The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-11-2001 City Council Agenda Packet AGENDA SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION STUDY SESSION SPECIAL MEETING DECEMBER 11~ 2001 CALL MEETING TO ORDER - 5:30 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM - 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION - 5:30 P.M. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION: (Government Code section 54956.9(a)) Name of case: Saratoga Fire Protection District v. City of Saratoga (Santa Clara County Superior Court No. CV-803540) OPEN SESSION - 6:15 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM - 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE COMMISSION INTERVIEWS - 6:15 P.M. 6:15 p.m. Mary Ann Henderson Arts Commission COUNCIL REORGANIZATION - 6:30 P.M. .ADULT CARE CENTER- 19655 ALLENDALE AVENUE CALL MEETING TO ORDER - 6:30 P.M. 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 December 7, 2001) COUNCIL REORGANIZATION Remarks from outgoing Mayor - John Mehaffey Reorganization of City Council. Recommended action: 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 Administer Oath of Office to Councilmembers. Recommended action: Administer Oath of Office. Remarks from new Mayor,-Vice MaYor, and Councilmembers. ADJOURNMENT TO RECEPTION - 7:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT TO STUDY SESSION - 7:30 P.M. ADULT CARE CENTER - 19655 ALLENDALE AVENUE 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 counciJ 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 CONSENT CALENDAR None PUBLIC HEARINGS None o Civic Center Master Plan Recommended action: Accept Report and direct staff accordingly. 2 ADJOURNMENT TO SPECIAL MEETING OLD BUSINESS 6. Saratoga Creek Settlement Agreement- Status Report Recommended action: Informational only. NEW BUSINESS o Sewer Lateral Ordinance & Abatement Options for Below-Grade Septic Systems Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. o Authorization to City Manager to Execute an Agreement with ATI Architects and Engineers for Public Safety Center Design Concept Recommended action: Authorize agreement and adopt resolution. Consider Requests to Join Friends of the Court Briefs in Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority Recommended action: Approve requests to join amicus briefs. 10. Review of Draft Council Master Meeting Calendar for 2002 Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. 11. Council Agency Assignments and Commission Liaisons Recommended action: "Mayor to solicit preferred assignments form Councilmembers. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS OTHER CITY MANAGER'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need ~pecial 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) December 19, 2001 January 2, 2002 Jan,uary 8, 2001 January 16, 2000 SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Regular Meeting/Council Chambers 13777 Fmitvale Avenue Saratoga, California Regular Meeting/Council Chambers 13777 Fmitvale Avenue Saratoga, California Joint Meeting Youth Commission/Library Commission Adult Day Care Center 19655 Allendale Avenue SaratOga, California Regular Meeting/Council Chambers 13777 Fmitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 7:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 4 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 11, 2001 ORIGINATING/I)[gP. T :~Ci~t~.~ .anager PREPARED AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: kEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Commission Interview for Arts Commission RECOMMENDED ACTION: That Council conduct an interviews for the Arts Commission. REPORT SUMMARY: The following person has been scheduled for an interview: 6:15 p.m. Mary Ann Henderson Arts Commission There are seven (7) vacancies to be filled on the newly established Saratoga Arts Commission. The terms for these vacancies will expire on October 1, 2005. The City Council interviewed the following applicants on Novemebr7, 2001: Leroy Murray, Pamela Roper Kaiser, Charles Guzzetta, and Mary Lou Taylor. The Council continued the interview process on December 5,2011 interviewing the following people: Betty Peck, Lisa Pontier de MatteiR and Robert Rockwood FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Appointments will not be made to the Arts Commission. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Adopt resolution and administer Oaths of Office at newt regular scheduled Council Meeting. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Application of the above named applicant. CITY OF SARATOGA COMMISSION APPLICATION FORM DATE: ~O~ ~ COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: MR. TELEPHONE:(/'~') :~ ~" A~DP~SS: /q~O C~r-- W~ YEAR YOU BECAME A SARATOGA RESIDENT: WORK WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO ATTEND DAYTIME MEETINGS? WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO ATTEND EVENING MEETINGS? BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN EACH OF THESE AREAS CURRENT OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYMENT HISTORY: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 4 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS: REFERENCES: PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: 5 MARY ANN HENDERSON Artist's Biography Mary Ann Henderson lived in Cleveland, Ohio before moving to Saratoga, CA eleven years ago. She receded her BFA degree bom Notre Dame College in Cleveland and studied one year at the University of Vienna, Austria. She did her graduate work in Art History at Case Western Reserve University. She worked 15 years as a fibrarian in the Cleveland suburbs and in Fairfax, VA. She has two adult children and enjoys her challenging life as a serious artist. Her husband enjoys his r°le as both muse and critic.- She has exhibited in numerous local and regional group and one-person shows and has received many major awards, including: 2000 KTEH public television commi~on to create painting for Tenth Anniversary Fine Art Portfolio 1999 National League of American Pen Women Award for Distinguished Achievement in the Arts 1998 Villa Montalvo...Samtoga Community of Painters at Montalvo 1998 Los Cratos Museum of Art Jm'ied Show...First Place, pastel/watercolor 1998 Triton Museum of Art; VAAST Juried Show...First Place, Club Award ...Second Place, Overall Award 1997 Santa Clara County Fair Fine Arts Juried Competition...First Place AFFILIATIONS: President (current) of Allied Artists West (AAW), a group of nationally known and emerging professional artists of Santa Clara County Past president of the Saratoga Contemporary Artists Aegis Gallery of Fine Art in Saratoga, CA. Nov.- SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 11, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: SUBJECT: Status of Settlement Agreement with San Francisco Baykeeper, Inc. and Friends of Santa Clara Creeks RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept Report. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is a copy of the Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement between thc City, thc San Francisco Baykcepcr, Inc. and the Friends of Santa Clara Creeks. The following is a summary status of the settlement stipulations: I..The City's Proiects A. No-dumping stencils. Complete. B. Warning signs. Signs Installed. C. Water quality testing. Water Quality Testing performed a minimum of three times a year at the stipulated locations. D. Maps of Strom Drains. Complete. E. Discharge response plan. All items being implemented, directly by the City, Saratoga Fire District, County Fire, and through the City's participation in the West Valley Clean Water Program via the NPDES permit requirements. F. Repair of sags in major storm drains in village area. 4th Street storm drain sag has been repaired and all storm drains are cleaned yearly. G. Non-stormwater effluent from the storm drain outfall at Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Problem solved and effluent has tested at acceptable levels. Ho Septic System phase-out. Septic Abatement Ordinance adopted and implemented. Attorney's Fees and Costs All fees have been paid. Water quality test results and reports submitted to Friends of Santa Clara Creek. IV. Dismissal of Litigation Stipulations Acknowledged. V. Other Provisions Stipulations Acknowledged. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A. 2 of 3 ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Continued implementation o£the settlement agreement conditions. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ---~ ATTACHMENTS: 1. Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement. 3 of 3 ~ __MUTUAL RELEASE AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT San Francisco BayKceper, Inc. and Friends of Santa Clara County Creeks (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), and the City of Saratoga ("the City"), hereby enter into the following Mutual Release and SettlementAgreement ("Agreement"). This Agreement is the result of extensive settlement discussionS~' undertaken in good faith and at arm's length, whereby Plaintiffs and the City have agreed to settle their disputes without asserting, admitting or conceding that any of the allegations or contentions of any party are true or correct. I. THE CITY'S PROJECTS' A. No-dumping stencils. By May 1, 1999, the City shall make its best effort to assure that no-dumping signs arc stenciled next to storm drain inlets in primary potential problem areas, such as those in parking lots serving commercial areas and in alleyways in the Village commercial ama, and that the signs are maintained in legible condition. Signs within the Saratoga Fire Department's jurisdiction are to identify the Saratoga Fire Department's telephone number as the number to call to report illegal discharges. B. Warning signs. By May 1, 1999, the City shall install, and thereafter maintain, two types of signs: Sign Type 1: The purpose of this type of sign is to warn people to avoid contact with Saratoga Creek ("Creek") water where levels of water pollution commonly exceed EPA recreational water contact criteria. All signs are to be placed where children are most likely to be close to the Creek, such as in Wildwood Park and at points of easy access near schools. i~$2g!L.T..~.S~: The purpose of this type of sign is to warn children to stay away from storm drain outlets. These signs are to be placed immediately above or beside major out falls. The signs are to be designed to be understood by children as young as possible, The City shall determine appropriate locations for the signs in consultation with the Coyote Creek Riparian Station investigators who have inspected the entire span of the Creek. Thereafter, the City shall solicit public input on proposed sign locations at a City Council meeting. Signs will be placed such that they have minimum impact on views from private property. C. Water quality testing. At least three times each year (as near as is reasonably possible to May 15, July 15, and September 15, but at least seven days after the last rainfall in Saratoga), beginmng in May 1999, the City shall conduct coliform tests of samples of steady-state Creek water, i.e., samples that are not influenced by stormwater runoff. At a minimum, samples shall be collected at the following locations in Saratoga Creek: (1) Springer Ave., (2) the downstream border of Wildwood Park, and (3) Crestbrook Drive. A sample shall also be collected of effluent fi.om the main outfall beneath Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Tests shall be for total coliform and fecal coliform, with dilution as necessary to determine levels up to 160,000 MPN/100mL. Within ten days after receiving each set of test analysis results, the City staff shall transmit a memorandum describing the results (1) to the City Council, and (2) to PlainfiffFriends of Santa Clara County Creeks. At'the earliest reasonable oppommity, the City Council shall place on its agenda a review of each memorandum. Each memorandum shall include an attachment explaining EPA's fecal coliform criteria, in a form approved by Plaintiffs. D. Maps of storm drains. Within one month of the execution of this Agreement, the City shall prepare, and thereafter maintain (or caUse to be prepared and maintained) professional quality maps of all storm drains, overlaid on cOpies of West Valley Samtation District's (WVSD) sewer line maps, or equivalent. E. Discharge response plan. The City shall make the following improvements in illicit discharge response procedures: (1) Accept the offer by Fire ChiefErnie IG-'aule to assume primary responsibility for initial investigations. (2) Assure that City personnel such as code enforcement officers, building inspectors, and street maintenance workers understand the City's discharge response obligations under its NPDES permit. (3) Assure that the personnel who will respond are trained to do it e. ffectively. Hold drills. (4) Assure that complete maps of the storm drain system are immediately available to personnel who may have to investigate discharge reports. Assure that primary response personnel know where the most important drain lines, outfalls, and manholes are. (5) Assure that the plan will work aider normal working hours, on weekends, and on holidays. (6) Have enfomement personnel and/or.building inspectors occasionally check construction sites for obviOus signs of illegal discharges into storm drains -- either direct discharges, or placement of dirt, debris, or other materials where rain will flush them into storm drains. Document these checks. (7) Have community service officers regularly check the areas around garbage containers · in commemial districts for code violations where violations have occurred repeatedly in the past. Document these checks. (8) Through annual publication in the Saratoga News and/or by mail as an insert accompanying solid waste (garbage) disposal bills, describe the City's discharge response plan to residents and publicize that anyone seeing an illegal discharge within the Saratoga Fire District's jurisdiction should call the Fire Department's 7-digit number. Assure that persons answering the City's main telephone number know that if they receive a call reporting a discharge, they should instruct the caller to call the Fire Department, or 911 if there is no alternative. (9) Assure that City ordinances allow, to the extent allowable under state and federal law, reasonable and prompt access by investigators to storm drain inlets on private property who are tracing illegal discharges in progress. Assure that investigators are informed of the legal requirements for access to private property under these circumstances. F. Repair of sags in major storm drains in village area. (1) The City agrees to schedule replacement of the 4th Street bridge as the next project to be completed after the Quito Avenue bridge replacement, at which time the sag in the 4th Street line will be eliminated. The City. also agrees to require elimination Of the sag in' thc Saratoga Avenue line as a part of the renovation of the Saratoga Fire Station when such renovation takes place. (2) Until the sags have been eliminated, the City will periodically clean the sagged areas, at a minimum once annually, in August, beginning in August 1999. G. Non-stormwater effluent from the storm drain outfall at Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. The City shall make a rigorous effort to identify the source(s) of, and reduce to an acceptable level (as defined below), the fecal coliform in the non-stormwater effluent emanating from the storm drain outfall at Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. If the City does not succeed in this effort by August 1, 1999, the City shall engage a consultant, approved by the Plaintiffs, to advise the City on how to resolve the problem. The City shall promptly and fully inform Plaintiffs of its investigative and remedial plans and actions. The City shall continue its source identification and remedial actions until the fecal coliform level for this outfall is acceptable. The fecal coliform level will be deemed "acceptable" if, in five consecutive tests of non-stormwater (dry weather) outfall effluent, with.samples collected at intervals of not less than two days nor more than 7 days, no sample exceeds a fecal coliform level of 400 MPN/100mL, and the geometric mean of all samples does not exceed 200 1VIPN/100mL. H. Septic system phase-out. By March 30, i 999, the City Council shall place on its agenda consideration of an ordinance to require the elimination of septic tanks as soon as reasonably possible. The City shall make its best effort to identify, within six months of the execution of this Agreement, the locations of all septic systems in the City, beginning with identification of septic tanks near Saratoga Creek. II. ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS The City shall pay Plaintiffs a total of $84,000 in full settlement of all claims for fees and costs (representing $75,000 in attorneys' fees, and $9,000 in out-of-pocket and expert witness costs). The City shall make three payments of equal size according to the following schedule: Upon execution of settlement Agreement: 1/3 July 1, 1999:1/3 July 1, 2000:1/3 Payments shall be made payable to Earth[ustice Legal De_fense Fund, and should be directed to: Attn: Claudia Polsky Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund 180 Montgomery Street, Suite 1725 San Francisco, CA 94104 .- III. REPORTING On October 15, or thirty days after the last water quality tests of the dry season, whichever is later, the City'shall annually submit to PlaintiffFriends of Santa Clara County Creeks a report indicating its activities in compliance with this settlement on an item-by-item basis. This report shall contain copies of all test results obtained pursuant to ¶C and ¶G, any maps produced pursuant to 'ID (one submittal only), and the text of any ordinance Passed pursuant to ~ (one submittal only). Reports should be directed to: Friends of Santa Clara County Creeks c/o Don Whetstone EISI 14395 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 IV. DISMISSAL OF LITIGATION Upon execution of this Agreement, the parties shall lodge the Agreement with the Court and concurrently stipulate to dismiss this litigation without prejudice. The parties shall additionally stipulate that the Court retains jurisdiction to vacate the order of dismissal on the motion of either party filed on or before October 1, 2003, for the purposes of entering a judgment under the terms of this Agreement. On October 1, 2003, in the absence of any pending action by any party to enforce this Agreement or any pending motion by any party to reopen this action, the dismissal shall ripen into a dismissal with prejudice. V. OTHER PROVISIONS A. Each of the parties represents and warrants that, in connection with the negotiation and execution of this Agreement, it has been represented by independent counsel of its own choosing, it has executed this Agreement after receiving the advice of such counsel, and its representative(s) have read and understand the provisions and terms of this Agreement. B. The undersigned counsel for Plaintiffs and the City each certify that they are fully authorized by the parties whom they represent to enter into this Agreement and legally bind their respective parties to its terms. The provisions of this Agreement shall bind the parties, their respective agents, and all those persons, firms, and corporations who are or will be acting in concert ofpfivity with them. THE UNDERSIGNED ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY' HAVE READ THIS AGREEMENT IN ITS ENTIRETY AND FULLY UNDERSTAND ITS TERMS: DATED: April ,1999 CITY OF SARATOGA fi Shaw, lV[ayor DATED: April ,1999 FRIENDS OF SANTA CLARA COUN'I~ CREEKS eY: . _.,/,.~---c .;" ;,~. Don Whetstone, President DATED: April ,1999 SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER, INC. BY: Michael R. Lozeau, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT: Claudia Polsky, Esq. Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund 180 Montgomery Street, Suite 1725 San Francisco, CA 94104 · (415) 627-6725 BY: Michael S. Riback Claudia Polsky 7 Attorney for San Francisco BayKeeper, Inc. and Friends of Santa Clara County Creeks 777 Davis Street, Suite 300 San Leandro, CA 94577 (510) 351-4300 . Meyers, Nave, Riback, Silver & Wilson BY: ;.-_ .." Michael S. Ribaek Attorney for the City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: December 11, 2001 CITY MANAGER: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works/ City Attorney PREPARED BY: John Cherbone/ Richard Taylor SUBJECT: Draft Sewer Lateral Ordinance and Report on Abatement Options for Below-Grade Septic Systems RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and provide direction to staff. If the Council wishes to consider adoption of the ordinance staff will notice the ordinance for a public hearing and first reading on December 19, 2001 or at another meeting as directed by the Council. REPORT SUMMARY: 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 the public sewer system. This report presents the draft ordinance and information concerning a method of connecting below-grade properties to the public seWer system. BACKGROUND: At its meeting of June 6, 2001 the City Council received a detailed report concerning water quality in Saratoga Creek and other creeks in the City. That report explained that several creeks in Saratoga exceed EPA standards for fecal coliform. The report noted that the City had been engaged in a lengthy process of abating potential sources of contamination by working with the West Valley and Cupertino Sanitary Districts, inspecting public storm drain systems, and by requiring abatement of septic systems on properties where it is feasible to connect to the public sewer system. The report concluded that although contamination levels have declined since these efforts began, overall contamination levels continue to exceed applicable standards. In response to the report, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would facilitate regular inspections of sewer laterals .connecting individual buildings to the public sewer system. In addition, Council directed staff to investigate methods of further reducing the number of homes relying on septic syStems by encouraging connection to the public sewer system. Sewer Lateral Ordinance: A draft sewer lateral ordinance is attached. In brief, the draft 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. Below, we first describe the existing City Code followed by a detailed description of the draft ordinance. The Existing Code The City has adopted certain provisions of the Santa Clara County Code regarding sewage disposal. (See Saratoga City Code § 7-10.030.) Section B11-9 of the Santa Clara County Code states that no person may "... maintain any sewage disposal system, sewer pipes or conduits, or any other conduits for the treatment or discharge of sewage..." in a manner that results in sewage either (1) seeping or draining onto the surface or within 12 inches of the surface, (2) seeping or draining into any well, stream, or other waters, (3) creating any condition that is unsafe, dangerous, or a nuisance. In addition, section 723.0 of the 1997 Uniform Plumbing Code (adopted by City Code § 16- 25.010) establishes a mechanism for testing building sewers. It further provides that building sewers shall be "watertight at all points." Because any violation of the Plumbing Code is a nuisance (Saratoga City Code § 3-05.010(e)), the City could bring a code enforcement action against any landowner maintaining a sewer lateral system that testing reveals to be not watertight at all points. The difficulty posed by the existing City Code is that provides no mechanism for regular testing of sewer laterals. Because leaks may be slow or may be located in areas shielded from view it is difficult to identify potential leaks and conduct the inspections necessary to enforce the Code's requirements. In addition, in many cases the sewer laterals have not been constructed in a manner that would allow testing to check for leakage. The traditional method of testing involves a water or air pressure test in which one end of the sewer lateral is blocked and the water level or pressure is monitored at the other end of the lateral to detect leakage between the two points. This form of testing requires that the sewer lateral have two clean-out junctions: one at the structure on the property and another at the property line. The Plumbing Code requires most new structures to have a clean out installed at the structure but does not require a clean-out at the property line. The draft ordinance seeks to address these problems. The Draft Ordinance The draft ordinance would make three substantive amendments to the City Code. The ordinance begins with findings describing the circumstances requiring legislative action by the City. These findings summarize the discussion in the June 6, 2001 report to the Council and in this report. Section 2.1 of the ordinance 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. Section 2.2 of the ordinance amends the Plumbing Code to require a two-way cleanout at the property line for all new construction. Section 2.3 of the ordinance amends the Plumbing Code to specify that. visual inspections of sewer laterals with video cameras are permitted in the discretion of the building inspector. The specifics of each of these sections are discussed below. Section 2.1 of the ordinance requires regular inspection of sewer laterals and requires installation of clean-outs necessary to allow inspection. Inspection and clean-out installation is required at the time a property is sold or transferred and at the time a permit is issued for any major plumbing project. Inspections and new clean-outs are not required for laterals that are less than 15 years old. Once a property has been inspected and the clean-out(s) installed, the property would be exempt from the inspection requirement for ten years. These time periods reflect staff's estimation that laterals less than 15 years old are unlikely to be leaking and that significant problems with inspected laterals are unlikely to develop over a period of ten years or less. These are estimates only, however, and the Council may wish to establish shorter or longer exemption periods. The ordinance requires inspections and clean-out installation at the time of major plumbing projects because such project can be expected to add to the load on the lateral. In addition, from a practical perspective, any lateral repairs found necessary can be included as part of the plumbing project. Inspection is required in connection with any project that involves the addition of more than 5 "drainage fixture units" as defined by the Plumbing Code. This is equivalent to a new toilet and kitchen sink. A copy of the Plumbing Code's listing of fixture units is attached to the draft ordinance for your information. Section 2.2 of the ordinance amends the Plumbing Code to require installation of a second clean-out at the property line. As described above, this is necessary to allow air or water pressure testing of sewer laterals. The amendment directs the City Engineer to develop detailed specifications for these clean--outs. These specification would be developed in consultation with the building industry and sewer service providers. Section 2.3 of the ordinance allows the use of remote video technology to inspect sewer systems. Although the air and water pressure tests are generally more accepted, there are times when those testing methods are not adequate. When the soil surrounding a sewer lateral is saturated, for example, an air or water pressure test would not reveal any leakage. By allowing remote video technology to be used, the ordinance will give the building inspector a greater range of tools to be used in the inspection process. Alternatives As an alternative to adopting the ordinance in its draft form the Council could direct staff to take no action or to revise the ordinance. If no ordinance is adopted staff would continue to inspect laterals on an ad-hoc basis as evidence of leakage becomes available. The Council could also direct staff to revise the ordinance. Issues that the Council may wish to consider include: Frequency of Inspections - the time period between inspections could be increased or decreased from 10 years. Trigger for Inspection and Clean-out Installation - inspections and clean out could be required only for major plumbing projects or only for sales or transfers rather than for both. Alternatively, the size of the plumbing project triggering the inspection/clean-out requirement could be adjusted up or dOwn. Inspection Method - inspections could be conducted entirely by remote video which would eliminate the need for a second clean-out at the property line. Fiscal Impacts The ordinance would place an increased burden on City staff due to-the need to conduct and monitor inspections at the time that properties are sold and improved. These costs could be offset by inspection fees. 4 BELOW-GRADE PROPERTIES: On June 6, the City Council also received information concerning properties, which have below grade exemptions. In order to abate these septic systems, the option available is to install a grinder pump and holding tank. It is generally believed that these septic systems, which are generally near creeks, are contributing to the pollution problem. The most direct way to eliminate this source of pollution is to require these properties to connect to the sewer system. Currently, the main concerns with eliminating the below grade exemption are additional costs to property owners beyond the "standard" septic abatement and the problems associated with pump failures. Staff has done additional research and believes the following to be true: The initial costs to abate a below grade septic system will not be more than a "standard" abatement because a smaller diameter pipe can be installed at a lower cost than the installation of a larger diameter gravity pipe. This should more than offset the cost to purchase a grinder pump (usually $750). Additionally, the smaller pipes can be directional bored, which will significantly reduce the disruption to landscaping, etc. 2. The existing septic tank can be modified for use as a holding tank for the pump system. o Any new holding tank installed or one modified from an existing septic tank, under normal usage, should have a minimum of three days of holding capacity in the event of a power outage or pump failure. 4. ' The West Valley Sanitation District has indicated that they would extend their financing program to include pumps and holding tank modifications. In addition to the above, it is also possible to leave the existing septic system functional, which would enable a property owner to "switch" over from the pump system in case of a power outage. This would require that a separate holding tank be installed for the pump system. The compliance of the property owner to operate the septic system only in the event of a pump failure is one negative aspect of this option. If Council wishes to explore the elimination of the below grade exemption, staff will bring back a draft amendment to the Septic Abatement Ordinance for review. FISCAL IMPACTS: Discussed above. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Notice for this meeting. public hearing will be held on the ordinance if Council directs staff to proceed. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Discussed above. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance. Table of Drainage Fixture Equivalents. A 6 q ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SARATOGA CITY CODE CONCERNING STANDARDS FOR AND INSPECTIONS OF SEWER LATERALS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. Despite the progress made by the City of Saratoga's ongoing water quality protection programs, fecal coliform levels in Saratoga Creek and other waterways exceed national standards for the protection of human health and the environment. Even where waterways appear clear, tests have recorded fecal coliform levels that pose a threat to human health. The risk to human health is heightened by the fact that people--especially children--may be attracted to unsafe water by its clean appearance. Bo Reviews of local conditions and technical literature indicate that the probable sources of contamination are subterranean flows from septic systems and faulty sewer lines. Old or improperly maintained sewer lines are commonly a source of leaks. Some older building sewers do not have cleanouts to allow for maintenance and inspection. The City Council has recently amended the Saratoga City Code to address contamination caused by septic systems. In addition, the Saratoga City Code requires building owners to repair faulty sewer lines and maintain building sewers in a safe condition. However, the Saratoga City Code does not require regular and effective inspections of building sewers. Increased enforcement of existing plumbing codes and maintenance requirements with respect to building sewers, supported by more frequent and effective inspections, would help to address faulty or leaking building sewers and thereby reduce fecal coliform levels in Saratoga Creek and other waterways. In order to promote more regular and effective inspection of building sewers, section 2.1 of this ordinance amends the Saratoga City Code to require persons seeking to convey real property or a building to first obtain an inspection of certain building sewers connected to the real property or building. Section 2.1 also amends the Saratoga City Code to require persons seeking to connect significant drainage fixtures to a building sewer to first obtain an inspection of that building sewer. In addition, Section 2.1 amends the Saratoga City Code to establish procedures and standards for conducting and reporting the results of the inspections required by this ordinance and to require the Saratoga City Health Officer to order repairs in the event that a building sewer is found not to be operating in compliance with the sewage disposal provisions of the Saratoga City Code. Section 2.1 provides an exception from the building sewer inspection requirements where a building sewer is less than fifteen years old or was inspected less 1 Ordinance No. than ten years earlier. Section 2.2 of this ordinance amends the Saratoga City Code to require the installation of two-way cleanouts on certain building sewers in order to facilitate inspection and maintenance. Go Section 2.3 of this ordinance amends the Saratoga City Code to expressly recognize remote video inspection as an acceptable method for testing building sewers and to gix;e the building inspector the authority to direct, at' the inspector's discretion, which type of test must be used for each building sewer test. Section 2.1. Building Sewer Inspections. The Saratoga City Code is hereby amended by adding Section 7-10.120, to read as set forth below: 7-10.120 Section Bll-9.1 is added concerning inspection of building sewers. Section B 11-9.1 is added to the Code of the County of Santa Clara, to read as follows: Section B11-9.1. Inspection of building sewers upon transfer of ownership of propertY or installation of a significant drainage fixture. (a) No person shall transfer or convey more than fifty percent of the ownership interest in any real property, residence, place of business, or other building that is connected to a public sanitary sewer facility without first (i) obtaining an inspection of the building ' sewer and a written report summarizing the results of the inspection, and (ii) ensuring that the building sewer is operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code and Sections 719.0 through 719.6 of the Plumbing Code. Where the real property, 'residence, place of business, or other building shares all or part of a building sewer with another real property, residence, place of business, or other building, the inspection shall also include the shared section of the building sewer. The inspection requirement set forth in this subsection does not apply with respect to a section of the building sewer (i) which was constructed less than fifteen years prior to the date of transfer or conveyance, or (ii) which was inspected in accordance with this section less then ten years prior to the 'date of transfer or conveyance. (b) No person shall connect, or cause the connection of, a significant drainage fixture to a., building sewer that is connected to a public sanitary sewer facility without first obtaining an inspection of the building sewer and a written report summarizing the results of the inspection. Any permit issued for installation of the significant drainage fixture shall require the permittee to ensure that the building sewer is operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code and Sections 719.0 through 719.6 of the Plumbing 2 Ordinance No. Code prior to completion of the installation of the significant drainage fixture. Where the real property, residence, place of business, or other building in which the significant drainage fixtures would be located shares all or a part of a building sewer with another real property, residence, place of business, or other building, the inspection shall also include the shared section of the building sewer. The inspection requirement set forth in this subsection does not apply with respec~ to a section of the building sewer (i) which was constructed less than fifteen years prior to the date of installation of the significant drainage fixture, or (ii) which was inspected in accordance with this section less then ten years prior to the date of installation of the significant drainage fixture. (1) For purposes of this subsection, a significant drainage fixture is any drainage fixture or group of drainage fixtures which in the aggregate have a Drainage Fixture Unit Value equal to or greater than five, as assigned and calculated pursuant to Table 7-3 of the Plumbing Code. Replacement in the same location of a drainage fixture connected to the building sewer shall not constitute the connection of a significant drainage fixture, provided that the replacement drainage fixture has a Drainage Fixture Unit Value equal to or less than that of the replaced drainage fixture. (2) All drainage fixtures connected to a building sewer after the date of the last inspection conducted in accordance with this section shall be considered as a group for purposes of calculating Drainage Fixture Unit Values. (c) Inspections conducted and reports prepared under this section shall meet the following requirements: (1) The inspection shall be made for the purpose of determining, and the report of the inspector shall state, whether the building sewer is operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code (Sewage Disposal), including Section B 11-9 of the Code of the County of Santa Clara, as adopted by reference, and Sections 719.0 through 719.6 of the Plumbing Code. (2) The inspection shall be conducted by a registered civil engineer or a registered environmental health specialist, or any other individual who is determined by the Health Officer to be qualified to perform such inspection. (3) The inspection shall be conducted in accordance with Section 723.0 of the Plumbing Code (Building Sewer Test). (4) The report of the inspection shall be submitted to the Health Officer at least 10 days prior to the transfer or conveyance, for inspections required by subsection (a), or the installation of the significant drainage fixture, for inspections required by subsection (b). (d)(1) The Health Officer shall order by notice in writing any person owning a building 3 Ordinance No. sewer, or any part thereof, that is not operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code and Sections 719.0 through 719.6 of the Plumbing Code to ensure that the building sewer is operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code and Sections 719.0 through 719.6 of the Plumbing Code within a specified period of time, not to exceed 180 days. No person shall transfer or convey more than fifty percent of the ownership interest in any real property, residence, place of business, or other building that is connected to the building sewer until the Health Officer finds, pursuant to an inspection conducted in accordance with this section, that the building sewer is operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code and Sections 719.0 through 719.6 of the Plumbing Code, which finding shall be a condition to 'the close of escrow or transfer of ownership-of the subject property. Failure to repair the building sewer within the time specified in the notice shall result in the City recording a Notice of Non-Compliance against the property under Section 7-10.090 of the Saratoga City Code. (2) The Health Officer may order by notice in writing any person owning a building sewer, or any part thereof, that is not operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code to discontinue use of the building sewer until the Health Officer finds, pursuant to an inspection conducted in accordance with this section, that the building sewer is operating in compliance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code. (3) The Health Officer shall cause such notice to be served personally to the owner or by mailing such notice to the owner by certified mail, postage prepaid, and addressed to the address last shown on the Santa Clara County secured assessment rolls and by posting a copy of such notice on the property. Section 2.2. Installation of Two-Way Cleanouts. The Saratoga City Code is hereby amended by adding Sections 16-25.020 and 16-25.030, to read as set forth below: 16-25.020 Additions, deletions and amendments. The addition, deletions and amendments set forth in this Article are made to the Plumbing Code, as adopted by reference in Section 16-25.010. 16-25.030 Section 719.1 is amended concerning installation of two-way cleanouts. Section 719.1 of the Plumbing Code is amended to read as follows: 719.1 Cleanouts shall be placed inside the building near the connection between the building drain and the building sewer or installed outside the building at the lower end of the building drain and extended to grade. 4 Ordinance No. Additional building sewer cleanouts shall be installed at intervals not to exceed one hundred (100) feet (30480 mm) in straight runs and for each aggregate horizontal change in direction exceeding one hundred thirty-five (135) degrees (2.36 rad).. In addition, a two-way cleanout shall be installed in the building sewer behind the curb or near the property line in a location approved by the Admi. nistrative Authority.. Such cleanout shall be a double-wye meeting the material and installation standards developed by the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall develop standards for the material and installation of building sewer cleanouts. Section 2.3. Video Inspections. The Saratoga City Code is hereby amended by adding Section 16-25.040, to read as set forth below: 16-25.040 Section 723.0 is amended concerning building sewer tests. Section 723.0 of the Plumbing Code is amended to read as follows: 723.0 Building Sewer Test Building sewers shall be tested in one or more of the following ways, as directed by the Administrative Authority: (1) By plugging the end of the building sewer at its points of connection with the public sewer or private sewage disposal system and completely filling the building sewer with water from the lowest to the highest point thereof; or (2) By approved equivalent low pressure air test; or (3) By remote video inspection conducted and reviewed by a qualified technician under the supervision of the Administrative Authority and reviewed and approved by the Administrative Authority; or (4) By such other test as may be prescribed by the Administrative Authority. The building sewer shall be watertight at all points and shall comply with all applicable codes and regulations. Section 3. Severance Clause. Each section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub-section, paragraph, sub- 5 Ordinance No. 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 declares 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.' The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the __ day of ,2001, and was adopted by the following vote following a second reading on the __ day of__, 2001'- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: MAYOR, CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY 6 Ordinance No. Table 7-3 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE TABLE 7-3 Drainage Fixture Unit Values (DFU) Min. Size Trap and Individual Fixtures Trap Arm7 Bar Sink ................................................................................................... 1-1/2' Bar Sink ......................................... '. ......................................................... 1-1/2-2 Bathtub or Combination Bath/Shower ..................................................... 1-1/2' Bidet, 1-1/4' trap ..................................................................................... 1-1/4' Clinical Sink, 3' trap ................................................................................ 3' Clothes Washer, domestic, 2" standpipe5 ............................................... 2' Dental Unit, cuspidor ............................................................................... 1-1/4' Dishwasher, domestic, with independent drain ....................................... 1-1/2' Drinking Fountain or Watercooler ............................................................ 1-1/4' Food-waste-grinder, commercial ............................................................. 2' Floor Drain, emergency ........................................................................... Kitchen Sink, domestic, with one 1-1/2' trap ........................................... 1-1/2-2 Kitchen Sink, domestic, with food-waste-grinder ..................................... 1-1/2-2 Kitchen Sink, domestic, with dishwasher ................................................ 1-1/2"2 Kitchen Sink, domestic, w/grinder and dishwasher ................................. 1-1/2-2 Laundry Sink, one or two compartments ................................................. 1-1/2" Laundry Sink, with discharge from clothes washer ................................. 1-1/2' Lavatory, single ....................................................................................... 1-1/4' Lavatory in sets of two or three ............................................................... 1-1/2' Mobile Home, trap .................................................. '. ................................ 3' Mop Basin, 3' trap ................................................................................... 3' Rece[~tor, indirect waste, 1-1/2' trap1.3 ................................................... 1-1/2' Receptor, indirect waste, 2' trap1,4 ......................................................... 2' Receptor, indirect waste, 3" trapI ........................................................... 3' Service Sink, 2' trap ................................... .. ............................................ 2' Service Sink, 3" trap ................................................................................ 3" Shower Stall, 2" trap ................................................................................ 2' Showers, group, per head (continuous use) ........................................... 2' Sink, commercial, 1-1/2' trap, with food waste ....................................... 1-1/2"2 Sink, service, flushing rim ........................................................................ 3" Sink, general, 1-1/2' trap ......................................................................... 1-1/2' Sink, general, 2' trap ............................................................................... 2' Sink, general, 3' trap ............................................................................... 3" Urinal, 1.0 GPF ........................................................................................ Urinal, greater than 1.0 GPF ................................................................... Urinal, 1-1/2" trap ................................... : .......................... ; ..................... 1-1/2"2 Washfountain, 1-1/2' trap ........................................................................ 1-1/2' Washfountain, 2' trap .............................................................................. 2" Wash Sink, each set of faucets ............................................................... Water Closet, 1.6 GPF Gravity Tank6 ............... : ..................................... 3' Water Closet, 1.6 GPF Flushometer Tank6 ............................................3' Water Closet, 1.6 GPF Flushometer Valve6 ...........................................3' Water Closet, 3.5 GPF Gravity Tank6 .................................................... 3' Water Closet, 3.5 GPF Flushometer Valve6 ...........................................3' Whirlpool Bath or Combination Bath/Shower ..........................................2' Private Individual 3 or mom Dwelling Dwellings 1.0 1.0 3.0' 3.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 ' 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 Public General Heaw-Use Use Assembly 2.0 6.0 1.0 2.0 0.5 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 (1) (1) (1) 3.0 3.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 6.0 2.0 3,0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 5.0 8.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 1Indirect waste receptors shall be sized based on the total drainage capacity of the fixtures that drain therein to, in accordance with Table 7-4. 2provide a 2'(51 mm) minimum branch drain beyond the trap arm. 3For refrigerators, coffee urns, water stations, and similar Iow demands. 4For commercial sinks, dishwashers, and similar moderate or heavy demands. 5Buildings having a clothes washing area with clothes washers in a battery of three (3) or more clothes washers shall be rated at six (6) fixture units each for purposes of sizing common horizontal and vertical drainage piping. 6Water closets shall be computed as six (6) fixture units when determining septic tank sizes based on Appendix K of this Code. 7Trap sizes shall not be increased to the point where the fixture discharge may be inadequate to maintain their self-scouring properties. 60 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 11, 2001 ORIGINATING ~_~ Attorney PREP~ AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Approval of Professional Services Agreement with ATI Architects and Engineers for the Public Safety Center Design Concept RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve authorization to City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with ATI Architects and Engineers in the amount of $25,000 for architectural services. REPORT SUMMARY: At its July 10~2001 meeting'the City Council authorized the Mayor to appoint an AdHoc Committee comprised of stakeholders and residents with an interest in a new Public Safety Center for the City of Saratoga. The committee was charged with determining the feasibility of constructing such a center located on the southeastern comer of Highway 9 and Saratoga Avenue. At its August 15th meeting, at the. request of the AdHoc Committee, the City Council authorized the appropriation of $25,000 for a Public Safety Center conceptual design study. This new center is envisioned to include a new West Valley Sheriff's Substation, a new Fire Station and a new retail center for the Post office, along with adequate parking. In October 2001, the City of Saratoga solicited Proposals and Statements of Qualifications from 56 Bay Area firms to provide Architectural services to develop site layout options for proposed Public Safety Center. The scope of the project was limited to potential site plans, conceptual drawings and estimated cost of the various options, and does not include building design or other more detailed aspects of architectural services. The City would like to have site plans prepared based upon 3 different options for a Public Safety Center. The first option assumes a Public Safety Center without use of Federated Church property for parking. The second option assumes the use of Federated Church property for shared parking and the third option assumes that one agency will move off site. ., In early November 2001, the City received eight proposals from qualified fh'ms for providing architectural services to develop site layout and the estimated costs for a Public Safety Center. The AdHoc Committee met to review the RFP's after the initial submittals narrowing the field of architects to three firms. The three firms were: · ATI Architects and Engineers $25,000 flat fee · Knoll & Tam Architects $27,840 with reimbursable expenses · George Miers and Associates did not submit a cost proposal At a subsequent meeting all three finns were invited to make presentations before the AdHoc Committee. After the presentations the Committee voted to recommend to the Council ATI Architects and Engineers. The vote for ATI Architects and Engineers was nearly unanimous. The Committee felt their technical capabilities were superior to the other two firms and felt that the principal involved showed a familiarity and understanding of the Committee's needs and concerns a great deal more than the other two firms. FISCAL IMPACTS: The cost proposal for this project is a $25,000 fixed fee amount, which has been previously appropriated for this purpose. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The proposal would not be approved and the project would not move forward. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: City Clerk will forward a certified copy Of the fully executed agreement to ATI Architects and Engineers. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: .~_ N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Architectural Services Proposal From ATI Architects and Engineers Attachment B - Architectural Services Proposal From Knoll & Tam Architects Attachment C - Architectural Services Proposal From George Miers & Associates Attachment D - Professional Services Agreement 2 of 2 Attachment A- ATI Architects and Engineers 3860 Blackhawk Road Danville, CA 94506 T: 925. 648. 8800 F: 925.648.8811 4200 East A venue Liverrnore, CA 94550 T: 925.447.4017 F: 925.447.9360 2510 Douglas Boulevard Ro~eville, CA 95661- T: 916. 772.1800 F: 916. 772.1820 October 31, 2001 Mr. Dave Anderson City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Ref: Request for Proposals Architectural Sen/ices for a Public Safety Center- Conceptual Design Project Dear Mr. Anderson: ATI is pleased to present our response to your Request for Proposal for architectural sen/ices for a Public Safety Center to be built on the comer of State Route 9 and Saratoga Avenue in Saratoga, California. ATI is a full sen/ice architectural and engineering firm providing professional sen/ices to public and private clients throughout California and Nevada. We have provided services to many cities, counties, and redevelopment agencies throughout the State. Our firm works well with Public Agencies and understands the process thoroughly. We are detailed oriented. We work well .with City staff and managers. We are very much aware of the importance of working with the Ad Hoc committee and the surrounding neighbors in order to provide the city with a complete study that actually represents all the needs of the community. We have the experience with other govemment agencies that will allow ATI to provide the City of Saratoga with a comprehensive study of the various options presented in the Request of Proposals. ATI will assign a senior design and management team to this project. Team members are aware · of the culture of Saratoga. Team members have actual project experience in Saratoga dating back twenty or more years. We are aware of the environment and the sensitivity of the project in relationship to the neighboring houses, businesses and the village. Because ATI is a full service architectural-engineering firm, we can provide all the design and engineering required to complete this project. All team members are in house, including civil engineering and survey crews. ATI is prepared to deliver a project that meets the RFQ and committee's requirements. We will deliver on time and within budget. If you have any questions, or need additional information please contact Davis Cudey, AIA at 925-648-8800. Required Information: Firm Name: ATI Architects & Engineers Address: 3860 Blackhawk Road Danville, CA. 94506 925-648-8800 ~ ~ [0 Fax: 925-648-8811 Contact: Davis Curley, AIA "Providino Value throuoh Ouafitv. Service and Innovation" Brief Firm History ATI Architects and Engineers is a unique company..We are multi-disciplined company offering a complete range of turn-key design services for Public buildings, commercial, industrial, retail, and residential projects. Recognized as an industry leader, ATI is ranked 48th in the nation on the "Hot Firm" listing by Zweig VVhite, a respected industry reporting firm. ATI has grown over the past twelve years into aleading Northern California consulting firm employing over 100 full-time design professional. ATI in the top. 25 architectural and engineering firms in Northern California. ATI was founded from the very beginning with a long term vision of providing full service architectural, structural, civil, mechanical, electrical and project management services to Public Agency, private developers, and Fortune 500 telecommuni_cafions companies. Desitin Philosophy ATI's architects and engineers have always been guided by the singular approach to design---call it "design attitude" that centers on the client's needs. Client design preferences and sensibilities are far more significant guideposts than some visionary aesthetic of the architect. Client functional needs, realistic budgets and facility uses, in fact, are paramount to both. Such a pragmatic, approach to design, however, does not turn it back on the aesthetics of architecture, but rather assures the form indeed follows function. ATI's Professional Staff 10 Architects 6 Civil Engineers 4 Electrical Engineers 5 Mechanical Engineers 4 Structural Engineers 2 Surveyors 12 Project Managers 32 Engineering Designers 20 CADD Operators 11 Administrative Assistants The firm's staff has more than doubled in size in five years. If we can provide any additional information prior to the selection process, please do not hesitate to call Davis Curley, AIA, Senior Project Manager at 925-648-8800. ATI is looking forward to the opportunity to work with the City of Saratoga Planning staff, the appointed Ad Hoc committee, and the community. Senior Project Manager Division Manager Relevant Experience ATI and it's professional architects and engineers have designed and engineered many projects for Public Agencies that have many of the same tasks as the subject project in Saratoga, California. After preliminary review of the project, and visiting the site, ATI feels that their expertise in defining the scope and developing the solutions for this complex problem lay in the years of professional experience of the designated team. The importance of the Teams understanding the needs and the culture of the City of Saratogais the essential element in defining the project. Finding a similar project is difficult, but projects that involve serious planning and programming, design, geology, culture and problem solving are represented below. The projects represented below are government agency projects or major commercial projects. Due to the limitation of proposal size, ATI has elected to provide graphics of only a few of it's many relevant projects. The Team The Team will be comprised of G. Michael Goldsworthy, AIA, SeniOr Vice President, Davis Curley, AIA, Senior Architect, Francis Chan, AIA, Director of Design, and Vijay Jayachandran, Senior Designer, John DeHorn, Civil Engeering Division Manager. Past Relevant Projects Project Name Location Architect Description City of Pleasanton Pleasanton, CA Mike Goldsworthy Full service City Hall Remodel Project Architect architectural 1987 and 1999 City of Pleasanton Pleasanton, CA Mike Goldsworthy Full A&E City Hall Remodel Project Architect 1996 City of Pleasanton Police Station 1996 City of Hayward Civic Center Bldg 197_0 0000 City of Pleasanton Administration bldg Remodel City of Ridgecrest City Hall Administration Offices, and Police Fadlity 1988 City of Oakland Administration Bldg Space Planning Services 1996 City of Cathedral City ' Civic Center, Police Facility and Administration Offices 1996 Pleasanton, CA Mike Goldsworthy Full service Project Architect architectural Hayward, CA Mike Goldsworthy Full Service Project Architect Architectural Pleasanton, CA Mike Goldsworthy Project Architect Full Service A&E Ridgecrest, CA Francis Chan Full Service Project Architect Architectural Oakland, CA Francis Chan Project Architect Cathedral City. CA Francis Chan Project Architect Full Service Architectural Full Service Architectural City of Coalinga Police Facility Administration Bldg Addition 1995 City of Belmont Civic Center Master Plan and Police Facility 1996 City of Santa Rosa City Hall 1989 City of Emeryville Civic Center 1999 County of San Joaquin 5th floor courthouse Remodel District Attorney's Offices 1999 County of Sacramento Department of Human Services 1998 State of Califomia Department of Developmental Services Agnews East 1998 Charis International Convention and Recreation Center 2000-2001 Campolinso High School Field & Facilities 2001 Oasis Point 2001 City of Stockton Weber Block Plaza 1999 Miramonte High School 2001 Coalinga, CA Belmont, CA Santa Rosa, CA Emeryville, CA Stockton, CA Sacramento, CA San Jose, CA Cathedral City, CA Moraga, CA Livermore, CA Stockton, CA Orinda, CA Francis Chan Project Architect Francis Chan Project Architect Francis Chan Project Architect Francis Chan Project Architect Davis Cudey Project Architect Davis Cudey Project Architect Davis Cudey Project Architect Mike Goldsworthy Director of Architecture Skip Goddell Project Architect Vi jay Jayachandran Project Designer Francis Chan Director of Design Vjjay Jayachandran Senior Designer Francis Chan Director of Design Vjay Jayachandran Senior Designer Davis Curley Project Architect Francis Chan Director of Design Vjay Jayachandran Senior Designer Full Service Full Service Preliminary Design Space needs Assessment Master Planning Full Service F. ull Service Master Planning and Full Service Master Planning Master Planning Master Planning Master Planning Full Sen/ice Design and Engineering Master Planning Personnel Resume G. MICHAEL GOLDSWORTHY, AIA Professional Qualifications Mr. Goldsworthy has 40 years experience in the architectural field; Over the past years as a practicing professional, he has developed the capabilities of designing a wide range of solutions to contemporary environmental design problems. He has worked as designer, project architect, project field representative and/or project management on a great number of religious, residential, urban, civic, commercial, and industrial projects with in-place construction costs of over 900 million dollars. Experience 2001 - Present 1996-2001 1976-1996 1975 -1976 1970-1975 1969-1970 1966-1969 1965-1966 1964-1965 Senior Vice President and Sacramento Regional Manager, ATI Architects and Engineers. Vice President, Architectural Division, ATI. Responsibilities include the overseeing and management of all aspects of the Architectural Division of ATI. Principal, Goldsworthy Architectural Group. The firm specialized in providing high quality design services and offered a full scope of services including: · Master planning, schematic, and preliminary architectural work · Contract documents for construction work · Field supervision during the construction period · Cost estimates · Structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing design · Landscaping and graphic presentations · Consultation at the conceptual and project level in concert with owners, developers, and consultants. Associate, Primiani-Weaver Architects (formerly Welton Becket Associates, San Francisco), San Francisco, California. Vice President, Welton Becket Associates, San Francisco, California. Associate, Rex Whitaker Allen and Associates, Architects, San Francisco, California. Project Architect, Welton Becket Associates, San Francisco, California. Associate, Alfred Johnson, Architect, San Mateo, California. Draftsman-Designer, William Kubach, Incorporated, Millbrae, California. AT/ Personnel Resume DAVIS O. CURLEY, AIA Professional Qualifications ' Mr. Curley has 25 years experience in the architectural field. Qualifications include: Design: Mr. Curley has been the architect of record and designer of commercial, retail, medical, office, research/development and residential projects. He has designed public works projects and · public agency office buildings. Production: Mr. Curley has been responsible for the management of the production of construCtion documents on projects of varying types. Construction Administration: Mr. Curley has been responsible for the administration of millions of dollars worth of construction, in the private and public sectors. · Management: For the past ten or more years Mr. Curley has been a senior management employee. He has managed architectural and construction personnel on a daily basis. Construction Management: Mr. Curley has managed the construction of major private and public projects on a daily basis for many years. His work included contract writing, consultant negotiations, cash flow analysis, schedules and on going construction decisions to maintain continuity. Cost Estimating/Value Engineering: For many years Mr. Curley has provided cost analysis and value engineering to clients in the private and public sectors. He is versed in conceptual estimating and feasibility studies of many project types. Marketing: In the past ten years Mr. Curley has been responsible for the marketing efforts of his own firm, and the firms that he has been associated with during this period. He was responsible for writing request for proposals, request for qualifications, contract proposals, promotional information and presentations.. Experience 2000 - Present 1998 - 2000 Division Manager, Architectural Division, ATI Architects and Engineers. Responsibilities at ATI include the overseeing and management of all aspects of architectural projects. Director of Architecture, DCA Architecture Construction, Stockton, CA. Design and managed projects, managed architects, drafters, and administrative personnel. Assisted the Construction division with cost models, estimating, and construction management. AT/ DAVIS O. CULREY, AIA Page 2 of 3 04/01 Personnel Resume 1993-1998 Relevant Projects: Weber Block Plaza Stockton, California City of Stockton Department of Housing and Redevelopment Dave Wong's Restaurant Stockton, California David and Phillip Wong Sharpe Depot Telescope French Camp, California I'CF Medical Office Building Remodel Manteca, California Kaiser Permanente San Joaquin County DA's office Stockton, California Senior Associate Architect, Director of Marketing, Carissimi Rohrer Associates, Architects and Planners, Inc., Sacramento CA. Responsibilities: Designed and managed the production of contract documents for many varied construction projects. Provided marketing management including writing proposal packages and making presentations. Managed consultants and staff. Relevant Projects: Agnews Developmental Center Campus relocation · San Jose, California Sacramento River Promenade Sacramento, California City of Sacramento Redevelopment Department of Human Services Sacramento, California County of Sacramento Operating rooms renovation Sacramento, California University California Davis Medical Center AT/ Personnel Resume FRANCIS F. CHAN Professional Qualifications Mr. Chan has served as Project Architect and Project Designer for a variety of building types including office, municipal, community centers, resort hotels, restaurants, shopping centers, banks, educational facilities, medical, detention centers, retirement housing/housing and marinas. Mr. Chan's experience' within these categories of building types included comprehensive building design providing for building and planning code analysis, including high-rise fire/life safety design, site utilization analysis, interior space planning, preparation and execution of contract documents, and project management. Experience 2001 - Present Design Studio Director, ATI Architects and Engineers, Danville, CA. 1979- 2OOO Vice President, MWM Architects, Inc., Oakland, CA Mr. Chan joined MWM in 1979, was appointed 'to. firm's Director of Design in 1987 and was appointed Vice President in 1990. During this tenure he has continued to expand his portfolio of diverse projects. ' Public and Private Sector Office Buildings · 12-story Oakland Executive Center for Equitec Financial Group, Oakland, California. · GNS Plaza for Pacific RealEquities, Newark, CA. 5-story 62,000 s.f. over parking garage. · State Compensation Insurance Fund District Office Building, Oakland, California. Three-story, 104,000 s.f. Golden Nugget 'Award of Merit. · State Compensation Insurance Fund District Office Building, San Jose, California. Three stories, 160,000 s.f. · 2020 Center Street/YMCA mixed-use facility, Berkeley, California. · U.C. Office of the President, proposed four-story, 240,000 s.f. office building, Oakland, California. · County of'Alameda Social Services Building, proposed five-story, 179,000 s.f~ office' building, Hayward, California. · City of Ridgecrest Civic CentedCity Hall Administrative Offices, and Police Facility, Ridgecrest, California. · City of Oakland Administration Building Complex Space Planning Services, Oakland, California. · City of Cathedral City Civic Center including Council Chambers, Police Facility and City Offices, Cathedral City, California. · City of Coalinga New Police Facility/Administration Building Addition, Coalinga,., California. ., AT/ Personnel Resume JoHN R. DEHORN, P.E. Professional Qualifications Mr. DeHorn has over thirty years of consulting experience as a civil engineer. He has demonstrated a record of achievement in design and consti'uction support services for a wide variety of public and private projects. He has a B.S. degree in Civil Engineering and registration as a Professional Civil Engineer in California and Washington. Experience 1999 - Present 1998 -1999 1993 -1998 1990 -1993 1987 -1990 1986 -1987 1984- 1986 1977 -1984 1969- 1977 1964- 1969 1962 -1964 Civil Engineering Supervisor, ATI Architects and Engineers. Responsibilities included overseeing and managing of the Civil Discipline. Engineering Consultant, Self-Employed, Danville, CA Chief Engineer, Juan C. Tenorio & Associates, Inc., Agana, Guam Engineering Consultant, Self-Employed, Danville, CA Vice President, Creegan + D'Angelo, Pleasanton, CA Engineering Consultant, Self-Employed, Danville, CA Vice President, Wilsey & Ham, Foster City & Dublin, CA Vice President; Wilsey & Ham, Bellevue, WA Chief Engineer, Cranmer Engineering Inc., Grass Valley, CA Civil Engineer. GS-5 to 11, U.S. Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest, CA 2nd Lt.'to 1st Lt., U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Fort Bragg, NC Specific Project Experience Rehabilitation and upgrading of community water systems including master planning, transmission / distribution lines, storage, pumping stations, pressure reduction and metering. Sanitary sewer and storm drainage design including master planning, trunks, collectors, lift stations and detention ponds. AT/ Project Team and Responsibilities Project Manager Davis O. Curley, AIA Senior Architect Mr. Curley will manage all the day to day buSiness of the Team, and coordinate with the City of Saratoga Staff and Ad Hoc Committee. Mr. Curley will provide his expertise on programming, scheduling, existing conditions documentation, coordination, and project Content. Mr. Curley has more than 30 years experience as an architect, planner, and construction manager. He isa native the West Valley, and knows the project site, agencies involved, and the culture of the community. He will provide leadership to the Team, and deliver to the City of Saratoga a final project that meets the requirements of the RFP and the community at large. Mr. Curley will be totally committed to the project from the very beginning to the final delivery of the report to the City staff. Davis Curley has provided professional architectural design and management services to various cities and counties throughout California, including City of San Jose, State of California, County of San Joaquin, County of Sacramento and the City of Stockton. Mr. Curley is very familiar with the process of delivering projects to City and County governments on time and in budget. Please refer to Davis Curley's resume following this section. Project Architect Francis Chan, AIA Director.of Design Francis Chan will produce the design concepts and manage the conceptual design portion of the work in conduction with his design team. 'The concepts will include the needs assessment produced early in the project, and the on going requirements as they develop in discussions with staff, the public, the users, and' the Ad Hoc committee. Mr. Chan has many years of experience leading design teams for municipal projects throughout the Califomia and the United States. ~: Please refer to Francis Chan's resume following this section. Senior Architect in Charge G. Michael Goldsworthy Vice President Michael Goldsworthy brings more that 40 years of architectural experience to this project. Mr. Goldsworthy will be providing insight and peer review to this team. Michael has a great deal of experience with City and County governments. He has designed many projects for government agencies. Mr. Goldsworthy is currently the Regional Vice President of the Sacramento office of ATI, but his membership on the team is needed and available. Please refer to G. Michael Goldsworthy's resume that follows this section. John DeHorn Civil Engineering Division Manager John DeHorn is an accomplished civil engineer with over thirty years experience. John is well suited for this project since he has vast knowledge in master planning, grading, and utilities. Mr DeHorn has worked thoughout the bay area, and is familiar with local and state government agencies. John is an important member of this team. His knowledge of costs related to site work is exceptional. Please refer to John DeHorn's resume that follows this section. Project Work Plan Description and Understanding ATI has reviewed the Request for Proposal and visited the site. The project manager for this project has lived in the area for thirty years before moving to the Sacramento region. He is very familiar with the location, the history of the corner, and the culture of the village. ATI has reviewed the preliminary needs assessment, and we are confidant a reasonable solution is attainable. ATI understands the inherent problems of the site as it relates to size, terran, utilities, traffic, and the location related to business and homes. ATI has a clear understanding of the physical properties of the site, and basic understanding of the needs, and with this information is prepared to complete a comprehensive conceptual site design for the Public Safety Center. Also, ATI understands the need for options. Options will allow for compromise on the part of the various agencies, and will add the reality component to the project. Detailed approach and methodology ATI's first priority will be to document as much information about the site that exists in documents. ATI's civil engineering group has pulled documents from the County of Santa Clara including assessors maps, and aerial photographs. We want to tie down the site and its topography during the very first phase of the work. Second, we would meet with the City of Saratoga Planning staff to get an endorsement of our work plan. We would make any adjustments necessary and begin the process with'the Public. Third, we would begin meeting with each agency separately to determine their needs as an agency. We are referring to Fire, Sheriff, and Post Office. We would produce a preliminary needs assessment matrix for each agency. Fourth, we would have joint meetings with the Planning staff and the agencies to review our findings. At this point in' time it is difficult to determine what direction the project will be going, but the findings will establish a clear route to the solution. Fifth, ATI will begin todesign the preliminary plans that meet the needs of the agencies, fulfil the requirements of the City, work within the physical characteristics of the site, and fulfill the expectations of the citizens of Saratoga and the culture of the village. At this point, ATI would be' ready to submit a 50% review by the public, planning staff, the Ad Hoc committee, Planning Commission, and City Council. Information gleaned from this exercise will require adjustments to the three options, but in our opinion one of the options will have greater impact than the other two. ATI has had experience with several public works projects where this method is used to meet the expectations of all concerned. In general this plan works effectively. Challenges The number one challenge well be meeting the expectations of the Public and the Ad Hoc committee due to recent failures to build an new Fire Station. The objections of over stressing the bounds of the zoning and planning regulations will have to be addressed. early in the project. ATI wants to spend quality effort in producing options that are acceptable, not create augments in support of our design, and be over ruled by the Public because we did not understand their point of view at the very outset. Two, the amount building and parking required to do the normal dayto day business. Three, the terrain is such that grade changes are not subtle but moderately steep. The object of the assignment is to build this project with the least amount of intensity to the site as possible. Fourth,' design a site that can be adapted in the future by the Architect to design buildings that will meet the criteria of the project, and provide a vehicle for an architectural style that is compatible with the culture of the village. ATI is ready to meet these challenges, and others, to make this project an outstanding success. Opportunities First, the project itself is an opportunity.. Second, the site is not only a challenge, but it is a great opportunity to design a project that can meet the needs of the clients, but give the Public something to be proud of. The site because of it's terrain, will allow for some exciting architectural facades. The site will also allow for underground parking that can be tucked away into the slopes in order to create a lower overall profile. Third, creating a work environment of three different agencies on the same site, that blends into the area surrounding the site can either be a challenge or an opportunity. ATI view this beautiful site as an opportunity. Project Time Line November 19, 2001 to November 23, 2001 Gather documentation of the site from agencies and utilities Review fire station package Review Federated Church's expansion plans Coordinate site information regarding utilities, CaI-Trans, Public Works, P.G. & E., and water works Be thankful it's Thanksgiving week November 26, 2001 to November 30, 2001 · Civil field work · Prepare boundary information · Meet with Post Office · Meet with Sheriff · Meet with Fire Department · Meet with Federated Church December 3, 2001 to December 7, 2001 · Plot aerial topography · Tie in boundary and Utilities · Combine meeting with Sheriff, Fire Department, Post Office, Planning, Church, and Ad Hoc committee. December 10, 2001 to December 21,2001 · Complete "first blush" of Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3 December 24, 2001 to December 28, 2001 · Meet with Staff and other interested parties for informal review 'Christmas Week' December 31, 2001 to January 4, 2002 · Present 50% review to Staff, Planning Commission, Council, and Public January 7, 2002 to January 11, 2002 · Progress plans reflecting input from 50% meeting and presentation January 15, 2002 to January 26, 2002 · 100% Review January 29, 2002 to February 2, 2002 · ' Set final hearing Attachment B- Knoll & Tam Architects 2 November, 2001 Mr. Dave Anderson City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 architects and planners Re: Public Safety Center Conceptual Design Project Dear Mr. Anderson, Noll & Tam Architects is delighted to present this proposal to develop conceptual plans for a new Public Safety Center for the City of Saratoga. Noll & Tam Architects is a 16 person architectural firm located in Berkeley, founded by Christopher Noll, and Janet Tam in 1991. Both Janet and I have more than twenty years of professional experience in the assessment, planning and design of public and institutional buildings and take an active role in the design and management of eveO' project in the office. We are supported by a talented staff of six architects, four design/technical staff members and four administrative support staff members. Our firm has doubled in size in the last five years. I will be the principal-in-charge for this project, responsible for overall project management and direction, and your primary contact. Elizabeth McLeod, who is currently managing the Saratoga Civic Center Master Plan project, will be the Project Manager, responsible for the day-to-day running of the project. We have successfully completed a wide range of complex projects in the last ten years, many of which started as master planning projects. Our public building projects include fire stations, police stations, civic buildings, libraries, university facilities, public schools, and recreational facilities. Our expertise includes master planning, programming, space .planning, civic building design, and facilitation of community involvement processes. In the past few years we have worked with more than 20 cities in the Bay Area to master plan and design civic facilities. We are currently working with the City of Saratoga to design a Civic Center Master Plan. We have · established a collaborative working relationship with City staff, and we have become familiar with the special character and important issues in Saratoga. As a firm, we are committed to providing enthusiastic and personalized service to our clients. We design buildings that are appropriate to their contexts, in both rural and urban settings. We have a strong interest in environmental and social issues, which we incorporate into our decision making process. ,We listen carefully to the needs of our clients and respond with thoughtful designs that meet those needs effectively and efficiently. We greatly value our relationship with the City of Saratoga, and we look forward to the opportunity to provide valuable service and creative ideas for you again. Sincerely, Principal · ~.,,~ :.~.::.._~ ? ~.~ ~ . .... _.. .. -.- . ::_..: - .. Morg~ Hill Re~tion ~nter Belmont Library FIRM QUALIHCATION$ Noll &Tam Architects has built a reputation for providing clients with outstanding service, expert project management, and creative design solutions that respond to budgetary requirements as well as social and physical context. We can provide full architectural and planning services. Most of our projects require pre-design services which include master planning, programming, and building evalu- ation. Working with Municipalities Noll & Tam Architects is currently working on the Saratoga Civic Center Master Plan and have become quite familiar with Saratoga's community vision and history. We enjoy working together with your City staffand understand Saratoga's particular requirements. In addition to the City of Saratoga, we have worked with over 20 cities over the last five years, and through these projects have become ve~ familiar with the procedures for municipal projects. Currently, we also working for the Cities of Oakland, Moraga, Morgan Hill, Santa Clara, Rohnert Park, Fremont, Newark, Seaside, Marina, Pittsburg, and Belmont. Our extensive experience working with city staff has familiarized us with the workings of Departments of Public Works, Recreation, and Planning. We frequently present our work to City Councils, Park and Recreation Commissions, and other public groups and agencies for feedback and approvals. We have found that the key elements to a successful partnership are through orga- nizing frequent, clear communication between all parties, anticipa- tion of the various r.equirements, and assiduous follow-through on the coordination process. Working with Community Groups One of our particular strengths is in facilitating a design process that requires the participation of diverse and multiple user groups in a way that is sensitive, inclusive, and responsive. We consider our role to be both project facilitator and architect, and have developed methods for managing and soliciting input from users that are high- ly effective. We are adept at balancing the needs of many different building user groups, discovering what resources and needs these groups have in common, and reaching consensus. Our method is to listen well, present clearly and comprehensively, while staying orga- nized and focused. Saratoga Community Center MoragaTownCenter RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE An effective master plan' requires listening closely and responding creatively to the needs voiced by those who use the facilities. Our process for each of the public sector .projects that follow required working with diverse user groups to clarify project goals and vision, and to facilitate a consensus process. We worked very, closely with our clients to develop a full understanding of how different facilities would best relate to each other and developed multiple alternatives that focused on functionality and flexibility. Our design goal is to respond to all of the individual needs of each user group, while still keeping a design overview of the whole. Noll & Tam Architects is curre, ndy completing a master planning design for the City of Saratoga's Civic Center. This project evalu- ated the current complex of buildings, which include City Hall and Planning Offices, the Civic Theater, a Community Center which also houses the Senior Center and Adult Day Care facilities, a preschool (currendy in a portable building), the Teen Center at the Warner-Hutton house, and the City's Maintenance Facility. The new Civic Center will include all of the above facilities, with a great- ly enlarged Community Center, an addition to the Theater for dressing rooms, as well as new City Council Chambers, and a gym- nasium. The design team has been working with representatives of the Ci~ of Saratoga, including' the City Manager, Director of Recreation, the Planning Director, a City Council member and the head of the Maintenance Facility. The master plan design will lay the groundwork for phased implementation. Noll &Tam Architects is currently in the schematic design phase for the new Moraga Town Center. The Town Center will include offices for the Town Administration, a police station, a community center, and a full-size gymnasium. The design team has been work- ing with the Moraga Facilities Committee, composed of City staff and Moraga citizens, first to evaluate three potential sites for a new Town Center that would be a focal point for the town's communi- ty activities, and now to develop the selected site and schematic building design. Our design process has included the refinement of the building program, and interviews with Town staffand the police department. The new buildings will blend well with the surround- ing open areas to maintain the semi-rural character of Moraga. Noll & Tam Architects completed a needs assessment, building pro- gram, and master plan design for the Belmont Library, a 28,700 square foot, San Mateo County branch library, that serves a com- munity of 26,000 pe°Pli'. The needs assessment included facilitat- ing several community and library task force meetings to clearl? define the needs of the community. Our master plan process involved a thorough investigation of the existing building condi- tions and several design alternatives, including designs for a new library and the renovation of and addition to the existing facility. Currendy, we are developing a schematic design for a new library. building to be located on the existing site. The master plan, which included multiple site plan alternatives, was completed in early 2000. Noll &Tam Architects completed a needs assessment, building Pro- gram, and master plan for the downtown Walnut Creek Library in 1999. This 9,240 square foot building was constructed in 1961, and is one of two branches of the Contra Costa County Library, that serves a community of 70,000 people. Our design for a two-story library more than quadruples the size of the original facility to accommodate for an expected increase in population and includes a community meeting room, young adult area, and a large children's room. The City of Rohnert Park is planning a new Civic Center that will include a new library and city, hall. Noll & Tam Architects com- pleted the design of the new library and it is currently under con- struction. The library` will be a 26,000 square foot building includ- ing a community meeting room, reading rooms, children's room, public desks, and staff work areas. The design process included community outreach workshops that are part of a visioning process and intended to uncover stakeholder concerns early on. Our build- ing design complements and respects existing and future facilities on the site, including a public safety building, a parking structure, and mixed used housing/commercial development. Oakland Zoo Store KEY PERSONNEL Individual resumes for the project team follow. We have assembled a core group of the most appropriate design individuals who have all worked together before and will provide a streamlined, hands-on approach to your master planning pro- ject. Chris Noll, Principal, .will be the Project Principal and will Icad the master planning concept design. He will be responsible for the progress of the project, overall quality control, and will have active client contact. Chris has over 20 years of professional experience and brings particular expertise in the design of com- mtmity projects, especially civic buildings. Chris is currently Principal in Charge of the Saratoga Civic Center Master Plan, Morgan Hill Library and City Hall Master Plan, and Rohnert Park Libdry, which also included master planning. Fli?abeth McLeod will act as the Project'Manager for this project and be responsible for the day-to-day project management in the office. She will also be responsible for the production of the design drawings, and coordination of the design team. Eliazbeth has recently performed this role on the Saratoga Civic Center Master Plan and UC Berkeley. Botanical Gardens Research Greenhouses. David L. Gates and Associates, our landscape architect brings site development and landscaping experience with a wide variety. of Bay Area Cities, and an understanding of local conditions. David is an urban planner and landscape architect with more than thirty years of experience in planning and design. His expe- rience includes large and small-scale landscape architectural pro- jects throughout the United States with a focus on public-sector work, in particular civic centers and community centers within community parks. DGA has a continuous working relationship with Noll &Tam. These shared projects include the Moraga Town Center, Mountain View Community, Center, Ash Street Park Master plan, and the Belmont Public Library. His civic experience includes the San Ramon Community Center, Dublin City Hall, Danville Library, and the Emerald Glen Park and Community Center. Scott Lewis, of Oppenheim Lewis, our cost estimator, is adept at value engineering and at identifying which components of a pro- ject have the most significant cost impacts. Oppenheim Lewis is Mountain View Community Center our cost estimator of choice for all public and institutional projects Scott will provide comparative costs for alternate design schemes early on in the design process, and provide cost judgements critical to keeping our project on budget. Through careful attention to detail and to evolving market conditions, Oppenheim-Lewis have'a remarkably successful record bringing our projects in on budget. In fact, our most recendy public bid project, the Rohnert Park Public Library, successfully bid only $1,000 offofour original esti- mate of $6.2 million. In addition, Scott Lewis is a member of the US Green Building Council, and is one of the countLv's leading experts on Green Design, particularly in the relationship between green design and costs. Cesar Chavez Student Center, UC Berkeley PROJEC'r WORKPLAN 1. Kick-Off Meeting We like to start each of our projects offwith a kick-off meeting, attended by the all significant members of the design team and the Project Committee. At this meeting we would review the project goals, program requirements, and scope of work., including refine- ment of square footage needs by each of the user groups. The design process and schedule would be discussed in detail, and the involvement by the various participants would be discussed. Key stakeholders would be identified, and the City Council review process determined. The construction budget would be discussed, and any other important issues identified for further discussion. Our goal would be to establish a clear understanding of the project goals, the deliverables, and the timeline. 2. Understanding Of Program Components We appreciate the unique opportunity the City has in considering a unified Public Safety Complex. In order to fully understand the strengths and limitations of the existing facilities, we would visit the current Public Safety complex buildings, as well as the adjacent Federated Church and Foothill Club and surrounding context. We would review whatever documentation is available' regarding their functional relationships. We would use the RFP and any addition- al program information that is available to understand how the Sheriff's Offce, Fire Protection District Office and U.S. Post Office facilities could be optimally designed for the site. We would generate typical footprints for each proposed program element that Freedom Branch Library, Watsonviile accurately represent the reality of each facility. Each option may be presented with alternative footprints (multi-story, varied plan configuration, etc.) for some of the elements to illustrate the pros and cons of different approaches as we develop master plans. Parking represents a major component of the design, and careful analysis of the requirements would be discussed, which may pro- duce a number of alternative parking scenarios for use in the mas- ter planning. Budget cost information would be produced and discussed, and revisions made to the program elements if necessary. Before proceeding into the~master planning process, we would review our findings with the Project Committee and make sure that everyone agreed on the program "building blocks" we would be using in the next step of the design process. Fremont Family Resource Center 3. Master Planning During this phase, we would p~:oduce three different master plan options following the descriptions in the RFP, and further conclu- sions from the findings described above. We would start with a thorough understanding of the existing site, examining the existing buildings, surrounding context, and other relevant features. Next, the design team will generate a number of site planning alternatives for all Options 1, 2 and 3 in conceptual form, and review our ideas with the Project Commi~ee, discussing the strengths and weaknesses of each concept. At this juncture, we will ask the Committee to select the alternatives to be further devel- oped and to confirm which function will be relocated for Option 3 (most likely the Post Office). Each 'of the alternatives will be devel- oped to a 50% design level, which will include building footprints, roughly identified spaces within the buildings, parking layouts, cir- ~culation paths, landsCape concepts, and other information to clear- ly convey the concepts represented in each of th~ different alterna- tives. Each alternative will be accompanied by a tentative phasing plan to illustrate the sequence in which the plan could be imple- mented. We will make each alternative distinctively different from the others, so that comparisons can be made. We will also prepare a summary of what we, and the Project Committee, feel are the pros and cons of each of the alternatives. After reviewing our pre- sentation with the Project Committee, and making any needed revisions, we will present the Master Plans to the City Council. Incorporating feedback from Council and the Project Committee, we will develop the alternatives to the 100% complete level. This Pinole Swim Center Fremont Family Resource Center will include more detail in the site plans and landscape plans. We will work closely with the Project Committee to determine the best way to present our concepts to the Community. and the Council. 4. Cost F~tinmtes Oppenheim Lewis, our cost estimating consultants, will take the' three alternative site plans and produce conceptual cost estimates for each. The estimates will detail the costs for facilities and site developments in each scheme. We will review these estimates with the Project Committee and make darifications and revisions as necessary before presentation to Council. 5. Phasing Plans Each of the three alternative Master Plans will include a Phasing Plan that will illustrate the sequence and proposed timeline in which the plan could be implemented. We will focus on the City's priorities, the current facilities and how to best make use of them, differences in cost, maintaining access to ongoing opera- tions, if required, and other appropriate concerns. We will review the Phasing Plans with the Project Committee, make necessary adj~tments, and finalize for presentation to Council. 6. 100% Presentation Our final presentation to council will include the 100% complete presentation drawings, the cost estimates, and the phasing plans._. If the Council or the Project Committee proposes revisions to our materials, we will incorporate those changes into our final product, which will be a brief, bound report summarizing the conclusions of the master planning process. PROJECT TIMELINE A proposed schedule is attached. PHASING STRATEGY A carefully thought out phasing plan will be critical to the success of any of the master plan alternatives, and will have an important impact on the overall cost of the project. Our design process will start with a review of the condition of each of the existing facilities in the Public Safety Complex. The infor- mation we gather will indicate to us the value and lifespan of the Pinole Community Center existing buildings, which will be a critical starring point for plan- ning how to implement the master plan goals. If a building has a certain utility to the City over a period of time, we will evaluate how to squeeze the most value out of it. If possible, we would like to utilize mcisting buildings for their programmed use tmtil a replacement facility is broughi on line, to eliminate the need to lease temporary facilities. If buildings are tO be renovated, there may be other vacated buildings that could be used temporarily during the construction process. The location of new facilities will impact other Public Safety uses in a number of ways, including disruption of access, reduction of parking, noise, dust, and other effects. We will develop phasing plans that reduce detrimental effects to ongoing Public Safe ,fy operations. Phasing ~m affect cost substantially. Where possible, we will try to rake advantage of the economy of scale, and the savings inher- ent in giving a contractor full and unhindered access to a con- strucfion site. Performing renovation and other construction work in close proximity to ongoing Public Safety functions will add costs to the construction projects. We will avoid such inconve- niences as much as possible. There may need to be upgrading of the site infrastructure to accommodate the master plan goals. If so, we will examine how to phase the work so there are no significant interruptions to utili- ty services to the existing and future operations. In the end, there is no single strategy for how best to phase the construction of the various Public Safety Center facilities over time. We will examine each master plan alternative, propose a phasing strategy with pros/cons, review our opinions with the Project Committee and Council, and make a final recommenda- tion that is an optimal solution to the City's needs for years to come REFERENCES Ron Fong Senior Engineer Engineering Division, Dept. of Environmental Services 39550 Liberty Street Fremont, CA 94537 510. 494. 4698 Santa Clara Community Center Kaxen Stein Town Manager Town of Moraga 2100 Donald Drive Moraga, CA 94556 925. 631. 6840 Julie Spier Recreation Director City of Morgan Hill 17555 Peak Avenue Morgan Hill, CA 95037 408. 779. 7271 Joe Gaffney City Engineer Engineering Dept. City of Rohnert Park 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 707. 588. 2240 FEES AND COSTS A fee proposal is attached. Public Safety Center Saratoga, California Proposed Schedule November December January February I March ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Nov Dec . Jan I Feb Mar 1 Kick-Off Meeting I day Tue 11/27/01 Tue 11/27/01 t i 2 Program Confirmation 3wks Wed 11/28/01 Tuo 12/18/01 a~ 3 Base Documentation 3 wks Wed 11/28/01 Tue 12/18/01 I~- t 4 Prelim. Master Planning 6 wks Wed 12/19/01 Tue 1/29/02 i i'~ 5 !Meeting with Committee 1 1 day Tue 1/15/02 Tue 1/15/02 i 6 50% Presentation Drawings 2 wks Wed 1/16/02 Tue 1/29/02 i 7 Council Presentation 1 I day Wed 1/30/02 Wed 1/30/02 8 Final Master Planning 4wks Thu 1/31/02 Wed 2/27/02; {,l~i !~ . 9 Meeting with Committee 2 I day Thu 2/28/02 Thu 2/28/02 i 11 Cost Estimate 2wks Fd 3/1/02 Thu 3/14/02 ! i 12 Council Presentation 2 1 day Fri 3/15/02 Fri 3/15/02 i i ,~.3~ Summary Report 2 wks Men 3/18/02 Fri 3,29,02 i i 41 Task ~ Rolled Up Task ~ Project Summary Split ............... Rolled Up Split ............... External Milestone · Project: SaratogaPSMPschedule Date: Thu 11/1/01 Progress Rolled Up Milestone ~ Deadline Milestone · Rolled Up Progress Summa~ ~ External Tasks ~ . · PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER Conceptual Design Project City of Saratoga FEE PROPOSAL Architectural Fees architects and planners Prin. P.A. Draft $125 $85 $70 Total Bcrkcicx 1. Kick-Off Meeting 2. Program Confirmation 3. Documentation/Base Plans/Code Research 4. Master Planning/Interim meeting with committee 5. 50% Presentation Drawings 6. Council Presentation 7. Final Plans/Interim Meeting 8. Cost Estimating 9. 100% Presentation Drawings/Phasing Diagrams 10. Council Presentation 11. Summary Report 4 4 $840 4 12 $1,520 16 12 $2,200 8 32 $3,720 4 16 16 $2,980 4 16 $1,860 4 20 $2,200 2 4 $590 2 16 16 $2,730 4 4 $840 2 10 8 $1,660 Subtotal Architectural Fees Subconsultant Fees 38 150 52 $21,140 12. Landscape Architecture: Gates & Associates · 13. Cost Estimating: Oppenheim Lewis Subtotal Consultant Fees $1,750 $4,950 $6,700 ]TOTAL PROPOSED FEE $27,840{ Notes: 1. 2. 3. Scope of Work is based upon Scope described in RFP for the Project dated 10/12/01 Normal reimbursable expenses will be billed in addition at 1.15 times actual costs. Client will provide Noll & Tam with accurate surveys of all sites in question, and an aerial photograph, if available. The goal of the master planning is to test the fit and relationship of the various functions on the site, and does not include the detailed interior space planning of any of the facilities. As always, Noll ~ Tam is prepared to discuss the scope of work and our fees, and to make adjustments as necessary to meet the City's goals. architects and CHRISTOPHER NOLL Professional Experience 1991 - present Noll & Tam Architect$, Berkeley, California Principal Education 1981 University of California, Berkeley, Master of Architecture 1981 International Laboratory for Architecture and Urban Design, Urbino, Italy 1978 Princeton University, Bachelor of Arts ...... Professional Registration Licensed to practice architecture in California, 1985, License No. C 15916 Professional Affiliations American Library Association / California Library Association National Trust for Historic Preservation planners Representative Project Experience Saratoga Civic Center Master Plan, Saratoga, California Master Planning and Design of the New Civic Center, including Community/Senior Center, Civic Theatre, City Hall Corporation Hall, Parking and Outdoor Public Spaces Morgan .Hill Library,-Morgan Hill, California Civic Center Master Plan, and Design and Construction of a new 40,000 sq. ft. Library Rohnert Park Library, Rohnert Park, California Master Planning, Design and Construction of a new, 40,000 sq. fi. Library Golden Gate Branch Library, Oakland, California Seismic Rehabilitation, Accessibility, and Code Upgrade of an Historic Carnegie Library Temescal Branch Library, Oakland, California Seismic Rehabilitation, Accessibility, and Code Upgrade of an Historic Carnegie Library Freedom Branch Library, Watsonville, California Conversion oran Existing Firehouse to a New Branch Library including Programming and Design Walnut Creek Library, Walnut Creek, California Programming and Master Planning for a new 45,000 sq.fi. Library Saint Albert Hall Library; Saint Mary's College of California, Moraga New construction of a 90,000 sq. fi. library in association with Thomas Hacker Architects, Portland American Canyon Branch Library, American Canyon, California Master Planning for a new 45,000 sq.fi. Library Marina Branch Library, Marina, California Master Planning and Design of a new 30, 000 square foot Branch Library · Millbrae Library, Millbrae, California Library Programming and Master Planning Tulare Cultural Center, Tulare, California Needs Assessment and Master Planning for a Library, Theater, Museum, and Community Center Belmont Library, Belmont, California Needs Assessment, Building Program, and Schematic Design for New Library Weekes Branch Library, Hayward, California Expansion and renovation of 4,500 sq. fi. Branch Library Bcrkcicx °471,' ELIZABETH MCLEOD architects and planners Professional Experience 0 1999- present NoB &TarnArchitect~, Berkeley, California Project Architect Education 1989 . University of California, Berkeley, Master of.Architecture · 1982 Principia College, Elsah IL, Bachelor of Arts Professional Registration Licensed to practice architecture in California, 1994 Representative Project Experience Saratoga Civic Center Master Plan, Saratoga, California Master Planning and Design of the New Civic Center, including Community/Senior Center, Civic Theatre, City Hall, Corporation Hall, Parking and Outdoor Public Spaces Morgan Hill Library, Morgan Hill, California Civic Center Master Plan, and Design and Construction of a new 40,000 sq. fi. Library Rohnert Park Library, Rohnert Park, California Master Planning, Design and Construction of a new, 40,000 sq. fi. Library Belmont Public Library, Belmont, California Needs Assessment, Building Program, and Schematic Design for New Library Millbrae Library, Millbrae, California Library Programming and Master Planning Westlake Middle School, Oakland, California Improvements to Gym and Shop Building. Bird Rehabilitation Facility, Cordelia, California New 12,000 square foot Veterinary Facility UC'Botanical Desert Greenhouse, Berkeley, California Replacement/Redesign of Existing.Greenhouse Various Laboratory Projects, UC Berkeley, California Ongoing remodeling of existing laboratories of approximately 1,000 square foot laboratories Individual Project Experience Oakland Housing Authority, Oakland, California Renovation of Existing Multi-Family Housing Oakland International Airport, Oakland, California Connector Building Between Terminal~ 1 and2 Oakland Unified School District, Oakland, California Emergency Services Upgrades at 19 Oakland Middle and High School~ Oakland Administration Building, Oakland, California Renovation of Historically Significant Building for Oj~ces. Pasqua Coffee, San Francisco, California Approximately 15 locations in San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York Preovolus Law Group, San Francisco, California Tenant Improvements for 3, 000 square foot office space. Attachment C- George Miers & Associates Proposal for ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE PROPOSED PUBLIC SAFETY.CENTER CITY OF SARA TOGA November 2, 2001 George Miers & Associates Facility Programming · Architecture · Interior Design GEORGE MIERS ASSOCIATES Architecture and Planning November 2, 2001 Mr. Dave Anderson City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Architectural Services for a Public Safety Center Dear Mr. Anderson: George Miers & Associates is pleased to submit the following proposal to provide Architectural Services for the City of Saratoga Public Safety Center Project. George Miers & Associates is an Architecture and Planning firm specializing in the programming and design of Public Service Facilities with a special expertise in Police facilities, Fire Stations, Emergency Operation Centers, Firing Ranges, and 911/Dispatch Centers. Our portfolio of completed projects also includes a strong complement of other public and private commissions, including Libraries, City Halls, Recreation Facilities, Permit Centers, and Administrative facilities. Our firm was established in 1982 and emphasizes a commitment to user oriented design and respect for the unique character and diversity of the clients and communities we serve. Established in 1982, our firm has maintained a steady staff of 20 to 25 employees since 1984. George Miers is the firm's lead program and design principal and he will be the main contact on this project. Over the last ten years our firm has emerged as one of the leading California architectural practices in the design of Municipal Law Enforcement facilities, and our recently completed projects have been acknowledged nationally by the Department of Justice and other Law Enforcement Agencies as representative of a fresh, new approach towards the design of community oriented police facilities. Indicative of this recognition has been the FBI's praise for our Antioch Police facility following use of their EOC/Community Room during a 1994 kidnapping which they described as "one of the most innovative and user-responsive Police Facilities in the country". In addition, the Department of Justice's "Top Cop" Joseph Brann has personally recommended our firm to police departments across the country who are looking to develop a "community.oriented" police facility. A partial list of our , police and fire department facility experience includes: · Antioch Police & Animal Services Facility · Livermore Police Facility · San Pablo Police Facility · Dublin Police and City Hall · Walnut Creek Police Facility · Lodi Firestation g4 · Lodi Firestation #2 (in progress) · Lodi Police Facility (in progress) · Campbell Police Facility (in progress) · Santa Cruz Police Facility After touring the site and studying the RFP, we feel that our experience on both Police and Fire Stations have many direct relationships to Saratoga's specific design issues. In 1150 Moraga Wa¢ Suite 150 ~ Moraga, CA 94556 ~ (925.) 63 !-6900 Fax t'92q)~ 11-6C)lO Mr. Dave Anderson City of Saratoga November 2, 2001 Page 2 addition, our experience with tight sites and difficult parking problems such as we have encountered and successfully solved on our Pinole City Hall project and our Lodi Police Facility and also-the Lodi Fire Station g4 projects provides us with an added empathy for the problems with which the City of Saratoga is confronted. We also have successfully incorporated phasing plans into our designs both on an individual building basis such as our Walnut Creek City Hall and Police Facility Addition and Remodeling, and on a Master Plan basis as illustrated by our Livermore Civic Center which has implemented the staged construction of the Police Facility (completed), City Hall expansion (under construction) and · new Library (construction to commence in the early Spring). Based upon our firm's collective experience, we feel we offer the City of Saratoga a strong problem-solving team which enjoys working on the type of multi-use level project described in the City's RFP. Hopefully, this enthusiasm and our experience is conveyed in the enclosed sections entitled "Workplan" and "Phasing Strategy". In regards to our track record, we have had excellent working relationships with all of our City and County clients (see enclosed reference section) many of whom have commissioned us for follow up projects without interviews. We believe this is not only indicative of the quality of our work, but also our commitment to stay with our projects long beyond their completion date. Towards this end we look forward to the opportunity of personally presenting our credentials to you and your selection committee. INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRM George Miers & Associates Architecture and Planning Established in 1982, George Miers & Associates is an Architecture, Planning and Interior Design- firm specializing in the programming and design of Police and Fire Department' Facilities, including Municipal Facilities, City Halls, Libraries, Community. Centers, One Stop Permit Centers, Child Development Centers, Educational Buildings, Administrative Offices, and Animal Care Facilities. Our portfolio of completed projects includes a wide array '6f both new and renovated projects, including numerous buildings on the National Register of Historic Places. ,.. A sampling of our recently completed projects includes a new 21,000 SF library for the City of San Carlos which is constructed over a 50,000 SF parking garage, the new 35,000 SF Santa Cruz Police Facility, the Prewett Family Park Aquatic Center in Antioch; the new Oakland Animal Shelter, the Livermore Police Facility, Pinole City Hall, Antioch Police and Animal Services Facility; Dublin Civic Center (Police and City Hall); the renovated San Pablo Police Facility, the Sonoma County One Stop Permit Center and renovation of the Sonoma County Administration Building including the Supervisor's Hearing Room, the Oakland SPCA Adoption and Education Center, the Coleridge Park Homes Air Rights Project; the YMCA Hotel Renovation in San Francisco, and a new Education Building, Garden Complex and Narthex Addition for the Los Altos United Methodist Church. Our current work includes new /remodeled Police and Fire Depa~rtinent facilities for the cities of Campbell, Lodi, and Walnut Creek and the San Francisco International Airport; the Livermore City Hall and Library Facility, the new multi-purpose theater, sanctuary and classrooms for the First United Methodist Church in downtown San Jose, and a new Education Building, Garden Complex and Narthex Addition for the Los Altos United Methodist Church. As exemplified by the above projects, one of the basic goals of our firm has been to maintain a varied design practice marked by a 'diversity of'public building types and sizes. We feel this is an important criterion for architectural practices because it facilitates interaction with a Wide variety of clients and a Sensitivity for different scales of work. For example, we feel that the attention paid to detail in smaller projects fosters a similar attention on larger complexes. Conversely, the need to develop strong unifying concepts for larger projects has a reciprocal impact on smaller commissions. It is our opinion that the lack of these combined concerns in modem day architectural practice has resulted in buildings that all too often fail to meet both the performance, programmatic and aesthetic needs of clients and users alike. In pursuit of this diversity, the firm has been involved in the design of numerous building types. In addition to the projects noted above, the firm has executed approximately 1,500 residential units ranging from Section 8 elderly rehabs in San Francisco and the conversion of 230 multi-family residential projects in Walnut Creek and Concord. Other projects range fi'om the new Elephant House at the Oakland Zoo to assistance with numerous nonprofit groups throughout the Bay Area. This diverse experience has instilled within our firm not only a versatility for handling different types of construction and engineering issues, but also has provided us extensive experience in working with a wide an'ay of community, government, institutional and corporate clients. We feel this variety of experience and sensitivity to issues will be of use on the City of Saratoga's Public Safety Center. ARCHITECTURAL EXPERIENCE The following partial list of projects provides an overview Of George Miers & Associates' public and commercial facilities. Police and Fire Department Facilities · City · City · City · City . .City · City · City · City of Livermore Police Facility; City Hall, and Library of Antioch Police/Animal Services Facility of Dublin Civic Center, City Hall/Police Facility of Santa Cruz Police FaCility of San Pablo Police Facility of Lodi Police Facility (in progress) of Campbell Police Facility (in progress) of Walnut Creek City Hall/Police Expansion (under construction) City of Redondo Beach Police Facility (program new and remodeled) Lodi Fire Station #2 (in progress) Lodi Fire Station #4 (under construction) Other Public Facilities · San Carlos.Library · City of Pinole City Hall · City of Oakland Animal Control Services · City of Lodi Fire Stations #2 and #4 ' City of San Diego Animal Control Facility (under construction) · City of La Quinta Civic Center · Sonoma County One Stop Permit Center . _ '· Sonoma County Administration Building Remodel · Contra Costa County GMEDA One Stop Permit Center (program/masterplan) · Contra Costa County Recorders/Election Facility (program/masterplan) · Contra Costa County Animal Control Facility (in progress) · San Jose Animal Control Facility (in progress) · Santa Clara County Library Administrative Services · Prewett Family Park Aquatic Facility, Community Center, and Library (Antioch, CA) · City of Redondo Beach Police Facility (program new and remodeled) · Hayward Library (program and remodeling) · Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District Administration Building · West County Wastewater District Plant Operations Facility · Oakley Library and Community Center (masterplan -in progresfi) · Contra Costa County Courts Facilities (masterplan & fire damage remodel) · Novato Civic Center (competition winner) · Suisun Civic Center (competition finalist) · Redwood City City Hall (competition finalist) GEORGE MIERS & ASSOCIATES v; City of Saratoga ARCHITECTURAL EXPERIENCE (continued) Commercial and Other Private Facilties · Tony La Russa's Animal Rescue Foundation, Walnut Creek, Ca. · Pets Unlimited Pet Hospital, San Francisco, Ca. · East Bay SPCA Adoption and Education Center, Oakland, Ca. · East Bay SPCA Spay Neuter Clinic, Oakland, Ca. ' · . Bakersfield SPCA Adoption and Education center, Bakersfield, Ca. · Sonoma Humane Society, Sonoma County, Ca. · Wisconsin Humane Society, Milwaukee, Wi. · Rochester (NY) Humane Society, Rochester, N.Y. · San Diego Humane Society, San Diego, Ca. · Los Gatos United Methodist Church, Los Gatos, Ca. · United Methodist Church of Los Altos, Los Altos, Ca. · First United Methodist Church of San Jose, San Jose, Ca. · 101 Ygnacio Plaza (80,000 SF), Walnut Creek, Ca. · Galaxy Office Complex (200,000 SF), Concord, Ca. · Kirby Plaza, (30,000 SF),Walnut Creek, Ca. · Camino Diablo (24,000 SF),Walnut Creek, Ca. · Morgan Plaza (12,000 SF), Walnut Creek, Ca. · Deer Valley Medical/Dental Facility (26,000 SF), Antioch, Ca. · Windchime of Walnut Creek (Sunrise) elderly care facility (43,000 SF), Walnut Creek, Ca. GEORGE MIERS & ASSOCIATES COMPARABLE PROJECTS We have listed below 6 recently completed municipal projects similar in nature to those contemplated for the City of Saratoga's Public Safety Center. Two of these are library facilities. Similar to Saratoga's situation with the Fire District, Post Office and Sheriff's Station, San Carlos is a jointly-operated facility owned by the and operated by the County. This project is also located in a tight Civic Center location and was constL over a 50,000 SF parking garage. The Livermore City Hall had the luxury of a larger site, allowing for a single- story solution. The third project below is the Pinole City Hall which contains urban design and community design-related similarities. The City of Santa Cruz facility and the Dublin Civic Center have been included to illustrate the breadth of our experience as well as the variety of architectural styles we have utilized inorder to meet the needs of individual communities. "'"'- Project Size: 21,000 SF Ubrary; 17,000 SF 2''d Floor Communi~j.Meeting and Office Space, 112 Stall Sub-level Parking Garage -~ ~:;~ ' i Building & Site Costs: $ 9,249,000 Project Description: The San Mateo County branch library is located on the San Cados Civic Center site within an established residential neighborhood. In addition to GMA's full service amhitectural : responsibilities, the scope of work included the evaluation of a previously prepared needs assessment =. study which led to a new program prepared by our office, along with the development of design alternatives for 1 ) expansion of the existing library by either an addition to the existing facility or by the cortstrucfion of a new facility (21,00{3 SF total), 2) additional community and City Hall meeting space, and 3) increased public staff parking. The final scheme resulted in a new two-story facilib/over a 50,000 SF paddng garage. All library services are located on the 1 '= floor while community meeting rcome and off~e lease space are located on the 2''d floor. A central interior rotunda links both floors visually while maintaining internal security for each. Contact: Ms. Jan Engel (San Mateo County Library), Ph (650) 312-5245 Project Architecr~Vlanager - George Miera Space Planningflntedors - Thna Goodwin Structural Engineer - Dominic Chu Mechanical Engineer- Warty Design Group Electrical Engineer - Flack + Kurtz CMl Engineer - LuYJMilani prOJect Architect - George Miers Project Manager - John Howland Space Planning/Interiors - Trina Goo~win Structural Engineer - Ron Vogel Mechanical Engineers - Capital Engineenng Electrical Engineers - Koch, Chun, Knoblach CMl Enginee~ - Luk and Associates Project Architect/Manager - George Miem Community Ptanniog -Trina Goodwin S'cuctural Engineer- Ron Vogel Mechanical Engineers - Mechanical Design Studio Electrical Engineers - Pinnacle Engineering Civil Engineer- Luk/Milani Project Size: 52,000 SF Project Budget: $15,000,000 Building Budget: $12,000,000 Project Description: The design of Livermore's new 45,000 SF Main Library c°mple~es the overall Civic Center Masterplen originally developed by GMA in 1990. The Ubrary's site plan has been oriented in a manner which relates both to the City Hall and Police facilities while serving as the primary focal point along North Livermora Blvd. The facility public entrance is entered through a major Civic Plaza and its two story open air rotunda which serves as a gathering/meeting place wiffl direct access to the Fdends of the Library and the library caf~ es well as the facility's public meeting rooms. The facility incorporates approMmately 200,000 books, 50 public computer stations, private meeting and study areas, a literacy program, a children's library with craft and story areas and the Friends of the Library shop. The facilib/also sepves as the administrative headquarters for the library system's three branch libraries. The interior space plan features a central skylit arcade which houses both the Circulation and Reference Desks and which leads to the Main Reading Room at the arcade terminus. Collections are then organized off of the arcade spine with new books and browsing occurring along the arcade. While the arcade contains abundant natural light, direct sunlight and ultra violet light is eliminated by overhangs and translucent panels, thus reducing damage to materials and minimizing computer monitor glare. Contact: Susan Gallinger, Ph~925) 373-5510 Project Size: 17,369 SF including 120 Seat Council Chamber Project Description: The Pinole City Hall is included as an example of both a Community Design process which included in excess of 20 meetings of the Steering Committee composed of City staff, Community leaders, and Council members, as well as an example of designing a new facility while respecting surrounding historical facilities. Completed in lgg6, the new Pinole City Hall features a building design which embraces the City's past, present, and future. Located adjacent to the City's Old Town with its varying turn-of-the-century architectural styles, the design borrows many of the 'generic' Old Town building features and assembles them in a manner which is both relevant today and for the future. The 2 stray building includes a 120 seat Council Chamber, Community Meeting room and a one-stop permit counter. The main entry rotunda establishes not only an Old Town presence, but also a new axis which extends through both the public counters and into the new City Hall gardens. This garden is bounded by the new City Hall and the exfsting Public Safeb/building and includes public art (featuring school children's art) and a modest water element. Contact: Keith Freeman, Ph (510) 724.G014 COMPARABLE PROJECTS (continued) Project Size: 35,Q33 SF Including Police firing range Construction Cost: $ 6,2Q3,000 Project Description: The Santa Cruz Police Facility is located in a mixed use area of downtown Santa Cruz and houses the Admin~aLion, Records, Operations and Investigation Departments. The facility also contains a muiti-purpose Community Room/Emergency Operations Center and a six lane, 25 yard fidng range. Due to the close proximity of the County Jail, no holding facility has been included; however, a group of 4 Prisoner Intervisw rooms with its own discrete entrance has been provided. The Police moved into the new facility on November 19, 1~9. Contact: Chief Steve Belcher, Ph (831) ~16 Project Architect/Manager - George Miem Structural Engineer - Ron Vogel Mechanical Engineer - H & M Mechanical Electrical Engineer - Belden Elec'mcal Civil Engineer- Ifland Engineers Project Size: 53,000 SF Construction Costs: $10,042,000 Project Description: The Dublin Civic Center is located on a ten-acre site adjacent to the intersection of 1580 and 1680. The project includes 21,000 SF of administrative offices, 19,000 SF Police Facility, a 150 seat Council Chamber, a 1,500 SF Regional Meeting Room and a 2,000 SF cable 'T~ studio, which will serve the Tri-Valley area. The design of the facility features two semi- circular wings arbund a central garden court. The two wings, housing the Police Department and the municipal offices, are offset along an EastNVest axis so as to accommodate futura expansion of both buildings. The buildings' evolving plan layout is further expressed through the rounded, two story facades, which spread out across the site as an evolving form symbolic to the City's emerging development. Master planning of the site includes a future Performing Arts Theater and a Gymnasium facility. Contact: Captain Gary Thuman, Ph (925) 833-6680 Project Architect/Manager - George Miem Sb'uctural Engineer - Vogel & Meyer Mechanical Engineers - Chartee & Braun Electrical Engineer - Silverman & Light Civil Engineer - Wileey & Hamm Project Size: 25,000 SF City Hall & Fire Administration Addition 43,000 SF Police Facility 30,(X]0 SF Library Addition Construction Cost: $7,972,539 Project Description: The Livermore Civic Center project includes development of Facility Programs and Master Planning for a new Police Facility, a City Hail addition including Fire Administration Offices, and a major addition to the City's Main Library. Phase I of the project is the Police Facility which broke ground in June lgO~. The two-story atmcture is designed around the client's goal for Communib/Policing from both staff and citizen perspectives. The overall plan is organized around the secure, central courtyard and is designed to meet Essential Facility Standards. The Program includes a new Dispatch Center - specifically designed for both ergonomics as well as psychological needs such as views to the exterior. The facility contains a 48 hour Holding Area as well as a multi- purpose classroom which converts via fold down tables into the City's Emergency Operations Center. The project was bid 5% below the construction estimate. Contact: Chief Ron Scott, Ph (925) 371-4710 COMPARABLE PROJECTS (continued) Project Size:. 58,300 SF PoliceFacility 8,662 SF Animal Shelter 6.4 Acres - Construction Cost: $9,850,000 Project Description: Antioch's Pubhc Safety Complex is situated on a 6.4 acre site and includes both the City's Police and Animal Services facilities. Since Animal Services is operated by pohce staff, it has been designed with a staff connection while maintaining separate pubhc and service access. The pohce facility.includes administration, investigation and SUpport functions, in addition to a 22-person . holding facility and a 10-lane, 75-foot pistol range. The building's plan is a reflection of both the flow of patrol activities within and the dear definition of security zones for the facility's various pubhc, operational and holding functions. Of particular importance is that while security is maintained, a sense of hght and openness is created via an internal courtyard around which the facility functions are organized. The result is a secure but humanized work environment. The police facility portion of the project bid at $134.30/SF with site improvements at $23.87/SF for a total land and building cost of $158.17 SF. Contact:. Captain Kitt Schwitters, Ph (925) 779-6964 PROJECT TEAM & KEY PERSONNEL We have proposed below a Project Team which offers the City of Saratoga in-depth master planning and design experience on Civic Centers, related public service buildings and landscape components including the Dublin Civic Center (Police and City Hall), the Livermore Civic Center Master Plan, the Pinole City Hall and Council Chambers, the Prewett Family Park Master Plan, and the Walnut Creek Civic Center expansion. Our proposed Team for this project includes the firm's key senior staff, each of whom has extensive Police and Fire Department Facility experience, as well as a Consultant Team with whom we have worked on a regular basis on numerous other Law Enforcement and Civic Center projects. We are a relatively unique architectural firm in. that the Principals of the firm actually perform the lead work on our projects - especially during the Facility Programming and Schematic Design phases on our projects. A reference check with our current and recent clients in Lodi, Antioch, Livermore, Campbell, Walnut Creek, Santa Cruz, and the United Methodist Churches of Los Altos, San Jose, and Los Gatos will confirm this working commitment. Architect George Miers & Associates 1150 Moraga Way, Suite 150 Moraga, CA 94556 Ph (925) 631-6900, Fx (925) 631-6910 George Miers - Lead Architect & Designer John Howland - Project Manager & Code Analysis Consultant Support Team as Required Security Electronics/911 Dispatch On-Line Electric 388 17th Street, Suite 230 Oakland, Ca 94612 (510) 268-8373 Sandy Zirulnik, Principal-In-Charge Civil Engineer Luk and Associates 399 Taylor Blvd., Suite 288 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 (92'5) 363-1981 George Luk, Principal Mechanical Engineer RAO Engineers 330 Arroyo Seco Hollister, CA 95023 (831) 637-0550 G. Rao, Principal Electrical Enginedr ' Koch, Chun, Knobloch & Associates 7300 Folsom Blvd., Suite 101 Sacramento, CA 95826 (916) 386-2090 Mike Stevens, Project Engineer StruCtural Engineer Biggs Cardosa Associates 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 San Jose, CA 95126 (408) 296-5515 Mark Cardosa, Principal Cost Consultant Construction Management 3250 Sullivan Road Sebastopal, CA 95472 (707) 829-5872 Petr Lenda, President Education Registration Background GEORGE THOMAS MIF, RS' Bachelor of Science, Washington University, St. Louis, MO Master of Amhitecture, University of California, Berkeley, CA California George Micrs established the firm in January 1982. During the past 20 years, as a design principal in both his current practice and as Studio Director at Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz, Mr. Micrs has designed and consWucted a broad array of builcling types including special use pubhc, commercial and residential facilities. This range of work has included City Administrative facilities, Public Safety facilities, Churches, Libraries, and Animal Care facilities to mention a few. Underlying this broad portfolio has been a commitment by Mr. Micrs and his firm to focus on a design process which emphasizes the redefinition of specific building types in order to better meet the needs of both present and future users. The vehicle for this emphasis has been a unique.and intense form of facility programming, which Mr. Miers personally conducts with the Client. Mr. Miers also has extensive experience in renovation where he has developed a national reputation in both restoration and adaptive reuse including over 8 million SF of commercial space and fifteen buildings on the National Register of Historic Places. In the course of this work, he has developed expertise in the application of building codes to existing structures and has lectured on the · benefits of Investment Tax Credits related to renovation. Previous Experience Articles Memberships ICad'LAN MCLAUGm,IN DIAZ Studio Director: Renovation and Commercial Development St. Cloud Comer - 100,000 SF Commercial Renovation. Nashville Tennessee. Magnolia Building - 300,000 SF Commercial Renovation. Dallas, Texas. National Register; Felt Building - 40,000 SF Commercial Renovation, Salt Lake City, Utah. National Register; Southern California Design Center - 550,000 SF Commercial Renovation, ~_ty of Commerce° California (formerly Uniroyal Tire Company). Oakland State Office Building - 270,000 SF New Construction and Remodel, Oakland, California. Reunion Center 'Building - 100,000 SF Commercial Renovation, Tulsa, Oklahoma. National Register; Center Mall Court - 50,000 SF Rehabilitation, Fresno, California (formerly Roos Atkins 'Building). Commercenter - 20,000 SF'lS-story office building. New Construction. Fresno, California. Sainte Claire Hotel Complex - 500 rooms. Feasibility Study. San Jose, California. Rice Hotel - 500 Rooms. Rehabilitation. Competition. Houston, Texas. Charles Schwab Corporate Offices - 100,000 SF rehabilitation and space planning, San Francisco, California. La Galleria Condominiums - 150 units, 13 stories, new conslruction. San Francisco, California "Designing Community-Oriented Police Facilities": Western City Magazine <' "Designing Animal Care Facffities which Emphasize Adoption Education Facilities" "The Town Hall: A Forum for Public Dialog": Western City Magazine "Learning From Fire - Towards a Comprehensive View of Fire Safety in the Built Environment": University of California, Berkeley "Density: The Architect's Urban Choices and Attitudes": Architectural Record Board Member: Oakland SPCA National Trust for Historic Preservation, Society for San Francisco Heritage, San Plarming and Urban Research (SPUR), The National Building Museum, The National Rehabilitation Association Education Registration Background Previous Projects Lectures JOHN HOWLAND Project Architect Bachelor of Science, Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo, CA California C14886 Since 1984 John Howland has acted as principal architect or project architect for numerous commercial, industrial; and residential projects. First as the principal of his own firm in Sonoma County until 1996, next as project manager for Barry Swenson Builder, a large-scale commercial and residential deYeloper in San Jose, and currently as an associate of George Miers & Associates, he has achieved expertise in architectural design, master planning, and interior design. He has made numerous successful presentations to, or served on, various Design Review and Planning Committees, including San Jose, Santa Rosa, Cotati, Petaluma, Sebastopol, and Timbercove In the last five years Mr. Howland has had extensive and successful contact with the State Office of Historic Preservation and has made extensive use of the State Historic Building Code. Noted for his innovative, imaginative approach to any project, he was featured in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat for his successful Planning Commission presentations to allow variances for "Courtyard" residential developments in that city. Most recently he was lauded by Allan Hess, architectural critic for the San Jose Mercury News, who called his design for the $11,000,000 restoration of the Letitia Building, a downtown National Register Landmark; "meticulous", [al "practical solution and a glorious space" [that] "redefines what office space can be". Currently Mr. Howland is Project Manager for the Lodi Police Facility, the First United Methodist Church of San Jose and the Livermore Library. Governmental Projects - County of Sonoma Office Park, Master Space Plan for entire County complex, Santa Rosa, CA. Southwest Area Community Plan, Santa Rosa, CA. Cotati Downtown Plan, Cotati, CA. Santa Rosa Development Standards, Santa Rosa, CA. Specific Plan, Southwest Area, Santa Rosa, CA. Cinema County Complex, Probation Dept. & Dislrict Attorney, office space plan, Santa Rosa, CA Institutional Projects - Center for Positive Center for Positive Thinking, Sanctuary, Offices, Classrooms, Santa Rosa, CA. Sonoma County Museum, Masterplan, interior design, exhibit design, Santa Rosa, CA. KSUN Radio Station and classrooms, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA. Farm House Alcohol Recovery Center, Masterplan Residential smacture, multi-use building, Lompoc, CA. The Art of Seeing: Architectural Lighting Architectural Vocabulary: Knowing Nrhat Changes Architectural Styles The Office Environment, Health, Comfort, and Future Acoustical Privacy: How to Be Isolated from Noise Ramona's Promise: Courtyard Housing in California Articles "Lighting, the Myth and Madness: A Critique on Rumors of Health Effects of Lighting", News Herald, San Francisco, October, 1984 GEORGE MIERS & ,~SSOCL~TES PROJECT WORKPLAN Public service projects, particularly police and fire facilities, are complicated enough given their own specific requirements. When these uses are combined on the same site and possibly in the same building, many-of these functions (particularly vehicular ingress and egress, internal exiting and security access, etc.) and certain building systems such as HVAC zoning become more complicated. At the same time, there are advantages and opportunities. For example, Sheriff, Police and Fire Stations need to be constructed to Essential Facility Standards (minimum 1.25 ~ normal structural requirements) and both require emergency power for various functions. The · ability to combine facilities should reduce emergency power costs fi.om what it would be in two separately located buildings, and combining both facilities structurally may also prove to be a cost savings vs. two separate structures. The key to analyzing a project such as this and ultimately selecting the most beneficial option for all parties is to clearly delineate each of these advantages and disadvantages in a manner which the decision makers (users) can understand. This is the task of the Architect Team. With this in mind, part of our workplan approach would be to implement the following tasks. We also have included a sample matrix illustrating the type of issues which we would expect to evaluate during these sessions. Task 1 Kick-Off Meeting with All Users - While every project obviously has an initial meeting, we feel that when multiple users are participating, it is particularly important that the Architect Team be well prepared so that the meeting is meaningful. In this case, we should have studied the previously prepared programs for each of the users and incorporated this information into a series of Matrix Evaluation forms, such as that presented herein, which can be sent to each user group beforehand for review and comment. We also will prepare a questionnaire relative to specific issues and questions. While it is our intention to meet with each individual user separately, we strongly feel that the more prepared all participants are at the first meeting will lead to a much more productive and efficient process. No one enjoys long drawn-out meetings which lack focus. It is the job of the Architect Team to structure these meetings such that all parties know not only the information which is needed, but the desired goal of each meeting. Following this initial meeting, minutes will be prepared by our Team and sent to all parties for review and agreement. Task 2 Individual Meetings with Each User Group - Following the joint meeting, it is important that we develop a thorough understanding of each group's program needs. While we realize that programs for each building type have already been prepared, it is essential that we understand the background and reasoning behind each of the stated program needs. We feel that these meetings can be divided into two parts: the first would deal with specific program needs i.e. the nature of the sleeping quarters in the Fire Station or the chain of evidence procedure and related program spaces for the Sheriff's Department, while the second part of the meeting should focus on site options. This latter task again requires the Architect Team to come to the meeting prepared with preliminary options in place and possibly even in model form. While this may seem premature to some, we have found that many users find it difficult to articulate spatial needs until they see it graphically. Since the purpose of these earlY meetings is to gain the best information of the users' needs, we feel it is incumbent upon us to utilize the best techniques for eliciting this information and we have found early graphic studies of program concepts often cuts thought weeks and months of meetings. Please contact our Sacramento County user (Pat Wilcox 916-875-5051) or Project Manager (Russ Sunahara 916-876-6340) to verify our success at this approach on a somewhat similar joint-use project. Once again, meeting minutes will GEORGE MIERS & ,4SSOCI,4TES Task 3 be prepared f0~ each session and sent to all parties. We suspect that the Fire and Sheriff' s Departments will require two meetings while the Post Office and Church will probably only require one. Develop Site Option - Following the user interviews, we will prepare a series ~f site options utilizing both plans and a study model. Given the number of different parcels, the varied topography and the many potential design options utilizing above and below grade structured parking and surface parking, we feel that everyone would be best served by a clear, 3-dimensional representation of the site. While we realize this may require more meetings, quite frankly, this site planning analysis is the most important in the entire building process. If we ~ake the wrong decision here, all of the work which follows merely reinforces that mistake. Hence, we feel the best decision-making tools should be incorporated. We prepare study models for all of our projects and consider it a standard part of our scope of work. We would expect at least 2 meetings regarding site options and possibly more depending on the nature of the schemes and their ability to satisfy all users. Again, meeting minutes will be prepared for each session. Task 4 Preparation of Budgets for Each 'Viable Option - Once the options are narrowed down to the most preferred, we will prepare preliminary budgets for each. This is a critical and difficult experience in that these figures will be the basis for the City's long-term decisions and yet, by necessity, they are based upon very preliminary information and rough sketches. To help compensate for this, we will incorporate costs from recent Bay Area projects and solicit opinions from local contractors who are performing these types of projects. As a final note, we want to stress that we believe there are many exciting design opportunities offered by this site and by the City's program. However, notwithstanding the complexity of the individual buildings, we actually feel that the building designs will prove to be the easier part of the exercise. The key to this project is parking - not just because of the site planning implications, but also because of the cost impacts. For example, since Sheriff and Fire Departments are Essential Facilities, if parking is placed below these buildings, they automatically must be designed to Essential Facility Standards which increase the lateral loads by 25%. Given the recent 1998-9 changes to structural codes following the Northridge earthquake, costs of parking structures, and particularly sublevel structures, have increased. This is an area where our firm has developed considerable experience with a variety of parking structure approaches including oUr San Carlos Library, First United Methodist Church in San Jose, and even our Lodi Police Facility parking studies which led to a different site with n._qo structured parking. Suffice it to say that this is clearly the first order of study and one we will aggressively approach looking at all possible options - with a bias towards minimizing structured parking and searching for joint-use options. GEORGE MIERS & .,t SSOCI.,,I TES Sample Shared Facility Evaluation Matrix Note: These items are for illustration only. The actual list of issues will be developed m joint and individual ~ions with the various user groups. ISherifPs Dept. [Fire Dept. IPo~t Office [Church (Parkin~ only) 1.0 Site Access/Parking General Building Separate Vehicular Enhance * * * ' Security Surveillance * * * Card Reader ? ? ? Covered Parking ? ? ? Shrift Change * * ' Joint Public Parking ? ? ? ? Ioint Staff Parking ? ? ? 2.0 Essential Facility Needs Structural * * = Emergency Power * * ? Emergency Operations Center ? ? ' 3.0 Dispatch/911 * * 4.0 Public Access * * Public Counter * * * Interview Rooms * - - Public Information * * * Classroom/Heating Rooms * * ? 5.0 Special ItVAC N.eeds 6.0 Special Plumbing Needs 7.o Special Security Electronics Needs s.0 Possible Shared Features These, as well as the Stairs/Elevators items above, need to be Lunch Room determined through user EOC/I-Iearing Room meetings Physical Training Locker Rooms GEORGE MIERS & ASSOCIATES City of Saratoga PROJECT TIMELINE The following schedule is preliminary and should be one of the agenda items at our initial kick-off meeting. Notwithstanding the complexity of the problem, we believe the schedule is realistic relative to the masterplarming work-which we will need to produce. What may need to be adjusted is the review time needed by the various affected users and concerned parties as well as the time needed to arrange presentations. We will certainly work with you to develop a schedule to meet your needs. Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Task 6 Kick-Off Meeting with All Users Individual Meetings with Each User Group Revise Site Options · Initial Presentation to City · Incorporate Comments and Second Presentation Preparation of Budgets for Each Viable Option Prepare Draft Report · 'Receive City Comments on Draft Report · Revise Report City Council Presentation Dec. 3, 2001 Dec. 4 - 17, 2001 Dec. 17 - Jan 23, 2002 Jan. 9, 2002 Jan. 16 - 23, 2002 Jan. 23 - Feb. 1, 2002 Jan. 23 - Feb. 7, 2002 Feb. 15 - 11, 2002 Feb. 15-22- March 1 Feb. 22 - March 15, 2002 GEORGE MIERS & ASSOCIATES City of Saratoga PHASING While this is an extremely important phasing and cost issue, it is difficult to discuss in detail without reference to specific schemes. With that said, there are several issues which clearly need to be addressed within the context of any phased master plan approach including: · 1) Does it really make sense to phase the project? - Phasing is often.a necessity and .we have had extensive experience developing successfully phased plans. At the same time, it is generally a more expensive, time- consuming, and disruptive process which, if it can be avoided, should be. As we consider phasing options, we will continue to point out the pros and cons and, where necessary, play deVil's advocate in illustrating the downside of phased processes relative to extended construction, disruption of user activities, access problems (particularly related to secure parking areas), extended costs, etc. 2) Maintaining Utility Services for Emergency Operations - Utility and subsurface services are of critical importance on a phased project and may dictate the type of electrical service, I-IVAC systems, etc. for the project. This is an extremely important issue which can have significant cost and construction time implications. 3) Maintaining Secure Access - Whichever facility is constructed first, the phasing plan must be designed to allow secure and unimpeded access in and out of the site. This is obviously of the utmost importance for Police and Fire, but should be a concern of the Post Office and Church as well 4) Maintaining Public Access - A clear, safe and ADA-compliant access system must be maintained .for all public entrances. Our Walnut Creek City Hall .and Police Expansion project offer a good example of such a phasing plan. GEORGE MIERS & ASSOCIATES REFERENCES Mr. Joseph Brann, Director COPS U.S. Department of Justice 1100 Vermont, N.W. Washington DC 20005 Deputy Chief Dave Larson Chief Steve Belcher City of santa Cruz Police Depamnent 155 Center Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 (831) 420-5814 Chief Ron Scott Livermore Police Department 1050 S. Livermore Avenue Livermore, CA 94550 (925) 371-4710 Mr. Dave Clemens Project Manager City of Livermore 1052 S. Livermore Avenue Livermore, CA 94550 (925) 373-5208 Chief Jerry Adams Captain David Main Lodi Police Department. 221 W. Pine Street Lodi, CA 95241 (209) 333-6726 Chief David Lewis (Retired) Antioch Police Department 300 "L" Street Antioch, CA 94509 (Dept.) (925) 779-6902 (Home) (925) 754-5097 Chief Rich Gregson Walnut Creek Police Department 1666 N. Main Street Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 943-5844 Captain Jeffrey R. Cameron' Redondo Beach Police Department P.O. Box 659 401 Diamond Street Redondo Beach, CA 90277 (925) 379-2477 x 2652 Commander Joseph Aita San Pablo Police Department Five Alvarado Square San Pablo, CA 94806 (925) 215-3108 Chief David Gullo Captain Russ Patterson Special Enforcement Division Campbell Police Department 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 (408) 866-2121 Sgt. John Glischinski San Francisco International Airport 676 McDonnell Road San Francisco, CA 94121 (415) 876-2435 Ms. Jan Engel Assistant Director of Library Services San Mateo County Library 25 Tower Road San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 312-5245 Mr. Gary Templin Executive Director East Bay SPCA 8323 Baldwin Street Oakland, CA 94621 (510) 569-0674 Pastor Jim Crawford First United Methodist Church 24 North Fifth Street San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 294-7264 Jerry J. Adams Chief of Police LODI POLICE DEPARTMENT 230 West Elm Street Lodi, California 95240 (209) 333-6727 November 1, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: I am pleased to write this letter of reference for the Architectural Firm of George Miers and Associates. George has been working with the city of Lodi on thc dcsign of a new police facility. We are currently in the final design phase for our building which includes a type. ! jail. He has also worked with the city of Lodi on designing a fire station which is in the final stages of construction. i1 cannot say enough aborn George and his staff. He is open, honest and extremely easy to work with..He provides valuable insight but ultimately allows the customer the final say. We have personally visited over twenty-eight recently constructed police facilities, three of which were designed by George. We have found his buildings to he among the best in design and functionality. Hc secms to have a knack for designing a building, which is secure, yet inviting to the public. He has a good f~! of the special needs of law enforcemem and sp~ificaily that ofthe working stre~ officer. George has experience designing jails, animal shelters and commUnications cemers which are extremely complex. If you would like to see an excellent example of his work, 1 would suggest you vish the Antioch Police Department which is not only an excellenl design but has been used as the -model for other facilities. Should you need any additional information or clarification do not hesitate to call mc at 9(,2093'~501 or Lieutenant Larry Manetti at (209) 333-6788 David J. Main Captain Support Services Division Attachment CITY OF SARATOGA STANDARD INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made at Saratoga, California by and between the CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation ("City"), and ATI Architects and Engineers, ("Con,tractor"), who agree as follows: RECITALS WHEREAS, City requires the services of a qualified contractor to provide the work product described in Exhibit A of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, City lacks the qualified personnel to provide the specified work product; and WHEREAS, Contractor is duly qualified to provide the required work product; and WHEREAS, Contractor is agreeable to providing such work product on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. RESULTS TO BE ACHEIVED. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Contractor shall provide to City the work product described in Exhibit A ("Scope of 'Work"). Contractor is not authorized to undertake any efforts or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of a fully executed Purchase Order from the Finance Department of the City of Saratoga. 2. · TERM. The term of this Agreement commences on December 5, 2001, and extends through June 30, 2002 or the completion of the project, whichever occurs first, unless it is extended by written mutual agreement between the parties, provided that the parties retain the right to terminate this Agreement as provided in Exhibit D at all times. 3. PAYMENT. City shall pay Contractor for work product produced pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B ("Payment"). The payments specified in Exhibit B shall be the only payments to be made to Contractor in connection with Contractor's completion of the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall submit all billings to City in the manner specified in Exhibit B; or, if no maimer is specified in Exhibit B, then according to the usual and customary procedures and practices ~hich Contractor uses for billing clients similar to City. 4. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth in Exhibit C ("Facilities and Equipment"), Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment Page 1 of 18 ~' which_may be required for completing the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. City shall furnish to Contractor only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit C according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 5. GENERAL PROVISIONS. City and Contractor agree to. and shall abide by the general provisions set forth in Exhibit D ("General Provisions"). In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the other term or condition shall control insofar as it is inconsistent with the General Provisions. 6. EXHIBITS. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are attached hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part of this Agreement. 7. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of City by the City Manager ("Administrator"). The Administrator has complete authority to receive information, interpret and define City's policies consistent with this Agreement, and communicate with Contractor concerning this Agreement. All correspondence and other communications shall be directed to or through the Administratoi- or his or her designee. 8. NOTICES. All notices or communication concerning a party's compliance with the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and may be 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 carrier indicates that the mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving Party. The Parties shall make good faith efforts to provicle 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 Contractor shall be sent to: Davis Curley 3860 Blackhawk Road Danville, California 94506 Notices to City shall be sent to: Dave Anderson City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Page 2 of 18 ~r With a copy (which copy shall not constitute notice) to: City Clerk City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 9. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement supersedes any and all agreements, either oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect to Contractor's completion of the Scope of Work on behalf of City and contains allgf the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to the rendering of such services in any manner whatsoever. 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. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Page 3 of 18 ~' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have execrated this Agreement. CONTRACTOR: By: Date: Print Name: Position: CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation By: Date: Name: Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Date: City Attorney APPROVED AS TO BUDGET AUTHORITY AND INSURANCE: By: Date: Administrative Services Director Attachments Exhibit A -- Scope of Work Exhibit B -- Contract Payment and Reporting Schedule Exhibit C -- Facilities and Equipment Exhibit D -- General Provisions Exhibit E -- Insurance Requirements Page 4 of 18 ~ EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK Contractor shall complete the attached Scope of Work. Page 5 of 18 ~r Scope of Work Architect is to provide professional services related to the design of this project in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances and to comply with appropriate standards of the industry. A description of the services or' tasks required of the architeCt is as follows: 1. Investigate and prepare three (3) alternative site plans for Options #1, #2 and #3. Option #1 - This option assumes a Public Safety Center design constructed without the use of the Federated Church parking lot. Given the constraints of the site the parking requirements of the participating agencies it will probably require the construction of an above or below ground parking garage. Option #2 - This option assumes a Public Safety Center design constructed with the use of the Federated Church parking lot. The church has asked that no parking structure be built above ground on their site, necessitating undergrOund parking on the Federated Church parking lot. The church woUld also like to make use of any additional non-secured parking spaces created as a result of their participation. Option #3.- This option assumes a Public Safety Center design constructed with one of the 3 primary agencies currently located on the site, moving from the site. This option would be considered if it was found that because of the size or technical constraints of the site that adequate parking, internal circulation, lack of space for adequate building square footage, may require one of the three agencies currently using the site to relocate off the site. Each option will reflect information included in the Request for Proposal, informati'on gathered from the users, information gathered from City staff, information gathered from the Ad Hoc committee and other sources that may be deemed creditable. The options will include physical information related to the site including, but not limited to, grading, utilities, trees and landscaping, the Memorial Plaza, curb, gutter, and property alignment. The Consultant will provide the information in a graphic manner, using two and three-dimensional views of the options. Prepare the layouts in a 50% and 100% submittal for each alternative to each option. In addition to the graphic and planning information being presented by the Consultant, the Consultant will meet periodically with members of the Ad Hoc committee, City staff, the users and other interested parties, to discuss in detail the progress of the various options. 3. Present the conceptual plans to the City Council at a Study Session or public input meeting for the 50% submittal and a second meeting for the 100% submittal for the options that the City Council approves, to proceed with. Develop construction cost estimates, or ranges of estimates, for each option. The cost estimates should detail the cost for each facility in each option. Develop a recommended strategy for how construction of the various facilities could be phased over time to provide maximum benefit to the existing users of the site with minimum disturbance. Nov 28 O1 04:36p R~I Danville 9256488811 ~ p.3 1.1 Labor Fees: Unless oiherwise agreed, fees for professional services are based on the time charged to the project. 'irhe fees are based on tile · rates listed below: .Classification Hourly Rate Administrative $ 57.00 Technician i $ 64.00 CADD Operator CADD Supervisor ii $ 79.00 $ 84.00 Construction Administrato~i $ 85.00 Assistant Project Managerl $ 90.00 Designer Junior Engineer !: $ 93.00 : $ 95.00 Engineer/Senior Designer ~ $104.00 Project Manager/Senior Erlgineer $115.00 Studio Director/Engineering Supervisor $145.00 Senior Project Manager ~ $145.00 Officer ' '; $175.00 Principal i $190.00 Associate ! 2.0 x Hourly Rate Temporary Employee :: 2.75 x Hourly Rate iiStandard Terms and Conditions - 2001 or ,"~ ~.3 2.0 Terms and Conditions "~ 2.1 Scope-of Service: The scope of services vided by ATI shall be set forth in project scope docu- ments approved by Client. Services requested by Cli- ent which are not set forth in project scope documents shall be paid for by Client as additional services, in ac- cordance with the current fee schedule.~Ud-ditional ser- vices include, but are not limited to, changes in the scope or detail of the work made at the request of Cli- ent; services made necessary by unforeseen conditions not disclosed to ATI before entedng into this agree- ment; services as a witness in connection with litiga- tion, arbitration, or other proceedings against persons other than ATI; ariel any other service performed by ATI not reasonably within the scope of the work envisioned at the time of entering into this agreement. 2.2 Invoices' ~ ~'~, ,,,~;~',-.~-~_ __~-,,~.. ~.-~, ~ ~, ~ .-.--~' '~--'~:~'"'~' ---7' ....... '~'m-~ja~,a~-l~ll=~ Invoices are paya61e receipt. Interest of one and one-half percent (1-1/2%) per month will be payable on any amounts not paid within 30 days from invoice date. Any and ali costs incurred in collecting any delinquent amount, including ~ attomey's fees, shall be paid by Client. ATI may sus- Rate Adjustments: The above hourly rates apply to ?end work in the event Clier~t's account is not town- rained current. Client re eases ATI, and shall indem- work performed during, the 2001 calendar year. Work nify and hold ATI harmless from and against, any and performed after the encl of the 2001 year, will be at the then current rate schedule· all claims or other consequences, inciuding attorneys and expert witness fees, arising from ATI's suspen- Premium Rate Services: FOr emergency work re- [~on of work. due to Client's nonpayment of invoices. quested by Clients with less than 48 hours notice, time summary intormation .,w,.ill be provided on the invoices shall be billed at a rate of 1 5 x the above Hourly in accordance with ATI s standard billing practices. If Rates with a four hour minimum charge, requested, ATI will prOvide additional documentation at the Client's expense, in accordance with the rates Expert Witness: For appearances as a witness in specified in ATI's professional service fees. Audit of connection with litigation, arbitration, or other proceed- any charges may be performed at Client's request and ings, time shall be billed at a ~te of 2.0 x the above expense, by an independent Certified Public Accoun- · 'hourly rate, with a four hour miff mum charge each day tancy firm. Such audit shall be limited to a review of appearances are required. :' time cards to verify labor charged to the contract and ' 1.2 Reimbursable Expenses. Project related di documentation for reimbursable expanses. rect costs including; but not limited to 'the following 2. imitation ofLiabili : ATI'S SERVICES WILL items, are billed as follows: ' B~FtREMvED ,N ~E AND S ~ 1) ATl'sd,rectcostplus 15 perCent for: ~,T~.xE~R L,~E_V_EL_0Fc i~iMANNE~RKiLC?oNSR~i~T~ a) Postage freight, and any other shipping SAME LOCALI UNDER SIMILAR CO' HE charges . i. THIS ASSURANCE OFFERED IN L' TIONS. b) Travel, lodging, and subsistence expenses WARRANTY, EITHER PRESSED R OF ANY c) Rental or purchase of materials and equipment , d) _Subcontracts ant Subcohtr ATI S LIABILITY O .._ IMPLIED. · . ~ actors N AC TO ANY e) v~cUetSside bluepnntmg an...d reprogral~hics set- 2) ATI's standard serv,ce centeirates for: V~iC'~S~';O~UC~E~.rP~RuF?,',,~.A.NC. ~,._~.- F- ~~ Contf~. ATI's Engineering Services - Ye~,ion 01015 (Bay Area) .......... ~,n,,~t:; ~ OBTAINED, AT CLl-' Hov 28 O1 04:36p R~I Danville 92564888'11 p.4 ATI ~i Standard Terms and Conditions - 2001 " NT'S EXPENSE, AND F~ILURE TO EXERCISE sons, including, but not limited to, duties to maintain ~[HE OPTION FOR ADDITIONAL COVERAGE safe working conditions, observe governmental recju- I~,AIVES ANY CLAIM OF LIABILITY BEYOND lations governing workplace safety, and keep in effect S'I~CH LIMITS. THIS LIMITATION ON ATI'S LIABIL; .. ITY~SHALL APPLY'WHATeVER THE NATURE OF worker's compensation and any other forms of insur- Y~ DLAIMED BASIS CFi LIABILITY INCLUDING STR GENCE, SIONS, LIABLE NATURE THERETO) AGES ARE LIGENT PEI LIMITATION) CONTRACT, Certi~,ete of Merit: Client Shall' make no claim OR IMPLIED)~ TORT, ABSOLUTE (aoWha.e_t_h.er. ~d!re_,~r_i.n. the form of a third ACTIVE OR PASSIVE l~d,n~ ~ ! I untes.~,q~liem shall have first~prO~idecl ATI NAL ~i ERRORS OR IS. with a _w~itte_n certifica"ti~D executed.by'a~ independent ANY OTHER ~HEORY. CLIEI~ Design P.m. fes..sional' spe"Ci~.rlg-each and every act or ES THAT IN N° EVENT SHALI¢ BE omission that the certifier ~3ds -constitutes a viola- ~NY CLAIMS pR DAMAG/E)~'~ ( tio, of the standard 0.f.c~re expec"St~-0f a Design Pro- NCLUDING !i COSTS ../RE fessional ~c;$~j~'der';~;ilar cirCum' stances. C~ such ceftin'to ATI no --'ss suc, cLA, ' DAM- ess tha. e DIRECT RESULT' ATI S NEG. OF WORK PER- agaJnst, fi¢l'l. such changes without additional f~e to Client. rinhh~ inch ,~l; ......... ~latu~o~-taw;-m.m'-~ner activities of !ts Employees while .P~.?orming services --r::ccs. ~uent releases ATI from and shall indem- nify and hold ATI harmless from and against, any and for Client. However, nothing in t~is section shall be all claims or other consequences, including reason- construed as relieving Client or an~, Construction Con- tr.actor of any duties that they m~y have under la able attorneys and expert witness fees~risine from or _? with respect t~ the safety of worke~ and other Der w as a result of any reuse of any of those ~.nstru'ments of ....... ~ng~rm~,.w~ v..~ ..... ~ service w~thout ATI's written authorizatior~. ~ - ----. ~,~,on u/uts (Bay~rea] FORMED UND THIS i ATI SHALL . . NOT BE HELD [ABLI FOR' ~ DAMAGE RE. 2.7 .~nce: ATI !s protected !n California by SULTING FROM ~ OF, ', "INCLUDING WoOers. Co~ation Insurance (and/o[~npioyer's BUT NOT LIMITf )\T0 E~.~ i AKES, FIRES,-Ii.ability insurance),-'-/or.j~odity .in.iurY'~.o~sistent with WIND STORMS, -'L~IQ }~/~1'. C ~ ~OES, HURRI- smtuto.~ requirements,..an~' f~rnish certificates CANES AND THE LIK~[ ~'~DITiON, ATI SHALL there~t~"ATI also carde~r~l Liabilit , .N_O_T B_E~.L..I_ABLE .T~.-~ iN!' OR THIRD PART/ES .A.~o~~~biTI. rutq CONSEQUENTIAt INiD~OI=NTa~ =,-,,.-,.,,,,, i[y msur. aflce. - '~ ' OR RELIANCE DAMa~, t'~':F.~TrT';,'-"27,",.r~-""'-~ .... ~n~s. ~ I~E 28 Ind ' · · . · HELD RESPONSli~'~/-; i, ~IABLE FOR CLAP'" ' · 'emn~ic~tion. Client shall ~ndemni and " " ' ,-~ save narrate fY WHICH ARISE, DI!~C: ~':iOR INDI~,-t-.r,v .... ~less A'l'f'~.p,m and against ~il~flfi~ d- THE FOLLOWING~I~(~[ [~u~,"~=o ""'""'" 'm mancls, causes of actio"tfT~am~,,~---~ ....... . e. - ,' ,,,,..,: ..... _-.~o, ~.~=t~. uxpenses. ,"/ ....... ".'~' t, losses, or ~~~e~to any person .L_I_E.D..~_/I'HE DATA AS Ai BA~i-~-~ INP~J"T~% a;ree '~:.u"_~_~_..r~z~ener?c/ar/es: Client and-AT1--/ . i/~ w~31~J<:. - ,.=,--'-~-'~' --~ a~r~em;;¢.~ ~e~_~,ce, .~eff. ormed by._ATI under this ' \ 'X g m are so~ely tot"the benefit of Client and are .i ' not intended b ' ' ' B) CLI/N/ CLtENT'S AG~NT.~ '~i ............ y e.,.t, her Ct,e or ATltobeneflt an C :. -, ~ rm.l~-t~, u~,~r person or entity JncludJn Y '~ CTOR_S, THIRD ,PARTIES, R S~ nroiect ,',,,,~----~-- n"~ot limited to the ~N~TLORTSO'/i~sHsu~p-~I,.E~5__ E.,. ,: ..... ,~r.~_ r ana/or any of TI/ON CONFORMS Tn n~'~,~~' ~UNSTRUC- Any such~efit is purely in~identa-i en--~'~'""'~":¥'°' · -' '-'~,~.,~. person .~.4;~, __, ~_ ~-'-'~ '; .... ,.x- ...... ,,u~ u~ seemed a third-party be-~ficiary of this contract· back charges which result from Contractor change ~ 2.4 Back Charges: ATI shallinot be liable for any ~.10 Instruments of Se~vices: Client acknowl. orders for increased constructimh costs. ATI and Cli- edges that any plans and specifications generated by ~ AT1 are instruments of professional service.' At the ent acknowledge that changes ~3 design during con- struction are required on most Construction projects, completion of work, ATI shall transfer blueprint copies and as such, Client and ContraCtor shall be solely re- of the plans and copies of specifications prepared un- der this agreement to Client if such transfer is within sponsible for their cost. Client isistrongly encouraged the project scope documents approved by Client. In to perform a construcfibility review of ATI's desi n .dra~ngs pdor to the initiation of~ ......... .g accepting and utilizing the bluepnnts and s eclfi i~uH~l, ruc~lon Jn or m m!n~mize the possibility of de[i,,n ,-~- ....... .oer tions Oti~=,~...,: __, P ' ca- construct!on. ATI shall make drawing revisions f~ ......... '" '.;--;; - ?a ...n c .... ;-~h, and 0 Mov 28 O1 04:37p RliI Danville 92S6488811 and this ATI- Standard Terms and Conditions - 2001 UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL TRANSFER OF BLUEPRINT COPIES FOR USE BY CLIENT BE DEEMED A SALE BY ATI~! ATI MAKES NO WAR. RANTIES, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR USE, WITH P, ESPECT TO SUCH IN- STRUMENTS OF SERVICE, WHICH ARE PRO. VlDED "AS IS." In certain circumstances ATI may be requested to provide drawings, specificatiq~s, or other data to client 2.14 Approval Authority: ATI will not be bound by any contract or agreement unJess signed by an officer of ATJ. on any form of electronic media. When requested, ATI shall provide such el.ectronic media as "Electronfc .9 16 Amen"---n~s to Agreement. This agree- instruments of Services only upon execution of a ~nt shall not be ' ed ' or Transmittal of Electronic Instruments of Services ~ended in any res ' writing and siR'ned agr~nt with Chent ii . . by ATI 2714.~fidentlal Information: Chent aR ~ acknow~t either part~ may disci'c;'~ 2.~rability of Provisions: If any provis~o~_n.. .ci.a[, tec.hnicat~ary~ tra~ie or.po,ion o~this..fi~keement is h~ t~eoSClu~ a~ provisions sha,~ n~Ot ~~tgisa~~ 2?8. _,"$1~.cce,$$or$ and Assigns: This A reement me term - nail De Din ' on and ' ~ricin~'nform-~n."~_ ,e. ~.n.~, shall tour e benefit of g .stmction. 2.15 EntirO~greement: This agreement (including any project s.c'~documents and ments) consti~utes~f 'A~;'=a~;; Client with ~~ mattar. Them private, Un~e~'~n~-~ '~1~ ;l' vary, agree,~ent. - "- !. ~3 Arbitration, Damages an¢~ Attorney's Pees: and Client shall submit all disputes between the meaning of this agreement, or cerni heir rights, obligations :or performam its binding arbitration. '~: Disputes cided and experi, the industry; only one mutu the arbitration one arbitrator and lect the third. The sol to enforce or interpret not to expand the dghts o. beyond this agreement'., tots shall have the ri damages only, and not special, con= I, or punitive award action decid, the~ any be entitled the losing ~11 attorney's ~nd arbitration co ~.s~s, be panel with of professional d~ services and client agree to use .In selecting each.shall se{ect shall jointly se- ~e arbitrators shall be 1tS agreement and of ATI or Client The arDitra- of the arbitrators, iL Any ruder be decided With reference Jaw, and the forum for s}uch arbitration sh"'aK agreed to by the arbiirators. ?. p.5 ConO~rm$- ATI's Engmeenag &~rvices- Fe;~ton OlOls [Bay Ar~aj EXHIBIT B PAYMENT 1. TOTAL COMPENSATION. City shall pay Contractor an amount not to exceed the " total sum of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) for work to be performed as a flat fee. The City will make an effort to make the fixed fee arrangement-cost effective by agreeing to reproduced copies of work materials for the AdHoc Committee if coordinated with the City Managers office ahead of time. The total sum stated above shall be the total which City shall pay' for the work product to be provided by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement. 2. INVOICES. Contractor shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for work performed and reimbursable expenses incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information: a. Serial identifications of bills, i.e., Bill No. 1; b. The beginning and ending dates of the billing period; c. a summary containing the total contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the total due this period, and the remaining balance available for all remaining billing periods. 3. MONTHLY PAYMENTS. City shall make monthly payments, based on such invoices, for satisfactory progress in completion of the Scope of Work, and for authorized reimbursable expenses incurred. 4. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES. There shall be no right to reimbursement of expenses incurred by Contractor except as specified in Exhibit A to this Agreement. Page 6 of 18 ~ EXHIBIT C FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Contractor's use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing said physical facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility which may involve incumng any direct expense, including, but not limiting the generality of this exclusiog,~!ong-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities. Contractor shall not use such services, premises, facilities, supplies or equipment for any purpose other than in the performance of Contractor's obligations under this Agreement. Page 7 of 18 EXHIBIT D GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. Contractor shall complete the Scope of Work hereunder in accordance with currently. approved methods and practices in Contractor's field. City shall have the right to control Contractor only with respect to specifying the results to be obtained from Contractor pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not have the right to control the means by which ' Contractor accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Likewise, no relationship of employer and employee is created by this Agreement between the City and Contractor or any subcontractor or employee of Contractor. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as limiting the right of Contractor to engage in Contractor's profession separate and apart from this Agreement so long as such activities do not interfere or conflict with the performance by Contractor of the obligations set forth in this Agreement. Interference or conflict will be determined at the sole discretion of the City. 2. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall complete the Scope of Work required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Contractor is engaged in the geographical area in which Contractor practices its profession. All work product of whatsoever nature which Contractor delivers to City pursuant to this Agreement shall be prepared in a substantial, first class and workmanlike manner and conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Contractor's profession. 3. TIME. Contractor shall devote such time to the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary for satisfactory performance of Contractor's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. 4.- CONTRACTOR NO AGENT. Except as City may specify in writing, Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever. 5. BENEFITS AND TAXES. Contractor shall not have any claim under this Agreement or · otherwise against City for seniority, vacation time, vacation pay, sick leave, personal time off, overtime, health insurance, medical care, hospital care, insurance benefits, social security, disability, unemployment, workers compensation or employee benefits of any kind. Contractor shall be solely liable for and obligated to pay directly all applicable taxes, including, but not limited to, federal and state income taxes, and in connection therewith Contractor shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all liability that City may incur because of Contractor's failure to pay such taxes. City shall have no obligation whatsoever to pay or withhold any taxes on behalf of Contractor. 6. ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED. No party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect. However, Page 8 of 18 qr with the consent of the City given in writing, Contractor is entitled to subcontract such portions of the work to be performed under this Agreement as may be specified by City. o PERSONNEL. a. Qualifications. Contractor shall assign only competent personnel to complete the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any such persons, Contractor shall, immediately upon receiving notice from city of such desire of City, cause the removal of such person or persons. Employment Eligibility. Contractor shall ensure that all employees of Contractor and any subcontractor retained by Contractor in connection with this Agreement have provided the necessary documentation to establish identity and employment eligibility as required by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Failure to provide the necessary documentation will result in the termination of the Agreement as required by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. a. In General. Contractor represents and warrants that, to.the best of the Contractor's knoWledge and belief, there are no relevant facts or circumstances which could give rise to a conflict of interest on the pag .of Contractor, or that the Contractor has already disclosed all such relevant information. b. Subsequent Conflict of Interest. Contractor agrees that if an actual or potential conflict of interest on the part of Contractor is discovered after award, the Contractor will make a full disclosure in writing to the City. This disclosure shall include a description of actions which the Contractor has taken or proposes to take, after consultation with the City to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the actual or potential conflict. Within 45 days, the.Contractor shall have taken all necessary steps to avoid, 'mitigate, or neutralize the conflict of interest to the satisfaction of the City. c. Interests of City Officers and Staff. No officer, member or employee of City and no member of the City Council shall have any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof. Neither Contractor nor any member of any Contractor's family shall serve on any City board or committee or hold any such position which either by rule, practice or action nominates, recommends, or supervises Contractor's operations or authorizes funding to Contractor. 9. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. In General. 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 governmental agencies, Page 9 of 18 ~ (including federal, state, municipal and local governing bodies) applicable to the performance of the Scope of Work hereunder, including, but not limited to, all provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1979 as amended. bo Licenses and Permits. Contractor represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Contractor to practice its profession. Contractor represents and warrants to City that Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Contractor to practice its profession. In addition to the foregoing, Contractor shall obtain and maintain during the term hereof a valid City of Saratoga Business License. Co Funding Agency Requirements. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance bom another entity, Contractor shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance prOgram. do Drug-free Workplace. Contractor and Contractor's employees and subcontractors shall comply with the City's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. Neither Contractor nor Contractor's employees and subcontractors 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 any facility, premises or worksite used in any manner in connection with performing services pursuant to this Agreement. If Contractor or any employee or subcontractor of Contractor is convicted or pleads nolo contendere to a criminal drug statute violation occurring at such a facility, premises, or worksite, the Contractor, within five days thereafter, shall notify the City. eo Discrimination Prohibited. Contractor assures and agrees that Contractor 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. 10. DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS. ao Property of City. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, stu~lies, surveys, photographs, memoranda or other written documents or materials prepared by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of City upon completion of the work to be performed hereunder or upon termination of this Agreement. Page 10 of 18 bo Co do Retention of Records: Until the expiration of five years after the furnishing of any services pursuant to this Agreement, Contractor shall retain and make available to the City or any party designated by the City, upon written request by City, this Agreement, and such books, documents and records of Contractor (and any books, documents, and records of any subcontractor(s)) that are necessary or convenient for audit purposes to certify the nature and extent of the reasonable cost of services to City. Use Of Recycled Products. Contractor shall prepare and submit all rePorts, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper. ProfessiOnal Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator, the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled "Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility" as per the sample below. Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. Contractor shall hold any confidential information received from City in the course of performing this Agreement in trust and confidence and will not reveal such confidentialinformation to any person or entity, either during the term of the Agreement or at any time thereafter. Upon expiration of this Agreement, or termination as provided herein, Contractor shall return materials which contain any confidential information to City. Contractor may keep one copy for its confidential file. For purposes of this paragraph, confidential information is defined as all information disclosed to Contractor which relates to City's past, present, and future activities, as well as activities under this Agreement, which information is not otherwise of public record under California law. RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTOR. Contractor shall take all responsibility for the work, shall bear all losses and damages directly or indirectly resulting to Contractor, to any subcontractor, to the City, to City officers and employees, or to parties designated by the City, on account of the performance or character of the work, unforeseen difficulties, accidents, occurrences or other causes predicated on active or passive negligence of the Contractor or of any subcontractor. Page 11 of 18 ~' INDEMNIFICATION. Contractor 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 performance of 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. Contractor acknowledges that City would not enter into.this agreement in the absence of the commitment of Contractor to indemnify and protect City as set forth below. Indemnity. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor 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, in whole or in part, to the performance of this Agreement. All obligations under this provision are to be paid by Contractor as they are incurred by the City. bo Limitation on Indemnity. Without affecting the fights of City under any provision of this agreement or this section, Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless City as set forth above for liability attributable to the sole fault of City, provided such sole 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 the City is shown to have been solely at fault and not in instances where Contractor is solely or partially at fault or in instances where City's fault accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved. In those instances, the obligation of Contractor will be all-inclusive and City will be indemnified for all liability incurred, even though a percentage of the liability is attributable to conduct of the City. c. Acknowledgement. Contractor acknowledges that its obligation pursuant to this section extends to liability attributable to City, if that liability is less than the sole fault of City. Contractor has no obligation under this agreement for liability proven in a court of competent jurisdiction or by written agreement between the parties to be the sole fault of City. d. Scope of Contractor Obligation. The obligations of Contractor under this or any other provision of this Agreement will not be limited by the provisions of any workers' compensation act or similar act. Contractor expressly waives its statutory immunity under such statutes or laws as to City, its employees and officials. e. Subcontractors. Contractor agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and Page 12 of 1 8 every subcontractor, subtier contractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Contractor in the performance or subject matter of this Agreement. In the event Contractor fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others as required here, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible according to the terms of this section. In General. 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 fights hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth herein is binding on the successors, assigns~, .._or heirs of Contractor and shall survive the termination of this agreement or this section. For purposes of Section 2782 of the Civil Code the parties hereto recognize and agree that this Agreement is not a construction contract. By execution of this Agreement, Contractor 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 Contractor or subcontractors from liability under this paragraph. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance as set forth in Exhibit E. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. 5. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. a. Events of default. Each of the following shall constitute an event of default hereunder: Failure-to perform any obligation under this Agreement and failure to cure such breach immediately upon receiving notice of such breach, if the breach is such that the City determines the health, welfare, or safety of the public is immediately endangered; or Page 13 of 18 Failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement and failure to cure such breach within fifteen (15) days of receiving notice of such breach, if the breach is such that the City determines that the health,' welfare, or safety of the public is not immediately endangered, provided that if the nature of the breach is such that the City determines it will reasonably require more than fifteen (15) days to cure, Contractor shall not be in default if Contractor promptly commences the cure and diligently' . proceeds to completion of the cure. Remedies upon default. Upon any Contractor default, City shall have the right to immediately suspend or terminate the Agreement, seek specific performance, contract with another party to perform this Agreement and/or seek damages including incidental, consequential and/or special damages to the full extent allowed by law. No Waiver. Failure by City to seek any remedy for any default hereunder shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights hereunder or any right to seek any remedy for any subsequent default. TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement with or Without cause by providing 10 days notice in writing to the other party. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time without prior notice in the event that Contractor commits a material breach of the terms of this Agreement. Upon termination, this Agreement shall become of no further force or effect whatsoever and each of the parties hereto shall be relieved and discharged herefrom, subject to payment for acceptable services rendered prior to the expiration of the notice of termination. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of this Agreement concerning retention of records, City's rights to material produced, confidential information, contractor's responsibility, indemnification, insurance, dispute resolution, litigation, and jurisdiction and severability shall survive termination of this Agreement. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. The parties shall make a good faith effort to settle any dispute or claim arising under this Agreement. If the parties fail to resolve such disputes or claims, they shall submit them to nonbinding mediation in California at shared expense of the parties for at least 8 hours of mediation. If mediation does not · amve at a satisfactory result, arbitration, if agreed to by all parties, or litigation may be pursued. In the event any dispute resolution processes are involved, each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys fees. d. LITIGATION. If any litigation is commenced between parties to this Agreement concerning any provision hereof or the rights and duties of any person in relation thereto, each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs. e. JURISDICTION AND SEVERABILITY. This Agreement shall be administered and interpreted under the laws of the State of California. Jurisdiction of litigation arising fi:om this Agreement shall be in that state and venue shall be in Santa Clara County, California. If any part of this Agreement is found to conflict with applicable laws, Page 14 of 18 ~ such part shall be inoperative, null and void insofar as it conflicts with said laws, but the remainder of this Agreement shall be in full force and effect. f. NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL. Contractor understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that the City will request that work product provided by Contractor under this Agreement be supplemented or continued .by Contractor under a new agreement following expiration or termination of this Agreement. Contractor waives all rights or claims to notice or heating respecting any failure by City to continue to request or retain all or any portion of the work product from Contractor following the expiration or termination of this Agreement. g. 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. h. WAIVER. Neither the acceptance of work or payment for work pursuant to this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any rights or obligations arising under this Agreement. The failure by the City to enforce any of Contractor's obligations or to exercise City's rights shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. Page 15 of 18 EXHIBIT E INSURANCE Please refer to the insurance requirements listed below. Those which have an "X" indicated in the space before the requirement apply to Contractor's Agreement (ignore any not checked). - Contractor shall provide its insurance broker(s)/agent(s) with a copy of these requirements and request that they provide Certificates of Insurance complete with copies of all required endorsements to: Administrative Services Officer, City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Contractor shall furnish City with copies of original endorsements affecting coverage required by this Exhibit E. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements and certificates are to be received and approved by City before work commences. City has the fight to require Contractor's insurer to provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications. X Commercial General/Business Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated: X $1,000,000 per occurrence/S2,000,000 aggregate limits for bodily injury and property damage $ per occurrence bodily injury/$ per occurrence property damage Coverage for X, C, U hazards MUST be evidenced on the Certificate of '-- Insurance If the standard ISO Form wording for "OTHER INSURANCE", or other comparable wording, is not contained in Contractor's liability insurance policy, an endorsement must be provided that said insurance will be primary insurance and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City, its officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be in excess of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute to it. X Auto Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated: X $1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage $ . per person/$ per accident for bodily injury $ . per occurrence for property damage $ 500,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage Garage keepers extra liability endorsement to extend coverage to all vehicles in the care, custody and control of the contractor, regardless of where the vehicles are kept or driven. Page 16 of 18 < X Professional/Errors and Omissions Liability with coverage as indicated: X $1,000,000 per loss/$2,000,000 aggregate $5,000,000 per loss/$5,000,000 aggregate Contractor must maintain Professional/Errors & Omissions Liability coverage for a period of three years after the expiration of this Agreement. Contractor may satisfy this requirement by renewal of existing coverage or purchase of either prior acts Or tail coverage applicable to said three year period. X Workers' Compensation Insurance X Including minimum $1,000,000 Employer's Liability The Employer's Liability policy shall be endorsed to waive any right of subrogation as respects the City, its employees or agents. The Contractor makes the following certification, required by section 1861 of the California Labor Code: I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions.of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract X Additional Insured Endorsement(s) for Commercial General/Business Liability coverage naming the-City of Saratoga, its officers, employees and agents as additional insured. (NOTE: additional insured language on the Certificate of Insurance is NOT acceptable without a separate endorsement such as Form CG 20 10) X The Certificate of Insurance MUST provide 30 days notice of cancellation, (10 days notice for non-payment of premium). NOTE: the following words must be crossed out or deleted from the standard cancellation clause: "... endeavor to..." AND "... but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives." All subcontractors used must comply with the above requirements except as noted below: Page 17 of 18 ~. As to all of the checked insurance requirements above, the following shall apply: Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-inSUred retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or (2) the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. City as Additional Insured. 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 the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor, premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of the protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. Other Insurance Provisions. The policies are tO contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: d. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees .or volunteers. e. The Contractor'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. f. Coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice bY certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII. Page 18 of 18 w SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. MEETING DATE: December 11, 2001 AGENDA ITEM CITY MANAGER: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Attorney PREPARED BY: Richard Taylor SUBJECT: Consider Requests to Join Friend of the Court Brief in Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City of Saratoga to join the friend of the court brief being prepared in Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority. 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 Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority, a case of possible concern to the City. Bonnano concerns public agency liability for dangerous conditions in th'e vicinity of agency property. State law provides that in certain circumstances public agencies may be held liable for injuries suffered due to dangerous conditions on property owned or controlled by the public agency. 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 near a busy uncontrolled intersection constitutes a dangerous condition of public property. The Court of Appeal agreed with the plaintiff and held that because the bus stop beckoned pedestrians to use the dangerous crosswalk and could have been made safer by being removed altogether or relocated. The case is being appealed to the California Supreme Court. The arguments that will be advanced in the amicus brief are described in the attached letter from the firm preparing the amicus brief. In summary, the amicus brief will argue (1) the governing statute does not authorize the courts to impose liability on a public agency for the conditions of property that the agency neither owns nor controls; (2) the governing statute does not require public agencies to evaluate on a regular basis whether a particular piece of property would be safer if located elsewhere; (3) the availability of damages should not depend on the ultimate destination of the injured . property; (4) the law pertaining to transit operators and other common carders limits liability in situations such as this; (5) public agencies should not be required to assure the safety of their patrons on property in the vicinity of public property; and (6) the rule adopted by the Court of Appeal is unworkable in that it sets no bounds on scope of the duty to assure the safety of means of ingress and egress to the public property. 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. ATTACHMENTS: Letter describing amicus brief. 2 DAVID W. BAER PARTNER DIP, ECT DIAL 415 995 S031 KEPLY TO SAN FRANCISCO E.I'4AIL dbae r~hansonbridJett, cOm August l6,2001 RECEIVED AUB 1 ? ZOO1 CLERK SUPREME COURT HltllSOI1 BRIDGE1! mRRcus RUDI'LLP The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the California Supreme Court 350 McAllister Street San Francisco, California 94102 Re'. Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Four, Case No. A087846 104 Agencies Urge the Court to Grant CCCTA's Petition for Review, or in the Alternative, to Depublish the Case Under California Rules of Court Rule 979 Dear Justices: Because Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCCTA) unfairly impacts almost every California public agency, 104 sister agencies and interested parties lock arms in urging the Court to grant CCCTA's petition for review or, alternatively, to depublish the Court of Appeal's opinion. Ignoring legislative mandate and judicial precedent, the First Appellate District proclaimed a new theory of premises liability---dangeroux 'location liability--under which merely creating' a destination is sufficient to impose damages on a public agency. Specifically, if a public entity puts its property to a use that "beckons" the public to come, the public entity can be held liable to a person injured by a hazard encountered en route, even though the public entity neither owns nor controls the hazardous property. The opinion essentially creates a duty for public entities to ensure that all routes traveled to their properties are safe. This is erroneous and unreasonably expands public agency liability. In short, Bonanno takes "build it and they Will come" one step further, to "build it and they will 'come ... and you will be held liable for all injuries during their journey." The 104 interested parties submitting this letter, however, ask this Court to consider if a public entity can be held liable for a dangerous condition on a third party's property that it is powerless to remedy. ~ i Each of the public entities listed in the attached Exhibit A concludes that Bonanno departs from existing dangerous condition law to their detriment, and separately authorizes Hanson Bridgett to submit this letter on their behalf. LAW OFFICSS ~AtgV~V. HANSON BRIOGE'rr.c Old SAN FR,,'~C ISCO 333 MARKET STREET 23RD FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO · CALIFORNIA 941 OS-2173 TELEPHONE 41 S.777-3200 FACSII~ILE 415.541.9366 VVOOD ISLAND E. SIR FRANCIS DRAKE BLVD.-SUITE LARKSPUR · CAuFORNIA TELEPHONE 41 S.92S FAC~,IPIIItc 41S.925.~409 SACRAMENTO 980 NINTH STREET SUITE IS00 SACRAl'lENTO · CALIFORNIA 9S814 TELEPHONE 916.442.3311 FAC$11~ILE 916.442.23411 The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the Califomia Supreme Court August 16, 2001 Page 2 STATEWlDE IMPACT ON GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS If allowed to stand, Bonanno will have extraordinary impact on governmental operations. In an attempt to satisfy the new duty of care, public entities will conduct countless studies reviewing properties "close" to their facilities to decide if relocating or removing a facility would make travel to them marginally safer. This duty to examine nearby properties (which will likely include a detailed analysis of traffic patterns and other risks) has no apparent end. Moreover, at some yet undefined threshold of danger, public entities must apparently relocate or cease providing public services altogether when the dangers posed on neighboring properties become too great. This unprecedented expansion of liability applies to all public entities whose property is open to the public. To illustrate the magnitude of this task to transit agencies alone, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority has more than 18,000 bus stops, each of which requires ongoing review under Bonanno. The charge against smaller transit agencies is proportionally taxing on their budgets and staff.' Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (8,000 bus stops); Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (1,661 bus stops); Golden Gate Bridge, Highwayand Transportation District (1,240 bus stops); Monterey-Salinas Transit (1,206 bus stops); Orange County Transit Authority (6,400 bus stops); Riverside Transit Agency (3,620 . transit stops); Sacramento Regional Transit District (3,781 transit stops); San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (5,582 transit stops); San Francisco Municipal Railway (5,300 transit stops); San Mateo County Transit District (2,545 bus stops); Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority (4,645 bus stops); .and Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (1,072 bus stops). At the same time, Bonanno offers no guidance as to the scope of the required studies. H-ow far must the inspection range? How likely must it be that the public property user will cross the nearby property? How often must an inspection be performed? How likely must it be that the users of adjacent .property are on their way to, or departing from, the piablic property? These questions are unlikely to be resolved, even alter years of litigation. But a few things are certain. Local governments will suffer under the burden of increased legal budgets, costly verdicts and expensive ongoing reviews of properties next to their facilities. Obviously, these costs cannot come without sacrifice: public agencies will be called upon to cut services. Using the example of transit districts again, commuters who rely on public transit will ultimately walk further to transit stops and pay increased fares. Despite all this, nothing need ever be done to, make the neighboring properties where hazards exist any safer. All agencies face a similar choice. Do they maintain the current level of service at the risk of later paying substantial damages, or do they spend significant resources att&mpting to eliminate the danger associated with travel to and from their service? For example, will public entities be required to analyze the placement of entrances on civic buildings to ensure they are positioned nearest a lighted, and purportedly safer, intersection? Must entrances to parking garages, playgrounds, swimming pools, schoolyards, restrooms and other facilities be relocated away The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the California Supreme Court August 16, 2001 Page 3 from busy streets? Indeed, as currently stated, the public property affected by Bonanno is without limit. SUMMARY OF FACTS THROUGH THE COURT OF'APPEAL PROCEEDING Darlene Bonanno is a mildly retarded woman who-suffered serious injuries when struck by a car while crossing a street on the way to a CCCTA bus stop in Martinez. CCCTA had long ago located this bus stop on the north side of Pacheco Boulevard at a T-intersection with DeNormandie Way. A marked and signed pedestrian crosswalk was available to pedestrians crossing Pacheco at this intersection. A four-way lighted intersection was situated one block west, but there was no stop light or stop sign on Pacheco at the DeNormandie intersection. The car that ultimately struck Bonanno had come to a full stop and its driver waved her across the crosswalk. The driver of the next car, however, peering through a fogged windshield directly into the early morning sun, totally failed to recognize that the car in front of him had stopped. In the resulting rear-end collision the stopped car was pushed forward, striking Bonanno. CCCTA did not own, control or operate the public street, the crosswalk, or the sidewalk near the accident, all of which were county property. Still, Bonanno argued that the location of CCCTA's bus stop constituted a dangerous condition because it "induced" pedestrians like herself to use the crosswalk to cross a busy street at an unlighted intersection (albeit with a marked pedestrian crosswalk), instead of an intersection with four-way, pedestrian-activated signal lights a block away. Earlier in the case, the trial court granted a non-suit in CCCTA's favor, ruling that the driver at fault was the sole cause of the accident. Bonanno appealed the non-suit. In an unpublished decision the Court of Appeal reversed, concluding that if CCCTA's bus stop constituted a dangerous condition, it also could have been a cause of the accident. The driver and other defendants.subsequently settled with Bonanno, and the matter went to trial with CCCTA as the only defendant--solely on the theory that CCCTA's bus stop constituted a dangerous condition. While the jury found that CCCTA was only 1% at fault, CCCTA's joint and several liability for Bonanno's economic damages resulted in a $1.5 million judgment against it. CCCTA appealed the judgment. In a classic example of bad facts making bad law, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to create a new precedent imposing premises liability on a public entity if it fails to make sure that a route traveled to its property is safe, despite the lack of anyJ dangerous condition on the entity's own property. The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the Califomia Supreme Court August 16, 2001 Page 4 DANGEROUS CONDITION LIABILITY BEFORE BONANNO Until Bonanno, public agency liability under California law was well-settled--except as'might be constitutionally required, liability could be imposed on a public agency only as specified by Statute? The intent of the legislature was "to confine potential governmental liability to rigidly delineated circumstances? The statute specifying the circumstances applicable here--- Government Code section 830--is clear: "'Property of a public entity' and 'public property' mean real or personal property owned or controlled by the public entity, but do not include easements, encroachments and other property that are located on the property of the public entity but are not owned or controlled by the public entity.'~ Consistent with the statute, liability under dangerous condition theories has historically been limited to property that a public agency actually owned, operated or controlled,s The same was true for private defendants, which have no duty to ensure a safe means of ingress and egress across adjacent property they do not control.6 Without the "crucial element" of control, no duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent injury on adjacent property exists.? To be sure, property owned or controlled by a public entity "may be considered dangerous if it creates a substantial risk of injury ... to persons on adjacent property; and its own property may be considered dangerous if a condition on the adjacent property exposes those using the public property to a substantial risk of injury? Thus, for examplel a decaying tree limb overhanging private property can subject a public entity to liability to persons injured on adjacent property? As discussed below, however, Bonanno, steers the law in a new direction, for the first time interpreting the Government Code to impose premises liability for injuries on adjacent property that the public entity neither owns nor controls, based on a hazard there that the public entity's property neither creates nor intensifies. 2 Gov. Code §815; Brown v. Poway Unified School Dist. (1993) 4 Cal.4th 820, 829; Peterson v. San Francisco Community College Dist. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 799, 809. 3Brown v. Poway Unified Sch. Dist., supra, 4 Cal.4th at 829. 4 Gov. Code §830(e), emphasis added. ~ LompocUnified Sch. Dist. v. Superior Court (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1688, 1693 -94; Low v. City of Sacramento (1970) 7 Cal.App.3d 826, 831-34 (necessary control defined as the power to ~ prevent, remedy or guard against the dangerous condition). 6 Sprecher v. Adamson Companies (1981) 30 Cal.3d 358, 368. ? Schwartz v. Helms Bakery Limited (1967) 67 Cal.2d 232, 239; Seaber v. Hotel Del Coronado (1991) 1 Cai.App.4m 481,492. s 4 Cal. L.Rev. Comm. Reports 1001 (1963), emphasis added. The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the California Supreme Court August 16, 2001 Page 5 SUMMARY OF APPELLATE DECISION In Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit duthorityt°the plaintiff sued CCCTA alleging that locating a bus stop near a busy uncontrolled intersection constituted a dangerous condition within the meaning of Government Code section 830. The ultimate issue was whether CCCTA could be held liable on a dangerous condition theory for injuries a pedestrian sustained outside any property owned, operated or controlled by CCCTA, when the pedestrian was hit by a car in a crosswalk which led to CCCTA's bus stop. CCCTA's property consisted solely of a sign it erected designating where the bus would stop, and, as plaintiff admits, there was nothing wrong with the bus stop itself and no danger there. Still, the Court of Appeal found, "It]his case is about the location of a public bus stop which beckoned a prudent pedestrian to cross a busy street in an unprotected crosswalk under conditions that posed a substantial risk of harm to pedestrian patrons.'dr Based on testimony that relocating or removing the bus stop altogether would have made it safer for pedestrians intending to use CCCTA's bus service, the Court of Appeal held that there was substantial evidence upon which the jury could have found that the bus stop constituted a dangerous condition,t2 This analysis is wrong for numerous reasons. First and foremost, never before has a public agency been held liable for a dangerous condition neither on, created by, nor intensified by any property that it owns, operates or controls. Obviously, there was no danger at the bus stop, and the Court of Appeal imposed liability on CCCTA because it considered the crosswalk on acounty roadway dangerous, disregarding the fact that CCCTA had no authority to remedy that condition. But the location of the bus stop did not create or worsen any dangerous condition in the crosswalk. Indeed, no feature of the bus stop made it dangerous to use the crosswalk or increased any danger that might be present. Rather, the crosswalk was equally safe or dangerous regardless of where the bus stop was located and moving the bus stop would have done nothing to remedy any danger in using .the crosswalk. In sum, the bus stop merely presented a reason to use the crosswalk; it did not create a dangerous condition. Second, whether a public entity's property might be made safer by locating it elsewhere is not, and never has been, the test to determine whether a dangerous condition exists under Government Code section 830. Accordingly, the feasibility of finding another location for the use to which public property is devoted has never previously been the basis for imposing premises liability. In this regard, the Court of Appeal's surprising attempt to analogize bus stops and street vendors reflects unfamiliarity, if not insensitivity, for the needs of those who use (2001) 89 Cai. App.4th 1398. Id. at 1408 (emphasis added). Id. at 1410 The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the California Supreme Court August_ 16, 2001 Page 6 public transit--particularly in urban settings, the commuting public depends on knowing where transit stops are located day ~n and day out. Third, whether an injured person can sue for damages should not depend on where he or she was. going. Recovery for injuries sustained by persons otherwise similarly situated exposed to the identical danger--should not turn upon the reason for their presence on public property. Conversely, a public entity's liability should not depend on whether its property was the plaintiWs end destination. Bonanno's ruling to the contrary is patently unfair to both plaintiffs and public entities, and invites mischief. Fourth, Bonanno upsets settled common carrier law which, even under a heightened duty of care, only requires a common carrier to "provide a reasonably safe place where the passenger may board''14 and limits liability to actual passengers and prosp~ctive passengers at the transit stop when the operator has indicated an intent to receive them. Fifth, property devoted to public use necessarily "beckons" people to get there by some means. The reality of the Bonanno opinion, accordingly, is to saddle public entities with the responsibility to ensure that the means of ingress and egress across nearby property are safe. This Court has consistently repudiated the notion that private property owners can be held liable for injuries that occur on adjacent property they neither own nor control, recently rejecting the "commercial benefit" theory of premises liability. 16 Bonanno's "dangerous location" theory-- imposing liability on a landowner for creating a reason for the public to use adjacent property-- simply recasts the discarded commercial benefit theory. However labeled, the theory has no merit. The touchstone of liability in the private and public property context alike is ownership or control. Bonanno is particularly troubling to Public entities because, consistent with the long-recognized evil inherent in creatinga duty of care beyond premises the landowner defendant owns or controls,I* the opinion provides no guidance as to how far the duty it creates might extend: Does it apply to adjacent property within 50, 500 or 5,000 feet.9 Does it apply when the adjacent property is sometimes, usually or always crossed to reach the public entity's property? In fact, ~3 Bonanno v. Central Contra COsta Transit Authority, supra, at 1410. ~ Lagomarsino v. Market Street Ry. Co. (1945) 69 Cal.App.2d 388, 395-96. ts Civil Code section 2100; Hart v. Fresno Traction Co. (1917) 175 Cal. 489, 490; Standard Civil Jury Instructions - Civil, BAJI No. 6.55. ~6 Alcaraz v. Vece ~997) 14 Cal.4th 1149, 1157-1159; see also Seaber v. Hotel Del Coronado, supra, 1 Cai.App.4 at 487-89, 491-93. ~7 Owens v. Kings Supermarket (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 379, 386; Steinmetz v. Stockton City Chamber of Commerce (1985) 169 Cal.App.3d 1142, 1147.' The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the California Supreme Court August 16, 2001 Page 7 any answers to these questions are inherently arbitrary, and for that very reason premises lliability--public and private--has previously been limited to property that the defendant either owns or controls. As so aptly stated by the court in Owens v. Kings Supermarket, "lilt is impossible to define the scope of any duty owed by a landowner off premises owned or controlled by him... To ask the questions is to demonstrate the futility of attempting to impose and define such a duty." Is In sum, whether a landowner might have reconfigured or relocated the use to which its property is devoted so as to avoid exposing users to a potential risk of harm which exists elsewhere has never been a relevant inquiry. Nor should it be allowed to become one. Rather, as Government Code section 830 provides and all other California courts have previously recognized, liability turns on whether the public entity owns or controls the property that constitutes, creates or intensifies a dangerous condition. By departing from this well-established test, Bonanno threatens a whole new class of lawsuits, the results of which are entirely unpredictable. CONCLUSION Plainly, the First Appellate District failed to consider the statewide impact created by the new "dangerous location" theory of liability it articulated. But as a publis.hed decision, the opinion reaches far beyond the public entity defendant in Bonanno. Indeed, Bonanno represents a radical departure from both established dangerous condition of public property law and common carrier law, vastly expands public agency liability, and is bound to inspire a flood of litigation, ultimately leading to a substantial diversion of public funds from.public services to legal expenses. If a crosswalk is dangerous, the simple solution should be to make the crosswalk safer, not eliminate the reasons to use it. Since CCCTA had no authority to remedy the dangerous condition in the crosswalk--neither owning nor controlling the roadway where it was Situated--there was no justification for holding it liable. Nor should any other public entity -subsequently be held liable for a dangerous condition which it does not create and cannot remedy. The 104 sister agencies and interested parties respectfully urge the Court to review this Alternatively, amici request depublication,~° but in doing so also point out the deficiencies of that remedy. Most fundamentally, Bonanno was wrongly decided and depublication alone will no[ ~8 Owens v. Kings Supermarket, supra, 198 Cal.App.3d at 386-387, emphasis the Court's and added, citations omitted, quoting Steinmetz v. Stockton City Chamber of Commerce, supra, 169 Cal. App.3d at 1147. (Courts consistently refuse to recognize a duty to persons injured in adjacent streets, parking lots or other property, over which the defendants do not have the fight of possession, management and control.) lo California Rules of Court, Rule 979 The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the California Supreme Court August 16, 2001 Page 8 eliminate use of the "dangerous location" theoryin subsequent litigation. The toothpaste is already out of the tube--the plaintiff's success in Bonanno is well-known in the legal community and the inability to cite the case as precedent does not preclude the use of its reasoning. Public entities will be forced to continue devoting substantial resources defending "dangerous location" litigation. If they wish to mitigate the risk of liability in these cases, public entities will still need to perform countless ongoing inspections to determine if hazards exist on adjacent property, and when they do, grapple with the question of what to do about it when they have no authority to remedy the hazard themselves. Because this case adversely affects almost every public entity even if it cannot be cited, it warrants review and reversal, not simply depublication. Respectfully, HANSON, BRIDGETT, MARCUS, VLAHOS & RUDY, LLP By Attachment (Exhibit A) EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT A Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority, Case No. A087846 104-Agencies and Interested Parties Urge the Court to Grant CCCTA's Petition for Review, or in the Alternative, to Depublish the Case Under California Rules' of Court Rule 979' The following public agencies 'and interested parties, by and through their counsel Hanson, Bridgett, Marcus, Vlahos and Rudy, LLP, join the amicus letter urging the California Supreme Court to grant Central Contra Costa Transit Authority's Petition for Review (and ultimately urge reversal), or in the alternative, to Depublish the Case Under California Rules of Court Rule 979. 1. AC Transit 2. Alameda County Water District 3. Arcata & Mad River Transit System 4. Association of California Water Agencies Joint Powers Insurance Authority (ACWA/JPIA) 5. California Association of Joint Powers Authorities 6. California School Boards Association 7. California Special Districts Association 8. California Transit Association 9. California Transit Insurance Pool (CalTIP) 10. Capistrano Unified School District 11. Castro Valley Unified School District 12. City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco Municipal Railway) 13. City of Antioch 14. City of Avalon 15. City of Bakersfield 16. City of Berkeley 17. City of Chino 18. City of Chula Vista 19. City of Clayton 20. City of Colma 21. City of Coronado 22. City of Cotati 23. City of Daly City 24. City of Emeryville 25. City of Hollister 26. City of Huntington Beach 27. City of Imperial Beach 28. City of Lafayette 29. City of Laguna Beach 30. City of Long Beach 31. City of Los Altos 32. City of Milpitas 33. City of Monterey 34. City of Moreno Valley 35. City of Mountain View 36. City of Napa 37. City of Newark 38. City of Novato 39. City of Palm Desert 40. City of Piedmont 41. City of Pinole 42. City of Pleasant Hill 43. City of Redding 44. City of Redlands 45. City of San Carlos 46. City of San Diego 888615.1 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. City of San Luis Obispo City of San Pablo City of San Ramon City of Santa Ana City of Santa Rosa City of Union City City of Vacaville City of Walnut Creek City of West Sacramento County of El Dorado County of Glenn ' County of Kern County of Modoc County of Mono County of Napa County of Nevada County of Sacramento County of San Mateo County of Santa Clara County of Siskiyou Dixie School District Golden Empire Transit District Golden Gate Bridge Highway & Transportation District Half Moon Bay Fire District Humboldt Transit Authority 72. Kensington police Protection and Community Services District 73. Laguna Salada Union School District 74. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 75. Me~opolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) 76. Mid-Peninsula Water District 77. Moraga School District 78. Morongo Basin Transit Authority 79. Napa County Transit Planning Agency (NCTPAfVine) 80. North Cr~st County Water Dislrict 81. Northern California Relief 82. Omnitrans (San Bernardino Valley Transit Agency) 83. Orange County Transporation Authority 84. Pittsburg Unified School District 85. Pleasanton Unified School District 86. Purissima Hills Water District 87. Riverside Transit Agency 88. Sacramento Regional Transit District 89. San Diego County Schools Risk Management J'PA 90. San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board 91. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 92. San Joaquin County Office of Education 93. San Lorenzo Unified School District 94. San Luis Obispo Transit Authority 95. Sanitary District #5 of Marin County 96. Santa Clara Valley Transporation Authority 97. Southern California Relief 98. Stinson Beach County Water District 99. Tamalpais Union High School Dislrict 100.Town of Corte Madera 101. Town of Danville 102. Town of Ross 103. Town of San Anselmo 104. Western Conwa Costa Transit Authority 888615.1 PROOF OF SERVICE I, Cindy French, declare that I am a resident of the State of California, I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the action entitled Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit .4uthority, California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Four, Case No. A087846; that my business address is 333 Market Street, Suite 2300, San Francisco, CA 94105-2173. On August 17, 2001, I served a true and accurate copy of the document(s) entitled: AMICUS LETTER FROM 104 PUBLIC AGENCIES AND INTERESTED. PARTIES URGING THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT TO GRANT CCCTA'S PETITION FOR REVIEW, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO DEPUBL1SH THE CASE UNDER CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT RULE 979; ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" LISTING JOINING AGENCIES AND INTERESTED PARTIES by First Class Mail pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1013 on the party(ies) in this action by placing said copy(ies) in a sealed envelope, each addressed to the last address(es) given by ihe party(ies) on the attached service list. I am readily familiar with Hanson, Bridget't, 'Marcus, Vlahos & Rudy, LLP's practices for collecting and processing documents for mailing with United States Postal Service. Following these ordinary business practices, I placed the above referenced sealed envelope(s) for collection and mailing with the United States Postal Service on the date listed herein at 333 Market Street, Suite 2300, San Francisco, CA 94105- 2173. The above referenced sealed envelope(s) will be deposited with the United States Postal Service on the date listed herein in the ordinary course of business. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomia that the foregoing is true and correct, and was executed on August 17, 2001 at San Francisco, California. CINDY FREI~H · 888537.1 SERVICE LIST Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Case No. A087846 CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL First Appellate District, Division Four 350 McAllister Street San Francisco, CA 94102 David B. Lynch, Esq. Dale L. Allen, Jr., Esq. Jennifer C. Rasmussen, Esq. Christopher E. Arras, Esq. LOW, BALL & LYNCH 601 California Street, #2100 San Francisco, CA 94108 Walter H. Walker, III, Esq. Dane J. Durham, Esq. Timothy M. Hamilton, Esq. LAW OFFICES. OF WALKER & HAMILTON 50 Francisco Street, #160 ' San Francisco, CA 94133 Michael C. Serverian, Esq. Alan S. Liang, Esq. RANKIN, LANDSNESS, LAHDE, SERVEKIAN & STOCK 96 N. 3rd Street, #500 San Jose, CA 95112 Bill Lockyer, Esq., Attorney General Stephanie Wald, Esq., Deputy Attorney General Angela Botelho, Esq., Deputy Attorney General STATE OF CALIFORNIA 455 Golden Gate Avenue, #11000 San Francisco, CA 94102 Kenneth J. Nellis, Esq. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LEGAL DIVISION 595 Market Street, Suite 1700 San Francisco, CA 94105 SERVICE LIS_T (continued) Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Case No. A087846 Silvano B. Marchesi, Esq. Gregory C. Harvey, Esq. CONTRA'COSTA COUNTY OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL 651 Pine Street, 9th Floor Martinez, CA 94559 Kara Ueda, Esq. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 1400 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 888537.1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 11, 2001 ORIGINATING~)EPT: C~ ~anager PREPARED B~: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: .... - .......... DEPT HEAD: Council Master Meeting Calendar for 2002 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is the draft Council Master Meting Calendar for 2002 your review and comments. As directed by the City Council a Joint Meeting with the Saratoga, Cupertino, and Campbell Union School Districts have been scheduled for 2/12/02 to discuss traffic and other issues. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: There will be no Council Meeting schedule for next year. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Provide copies to all parties on the schedule; notify KSAR and UPdate website. ' ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Calendar CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR FOR 2002 1/2 1/8 1/16 1/22 2/6 2/12 2/20 3/6 3/12 3/20 4/3 4/17 4/23 5/1 5/11 5/7 5/15 6/5 6/19 6/25 7/3 7/17 8/7 8/21 9/4 9/18 10/2 10/16 11/6 11/20 12/4 12/10 12/18 Regular Meeting Adjourned Meeting - Youth Commission, Library Commission, Regular Meeting - City Attorney Evaluation Adjourned Meeting - Planning Commission, Heritage Preservation Commission Regular Meeting Adjourned Meeting - Public Safety Commission, Saratoga Union School District, Cupertino Union School District, Campbell Union School District Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Adjoumed Meeting - SASCC, Parks and Recreation Commission Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Adjourned Meeting -Public Safety Commission, Sheriff, Fire Districts Regular Meeting Council Retreat Adioumed Meeting - Finance Commission, Chamber of Commerce, SBDC Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Adjourned Meeting - Saratoga Union School District Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting - City Manager Evaluation Summer Recess Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Adjoumed Meeting - Council Reorganization Regular Meeting SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 11, 2001 PREPAREDORIGINATING~EPT:B~~C!ty, ~inager AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Council Agency Assignments and Commission Liaisons RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. REPORT SUMMARY: It is the appropriate time of year to present to the City Council a list of all the outside agencies, commission, and committees City Councilmembers are assigned to each year. For your information I have attached Resolution 01-002 (Attachment A), a brief informational sununary about the various agencies, commissions, and committees (Attachment B) and a master schedule (Attachment C). Staff is requesting the Council review the attached information and submit their preferences to the Mayor by Wednesday, December 26, 2001. The final assignments will be brought back for Council consideration on January 2, 2001. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council representatives to various agencies and Council liaison to various Commissions will remain the same. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Adopt resolution on January 2, 2002 to memorialize the appointments. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENT: Attachment A - Resolution 01-002 Attachment B - Informational Summary Attachment C - Master Schedule RESOLUTION NO. 01-002 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES WHEREAS, the City Council reorganized on December 12, 20.00, for the coming year; and WHEREAS, representatives from the City Council serve on various committees, commission and agencies; and WHEREAS, the responsibility for representing the City Council should be shared by all its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after due consideration of the interest of the City Council and the needs of the various organizations to which the City Council sends representatives, the following representatives agree hereby appointed to the committees, commissions, and agencies named, through December 2001, or until replaced. Agency Councilmember Alternate Association of Bay Area Government Mehaffey Baker Chamber of Commerce Waltonsmith Streit -- ~ Cities Association Leg. Task Force Streit l Bog_osian County HCD Policy Committee Baker ~ Waltonsmith Emergency Planning Council Baker Waltonsmith Hakone Foundation Liaison Mehaffey/Streit N/A KSAR Community Access TV Board Baker Mehaffey Library Joint Powers Association Bogosian Streit Northern Central Flood Control Zone Bogosian Waltonsmith Advisory Board Peninsula Division, League of California Mehaffey Streit Cities Santa Clara County Valley Water Streit Baker Commission Santa Clara County Cities Association Mehaffey Baker SASCC Liaison Waltonsmith Bogosian Saratoga Business Development Council Mehaffey Waltonsmith Sister City Liaison Waltonsmith Mehaffey West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Streit Baker Association .Valley Transportation Authority PAC Waltonsmith Mehaffey _ West Valley Sanitation District Baker Mehaffey Silicon Valley Animal Control JPA Bogosian Baker PI ann in__g_C ommission Baker N/A Parks and Recreation Commission Streit N/A Finance Commission Mehaffey__ Libr~ommission ___~N/A ~ ~sian ~ Public Safety Commission ~e Preservation Commission Youth Commission Task Force ~ansion Committee -~ Waltonsmith __~Waltonsmith Mehaffe The above and forgoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 3rd day of January, 200~, by the following vote: AYES: Evan Baker, Stan Bogosian, Nick Streit, Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor John Mehaffey NOES:' None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Jo~ehaffey, Ma~or Saratoga City Council Committee/Agency Information Sheet Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) - ABAG is the Regional Planning Agency for the nine County Bay Areas. Executive Board meetings are held quarterly, however a representative appointed by the Santa Clara Cities Association represents Saratoga along with other cities in Santa Clara County. The only meeting a Councilmember may actually need to attend is the annual' General Assembly held in Oakland in thc spring, date and time to be announced. Saratoga Chamber of Commerce - Both the Mayor and City Manager serve as ex- officio members of the Chamber of Commerce Board. In 2002, meetings will be held on the fourth Wednesday of every month at 6:30 p.m. at West Valley College-President's Board Room. Santa Clara County_ Cities Association Legislative Task Force - The Task Force is an advisory body to the Cities Association which reviews pending state and federal legislation for potential impacts to cities. Occasionally, the Task Force will recommend positions for the Cities Association and individual City Councils to take on specific legislation. The Task Force usually meets five to six times a year on the fourth Thursday of the month at 5:30 p.m. at the Sunnyvale City Hall. Santa Clara Coun~ Housing and Community_ Development (HCD) Council Committee - The HCD Council Committee is comprised of local elected officials who review and recommend policies and priorities concerning the County's Housing & Community Development, and Community Development Block Grant Programs (CDGB) to the County Board of Supervisors. The Committee's meeting schedule varies, but it generally convenes six to eight times throughout the year at the offices of the County Housing Authority, 505 West Julian Street, San Jose. The first meeting is schedule for January 25, 2001 at 5:30 p.m. Santa Clara County Emergency Planning Council (EPC) - The EPC is comprised of City and County representatives who review and prioritize emergency planning efforts at the countywide level. The EPC meets quarterly at the County EOC usually on the third Thursday of the month at 12 noon. Hakone Foundation Board - According to the Lease Agreement between the City of Saratoga and the Hakone Foundation that was signed on October 18, 2000 two members of the City Council will serve on Hakone Board and one member of the City Council to serve on the Executive Committee of the Foundation. The Board meets third Monday of every month at 8:00 p.m. at the Cultural Exchange Center in the gardens. KSAR Community_ Access CATV Foundation Board - One member of the City Council, along with the City manager, represent the City on the Community Access Television Board. Other Board members include one Trustee from the West Valley- Mission College District Board, one staff member fi.om West Valley College, and three public members who must be Saratoga residents and who are selected jointly by thc four City and College Board members. The CATV Board established policies and priorities for the management and operation of the local community access television station, which are then implemented by the Community Access Coordinator. Currently, the Board meets on the second Thursday of every month at 8:30 a.m. at City Hall. Santa Clara County Library_ System Joint Powers AuthoriW Board - Each city which is a JPA member, along with the County, has a representative on the JPA Board. Board members are elected officials of the JPA member agencies. The Library JPA is the policy making and governing body of the County's library system, of which Saratoga Community Library is a part. The Library JPA is currently meeting on a quarterly basis~, Santa Clara Water District North - Central Flood Control Zone Advisory_ Committee - The Water District provides flood control activities throughout the county via five flood control zones which fund these activities through benefit-assessments levied against properties within each zone. The City of Saratoga is locates entirely within the North-Central Zone of the District. Each zone is served by an advisory committee of elected and appointed representatives of the cities Within the zone. The purpose of the advisory committee is to formulate recommendations on flood control efforts within the zone to the Water District's Board °fDirectors. The North-Central FCZ Advisory Committee generally meets four times per year in February, May, September, and November on Wednesdays at 11:30 a.m. at the Rinconada Water Treatment Plant on More Avenue in Los Gatos. League of California Cities Peninsula Division - Saratoga, by virtue of its location, is situated within the peninsula Division of the League of California Cities. The League serves to represent the interests of all California citie.s by advocating public policy at both the state and national levels. Official League policy is formulated through system of committees, departments and divisions, the latter of which is comprised of elected officials from each city within the division. The Peninsula Division of the League meets on an as-needed basis, generally several times each year, at a location usually within southern San Mateo County. Santa Clara Valley Water District Water Commission - Similar to the Flood Control Zone Advisory Committees, the Water District's Water Commission advises the Water District Board on water supply issues in Santa Clara County. The Commission is mostly made up of elected official who represent the cities within the county, although staff members appointed by their City Councils represent some cities. Thc Water Commission meets two or three times per year on Wednesday mornings at 9:00 a.m., also at the Rinconada Water Treatment Plant in Los Gatos. Santa Clara County Cities Association (City Selection Committee) - The Cities Association serves as a forum for the 15 cities within Santa Clara' County to discuss issues of mutual concern. It is staffed by former Saratoga councilmember and mayor Marty Clevengcr, whose title is Executive Director. Each city is represented at meetings of the Cities Association by one city councilmember, and meeting are held on the second Thursday of every month at 7:00 p.m. at Sunnyvale City hall. Occasionally, the Cities Association will convene as the City Selection Committee to perform certain statutory obligations relating to the appointment of city representatives to various county and regional bodies such as LAFCO, the Air District Board, ect., however no additional meeting result because of this. Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council Liaison - One member of the City Council serves as liaison to the SASCC Board to maintain open communications between the City and SASCC. The Board meets on the third Monday every month at 9:30 a.m. at City Hall. Saratoga Business Development Council (SBDC) - The SBDC was conceived a couple of years ago to serve as a forum for interested parties to discuss issues relating to economic development and business promotion within Saratoga. Up to two members of thc City Council may attend SBDC meetings. The SBDC generally meets the fourth Tuesday every other month at 8:00 a.m. Saratoga Sister City Committee Liaison - One member of the City Council serve as liaison to the Sister City Committee, which meets the first Tuesday of every month at 7:00 p.m. usually at the Community Center. The purpose of the Sister City Committee is to plan and carry out programs and activities, which strengthen Saratoga's relationship with its sister, city, Muko-Shi, in Japan. West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority - Two years ago, the west valley cities of Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga formed a JPA to coordinate efforts in carrying out solid waste collection and disposal activities, and in meeting the mandates of AB939, the States' Integrated Waste Management Act. Because the four cities have similar demographics and are served by the same solid waste hauler and disposal service, a coordinated approach to solid waste management in the west valley makes good sense. The JPA is served by an Executive Director who is a private consultant under contract and who has considerable expertise in the field of solid waste. One of their important functions the JPA performs each year is the establishment of solid waste collection rates within each city. The JPA Board is composed of one councilmember from each of the four member agencies, and is currently meeting on a quarterly basis, dates to be determined, typically starting at 5:00 p.m. at Monte Sereno City Hall. 3 ~ Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority_ Policy Adviso~ Committee - The VTA PAC is one of several standing advisory committees to the VTA Board of Directors. Composed of elected official representing the cities through the County, the PAC makes recommendations to the VTA Board on issues of transportation planning and programming. The VTA PAC currently meets on the second Thursday of every month at 5:00 p.m. at the VTA offices on North First Street in San Jose. West Valley Sanitation District - The West Valley Sanitation District is governed by a five member board composed of one councilmember from each of the four west valley cities, and the 4th District County Supervisor. The Board meets on the second and fourth Wednesday of every month at 6:00 p.m. at the District's Office, 110 E Stmnyoaks Avenue in Campbell. Board members are compensated $100 for each meeting attended. Silicon Valley Animal Control JPA- On June 21, 2000, the City Council entered into a Joint Powers Agreement with Santa Clara, Campbell, Cupertino, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Sunnyvale. The purpose of the agreement was to create an Authority to provide for the member agencies to own, manage, operate and maintain facilities. The Authority will provide animal field, sheltering, medical and dead animal pick-up services. The Authority will be administered by a Board of Directors consisting of seven Directors appointed by the Legislative Body of each City as follows: (2) from the City of Santa Clara, (2) from the City of Sunnyvale, (3) Director collectively appointed by the Cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, and the Town of Los Gatos. The Cities of Saratoga, Campbell, and Cupertino will represent the West Valley Cities on the Board this year. The Board currently meets on the fourth Monday of every month either at the City of Sunnyvale's Community Center or at the Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety. SCHEDULE OF VARIOUS CITY AND OUTSIDE AGENCY MEETINGS (City of Saratoga) Monday Tuesday Wednesday I st 2"d 3rd 4th 5~' I st 2"d 3'el 4* 5.h I st 2"d 3ra 4th 5th I st 2"d 3'd 4~h 5~h I st 2nd 3'a 4~ 5* Council - Reg & Adj. 7p 7p 7p F'lanning Commission 7:30p 7:30p Parks & Rec. Comm. 7:-100 Public Safety Comm. ~:30p CH Library Commission 7:30p Lib. lerltage Pres. Comm. 9a WitH Finance Commission 7p Youth Commission 7p WHtl ABAG Oakland hamber of Commerce 6p . SCC Cities Assn. 5:30p Done for this y~. eglslative Task Force) sv Meets 5-6X/yr. SCC Housing & 6-Sx/yT. Community Development meeting 1125 CC Emergency Ping. ~p Hakone Foundation 8p HJG KSAR 8:30a CH CC Lib. System JPA 4x/yr C Vall~Water Dist. Wednesdays at 1:30 pm (Feb, May, Sept, Nov) ). Central Flood Cont. in Rinconada Water Treatment Plant - LG !, ~,~ ~ ::. OCC - Peninsula Div. I ] I I Di .... Mcelings SC Vly Water Dist. .'~ Wednesdays at 12 pm in Rinconada Water 2-3X/yr Comm. 'l'rcatmcnt Plant - LG CC Cities Assn. (City 7p ;election Committee) sv SASCC ' 9:30a CIt SBDC 8a · ;ister City Committee 7p cc ~V V Solid Waste JPA M~ SC VTA PAC ~J _j Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Ann. Qtr 1st 2"a 3rd 4'~ 5 it Valley Sanitation 6p District ~°n Valley Animal 5:30 Control JPA p.m SV