Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-07-1999 Staff REports SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 31 AGENDA ITEM EA. 3 i MEETING DATE: April 7, 1999 CITY MANAGER: rl i ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services DEPT. HEAD: 4,4A, SUBJECT: Monthly Financial Report for February 1999 RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Accept the monthly financial reports for February 1999. REPORT SUMMARY: The accompanying financial reports represent the monthly revenues, expenditures and fund balances in all City funds for Fiscal Year 1998 -99, as of February 1999. FINANCIAL SUMMARY Overall, revenues are slightly higher than expected at this point in the annual cycle, and expenditures are slightly lower than expected. In the General Fund, revenues are about $310,000 higher than expected as of February, primarily due to an unanticipated property tax equity allocation (TEA) payment, and slightly higher sales tax revenues, motor vehicle license fees, refunds and reimbursements, and interest income. All other General Fund revenues are approximately as budgeted at mid -year. General Fund expenditures are about $134,000 less than anticipated as of February, with savings in many of the program budgets. Vacancies in the Public Works department has resulted in salary savings in the General Fund. In other funds, vehicle fines are higher than the original conservative estimate, although not much higher than this time last year. Development Service revenues are about 40% higher than expected as of February due to an active development environment. Development expenditures, however, are on target. The Streets and Roads fund has experienced some savings from staffing vacancies. Recreation Services expenditures appear lower than anticipated as of February, but the spring and summer are the busy season, during which both revenues and expenditures are expected to pick up. Other funds are generally as anticipated. Please note that operating transfers are generally only done at year end, including the transfer for the indirect cost allocation for administrative overhead. Therefore, while the transfers are included in the annual budget figures, they are not in the monthly estimate nor the monthly actuals. FISCAL IMPACTS: None. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): None. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Accept and file the report. ATTACHMENTS: Monthly Financial Report for February 1999 Treasurer's Report for February 1999 cc: Finance Commission MJW:mjw Monthly_Feb99 Monthly_Feb99 2 4t CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999 PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% FUND BALANCE BALANCE ADJUSTMENTS YEAR TO DATE BALANCE FUND FUND DESCRIPTION JULY 1, 1998 TRANSFERS REVENUES EXPENDITURES FEBRUARY 28,1999 001 GENERAL FUND 5,847,373 (893,193) 4,110,682 3,377,160 5,687,702 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: 100 COPS SUP. LAW ENFORCEMENT 19,573 70,145 17,685 72,033 110 TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 100,735 987 99,748 150 STREETS &ROADS SRF 691,717 362,030 1,053,747 170 HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF 26,377 10,068 36,445 180 LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF 85,792 78,294 67,868 96,218 250 DEVELOPMENT SRF 289,473 1,147,496 534,188 902,781 260 ENVIRNMNTAL PRG SRF 85,773 378,574 207,684 256,663 270 HOUSING &COMM DEV SRF 68,401 69,248 73,101 210,750 290 RECREATION SRF 42,706 339,508 382,214 292 FACILITY OPS SRF 74,956 31,773 43,183 710 HERITAGE PRSRVTN TRST FND 6,242 6,242 TOTAL SPECIAL REV. FUNDS 555,254 830,048 2,634,907 2,543,341 1,476,868 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS: 160 TRANS DEV ACT SRF 4,800 4,800 293 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF 11,294 48,829 15,366 75,489 310 PARK DEVELOPMENT 2,219,278 83,835 61,514 2,241,599 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJ. FUNDS 2,230,572 53,629 99,201 141,803 2,241,599 DEBT SERVICE FUND: 400 LIBRARY BONDS DEBT SVC 1,402 92,893 85,183 9,112 TOTAL DEBT SVC. FUND 1,402 92,893 85,183 9,112 AGENCY FUNDS: 420 LEONARD ROAD DEBT SVC 41,036 7,896 12,263 36,669 700 QUARRY CREEK PROJ ADM 24,697 9,516 247 34,460 720 C.A. TV TRUST FUND 77,450 77,450 730 PARKING DIST #2 DEBT SVC 12,181 8,800 501 20,480 740 PARKING DIST #3 DEBT SVC 1,782 96,028 166,254 (68,444) 800 DEPOSIT AGENCY FUND 409,477 409,477 990 SARATOGA PUBL FIN AGNCY 228,441 228,441 TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 795,064 9,516 112,971 213,478 704,073 TOTAL ALL FUNDS 9,429,665 7,050,654 6,360,965 10,119,354 fs299\RECAP Page 1 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28,1999 x PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% C REVENUES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE REVENUE RECAP BY FUND 001 GENERAL FUND 6,155,625 6,503,691 3,799,449 4,110,682 8.2% SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: 100 COPS -SLESF FUND 71,000 71,000 70,145 -1.2% 110 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 32,938 122,938 22,938 100,735 339.2% (1) 150 STREETS ROADS SRF 721,281 360,122 362,030 0.5% 170 HILLSIDE REPAIR FUND 5,160 10,000 3,440 10,068 192.7% 180 LANDSCAPE LIGHTING FUND 128,975 85,317 78,294 -8.2% 250 DEVELOPMENT FUND 1,240,700 1,504,000 827,133 1,147,496 38.7% (2) 260 ENVIRNMNTAL PROGRAM FUND 709,291 367,920 378,574 2.9% 270 HOUSING COMMUNITY DEV FUND 372,013 442,013 71,733 73,101 1.9% 290 RECREATION FUND 589,700 357,050 339,508 -4.9% 292 FACILITY OPERATIONS FUND 134,000 86,333 74,956 -13.2% 710 HERITAGE PRSRVTION TRUST FUND TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 4,005,058 4,423,198 2,252,987 2,634,907 17.0% CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS: 160 TRANSPORT DEVELOP ACT SRF 99,676 293 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF 21,500 14,333 15,366 7.2% 310 PARK DVLPMNT CAP PRJ FND 143,520 95,680 83,835 -12.4% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 264,696 110,013 99,201 -9.8% DEBT SERVICE FUND: 400 LIBRARY BOND DEBT SRV FND 94,106 94,106 92,893 -1.3% TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 94,106 94,106 92,893 -1.3% TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 420 LEONARD RD DEBT SER FUND 12,263 8,175 7,896 -3.4% 700 QUARRY CREEK TRUST FUND 350 233 247 5.9% 720 CA TV TRUST FUND 730 PRK DST #2 DBT SR/AGNCY FD 11,538 7,692 8,800 14.4% 740 PRK DST #3 DBT SR/AGNCY FD 168,225 98,131 96,028 -2.1% 800 DEPOSITS AGENCY FUND 990 SARATOGA PFA AGENCY FUND TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 192,376 114,232 112,971 -1.1% TOTAL ALL FUNDS 10,711,861 11,478,067 6,370,787 7,050,654 10.7% fs299 \REVENUE Page 2 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999 PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% REVENUES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE GENERAL FUND 001 PROP TAX SECURED 1,340,000 629,800 645,377 2.5% TEA ALLOCATION 109,030 109,030 100 (3) 1,340,000 1,449,030 629,800 754,407 19.8% SALES TAX 1% 962,964 1,000,000 641,976 700,847 9.2% SALES TAX PROP 172 72,036 42,021 45,983 9.4% 1,035,000 683,997 746,830 9.2% TRANSFER TAX 286,000 166,833 149,918 -10.1% CONSTRUCTION TAX 375,000 250,000 239,475 -4.2% TRANS OCCUP TAX 257,250 128,625 121,601 -5.5% FRANCHISE FEES FRANCHISE PG &E 207,315 FRANCHISE TCI 160,680 80,340 88,630 10.3% FRANCHISE SJ WATER 92,731 92,731 84,261 -9.1% FRANCHISE GREEN VALLEY 283,000 165,083 163,989 -0.7% 743,726 338,154 336,880 -0.4% BUSINESS LICENSES 274,050 182,700 181,835 -0.5% MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE FEE 1,173,000 1,250,000 782,000 884,686 13.1% (4) OFF HIGHWAY MV FEE 170 500 498 -0.4% HOPTR 16,000 8,000 7,755 -3.1% 1,189,170 790,500 892,939 13.0% DISASTER RECOVERY 321,190 214,127 89,839 -58.0% (5) OTHER REFUNDS REIMBURSES 171,559 114,373 192,757 68.5% (6) FINES -FALSE ALARM 25,000 16,667 20,100 20.6% FORFEITURES 40,000 26,667 31,459 18.0% INTEREST 250,000 375,000 166,667 242,049 45.2% (7) RENTALS -CELL PHONE 44,000 29,333 47,827 63.0% (4) CONTRIB/DONATIONS 10 100 SALE OF ASSETS 5,000 MISC. 10,000 6,667 11,892 78.4% UNSPEC REV REDUCT. (300,000) ADMIN. REIM. ANIMAL LICENSES 13,680 6,840 5,234 -23.5% FUEL SALES 15,000 7,500 6,692 -10.8% GROUND MAINT 5,000 3,333 2,250 -32.5% PERMIT ENCRMT. 55,000 36,667 36,688 0.1% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 6,155,625 6,503,691 3,799,449 4,110,682 8.2% fs299 \REVENUE Page 3 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999 Z PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% REVENUES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: I COPS -SLESF SP REV FD 100 SUPPL LAW ENFORCE 71,000 71,000 70,145 -1.2% TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 110 REFUNDS REIMB. CROSSING GUARD MATCH 2,938 2,938 3,000 2.1% FINES VEHICLE CODE 30,000 120,000 20,000 97,735 388.7% (1) TOTAL TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 32,938 122,938 22,938 100,735 339.2% STREETS ROADS SRF 150 REFUNDS REIMB. 31,500 6,000 6,158 2.6% MISC. ST HIGHWAY USER 2107.5 6,000 6,000 6,000 0.0% ST HIGHWAY USER 2106 149,051 86,946 89,807 3.3% ST HIGHWAY USER 2107 260,188 151,776 146,493 -3.5% ST FHWA REIMB. 87,000 ST 2105 S &H CODE 187,542 109,400 113,572 3.8% TOTAL ST &RDS SRF 721,281 360,122 362,030 0.5% HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF 170 REFUNDS REIMB. HILLSIDE STREET REPAIR 5,160 10,000 3,440 10,068 192.7% TOTAL HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF 5,160 10,000 3,440 10,068 192.7% LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF 180 PROP. TAX 70,355 46,903 45,459 -3.1% CAPITAL IMPR (PARK DIST) 57,620 38,413 32,835 -14.5% INTEREST 1,000 TOTAL LANDSCAPE/LGTNG SRF 128,975 85,317 78,294 -8.2% DEVELOPMENT SRF 250 GEOLOGY REVIEW FEES 52,500 70,000 35,000 53,523 52.9% (2) ENGINEERING FEES 54,000 150,000 36,000 129,637 260.1% PLANNING FEES 320,000 359,000 213,333 297,823 39.6% ARBORIST FEE 50,000 60,000 33,333 45,986 38.0% MAP/PUB /OTHER SALES 200 0 133 0% DOCUMENT STRG FEES 7,000 10,000 4,667 10,150 117.5% PERMITS- BUILDING 725,000 795,000 483,333 564,476 16.8% PERMITS GRADING 32,000 60,000 21,333 45,901 115.2% V TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SRF 1,240,700 1,504,000 827,133 1,147,496 38.7% fs299 \REVENUE Page 4 4/2/99 1 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28,1999 .r. r PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% REVENUES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE ENVIRNMNTAL PRG SRF 260 CLEAN AIR GRANT 162,000 47,000 46,802 -0.4% ST REFUSE SURCHG AB939 20,000 13,333 15,701 17.8% ENVIRONMENTAL FEES 527,291 307,586 316,071 2.8% 1 TOTAL ENVIRON PRG SRF 709,291 367,920 378,574 2.9% HOUSING &COMM DEV SRF 270 HCD /CDBG /SHARP GRANTS 369,413 8 100 INTEREST 2,600 1,733 2,522 45.5% SHARP LOAN REPAYMENT 70,000 70,000 70,571 0.8% TOTAL HOUSING /COMM DEV SRF 372,013 442,013 71,733 73,101 1.9% RECREATION SRF 290 SPORTS LEAGUE FEES 44,000 29,333 26,620 -9.2% CAMP FEES 96,000 29,000 25,565 11.8% EXCURSION FEES 82,500 55,000 63,333 15.2% CLASS /SPECIAL EVENT 324,000 216,000 202,388 -6.3% SNACK BAR SALES 1,200 800 825 3.1% REDWOOD SPORTS PRGM. 28,000 18,667 15,139 -18.9% TEEN SERVICES 13,000 11,000 7,583 2,613 -65.5% SNACK BAR SALES 1,000 667 1,174 76.1% WARNER HUTTON CONTRIBUTIONS 2,000 1,851 100 TOTAL RECREATION SRF 589,700 589,700 357,050 339,508 -4.9% FACILITY OPS SRF 292 BUILDING RENT 125,000 120,000 83,333 72,439 -13.1% PARKS RENT 9,000 4,000 3,000 2,517 -16.1% TOTAL FACILITY OPS SRF 134,000 124,000 86,333 74,956 -13.2% HERITAGE PRSRVTN TRST FND 710 INTEREST TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 4,005,058 4,423,198 2,252,987 2,634,907 17.0% fs299 \REVENUE Page 5 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999 PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% REVENUES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS TRANSPORT DEVELOP ACT SRF 160 TOTAL TDA 99,676 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF 293 THEATER TCK SRCHG 21,500 14,333 15,366 7.2% PARK DVLPMNT CAP PRJ FND 310 PARK DEVELOPMENT 143,520 95,680 83,835 -12.4% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 264,696 264,696 110,013 99,201 -9.8% DEBT SERVICE FUND: LIBRARY BOND DEBT SRV FND 400 PRINCIPAL 75,000 75,000 75,000 0.0% INTEREST 18,906 18,906 17,693 -6.4% OTHER 200 200 200 0.0% TOTAL LIBRARY BOND DEBT 94,106 94,106 92,893 -1.3% fs299 \REVENUE Page 6 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999 PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% REVENUES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE AGENCY FUNDS: LEONARD RD DEBT SER FUND 420 CAPITAL IMPR (PARK DIST) 12,263 8,175 7,896 -3.4% QUARRY CREEK TRUST FUND 700 INTEREST 350 233 247 5.9% CA TV TRUST FUND 720 DEPOSITS PRK DST #2 DBT SR/AGNCY FD 730 SERVICES (LLA DISTRICTS) 11,538 7,692 8,800 14.4% PRK DST #3 DBT SR/AGNCY FD 740 SERVICES (LLA DISTRICTS) 168,225 98,131 96,028 -2.1% DEPOSITS AGENCY FUND 800 DEPOSITS SARATOGA PFA AGENCY FUND 990 BOND AMORTIZATION TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 192,376 192,376 114,232 112,971 -1.1% GRAND TOTAL 10,711,861 11,478,067 6,370,787 7,050,654 10.7% REVENUE NOTES: (1) Traffic Safety Vehicle Fines Budgeted very conservatively; actual fine revenues expected to be higher. (2) Development Fees Development activity remains higher than originally anticipated. (3) Tax Equity Allocation (TEA) Final payment from Santa Clara County not anticipated. (4) These revenues higher than originally budgeted. (5) Disaster Recovery FEMA refund in process, but not received yet. (6) Other Refunds and Reimbursements Workers' compensation insurance premium refund not anticipated. (7) Interest Income Budgeted very conservatively; actual interest is expected to be higher than budgeted. fs299 \REVENUE Page 7 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA r IL EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28,1999 PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT F D 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) U E 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ N P ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 D T TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE EXPENDITURE RECAP BY FUND 001 GENERAL FUND 4,283,616 3,511,586 3,377,160 -3.8% SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 100 COPS SUP. LAW ENFORCEMENT 72,944 24,967 17,685 -29.2% 110 TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 15,413 1,000 987 -1.3% 150 STREETS &ROADS SRF 3,130,636 1,171,731 1,053,747 -10.1% 170 HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF 1,000 36,445 100 180 LANDSCAPEILGTNG SRF 148,359 87,393 67,868 -22.3% 250 DEVELOPMENT SRF 1,312,499 554,263 534,188 -3.6% 260 ENVIRNMNTAL PRG SRF 480,980 213,676 207,684 -2.8% 270 HOUSING &COMM DEV SRF 388,419 251,705 210,750 -16.3% 290 RECREATION SRF 916,794 417,378 382,214 -8.4% 292 FACILITY OPS SRF 236,614 37,831 31,773 -16.0% 710 HERITAGE PRSRVTN TRST FND TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUN 6,703,658 2,759,943 2,543,341 -7.8% CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS: 160 TRANS DEV ACT SRF 98,103 5,000 4,800 -4.0% 293 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF 125,080 78,211 75,489 -3.5% 310 PARK DEVELOPMENT 567,000 70,275 61,514 -12.5% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUN 790,183 153,487 141,803 -7.6% 1 DEBT SERVICE FUND: 400 LIBRARY BONDS DEBT SVC 94,093 85,000 85,183 0.2% TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 94,093 85,000 85,183 0.2% TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 420 LEONARD ROAD DEBT SVC 12,263 11,969 12,263 2.5% 700 QUARRY CREEK PROJ ADM 2,500 35,000 34,460 -1.5% 720 C.A. TV TRUST FUND 730 PARKING DIST #2 DEBT SVC 11,538 500 501 0.2% 740 PARKING DIST #3 DEBT SVC 168,225 166,681 166,254 -0.3% 800 DEPOSIT AGENCY FUND 990 SARATOGA PUBL FIN AGNCY TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 194,526 214,150 213,478 -0.3% TOTAL ALL FUNDS 12,066,076 6,724,166 6,360,965 -5.4% fs299\EXPEND. Page 8 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA Il k EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28,1999 PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 a YEAR -TO -DATE PERCENT F D 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) U E 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL N P ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 D T TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE 001 GENERAL FUND 1005 CITY COUNCIL 31,317 29,815 -4.8% 1010 CONTINGENCY 200,000 1015 CITY COMMISSIONS 41,805 36,420 -12.9% 1020 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE 152,132 143,971 -5.4% 1025 CITY ATTORNEY 54,000 177,000 182,214 2.9% 1030 CITY CLERK 45,840 42,748 -6.7% 1035 EQUIPMENT OPERATIONS 199,728 192,999 -3.4% 1040 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 241,653 241,472 -0.1% 1045 HUMAN RESOURCES 76,645 70,367 -8.2% 1050 GENERAL SERVICES 72,763 69,101 -5.0% 1060 FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 191,581 193,353 0.9% 1065 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYS. 64,630 66,581 3.0% 2005 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 28,901 19,325 19,559 1.2% 2010 CODE ENFORCEMENT 123,109 35,032 26,566 -24.2% 2015 POLICE SERVICES 2,594,707 1,679,723 1,662,791 -1.0% 2025 ANIMAL CONTROL 16,458 10,680 10,012 -6.3% 3030 PARKS /OPEN SPACE 800,843 332,079 266,608 -19.7% (8) 3035 GENERAL ENGINEERING 244,150 83,597 70,138 -16.1% (8) 4005 ADVANCED PLANNING 94,664 21,094 19,424 -7.9% 7005 SENIOR SERVICES 54,689 7010 COMMUNITY SUPPORT 72,095 a 34,962 33,021 -5.6% 9010 CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL GENERAL FUND 4,283,616 3,511,586 3,377,160 -3.8% SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: 100 COPS SUP. LAW ENFORCEMENT 72,944 24,967 17,685 -29.2% (9) 110 TRAFFIC SAFETY SRF 15,413 1,000 987 -1.3% 150 STREETS &ROADS SRF 3005 STREET MAINTENANCE 2,091,156 921,132 845,959 -8.2% (8) 3010 SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS 77,988 50,861 42,109 17.2% 3015 TRAFFIC CONTROL 222,275 99,861 78,583 -21.3% (8) 3020 FLOOD AND STORM DRAIN CONTRO 108,471 38,572 30,529 -20.9% 3025 MEDIANS AND PARKWAYS 123,754 50,293 48,626 -3.3% 5010 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT 184,642 11,012 7,941 -27.9% (10) 9015 QUITO ROAD BRIDGE CAP RPOJ 322,350 TOTAL STREETS &ROADS SRF 3,130,636 1,171,731 1,053,747 -10.1% fs299 \EXPEND. Page 9 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28,1999 ;rte PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% 1 EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR-TO-DATE PERCENT F D 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) U E 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL N P ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 D T TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE 170 HILLSIDE REPAIR SRF 1,000 36,445 100 (11) 180 LANDSCAPE /LGTNG SRF 148,359 87,393 67,868 22.3% (8) 250 DEVELOPMENT SRF 4010 ZONING ADMINSTRATION 551,368 212,821 200,648 -5.7% 4015 INSPECTION SERVICES 544,957 229,273 208,218 -9.2% 4020 DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 216,174 112,169 125,322 11.7% (12) TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SRF 1,312,499 554,263 534,188 -3.6% 260 ENVIRNMNTAL PRG SRF 5005 INTEGRATED WASTE MGMT 151,526 92,321 100,040 8.4% 5015 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 329,454 121,355 107,644 11.3% (8) TOTAL ENVIRNMNTAL PRG SR 480,980 213,676 207,684 -2.8% 270 HOUSING&COMM DEV SRF 7015 HCDAADMINISTRATION 338,419 218,371 191,135 -12.5% 9010 ADA IMPROVEMENTS CAP PROJ 50,000 33,333 19,615 -41.2% 270 HOUSING &COMM DEV SRF 388,419 251,705 210,750 -16.3% 290 RECREATION SRF 6005 RECREATION 756,332 363,063 337,627 -7.0% (13) 6010 TEEN SERVICES 160,462 54,315 44,587 17.9% (13) TOTAL RECREATION SERVICES 916,794 417,378 382,214 -8.4% 292 FACILITY OPS SRF 236,614 37,831 31,773 -16.0% 710 1040 HERITAGE PRSRVTN TRST FND TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 6,703,658 2,759,943 2,543,341 -7.8% fs299 \EXPEND. Page 10 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28,1999 PERCENT OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.6% EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR 1998 -99 YEAR-TO-DATE PERCENT F D 1998 -99 1998 -99 (YTD) U E 1998 -99 REVISED ESTIMATED ACTUAL/ N P ORIGINAL BUDGET ACTUAL a 2/28/99 2/28/99 2/28/99 D T TITLE BUDGET (if different) (if different) ESTIMATE ACTUAL ESTIMATE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 160 TRANS DEV ACT SRF 98,103 5,000 4,800 -4.0% 293 THEATER TCK SRCHG SRF 125,080 78,211 75,489 -3.5% 1 310 9010 PARK DEVELOPMENT 567,000 70,275 61,514 -12.5% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUN 790,183 153,487 141,803 -7.6% DEBT SERVICE FUND: 400 8015 LIBRARY BONDS DEBT SVC 94,093 85,000 85,183 I 0.2% AGENCY FUNDS: 420 8020 LEONARD ROAD DEBT SVC 12,263 11,969 12,263 2.5% 700 9010 QUARRY CREEKPROJADM 2,500 35,000 34,460 -1.5% 720 1040 C.A. TV TRUST FUND 730 8005 PARKING DIST #2 DEBT SVC 11,538 500 501 0.2% 740 8010 PARKING DIST #3 DEBT SVC 168,225 166,681 166,254 -0.3% 990 1040 SARATOGA PUBL FIN AGNCY TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS 194,526 214,150 213,478 -0.3% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 12,066,076 6,724,166 6,360,965 -5.4% EXPENDITURE NOTES: (8) Various Public Works Programs Salary savings. (9) Salary savings (10) Altrans grant not paid yet this year. (11) Project carried over from previous year (12) Development Regulation Contract costs higher due to staffing shortages. (13) Recreation Services Busiest season is in the spring and early summer, when revenues will surge somewhat. fs299 \EXPEND. Page 11 4/2/99 CITY OF SARATOGA Cash and Investment Report Balance as of February 28, 1999 Anticipated Acquisition FDR* Book Market Par Maturity Monthly Type Institution Date Rating Value Value Value Yeild Date Term Earnings Unrestricted Cash Investments: Cash: DD Comerica Bank Savings N/A AAA $447,857 $447,857 $447,857 1.400% Revolving 1 $522 CK Comerica Bank General Checking N/A AAA 484,584 484,584 484,584 0.000% Revolving 1 N/A CK Comerica Bank Payroll Checking N/A AAA 5,241 5,241 5,241 0.000% Revolving 1 N/A CK Comerica Bank Petty Cash N/A AAA 959 959 959 0.000% Revolving 1 N/A Subtotal Cash 938,641 a 938,641 938,641 0.668% 1 522 L.A.LF. Investments: MF L.A.I.F. N/A N/A 6,684,620 b 6,721,030 6,684,620 5.265% Revolving 90 29,329 CD Saratoga National Bank 07/03/98 AAA 500,000 500,000 500,000 5.900% 07/03/99 365 2,458 CD Heritage Bank of Commerce 10/14/98 AAA 531,358 531,358 531,358 5.650% 10/14/99 365 2,502 Subtotal CDs 1,031,358 1,031,358 1,031,358 5.771% 730 4,960 TN US Treasury Note State Street Custody 03/12/98 AGY 995,557 995,000 995,000 5.570% 03/09/99 362 4,621 MF Govt Cash Reserve Fund State Street N/A AAA 2,659 2,659 2,659 4.460% Revolving 1 10 Subtotal L.A.I.F. Investments 8,711,535 8,747,388 8,710,978 5.338% 591 38,910 Subtotal Unrestricted Cash Investments 9,650,176 9,686,029 9,649,619 4.885% 296 39,432 Restricted Cash Investments: SV Saratoga National Bank -CDBG N/A AAA 162,320 162,320 162,320 2.530% Revolving 1 342 CK Wells Fargo Bank CDBG N/A AAA 23,918 23,918 23,918 0.000% Revolving 1 N/A CK Wells Fargo Bank CDBG N/A AAA 8,181 8,181 8,181 0.000% Revolving 1 N/A Subtotal Restricted Cash Investments 194,419 194,419 194,419 0.176% 1 342 Total Cash and Investments $'9,&4#;5 5 $4,$$Q ,844,x!3!7 4, ilMla .:::.A,vg dlad.::. #4S► '9,775::1 Benchmark Yield Comparison 3 Month Treasury 4.650 %1 6 Month Treasury 4.820 %I Schedule of Maturities: Reserve Analysis: General Fund Reserve requirement adopted 6/25/97: $2,000,000 Immediate $7,817,680 General Fund Balance as of 2/28/99 $5,687,702 FY 1998 -1999 $995,557 FY 1999 -2000 1,031,358 Available Funds: Unrestricted Pooled Cash Investments available for current year expenses in all fun $8,618,818 Total $9,844,595 (Includes unrestricted funds maturing within the current fiscal year) Maturity General Fund Loans Receivable: Principal Rate Date Term Hakone Foundation $219,950 6.500% 03/01/2004 3,650 NOTES: FDR The Financial Directory rating is based on computer analysis of prime financials reported quarterly by the institutions to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Home Loan Bank Board. Ratings based on information released July 1998. *Market values for U.S. Treasury Notes provided by State Street Bank and Trust Company. This loan is noted for memorandum purposes only. The loan is amortized per the agreement with the Hakone Foundation. No payments are received. This report reflects Pooled Cash, Investments and Restricted Cash which are available resources to fund operations, debt service and capital improvements. Other interest bearing assets (notes receivable) are listed above. Debt service reserve funds held by trustees are restricted pursuant to indenture covenants and have been excluded from this report. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53646, the City's investment portfolio is in compliance with the adopted investment policy and there are adequate resources to meet anticipated pool expenditure requirements for the next six months. Y j�/ L i 4 e::: Submitted by: Approve by 4/2/99 o:\repon\(mnyr), (Unaudited Results) SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 3 lg 3 AGENDA ITEM 5.8 6 MEETING DATE: APRIL 7, 1999 CITY MGR: *M' ORIGINATING DEPT.: PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. READ: N r) SUBJECT: Final acceptance of subdivision public improvements within Tracts 8600, 8639, 8700 and 8821 Recommended Motion(s): 1. Move to grant final acceptance of the subdivision public improvements within the following subdivisions: a) Tract 8600 b) Tract 8639 c) Tract 8700 d) Tract 8821 2. Move to adopt the following Resolutions rescinding the previously rejected Offers of Dedications and accepting the following roads into the City's publicly maintained street system: a) Resolution accepting dedication of streets within Tract 8600 which includes: northerly half of Douglass Lane, westerly half of Taos Drive, and Taos Court. b) Resolution accepting dedication of streets within Tract 8639 which includes: Spring Blossom Court. c) Resolution accepting dedication of streets within Tract 8700 which includes: Bellgrove Circle, Congress Junction Court, Woodleigh Circle, and Masson Terrace Court. d) Resolution accepting dedication of streets within Tract 8821 which includes: northerly portion of Saratoga Dills Road, westerly portion of Pontiac Avenue, and southerly portion of Trinity Avenue. Report Summary: The subdivision public improvements within Tracts 8600, 8639, 8700, and 8821 have been completed and satisfactorily maintained by the subdividers for the required one year maintenance/warranty period. Consequently, I am recommending that the City Council grant final acceptance of these improvements and assume the maintenance responsibility for them as contemplated by the Subdivision Improvement Agreements for each Tract. This can be accomplished by adopting the attached Resolution which rescinds the previously rejected Offers of Dedications made on the Final Maps. Fiscal Impacts: There will be an increase of approximately $7,500 per year (using figures from the Pavement Management Program) in the City's street and stone drain maintenance expenses as a result of adding to the inventory of City maintained streets and storm drains. Roughly 1,830 feet of street for Tract 8600, 250 feet of street for Tract 8639, 4,200 feet of street for Tract 8821, and 1,335 feet of street for Tract 8821 will be added to the City's street system. Advertising, Noticing and Public Contact: Nothing additional. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: The subdivision public improvements would continue to remain as private improvements for which the developers and the individual lot owners within each subdivision would collectively have maintenance responsibility. Follow Un Actions: The Resolutions will be recorded Attachments: 1. Resolution Accepting Dedication of Streets for Tract 8600. 2. Resolution Accepting Dedication of Streets for Tract 8639, 3. Resolution Accepting Dedication of Streets for Tract 8700. 4. Resolution Accepting Dedication of Streets for Tract 8821. 5. Tract 8600 Vicinity Map. 6. Tract 8639 Vicinity Map. 7. Tract 8700 Vicinity Map. 8. Tract 8821 Vicinity Map. Recording requested by, and to be returned to: City of Saratoga Department of Public Works 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 RESOLUTION NO. 36 -B- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OFFERS OF DEDICATION TRACT NO. 8600 It appearing that on or about December 3, 1998, the streets, storm drains and other improvements as shown on the hereinafter referred to subdivision map and on approved improvement plans therefore were completed and thereafter were maintained by the subdivider for a period of not less than an additional year from the date of satisfactory completion. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: That portion of the City's previous resolution rejecting the dedication of certain streets, storm drains and other easement as shown on the following described subdivision map: Map of Tract 8600 recorded in book of Maps, Pages Santa Clara County Records on 199 And as set forth in the City Clerk's certification on said map, is hereby rescinded and the previously rejected offers of dedication on said map are hereby accepted, except the following: NONE and all of the above streets which are accepted under this resolution are hereby declared to be public streets of the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California. FURTHER, that certain Warranty/Maintenance Bond posted with the City on January 5, 1996, in the amount of $6,500 (Receipt No. 34650), is hereby authorized to be released to the subdivider. 4. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on the day of 19 at a regular meeting of the City Council of Saratoga by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK 1 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION •Application No. /Location: SD -92 -008; 19855 Douglass Lane Applicant/Owner: ::::a:r;: 712.A Date: March 24 1993 APN: 397-16-006 Director Approval: itic.. 44 iill A. I= Isliktiiiilip■i11,11116iitili is .5 we= wilmilmowi �1�■ is i i� lam:: ::::::NTE:::::: -;A.v.,---17.411.1 III iii ;#1i s ,if. A up 7,3 1,4 BEL gh bili,„ L: "le% e 14:41.11„,„„Liti lir i op v e Emir irm 4 .)4 Ilri tylikiiiMIer i II Se. 4 r y s in 1 19855 Douolass Lane Recording requested by, and to be returned to: City of Saratoga Department of Public Works 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 RESOLUTION NO. 36 -B- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OFFERS OF DEDICATION TRACT NO. 8639 It appearing that on or about August 27, 1997, the streets, storm drains and other improvements as shown on the hereinafter referred to subdivision map and on approved improvement plans therefore were completed and thereafter were maintained by the subdivider for a period of not less than an additional year from the date of satisfactory completion. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: That portion of the City's previous resolution rejecting the dedication of certain streets, storm drains and other easement as shown on the following described subdivision map: Map of Tract 8639 recorded in book of Maps, Pages Santa Clara County Records on 199_ And as set forth in the City Clerk's certification on said map, is hereby rescinded and the previously rejected offers of dedication on said map are hereby accepted, except the following: NONE and all of the above streets which are accepted under this resolution are hereby declared to be public streets of the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California. FURTHER, that certain Warranty/Maintenance Bond posted with the City on January 5, 1996, in the amount of $9,000 (CD Account No. 3987001165), is hereby authorized to be released to the subdivider. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on the day of 19 at a regular meeting of the City Council of Saratoga by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No. /Location: SD -90 -010; 12585 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road Applicant /Owner: Vidanage nn- Staff Planner: James tea i gren 1 R_A C 1 T 8 (o3CI _...72( Date: May 22, 1991 APN: 366 -13 -058 Director Approval: ix, 061 C73 24o1c151 1 SEA AUL► i *safe O 326- .4 lli) (10 (N) 030 42 c421-204011 22114 *42 111/1 1241151 124161 1l. �f/ i6.141. an sst•4r•3• awes Mfrs a6. 36f. -2o-0 R lg. o 03 of 07 OS t6 1• N 1242/5 /LS7! tA) (.6 20-12 21.1a.Cal) y3Y6-ss -19H otf 3 3156.-2o-ve 219825 soli 12445C16) z',71 311.56 -o1 m 366 -SO ./3 1243• C•2) `i 11. 113607 r2T I p No. •21• -o! Q ts• /11 21370 12447516) W 1. 10 3 to o Ay' ?6G -2o- 14 (6) 3K0 tes44 tOS3 t0577 11 C!° t ss) tit) 2e37 .....s.. ie3 3i4 12 4 7 1 514) l64- •20• /s o(. 'moose 20549 220523 :7I 12 Sure! 6 e 1 to 124•3cl W R441 W 6.• :014 MANOR OR. (1 la rw soslo 2 0371. s es42 .303 0424 so412 (17) IYYIe 2 c4) (s) C C ,t, m IR' .64-1.• 3"" x4. 4fr. •2 It143 Gt.) �r er 1°; u. a•1. 20 11 24 0 I 1 27 21 4 v (i 1253005) izsee I/7) 1 )�I71 364.20 21414/ 20504 (14) 111) 1 '1 416 58 3K 715 Z 15477 1 444 12516 1 C lso) vigil o Izoz9 125ao ?e 21 20.4. CORDON 12431 15513 ,410 2o3 1166. 19 20 -2e 3K 24:0•• V5 CT. 3 (14) (30) r till I i 0 46. t oN1 !Ma (1) rtY11 Q 12Y1i te) 4 41(5' 31.4. 3 17 ZO (11 W 11.4 2S 21 a CT• 1.1) s 0s. 166 -1! till 1 11) -.4t W Iis e� E Lo)SI r LW J 386- 4 -l6. O CL AR�G t5) 063 2 01. s w OS 0334 031 104/0 (9 tW am Is5i7 2 1, s e V� (1t) on (so) U1) (12) •4•.•13- i aS 20 CIO 3 lVl 364.1! Saa.1 •12 !3 13 L QL 26' 21 30 !1 •Z 0 It3� 11.6) Is5M1 W 1 (y f (t) O� i lsi) MO X Mike. n 40 1t s)4(4) fi S3 1 51.1/ I1 3s• rt3f1 a6. 1s5Y. n) (CI r 1. 02 1•.1.5143 6.19.57 IsS7: Y 0 11 bJU7 ea CO (A7 1 (1 1 34 .y. %6 of 21 125(. 12401 (54.) (26 00 K l k 16 5 22 47 131 3 1 I6 364 4+1 .1 12sK(SS l!7) 136) CIS) 166.+K.. 0 12s11?4C1) 131/51'1 45 V s.z X03 1615° ��i Ct 1 4 124.1/ f6L- 13.41. '.I rS Q On) 4 36 166/ e 5$(4) ''c' UM y Cyr t o 4641 164 13 .0 l2 �4 t;5 V26-; CT. 156 y fi -r /2644 .4a s 12771 111/ 6 11 O tw -36- -53-4 �a S o, r ak t 31) W (441 2 7 s (4) os 5.4 4 265 12244 CI 126. j 366 52040 1) •3e• O e 6 51 3- -13 .340a4) 3 1 1272.1 U2) 2 3s6-56,-.4 ta I. ,x<::;,;<, 1210) fn PIS 12489 1;)..0 I 14 w I 3 312.-22-1* Is r 3 i 4 11732 12585 Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road Recording requested by, and to be returned to: City of Saratoga Department of Public Works 13 777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 RESOLUTION NO. 36 -B- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OFFERS OF DEDICATION TRACT NO. 8700 It appearing that on or about March 11, 1999, the streets, storm drains and other improvements as shown on the hereinafter referred to subdivision map and on approved improvement plans therefore were completed and thereafter were maintained by the subdivider for a period of not less than an additional year from the date of satisfactory completion. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: That portion of the City's previous resolution rejecting the dedication of certain streets, storm drains and other easement as shown on the following described subdivision map: Map of Tract 8700 recorded in book of Maps, Pages Santa Clara County Records on 199 And as set forth in the City Clerk's certification on said map, is hereby rescinded and the previously rejected offers of dedication on said map are hereby accepted, except the following: NONE and all of the above streets which are accepted under this resolution are hereby declared to be public streets of the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California. FURTHER, that certain Warranty/Maintenance Bond posted with the City on January 5, 1996, in the amount of $98,500 (CD Account No. 2879000228), is hereby authorized to be released to the subdivider. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on the day of 19 at a regular meeting of the City Council of Saratoga by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No. /Location: PD 94-002 13150 SARATOGA AVENUE Applicant /Owner: GREENBRIAR HOMES COMPANY Staff Planner: James Walgren 1 S 00 Date: September 14, 1994 APN: 389 11 012, 013 014 Director Approval: v 1 )111a11 Illiarr 7 AMMO on: MI iiie 1111 0■,. y ...1. ,SAt o (A Ira n 4 7 pima liar *ow. ,t_, 4. ggri a 4 r.1 mum 11 1 iff in r s b ug n 4 ,p 14 4, R -1 1;0, 00 i 1 e I OOU, Al (1 .4 '62° l' 40 M 1111111111111111111111111, 1 Px. it Iu CON AVE r C -N W ill: A 4.000 l■ a ii 11I 3.000 1 1 11 II 1 M -M- t .1 1 77 I w •vr 1 ‘"..°4C.. 'P LI .91711Witake EMI lt 4 .1 4 I 11 dr'4, ,,,*■1•', b Ap,„ 1111m.Ano in igir I. V I 41041 w y Ni i li "=i ll 1 1 141 i t ,h 4 )e 1 '4 1 1 i 1. 1 41 jar ..4°A.g..1. 411V.,,„,4 *41” (44 VW: 4N■ v v r.e -------.1:., m 1 )b-444., 40/ itiff OM X r r l 31 .r1n Sara4-.•.rm A, Recording requested by, and to be returned to: City of Saratoga Department of Public Works 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 RESOLUTION NO. 36 -B- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OFFERS OF DEDICATION TRACT NO. 8821 It appearing that on or about December 3, 1998, the streets, storm drains and other improvements as shown on the hereinafter referred to subdivision map and on approved improvement plans therefore were completed and thereafter were maintained by the subdivider for a period of not less than an additional year from the date of satisfactory completion. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: That portion of the City's previous resolution rejecting the dedication of certain streets, storm drains and other easement as shown on the following described subdivision map: Map of Tract 8821 recorded in book of Maps, Pages Santa Clara County Records on 199_ And as set forth in the City Clerk's certification on said map, is hereby rescinded and the previously rejected offers of dedication on said map are hereby accepted, except the following: NONE and all of the above streets which are accepted under this resolution are hereby declared to be public streets of the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California. FURTHER, that certain Warranty/Maintenance Bond posted with the City on March 11, 1996, in the amount of $2,100 (Receipt No. 35654), is hereby authorized to be released to the subdivider. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on the day of 19 at a regular meeting of the City Council of Saratoga by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK i I Item #6 1 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION GPA -94 -003, AZO -94 -002 SD -95 -008; 'Application No./Location: 20851 Saratoga Hills Rd. Applicant /Owner: TRINITY DEVELOPMENT Staff Planner: James Walgren, AICP T RA L iT (88 2.1 Date: 1/10/96 APN: 503 -49 -041 042 Director Approval: 9 aii). N t ,...6. 10 ig atr ic 1666 111111147 41 1 L ,I•b- e's: i L .i A:15761-1 W 1, r_TE i 1 Af-r., 0' 1' L 1 x= iiraii"1...... AL v 1 111 1/ M 11 i. fc i a lel 1 i i i N' 40 4 4 Li I 0 .k 1 r 1 ../...:..T.,„,...„... 41, i 11 lig i i .\''.\‘'C''1. 114 R- II-. i .i 7 ti ftiPa ft%:. `C L I 44 .7 0 f 1,1* I I I 1 "II* 118 I 111 ---in .0 1 -st i vavaimivIll 4 ilk i z 4, i 7 ..LiT i 0 A i k Cif 20851 Saratoga Hills Rd. 000001 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 3I A AGENDA ITEM 6 4 MEETING DATE: APRIL 7, 1999 CITY MANAGER: 1� ly ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER DEPT. HEAD: SUBJECT: Vessing Road Assessment District RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): 1. Conclude the Public Hearing. 2. Direct the City Clerk to tabulate the assessment ballots and report the results. 3. Move to adopt either the two Resolutions necessary to proceed with the formation of the assessment district, or the Resolution abandoning the assessment district proceedings, depending on the result of the balloting and the Council's desire. REPORT SUMMARY: On March 25, most of the property owners in the proposed Vessing Road Assessment District attended a meeting at City Hall to discuss the status of the proceedings, and to decide whether or not to continue with the formation of the assessment district. By the conclusion of the meeting, it appeared evident that the vast majority of the property owners now indeed support the formation of the district. The reasons for this are threefold. First, the property owners have been unsuccessful in developing a satisfactory alternative to the assessment district for improving their private road to minimum public street standards. Second, a significant obstacle to forming the assessment district seems to have been overcome as a result of recent court judgment entered in favor of the property owners. The court apparently has ruled that an historical road right -of -way across a property not within the boundaries of the proposed district, but which benefits the property owners and is needed by them to improve their road, does still exist. Third, the property owners remain eager to fulfill their original objective of improving Vessing Road to a standard which will allow them to dedicate the road to the City for ongoing maintenance purposes. 1 At the meeting, the property owners were each provided with a supplemental ballot and instructions, and encouraged to return their ballots by the close of the public hearing on April 7. The same supplemental ballot and instructions were also mailed to those property owners who were not in attendance at the meeting. At the public hearing which was continued from March 17, the Council must allow any remaining testimony to be offered, after which the hearing should be closed. At that point, the Council should direct the City Clerk to tabulate the ballots which are submitted by the close of the hearing and to report the results. Assuming the result of the balloting supports formation of the assessment district, the Council can proceed with the formation of the district by passing the first two resolutions attached to this report. However, the Council is not obligated to form the assessment district in this case and may opt to abandon the proceedings if it chooses by adopting the third resolution attached hereto. Of course, if the result of the balloting opposes formation of the district, the Council must adopt the resolution abandoning the proceedings. If the Council passes the first two resolutions, the actual work to bring the project to fruition can begin. This involves the acquisition of necessary right -of -way (surveys, appraisals, and possible condemnation proceedings if that becomes necessary), finalizing an agreement with the San Jose Water Company for completing the water main extension design and construction work, and obtaining construction bids for the street improvement work. These next steps will take several months to complete, after which a very accurate estimate of the total project cost will be known. At that time, the City Council may reduce the assessment amounts for each property owner accordingly, before the actual Notices of Assessments are issued and recorded. Recall that the assessment amounts included in the ballots are based on an extremely conservative, worst case estimate of the total project cost, and are the maximum amounts that each property owner would be subject to pay. Very likely, the actual total project cost will be considerably less, thereby allowing the City Council to reduce the assessment amount for each property owner before the final assessments are confirmed. FISCAL IMPACTS: There are no direct fiscal impacts on the City as a result of moving forward with the assessment district. All of the costs associated with forming the district, and with developing the project, will be recovered via the assessments. Even if later on it is decided to abandon the proceedings before advancing to construction, the City will be entitled to recover any up front costs incurred to develop the project to that point. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: The property owners in the proposed district have each been notified of the continued public hearing. 1 CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Depends on the Council's action. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: If the Council adopts the first two resolutions, staff will proceed with the work required to advance the project to the point of construction. If the Council adopts the third resolution, it will be recorded and the property owners notified of the termination of the proceedings. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memorandum of proceedings prepared by the Assessment District legal counsel. 2. City Clerk's Certificate re: Assessment Ballot Results. 3. Resolution overruling protests. 4. Resolution approving report and assessment and ordering improvement. 5. Resolution abandoning proceedings. 6. Assessment Engineer's Report. 7. Original Notice of Improvement and Assessment Ballot. 8. Supplemental Notice and Assessment Ballot. �c j MEMORANDUM OF PROCEEDINGS TO BE TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7, 1999, IN CONNECTION WITH VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA On May 21, 1997, the City Council approved the Resolution of intent to reimburse expenditures, the boundary map, the legal services agreement, the consultant services agreement and the resolution of intention to order improvement. The boundary map was filed with the County Recorder on May 23, 1997. On November 19, 1997, the Council approved the amendment of the resolution of intention by resolution, designated the City Engineer as Superintendent of Streets and designated the City Engineer's Office as the Superintendent of Street's Office for assessment district purposes, accepted and filed the Engineer's Report and set the hearing for 8 p.m. on Wednesday, January 21, 1998. Additionally, the Notice of Improvement and the Assessment Ballot were filed with the City Clerk, and they were mailed to each property owner within the boundaries of the proposed district on November 25, 1997. On January 21, 1998, the public hearing was opened and continued from time to time to this date. The following affidavits and certificates are on file in the City Clerk's office: (a) Certificate of filing boundary map with County Recorder; and (b) Certificate of mailing notice of improvement (w /ballot and return envelope). 1. OPEN CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING. This is the time set for the continued public hearing on the Resolution of Intention, as amended, and the Engineer's Report. 2. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. The City Clerk will then open and count the ballots received from the property owners within the boundaries of this district. Judged by the outcome of ballots, and if the Council wishes to proceed, it is in order to consider the following: 3. City Clerk's Certificate Re: Assessment Ballot Results. This is to be filed. Please see additional instructions below. 4. Resolution overruling protests. If the Council wishes to overrule protests, this resolution is to be passed. 5. Resolution Approving Report and Assessment and Ordering Improvement. This resolution is to be passed. CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE RE: ASSESSMENT BALLOT RESULTS VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA I, SUSAN RAMOS, City Clerk of the City of Saratoga (the "City hereby certify: I have personally received and assembled all assessment ballots eligible to be cast in the assessment ballot proceedings called by the City Council in its Resolution of Intention to Order Improvement, and in accordance with instructions contained in the Assessment Ballot, I hereby declare the election closed. I personally counted the ballots and certify the result of that count to be as follows: TOTAL BALLOTS THAT COULD BE CAST: 20, representing assessments of $620,000.00. TOTAL BALLOTS CAST "YES representing assessments of TOTAL BALLOTS CAST "NO representing assessments of THE BALLOTS CAST AND RETURNED DO NOT CONSTITUTE A MAJORITY PROTEST, weighted by the respective amounts of assessments, as provided by Article XIIID of the California Constitution and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act. I make this Certification on April 1999 SUSAN RAMOS, City Clerk City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OVERRRULING PROTESTS VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Saratoga resolves: On January 21, 1998, the City Council opened a public hearing on the resolution of intention, as amended, and the engineer's report on the proposed improvement in Vessing Road Assessment District, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California. The hearing was continued from time to time to April 7, 1999 at 7:30 P.M. Prior to the conclusion of the hearing, certain interested persons made protests or objections to the proposed improvement, the extent of the assessment district or the proposed assessment. The City Council hereby overrules each of these protests, written or oral. The City Council finds that the protest against the proposed improvement (including all written protests not withdrawn in writing before the conclusion of the protest hearing) does not constitute a majority protest weighted by the respective amounts of the assessments, as provided by Article XIIID of the California Constitution and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a meeting held on the 7th day of April, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk T RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING REPORT AND ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Saratoga resolves: WHEREAS, this City Council has taken a series of actions preliminary to ordering the improvement in Vessing Road Assessment District, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California, and now makes the following findings and orders: 1. The City Council adopted a map showing the boundaries of the land benefited by the proposed improvement. A copy of the boundary map was filed in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara in the Book of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts. 2. The City Council adopted its Resolution of Intention to order the improvement described therein under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, and directed Civil Consultants Group, as the Engineer of Work for the assessment district, to prepare the report required by Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code. Said Resolution of Intention was later amended. The improvement is generally described as follows: a) Steps preliminary to the construction of a water supply system consisting of 620 feet; more or less, of water mains, fire hydrant and metered services, including, but not limited to, feasibility studies, engineering plans, cost estimates, legal expenses, and acquisition of easements and rights -of -way necessary therefor. b) The acquisition of property necessary for the improvement of Vessing Road from its intersection with Quito Road to Vessing Court to minimum acceptable City of Saratoga standards by clearing, grubbing, grading, and the construction therein of base, pavement, curbs, gutters, driveway aprons and conforms, striping, signage, retaining structures, utility relocation, where required, and a water transmission system consisting of 620 feet, more or less, of water main, fire hydrant and metered services. c) The acquisition of all lands, easements and rights -of -way and the performance of all work auxiliary to any of the above necessary to complete the same. it 3. The Engineer of Work filed the report as directed, and the City called a hearing on the report as required by Section 10301 of the Streets and Highways Code. Notice of the hearing was given by mailing to affected property owners, all according to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913. In addition, an Assessment Ballot was mailed to affected property owners, as required by Article XIIID of the California constitution and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act. An affidavit of mailing the Notice of Improvement and the Assessment Ballot was filed with the City Clerk. 4. The public hearing was continued from time to time to April 7, 1999. 5. At the time and place for which notice was given, the City conducted a public hearing and gave every interested person an opportunity to object to the proposed improvement, the extent of the assessment district, or, the proposed assessment. 6. The City Council finds that an assessment ballot proceeding on the question of the proposed assessment was conducted in accordance with Article XIIID of the California Constitution and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act, and that the ballots marked and returned do not constitute a majority protest as defined therein. 7. The documents and events described in paragraphs 1 to 5, inclusive, are stated here in tabular form, with their dates and, where appropriate, their numbers. All documents are now on file with the City Clerk. Document or Event Date Number a. Resolution approving boundary map 05/21/97 97 -23.1 b. Boundary map filed with County Recorder 05/23/97 Dated c. Resolution of Intention 05/21/97 97 -23.4 d. Resolution amending Resolution of Intention 11/19/97 97 -23.5 e. Filing of Engineer's Report 11/19/97 Dated f. Resolution accepting Report 11/19/97 97 -23.7 g. Certificate of Mailing Notice of Improvement and Assessment Ballot 11/25/97 Dated h. Public hearing conducted 04/07/99 8. The City Council approves the Engineer's Report and each component part of it, including each exhibit incorporated by reference in the report. 9. The City Council finds that the Engineer of Work in the Engineer's Report has fairly and properly apportioned the cost of the improvement to each parcel of land in the assessment district in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each parcel, respectively, from the improvement. The City hereby confirms and levies each individual assessment as stated in the Engineer's Report. 10. This City orders the improvement described in paragraph 2 and as detailed in the Engineer's Report. 2 11. Bonds representing unpaid assessments, and bearing interest at a rate not to exceed twelve percent (12 per annum, will be issued in the manner provided by the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Division 10, Streets and Highways Code), and the last installment of the bonds shall mature not to exceed twenty -four (24) years from the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. 12. According to Section 10603 of the Streets and Highways Code, the City designates the City Treasurer to collect and receive payment of the assessments. The property owners who elect to pay their assessments in cash before the issuance of improvement bonds will not be required to pay their pro rata share of the allowance for special reserve fund, allowance for bond discount and allowance for capitalized interest. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a meeting held on the 7th of April, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk 3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ABANDONING PROCEEDINGS VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Saratoga resolves: The assessment proceedings known as Vessing Road Assessment District, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California, are hereby abandoned. Pursuant to Section 3117 of the California Streets and Highways Code, the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this resolution of abandonment with the Santa Clara County Recorder. As further specified by Section 3117, the following information pertains to these assessment proceedings: (a) The date of this resolution of abandonment is April 7, 1999. (b) The date of the original resolution of intention was May 21, 1997. (c) The boundary map for Vessing Road Assessment District, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California was filed for record in the office of the Santa Clara County Recorder on May 23, 1997, in Book 31 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at pages 66 and 67. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a meeting held on the 7th of April, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor AITEST: Deputy City Clerk v u' ENGINEER'S REPORT VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, Engineer of Work for Vessing Road Assessment District, makes this report, as directed by the City Council, pursuant to Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code (Municipal Improvement Act of 1913). The improvements which are the subject of this report are briefly described as follows: a) Steps preliminary to the construction of a water supply system consisting of 620 feet; more or less, of water mains, fire hydrant and metered services, including, but not limited to, feasibility studies, engineering plans, cost estimates, legal expenses, and acquisition of easements and rights -of -way necessary therefor. b) The acquisition of property necessary for the improvement of Vessing Road from its intersection with Quito Road to Vessing Court to minimum acceptable City of Saratoga standards by clearing, grubbing, grading, and the construction therein of base, pavement, curbs, gutters, driveway aprons and conforms, striping, signage, retaining structures, utility relocation, where required, and a water transmission system consisting of 620 feet, more or less, of water main, fire hydrant and metered services. c) The acquisition of all lands, easements and rights -of -way and the performance of all work auxiliary to any of the above necessary to complete the same. Bonds representing unpaid assessments, and bearing interest at a rate not to exceed twelve percent (12 per annum, shall be issued in the manner provided by the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Division 10, Streets and Highways Code), and the last installment of the bonds shall mature not to exceed twenty-four (24) years from the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. This report includes the following attached exhibits: EXHIBIT A: Plans and specifications for improvements to be constructed. Plans and specifications are a part of this report whether or not separately bound. EXHIBIT B: An estimate of the cost of the improvements. EXHIBIT C: An assessment roll, showing the amount proposed to be specially assessed against each parcel of real property within this assessment district. Each parcel is described by County Assessor's parcel number or other designation, and each parcel is also assigned a separate "assessment number" for the purposes of this proceeding. EXHIBIT D: A statement of the method by which the undersigned determined the amount proposed to be assessed against each parcel, based on benefits to be derived by each parcel, respectively, from the improvements. EXHIBIT E: A list of the names and addresses of the owners of real property within this assessment district, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for taxes, or as known to the Clerk. The list is keyed to Exhibit C by assessment number. EXHIBIT F: A diagram showing all of the parcels of real property within this assessment district. The diagram is keyed to Exhibit C by assessment number. EXHIBIT G: A general description of the rights -of -way to be acquired. EXHIBIT H: Proposed annual assessment per parcel for expenses in c onnection with the registration of bonds. Resp &fully submitte l I CIVIL CONSULTAN S iROyy Engine r of Work By: .A o Q RpFESS /C ¢4- SCp �t<, cc cc No. C 14760 Exp.3 /31/01 Y C /VIL OF CAL EXHIBIT A PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THOUGH BOUND SEPARATELY, ARE A PART OF THIS REPORT I I EXHIBIT B ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST Vessing Road Assessment District Item Unit Item Total No. Description Quantity Unit Price Cost Cost 1 Street Improvements 1 Traffic control 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500 2 2" AC overlay 200 TN 50.00 10,000 3 Wedge cut 600 LF 3.25 1,950 1 4 Pavement fabric 1,500 SY 1.25 1,875 5 Grading 400 CY 35.00 14,000 6 Pavement grinding 17,550 SF 1.00 17,550 7 Finish grading 17,550 SF 0.45 7,898 8 Driveway conforms 8 EA 2,000.00 16,000 9 PCC curb gutter 1,500 LF 21.00 31,500 10 AC pavement 400 TN 55.00 22,000 11 Class II aggregate base 500 TN 45.00 22,500 12 Raise manholes 4 EA 275.00 1,100 13 Offset drain inlet 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 14 Remove AC berm 470 LF 7.00 3,290 15 Remove /replace PCC curb gutter 50 LF 25.00 1,250 16 Clearing and grubbing 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 17 PCC swale 70 LF 20.00 1,400 18 Drain inlet 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 Total Street Improvement Costs $172,313 1 Water System Improvements 19 6 -inch DlCL pipe 620 LF 48.00 $29,760 20 Fire hydrant 1 EA 4,140.00 4,140 21 1" metered services 6 EA 1,153.00 6,918 22 1" unmetercd service 1 EA 1,153.00 1,153 23 Retirement of existing services 1 LS 2,900.00 2,900 24 Other 1 LS 5,109.00 5, 109 25 Tax gross up 1 LS 15,020.00 15,020 Total Water System Improvement Costs $65,000 Total Construction Cost $237,313 Notes: 1. Eat ;mote of street improvement costs prepared by City of Saratoga 2. Estimate of water system improvement costs prepared by San lose water Company 3. Coat of water services revised per telephone eonvensation w/ J. Bartitean of San Jose Water Company, 9/26/97 ESTIMATED COSTS AND EXPENSES Vessing Road Assessment District Construction Costs Street Improvements $172,313 Water System Improvements 65,000 Subtotal $237,313 Contingencies 110% 23,687 Total Construction Costs $261,000 Incidental Costs Engineering Services Street improvement design $2,500 Water system design 5,000 Preliminary surveys 3,525 Construction engineering 7,500 Subtotal Engineering Services $18,525 Financing and Administrative Costs Bond counsel $15,000 Assessment engineering 9,810 Printing, advertising and bidding 2,000 Bond reserve 18% 49,600 Bond discount 12% 12,400 Capitalized interest 21,700 Bond printing and advertising 5,000 Paying agent and registrar 3,000 Financial advisor 5,500 Assessment district management 1,000 Other 4,535 Subtotal Financing Administration $129,515 Subtotal $148,070 Contingencies ±10% 14,808 Total Incidental Cost ~r $162,878 Land Acquisition Costs Right -of -Way Acquisition $180,000 R/W documents 6,500 Appraisal services 4,000 Legal expense 9,500 Total Land Acquisition Cost $200,000 Credits Landowner contributions for preliminary surveys (3,878) Total Balance to Assessment 200 $620,000 EXHIBIT C 10/21/97 Page 1 ASSESSMENT ROLL CITY OF SARATOGA Vessing Road Assessment District Assessment Assessment Parcel Number Amount Description 1 33,934.00 397 -06 -055 2 32,057.00 397 -05 -031 3 40,785.00 397 -05 -029 4 43,271.00 397 -06 -054 5 35,111.00 397 -06 -046 6 35,111.00 397 -06 -045 7 35,111.00 397 -06 -028 8 35,111.00 397 -06 -037 9 46,743.00 397 -06 -048 10 32,057.00 397 -05 -039 11 32,057.00 397 -05 -041 12 24,214.00 397 -05 -067 13 24,214.00 397 -05 -085 14 24,456.00 397 -05 -086 15 24,214.00 397 -05 -087 16 24,214.00 397 -06 -111 17 24,214.00 397 -06 -110 18 24,214.00 397 -06 -109 19 24,456.00 397 -06 -108 20 24,456.00 397 -06 -030 i I TOTAL: 620,000.00 T' EXHIBIT D VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA METHOD OF SPREAD The amounts to be assessed against the parcels of property to pay the costs and expenses of the work and improvements have been based on the estimated benefits to be derived by the various properties within the assessment district from the proposed improvements. The total assessment to be levied against any parcel of land in the district shall be the sum of the amounts determined by the following: A. Basic Street Improvements (Item 1): The cost of constructing street improvements along Vessing Road and Vessing Court including, but not necessarily limited to grading, paving, land acquisition, local surface drainage facilities, utility relocations and minor traffic signage shall be assessed as follows: 1. Special Benefit: Vessing Road and Vessing Court together form a cul -de- sac approximately 1,250 feet in length. The only purpose of the streets is to provide access to properties fronting either Vessing Road or Vessing Court. The basic street improvements described above provide special and direct benefit to all parcels dependent on Vessing Road for vehicular ingress and egress from Quito Road. The street improvements will eliminate existing broken pavement and potholes which are considered a nuisance and which could pose a potential safety hazard. Additionally, the improved street surface and the addition of a new drainage inlet will provide for improved local drainage conditions. Accordingly, the costs of said improvements will be distributed equally to all properties within the district. 2. General Benefit: Vessing Road and Vessing Court constitute a "dead -end" street which provides for neither "thru- traffic" or general vehicular circulation. Because they provide only for local traffic, it can be fairly assumed that vehicles utilizing either Vessing Road or Vessing Court do so to access one or more of the several properties within the district. Whether the purpose of vehicle trips along these streets is for direct access to individual properties by residents and guests, or results from delivery, service, utility or public safety vehicles, the trips are of direct and specific benefit to the parcels within the district and no benefit is attributable to other properties in the surrounding community or to the public in general. B. Frontage Improvements (Item 2): The cost of concrete curb and gutter shall be spread in accordance with benefit received as follows: 1. Special Benefit: The construction of curb and gutter is typically required along individual property frontages when streets are improved to City standards. Such construction, together with other improvements (such as sidewalks) are commonly referred to as "frontage improvements The construction of curb and gutter will also contribute to improved drainage along the fronting properties. Even if Vessing Road and Vessing Court were not strictly local streets (see Paragraph Al, above), the benefit of frontage improvements would be attributable as a special benefit to the immediate fronting property. Accordingly, the cost of concrete curb and gutter shall be spread to benefitting properties in the ratio that the length of each parcel's improved street frontage bears to the total length of parcel frontage on improved streets within the project. Excepting that parcels having previously constructed comparable frontage improvements shall not be assessed and their frontages shall not be included in the computation of the distribution ratios. 2. General Benefit: Historically, it has been the practice throughout California to associate frontage improvements with the individual property even on major thoroughfares. In the case of non -local streets, general benefit is usually ascribed to "arterial improvements" (such as travel lanes, traffic signals, medians, etc.) which are necessary for community-wide or regional traffic circulation. In contrast, frontage improvements are of direct benefit to the parcels within the district and no general benefit is attributable to other properties in the surrounding community or to the public in general. C. Water System Improvements (Item 3): The total cost of constructing water system improvements shall be spread to the benefitting parcels as follows: 1. Water Main Extension: The cost for the extension of the water distribution main in Vessing Road between Vessing Court and Quito Road (including pipelines, valves, fire hydrants, and connections to the existing distribution system) shall be spread to each parcel within the service area of the new fire hydrant on an equal basis. (a) Special Benefit: The principal purposes for the extension of the water main (to be operated by San Jose Water Company) is to improve fire suppression flow and increase system redundancy for residential properties along Vessing Road. All benefit is specific to those parcels situated along either side of Vessing Road between Vessing Court and Quito Road. (b) General Benefit: The water main extension is totally within the district and no quantifiable general benefit is attributable to other properties in the surrounding community or to the public in general. 2. Relocation of Water Services: The cost for installation of new metered water services and retirement of existing service connections shall be spread to each parcel receiving a new metered service on an equal basis. (a) Special Benefit: All benefit is specific to those parcels receiving new metered services. (b) General Benefit: There is no general benefit to any parcels other than those receiving new metered service connections. D. Rights -of -Way (Item 4): The cost for acquisition of rights -of -way shall be spread to all properties within the district in the same proportions as the costs for Item 1 Basic Street Improvements. The assignment of special and general benefits for rights -of -way are also consistent with those for Item 1. E. Incidental Costs (Item 5): The cost of incidental expenses spread to the various parcels within the district shall be the sum of the following: 1. Street Construction Related Costs: Incidental expenses (such as design engineering and other professional services) identified as related to the construction of street improvements shall be spread in the ratio that each parcels' aggregate assessment for Items 1 and 2 bears to the total of assessments for Items 1 and 2 for all parcels in the district. The assignment of special and general benefits incidental costs related to the street construction shall be the same and in the same proportions as those for their corresponding items for improvement. 2. Water System Related Costs: Incidental costs (including design engineering and tax gross -up expense) identified as related to the construction of water system improvements shall be spread in the ratio that each parcel's aggregate assessment for Item 3 bears to the total of assessments for Item 3 for all parcels in the district. The assignment of special and general benefits for incidental costs related to water system elements shall be the same and in the same proportions as those for their corresponding items of improvement. 3. Financing and Administrative Related Incidental Costs: Incidental expenses (such as assessment engineering, bond counsel and bond costs) identified as related to the financing of the works of improvement shall be spread in the ratio that each parcel's total assessment for Items 1 through 4 (inclusive) bears to the total of assessments for Items 1 through 4 (inclusive) for all parcels in the district. The assignment of special and general benefits for financing and administrative incidental costs shall be the same and in the same proportions as those for their corresponding items of improvement. F. Credit for Preliminary Survey Costs (Item 6): Funds for the initial design surveys were advanced by voluntary contributions from sixteen property owners within the district. A total of $3,525 was expended for this purpose. Credits, including allowances for the 10% contingency mark -up ($352) shall be distributed equally to all properties having advanced funds for this purpose. All credits are for local special benefit. EXHIBIT E Page 1 PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST CITY OF SARATOGA Vessing Road Assessment District ASSESSMENT NUMBER(S) NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER 1 Arthur W. Dana Jr. (APN: 397 -06 -055) 18500 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 2 Thomas H. Gurnee (APN: 397 -05 -031) 18545 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 3 Austin M. Barbara J. Kilburn (Tr.) (APN: 397 -05 -029) 18531 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 4 Paul Livia Hug (Tr.) (APN: 397 -06 -054) 18540 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 5 Thomas F. Bonnie L. Mueller (APN: 397 -06 -046) 18564 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 6 Douglas A. Jonathan (APN: 397 -06 -045) 18584 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 7 Dan Manju Banerje (Tr.) (APN: 397 -06 -028) 18594 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 8 Donald H. Shirley J. Hambey (Tr.) (APN: 397 -06 -037) 18600 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 9 Clinton O. Lois M. Lindseth (Tr.) (APN: 397 -06 -048) 18620 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 10 Kurt P. Gutenberg /Karen E. Louie (Tr.) (APN: 397 -05 -039) 18579 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 11 Abe Maureen A. Piramoon (APN: 397 -05 -041) 18557 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 12 James G. Sandra S. La Maack (APN: 397 -05 -067) 18601 Vessing Road Saratoga CA 95070 EXHIBIT E Page 2 PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST CITY OF SARATOGA Vessing Road Assessment District ASSESSMENT NUMBER(S) NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER 13 Michael A. Carol S. Van Buskirk (APN: 397 -05 -085) 18653 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 14 Donald E. Barbara G. McKenzie (Tr.) (APN: 397 -05 -086) 18681 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 15 Stephen A. Sandra S. Moore (APN: 397 -05 -087) 18691 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 16 Glenn Brenda Yamasaki (APN: 397 -06 -111) 18668 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 17 Bruce A. Thompson (Tr.) (APN: 397 -06 -110) 18656 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 18 John L. Lucy F. Huang (APN: 397 -06 -109) 18644 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 19 James A. Marlene L. Tate (APN: 397 -06 -108) 18632 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 20 Barbara G. McKenzie (APN: 397 -06 -030) 18680 Vessing Court Saratoga CA 95070 END OF LIST r EXHIBIT F ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM J°'' i✓ EXHIBIT G VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF RIGHTS -OF -WAY TO BE ACQUIRED 1. 14521 Quito Road (A.P.N. 397 -05 -021): The Southerly 17 feet of property as described in Legal Description recorded May 20, 1913 in Book 403 of Official Records, page 389. 2.18545 Vessing Road (A.P.N. 397 05-029): The Southerly 17 feet of property as described in Legal Description recorded May 20, 1913 in Book 403 of Official Records, page 389. 3. 18540 Vessing Road (A.P.N. 397-06-054): The Northerly 17 feet of property as shown on Record of Survey recorded September 2, 1960 in Book 125 of Maps, page 9. 4. 18620 Vessing Road A.P.N. 397 -06 -048): The Northerly 17 feet of property as shown on Record of Survey recorded October 31, 1960 in Book 127 of Maps, page 5. 5 t I C L EXHIBIT H PROPOSED ANNUAL ASSESSMENT PER PARCEL FOR EXPENSES IN CONNECTION WITH THE REGISTRATION OF BONDS VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Pursuant to Section 8682.1 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, the Auditor will annually enter in the assessment roll on which taxes will next become due, opposite each lot or parcel of land, each lot's or parcel's pro rata share of the annual expenses of the City in connection with the registration of bonds. Such expenses will include the amount or estimated amount necessary to pay the fees and charges coming due during the fiscal year covered by the assessment roll of corporate or other authenticating agents, transfer agents, registrars, paying agents, agents engaged to assist in complying with federal arbitrage requirements or other agents of the City. rf 3 NOTICE OF IMPROVEMENT VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Saratoga will conduct a public hearing on the Resolution of Intention (adopted May 21, 1997, as amended), and the Engineer's Report for the proposed Vessing Road Assessment District, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California. At the hearing the City Council will take public testimony, including protests against the proposed improvement, the extent of the assessment district, or the proposed assessment. The public hearing will be held in the Chambers of the City Council, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California: At 8:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 21, 1998. The proposed improvement is briefly described as follows: a) Steps preliminary to the construction of a water supply system consisting of 620 feet; more or less, of water mains, fire hydrant and metered services, including, but not limited to, feasibility studies, engineering plans, cost estimates, legal expenses, and acquisition of easements and rights -of -way necessary therefor. b) The acquisition of property necessary for the improvement of Vessing Road from its intersection with Quito Road to Vessing Court to minimum acceptable City of Saratoga standards by clearing, grubbing, grading, and the construction therein of base, pavement, curbs, gutters, driveway aprons and conforms, striping, signage, retaining structures, utility relocation, where required, and a water transmission system consisting of 620 feet, more or less, of water main, fire hydrant and metered services. c) The acquisition of all lands, easements and rights -of -way and the performance of all work auxiliary to any of the above necessary to complete the same. The total amount of the proposed assessment chargeable to the entire district, including construction costs, incidental costs, financing and administrative costs, land acquisition costs, costs of steps preliminary to the construction of a water supply system and contingencies is $620,000.00. The amount chargeable to your parcel is set forth below. Bonds representing unpaid assessments, and bearing interest at a rate not to exceed twelve percent (12 per annum, shall be issued in the manner provided by the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Division 10, Streets and Highways Code), and the last installment of the bonds shall mature not to exceed twenty-four (24) years from the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. The basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessment was calculated is as follows: lT". s The amounts to be assessed against the parcels of property to pay the costs and expenses of the work and improvements have been based on the estimated benefits to be derived by the various properties within the assessment district from the proposed improvements. The total assessment to be levied against any parcel of land in the district shall be the sum of the amounts determined by the following: A. Basic Street Improvements (Item 1) The cost of constructing street improvements and appurtenances along Vessing Road and Vessing Court including, but not necessarily limited to: grading, paving land acquisition, local surface drainage facilities, utility relocations and minor traffic signage; shall be assessed equally to all properties within the district. B. Frontage Improvements (Item 2) The cost of concrete curb and gutter shall be spread to benefitting properties in the ratio that the length of each parcel's improved street frontage bears to the total length of parcel frontage on improved streets within the project, except those parcels having previously constructed comparable frontage improvements shall not be assessed and their frontages shall not be included in the computation of the distribution ratios. C. Water System Improvements (Item 3) The total cost of constructing water system improvements shall be spread to the benefitting parcels as follows: 1. Water Main Extension: The cost for the extension of the water distribution main and appurtenances in Vessing Road between Vessing Court and (including pipelines, valves, fire hydrants, and connections to the existing distribution system) shall be spread to each parcel within the service area of the new fire hydrant on an equal basis. 2. Relocation of Water Services: The cost for installation of new metered water services and retirement of existing service connections shall be spread to each parcel receiving a new metered service on an equal basis. D. Rights -of -Way (Item 4) The cost for acquisition of rights -of -way shall be spread to all properties within the district on an equal basis. E. Incidental Costs (Item 5) The cost of incidental expenses spread to the various parcels within the district shall be sum of the following: 1. Street Construction Related Costs: Incidental expenses (such as design engineering and other professional services) identified as related to the construction of street improvements shall be spread in the ratio that each parcel's aggregate assessment for Items 1, 2 and 4 (inclusive) bears to the total of assessments for Items 1 and 2 for all parcels in the district. 2. Water System Related Costs: Incidental expenses (including design engineering and tax gross -up expense) identified as related to the construction of water system improvements shall be spread in the ratio that each parcel's aggregate assessment for Item 3 bears to the total of assessments for Item 3 for all parcels in the district. 3. Financing and Administrative Related Incidental Costs: Incidental expenses (such as assessment engineering, bond counsel and bond costs) identified as related to the financing of the works of improvement shall be spread in the ratio that each parcel's total assessment for Items 1 through 4 (inclusive) bears to the total of assessments for Items 1 through 4 (inclusive) for all parcels in the district. F. Credit for Preliminary Survey Costs (Item 6) Funds for the initial design surveys were advanced by voluntary contributions from sixteen property owners within the district. A total of $3,525 was expended for this purpose. Credits, including allowances for the 10% contingency mark -up ($352), shall be distributed equally to all properties having advanced funds for this purpose. For further particulars you may refer to the Resolution of Intention, as amended, and the Report on file with the City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA. Said Report and Resolution are open to public inspection and by reference incorporated herein. All interested parties are referred thereto for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of the assessment district and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the assessment district. At the public hearing, the City Council will consider all objections or protests, if any, to the proposed assessment and any interested person will be permitted to present written or oral testimony. Inquiries about the improvement proceedings will be answered by Civil Consultants Group, 4444 Scotts Valley, Drive, Suite 6, Scotts Valley, California at: (408) 438 -4420, attention: Gene Scothorn. Pursuant to Section 8682.1 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, the Auditor will annually enter in the assessment roll on which taxes will next become due, opposite each lot or parcel of land, each lot's or parcel's pro rata share of the annual expenses of the City in connection with the registration of bonds. Such expenses will include the amount or estimated amount necessary to pay the fees and charges coming due during the fiscal year covered by the assessment roll of corporate or other authenticating agents, transfer agents, registrars, paying agents, agents engaged to assist in complying with federal arbitrage requirements or other agents of the City. IN ADDITION, THE RECORD OWNER OF THIS PARCEL IS ENTITLED TO VOTE ON THE QUESTION WHETHER THE ASSESSMENT SHALL BE LEVIED. SEE THE ENCLOSED BALLOT FOR INSTRUCTIONS. An Assessment Ballot may be submitted, changed or withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the public testimony portion of the public hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City will tabulate the assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in support of or opposition to the proposed assessment. Assessment ballots will be weighted according to the respective amounts of the individual assessments. If the amount of the assessments in opposition to the proposed assessment is greater than the amount of the assessments in support of the proposed assessment, the assessments will not be levied. DATED: November 19, 1997 LARRY PERLIN, City Clerk, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California 3 ASSESSMENT BALLOT VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA This assessment ballot is for the use of the property owner of the property identified below by its Assessor's Parcel Number within Vessing Road Assessment District, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California. In order to be counted, this ballot must be signed by the owner or owners whose name(s) and address appear on the last equalized secured property tax assessment roll or, if the owner is not an individual by an authorized representative of the owner. In the case of any public entity, the State of California or the United States, this ballot must be signed by the representative of that public entity. This ballot must be returned either by mail or in person, before the close of the public testimony portion of the hearing, which begins at 8:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 21, 1998, to: Larry Perlin, City Clerk City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Mailing by that date will not be sufficient. The ballot must be physically received by the City prior to the deadline in order to be counted. Ballots will be tabulated after completion of the public hearing on the proposed assessment. Ballots will be weighted according to the respective amounts of the individual assessments. If the amount of the assessments represented by "NO" votes is greater than the amount of the assessments represented by "YES" votes, the assessments will not be levied. Owner(s) Name(s): Assessment Parcel and Diagram Nos.: Assessor's Parcel Nos.: Votes Cast (Assessment Amount): MARK WITH AN "X" OR OTHER MARK. ASSESSMENT BALLOT MEASURE Shall the City establish the proposed YES assessment district and levy special assessments in the amounts (or less) and for the purposes stated in the Engineer's Report for Vessing Road Assessment District. NO OWNER SIGNATURE DATE: OWNER SIGNATURE DATE: March 25, 1999 TO:. ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE PROPOSED VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FROM: Larry I. Perlin, City Manager RE: Vessing Road Assessment District Balloting and Public Hearing This notice is being provided as a supplement to the original notice and ballot mailed in these proceedings. The public hearing originally opened on January 21, 1998, has been continued once again to Wednesday, April 7, 1999 at 7:30 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga. If you have not previously returned your original ballot, either it or the enclosed supplemental ballot must be returned on or before the close of the public hearing on April 7. If you have already returned your original ballot and wish to change your vote, you may do so by returning the enclosed supplemental ballot on or before the close of the public hearing on April 7, in which case the supplemental ballot will supersede the original ballot. If you have previously returned your original ballot and do not wish to change your vote, you do not need to do anything further. Should you have any questions, please call me at (408) 868 -1213. SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT BALLOT VESSING ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA This supplemental assessment ballot is for the use of the property owner of the property identified below by its Assessor's Parcel Number within Vessing Road Assessment District, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California. In order to be counted, this ballot must be signed by the owner or owners whose name(s) and address appear on the last equalized secured property tax assessment roll or, if the owner is not an individual by an authorized representative of the owner. In the case of any public entity, the State of California or the United States, this ballot must be signed by the representative of that public entity. This ballot must be returned either by mail or in person, before the close of the public testimony portion of the hearing, which has been continued to Wednesday, April 7, 1999 at 7:30 P.M., to: Susan Ramos, Ci ty Clerk City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Mailing by that date will not be sufficient. The ballot must be physically received by the City prior to the deadline in order to be counted. Ballots will be tabulated after completion of the public hearing on the proposed assessment. Ballots will be weighted according to the respective amounts of the individual assessments. If the amount of the assessments represented by "NO" votes is greater than the amount of the assessments represented by "YES" votes, the assessments will not be levied. Owner(s) Name(s): Arthur W. Dana, Jr. Assessment Parcel and Diagram Nos.: 1 Assessor's Parcel Nos.: 397 06-055 Votes Cast (Assessment Amount): $33,934.00 MARK WITH AN 'X' OR OTHER MARK. ASSESSMENT BALLOT MEASURE Shall the City establish the proposed YES assessment district and levy special assessments in the amounts (or less) and for the purposes stated in the Engineer's Report for Vessing Road Assessment District. NO OWNER SIGNATURE DATE: OWNER SIGNATURE DATE: -4 t li TABLE 3 SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS Vessing Road Assessment District Item 1 Item 2 Total Item 3 Item 4 Total Item 5 Item 6 Assmt Property Street Street Frontage Items Water Metered Total R/W Items Incidental Costs Owner Total Assmt No. APN Owner Address Imprmts Imprmts I 2 Main Services Water Acquire 1 -4 Engr -S I Engr -W I Finance I Total Contrib Assmt No. 1 397 -06 -055 Dana 18500 Vessing Road 8,189 $6,832 $15,021 $0 $10,000 $25,021 $1,179 $0 $7,734 $8,913 $33,934 2 397 -05 -031 Gurnee 18545 Vessing Road 8,190 8,190 5,658 5,658 10,000 23,848 643 436 7,372 8,451 (242) $32,057 2 3 397 -05 -029 Kilburn 18531 Vessing Road 8,190 4,618 12,808 5,659 1,674 7,333 10,000 30,141 1,006 564 9,317 10,887 (243) $40,785 3 4 397 -06 -054 Hug 18540 Vessing Road 8,190 5,880 14,070 5,659 2,204 7,863 10,000 31,933 1,105 605 9,871 11,581 (243) $43,271 4 5 397 -06 -046 Mueller 18564 Vessing Road 8,190 8,190 5,659 2,204 7,863 10,000 26,053 643 605 8,052 9,300 (242) $35,111 5 6 397 -06 -045 Jonathan 18584 Vessing Road 8,190_ 8,190 5,659 2,204 7,863 10,000 26,053 643 605 8,053 9,301 (243) $35,111 6 7 397 -06 -028 Banerje 18594 Vessing Road 8,190 8,190 5,659 2,204 7,863 10,000 26,053 643 605 8,053 9,301 (243) $35,111 7 8 397 -06 -037 Hambey 18600 Vessing Road 8,190 8,190 5,659 2,204 7,863 10,000 26,053 643_ 605 8,053 9,301 (243) $35,111 8 9 397 -06 -048 Lindseth 18620 Vessing Road 8,190 8,384 16,574 5,659 2,204 7,863 10,000 34,437 1,300 605 10,644 12,549 (243) $46,743 9 10 397 -05 -039 Guttenberg 18579 Vessing Road 8,190 8,190 5,659 5,659 10,000 23,849 643 435 7,372 8,450 (242) $32,057 10 I1 397 -05 -041 Piramoon 18557 Vessing Road 8,190 8,190 5,659 5,659 10,000 23,849 643 435 7,372 8,450 (242) $32,057 11 12 397 -05 -067 Lamaack 18601 Vessing Road 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 (242) $24,214 12 13 397 -05 -085 Van Buskirk 18653 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 (242) $24,214 13 14 397 -05 -086 McKenzie 18681 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 $24,456 14 15 397 -05 -087 Moore 18691 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 (242) $24,214 15 16 397- 06 -111 Yamasaki 18668 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 (242) $24,214 16 17 397 -06 -110 Thompson 18656 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 (242) $24,214 17 18 397 -06 -109 Huang 18644 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 (242) $24,214 18 19 397 -06 -108 Shakeri 18632 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 $24,456 19 20 397 -06 -030 McKenzie 18680 Vessing Court 8,190 8,190 0 10,000 18,190 643 0 5,623 6,266 $24,456 20 Totals 1 $163,799 1 $25,714 1 $189,513 1 $56,589 I $14,898 1 $71,487 1 $200,000 1 $461,000 1 $14,878 1 $5,500 I $142,500 1 $162,878 1 ($3,878)1 $620,000 7 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIV SUMMARY NO. 3 I a AGENDA ITEM G i MEETING DATE: April 7, 1999 CITY MANAGER ORIGINATING DEPT: Office of the City Manager Paula Reeve, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Allocations for FY 1999/00 Housing and Community Development Act Funds (CDBG) and Human Services Grants RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): 1. Conduct the Public Hearing. 2. Make allocations for approximately $166,543 for FY 1999/00 CDBG and Human Services funds. REPORT SUMMARY: The City Council is being asked to conduct a Public Hearing to receive comments and recommendations on project proposals for 1999/00 Housing and Community Development Act (HCDA) funds provided through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. Council is further requested to make a determination regarding the allocation of $166,543 of these funds for Saratoga's FY 1999/00 grant proposals. The availability of Block Grant funds for eligible projects and activities has been publicized in the local newspaper. In an effort to continue streamlining the CDBG program administration process during the upcoming fiscal year, only proposals for specific Saratoga rehabilitation projects sponsored by the City, or projects by agencies operating in Saratoga are being considered during the 1999 /00 funding cycle. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM BACKGROUND The City of Saratoga and seven other "nonentitlement" cities (population under 50,000) within Santa Clara County, including the Urban County, receive federal Housing and Community Development Act funds. These funds are administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), for eligible projects and activities. By regulation, nonentitlement cities receive funds through a cooperative Agreement with the Urban County of Santa Clara (the locally responsible grant recipient). Expenditure of these funds is restricted by federal regulations and additional guidelines imposed by the County. FY 1999 /00 ALLOCATIONS The total allocation to the County for 1999/00 is expected to be approximately $2,591,000. Twenty percent of this grant will be disbursed for administrative expenses; forty percent is allocated to the Countywide competitive pool where funds are prioritized for projects and activities to increase the supply of affordable housing in the County; and the remainder is disbursed to the "nonentitlement cities" and the County to be allocated for other eligible CDBG programs, which is the focus of this report. The City of Saratoga will receive $151,543 for projects, plus $15,000 to cover staff administration expenses for a total of $166,543 for Council's consideration for the 1999/00 CDBG funding cycle. Saratoga may allocate $32,374 of its total grant to Human Services proposals, as set by a pre determined cap of the total County grant. Human Services include, but are not limited to: child care, job training programs, counseling, recreation programs and services for senior citizens. FY 1999 /00 HUMAN SERVICES AND CDBG FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS One Human Services and two CDBG grant project proposals were received during the application cycle. An additional consideration is the mandatory annual $15,000 contribution to fund the County's Rehab Program assistance to Saratoga. Attachment 1 contains a Chart of Staff's funding recommendations, and Attachments 2 through 4 are copies of the applicants' project proposals for Council's review. Human Services Proposal 1 Proposal SASCC Adult Day Care Program (Attachment 2) Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council submitted its annual proposal for CDBG Human Services funding for continued support of the SASCC Adult Day Care Center Program during FY 1999/00. Recommendation: Staff recommends funding the Saratoga Adult Day Care Center Program with the total $32,374 available from CDBG Human Services Grant funds. 2 CDBG Proposals 1 Proposal Project etch (Attachment 3) Project Match is requesting $14,700 to subsidize the rent payments of its senior group home located at 20218 Blauer Avenue in Saratoga. Project Match has been a recipient of CDBG funding from the City since 1991 for this project which provides shared residential housing to approximately three to five low income seniors at a time. Recommendation: Staff endorses funding $14,700 to support Project Match in its effort to continue providing affordable housing to low income Saratoga seniors. Low income housing for Seniors has been identified as an affordable housing need in Saratoga. 2 Proposal Community Center Senior Wing Rehab (Attachment 4) Staff would like complete the City's project to refurbish the Senior Wing of the Community Center which was awarded $100,000 during last year's funding cycle. Phase I of the project was completed last fall which included installing a concrete patio enclosed by a railing to enable the Senior Day Care Program participants to enjoy the outdoors on sunny days. Staff is now proposing additional funding to complete Phase II of the project to undertake improvements to interior office and storage space, to modernize the paint, ceilings and floor coverings as outlined on Attachment 4, for a total $179,400. Attachment 4 is a preliminary breakdown of the proposed improvements compiled by the County's Housing Rehabilitation Specialist. Recommendation: Staff is recommending funding Phase II of the Senior Wing Rehab Project with $104,469 from the FY 99/00 grant, and the approximate $75,000 balance from Phase I, for a total of $179,400. This project is a perfect example of streamlining the focus of the CDBG Program by allocating funds to Saratoga specific projects which benefit an approved population sector, in this particular instance, the senior population. In addition refurbishing this wing of the Community Center benefits both the City and SASCC. Funding Requirement for County Housing Rehabilitation Assistance Each participating City utilizing the services of the County's Housing Rehabilitation Specialist is required to pay $15,000 from its annual CDBG grant to cover these costs. These services include site inspections, estimates, work write -ups, the job bidding and award processes, and project supervision and compliance oversight. Recommendation: Staff recommends funding $15,000 for the County's Housing Rehabilitation Specialist services which will be required extensively to assist with the Senior Wing rehab project. 3 Recommendation: Staff recommends funding $15,000 for the County's Housing Rehabilitation Specialist services which will be required extensively to assist with the Senior Wing rehab project. FISCAL IMPACTS: As noted above, the City has been awarded an HCDA allocation from the Urban County program for project costs, plus $15,000 for staff administrative expenditures, for a total of $166,543 for FY 99/00. ADVERTISING NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: CDBG Grant Application and Public Hearing Notice placed in the Saratoga News during March, 1999. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING: The City's FY 99/00 CDBG allocation will remain with the County, and Saratoga will not meet its policy goals relating to providing housing assistance, rehabilitation loans and alternate housing opportunities within the City. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Forward Council's CDBG recommendations to the County; execute agreements with agencies receiving funding. ATTACHMENTS: 1. FY 99/00 Funding Recommendation Summary 2. SASCC Adult Day Care Program Proposal 3. Project Match Proposal 4. Community Center Senior Wing Rehabilitation Proposal 4 LA I Attachment 1 FY 1999/00 Funding Recommendations for Human Services and Community Development Block Grant Proposals Agency Type Project Amount Amount Requested Recommended SASCC Human Sr. Day Care Program 32,374 32,374 Services Project CDBG Rent Subsidy Blauer 14,700 14,700 Match Ave. Sr. Home City of CDBG Corn. Cntr. 104,469 104,469 Saratoga Sr. Wing Rehab City of Admin. County Rehab 15,000 15.000 Saratoga Services GRAND TOTAL $166,543. Total Available FY 1999/00 CDBG Funds $119,169 CDBG 32,374 Human Services Cap 15,000 Program Administration $166,543 Attachment 2 yP ept0G4 4 i f SASCC i P.O. Box 3033 O 0 J SARATOGA, CA 95070 G O (408) 868 -1257 O O RDI N G Paula Reeves March 26, 1999 Administrative Analyst 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Paula, Enclosed please find the narrative portion of the CDBG grant proposal. I have also included our most recent audit from June 30, 1998. The rest of the CDBG grant proposal, which includes all the financial statements and budget information will be delivered to your office no later than the end of the day, Monday, March 29, 1999. Thank you for your patience and please contact me right away if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mary Aden Richards Executive Director SASCC Caring for and serving the needs of Saratoga Area Seniors City of Saratoga Community Development Block Grant Program/ Human Services Grant Program FY 1999/2000 PROPOSAL COVER PAGE APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council NAME: P.O. Box 3033 ADDRESS: Saratoga, CA. 95070 NAME/TITLE OF PROPONENT: Peggy Corr, President SIGNATURE: TELEPHONE NUMBER: 408 -868 -1253 PROJECT NAME: Saratoga Adult Care Center Day Care Program DOLLAR AMT. OF FUNDS REQUESTED FROM CITY OF SARATOGA $32,374.00 PROJECT ABSTRACT (Limit statement to space provided) The Saratoga Adult Care Center is a Social Adult Day Program, which has provided a safe and stimulating environment for frail elders and respite for caregivers for the past eleven years. The program is open Monday through Friday from approximately 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Since the program serves mostly low- income elders, requests for funding are made to numerous sources in order to subsidize one of the fastest growing segments of our West Valley area's population. Adult Day Care Services are an ideal way to care for the needs of frail seniors, often eliminating the need for institutionalized care and reducing care costs for both the families and the community as a whole. The project will provide over 5000 hours of participant care, 351 participant days monthly to 40 to 42 persons and respite to caregivers in 50 different families. The City of Saratoga does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or disability in the provision of services and programs. SARATOGA ADULT CARE CENTER THE SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL NARRATIVE 3A. Organizational Qualifications The Saratoga Adult Care Center is a major program component of the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) incorporated as a non profit organization in 1979. SASCC also operates the Saratoga Senior Center for more active older adults. Recognizing the needs of the aging population, supported by a community assessment, SASCC opened the Saratoga Adult Care Center in 1988 as the first facility in Santa Clara County to be designed and built specifically as an adult care center. It provides much needed respite for caregivers and promotes a higher quality of life for the participants at much less cost to both family members and public agencies. The Saratoga Adult Care Center's main objectives are to prevent or delay institutionalization of the frail elderly, enabling them to remain in their homes for as long as possible and to improve the quality of life for the participants and the caregivers. The need for this service will accelerate as the population ages. By the year 2010, Santa Clara County's population of those 85 years of age and over is expected to double. The Saratoga Adult Care Center opened in January 1988 and has steadily increased in number of days open from two at the onset to five full days weekly by February 1994. During this time, the average number of families served monthly increased from 9 to 40 at any one time, with well over 351 visits by participants each month. This increased utilization and the recent establishment of a wait list, validate the need and demand for the service. Though licensed by Community Care Licensing for 30 participants per day, the Center comfortably serves 20 -21 participants per day. Participants come from surrounding areas of the West Valley Corridor, including Saratoga, Los Gatos, Santa Clara, Campbell, West San Jose and Cupertino. The Board of Directors of the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council is responsible for the Saratoga Adult Care Center. The Center operates under the guidance of its own Advisory board, whose members are nurses, physicians, business persons and community volunteers who know the area and have had experience with Adult Care. (Current list is attached.) The Administrative Director is responsible for the daily operations of the Center and has a Master Degree in Social Work with many years of experience in Older Adult Case Management. She is the only full -time staff member and the others include a part-time Program Coordinator with over eleven years in the assignment, three part-time Program Assistants, a part-time Social Worker and Clerical Assistant The staff is highly trained, each with many years of experience working with frail elders. Thirty trained volunteers supplement the seven paid staff and provide over 500 hours of service annually. B. Past Performance and Evaluation The Administrative Director of the Saratoga Adult Care Center submits quarterly reports to the City of Saratoga as required and gives monthly reports to the Board of Directors and to the Advisory Board of Saratoga Adult Care Center all to assure that effectiveness is evaluated regularly. The Center also meets state licensing and sanitation requirements annually. The quality and effectiveness of the program is also measured by a new Participant/Caregiver survey, which is filled out by family members twice a year. Results from the survey indicate improvement in quality of life for both the participant and caregiver as well as changes in mental and physical functioning of the participant Evidence that institutionalization has been avoided or delayed can be determined by census and discharge information. The Administrative Director works with the other Adult Daycare Directors in the county, with Volunteer Exchange, the Network of Aging Providers and other community agencies. Staff has served on the Senior Care Commission and the Board of Information and Referral, Inc. The Center utilizes volunteers and community service organizations, which contribute hundreds of hours. All this interagency coordination helps to eliminate duplication of services where appropriate and builds awareness of the Adult Care Center's programs throughout the county. C. Project Outcome Objectives (1) Provide respite care daily to 20 frail and less independent participants from the West Valley Area of Santa Clara County. (2) Prevent or delay institutionalization of individuals who require considerable personal assistance. (3) Provide socialization, instruction, and structured activities for the less independent elderly such as exercise, crafts, skill development and nutritious meals daily in a licensed care facility. (4) Continue to facilitate caregiver support groups twice monthly in cooperation with the Alzheimer's Association and provide similar support services to local churches and civic organizations of the West Valley area. (5) Provide respite and improve quality of life for caregivers and eliminate or delay the high emotional and financial cost of custodial care. (The Adult Care Center is about $9/hour as compared to the average nursing homes which charges about $150 per day.) (6) Continue utilizing volunteer services to help contain Center costs. (7) Maintain maximum enrollment of approximately 40 participants each month. (8) Increase funding base through local resources, participant fees and fund raising events in an effort to reduce dependence on City and county funding. Due to the low- income status of the population served and the service intensive nature of the program, becoming self supporting is not feasible. D. Project Management The services provided by the Saratoga Adult Care Center are overseen by the SASCC Board of Directors and the Care Center Advisory Board. The Administrative Director who is responsible for the day to-day operations of the Center reports directly to the Executive Director of SASCC for consultation and guidance purposes. All the staff at the Saratoga Adult Care Center are employed by the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council and are paid through a payroll system administered by SASCC. The Administrative Director supervises six part-time employees. The Program Coordinator reports directly to the Administrative Director. She is responsible for scheduling all activities, special events and classes for the participants. She leads many of the activities and oversees the three Program Assistants who also run activities and assist participants with participation, meals, toileting and all other special needs. When needed, the Administrative Director may choose to get involved as well. The licensed Social Worker evaluates the needs of potential new clients, does home visit assessments, develops Care Plans, works with families in need, facilitates support groups and other related activities. She reports directly to the Administrative Director, as does the Clerical Assistant who is responsible for bills, typing and filing. The program provides exercise routines, memory training and stimulation through travelogues, crafts, music, a variety of entertainment, current events, discussions and directed conversation. Special adaptive exercises and skill training are focused on participants who need help with physical disabilities (e.g. stroke, aphasia, Parkinson's.) A full nutritious meal is served daily. Volunteers and instructors assigned by West Valley College augment the activities and help contain costs. Caregiver support groups are organized as a community service to assist those who are caring for dependent elders to cope with the stresses of providing such care. This group is facilitated by the social worker, meets twice a month and is co- sponsored by the Alzheimer's Association. The Administrative Director and Program Coordinator maintain strong public relations ties with local, county and state senior organizations and participate in required trainings. They are involved with public speaking engagements, organizational networking and other important community events. All this promotes high visibility for the program and has resulted in full capacity census for the last two years. A five minute video was produced about the Saratoga Adult Care Center with the assistance of volunteers from West Valley and Mission Colleges and is an excellent public relations tool. E. Statement of Need The Saratoga Adult Care Center provides non medical, supportive day services to those persons over 60 years of age, in need of supervision and assistance with some activities of daily living. The program also provides the badly needed respite to the caregivers of these frail elders. Advances in medical technology and increased life expectancy have caused a sharp increase in the aging population. Simultaneously, the number of available caregivers capable of caring for elderly family members has decreased as the size of the American family and proximity to one another diminishes. Adult Care is a supportive service available to frail seniors and their families, which is largely underutilized. This affordable care option can prevent or delay the need for institutionalization and enhance the family's ability to care for elderly relatives at home, while giving them time to carry out necessary family tasks or employment responsibilities. According to County statistics, sixty percent of frail elders residing in Santa Clara County live at poverty level. As this segment of our population continues to grow, funding for Adult Day Services has become more critical than ever. As a result, the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council continues to seek funds from a variety of sources. Although the City of Saratoga has been unable to meet full funding requests, it offers in -kind services to the Adult Care Center and through a Community Development Block Grant, has been able to fund approximately 22% of the Care Center's budget. Other funding sources such as United Way are currently giving low priority to new funding requests and Santa Clara County has also denied funding for the passed two years. A grant application has been submitted to the City of Campbell and one will be submitted to the City of San Jose in the summer of 2000 as well. E. Proiect Beneficiaries Beneficiaries are typically frail seniors who are isolated in their homes and would benefit from day care in a safe and stimulating environment. Sixty percent of the projected beneficiaries are residents of Saratoga, with other participants coming from adjacent areas of Campbell, Los Gatos, and San Jose. These persons with an average age of 85 years are on low, fixed incomes and 82% of these participants have low to very low incomes. The Adult Care Center now is full five days weekly and revenues continue to increase, but subsidy is necessary. F. Fiscal Please refer to the Program Budget sheet in which we request $32,374 to support a portion of the total operating costs of the Saratoga Adult Care program including salaries, organization costs, training expense, audit, insurance, mileage expense and necessary licenses and memberships. With intensive volunteer effort, which provides program presenters and hands -on service to participants, this program creatively stretches its revenues. The budget is tightly controlled and expenses are reviewed monthly by the Finance Committee, Advisory Board and Board of Directors of the Corporation. Rent, utilities and janitorial services are provided in -kind by the City of Saratoga. This is a significant budget saver and the exact dollar value has not been accurately determined. Since 66% of the participants have low or very-low income, their daily payments are subsidized and average only $19 per day. With the efficient and Spartan use of resources the cost of the program is factored at $9 per hour or $45 daily per participant. This is considerably less than in -home or nursing care for an individual who might otherwise require public support. Funds are requested from the City of Saratoga to underwrite the program for these beneficiaries. In addition, the Saratoga Adult Care program gains support from fund raising and marketing efforts through fashion show luncheons, theatre parties, a spaghetti dinner and targeted requests. An on -going effort to involve businesses and community services results in additional contributions of time and funding. Meal cost reimbursements from the Council on Aging (USDA) and donations from participant's estates have also added to budget stability. SASCC's Endowment Fund provides monthly allocations to supplement the deficit in the budget. OJECT Attachment 3 AMU aim atch inc. 555 -C Meridian Avenue San Jose, CA 95126 -3423 (408) 287 -7121 r AA Ma) oy Shared Housing Senior Group Residence Homelessness Prevention Bridges to Independence March 26, 1999 Ms. Paula Reeve Public Services Assistant Office of the City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitdale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Ms. Reeve, Attached is the Project Mach CDBG request for $14,700 to support our Saratoga Senior Group Residence Rent Subsidy Program for FY 99 -2000. Project Match has been a recipient of this funding since 1991 for our Senior Group Residence located at 20218 Blauer Drive. If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. The current rental agreement with the owner covering the period of the rent subsidy we are retlesti Ig is available upon request. Very truly yo p •'e""'!ire& or I I Funded in part by the cities of San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Milpitas, Campbell, and Los Altos; the County of Santa Clara; and the Community Development Block Grant programs of Sunnyvale, Mountain View, and the Urban County of A United Way Agency Santa Clara including the unicorporated areas and participating cities. City of Saratoga Community Development Block Grant Program/ Human Services Grant Program FY 1999 2000 PROPOSAL COVER PAGE APPLICANT ORGANIZATION NAME Project Match, Inc. ADDRESS 555 Meridian Ave., Suite C San Jose, CA 95126 NAME/TITLE OF PROPONENT Bob Campbell, Executive Director SIGNATURE TELEPHONE NUMBER (408) 287 -7121 PROJECT NAME Saratoga Senior Group Residence Rent Subsidy DOLLAR AMT. OF FUNDS REQUESTED FROM CITY OF SARATOGA $14,700 PROJECT ABSTRACT (Limit statement to space provided) This request if for rent subsidy funds to continue to provide affordable housing for low income seniors in the City of Saratoga. This is a request for the continuation of our partnership with the City in our Saratoga Senior Group Residence Rent Subsidy Program which began is 1991. The City of Saratoga does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or disability in the provision of services and programs 4 SARATOGA SENIOR GROUP RESIDENCE RENT SUBSIDY PROGRAM NARRATIVE For the past 21 years, Project Match has provided affordable housing for very low income seniors throughout Santa Clara County. At the same time, our innovative shared housing strategy has provided companionship, security and affordable housing for thousands of seniors. Considering that over 107,000 seniors in the County have incomes below $25,000 annually and rental costs are above $800 monthly, Project Match's strategy is as vital now as it was 21 years ago. Our Saratoga Senior Group Residence Rent Subsidy Program we will serve seniors 60 years of age and older who have low- incomes. In our Group Residence Program we will continue to work to create environments that honor people as individuals and develop relationships that provide a sense of security, place and self worth. The Saratoga Senior Group Residence Rent Subsidy Program will provide shared housing for seniors in a single family home located on 20218 Blauer Dr. in the City of Saratoga. We will act as property manager of the group residence and coordinate all placement opportunities. Our Senior Group Residence Program has proved extremely successful in helping seniors experiencing depression that results from the isolation of living alone, and has served as a model for other such programs throughout the nation. Project Match operates a total of 7 Senior Group Residence programs throughout Santa Clara County. There are currently 33 rooms available in our 7 Senior Group Residences. Last year the average room in our Group Residences was $361. Our occupancy rate was over 95%. The average length of stay in our group residences is two years while the longest residency is almost 9 years. The two primary reasons seniors leave our group residences are because (1) their medical needs become so serious that they require 24 -hour care or (2) because the resident dies. Our goal is to help clients identify those qualities of life they value and to work together to obtain the necessary resources that will allow them to live by these values. This program has proved so successful that the television news magazine 20/20 featured it as an innovative solution to the problem of social isolation among seniors. Our program benefits seniors with very low incomes to: Gain affordable housing Identify their self care, mutual care, and professorial care needs and to get these needs met Experience their living environments as affordable, safe, companionable, respectful, and community oriented Our Saratoga Senior Group Residence Rent Subsidy Program, located on Blauer Dr. will provide affordable housing for 6 low- income seniors 60 years of age or older. The house is currently at 100% occupancy with all six rooms being filled. The program provides this affordable housing through rent subsidies form the City's Hosing Find for Low Income Seniors. The house has been leased for this purpose since 1991 and the City of Saratoga has provided rent subsidy since that time. Eligibility Criteria 1. Priority for occupancy will be given to low- income seniors living or having families living in the City of Saratoga. 2. Shared housing will be provided for Males or Females, 60 years of age or older. All individuals living in or applying for vacancies in the house will be functionally independent (physically and emotionally). All potential applicants will be required to pass a health screening. The house will provide housing for 6 seniors and will operate at a minimum 95% occupancy rate over the period July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000 3. Income limits for those who will be eligible for 1999 -2000 will be as follows: Maximum $37,000 (65% of median) annual income for one person Proposed Reimbursement to Project Match: 1. City will use only CDBG funds to subsidize rents. If at any point the program fails to meet CDBG Requirements, no City funds will be used. 2. City will reimburse Project Match monthly upon receipt of invoice in the amount of $1,225 for the period July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000. 3. It is undcrstopd that the program can be extended beyond this period by mutual agreement. APR -01 -1999 14 :28 HCD &IWMP &PPP 408 441 FED, Attachment 4 County of Santa Clara y Environmental Resources Agency Y Housing and Community Development 4 1 1735 North First Street Suite 265 '71 Faso San Jose. California 95112 /1'q C V' (44)8144.141261 FAX 441.O36G April 1, 1999 Paula Reeve, Public Services Assistant City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 SUBJECT: CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY CENTER (SENIOR WING) The following is a preliminary breakdown of the proposed improvements requested by you and shown on the sketch given to me at our March 9, 1999 meeting. Cost estimates are based on having the work done by a general contractor paying prevailing wages directly or through subcontractors: 1. Interior demolition 5,200.00 2. Interior walls, ceilings and structural members 26,000.00 3. Electrical 2,600.00 4. Heating- ventilation -air conditioning 1,300.00 5. Concrete flat work 3,900.00 6. 400 sq. ft. storage room 28,600.00 7. Drywall insulation 13,000.00 8. Painting, staining and clear finishing 10,400.00 9. Suspended acoustic ceilings 6,500.00 10. Doors hardware 26,000.00 11. Floor coverings 32,500.00 SUBTOTAL $156,000.00 GENERAL CONTRACTOR'S OVERHEAD PROFIT 23.400.00 TOTAL $179,400.00 If you have any questions, please call me at (408) 441 -0261, ext. 4174. Very truly yours Robert C. Rathbun Housing Rehabilitation Specialist Ih #9.saratoga.community.ctr Board of Supervisors: Donald F, Gage. Blanca Alvarado. Pete McHugh. James T. Beall Jr.. S. Joseph Simitian county Executive: Richard Wittenberg TOTAL P.02 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 3/ 26 AGENDA ITEM 5 MEETING DATE April 7, 1999 CITY MANAGER: r*17711N W. ORIGINATING DEPT. City Manager PREPARED BY: City Clerk SUBJECT: Ordinance Adding Article 4.80 to Chapter 4 of the Saratoga City Code Relating to Regulation of Adult- Oriented Businesses. RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Adopt the attached ordinance. REPORT SUMMARY: The City Council introduced the attached ordinance at their regular meeting of March 17, 1999. It is before you for adoption. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Summary of the introduced ordinance was published in the Saratoga News on March 24, 1999 as required by law. Summary of the adopted ordinance will be published within fifteen days after its adoption as required by law. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): The attached ordinance will not be adopted. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Subject ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 71- AN ORDINANCE ADDING ARTICLE 4.80 TO CHAPTER 4 OF THE SARATOGA CITY CODE RELATING TO REGULATION OF ADULT- ORIENTED BUSINESSES The City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby finds that: (a) The City Council, in adopting this ordinance, takes legislative notice of the existence and content of the following studies concerning the adverse secondary side effects of Adult- Oriented Business in other cities: Garden Grove, California (1991); Tucson, Arizona (1990); Seattle, Washington (1989); Austin, Texas (1986); Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (1986); Indianapolis, Indiana (1984); Houston, Texas (1983); Beaumont, Texas (1982); Minneapolis, Minnesota (1980); Phoenix, Arizona (1979); Whittier, California (1978); Amarillo, Texas (1977); Cleveland, Ohio (1977); Los Angeles, California (1977). The City Council finds that these studies are relevant to the potential problems addressed by the City in enacting this ordinance to regulate the adverse secondary side effects of Adult- Oriented Businesses, and more specifically finds that the these studies provide convincing evidence that: (1) Adult- Oriented Businesses are linked to increases in the crime rates in those areas in which they are located and in surrounding areas. (2) There is substantial evidence that an increase in crime tends to accompany, concentrate around, and be aggravated by Adult- Oriented Businesses. (b) Based on the foregoing, the City Council of the City of Saratoga finds and determines that special regulation of Adult- Oriented Businesses is necessary to ensure that their adverse secondary side effects will not contribute to an increase in crime rates. The need for such special regulations is based upon the recognition that Adult- Oriented Business have serious objectionable operational characteristics, thereby having a deleterious effect upon the adjacent areas. It is the purpose and intent of these special regulations to prevent such adverse secondary side effects. 1 (c) In developing this ordinance, the City Council has been mindful of legal principles relating to regulation of Adult Oriented Businesses and does not intend to suppress or infringe upon any expressive activities protected by the First Amendment of the United States and California Constitutions, but instead desires to enact reasonable time, place, and manner regulations that address the adverse secondary effects of Adult Oriented Businesses. The City Council has considered decisions of the United States Supreme Court regarding local regulation of Adult- Oriented Businesses, including but not limited to: Young v. American Mini Theaters, Inc., 427 U.S. 50 (1976) (Reh. Denied 429 U.S. 873); Renton v. Playtime Theaters, 475 U.S. 41 (1986) (Reh. Denied 475 U. S. 1132); FW/PBS. Inc. v. Dallas, 493 U.S. 215 (1990); Barnes v. Glenn Theater, 501 U.S. 560 (1991); United States Court of Appeals 9th Circuit decisions, including but not limited to: Topanga Press, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, 989 F.2d 1524 (1993); several California cases including but not limited to: City of National City v. Wiener, 3 Cal.4th 832 (1993); People v. Superior Court (Lucero) 49 Ca1.3d 14 (1989); and City of Vallejo v. Adult Books. et al., 167 Cal.App.3d 1169 (1985); and other federal cases including Lakeland Lounge v. City of Jacksonville (5th Cir. 1992) 973 F.2d 1255, Hang On, Inc. v. Arlington (5th Cir. 1995) 65 F.3d 1248, Mitchell v. Commission on Adult Entertainment (3rd Cir. 1993) 10 F.3d 123, International Eateries v. Broward County (11th Cir. 1991) 941 F.2d 1157, and Star Satellite v. City of Biloxi (5th Cir. 1986) 779 F.2d 1074. The City Council also takes legislative notice of the facts recited in the case of Key, Inc. v. Kitsap County, 793 F.2d 1053 (1986), regarding how live adult entertainment results in adverse secondary effects and law enforcement problems. (d) The City Council finds the following, in part based upon its understanding of the documents and judicial decisions in the public record: (1) Evidence indicates that some dancers, models and entertainers, and other persons who publicly perform Specified Sexual Activities or publicly display Specified Anatomical Parts in Adult- Oriented Businesses (collectively referred to as `performers') have been found to engage in sexual activities with patrons of Adult- Oriented Businesses on the site of the Adult- Oriented Businesses; (2) Evidence has demonstrated that performers employed by Adult- Oriented Businesses have been found to offer and provide private shows to patrons who, for a price, are permitted to observe and participate with the performers in live sex shows; 2 (3) Evidence indicates that performers at Adult- Oriented Businesses have been found to engage in acts of prostitution with patrons of the establishment; (4) Evidence indicates that fully enclosed booths, individual viewing areas, and other small rooms whose interiors cannot be seen from public areas of the establishment regularly have been found to be used as a location for engaging in unlawful sexual activity; (5) As a result of the above, and the increase in incidents of AIDS and Hepatitis B, which are both sexually transmitted diseases, the City has a substantial interest in adopting regulations which will reduce, to the greatest extent possible, the possibility for the occurrence of prostitution and casual sex acts at Adult- Oriented Businesses. (e) Licensing and other police power regulations are legitimate, reasonable means of accountability to help protect the quality of life in the community of Saratoga and to help assure that all operators of Adult- Oriented Businesses comply with reasonable regulations that minimize the adverse secondary effects which typically accompany the operation of such businesses. (f) It is not the intent of the City Council of the City of Saratoga in enacting this ordinance, or any provisions thereof to condone or legitimize the distribution of obscene material, and the City of Saratoga recognizes that state law prohibits the distribution of the obscene materials and expects and encourages law enforcement officials to enforce state obscenity statutes against such illegal activities in the City of Saratoga. (g) Nothing in this ordinance is intended to authorize, legalize, or permit the establishment, operation, or maintenance of any business, building, or use which violates any City ordinance or any statute of the State of California regarding public nuisances, unlawful or indecent exposure, sexual conduct, lewdness, obscene or harmful matter or the exhibition or public display thereof. (h) In prohibiting public nudity in Adult- Oriented Businesses, the City Council does not intend to proscribe the communication of erotic messages or any other communicative element or act, but rather only to prohibit public nudity due to the secondary impacts associated with such public nudity; and 3 (i) The City Council also finds, as a wholly independent basis, that it has a substantial public interest in preserving societal order and morality, and that such interest is furthered by a prohibition on public nudity; and (j) While the City Council desires to protect the rights conferred by the United States Constitution on Adult- Oriented Businesses, it does so in a manner that ensures the continued and orderly use and enjoyment of property within the City and diminishes, to the greatest extent feasible, those undesirable secondary effects which the aforementioned studies have shown to be associated with the development and operation of Adult Oriented Businesses; and (k) In enacting a nudity limitation, the City declares that the limitation is a regulatory licensing provision and not a criminal offense. The City has not provided a criminal penalty for a violation of the nudity limitation. The City adopts such a limitation only as a condition of issuance and maintenance of an Adult- Oriented Business permit issued pursuant to the City Code; and (1) The City Council finds that requiring separations between entertainers and patrons and preventing the exchange of money between entertainers and patrons also reduces the likelihood of drug and sex transactions occurring in Adult- Oriented Businesses; and (m) Enclosed or concealed booths and dimly -lit areas within Adult- Oriented Businesses greatly increase the potential for misuse of the premises, including unlawful conduct of a type which facilitates transmission of disease. Requirements that all indoor areas be open to view by management at all times, and that adequate lighting be provided are necessary in order to reduce the opportunity for, and therefore the incidence of illegal conduct within Adult- Oriented Businesses, and to facilitate the inspection of the interior of the premises thereof by law enforcement personnel, and (n) The City Council finds that Adult- Oriented Business Permits shall be denied to applicants with recent criminal convictions for sexually- related offenses due to the evidenced lack of commitment to enforcement of prohibitions with respect to sexual offenses and due to the high incidence of recidivism with respect to sexual crimes. SECTION 2. Article 4.80 entitled "Adult- Oriented Businesses" is hereby added to Chapter 4 of the Saratoga City Code, to read as follows: 4 l!` "Article 4.80. ADULT- ORIENTED BUSINESSES SEC. 4.80.010. LEGISLATIVE PURPOSE. It is the purpose of this Article to regulate Adult- Oriented Business in order to promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the citizens of the City. The provisions of this Article have neither the purpose nor effect of imposing a limitation or restriction on the content of any communicative materials, including adult- oriented materials. Similarly, it is not the intent nor effect of this ordinance to restrict or deny access by adults to adult- oriented materials protected by the First Amendment, or to deny access by the distributors and exhibitors of adult- oriented entertainment to their intended market. Neither is it the intent nor effect of this ordinance to condone or legitimize the distribution of obscene material. SEC. 4.80.015. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this Article the following words and phrases shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section: (a) Adult arcade. The term "adult arcade" as used in this Article, is an establishment where, for any form of consideration, one or more still or motion picture projectors, or similar machines, for viewing by five (5) or fewer persons each, are used to show films, computer generated images, motion pictures, video cassettes, slides or other photographic reproductions thirty (30) percent or more of the number of which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the depiction or description of specified sexual activities of specified anatomical areas. (b) Adult bookstore. The term "adult bookstore" as used in this Article, is an establishment that has thirty (30) percent or more of its stock in books, magazines, periodicals or other printed matter, or of photographs, films, motion pictures, video cassettes, slides, tapes, records or other form of visual or audio representations which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the depiction or description of specified sexual activities and or specified anatomical areas. 5 (c) Adult cabaret. The term "adult cabaret" as used in this Article, means a nightclub, restaurant, or similar business establishment which: (1) regularly features live performances which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the display of specified anatomical areas or specified sexual activities; and/or (2) which regularly features persons who appear semi -nude; and/or (3) video films, computer generated images, motion pictures, video cassettes, slides, or other photographic reproductions thirty (30) percent or more of the number of which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the depiction or description of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. (d) Adult hotel/motel. The term "adult hotel/motel" as used in this Article, means a hotel or motel or similar business establishment offering public accommodations for any form of consideration which, (1) provides patrons with closed- circuit television transmissions, films, computer generated images, motion pictures, video cassettes, slides, or other photographic reproductions thirty (30) percent or more of the number of which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the depiction or description of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas, and (2) rents, leases, or lets any room for less than a six (6) hour period, or rents, leases, or lets any single room more than twice in a 24- hour period. (e) Adult motion picture theater. The term "adult motion picture theater" as used in this Article, means a business establishment where, for any form of consideration, films, computer generated images, motion pictures, video cassettes slides or similar photographic reproductions are shown, and thirty (30) percent or more of the number of which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the depiction or description of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. (f) Adult theater. The term "adult theater" as used in this Article, means a theater, concert hall, auditorium, or similar establishment which, for any form of consideration regularly features live performances which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on the display of specified anatomical areas or specified sexual activities. 6 (g) Adult- Oriented Business Operator. The term "Adult-Oriented Adult p Business Operator" (hereinafter "operator as used in this Article means, a person who supervises, manages, inspects, directs, organizes, controls or in any other way is responsible for or in charge of the premises of an Adult- Oriented Business or the conduct or activities occurring on the premises thereof. (h) Applicant. The term "Applicant" as used in this Article, means a person who is required to file an application for a permit under this chapter, including an individual owner, a managing partner, officer of a corporation, or any other operator, a manger, employee, or agent of an Adult- Oriented Business. (i) Bar. The term "Bar" as used in this Article, means any commercial establishment licensed by the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to serve any alcoholic beverages on the premises. (j) City Manager. The term "City Manager" as used in this Article, means the City Manager of the City of Saratoga or the authorized representatives thereof. (k) Computer Site. The term "computer site" as used in this Article, means a business which provides, for pecuniary compensation, monetary or other consideration, live performances that are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the display of specified anatomical areas or specified sexual activities and/or which regularly feature persons who appear semi -nude and which such performances can be viewed by computer or any other type of electronic device. (1) Distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon. The term "distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon," as used in this Article, means the dominant or essential theme of the object described by such phrase. For instance, when the phrase refers to films "which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon" the depiction or description of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas, the films so described are those whose dominant or predominant character and theme are the depiction 7 of the enumerated sexual activities or anatomical areas. See, Pringle v. City of Covina, 115 Cal.App.3 151 (1981). (m) Figure model. The term "Figure model" as used in this Article, means any person who, for pecuniary compensation, considera- tion, hire or reward, poses in a modeling studio to be observed, sketched, painted, drawn, sculptured, photographed or otherwise depicted. (n) Health officer. The term "Health Officer" as used in this Article, means the "City Manager Any of the powers or duties to be exercised or approvals to be granted by the Health Officer under this Article may be delegated by the City Manager, in whole or in part, to the County Health Department or to such other authorized agents as the City Manager may designate. (o) Modeling studio. The term "modeling studio" as used in this Article, means a business which provides, for pecuniary compensation, monetary or other consideration, hire or reward, figure models who for the purposes of sexual stimulation of patrons, display "specified anatomical areas" to be observed, sketched, photographed painted, sculpted or otherwise depicted by persons paying such consideration. "Modeling studio" does not include schools maintained pursuant to standards set by the State Board of Education. "Modeling studio" further does not include a studio or similar facility owned, operated, or maintained by an individual artist or group of artists, and which does not provide, permit, or make available "specified sexual activities." (p) Nudity or a state of nudity. The term "Nudity or a state of nudity" as used in this Article, means the showing of the human male or female genitals, pubic area, or buttocks with less than a fully opaque covering, the showing of the female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any part of the nipple, or the showing of the covered male genitals in a discernible turgid state. (q) Operate an Adult- Oriented Business. The term "operate an adult- oriented business" as used in this Article, means the supervising, managing, inspecting, directing, organizing, controlling or in any way being responsible for or in charge of the conduct of activities 8 1 of an Adult Oriented Business or activities within an Adult Oriented Business. (r) Permittee. The term "Permittee" as used in this Article, means the person to whom an Adult- Oriented Business Permit is issued. (s) Person. The term "Person" as used in this Article, means any individual, partnership, copartnership, firm, association, joint stock company, corporation, or combination of the above in whatever form or character. (t) Regularly Features. The term "regularly features" as used in this Article with respect to an adult theater or adult cabaret, means a regular and substantial course of conduct. The fact that live performances which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis upon the display of specified anatomical areas or specified sexual activities occurs on two (2) or more occasions within a thirty (30) day period; three (3) or more occasions within a sixty (60) day period; or four (4) or more occasions within a one hundred and eighty (180) day period, shall to the extend permitted by law be deemed to be a regular and substantial course of conduct. (u) Semi -nude. The term "Semi- Nude" as used in this Article, means a state of dress in which clothing covers no more than the genitals, pubic region, buttocks, areola of the female breast, as well as portions of the body covered by supporting straps or devices. (v) Specified anatomical areas. The term "specified anatomical areas" as used in this Article, means any of the following: (1) Less than completely and opaquely covered human (i) genitals or pubic region; (ii) buttocks; and (iii) female breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola; (2) Human male genitals in a discernibly turgid state, even if completely and opaquely covered; 9 (3) Any device, costume or covering that simulates any of other body parts included in subdivisions (1) or (2) above. (w) Specified sexual activities. The term "specified sexual activities" as used in this Article, means any of the following, whether performed directly or indirectly through clothing or other covering: (1) The fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals, pubic region, buttocks, anus, or female breast; (2) Sex acts, actual or simulated, including intercourse, oral copulation, or sodomy; (3) Masturbation, actual or simulated; (4) Excretory functions as part of or in connection with any of the other activities described in subdivision (1) through (3) of this subsection. SEC. 4.80.020. PERMITS REQUIRED. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in, conduct or carry on, or to permit to be engaged in, conducted or carried on, in or upon any premises in the City of Saratoga, the operation of an Adult- Oriented Business unless the person first obtains and continues to maintain in full force and effect a permit from the City of Saratoga as herein required. (Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit) (b) It shall be unlawful for any persons to engage in or participate in any live performance depicting specified anatomical areas or involving specified sexual activities in an Adult- Oriented Business unless the person first obtains and continues in full force and effect a permit from the City of Saratoga as herein required. (Adult- Oriented Business Performer Permit) SEC. 4.80.025. ADULT- ORIENTED BUSINESS REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATIONS. 10 (a) Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory permits are nontransferable, except in accordance with Section 4.80.040. Therefore, all applications shall include the following information: (1) If the applicant is an individual, the individual shall state his or her legal name, including any aliases, address, and submit satisfactory written proof that he or she is at least eighteen (18) years of age. (2) If the applicant is a partnership, the partners shall state the partnership's complete name, address, the names of all partners, whether the partnership is general or limited, and attach a copy of the partnership agreement, if any. (3) If the applicant is a corporation, the corporation shall provide its complete name, the date of its incorporation, evidence that the corporation is in good standing under the laws of California, the names and capacity of all officers and directors, the name of the registered corporate agent and the address of the registered office for service of process. (4) If the applicant has had any convictions within the last five (5) years of the offenses set forth in Section 4.80.045(d)(5). (b) If the applicant is an individual, he or she shall sign the application. If the applicant is other than an individual, an officer of the business entity or an individual with a ten (10) percent or greater interest in the business entity shall sign the application. (c) If the applicant intends to operate the Adult Oriented Business under a name other than that of the applicant, the applicant shall file the fictitious name of the Adult- Oriented Business and show proof of registration of the fictitious name. (d) A description of the type of Adult- Oriented Business for which the Permit is requested and the proposed address where the Adult- Oriented Business will operate, plus the name and 11 addresses of the owners and lessors of the Adult- Oriented Business site. (e) The address to which notice of action on the application is to be mailed. (f) The names of all employees, independent contractors, and other persons who will perform at the Adult- Oriented Business, who are required by Section 4.80.045 to obtain an Adult- Oriented Business Performer Permit (for ongoing reporting requirements see Section 4.80.045(a). (g) A sketch or diagram showing the interior configuration of the premises, including a statement of the total floor area occupied by the Adult- Oriented Business. The sketch or diagram need not be professionally prepared, but must be drawn to a designated scale or drawn with marked dimensions of the interior the premises to an accuracy of plus or minus six (6) inches. (h) A certificate and straight -line drawing prepared within thirty (30) days prior to application depicting the building and the portion thereof to be occupied by the Adult- Oriented Business. (i) A diagram of the off street parking areas and premises entries of the Adult- Oriented Business showing the location of the lighting system required by Section 4.80.070(c) and (j). (j) If the City Manager determines that the applicant has completed the application improperly, the City manager shall promptly notify the applicant of such fact and, on request of the applicant, grant the applicant an extension of time of ten (10) days or less to complete the application properly. In addition the applicant may request an extension, not to exceed ten (10) days, of the time for the City Manager to act on the application. The time period for granting or denying a Permit shall be stayed during the period in which the applicant is granted an extension of time. (k) The fact that an applicant possesses other types of State or City permits or licenses does not exempt the applicant from the 12 requirement of obtaining an Adult-Oriented Q g vented Business Regulatory Permit. (1) Along with the filing of the application, the applicant shall pay a filing fee, as established by resolution adopted by the City Council from time to time, which shall not be refundable. SEC. 4.80.030. INVESTIGATION AND ACTION ON APPLICATION. (a) Upon receipt of a completed application and payment of the application and permit fees, the City Manger shall immediately stamp the application as received and promptly investigate the information contained in the application to determine whether the applicant shall be issued an Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit. (b) Within forty -five (45) days of receipt of the completed application, the City Manager shall complete the investigation, grant or deny the application in accordance with the provisions of this Section, and so notify the applicant as follows: (1) The City Manager shall write or stamp "Granted" or "Denied" on the application and date and sign such notation. (2) If the application is denied, the City manager shall attach to the application a statement of the reasons for denial. (3) If the application is granted, the City manager shall attach to the application an Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit. (4) The application as granted or denied and the Permit, if any, shall be placed in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed to the applicant at the address stated in the application. (c) The City Manager shall grant the application and issue the Adult Oriented Business Regulatory permit upon findings that the applicant has met all of the development and performance 13 standards and requirements of Section 4.80.070, unless the application is denied for one or more of the reasons sets forth in Section 4.80.035. The Permittee shall post the Permit conspicuously in the Adult- Oriented Business premises. (d) If the City Manager grants the application or if the City Manager neither grants nor denies the application within thirty (30) days after it is stamped as received (except as provided in Section 4.80.025 (j) the applicant may begin operating the Adult Oriented Business for which the Permit was sought, subject to strict compliance with the development and performance standards and requirements of Sections 4.80.070. SEC. 4.80.035. PERMIT DENIAL. The City Manager shall deny the application for any of the following reasons: (a) The building, structure, equipment, or location used by the business for which an Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory permit is required do not comply with the requirements and standards of the health, zoning, fire and safety laws of the City and the State of California, or with the locational or development and performance standards and requirements of these regulations. (b) The applicant, his or her employee, agent, partner, director, officer, shareholder or manager has knowingly made any false, misleading or fraudulent statement of material fact in the application for an Adult Business Regulatory Permit. (c) An applicant is under eighteen (18) years of age. (d) The required application fee has not been paid. (e) An applicant has been convicted of an offense specified in Section 4.80.045(d)(5). Each Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory permit shall expire one (1) year from the date of issuance, and may be renewed only by filing with the City Manager a written request for renewal, accompanied by the 14 Annual Permit Fee and a copy of the Permit to be renewed. The request for renewal shall be made at least thirty (30) days before the expiration date of the Permit. When made less than thirty (30) days before the expiration date, the expiration of the Permit will not be stayed. Applications for renewal shall be acted on as provided herein for action upon applications for Permits. SEC. 4.80.040. TRANSFER OF ADULT- ORIENTED BUSINESS REGULATORY PERMITS. (a) A permittee shall not operate an Adult- Oriented Business under the authority of an Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit at any place other than the address of the Adult Oriented Business stated in the application for the Permit. (b) A permittee shall not transfer ownership or control of an Adult Oriented Business or transfer an Adult Oriented Business Regulatory Permit to another person unless and until the transferee obtains an amendment to the Permit from the City Manager stating that the transferee is now the permittee. Such an amendment may be obtained only if the transferee files an application with the City Manager in accordance with Section 4.80.025, accompanies the application with a transfer fee in an amount set by resolution of the City Council, and the City Manager determines in accordance with Section 4.80.030 that the transferee would be entitled to the issuance of an original Permit. (c) No Permit may be transferred when the City Manager has notified the permittee that the permit has been or may be suspended or revoked. (d) Any attempt to transfer a permit either directly or indirectly in violation of this section is hereby declared void, and the Permit shall be deemed revoked. SEC. 4.80.045. ADULT- ORIENTED BUSINESS PERFORMER PERMIT. (a) No person shall engage in or participate in any live performance 15 T depicting specified anatomical areas or involving specified sexual activities in an Adult- Oriented Business, without a valid Adult Oriented Business performer permit issued by the City. All persons who have been issued an Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit shall promptly supplement the information provided as part of the application for the Permit required by Section 4.80.025, with the names of all Performers required to obtain an Adult- Oriented Business Performer Permit, within thirty (30) days of any change in the information originally submitted. Failure to submit such changes shall be grounds for suspension of the Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit. (b) The City Manager shall grant, deny and renew Adult Business Performer Permits. (c) The application for a Permit shall be made on a form provided by the City Manager. An original and two copies of the completed and sworn permit application shall be filed with the City Manager. (d) The completed application shall contain the following information and be accompanied by the following documents: (1) The applicant's legal name and any other names (including "stage names" and aliases) used by the applicant; (2) Age, date and place of birth; (3) Height, weight, hair and eye color; (4) Present residence address and telephone number; (5) Whether the applicant has ever been convicted of: (i) Any of the offenses set forth in Sections 315, 316, 266a, 266b, 266c, 266e, 266g, 266h, 266i, 647(a), 647(b) and 647(D) of the California Penal Code as those sections now exist or may hereafter be amended or renumbered. 16 y (ii) The equivalent of the aforesaid offenses outside the State of California. (6) Whether such person is or has ever been licensed or registered as a prostitute, or otherwise authorized by the laws of any other jurisdiction to engage in prostitution in such other jurisdiction. If any person mentioned in this subsection has ever been licensed or registered as a prostitute, or otherwise authorized by the laws of any other State to engage in prostitution, a Statement shall be submitted giving the place of such registration, licensing or legal authorization, and the inclusive dates during which such person was so licensed, registered, or authorized to engage in prostitution. (7) State driver's license or identification number; (8) Satisfactory written proof that the applicant is at least eighteen (18) years of age; (9) The applicant's fingerprints on a form provided by the Sheriffs Department, and a color photograph clearly showing the applicant's face. Any fees for the photographs and fingerprints shall be paid by the applicant; (10) If the application is made for the purpose of renewing a Permit, the applicant shall attach a copy of the Permit to be renewed. (e) The completed application shall be accompanied by a non- refundable application fee. The amount of the fee shall be set by resolution adopted by the City Council, from time to time. (f) Upon receipt of an application and payment of the application fees, the City Manager shall immediately stamp the application as received and promptly investigate the application. (g) If the City Manager determines that the applicant has completed the application improperly, the City Manager shall promptly notify the applicant of such fact and grant the applicant an extension of time of not more than ten (10) days to complete the application 17 properly. In addition, the applicant may request an extension, not to exceed ten (10) days, of the time for the City Manger to act on the application. The time period for granting or denying a Permit shall be stayed during the period in which the applicant is granted an extension of time. SEC. 4.80.050. INVESTIGATION AND ACTION ON APPLICATION. (a) Within ten (10) days after receipt of the properly collected application, the City manager shall grant or deny the application and so notify the applicant as follows: (1) The City Manager shall write or stamp "Granted" or "Denied" on the application and date and sign such notation. (2) If the application is denied, the City Manager shall attach to the application a statement of the reasons for denial. (3) If the application in granted, the City Manager shall attach to the application an Adult Oriented Business Performer Permit. (4) The application as granted or denied and the Permit, if any, shall be placed in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed to the applicant at the residence address stated in the application. (b) The City Manager shall grant the application and issue the Permit unless the application is denied for one or more of the reasons set forth in subsection (d) of this section. (c) If the City Manager grants the application or if the City Manager neither grants nor denies the application within ten (10) days after it is stamped as received (except as provided in Section 4.80.045(g), the applicant may begin performing in the capacity for which the Permit was sought. (d) The City Manager shall deny the application for any of the following reasons: 18 (1) The applicant has knowingly made any false, misleading, or fraudulent statement of a material fact in the application for a Permit or in any report or document required to be filed with the application; (2) The applicant is under eighteen (18) years of age; (3) The Adult- Oriented Business Performer Permit is to be used for performing in a business prohibited by State or City law. (4) The applicant has been registered in any state as a prostitute. (5) The applicant has been convicted of any of the offenses enumerated in Section 4.80.045(d)(5) or convicted of an offense outside the State of California that would have constituted any of the described offenses if committed within the State of California. A Permit may be issued to any person convicted of the described crimes if the conviction occurred more than five (5) years prior to the date of the application. (e) Each Adult- Oriented Business Performer Permit shall expire one (1) year from the date of issuance and may be renewed only by filing with the City Manager a written request for renewal, accompanied by the application fee and a copy of the Permit to be renewed. The request for renewal shall be made at least thirty (30) days before the expiration Y xp date of the Permit. When made less than thirty (30) days before the expiration date, the expiration of the Permit will not be stayed. Applications for renewal shall be acted on as provided herein for application for Permits. SEC. 4.80.055. SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF ADULT ORIENTED BUSINESS REGULATORY PERMITS AND ADULT ORIENTED BUSINESS PERFORMER PERMITS. An Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit or Adult- Oriented Business Performer Permit may be suspended or revoked in accordance 19 with the procedures and standards of this Section. (a) On determining that grounds for Permit revocation exist, the City Manager shall furnish written notice of the proposed suspension or revocation to the Permittee. Such notice shall set forth the time and place of a hearing, and the ground or grounds upon which the hearing is based, the pertinent Code sections, and a brief statement of the factual matters in support thereof. The notice shall be mailed, postage prepaid, addressed to the last known address of the Permittee, or shall be delivered to the Permittee personally, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing date. Hearings shall be conducted in accordance with procedures established by the City Manager, but at a minimum shall include the following: (1) All parties involved shall have a right to offer testimonial, documentary, and tangible evidence bearing on the issues; may be represented by counsel; and shall have the right to confront and cross examine witnesses. Any relevant evidence may be admitted that is the sort of evidence upon which retainable persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs. Any hearing under this Section may be continued for a reasonable time for the convenience of a party or a witness. The City Manager's decision may be appealed in accordance with Section 4.80.060. (b) A Permittee may be subject to suspension or revocation of a Permit, or be subject to other appropriate disciplinary action, for any of the following causes arising from the acts or omissions of the Permittee, or an Employee, agent, partner, director, stockholder, or manager of an Adult Oriented Business: (1) The Permittee has knowingly made any false, misleading or fraudulent statement of material facts in the application for a Permit, or in any report or record required to be filed with the City. (2) The Permittee, employee, a ent, partner, director, g P stockholder, or manager of an Adult- Oriented Business- has 20 t knowingly allowed or permitted, and has failed to make a reasonable effort to prevent the occurrence of any of the following on the premises of the Adult- Oriented Business, or in the case of an Adult- Oriented Business Performer, the permittee has engaged in one of the activities described below while on the premises of an Adult Oriented Business: (i) Any act of unlawful sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, or masturbation. (ii) Use of the establishment as a place where unlawful solicitations for sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, or masturbation openly occur. (iii) Any conduct constituting a criminal offense which requires registration under Section 290 of the California Penal Code. (iv) The occurrence of acts of lewdness, assignation, or prostitution, including any conduct constituting violations of Sections 315, 316, or 318 or Subdivision b of Section 647 of the California Penal Code. (v) Any act constituting a violation of provisions in the California Penal Code relating to obscene matter or distribution of harmful matter to minors, including but not limited to Sections 311 through 313.4. (vi) Any conduct prohibited by this chapter. (3) Failure to abide by an disciplinary action previously imposed by an appropriate City official. (c) After holding the hearing in accordance with the provisions of this Section, if the City Manager finds and determines that there are grounds for disciplinary action, based upon the severity of the violation, the City Manager shall impose one of the following: (1) A warning; 21 (2) Suspension of the Permit for a specified period not to exceed six months; (3) Revocation of the Permit. SEC. 4.80.065. APPEAL OF DENIAL. SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION. After denial of an application for an Adult- Oriented Business Regulatory Permit or an Adult- Oriented Business Performer Permit, or after denial of renewal of a Permit, or suspension or revocation of a Permit, the applicant or person to whom the Permit was granted may appeal through the following procedures: (a) Request for appeal hearing. The applicant shall file a written request for an appeal hearing, which states the specific grounds on which the decision of the City Manager to deny, suspend, or revoke the permit is contested, within ten (10) days after service of the notice of the written decision, by deposit of the notice, addressed to the holder of the permit, by certified mail and/or by hand delivery. At the time of submitting the written request for an appeal hearing, the appellant shall pay an appeal hearing fee, set forth in the City fee schedule. If the applicant or person to whom the permit was granted does not request an appeal hearing with the ten (10) day period, no further notice is required and the action will become final. (b) Appeal hearing. An appeal hearing shall be conducted as provided for in Section 4- 55.080 and 4- 55.150 of this Code. (c) The decision of the Board of Appeals shall inform the applicant of the right to a prompt judicial review and that any judicial action appealing the Board of Appeals decision shall be commenced within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the service of the decision. SEC. 4.80.070. ADULT- ORIENTED BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. (a) Maximum occupancy load, fire exits, aisles and fire equipment shall be regulated, designed and provided in accordance with the fire and building regulations and standards adopted by the City of Saratoga. 22 (b) No Adult- Oriented Business shall be operated in any manner that p y permits the observation of any material or activities depicting, describing or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas" from any public way or from any location outside the building or area of such establishment. This provision shall apply to any display, decoration, sign, show window or other opening. No exterior door or window on the premises shall be propped or kept open at any time while the business is open, and any exterior windows shall be covered with opaque covering at all times. (c) All off street parking areas and premise entries of the adult oriented business shall be illuminated from dusk to closing hours of operation with a lighting system which provides an average maintained horizontal illumination of one (1) foot candle of light on the parking surface and/or walkways. The required lighting level is established in order to provide sufficient illumination of the parking areas and walkways serving the adult oriented business for the personal safety of patrons and employees and to reduce the incidence of vandalism and criminal conduct. The lighting shall be shown on the required sketch or diagram of the premises. (d) The premises within which the Adult- Oriented Business is located shall provide sufficient sound absorbing insulation so that noise generated inside said premises shall not be audible anywhere on any adjacent property or public right -of -way or within any other building or other separate unit within the same building. (e) The building entrance to an Adult- Oriented Business shall be clearly and legibly posted with a notice indicating that persons under eighteen (18) years of age are precluded from entering the premises. Said notice shall be constructed and posted to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee. No person under the age of eighteen (18) years shall be permitted within the premises at any time. (f) All indoor arenas of the Adult Oriented Business within which patrons are permitted, except rest rooms, shall be open to view by the management at all times. 23 (g) Any Adult- Oriented Business which is also an Adult arcade, shall comply with the following provisions: (1) The interior of the premises shall be configured in such a manner that there is an unobstructed view from a manager's station of every area of the premises to which any patron is permitted access for any purpose, excluding restrooms. Restrooms may not contain video reproduction equipment. If the premises has two or more managers stations designated, then the interior of the premises shall be configured in such a manner that there is an unobstructed view of each area of the premises to which any patron is permitted access for any purpose from at least one of the manager stations. The view required in this subsection must be direct line of sight from the managers station. (2) The view area specified in section (5) shall remain unobstructed by any door, walls, merchandise, display racks, or other materials at all times. No patron is permitted access to any area of the premises which has been designated as an area in which patrons will not be permitted. (3) No viewing room may be occupied by more than one person at any one time. (4) The walls or partitions between viewing rooms or booths shall be maintained in good repair at all times, with no holes between any two such rooms such as would allow viewing from one booth into another or such as to allow physical contact of any kind between the occupants of any two such booths or rooms. (5) Customers, patrons or visitors shall not be allowed to stand idly by in the vicinity of any such video booths, or from remaining in the common area of such business, other than the restrooms, who are not actively engaged in shopping for or reviewing the products available on display for purchaser viewing. Signs prohibiting loitering shall be 24 t n 3 posted in prominent places in and near the video booths. (6) The floors, seats, walls and other interior portions of all video booths shall be maintained clean and free from waste and bodily secretions. Presence of human excrement, urine, semen or saliva in any such booths shall be evidence of improper maintenance and inadequate sanitary controls; repeated instances of such conditions may justify suspension or revocation of the owner and operators permit to conduct the adult- oriented establishment. (j) All areas of the Adult- Oriented Business shall be illuminated, at a minimum, with the following foot candles, evenly distributed at ground level: Area Foot- Candles Bookstores and other retail 20 establishments Theaters and cabarets 5 (except during performances, at which times lighting shall be at least 1.25 foot candles) Arcades 10 Motels/Hotels 20 (in public areas) Modeling studios and 10 computer sites (k) The Adult- Oriented Business shall provide and maintain separate rest room facilities for male patrons and employees, and female patrons and employees. Male patrons and employees shall be prohibited from using the rest room(s) for females, and female patrons and employees shall be prohibited from using the rest room(s) for males, except to carry out duties of repair, maintenance and cleaning of the rest room facilities. The rest rooms shall be free from any Adult Oriented Material. Rest rooms 25 shall not contain television monitors or other motion picture or video projection, recording or reproduction equipment. The foregoing provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to an Adult- Oriented Business which deals exclusively with sale or rental of Adult Material which is not used or consumed on the premises, such as an Adult Bookstore or Adult Video Store, and which does not provide rest room facilities to its patrons or the general public. (1) The following additional requirements shall pertain to Adult- Oriented Businesses providing live entertainment depicting Specified Anatomical Arena or involving Specified Sexual Activities, except' for businesses regulated by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission and those businesses that are computer sites: (1) No person shall perform live entertainment for patrons of an Adult Oriented Business except upon a stage at least eighteen (18) inches above the level of the floor which is separated by a distance of at least ten (10) feet from the nearest area occupied by patrons, and no patron shall be permitted within ten (10) feet of the stage while the stage is occupied by an entertainer. "Entertainer" shall mean any person who is an employee or independent contractor of the Adult- Oriented Business, or any person who, with or without any compensation or other form of consideration, perform live entertainment for patrons of an Adult Oriented Business. (2) The Adult- Oriented Business shall provide separate dressing room facilities for entertainers which are exclusively dedicated to the entertainers' use. (3) The Adult Oriented Business shall provide an entrance/exit for entertainers which is separate from the entrance/exit used by patrons. (4) The Adult- Oriented Business shall provide access for entertainers between the stage and the dressing rooms which is completely separated from the patrons. If such 26 f separate access is not P h Y Y sicall feasible, the Adult Oriented Business shall provide a minimum (3) foot wide walk aisle for entertainers between the dressing room area and the stage, with a railing, fence or other barrier separating the patrons and the entertainers capable of (and which actually results in) preventing any physical contact between patrons and entertainers. (5) No entertainer, either before, during or after performances, shall have physical contact with any patron and no patron shall have physical contact with any entertainer either before, during or after performances by such entertainer. This subsection shall only apply to physical contact on the premises of the Adult- Oriented Business. (6) Fixed rail(s) at least thirty (30) inches in height shall be maintained establishing the separations between entertainers and patrons required by this subsection. (7) No patron shall directly pay or give any gratuity to any entertainer and no entertainer shall solicit any pay or gratuity from any patron. (8) No owner or other person with managerial control over an Adult- Oriented Business (as that term is defined herein) shall permit any person on the premises of the Adult Oriented Business to engage in a live showing of the human male or female genitals, pubic area or buttocks with less than a fully opaque coverage, and/or the female breast with less than fully opaque coverage over any part of the nipple or areola and/or covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state. This provision may not be complied with by applying an opaque covering simulating the appearance of the specified anatomical part required to be covered. (m) Adult- Oriented Businesses shall employ security guards in order to maintain the public peace and safety, based upon the following standards: 27 J` (1) Adult Oriented Businesses featuring live entertainment, except for computer sites, shall provide at least one (1) security guard at all times while the Business is open. If the occupancy limit of the premises is greater than thirty -five (35) persons, an additional security guard shall be on duty. (2) Security guards for other Adult- Oriented Businesses may be required if it is determined by the City Manager that their presence is necessary in order to prevent any of the conduct listed in Section 4.80.055(b)(2)(i) (vi) from occurring on the premises. (3) Security guard(s) shall be charged with preventing violations of law and enforcing compliance by patrons of the requirements of these regulations as well as controlling behavior and reporting all criminal offenses to the Police Department. Security guards shall be uniformed in such a manner so as to be readily identifiable as a security guard by the public and shall be duly licensed as a security guard as required by applicable provisions of the State. No security guard required pursuant to this subsection shall act as a door person, ticket seller, ticket taker, admittance person, or sole occupant of the manager's station while acting as a security guard. The City Manager reserves the right to determine the number of guards and may require that the number of guards be increased if necessary. The foregoing applicable requirements of this Section shall be deemed conditions of Adult Oriented Business Regulatory Permit approvals, and failure to comply with every such requirement shall be grounds for revocation of the Permit issued pursuant to these regulations. SEC. 4.80.075. REGISTER AND PERMIT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES. (a) Every permittee of an Adult- Oriented Business which provides live entertainment depicting specified anatomical areas or involving specified sexual activities must maintain a register of all persons so performing on the premises and their permit numbers. 28 ,1: c i Such register shall be available for inspection during regular business hours by any police officer or health officer of the City of Saratoga. SEC. 4.80.080. DISPLAY OF PERMIT AND IDENTIFICATION CARDS. (a) Every Adult- Oriented Business shall display at all times during business hours the permit issued pursuant to the provisions of this chapter for such Adult- Oriented Business in a conspicuous place so that the same may be readily seen by all persons entering the Adult- Oriented Business. (b) The City Manager shall provide each Adult- Oriented Business Performer required to have a Permit pursuant to the chapter, with an identification card containing the name, address, photograph and permit number of such performer. (c) An Adult- Oriented Business Performer shall have such card available for inspection at all times during which such person is on the premises of the Adult- Oriented Business. SEC. 4.80.085. EMPLOYMENT OF AND SERVICES RENDERED TO PERSONS UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN (18) YEARS PROHIBITED. (a) It shall be unlawful for any permittee, operator, or other person in charge of any Adult- Oriented Business to employ, or r Y provide any service for which it requires such permit, to any person who is not at least eighteen (18) years of age. (b) It shall be unlawful for any permittee, operator or other person in charge of any Adult- Oriented Business to permit to enter, or remain within the Adult- Oriented Business, any person who is not at least eighteen (18) years of age. SEC. 4.80.090. INSPECTION. An applicant or Permittee shall permit representatives of any City Department or County Agency to inspect the premises of an Adult- Oriented Business for the purpose of insuring compliance with the law 29 and the development and performance standards applicable to Adult Oriented Businesses, at any time it is occupied or opened for business. A person who operates an Adult Oriented Business or his or her agent or employee is in violation of the provision of this section if he/she refuses to permit such lawful inspection of the premises at any time it is occupied or open for business. SEC. 4.80.095. REGULATIONS NONEXCLUSIVE. The provisions of this article regulating Adult- Oriented Businesses are not intended to be exclusive and compliance therewith shall not excuse noncompliance with any other regulations pertaining to the operation of businesses as adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga. SEC. 4.80.100. EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONS WITHOUT PERMITS UNLAWFUL. It shall be unlawful for any owner, operator, manager, or permittee in charge of or in control of an Adult- Oriented Business which provides live entertainment depicting specified anatomical arena or involving specified sexual activities to allow any person to perform such entertainment who is not in possession of a valid, unrevoked Adult Oriented Business Performer Permit. SEC. 4.80.105. TIME LIMIT FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR PERMIT. All persons who possess an outstanding businesses license heretofore issued for the operation of an Adult- Oriented Businesses and all persons required by this chapter to obtain an Adult- Oriented Businesses Performer Permit, must apply for and obtain such a permit within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this chapter. Failure to do so and continued operation of an Adult- Oriented Business, or the continued performances depicting specified anatomical arena or specified sexual activities in an Adult- Oriented Businesses after such time without a permit shall constitute a violation of this chapter." 30 SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase in this ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this chapter or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and operation from and after thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption. The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law, was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of Saratoga held on the day of 1999, by the following vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk April 7, 1998 Rev. February 23, 1999 Rev: March 8, 1999 MSR:pcp:apn:dsp J: \WPD\MNRSW\273 \ORD99\ADLTBUS.99 31 -.a SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO: AGENDA ITEM: MEETING DATE: April 7, 1999 CITY MANAGER: tell"! ORIGINATING DEPT: Community Development DEPT HEAD: I 4Ir1 SUBJECT: Recently adopted Ordinance repealing Article 7 -10 and adding a new Article 7 -10 to the Municipal Code relating to sewage disposal. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Direct staff regarding the issues outlined below. REPORT SUMMARY: The City Council recently adopted a revised sewage disposal Ordinance that both incorporated the County's sewage disposal requirements and added more stringent City requirements. The Ordinance went into effect on Monday, April 5, 1999. As Community Development staff has prepared to implement the Ordinance, it has become apparent that some of the Ordinance's requirements need to be clarified since varying interpretations of the Ordinance are possible. Specifically, staff is seeking the Council's direction as to whether all septic systems on properties within 200 ft. of the public sanitary sewer system, regardless of their condition, should be required to be abandoned within a specified period of time, or whether only those septic systems which in the Health Officer's judgment should be abandoned are required to be. If the City Council's intent is the former, then the Ordinance should be further amended to make that requirement clear. Additionally, staff would recommend that a procedural framework for how the City will implement this requirement be incorporated into the Ordinance. For example, the mechanism for ensuring that prospective buyers of properties on which septic systems exist are made aware that they will be required to connect to the sanitary sewer within a certain period of time should be specified in the Ordinance. Further, the maximum (5 year timeframe for phasing out septic systems should be more definitively stated. A second issue which staff would ask the City Council to reconsider is whether or not the Council desires to be the body which considers requests for financial hardship exceptions as provided for in the Ordinance. An alternative would be to have the City Manager or perhaps the Nuisance Abatement Board of Appeals consider these requests. (The Municipal Code currently provides for a Nuisance Abatement Board of Appeals to hear appeals of nuisance abatement orders issued by the City. It is comprised of the City Engineer, Community Development Director and Chief of the Saratoga Fire District). The drawback to having the City Council hear these requests is that a property owner would be required to appear at a publicly broadcast meeting and to present rather personal and potentially embarrassing evidence in support of their plea. FISCAL IMPACTS: Negligible. Additional staff time will be expended to amend and/or clarify the adopted sewage disposal Ordinance. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: None at this time. A notice of the amended and /or clarified Ordinance will be published in the Saratoga News for the next available meeting. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION: The adopted sewage disposal Ordinance would not be amended or clarified and certain implementation provisions could be subject to varying interpretation and potential challenges. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: An amended sewage disposal Ordinance will be scheduled for introduction at the next regular City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: 1. City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance. 2. County of Santa Clara Sewage Disposal Ordinance, incorporated by reference. 2 4" ORDINANCE NO. 71- 1 90 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA REPEALING ARTICLE 7 -10 OF AND ADDING ARTICLE 7 -10 TO THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, RELATING TO SEWAGE DISPOSAL The City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Article 7 -10 of the Code of the City of Saratoga is hereby repealed. SECTION 2. Article 7 -10 is hereby added to the Code of the City of Saratoga to read as follows: "7- 10.010 Health Officer Defined. For the purposes of this Article, the term "Health Officer" shall mean the City Manager. Any of the powers or duties to be exercised or approvals to be granted by the Health Officer under this Article may be delegated by the City Manager, in whole or in part, to the County Health Department or to such other authorized agents as the City Manager may designate. The term "Health Officer" shall be synonymous with the term "director" as used in Division B11, Chapter II, Article 1 and 2, of the Code of the County of Santa Clara. 7- 10.020. Adoption of County of Santa Clara Code Regarding Sewage Disposal. Division B11, Chapter II, Article 1 and 2 only, of the Code of The County of Santa Clara, as it may be amended from time to time, one copy of which has been filed for use and examination by the public in the office of the City Clerk, is referred to and, except as to additions, deletions and amendments hereinafter noted, such regulations are adopted and made a part hereof, the same as if fully set forth in this Article, and shall be the sewage disposal regulations for the City. 7- 10.030. Additions. Deletions and Amendments. The additions, deletions and amendments set forth in this Article are made to Division B11, Chapter II, Article 1 and 2 only, of the Code of the County of 1 Santa Clara, as adopted by reference in Section 7- 10.010. 7- 10.040. Section B11 -6 is Amended Concerning Non Responsibility For Damage. Section B11-6 of the Code of the County of Santa Clara is amended to read as follows: `Section B11-6. County and City Not Responsible for Damage. This Chapter shall not be construed as imposing upon the county or the city any liability or responsibility y y y for dams a resulting from g g the defective construction of any sewage disposal system as herein provided, nor shall the county or the city or any official or employee thereof be held as assuming any such liability or responsibility by reason of the inspection authorized P y y p zed hereunder. 7- 10.050 Section B11-13.2 is Added Concerning Inspection of Private On -Site Sewage Disposal System Upon Sale of Property. Section B11-13.2 is added to the Code of the County of Santa Clara, to read as follows: `Section B11 -13.2. Inspection of Private On -Site Sewage Disposal System Upon Transfer of Ownership of Property. (a) No person shall sell, transfer, or convey more than fifty percent of the ownership interest in any real property, residence, place of business, or other building, upon which a private on -site sewage disposal system exists, without first obtaining an inspection of the sewage disposal system and written report summarizing the results of the inspection. (b) The inspection shall be made for the purpose of determining, and the report of the inspector shall state, whether the private on -site sewage disposal system is operating in compliance with this Code. (c) 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 2 ¢e Officer to be qualified to perform such inspection. (d) The report of the inspection shall be submitted to the Health Officer as a condition to close of escrow or transfer of ownership of the subject property.' 7- 10.060. Section B11-13.3 is Added Concerning Requirement of Connection to Public Sewer. Section B11-13.3 is added to the Code of the County of Santa Clara, to read as follows: `Section B11 -13.3. When Connection to Public Sewer is Required. (a) The Health Officer may order by notice in writing any person owning or occupying property within the boundaries of the City from or upon which any sewage whatsoever is generated, which premises are not connected to an existing public sewer facility available within 200 feet of the boundary line of such property, to connect thereto or vacate or cause to be vacated such premises within a specified period of time. (b) The City Council, however, after receiving evidence from the Health Officer, may declare and determine that the continued use of an existing on -site sewage disposal system is and could reasonably be expected to remain adequate for treatment and disposal of sewage without constituting a public nuisance by reason of the soil condition, drainage conditions, the degree of urban development in the area and the type and condition of the particular sewage disposal system in question. As a condition to such determination, the owners of the property with reference to which such determination has been made, shall execute in writing in a form acceptable for recordation a covenant to: (1) Cause connection to be made to the existing public sewer facilities within a specified time not to 3 exceed five years from the date of such determination or upon demand of the Health Officer, whichever date comes first, based upon the determination of such officer that one or more of the conditions recited in sub section (b) above have changed so that such existing sewage treatment and disposal constitutes a public nuisance; (2) Notify any purchaser or transferee for consideration of any rights in and to such property, of the existence of such a covenant and the performance or nonperformance thereof prior to such purchase or transfer. (c) The five year maximum time period set forth in subparagraph (b)(1) may be extended by the City Council upon a determination of financial hardship.' 7- 10.070. Section B11-29.1 is Amended Concerning Recordation of Notice of Violation. Section B11 -29.1 of the Code of the County of Santa Clara is amended to read as follows: `Section B11 -29.1. Record Notice of Violation. The Health Officer shall record a notice of the existence of a substandard sewage disposal system violation in the office of the County Recorder, and shall notify the owner of the affected real property and any other known party responsible for the violation that such action has been taken. This notice is to inform all parties that no improvements, including building additions, can be approved while the substandard sewage disposal system continues in operation.' 7- 10.080. Section B11-30 is Amended Concerning Appeals. Section B11-30 of the Code of the County of Santa Clara is amended to read as follows: 4 Ord. 71 -190 r Y, `Section B11-30. Appeal From Denial. Revocation or Suspension. Any appeal to the decision of the Health Officer pursuant to Articles 1 and 2 of this Chapter shall be filed in accordance with the provisions in Section 2- 05.030 of the Code of the City of Saratoga.'" 7- 10.090. Sewage Disposal System constituting a Public Nuisance. `Private on -site sewage disposal systems which the Health Officer determines are not operating in compliance with the requirements of Division B -11, Chapter II, Articles 1 and 2 of the Code of the County of Santa Clara, are hereby deemed by the City Council to be a public nuisance and may be abated in the manner set forth in Articles 3 -15 and 3 -20 of the Code of the City of Saratoga." SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and operation from and after thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption. The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law, was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of Saratoga held on the -4rri day of m by the following vote. AYES: Councilmanbers Baker, Streit, Vice Mayor Bogosian, Mayor Shaw NOES: Nam ABSENT: Counciln>ember Mahaffey Mayor ATTEST: .1tC CZ City Clerk February 22, 1999 MSR:dsp J:\WPD\MNRS W\2 73 \oRD99\SE W- DISP.CLN 5 4 bt ORDINANCE NO. NS- AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ARTICLES 1 AND 2 OF CHAPTER II. DIVISION B11 AND ADDING NEW ARTICLES 1 AND 2 OF CHAPTER II, DIVISION B11 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA RELATING TO THE DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SUMMARY This ordinance repeals Articles 1 and 2 and adds new Articles 1 and 2 of Chapter II. Division B I I of the Ordiiinance Code of the County of Santa Clara establishing standards for the design. installation, approval, and operation of on -site sewage disposal systems. These standards are established to insure that such systems are built and operated in a safe and effective manner and are subject to review and approval by Environmental Health Services. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Article 1 of Chapter II, Division --1311 (commencing with Section B11-14) is repealed. SECTION 2. Article 2 of Chapter II, Division B11 (commencing with Section B11-24) is repealed. SECTION 3. Article 1 (commencing with Section B11 -5) of the Santa Clara Ordinance Code is added to read: Article 1 In General Section B11-5 Intent and Application. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards for the approval, installation, and operation of individual, on -site sewage disposal systems consisiitent with the appropriate California Regional Water Quality Board standards and basin plans. Such standards are adopted so as to preclude the creation of health hazards and nuisance conditions and to protect surface and groundwater quality. Individual, on -site sewage disposal systems may be considered for use where a sanitary sewer is not available consistent with the provisions of Section B11-8 of this chapter. This chapter shall pertain to premises where there is proposed or exists a residence, place of business or other building or place which people occupy, or where persons congregate, reside or are employed and wherein the volume of waste produced is two thousand five hundred (2,500) gallons per d or less. If the amount of waste produced is in excess of two thousand five hundred (2,500) gallons per day, or where a multiunit building containing more than five (5) units is proposed, the method of i C C 'l treatment and disposal shall be as approved by the appropriate California Regional Water Quality Board consisutent with the requirements of Section B11-12 of this chapter. The method of on -site treatment and sewage disposal on all parcels created after January 1. 1984 that are one -half (1/2) acre or less in size, or are less than two and one -half (2 acres in size if located within a reservoir watershed, or where the percolation rates are 61 to 120 min. /in. and the ro osed loading rate is greater than P P an 0.1 al. ft.2 da shall be Regional g y submitted to the Re Water Quality Control Board having jurisdiction for review and approval. System design shall he consistent with Section B11 -13 of this chapter. Section B11-6 County not responsible for damage. This chapter shall not be construed as imposing upon th county any liability or responsibility for damage resulting from the defective construction of any sewage disposal system as herein provided nor shall the county or any official or employee thereof be held as assuming any such liability or responusibility by reason of the inspection authorized hereunder. Section B11 Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the director of environmental health to enforce the provisions of this chapter; and in the performance of this duty, to enter at any reasonable hour any premises as may be necessary. For purposes of this chapter, the term "director" shall mean the director of environmental health or duly authorized agent thereof. Section B11 Public sanitary sewer; connection to. Every premises where there is proposed a residence, place of business, or other building or place which people occupy, or where persons congregate, reside, or are employed, and which abuts a street or alley in which there exists an approved sanitary sewer, or which property line is within three hundred (300) feet of an approved sanitary sewer, shall be connected to said sanitary sewer in the most direct manner possible, provided a right -of -way can be obtained. On property where an on -site sewage disposal system currently exists, connection to the available sanitary sewer shall be required at the time of system failure or when the building is remodeled, increased in square footage, or altered in such a manner as to change uninhabitable area into habitable area. Section B11-9 Violations and Penalties. (a) No person shall construct, add to, repair, alter, or maintain any sewage disposal system, sewer pipes or conduits, or any other conduits for the treatment or discharge of sewage, impure waters, or any matter or substance offensive, injurious, or dangerous to health, whereby sewage shall do any of the following: (1) empty, flow, seep, or drain onto the surface of any land, or saturate the soil within twelve (12) inches of the surface. (2) empty, flow, seep, drain into, or affect any well, spring, stream, river, lake, or other waters. (3) result in any condition which, in the opinion of the director, is unsafe, dangerous, or creates a nuisance. (b) A violation of this section is hereby declared a public nuisance. (c) Any person violating any provision of this chapter or regulation adopted pursuant to this chapter, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment in county jail not exceeding one year, or both such fine and imprisonment. Every day during any portion of which a violation occurs or continues is a separate and distinct offense. Section B11-10 Power of director to make additional regulations. The director is hereby authorized to make all rules and regulations governing construction. maintenance, and administration of private sewage disposal systems as deemed necessary to carry out the intent of this chapter. SECTION 4. Article 2 (commencing with Section B11 -11) of the Santa Clara Ordinance Code is added to read: Article 2 On -site Disposal Systems Section B11-11 Private sewage disposal systems; when used. (a) Every residence, place of business, or other building, or place where persons congregate. reside. or are employed, and which cannot be connected to a sanitary sewer, shall be provided with a water flush toilet sewage disposal system. Where the volume of waste produced is in excess of 2500 gallons per day or where more than five (5) units are proposed. said sewage disposal system shall he constructed, altered, reconstructed, and maintained as approved by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board having jurisdiction consistent with B11 -12 of this chapter. (b) Every residence, place of business, or other building, or place where persons congregate. reside, or are employed, and which cannot be connected to a sanitary sewer, shall be proiivided with a water flush toilet sewage disposal system. Each detached living unit, except as otherwise provided below, is to have its own sewage disposal system. Where the volume of waste produced is less than 2500 gallons per day, said system shall be constructed, altered, reconstructed, and maintained in such a manner as to meet the requirements of Section B11-13 of this chapter. Exceptions to the above may be granted by the director as follows: (1) More than one (1) agricultural employee living unit may be connected to a single individual sewage disposal system. (2) Second dwelling units permitted for family care may utilize a single individual sewage disposal system. Section B11 -12 Sewage disposal systems subject to California Regional Water Quality Control Board waste discharge requirements; county permit required; fee. Sewage disposal systems which are subject to the requirements and approval of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board shall also be subject to the approval of the director. The proposed system shall be deiisigned to accommodate the waste discharge consistent with the requirements of the appropriate California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The director shall require engineered sewerage plans to be submitted by a regisutered civil engineer or a registered environmental health specialist with experiuence in on -site sewage system design before issuing a permit. A registered civil engineer or a registered environmental health specialist shall: 1 be required to inspect the construction of the sewage disposal system and. upon completion. to submit a letter of certification to the director verifying the proper installation and operation of the sewage disposal system; and (2) be responsible for-sampling for a minimum period of one year consistent with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board waste discharge requirements. The applicant shall contract with a private sanitary engineering firm to ensure the proper maintenance of the sewage disposal system for the first five (5) years of operation. The applicant shall obtain a permit and pay a fee in an amount as determined by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. Section B11-13 Private sewage disposal system. At any residence, place of business, or other building where there is installed a water flush toilet sewage disposal system which is not connected to an approved sanitary sewer. there shall be installed a private on -site sewage disposal system consisting of a septic tank and subsurface leaching system for the disposal of the tank effluent. The septic tank and subsurface leaching system shall be so constructed as to meet the requirements of construction and maintenance prescribed by this chapter and the rules and regulations of the director. (a) Sewage disposal systems shall be installed in accordance with the plans approved by the director. Any changes in the installation plans must be reviewed and approved by the director or appropriate California Regional Quality Control Board prior to installation. (b) No person shall construct, add to, repair, or alter any existing sewage disposal system without first submitting plans to the director for approval and obtaining a permit pursuant to the requirements of this chapter. (c) The septic tank effluent shall discharge into an approved subsurface leaching system. (d) Two (2) leaching systems (dual leaching), each one hundred (100) percent of the total size required by the director, shall be installed and interconnected with an approved flow diversion device. A riser shall extend from this device to or above the ground surface. This device shall be rotated once each year so that each leaching system is dosed with septic tank effluuent on alternate years. (e) In addition to the dual leaching system, the director reserves the authority to require that an additional area of the property, suitable for one hundred (100) percent expansion of the subsurface leaching system, be desigunated and reserved. (f) Sewage disposal systems shall be located so as to be easily accessiuble for maintenance and repairs. L XL (g) At the discretion of the director. an inspection riser may be reiiquired at the end of each drainline. (h) The director shall require soil percolation tests and at least one soil boring or excavation per site. Additional exploratory tests or other informaution may be required to verify adequate depth of permeable soil and/or separation between trench bottom and groundwater. Where the director has adequate evidence to demonstrate suitable permeable soil and groundwater separation. testing requirements may be waived. (i) Soil percolation tests shall be required on every parcel unless the director determines. on a case by case basis, that a percolation test is not necessary. The director shall determine the percolation test method and the number and location of the percolation test borings. (j) When a geological report is required by the county geologist, it shall be made available to the director. (k) A private sewage disposal system shall not be approved or permitted when any of the following conditions exist: (1) less than ten (10) feet of permeable soil exists beneath the bottom of the proposed leaching field trenches; (2) any portion of the drainfield area has been covered with fill exceeding 12 inches in depth: (3) the minimum distance between trench bottom and groundwater does not conform to the following: Percolation Rate, Min/in Distance Less than l Disapproved 1 -5 20' 6- 120 10' More than 120 Disapproved (4) soils or rock formations contain continuous channels, cracks, or fractures; (5) the area is subject to ponding or flooding. The definition of "area subject to flooding" is the Santa Clara Valley Water District's 10 -year floodplain designation or areas observed to be subject to flooding from field observations; (6) slopes exceed twenty (20) percent, except as otherwise provided in Section B11-26; (7) the following setback distance requirements cannot be provided for the sewage disposal system: MINIMUM DISTANCES (in feet) MEASURED DISPOSAL SEPTIC FROM FIELD TANK All wells 100 100 Water courses (top of bank) 100 100 Reservoirs (high water mark) 200 200 Cuts or steep embankments (top of cut) 4xh2 4xh 1 Drainageway /swale (break of slope) 50 50 Property line 10 10 Foundation 10 5 Water service line 10 10 Septic tanks 6 Swimming pool 10 10 Road easement, pavement, or driveway 5 5 (1) No private sewage disposal system shall be approved on any parcel of land where the percolation rate exceeds 120 min/inch or is less than 1 min/inch. (m) No part of any private sewage disposal system shall cross any property line. (n) Upon notice from the director that work on the sewage disposal system is being conducted in violation of this chapter, or in an unsafe or dangerous manner, such work shall be immediately stopped. The stop work order shall be in writing and shall be issued to the owner of the property involved, or to the owner's agent, or to the person doing the work. It shall state the conditions under which work may be resumed. Section B1 1 -13.1 Plans. Plans shall include a contoured plot plan to a minimum scale of one (1") inch to twenty (20') feet. The plans shall comply with and contain all information required by Santa Clara County Health Department, Septic Tank Sewage Disposal System, Bulletin "A and any additional information the director may require. Any change in the plans after the issuance of a permit may invalidate the permit unless the changes are first approved by the direciitor. Section B11-14 Fees. Permit fees for sewage disposal systems subject to this chapter and all related fees shall be an amount as determined by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. Section B11-15 State contractor's license required for installation or repair; registration fee. No person shall install, construct, alter, enlarge, reconstruct, replace, improve, recondition, or repair a private sewage disposal system pursuant to this article unless such person has done the following: (a) Secured a general engineering contractor's license (Class A) as defined in Section 7056 of the Business and Professions Code, or a Class C-42 sanitation system contractor's license from the Contractors State License Board of the State of California: and (b) Registered with the director and paid a fifty dollar ($50.00) registraiition fee upon furnishing satisfactory proof to the director as to the possession of such state contractor's license. Proof of a current valid license shall be supplied to the director by June 30 and biennially thereafter. The property owner may construct or repair an on -site sewage disposal system on his/her own property. which system serves or will serve the building on said property that is neither being offered for sale nor intended to be so offered provided: (a) persons hired by the owner to do the subject work must comply with Section B11 -15 (a) and (b); and, (b) a permit is obtained. Section B11-16 Refusal to issue building permit. No building permit shall be issued for any building that is not to be connected to an approved sanitary sewer unless the applicant has received written approval of the director for the on -site sewage disposal system. Section B11-17 Refusal to issue certification of occupancy. (a) No certification of occupancy shall be issued for any building that is not connected to an approved sanitary sewer without written approval of the director for the on site sewage disposal system. (b) No person shall occupy or otherwise use any premises or building that has not been connected to an approved sanitary sewer unless the method of sewage disposal has been approved by the director. Section B11-18 Reserved. Section B11-19 Cumulative impact. Where sewage disposal systems are installed or considered, ground water mounding and watershed protection are factors to be considered. The director may require additional geological studies or other information demonstrating to the satisfaction of the director, that use of a subsurface leaching system will not do any of the following: permit sewage effluent to surface, degrade water quality, create a nuisance, jeopardize other properties, affect soil stability, or present a threat to the public health or safety. The applicant shall submit a technical report addressing each of these concerns. The report shall be prepared by a state registered civil engineer with a soils and geologiiical background or a state certified engineering geologist. The technical report shall include, but shall not be limited to, soil percolation rates, contours, soil depth, seasonal ground water elevation(s), location of all existing or proposed ground cuts, rock formations, soil stability, drainage, a cumulative impact assessment, and other such data as determined by the director and the Caliiifornia Regional Water Quality Control Board having jurisdiction. Section B1 1-20 Sewer wells; cesspools; seepage pits. l•- All sewer wells, cesspools. seepage pits, and similar excavations are hereby declared to be a public nuisance and are prohibited. Section B11-20.1 Holding tanks. All holding tanks are hereby declared to be a public nuisance and are prohibited. (a) Exception to this prohibition may be granted by the director: (1) If it is necessary to use a holding tank to abate a nuisance or health hazard. (2) If used in conjunction with a public sanitary sewer where there is an agreement between the public agency and the property owner for maintenance of the holding tank. (3) If. in a non residential land use, vital to the public health, safety, or welfare. wherein a conventional septic tank and drainfield system cannot be approved and a holding tank is determined by the director to provide the safest and most acceptable method of sewage disposal. (b) Where exceptions are granted, the director must also approve the tank pumper and maintenance schedule. Section B11-21 Permit and sewage disposal plans; new construction; rebuilding: remodeling. No person shall construct, build, rebuild, or remodel any residence, place of business, or other building or place where persons reside, congregate or are employed which is not to he connected to an approved sanitary sewer without first submitting plans of the sewage disposal system to the director for approval and obtaining a permit pursuant to this chapter. The permit cannot be transferred and expires one (1) year after the date of issuance; except that the director, upon a showing of good cause, may extend the permit for any time not to exceed one (1) additional year. Failure to obtain a permit from the director is a violation of this chapter. The director may revoke a permit or approval issued pursuant to this chapter in case of any false statement, or misrepresentation of fact in the application or on the plans on which the permit or approval was based. Section B11-22 Septic tank requirements. (a) Septic tanks shall be a minimum of fifteen hundred (1,500) gallons with two (2) compartments. For above average sewage volumes, the director may require a larger tank size to achieve sufficient holding time for the anticipated sewage load. The first compartment shall be two thirds the total tank volume. The compartments are to be separated by a baffle or equivaulent arrangement. The tank dimensions shall be such as to provide maximum settling and treatment. (b) Septic tanks shall be watertight and constructed of reinforced conucrete, heavyweight reinforced concrete blocks, or other materials as approved by the director. All interior surfaces shall be coated with bitumastic or similar compound to minimize corrosion. (c) Access to each septic tank compartment shall be provided by a manhole at least twenty (20) inches in diameter and having a durable handle to facilitate removal: (d) A riser shall extend from each manhole cover to or above the surface of the ground. The riser shall be of a size larger than the manhole cover, be both gas and watertight, and be constructed of durable material. (e) All connections from building to septic tank shall conform with construction standards as required by the local building official. Section B11-23 Solid pipe, joints and connections. Pipe for sewage disposal systems shall conform to the standards of the most recent edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code which is adopted by reference into the county's building ordinances. Pipe diameter shall be four (4) inches. All solid pipe joints and connections shall be glued. cemented. or made with an elastomeric seal so as to be watertight. Section B11-23.1 Distribution pipe. Perforated pipe for distribution systems shall conform to the most recent edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code which is adopted by reference into the county's building ordinances. Pipe diameter shall be four (4) inches. Section B11-24 Subsurface leaching system requirements. A subsurface leaching system shall consist of trenches two (2) feet in width, a minimum of three (3) feet and a maximum of eight (8) feet in depth, containing four (4) inch perforated sewage conductor pipe and filled with washed rock 3/4 to 2 1/2 inches in size. In addition, subsurface leaching systems are subject to the following requirements: (a) Trenches shall be placed in undisturbed earth and in an accessible area. (b) The bottom of a trench shall be level (0 -2 inches maximum slope /100 lineal feet). (c) Trenches shall not be excavated when the soil is so wet that smearing or compaction occurs. (d) In clay soils when glazing occurs, the trench surfaces shall be scarified to the depth of the glazing and the loose material reiimoved. (e) Rock material in the trench shall be washed and free of fines, and shall be covered with untreated building paper prior to backfilling with natural earth. (0 The minimum design volume shall be 450 gallons per day for up to a three bedroom dwelling; for each additional bedroom or potential bedroom, 150 gallons per day shall be added. (g) Commercial sewage disposal systems shall be sized based on peak flows. (h) Trench length for each leaching system shall be determined by the following: allons of effluent s g sq ft of trench loading rate (gal /sq ft) sq ft of trench lineal feet of trench per each half of 4 sq ft/lineal foot dual system of trench Maximum Effluent Loading Rates of Soil Absorption Systems Percolation Rate Loading Rate min/in* gal /ft2 /dav Less than 1 system prohibited 1to10 0.56 11 to 20 0.45 21 to 30 0.30 31 to 40 0.26 41 to 60 0.23 61 to 120 0.20 greater than 120 system prohibited "'Average stabilized percolation rate **Regional Water Quality Control Board approval is necessary ary (Section B11-5.) Regardless of the above, each dual leaching system shall be a minimum of two hundred (200) feet. When sufficient information is available, the director may designate the length of drainfield required in lieu of a percolaiition test. Each linear foot of trench equates to four (4) square feet of effective infiltrative surface. (i) Adjacent trenches on slopes shall be connected with a watertight overflow line in a manner that allows each trench to be filled with sewage effluent to the depth of the rock before the sewage flows to the next lower trench. (j) Trenches shall be constructed in accordance with the following requirements: Construction Details: Length of trench by percolation rate Width of trench, in inches 24 Depth of trench, in feet minimum 3 Depth of trench, in feet maximum 8 Minimum cover over rock, in inches 12 Spacing of trenches, center to center, in feet minimum 10 Rock under pipe, in inches, minimum 18 Rock over pipe. in inches 2 Size of rock, in inches '/4 -2 Section B11-25 Construction inspections. A stamped copy of the building plans for the approved sewage disposal system shall be kept available at the job site during system installation and the system passes final inspection by the director. Inspections of each new installation shall be made to ensure compliance with all the requirements of this code. Requests for inspection must be made at least one business day in advance of the commencement of work. In the event the director deterumines there has been an improper installation, a stop work order may be posted on the job site. Before any further work is done on a posted system, clearance from the director must be obtained. Section B11-25.1 Posting of maintenance guidelines. Upon final approval of the system, the director shall provide a card which shall be posted on the premises showing the date that the system was finalized, system maintenance guidelines. and the telephone number of Enviiironmental Health Services. Section B I 1 -26 Slope variances. No sewage subsurface leaching system shall be constructed on slopes exceeding 20 percent. Variances to this slope reuquirement may be granted by the director where the applicant can demonstrate, through a technical report and a complete engineering installation plan prepared by a state registered civil engineer, or a state certified engineering geologist, or a state registered environmental health specialist that use of a subsurface leaching system will not permit sewage effluent to surface, or will degrade water quality, create a nuisance, affect soil stability, or present a threat to the public health or safety. The technical report shall include, but not be limited to. soil percolation rates, contours, soil depth, seasonal ground water elevation(s), location of all existing or proposed ground cuts, rock formations, soil stability, drainage, and such other data as determined by the director and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board having jurisdiction. Section B11-27 Life extending construction. (a) Major expansion and/or major intensification of use. Where conustruciition associated with an existing structure will result in a major expanusion of the structure (greater than 500 cumulative square feet of all additions) or where such construction will result in a major intensification of the use of the property, the on -site sewage disposal system shall meet the minimum prevailing sewage disposal requirements of this code. (b) Minor expansion. Where construction associated with an existing structure will result in a minor expansion of the structure (500 cumulative square feet or less of all additions) the director shall: (1) Conduct an on -site inspection to determine adequacy and safe functioning of the existing sewage disposal system. (2 Require exposure q p and pumping of the existing septic tank except where g P p the applicant can document that the tank has been pumped within the last three years: a receipt for service from a licensed septic tank pumping firm may be considered sufficient documentation. (3) Determine the location of existing leachlines and identification of area where future leachline expansion may occur; the septic tank file shall then be updated. (4) Require improvement and/or expansion of the existing sewage disposal system when. in the judgement of the director, the system is determined to be inadequate to accept current and /or projected waste flows. Such determinations are to be made based on size and functioning of the current system, coupled with slope, soil, hydrological, and related factors. Where inspection results in a determination that the sewage disposal system is failing, can reasonably be expected to fail or to contaminate surface or ground waters, the director shall require the replacement or improvement of the sewage disposal system pursuant to Section B11-11 of this code. Where improvement and/or expansion of the sewage disposal system is required. but required repairs cannot be made, the director shall disallow the application. (c) Remodeling or repair. Where the existing sewage disposal system does not meet requirements of this chapter, but is functioning safely and cannot be improved, construction shall be limited to the remodeling or repair (as defined in the Uniform Building Code) of the existing structure provided: (1) The construction will not constitute any expansion or intensifiucation of the use of the property or structure. (2) Construction will not result in conversion of uninhabitable area(s) such as a garage. deck. porch, patio. or similar area(s) to habitable area(s). For purposes of implementing this section, the term "intensification of use" shall mean a change which may place an additional demand on the sewage disposal system of a property. The magnitude of the intensification (major or minor) shall be determined by the director. The'restrictions in this section also apply in the event of accidental or natural damage to a structure, where no expansion or intensification of use exists. For purposes of implementing this section, the terms "remodeling" and "repair" are as defined in the Uniform Building Code which is adopted by reference into the county's building ordinance. Section B11-28 Abatement. To the extent possible, failing sewage disposal systems shall be brought into compliance with this code. In case of any failure, malfunction, or breakdown of any private sewage disposal system, if not corrected within a time designated by the director, the director may order or cause corrections to be made and bill the property owner for such costs and may place a lien on the property for such abatement costs. The director may also order vacation of the premises if no safe manner of abatement is possible. B11-29 Abandoned private sewage disposal systems. Every private sewage disposal system which has been abandoned or has been discontinued from further use or to which no waste or waste discharge pipe from a plumbing fixture is connected shall: (a) Have the sewage removed from, and disposed of, in an approved manner. (b) Have the tank top and bottom crushed, backfilled, and compacted with material approved by the director or be removed and disposed of in an approved manner. Section B11-29.1 Record notice of violation. The director may record a notice of the existence of a substandard sewage disposal system violation in the office of the county recorder, and shall notify the owner of the affected real property. and any other known party responsible for the violation that such action has been taken. This notice is to inform all parties that no improvements, including building addictions. can be approved while the substandard sewage disposal system continues in operation. Section B11-30 Appeal from denial, revocation, or suspension. Any appeal to the decision of the director pursuant to this chapter shall be made in writing to the Regional Water Quality Control Board having jurisdiction within fifteen (15) days after any such decision is received by the applicant. A copy of such appeal shall also be filed with the director. The appeal shall specifically describe the grounds upon which it is taken. The decision issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board shall be final. Section B11-31 B11-34 Reserved. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara, State of California on 1990 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors NOES: Supervisors ABSENT: Supervisors Chairperson SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIV SUMMARY NO. 3(0?? AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: April 7, 1999 CITY MANAGER ORIGINATING DEPT: Office of the City Manager Paula Reeve, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement with CCS Planning and Engineering to begin Phase I of the Prides Crossing Traffic Study RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Authorize staff to enter into a professional services agreement with CCS Planning and Engineering to perform several tasks associated with Phase I of the Prides Crossing Traffic Study. REPORT SUMMARY: During the February 2, 1999 meeting, Council approved the concept of entering into a contract with CCS Planning and Engineering to perform several initial tasks associated with Phase I of the Prides Crossing Traffic Study. Prior reports to Council and the Public Safety Commission are included in (Attachment 1). After researching various options, staff has now determined that Phase I of the Study should consist of the following tasks listed on the CCS Cost Proposal Summary (Attachment 2) including the Initial Workshop, Data Gathering, and the Tool Kit. Initial Workshop City staff and CCS representatives intend to begin the Study by conducting an initial workshop to involve the Prides Crossing community in identifying traffic problems and concerns in their neighborhoods. This approach actively involves residents from the beginning of the project, and their concerns are immediately acknowledged and recorded. It also gives staff a starting point to identify the issues and a chance to garner the residents' trust and cooperation. Issues that are critical to a small number of people will be weeded out early, since the responsibility for building support rests with the residents making the initial complaint. Data Gathering CCS personnel will then conduct a variety of data collection activities to help define the problems identified during the workshop. These include such research tools as traffic counts, radar speed studies, license plate counts, observations, attitudinal and mail -back surveys to determine the number of neighborhood residents affected, and noise surveys to determine the number of neighborhood residents affected, and noise measurements. The recently hired City Traffic Engineer will take an active role in reviewing and commenting on the data collected by CCS. It is particularly important that the data collection process occurs before schools let out in June so the statistics accurately reflect the impact of school related traffic patterns in the area. The data collected may confirm the problems identified during the initial workshop, and justify proceeding with Phase H of the Study where another workshop is held with residents as a basis to establish consensus on the solutions. The Tool Kit Phase I of the Study also involves having CCS develop a Tool Kit consisting of traffic management guidelines specifically tailored for Saratoga. This process leads users directly to the tools designed to remedy particular problems without having to sift through a large number of actions and devices. As local interest in Traffic Calming grows, staff recognizes the need to develop a systematic approach to follow when determining whether and how future projects should be undertaken FISCAL IMPACTS: The combined total for the Initial Workshop, Data Gathering and the Tool Kit as outlined on the attached CCS spreadsheet is $8,555. Funds to cover this expense are included in the approved FY 98/99 General Engineering Program Budget under Activity 4013, Engineering Services Contracts. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING: An agreement would not be entered into with CCS to begin Phase I of the Prides Crossing Traffic Study as anticipated by staff and the Public Safety Commission. Since extensive work has already been undertaken to reach this recommendation, and the Public Safety Commission gave its assurance to support Phase I of the Study, the residents of Prides Crossing may become discouraged with the City's inability to begin the project. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Execution of Agreement by City Manager and CCS Traffic and Engineering. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Background Reports 2. CCS Traffic and Engineering Cost Proposal Summary Attachment 1 i X04 sAAril oEuc2FI cD gg., D ACgOZA ilegt 13777 FRLIITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (40S) SOS-1200 (s()1 MEMBERS: Star: Bo,�osiar. .cocs Snag 7 w1d;: L February 2, 1999 To: The City Council From: Paula Reeve, Analyst Office of the City Manager Re: Status Update on Greater Prides Crossing Area Traffic Study and approval to hire CCS Planning and Engineering c: The Public Safety Commission RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council directs staff to proceed with developing a contract to have CCS Planning and Engineering proceed with only the data gathering and Traffic Calming workbook components of the Greater Prides Crossing Area Traffic Study. BACKGROUND: The Task Force presented a recommendation to the Public Safety Commission to accept proposals from CCS Planning and Engineering and Alternate Street Design to conduct a Traffic Study of the greater Prides Crossing residential neighborhood at the October 2, 1998 meeting (Attachment 1). After a lengthy discussion the Public Safety Commission approved the concept of the Study, but agreed that conducting the entire study would be premature and out of sequence with the Circulation Element update taking place this year. Therefore, the Commission recommended working on two components of the Study while the Circulation Element is being amended, and postponing the remaining tasks in the scope of work pending completion of the update. These initial tasks include data gathering in the Prides Crossing area, and developing a Traffic Calming workbook, or standard guidelines to address similar traffic problems occurring throughout Saratoga. Panted on recycled paper Once the update is completed, Prides Crossing would be the prototype for testing the criteria formulated in the new Circulation Element and the Traffic Calming workbook, or "tool- kit At this point, staff is requesting approval from the City Council to develop a contract with CCS Planning and Engineering to perform the tasks listed above. Prior to securing the services of CCS Planning and Engineering, however, staff is reconsidering the level of involvement required of them to complete the work. Staff is exploring two additional options including: 1) developing the Traffic Calming work book in- house, with final review /editing performed by CCS Planning and Engineering, and 2) having the new City Traffic Engineer conduct the data collection with review and analysis by CCS. A final recommendation regarding the scope and costs of a contract with CCS would then be brought back to the Council for approval on March 3. Attachment 1 04 SA pi S et aegt 13777 i i i FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 950 (1 (-10 1) 5(i,ti -1 _'U� i ('0l' ('IL 11EJ1131.:1?S. E October 2, 1998 To: Hugh Hexamer, Chair, Public Safety Commission Public Safety Commission From: Paula Reeve, Analyst Office of the City Manager Subject: Task Force Recommendation Concerning Greater Prides Crossing Area Traffic Study RECOMMENDATION: That the Public Safety Commission recommends that the City Council accept proposals from CCS Planning and Engineering and Alternate Street Design to conduct a traffic study of the greater Prides Crossing residential neighborhood. BACKGROUND: For several years now, the residents within the Prides Crossing area, and in particular, residents along Miller Avenue, have voiced their concerns to the City Council and the Public Safety Commission about traffic problems in their neighborhood. These include: Cut through and speeding traffic on Miller Avenue, particularly since the opening of State Route 85. Vehicle Code violations and congestion resulting from the excessive traffic near the Christa McAuliffe Elementary School. Reckless drivers and cut through traffic on Brookglen Drive, due to the configuration of the street. In an effort to address and resolve these on -going concerns, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a traffic calming study of the greater Prides Crossing residential neighborhood in February 1998. The intent of the Study is to evaluate the actual conditions of traffic speeds and volumes on streets within the greater Prides Crossing area, evaluate the impacts of traffic control and calming devices or traffic enforcement including potential or estimated diversion from one street to another; including along the major arterial streets bordering the neighborhood, and to recommend end specific traffic calming techniques or other mitigation measures for specific streets where appropriate. One additional outcome of the Study will be to develop a set of guidelines for the City to follow when considering future Traffic Calming projects. During March 1998, five proposals were received from qualified traffic planning and engineering consulting firms in response to the RFP. In order to move the process forward, a task force composed of Councilmember Jim Shaw, Public Safety Commissioners Frank Lemmon and Fran Andreson, Erman Dorsey and Paula Reeve of City staff, and two members of the public, Elmer Szanto and Nancy Finnigan, was convened to review the proposals, recommend a scope of work for the project, and secure a final proposal from the top ranked firm to perform the recommended scope of work. PROPOSAL SELECTION During a series of meetings, the Task Force reviewed and ranked the proposals, agreed upon a scope of work, and interviewed the most qualified consultants. The Task Force based its selection on the following evaluation criteria: the consultant's demonstrated experience and ability to manage similar projects involving municipalities and other agencies, the quality, amount, and type of services proposed the work plan, and the fee. After reviewing the proposals, the Committee unanimously agreed the proposal from CCS Planning Engineering comprehensively addressed the scope of work in the RFP for a competitive fee. An abbreviated format of the proposal is included in Attachment 1. A spreadsheet on Page 4 summarizes the tasks, time requirements and the associated fees totaling $17,285. Several additional factors influencing the Committee's selection of CCS were the firm having previously completed successful traffic calming and engineering projects in Saratoga, and having its office located in nearby San Jose. The proposal of a second firm, Alternate Street Design, was also chosen to compliment the services of CCS. Traffic Engineer Michael Wallwork, the President of Alternate Street Design, a Florida based firm, has world -wide experience with traffic calming projects. Mr. Wallwork has presented impressive local seminars on traffic calming techniques which several Task Force members have attended. The Task Force concurred that due to his expertise with traffic calming, Mr. Wallwork's services should be retained on an hourly basis, up to a maximum of twenty hours, to rovide additional P expert advice. At this time, Mr. Wallwork has agreed to work on a retainer basis in conjunction with CCS to provide the services outlined on Attachment 2 for a fee of $4,200. The combined total of both the CCS and Alternate Street Design proposals is $21,485. FISCAL IMPACTS: The estimated cost to complete the work outlined in the two proposals is roughly $21,485. The City's FY 1998/99 adopted budget contains $25,000 for this study. SUMMARY As local interest in Traffic Calming grows, the City recognizes the need to develop a systematic approach to determine whether and how future Traffic Calming projects in Saratoga should be undertaken. As mentioned earlier, a very important outcome of the Prides Crossing Area Traffic Study will be a set of guidelines for the City to follow when considering future Traffic Calming projects in Saratoga. The Study, in essence, is a prototype and a valuable opportunity to complete a comprehensive Study to address specific traffic problems in a large residential section of the City. The Task Force recommends conducting the entire study. Aside from the initial data collected by the selected engineering consulting firm, the input from the neighborhood residents is a vital component to gain a clear understanding of the traffic problems affecting the Prides Crossing Area. The matter is now before the Public Safety Commission to recommend to the City Council whether to proceed with the project, or to suggest some other alternative which the Commission feels is more appropriate. Respectfully submitted: Paula Reeve CCS PLANN AND ENGR 408 CCS Proposal Attachment 1 City of Saratoga Prides Crossing Area Trafc Study Scope of Work I Scope of Work CCS will complete the Traffic Study through the following work tasks. Task 1 Data Gathering CCS will lead this task, to include review of available traffic counts and speed data already collected by the City or residents, and definition of additional data needed. We will work with area residents to recruit volunteers to collect data, and will collect the remaining data with consultant staff. This scope and fee assume CCS will collect machine volume counts at unto three locations (7-day counts), and peak hour counts at two ca3ions, This task also includes visits to local traffic generators such as the schools, churches, or temples, to talk to staff and collect traffic- related information. Information to be requested will include schedules of events, typical participation, staff size, locations of parking lots, maps of school districts, and location of participant residences (zip code only, we will not request street addresses). A third important component of this task is data collection from the Sheriff and Fire Departments. Each department will be asked to provide statistics and information on current response times and routes, and locations of substations that typically respond to incidents in the Prides Crossing neighborhood. Deliverables Traffic count and speed data, map of emergency vehicles response routes and travel times Task 2 Initial Workshop Smith E&M staff will lead the initial workshop. The most fundamental purpose of the initial workshop is to understand the community member's perceptions of the problem. We understand that not all residents will perceive the problem to have the same nature, cause or intensity and that several definitions of a problem may be offered. Another key purpose of the initial workshop is to explain the rules and process. For example, if the City has objective criteria for installing a speed hump or a stop sign, these should be made plain up front. Workshop handouts will be distributed to educate participants and facilitate the discussion. These handouts will include information sheets on traffic calming devices with descriptions of the intended uses for each device, and "tool kits" from other communities showing how traffic calming plans are developed and implemented. A sample handout from a recent project in Oakland included in our proposal is incorporated herein by reference. Informational handouts will also be available to help participants understand traffic calming devices and how they work. CCS Revised 9/8/98 Page 1 CCS PLANN AND ENGR 408 09/07 '98 16:51 NO.986 04/05 City of Saratoga Prides Crossing Area Traffic Study Scope of Work A secondary goal of the workshop facilitator is to draw critics and opponents into the process early. If any Prides Crossing Area residents are opposed to traffic calming treatments, it is desirable to draw them into the process early and not allow them to remain silent. A planning process driven solely by traffic calming activists can result in a plan that draws storms of protest by opponents and leaves public officials caught in a crossfire. Involvement of opponents early tends to temper solutions so that what gets proposed as the outcome of the process is likely to be accepted by a broader segment of the community. Deliverables Workshop handouts, record of public input Task 3 Field Workshop CCS will lead the second workshop which should be held within the Prides Crossing neighborhood. CCS will present the results of the data collection, a summary of public input at the initial workshop, emergency vehicle inputs, and a draft traffic calming plan which will be described as a "straw man" concept to start the discussion. Residents will be invited to suggest ideas or changes to the draft plan, and the meeting facilitator will mark all suggestions on a large copy of the draft plan. All suggestions will be briefly evaluated for effectiveness and for impact on emergency vehicle response mutes before being included in the draft plan. As consensus is reached, CCS staff will adjourn the indoor onion of the meeting eetrng and invite interested participants to take part in a field review of individual plan elements. The review will determine precise locations for each element, and document if there may be any objectionable parking loss or other concerns. Deliverables Draft "Straw Man" Plan, Revised Plan, Field Notes Task 4 Preliminary Report CCS will lead preparation of the report with significant input from Smith E&M. The preliminary report will summarize traffic characteristics of the neighborhood, the proposed traffic calming plan, a discussion of the expected benefits of each element of the plan, and expected construction costs. Each element of the plan will be identified with a relative priority, and elements will be grouped into bundles, so the plan can be constructed in stages. The report will also include a qualitative assessment of potential traffic impacts on surrounding areas. A separate chapter of the report will be devoted to emergency vehicle response routes and times. The recommended plan will be developed to avoid increases in response times or mandates for route changes. However, if some of the plan elements result in any potential impacts on emergency vehicle response, this chapter of the report will fully disclose the impacts. The Preliminary Report will be presented at a meeting of the Public Safety Commission and one additional CCS Revised 9/8/98 Page 2 CCS PLANN AND ENGR 408 09/07 '98 16:52 NO.986 05/05 (dry of Saratoga Prides Crossing Area Tra Study Scope of Work meeting if needed. Deliverables Preliminary Report (15 copies plus reproducible. originals) Task 5 Final Report CCS will meet with City staff to receive comments received on the preliminary report and discuss possible revisions. Comments will be incorporated to prepare the Final Report. Drawings of each element of the plan will be included in a format suitable to guide construction of the elements. CCS will present the Final Report and plan to the City Council. CCS staff will be available to provide as- needed support to City staff for implementation and follow -up monitoring. Deliverables Final Report (5 copies plus reproducible originals) Task 6 Tool Kit This task will result in development of a traffic calming workbook for application to any neighborhood in Saratoga. The tool kit will address the RFP statement that the draft report produced in Task 5 "should discuss the extent to which the recommendations considered could be applied to address similar traffic problems throughout the City leading to development to stardpidelines for future traffic calming efforts." Elements of the tool kit include: CA process_4hrough which residents bring concerns to the attention of officials, matters are studied, alternatives are considered and appropriate actions taken. It would include procedures for petitions to initiate study efforts, definition of threshold levels indicating when calming action may be appropriate (see excerpt from Boulder in our proposal), a process for study of alternatives, and procedures for assurance that a majority of residents support the proposed alternative. Templates for petitions and sample community information sheets would be included. Specific policy guidelines, standards and warrants for speed humps, and stop signs on local residential streets. A community "tool kit" for traffic calming. The "tool kit" is a public information document that lets residents know what traffic calming resources are available as well as what constraints and Iimitations there are. It would include descriptions of the various measures responding to neighborhood traffic problems, a summary of the situations where each measure works well and where it works poorly, advantages and trade -offs, illustrations of each measures, design considerations, specific site location criteria and design requirements and, if specific conditions are required to authorize employment of a particular measure, a description of those "warrants The tool kit will consist of a compilation of relevant materials from other agencies. Deliverables Tool Kit (one bound and one unbound copy) C CS Revised 9/8/98 Page 3 10/07/98 10:04 FAX 828 254 4002 KINKO'S Attachment 2 Alternate Street Design, P.A. 3289 Country Oaks Court, Orange Park, Florida 32065 -7641 f 904-269-1851, Fax 904-278 -4996, Email: wallwork @mediaone.net October 2, 1998 Paula Reeve Office of the City manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: Traffic Calming Project Dear Ms Reeve: Alternate Street Design, P.A. is submitting this revised proposal as requested to incorporate a smaller scope of services as requested below. Scope of Services Travel to Saratoga to review sites during the day and peak periods to develop a clear understanding of what is happening in the field. 2.. A review of the data applying to the area. 3. A public workshop where the residents are educated on traffic calming, their problems arc identified with the necessary follow -up questions to ensure that the `real' problems arc brought forth, setting of objectives that are realistic and then conducting a public design workshop where they are assisted in preparing their own traffic calming scheme. PROFESSIONAL FEES: Our professional fee for the trips, attending the public meetings, design and reviews is as follows: Professional Engineer $3,000.00 Travel costs estimate (billed at cost) $1,200.00 Approximate Total $4,200.00 Professional fee for additional services is $150.00 per hour. 10 /07 /98 10:04 FAX 828 254 4002 KINKO'S 002 Paula Reeve Traffic Calming Project Page Two If the above scope of work and fees meet with your approval, please indicate Pe y ppr ,pleas indieat your acceptance of this agreement by signing in the space provided. Enclosed are two originals for your signature, please return one to this office for our records. Sincerely, Alternate Street Design Mic 1 J. Wallwork, P.E. .President/ ransportation Engineer Terms Accepted By: Signature Date Name (typed or printed) Title Organization Estimated Staff Hours and Cost Prides Crossing Area Traffic Study CCS and Smith E &M Revised 9/8/98 CCS Staff SE &M Total Labor Row Task Description Fitzsimons Fairchild Kobayashi Tech Office Smith Hours Exp. Cost I Total $125 $105 $70 $50 $60 $125 _1 1 Data Gathering 2 12 10 4 28 $325 $2,050 $2,375 2 Initial Workshop 2 4 16 22 $150 $2,450 $2,600 3- Field Workshop 1 8 8 2 2 21 $50 $1,895 $1,945 4 Preliminary Report 2 20 4 8 16 6 56 $150 $4,740 $4,890 5- Final Report 1 8 2 2 4 2 20 $200 $1,695 $1,895 6 Tool Kit 8 2 4 1 16 30 $400 $3,180 $3,580 Total Labor Hours 4 48 26 22 30 46 177 Total Column Cost $500 $5,040 $1,820 $1,100 $1,800 $5,750 $1,275 $16,010 $17,28 f W i'" (T `t i N1 1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 3/0 I AGENDA ITEM 8"8 MEETING DATE: APRIL 7, 1990 CITY MGR: S 1Tl llI ORIGINATING DEPT.: PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. AFAD: .1 e l SUBJECT: Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA -1; Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report and Adoption of Resolution of Intention for FY 99 -00 Recommended Motion(s): 1. Move to adopt the Resolution preliminarily approving the Engineer's Report for FY 99 -00. 2. Move to adopt the Resolution of Intention. Report Summary: Attached are the next two Resolutions the Council must adopt to continue the process for renewing the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA -1 for FY 99 -00. Briefly, the two Resolutions are: 1. A Resolution of Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1999 -2000 This is the Resolution required under Streets Highways Code Section 22623 which grants preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for the renewal of the District for FY 99 -00. (NOTE The Engineer's Report will be finalized early next week and transmitted under separate cover.) 2. A Resolution of Intention to order the levy and collection of assessments Fiscal Year 1999- 2000 This is the Resolution required under S &H 22624 which, among other things, fixes the date and time for the Public (Protest) Hearing on June 2. There are no significant changes proposed for any of the Zones within the District in FY 99 -00. However, staff recently bid out the landscape maintenance work in all of the landscape districts, and the figures for maintenance services in the Engineer's Report will reflect the bid amounts received. In all cases, these are higher than what the current maintenance costs are. This generally translates into higher assessments for the landscape districts, yet may not trigger the Prop. 218 balloting process since several of these Zones authorized an even higher ceiling on their assessments in balloting conducted over the past few years. Those Zones which will require balloting will be identified at the meeting when the Engineer's Report is presented. The actual award of the new maintenance contracts will not occur until June 2, after the close of the public hearing when the final assessment amounts are approved. Both Resolutions must be adopted by separate vote at your meeting to continue the process of renewing the District for another year in the time frame called for in the Budget Preparation Calendar. Fiscal Impacts: There are no direct fiscal impacts on the City's General Fund from the Landscaping Lighting Assessment District. All of the costs associated with the District are recovered via the assessments. Advertising, Noticing and Public Contact: Nothing additional at this time. After your meeting, the Resolution of Intention will be published and mailed, along with a separate notice to those property owners subject to the Prop. 218 balloting process, informing them of the Public Hearing, and which will also include the ballot and balloting instructions. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: The Resolutions would not be adopted and the process for renewing the District would not continue. Follow Up Actions: The Resolution of Intention will be published and mailed with the required notices and Proposition 218 ballots to certain property owners. Attachments: 1. Resolutions (2). RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA -1 FISCAL YEAR 1999 2000 RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, on the 17th day of February, 1999, said Council did adopt its Resolution No. 99 -10, "A Resolution Describing Improvements and Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report For Fiscal Year 1999- 2000," for the City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA -1, in said City and did refer the proposed improvements to the Engineer of the City and did therein direct said City Engineer to prepare and file with the City Clerk of said City a report, in writing, all as therein more particularly described: WHEREAS, said City Engineer prepared and filed with the City Clerk a report in writing as called for in said Resolution No. 99 -10 and under and pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; WHEREAS, said Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that neither said report, nor any part thereof should be modified in any respect; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and ordered, as follows: 1. That the plans and specifications for the existing improvements and the proposed new improvements to be made within the assessment district or within any zone thereof, contained in said report, be, and they are hereby preliminarily approved. 2. That the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs and expenses of said improvements, maintenance and servicing thereof, and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report, be, and each of them are hereby preliminarily approved. 3. That the diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the assessment district referred to and described in said Resolution No. 99 -10 and also the boundaries of any zones therein and the lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within said district as such lot or parcel of land is shown on the County Assessor's maps for the fiscal year to which the report applies, each of which lot or parcel of land has been given a separate number upon said diagram, as contained in said report, be, and it hereby is preliminarily approved. 1 4. That the proposed assessment of the total amount of the estimated costs and expenses of the proposed improvements upon the several lots or parcels of land in said assessment district in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots or parcels, respectively, from said improvements including the maintenance or servicing or both, thereof, and of the expenses incidental thereto, as contained in said report, be, and they are hereby preliminarily approved. 5. That said report shall stand as the Engineer's Report for the purpose of all subsequent proceedings to be had pursuant to said Resolution No. 99 -10. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 7th day of April, 1999 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 2 RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA -1 FISCAL YEAR 1999 -2000 RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 99 -10, "A Resolution Describing Improvements and Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report for Fiscal Year 1999 2000," for City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA -1, adopted on February 17, 1999, by the City Council of said City, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, the Engineer of said City has prepared and filed with the Clerk of this City the written report called for under said Act and by said Resolution No. 99 -10, which said report has been submitted and preliminarily approved by this Council in accordance with said Act; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and ordered, as follows: 1. In its opinion the public interest and convenience require and it is the intention of this Council to order the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 1999 -2000 pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the construction or installation of the improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" hereto attached and by reference incorporated herein. 2. The cost and expenses of said improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, are to be made chargeable upon the assessment district designated as "City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA -1," the exterior boundaries of which are the composite and consolidated areas as more particularly described on a map thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of said City, to which reference is hereby made for further particulars. Said map indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory included in the district and of any zone thereof and the general location of said district. 1 3. Said Engineer's Report prepared by the Engineer of said City, preliminarily approved by this Council, and on file with the City Clerk of this City is hereby referred to for a full and detailed description of the improvements and the boundaries of the assessment district and any zones therein, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the district. 4. Notice is hereby given that Wednesday, the 2n day of June, 1999, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, be and the same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place for a hearing by this Council on the question of the levy and collection of the proposed assessment for the construction or installation of said improvements, including the maintenance and servicing, or both, thereof, and when and where it will consider all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person at or before the conclusion of said hearing, against said improvements, the boundaries of the assessment district and any zone therein, the proposed diagram or the proposed assessment, to the Engineer's estimate of the cost thereof, and when and where it will consider and finally act upon the Engineer's report, and tabulate the ballots. 5. The Clerk of said City be, and hereby is, directed to give notice of said hearing by causing a copy of this Resolution to be published once in the Saratoga News, a newspaper published and circulated in said City, and by conspicuously posting a copy thereof upon the official bulletin board customarily used by the City of Saratoga for the posting of notices, said posting and publication to be had and completed at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing specified herein. 6. The Office of the City Engineer be, and hereby is designated as the office to answer inquiries regarding any protest proceedings to be had herein, and may be contacted during g the regular office hours at the City Hall, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070, or by calling (408) 868 -1216. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 7 of April, 1999, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 2 Mayor Attest: City Clerk 3 Exhibit A DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS The design, construction or installation, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, of landscaping, including trees, shrubs, grass or other ornamental vegetation, statuary, fountains and other ornamental structures and facilities, and public lighting facilities for the lighting of any public places, including traffic signals, ornamental standards, luminaires, poles, supports, tunnels, manholes, vaults, conduits, pipes, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, braces, transformers, insulators, contacts, switches, capacitors, meters, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances, including the cost of repair, removal or replacement of all or any part thereof; providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste; electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other improvements; and the operation of any fountains or the maintenance of any other improvements. s MSRdsp March 28. 1997 JAWPDIMNRSW12731RES971EXA UA97 Supplement to Exhibit A City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA -1 Special Benefits provided to each Zone Zone 1 (Manor Drive Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance of the Manor Drive medians and Saratoga Sunnyvale Road frontage along Tract 3822. Zone 2 (Fredericksburg Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance along the Cox Avenue frontage of Tracts 3777, 4041, and 4042. Zone 3 (Greenbriar Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance of the Seagull Way entrance to Tract 4628, 4725 and 4726, and of the common areas along Goleta Avenue and Guava Court. Zone 4 (Quito Lighting District) Provides for streetlighting and landscape maintenance in the El Quito Park residential neighborhoods; Tracts 669, 708, 748, 6785, 7833, and 8700. Zone 5 Azule Lighting District) Provides for streetlighting in the Azule Crossing residential neighborhoods: Tracts 184, 485, 787, 1111 and 1 800. Zone 6 Sarahills Lighting District) Provides for streetlighting in the Sarahills residential neighborhood; Tracts 3392 and 3439. Zone 7 (Village Residential Lighting District) Provides for streetlighting in four separate residential neighborhoods surrounding Saratoga Village. Includes all or a portion of Cunningham Acres, La Paloma Terrace, Mary Springer #1 and #2, McCartysville, Saratoga Park, Williams and Tracts 270, 336, 416, 2399, 2502, 4477, 5350, 5377, 5503, 5676, 6419 and 6731. Zone 9 (McCartysville Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tract 5944. Zone 10 (Tricia Woods Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tracts 6199, 7495 and 7928. Shared with Zone 27. Zone 11 (Arroyo de Saratoga Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance of the Via Monte entrances to all or a portion of Tracts 2694, 2835, 2844, 3036 and 4344. Zone 12 (Leutar Court Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance of the Leutar Court frontage in Tract 6996. Zone 15 (Bonnet Way Landscape District) Provides for monthly landscape maintenance along Bonnet Way; Tract 5462. Zone 16 (Beauchamps Landscape District) Provides for landscaping and lighting of the Prospect Road entrance to the Beauchamps subdivision; Tract 7763. Zone 17 (Sunland Park Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance along the Quito Road frontage of Tracts 976 and 977. Zone 22 (Prides Crossing Landscape District) Provides for periodic landscape maintenance along Prospect Road between the Route 85 overcrossing and Titus Avenue and along Cox Avenue between the Route 85 overcrossing and Saratoga Creek. Includes all properties bordered by Route 85, Prospect Road and Saratoga Creek with the exception of the Brookview neighborhood (Tracts 1493, 1644, 1695, 1727, 1938 and 1996). Zone 24 (Village Commercial Landscape and Lighting District) Provides for routine maintenance of Village Parking Districts 1 -4, Big Basin Way landscaping and street lighting. Zone 25 (Saratoga Legends Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga Sunnyvale Road frontage, and pedestrian pathways within Tract 8896. Zone 26 (Bellgrove Landscape and Lighting District) Provides for common area landscape maintenance and lighting associated with Tract 8700. Zone 27 (Cunningham Place /Glasgow Court Landscape District) See description for Zone 10. Zone 28 (Kerwin Ranch Landscape District) Provides for landscape maintenance along the Fruitvale and Saratoga Ayes. Frontages of Tracts 8559 and 8560. Zone 29 (Tollgate Landscape and Lighting District) Provides for maintenance of the common area landscape and lighting improvements along Tollgate Road at the entrance to Tracts 3946 and 5001. 4 CITY OF SARATOGA q LLA -1 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FY 1999 -2000 ZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3 ZONE 4 ZONE 5 ZONE 6 OF PARCELS 29 85 176 693 113 64 FACTOR 0.0078 0.0227 0.0471 0.1853 0.0302 0.0171 EXPENDITURES 1001 WAGES $162.66 $476.75 $987.16 $1,468.66 $239.48 $135.63 Public Works Director 26.03 76.29 157.97 622.01 101.42 57.44 Office Specialist II 35.43 103.85 215.02 846.65 138.05 78.19 Park Maint. Leadworker 101.20 296.61 614.16 Park Maint. Worker II Park Maint. Worker I 2001 BENEFITS $49.14 $144.03 $298.23 $388.33 $63.32 $35.86 Public Works Director 6.51 19.07 39.49 155.50 25.36 14.36 Office Specialist II 9.74 28.56 59.13 232.83 37.96 21.50 Park Maint. Leadworker 32.89 96.40 199.60 I Park Maint. Worker II Park Maint. Worker I 4010 CONTRACT SERVICES $450.00 $800.00 4011 LEGAL SERVICES $3.88 $11.37 $23.54 $92.67 $15.11 $8.56 4013 ENGINEERING SERVICES $49.17 $144.13 $298.43 $1,175.08 $191.61 $108.52 Engineer's Report 49.17 144.13 298.43 1,175.08 191.61 108.52 New Parcel Charge 4014 REPAIR SERVICES 4015 MAINTENANCE SERVICES $1,740.00 $2,892.00 $2,220.00 4022 WATER $630.00 $275.00 $775.00 4023 POWER $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,400.00 I Irrigation Controllers Streetlights 10,000.00 2,000.00 2,400.00 I 4040 ADVERTISING $9.21 $27.00 $55.91 $55.60 $9.07 $5.14 SUB -TOTAL $3,094.06 $3,970.28 $5,458.26 $13,180.35 $2,518.59 $2,693.71 8001 INDIRECT COST ALLOCATION $402.23 $516.14 $709.57 $1,713.45 $327.42 $350.18 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,496.29 $4,486.41 $6,167.83 $14,893.79 $2,846.00 $3,043.89 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES $1,730.00 $345.00 $2,300.00 $20,400.00 $8,200.00 PROJECTED FY 98 -99 CARRYOVER $279.66 $166.92 $114.90 $25,755.18 $14,900.64 $55.77 TOTAL TO ASSESS $1,486.63 $3,974.49 $3,752.93 ($31,261.39) ($20,254.64) $2,988.12 CARRYOVER NOT ASSESSED IN FY 99 -00 PROJECTED CARRYOVER TO FY 00 -01 $31,261.39 $20,254.64 I NET TO ASSESS $1,486.63 $3,974.49 $3,752.93 $0.00 $0.00 $2,988.12 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT $46.76 $21.32 $0.00 $0.00 $46.69 1 MAX APPROVED ASSESSMENT $52.50 $63.00 $78.75 MAX ALLOWABLE ASSESSMENT $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 LLA99- 00Prelim i CITY OF SARATOGA LLA -1 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FY 1999-2000 ZONE 7A ZONE 7B ZONE 9 ZONE 10 ZONE 11 ZONE 12 OF PARCELS 472 291 48 9 250 9 FACTOR 0.1262 0.0778 0.0128 0.0024 0.0669 0.0024 EXPENDITURES 1001 WAGES $1,000.30 $616.71 $269.22 $50.48 $1,402.21 $50.48 Public Works Director 423.65 261.19 43.08 8.08 224.39 8.08 Office Specialist II 576.65 355.52 58.64 11.00 305.43 11.00 Park Maint. Leadworker 167.50 31.41 872.39 31.41 Park Maint. Worker II Park Maint. Worker 2001 BENEFITS $264.49 $163.07 $81.33 $15.25 $423.62 $15.25 Public Works Director 105.91 65.30 10.77 2.02 56.10 2.02 1 Office Specialist II 158.58 97.77 16.13 3.02 83.99 3.02 Park Maint. Leadworker 54.44 10.21 283.53 10.21 Park Maint. Worker II Park Maint. Worker 4010 CONTRACT SERVICES $475.00 $84.38 $125.00 $350.00 4011 LEGAL SERVICES $63.12 $38.91 $6.42 $1.20 $33.43 $1.20 4013 ENGINEERING SERVICES $814.44 $493.43 $81.39 $15.26 $423.91 $15.26 Engineer's Report 800.34 493.43 81.39 15.26 423.91 15.26 New Parcel Charge 14.10 4014 REPAIR SERVICES 4015 MAINTENANCE SERVICES $2,352.00 $545.40 $960.00 $960.00 4022 WATER $2,100.00 $735.00 $1,125.00 $300.00 4023 POWER $5,800,00 Irrigation Controllers Streetlights 5,800.00 4040 ADVERTISING $37.87 $23.35 $15.25 $2.86 $79.41 $2.86 SUB -TOTAL $7,980.23 $1,335.47 $5,380.62 $1,449.83 $4,572.58 $1,695.05 8001 INDIRECT COST ALLOCATION $1,037.43 $173.61 $699.48 $188.48 $594.44 $220.36 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $9,017.65 $1,509.08 $6,080.10 $1,638.31 $5,167.02 $1,915.41 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES $21,165.92 $1,509.08 PROJECTED FY 98 -99 CARRYOVER $11,170.98 $0.00 ($205.85) ($2,102.36) $341.49 ($691.72) TOTAL TO ASSESS ($23,319.25) $0.00 $6,285.95 $3,740.67 $4,825.53 $2,607.13 CARRYOVER NOT ASSESSED IN FY 99 -00 ($1,151.73) ($672.13) PROJECTED CARRYOVER TO FY 00 -01 $23,319.25 $0.00 NET TO ASSESS $0.00 $0.00 $6,285.95 $2,588.94 $4,825.53 $1,935.00 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT $0.00 $0.00 w' q'D $287.66 $19.30 y `A s MAX APPROVED ASSESSMENT $52.50 MAX ALLOWABLE ASSESSMENT $0.00 $0.00 $77.08 $287.66 $207.12 LLA99- 00Preiim CITY OF SARATOGA LLA -1 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FY 1999 -2000 ZONE 15 ZONE 16 ZONE 17 ZONE 22 ZONE 24 ZONE 25 OF PARCELS 41 55 200 863 124 15 FACTOR 0.0110 0.0147 0.0535 0.2308 0.0332 0.0040 EXPENDITURES 1001 WAGES $229.96 $308.49 $1,121.77 $4,840.43 $8,152.50 $84.13 Public Works Director 36.80 49.37 179.51 774.60 111.30 13.46 Office Specialist II 50.09 67.19 244.34 1,054.34 151.49 18.33 Park Maint. Leadworker 143.07 191.93 697.91 3,01 1.48 432.70 52.34 Park Maint. Worker II 4,435.00 Park Maint. Worker I 3,022.00 2001 BENEFITS $69.47 $93.20 $338.89 $1,462.33 $2,447.21 $25.42 Public Works Director 9.20 12.34 44.88 193.65 27.82 3.37 Office Specialist II 13.77 18.48 67.19 289.94 41.66 5.04 Park Maint. Leadworker 46.50 62.38 226.82 978.73 140.63 17.01 Park Maint. Worker II Park Maint. Worker I 1,330.50 906.60 4010 CONTRACT SERVICES $250.00 $75.00 $1,000.00 $2,125.00 4011 LEGAL SERVICES $5.48 $7.35 $26.75 $115.41 $16.58 $2.01 4013 ENGINEERING SERVICES $69.52 $93.26 $339.13 $1,463.34 $210.26 $25.43 Engineer's Report 69.52 93.26 339.13 1,463.34 210.26 25.43 New Parcel Charge 4014 REPAIR SERVICES 4015 MAINTENANCE SERVICES $2,724.00 $900.00 $3,720.00 $4,980.00 $4,000.00 4022 WATER $600.00 $1,250.00 $1,050.00 $2,025.00 4023 POWER $125.00 $65.00 $18,500.00 Irrigation Controllers 65.00 Streetlights 125.00 18,500.00 4040 ADVERTISING $13.02 $17.47 $63.53 $274.13 $39.39 $4.76 SUB -TOTAL $3,961.46 $1,619.77 $7,860.06 $14,250.63 $37,515.94 $141.75 8001 INDIRECT COST ALLOCATION $514.99 $210.57 $1,021.81 $1,852.58 $4,877.07 $18.43 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,476.45 $1,830.34 $8,881.87 $16,103.21 $42,393.01 $160.18 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES $18,100.00 PROJECTED FY 98 -99 CARRYOVER ($1,924.35) ($56.96) ($332.82) $488.45 $24,293.01 $3,538.83 TOTAL TO ASSESS $6,400.80 $1,887.30 $9,214.69 $15,614.76 $0.00 ($3,378.65) CARRYOVER NOT ASSESSED IN FY 99 -00 ($1,181.50) PROJECTED CARRYOVER TO FY 00 -01 $3,378.65 NET TO ASSESS $5,219.30 $1,887.30 $9,214.69 $15,614.76 $0.00 $0.00 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT $127.30 z $34.31�� $18.09 N/A $0.00 MAX APPROVED ASSESSMENT $94.50 $52.50 $341.25 MAX ALLOWABLE ASSESSMENT $127.30 $20.76 N/A LLA99- 00Prelim e CITY OF SARATOGA LLA -1 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FY 1999 -2000 ZONE 26 ZONE 27 ZONE 28 ZONE 29 TOTAL OF PARCELS 94 31 16 61 3,739 FACTOR 0.0251 0.0083 0.0043 0.0163 1.0000 (1) EXPENDITURES 1 1001 WAGES $527.23 $173.87 $89.74 $342.14 $22,730.00 (2) Public Works Director 84.37 27.82 14.36 54.75 3,356.00 Office Specialist II 114.84 37.87 19.55 74.52 4,568.00 Park Maint. Leadworker 328.02 108.18 55.83 212.86 7,349.00 Park Maint. Worker II 4,435.00 Park Maint. Worker I 3,022.00 2001 BENEFITS $159.28 $52.53 $27.11 $103.36 $6,720.73 (3) Public Works Director 21.09 6.96 3.59 13.69 839.00 Office Specialist II 31.58 10.42 5.38 20.49 1,256.20 Park Maim. Leadworker 106.61 35.16 18.15 69.18 2,388.43 Park Maim. Worker II 1,330.50 Park Maim. Worker I 906.60 4010 CONTRACT SERVICES $290.62 $6,025.00 (4) 4011 LEGAL SERVICES $12.57 $4.15 $2.14 $8.16 $500.00 (5) 4013 ENGINEERING SERVICES $159.39 $52.56 $27.13 $103.43 $6,354.10 (6) Engineer's Report 159.39 52.56 27.13 103.43 6,34000 New Parcel Charge 14.10 4014 REPAIR SERVICES $0.00 4015 MAINTENANCE SERVICES $21,192.00 $1,878.60 $3,648.00 $1,020.00 $55,732.00 (7) 4022 WATER $3,800.00 $550.00 $1,250.00 $16,465.00 (8) 4023 POWER $600.00 $39,490.00 (9) Irrigation Controllers 600.00 665.00 Streetlights 38,825.00 4040 ADVERTISING $29.86 $9.85 $5.08 $19.38 $800.00 (10) SUB -TOTAL $26,480.33 $3,012.18 $5,049.21 $1,596.47 $154,816.83 8001 INDIRECT COST ALLOCATION $3,442.44 $391.58 $656.40 $207.54 $20,126.19 (1 1) TOTAL EXPENDITURES $29,922.77 $3,403.76 $5,705.60 $1,804.01 $174,943.01 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES $73,750.00 (12) PROJECTED FY 98 -99 CARRYOVER $1,963.49 ($482.45) ($258.40) $2,243.66 $79,258.07 (13) TOTAL TO ASSESS $27,959.28 $3,886.21 $5,964.00 ($439.65) $21,934.94 CARRYOVER NOT ASSESSED IN FY 99 -00 ($258.40) ($3,263.76) (14) PROJECTED CARRYOVER TO FY 00 -01 $439.65 $78,653.58 (15) NET TO ASSESS $27,959.28 $3,886.21 $5,705.60 $0.00 $97,324.76 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT $297.44 $0.00 (16) MAX APPROVED ASSESSMENT $498.75 $300.00 $100.00 (17) MAX ALLOWABLE ASSESSMENT $64.24 18) LLA99- OOPrelim Notes for FY 99 -00 Assessment Schedule 1. The Factor for each Zone represents the number of parcels in each Zone as a percentage of the total number of parcels in the District. 2. Wages include 5% of Public Works Director, 10% of Office Specialist II, 15% of Parks Maintenance Leadworker, and 10% of Park Maintenance Workers I II. Wages are spread to each zone per the factor. Wages for Parks Maintenance Leadworker are spread proportionately to landscape districts only. Wages for the Park Maintenance Workers I II are assigned to Zone 24 only. 3. Benefits are spread the same as wages. 4. Contract Services are for one -time needed improvements identified in various Zones. 5. Legal Services are fixed at $500 and are spread to each Zone per the factor. 6. Engineering Services charges are spread to each Zone per the factor. New Parcel Charges are assigned to those Zones in which new parcels have been added from the previous year. 7. Maintenance Services are the proposed landscape maintenance costs for landscape districts as bid in February, 1999. 8. Water is estimated annually for landscape districts based on historical usage. 9. Power is estimated for both landscaping and street lighting districts based on historical usage. 10. Legal advertising is spread to each zone per the factor. Advertising associated with maintenance contract bids is spread proportionately to the landscape districts only. 11. Indirect Costs are determined from the City's Indirect Cost Allocation schedule. Preliminary estimate is 13% of direct costs. 12. Property Tax revenues are estimated annually for the original 7 Zones of the District. 13. Projected FY 98 -99 Carryover is calculated from the audited fund balance figures as of June 30, 1998 projected through the end of FY 98 -99. 14. Carryover Not Assessed in FY 99 -00 represents a portion of the projected FY 98 -99 negative carryover amounts for which each Zone in a deficit position will not be assessed in FY 99 -00. The amounts not assessed are covered by the available fund balance. 15. Projected Carryover to FY 00 -01 represents the projected surplus for each Zone as of June 30, 2000. 16. Preliminary Assessment is the Net to Assess for each Zone divided by the number of parcels in each Zone, except for Zone 24. 17. Maximum Approved Assessment represents the maximum assessment which may be levied in these Zones as approved via prior balloting, and above which another Proposition 218 ballot is necessary. 18. Maximum Allowable Assessment represents the maximum assessment which may be levied in these Zones above which a Proposition 218 ballot is necessary. SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA -1 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT HISTORY ZONE DATE FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY CREATED 80 -81 81 -82 82 -83 83 -84 84-85 85 -86 86 -87 87 -88 0 (7C) 4/16/80 $102.01 $92.50 $92.58 $56.80 $21.02 $34.56 $35.38 $21.60 1 4/16/80 $34.26 $10.54 $0.00 $10.90 $6.80 $203.76 $207.82 $113.70 2 4/16/80 $11.30 $5.62 $6.16 $6.62 $7.86 $8.86 $35.14 $27.40 3 4/16/80 $4.76 $4.46 $0.00 $0.00 $4.20 $11.60 $8.70 $20.50 4 4/16/80 $20.95 $18.54 $0.00 $2.06 $2.30 $5.86 $6.70. $2.26 5 4/16/80 $23.52 $21.28 $2.12 $0.84 $1.24 $5.00 $6.56 $5.14 6 4/16/80 $42.03 $36.68 $0.00 $15.68 $11.32 $14.78 $16.94 $10.54 7 (7R) 4/16/80 $10.41 $8.90 $6.66 $5.78 $2.54 $2.50 $3.32 $3.14 8 (VPD #1) 4/16/80 $269.07 $48.26 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $213.80 $341.32 9 5/4/83 $65.00 $84.86 $83.52 $90.82 $87.40 10 4/18/84 $1,416.00 $0.00 $167.34 $186.26 11 4/18/84 $14.32 $5.66 $8.38 $7.70 12 4/17/85 $172.00 $153.02 $154.16 13 4/17/85 $18.00 $5.24 $3.04 14 4/17/85 $142.10 $121.30 $107.04 15 4/17/85 $222.00 $170.76 $87.44 16 4/16/86 $2,376.44 $3.04 17 4/15/87 $10.00 18 4/15/87 $50.00 19 (VPD #2) 4/19/89 20 (VPD #3) 4/19/89 21 (VPD #4) 4/19/89 22 4/17/91 23 5/1/91 24 8/3/94 25 7/1/97 I 26 7/1/97 27 7/1/98 28 7/1/98 29 7/1/98 (1) Zones 0, 8, 19, 20 21 merged to create Zone 24. (2) Zone detached on 5/20/92. (3) Zone detached in FY 96 -97. (4) Zones 14 18 merged to create Zone 27. LLA HISTORY i SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA -1 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT HISTORY ZONE DATE FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY CREATED 88 -89 89 -90 90 -91 91 -92 92 -93 93 -94 94-95 95 -96 0 (7C) 4/16/80 $21.66 $21.66 $14.64 $73.56 $49.72 $72.64 (1) 1 4/16/80 $113.54 $105.94 $95.12 $101.54 $62.20 $90.32 $77.68 $33.88 2 4/16/80 $29.66 $32.00 $34.62 $36.50 $5.98 $18.15 $118.68 $40.04 3 4/16/80 $23.06 $46.82 $1 3.14 15.36 $25.80 $45.21 $25.26 $32.52 4 4/16/80 $1.86 $1.86 $1.60 $2.10 $23.84 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 4/16/80 $4.98 $4.98 $6.24 $6.40 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 6 4/16/80 $10.60 $10.60 $8.62 $8.58 $0.00 $0.00 $25.40 $52.50 7 (7R) 4/16/80 $2.64 $2.64 $3.78 $4.26 $6.88 $0.00 $10.88 $0.00 8 (VPD #1) 4/16/80 $330.36 $117.20 $0.00 $133.36 $0.00 $0.00 (1) 9 5/4/83 $113.74 $157.20 $136.74 $144.82 $138.82 $161.30 $169.92 $201.02 10 4/18/84 $234.70 $435.80 $348.74 $385.38 $371.12 $326.17 $442.58 $337.98 11 4/18/84 $8.04 $8.76 $9.58 $10.72 $11.32 $15.48 $19.02 $13.86 12 4/17/85 $168.04 $188.04 $209.84 $222.60 $242.42 $203.01 $380.00 $307.22 13 4/17/85 $3.60 $3.60 $3.70 $3.16 $0.00 $0.00 $3.46 $11.24 14 4/17/85 $114.48 $152.48 $137.56 $148.72 $192.74 $110.10 $264.58 $193.40 15 4/17/85 $83.76 $126.18 $102.60 $100.72 $98.90 $227.39 $202.04 $146.92 16 4/16/86 $3.22 $3.22 $59.88 $40.56 $45.16 $42.58 $54.40 $40.80 17 4/15/87 $7.70 $7.70 $8.72 $8.66 $0.00 $5.06 $25.20 $213.18 18 4/15/87 $6.08 $135.18 $154.56 $164.94 $88.10 $0.00 $0.00 $104.50 19 (VPD #2) 4/19/89 $1,851.00 $1,520.30 $5,243.00 $6,969.76 $13,620.00 20 (VPD #3) 4/19/89 $6,412.00 $6,414.00 $14,092.00 $18,770.62 $21,252.35 (1) 21 (VPD #4) 4/19/89 $0.00 $977.78 $2,933.00 $5,406.00 $14,385.56 (1) 22 4/17/91 $36.00 $0.00 $13.21 $22.58 $21.68 1 23 5/1/91 $110.00 (2) 24 8/3/94 $0.00 $0.00 25 7/1/97 26 7/1/97 27 7/1/98 28 7/1/98 29 7/1/98 1 (1) Zones 0, 8, 19, 20 21 merged to create Zone 24. (2) Zone detached on 5/20/92. (3) Zone detached in FY 96 -97. (4) Zones 14 18 merged to create Zone 27. LLA HISTORY SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA -1 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT HISTORY Preliminary ZONE DATE FY FY FY FY r CREATED 96 -97 97 -98 98 -99 99 -00 0(7C) 4/16/80 1 4/16/80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $51.26 2 4/16/80 $18.48 $23.00 $24.92 $46.76 3 4/16/80 $24.66 $38.40 $18.22 $21.32 4 4/16/80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 4/16/80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 6 4/16/80 $0.00 $50.50 $50.92 $46.69 7 (7R) 4/16/80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 8 (VPD #1) 4/16/80 9 5/4/83 $175.58 $136.14 77.08 $130.96 10 4/18/84 $337.48 $287.66 $287.66 $287.66 11 4/18/84 $9.38 $35.74 $26.84 $19.30 12 4/17/85 $285.98 $207.12 $207.12 $215.00 13 4/17/85 (3) 14 4/17/85 $70.18 $69.78 (4) 15 4/17/85 $145.12 $127.30 $127.30 $127.30 16 4/16/86 $30.42 $60.96 $53.34 $34.31 17 4/15/87 $210.50 $35.68 $20.76 $46.07 18 4/15/87 $64.28 $64.24 (4) 19 (VPD #2) 4/19/89 20 (VPD #3) 4/19/89 21 (VPD #4) 4/19/89 22 4/17/91 $9.96 $33.74 $11.36 $18.09 23 5/1/91 24 8/3/94 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 25 7/1/97 $262.26 $0.00 $0.00 26 7/1/97 $207.10 $0.00 $297.44 27 7/1/98 $64.24 $125.36 28 7/1/98 $229.94 $356.60 29 7/1/98 $70.34 $0.00 (1) Zones 0, 8, 19, 20 21 merged to create Zone 24. 1 (2) Zone detached on 5/20/92. I (3) Zone detached in FY 96 -97. (4) Zones 14 18 merged to create Zone 27. I LLA HISTORY