by merger, consolidation, incorporation
of an existing unincorporated association or the formation of additional branches,
divisions or regions. But otherwise this Agreement is neither transferable nor assignable.
19. Cancellation of prior agreement. This Agreement supersedes any and all
agreements, either oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect to Little
League's use of the Park (including the agreement between City, Little League and other
parties dated )and contains all of the covenants and agreements
between the parties with respect to their respective rights and obligations concerning the
Park. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements,
promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone
acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other
agreement, statement or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or
binding. No amendment, alteration, or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be
valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto.
20. Authority. Each signatory hereto hereby represents and warrants'that he or she is
duly authorized to enter this Agreement on behalf of the entity to be bound by this
Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year
first above written.
Page 8 of 9
Saratoga Little League Baseball, Inc., a California Nonprofit Corporation:
By: Date:
Print Name:
Position:
CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation
By: _
Name:
Title:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:
By:
Administrative Services Director
Date:
Date:
Date:
Page 9 of 9
"Exhibit A"
Additional City Maintenance Tasks -Saratoga Little League Baseball
TASK: HOURS:
Pre-Season
• Replace clay infield area 16 hours
• Field conversion of fields 32 hours
• Replace clay in batter box and pitcher mounds 16 hours
• Scarify, roll, clean-up fields 2 hours
• Set up outfield fencing 64 hours
REGULAR SEASON (Approximately 10 weeks)
• Roll infield (3 times) 6 hours
• Mow (2 times weekly) 40 hours
• Fertilize (2 times) 2 hours
• Slit Aerate (3 times) 3 hours
• Clean cinder clay (weekly) 10 hours
• Misc. (ie-push clay back in batter box, clean dugouts, 20 hours
push clay back on pitcher's mound) (weekly)
• Field Prep (Drag fields, line infields) (weekly) 40 hours
• Dethatch (2 times) 8 hours
END OF SEASON
• Field Conversion (2 people, 2 days) 32 hours
TOTAL HOURS: 291
@ $21.00/HR: $6,111.00
MATERIALS:
• Cinder Clay $1,100.00
• Clay $ 500.00
• Resod Fields (contract out) $ 500.00
TOTAL MATERIALS: $2,100.00
TOTAL ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE COST: $8,211.00
AGREEMENT CONCERNING Pony League
USE OF CONGRESS SPRINGS PARK
THIS AGREEMENT, dated by and between THE CITY
OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation ("Cit}~'), and SARATOGA Pony League
BASEBALL ("Pony League"), is made with reference to the following facts:
A. City is owner of a public park, located on Glen Brae Drive, known as Congress
Springs Pazk ("the Park"), in which City has constructed facilities, including multi-use fields, a
snack shack, and parking areas.
B. Pony League has regularly utilized the Park for the conduct of games and
practices during its season and desires to continue such use.
C. City and Pony League desire to execute this Agreement to establish their
respective rights and obligations concerning the use of the Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
I. Term and Times of Use. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution
by the parties and shall terminate on December 31, 2002. During the term of this
Agreement Pony League shall have the right to use the field at the Park designated by the
Public Works Director for use by Pony League ("Pony Field") pursuant to this
Agreement during the months of January through June ("Baseball Season"). Each yeaz,
Pony League shall inform City as to (a) the anticipated specific starting and ending dates
of its use of the Pony Field and (b) the schedule for games and practices during the
Baseball Season. Such notice shall be furnished to City at least thirty (30) days prior to
the commencement of the Baseball Season. During the Baseball Season Pony League
shall be entitled to the joint use of the Pony Field with Saratoga Little League, Inc. during
the conduct of its games and practices. At all other times, the Pony Field shall remain
open for use by the general public and organized activities as authorized by City.
2. Responsibilities of Pony League. Pony League shall be responsible for the
following:
(a) Clean up of litter and debris after each game or practice and deposit of all
garbage in the trash containers.
(b) Ensuring the safety of all Pony League activities including, but not limited to,
preventing baseballs from exiting the park onto Highway 85 during Pony
League practice or games. Pony League shall immediately notify the Public
Works Director if a baseball exits the park onto Highway 85 during and Pony
League practice or game. If it is determined that a ball is willfully hit or
thrown onto Highway 85 by any Pony League member during the Baseball
Season, Pony League's rights to use of the Park shall terminate for the
Page 1 of 8
• remainder of the Baseball Season and, if the event occurs in the second half of
the Baseball Season, for the following Baseball Season.
(d) Making arrangements with City for a preseason inspection of the turf fields at
least 30 days prior to the beginning of the Baseball Season, at which time
Pony League shall advise the City of any objections to the condition of the
turf fields. During the Baseball Season Pony League shall immediately notify
the City of any objections to the condition of the turf fields.
4. Payment. In consideration for the use of the Park pursuant to this Agreement, Pony
Leagne shall pay to the City the amount of $ for each Baseball Season during
the term of this Agreement. Such payment shall be made no later than December 15` of
each year and shall be delivered to the Director of the Department of Public Works.
5. Park Use Policy. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the
Public Works Director shall have full authority to regulate the use of the Park, including,
but not limited to, regulation of field layouts and imposing field "rest" periods during the
season, based upon the condition of the park and fields as determined by the Public
Works Director to ensure the long term health of the Park.
6. Rainy Day Policy. Pony League shall cancel games or practices if it has rained in
the past 24 hours or if the field, as determined by the Public Works Director, is deemed to
be in an unplayable condition at game/practice time. During periods of
unstable/questionable weather conditions, the Public Works Director will determine
whether the Pony Field at the Park is playable. If the field is closed due to the above
conditions, a sign will be posted at the park stating "Field Closed Today." This policy
shall be publicized by Pony League and made available to all Pony League field users.
7. Penalties for Field Use Violations. Any unauthorized use of the Park by Pony
League and/or Pony League members may result in a penalty, as determined by the
Director of Public Works. Unauthorized use includes, but is not limited to, any violation
of the Park Use Policy or Rainy Day Policy set forth above. Penalties shall be as follows:
1 s` Penalty during season: No use of Park for one week from the date the
penalty is imposed or payment of damages up to a maximum of $1y00 as
determined by the Director of Public Works.
2„a Penalty during season: No use of Park for one month from the date the
penalty is imposed or payment of damages up to a maximum of $Sy000 as
determined by the Director of Public Works.
3`a Penalty during season: No use of Park for the remainder of season or
payment of damages up to a maximum of $10.000 as determined by the
Director of Public Works.
LJ
Page 2 of 8
8. Termination. Pony League may cancel this Agreement by giving written notice to •
City not less than sixty (60) days prior to the commencement of its season. City may
cancel this Agreement by giving written notice to Pony League not less than one hundred
twenty (120) days prior to the date on which the annual rental charge specified in
Pazagraph 4 would otherwise be due and payable. Provided, however, if City determines
Pony League is violating any terms of this agreement or in any way engaging in activities
that City determines are or may be harmful or hazazdous to persons or property, City may
at its sole discretion cancel this Agreement if after giving of written notice to Pony
League to correct the violation, within thirty (30) days, Pony League has not made the
necessary correction. City may at its sole discretion suspend all use of the Park by Pony
League pending the correction of any violation.
9. Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of
City by the Public Works Director or his or her designee. The Public Works Director has
complete authority to receive information, interpret and define City's policies consistent
with this Agreement, and communicate with Pony League concerning this Agreement.
All correspondence and other communications shall be directed to or through the Public
Works Director or his or her designee.
10. Notices. All notices or communication concerning a party's compliance with the
terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and maybe given either personally, by
certified mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight express carrier. The notice shall
be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered in person or the date
upon which the postal authority or overnight express tamer indicates that the mailing
was delivered to the address of the receiving Party. The Parties shall make good faith
efforts to provide advance courtesy notice of any notices or communications hereunder
via telefacsimile. However, under no circumstances shall such courtesy notice satisfy the
notice requirements set forth above; nor shall lack of such courtesy notice affect the
validity of service pursuant to the notice requirement set forth above. Any Party hereto,
by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other, may designate any other address as
substitution of the address to which the notice or communication shall be given. Notices
or communications shall be given to the Parties at the addresses set forth below until
specified otherwise in writing:
Notices to Pony League shall be sent to:
Notices to City shall be sent to:
John Cherbone
Public Works Director
City of Saratoga
Page 3 of 8
. 13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
With a copy (which copy shall not constitute notice) to:
City Clerk
City of Sazatoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Sazatoga, CA 95070
11. No Agency. Except as City may specify in writing, Pony League shall have no
authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an
agent. Pony League shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this
Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
12. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall observe and comply with all laws,
policies, general rules and regulations established by City and shall comply with the
common law and all laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of all other governmental
agencies, (including federal, state, municipal and local governing bodies).
13. Drug-free Workplace. Pony League and Pony League's employees and
volunteers shall comply with the City's policy ofmaintaining adrug-free workplace.
Neither Pony League nor Pony League employees and volunteers shall unlawfully
manufacture, distribute, dispense, possess or use controlled substances, as defined in 21
U.S. Code Section 812, including marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and amphetamines, at the
Pazk. If Pony League or any employee or volunteer of Pony League is convicted or
pleads nolo contendere to a criminal drug statute violation occurring at the Park, then
Pony League, within five days thereafter, shall notify the City.
14. Discrimination Prohibited. Pony League assures and agrees that Pony League
will comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other laws prohibiting
discrimination and that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, disability,
sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, religion, Vietnam era veteran's status,
political affiliation, or any other non-merit factors be excluded from participating in, be
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under this Agreement.
15. Indemnification of City. Pony League and City agree that City, its employees,
agents and officials shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be fully protected from
any loss, injury, damage, claim, lawsuit, cost, expense, attorneys fees, litigation costs,
defense costs, court costs or any other cost arising out of or in any way related to the
negligent acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Pony League"or conduct for
which the law imposes strict liability on Pony League in connection with this Agreement.
Accordingly, the provisions of this indemnity provision are intended by the parties to be
. interpreted and construed to provide the fullest protection possible under the law to the
City. Pony League acknowledges that City would not enter into this agreement in the
absence of the commitment of Pony League to indemnify and protect City as set forth
Page 4 of 8
below.
(a) To the fullest extent permitted by law, Pony League shall defend,
indemnify and hold harmless City, its employees, agents and officials, from any
liability, claims, suits, actions, azbitration proceedings, administrative
proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind
whatsoever without restriction or limitation; incurred in relation to, as a
consequence of or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or
impliedly, to the negligent acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of the
Pony League (including, but not limited to, damage or injury resulting directly or
indirectly from soccer balls exiting the Park onto Highway 85, during Pony
League practice or games) or conduct for which the law imposes strict liability on
the Pony League in the performance or failure to perform this Agreement. All
obligations under this provision are to be paid by Pony League as they are
incurred by the City.
(b) Without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this agreement
or this section, Pony League shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless
City as set forth above for liability attributable to the fault of City, provided such
fault is determined by agreement between the parties or the findings of a court of
competent jurisdiction. This exception will apply only in instances where and
only to the extent that the City is shown to have been at fault.
(c) The obligations of Pony League under this or any other provision of this
Agreement will not be limited by the provisions of any workers' compensation act
or similar act. Pony League expressly waives any statutory immunity under such
statutes or laws as to City, its employees and officials.
(c) Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no
additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights
hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth herein is
binding on the successors, assigns, or heirs of Pony League and shall survive the
termination of this agreement or this section. By execution of this Agreement,
Pony League acknowledges and agrees that it has read and understands the
provisions hereof and that this paragraph is a material element of consideration.
City approval of the insurance contracts required by this Agreement does not
relieve the Pony League from liability under this paragraph.
16. Insurance Requirements. Pony League shall procure and maintain for the
duration of the Agreement "occurrence coverage" insurance as specified below against
claims for the injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in
connection with Pony League's use and maintenance of the Park and the performance of
the obligations hereunder by Pony League, its agents, representative or employees.
(a) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Pony League shall maintain limits no less than: •
Page 5 of 8
i. General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage.
2. Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per
accident.
(b) Other Insurance Provisions. The policies aze to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the
provisions:
General Liability Coverage.
a. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers aze to be
covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities
performed by or on behalf of Pony League. The coverage shall
contain no special limitations on the scope of the protection afforded
to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
b. Pony League's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the
City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance
or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers shall be excess of Pony League's insurance
and shall not contribute with it.
c. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall
not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers.
d. Pony League's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect
to the limits of the insurer's liability.
2. Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage.
The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the
City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses
arising from work performed by Pony League for the City.
3. All Coverages.
Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to
state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either
party, reduced in coverage or in its limits except after thirty (30)
days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested,
has been given to the City.
Page 6 of 8
(c) Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a
Bests' rating of no less than A: VII.
(d) Verification of Coverage. Pony League shall furnish City with
certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting
coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for
each insurance policy aze to be signed by a person authorized by that
insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements
are to be received and approved by the City before Pony League may
make use of the pazk, fields or snack shack. The City reserves the right to
require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any
time.
17. Parties In Interest. This Agreement. is entered only for the benefit of the parties
executing this Agreement and not for the benefit of any other individual, entity or person.
18. Successors and assigns. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be
binding upon the successors of the parties hereto by merger, consolidation, incorporation
of an existing unincorporated association or the formation of additional branches,
divisions or regions. But otherwise this Agreement is neither transferable nor assignable.
19. Cancellation of prior agreement. This Agreement supersedes any and all
agreements, either oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect to Pony
League's use of the Park (including the agreement between City, Pony League and other
parties dated )and contains all of the covenants and agreements
between the parties with respect to their respective rights and obligations concerning the
Pazk. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements,
promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone
acting on behalf of any party, which aze not embodied herein, and that no other
agreement, statement or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or
binding. No amendment, alteration, or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be
valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto.
20. Authority. Each signatory hereto hereby represents and warrants that he or she is
duly authorized to enter this Agreement on behalf of the entity to be bound by this
Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year
first above written.
Saratoga Pony League Baseball:
By:
Print Name:
Date:
~_~
Page 7 of 8
Position:
CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation
By:
Name:
Title:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
City Attorney
APPROVED A5 TO INSURANCE:
By:
Administrative Services Director
s
Date:
Date:
Date:
Page 8 of 8
.'~
`~~t
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: _,
ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: .~~~-~
PREPARED BY:. ' ~ DEPT HEAD:
SUBJECT: Approval of a Professional Services Agreement for Landscape Architecture
services with MPA Design in connection with the Azule Park Improvement
Project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Approve a Professional Services Agreement for Landscape Architecture services with MPA
Design of San Francisco in the amount of $67,000.00 and authorize the City Manager to execute
the same.
REPORT SUMMARY:
Request for Proposals (RFPs) were sent out in November to Landscape Architects for
professional planning and design services for the development of Azule Park. Interviews of the
qualified firms were held on January 2, 2002 by a selection panel consisting of 2 staff members,
Pazks and Recreation Commissioner Greg Gates and Azule resident Jim Schindler. A total of 5
firms were interviewed, with two firms emerging as the top candidates, MPA Design of San
Francisco and Amphion, Inc. of Oakland. The original cost proposals for these firms as
presented on January 2, 2002 for the same services is as follows:
• MPA Design: $80,500
• Amphion, Inc: $67,416
Background and reference checks were performed January 3, 4 and 7. The two firms scored
nearly evenly, with no clear advantage to either firm. Upon speaking with each firms' Principal
on Monday, January 7, MPA Design was cleazly more motivated to take on the project, and made
an unsolicited offer to reduce their fees by $5,000. MPA Design was then asked by Staff if they
would lower their offer by an additional $8,500, for a final cost proposal of $67,000, placing.
them in the same range as the cost proposal from Amphion.
MPA Design agreed, and the panel brought forward a recommendation to the Parks and
Recreation Commission on January 7, 2002 to choose MPA Design as the top candidate for the
Azule Pazk Improvement Project. The Pazks and Recreation Commission unanimously approved
the recommendation of the Panel to select MPA Design as the most qualified candidate for the
project. The decision to choose MPA Design was weighted more towards their creative skills
and willingness /eagerness to take on the project as opposed to their lower bid.
Therefore, staff recommends City Council approve a Professional Services Agreement with MPA
Design to provide professional planning and design services for the Azule Park Improvement
Project.
Design work is scheduled to commence as soon as an agreement is executed. Construction is
expected to commence sometime late summer. ',
FISCAL IMPACTS:
Funding for the project development work is programmed in the adopted 2001-2006 Capital;
Improvement Plan.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
1. A Professional Services Ageement with MPA Design will not be
Council my direct staff to negotiate a contract. with another consultant.
this will result in finding a more competent consultant for this project.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
None in addition to the above.
FOLLOW UP ACTION(S):
approved. The Cit}~
Staff does not believe;
1. The Professional Services Agreement will be executed and work will begin immediately.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Nothing additional.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Consultant Proposals
~J
2 of 3
L, Jan 30 02 06:i5p MPR Design
7
4154344665
MPA Design
Larnlzcapc Archircu<
ana UrL+an Ucsigncn
January 10, 2002
John Cherbone
Public Works Director
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
414 Masan Strccr
Sao Francisco, C;A
94102.1119
415 934.4664
FAX 415 434-4665
t-/n~n~
p.l
Post-It'" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 aaf pages " ~
To
L ~ Prom , q-
LK!<:
Co. Co.
Dept. Phone e
Fax Y ~C~'/ 8Gg _ J ~~ Faz p
Subject: Azule Park, Saratoga
Dear Mr. Cherbone:
Design Fee: reduced by $13,500 to $67,000
• We would be very pleased to work with the city on this challenging project. The agreed
to reduction in fee would be shared between MPA Design and three subconsultants.
Subconsultant total was $24,300 before markup so we are reducing this by $5,310.00.
Civil includes $4,000 for a survey which cannot be reduced.
Civil $11,790 1.10
$12,960
Electrical $5,000 1.10 $5,500
Irrigation 2 700 1.10 2 970
$ 19,490 $21,430
We now understand that the park will be used from sunrise to sunset and only minimal
lighting for security will be required. Given the tight budget, eve suggest a tnaximum of
7 attractive park "non-glare" lights @ I6' high x 3,500 = $24,000 plus electrical service
@ $7,000 = S31,500 maximum, and possibly providing conduit for future night lighting
of the tennis courts, at least between the Ywo courts, unless everyone is opposed to this
lighting concept. The perimeter court lights could be added with only minimal change.
Public Workshops
Due to the fast schedule and reduction in fee, we would like to reduce the number of
v<'orkshops.
C)fficcs in San Frmdsco :rod Walqut Crcck
Jan 10 02 06:15p MPR Design 4154344665 p.2
John Cherbone 2
January 9, 2002
•Public workshops presently 5 are proposed (we showed only 4 in our proposal), reduce
to 3 based on recent San Jose, Cupertino and Campbell experience this should be
adequate: Once the concept isagreed toand any.fine-tuning ofyour present program and
playground features are selected, the project then becomes more of a technical PS&E
production effort. If the public meetings were at two-week intervals, this covers 1 %2
months with the last 2 %z months for intensive production work. As the drawings are
updated, they could be posted on a web site or displayed at the Civic Center so that
interested public could comment on any new visual design element which was not
covered in the three meetings. We believe all the visual elements can be covered in the
workshops.
NIPA Normal Procedures:
• For progress printings at schematics, design development stages - 5 copies of
each drawing. For contract documents, 5 copies plus e-mailed digital
information.
• Printing of contract documents for construction bids. This is a separate city
expense. MPA wil I provide digitized information to City of Saratoga, or directly
to the printing service which the City wishes to use.
• In the event the City wishes to expand the scope of the project beyond the
$700,000 budget level, MPA's fee should be adjusted based on 9.57% fee. If the
budget were increased by 10%, the design fee would rise proportionately.
• MPA lump sum fee will not rise or drop based on actual construction bids. On
the 12 examples we furnished you ofbids on all major projects, none were more
than 9.5% above estimates. However, bidding results can change rapidly if the
quantity of new projects out to bid either rises or falls in a significant manner.
We hope this does not occur.
To meet the schedule, MPA needs an up-to-date topographic survey at 1" = 20' on a CAD
format as soon as possible. We also need an aerial photograph in plan view which
includes the school and nearby houses in a digital form. If a purchase order for this
could be issued immediately, this would save t~vo weeks.
Yours very truly,
MPA Design
~~
. ~ r.~~~l
Michael Painter, FASLA
President •
MP:cs
i7
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002
ORIGINATING DEPT: Community Development
PREPARED BY: Thomas Sullivan, AICP
AGENDA ITEM: _1__
CITY MANAGER: 0~~
DEPT HEAD:
SUBJECT: Consideration of Initiating a Study to Create a Single Story Zoning Overlay
Requirement for the Brookview and Saratoga Woods Neighborhoods
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Adopt the attached Resolutions which direct Staff to conduct a poll of all of the property
owners of both neighborhoods to determine the breadth of interest of establishing a zoning
overlay. restriction to limit the area to single stories only. Further direct Staff to report thc:
findings of that poll to the Planning Commission who will then consider the issue in ari
advertised public hearing and report their findings to the City Council.
REPORT SUMMARY:
Last spring the Planning Commission considered an application to allow a second story addition
to a dwelling in the Brookview neighborhood. This application was granted by the Planning;
Commission and then appealed to the City Council. The City Council overturned the Planning;
Commission's approval. The appeal process brought out large numbers of property owners of
the area. Staff has had discussions with the neighbors who filed the appeal with regards to how
to change the zoning so that they did not need to be so vigilant. The concept of a single story
overlay restrcrion was suggested.
Vice Mayor Baker has also discussed this issue with staff. Through those discussions it was
determined that this has been an ongoing issue in both the Brookview and Saratoga Woods
neighborhoods.
Both of these neighborhoods are predominately single story dwellings. Staff has attached copies
of maps indicating where two story structures exist to the proposed resolutions. The maps
distinguish between original construction and newer additions. The Brookview neighborhood
had three original 2-story dwellings and has had 13, 2"d story additions constructed over the
years. There are a total of 323 dwellings in the Brookview neighborhood. In Saratoga Woods,
there were 26, original 2-story homes, this includes three that finished attics above the garages.
In Saratoga Woods, there have been seven 2°a story additions. There are 394 dwellings in the
Saratoga Woods neighborhood.
During the appeal hearing of the Polumbo's proposed 2"d story addition at 19208 Brookview
Drive there was overwhelming sentiment to overturn the approval of the project. A poll needs
to be taken to determine what the level of support there is to have the City adopt regulations
restricting the neighborhoods to single stories. Staff suggests the use of mail-in post cards with
a simple explanation of what is involved and an opportunity to vote, yea or nay. Unless there is
substantial property owner support, it might not be wise to move forward with such ',a
restriction.
The existing 2-story dwellings should be specifically exempted from any provision limiting the
area to single stories so as not to create non-conforming structures. This should also be
explained in the information regarding the poll.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
The fiscal impacts are limited to staff time, the post cards and postage to conduct the poll and
the subsequent public hearing noticing costs. It should be noted that the public hearing
noticing will be more significant that typical public hearings as whole neighborhoods will need
to be noticed.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Maintaining the status quo will result in continued appeals of applications for second story
additions.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
1. Leave the zoning restrictions "as is" and deal with each application on its own merits. ',
2. Direct the Planning Commission to move directly to public hearings to consider the
merits of a zoning overlay restricting one or both of the neighborhoods to single sto 'ry
construction only.
FOLLOW UP ACTION(S):
Not Applicable
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
This meeting was publicly noticed on January 11, 2002.
ATTACHMENTS:
I. A copy of a map of the Brookview neighborhood
2. A copy of a znap of the Saratoga Woods neighborhood
3. A resolution initiating a study to consider establishing a single story zoning overlay for
the Brookview Neighborhood.
4. A resolution initiating a study to consider establishing a single story zoning overlay for
the Saratoga Woods Neighborhood.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTI'Y
OF SARATOGA INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO AMEND
THE ZONING CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
WHERE AS, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga is responsible for making
recommendations to the City Council of the City of Saratoga with respect to proposed amendments to
the zoning code of the City of Saratoga; and
WHERE AS, the Plamiing Commmission is requested to initiate a Study to consider amendments to the
zoning code with respect to establishing asingle-story zoning overlay for the Brookview neighborhood
as shown on the attached map labeled Exhibit A: and
WHEREAS, this matter was considered at a duly noticed public meeting on January I6, 2002, at which
time all members of the public were afforded an opportunity to comment on the initiation of these
proceedings.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that City Staff is hereby directed to conduct amail-in poll to
determine the level of property owner interest and report the results of such poll to the Planning;
Commission.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission is hereby directed
to initiate proceedings to consider amendments to the zoning code for the City of Saratoga with respect
to restricting the Brookview neighborhood, as shown on the attached Exhibit A, to single stork
construction.
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the
Saratoga City Council held on the 16`h day of January, 2002 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
NICK STREIT, MAYOR
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
Brookview
Exhibit A
Original
M, .
~~
~~
500 0 500 1000 1500 ~ 2000 ~ `251
N
W E
S
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SARATOGA INTTIATING PROCEEDINGS TO AMEND
THE ZONING CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
WHERE AS, the Planning- Commission of the City of Saratoga is responsible for making
recommendations to the City Council of the City of Saratoga with respect to proposed amendments to
the zoning code of the City of Saratoga; and
WHERE AS, the Planning Commission is requested to initiate a Study to consider amendments to the
zoning code with respect to establishing asingle-story zoning overlay for the Saratoga Woods
neighborhood as shown on the attached map labeled Exhibit A: and
WHERE AS, this matter was considered at a duly noticed public meeting on January 16, 2002, at which
time all members of the public were afforded an opportunity to comment on the initiation of these
proceedings.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that City Staff is hereby directed to conduct amail-in poll to
determine the level of property owner interest and report the results of such poll to the Planning
Commission.
M NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission is hereby directed
to initiate proceedings to consider amendments to the zoning code for the City of Saratoga with respect
to restricting the Saratoga Woods neighborhood, as shown on the attached Exhibit A, to single story
construction.
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the
Saratoga City Council held on the 16`}` day of January, 2002 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
NICK STREIT, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk
500 p ~ ~ ~ ~~, , , , i
500 1000 1500 2000 25~
Feet
N
W E
S •
aaratoga Woods
Exhibit A
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2002 CITY MANAGER: ~~~~ ~~
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Attorney PREPARED BY: Richard Taylor
SUBJECT: Second Reading of Parks and Recreation Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1) Conduct public hearing on proposed ordinance amending the City's parks and
recreation ordinance;
2) Approve motion to waive the second reading of the ordinance; and
3) Approve ordinance.
STAFF REPORT
The City Council after a public hearing on December 19, 2001 approved a first reading of
the attached ordinance in order to (1) prohibit objects from being hit or thrown into public;
rights of way near City parks, (2) clarify the. City's authority to enter into season-long
agreements with AYSO, Little League Baseball, and other groups, subject to conditions
imposed by the Director of Parks, and (3) make. several technical "clean-up" amendments
to the Code. The effect of the ordinance is described in the staff report for the December
19, 2001 meeting.
At the first reading the Council revised the ordinance to state that the group permit
requirement applies to any "publicly advertised" assemblage rather than a "pre-
advertised" assemblage. This change is reflected in the attached draft. The Council also
directed that the ordinance be considered by the City Parks and Recreation Commission.
The Commission considered the ordinance at its meeting of January 7, 2002 and proposed
no changes to the ordinance.
Ordinarily, a second reading matter would be placed on the consent calendar. Because
the draft ordinance had not been considered by the Parks and Recreation Commission
prior to the first reading, however, the ordinance has been set for an additional public
1
hearing to ensure that the public had a full opportunity to comment on this matter.
FISCAL IMPACTS: No significant fiscal impacts.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: .
Notice for this meeting.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Discussed above.
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft Ordinance.
2
i
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SARATOGA CITY CODE
CONCERNING PARKS AND RECREATION
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings.
A. The City of Saratoga has witnessed an increased demand for areas for organized,
recreational sporting events such as soccer and baseball. In an effort to address this
demand, the City has worked to make City parks available for recreational sporting
events.
B. Because of the increased use of City parks for recreational sporting events, the City has
identified a risk that baseballs, soccer balls, and other objects could be thrown, kicked, or
hit into nearby roadways, potentially causing serious injury or damage. City pazks are
designed to avoid this risk during sporting events and other appropriate recreational
activities. For example, the City has installed protective netting at Congress Springs Park
to prevent balls from being thrown or hit into California State Highway 85, adjacent to
the park. However, if parks are used improperly, there is a risk of injury or damage to
people and property using nearby roadways. Additional protection would be provided to
people and property at Congress Springs Park and at other City parks by prohibiting
anyone from throwing, kicking, or hitting balls, rocks, or other objects from parks into
nearby roadways in a manner that could cause injury or damage.
C. To promote the use of City parks for recreational sporting events, the Director of Pazks
has previously issued season-long group use permits to soccer leagues and baseball
leagues, pursuant to Section 11-10.010 of the Saratoga City Code. An amendment to
Section 11-10.010 would clarify that the Director has the authority to make a group use
permit effective for multiple times, multiple days, and multiple locations.
D. In order to protect people and vehicles that walls or drive neaz parks from damage or
injury caused by errant balls and other objects, Section 2.1 of this ordinance amends
Section 11-05.030 of the Saratoga City Code to prohibit anyone from throwing, kicking,
or hitting any ball, rock, or other object from a park into a public road, parking azea, or
pathway.
Page 1 of 5
Ordinance No.
E. In order to ensure that the use of City pazks for recreational sporting events is fairly and
properly controlled and allocated, Section 2.2 of this ordinance amends Section 11-
05.050(a) of the Sazatoga City Code to clarify that Section 11-05.050 applies to the use or
occupation of any park or area thereof by any publicly advertised assemblage, regazdless
of the number of persons assembling, and to the use or occupation of any park or area
thereof by any group of persons twenty-five or more in number, regardless of whether the
group's use or occupation is publicly advertised.
F. In order to clarify the Director of Pazks' authority regarding group use permits, Section
2.3 of this ordinance amends Section 11-10.010 of the Saratoga City Code to clarify that
the Director of Parks may issue any group use permit for multiple times, multiple days,
and multiple locations.
G. In order to facilitate the processing and coordination of applications for season-long
group use permits for recreational sports leagues, Section 2.4 of this ordinance amends
Section 11-10.020 of the Sazatoga City Code to provide that the City Council may
authorize an application for a group use,permit to be filed more than ninety days in
advance of the proposed use, and Section 2.5 of this ordinance amends Section 11-10.050
of the Sazatoga City Code to provide that the City Council may revoke a group use permit
at any time.
Section 2.1. Protection of Persons and Vehicles Near Parks.
Section 11-05.030 of the Saratoga City Code regarding activities prohibited in pazks is
hereby amended by redesignating the existing subsection (p) as subsection (c~ and by inserting a
new subsection (p), to read as set forth below:
(p) Throw, kick, or hit any ball, rock, or other object into any public driveway, roadway,
highway, parking azea, sidewalk, bicycle path, or trail inside or outside the pazk in such a
manner that the ball, rock, or other object could cause injury to any person or cause
damage to any vehicle or other property.
Section 2.2. Clarification of Acts Prohibited Except with Special Permit.
Section 11-05.050(a) of the Saratoga City Code regazding acts prohibited in parks
without a permit is hereby amended, to read as set forth below:
(a) The use or occupation of any pazk or area thereof by any publicly advertised
assemblage or by any group of persons twenty-five or more in number.
Page 2 of 5
Ordinance No.
Section 2.3. Group Use Permits.
Section 11-10.010 of the Saratoga City Code is hereby amended as shown below. Text
inserted by this ordinance is indicated in bold, double-underlined font exam le ;text deleted by
this ordinance is indicated in strikeout font (ele). Text in standard font is unchanged by this
ordinance.
11-10.010 Group use permit.
Certain predesignated areas of City pazks may be made available for the temporary
°~~lnsi~-use of groups of persons upon the issuance of a r~ti~r¢roup use permit
therefor by the Director in accord with the following provisions:
(a) Each group must consist often or more persons unless it is acommunity-oriented
group, and have one or more adults who agree in writing to be responsible for such group
during the entire period of exclusive use of the area in question.
(b) Each group shall in no event exceed in number seventy-five percent of the capacity of
such park or the azea of such pazk, as is established by the park regulations, and in all
events the Director shall have the authority to limit the size of the group to a number less
than such percentage of capacity in conditioning such permit.
(c) Each permit shall specify (I) the park(s) and area(s) of the park(s) to which the
permit applies: (21 the day(s) and hour(s) for which the permit is issued, over a
period not to exceed one year: (31 whether the permit is for exclusive or non-
exclusive use: and (41 any other conditions imposed by the Director. No group use
permit shall be issued to the same or substantially the same group of persons more often
than once every ninety days.
Section 2.4. Time for Filing Group Use Permit Applications.
The introductory clause of Section 11-10.020(a) of the Saratoga City Code regarding
group use permits is hereby amended, as shown below. Text inserted by this ordinance is
indicated in bold, double-underlined font exam le ;text deleted by this ordinance is indicated in
strikeout font (ex-ample). Text in standazd font is unchanged by this ordinance. Paragraphs (1)
through (7) of Section 11-10.020(a) of the Saratoga City Code are not amended by this
ordinance.
(a) Application for a group use pennit shall be in writing on forms furnished by the City,
and be filed with the Director no less than twenty nor more than ninety days prior to the
date of the proposed use, unless the Citv Council authorizes an earlier filing, and shall
contain the following information:
Page 3 of 5
Ordinance No.
Section 2.5. Revocation of Group Use Permits by the City Council.
Section 11-10.050 of the Saratoga City Code regarding group use permit revocation is
hereby amended as shown below. Text inserted by this ordinance is indicated in bold, double-
underlined font exam le ;text deleted by this ordinance is indicated in strikeout font (ex~rxgle).
Text in standard font is unchanged by this ordinance.
11-10.050 Revocation of permit.
Any permit issued under the provisions of this Article shall be subject to revocation Eby
the Director upon a finding of any violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter,-er
any other provisions of this Code, or any of the conditions of such permit~eh or ii
the City Council at anv time. Such revocation shall be effective immediately, but
~vhiek in the case of a revocation by the Director. shall be subject to review by appeal
to the City Council in accordance with the procedure set forth in Section 2-05.030 of this
Code.
Section 3. Severance Clause.
Each section, sub-section, pazagraph, sub-pazagraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this
ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-
paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance. If any section, sub-section, paragraph,
sub-paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held invalid, the City Council
declazes that it would have adopted the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective of the
portion held invalid, and further declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this
ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated.
Section 4. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance or a summary thereof to be published once in a
newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption.
Page 4 of 5
Ordinance No.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regulaz meeting of the City
Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 19th day of December, 2001, and was adopted by the
following vote following a second reading on the 16th day of January, 2002:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MAYOR, CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
L..I
Page 5 of 5
Ordinance No.
X
'~-~ Economic Development Options
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: Januarv 16, 2002 AGENDA ITEM:
ORIGINATING DEPT.: Cit~ManaQer's Office CITY MANAGER: ~~~~-
PREPARED BY: Danielle Surdin. Econ. Dev. Coord. DEPT. HEAD:
SUBJECT: Economic Development Options
ACTION (S)
1. Direct staff on preferable Economic Development Options
REPORT SUMMARY:
Introduction•
Economic Development can play a vital and necessary role in government by facilitating
communication between the private and public sectors. This synergy has the potential to
improve the community's quality of life, stimulate business investment, and diversify the
public revenue base.
Economic development strategies vary from city-to-city depending on available capital,
community profile, and overall assessed needs. Cities like Saratoga without a
Redevelopment Agency and with limited development potential can still have an
effective economic development program. While some options. are more costly than
others such as recruiting activities and capital projects, retention and promotion of
existing local businesses can reinforce and strengthen businesses. Cities that are
successful in retaining businesses and invest in their current business districts can become
known for their pro-business atmosphere. On the other hand, a focus on attraction of new
businesses has the potential for introducing new services and products into the local
economy. Economic development programs can assist in changing the private sectors
perception of government as a regulatory entity, to that of a valued community
partnership. ,
Back rg ound
At the October 4, 2000, meeting, the City Council acted to create an Economic
Development Coordinator position in order to facilitate economic revitalization efforts in
the City of Saratoga. In May 2001, the City hired Danielle Surdin as our Economic
Economic Development Options
Development Coordinator to implement various economic development programs for
business retention, promotion, and recruitment in partnership with the business
community.
In the past six months staff has been focusing economic development efforts on business ':
retention and promotion. The City has concentrated on developing personal relationships
within the business community as a high priority. Staff has also been developing
marketing materials during this time to create basic promotional material. The Village
Lighting project has been completed, the Village Streetscape Improvements are ready to
present to the Sazatoga Business Development Council (SBDC) in January, and staff has
been working with consultants on the Gateway Taskforce.
At the request of the City Council the staff is presenting options for future economic
development efforts, and outlining the roles and function of several local economic
development organizations to accomplish these tasks. The staff is seeking Council input
to more clearly define our economic development goals and approach for 2002. Staff has
provided Council a variety of economic development options under the three categories
of new business atttaction, local business retention, and promotion. Staff will develop a
strategic economic development plan based on Council's direction.
Economic Development Options & Strategy
New Business Attraction:
This aspect of economic development entails attracting new businesses to the community,
whether to vacant tenancies or new construction. A variety of approaches are available to
the City for recruiting new businesses, including working with commercial real estate
brokers and commercial builders to attract desirable. businesses to the community.
Another approach is to provide a formal new business incentive program, much like that
which was used to amact the Patrick James clothing store to the Village. The following is
a list of options for Council to consider:
1. Network quarterly with commercial brokers and surrounding cities Economic
Development professionals to keep up-to-date on business leads and issues.
2. Develop an incentive program with criteria for City funding of (1) projects for
which assistance might be provided, and (2) business types and project types ''
which might be eligible for expedited .processing. Other cities have similar
programs that aze based on the number of jobs, payroll per job, assessed !! ,
valuations, or taxable sales.
3. Targeted business amaction -canvas other bay area cities for small and medium
sized businesses wanting to expand, which fit the desired profile, and offer them ',
assistance to relocate or expand.
4. Attend trade shows of desired industries and actively promote Saratoga as a place
to do business -highlight quality of life and other desirable demographics
through amactive and consistent marketing material.
Economic Development Options
5. Develop and distribute a new business-marketing packet. This would be an
effective tool to establish a positive working relationship with new businesses and
immediately encourage them to establish business relationships with the local
merchants and business organizations. By fostering these relationships as early as
possible, the City can position itself to better cooperate with businesses in
retention or expansion efforts. The packet would include information about city
regulations pertaining to business, contact information for local utility companies,
business services, city departments and civic organizations, and demographics.
6. Develop a public relations program to publicize accomplishments in business
amaction and retention, business and community growth, and convenient permit
process and business friendly climate. The information would be disseminated to
real estate brokers, developers, and business owners to highlight the City's efforts
in trying to recruit and promote new businesses.
Local Business Retention:
Retention is a key economic development tool to help keep the viability and longevity of
our local business community strong. Retention usually tends to be a less expensive
option in the economic development strategy, as a majority of efforts consist of
disseminating information and alerting businesses to business assistance programs. The
following is a list of options the City of Saratoga could consider:
1. Create business assistance awareness by developing a directory of small business
assistance programs. The City could compile information regarding the types of
business assistance programs available to local businesses. The directory should
include not only programs offered by the City, but also programs available to
local businesses through regional, state, and federal funding. By making this
information readily available to small businesses, the City can help promote the
use of programs that will assist local businesses to expand and prosper. Often the
biggest barrier to small businesses getting the assistance they need is a lack of
awareness to such programs.
2: Initiate a business visitation program and visit approximately 2-3 businesses a
month to learn about their operations, discuss potential problems, and identify
opportunities for City support.
3. Commercial beautification projects - downtown Village Revitalization and
Gateway Commercial Improvements add to the overall business climate and
location attractiveness (decorative lighting, improved streetscapes, and furniture)
4. Create a quarterly business newsletter highlighting marketing tips, sale
techniques, and other business related activities.
5. Monitor quarterly sales tax reports to identify businesses needing attention.
Economic Development Options
Promotion•
Promotion of our local businesses is essential to draw both regional visitors and the local
Sazatoga resident. The local Sazatoga household has a mean income of $184,500, which
is a higher disposable income level then many other bay area communities. Through
effective marketing materials, advertising, and special events the City can help make
residents familiaz with what our business community has to offer. Many cities have a
significant promotional budget to help fund local business promotion efforts. The
following is a list of promotional ideas for Council to consider:
1. A marketing portfolio consisting of the Available Lease Space Brochure, Winery
& Entertainment Guide, Historical Walking Tour Brochure, Business Assistance
Directory, and demographics. Make a clean and consistent look to drive the
message home - create a branding image.
2. A website tour of Saratoga that shows options for shopping, dining, lodging, and
other activities.
3. Use special events such as the Village Lighting Ceremony and Celebrate Saratoga
to draw visitors and residents into commercial districts.
4. Collaborate with surrounding cities' Chamber of Commerce, Convention of
Visitor's Bureau, and fellow Economic Development professionals to promote
Sazatoga as a destination city.
5. Develop local promotional efforts such as a shop locally program. The City could
supply advertising or street banner time to support merchant events.
6. Review of the sign ordinance to create a promotional banner/accent banner
program for merchants (pole-mounted banners).
7. Utilize City promotional materials for hotel industry to increase overall Transit
Occupancy Tax.
Community Players
The Economic Development program should focus and build civic-minded broad-based
relationships with the local community's key players. The following are identified as
Sazatoga's key community economic development players:
The Saratoga Chamber of Commerce:
• Business-to-business networking opportunities
• Referrals and yeazly directory
• Visitor Information & Tourism
• Special Events
• Member-based Mazketing
West Valley College:
• Business Assistance Seminazs
• Customized Employee Training
• Graphic Design, Marketing, & Web Design Assistance
4 Economic Development Options
• Saratoga Business Development Council:
• Forum for business owners to shaze concerns & ideas
• Mazketing input and overall analysis on Sazatoga's promotion goals
• Feedback on business related projects and issues
Conclusion•
With Council direction on economic development priorities, staff will work cohesively
with all these entities to effectively position Saratoga as a desirable city in which to live,
work, and do business.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
There are many facets to the Economic Development Options. Depending on how the
City Council would like to direct emphasis on certain objectives, a cost analysis would
need to be performed by staff. Business Attraction incentives and professional marketing
materials would be more costly; retention efforts are less costly because they generally
consist of providing information and staff time. The Economic Development budget for
FY 200-02 is $56,000 with a little over half currently utilized. The budget allocation for
the FY 2002-03 is projected to be the same. This may need to change depending on the
level of effort the City wishes staff to undertake in the Economic Development area.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING:
Delays the overall Economic Development Outline for the City of Saratoga.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Staff can prioritize the options given to Council in terms of urgency.
FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS:
1. Staff will begin to create a detailed Economic Development implementation plan with
estimated cost analysis and project timeline.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING, AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Nothing Additional.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: March 21, 2001
ORIGINATING DEPT: City
AGENDA ITEM: /7 ,~ _
CITY MANAGER: ~~~-~`-'-'
PREPARED BY:
DEPT HEAD:
SUBJECT: Consideration of Establishing Eligibility Requirements for the City's
Commissions and Committees
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Accept report and direct staff accordingly.
STAFF REPORT:
The City of Sazatoga has never memorialized by resolution or by policy establishing eligibility
requirements for the City's Commissions and/or Committees.
In the past the City has requested that an applicant be a resident of the City of Saratoga and at
least 18 yeazs old. The exception to the age requirement has been the Youth Commission and th.e
exception to residency requirement has. been that one member of the Library Commission is
allowed to be from Monte Sereno.
Staff conducted a statewide survey requesting information regazding commission and committee;
eligibility requirements. Upon reviewing the information, staff has concluded that the following
requirements were the most consistent requirements amongst the cities that responded to the
request. .
• Must be a resident of the City of Saratoga (with the exception of one seat on the Library
Commission)
• Beat least 18 yeazs old at the time of appointment (with the exception of the Youth
Commission)
• Be a Registered Voter within the City
• Be a U.S. Citizen
• Must be able to attend meetings regularly and commit time as necessary to be able to
make informed decisions on issues coming before them.
• Shall not hold any public office, place or position of employment with the City of
Sazatoga.
• No person shall serve at the same time on more that one standing Commission
• Must attend one commission/committee meeting prior to participating in the interview
process
The City Council may wish to consider the above list of requirements and direct to bring back
Council desires as a policy for resolution adoption by Council.
Regarding the proposed requirement of being a Unites States Citizen, State law technically
imposes a citizenship requirement on all civil officers (6overnment Code section 1020).
However, the state Attomey General has opined that the requirement is too broad because it
applies to all civil officers. The Supreme Court has held that states and local governments can i
only impose a citizenship requirement on "officers who participate directly in the formulation,
execution, or review of broad public policy perform functions that go to the heart of
representative government." (Sugarman v. Dougall (1972) 413 U.S. 634.) Because the state law
did not limit itself to officers fitting this description, the Attorney General has opined that the law
in not constitutional
Instead of relying solely on state law, the City could amend the City Code to impose a
citizenship requirement for those commission positions that the City.Council has determined aze
directly involved in formulating, executing, and/or reviewing broad public policy issues.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Council would not have eligibility requirements for the various Commissions and
Committees.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council would not make any recommendations and no formal resolution or policy would be
developed.
FOLLOW UP ACTION:
City Clerk to bring back Council's desires as policy for resolution adoption by Council.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A -Survey Results
N
O
O
N
0
e~
ti
U
..,
s~
... o
,..,
a+ W DC
.~
.. ~
~ °'
~
o
a ~
~
~C
yC
..Nr
...
U
~ ~
s.
a~
0
a~ U
...
~ ~
o
DC
~C
~C
~C
yC
d~
yC yC DC >C
^~
..,
tx
yC
~
~
yC
~
~
~
~
~
~
DC
~
~
~
~
~
C
~
'~'
~ .~
v
CQ
°r
o
~
w
~
Q
a
~'~
~
a~i
~
~
:~
i
~
3
o
U
a
~~
z i~.i
w V
a y
a ~
Fii
~ U
~ ~
~ .
F.i
~ z"
~ .'~".
w
~ ~
a Yr
z Sr
~ O
~
U
;n o
... ..
w
a; ~
..
~ „
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
a ~ ~
w
...,
U
~ ~
~.
0
~ U
~
... ~
,~
a o ~ ~c
~~ ~
...
x ~ ~ ~ ~
~
.. ~ ~. ~
~
o
~
~ ~
~ ~
;c U ~
~,
U~ ~+ A, ~ W ~ ~.
~..J
i