HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-18-2009 CC PKT
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA (Pursuant to Gov’t. Code
54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on November 12, 2009) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC Oral Communications on Non-Agendized Items Any member of the public
will be allowed to address the City Council for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the council from discussing or taking action on such
items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff. Oral Communications -Council Direction to Staff Instruction
to Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. Communications from Boards and Commissions Council Direction to Staff Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Communications
from Boards & Commissions. ANNOUNCEMENTS CEREMONIAL ITEMS SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar contains routine items of business. Items in this section will be
acted in one motion, unless removed by the Mayor or a Council member. Any member of the public may speak to an item on the Consent Calendar at this time, or request the Mayor remove
an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Public Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. AGENDA REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1
1. Minutes – Cost Recovery Study Session – October 13, 2009 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 2. City Council Meeting Minutes – October 21, 2009 Recommended action: Approve minutes.
3. Minutes – Siemans Energy/Water Efficiency & Budget Policies Review Study Session – October 26, 2009 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 4. City Council Minutes – November 4, 2009
Recommended action: Approve minutes. 5. Review of Accounts Payable Registers Recommended action: That the City Council accepts the Check Registers for Accounts Payable cycles: October
29, 2009 November 05, 2009 6. On-going Designation of City Engineer Recommended action: Approve Resolution Confirming the On-going Designation Regarding the City Engineer 7. Citywide
Signal Upgrade Project – Agreement for Professional Design Services Recommended action: 1. Approve Independent Contractor Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company Inc. 2. Authorize the CityManager
to execute the same. 3. Authorize the Public Works Director to issues change orders for up to 25% of the Agreement amount. 8. Council Liaison to Saratoga Ministerial Association Recommended
action: Adopt the attached Resolution amending Resolution No. 08-082 appointing Council representatives to Committees, Agencies and AdHoc Committees to include a new agency – Saratoga
Ministerial Association. PUBLIC HEARINGS Applicants/Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may comment
on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested for continuance are subject
to Council’s approval at the Council meeting 9. Appeal of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09-0004: 20398 Blauer Drive, which was denied by the Planning Commission, to operate
a new day care facility in the Professional Administrative Zoning District. 2
Recommended action: Deny the appeal for a Conditional Use Permit, thus affirming the Planning Commission denial issued on October 14, 2009. OLD BUSINESS 10. Website Policy Recommended
action: Accept report and adopt resolution establishing a policy for the City of Saratoga website. 11. Commission Qualifications and Expiring Terms Recommended action: Accept the staff
report and list of Commission qualifications and Commissioner terms that will be expiring in the next calendar year and provide staff with additional direction if needed. NEW BUSINESS
12. Urgency Ordinance for Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Recommended action: Adopt the proposed interim urgency ordinance placing a 45 day moratorium on the establishment of medical
marijuana dispensaries in order to provide the City of Saratoga with time to determine whether to adopt an ordinance regulating the location or operation of medical marijuana dispensaries.
13. Review of Facility Rental Fees and Criteria for Non-Profit Organizations Recommended action: Review and comment on the existing Facility Rental policies and rental fees for nonprofit
group use. 14. Parks and Recreation Commission North Campus Name Recommendations Recommended action: Accept report and select one of the names recommended by the Parks and Recreation
Commission for the North Campus. 15. CaliforniaFIRST Letter of Commitment Recommended action: Accept report and approve CaliforniaFIRST letter of commitment. 16. Energy Efficiency Projects
– Funding Resolution Recommended action: 1. Accept Report and provide direction to staff. 2. Approve Budget Resolution. ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Chuck Page Hakone Foundation
Executive Committee Peninsula Division, League of California Cities SSC Cities Association Board 3
SCC Cities Association Selection Committee Valley Transportation Authority PAC West Valley Sanitation District West Valley Mayors and Managers Association Council Finance Committee City
School Ad-Hoc Vice Mayor Kathleen King Hakone Foundation Board West Valley Flood Control Zone & Watershed Advisory Committee SSC Cities Association Executive Board SCC Cities Association
– Joint Economic Development Policy Committee (JEDPC) City School Ad-Hoc Councilmember Jill Hunter Historical Foundation Library Joint Powers Association Santa Clara County Valley Water
District Commission Village AdHoc Councilmember Howard Miller Chamber of Commerce KSAR Santa Clara County Emergency Council West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Association Council Finance
Standing Committee Councilmember Susie Nagpal ABAG Comprehensive County Expressway Planning Study Policy Advisory Board (PAB) County HCD Policy Committee SASCC Sister City Liaison Village
AdHoc CITY COUNCIL ITEMS CITY MANAGER’S REPORT ADJOURNMENT In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Council by
City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community Development Department Director at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies
of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff
after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerk at the time they are distributed to the City Council. In compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting
will enable the City to make reasonable 4
arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II) Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Ann Sullivan, City Clerk for the City of Saratoga, declare
that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council for the City of Saratoga was posted on November 12, 2009, for the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070
and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us Signed this 12th day of November 2009 at Saratoga, California.
Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk NOTE: To view current or previous City Council meetings anytime, go to the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us 5
12/1 Council Reorganization 12/2 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Planning Commission 12/16 Regular Meeting – 1/6/2010 Regular Meeting Cancelled 1/20/2010 Regular Meeting 2/3/2010
Regular Meeting 2/17/2010 Regular Meeting CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR 2009 6
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: CityManager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson
SUBJECT: Minutes – Cost Recovery Study Session – October 13, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for October 13, 2009 Cost Recovery
Study Session. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING,
NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Minutes from October 13, 2009 Cost Recovery Study Session. 7
1 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL COST RECOVERY STUDY SESSION OCTOBER 13, 2009 Mayor Page called the Study Session meeting to order at 6:00PM. PRESENT: Councilmembers: Howard Miller, Jill
Hunter, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page ABSENT: Susie Nagpal (Excused absent) ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Mary Furey, Administrative Services Director John Livingstone,
Community Development Director Claudia Cauthorn, Ann Sullivan, City Clerk REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR OCTOBER 13, 2009 Ann Sullivan, City Clerk, reported that pursuant
to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of October 13, 2009, was properly posted on October 8, 2009. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC None AGENDA ITEM: RECREATION DEPARTMENT
COST RECOVERY Interim Recreation & Facilities Director Claudia Cauthorn presented the staff report. Ms. Cauthorn noted that during the budget preparation process for fiscal year 2009/2010,
Council requested a Cost Recovery Study Session to review and establish cost cost recovery policies for the Recreation and Community Development departments in order to determine an
appropriate level of cost recovery for both departments. In addition, she stated that any recommended cost recovery policies would apply to the Recreation Services and Facility Rental
Divisions and would exclude the Teen Services Division, as insignificant revenues are generated from that division. She added the Building Maintenance Division would be excluded as well
since this function is funded through Internal Service Funds and the costs are allocated to other operating departments. Ms. Cauthorn noted that a recent survey of various City Recreation
departments in the area concluded that Saratoga has similar cost recovery rate as many other recreation departments in the area, adding that Saratoga’s current cost recovery rate is
66% and recommended that the 65% 8
2 cost recovery level adopted for the current FY budget (09/10) (excluding the Building Maintenance Division) be adopted as the minimum for cost recovery for all future budgets. Vice
Mayor King expressed concerns that the City was subsidizing the recreation programs/classes with tax revenues from the general fund and that those dollars should not fund classes. She
also voiced concerns that the cost recovery would be only 55% as opposed to the projected 65% cost recovery rate. In addition, she noted the citizens of Saratoga looked to the Council
to retain the value of their community by funding capital expenses, such as road maintenance. Councilmember Miller voiced concerns about the difference (gap) between the 65% and 100%
cost recovery rate calculation, and that it appeared that some program areas had not been included in the table. Ms. Cauthorn clarified that the activities for which Recreation receives
no revenues for were not included (information referral). Staff noted that there are indirect costs that affect the department’s cost recovery, such as staff costs (salaries, benefits,
etc.) time spent on telephones or at the counter assisting the public, cost of building (heating, cooling, insurance, etc.) These are daily costs that will affect the cost recovery percentage
whether a facility is rented or not. Staff also pointed out that the types of programs determine the percentage profitability; noting there are basically two types of programs – community
based services versus the individual based services. Community based services such as CERT training, First Aid classes, etc., are services provided as a benefit to the community. These
community/city functions are less profitable than individual/private functions. Staff noted there is an opportunity to increase these revenues if facilities are used more for individual
(private) functions that recoup a far greater proportion of their cost. Vice Mayor King noted that staff’s explanations did help lessen her concerns and she felt that she could explain
the cost factors to residents more clearly to help them better understand the cost recovery percentages. Councilmember Miller added he would spend some time with Finance Director Furey
to better understand the philosophies regarding the table provided in the staff report that depicted the benefits from the different services provided by the Recreation Department. He
also noted that he was very proud of the pro-active steps taken by staff in the Recreation Department to bring awareness to the community of the variety of programs that are available
to citizens of all ages. Councilmember Hunter stated the community services provided by the Recreation Department exemplify what Saratoga is all about and she does not feel that the
Recreation Department can and should be 100% cost recovery. She added the Mission Statement is very important as to what you want your city to be – it is the heart and soul of the city
and it provides a much-needed service to the City. Audience member Joyce Hlava commented that the Community Community Center facilities presented an expense to the city on a daily basis,
such as heating, cooling and general maintenance and those costs would have to be absorbed somewhere – whether the facilities are being rented or not. 9
3 Mayor Page noted that many residents are very supportive of the Recreation Department and the services provided to the community, and recently named the building after Joan Pisani,
the former director and founder of the recreation department. CityManager Dave Anderson noted he has asked recreation staff to be selective in the programs they offer in order to be
more cost efficient. He added the department could increase their cost recovery rate by reducing the number of community service oriented classes such as CERT, First Aid, etc. and rent
the facilities for more private based events, including less city use of facilities for meetings and events. CityManager Anderson stated that currently the recreation department has
been focusing on providing quality programs and maintaining a 65% cost recovery rate. He asked Council to provide staff with additional direction in terms of refinement of the cost model
of the budget philosophy so that they could be more cost efficient. COUNCIL CONCENSUS: Council concurred that there are other factors affecting the cost recovery percentage such as:
o Cost factors associated with owning the buildings, whether or not facilities are being rented and generating income to use the facility. o Staff/overhead costs. o Economic and Market
factors affect the use of facilities as well as class/activity enrollment. o Fees generated by rental of North Campus may be affected by facility use policy. DIRECTION TO STAFF: Council
ended their discussion by concluding that staff should continue to improve fee-generated revenue in order to maintain the 65% cost recovery rate. Councilmember Miller will meet with
Director Furey to create a cost recovery philosophy that the council can easily explain to the citizens in a manner that is understandable. Council concurred 4-1-0 with Councilmember
Susie Nagpal absent. Mayor Page declared a break at 7:30PM Mayor Page reconvened the Study Session at 7:40PM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT COST RECOVERY: Community Department Director
John Livingstone presented the staff report. Director Livingstone explained that various divisions of his department were not full cost recovery, such as many non-billable planning services
and code enforcement. He noted that the city arborist spends a lot of her time in the field following up on calls regarding tree issues and the code enforcement official spends a lot
of her time on the phone and in the field following up on complaints and issues regarding code violations. In addition, he stated other areas that were not cost recovery included reviewing
business license applications, counter time, processing false alarm notifications, email follow-ups, heritage preservation questions and answering 10
4 questions from realtors. He added the Building Division is usually 100% cost recovery and the arborist is about 40% cost recovery. Director Livingstone noted that the CDD cost recovery
rate was dependent on economic factors. He added the CDD generated significant income during good years, which helped offset operating costs; and during downturns in the economy, such
as what is happening currently throughout the country, the CDD experiences a lower income to offset operating costs. Director Livingstone added that staff collected data about Community
Development Departments in the cities that are normally used for comparison but were unable to get direct comparison results due to a variety of reasons, such as higher staffing in Code
Enforcement, higher commercial development activity. He noted all of the cities from which they had received data for FY 2008/09 had operating costs that were not offset by revenues
received; and with the exception of Cupertino, all of the cities have cost recovery rates well below 100% for their Community Development Departments. He concluded by noting staff’s
recommendation to offset the impact to the General Fund is that Council adopt a policy that would enable the CDD to “bank” excess revenues over department expenses during profitable
years and utilize those reserves during lower economical times when building activity is low; thereby lowering the subsidy from the General Fund. CityManager Dave Anderson added that
if the CDD is dependent on a subsidy from the General Fund for part of the CDD cost recovery, part of the cost recovery policy would be that they would do their part as well to help
reduce operating costs by restructuring the CDD to rely more on contractual services rather than hiring staff when the economy is good. He noted that due to the cyclical nature of the
operating revenues it is suggested that the council establish such a reserve and that one third of the funds be used to offset revenue shortfall in any given year. This will offset the
impact to the General Fund in years of economic downturn. Mayor Page noted he supported the “banking fund” proposal to help balance the operating costs and to minimize the impact to
the General Fund. Councilmember Miller noted the Advanced Planning Department is a general obligation of the city and should not be considered for the 100% cost recovery plan and added
that he supported the “banking fund” proposal as well. Councilmember Hunter was supportive of the “banking fund” proposal. Vice Mayor King noted she was supportive of the “banking fund”
proposal and would like some policy stating that there is a mid-year correction if projects are slowing down and the “banking fund” is being utilized to cover department costs and we
need to consider decreasing staff size. Mayor Page questioned if planning and building fees covered the cost of contractors. Director Livingstone noted the fees do cover contractor costs
if a contractor is brought in to fill a position that is vacant. Audience member Joyce Hlava stated it is important to consider how much time it takes to train people to replace staff
in the planning department when they are let go during economic down turns and that there is an expectation of the community to be able to go to city hall and receive 11
5 counter assistance. She also felt the “Community percentage” in the Current Planning portion of the chart on page two of the staff report should be much higher than 10%. COUNCIL DIRECTION:
· Adopt a policy that enables the CDD to establish and use a buffer account to “bank” excess revenues over expenses in profitable years and as a best practice utilize up to one third
of the development reserve during times when building activity is low. · Any proposed subsidy of the General Fund to cover Community Development operating costs will be highlighted in
the regular budget cycle. Council concurred 4-1-0 with Councilmember Susie Nagpal absent. ORDINANCE APPROVALS AND ASSOCIATED COSTS: CityManager Dave Anderson presented the staff report
noting that Councilmember Miller expressed an interest in reviewing ordinances that were approved by the Council at its January 2009 retreat as Work Plan items for the Community Development
Department and City Attorney, together with ordinances approved by the Council subsequent subsequent to the retreat. Councilmember Miller also requested an analysis of costs associated
with ordinance preparation. City Attorney Richard Taylor provided Council and staff with a summary of costs for ordinances prepared as a result of the Council retreat Work Plan and for
non-Work Plan ordinances. Vice Mayor King expressed concerns that the ordinance costs noted by the City Attorney’s office may not cover all associated costs incurred with the Ordinance
Work Plan and Non-Work Plan Ordinances. Council concluded they were pleased with the progress of the ordinance work plan and subsequent ordinances that were approved by Council. Council
also expressed their acceptance of costs associated with the ordinance expenses to date. There being no additional business, Mayor Page adjourned the Study Session at 8:45PM. Respectfully
submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 12
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: CityManager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Minutes – October 21, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for October 21, 2009 City Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND
PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Minutes from October 21, 2009 City Council meeting. 13
MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 21, 2009 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session in the Administrative Conference Room at 5:30 p.m. ANNOUNCEMENT
OF CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – Anticipated Litigation: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) (1 potential case) CONFERENCE
–INSTRUCTION TO REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov’t Code Section 54956.8):Wildwood Way Agency Negotiator: Dave Anderson, City Manager and John Cherbone, Public Works Director MAYOR’S REPORT
ON CLOSED SESSION Mayor Page stated there was no reportable information City Council held a Joint Meeting with members of the Heritage Preservation Commission and the Historical Foundation
in the Administrative Conference Room at 6:00 p.m. Mayor Page called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers
Howard Miller, Jill Hunter, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page ABSENT: Susie Nagpal – Excused Absence ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Richard Taylor, City Attorney
Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Mary Furey, Finance Director John Livingstone, Community Development Director John Cherbone, Public Works Director Chris Riordian, Senior Planner Leo Salindong,
IT Analyst REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA Ann Sullivan, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of October 21, 2009,
was properly posted on October 15, 2009. 14
2 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following people requested to speak: Citizen Ray stated strong winds caused a large oak tree to fall on Farwell Avenue in Saratoga during the recent storm.
He also noted the cement plant in Cupertino dispenses 1 million tons of plant dust into the air and has been causing air pollution in the area for many years and each time it is running.
He noted the public has expressed a strong interest in this issue. [Councilmember Hunter noted the Oak that fell on Farwell Avenue was listed as one of the top 20 trees year in Saratoga
and was honored by the Council two years ago as such.] DIRECTION TO STAFF None COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Peter Marra, Chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission,
addressed the Council regarding the Joint Meeting held prior to the Regular meeting this evening. He provided a report on the conclusion of the awarding of the special plaques commemorating
historical places in the community. In addition, he provided a progress report regarding the evaluation of more than a hundred resources that are designated as historic sites. Bob Himel,
President of the Saratoga Historical Foundation, provided a brief summary of their meeting earlier with Council, noting they manage the Historical Museum in Saratoga Village along with
the McWilliams House. He stated they provide a series of programs that are historically oriented towards Saratoga and invited everyone to visit their website at www.saratogahistory.com
for more information on their programs. DIRECTION TO STAFF None ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilmember Hunter reported the annual Witchy-Walk-About event will be held on Saturday, October 31 from
2 to 4 p.m. Vice Mayor King reported the North Campus Grand Opening is Friday, October 23 at 3:30 p.m. and the naming opportunity for the North Campus ends on the 23rd as well. Mayor
Page reported the annual Turkey Trot Race will be held on the morning of Thanksgiving Day in San Jose. He noted this is a fund raiser for three local organizationshousing, health care
and food. food. He invited people to visit their website at www.svturkeytrot.com for more information or to register for the race. 15
3 CEREMONIAL ITEMS 1. PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING OCTOBER 18-24, 2009 AS TEEN READ WEEK STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Acknowledge proclamation. Mayor Page read and presented the proclamation to
Teen Librarian Lisa Pirlot and her Teen Advisory Board. 2. PROCLAMATION FOR CERT FIRST RESPONDERS – RUSS SWEENEY AND DOUG MCNEIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Present commendations. Mayor Page
read and presented the proclamation to Saratoga resident Russ Sweeney and Los Gatos resident Doug McNeil. 3. PROCLAMATION FOR “END POLIO NOW DAY” – OCTOBER 23, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Present commendation. Mayor Page read and presented the proclamation to Paul Conrado, President of the Saratoga Rotary Club. Due to the large number of people in the audience for Agenda
Item 12 – Adopt a Facility Use Policy for the North Campus, Mayor Page asked for Council concurrence to move that item up first for discussion and to move the Consent Calendar and the
Public Hearing to the end of the agenda. Mayor Page and Council concurred to move to agenda item 12 as the next item of business and to move the Consent Calendar and the Public Hearing
to the end of the agenda. Councilmember Hunter asked for concurrence to allow citizen Marilyn Marchetti to give the presentation regarding Item 13 – Village Entrance Sign at this time
as she was not feeling well and would be leaving the meeting. Council concurred to allow Ms. Marchetti to give her presentation regarding Item 13 prior to Item 12. Marilyn Marchetti,
member of the Saratoga Village Development Council, addressed the Council regarding the design of the proposed Village Entrance Sign. CONSENT CALENDAR Council returned to the CONSENT
CALENDAR at 10:30PM 16
4 4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES – OCTOBER 7, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Mayor Page removed this item for one small correction. PAGE/KING MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES – OCTOBER 7, 2009. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 5. REVIEW OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE REGISTERS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accepts the
Check Registers for Accounts Payable cycles: October 01, 2009 October 08, 2009 KING/MILLER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE CHECK REGISTERS FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CYCLES OCTOBER 01, 2009 AND OCTOBER
08, 2009. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 6. TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED AUGUST 31, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review and accept the Treasurer’s Report
for the month ended August 31, 2009. KING/MILLER MOVED
TO ACCEPT THE TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED AUGUST 31, 2009. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 7. IT SUPPORT CONTRACT RENEWAL WITH ZAG TECHNICAL SERVICES
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and approve renewal contract with ZAG Technical Services. Councilmember Miller removed this item for clarification. KING/HUNTER MOVED TO APPROVE RENEWAL
CONTRACT WITH ZAG TECHNICAL SERVICES. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 8. MOTOR VEHICLE (MV) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NO PARKING STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Move to adopt
the Motor Vehicle Resolution authorizing No Parking on Bankmill Road MV RESOLUTION NO. 284 17
5 KING/MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE MOTOR VEHICLE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NO PARKING ON BANKMILL ROAD. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. Council moved to Item 13 after
approving Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. PUBLIC HEARING AMENDING FEE SCHEDULE (RESOLUTION 09-019) TO INCLUDE KEVIN MORAN PARK STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing to review
recommendations for proposed fee changes for Kevin Moran Park, provide direction, and approve a resolution amending the City's Fee Schedule effective for Fiscal Year 2009/10. Interim
Director Claudia Cauthorn presented the staff report. Mayor Page opened the public comment period. No one requested to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the public comment period.
RESOLUTION NO. 09-055 HUNTER/KING MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY’S FEE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT.
OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS 10. PROPOSITION 1A SECURITIZATION PROGRAM STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review Prop 1A Securitization program option, adopt resolution, and approve purchase and
sale agreement to participate in the securitization program. Administrative Services Director Mary Furey presented the staff report. Mayor Page opened the public comment period. No one
requested to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the public comment. RESOLUTION NO. 09-053 18
6 KING/HUNTER MOVED TO ACCEPT PROPOSITION 1A, ADOPT RESOLUTION AND APPROVE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SECURITIZATION PROGRAM. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER
NAGPAL ABSENT. 11. INITIATION OF ANNEXATION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 39,640 (GROSS) SQUARE FOOT PARCEL (APN 503-13-138) LOCATED AT 22215 MOUNT EDEN ROAD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends
the City Council approve the attached Resolution thereby initiating the annexation of 22215 Mount Eden Road. Senior Planner Chris Riordan presented the staff report. Mayor Page invited
public comment. No one requested to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the public comment. RESOLUTION NO. 09-054 KING/MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION THEREBY INITIATING
THE ANNEXATION OF 22215MOUNT EDEN ROAD. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. Mayor Page asked for Council concurrence to move to Item 9 for the next item of business.
Council concurred. 12. ADOPT A FACILITY USE POLICY FOR THE NORTH CAMPUS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Amend the existing building policies to include hours of use for the North Campus site.
Item started at 7:50PM Interim Recreation Director Claudia Cauthorn presented the staff report. Mayor Page invited public comment The following people requested to speak on this item:
Scott Wheelright, member and representative of Latter Day Saints Church, spoke in support of the West Valley Muslin Association (WVMA) and offered their church facility to WVMA for them
to hold their Ramadan events in the event North Campus wouldn’t work out. 19
7 The following speakers addressed the Council in support of 8:00AM to 11:00PM – inclusive of cleanup time; and to grandfather in existing users such as the WVMA, which could extend
the hours for WVM to 11:15 or 11:30 during certain times of the Lunar Calendar: Isbal Mirza Anwar Awad spoke on behalf of Dr. Yacoub Elzig Reshma Hder Hume Qureshi Abdul Ghori Safeer
Mohiuddih Asham Heider Hasham Hyder Yacouba Traore Ahmad Torjama Imtiaz Quresiti Sarah Azad Hera Hyder Kareem Syed Kamran Khan Aladdin Bakri Muzaffer Haider Ann Waltonsmith Peter Marra
Arvin Engelson Shahid Siddiqui Razi Mohiuddin Jack Mallory The following people addressed the Council asking that the North Campus hours be set at 8:00AM to 9:00PM on weekdays and 8:00Am
to 10:00PM on weekends inclusive of cleanup time: Roger Piazza Tom Saari Bill Ford Denise Goldberg PattyWoolcock felt 10:00PM was a reasonable time to empty the parking lot; stated she
supported grandfathering in WVMA and asked that whatever the usage rules are, they also apply to the the Sheriff’s deputies. Graham Mastyn supported having the parking lot emptied by
9:30PM Mayor Page declared a break at 9:05PM Mayor Page reconvened the meeting at 9:15PM Paul Hernandez suggested using the facility for a while and then make a decision regarding the
hours of usage. 20
8 Mayor Page closed the public comment period. Council thanked all the members of the audience for the respectful manner in which they presented their opinions. VOTE ON FACILITY USE
OF NORTH CAMPUS: KING/MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT ALTERNATIVE “F” GRANDFATHERING THE EXISTING USERS OF THE NORTH CAMPUS AT A NORTH CAMPUS LOCATION SPECIFIED BY THE CITY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF
8:00AM AND 11:00PM INCLUSIVE OF “CLEAN UP TIME” ON THE CONDITION THAT THEY LOSE THIS PRIVILEGE IF EITHER (1) THE USE CEASES FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR, (2) THEY EXCEED THE HOURS OF THEIR
CURRENT USE TWO ORMORE TIMES, OR (3) THE CITY COUNCIL CONCLUDES AFTER A NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING THAT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED SUCH THAT ALLOWING THE EXTENDED HOURS OF USE
IS NO LONGER IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE TERM “INDOOR USES” ALSO INCLUDES USE OF THE OUTDOOR PARKING AREA BUT ONLY FOR PARKING BY PARTICIPANTS IN THE INDOOR USE. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0
WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. VOTE ON HOURS OF USE: Vice Mayor King made a motion to accept Alternative “D” regarding hours of use. Councilmember Miller requested a friendly amendment
to that motion allowing staff to request an increased deposit for groups that declare they will be doing “cleanup” between 10:00PM and 11:00PM and that the rental group would forfeit
the deposit if the cleanup was not done quietly. Vice Mayor King accepted the friendly amendment. KING/MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT ALTERNATIVE “D” ALLOWING (1) USE OF THE NORTH CAMPUS FROM
8:00AM TO 10:00PM DAILY EXCLUSIVE OF “CLEAN UP”, WHICH CAN OCCUR AFTER 10:00PM AND GUESTS MUST LEAVE BY 10:00PM – (MATCHING THE FOOTHILL CLUB REQUIREMENTS); AND (2) ALLOWS STAFF TO REQUEST
AN INCREASED DESPOSIT FOR GROUPS DECLARING THAT THEY WILL BE DOING “CLEAN UP” BETWEEN 10:00PM AND 11:00PM AND THE CLEANUP IS NOT DONE QUIETLY. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER
NAGPAL ABSENT. VOTE ON OPEN SPACE LOCATED AT STREET FRONTAGE AREA OF NORTH CAMPUS GROUNDS: KING/MILLER MOTIONED TO ADOPT EXISTING OUTDOOR PARK USE POLICY TO INCLUDE STREET FRONTAGE OPEN
SPACE AREA AT NORTH CAMPUS. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0WITH NAGPAL ABSENT. 21
9 Item concluded at 10:00PM Due to a significant number of people in the audience for Agenda Item 15 – City Wide Program to plant 2,015 trees in Saratoga by 2015, Mayor Page asked for
Council concurrence to move this item up next for discussion. Council concurred. 13. VILLAGE ENTRANCE SIGN STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve design and installation of Village Entrance Sign
John Cherbone presented the staff report. Mayor Page opened the public comment period. The following person requested to speak on this item: [Marilyn Marchetti, member of the Saratoga
Village Development Council, addressed the Council earlier in the evening regarding the design of the proposed Village Entrance Sign.] Paul Hernandez suggested the Village Entrance Sign
be in gold leaf rough hewn letters and added the signage should be integrated into a fence barrier with shrubbery to help provide safety to people in the Blaney Plaza area from traffic
on Saratoga Avenue. No one else requested to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the public comment. DIRECTION TO STAFF: Continue to work on the final draft and implementation plan
of the Village Entrance Sign and bring back to Council on a future agenda as a Consent Item. Council also stated they would like the gold leaf letter coloring on the sign so that it
would be consistent with other signage in the community and to photo shop the exact location of the sign into the final photo of where the proposed sign will be placed at Blaney Plaza.
Mayor Page asked for Council concurrence to move to Item 11 for the next item of business. Council concurred. 14. UNDEVELOPED CITY OWNED PROPERTY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report
and provide direction to staff. Public Works Director John Cherbone presented the staff report. Mayor Page invited public comment. 22
10 The following person requested to speak on this item: Paul Hernandez inquired if the City paid taxes on these parcels of land. Mayor Page noted the City does not pay taxes on these
parcels. Mayor Page closed the public comment period. Vice Mayor King noted she requested to have this item agendized so that Councilmembers were aware of these parcels of land. Council
determined that the current economy was not conducive to selling property at this time and recommended waiting until the economy improved. Council moved to Item 14 at 11:00PM 15. CITY
WIDE PROGRAM TO PLANT 2,015 TREES IN SARATOGA BY THE YEAR 2015 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff accordingly. Kate Bear, City Arborist, presented the staff report. Ms. Bear noted the
Heritage Tree Society of Saratoga has offered to create the data base that would track the planting of new trees and they would post this information on their website. The City website
would provide a link to the Heritage Tree Society. She noted the Heritage Tree Society has offered to purchase and install a sign on Saratoga Avenue stating: “Saratoga Proudly a Tree
City USA”. She added the sign would indicate how many trees have been planted and volunteers have offered to periodically update the sign indicating how many trees have been planted.
Mayor Page invited public comment. The following people requested to speak on this item: Cheriel Jensen spoke in support of this project. Denise Goldberg spoke in support of this project.
Kathy Forte, Director of Gate House Homeowners Association noted residents are excited about this project. Mayor Page closed the public comment. Council concurred that this was an interesting
project and noted there are a number of issues that would need to be defined and resolved, such as how much staff time this project would require, funding issues, where to plant trees,
verification of newly planted trees, and how would the data regarding the number of trees planted be logged and by whom. 23
11 Council noted the proposed signage indicating Saratoga was a “Proud Tree City USA” was a good idea and added this also needed additional research. Council was supportive of this project
and suggested the Saratoga/Monte Sereno Community Foundation be contacted to see if they would be interested in partnering with the City and if they would be interested in helping to
raise funds or provide a grant. Council also suggested including this proposal in the next Saratogan, which would be the winter edition. Mayor Page asked for Council concurrence to move
to the Consent Calendar for the next item of discussion. Council concurred. Council moved to the Consent Calendar at 10:30PM. ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Chuck Page – reported:
Hakone Foundation Executive Committee – he attended meeting the last meeting; they welcomed back Beverly Harada to the Board of Directors; upcoming events include a 2010 Lunar Celebration
for the Year of the Tiger and some interesting artwork related to this event. Peninsula Peninsula Division, League of California Cities – voted on a Proposition that will forever limit
states ability to take money from local governments. He asked councilmembers to provide their personal email addresses to Rebecca Elliott so they will be included in the email communications
regarding this issue. West Valley Sanitation District – met and they updated some ordinances. West Valley Mayors and Managers Association – Los Gatos has passed a moratorium on medical
marijuana stores. Vice Mayor Kathleen King – had nothing to report. Councilmember Jill Hunter – reported: Historical Foundation – she attended the last meeting and noted three archeologists
from CalTrans have been studying significant historical sites along Highway 9. Heritage County Commissioner April Halberstadt has been working with CalTrans to install “historical” signage
along Highway 9 depicting the historical sites. In addition, there have been a number of organizations, such as Eucalyptus Magazine, Relocation Magazine, Mercury News and and Contra
Costa Times that have been featuring Saratoga landmarks. Library Joint Powers Association – meets next week Santa Clara County Valley Water District Commission – meets next week. Councilmember
Howard Miller – reported: Chamber of Commerce – has moved to their new location and they will be scheduling a meeting with the City Manager to discuss their budget. KSAR – hired summer
interns with the CDBG money that the City provided to them earlier in the year. The interns produced a large number of educational videos regarding Saratoga events and he is hoping some
of them will attend a future Council meeting and provide a summary of what they accomplished. Councilmember Susie Nagpal – absent. 24
12 CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Vice Mayor King noted the West Valley Community Services attended the last Rotary meeting and gave a presentation on a newly acquired refrigerated truck that they
will be using to collect excess fruits and vegetables from local growers to make available to people needing assistance. They asked if Council could agendize this on an upcoming meeting
so that they could inform the community of this new service they will be providing. Mayor Page seconded this request. Vice Mayor King also requested staff to provide an update in the
next Council Newsletter regarding the status of the ABAG Renewable Energy Program for Homeowners. Mayor Page noted Council will look at Councilmember Susie Nagpal’s outside agency assignments
at a later date. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business Mayor Page asked for a motion to adjourn. KING/MILLER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING AT
11:30PM. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 25
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: CityManager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson
SUBJECT: Minutes – Siemans Energy/Water Efficiency & Budget Policies Review Study Session – October 26, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted
for October 26, 2009 Siemans Energy/Water Efficiency & Budget Policies Review Study Session. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Minutes from October 26, 2009 Study Session. 26
1 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION OCTOBER 26, 2009 SIEMANS ENERGY/WATER EFFICIENCY STUDY & BUDGET POLICIES REVIEW PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Page, Jill Hunter, Howard
Miller, Vice Mayor Kathleen King ABSENT: Susie Nagpal (Excused absence) STAFF: Dave Anderson, City Manager John Cherbone, Public Works Director Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Crystal Morrow,
Administrative Analyst II Siemens Representatives: Kelly Ferguson, Rylan Ortiz, Rolando Toledo, Alex Ramos, Bala Jayaraman, and HydroPoint Data Systems representative Ben Slick AGENDA
ITEM 1 – Presentation of Siemens Clean Energy Project Preliminary Study Results. On March 4, 2009 Kelly Ferguson presented a slide show on the Siemens Energy Management Program. At that
meeting Council signed a memorandum of understanding allowing Siemens to conduct a free preliminary study of the City’s energy and water use. The purpose of this Study Session is for
Siemens to present the results of that study. Ms. Ferguson stated the study indicated the City’s annual utility spending is $400K with 55% going towards water, 5% going towards gas,
and 40% going towards electricity. She noted that while the City has already carried out a number of energy saving projects there are two areas – water consumption and energy use that
could be improved to help reduce operating costs for the City. Siemens identified potential areas for energy efficiency improvement measures: o PC Power Management o HVAC Upgrades o
Building Envelopes o Solar Thermal o Window Film o Plug Load Controller o Thermal Storage o Solar Water Heating o Cool Roofs Ms. Ferguson noted the Siemens Energy Management Program
uses energy performance contracting, which is a financing mechanism that allows client organizations to carry out “clean” energy projects without an upfront investment. She added energy
performance contracting can be used for energy 27
2 efficiency, water saving, renewable energy projects and more; and the initial project costs would be financed by Siemens, who is then repaid through savings that result from the project.
She added Siemens would help provide a financing solution so that much of the energy services program is self-funding; and Siemens’ proposals guarantee energy, water, and operational
savings so there is no risk to the City in accomplishing the facility improvements. The proposed project options included: OPTION 1: Lighting upgrades, PC power management, irrigation
controls, streetlight upgrades at a cost of $1 million with a 10-year payback. OPTION 2: HVAC upgrades at a cost of $1.4 million with a 20-year payback. OPTION 3: HVAC upgrades and library
photovoltaic system at a cost of $4.2 million with a 30-year payback. Discussion took place regarding areas of recommended cost saving improvements: Street Lights and Park Lighting:
Ms. Ferguson noted the current technology options are Induction Lighting, a form of fluorescent fluorescent lighting, or LED – with payback comparable to the LED option, but at a lower
cost per fixture. Councilmember Hunter noted the City does not have many street lights. Ms. Ferguson acknowledged there are a limited number of Lighting and Landscape Districts with
street lights that may be in need of an upgrade; this could be discussed in a more detailed study with the Public Works Director. CityManager Dave Anderson stated the City has 455 lights;
the City owns 182 and PGE owns the rest. Library Solar Heating: Ms. Ferguson stated the potential facility improvement measures at the Saratoga library would be solar photovoltaic with
capital contribution offsets – 30% of consumption; long payback; has limited roof space for solar panels. The parking lot could be reconfigured to accommodate solar panels, but it would
increase the cost. Ms. Ferguson noted Siemens would like to look at the city hall complex overall to see what the potential is for the installation of solar energy at a more affordable
cost, thus continuing Saratoga’s statement that they are a sustainable City. Councilmember Hunter noted that solar equipment is changing all the time and is getting smaller as technology
develops with solar panels continuing to become more efficient. Ms. Ferguson responded that may be true on a larger scale as opposed to a smaller scale and the solar panels are becoming
more efficient. She added they have been receiving lower equipment pricing from local solar companies and accompanied by the faster payback terms; this has allowed them to create a package
that has a more reasonable payback period. She added, in terms of capital expenditure, the City could reduce their overall cash flow by taking advantage of the solar rebates that are
available from the state. 28
3 Ms. Ferguson also noted there would be some capital expenditure for the street lighting. Discussion took place regarding the “Overview of Refined Options” as noted in the handout and
Councilmember Miller inquired about the cost range -$1.4 million – being the same for Option 2 and Option 3. Vice Mayor King commented about the actual cost savings; noting that for
each dollar spent, we would save a dollar over the next 10 years and with interest we wouldn’t see any savings until after 10 years and questioned if Siemens could guarantee that there
wouldn’t be any change in technology during that time. Councilmember Miller noted that this program provides the City with an option to fund all the recommended improvements without
utilizing City funds. Ms. Ferguson stated that once the City decides on which project they would be interested in implementing, Siemens would help with financing options; adding Siemens
does not provide financing and the City is not obligated until financing is secured. Councilmember Hunter noted that her concern focused more on the water consumption costs than on electricity
costs, especially if water rates will be increasing by 30%. Vice Mayor King agreed with Councilmember Hunter that our priority should be on water efficiency since that is 55% of our
annual utility costs, noting that there was no clear data in the proposal on how Siemens could implement a program to help the City be more water efficient. Ms. Ferguson responded that
would be the next step – a Detailed Study at the cost of $50,000. This phase would first require a “Letter of Intent” to move forward with the Detailed Study. She noted that if the City
decided to move forward with the Letter of Intent, the $50,000 Detailed Study cost would be rolled into project financing and would not be a direct cost to the City, unless the City
decided not to move forward after Siemens met the City’s detailed project criteria. Siemens representative Bala Jayaraman, added that they believe there is an energy savings project
that will meet the criteria for the City, and the Letter of Intent ensures that Siemens will put in writing what the criteria is and that they will meet the criteria that the City has
defined in the Letter of Intent. Councilmember Miller expressed his concern regarding the accuracy of a Detailed Study to acquire meaningful baseline data on the newly completed North
Campus and Kevin Moran Park facilities, and Congress Springs Park. In addition, he asked what establishes acceptable criteria for the Letter of Intent. Mr. Jayaraman replied that it
would include items such as financial criteria in terms of how much payback the City would want, capital expenditure contributed by the City, interest rates, payback period, and is the
project financeable. He added a 10-year payback period would be a recommended criteria; adding they would not recommend a payback period to be the same number of years as the life expectancy
of the equipment. 29
4 Mr. Jayaraman stated that since the risk Siemens takes is based on the performance, they would ensure that the baseline the City is currently working on is correct and the only way
they can do that is to measure it. Mayor Page noted that staff should include in the Letter of Intent the cost incurred by the City to complete the recent facility improvements and that
cost should be included in the payback criteria. Vice Mayor King suggested staff provide data on which energy efficient equipment they have already installed in the last 3 years and
the projected cost efficiency percentages they expect to see from those installations before any equipment is changed. She also indicated she would like additional understanding and
reference verifications before moving on to the next step. CityManager Dave Anderson made an observation that if Siemens performs the Detailed Study, it should develop cost efficiency
data on equipment that has already been installed. Council could establish the criteria, noting Council has indicated in the preceding discussion they would like: Ø 10 or 15 year payback
period. Ø 25% savings on electricity and water. Ø 15 to 20% longer useful life than the payback. In addition, CityManager Anderson noted that with those parameters, Siemens would have
to conduct research to indicate whether or not they could meet those parameters to attain Council’s goals. CityManager Anderson summarized the alternative directions: Ø Staff should
provide a report on what they have already done in the past three years and what they can continue to do to be more energy efficient. Ø Council would develop criteria for Siemens to
conduct a detailed study. They would then determine whether or not they could meet the criteria. Vice Mayor King noted Council could give direction to proceed with both recommendations.
Councilmember Miller stated he would like to know more about what the valid criteria options are. Councilmember Hunter noted that a Councilmember was absent and this Councilmember had
expressed concerns at the first Siemens’ presentation and noted that she wanted more research conducted before moving forward. Mayor Page noted that is what this study session is providing
– the process to look at the energy efficient options that are available before moving forward. Siemens representative Bala Jayaraman stated that they would provide Letter of Intent
criteria that they have been presented with over the last several years from other cities in order to help staff and Council determine the criteria they would like to present in their
Letter of Intent. Council and staff was in agreement with Mr. Jayaraman’s suggestion and noted that after they received that compiled sample criteria from Siemens, another Council Study
Session could be scheduled to go over that data and determine the criteria that would be best for the City of Saratoga. 30
5 DIRECTION TO STAFF: · Schedule a future study session to go over criteria that will be provided by Siemens and at that Study Session Council will establish the criteria they would
like staff to present in a Letter of Intent, if Council decides to move forward. Council concluded discussion on Agenda Item 1. AGENDA ITEM 2 – Budget Policies. Finance Director Mary
Furey presented the staff report. Director Furey noted that as of the October 13, 2009 Cost Recovery Study Session, Council direction affirmed the Recreation Department’s stated cost
recovery goal of approximately 65%, in alignment with recovery obtained by other surveyed Recreation Departments. In addition, Council did not establish a cost recovery rate for the
Community Development Department as it was determined there was not enough consistent financial information to make a valid decision. Council did, however, establish a fund balance policy
for the Development Reserve which allows for the utilization of up to one-third of the fund balance reserve to offset revenue shortfalls. This new policy is to include direction that
Community Development Department excess revenues over expenditures would be allocated into the Development fund balance reserve in order to build the reserve up in more profitable years,
for use in years in which revenues drop below expenses. This mechanism is intended to mitigate the economic impacts of revenue peaks and valleys that occur with development activities
over multiple year cycles. Ms. Furey noted that there are budget policies and budget practices and wouldn’t recommend incorporating all the “practices” into the budget document. She
added due to council changes and changes in general, budget policies are an on-going process. Ms. Furey also pointed out the budget document itself is a budget policy statement and when
council adopts the budget it’s an operations plan, – a financial plan, a policy document and a communications document, and that is why narrative is included; it helps to explain the
what, why, and how, rather than just focusing on numbers. Director Furey added that typically most budget policies are not set up for one year, they are usually ongoing. Vice Mayor King
inquired about the 65% cost recovery policy for the Recreation Department. Director Furey stated the 65% cost recovery policy for the Recreation Department was noted in the summary narrative
of the last fiscal year operating budget that was adopted by Council. She added the budget policies Council adopted as part of the overall Financial Policies Statements and Cost Recovery
Study Session will be incorporated into the next fiscal year budget. Councilmember Miller inquired if the minimum fund balance reserve of at least 20% is the same as the operating reserve
balance that was adopted July 1, 1999. Director Furey stated it was not; it came
about as a result of a recent credit agency rating of the city – that having a policy stating an overall fund balance reserve of 20% of operating expenditures in the General Fund for
working capital cash balance is viewed favorably by the rating agencies. 31
6 Vice Mayor King recommended staff clarify that statement by re-wording the policy to say “over all General Fund reserve” so that the statement wouldn’t be questioned in the future.
DIRECTION TO STAFF: · Re-word statement regarding “minimum fund balance reserve” to say “over all General Fund reserves” so that the statement wouldn’t be questioned in the future. Councilmember
Miller inquired about the minimum annual funding goal of $1,000,000 for CIP Streets/Pavement Management program and how this fits in the road budget CityManager Anderson stated the City
receives about $600K in gas tax which has to be spent on road maintenance. Staff realized that in order to maintain our pavement management index we would need at least $1,000,000; adding
that this has been a long term goal of the city to do this. The City Council made a commitment to establish $1,000,000 in funding to maintain our pavement management index by supplementing
the $600,000 that we receive from the state initially with the TEA funding, which which was subsequently replaced with funding from the road impact fee. Councilmember Miller asked how
much of the TEA money is used to supplement the million dollar fund. Mr. Anderson stated the road impact fees were used and no TEA dollars were used at this point. Vice Mayor King asked
if the state has taken away the gas tax revenues during the last couple of years. Director Furey noted the state has not. Councilmember Miller questioned if the statement regarding ‘The
$300,000 of designated TEA proceeds previously transferred to the CIP Streets/Pavement Management program was reverted back to the General Fund effective with the FY 2008/09 budget’
needed to remain in that summary statement. Director Furey noted that it no longer needed to be included. Vice Mayor King inquired if the CIP Streets/Pavement Management program was
originally set at $1.2 million. Director Cherbone stated the road impact study goal was estimated at $1.4 million to stay at a PCI of 72; however the funding goal is set at $1 million
minimum. Mr. Anderson added the state and the federal governments provide supplemental funding on a fairly regular basis through the grant and supplement city revenues to assist the
City in achieving this goal. Vice Mayor King recommended the summary should state that in order to stay at 72 PCI the Streets/Pavement Management program requires $1.4 million funding
and the policy is to spend at least $1 million in local funds each year. Mr. Anderson noted that staff could seek grants or federal monies for the remaining portion. 32
7 Vice Mayor King noted the funding history that was used to fund the CIP Streets/Pavement Management program was originally with VTA grants and when that money was no longer available
we tried to implement a Utility Tax and that didn’t pass, so we agreed to supplement the fund with TEA money and currently the Vehicle Impact Fee is used to fund that program. Director
Cherbone acknowledged that the city did receive money from Measure B, which no longer exists, and now from Prop 42. Mr. Anderson noted there have been three structural funding sources
for the CIP Streets/Pavement Management program and that should be noted in the summary wording. Councilmember Miller added that history should be included in the summary as well. DIRECTION
TO STAFF: · Remove the last sentence from the seventh bullet in the Appropriations and Budgetary Control summary of the Financial Policy Statements, ‘The $300,000 of designated TEA proceeds
previously transferred to the CIP Streets/Pavement Management program was reverted back to the General Fund effective with the FY 2008/09 budget’. · The summary in the Appropriations
and Budgetary Control section should include wording that states “In order to stay at PCI of 72, the CIP Streets/Pavement Management program requires $1.4 million. The policy is to spend
at least $1 million. Councilmember Miller asked for clarification on the allocation of the $100,000 TEA dollars for facility improvements. Director Furey noted that money goes towards
major capital improvements for facilities such as HVAC systems and minor improvements such as re-keying door locks. Mr. Anderson added we were behind on funding of capital equipment
for facilities and as a result Council dedicated a revenue source to that program. Facilities Supervisor Thomas Scott implemented a 5-year program to bring facilities up to par, noting
staff is currently half way through the facility updates. Vice Mayor King noted that originally TEA funds were used mostly for pro-active capital uses such as roads and the Sheriff’s
contract and now it is mostly being used for staff through the General Fund. Mr. Anderson noted that TEA dollars really aren’t for staff and proceeded to distribute a handout depicting
TEA funding allocations: o Additional hours for Sheriff’s patrol, o Additional street maintenance, o Additional Facility maintenance, o Funding for the Saratogan, o Funding for street
sweeping in the Village, o Spot color for medians, o Addition of Administrative Analyst position to support reactivating commissions, 33
8 o Convert two temporary positions to benefitted positions (maintenance/technical) Councilmember Miller stated that basically half the TEA money is being spent on Council priorities
and the other half goes to the General Fund. Director Furey and City Manager Anderson noted the General Fund does support everything else, including the Sheriff’s contract, staff, etc.
Councilmember Miller asked if the TEA Funding Allocation list that was distributed represents Council policy. Director Furey noted staff hasn’t been directed differently and City Manager
Anderson added that staff continues to fund the expenditures that Council set forth as on-going expenditures from this source in 2007/08. Director Furey noted Council would have to direct
staff to discontinue specific expenditures – such as the publication of the Saratogan – if that is what Council desired. Vice Mayor King stated the issue is the $385,000 that is going
into the General Fund in order to cover the operational costs of the City. Director Furey noted noted the Sheriff’s contract alone had increased $500,000 in the last three years. Vice
Mayor King stated property taxes would increase over the years and would help offset those increases; the number of employees could be reduced over the years as some areas will become
more automated. Mr. Anderson stated the problem is that external costs continue to increase and the property tax rate is decreasing and at some point those factors will be problematic
and will require a significant decrease in services. CityManager Anderson proceeded to distribute a handout depicting Public Safety Costs for Law Enforcement Contracts for FY 2006/07,
2007/08, 2008/09 and 2009/10; including data reflecting the percentage increase for the Sheriff’s contract for those years; and a hand out depicting actual employee salaries and benefits
for FY 2007/08, estimated employee salaries and benefits for FY 2008/09; and adopted employee salaries and benefits for FY 2009/10. CityManager Anderson noted that in the past, the annual
increase for the Sheriff’s Office contracts were at seven, eight, and nine percent and as a result the contract cities met and informed the Sheriff’s Department that the cities were
contemplating creating their own law enforcement department unless the Sheriff’s Department agreed to a new agreement. The contract cities collectively negotiated a new agreement with
the Sheriff’s Department that included price caps, and that is why their contract is limited to four or five percent. Council discussed the Sheriff’s budget and the services provided
by the Sheriff’s department and noted they were pleased with the services that were provided. 34
9 Councilmember Miller stated he agreed that the level of funding for the Sheriff’s Office is great and the level of service is great, however he questioned the fact that the funding
for the Sheriff’s Department is a quarter of the annual budget and yet nothing is noted about that in the budget summary. CityManager Anderson concurred with Councilmember Miller and
stated that the Sheriff’s contract is the largest expenditure for the city and there is nothing noted about it; adding that there must be some policy or criteria that could be noted
in the summary. Vice Mayor King noted that since the contract is limited to a specific percentage increase each year, why not include that in the budget summary. CityManager Anderson
noted staff would look at the Sheriff’s Contract to see if there are any policies that could be noted in the budget summary. DIRECTION TO STAFF: · Review Sheriff’s contract for specified
policy requirements that could be noted in the budget summary. Council proceeded to discuss the CIP policies. They noted $50,000 has been set aside for sidewalks; $50,000 for storm drains;
and $300,000 for hillside reserves. They also discussed whether or not to implement a policy regarding the Discretionary Fund. Director Furey noted the Discretionary Fund use is a practice
item – not a policy item. CityManager Dave Anderson added Council could establish goals for the Hillside Reserve Fund and staff would start building on those goals by adding specific
amounts as directed by Council each budget cycle. Council decided to establish a goal of $1 million dollars in the Hillside Reserves to be funded at $100,000 per year for the next 10
years. Council discussed the Traffic Safety Program projects and how to fund those projects. Council also discussed funding building replacement and land acquisition. DIRECTION TO STAFF:
· Build the Hillside Reserve Fund to one million dollars at $100,000 a year for the next 10 years. · Note in the next fiscal year budget summary (narrative): Ø It is Council Practice
to establish CIP annual funding of $50,000 for sidewalks, $50,000 for storm drains, and to build a $1 million hillside reserve fund – to be funded at a $100K a year for the next 10 years.
Ø Traffic Safety projects will be handled in the CIP on an “as needed basis” for Council prioritization. · Establish a Property/Facility Acquisition Replacement Reserve. This fund is
intended to build capital for future property acquisition and future facility replacement. · Include in budget policy that future councils pursue remaining TEA funds. 35
10 Director Furey noted the GFOA will be changing the rules on Fund Balance Reserves and this sinking fund practice may have to be addressed in the next budget cycle. Vice Mayor King
also expressed an interest in developing a retrospective ten-year trend on revenue and costs. CityManager Dave Anderson noted that we already have retrospective data for the past several
years and it is continually being refined. In addition, Director Furey is working on a five-year prospective trend. Director Furey noted that past finance directors had completely different
funds and accounting practices and those practices don’t exist any longer. Councilmember Miller added that with Director Furey’s efforts, much of the revenue and cost trend has already
been established for the past five to seven years – such as employee data. Vice Mayor King stated she would like the five-year trend data with a goal of ten years included in the budget
policies. Councilmember Miller clarified the retrospective and prospective trend data request stating it would be a five year goal with ten years of trend data. Director Furey noted
she will keep accumulating it over the next five years. There being no additional business Mayor Page adjourned the Study Session at 9:05. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City
Clerk 36
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: CityManager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson
SUBJECT: City Council Minutes – November 4, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the November 4, 2009 City Council Meeting: FISCAL
IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC
CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Minutes from November 4, 2009 37
MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 4, 2009 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session in the Administrative Conference Room at 5:30 p.m. ANNOUNCEMENT
OF CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) (1 potential case) CONFERENCE
– INSTRUCTION TO REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov’t Code Section 54956.8):Wildwood Way Agency Negotiators: Dave Anderson, City Manager and John Cherbone, Public Works Director MAYOR’S REPORT
ON CLOSED SESSION Mayor Page stated there was no reportable information. City Council held a Joint Meeting with members of the Ministerial Association in the Administrative Conference
Room at 6:00 p.m. Mayor Page called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Howard Miller, Jill Hunter,
Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page ABSENT: Susie Nagpal (Excused Absence) ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Richard Taylor, City Attorney Barbara Powell, Assistant CityManager
Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Mary Furey, Finance Director John Cherbone, Public Works Director John Livingstone, Community Development Director Cynthia McCormick, Associate Planner Kate
Bear, City Arborist REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA Ann Sullivan, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of November
4, 2009, was properly posted on October 29, 2009. 38
2 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following people requested to speak: Citizen Ray addressed the Council regarding the pollution from the Lehigh Cement Plant in Cupertino. He stated he recently
attended a meeting in Sacramento regarding this concern. Grover Steele addressed the Council regarding the October 13th article in the Saratoga Newspaper about the proposed Community
Garden by the Peck family and the potential development of the West Valley Water District property bordering the Saratoga Creek; he stated he does not support this proposal. Naomi Matsumoto
expressed her appreciation of the support shown by the City Council for the West Valley Community Services program. She noted they have seen a 30% increase in participation from a year
ago from people who need their services. She added they are having a difficult time keeping enough donated food items available for the people who are in need and welcomed any and all
donations. Vice Mayor King asked if they had enough volunteers for serving food on Thanksgiving Day. Ms. Matsumoto noted they have enough servers lined up for that day; however they
do need volunteers to adopt seniors for the Adopt a Family Program for the holidays. Vice Mayor King asked how people could get excess produce from their fruit and vegetable trees to
West Valley Community Services. Ms. Matsumoto stated people could drop the excess produce off at the West Valley Community Services office or they could call their office to schedule
a time where they could meet at the Los Gatos location to pick up the donated produce. Janice Gamper addressed the Council regarding the discontinued public transportation services for
people that needed transportation services later in the evening and asked how she could get transportation assistance for her and her father. DIRECTION TO STAFF Mayor Page suggested
Ms. Gamper call 211 for transportation assistance. COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Reverend Eric Swanson from West Hope Presbyterian Church provided a brief report on the
Joint Meeting with the Ministerial Association prior to the Regular Council meeting. He noted the association meets once a month and their goal is to continue networking with the various
communities of faith within Saratoga to build a community of peace. They expressed an interest in working with the City to reach out together to build community. Reverend Swanson invited
all Saratoga communities of faith to participate in the Thanksgiving Dinner Interfaith celebration on Thanksgiving Day at Congregation Beth David. In addition, he invited everyone that
would like to be more involved in the 39
3 community to visit their website at www.SaratogaServes.org – a program that was enacted in 2008 that promotes service and good will in the Saratoga community. Mayor Page took this
opportunity to invite the members of the Ministerial Association that were in attendance to join him on the Dais so that he could present them with a proclamation declaring the month
of November as “National Family Care Givers Month”. Mayor Page read the proclamation and presented it to the members that were present. DIRECTION TO STAFF None ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Mayor
King stated the Sister City 25th Anniversary celebrations will be starting this week and invited everyone to help welcome the delegation from Muko Japan and to join them in the tree
planting event at the Warner Hutton House on Saturday . She added people could call the city offices to obtain a schedule of events. Councilmember Hunter noted there was an event for
children scheduled at the Saratoga Library on Saturday. Ms. Hunter also invited everyone to come to the annual Tree Lighting Ceremony on November 27th – followed by the Village Open
House events. Mayor Page noted the City began their Sister City relationship with Muko, Japan twenty five years ago; which includes a student exchange program. He added the Mayor from
Muko, Japan would be a member of the delegation scheduled to arrive on Thursday. Vice Mayor King invited everyone to participate in the “Turkey Trot” competition in downtown San Jose
on the morning of Thanksgiving Day. CEREMONIAL ITEMS None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. REVIEW OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE REGISTERS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council
accepts the Check Registers for Accounts Payable cycles: October 15, 2009 October 22, 2009 MILLER/HUNTER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE CHECK REGISTERS FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CYCLES: OCTOBER 15,
2009 AND OCTOBER 22, 2009. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 40
4 2. TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review and accept the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended September 30, 2009. MILLER/HUNTER MOVED
TO ACCEPT THE TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 3. FINAL MAP APPROVAL FOR TWO LOTS LOCATED AT 15211 HUME
DRIVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Move to adopt Resolution granting final map approval of tentative map application No. SUB 09-0001 for two lots located at 15211 Hume Drive. RESOLUTION NO.
09-056 MILLER/HUNTER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL MAP APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE MAP APPLICATION NO. SUB 09-0001 FOR TWO LOTS LOCATED AT 15211 HUME DRIVE. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1WITH
COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 4. FY 2009 – 2010 CDBG COUNTY/CITY CONTRACT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the CityManager to execute a $464,069.77 contract with Santa
Clara County for the FY 2009-2010 CDBG Program. RESOLUTION NO. 09-057 MILLER/HUNTER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A $464,069.77 CONTRACT WITH SANTA
CLARA COUNTY FOR THE FY 2009/2010 CDBG PROGRAM. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 5. UPDATE OF SARATOGA’S LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (LHMP) MATRICES PURSUANT TO
THE DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the CityManager to submit the attached updated mitigation matrices to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for their preliminary review and comment. MILLER/HUNTER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT THE UPDATED MITIGATION MATRICES
TO THE ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS (ABAG) AND THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGAEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) FOR THEIR PRELIMINARY REVIEW AND COMMENT. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1WITH COUNCILMEMBER
NAGPAL ABSENT. 41
5 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. APPEAL OF A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (TRP09-0222). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission decision denying the appeal
and allowing the removal of four oak trees. The attached resolution would make removal subject to all the Planning Commission conditions, including a provision that work may not proceed
if a court has determined that the Applicant may not remove trees within the easement. City Arborist Kate Bear presented the staff report regarding the appeal of a tree removal permit
on Via Regina Drive. Max Keyashian, appellant, addressed the Council requesting that they deny the Planning Commission’s decision allowing the removal of four oak trees at 21818 Via
Regina. Linda Yelavich, applicant, addressed the Council asking that they uphold the Planning Commission’s decision granting removal of four oak trees at 21818 Via Regina. Mayor Page
opened the public hearing for comment. No one requested to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the the public hearing comment. Mr. Kayeshian re-addressed the Council asking Council
to deny the Planning Commission’s decision to allow removal of four oak trees at 21818 Via Regina. Linda Yelavich re-addressed the Council asking Council to uphold the Planning Commission’s
decision. Councilmember Hunter noted she supported the appellant opposing the Planning Commission’s decision to allow the removal of four oak trees. RESOLUTION NO. 09-058 MILLER/KING
MOVED TO UPHOLD THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION APPROVING APPLICATION NO. TRP 09-0222 FOR THE REMOVAL OF FOUR COAST LIVE OAK TREES AT 21818 VIA REGINA; AND TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION
WHICH WOULDMAKE REMOVAL SUBJECT TO ALL THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS, INCLUDING A PROVISION THAT WORK MAY NOT PROCEED IF A COURT HAS DETERMINED THAT THE APPLICANT MAY NOT REMOVE
TREES WITHIN THE EASEMENT. MOTION PASSED 3-1-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER HUNTER OPPOSING AND COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. 42
6 OLD BUSINESS 7. HERRIMAN AVENUE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AND BICYCLE LANE REVIEW STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive report and provide direction to staff Public Works Director John Cherbone presented
the staff report. Franziska Church and Sohrab Rashid, Traffic Engineers from Fehr & Peers, provided additional data regarding pedestrian and bicycle lane options on Herriman Avenue and
noted they recommended Options 1 or 3. Mayor Page invited public comment. The following people requested to speak on this item: Carl Dwjta stated option 3 was probably the most ideal
for the majority of the residents; however he was in support of Option 4. Marilyn Foust stated a sidewalk was installed on a street that wasn’t made to accommodate a sidewalk. She noted
she receives complaints from the postman and noted she would like an option where there is a buffer and not to keep Herriman the way it is now. Minggui Pan noted he does not support
Option 2 as it would benefit only one or two residents and the chosen option should benefit the the majority of the residents. Bob Dimicco noted he supports Option 1. Annette Cozimel
stated she supports Option 4. No one else requested to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the public comment. KING/MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE OPTION 1: KEEP CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF
HERRIMAN AVENUE. CREATE RAISED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY BY FILLING IN BETWEEN THE ASPHALT BERM AND CONCRETE CURB. MOTION PASSED 3-1-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER HUNTER OPPOSING AND COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL
ABSENT. NEW BUSINESS 8. STATUS OF JANUARY 6, 2010 COUNCIL MEETING STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 43
7 Consider cancelling the meeting of January 6, 2010. City Clerk Ann Sullivan presented the staff report. PAGE/KING MOVED TO CANCEL THE JANUARY 6, 2010 COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION PASSED
4-0-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Chuck Page – reported: Valley Transportation Authority PAC – meets Thursday evening and may vote on a
couple items: Reorganization of small city groupings – specifically whether or not to add Milpitas to Sunnyvale and Santa Clara; and Governances – how the five small city representatives
are appointed to the board. He noted VTA may be looking at additional employee layoffs due to the downturn in the economy and reduced ridership. Vice Mayor Kathleen King – reported:
West Valley Flood Control Zone & Watershed Advisory Committee – suggested Council reconsider this committee as they only schedule four meetings a year and feels the meetings have not
been very productive overall. SSC Cities Association Executive Board – will meet next Thursday and noted the Cities Association will have “California Forward” come in to talk about the
future Initiatives, such as the City of San Jose’s efforts to ban plastic bags, CDC grants of $376 million dollars that are available to the County Health Departments and only 40 grants
will be given out. These grants will be applied to improving access to community exercise programs, quitting smoking, and general health plan coverage’s. She reminded Council of the
annual Christmas Party on December 3, 2009. Councilmember Jill Hunter – reported: Thanked KSAR for always attending every city function and for interviewing people. Library Joint Powers
Association – she attended the County Library meeting and noted they will be conducting a survey of people that do not have library cards; adding that only 45% of Saratogans have a library
card. She stated their goal is to increase the number of library cards and circulation as this is what determines how much funding the Saratoga Library receives. She added Saratoga was
recognized for their donation of $50K to the library. She thanked the Friends of the Library group for their continued fund raising efforts. Santa Clara County Valley Water District
Commission – she attended the last meeting; they discussed the new changes that will be effective January 1, 2010 and stated the District’s goal is to have people cut back 20% in their
water usage. She noted the County in general has reduced water usage by 15%. Councilmember Howard Miller – reported: he attended the HTC Policy Committee meeting as an alternate and
noted there are two items Council will want to be aware of regarding CDBG Grants. He stated the downturn in the economy has caused the County to look for ways to minimize the cost of
their programs. For 2011 the County will try to limit the amount of administrative overhead for public service grants by considering having fewer grants at a larger amount. In addition
they are considering retaining about 44
8 $15,000 of administrative dollars that normally the City would use to administer the programs to help fund their services. Chamber of Commerce – has moved into their new office on
Big Basin; facility is open for business; and they expressed their appreciation to the city for waiving the CUP fee. KSAR – is looking at spending some of the PEG capital dollars to
purchase some video editing stations. Santa Clara County Emergency Council – will be attending the meeting on Thursday. Council Finance Standing Committee – met earlier today and noted
Council did receive an updated Financial Report. He added the new computer software system is now able to generate reports for current revenue and expense by quarter, versus by budget.
He stated expenses are below what was expected at this point – which is good; and revenue is difficult to determine as it is very seasonal, e.g. property tax dollars, which will be coming
later in the fiscal year and those tax dollars are at where we expected them; and the Building Department has been issuing a lot of building permits, however, due to the economy not
as many projects are coming in right now. Councilmember Susie Nagpal – Excused Absence. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Miller noted the Boy Scouts of Troop 535 will be conducting their
Citywide E-Waste Recycling in January and would like to attend the first meeting in December to provide additional information on this program. Mayor Page stated Troop 535 members could
speak during the Non-agendized portion of the Council Agenda on December 2, 2009, and they could lead the Pledge of Allegiance. Councilmember Hunter provided Council with copies of an
article in the Saratoga News 15 years
ago regarding trees and noted she would provide City Arborist Kate Bear with one as well. Mayor Page announced that as a result of the Joint Meeting held earlier with the Saratoga Ministerial
Association he would like to agendize the addition of a new Council assignment for a council liaison to the Ministerial Association. CityManager Dave Anderson reported that SASCC wanted
to convey their appreciation of the City’s participation in the recent shredding of documents; they conducted a successful Health Faire providing seasonal flu shots recently; and SASCC
members are in the process of selecting an investment advisor. Their investment committee is conducting interviews to acquire a firm to assist SASCC with their portfolio. Councilmember
Hunter noted she will be attending future SASCC meeting and inquired about the SASCC schedule. CityManager Dave Anderson stated he would have Debbie Bretschneider contact her regarding
the SASCC meeting schedule. City Attorney Richard Taylor noted he is unable to attend the November 18, 2009 Council meeting and Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer would be attending
in his absence. 45
9 CITY MANAGER’S REPORT CityManager Dave Anderson noted he would like Council’s permission to leave the state during the week of Thanksgiving. Council extended their approval for Mr.
Anderson to leave the state during the week of Thanksgiving. Council Hunter noted Council members and staff were wearing white ribbons in honor of Susie Nagpal and wished her a speedy
recovery. ADJOURNMENT There being no additional business Mayor Page asked for a motion to adjourn. KING/HUNTER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING AT 9:25PM. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH
COUNCILMEMBER NAGPAL ABSENT. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 46
Dave Anderson Melanie Whittaker Mary Furey SUBJECT: Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review and accept the Check Registers for the
following Accounts Payable payment cycles: REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are the Check Registers for: Date Ending Check No. 10/29/09 113605 113671 66 181,977.71 10/29/09 10/22/09 113604 11/05/09
113672 113733 61 225,804.83 11/05/09 10/29/09 113671 AP Date Check No . Issued to Dept. Amount 10/29/09 113617 Public Safety 28,352.08 10/29/09 113621 Facilities 39,490.31 10/29/09 113646
Various 20,555.55 11/05/09 113678 Public Works 39,166.87 11/05/09 113682 Public Works 49,986.00 11/05/09 113692 Public Works 37,029.56 PREPARED BY: DEPT. DIRECTOR: Type of Checks Date
Starting Check No. Ending Check No. Total Checks Amount Checks Released October 29, 2009 November 05, 2009 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT:
Finance & Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: North Campus Improvement Pacific Gas & Electric Various Electric/Gas Services CRW Industries CIP -Facilities Project Prior Check Register
The following is a list of Accounts Payable checks issued for more than $20,000 and a brief description of the expenditure: City of San Jose -Animal Services General Monthly Animal Services
-August & September Fund Purpose Accounts Payable Accounts Payable Prospect Median #11 Blossom Valley Construction CIP -Streets Project Casey Construction CIP -Streets Project Retaining
Wall -Comer Dr County of SC -Enviromental Hazardous Waste General Hazardous Waste Fees 47
The following are Accounts Payable checks that were voided or manually issued: AP Date Check No. Amount 11/05/09 113687 (348.00) 11/05/09 113361 (445.53 11/05/09 113658 (682.81) The
following is a list of cash reduction by fund: Fund # AP 10/29 AP 11/05 Total 111 General 91,553.28 95,589.51 187,142.79 231 Village Lighting 2,746.51 2,746.51 232 Azule Lighting 225.48
225.48 233 Sarahills Lighting 250.34 250.34 241 Arroyo de Saratoga Landscape 85.00 85.00 242 Bonnet Way Landscape 135.00 135.00 243 Carnelian Glen 135.00 135.00 244 Cunningham/Glasgow
Landscape 150.00 150.00 245 Fredericksburg Landscape 132.00 132.00 246 Greenbriar Landscape 556.00 157.25 713.25 247 Kerwin Ranch Landscape 311.00 311.00 248 Leutar Court Landscape 85.00
85.00 249 Manor Drive Landscape 160.00 160.00 251 McCartysville Landscape 198.34 198.34 252 Prides Crossing Landscape 1,053.14 1,053.14 253 Saratoga Legends Landscape 158.00 158.00 254
Sunland Park Landscape 203.00 203.00 255 Tricia Woods Landscape 53.58 53.58 271 Beauchamps Landscape 142.12 142.12 272 Bellgrove Landscape 2,018.01 2,018.01 273 Gateway Landscape 203.00
203.00 274 Horseshoe Landscape/Lighting 329.17 329.17 275 Quito Lighting 1,255.41 1,255.41 276 Tollgate LLD 90.00 41.10 131.10 277 Village Commercial Landscape 475.00 475.00 411 CIP
Street Projects 5,083.55 101,149.35 106,232.90 412 CIP Parks Projects 2,985.00 445.53 3,430.53 413 CIP Facility Projects 49,362.74 13,178.12 62,540.86 414 CIP Admin Projects 4,679.00
4,679.00 431 Grant Fund -CIP Streets 2,564.46 2,564.46 481 Gas Tax Fund 9,524.60 9,524.60 611 Liability/Risk Mgt 260.00 260.00 612 Workers' Comp 470.47 470.47 622 Information Technology
155.83 5,926.98 6,082.81 623 Vehicle & Equipment Maint 2,433.33 220.45 2,653.78 624 Building Maintenance 17,164.82 3,687.07 20,851.89 191,977.71 225,804.83 417,782.54 ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Check Registers in the 'A/P Checks By Period and Year' report format CSFMO (void) Reissued ck # 113732
Issued to to Description A Equipment (void) Reissued ck # 113730 Sierra Display (void) Reissued ck # 113733 TOTAL Fund Description 48
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 16:02:37 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.t_c=’21’ and transact.ck_date=’20091029
00:00:00.000’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113605 10/29/09 762 A TOOL SHED 1115301 SUPPLIES − PARKS 0.00 24.18 11111 113606 10/29/09 72 ADVANTAGE JANITORIAL SUP 6246202 SUPPLIES − JANITORIAL 0.00 997.54 11111 113607 10/29/09
152 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCI 1114101 ANNUAL DUES 2010 0.00 550.00 11111 113607 10/29/09 152 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCI 1114101 ANNUAL DUES 2010 0.00 335.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 885.00 11111
113608 10/29/09 166 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF SAFE 6246202 2010 DUES − SCOTT 0.00 155.00 11111 113609 10/29/09 500 ANGELI, JOSEPH 1116101 CANCELLED CLASS 0.00 74.00 11111 113610 10/29/09 197
ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRIN 6246202 MTHLY SVC 09/07−10/06 0.00 131.07 11111 113611 10/29/09 500 BALL, DEBBIE 1116101 CANCELLED CLASS 0.00 74.00 11111 113612 10/29/09 500 BOYD, TIM 111 PROJ
DEPOSIT REFUND 0.00 84.38 11111 113613 10/29/09 130 CDWG, INC 6223201 ADOBE SOFTWARE 0.00 24.00 11111 113614 10/29/09 698 CF ARCHIBALD PAVING, INC 481 RETENTION − PAVEMENT 0.00 −501.29
11111 113614 10/29/09 698 CF ARCHIBALD PAVING, INC 4819111−001 2009 PAVEMENT MGMT 0.00 10,025.89 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 9,524.60 11111 113615 10/29/09 176 CIENEGA LANDSCAPING 2745302 LNDSCP
HORSHOE 10/09 0.00 320.00 11111 113615 10/29/09 176 CIENEGA LANDSCAPING 1115301 LNDSCP FOOTHILL 10/09 0.00 178.00 11111 113615 10/29/09 176 CIENEGA LANDSCAPING 2435302 LNDSCP C GLEN
10/09 0.00 135.00 11111 113615 10/29/09 176 CIENEGA LANDSCAPING 1115301 LNDSCP VILLAGE 10/09 0.00 220.00 11111 113615 10/29/09 176 CIENEGA LANDSCAPING 1115301 LNDSCP C SPRING 10/09 0.00
400.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,253.00 11111 113616 10/29/09 179 CIM AIR, INC 6246202 HVAC MAINTENANCE 0.00 1,200.00 11111 113616 10/29/09 179 CIM AIR, INC 6246202 EQUIPMENT SURVEY 0.00 1,680.00
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,880.00 11111 113617 10/29/09 517 CITY OF SAN JOSE 1117101 ANIMAL SVC 08/09 0.00 14,176.04 11111 113617 10/29/09 517 CITY OF SAN JOSE 1117101 ANIMAL SVC 09/09 0.00
14,176.04 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 28,352.08 11111 113618 10/29/09 229 COAST OIL COMPANY LLC 6235202 DIESEL /UNLEADED 0.00 2,105.55 11111 113619 10/29/09 494 COMCAST 6223201 MTHLY SVC 10/20−11/19
0.00 98.95 11111 113620 10/29/09 785 COMCAST8770XXXXXXXXX627 6223201 MTHLY SVC 09/09 0.00 32.88 11111 113621 10/29/09 516 CRW INDUSTRIES 413 RETENTION − N CAMPUS 0.00 −144.59 11111 113621
10/29/09 516 CRW INDUSTRIES 413 RETENTION − N CAMPUS 0.00 38,189.00 11111 113621 10/29/09 516 CRW INDUSTRIES 4139351−001 N CAMPUS IMPROVEMENT 0.00 1,445.90 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 39,490.31
11111 113622 10/29/09 342 DATA TICKET INC 1117101 CITATION FEES 09/09 0.00 136.45 49
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 2 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 16:02:37 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.t_c=’21’ and transact.ck_date=’20091029
00:00:00.000’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113623 10/29/09 552 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1114103 FINGERPRINTING FEE 0.00 96.00 11111 113624 10/29/09 572 DOLPHIN CHARTERS 1116101 EXCURSION SVC 10/21 0.00 900.00 11111 113625
10/29/09 547 EBEN L KURTZMAN 1114103 LGL SVC 09/17/09 0.00 45.00 11111 113626 10/29/09 532 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D 1118101 DE2176 − CLOSING 9/29 0.00 56.00 11111 113627 10/29/09 416
EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1115301 TURF SPRAY − K MORAN 0.00 1,400.00 11111 113627 10/29/09 416 EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1115301 TURF SPRAY − K MORAN 0.00 1,400.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,800.00
11111 113628 10/29/09 423 FEHR & PEERS 1115101 REVIEW SVC − TSC 0.00 3,392.55 11111 113628 10/29/09 423 FEHR & PEERS 1115101 PROF SVC −TSC 07/09 0.00 5,487.46 11111 113628 10/29/09 423
FEHR & PEERS 4119121−001 TRAFFIC SAFETY CIP 0.00 670.02 11111 113628 10/29/09 423 FEHR & PEERS 4119121−001 TRAFFIC SAFETY CIP 0.00 779.71 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 10,329.74 11111 113629 10/29/09
426 FLINT TRADING, INC 4119111−002 SUPPLIES− RESURFACING 0.00 711.26 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 1115301 MEDIANS 10/09 0.00 4,327.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454
GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2415302 ARROYO DE SARA 10/09 0.00 85.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2445302 CUNINGHAM/GLAS 10/09 0.00 150.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454
GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2455302 FREDRICKSBURG 10/09 0.00 132.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2465302 AZULE 10/09 0.00 219.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA
LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2465302 SEAGULL 10/09 0.00 187.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2485302 LEUTAR CT 10/09 0.00 85.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE
2495302 MANOR DR 10/09 0.00 160.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2715302 BEAUCHAMPS 10/09 0.00 85.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2755302 QUITO
PASEO 10/09 0.00 60.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2755302 QUITO MARTHA 10/09 0.00 105.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2765302 TOLLGATE 10/09
0.00 90.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2425302 BONNET WAY 10/09 0.00 135.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2525302 PRIDES CROSSING 10/09 0.00
448.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 2555302 TRICIA WOODS 10/09 0.00 45.00 11111 113630 10/29/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 1115201 ALOHA/HWY9 09/09 0.00 390.00
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 6,703.00 11111 113631 10/29/09 455 GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPME 1115301 SUPPLIES − PARKS 0.00 25.00 11111 113632 10/29/09 453 GT JORDAN ELECTRIC, INC 4139322−001 ELECTRICAL
− THEATER 0.00 522.00 11111 113633 10/29/09 491 HUMAN BEHAVIOR ASSOCIATE 1112301 EAP SVC 09/09 0.00 0.00 218.50 11111 113634 10/29/09 19 IAN GEDDES TREE CARE, IN 1115301 GRIND STUMP−HIST
PARK 0.00 357.50 11111 113635 10/29/09 500 INNAMORATO, JULIE 1116101 CANCELLED CLASS 0.00 138.00 11111 113636 10/29/09 63 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTR 4119111−002 SUPPLIES − RESTRIPING 0.00
391.93 11111 113636 10/29/09 63 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTR 4119112−002 SIGNS − REPAVING SARA 0.00 1,092.50 11111 113636 10/29/09 63 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTR 4119111−002 SUPPLIES − RESTRIPING
0.00 109.25 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,593.68 50
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 3 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 16:02:37 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.t_c=’21’ and transact.ck_date=’20091029
00:00:00.000’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113637 10/29/09 199 JENSEN, PAUL 4319142−005 SURVEY WORK 08/09 0.00 200.00 11111 113637 10/29/09 199 JENSEN, PAUL 4119142−006 CDBG−SURVEY WORK 0.00 585.00 11111 113637 10/29/09
199 JENSEN, PAUL 4319142−005 SURVEY WORK 07/09 0.00 390.00 11111 113637 10/29/09 199 JENSEN, PAUL 1115101 SURVEY WORK 07/09 0.00 800.00 11111 113637 10/29/09 199 JENSEN, PAUL 4319274−001
DE ANZA TRAIL 07/09 0.00 80.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,055.00 11111 113638 10/29/09 92 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES, I 1115201 LANDSCAPE TOOLS 0.00 420.45 11111 113639 10/29/09 500 KANAZAWA, HANNAH
1116101 CANCELLED CLASS 0.00 108.00 11111 113640 10/29/09 750 KING GRADING 4129276−002 HILL EROSION CONTROL 0.00 2,985.00 11111 113641 10/29/09 171 LABOSSIERE, MONICA 1112301 SUPPLIES
− COOK OFF 0.00 29.46 11111 113642 10/29/09 183 LEXISNEXIS 1114103 MTHLY SVC 09/09 0.00 167.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 1115301 BEAUCHAMPS PARK 0.00 212.00 11111
113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 1115301 RAVENWOOD PARK 0.00 110.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 1115301 AZULE PARK 0.00 565.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221
LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 1115301 KEVIN MORAN PARK 0.00 200.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 1115301 HISTORICAL PARK 0.00 170.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING,
INC 1115301 NORTH CAMPUS 0.00 450.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 2515302 MCCARTYSVILLE 0.00 180.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 2545302 SUNLAND
0.00 203.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 2475302 KERWIN RANCH 0.00 311.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 2725302 BELLGROVE 0.00 1,598.00 11111 113643
10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 2535302 LEGENDS 0.00 158.00 11111 113643 10/29/09 221 LORAL LANDSCAPING, INC 2735302 GATEWAY 0.00 203.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 4,360.00 11111 113644 10/29/09
291 MAXIMUS CONSULTING SVC, 1113101 1ST 40% INSTALL 09/10 0.00 832.00 11111 113645 10/29/09 60 ONTRAC 1115201 SHUTE MIHALY 9/8,9/14 0.00 10.00 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS &
ELECTRIC 6246202 NATURAL GAS 0.00 79.99 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 6246202 BUILDINGS 0.00 11,988.83 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1115301 PARKS/OPEN
SPACE 0.00 857.84 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1115201 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 0.00 1,135.50 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1115201 STREET LIGHTS 0.00 640.21
11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1115201 SEAGULL 0.00 59.69 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2755302 QUITO 0.00 1,090.41 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC
GAS & ELECTRIC 2325302 AZULE 0.00 225.48 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2335302 SARAHILLS 0.00 250.34 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2315302 VILLAGE
LIGHTING 0.00 2,205.09 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2315302 5TH STREET 0.00 11.63 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2315302 4TH STREET 0.00 529.79
11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2515302 MCCARTYSVILLE 0.00 18.34 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2555302 TRICIA WOODS 0.00 8.58 11111 113646 10/29/09
173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2715302 BEAUCHAMPS 0.00 57.12 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2525302 PRIDES CROSSING 0.00 35.14 51
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 4 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 16:02:37 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.t_c=’21’ and transact.ck_date=’20091029
00:00:00.000’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2725302 BELLGROVE 0.00 420.01 11111 113646 10/29/09 173 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2745302 HORSESHOE 0.00 9.17 11111 113646 10/29/09 173
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 6246202 NORTH CAMPUS 0.00 932.39 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 20,555.55 11111 113647 10/29/09 195 PAPA 1115301 2010 DUES − MEEK 0.00 40.00 11111 113647 10/29/09 195 PAPA 1115301
2010 DUES − MARTIN 0.00 40.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 80.00 11111 113648 10/29/09 278 PETROTEK 6235202 FUEL TESTING 09/09 0.00 200.00 11111 113649 10/29/09 652 PTM DOCUMENT SYSTEMS 1113101
BLANK AP CHECKS 0.00 494.82 11111 113649 10/29/09 652 PTM DOCUMENT SYSTEMS 1113101 BLANK W2’S 0.00 43.52 11111 113649 10/29/09 652 PTM DOCUMENT SYSTEMS 1113101 BLANK 1099’S 0.00 19.90
11111 113649 10/29/09 652 PTM DOCUMENT SYSTEMS 1113101 PAYROLL CHECKS 0.00 244.16 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 802.40 11111 113650 10/29/09 375 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRAVEL 1116101 EXCURSION SVC 10/21
0.00 50.00 11111 113651 10/29/09 393 REED & GRAHAM, INC 4119111−001 ASPHALT 0.00 203.23 11111 113651 10/29/09 393 REED & GRAHAM, INC 4119111−001 ASPHALT 0.00 171.47 TOTAL CHECK 0.00
374.70 11111 113652 10/29/09 500 RIO ADOBE SOUTHWEST CAFE 1111201 COMMISSION DINNER 0.00 4,554.23 11111 113653 10/29/09 500 SAGHEZCHI, SOHAIL 111 PROJ DEPOSIT REFUND 0.00 2,020.00 11111
113654 10/29/09 114 SARWARI SHAHEEN 1114101 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 14.88 11111 113654 10/29/09 114 SARWARI SHAHEEN 1115101 SUPPLIES − PW MTG 0.00 5.34 11111 113654 10/29/09 114 SARWARI
SHAHEEN 1118101 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 82.58 11111 113654 10/29/09 114 SARWARI SHAHEEN 1115101 COSTCO 10/15 0.00 10.07 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 112.87 11111 113655 10/29/09 69 SASCC 1112201 RECORDS
MGMT 10/19 0.00 1,017.50 11111 113656 10/29/09 136 SCOTTY’S AUTOMOTIVE 6235202 MAINTENANCE VEH 107 0.00 63.89 11111 113656 10/29/09 136 SCOTTY’S AUTOMOTIVE 6235202 MAINTENANCE VEH#104
0.00 63.89 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 127.78 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201 CTY ATTN− CTY MGR/CLK 0.00 3,897.60 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201
CTY ATTN− COM DEV 0.00 1,747.20 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201 CTY ATTN− CODE ENF 0.00 1,382.40 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201
CTY ATTN− LITIGATION 0.00 1,075.20 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201 CTY ATTN− COUNCIL MTG 0.00 384.00 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201
CTY ATTN− PUBLIC WORK 0.00 1,017.60 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201 CTY ATTN− RECREATION 0.00 57.60 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1114102
CTY ATTN− ADV PLAN 0.00 2,457.60 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201 GEN LGL− CTY MGR/CLK 0.00 362.60 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201
GEN LGL− NON DEPT 0.00 121.53 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201 GEN LGL− NON DEPT 0.00 1,021.60 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 1118201 LITIGATION
MGMT 0.00 1,110.20 11111 113657 10/29/09 154 SHUTE MIHALY & WEINBERGE 4319274−001 CEQA DE ANZA TRAIL 0.00 1,894.46 52
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 5 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 16:02:37 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.t_c=’21’ and transact.ck_date=’20091029
00:00:00.000’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 16,529.59 11111 113658 10/29/09 149 SIERRA DISPLAY INC 1115301 FERTILIZER − C SPRING 0.00 682.81 11111 113659 10/29/09 160 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPP 4139351−002 SEEDS
− N CAMPUS 0.00 737.44 11111 113660 10/29/09 162 SILICON VALLEY COMM NEWS 1114101 LGL NOTICE 09/14/09 0.00 159.25 11111 113661 10/29/09 787 SPRAY TECHNOLOGY 2465302 SUPPLIES − GREENBRIAR
0.00 150.00 11111 113662 10/29/09 253 STEVE BENZING ARCHITECT 4139351−001 KITCHEN − N CAMPUS 0.00 125.00 11111 113663 10/29/09 256 STEVENS CREEK QUARRY INC 4119111−001 SAND − RESURFACING
0.00 224.97 11111 113664 10/29/09 336 TLC ADMINISTRATORS 1112301 125 MTHLY SVC 10/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113665 10/29/09 343 TMT ENTERPRISES INC 1115301 SUPPLIES − PARKS 0.00 54.63 11111
113666 10/29/09 389 U SAVE ROCKERY 4119111−001 RESURFACING SUPPLIES 0.00 144.21 11111 113667 10/29/09 385 UNIVERSAL SWEEPING SERVI 2525302 WALL WASH − PROSPECT 0.00 570.00 11111 113667
10/29/09 385 UNIVERSAL SWEEPING SERVI 2775302 WASH − VILLAGE 0.00 475.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,045.00 11111 113668 10/29/09 786 WALKER, NINA 1118302 SUPPLIES − N CAMPUS 0.00 4.88 11111
113668 10/29/09 786 WALKER, NINA 1118302 SUPPLIES − N CAMPUS 0.00 27.33 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 32.21 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 MTHLY SVC 09/09 0.00 100.00
11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 MTHLY SVC 10/09 0.00 100.00 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 MTHLY SVC 08/09 0.00 100.00 11111 113669
10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 C SPRINGS 09/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 C SPRINGS 10/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113669 10/29/09
408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 EL QUITO 10/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 EL QUITO 09/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS −
WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 WILDWOOD PARK 09/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 WILDWOOD PARK 10/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS −
WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 K MORAN PARK 10/09 0.00 175.00 11111 113669 10/29/09 408 WCBS − WEST COAST BUILDI 1115301 K MORAN PARK 09/09 0.00 175.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,700.00 11111 113670
10/29/09 646 WEBER TRACTOR SERVICE 413 RETENTION N CAMPUS 0.00 −943.11 11111 113670 10/29/09 646 WEBER TRACTOR SERVICE 4139351−001 N CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS 0.00 9,431.10 TOTAL CHECK 0.00
8,487.99 11111 113671 10/29/09 500 WILSON, WANDA 1116101 CANCELLED EXCURSION 0.00 49.00 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 181,977.71 TOTAL FUND 0.00 181,977.71 TOTAL REPORT 0.00 181,977.71 53
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 15:32:29 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between ’113672’
and ’113733’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T & T 1115301 BLANEY MODEM 0.00 15.29 11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T & T 6246202 MONTHLY RECURRING 0.00 178.07 11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T & T 6246202 ALARM
SYSTEM 0.00 85.78 11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T & T 6246202 SUPERTRUNK 0.00 559.08 11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T & T 6246202 SR CENTER ALARMS 0.00 30.51 11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T
& T 1117102 EMERGENCY RESPONSE 0.00 204.57 11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T & T 6246202 NORTH CAMPUS 0.00 73.18 11111 113672 11/05/09 234 A T & T 1115301 EL QUITO IRRIGATION 0.00 15.63
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,162.11 11111 113673 11/05/09 17 AAA FIRE PROTECTION SERV 6246202 FIRE SYSTEMS SVC 0.00 327.90 11111 113674 11/05/09 72 ADVANTAGE JANITORIAL SUP 6246202 SUPPLIES −
JANITORIAL 0.00 331.30 11111 113674 11/05/09 72 ADVANTAGE JANITORIAL SUP 1115301 SUPPLIES − JANITORIAL 0.00 164.12 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 495.42 11111 113675 11/05/09 521 ALLIED LOCK & SAFE
INC 1115301 SUPPLIES − PARKS 0.00 112.85 11111 113676 11/05/09 790 AT&T MOBILITY 1112101 MTHLY SVC 7/30−8/16 0.00 65.73 11111 113676 11/05/09 790 AT&T MOBILITY 1112101 MTHLY SVC 8/17−09/16
0.00 67.50 11111 113676 11/05/09 790 AT&T MOBILITY 1112101 MTHLY SVC 09/17−09/22 0.00 14.10 11111 113676 11/05/09 790 AT&T MOBILITY 1112101 MTHLY SVC 9/23−10/22 0.00 73.41 TOTAL CHECK
0.00 220.74 11111 113677 11/05/09 327 BELANGER, CHRISTINE 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − DANCE 0.00 188.00 11111 113677 11/05/09 327 BELANGER, CHRISTINE 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − DANCE 0.00 126.00
11111 113677 11/05/09 327 BELANGER, CHRISTINE 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − DANCE 0.00 42.00 11111 113677 11/05/09 327 BELANGER, CHRISTINE 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − DANCE 0.00 168.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00
524.00 11111 113678 11/05/09 760 BLOSSOM VALLEY CONSTRUCT 411 RETENTION − MEDIAN 11 0.00 −4,351.88 11111 113678 11/05/09 760 BLOSSOM VALLEY CONSTRUCT 4119132−002 PROS MEDIAN NO.11 0.00
43,518.75 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 39,166.87 11111 113679 11/05/09 365 BOREL, KRISTIN 1118302 SUPPLIES − N CAMPUS 0.00 71.52 11111 113679 11/05/09 365 BOREL, KRISTIN 1112101 OFFICE SUPPLIES
0.00 39.30 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 110.82 11111 113680 11/05/09 20 BRUCE’S TIRE, INC 6235202 MAINTENANCE VEH#110 0.00 220.45 11111 113681 11/05/09 503 CALIFORNIA ASSOC OF PARK 1111201 COMMISSIONER
DUES 0.00 190.00 11111 113682 11/05/09 775 CASEY CONSTRUCTION INC 4119153−001 RETAINING WALL−COMER 0.00 49,986.00 11111 113683 11/05/09 163 CHOW, JACKSON 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − SPEECH
0.00 580.65 11111 113684 11/05/09 654 CIVICA SOFTWARE 4149413−001 COMPLETION OF WEBSITE 0.00 4,679.00 11111 113685 11/05/09 235 COMCAST 6223201 MTHLY SVC 10/26−11/25 0.00 104.95 11111
113686 11/05/09 785 COMCAST8770XXXXXXXXX627 6223201 MTHY SVC 10/16−11/15 0.00 32.88 54
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 2 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 15:32:29 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between ’113672’
and ’113733’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113687 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1112301 ACCTG SUPERVISOR AD 0.00 128.00 11111 113687 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1113101 ANNUAL DUES − EDRIS 0.00 110.00 11111 113687 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1113101
ANNUAL DUES − FUREY 0.00 110.00 11111 113687 V 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1112301 ACCTG SUPERVISOR AD 0.00 −128.00 11111 113687 V 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1113101 ANNUAL DUES − EDRIS 0.00 −110.00
11111 113687 V 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1113101 ANNUAL DUES − FUREY 0.00 −110.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 0.00 11111 113688 11/05/09 591 DANCE FORCE LLC 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − DANCE 0.00 201.60 11111
113689 11/05/09 211 DEEP CLIFF GOLF COURSE 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GOLF 0.00 216.84 11111 113689 11/05/09 211 DEEP CLIFF GOLF COURSE 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GOLF 0.00 216.84 TOTAL CHECK 0.00
433.68 11111 113690 11/05/09 1 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 1117101 CITATION FEES 10/09 0.00 304.00 11111 113691 11/05/09 651 ELLA CHEKHANOVSKAYA 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GYM 0.00 186.43 11111
113691 11/05/09 651 ELLA CHEKHANOVSKAYA 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GYM 0.00 149.14 11111 113691 11/05/09 651 ELLA CHEKHANOVSKAYA 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GYM 0.00 335.57 11111 113691 11/05/09
651 ELLA CHEKHANOVSKAYA 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GYM 0.00 500.42 11111 113691 11/05/09 651 ELLA CHEKHANOVSKAYA 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GYM 0.00 410.14 11111 113691 11/05/09 651 ELLA CHEKHANOVSKAYA
1116101 INSTRUCTOR − GYM 0.00 181.97 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,763.67 11111 113692 11/05/09 1 ENVIRONMENTAL 1115103 HAZ WASTE FEES 0.00 37,029.56 11111 113693 11/05/09 789 FLANNERY, JACQUELINE
R 1116101 INSTRUCTORS − BAKING 0.00 72.50 11111 113694 11/05/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 1115301 REPAIRS − BLOSSOM CT 0.00 481.57 11111 113694 11/05/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE
2465302 REPAIRS − GUAVA CT 0.00 145.00 11111 113694 11/05/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 1115301 REPAIRS − FRUITVALE 0.00 136.62 11111 113694 11/05/09 454 GACHINA LANDSCAPE MANAGE 1115301
REPAIRS − CIVIC CNTR 0.00 208.76 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 971.95 11111 113695 11/05/09 455 GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPME 1115301 SUPPLIES − PARKS 0.00 14.18 11111 113695 11/05/09 455 GARDENLAND POWER
EQUIPME 1115201 SUPPLIES − STREETS 0.00 60.17 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 74.35 11111 113696 11/05/09 466 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 1115301 SUPPLIES − PARKS 0.00 363.67 11111 113697 11/05/09 563 HEID,
W JEFFREY 1115101 PROF SVCS−GREENBRIAR 0.00 1,147.50 11111 113697 11/05/09 563 HEID, W JEFFREY 1118101 PROF SVC − N CAMPUS 0.00 4,187.50 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5,335.00 11111 113698 11/05/09
489 HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS, IN 1115301 SUPPLIES − PARKS 0.00 156.52 11111 113699 11/05/09 500 HOURIGAN, BARBARA 111 FACILITY DEP REFUND 0.00 300.00 11111 113699 11/05/09 500 HOURIGAN,
BARBARA 111 PAYMENT REFUND 0.00 355.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 655.00 11111 113700 11/05/09 14 HYDROTEC IRRIGATION EQUI 4139351−001 N CAMPUS IRRIGATION 0.00 13,178.12 55
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 3 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 15:32:29 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between ’113672’
and ’113733’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113701 11/05/09 19 IAN GEDDES TREE CARE, IN 1115201 REMOVE DEBRIS −QUITO 0.00 735.00 11111 113701 11/05/09 19 IAN GEDDES TREE CARE,
IN 1115301 CLEANUP − SARA/LG RD 0.00 1,790.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,525.00 11111 113702 11/05/09 525 JAMELLO, NANCY 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − YOGA 0.00 288.00 11111 113702 11/05/09 525 JAMELLO,
NANCY 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − YOGA 0.00 207.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 495.00 11111 113703 11/05/09 118 JUST FOR KICKS 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − SOCCER 0.00 59.25 11111 113704 11/05/09 788 KASHUBA,
BRENDA LYNN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − HEALTH 0.00 373.75 11111 113705 11/05/09 500 LEBLANC, TRACY 1116101 CANCELLED CLASS 0.00 84.00 11111 113706 11/05/09 311 MELODY ACADEMY OF MUSIC 1116101
INSTRUCTOR − PIANO 0.00 328.32 11111 113706 11/05/09 311 MELODY ACADEMY OF MUSIC 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − PIANO 0.00 328.32 11111 113706 11/05/09 311 MELODY ACADEMY OF MUSIC 1116101 INSTRUCTOR
− PIANO 0.00 109.44 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 766.08 11111 113707 11/05/09 328 METROPOLITAN PLANNING GR 111 DEV REVIEW − 09/09 0.00 925.00 11111 113708 11/05/09 499 MILLMAN & INDUSTRIAL CAR 111
DED:3000 DUES 0.00 320.00 11111 113709 11/05/09 500 MORA, RICHARD 1116101 CANCELLED CLASS 0.00 115.00 11111 113710 11/05/09 89 MY FIRST ART CLASS 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − ART 0.00 539.55
11111 113710 11/05/09 89 MY FIRST ART CLASS 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − ART 0.00 359.70 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 899.25 11111 113711 11/05/09 135 NORTH BAY BLDG MAINTENAN 6246202 WKLY SVC 10/11−17
0.00 342.00 11111 113711 11/05/09 135 NORTH BAY BLDG MAINTENAN 6246202 WKLY SVC 10/04−10 0.00 228.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 570.00 11111 113712 11/05/09 145 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 1114102 OFFICE
SUPPLIES 0.00 26.53 11111 113712 11/05/09 145 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 1112301 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 144.71 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 171.24 11111 113713 11/05/09 156 OKIN,YELENA 1116101 INSTRUCTOR −
BEADING 0.00 58.50 11111 113714 11/05/09 161 ON−LINE STRIPING SERVICE 4119111−002 STRIPING SVC 09/2010 0.00 11,850.00 11111 113715 11/05/09 540 ORCHARD SUPPLY 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES
0.00 588.81 11111 113716 11/05/09 214 PETTY CASH − RECREATION 1116101 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 38.32 11111 113717 11/05/09 409 REPUBLIC ITS 1115201 SIGNAL REPAIRS 0.00 3,289.61 11111 113717
11/05/09 409 REPUBLIC ITS 6118499 SJWC−WIRING ISSUE 0.00 260.00 11111 113717 11/05/09 409 REPUBLIC ITS 1115201 SIGNAL TEST&REPAIR 0.00 610.00 11111 113717 11/05/09 409 REPUBLIC ITS 1115201
SIGNAL RESPONSE 07/09 0.00 4,438.45 11111 113717 11/05/09 409 REPUBLIC ITS 1115201 TEST/REPAIR 08/09 0.00 225.00 11111 113717 11/05/09 409 REPUBLIC ITS 1115201 SIGNAL RESPONSE 08/09
0.00 4,437.55 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 13,260.61 56
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 4 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 15:32:29 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between ’113672’
and ’113733’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113718 11/05/09 87 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 6246202 BUILDINGS 0.00 217.74 11111 113718 11/05/09 87 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1115301 PARKS/OPEN SPACES 0.00 5,870.04 11111 113718 11/05/09
87 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 2765302 TOLLGATE 0.00 41.10 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 6,128.88 11111 113719 11/05/09 500 SHIH, SHERRY 111 FACILITY DEP REFUND 0.00 300.00 11111 113720 11/05/09 500 SOHN,
SAM 1117101 CITATION FEE REFUND 0.00 356.00 11111 113721 11/05/09 500 SPANO, MARCIE 1116101 CANCELLED CLASS 0.00 125.00 11111 113722 11/05/09 256 STEVENS CREEK QUARRY INC 4119111−001
RESURFACING MATERIAL 0.00 148.54 11111 113722 11/05/09 256 STEVENS CREEK QUARRY INC 4119111−001 DISCOUNT 0.00 −2.06 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 146.48 11111 113723 11/05/09 266 SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR
IN 6223201 ASP MTHLY SVC 11/09 0.00 5,390.00 11111 113723 11/05/09 266 SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR IN 6223201 HTE MTHLY SVC 11/09 0.00 350.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5,740.00 11111 113724 11/05/09
385 UNIVERSAL SWEEPING SERVI 1115103 EXTRA SWEEPING 10/09 0.00 315.00 11111 113724 11/05/09 385 UNIVERSAL SWEEPING SERVI 1115103 SWEEP SVC 10/09 0.00 742.92 11111 113724 11/05/09 385
UNIVERSAL SWEEPING SERVI 1115103 SWEEP SVC 10/09 0.00 7,489.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 8,546.92 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 EXCURSION 10/07 0.00 255.00 11111 113726
11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 EXCURSION LUNCH 10/07 0.00 8.18 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 EXCURSION SNACKS 0.00 18.47 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 16.37 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 EXCURSION WATER 11/5 0.00 8.38 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK
PURCHASING CARD 1116101 CPRS CONF − KIM 0.00 329.00 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 9.82 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD
1111201 SUPPLIES RETURNED 0.00 −29.94 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 CONSTANT CONTACT 0.00 70.00 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101
RAGING WATERS TIX 0.00 512.73 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1116101 PARKS&REC CONF 03/10 0.00 329.00 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112101 ACM
MEETNG 09/25 0.00 102.91 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 WEBSITE COMMITTEE 0.00 61.47 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111101 OFFICE SUPPLIES
0.00 10.90 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115101 COURIER − GRANT APP 0.00 92.64 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115201 MEETING EXP 10/13 0.00 120.12
11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1113101 HR MEETING 10/29 0.00 37.25 11111 113726 11/05/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1113101 PERS TRAINING 10/29 0.00 275.00 11111
113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1114101 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 224.19 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6223201 IT COMPUTER SUPPLIES 0.00 49.15 11111 113726
11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112101 MEETING EXP 9/23 0.00 25.98 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112101 AGENDA MEETING 9/24 0.00 42.25 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111101 COUNCIL MEETING 9/29 0.00 11.67 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111201 COMMISSION REG DINNER 0.00 843.51 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111201 RETURN SUPPLIES 10/06 0.00 −104.65 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111101 COUNCIL MEETING 10/08 0.00 320.00 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111101 AGENDA MEETING 10/08 0.00 50.50 57
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 5 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 15:32:29 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between ’113672’
and ’113733’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111101 COUNCIL MEETING 10/13 0.00 135.36 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6128501 WELLNESS SNACKS 0.00 223.55 11111
113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 117.54 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 10.91 11111
113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 27.26 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 88.57 11111
113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 118.05 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1117102 SUPPLIES − EMERGENCY 0.00 348.87 11111
113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 19.10 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 91.69 11111 113726
11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 21.84 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 28.12 11111 113726
11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 2465302 SUPPLIES − GREENBRIAR 0.00 12.25 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1114101 CR − INCORRECT CHARGE 0.00 −346.06 11111 113726
11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION 0.00 200.00 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6128501 WELLNESS BOOKS 0.00 114.45 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 COOK OFF − EMPL RECOG 0.00 64.26 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 COOK OFF − EMPL RECOG 0.00 130.00 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 COOK OFF − EMPL RECOG 0.00 104.98 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 COOK OFF − EMPL RECOG 0.00 20.24 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 COOK OFF − EMPL RECOG 0.00 89.32 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1112301 COOK OFF − EMPL RECOG 0.00 29.46 11111 113726 11/05/09
391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111201 STUDY SESSION 9/22 0.00 113.70 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1111201 STUDY SESSION 9/22 0.00 32.29 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US
BANK PURCHASING CARD 1114101 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 27.69 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1114101 APA DUES − FOSSATI 0.00 189.00 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING
CARD 1115201 MEETING EXP 09/30 0.00 73.85 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115201 MEETING EXP 10/14 0.00 170.56 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115301
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 11.78 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115301 TRAINING − MARSHALL 0.00 150.00 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115301 MEETING
EXP 9/24 0.00 27.98 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6128501 WELLNESS SNACKS 0.00 58.51 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115201 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00
37.45 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 6128501 WELLNESS SNACKS 0.00 73.96 11111 113726 11/05/09 391 US BANK PURCHASING CARD 1115201 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 8.09 TOTAL CHECK
0.00 6,314.52 11111 113727 11/05/09 396 US POSTMASTERS 1116101 POSTAGE − 2010 GUIDE 0.00 2,000.00 11111 113728 11/05/09 441 WHITLINGER, JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − TENNIS 0.00 385.00 11111
113728 11/05/09 441 WHITLINGER, JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − TENNIS 0.00 440.00 11111 113728 11/05/09 441 WHITLINGER, JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − TENNIS 0.00 440.00 11111 113728 11/05/09
441 WHITLINGER, JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − TENNIS 0.00 330.00 11111 113728 11/05/09 441 WHITLINGER, JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − TENNIS 0.00 330.00 11111 113728 11/05/09 441 WHITLINGER,
JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − TENNIS 0.00 330.00 11111 113728 11/05/09 441 WHITLINGER, JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR − TENNIS 0.00 330.00 11111 113728 11/05/09 441 WHITLINGER, JOHN 1116101 INSTRUCTOR
− TENNIS 0.00 330.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,915.00 11111 113729 11/05/09 751 ZAMAR MEDIA SOLUTIONS 6246202 SUPPLIES − FACILITIES 0.00 201.62 11111 113730 11/05/09 762 A TOOL SHED 4129224−001
EXCAVATOR RENTAL 0.00 445.53 58
SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR PAGE NUMBER: 6 DATE: 11/09/2009 CITY OF SARATOGA ACCTPA21 TIME: 15:32:29 CHECK REGISTER − DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between ’113672’
and ’113733’ ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 5/10 FUND − 009 − DISBURSEMENT FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT −−−−−−−−−−−−−−VENDOR−−−− −−−−−−−−−BUDGET UNIT −−−−−DESCRIPTION−−−−−− SALES TAX AMOUNT
11111 113731 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1113101 FY2010 DUES − FUREY 0.00 110.00 11111 113732 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1113101 FY2010 DUES − EDRIS 0.00 110.00 11111 113732 11/05/09 284 CSMFO 1112301
PY NOTICE/AD 0.00 128.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 238.00 11111 113733 11/05/09 160 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPP 1115301 SUPPLIES − C SPRINGS 0.00 682.81 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 225,804.83 TOTAL
FUND 0.00 225,804.83 TOTAL REPORT 0.00 225,804.83 59
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Jonathan Wittwer DIRECTOR: John Cherbone Assistant
City Attorney SUBJECT: On-going Designation of City Engineer RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Resolution Confirming the On-going Designation Regarding the City Engineer. REPORT SUMMARY: The
City Engineer is the person designated by the City Council as being responsible for the duties to be performed by the City Engineer. This Resolution confirms the ongoing designation
of the Public Works Director as the person responsible for the duties to be performed by the City Engineer. In the event that any Public Works Director is not a licensed engineer, the
Public Works Director will designate in writing one or more City employees or City contractors duly licensed as an engineer to carry out the duties to be performed by the City Engineer.
FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Public Works Director will compose letter(s) designating one or more
city employees or City contractors to perform the duties of City Engineer. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A 60
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Resolution Confirming the Ongoing Designation Regarding the City Engineer. 61
RESOLUTION NO. _____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONFIRMING THE ONGOING DESIGNATION REGARDING THE CITY ENGINEER WHEREAS, the City Engineer is the person
designated by the City Council as being responsible for the duties to be performed by the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has had the ongoing responsibility for
the duties to be performed by the City Engineer and the delegation thereof with the knowledge and consent of the City Council; and WHEREAS, holding a engineering license is not a mandatory
qualification to hold the position of Public Works Director; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Director may designate one or more City employees or City contractors licensed as engineers,
to carry out the duties to be performed by the City Engineer. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: 1. The City Council hereby confirms
the ongoing designation of the Public Works Director as the person responsible for the duties to be performed by the City Engineer; and that 2. The Public Works Director may designate
in writing one or more City employees or contractors duly licensed as an engineer to carry out the duties to be performed by the City Engineer and shall do so in the event that the Public
Works Director is not a licensed engineer. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of Saratoga, State of California, on this 18th day of November 2009 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chuck Page Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Ann Sullivan City Clerk 62
Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Kristin Borel DIRECTOR: John Cherbone
Public Works Analyst Public Works SUBJECT: Citywide Signal Upgrade Project – Agreement for Professional Design Services RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Approve Independent Contractor Agreement
with Mark Thomas & Company Inc. 2. Authorize the CityManager to execute the same. 3. Authorize the Public Works Director to issues change orders for up to 25% of the Agreement amount.
REPORT SUMMARY: Background: The Public Works Department has applied for and received CDBG grant money for the Citywide Signal Upgrade Project. We plan to update existing signals with
audible signals for the visually impaired. The City plans to install a “vibrotactile” type of pedestrian signal. While a pedestrian’s hand is on the pushbutton the device gives the pedestrian
a vibration when the WALK signal is on. This is an unobtrusive means of providing the visually impaired with 100% confidence that the WALK light is on. While inspecting the intersections
to be upgraded it was noted that ADA design improvements were needed at the majority of the intersections including, improving slopes, widening ramps, and aligning the path of travel
to the improved ramps. The decision was made to put out a RFP to select a consultant to design improvements for all fifteen intersections and then have the designs available for construction
bidding at a later date. Discussion: In October 2009, the Public Works Department solicited bids for design services for the design and construction drawings for Citywide Signal Upgrade
Project. Nine companies responded with cost proposals for the requested services. Bids ranged from $45,447 to $161,400. The lowest bid in the amount of $45,447 was submitted by Mark
Thomas & Company, Inc. They have a good reputation and a successful track record for bringing projects to completion within estimated timelines. 63
Page 2 of 2 After reviewing the proposal, staff is requesting that a 25% contingency be approved for this project, bringing the total costs to $56,800. Some costs could not be determined
until the actual field work is done and staff is anticipating that surveying and additional ADA ramps may be required. Even with this higher contingency, the amount is still lower than
the second lowest bid that the City received. Therefore staff recommends that the Council approve the Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. and authorize the CityManager to execute
the same. FISCAL IMPACTS: The CIP contains sufficient funds for the design services for the signal project and will be reimbursed through the CDBG grant money. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Contract will not be executed and design for the signal project will not be developed at this time. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: None in addition to the above. FOLLOW
UP ACTION: The Agreement will be executed. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1. RFP 2. Consultant Proposal 2. Independent Contractor
Agreement 64
�
�
�
� �
�
�
� 65
�
� �
� �
� �
�
· ·
· · · · �
� ·
· · �
� · 66
�
� �
� �
�
�
�
�
�
�
� 67
�
� 68
�
� �
� �
�
�
�
69 7.15 Interface cable included but not shown INFORMATION ON THIS IS PROPRIETARY TO POLARA AND
SHALL NOT BE USED, COPIED, REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF POLARA.. o o o 3.22 --1 Revised DWG. NO. CCU CENTRAL CONTROL UNIT (CCU) The CCU is to
be installed inside the Traffic Cabinet and is powered by the AC supply mains (115 VAC). The CCU is the power supply and signaling interface between the existing Intersection Traffic
Control Unit and the Push Button Stations which are located in the field. One CCU can control up to 12 Push Button Stations. The CCU controls up to four Pedestrian phases, receiving
its timing from the Walk and Don't Walk signals. Additional advanced configurations can be obtained by utilizing its general purpose Inputs and Outputs. All Inputs and Outputs have full
optical isolation and include Transient Voltage Protection. Ped Walk /Don't Walk Inputs: Optically Isolated 80-150 Volts AC/DC 5mA Maximum General Purpose Outputs & Ped Outputs: Optically
Isolated 36 Volts AC/DC Peak .3A Solid State Fused Contact Closure Fault Output: Normally Open and Closed Relay Contacts 125 Volts AC/DC 1 A Maximum A, B, C, D PBS Power Outputs: Nominal
22 Volts DC, Short Circuit Protected -Auto Recovering General Purpose Inputs: 10 -36 Volts AC/DC Peak 10mA Maximum, Optically Isolated Environmental: Operating and Storage -30T (-34·C)
to 165T (74·C) 0-100% Humidity Non-Condensing 4115 W. ENGINEERING ARTESIA AVE. FULLERTON INC. CA. 92833 TOLERANCES: .XXX ±.005.XX ±.02 (EXCEPT AS NOTED) SCALE 1: 1 DRAWN BY CKR. BB ENG.
MGR. MFG. MGR. SHEET 1 OF 1 DATE DSN. ENG. Q.A. APP. FINAL APP. USE 03-14-03 2W NAV TITLE 2 WIRE NAVIGATOR CENTRAL
CONTROL UNIT DWG. NO. CCU REV. DATE LTR E.C.O. NO. BY CKR ENG DSN MFG QA FNL
�
�
�
� �
�
�
� �
�
�
�
�
� 70 1----5.44 PUSH BUTTON
FOR INFORMATION ON THIS DOCUMENT IS PROPRIETARY TO POI..ARA AND SHALL NOT BE USED, COPIED. REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF POLARA. 14.09
J-n;.20 I MAX I--Revised DWG. NO. N25ANO-X PUSH BUTTON STATION The 2 Wire Navigator PBS is the pedestrian interface to the Navigator Accessible Pedestrian System. A system includes a
Central Control Unit (CCU), a Configurator, and up to 12 Push Button Stations. The PBS provides valuable information and cues via both a vibrating arrow button and audible sounds making
the intersection accessible for all pedestrians. All sounds emanate from the back of the unit. The weather-proof speaker is protected by a vandal resistant screen. A sunlight visible
red lED latches "ON" to confirm the button has been pushed. PBS includes frame, sign. ADA compliant push button, and mounting hardware. By interfacing with the Central Control Unit that
installs in the traffic control cabinet the PBS can provide the following standard features. -Confirmation of button push via latching LED, sound, and vibrotadile bounce. Direction of
travel (with extended button push). -Standard locating tone during Don't Walk (and clearance if desired). -Cuckoo, chirp, or standard voice message during walk. -Vibrating button during
walk. -Standard locating tone, custom sound, or verbal countdown during PED clearance. -All sounds automatically adjust to ambient over 60dB range. -Most sounds can have minimum and
maximum volume independently set. -All sounds are synchronized. -Extended button push can turn on, boost volumes, and/or mute all sounds except those on activated crosswalk. -Special
emergency messages available. Additianal custom options listed on page 2. ENGINEERING 4115 W. ARTESIA AVE. FULLERTON INC. CA. 92833 TOLERANCES: .XXX ±.005.XX ±.02 (EXCEPT AS NOTED) SCALE
1:3 DRAWN BY CKR. BB ClM ENG. MGR. MFG. MGR. SHEET 1 OF 2 lB FB DATE DSN. ENG. a.A. APP. FINAL APP. USE 03-14-03 WR RVC JMc TITLE
2 WIRE NAVIGATOR DWG. NO. REV. DATE LTR E.C.O. NO. BY CKR ENG DSN MFG QA FNL PUSH BUTTON STATION (PBS) N25ANO-X
�
�
�
�
�
� �
�
71 Custom message and sound options definable by customer include:
Custom locating tone Informational message Custom walk sounds/message Custom clearance sound Multiple languages (up to three, selectable by user) Street name in Braille on the sign All
above features along with many more are field selectable using a Configurator. With the Configurator, a single PBS or all PBS's on the intersection can be changed/updated with a single
bulton push. Available in three standard colors -Black, Green & Yellow -X at end of part number specifies color: -B = Black, -G = Green, -Y = Yellow Environmental: Push Bultan: Construction:
-40"F (-40'C) to 150'F (55'C) ADA Compliant, raised tactile arrow on button, solid state switch rated to 20 million actuations minimum. Die-cast aluminum, powder coated The 2 Wire Navigator
is designed to operate using existing button wires (a pair of wires + and Common) for each phase with from one to a maximum of three Push Button Stations on a phase. If there is not
a separate common for each phase, Polara cannot guarantee the system will work properly in all instances. Each case will have to be tried and proven because it depends upon the condition
of the wires, splices, etc., and whether the common is shared with the 115V light system. In the event the 2 Wire system does not work, Polara will swap it out for a 4 Wire system as
long as there is no damage to the units. STANDARD SIGN OPTIONS PUSH BUTTON FOR OPTION A n START CROSSING ... Watch For Vehicles Don START finish Crossinq II started I DON'T CROSS TO
CROSS PUSH BUTTON • OPTION B DWG. NO. N25ANO-X INFORIMTION ON THIS IS PROPRIETARY TO POLAR-' AND Stw.L NOT BE USED. COPIED, REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED IN WHOLE OR IN PART
WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF POL.ARA. REV REV. 20-05 TOLERANCES: .XXX ±.005.XX ±.02 (EXCEPT AS NOTED) TITLE DWG. NO. ECO DATE CREATED SCALE SHEET OF USE 2 WIRE NAVIGATOR
N25ANO-X 03-14-03 1:3 2 2
72
73 OFFICES Cupertino Fresno Pleasanton Sacramento Salinas Son Jose Son'Maleo Counly Walnut Creek MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC. Providing Engineering, Surveying and Pfanning SelVices November
4th, 2009 Mr. John Cherbone Public Works Director CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95051 SJ-09853 RE: PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN SERVICES -CITYWIDE ACCESSIBLE SIGNAL UPGRADE
PROJECT Dear Mr. Cherbone: We are excited about working with the City of Saratoga once again and being a part of your program to improve pedestrian and signalization improvements throughout
the City. We know that the design of the improvements you are contemplating at these intersections will involve numerous factors beyond updating of the existing traffic signal equipment.
Accordingly, we reviewed each intersection location to gain a full appreciation of the improvements we feel are needed to meet current ADA requirements. Typically, most firms proposing
on this type of project would require a civil engineer and traffic engineer to design the proposed improvements. Mark Thomas will bring a distinctive advantage to the City by using an
in-house team of surveyors, engineers, and designers that have completed numerous traffic signal projects throughout Northern California. Our ability to do both the civil design and
traffic signal design elements, without the need for other subconsultants, will serve the City well in meeting the aggressive delivery schedule for this project. THE MANAGEMENT TEAM
To compliment this important distinction, I have assigned Mr. Michael Fisher, a registered civil engineer with more than 16 years of experience, to lead our team as Project Manager.
Michael not only has the traffic signal design experience you need, but has demonstrated experience in the design of roadway improvements including utility coordinations, drainage deSign,
and most importantly working with property owners. His "hands-on" work ethic has led to the successful completion of our traffic signal projects. As Principal-in-Charge, I will bring
more than 30 years of planning, designing, and managing hundreds of projects that have included similar roadway and traffic signal improvements. My involvement will ensure delivery of
the project to the City within the timeframes stipulated in Corporate Headquarters 1960 Zanker Road San Jose, CA 95112 www.markthomos.com Tel: 1408) 453-5373 Fax: 14081453-5390
74 Mr. John Cherbone Page 2 November 4, 2009 your request for proposals. Together, Michael and I will commit our experience and energies to addressing the issues we have determined are
critical to delivering this project on time and within a reasonable budget. CONCLUSION In the following pages, you will be able to review the qualifications of our respective Team Members
and other information requested in your RFP. Please call on Michael Fisher or myself at (408) 453-5373 if you have any questions regarding the content of this proposal. We both look
forward to working with you. Sincerely yours, MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC. Jimmy W. Sims, PE Principa I-i n-Charge Michael Fisher, PE Project Manager
75 Background Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. (MTCo) is a California based corporation that provides consulting engineering services throughout the state, with a particular emphasis in the
Bay Area. Our corporate headquarters is located in San Jose and we also maintain eight (8) other branch offices located in Cupertino, San Carlos, Walnut Creek, Pleasanton, Sacramento,
Fresno, Irvine, and Salinas. Our project team will be working from our local San Jose office, which is just minutes from the City of Saratoga's offices. Since 1927 our firm has grown
to provide our clients with exceptional services through a team of more than 200 fulltime professionals. Our record of successfully delivering transportation projects has maintained
and increased our list of repeat clientele who now provide the company with 80% of our workload. As a result, MTCo has been able to not only maintain staff levels, but has consistently
recruited new talent over the past five years, helping to ensure our ability to respond to client needs needs with qualified professionals knowledgeable in current standards and practices.
Our projects typically involve a multi-disciplinary approach that effectively utilizes our in-house disciplines. We strongly practice "hands-on" management at every level of project
development as we implement our work plans, engage resource and permitting agencies, and provide support during the construction phase. Key Services -MTCo routinely provides a wide range
of services to our clientele in the following areas: • Traffic Engineering -Signal Design (new and modification to existing), Ramp Metering, Street Lighting Design, Signing and Striping,
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design • Roadway Design -Street and Intersection Improvements, ADA Compliance Analysis and Design • Surveying and Mapping -ALTA, Boundary, GPS, Topographic
Survey, Right of Way Engineering, Record Maps & Legal Descriptions The Mark Thomas Team Having managed many local roadway, intersection, and traffic signal design projects, we bring
solid leadership skills and a record of accomplishment. .. • Project Management • Roadway Design • Traffic Signal Design • Drainage Design • Signage I Striping • Surveying The Right
Team to Meetlhe Challenges olthe City's On-Call Traffic Engineering Projects MTCo's capabilities are well-matched to meet the needs of the projects that the City of Saratoga is contemplating.
Having managed many local roadway, intersection, and traffic signal design projects, we bring solid leadership skills ccc c________ and an extensive record of accomplishment. MTCo will
perform traffic engineering design services for the City's Citywide Accessible Signal Upgrade project. Services will include traffic signal design, signing and striping design, ADA compliance
analysis, and pedestrian crosswalk and bicycle lane planning and design. Our Project Manager, Michael Fisher, will be the single point, day-to-day contact for all tasks assigned. He
will manage and direct!he overall efforts of the team, coordinate and supervise interaction of all team members, making sure their efforts are fully integrated with in-! house engineers
and designers. He will ensure the overall project schedule is being adhered to and critical milestone dates are met on time and within budget. Additionally, he will represent the design
team at all technical and public workshop meetings and will be part of the presentation team in performing public outreach services.
76 Jpc.ling & Approach PROJECT UNDERSTANDING &ApPROACH The City of Saratoga wishes to retain a design consultantto provide professional engineering services including ADA recommendations
based on funding and priority of the preparation of plans, specifications and bid documents for the modification of various traffic signals and ADA facilities at 15 different intersection
locations within the City including pedestrian heads, PPB's, curb ramps, slope, and pavement delineation modifications. We understand that budget may be an issue, so we intend to prioritize
locations to meet budgetary requirements. In House Expertise Saves Time and Money -MTCo brings a distinctive advantage to the project by performing civil design, field surveys and traffic
signal design in house. This allows the Project Manager to manage all aspects of the project in-house, resulting in better internal communication and increased responsiveness to the
City's needs. From the onset, the City will reap the benefit of having a team that has worked efficiently on projects similar to yours. This will help to bring the project to construction
on time and within budget. Practical Solutions -MTCo believes in delivering a final project with practical solutions. MTCo will begin with the early identification of project challenges
and development of design alternatives that will streamline the preliminary design process. This approach allows expeditious processing and documentation of the design process and final
decisions to be made by the City. CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES MTCo visited the project site. Based on our experience and expertise, the following issues have been identified for this
project: Signal Design -Traffic signals will be analyzed for features including the existing equipment functionality, missing equipment, ADA standards, stand alone poles for pedestrian
push buttons, location benefit from countdown pedestrian heads or audible pedestrian signals, etc. Equipment can be upgraded to add clarity and increase functionality for users as shown
in the photo below. ADA Design -In addition to upgrading the signal equipment, using state of the art vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian equipment, it is critical to integrate ADA compliant
practices in all aspects of the design including curb ramps, slopes, and path of travel. This is an area in which MTCo excels having assisted many municipalities and Caltrans analyze
and achieve ADA cornpliance on both new construction and retrofit projects. MTCo's experience will be invaluable in assessing and then prioritizing ADA requirements throughout the project
sites. The photos on the following page show situations where slopes, landing areas behind ramps, and clear path of travel do not meetADApractices.
77 iJjding & Approach Survey" MTCo's in house survey department is available to identify existing conditions including ADA slopes, conforms, existing utility locations, and existing
features such as trees and driveways. MissingADAand/or Pedestrian Facilities" FamiliaritywithADAstandards is critical forthis project. In some cases pedestrians are accommodated, but
no ADA facilities are present (see photo below right). In some cases there is a pedestrian signal and no pedestrian walk path (see photo below left). This demands interpretation based
on experience. -.... Signage and Striping " MTCo has extensive knowledge in signage and striping design standards having incorporated these features into past projects for Caltrans and
various cities. Intersections will be analyzed to ensure that the existing sign age and striping is laid out in the most efficient manner to promote pedestrian safety. Some locations
have signs that are an obstruction to pedestrian signal heads (see photo below left). In addition, where possible, MTCowililookatpossiblestriping for bicycle lanes.
78 ;:;c()pe of Services TASK 1 -PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1.1 Project Management MTCo will monitor the project budget and schedule, manage and supervise in-house staff; implementing the QAlQC
program; and attend and participate in project meetings. MTCo will obtain any additional as-built information available through the City, including right-of-way mapping, adjacent landowner's
information, utilities, traffic data (inc[uding accident records) and other appropriate information. Any availab[e survey data and site mapping will also be acquired and reviewed. This
information will be the basis for the initial mapping. 1.2 Coordination/Status Meetings MTCo will coordinate regular ProjectTeam meetings for the project; a total of three (3) meetings
are assumed. We will be responsible for preparation and distribution of meeting
agendas, preparation of updated CPM schedules, conducting the meeting, and preparation of meeting minutes. MTCo will also coordinate with PG&E, utility companies and City utility departments
as necessary. Site Visit -A preliminary field review will be conducted to review the intersection. [t is anticipated that the review team would consist of MTCo, and City staff. 1.3 Kick-Off
Meeting MTCowili conduct a kick-off meeting in which the following elements will be covered: Introduction ofthe Team CPM Schedule City Requirements ManagementApproach Key Staff Ro[es
and Responsibi[ities TASK 2 -SURVEY 2.1 Topographic Field Surveys Project De[iverab[es City Process Coordination with City Staff for design input Fie[d surveys will be performed to provide
elevations of existing non-ADA-compliant handicap ramps on designated intersections in Saratoga. The sketch at right indicates where elevations will typically be located on each ramp
to be surveyed. We are providing only two field days to perform the survey. This may not be enough time to survey all ramps. [t is estimated that we can visitfourto six or so intersections
in a day. Trigonometric survey techniques will be used to provide the elevations and locations locations --'k--'-""sketched above and elevations and coordinates wil[ be assumed. There
will be no correlation between the coordinates of ramps from different intersections. ---,j-. ----..;00'0'---:':---• TASK 3 -PRELIMINARY DESIGN 3.1 [nitial Study and Recommendation •
MTCo will prepare an initial study using the spreadsheet provided by the City. MTCo to review the site during a one day meeting with City staff present. Direction to be discussed and
agreed upon regarding each site during this a[[ day meeting. MTCo to summarize the findings and recommendation in an initial study report. The study may include prioritization recommendations.
79 iCOIDe of Services 3.250% Preliminary Plans MTCowili prepare the preliminary 50% plans and estimate for conceptual review and approval by the City. MTCo will meet with City staff
to discuss alternatives regarding the design. Alternatives will be discussed with City staff using exhibits and project direction will be achieved at the time of the meeting or at a
site review with City staff. The project is anticipated to include visible and audible pedestrian signals, pedestrian push buttons and curb ramp improvements. As the budget is not anticipated
to be sufficient to address all of the recommended improvements on all 15 signal locations, this proposal is based on an assumed maximum of 10 ramp improvements as the limit of concrete
work for the project. TASK 4 -FINAL DESIGN 4.1 90% Draft PS&E Submittal The PS&E packages developed under this task shall be submitted at 90% and Final stages of completion. The intent
of this draft submittal is to allow city staff to review and comment priorto final bid documents. This submittal is defined as the 90% plans, technical specifications and engineers estimate.
All elements of the plans shall be included in this stage, including signal design as shown below: Description: Scale: # of sheets Title Sheet 1" = 200' 1 Construction Details 1"=10'
2 Traffic Signal Modifications 1" = 20' 15 Total # of Sheets 18 sheets Quantity take-offs and construction cost estimates will be based on the Caltrans standard measurement and payment
provisions, and as modified by the City. Technical specifications will be prepared in accordance with City standards. 4.2 Final PS&E Submittal Final PS&E submittals will incorporate
City's comments from previous submittals. The "Final" set shall include the construction plans, specifications and construction cost estimated the construction plans, specifications
and construction cost estimate. ASSUMPTIONS • Four meetings total • Design to be shown on aerial • Survey to determine local elevation differences (not on documented datum) • City to
provide intersection as-builts • Plans will not show entire as-built data • Bid Support not included • Construction Support not included • Drainage design available as additional work
• All intersections to be included as one bid package
80 Schedule The following schedule depicts important milestones for the City of Saratoga's Citywide Accessible Signal Upgrade Project. MILESTONES DATES DURATION Notice to Proceed November
16, 2009 1 Day Kick-off Meeting November 18, 2009 1 Day Site Walk November 18, 2009 1 Day Survey November 25, 2009 2 Days 50% Plans January 15, 2009 4 Weeks City Review February 1, 2009
2 Weeks 90% Plans March 1, 2009 4 Weeks City Review March 15, 2009 2 Weeks Final Plans April 1 , 2009 2 Weeks
81 This $110M Phase 1 project will construct a new interchange at 1-580 between Airway Boulevard and Portola Avenue. Mark Thomas and Company, (MTCo) is responsible for preparing the
Project Report and Environmental Document (PRIED) and the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) documents for this major transportation improvement project. MTCo was responsible
for the planning and design of more than three miles of roadway improvements; traffic system improvements, including stage construction; traffic handling; signing and striping; four
new traffic signals and two traffic signal modifications. Traffic signal designs will adhere to the latest Cal trans specifications and standards. MTCo managed the efforts of Dowling
Associates, Inc. (Dowling) who performed traffic forecasting and operations analysis tasks for this proposed new interchange. Dowling prepared 2005 and 2025 land use data based on the
2010 Tri-Valley Model, Projections 98 land use data, and prior modeling efforts by the City of Livermore focused on the North Livermore area. The traffic operations analysis involved
calculating level of service for freeway and surface street components of the network, as well as creating a CORSIM model to evaluate freeway operations. The Route 238 Corridor Improvement
Project will improve more than five miles of streets through urban areas and includes signal installation and modification, intersection improvements, pedestrian-activated signals, street
widening and realignment, sidewalk reconstruction, and landscaping. The MTCo team developed an innovative "mini loop" concept that will reconfigure an existing five-legged intersection
and convert three major roads in downtown to one-way streets. This solution will increase the capacity of the existing roadway network and improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility while
minimizing Right of Way acquisition. In addition, MTCo assisted the City of Hayward in preparing presentation materials for numerous public meetings on this highly controversial project.
MTCo managed the efforts of Dowling Associates, Inc., who prepared the travel forecasts, traffic operations studies, and congestion management alternatives analyses. MTCo also created
computer-generated models of the proposed improvements and superimposed them on existing photographs to illustrate circulation and aesthetic improvements to the public. MTCo is currently
leading a multidisciplinary team for the PS&E phase of this project. Construction is scheduled for March 2010.
82 Under this task order, MTCo engineers performed field investigation and assessment for State-owned pedestrian facilities for compliance with the latest American DisabilitiesAct (ADA)
requirements. More than 150 sites involving park and ride facilities, vista points, safety roadside rest areas, pedestrian overcrossings, and pedestrian undercrossings throughout District
4's nine counties were evaluated. Caitrans Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 82-03 was used as guideline for the compliance checklist which involves 18 design standards. In addition,
MTCo engineers developed corrective measures and cost estimates to upgrade the non-compliant sites. The evaluation process and templates for recording ADA compliances developed by MTCo
are being used as a model to other Districts in the State. Under a separate task order, MTCo performed ADA site assessment for sidewalks and intersections along Route 13 (Ashby Avenue)
between 1-80 and Domingo Avenue in the City of Berkeley. A total of 38 intersections and approximately 6.5 miles of sidewalks were evaluated in an aggressive completion schedule. MTCo
developed correction measures and cost estimates to upgrade these facilities to standard. The City of Seaside Auto Mall Revitalization project soughtto improve the economic viability
and image of the existing Auto Center District by reconstructing and upgrading the existing roadway systems and improving internal circulation forthe auto dealerships. Roadway improvements
for all the internal circulation streets of the Auto Center included replacing the stamped concrete roadway with a standard roadway structural section, standard curb and gutter, and
new monument icon tower at the circular intersections. Improvements to Fremont Boulevard and Del Monte Boulevard, the two Auto Center exterior roadways, included new and existing traffic
signal modifications and lighting and signing upgrades, complete reconstruction of internal streets, and enhancing all of the major entrances to the center with layered landscaped gateways,
planterwalls, and auto display areas.
83 MTCo was responsible for the widening of the Mathilda Avenue Overhead Bridge across the Caltrain tracks, realigning and downgrading Evelyn Avenue from a four-lane to a two-lane facility,
and adding a loop off-ramp from southbound Mathilda to Evelyn. Improvements also included the design of one new traffic signal and the modification of two existing signals, new street
light design, and design of pedestrian ramps to meet ADA requirements, including connector ramps and sidewalks. The improvements made to Mathilda and Evelyn Avenue connectors will facilitate
traffic movement to and from the downtown area, which was identified as a gateway to downtown Sunnyvale as part of the Downtown Specific Plan. This project proposes a modification and
reconfiguration of the existing Union City BART Station, to allow integration of a future passenger rail station serving Capitol Corridor and future Dumbarton Commuter Rail. As part
of the ROMA Design Group team, MTCo was involved in the final design of the Union City Intermodal Station, Phase 1 project and prepared the PS&E packages for the Site Contract and the
Station Contract. Access for all modes of transportation will be improved -pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicles and transit. Design elements included: • New traffic signal atthe main Bart
entrance • New pedestrian crosswalks (2) with in-roadway warning lights • New access roads from Union Square and Decato Road for pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicles and transit. • Enhancements
to the BART entrance by creating a new pedestrian walkway/plaza in front of the station with pavers, large trees, landscaping, monumental signage, pedestrian lighting, slope treatment
of the existing BART berm and providing pedestrian access with decorative walkways directly from Decoto Road and the future six-acre Avalon Bay housing development project located adjacent
to BART Station.
84 lat:ed Experience Our team has worked with numerous Cities throughout California. We are familiar with various City standards and experienced in working with City staff to achieve
their goals. Mark Thomas also has extensive experience with ADA conformance, new traffic signal design, modifications to existing traffic signals, and pedestrian safety enhancement projects.
In the table below we have highlighted similar projects completed and constructed within the past two years. In addition, we have also listed some of our in-house traffic signal projects
currently in the design phase. '1111-.. . ... ' •• .,. 1 Mathilda Avenue Bridge Rehabilitation PS&E, Isabel Avenue (Route 84)/1-580 Interchange Livermore Tennant Avenue/Route 101 Interchange
Hill ../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../:lIIt
, '-.-
85 ,Ia:ted Experience We pride ourselves on maintaining strong relationships with our clients. In the chart below, we have listed references for our Project Manager. We are confident
that you will be met with positive feedback on Mr. Fisher's performance. City of Livermore City of Seaside City of Sunnyvale City of Morgan Hill Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority
Isabel Avenue (Route 84)/1-580 Interchange, PAlED, PS&E Auto Center Revitalization PS&E Mathilda Avenue Bridge Rehabilitation PS&E Tennant AvenuelRoute 101 .interchange Modification,
PSRlPR SR 85/87 & US 101 Metering Study 2008-2009 Roberto Escobar Associate Civil Engineer City of Livermore 1052 S. LivermoreAve Livermore, CA 94550 (925) 960-4532 Diana Ingersoll Director
of Public Works City of Seaside 440 Harcourt, CA 93599 (831 )899-6825 Manny Kadkhodayan Senior Engineer City of Sunnyvale PO Box 3707 Sunnyvale, CA 94088 (408) 730-7430 Julie Behzad
Senior Civil Engineer City of Morgan Hill 17555 Peak Ave Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408) 778-6480 David Kobayashi Transportation Engineer Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority 3331 North
First Street, Building A San Jose, CA 95314 321-5678
86 Principal-In-Charge , i Jimmy Sims, P.E. I MARK THOMAS & COMPANY John Cherbone blic Works City of Saratoga Project Manager Michael Fisher, P.E. MARK THOMAS
& COMPANY KEY STAFF PROFILES AND AVAILABILITY JIMMY SIMS, P.E., PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE Jimmy has more than 28 years of experience in the planning and design of transportation, local roadways,
and public works projects. He has managed the planning, design and construction of more than $500M of roadway and site improvements for Cities and Agencies throughout Northern and Southern
California. He has extensive working knowledge of roadway design, drainage design, signal design, signing and striping, bike facility design, specification writing and construction
Over the course of his career he has developed his communication skills through his project experiences and through his 10-year tenure as a Planning Commissioner. MICHAEL FISHER.
P,E., PROJECT MANAGER Michael is a project manager with more than 16 years of experience in roadway and traffic signal design, Hehas wqrked on diverse types a/projects from a single
signal modification to a complete corridor reconstruction to accommodate a new light rail transi\system. His experience includes ov¢r 60 traffic signal designs including signalized urban
interchange; signals and light rail transit systems; temporary signal placement for stage construction; and related work as alternative detection
devices and signal communications systems. He is fanli1iar iwith State of California standards, as well as many municipalities throughoujCalifornia. [ , BRIAN PANTALEON, P.E., TRAFFIC
SIGNAL DESIGN Brian has more than lQ years of experience in civil engineering design with an emphasis in . transportation design. His responsibilities include, but are not limited to
technical design of rOadway and drElinage p(ojects. He has extensive experience in transportation design projects for various agencies which involves traffic signal design, geometriclayouf
design, stage construction,and construction estimating. He is highly knowledgeable in applying the appropriate design standards on transportation projects. TOMMY CHO, P.E., TRAFFic SIGNAL
DESIGN . Tommy has more than years of experience in muniCipal and transportation engineering. His experience local roadway and intersection improvement. drainage
and utility design, traffic signal design, parking facilities, construction staging, andADAcompliance. i . VINCENT LUCHESSI, P.E., TRAFFIC SIGNAL DESIGN '. . Vincent has morethan five
years of experience in municipal and transportation engineering. He has served as design engineer on numerous projects. involving traffic signal and lighting systems design. Hjs e¥perience
includes local roadway and intersection improvements. geometric design, drainage design. utility coordination and the preparation of plans. specifications and estimates. PETER TRINH,
E.I. T., TRAfFIC SIGNAL DESIGN Peter has more than twd years of experience in municipal and transportation engineering. He has served as design engineer on projects including local roadway
and intersection improvements. His experience includes geometric design, drainage design, utility coordination and the preparation of plans, specifications and estimates. JULIAMACRoRY,
P.L.S.,SURVEYMANAGER Julia has more than 16 years experience in the land surveying profession. She has extensive experience managing bQth office and field survey crews for large-scale
public works and state roadway projects as well as commercial and private land development projects. As Survey Manager she is responsible for producing and/or supervising the production
of various types of mapping products, topographic surveys, ALTA surveys, and plats and legal descriptions as well as reviewing title reports and preparing maps in various Northern California
Counties.
87 Principal-In-Charge QLialificl\tions Summary Jimniy has more than 28 years of experience in the planning and design of transportation, local roadways, and public works projects. In
that time,he has managed the planning, . design and construction of more than $500M. of roadway and site · irnprovementsfor Cities and Agencies throughout the state. Additionally, .
based on firsthand experience of a wide yarietyofprOjects,he hasa strong understanding of the transportationqhallenges and priorities of !:lay Area.cities and cOmmunities. II forthisproject,
an9as Regi.onal Division Manager bfMark , J::;i1nmYWillensurethatappropriateresources are COmmittE)d to re timely executionforthe
Cityof$fjrat6ga. . . I REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Isabel Avenue (Route 84)/1-580 Interchange PRIED PS&E, Livermore, CA Project Manager responsible for a new interchange project serving
the City of Livermore's western area. Responsible for preparation of Caltrans-oriented Project Report, Environmental Document, and PS&E documents for the interchange and local roadway
improvements along Portola Avenue (one mile, four lanes), East Airway Boulevard (one · mile, two lanes), and Constitution Avenue (0.5 miles, two lanes). More than $9M of utility · relocations
involved in the project for water, sewer, storm drain, joint trench, and reclaimed water systems. Permitting from resource agencies such as Fish and Game, ! Army Corp of Engineers, and
the RWQCB obtained. Project costs will approach $120M for Phase I improvements. Route 238 Corridor Improvements PSRlEIR, Hayward, CA · Project Manager responsible for preliminary engineering
and environmental documentation '. for more than five miles of existing Foothill Boulevard and Mission Boulevard (Route 238) between 1-580 and Industrial Parkway. An innovative one-way
mini-loop concept is being designed in downtown Hayward along with eastbound Jackson to northbound Foothill grade separations. Project costs will approach $90M. Santa Nella CSPTransportation
Improvement Plan, Santa Nella, CA Project Manager responsible for planning and preliminary design of more than $200M in transportation improvements involving two interchanges along 1-5
and over 13 miles of arterial roadways that will support the development of the County's Santa Nella Community Specific Plan. Lead a multi-disciplinary team in preparing aerial mapping,
traffic forecast and operational analysis, and environmental reviews. Conceptual alternatives were developed for modifying the existing Route 33/1-5 interchange and a new interchange
at Hilldale Avenue/I-5 in accordance with Caltrans standards. The widening of Route 33 from two lanes to six lanes was also developed. All improvements were developed based on 2025 traffic
forecasts. Phase 1 of the project will provide capital improvement costs for use in updating existing Traffic Impact Fee programs. Phase 2 will involve preparation of PSR documents for
the Route 33 and 1-5 interchange improvements. Phase 3 will involve preparation of plan line alignments for future Right-ofWay preservation as development occurs within the Santa Nella
CSP boundaries. First Street (Route 84) & Inman Traffic Signal PS&E, Livermore, CA Project Manager for planning and design of new traffic signal at existing intersection. Responsible
for preparation of PS&E processed through Cal trans District 4 for an encroachment permit. Landscape median islands were reconfigured and new sidewalks
88 · Principal-In-Charge REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE (continued) and drainage systems installed. Also responsible for providing and managing performance of construction surveys and engineering
support during construction. Construction Costs approached $150,000. Campus Parkway Phases I & II, Merced County, CA Project Manager for a new 4.5-mile arterial roadway that will extend
from Coffee Street to Yosemite Avenue. Campus Parkway is a critical element of the Merced Loop System that will ultimately provide a roadway network to help provide belter access to
the new UC Merced complex and to existing industrial developments located in the Cities of Merced and Atwater. Responsible for leading a team that included in-house surveyors, roadway
designers, geotechnical, traffic, and electrical engineers in the preparation of Phase 1 PS&E documents, which involve more than one mile of six-lane roadway improvements, including
installation of a traffic signal, underground utility systems (water, sewer, storm drains), a drainage retention basin and pumping station. Utility coordination for relocation of overhead
power and service to new street lights, pump station, and traffic signal was performed. Right-of-Way needs were also developed. Construction costs will approach $50M. Atwater-Merced
Expressway PAlED, Merced County, CA Project Manager for the planning and preliminary design for more than seven miles of a new expressway within the greater Atwater-Merced area. Responsible
for leading a multidisciplinary team of in-house roadway engineers and subconsultant specialists performing environmental technical studies, traffic engineering, geotechnical investigations,
and hydrology analyses in developing and screening alignment alternatives through a detailed comparison matrix using GIS database information provided by the Merced County Association
of Governments (MCAG). A Draft and Final Project Report will be prepared accompanied by a Draft and Final EIRIEIS document. Project costs are expected to reach more than $250M. Whipple
Road Sidewalk Improvements PS&E, Union City, CA Project Manager for the preparation of conceptual and final PS&E documents for this sidewalk reconstruction project. Responsible for design
of retaining walls, utility coordination, and construction staging. Project included design of new curb and gulter, curb returns, driveways, sidewalks, and wheelchair ramps to comply
with the latest ADA requirements.
89 Project Manager Qualifications Summary Michaelis a proven Project Manager who brings more Ihan.16 years of transportation experience, with apartic;ular emphasis in traffic signal
design,to this position. His . background encompasses a diverserange of projects, from a single signal modification to il complete corridor re.c()nstructionto accommodate a neW lightrail
transit system .. His experience includes over .60 . traffic signal qesigns .. including signalized urQan interchange; signals adjacent to railroad and light railjr<jnsitsystems; temporary
signal placement for stage construction;and related work as alternative detection devices and signal communications systems. Heiswell-versed in the State of Californiastandards, as well
as the standards of numerousmunicipalitiesthroughoulnorthern California. REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Isabel Avenue (Route 84)11-580 Interchange, PAlED, PS&E, Livermore, CA Project Engineer
responsible for the planning and design of four new traffic signals and two traffic signal modifications. Also responsible for the design of four new ramp meters, freeway signing, ramp
lighting, and local roadway lighting. In addition, responsible for drainage design including drainage plans, profiles, details, quantities and drainage report. Auto Center Revitalization
PS&E, Seaside, CA Project Engineer responsible for the design of two new traffic signal locations and two traffic signal modifications on local streets as part of a major retail redevelopment
project. MathildaAvenue Bridge Rehabilitation PS&E, Sunnyvale, CA Project Engineer responsible for electrical work for major renovation of the primary entry point from the north part
of Sunnyvale and Route 101, to the large-scale downtown . renovation project. Electrical work includes three traffic signal modifications and one new traffic signal, including interconnect.
Lighting was designed to downtown Sunnyvale standards, and includes 110 double luminaire decorative poles. Lighting analysis was I performed usingAGI software. Lighting will be a key
feature which will define the area. BART Intermodal Transit Facility PS&E, Union City, CA I Project Engineer responsible for traffic signal design for one traffic signal and two i pedestrian
crossing signals. The pedestrian emphasis of this transit-oriented development area, make pedestrian flow a key design feature. The traffic signal includes I an all-pedestrian phase
. . 11th Street Enhancement, Union City, CA I Project Manager responsible for the planning and preliminary design of one new traffic signal and for the design of roadway lighting for
new roadway. Project lighting included a I 250 car interim BART parking lot, roadway lighting and pedestrian lighting. 1 Route 1 01/TennantAvenue PSR/PR, Morgan Hill, CA .! Project Manager
for $11 million project includes two signal modifications and 2 new ramp i meters. I
90 : Traffic Signal Design Qualifications Summary Brian has more than 1 0 years of experience in ciYil engineering design with an emphasis in transportation His responsibilities
include,qut are not limited to technical design of roadway and drainage projects. He has extensive experience in transportation design projects for various agencies which involves traffic
Signal design, geometric and construction estimating; H(l is highly knowledgeable in applying the appropriate design
standards on transportation projects. , REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE I Isabel Avenue (Route 84)/1-580 Interchange, PAlED, PS&E, Livermore, CA I Design Engineer responsible for the preparation
of two geometric phases for the new interchange. Provided additional support in the design of four new traffic signals and two signal modifications and in the development of Right-of-Wayexhibits.
Auto Center Revitalization PS&E, Seaside, CA · Design Engineer responsible for the geometric layout for the revitalization of the Seaside · Auto Center. Provided additional support in
the design of two new traffic signal locations and two signal modifications on local streets. Route 92 Widening & Main Street Improvements PRIED, PS&E, HalfMoon Bay, CA Design Engineer
responsible for preparing the utility and sanitary sewer plans, details, and quantities. Other responsibilities included preparation of temporary water pollution control plans and erosion
control plans. Prado Road/Route 1 01 Interchange Improvements, San Luis Obispo, CA Design Engineer responsible for preparing the Geometric Approval Drawings for a new : interchange which
would provide access to an adjacent proposed commercial development. 1-280/1-880/Stevens Creek Interchanges Improvements PSR, PAlED, Santa Clara County,CA · Project Engineer responsible
for preparing conceptual design alternatives for a proposed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) lane along Stevens Creek Boulevard. Alternatives include four at-grade and one grade-separated alternative.
Other responsibilities include preparation ofa preliminary estimate for each alternative. Montague Expressway/Highway 101 Interchange & 1-680 Interchange PSR/PDS, Santa Clara, CA · Project
Engineer responsible for preparing Geometric Approval Drawings for the modification of an existing full cloverleaf to a standard partial cloverleaf. i Route 880 HOV Lanes Widening PRIED,
PS&E, Santa Clara County, CA I Project Engineer responsible for preparing exhibits for the modification of two frontage I roads (Barber Lane and O'Toole Ave) along Route 880. I I, River
Oaks Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge and Trail, San Jose, CA i Design Engineer responsible for preparing the plans, specifications,
and estimates for a i bicycle /pedestrian trail that connects the City of San Jose with the City of Santa Clara I overthe Guadalupe River. I
91 Signal Design G}ualific;ations SlImmary Tommy has more than 9 years of experience in municipal and transportation .,n"in".,riii in .. His exp(lrj(lnce includes local roadway and intersection
improvement, and utility design, traffic signal design, parking facilities, construction staging REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Route 880 HOV Lanes Widening, PS&E,
Santa Clara County, CA Design Engineer responsible for the preparation of final plans and estimate for widening 1-880 to extend the existing High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane system
south an .• additional 4.6 miles from Route 237 in Milpitas to US 101 in San Jose. This $65M project funded through the State's Corridor Management Investment Program (CMIA) includes
freeway widening, interchange modifications, new traffic signals, retaining walls, median · barrier, extending an existing slab bridge structure over Hetch Hetchy and updating the "
existing ramp metering system, BART Intermodal Transit Facility PS&E, Union City, CA Project Engineer responsible for parking lot design, redesign the underground utilities and construction
staging, He also provides construction support, utility company coordination, review submittal and prepare construction change order. Stevens Creek Bridge Replacements at Steven Canyon
Road, Santa Clara, CA Design Engineer responsible for designing horizontal and vertical alignments, retaining walls, and construction staging plans for the final PS&E preparation of
the roadway components to replace four existing bridges as part of the HBP program. CaltransADA Compliance Site Assessment, CA Design Engineer responsible for identified items that do
not meet Caltrans Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 82-02 guidelines on various sites in nine Bay area counties. He also prepares a construction cost estimate and ease of upgrade each
of these items to · meet the guidelines foreach site, Auto Center Revitalization PS&E, Seaside, CA Design Engineer responsible for drainage, sanitary improvement and rehabilitation plan,
utility plan, staging construction and infiltration trench design for the revitalization of the · Auto Center. Union Land Shopping Center Parking Lot Modifications PS&E, Union City,
CA Design Engineer responsible for preparing the plans, specifications, and estimates for , this parking lot modification to maximize the number of parking and to improve the traffic
flowforthe expanding business in this shopping center. South Town, Vacaville, CA I Design Engineer responsible for preparing the signal repair/modification plans for an I intersection
due to the construction of a Box Culvert from a subdivision, I Shoreline Drive/Crow Canyon Road Southwest Corner Widening, and Alcosta/San : Ramon Valley Blvd Northeast Corner Widening,
San Ramon, CA , Design Engineer responsible forthe preparing the signal plans for these two intersections : due to widening . .-!
92 •.. Traffic Signal Design Qualifications Summary , ' " '-. Vincent has more than five years of experience in municipal and transportation has served
as design engineeron numerous projects, involving traffic . signal and lighting systems design.· His. experience includes local .. roadwClyand intersection improvements; geometric design,drainage
design, utility coordination and .' thepreparationbf plans, specificationsand estimates. REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Isabel Avenue (Route 84)/1·580 Interchange, PAlED, PS&E, Livermore,
CA Design Engineer responsible forthe preliminary layout of the roadway lighting system and the design of five traffic signals on future Route 84 to 1·580 with a new interchange that
provides direct access to the North Livermore area. Route 238 Corridor Improvements PSRlEIR, Hayward, CA Design Engineer responsible for the preliminary engineering and environmental
document preparation for the widening of more than five miles of Foothill Boulevard and . Mission Boulevard between 1-580 and Industrial Parkway. Duties include the evaluation of i geometric
and signal layout alternatives of two intersections that require unique signal I bridge designs, identification of existing utilities and preparation of relocation alternatives for utilities,
preparation of preliminary geometric layouts and profiles and preparation of " exhibits to support the preparation of the environmental document. I Auto Center Revitalization PS&E, Seaside,
CA Design Engineer responsible for roadway improvements atthe Seaside Auto Mall. Duties included the preparation of signal plans at four locations, layout, profile and site grading .
.. BART Intermodal Transit Facility PS&E, Union City, CA Design Engineer responsible for design of a pedestrian and bicycle oriented traffic signal along with the preparation of layout
plans, typical sections, signing and striping plans as well as the design of one traffic signal. 11th Street Enhancement, Union City, CA Design Engineer responsible for preparing construction
drawings and circuit design for the roadway lighting system. Stevens Creek Bridge Replacements at Steven Canyon Road, Santa Clara, CA Design Engineer responsible for designing horizontal
and vertical alignments, retaining walls, and construction staging plans for the final PS&E preparation of the roadway components to replace four existing bridges as part of the HBP
program. Campus Parkway (Phase II) PS&E, Merced County, CA Design Engineer responsible for assisting in the preparation of the plans, specifications, and estimate for a new three-mile
segment of major arterial roadway. Campus Parkway is a critical element of the Merced Loop System that will ultimately provide a roadway network that will help provide better access
to the new UC Merced Campus and to existing industrial developments located in the Cities of Merced and Atwater. Responsible for the geometric design of two roundabouts, including alignments,
profiles, cross sections, and the development of the geometric approval drawing. Total estimated construction cost of Phase II is $50M. ""'I .
93 c Signal Design QUalific'ltions Summary · Peter has more than two years of experience in municipal and transportation engineering. He has served.as design engineer on projects including
local roadway and intersection improvements. His experience includes geometric design, drainage design, utility coordination and the preparation ofplans,specifica\ions and estimates.
. REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Isabel Avenue (Route 84)/1·580 Interchange PRIED PS&E, Livermore, CA Design Engineer responsible for layout of roadway lighting system and design of six traffic
signals. Prepared stage construction and traffic handling plans, assisted in the design of the erosion control and temporary water pollution control plans, as well as construction details
for the project connecting future Route 84 to 1·580 with a new interchange that provides direct access to the North Livermore area. MathildaAvenue Bridge Rehabilitation PS&E, Sunnyvale,
CA , Design Engineer responsible for layout of the roadway lighting system and design offour , traffic signals. Performed analysis of roadway lighting levels using AGi32 Lighting : Analysis
software and prepared a report documenting the results. • Auto Center Revitalization PS&E, Seaside, CA · Design Engineer responsible for roadway improvements atthe SeasideAuto Mall.
Duties included the design of signal plans at four locations . . ' 1·280/1·880/Stevens Creek Interchanges Improvements PSR, PAlED, Santa Clara I County,CA Design Engineer responsible
for preparation of typical sections, preliminary geometric · layouts and profiles as well as exhibits for submittals. · 1·580 Eastbound HOV/lsabelAvenue Interchange Interface, Livermore,
CA Design Engineer responsible for modifying the typical cross section sheets and assisting in submittal preparation. Route 101ITennantAvenue, PS&E, Morgan Hill, CA Design Engineer responsible
for modification of two traffic signals and the preparation of · the drainage report and design for the project. Permanente Creek Bicycie/Pedestrian Trail PSRlPR, PS&E, Mountain View,
CA Design Engineer responsible for analyzing alternatives for a bicycle/pedestrian undercrossing and overcrossing. Prepared plans for the design of the bicycle/pedestrian trail including
geometrics, profile, drainage, utilities, and stage construction. Project was designed toADAcompliantstandards.
94 Survey Manager QUalifications SUmmary· JUliil hilS more than 16 years experience in the land surveying profession. She has el(tensiveexperience managing both office and field survey
crews public worksahdstate roadway projects as well as commercial and private land development projects. As Survey Managershe is responsible for produGing
and/or supervising the production of varioUS types. of mapping products, topographicsurveys,ALTA surveys, ahdplals anq legal descriptions as well as reviewing title reports and preparing
maps in variOuS Northern CaliforniaGounties.· I REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE I Regional Medical Center -ADA Topographic Survey Exhibit, San Jose, 2008' I Project Manager at for the preparation
of a topographic exhibit produced to check the .1 compliance of the as-built improvements with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) I regulations. Directed the field crews in collecting
topographic information of parking spaces, curbs, sidewalks and other hardscape improvements on areas within the hospital grounds that had recently been improved. Managed the project
budget and schedule and performed the QAlQC on the final exhibit. . RDA-Streetscape Improvement Project, San Carlos Street, San Jose, 2008' Project Manager for the preparation of a topographic
exhibitfor four blocks of San Carlos Street in downtown San Jose. This project involved aerial topographic mapping, GPS survey, traversing, conventional topographic surveying and laser
scanning. Responsible for the coordination of these activities and ensuring that all the information collected was presented in a seamless manner. Performed the research of County records
in order to produce a record boundary of the San Carlos Street right-of-way and adjusted the traverse ofthe street monuments necessary to tie this record boundary to the topographic
survey. Was responsible for the QAlQC for the finished topographic exhibit while monitoring schedule and budget. Rivermark of Santa Clara, 2001-2006, Santa Clara' Project Manager at
for ALTAlACSM surveys of both the Commercial portion of Rivermark Village and of the Sierra Hotel. Directed field survey crews in obtaining necessary topographic information while overseeing
the drafting and calculations. This survey included obtaining the heights of the highest points of the Commercial Buildings in order . to compare those with the height restrictions imposed
by the flight paths of the nearby Mineta San JoseAirport. Since 2001, she was a key player at in the production of plats and legal descriptions, Tract and Parcel Maps, design topographic
surveys and control surveys over the entire Rivermark site including the Residential, Commercial and School components. Also, was involved in performing construction staking calculations
during this time. Boulevard, Santa Clara' A single family development of 130 homes. As a Project Surveyor, adjusted the control survey and resolved the site boundary. Researched through
Santa Clara County maps and documents and examined the title report. Supervised field crews in field data collection for the boundary, updated the survey control as needed and provided
construction staking calculations throughout the project. Provided QAlQC for the final Tract map and various plats and legal descriptions as well.
95 PIC $275 TASK 1 Management 1 1 Project Maoagement aod Initiation 1 1 2 Coordination/Status Meetings 1 3 Kick-Off Meeting Subtotal Task 1 1 TASK 2 Survey & Right of Way 2 1 Topographic
Field SUlveys Subtotal Task 2 0 TASK 3 Prelimiuary Design 3 1 Initial Study and Recommendation 3 1 1 Field Review 3 1 2 Report preparation Prepare 50% Design 3 2 1 SignallLighting 3
2 2 Pavement Delineation/Signing 3 2 3 Ramp details 3 2 4 Cost Estimate 3 2 5 Submit 50% Subtotal Task3 0 TASK 4 Final Design Prepare 90% PS&E 4 1 1 Review 50% Comments 4 1 2 SignallLighting
4 1 3 Pavement Delineation/Signing 4 1 4 Ramp details 4 1 5 Cost Estimate 4 1 6 Technical Specifications 4 1 7 Submit 90% Prepare F1nal PS&E 4 2 1 Prepare Final PS&E Submittal 4 2 2
Submit Final Subtotal Task 4 0 TOTAL HOURS 1 TOTAL DESIGN COST $275 City of Sal'atoga Citywide Accessible Signal Upgrade Project Fee Schedule for Scope of Services MARK THOMAS & COMPANY,
INC. Updated November 2,2009 Associate Assistant Survey PM Engineer Engineer Surveyor Crew $172 $142 $105 $130 $215 12 12 2 14 12 0 0 0 8 16 0 0 0 8 16 8 8 8 16 40 4 20 4 4 16 96 0 0
0 4 4 60 8 10 8 4 4 4 4 20 4 4 20 118 0 0 0 50 226 0 8 16 $8,600 $32,092 $0 $1,040 $3,440 Total MTCo Honrs Labor Cost Reimbursables MTCo TOTAL COST Total 1 $275 $275 $275 24 $3,768 $3,768
$3,768 2 $344 $344 $344 27 $4,387 $0 $4,387 $4,387 24 $4,480 $4,480 $4,480 24 $4,480 $0 $4,480 $4,480 16 $2,512 $2,512 $2,512 24 $3,648 $3,648 $3,648 0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 40 $5,680
$5,680 $5,680 4 $568 $568 $568 20 $2,840 $2,840 $2,840 4 $568 $568 $568 4 $568 $568 $568 112 $16,384 $0 $16,384 $16,384 4 $688 $688 $688 64 $9,208 $9,208 $9,208 8 $1,136 $1,136 $1,136
10 $1,420 $1,420 $1,420 8 $1,136 $1,136 $1,136 8 $1,256 $1,256 $1,256 4 $568 $568 $568 24 $3,528 $3,528 $3,528 8 $1,256 $1,256 $1,256 0 $0 $0 $0 138 $20,196 $0 $20,196 $20,196 301 $45,447
$0 $45,447 $45,447
Citywide ADA Traffic Signal Upgrade Design Public Works Department Page 1 of 21 Standard Contract CITY OF SARATOGA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STANDARD INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT THIS
AGREEMENT is made at Saratoga, California by and between the CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation ("City"), and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. ("Contractor"), who agree as follows:
RECITALS WHEREAS, City requires the services of a qualified contractor to provide the work product described in Exhibit A of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, City lacks the qualified personnel
to provide the specified work product; and WHEREAS, Contractor is duly qualified to provide the required work product; and WHEREAS, Contractor is agreeable to providing such work product
on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. RESULTS TO BE ACHIEVED Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this
Agreement, Contractor shall provide to City the work product described in Exhibit A ("Scope of of Work"). Contractor is not authorized to undertake any efforts or incur any costs whatsoever
under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of a fully executed Purchase Order from the Finance Department of the City of Saratoga. 2. TERM The term of this Agreement commences on
November 19, 2009 and extends through May 19, 2010 or the completion of the project, whichever occurs first, unless it is extended by written mutual agreement between the parties, provided
that the parties retain the right to terminate this Agreement as provided in Exhibit D at all times. 3. PAYMENT City shall pay Contractor for work product produced pursuant to this Agreement
at the time and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B ("Payment"). The payments specified in Exhibit B shall be the only payments to be made to Contractor in connection with Contractor’s
completion of the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor 96
Citywide ADA Traffic Signal Upgrade Design Public Works Department Page 2 of 21 Standard Contract shall submit all billings to City in the manner specified in Exhibit B; or, if no manner
is specified in Exhibit B, then according to the usual and customary procedures and practices which Contractor uses for billing clients similar to City. 4. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Except
as set forth in Exhibit C ("Facilities and Equipment"), Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment, which may be required for completing the
Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. City shall furnish to Contractor only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit C according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit
C. 5. GENERAL PROVISIONS City and Contractor agree to and shall abide by the general provisions set forth in Exhibit D ("General Provisions"). In the event of any inconsistency between
said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the other term term or condition shall control insofar as it is inconsistent with the General Provisions.
6. EXHIBITS All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are attached hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part of this Agreement. 7. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of City by John Cherbone ("Administrator"). The Administrator has complete authority to receive information, interpret and define City's
policies consistent with this Agreement, and communicate with Contractor concerning this Agreement. All correspondence and other communications shall be directed to or through the Administrator
or his or her designee. 8. NOTICES All notices or communication concerning a party's compliance with the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and may be given either personally,
by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight express carrier. The notice shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered in person or the date upon
upon which the postal authority or overnight express carrier indicates that the mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving Party. The Parties shall make good faith efforts
to provide advance courtesy notice of any notices or communications hereunder via telefacsimile. However, under no circumstances shall such courtesy notice satisfy the notice requirements
set forth above; nor shall lack of such courtesy notice affect the validity of service pursuant to the notice requirement set forth above. Any Party hereto, by giving ten (10) days written
notice to the other, may designate any other address as substitution of the address to which the notice or 97
Citywide ADA Traffic Signal Upgrade Design Public Works Department Page 3 of 21 Standard Contract communication shall be given. Notices or communications shall be given to the Parties
at the addresses set forth below until specified otherwise in writing: Notices to Contractor shall be sent to: John Cherbone City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070
Notices to City shall be sent to: Dave Anderson, City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 With a copy (which copy shall not constitute notice) to: City
Clerk City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 9. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement supersedes any and all agreements, either oral or written, between the parties hereto
with respect to Contractor's completion of the Scope of Work on behalf of City and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to the rendering of such
services in any manner whatsoever. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any
party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or binding.
No amendment, alteration, or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. -The remainder of this page is intentionally
blank-98
Citywide ADA Traffic Signal Upgrade Design Public Works Department Page 4 of 21 Standard Contract IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement. CONTRACTOR: By:
________________________________ Date: _________________ Print Name: Richard Tanaka Position: Principal CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation By: __________________________________
Date: __________________ Name: Dave Anderson Title: City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:_______________________________ Date:___________________ City Attorney Attachments Exhibit A
--Scope of Work Exhibit B --Contract Payment and Reporting Schedule Exhibit B-1 – Rate Schedule Exhibit C --Facilities and Equipment Exhibit D --General Provisions Exhibit E --Insurance
Requirements 99
Citywide ADA Traffic Signal Upgrade Design Public Works Department Page 5 of 21 Standard Contract EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK On request of the Public Works Director or his or her designee,
Consultant will perform design services on behalf of the City in the following particulars: a) ADA design for fifteen (15) intersections in Saratoga in preparation for the installation
of “vibrotactile” pushbuttons. These include: 100 _t8 _ Saratoga Owned Signals to be Upgraded Street Cross Street 1 Frui tvale Avenue Allendale 2 Prospect Road Miller Avenue 3 Quito
Road Allendale Avenue 4 Quito Road Pollard Road 5 Saratoga Avenue Bellgrove Circle I Vineyard Lane 6 Saratoga Avenue Cox Avenue 7 Saratoga Avenue Dagmar Drive 8 Saratoga Avenue Fruitvale
Avenue 9 Saratoga Avenue Scotland Drive I Audry Smith 10 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Blauer Drive 11 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Cox Avenue I Wardell Road 12 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Herriman
Avenue 13 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Pierce Road 14 Saratoaa-Sunnwale Road Reid Lane I Gerald Zapelli Court 15 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Seagull Way
Citywide ADA Traffic Signal Upgrade Design Public Works Department Page 6 of 21 Standard Contract EXHIBIT B PAYMENT 1. TOTAL COMPENSATION . City shall pay Contractor at the rates set
forth on the attached rate schedule, exhibit B-1. The total compensation (including equipment, supply, and expense costs) pursuant to Exhibit A – Scope of Work of this Agreement shall
not exceed Forty five thousand four hundred forty seven dollars ($45,447). 2. INVOICES Contractor shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement,
based on the cost for work performed prior to the invoice date. Hourly Rates schedule is shown on Exhibit B-1. Invoices shall be sent to the City no later than the 15th of the month
following the month term being invoiced for. Invoices shall contain the following information: i. Serial identifications of bills for each applicant/project, i.e. Invoice No.1 on each
individual invoice sheet. ii. Reference the City’s application number per applicant/project (as identified on the City transmittal cover sheets) on each individual invoice sheet. iii.
The beginning and ending dates of the billing period on each individual invoice sheet. iv. A summary cover sheet containing the total contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the
total due this period, and the remaining balance available for all remaining billing periods. 3. MONTHLY PAYMENTS City shall make monthly payments, based on such invoices, for satisfactory
progress in completion of the Scope of Work. 4. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES There shall be no right to reimbursement of expenses incurred by Contractor except as specified in Exhibit A to
this Agreement. 101
Public Works Department Page 7 of 21 Standard Contract EXHIBIT B-1 RATE SCHEDULE 102 Ch;J_ AneoMble s.._1 UfI'CJ"IOd .. Pn>ject ."s.,_ .. Ie ..... !ke ... 1>:IA IlK T HVpOo-M"AS-&I-C,OM,t-
' ANV . I NC. -
Public Works Department Page 8 of 21 Standard Contract EXHIBIT C FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space,
as may be reasonably necessary for Contractor's use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of City. The location, quantity, and
time of furnishing said physical facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility which may involve incurring any direct
expense, including, but not limiting the generality of this exclusion, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities. Contractor shall
not use such services, premises, facilities, supplies or equipment for any purpose other than in the performance of Contractor's obligations under this Agreement. 103
Public Works Department Page 9 of 21 Standard Contract EXHIBIT D GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall be an independent
contractor and shall not be an employee of City. Contractor shall complete the Scope of Work hereunder in accordance with currently approved methods and practices in Contractor's field.
City shall have the right to control Contractor only with respect to specifying the results to be obtained from Contractor pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not have the right to
control the means by which Contractor accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Likewise, no relationship of employer and employee is created by this Agreement between
the City and Contractor or any subcontractor or employee of Contractor. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as limiting the right of Contractor to engage in Contractor
profession separate and apart from this Agreement so long as such activities do not interfere or conflict with the performance by Contractor of the obligations set forth in this Agreement.
Interference or conflict will be determined at the sole discretion of the City. 2. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE Contractor shall complete the Scope of Work required pursuant to this Agreement
in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Contractor is engaged in the geographical area in which Contractor practices
its profession. All work product of whatsoever nature which Contractor delivers to City pursuant to this Agreement shall be prepared in a substantial, first class and workmanlike manner
and conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Contractor’s profession. 3. TIME Contractor shall devote such time to the Scope of Work pursuant to
this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary for satisfactory performance of Contractor's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. 4. CONTRACTOR NO AGENT Except as City may specify in
writing, Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied,
pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever. 104
Public Works Department Page 10 of 21 Standard Contract 5. BENEFITS AND TAXES Contractor shall not have any claim under this Agreement or otherwise against City for seniority, vacation
time, vacation pay, sick leave, personal time off, overtime, health insurance, medical care, hospital care, insurance benefits, social security, disability, unemployment, workers compensation
or employee benefits of any kind. Contractor shall be solely liable for and obligated to pay directly all applicable taxes, including, but not limited to, federal and state income taxes,
and in connection therewith Contractor shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all liability that City may incur because of Contractor’s failure to pay such taxes. City shall
have no obligation whatsoever to pay or withhold any taxes on behalf of Contractor. 6. ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED No party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to
this Agreement. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect. However, with the consent of the City given
in writing, Contractor is entitled to subcontract such portions of the work to be performed under this Agreement as may be specified by City. 7. PERSONNEL a. Qualifications. Contractor
shall assign only competent personnel to complete the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement,
desires the removal of any such persons, Contractor shall, immediately upon receiving notice from city of such desire of City, cause the removal of such person or persons. b. Employment
Eligibility. Contractor shall ensure that all employees of Contractor and any subcontractor retained by Contractor in connection with this Agreement have provided the necessary documentation
to establish identity and employment eligibility as required by the
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Failure to provide the necessary documentation will result in the termination of the Agreement as required by the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986. c. Prevailing Wages. This is a public works contract within the meaning of Part 7 of Division 2 of the California Labor Code (Sections 1720 et seq.). In accordance with
California Labor Code Section 1771, all contractors and subcontractors on this public work project shall pay not less than current prevailing wage rates as determined by the California
Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Pursuant to Section 1773 of the California Labor Code, the City has obtained the general prevailing rate of wages and 105
Public Works Department Page 11 of 21 Standard Contract employer payments for health and welfare, vacation, pension and similar purposes in the City of Saratoga, a copy of which is on
file at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California at the office of the Public Works Director, and shall be made available for viewing to any interested party upon request. 8. CONFLICT
OF INTEREST a. In General. Contractor represents and warrants that, to the best of the Contractor’s knowledge and belief, there are no relevant facts or circumstances which could give
rise to a conflict of interest on the part of Contractor, or that the Contractor has already disclosed all such relevant information. b. Subsequent Conflict of Interest. Contractor agrees
that if an actual or potential conflict of interest on the part of Contractor is discovered after award, the Contractor will make a full disclosure in writing to the City. This disclosure
shall include a description of actions, which the Contractor has taken or proposes to take, take, after consultation with the City to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the actual or potential
conflict. Within 45 days, the Contractor shall have taken all necessary steps to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the conflict of interest to the satisfaction of the City. c. Interests
of City Officers and Staff. No officer, member or employee of City and no member of the City Council shall have any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds
thereof. Neither Contractor nor any member of any Contractor’s family shall serve on any City board or committee or hold any such position which either by rule, practice or action nominates,
recommends, or supervises Contractor's operations or authorizes funding to Contractor. 9. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS a. In General. Contractor shall take reasonable care to observe and comply
with all laws, policies, general rules and regulations established by City and shall comply with the common law and all laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of governmental governmental
agencies, (including federal, state, municipal and local governing bodies) applicable to the performance of the Scope of Work hereunder, including, but not limited to, all provisions
of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1979 as amended. 106
Public Works Department Page 12 of 21 Standard Contract b. Licenses and Permits. Contractor represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals
of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Contractor to practice its profession. Contractor represents and warrants to City that Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense,
keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Contractor to practice its profession. In addition to
the foregoing, Contractor shall obtain and maintain during the term hereof a valid City of Saratoga Business License. c. Funding Agency Requirements. To the extent that this Agreement
may be funded by fiscal assistance from another entity, Contractor shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance
program. d. Drug-free Workplace. Contractor and Contractor’s employees and subcontractors shall shall comply with the City's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. Neither Contractor
nor Contractor’s employees and subcontractors shall unlawfully manufacture, distribute, dispense, possess or use controlled substances, as defined in 21 U.S. Code Section 812, including
marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and amphetamines, at any facility, premises or worksite used in any manner in connection with performing services pursuant to this Agreement. If Contractor
or any employee or subcontractor of Contractor is convicted or pleads nolo contendere to a criminal drug statute violation occurring at such a facility, premises, or worksite, the Contractor,
within five days thereafter, shall notify the City. e. Discrimination Prohibited. Contractor assures and agrees that Contractor will comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 and other laws prohibiting discrimination and that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, religion, Vietnam
era veteran's status, political affiliation, or any other non-merit factors be excluded from participating in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination
under this Agreement. 10. DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS a. Property of City. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda or other written documents or materials
prepared by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of City upon completion of the work to be performed hereunder or upon termination of this Agreement. 107
Public Works Department Page 13 of 21 Standard Contract b. Retention of Records. Until the expiration of five years after the furnishing of any services pursuant to this Agreement, Contractor
shall retain and make available to the City or any party designated by the City, upon written request by City, this Agreement, and such books, documents and records of Contractor (and
any books, documents, and records of any subcontractor(s)) that are necessary or convenient for audit purposes to certify the nature and extent of the reasonable cost of services to
City. c. Use Of Recycled Products. Contractor shall prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal
or less cost than virgin paper. d. Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator, the first page of a technical report, first page of design
specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design preparation. The stamp/seal shall
be in a block entitled "Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility" as per the sample below. ______________________________ Seal and Signature of
Registered Professional with report/design responsibility. 11. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION Contractor shall hold any confidential information received from City in the course of performing
this Agreement in trust and confidence and will not reveal such confidential information to any person or entity, either during the term of the Agreement or at any time thereafter. Upon
expiration of this Agreement, or termination as provided herein, Contractor shall return materials which contain any confidential information to City. Contractor may keep one copy for
its confidential file. For purposes of this paragraph, confidential information is defined as all information disclosed to Contractor which relates to City's past, present, and future
activities, activities, as well as activities under this Agreement, which information is not otherwise of public record under California law. 12. RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTORContractor
shall take all 108
Public Works Department Page 14 of 21 Standard Contract responsibility for the work, shall bear all losses and damages directly or indirectly resulting to Contractor, to any subcontractor,
to the City, to City officers and employees, or to parties designated by the City, on account of the performance or character of the work, unforeseen difficulties, accidents, occurrences
or other causes to the extent predicated on active or passive negligence of the Contractor or of any subcontractor. 13. INDEMNIFICATION Contractor and City agree that City, its employees,
agents and officials shall, be fully protected from any loss, injury, damage, claim, lawsuit, cost, expense, attorneys fees, litigation costs, defense costs, court costs or any other
cost to the extent arising out of or in any way related to the negligent performance of this Agreement. Accordingly, the provisions of this indemnity provision are intended by the parties
to be interpreted and construed to provide the fullest protection possible under the law to the City. Contractor acknowledges that City would not enter into this agreement in the absence
of the commitment of Contractor to indemnify and protect City as set forth below. a. Indemnity. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless
City, its employees, agents and officials, from any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or
costs (including, without limitation, costs and fees of litigation) of any kind whatsoever without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a consequence of or arising
out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part, to the performance of this Agreement. All obligations under this provision are to be paid by
Contractor as they are incurred by the City. b. Limitation on Indemnity. Without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this agreement or this section, Contractor shall
not be required to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City as set forth above for liability attributable to the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of City, provided
such active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct is determined by agreement between the parties or the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. c. Scope of Contractor
Obligation. The obligations of Contractor under this or any other provision of this Agreement will not be limited by the provisions of any workers' compensation act or similar act. Contractor
expressly waives its statutory immunity under such statutes or laws as to City, its employees and officials. d. Subcontractors. Contractor agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements
with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and every subcontractor, sub tier contractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf
of Contractor 109
Public Works Department Page 15 of 21 Standard Contract in the performance or subject matter of this Agreement. In the event Contractor fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from
others as required here, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible according to the terms of this section. e. In General. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements
imposes no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth herein is binding on the
successors, assigns, or heirs of Contractor and shall survive the termination of this agreement or this section. For purposes of Section 2782 of the Civil Code the parties hereto recognize
and agree that this Agreement is not a construction contract. By execution of this Agreement, Contractor acknowledges and agrees that it has read and understands the provisions hereof
and that this paragraph is a material element of consideration. City approval of the insurance contracts required by this Agreement does not relieve the Contractor or subcontractors
from liability under this paragraph. 14. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance as set forth in Exhibit E. The cost of
such insurance shall be included in the Contractor’s bid. 15. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES a. Events of default. Each of the following shall constitute an event of default hereunder: 1. Failure
to perform any obligation under this Agreement and failure to cure such breach immediately upon receiving notice of such breach, if the breach is such that the City determines the health,
welfare, or safety of the public is immediately endangered; or 2. Failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement and failure to cure such breach within fifteen (15) days of receiving
notice of such breach, if the breach is such that the City determines that the health, welfare, or safety of the public is not immediately endangered, provided that if the nature of
the breach is such that the City determines it will reasonably require more than fifteen (15) days to cure, Contractor shall not be in default if Contractor promptly commences the cure
and diligently proceeds to completion of the cure. b. Remedies upon default. Upon any Contractor default, City shall have the right to immediately suspend or terminate the Agreement,
110
Public Works Department Page 16 of 21 Standard Contract seek specific performance or contract with another party to perform this Agreement. c. No Waiver. Failure by City to seek any
remedy for any default hereunder shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights hereunder or any right to seek any remedy for any subsequent default. 16. TERMINATION Either party
may terminate this Agreement with or without cause by providing 10 days notice in writing to the other party. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time without prior notice in
the event that Contractor commits a material breach of the terms of this Agreement. Upon termination, this Agreement shall become of no further force or affect whatsoever and each of
the parties hereto shall be relieved and discharged here-from, subject to payment for acceptable services rendered prior to the expiration of the notice of termination. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, the provisions of this Agreement concerning retention of records, City's rights to material material produced, confidential information, consultant's responsibility, indemnification,
insurance, dispute resolution, litigation, and jurisdiction and severability shall survive termination of this Agreement. 17. DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties shall make a good faith effort
to settle any dispute or claim arising under this Agreement. If the parties fail to resolve such disputes or claims, they shall submit them to non-binding mediation in California at
shared expense of the parties for at least 8 hours of mediation. If mediation does not arrive at a satisfactory result, arbitration, if agreed to by all parties, or litigation may be
pursued. In the event any dispute resolution processes are involved, each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys fees. 18. LITIGATION In the event that either party brings an action
under this agreement for breach or enforcement thereof, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs whether or not such action is
prosecuted to judgement. 19. JURISDICTION AND SEVERABILITY This Agreement shall be administered and interpreted under the laws of the State of California. Jurisdiction of litigation
arising from this Agreement shall be in that state and venue shall be in Santa Clara County, California. If any part of this Agreement is found to conflict with applicable laws, such
part shall be inoperative, null and void insofar as it conflicts with said laws, but the remainder of this Agreement shall be in full force and effect. 111
Public Works Department Page 17 of 21 Standard Contract 20. NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL Contractor understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that
the City will request that work product provided by Contractor under this Agreement be supplemented or continued by Contractor under a new agreement following expiration or termination
of this Agreement. Contractor waives all rights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to continue to request or retain all or any portion of the work product
from Contractor following the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 21. PARTIES IN INTEREST This Agreement is entered only for the benefit of the parties executing this Agreement
and not for the benefit of any other individual, entity or person. 22. WAIVER Neither the acceptance of work or payment for work pursuant to this Agreement shall constitute a waiver
of any rights or obligations arising under this Agreement. The failure by the City to enforce any of Contractor’s obligations or to exercise City's rights shall in no event be deemed
a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. 112
Public Works Department Page 18 of 21 Standard Contract EXHIBIT E INSURANCE Please refer to the insurance requirements listed below. Those that have an “X” indicated in the space before
the requirement apply to Contractor’s Agreement (ignore any not checked). Contractor shall provide its insurance broker(s)/agent(s) with a copy of these requirements and request that
they provide Certificates of Insurance complete with copies of all required endorsements to: Administrative Services Officer, City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070.
Contractor shall furnish City with copies of original endorsements affecting coverage required by this Exhibit E. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer
to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements and certificates are to be received and approved by City before work commences. City has the right to require Contractor’s insurer to
provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications. X Commercial General/Business Liability
Insurance with coverage as indicated: X $2,000,000 per occurrence/$2,000,000 aggregate limits for bodily injury and property damage ___ $ ____________ per occurrence bodily injury/$
___________ per occurrence property damage ___ Coverage for X, C, U hazards MUST be evidenced on the Certificate of Insurance ___ If the standard ISO Form wording for "OTHER INSURANCE",
or other comparable wording, is not contained in Contractor's liability insurance policy, an endorsement must be provided that said insurance will be primary insurance and any insurance
or self-insurance maintained by City, its officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be in excess of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute to it. X Auto Liability Insurance
with coverage as indicated: X $2,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage ___ $ ____________ per person/$__________ per accident for bodily injury 113
Public Works Department Page 19 of 21 Standard Contract ___ $ ____________ per occurrence for property damage ___ $ 500,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage
___ Garage keepers extra liability endorsement to extend coverage to all vehicles in the care, custody and control of the consultant, regardless of where the vehicles are kept or driven.
X Professional/Errors and Omissions Liability with coverage as indicated: X $1,000,000 per loss/$2,000,000 aggregate $5,000,000 per loss/$5,000,000 aggregate Contractor must maintain
Professional/Errors & Omissions Liability coverage for a period of three years after the expiration of this Agreement. Contractor may satisfy this requirement by renewal of existing
coverage or purchase of either prior acts or tail coverage applicable to said three-year period. X Workers' Compensation Insurance X Including minimum $1,000,000 Employer's Liability
The Employer's Liability policy shall be endorsed to waive any right of subrogation as respects the City, its employees or agents. The Contractor makes the following certification, required
by section 1861 of the California Labor Code: I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers'
compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this
contract X Additional Insured Endorsement(s) for Commercial General/Business Liability coverage naming the City of Saratoga, its officers, employees and agents as additional insured.
(NOTE: additional insured language on the Certificate of Insurance is NOT acceptable without a separate endorsement such as Form CG 20 10) X The Certificate of Insurance MUST provide
30 days notice of cancellation, (10 days notice for non-payment of premium). NOTE: the following words must be crossed out or deleted from the standard cancellation clause: ". . . endeavor
to . . ." AND AND ". . . but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives." 114
Public Works Department Page 20 of 21 Standard Contract All subcontractors used must comply with the above requirements except as noted below: As to all of the checked insurance requirements
above, the following shall apply: a. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of
the City, either (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or (2) the Contractor
shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. b. City as Additional Insured. The City, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations
of the Contractor, premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations
on the scope of the protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. c. Other Insurance Provisions. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain,
the following provisions: 1. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
2. The Contractor’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 3. Coverage
shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested,
has been given to the City. 115
Public Works Department Page 21 of 21 Standard Contract d. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A: VII 116
Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan DIRECTOR: Dave
Anderson City Clerk City Manager SUBJECT: Council Liaison to the Saratoga Ministerial Association RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the attached Resolution amending Resolution No. 08-082 appointing
Council representatives to Committees, Agencies and AdHoc Committees to include a new agency – Saratoga Ministerial Association. BACKGROUND: Throughout the year, the City Council invites
various outside agencies to participate in a Joint Meeting. The purpose of these meetings is to continue good relations and/or establish new relationships with outside agencies that
in some way affect the City. At the November 4, 2009 Joint Meeting, Council met with members of the Saratoga Ministerial Association. At that meeting members of the Ministerial Association
expressed an interest in working with the City to explore areas where both the City and the Ministerial Association could work together to build community relationships. After a very
productive dialog, it was recommended that a new agency – Saratoga Ministerial Association be added to the Council Agency and Ad hoc Committee list and that a City official attends the
monthly meetings of the Association. Council directed staff to amend the attached Resolution No. 08-082 by creating a new agency – Saratoga Ministerial Association – to be added to the
Council Agency and Ad hoc Committee. Mayor Chuck Page volunteered to be the representative to this new agency and Councilmember Howard Miller volunteered to be the alternate. The following
changes to the Council Agency and Ad hoc Committee have been requested by the Mayor and are reflected in the attached resolution: Agency Councilmember Alternate Saratoga Ministerial
Association Page Miller 117
Page 2 of 2 FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Resolution No. 08-082 would not be amended and there would be no City official required to attend
the monthly meetings of the Saratoga Ministerial Association. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing
additional. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Resolution No. 08-082 Attachment B – Amended Resolution 118
119 RESOLUTION NO. 08 -082 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO AGENCIES AND ADHOC COMMITTEES FOR 2009 WHEREAS, the City Council
reorganized on December 2, 2008, for the coming year; and WHEREAS, representatives from the City Council serve on various agencies and adhoc committees; and WHEREAS, the responsibility
for representing the City Council should be shared by all its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after due consideration orthe interest of the City Council and the needs of
the various organizations to which the City Council sends representatives, the following representatives agree hereby to be appointed to the agencies and adhoc committees named, through
December 2009, or until replaced: Agency Councilmember Alternate Association of Bay Area Govemment Nagpal Hunter Chamber of Commerce Miller Nagpal Comprehensive County Expressway Planning
Study Policy Advisory Nagpal Miller Board (PAB) __ ..... County BCD Policy Committee Nagpal Miller Hakone Foundation Board King N/A Hakone Foundation Executive Page N/A Committee Historical
Foundation Hunter Miller KSAR Community Access TV Board Miller Hunter Library Joint Powers Association Hunter Nagpal West Valley Flood Control & King Miller Watershed Advisory Committee'
Peninsula Division, League of Page King California Cities Recycling & Waste Reduction Cities Association Cities Association Commission of SCC Appointment Appointment Santa Clara Valley
Water District Hunter Miller Commission Santa Clara County Cities Association Page King Executive Board SCC Cities Association Selection Page King Committee Santa Clara County Cities
Association-King Miller Joint Economic Development Policy Committee (JEDPC) Santa Clara County Emergency Miller Hunter
120 Council SASCC Nalo'Pal Hunter Sister City Liaison Nagpal Hunter West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Miller Nagpal Association Valley Transportation Authority PAC Page King West
Valley Sanitation District Page Nagpal West Valley Mayors and Managers Page King Association (Both members are requh'ed to attend meetings) Airport Land Use Committee Cities Association
Cities Association Aopoinnnent ApPointment City School Ad-Hoc King Page Council Finance Committee Page Miller Ad-Hoc Huntcr Nagpal The above and forgoing resolution was
passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 17th oay of Deccmber, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Councilmember
Howard Miller, Jill Hunter, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page None Susie Nagpal None ullivan, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO 08-082 APPOINTING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO AGENCIES AND ADHOC COMMITTEES FOR 2009 WHEREAS,
the City Council reorganized on December 2, 2008, for the coming year; and WHEREAS, representatives from the City Council serve on various agencies and adhoc committees; and WHEREAS,
the responsibility for representing the City Council should be shared
by all its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after due consideration of the interest of the City Council and the needs of the various organizations to which the City Council
sends representatives, the following representatives agree hereby to be appointed to the agencies and adhoc committees named, through December 2009, or until replaced: Agency Councilmember
Alternate Association of Bay Area Government Nagpal Hunter Chamber of Commerce Miller Nagpal Comprehensive County Expressway Planning Study Policy Advisory Board (PAB) Nagpal Miller
County HCD Policy Committee Committee Nagpal Miller Hakone Foundation Board King N/A Hakone Foundation Executive Committee Page N/A Historical Foundation Hunter Miller KSAR Community
Access TV Board Miller Hunter Library Joint Powers Association Hunter Nagpal Lower Peninsula Valley Flood Control & Watershed Advisory Committee King Miller Peninsula Division, League
of California Cities Page King Recycling & Waste Reduction Commission of SCC Cities Association Appointment Cities Association Appointment Santa Clara Valley Water District Commission
Hunter Miller Santa Clara County Cities Association Executive Board Page King SCC Cities Association Selection Committee Page King Santa Clara County Cities Association-Joint Economic
Development Policy Committee (JEDPC) King Miller Santa Clara County Emergency Miller Hunter 121
Council Saratoga Ministerial Association Page Miller SASCC Nagpal Hunter Sister City Liaison Nagpal Hunter West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Association Miller Nagpal Valley Transportation
Authority PAC Page King West Valley Sanitation District Page Nagpal West Valley Mayors and Managers Association Page King (Both members are required to attend meetings) Airport Land
Use Committee Cities Association Appointment Cities Association Appointment City School Ad-Hoc King Page Council Finance Committee Page Miller Village Ad-Hoc Hunter Nagpal The above
and forgoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 18th day of November, 2009, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
______________________________ Chuck Page, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 122
Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Community Development CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Cynthia McCormick, AICP DIRECTOR:
John Livingstone, AICP SUBJECT: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09-0004: 20398 Blauer Drive, which was denied by the Planning Commission, to operate a new day care
facility in the Professional Administrative Zoning District. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Deny the appeal for a Conditional Use Permit, thus affirming the Planning Commission denial issued on
October 14, 2009. REPORT SUMMARY: Project History On March 18, 2009 an application was received for a new day care center with 80 students and 10 teachers. The property is located in
the Professional Administrative (PA) zoning district and requires a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use. Following a request from Staff in April and May (Attachment 4), a traffic
study submitted by the applicant in late June indicated that the 14 available parking spaces could accommodate 40 students (Attachment 6). At that time, the applicant indicated they
wanted to conduct additional research to support their proposal for more students. Following a period of no correspondence, staff followed up with the applicant’s traffic engineer in
late August, and learned that the applicant had not pursued the additional research. Staff informed the applicant and owner that the City’s traffic consultant would need to review the
final traffic study before staff could make a recommendation and schedule the project for Planning Commission review. After the owner declined to pay fees for the peer review, Staff
met with the owner in September to try and resolve the matter. However, the owner requested that the Planning Commission review the project (without peer review) at the October 14th
Public Hearing. On October 14th, the Planning Commission reviewed the application for the new day care facility. As proposed, the day care center would provide services for 56 students
(16 more children than recommended by the applicant’s traffic engineer). The facility would operate from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. in an existing 5,000 square foot building formerly occupied
by office uses. The day care center would include a playground in the front of the building adjacent to Blauer Drive, as shown on the Site Plan (Attachment 5) and as described in the
Staff Report dated October 14, 2009 (Attachment 2). 123
Page 2 of 2 The Planning Commission opened the Public Hearing and heard testimony from the owner and members of the public. Ten neighbors spoke in opposition to the project with concerns
regarding traffic, noise, children’s safety, pedestrian safety, and the ability of four (4) teachers to care for the 56 children (see Attachment 3). After the public hearing was closed,
the Planning Commission discussed several issues including the height of the fence in the front yard being over the maximum allowed once a retaining wall is put in place, the location
of the playground near a busy street, the lack of enough open space for the children (as required by the State), the lack of a peer review to confirm the allowable number of students,
and the employee/student ratio. Following a detailed discussion of the above items, the Planning Commission denied the project unanimously (7-0) with prejudice. FISCAL IMPACTS: Not applicable
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Depending on the alternative action, the proposal for a new day care center could be approved. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council
could also take one, or a combination of, the following alternative actions. 1. Approve the appeal, thus reversing the Planning Commission denial issued on October 14, 2009, and approving
the Conditional Use Permit for a day care center. 2. Direct the applicant to make changes and continue the public hearing to a date certain. 3. Direct the applicant to make changes and
refer the application back to the Planning Commission. FOLLOW UP ACTION: Not applicable ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Mailed notice to property owners within 500 feet, posted
notice, and advertised the notice in the Saratoga News. ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Council Resolution of denial of application CUP09-0004 2. 10/14/09 Planning Commission Hearing Staff Report,
Resolution, Fire Department Review 3. Neighbor Correspondence 4. Staff Correspondence 5. Site Plan (“Exhibit A” from Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 2009) 6. Traffic Study
7. Mailing notice and address list 8. Appeal application dated 10/28/09 9. Applicant Submittals 124
RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING AN APPEAL; THEREBY AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
CUP 09-0004 for a new day care facility in the Professional Administrative Zoning District Alex Du Von; 20398 Blauer Drive WHEREAS, on October 14, 2009, following a duly noticed public
hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and present evidence, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission denied a Conditional Use Permit
application (CUP09-0004) for the operation of a day care facility for 56 students in the Professional Administrative Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 2009 an appeal of the
Planning Commission decision was filed by the appellant Julia Hashemieh; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 2009, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal
at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga has considered
the appeal and all testimony and other evidence submitted in connection therewith. Now, therefore be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby: I. Denies the appeal
and affirms the Planning Commission’s denial of a Conditional Use Permit application; and II. Determines that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to projects
which a public agency rejects or disapproves, pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15270(a). III. Determines that the applicant
has not met the burden of proof required to support said application for Conditional Use Permit Approval, as consistent with the following Conditional Use Permit findings specified in
City Code Section 15-55 and the below General Plan goals and policies. General Plan Goals and Policies The proposed project is not consistent with the following General Plan Policies:
Provide adequate parking for non-residential uses to minimize intrusion into adjacent neighborhoods (Circulation Policy 7.0a). The project is not consistent with this General Plan Policy
in that as proposed, the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students on property which has only 14 available parking spaces. Applicant’s own Traffic Study
dated June 18, 2009 (as to which Applicant refused Peer Review) indicates that existing parking on 125
2 Application No. CUP 09-0004; 20398 Blauer Drive site can accommodate only 40 students (based on the assumption that “the average parking duration would be a few minutes” and giving
no consideration to the potential for large events). Hence, the City Council finds that the proposed non-residential project will not provide adequate parking to minimize intrusion into
adjacent neighborhoods. Development proposals shall be evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light, appearance, and intensity of
the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be fully mitigated (Land Use Policy 5.2). The project is not consistent with this General Plan Policy in that the number
of available parking spaces is not in proportion to the number of students proposed, the proposed fence is over the maximum allowed in the front setback, and play structures are not
allowed in the front setback and would not be harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses. Use Permit Findings The Applicant’s Project has not met the burden of proof
to support the Findings required for approval of a Use Permit under Article 15-55 of the City Code, as set forth below: The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing
or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. As proposed,
the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students on property which has only 14 available parking spaces. The applicant’s own Traffic Study dated June 18,
2009 (as to which Applicant refused Peer Review) indicates that existing parking on site can accommodate only 40 students (based on the assumption that “the average parking duration
would be a few minutes” and giving no consideration to the potential for large events). Hence, the City Council finds that the proposed non-residential project will intrude into and
adversely affect the immediate neighborhood and surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. Day Care Facilities are not allowed as of right in the
Professional Administrative (PA) zoning district. Due to the inadequate parking spaces on the property and the intrusion and adverse affects which will result to immediate neighborhoods
and surrounding properties, this proposed project is not in accord with the following purposes of the PA zoning district: City Code Section 15-05.020 (a) To control the physical development
of the City in such a manner as to preserve it as essentially a residential community with a rural atmosphere. (c) To foster a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land
uses. (d) To promote the stability of existing land uses which conform with the General Plan, and to protect them from inharmonious influences and harmful intrusions. (e) To ensure that
public and private lands ultimately are used for the purposes, which are most appropriate and most beneficial from the standpoint of the City as a whole. 126
3 Application No. CUP 09-0004; 20398 Blauer Drive (h) To minimize traffic congestion and to avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive
size in relation to the land around them. (j) To provide for adequate off-street parking and loading facilities. and City Code Section 15-18.010 (a) To reserve appropriately located
areas for harmonious transitional uses to serve as buffers between residential districts and commercial districts (as proposed this will not be a harmonious transitional use). (c) To
create a suitable environment for office buildings especially designed for their purposes, located on sites large enough to provide room for landscaped open spaces and off-street parking
facilities. (e) To provide adequate space to meet the needs of modern office buildings, including off-street parking of automobiles …. (f) To minimize traffic congestion …. The proposed
location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious
to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be
operated or maintained will be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare and injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that: as proposed, the facility would
have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students on property which has only 14 available parking spaces. The applicant’s own Traffic Study dated June 18, 2009 (as to which
Applicant refused Peer Review) indicates that existing parking on site can accommodate only 40 students (based on the assumption that “the average parking duration would be a few minutes”
and giving no consideration to the potential for large events). The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Saratoga Zoning Ordinance (Chapter
15 of the City Code. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. The proposed fence that would be located on top of a retaining wall would be taller than the maximum allowed height
for fences in the front setback. Play structures are not allowed in the front setback and the project does not meet the State’s requirement for outdoor play space. Furthermore, the project
does not meet the City’s requirement for off-street parking. IV. Project Denial After careful consideration of the entire Application and any other exhibits and evidence submitted in
connection with this matter, the statutory exemption from CEQA is approved, the findings for denial set forth above are made, and the Application No. CUP-09-0004 for a new day care facility
in the Professional Administrative Zoning District is hereby denied. 127
4 Application No. CUP 09-0004; 20398 Blauer Drive PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of Saratoga, State of California, this 18th day of November, 2009 by the following vote: AYES:
NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ________________________________________________ Chuck Page, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 128
1 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No. CUP 09-0004 Location: 20398 Blauer Drive Type of Application: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Applicant: Alex Du Von Staff Planner: Cynthia
McCormick, Assistant Planner, AICP Meeting Date: 10/14/09 APN: 393-02-005 Department Head: John Livingstone, AICP 20398 Blauer Drive 129
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 03/18/09 Application complete: n/a Notice published: 09/29/09 Mailing completed: 09/29/09 Posting completed: 10/08/09 PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a new day care facility in an existing 5,000 square foot building formerly occupied by office uses. As proposed, the facility
would have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students. The property has 14 available parking spaces. The proposed hours of operation are from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The
property is located in the Professional Administrative (PA) zoning district and requires a use permit for the proposed use. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves, pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section
15270(a). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the application as proposed because the applicant would not agree to a Peer Review of the Traffic Study
and staff cannot therefore confirm the validity of the Traffic Study. Alternatively, the Planning Commission could continue the project to allow the applicant to pay fees necessary for
peer review of the traffic study. Staff recommendations regarding the number of students allowed would be primarily based on results of the traffic study and peer review recommendations.
PERMANENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Staff is not recommending any permanent conditions of approval. 130
3 PROJECT DATA ZONING: Professional Administrative (PA) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Administrative (PA) PARCEL SIZE: 21,780 sq. ft. TENANT SPACE:Approximately 5,000 sq. ft.
FORMER USE: The project would be located in an existing building formerly occupied by offices which are a permitted use. SURROUNDING LAND USES: Land uses surrounding the site are commercial
uses to the north and west, and residential uses to the east and south. PROPOSED USE: The facility would operate as a daycare center. HOURS OF OPERATION: Proposed hours of operation
for the facility are from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. EMPLOYEES: As proposed, the facility would operate with 4 employees. STUDENTS: As proposed, the facility would provide services for 56
students. BUILDING SITE: The project would be located in an existing 5,000 square foot building. PARKING: The property has 14 existing parking spaces. SIGNAGE: The applicant is not proposing
any signage at this time. If any signage is desired in the future, the applicant would be required to submit a sign permit application for review and approval by the Planning Commission
or through the administrative review process, as appropriate. 131
4 PROJECT DISCUSSION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS Background Prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission review, staff met with the applicant to discuss concerns related to traffic
impacts and parking requirements for the proposed project. Staff also spoke with the applicant regarding the need for a Peer Review of the applicant’s Traffic Study. Standard practice
for determining the required numbers of parking spaces has been based on a Traffic Study performed by an applicant’s traffic engineer and a Peer Review of the traffic study by the City’s
traffic consultant. The purpose of the Peer Review is to validate the adequacy and appropriateness of the assumptions used by the applicant’s traffic engineer for the project analysis
and recommendations. The applicant would not agree to a Peer Review and has requested the Planning Commission make a decision on the proposal based solely on the Traffic Study without
peer review of the Traffic Study provided by the applicant’s traffic engineer. Based on the results of the Traffic Study, the applicant has reduced the number of proposed students from
80 to 56. However, the Traffic Study, conducted by the applicant’s traffic engineer, indicates that the 14 available parking spaces could only accommodate 40 students. The Traffic Study
is included as Attachment #3 and is discussed below. Proposed Project The use would operate as a day care facility for young children. The day care facility would be located in an existing
5,000 square foot building. The property currently has 14 available parking spaces. As proposed, the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students. The
proposed hours of operation are from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The applicant also proposes a play area within the front setback. The play area would be comprised of three areas of grass
and artificial turf. The three play areas would be connected by a 10” high redwood bridge/walkway and enclosed within a fence. The site plan does not show the location of any permanent
play structures; however the applicant has indicated their intent to have portable play equipment that would be brought inside the facility in the evening. Examples of the type of play
equipment proposed will be on display at the Public Hearing. City Code does not allow play equipment within the front setback area. Furthermore, play equipment may not appear harmonious
with other buildings and uses in the neighborhood. The minimum front setback area is twenty-five feet. According to the California State Department of Social Services, the open space
requirement for licensed day care centers is 75 square feet per child. Currently, the site plans shows approximately 2,800 square feet of play area which would accommodate approximately
37 children. Fencing and Landscaping: The property is currently surrounded by existing mature landscaping. New landscaping and a four foot (4’) high wrought-iron fence and gate would
be installed in the front yard. The wrought-iron 132
5 fence would be comprised of two inch (2”) horizontal rails, one inch (1”) vertical rails, and three inch (3”) posts. Traffic and Parking The applicant submitted a traffic study completed
by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (attachment 4). The applicant’s Traffic Study indicates that a maximum of 40 students could be accommodated by the 14 available parking spaces.
The Traffic Study assumes that “the average parking duration would be a few minutes.” The Traffic Study does not consider the potential for large events and the applicant has not provided
further details on the types of programs offered at the day care center. While the Traffic Study does discuss the possibility of using parking spaces on Blauer Drive as well as parking
spaces from adjacent buildings, the City does not count street parking towards the offstreet parking requirement. Furthermore, staff discourages shared parking on other sites because
it restricts the types of current and future uses that the adjacent property can accommodate, given the reduced parking available for their use. The City’s shared parking requirements
are discussed below. Per City Code section 15-35.020(h) off-street parking spaces shall be located on the same site as the use for which the spaces are required, or on an adjacent site
or a site separated only by an alley. City Code section 15-35.020(d) indicates that the off-street parking requirements may be satisfied by a common parking facility provided that the
total number of spaces shall be not less than the sum of the individual requirements (i.e., there is no overlap of parking). City Code also requires a formal contract for the shared
parking agreement be recorded in the office of the County Recorder. Neighbor Correspondence The applicant notified adjacent businesses and residents. Public notice was sent to all property
owners within 500 feet of the project. Staff has received two written comments and one verbal comment from adjacent residents as of the writing of this staff report. The neighbor at
20390 Blauer Drive (left side of property) provided written concerns regarding traffic, noise, and property values. This neighbor would like a sound wall separating their property from
the subject property. This neighbor would also like to minimize the front exit and entrance. Staff spoke with this neighbor who reiterated their concerns regarding noise and traffic
generated by parents dropping off and picking up their children. The neighbor at 20483 Tricia Way (behind property) provided written concerns regarding traffic drop off/pick up of children
in the parking lot at the back of the property. Staff spoke with this neighbor who also voiced concerns regarding the playground in the front of the property and the potential traffic
delays caused by queuing of vehicles along Blauer Drive which is a single lane road that provides access to a larger shopping center, other commercial uses, and a residential neighborhood.
This neighbor has since sent an email to staff which is included in Attachment 3. 133
6 The neighbor at 20480 Blauer Drive (right side of property) contacted staff by phone with concerns regarding traffic circulation near the proposed day care facility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the application as proposed because the applicant would not agree to a Peer Review of the Traffic Study and staff cannot therefore
confirm the validity of the Traffic Study. Alternatively, the Planning Commission could continue the project to allow the applicant to pay fees necessary for peer review of the traffic
study. Staff recommendations regarding the number of students allowed would be primarily based on results of the traffic study and peer review recommendations. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution
of Denial. 2. Newspaper Notice, Mailed Notice, Address Labels 3. Neighborhood Notification 4. Site Access, Circulation and Parking Study by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. 5.
Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A”. 6. Fire Department comments, Exhibit "B”. 134
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. FOR DENIAL OF USE PERMIT Application # CUP 09-0004 Alex Du Von; 20398 Blauer Drive The City of Saratoga Planning Commission finds
and determines as follows with respect to the above-described application: I. Project Summary The City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for a Use Permit for
the Project shown in Exhibit "A" date stamped September 24, 2009, incorporated by this reference. The proposed use is a day care facility in the Professional Administrative (PA) zoning
district. The use would be located in an existing 5,000 square foot building formerly occupied by office uses. As proposed, the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services
for 56 students. The property has 14 available parking spaces. The proposed hours of operation are from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The foregoing use will be described as the “Project” in
this Resolution. II. Use Permit Requirement City Code Sections 15-55.010 and 15-18.030(f) require a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission for any day care facility in the
Professional Administrative (PA) zoning district. III. Planning Commission Review On October 14, 2009 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing on the Project at which
time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and argument. The Planning Commission considered the Project, the staff report on the Project,
CEQA documentation, correspondence, presentation from the Applicant and the public, and all testimony and other evidence presented at the Public Hearing. IV. Environmental Review The
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves, pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Chapter
3, Article 19, Section 15270(a). V. Use Permit Findings The Applicant’s Project has not met the burden of proof to support the Findings required for approval of a Use Permit under Article
15-55 of the City Code, as set forth below: 135
2 Application No. CUP 09-0004; 20398 Blauer Drive The proposed conditional use will [not] adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, or will [not] adversely
affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. Staff is unable to make this Finding. A Traffic Study, dated June 18, 2009 indicates that existing parking on site can accommodate
40 students; however the applicant has proposed services for 56 students. Moreover, a Peer Review has not been completed for the project to validate the adequacy and appropriateness
of the assumptions used for the project analysis and recommendations. Given
the site’s parking deficiency, parking and traffic by parents would potentially spillover into the adjacent neighborhood and properties. The proposed location of the conditional use
is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. Staff is unable to make this Finding. Day Care Facilities are
not allowed as of right in the Professional Administrative (PA) zoning district. The number of available parking spaces is not in proportion to the number of students proposed for the
Day Care Facility and therefore the proposed use is too intensive for the proposed location. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated
or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Staff is unable to make this Finding.
Finding #1 demonstrates why this finding cannot be made. The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Saratoga Municipal Code. Staff is unable
to make this Finding. Per the Traffic Study dated June 18 2009, the site does not currently have adequate parking available to serve the project. VI. Project Denial After careful consideration
of the application, site plan, architectural drawings, Traffic Study, and other materials and exhibits and evidence submitted to the City in connection with this matter, Application
No. CUP 09-0010 for a Use Permit for a daycare center is denied. 136
3 Application No. CUP 09-0004; 20398 Blauer Drive DENIED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 14th day of October 2009 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
___________________________________ Yan Zhao Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: ___________________________________ John F. Livingstone, AICP Secretary to the Planning Commission ACCEPTANCE
BY APPLICANT AND OWNER This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant
and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions
within the time required in this Resolution by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission. __________________________________ ____________________________ Applicant Date _______________________________
___ ____________________________ Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date 137
fire SARATOGA FIRE DISTRICT COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 14380 SARATOGA AV. SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 Telephone: 408-867-9001 Fax: 408-867-1330 www.saratogafire.org Plan Review Transmittal
for Planning Department File #: CUP 09-0004 Plan Log #: 09-1242 Date: May 27, 2009 # of Lots: one Applicant: Saratoga Day Care Center/Von Location: 20398 Blauer Drive Project: tenant
improvement of a approximately 5,000 sq ft commercial building for a day care center. This tenant improvement constitues a change of use of the building. 1. Property is not located in
a designated Wildland/Urban Interface (WUI) area. 2. Page A0 describes the building construction type as V-III 1 hr which is not a valid construction type per 2007 CBC. Clarify the building
construction type and if applicant claims the building is 1 hour rated construction provide evidence of said rating as this office has no record of this building being 1 hour rated construction.
Presently the building has no automatic fire sprinkler or fire alarm systems installed. installed. 3. Per 2007 California Fire Code (CFC) and 2007 California Building Code (CBC) the
occupancy classification for this use is Educational Group E-Day Care, the use of a building or structure, or portion thereof, for educational, supervision or persoanl care services
for more than six children older than 2 and a half years of age shall be classified as an E occupancy. 4. Per 2007 CFC 907.2.3: Group E, a manual and automatic fire alarm system shall
be installed in Group E occupancies with an occupant load of 50 or more persons or containing more than one classroom or one or more rooms used for day care purpose. An Early Warning
Fire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained. The alarm contractor shall submit three (3) copies of working drawings to the fire district for review and approval. The alarm system
must be installed by a licensed contractor. The fire district must issue a permit prior 5. Provide exits signs per 2007 CBC Chapter 10 Means of Egress. to the installation of the system
(City of Saratoga Code 16-60). 6. Provide portable fire extinguishers minimum 2A-10BC at minimum 75 feet of travel per CCR Title 19. 7. Page A3 indicates a kitchen area with range and
hood. Applicant is to contact Santa Clara County Department of Health to determine if any permits are required from that department for the cooking operations in the kitchen area. If
County Health determines that the kitchen hood system be equipped as a Class 1 hood for grease laden vapors then an approved fire protection system for the hood shall be required. If
no permits are required by County Health, then no hood fire protection system shall be required. Applicant is to communicate in writing to Saratoga Fire of the determination by County
Health. 8. Premises Identification: Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the
street or road fronting the property (2007 CFC 505). APPROVED: HAL NETTER PLAN CHECKER: HAL NETTER 138
From: Jim Leney [mailto:jleney@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jim Leney Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 9:55 AM To: City Clerk [Ann Sullivan] Subject: APN 393-02-005 City Council, I am writing
to voice my strong opinion that the City Council should uphold the decision of the planning commission for APN 393-02-005, to reject the application of Julia Hashemieh to open a day
care facility on Blauer Drive. ia
l neighborhood and provides a professional office facility free of extreme noise. I work from home 1-2 days per week with my property about 100 feet away. I am father of two . I love
children but the noise of 56 children would disturb my work or force me to close all my doors and windows at all times. The traffic early and late in the day would increase at the Blauer-Regan
intersection and down Blauer Drive past my house. The proposed changes to the front of the building would be an eyesore with play equipment that, best case, remains in view all day.
Also as a citizen of Saratoga, I agree with the planning committee that there are serious liability issues with this location. That area has a blind hedge right near the eastern driveway
leading to the back of the center. It would be an accident waiting to happen with children and parents crossing the street there. There are other safety concerns and added traffic that
were documented during the planning commission hearing. I have owned my home in Saratoga for 10 years. The zoning laws we have should protect the City of Saratoga, my family, my neighbors
and our local property values from such negative impacts. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, Jim Leney 20353 Blauer Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 408-307-7917 (cell) jim@leney.org
139
140 City of Saratoga Planning Commission 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: CUP 09-0004; 20398 Blauer Drive Planning Commission Members, 20483 Tricia Way Saratoga, CA 95070
October 14, 2009 I have lived at 20483 Tricia Way since 1985. While the back yard of my property borders the rear of the commercial property located at 20398 Blauer Drive, there has
never been any problem with this association as this property has always been used as a business office. Consequently, there were very few cars or employees involved and we enjoyed a
quiet relationship. Now, we face the prospect of this location being used as a daycare center with up to 56 students at anyone time. I object to this use for the following reasons: 1.
The plan for this daycare center is to use the parking area behind the building as an automobile access for the purpose of dropping off and picking up children. The cars will be required
to drive around the back of the building for this purpose. Typical daycare facilities generate a great great deal of traffic, twice a day, at the specified time when parents drop off
and pick up their children. With up to 56 students, I can envision a line of cars encircling the building twice a day with all the associated noise of exuberant children. As my backyard
borders the rear of the property in question and is only separated by a 6-foot high fence, I believe this will greatly diminish the quiet environment of my backyard that I have enjoyed
for the past 24 years. 2. The traffic of parents dropping off and picking up their children twice a day will spill out onto Blauer Drive. As in other daycare centers, there will be lines
of cars on Blauer Drive twice a day, waiting for their turn to pick up or drop off their children. This will be a problem for the access to the homes and business serviced by Blauer
Drive including, the office complex next to 20398 Blauer Drive, Argonaut Shopping Center, the homes that are next to and across the street from the daycare center as well as all of the
homes that use Blauer Drive for access to their property. 3. The lines of cars mentioned in item 3 could constitute a safety issue. 4. Periodically, an 18 wheel truck /trailer comes
into Blauer Drive to drop off supplies for Safeway. This truck is required to make a wide turn in order to turn left into the rear entrance behind Argonaut Shopping Center. This turn
will be impossible if there is a line of cars waiting to pick up or drop off children. 5. Due to the noise and traffic mentioned above, I believe the value of my property will be reduced.
6. I do not think the Professional Administration CPA) zoning for this property includes its use as a daycare center. If so, the use as a daycare center constitutes a variance to the
current zoning. 7. I believe the safe occupancy for this building would be exceeded with 56 students and 4 employees. I wonder what the Saratoga Fire Department has to say about this
occupancy and the existing fire exits. For all of the reasons above, I urge the Planning Commission to reject the Condition Use Permit for a daycare center at 20398 Blauer Drive. Yours
truly,
141 CynthiE McCormick Planner 0tn City of Development Dept. 13777 Fruitvale pve. Saret06a, CA 95070 I stron8-Y object to
roequest of eRowing d ey cere center at 20 398 Drive, Saratoba. Wi th the of emplo;yees end the nUillber df students a very unsa fe traffic situati on
will erise. It is e lr eady busy in erea, and the &ddi ti.:mel emount of C8 rs will be naz&rcous ell who use Bl eur Drive. 1 eEL predict will
b e acci dents with c h ildren in the cers because of the way people drive s o fast in erea. SinCErely , Anita Nettenstrom 20311 Circle S8retob2,
CA 95070 (408) 8 67-6250 CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
142 City of Saratoga Planning Commission 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 CITY Or S,L..RJ.lJOGA -:Ol\'i"I;Ul\iiTY DEVELOPMENT RE: CUP 09-0004: 20398 Blauer Drive Addressed to:
The Planning Commission Members Oct. 9, 2009 13035 Regan Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 Phone: 867-9786 I am a resident of Saratoga and have been since 1960. The aforementioned Day Care Center
that is being considered borders most of my backyard property at 13035 Regan Lane. The last few years have been a headache with the present owners of the property on Blauer Drive. Not
so with the businesses renting the Property. I have reported the existence of a fire hazard to the Fire Marshal regarding the trash, dead limbs, and dry needles that have been collecting
for the last few years (3 or 4) against the fence in the back of the building. I am 82 years old and I try to keep my small orchard in the back free of dry material as requested by the
fire departments, etc. The present owner has not responded in any way to do the same. To make this short, what can we expect in the way of cooperation from this person if other problems
arise such as the following: 1. The traffic is already bad at the corner of Regan Lane with people not stopping at all at the four way stop, speeding around the corner and up Regan Lane.
What can we expect when 50 or more cars will be standing leaving off and picking up children? Our subdivision is already the feeder for all of the neighboring areas with all the traffic
using Regan Lane and not obeying the traffic laws. The situation can only get worse with standing traffic and it will present a real safety issue with the trucks servicing the stores
at Argonaut. 2. When and if I can no longer reside in my home will the town of Saratoga give me a tax reduction since my property value will certainly be devalued as a result of the
noise and congestion ensuing from this plan? 3. With the lack of regard from the present traffic users, all of this traffic will most assuredly spill over into the residential area of
Argonaut Place. 4. It absolutely astounds me that such a situation as this is all right as long as it happens in someone else's neighborhood. The reason most of us purchased our homes
is for the intrinsic value represented by that purchase. For all of the reasons above I implore you to reject the Condition Use Permit for the daycare center at 20298 Blauer Drive. Thank
you, Margaret B. Towns ;;3. ;;;dJJ
143 October 14, 2009 12990 ReganLane Saratoga, CA 95070 Phone: 867-5181 City of Sa ratoga Planning Commission 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: CUP 09-0004: 20398 Blauer
Drive Addressed to: The Planning Commission Members I have been a resident of Saratoga since 1979. When my late husband and I purchased our home (corner Regan Lane and Blauer Drive)
we were buying into a serene, country-like setting with little traffic and no four-way stop signs. The area was strictly residential. Now I am living at a very busy intersection. Since
I do not want to experience any further increase in traffic and congestion and its possible consequences, I strongly oppose opening our neighborhood to a RQW..daycare center. There would
not be sufficient parking spaces for young mothers or fathers to drop off their children; the traffic would spill over into Blauer Drive and Regan Lane where there are no pedestrian
walks and thus would make walking extremely unsafe. My kitchen and dinette windows are facing the intersection of Blauer and Regan, so I am living the traffic situation every day. There
is a four-way stop sign now which is observed by many but unfortunately not by all drivers. We have an increase in residential traffic, shoppers coming or going to the Argonaut Shopping
Center, huge delivery trucks backing into the alley at Safeway or making a u-turn at the intersection; also can be seen Comcast vehicles, landscape companies with sometimes immense equipment,
fire engines, gardeners with trucks and trailers, huge trucks with building material etc. A fence that surrounds my property has been damaged three times in the course of a few years,
and .trn umy.\ete husband barely escaped being hit by an automobile at our corner. When personally the shopping center I am exercising great caution due to the danger
the traffic constitutes. ifJe young children and their familieffubjected to this environment on a daily basis? Do we not take responsibility for their safety? In conclusion, I would
like to express my sincere belief that it would be more appropriate and wiser to find a location for a daycare center in an area that is experiencing less traffic, and as a consequence
can be deemed far safer for small children, their parents and everyone concerned . Thank you for your consideration, /J? Jutta M. Jacobs
144 October 14,2009 Bill and Linda Mullen 12960 Regan Lane Saratoga, Ca 95070 (Tel: 408.867.7833) REGARDING: Application CUP 09-0004 Blauer Drive Applicant: Alex Du Von Aka ... "Daycare
Center" ATTENTION: City of Saratoga I Community Development Department We are AGAINST the use of this property for the purposes listed in your "Notice of Public Hearing". The basis for
this opposition are: 1. TRAFFIC a. There will be a significant cluster of traffic in the early morning hours and in the late afternoon I early evening period. i. There is already significant
traffic in the early morning at the adjacent shopping center I Starbucks ii. There is very limited parking on the property -definitely not for 50-plus cars iii. There is very limited
queuing possibility at this sight iv. The corner of Blauer and Regan will become a very busy "U" turn location -it is already a busy intersection at these times 2. SAFETY a. There are
no sidewalks at this location or in the neighborhood b. Large delivery trucks use Blauer for delivery and turn in (and exit) at the alley immediately across from the proposed property
c. There are no outdoor playing facilities for the children -nor could any proper playing facilities be developed for 50-plus children at this location d. Residents: many walk in the
neighborhood and Blauer is a major exit/entrance point -an additional 50-plus cars in the early morning late afternoon cluster presents an increased walking danger e. There are no sidewalks,
no crosswalks, no street lights in this area or in the neighborhood f. There will very likely be an increase in traffic through the neighborhood 3. FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD FIRST a. This
area is family neighborhood first -not a commercial development b. The shopping center is a convenience and benefit to the neighborhood -this can not be said for the proposed property
use c. The unwelcome use of our neighborhood streets for parking
145 City of Saratoga Planning Commission 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: CUP 09-0004; 20398 Blauer Drive Planning Commission Members, I have been a resident at 20486 Tricia
Way since 1986. 20486 Tricia Way Saratoga, CA 95070 October 14,2009 Now, the 20398 Blauer Dr. location may be used as a daycare center with up to 56 students at one time. I find this
out of line with the neighborhood. 1. There are usually very long lines of cars with parents dropping off and picking up children at a daycare center as can be seen on Cox Ave. at the
Challenger School. Cox is a two lane road in both directions while Blauer is a one lane road in both directions. The area for cars to line up will extend past the Co america Bank parking
lot onto Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd and cause problems on that road. If they line up in the other direction, the intersection of Blauer and Regan will be impacted. The traffic will be a nightmare.
2. Safeway (18 wheeler) trucks come quite frequently to Safeway (I can see them from my deck) and have to make a very wide turn across Blauer to enter the back of the stores. It comes
at all times of the day. This wide turn would be impossible with lines of parents waiting for their children. 3. I wonder if 4 employees can control 56 toddlers in a safe way. Perhaps
more employees are in the wings. I assume the noise level has no place to go but up. We tolerate Starbucks and all the noise and traffic that the shopping center generates. Please do
not add one more burden to our neighborhood. I urge the Planning Commission to reject the Condition Use Permit for a daycare center at 20398 Blauer Drive. Yours truly, Carole Hardy
146 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form . -. Applicant Name: (5AlZd;TOCbf m.y C4/Z2 L6MFI? Date: 1/7/0/Project Address: 2?J398 f2LAVEg J;g Application Number: ____ _ Dear Neighbor,
I am proposing a project at the above address a·nd would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors
across the street from the property are being provided th is notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the
project. The City of Saratoga asks that this form be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please familiarize yourselfwith the
proposed pllans.· NOTE: These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may change as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any
changes that may occur. Please contact the City of Saratoga at 408-868-1222 to speak with the the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposal
and have reviewed the plans. ' Neighbor Name: --"C=-....JfJU>-=-fL--=f_S_--'-·t+ _______ Date: () (0 tj �
� C£ #;J1/JtsQ 1& Am , . i Neighbor Phone #: Email: Please address any initial concerns with the project below (attach
additional sheets if nece,s sary): Revised September 2008 6
147 C:ity of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Applicant Name: S4!2A1PqA VA./' U9.!.2'C= Ce/vr;5';<: Date: ____ _ Application r-.Jumber: ____ _ Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project
at the above address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street
from the property are being provided th is notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. The City
of Saratoga asks that this form be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please familiarize yourselfwith the proposed fJ lans
. NOTE: These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may change as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that
may occur. Please contact the City of Saratoga at 408-868-1222 to speak with the aSSigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposal and have reviewed
the plans. Neighbor Name: ·yO U G-L-I}-5 S UL L /V/}/fJ Date: Neighbor Address : _! _7(_(_C_(_J1_ _LA J_ A-_l_f ____________ Neighbor Phone #: 7
rJ.)O C; t E °1 -"D0UC:rSULL @G()f\./{c;f5;;-NET mal: _____ __ Please address any initial concerns with the project below (attach additional sheets if nece,s sa. ry):
--vvc:z;;0, 0;/4 SIGNATURE: ___ _ ____ _____________________________ ___ Revised September 2008 6
148 Applicant Name: City of Sa ratoga Neighbor Notification Form ,-->LP-A;tVL7A=,:!l1:/aRE Project Add ress: �
� __ Appl ication Number: _____ Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above address a"nd would like to provide you with
an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy
in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. The City of Saratoga asks that this form be signed by each neighbor to indicate
that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please familiarize yourselfwith the proposed Pllans. NOTE: These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may change as the project moves
forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. Please contact the City of Saratoga at 408-868-1222 to speak with
the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposal and have reviewed the plans. -Neighbor Name: __
__ _ _________ Date: Neighbor Address: __ __
__ ___________ Neighbor Phone #: Please address any initial concerns with the project below (attach additional sheets if nece,s sary): "
, . ------Revised September 2008 6
149 City of Sa ratoga Neighbor Notification Form j /7' //JrY. D ate: -If '-F-t-.<.</+I....U=",---':,::-:-J_ Proj ect Ad dress:
Ap plica ti 0 n N umber: ____ Dear I
am proposing a project at the above address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors
across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a deCision being made on the project.
The City of Saratoga asks that this form be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please familiarize yourselfwith the proposed
f'llans. NOTE: These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may change as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes
that may occur. Please contact the City of Saratoga at 408-868-1222 to speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposal and have
reviewed the plans . ,. ! . I Neighbor Name: __ __:/"_''-\=_':":...;e>;;'-::': ....A._; )_ •. ________: ---____ Date: -=to) i D
It) 9 i '" ,'I r I ;} J.<. , ' .... j <.; '\ J' '1,/" /')'. . {7 0 I Neighbor Address: . [ c:..--iJ--(0 ') p ./?<./--1--D <::. t'?C , r //I "'. ..{ //{ r . /l ' /lV
'. r 'I (:/li ) F Neighbor Phone i: Sb-r-i)IG l /Email: .1 l/.;-i. '-Please address any initial concerns with the project below (attach additional sheets if necessar\l\:
. UJ1 W t\))) 0",. CiA4l";, . . . JO[ " 4 Z009 -CITY OF SAM fU(jt\ tOMMI i/lJlTY DEVELOPMENT L SIGNATURE: . .?L.
Revised September 2008 6
150 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Appl ica nt N a me: _ --=.5.!0,---�
� Date: 7 /7 /01 - I Application Number: ____ _ Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above
address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property
are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. The City of Saratoga asks that
this form be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please familiarize yourselfwith the proposed plans. NOTE: These plans are PRELIMINARY
ONLY and may change as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. Please contact the City of
Saratoga at 408-868-1222 to speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposal and have reviewed the plans. -Neighbor Name: _____
_7_ _________ Date: ______ Neighbor Address: _______________________________ ___ Neighbor Phone #: __________ _ Emai l: Please address
any initial concerns with the project below (attach additional sheets if nece,s sary): ml JUI 1 4 2009 lYJ glTY OF-SAKATOGA COMMONI /'f [JEVELOPMENT SIGNATURE: _______________________
__________________________________
_ Revised September 2008 6
NOT I C E O F I NCOMP L E T E A P P L I C A T ION April 9, 2009 Via US Mail Alex Du Von P.O. Box 321172 Los Gatos, CA 95032 RE: Application No. CUP09-0004; Use Permit for Daycare Facility
at 20398 Blauer Drive, Saratoga, California Dear Mr. Du Von: This letter is in regards to the application and plans submitted to the Planning Division on March 18, 2009. Staff has reviewed
the plans and is requesting the below items for clarification. Prior to deeming your application complete, the information noted below must be provided. Please provide the following:
Title Report Please submit to a current title report (dated within 90 days). Letter of Authorization Please provide evidence showing the applicant to being the owner of the property,
or evidence that the applicant is duly authorized agent of the owner. Fire Department Fees Please provide evidence of fees paid to the Saratoga Fire Department. Neighborhood Outreach
Provide written documentation that all of the adjacent property owners have reviewed the plans for the proposed project and include their comments. A template has been attached for your
convenience (Attachment A). Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 151
Blauer Daycare Facility Project Address: 20398 Blauer Drive Application CUP09-0004; Use Permit for Daycare Facility Page 2 Conditional Use Permit Findings Please provide use permit findings
per Section 15-55.070 of the City Code. I have attached the City Conditional Use Permit requirements (Attachment B). Parking Calculation Though the site plans show the parking availability,
staff is unable to determine the required number of parking spaces for the proposed use. Please provide us with that information. Photos of Site Please provide photos of the proposed
project site. Photos should be from the exterior of all sides of the building. Hours of Operation Please indicate on the plans the hours of operation for the proposed use. Number of
Employees Please indicate on the plans the number of employees necessary to operate the proposed use. For additional information concerning the City of Saratoga’s code sections, please
refer to our web site www.saratoga.ca.us. Click on the Municipal Codes link and use either the table of contents or the search engine to find specific sections. Please note that it is
always difficult to identify all issues at this stage of your application and there may be additional information requested by the Planning Department or other agencies during the review
process. I will forward comments from other departments when they are received. Please feel free to contact me at (408) 868-1212 with any questions that you may have. Your assistance
in processing these comments is appreciated. Sincerely, Eric W. Lentz Associate Planner City of Saratoga 152
May 19, 2009 Alex Du Von PO Box 321172 Los Gatos, CA 95032 RE: Notice of Required Traffic Study; 20398 Blauer Drive, Saratoga, California Conditional Use Permit (CUP 09-0004) Dear Alex
Du Von: As we discussed on the phone, your application for a daycare facility at 20398 Blauer Drive has been reassigned to me. Given the potential traffic impacts associated with your
proposal, a Traffic Study is required to determine the number of students that can be accommodated given existing parking and any potential traffic impacts resulting from the proposed
daycare use. Please submit a traffic study report conducted by a licensed traffic engineer (of your choosing). The City of Saratoga’s consulting traffic engineer will then conduct a
peer study of the report. The peer study will require a $2,500 deposit. You will be refunded any amount remaining in the peer study account following final planning approval and occupancy.
The traffic study should include Parking Generation, Trip Generation, Intersection Analysis, On-Site Circulation Analysis, and Conclusions and Recommendations. Please also include a
Project Description including hours of operation, number of employees, number of classrooms, number of students per classroom, maximum number of students allowed on site at any one time,
the number of parking spaces dedicated for the tenant space, and the number of parking spaces shared with other uses in the shopping center. Sincerely, Cynthia McCormick Assistant Planner,
City of Saratoga Planning Division CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 153
Please feel free to contact me at (408) 868-1230 with any questions that you may have. Sincerely, Cynthia McCormick June 23, 2009 To: Alex Du Von Re: Traffic Study Dear Applicant: Thank
you for submitting the Traffic Study this morning. Staff has reviewed the Traffic Study and has the following comments on the Traffic Study completed by Hexagon Transportation Consultants.
Total Required Parking Spaces: The total required parking spaces must include those needed for both employees and student drop-off. The submitted traffic study does not account for
employee parking. Please resubmit the traffic study to address this requirement. Employee Parking: The traffic study must include the number of parking spaces required for the number
of employees proposed. The City of Saratoga requires one (1) parking space for each employee, including teachers and administrators of a day care center. Per the project description,
the project would require 10 spaces to accommodate the 10 proposed employees, leaving 4 spaces spaces for student drop-off parking. Based on the parking use rate provided by Hexagon,
staff estimates that the 4 available spaces would accommodate no more than an estimated 11 students. Shared Parking: The parking requirements may be satisfied by a common parking
facility; provided that the total number of spaces shall be not less than the sum of the individual requirements, and provided further, that a contract between the parties setting forth
the agreement for joint use of a common parking facility is recorded in the office of the County Recorder and a certified copy there is filed with the City. Should the applicant decide
to pursue this option, the traffic study must include a table showing all individual tenants (by name) in the shopping center, their individual square footages, and their parking requirements
per City Code Section 15-35. Please note that the City of Saratoga requires one (1) parking space for each two hundred square feet of floor area of office space. Assuming all tenants
are office uses, an office complex of 4,000 SF would require 20 spaces. Based on the parking use rate provided by Hexagon, staff estimates that the 5 additional spaces would accommodate
no more than an estimated 14 students. Should the applicant be able to acquire a lease of the 5 adjacent parking spaces and record an agreement for joint use of parking, staff estimates
that that the 9 shared spaces would accommodate no more than estimated 26 students (this calculation allows one additional student based on rounding). Street Parking: Street parking
is not counted towards the required number of spaces. CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 154
1 Cynthia McCormick From: Cynthia McCormick Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 2:58 PM To: 'alexduvon@yahoo.com' Subject: RE: traffic study comments for day care center at 20398 Blauer Drive.
DearAlexDuVon, Thankyouforsubmittingthetrafficstudythismorning. Pleaseseeattachedregardingcommentsonthesubmittedtrafficstudyforthedaycarece
nterat20398BlauerDrive. Oncethetrafficstudyhasbeenupdatedwiththeattachedrequirements,IwillforwardthestudytotheCityof Saratoga’strafficconsult
antforpeerreviewandrecommendations. Pleasenotethatstaffcannotschedulethepublichearinguntilallrequirementshavebeenmetandallrecommendations
havebeenfinalizedbytheCity’strafficconsultant. Sincerely, CindyMcCormick 4088681230 Cc:HexagonTrafficConsultants 155
1 Cynthia McCormick From: Cynthia McCormick Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 3:45 PM To: 'Juliahashemieh' Cc: 'duvonalex@yahoo.com' Subject: RE: traffic study comments for day care center
at 20398 Blauer Drive. Attachments: traffic study comments.pdf; incomplete letter (June).pdf; Incomplete Letter (April).pdf Julia – The Planning Director reviewed your application and
has indicated that he would be happy to meet with you once you do the following: 1) submit the items requested in April (see attached); and 2) submit notification forms for the other
two neighbors and address all neighbor’s concerns (see attached); and 3) propose a solution that meets the City’s parking requirements for day care centers (as discussed in staff’s comments
on the traffic study; also attached). Cindy 4088681230 156
June 24, 2009 To: Alex Du Von (applicant) CC: Julia Hashemieh Re: Conditional Use Permit Application status On April 9 2009, the City sent you a letter indicating that you would need
to submit additional information prior to deeming your application complete (see attachment). Staff has not yet received the following items: Title Report, Neighborhood Outreach forms
for two (2) of five (5) neighbors, Conditional Use Permit Findings, Photos of Site, and Hours of Operation. Please note that a “property profile” does not satisfy the requirement for
a copy of the title report. Please submit notification forms for 13035 Regan Lane (behind the property) and 12948 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (across the street). To date, two neighbors
have indicated concern with regard to potential traffic issues. One neighbor also indicated concern regarding potential noise impacts. The purpose of the City’s off-street parking regulations
is to alleviate or prevent shortage of off-street parking and insulate surrounding land uses from impact. The purpose of the traffic study is to review potential traffic and parking
issues. The traffic study may also help address neighbor concerns. According to the traffic study (submitted on June 23rd), the property does not have enough parking to accommodate the
number of students proposed. This would potentially result in spillover traffic into the adjacent shopping center and neighborhood. After meeting with the Planning Director, staff recommends
that you reduce the number of students and/or the number of employees, in accordance with the available parking (14 spaces). As indicated in previous correspondence, one parking space
is needed for each employee, and 0.34 parking spaces is needed for each student. Please be advised that the Community Development Department does not encourage shared parking because
it restricts the types of uses that the adjacent property owner can accommodate, given the reduced parking available for their use. The Planning Director would be happy to meet with
you once you submit the items requested in April, address the neighbor’s concerns, and propose a solution that meets the City’s parking requirements for day care centers (as discussed
in staff’s comments on the traffic study). Please feel free to contact me at (408) 868-1230 with any questions that you may have. Sincerely, Cynthia McCormick CITY OF SARATOGA 13777
FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 157
1 Cynthia McCormick From: Cynthia McCormick Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 4:29 PM To: 'Juliahashemieh' Subject: RE: day care center at 20398 Blauer Drive. Attachments: traffic study.doc
Julia– BeforeIcansendtheHexagonreporttoourtrafficconsultantforpeerreview(andconsiderationofyourproposal),we needtocollectthedepositandflat�
�feesfortheirreview.ThisdepositwasrequestedinMay(seeattached).Theletter wasoriginallyaddressed(andsent)toAlexDuVonwhoisstilltheprimaryapplicant
inourrecords. Ididnotrealizethatthefeeswerenotpaidyet,butIthinkwemayhaveputthefeecollectiononholdwhileyouwere workingwithHexagon.
Wewillnowneedtocollectthefeesifyouaremovingforwardwithoutthesurveyfrom Hexagon.The$2,500depositand$500flatfeewillneedtobecollectedregardl
essofthesurvey. Thanksforyourtime! Cindy 4088681230 158
September 17, 2009 To: Alex Du Von (applicant) CC: Julia Hashemieh RE: Public Hearing for Conditional Use Permit Dear Mr. Du Von and Ms. Hashemieh: The above referenced project has been
scheduled for a Site Visit and Public Hearing. Staff recommends that you are present at both the site visit and public hearing to answer questions. Please see the attachment regarding
what to expect during the site visit and Public Hearing. The Site Visit will occur at the subject property on Tuesday, October 13th between 3:30 and 5:00pm. The Public Hearing will commence
the following day, Wednesday, October 14th starting at 7:00 pm in the City Hall Theater, located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. The time the item will be heard will depend on other projects
on the agenda. IMPORTANT: 1) Please update the plans to indicate the total number of employees and students you propose. 2) Currently, the plans do not show any play equipment. I have
assumed that you will not have play equipment in the front yard of the building. If you intend to put play equipment in the front yard (which staff does not recommend), please indicate
so on the plans and provide details of the equipment (pictures and brochures with dimensions). 3) Please provide details (height, color, and materials) of the proposed fence, gate, and
bridge. Please provide me with the following no later than 2:00 pm Friday September 25th: 1 -Full size complete plan set; 24” x 36” (stapled /folded) 2 – Copies of the Site Plan
and Floor Plan; 24” x 36” for display (loose rolled sheets) 15 -Reduced size complete plans sets; 11” x 17” (3-hole punched, stapled, z-folded) The plans should include the items
above concerning the number of employees and students, clarification regarding the playground equipment, and details for the fence, gate, and bridge. Please feel free to contact me at
(408) 868-1230 with any questions that you may have. Sincerely, Cynthia McCormick CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVEN
159
1 Cynthia McCormick From: Cynthia McCormick Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:10 PM To: 'Juliahashemieh'; 'alexduvon@yahoo.com' Subject: next steps Attachments: Complete Letter.pdf;
Planning Commission meeting info.pdf Dear Mr. Du Von and Ms. Hashemieh: As discussed in our meeting on Tuesday, the above referenced project has been scheduled for a Site Visit and Public
Hearing. Staff recommends that you are present at both the site visit and public hearing to answer questions. Please see the attachment regarding what to expect during the site visit
and Public Hearing. The Site Visit will occur at the subject property on Tuesday, October 13th between 3:30 and 5:00pm. The Public Hearing will commence the following day, Wednesday,
October 14th starting at 7:00 pm in the City Hall Theater, located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. The time the item will be heard will depend on other projects on the agenda. IMPORTANT:
1) Please update the plans to indicate the total number of employees and students you propose. 2) Currently, the plans do not show any play equipment. I have assumed that you will not
have play equipment in the front yard of the building. If you intend to put play equipment in the front yard (which staff does not recommend), please indicate so on the plans and provide
details of the equipment (pictures and brochures with dimensions). 3) Please provide details (height, color, and materials) of the proposed fence, gate, and bridge. Please provide me
with the following no later than 2:00 pm Friday September 25th: 1 -Full size complete plan set; 24” x 36” (stapled /folded) 2 – Copies of the Site Plan and Floor Plan; 24” x 36”
for display (loose rolled sheets) 15 -Reduced size complete plans sets; 11” x 17” (3-hole punched, stapled, z-folded) The plans should include the items above concerning the number
of employees and students, clarification regarding the playground equipment, and details for the fence, gate, and bridge. Please feel free to contact me at (408) 868-1230 with any questions
that you may may have. Sincerely, Cynthia McCormick 160
161 '. . TENANT , IMPROVEMENT SARATOGA DAY CARE CENTER SYMBOLS (0 REFERENC.E NOTES -$-C.ONTROI... POINT 0 DOOR,5"l'l-'tBOL SEC. nON IDENTIFICA nON 5HEET REFERENC.E 0 SYMBOL..
® DeTAIL IDENTlflCATION SHEET REFERENc.e 0 FIXTURE TYPE INTERiOR ELEVATION &, &HEET REFERENce REVISION SYMBOL W Sl6NA6E ---PROPERTYLlNE I..INf ---FINISH C.ONTOURS
.; EXISTING BLAUER DRIVE, . SARATOGA CALIFORNIA . ASBFO:.EVIATIONS AS 6'T'P. 6D. GYPSUM SOARD AFf
ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR HDR HEADE>< AG AS>PHAl.. T CONCRETE HVAG HEATIN6vENTIL. .... TIOH4 AIR c.oNDITIOHIH6 AOJ. AO..lJSTABLE HO ' HOLDOI"tN BEARIN6 HG HOLLOi"l GORE.
ElM HM METAL BLK'6 BLoc..to=.IN6 LT. LI6HT B/T BET\"'I.EEN ... FR I'4AtoIUFAGTU12.ER GF .GOBIC-Fa;T MAX. MAXlHIIH GI G .... ... ,N.
MINIMUM GEl GATCH BA5J.N t<15G. MI$G.ELLANEOOS CLe:.. C.EILINc:. "'T. T. Moc.JNTI:D. MOUNT1).l6 GL GENTER LINE (N) NE)"{ COL CO"",," Hie NOT INCONTfl..ACT GONG. GONGRETE "T5 NOT n? 5(;.ALE
CONT. GONTINUOU'5 0/OVE!'< OIA DIAMeTER O.G-. ONG-ENTER 4> DIAMEreR PLYi"'iD_ PL'(}oO\OOD DElL DOJeLE PTDF PRE'5SVRE TREATED DaJ6LASPIR D5 " RADiUS OF D0U6LAS FIR
REQ\J1Fl.ED IE) EXJ'5TIN6 " .... ROO>< E .... EACH F:DriO. REDl<"iOOD ELEv. ELEVATION 5G '50UDCORE EG. EQUAL 5TL STEfL FOG F AGE Of CONCRETE SG. 5GlJARE FOM FACE OF MASONRY
Sr. SGUAREFEET F05 F,a..c.E Of STUD (OR !;,TEEL) THI<. THIGKNESS reI< TO SE REMOVED FF PINI'5HED FLOOR TOB TOP0i"6E.Ar.Jo.o( FI> F1NI'5H 6RADf: TO" TOPOPGl.IJil.6 FT"'. FooTIH($. To6
TONGUe AND 6Fl.OOVE 6A. 6A1J6E He · TOP"AND BOTTOM 6LU-LAM6UJE LAM[NATED TOP TOP OF PAV[N6 T5L TOP OF SLAB ""0 UNLESS NOTED OTHERI"IISE 1>5 6ALvAN1ZED STeEL .. .. 6. e. c.oNST;WZnO"'!:+I;..u
Be"I'" I"IlTH POou..oi"\lN6c.ooES·: C.JrolJFOftJoijA BULDlN6 c,ooe 2001 C.AUfORHlAE1..fC.TRlGA1.. GOoe GAl..If"ORf<l1A MEGHAHlG.AL cooe lOO1 GAUFOft"'IA
rlFt£ CODE: lOO'l G.AJ.JP. AOMltl c.ooe. TJTL.eS 1:J .l.. GAUfORfoolIA f"\....I.I)oo4B !t-'6 GOOE! 200' (..IT"( or SAtoiT A a.AR.A HVlilGP.AL c;..ooe ",FPA 101. I"!"! I tiFPA ""!.
NA"A 13, 1""6 UI'\!..E5S NOTED, A1.L DiMet-lSIOJo'SA.RE TO PAGE OF STUD, ROI.l6i'I GONGft.ETE Of' M....s.o",J2."",OIt aNTERLlNe
OF STEEl.. t-IOTIPT" AP.GHlTE!('..T ef;I"'OflE Al'IY tHAtoi6e lpot c.ot'5TFtlJG.TIOf'l PO NOT SGAl.E OFf' OF p.t0TlF'1" T IKMEOIA
TE1. Y Of" IN THe APPl.lGAt-iT RSr ASH AAGHiTeC. T OF R.ec,oRD OTtotEoR RI$POIolSIULE
EI"6I1'tef!:J=t. APPROVED BY THe 1lIE 6011-0[1-'6 OFFlGlAl.. TO THAT, ,,_ Al.L at-GON!:YrfWGTlON
eY' OOAWflEO DEf"\1T"( INflPeGTOPl5 BY n-JE OFFIGI}o.L e. AW.. c.oDE Df:FlGIENGl.e5 DETEG reo AND PEV!Jt, 1101-15
I"'p.QH r,.e APPROVED P\...Al'I5 ARe: 6Jt.01J6MT TO me ATTe"'T1O\'I Of' THE c.oRReGTlOfol. AND . It" HOT GOfUlfGTE'P. PES!6N$ TO OVfFtGOt-te n.e
OeFlGlfp.tGY SH....u.. & ARfO BY TI-IE P,Il.O..!f:CT ARCHfTeGr OR EH6INEER OF REGORD FOJt J,PPP.CVA1.. a" eIAL.D1t-160FF,c..w... G. AU. c;..oRRe:CTNE! 1"ICfU(. REGwtED GOJ-CPLETED
It-! WJTH PLAl'IS, SPfClFlc:.A noNS. "NO GfT'( GOOfS. THE C.AJ-lfORNIA Etu:Fl6Y c.oHSUtVATIOH ST"'PlDARD5 fOR 5IJLDlt-I$rSHAVE
BeE"" TWf 8UL0fN6 peSCRI6ED ON TH ese. P A6ES ts Sl)8ST .... HTlA1.. CONFORMANGe.. ALL POTElmAL THORGll.l6"'L'(
F.AHUARlZe n+:M5f:\..VES »UTH.J06 GONOIT1O+1So 9<ODI"'6 TO eJolSORE T ....... T TIo'E,( UNPe.RST ""ND TiE )'CORte.. ANY' GO"'DtTlONS ";HIGto4 AJlE: NOT
AFlE DIFFEReNT TIfAN BY COOE SE 6RO\.IGoftT TO THe ATTetlT[ON OF TO BlDD",,6 nte)o'(ORK SLISMITT
AI-DGGI)}.4EJrrl.T5 POFl DefeRReD 5IJBMITT AL e.e: StlBMJTTI!!':D TO ARGHlTeG T f!)oI6INeE.R Of' THf.M .AND
FORI"VVU' THEM TOnH! 5!.11..0I"'6 OFfIQA!.. "'OT ATiOH ''''DlGA TI"'6 THAT THE DEFeRReD SVBMIT'T AS.. DOGlIl-ffNT5 HAVE seeN ,AND THAT THEY H.AVe: eu",
POIND TO BE 11'1 6e"'E.RAL. c;..oNFOI'Q-iAHG!:: TNE DE5L6tt OF THe B\.lI...OIN6. THe DePfAAED $l..I6HITT SoHJr>U. NOT BE IS5T AU..eD IJNTL THe!ft DESI6tl AND
5t..16M[TTAl-HAVe. BEE'" H>PROVf.D 6'( THe BW..D1N6 0ff\GIAL.. LOGAT.otl5. c.L/:iARA",a Pn-IEIoIS.'OtI5 lITLlTY AU. eQUIPMENT S+fA\..L
ee c..QOP.DIl'tAreD """,P VERIFIED BY THE GONTRAC.TOR. ALL AO-COVER SHEET AI-SITE PLAN (EXlSTING & NEW) A2-EXlSTING FLOOR PLAN
AJ-NEW DAY CARE CENTER FLOOR PLAN PROPERTY INFORMATION LAND USE ZONE ---------PA APN---------------393-02.{)()5 PRESEND LAND USE ------ LAND AREA -.--2 1,780SF
BUILDING INFORMATION OCCUPANCY ------------E31B CCiNSTRUCTION TYPE -----------. V-ill I fIR STORIES---------·------------ONE BUlLDING AREA --------. 5,000 SF AREA OF INPROVEMENT ----.---2,000
SF lDA Y CARE CENTERI FIRE SPRINKLERS----------REQUlRED PARKING INFORMATION 14 SPACES HiJaO' ONEHC HiX21i REQUIRMENT I PER 6 CHILDREN UP TO 5 SPASCES & I PER 10 TIlERE AFTER Hours of
Operation: 7:00am to 6:00pm Monday to Friday Dayca re Staff: Capacity: 4 Teachers 1 Nurse 40 Children REVJBlONB BY a: UJ IZ W W > () a: w a: « () o o II: W .J !1l « (I)
C.9 OJ O ' M «r 0 (IJ a: « (J) \I) N OJ < ... 0<0 wd, (J)", ON "'ao Zo < ... UJ -COVER SHEET ORAWN I\D C .... ECK .. D ' 9 -00 BCALI! NONe .JOB NO. SHEBT j\O OF 5 8MEETS
162 Z <l:: C) UJ II RESIDENTIAL r iO f'-eDI'JcX>D TJ':!Z -t 60' NI I __ . _________ ___ __ "_. _ . __ _______ . _ . __ __ ____ _ . ____ __ ___ . _ _ .. ___
______ .. _____ __.. __. . ._ __ ____ _ _ _ ._ (E) I -------'171.54' J 6'REDYiotm FENCE 1/
/i (E) , : TRASH /f I ENClOURt;: i I . I I I I f I <e>·-II I /
I /t@)5' 1,' , I Wj (E), i @: \ · \ 1, �
� ii' II: 0 1 WATER StiOT-OF"F VALVE I ""1 /1 0 EJ 01 ' §l
' I , I I II /I @. \« 1/! i I! RESIDENTIAL ! I /I I I i j AC P ARKING PLANTING 1 (E) EXISTING PROFESSINAL BUILDING PROPOSED FOR DAY CARE CENTER 5,000 SF (E) PCANorlNG I i 'DI 1,,1 /'
, ENTRY . . I (E) PATIO up_ (E). PATIO W <IJ /! Ii ,-,' P (E) -0 --------�
� _\1.-, I 321 'I II 'I' ' .. . "
li'----i-,i---"-"------<'I-0y:;,TEM I ( -) . . . . SU/Z.=-r,:CS (rf:') 0) I COMMERCIAL I ! ; I ! I /I I ! , I ,I II II .
I I i I ! i i 1////I I II 0 .. :1C' J!**'0'2 _ 'I v : , 'ROD FENCE 1 :e:.Wr . * I u I--______________ �
�-_-_-_----_'--.:s-:::::::::=-=.l't
WAY l'jE.W LANOSCl'FE WATER METER N;:::1Aj I I .1 i I ( E ) L_______ 3,"116 SF. FlA, A"'-EA ------.-I BLAUER DRIVE COMMERERCIAL -TRACT
MAP DAY CARE S ITE P LAN I i -r--271.75' I 111'llllf 1 I 10 ' __
1l [ I ffi f N .. APN 393-2-005 SCALE' 1"= 20' RBVISIONS BY --_. ." Z ,-, a: '" 0 . ffi-" C : Vi c) . rn w (} "? ... -' W Z ' Z < ... Z a 0 u<O 11. • 1 :z: Z -'
w.., >-W· -' rn", w :! . 0'" Z > -'., z -'" Zo . ,. <" OJ . -.-U? . .----- N I (I) . (fj 0 II W ill > ' Ol ill UJ « 0 z () q
.-....J.. II N (f) ::::l co Cf) I-0 --Z I-II II W « W UJ I Z 0 (f) « 0co 0 0 Z _ . ..!":._-.J , ' ,- -r---II ill Z w 0 ill > I'-() II: 0 II) ill 0 en I«I II:
« () w () J « « « .J CJ 0 III 0 « Ieo « C) (» II: 0 (I) « 0 (J) « N II « Cf) SIT E FLAN DRAWN AD CHECKED DATE 4 -3G>--di .JOB NO. SHEET 1-\ I o. 5 S H e
ETS
163 PLAYGROUND PACKAGES .2 ---------------------_._--------_._----_...... .._---... _----------------_ .. _------/--------------(E) .(E) o ( E ) PLANT ING EXISTING PROFESSINAL BUILDING
PROPOSED FOR DAY CARE CENTER 5,000 SF ENTRY (E),PATIO BLAUER DRIVE (E)-PATIO sLAB NEVV PLAYGROUND PACKAGES D A Y CARE SITE PLAN CLIMBERS VARIETY MEDIEVAL CASTLE ! "
I ! I II N ___________ _ APN 393-2-005 SCALE: I II: 201 R EVISIONS B Y --.;.'..:.=-.. :--.. -.. a::: ill Z W 0 oill [> " 0 ill
0 II: [ ti, oct W () J« >-S (!) c0 t ... (1) 0 ct 00 o(!) OJ a: (I) « g (jJ a::: ct . CJ) SITe FLAN PLAYGROLND PAC Kf6 cS DRAWN AD CHECKED O AT_ <) -cA
.JO B N O . BHSI!:T ;\ 1.1) OF s SHEE TS . t-;
164 REVISIO NS BY 133I-0 ---- ----------
ai-a" 'Z.B'-d k , 7!qlJ ---------1-2-'--0 11 481-.0" s'-o' --------.-------_._----. __ .--' -.-. __ ._--! f\U ·(E) EJ L (E) I AC3 I AC2 AC1 ,I rYl C5 JcJ b-c
If I JANITO 7r-1l (E) = L!::::::==I CLOSET "----0 MECH.ROOM (E) "9 , (E) (E) (E) '(E)' (E) KITCHEN OFF r AC3 1 WOMEN [] [] MEN OFF EJ OFF I (E) B LOBBY (E) G 71lf\ r--1\
f1 f1 B JANITOR ( J\ c; J=1 s: =-.9 . HALL (E) (E)· HALL _._._------, \J I 0 ! =9 (E) I i V <:; " (E) (E) RECEPTIONIST OFfC (E) i OFF
'OFF i (E) OFF (E) (E)· I I OFF I---i , OFF I i_ ___ I --'" :'U"; en UJ 0 . 0> 0> ..J z · z . .... 0( ... 0.« >, J: w- ... w. .,
"' 0> W ::! ::; 0 '" z > -'., Z 0> 2 0 W 0 ... 0('" :-C";I -."? . ... .. --'-..... :l:c-N (') c/) 0 a: ill II) > ' (j) ill ill ( 0 Z 0 0 ..J a: N til « I-0
--Cf) Z I-a: 0: IU < ill ill r (!) z 0 til (0 <C 0 0 0 Z J I--.. _._. -. ..... , _.' a: ill (E) (E) (E) :d. I 'OFF OFF (lFIjC I (E) I OFF J \Jl (E) I LOBBY
--1= (E) (E) 'OFF I OFF (E) Ii I I I (E) (E) "OFF ==== ; I OFF OFF = -= , IAJ I I , II ,-'I ! 'ki i \j I J I l i r I I 1.0'-9' I 1'2
J 2 1'-9 11 ! 26-9" 5'-a" " > ;Y -J IZ w 0 ill > i' 0 [ 0 ill ill 0 (j) a: <t: [ <i 0 w 0 >-J ( ( <t: J 0 !)l 0 « I-(9 <0 (j) 0: 0 (') <{ «t-NO til a: <C Cf) -1=')'J5TING FLaJR
FCI\N m'-o' .. _ .. _--_._-_.--._-_._--_._----------_._-_._._----_._--------------_ .... _. __ ._----------------WALL KEY: D R AWN EXlSTTING WALLS TO REMAIN t'O CHECK ED <:::: =:
= =::l EXlSTING WALLS TO REMOVE OATE NEW 2X4 WALLS "1--000"1 ====111 NEW2X6WALLS
.JOB NO. (E) EXlSITlNG N S HEET (N) NEW 10\ 2 -EXISTING FLOOR PLAN APN 393-2-005 005 OF S SHEETS
165 8 t ou 1-6'_'11 11'-0 11 1 I i 12.'-0" '1'-(,,' l DROP OFF (E) t NEVV DAY CARE CENTER
FLOOR PLAN · 9'-9" 13'-0' , 10'-0-1 8'-0" 1 I I I 0 1 I ' i-n ,! 1 VeE) et) 3070 'OTOF< FMNr GLASS WJ\LL. r-(E) I I I J (E) COL II D -.. --..
_ _ _ _ ___--_-_-_ .1,: •l ==='" EXISTIING WALLS TO REMAIN "'::.: ===:, EXISTING WALLS TO REMOVE ____ NEW 2X4 WALLS N '''II' NEW 2X6 WALLS (E)
EXISITlNG ________________________________ • -APN 393-2-005 REVISIONS BY -'1 '" Z .r a:. a: N 0 UJ 0 '" UJ 0 :£.' '.".. -w' z z « .. z B 0 (!)<D !l. ' ,
J: Z Wee UJ · -' en", I--' W -' i 0'" z :; ..,,,, z U '" ZO UJ .-.. ..,,, M --W -_. "." ... --.... --'----f-N ::c (') , (j) a a: w I{) > ' (J) W W r: . 4: 0 Z 0
() :::! a: N I/J :J « f-0 (() --.. (j) Z I-a: cc w 4: w w r z 0 I/J « <0D 0 0 z . 1:. .J f--..... _--a: w f-Z ill 0 W > I'-0 [ 0 w 0 I{) cc OJ « [ 4: 0 ill () >-J 4: «
.J (9 0 Ql 0 <! fro « (9 (J) [ 0 (') 4: f-a (j) « N a: <! (j) NtoW DAY CAf'. FLOOR PLAN ORAWN f',t;:J CHECKIiD DATE 4-3<209 on .JOB N O. S HEET OF ::; SHEETS
166 ...... A CONSUlTANTS, INC. Date: To: From: June 18, 2009 Nader Sarveresth Gary Black Massimo LoPorto Memorandum
m1 JUN L 3 2009 ill) CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Subject: Site Access, Circulation and Parking Study for the Proposed Daycare Facility located at 20398 Blauer
Drive in Saratoga, California Hexagon Transportation Consultants has completed a site access, circulation, and parking study for the proposed daycare facility located at 20398 Blauer
Drive in Saratoga, California. The proposed project site is located approximately 300 feet east of the Saratoga Sunnyvale Road/Blauer Drive intersection, on the south side of Blauer
Drive. The project proposes to reoccupy the former real estate office building and would serve up to 80 students with up to 10 employees. The existing building is approximately 5,000
square feet (s.f.) and sits approximately 25 feet back from Blauer Drive. The site is accessed by two driveways joined by a one-way circulation aisle providing access to a 14-space parking
lot. The site location is shown on Figure I. The purpose of this study is to satisfy the requirements of the City of Saratoga by identifying any site access, circulation and parking
deficiencies ofthe proposed project. The study identifies the site's existing conditions, estimates the number of vehicle trips and parking generation due to the proposed project, compares
the project conditions to the requirements ofthe City of Saratoga, and draws conclusions peliaining to the suitability of the project site for the project's trip generation and parking
generation. Existing Conditions The project site is located on a parcel adjacent to an occupied office complex. The on-site traffic circulation is one-way. Inbound traffic enters the
site at the westernmost driveway, and outbound traffic exits the site at the easternmost driveway. Both driveways are 32 feet wide (see Figure 2). Saratoga Sunnyvale Road is a four-lane
divided aJierial with median breaks for left-turn access lanes in the vicinity ofthe project site. Saratoga Sunnyvale Road has bicycle lanes in both directions. The Saratoga Sunnyvale
Road/Blauer Drive intersection is signalized with left-turn lanes on all approaches and has protected left-turn phasing. Blauer Drive is two-lane local street that begins at Saratoga
Sunnyvale Road and continues east where it changes its designation to Chateau Drive. Blauer Drive provides access to the project site and forms the nOlihern project boundary. Blauer
Drive has a 25-foot westbound left-turn pocket that serves the inbound traffic for the project site. 40 South Market Street, Suite 600 • San Jose, California 95113 phone 408.971.6100
• fax 408.971.6102 • www.hextrans.com
167 LEGEND i:::::::::::::IIII = Site Location ., = Study Intersection Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Blauer Dr ... .... .... ... .. .. .. . .. . . . .. . . ... . .
. . . . ... Chateau Dr @NORTH Figure 1 SITE LOCATION AND STUDY INTERSECTION 20398 Blauer Dr Day Care
168 Figure 2 Hexagon SITE PLAN Transportation Consultants, Inc. 20398 Blauer Dr Day Care
169 Mr. Nader Sarveresth June 18, 2009 Page 40f9 Manual peak hour turning movement counts were conducted at the intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Blauer Dri ve. These counts
are included in Appendix A of this repOit. Level of Service Analysis Traffic conditions at the study intersection were evaluated using level of service (LOS). Level of Service is a qualitative
description of operating conditions ranging from LOS A, or free-flow conditions with little or no delay, to LOS F, or jammed conditions with excess ive delays. The various analysis methods
are described be low. The City of Saratoga uses the Santa Clara County CMP level of service methodology, TRAFFJX, for evaluation of signalized intersection s. TRAFFIX is based on the
2000 Highway Capacity Manual (2000 HCM) method for signalized intersections. TRAFFIX eva luates signalized intersection operations on the basis of average control delay time for all
veh icles at the intersection. Control delay is the amount of de lay that is attributed to the palt icular traffic control device at the intersection, and includes initia l deceleration
delay, queue move-up time, stopped de lay, and final acceleration delay. The correlation between average de lay and level of service is shown in Table 1. Table 1 Signalized Intersection
Level of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay Level of Service A B C D E F Description Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle lengths.
Operations with low delay occurring with good prog ression and/or short cycle lengths. Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual
cycle failures begin to appear. Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high VIC ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual
cycle failures are noticeable. Operations with high delay va lues indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high VIC ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.
This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to oversaturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths.
Average Control Delay Per Vehicle (Sec.) Up to 10.0 10.1 to 20.0 20.1 to 35.0 35.1 to 55.0 55. 1 to 80.0 Greater than 80.0 Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity
Manual , (Washington , D.C. , 2000).
170 ]vIr. Nader Sarveresth June 18, 2009 Page 5 0/9 Levels of Service U nde .. Existing Conditions The existing counts at the intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Blauer Drive
were used to ca lculate existing levels of serv ice. The intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Blauer Drive currently operates at acceptable levels of service during both peak
hours (see Table 2). The level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix B of this repo11. Table 2 Level of Service Summary Existing Existing + Project Peak Count Avg. Avg.
Change in Intersection Hour Date Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay /a/Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. and Blauer Dr. AM 6/11/09 9.6 A 10 .9 B+ +1.3 PM 6/11/09 13.9 B 15 .3 B +1.4 Notes: /a/Change in
delay is measured relative to Existing CondITions. Trip Generation Estimates Through empirical research, data have been collected that corre late to common land uses their propensity
for producing traffic. Thus, for the most common land uses there are standard trip generation rates that can be applied to he lp predict the future traffic increases that would result
from a new development. Hexagon has prepared a project trip estimate based on trip generation rates obtained from fTE 's Trip Generation, Eighth Edition. The trip generation estimates
concentrate on the AM and PM peak hours of traffic. These occur between the hours of7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM, respective ly. Utilizing the ITE trip generation rates,
it is estimated that the proposed daycare facility would generate 64 trips in the AM peak hour and 66 trips in the PM peak hour (see Table 3). The vehicle trips would consist of employee
trips and parents and caregivers briefly parking in order to assist the ir children with entering and exiting the daycare facility. The average parking duration would be a few minutes.
It was assumed that al l the project-generated traffic would originate from Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and not from the residential neighborhood to the east of the project site. There are
no major thoroughfares to the east of the project site, and it is not anticipated that the proj ect would create cut-through traffic through the ne ighborhood. It is possible that some
neighborhood residents would use the daycare facility, but their trips would not be considered cut-through traffic because they would originate in the neighborhood. The trip distribution
pattern for proj ect-generated traffic \vas estimated based on traffic patterns at the Saratoga Sunnyvale Road/Blauer Drive intersection. Based on the turning movements at this intersection,
37% of the project traffic would travel to/from the north and 63% would travel to/from the south on Saratoga Sunnyvale Road. Levels of Service Under Existing Plus Project Conditions
With the addition of project-generated traffic, the intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Blauer Drive would operate at acceptable leve ls of service during both peak hours (see
Table 2). The level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix B of this repo11.
171 Mr. Nader Sarveresth June 18, 2009 Page 6 0/9 Table 3 Project Trip Generation Estimate AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Size Rate /a/In Out Total Rate /a/In Day Care Center fb/80
children 0. 80 34 30 64 0.82 31 Notes: lal Rates expressed in trips per child. Ibl Trip generation rates for Day Care Center (lTE Land Use #565) used for the project. Source of Trip
Generation Rates: ITE Trip Generation, 8th Edition. Site Access, Circulation and Parking Out Total 35 66 The s ite access, c irculation, and parking ana lys is were based upon fie ld
surveys of the proj ect s ite conducted on June 16, 2009. Site Access The proj ect would ut ilize the existing one-way driveways on th e s ite that connect to Blauer Drive. The westernmost
driveway serves inbound traffi c and the easternmost driveway serves outbound traffi c. Both driveways are 32 feet wide. Due to the re latively low vo lume of traffic travelin g on Blauer
Drive, the exist ing entrance and exit driveways would be adequate for the project. Site Circulation Parking on th e s ite is provided on th e southern and eastern perim eter. The southern
perimeter has a row of 9 parking spaces (one handicapped sta ll ), and the eastern perimeter has a row of 5 parking sta ll s. The parking spaces are oriented at 90-degrees to the drive
ai s le and are 10 feet in width and 20 feet in length. Suffic ient room for vehic le turning and maneuvering is prov ided in the parking lot. Emergency Vehicle and Truck Access The
exist ing site was checked for emergency vehicle and truck access using truck turning movement templates SU-3 0, representing small and medium-s ize trucks, and WB-40, representing semi-trailer
trucks. The existing Blauer Drive site access driveways would permit access to SU-30 and WB-40 trucks, such as delivery vehicles and small emergency vehic les . However, the drive aisle
in the rear of the s ite would not be able to accommodate the turning radii of these trucks. Due to the relatively limited number of de livery items requi red for the proposed project
use, temporary parking fo r SU-30 and WB-40 trucks for load ing could be accommodated on the project fro ntage on Blauer Drive. Parking Supply and Demand From numerous parking studies
conducted across the countlY, data have been collected that correlate parking generation to common land uses. Hexagon has prepared a project parki ng generation est imate based on ITE's
Parking Generation, Third Edition, 2004. It should be ment ioned that our prev ious experience with working on daycare centers in Saratoga is that th e City prefers the 85th percentile
be used for parking generation . Thus, the parking generation estimates are based on the 85th percentile rate.
172 Mr. Nader Sarveresth June 18, 2009 Page 7 0/9 Based on ITE parking generation rates, the peak parking demand would be 27 parking stalls (see Table 4). The proj ect site plan shows
a total of 14 parkin g spaces. Thus, the project site would be defi cient by 13 parking spaces. This parking defi ciency could create spillover to the adjacent property or onto Blauer
Drive. The project frontage on Blauer Drive could accommodate four parked cars. If the four parking spaces available on the frontage on Blauer Drive were considered on-site parking,
the parking defi ciency would be reduced from 13 parking spaces to 9 parking spaces. Adj acent to the project site on the west is a 4,000 s.f. office complex with 25 parking spaces.
Although the spaces are for private use only, some daycare parents may dec ide to park illega lly. The tenants in the adjacent office complex may complain if this were to occur, and
it should not be assumed by the project applicant that parking on this property for the daycare center would would be permitted. Based on ITE parking generati on rates, the peak parking
demand for th e adjacent office complex is 14 parking spaces. As mentioned above, thi s office complex has 25 parkin g spaces. Therefore, this complex may have a parking surplus of I
I parkin g spaces. An arrangement may be able to be made between the project applicant and the adjacent office complex to lease th e 9 add itional paring spaces required for the daycare
center. If an arrangement cannot be made between the proj ect applicant and the property owner of the adj acent office complex to lease additional parkin g spaces, the proj ect would
need to serve a reduced number of children. Using the ITE 85th percent ile parking rate for the daycare center, the project would need to reduce the number of children it serves by 40,
for a total of up to 40 children, to stay within the 14 parking spaces supplied on-s ite. If the four parking spaces on the project frontage on Blauer Drive were considered on-site parking,
the daycare could serve up to 52 children. Table 4 Parking Generation Estimate Parking Use/Capacity Day Care Center fb/Parking Spaces Provided On-Site /d Size Units Rate /a/Parking Spaces
80 children 0.34 27 14 Number of Deficient Pa rking Spaces -13 Notes: lal Rates expressed in terms of parking spaces per child. Ibl Parking generation rates for Day Care Center (ITE
Land-Use Code #565) used for the proj ect. Icl Number of parking spaces provided on-site obtained from project site plan dated April 30, 2009. Source for rates: ITE Parking Generation,
3rd Edition , 2004 . Pedestrian and Bicycle Access and Circulation With the exception ofa sma ll portion, Blauer Drive does not have sidewalks on e ither side of the street. The proj
ect site plan does not indi cate that a sidewalk would be built with the proposed project. The adjacent properties and the ne ighborhood to the east of the project site do not have sidewalks.
It is not recommended that the proj ect appli cant construct a sidewalk on the project frontage because there is no sidewalk network to connect to. Al so, the project is expected to
generate only a minimal amount of pedestrian traffi c.
173 Mr. Nader Sarveresth June 18, 2009 Page 8 0/9 Crosswa lks with pedestrian pushbuttons and signal heads are present at the Saratoga Sunnyvale Road/Blauer Drive intersection. Sidewalks
are present on both sides of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road. Bicycle lanes are present in both travel directions on Saratoga Sunnyvale Road. Conclusions The intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale
Road and Blauer Drive currently operates at acceptable leve ls of service and wou ld continue to operate at acceptable levels with the addition of project-generated traffic. The proposed
project would generate 64 AM and 66 PM peak hour vehicle trips. The proposed project would generate the need for 27 parking spaces, creating a parking deficiency of 13 parking spaces.
The maximum number of children that the project could serve with the existing on-site parking supply would be 40 children. The daycare could serve 52 children ifthe four parking spaces
on the project frontage on Blauer Drive were considered on-site parking. The adjacent office complex immediately west of the project site may have a parking surp lus and may be wi lling
to lease the 9 addit ional required parking spaces for the proposed daycare. It is recommended that the project applicant contact the propeliy owner of the office to discuss the potential
for leas ing parking spaces for the proposed daycare center.
174 20398 Blauer Drive Daycare Technical Appendices June 18, 2009
175 Appendix A Traffic Count Data
176 AM Peak-Hour Volume Count Worksheet Date: 6/11/09 Counter: Patti and Ron Intersection Name: Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. and Blauer Saratoga Weather: Clear 09ML01 Start Time 7:00 7:15
7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00 Peak Hour 7:00 -8:00 7:15 -8:15 7:30 -8:30 7:45-8:45 8:00 -9:00 Peak Volumes: Cut and Paste Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right 0 0
0 0 0 0 North Approach Thru 0 24 57 87 160 254 341 410 473 Thru 160 230 284 323 313 313 Q) o" z Left 0 3 4 8 10 14 23 32 38 Left 10 11 19 24 28 28 EI 81 Total Right 0 0 27 12
61 24 95 42 170 53 268 78 364 123 442 136 511 160 Total Right 170 53 241 66 303 99 347 94 341 107 341 107 N 0 N I Blauer Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd East Approach South Approach
Thru Left Total Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 22 12 104 0 0 19 43 19 234 0 0 26 68 29 398 0 0 40 93 36 549 1 0 56 134 54 730 1 0 75 198 76 931 2 0 89 225 102 1,152 3 0 106 266 120
1,324 3 Thru Left Total Right Thru Left 0 40 93 36 549 1 0 46 112 42 626 1 0 56 155 57 697 2 0 63 157 73 754 3 0 66 173 84 775 2 0 66 173 84 775 2 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Out ill Total
882 341 1,223 Right Thru Left 0 313 28 a • .a... . 0 0 0 Ii m m 2 775 84 Left Thru Right 379 861 1,240 Out ill Total Total Right 0 0 116 0 253 0 427 0 586 0 785 0 1,009
0 1,257 0 1,447 0 Total Right 586 0 669 0 756 0 830 0 861 0 861 0 'c"o Ii U1 ..... 1:;-w '" AUTO-CENSUS Traffic Monitoring and Analysis 870 Castlewood Dr. #1 Los
Gatos, CA 95032 Phone 408-826-9673 Fax 408-877-1625 None West Approach Thru III iii' " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (eft ---Total
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PK Hour 849 1,022 1,214 1,334 1,375 1,375
177 PM Peak-Hour Volume Count Worksheet Date: 6/11 /09 Counter: Patti ana Kon Intersection Name: :saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. and Blauer Saratoga Weather: Clear 09ML01 -_._ ------.. -. _--.
. _. _._-_. --------_ ..... _--.. _. North Approach East Approach South Start Time Right Thru Left Total Right Thru Left Total Right Thru Left Total 4:00 a 0 a a
a a a a a a a a 4:15 a 152 8 160 22 a 29 51 12 88 a 100 4:30 a 306 28 334 41 0 63 104 32 224 0 256 4:45 a 503 43 546 53 0 116 169 49 319 0 368 5:00 0 709 55 764 67 a 160 227 59 447 a
506 5:15 0 890 61 951 87 a 210 297 72 549 1 622 5:30 a 1,097 68 1,165 97 a 267 364 85 667 2 754 5:45 a 1,360 78 1,438 108 a 316 424 100 782 3 885 6:00 0 1,592 88 ... __ 1138O _ 122 a
354 476 115 889 -3 1,007 Peak Hour Right Thru Left Total Right Thru Left Total Right Thru Left Total 4:00 -5:00 a 709 55 764 67 a 160 227 59 447 a 506 4:15 -5:15 a 738 53 791 65 a 181
246 60 461 1 522 4:30 -5:30 a 791 40 831 56 a 204 260 53 443 2 498 4:45 -5:45 0 857 35 892 55 a 200 255 51 463 3 517 5:00 -6:00 a 883 33 916 55 a 194 249 56 442 3 501 Peak Volumes: a
883 33 916 55 a 194 249 56 442 3 501 Cut and Paste Q) <: o Z .=1 81
M 0 M 0 0 0 .--y-. .. -Out ill Total 497 916 1,413 Right Thru Left ° 883 33 C1> i w <4> C1> w '" 0 '..".. CD C...D. Ii C'"D 3 442 56 Left Thru Right 1,077
501 1,578 Out ill Total Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. Right a a a a a a a a a Right a a a 0 a ° 1:;- AUTO-CENSUS Traffic MOnitoring and Analysis 870 Castlewood Dr. #1 Los Gatos,
CA 95032 Phone 408-826-9673 Fax 408-877-1625 ' 0_ " -West A 3proach Thru .to, <: !!l a a a a a a a a a Thru a a a a a ° Left a a a a a a a a a Left a a a a a ° Total a a a a a a a a
a Total PK Hour a 1,497 a 1,559 a 1,589 a 1,664 a 1,666 ° 1,666
178 Appendix B Intersection Level of Service Calculations
179 COMPARE Tue Jun 1609:51:47 2009 20398 Blauer Drive Day Care Saraloga, CA Hexagon Transportalion Consullanls, Inc. Level Of Service Compulalion Report 2000 HCM Operalions (Fulure
Volume Allernative) Exisling (AM) Intersection #1: Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd and Blauer Dr Final Vol: o o o Lanes: o o o o o Signal=ProtecURights=lnciude Final Vol: 0 313 28'" Lanes: 0 0
2 0 Signal=Protect Rights= lnclude j----. =t Lanes: Final Vol: Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec): Loss Time (sec): Critical VIC: Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): Avg Delay (sec/veh):
6/11/2009 100 9 0.322 9.6 9.6 LOS: A 1 0 o 2 84 Signal=ProtecURights= lnciude Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap J.-+-} Lanes: o o o Final Vol: o 66 Street Name : Saratoga Sunnyvale
Rd Blauer Dr Approach : North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1
Min . Green : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R : 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1
1---------------1 Volume Module : » Count Date : 11 Jun 2009 « Base Vol : 2 775 84 28 313 0 Growth Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 Initial Bse : 2 775 84 28 313 0 Added
Vol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut : 2 775 84 28 313 0 User Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF
Volume : 2 775 84 28 313 0 Reduct Vol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 1. 00 1. 00 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 o 0 o 0 o 1. 00 o o o o 1. 00 1. 00 o o 66 0 1.00 1.00 66 0 o 0 o 0 66
0 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 66 0 o 0 107 1. 00 107 o o 107 1. 00 1. 00 107 o Reduced Vol : 2 775 84 28 313 0 0 0 0 66 0 107 PCE Adj : 1 . 00 1.00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .
00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 MLF Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 FinalVolume : 2 775 84 28 313 0 0 0 0 66 0 107 ------------1--------------
-1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module : Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment : 0.92 0 . 98 0 . 95
0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 Lanes : 1 . 00 1 . 80 0 . 20 1 . 00 2 . 00 0 . 00 0.00 0 .0 0 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 Final Sat .: 1750 3338 362 17503800
0 0 0 0 1750 0 1750 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module : Vol/Sat : 0 . 00 0 . 23 0 . 23 0 . 02 0 . 08 0 . 00
0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 04 0 . 00 0 . 06 Crit Moves : Green Time : Volume/Cap : Delay/Veh : User OelAdj : AdjDel/Veh : LOS by Move : HCM2k95thQ : **** 1.1 72 . 0 0 . 11 0.32 51.6 5
. 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 51.6 5.2 D-A o 10 72 . 0 0 . 32 5 . 2 1. 00 5 . 2 A 10 **** 5 . 0 75 . 9 0.32 0 . 11 48 . 0 3 . 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 48 . 0 3 . 2 D A 3 3 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0
A o 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 1. 00 1. 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 A A o 0 Note : Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. 0.0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0 A o 14 . 0 0 . 0 0.27 0 .
00 39 . 0 0 . 0 1.00 1. 00 39 . 0 0 . 0 o A 4 0 **** 19 . 0 0 . 32 35 . 5 1. 00 35 . 5 D+ 7 Page 3·1 Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon
Trans., San Jose
180 COMPARE Tue Jun 1609:51:472009 20398 Blauer Drive Day Care Saratoga, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume
Alternative) Existing (PM) Intersection #1: Saratoga Sunnyva le Rd and Blauer Dr Final Vol: o o o Lanes: o o o o o Final Vol: Lanes: Signal=Protect Rights= lnclude j-----..t. =f Lanes:
Final Vol: Signal=ProtecURights=lnciude o 883-' 33 Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec): Loss Time (sec): Critical VIC : Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): Avg Delay (sec/veh): 6/11 /2009 100 9 0.379
13.4 13.9 LOS: B 1 0 o 3'" 442 56 Signal=ProtecURights= lnclude Signal=Protect Rights=Overiap .J..--r Lanes: o o o Final Vol: 55 o 194'" Street Name : Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Blauer
Dr Approach : North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min
. Green : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R : 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1
Volume Module : » Count Date : 11 Jun 2009 « Base Vol : 3 442 56 33 883 a a a a 194 a 55 Growth Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .
00 Initial Bse : 3 442 56 33 883 0 0 0 0 194 0 55 Added Vol : 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut : 3 442 56 33 883 0 0 0 0 194 0 55 User Adj :
1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Adj : 1 . 00 1.00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Volume
: 3 442 56 33 883 0 0 0 0 194 0 55 Reduct Vol : a a 0 0 a a a a a a a 0 Reduced Vol : 3 442 56 33 883 a a a a 194 a 55 PCE Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .
00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 MLF Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 FinalVolume : 3 442 56 33 883 a a a a 194 0 55 ------------1--------------
-1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane : 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment : 0 .92 0 .98 0 . 95 1900 1900 0 . 92 1. 00 1900 0 . 92 1900 1900
0 . 921.00 1900 0 . 92 1900 1900 0 . 921.00 1900 0 . 92 Lanes : 1 . 00 1 . 77 0 .23 1 . 00 2 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 Final Sat .: 1750 3284 416 1750 3800
0 0 a 0 1750 a 1750 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module : Vol/Sat : 0 . 00 0 .13 0 . 13 0 . 02 0 . 23 0 . 00
0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 11 0 , 00 0 . 03 Crit Moves : Green Time : Volume/Cap : Delay/Veh : User DelAdj : AdjDel/Veh : LOS by Move : HCM2k95thQ : **** 0 . 5 54 . 2 0 . 38 0 . 25 77.4
12 . 2 1. 00 1. 00 77.4 12 . 2 E-B 1 8 54.2 0 . 25 12.2 1. 00 12 . 2 B 8 **** 7.6 61 . 3 0 . 25 0 . 38 44.5 9 . 9 1. 00 1. 00 44 . 5 9 . 9 D A 3 13 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0 A a
0 . 0 0 . 0 0.00 0 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 1. 00 1. 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 A A o a Note : Queue reported is the number of cars per lane . 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0 A a *** * 29 . 2 0 . 0 0 . 38
0 . 00 28 . 6 0 . 0 1. 00 1. 00 28 . 6 0 . 0 C A 10 a 36 . 8 0 . 09 20 . 7 1. 00 20 . 7 C+ 2 Page 3-2 Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon
Trans., San Jose
181 COMPARE Tue Jun 1609:51:47 2009 20398 Blauer Drive Day Care Saratoga, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Fulure
Volume Alternative) Existing + Proj (AM) Intersection #1: Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd and Blauer Dr Final Vol: o o o Lanes: o o o o o Signal=ProlecURights= lnclude Final Vol: 0 313 41 "· Lanes:
0 0 2 0 Signal=Protect Righls= lnclude j- r Lanes: Final Vol: Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec): Loss Time (sec): Critical VIC. Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): Avg Delay
(sec/veh): 6/1112009 100 9 0.341 10.5 10.9 LOS: B+ 1 0 1 775"· o 2 105 Signal=ProtecURights=lnclude Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap -t. J-+-r Lanes: o o o Final Vol: 118 o 85'·· Street
Name : Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Blauer Dr Approach : North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L T R L T R
L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min . Gree n : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R : 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0
4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module : » Count Date : 11 J un 2009 « Base Vol : 2 775 84 28
313 0 0 0 0 66 0 107 Growth Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 Initi al Bse : 2 775 84 28 313 0 0 0 0 66 0 107 Added Vol : 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proj . Trips : 0 0 21 13 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 11 Initial Fut : 2 775 105 41 313 0 0 0 0 85 0 118 User Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .
00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Vo l ume : 2 775 105 41 313 0 0 0 0 85 0 118 Reduct Vo l : 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol : 2 775 105 41 313 0 0 0 0 85 0 118 PCE Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 MLF Adj : 1 . 00 1
. 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 Final Vo l ume : 2 775 105 41 313 0 0 0 0 85 0 118 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1
1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module : Sat/Lane : 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment : 0 . 92 0 . 98 0 . 95 0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 0 . 92 1 . 00
0 . 92 0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 Lanes : 1 . 00 1 . 75 0 . 25 1 . 00 2 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 Final Sat .: 1750 3258 441 l7503800 0 0 0 0 1750 0 1750 ------------1----------
-----1 1---------------1 1---------------·1 1---------------1 Capac i ty Anal ysis Module : Vo l /Sat : 0 . 00 0 . 24 0 . 24 0 . 02 0 . 08 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 05 0 . 00 0
. 07 Crit Moves : Green Ti me : Volume/Cap : Delay/Veh : User DelAdj : AdjDel/Ve h : LOS by Move : HCM2k95thQ : **** l.169 . 9 0 . 11 0 . 34 5l.6 6 . 0 1. 00 1. 00 51.6 6 . 0 D-A o 11
69 . 9 0 . 34 6 . 0 1. 00 6 . 0 A 11 **** 6 . 9 75 . 7 0 . 34 0 . 11 46 . 1 3 . 2 1. 00 1. 00 46 . 1 3 . 2 D A 3 3 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0 A o 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 0
0 . 0 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 A A o 0 Note : Queue reported is the numbe r of cars per lane . 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0 A o **** 14 . 3 0 . 0 0 . 34 0 . 00 39 . 4 0 . 0 1. 00
1. 00 39 . 4 0 . 0 D A 6 0 21.1 0 . 32 33 . 8 1. 00 33 . 8 C-7 Page 3·3 Traff ix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed 10 Hexagon Trans., San Jose
182 COMPARE Tue Jun 1609:51:472009 20398 Blauer Drive Day Care Saratoga, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operalions (Future Volume
Alternative) Existing + Proj (PM) Intersection #1: Saratoga Sunnyva le Rd and Blauer Dr Final Vol: o o o Lanes: o o o o o Signal=ProtectJRights=lnciude Final Vol: 0 883'" 44 Lanes: 0
0 2 0 1 Signal=Protect Rights= lnclude J- ---JI!o-r Lanes: Final Vol: Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec): Loss Time (sec): Critical VIC: Avg Crit Del (seclveh): Avg Delay
(seclveh): 6/11 /2009 100 9 0.393 14.4 15.3 LOS: 8 1 0 o 3'" 442 76 Signal=ProtectJRights=lnclude Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap .J..--r Lanes: o o o Final Vol: 68 o 216'" Street
Name : Saratoga Sunnyva le Rd Blauer Dr Approach : No r th Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1 ---------------1 1---------------11---------------1
1 ---------------1 Mi n , Green : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4 , 0 4 , 0 4 . 0 4 , 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 , 0 4 . 0 4 , 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1
1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module : » Count Date : 11 Jun 2009 « Ba s e Vo 1 : 3 442 56 33 883 0 0 0 0 1 94 0 55 Growth Ad j : 1 , 00 1 . 00 1 , 00 1 . 00 1 , 00 1 .
00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 , 00 1 , 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 In i tia l Bse : 3 442 56 33 883 0 0 0 0 194 0 55 Added Vol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proj . Trips : 0 0 20 11 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 13 I nit i
a l Fut : 3 442 76 44 883 0 0 0 0 216 0 68 User Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1. 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00
1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Volume : 3 442 76 44 883 0 0 0 0 216 0 68 Reduct Vol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vo l : 3 442 76 44 883 0 0 0 0 216 0 68 PCE
Ad j : 1. 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 MLF Adj : 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1. 00
FinalVolume : 3 442 76 44 883 0 0 0 0 21 6 0 68 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturat i on Flow Module : Sat/Lane : 1900 1900 1900
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment : 0 . 92 0 . 98 0 . 95 0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 0 . 92 1 . 00 0 . 92 Lanes : 1 . 00 1 . 70 0 . 30 1 . 00 2 .
00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 Fi nal Sat .: 1750 3157 543 1750 3800 0 0 0 0 1750 0 1750 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1
Capac ity Analys i s Module : Vol/Sat : 0 . 00 0 . 14 0 . 14 0 , 03 0 . 23 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 12 0 . 00 0 , 04 Crit Moves : **** Green Ti me : Volume/Cap : Delay/Veh : User
DelAdj : AdjDel/Veh : LOS by Move : HCM2k9 5t hQ: 0 . 4 50 . 5 0 . 39 0 . 28 79 . 9 14 . 3 1. 00 1. 00 79 . 9 14 . 3 E-B 1 9 50 . 5 0 . 28 14 . 3 1. 00 14 . 3 B 9 **** 9 . 1 59 . 1 0
. 28 0 . 39 43 . 4 11 . 0 1. 00 1. 00 43 . 4 11 . 0 D B+ 3 14 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0 A o 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 1. 00 1. 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 A A o 0 Note : Queue re
ported is the number of cars per lane . 0 . 0 0 . 00 0 . 0 1. 00 0 . 0 A o **** 31.4 0 . 0 0 . 39 0 . 00 27 . 3 0 . 0 1. 00 1 . 00 27 . 3 0 . 0 C A 11 0 40 . 5 0 . 10 18 . 5 1. 00 18
. 5 B-3 Page 3·4 Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates. Inc Licensed to Hexagon Trans , San Jose
Memorandum Date: September 10, 2009 To: Cindy McCormick From: Massimo LoPorto Subject: Parking Generation Ratios for the Proposed Daycare at 20398 Blauer Drive in Saratoga, California
Hexagon completed a traffic and parking analysis for the proposed daycare center at 20398 Blauer Drive in Saratoga, California. Please note that the parking ratio used in the analysis
to estimate parking demand includes both parent and employee parking. 183 ,... ...... ......... [lAGON liON ( ONIUl TANTI. INC 40 South Market Street, Suite 600
• Son Jose, Californio 95113 phone 408.971 .6100 • fox 408.971.61 02 • www.hextrons.com
NOTICE O F PUBLIC HEARING The City of Saratoga’s City Council announces the following public hearing on: Wednesday, the 18th day of November, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will
be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. The public hearing agenda item is stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures. APPLICATION/ADDRESS: CUP09-0004/20398
Blauer Drive APPLICANT: Julia Hashemieh APN: 393-02-005 DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested an Appeal of a Conditional Use Permit denial by the Planning Commission to allow operation
of a new day care facility in an existing 5,000 square foot building formerly occupied by office uses. As proposed, the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services for
56 students. The property has 14 available parking spaces. The proposed hours of operation are are from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The property is located in the Professional Administrative
(PA) zoning district and requires a use permit for the proposed use. In accordance with the Saratoga City Code, the City Council may affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Planning
Commission, and may refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for such further action as may be directed by the Council. When an appeal has been filed pertaining to only a portion
of a decision by the Planning Commission, the City Council has authority to review the entire matter and may affirm, reverse or modify all or any other portion of the decision notwithstanding
the fact that no appeal has been taken therefrom. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the City Council pursuant
to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order for information to be included in the City Council’s
information packets, written communications should be filed on or before Monday, November 9th, 2009. A site visit will be held on the Tuesday proceeding the hearing date above as part
of the standard Site Visit Committee agenda. The site visit will be held at the subject property is open to the public. Site visits begin at 9:00am and the timing of each site visit
will depend on other items on the agenda. The Site Visit Committee will visit the site listed above and may visit other sites as well. For more information please contact the City Clerk
at 408-868-1269 or review the Site Visit Agenda on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is
the subject of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in preparing its notice mailing lists. If you believe that your neighbors
would be interested in the project described in this notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much
information as possible concerning this project. Cynthia McCormick, (408) 868-1230 /s/Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 184
Parcel Number Owner Name Owner Address Owner City, State 39301019 LEVY STANLEY JR AND DENISE M 12915 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39301021 MIRELEZ FRED JR AND ALICIA G 12951 REGAN LN SARATOGA,
CA 39301022 WHITLOW JEANNE L TRUSTEE 12969 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39301023 BOGDANOVICH ELI J TRUSTEE & ET 20391 BLAUER DR SARATOGA, CA 39301041 ARGONAUT ASSOCIATES,LLC 1285 OAKMEAD PY
SUNNYVALE, CA 39301042 GRAM ARGONAUT LLC 1285 OAKMEAD PY SUNNYVALE, CA 39302003 SARATOGA COURTYARDS LLC 1855 PARK AV SAN JOSE, CA 9 39302004 COMPEAN LUPE TRUSTEE 936 HARRIET AV CAMPBELL,
CA 39302005 WHITEHEAD ROBERT L AND LONNIE 20119 KILBRIDE DR SARATOGA, CA 39302006 HAWKS CHRISTOPHER R AND TRAXLE 20390 BLAUER DR SARATOGA, CA 39302007 TOWNS, MARGARET TRUSTEE & 13035
REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39302008 CAVANAUGH THOMAS K ET AL 13045 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39302009 KENNEDY JAMES A AND MARY R TRU 13055 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39302010 LJEPAVA CLARA L TRUSTEE
13065 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39302011 GLOEGE ISABEL S 13109 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39302012 CHENG KATHY P O BOX 2189 SARATOGA, CA 39302013 LEVINSON GREGORY L AND MARINA 20421 TRICIA WY
SARATOGA, CA 39302014 YOUNG HONESTY TRUSTEE 20438 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39302031 DOSHI DIVYA AND RAJ 20447 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39302032 GLUCKMAN GWEN B AND PHILIP B 20459 TRICIA
WY SARATOGA, CA 39302033 BROWN GREGORY W AND JACQUELYN 20469 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39302034 CHU EDWARD Y M TRUSTEE 20325 PINNTAGE PARKWAY CUPERTINO, CA 39302035 SULLIVAN DOUGLAS R TRUSTEE
20483 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39302036 HARDY THOMAS AND CAROLE TRUSTE 20486 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39302037 ALLIONE ARTHUR G 20472 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39302038 YEN BRUCE AND WANG JUNG
F 20460 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39302039 PATEL JITENDRA G AND SHASHI J 20446 TRICIA WY SARATOGA, CA 39305001 CHU POYIN AND TEE-JEAN TRUSTEE 20350 ARGONAUT DR SARATOGA, CA 39305030 CHEN
CHIH-CHENG AND LO CHEW-ER 13092 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39305031 TROUTMAN FRANK G JR AND FRANCE 13070 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39305032 FELLOWS RICHARD A AND CAROLYN 20360 ARGONAUT DR SARATOGA,
CA 39306001 WALIA LAKHINDER AND MAMTA K 20360 BLAUER DR SARATOGA, CA 39306002 CHANG GINA H TRUSTEE 20344 BLAUER DR SARATOGA, CA 39306003 GARCIA PHILIP AND VICTORIA S 20330 BLAUER DR
SARATOGA, CA 39306004 FU YIA-YUAN K AND CHAO-HSIANG 20312 BLAUER DR SARATOGA, CA 39306026 BADEN ERIC A AND ROSE B 20325 ARGONAUT DR SARATOGA, CA 39306027 WILSON LERRY C AND JILL C 20335
ARGONAUT DR SARATOGA, CA 39306028 NAGESH, KITTUR & MEERA 20345 ARGONAUT SARATOGA, CA 39306029 STEWART JOHN B JR AND JANICE M 13040 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39307007 BONACORSO ANTHONY R
AND SINA S 20341 CRAIGEN CL SARATOGA, CA 39307008 LISCOM DAVID 20351 CRAIGEN CL SARATOGA, CA 39307009 CONWAY RALPH W AND TERESA R 12930 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39307010 SAMBASIVAM CHIDAMBARAM
AND NAC 20346 CRAIGEN CL SARATOGA, CA 39307011 AMATO KEVIN J AND ANA M 20338 CRAIGEN CL SARATOGA, CA 39307012 CHENG CHEE LIN ET AL 20330 CRAIGEN CL SARATOGA, CA 39307027 MILLER NANCY
L 20317 BLAUER DR SARATOGA, CA 39307028 SONG PAUL J AND HSIA WEI-JEN PO BOX 70575 SUNNYVALE, CA 39307029 LENEY JAMES B AND MEGAN D TRUS 20353 BLAUER DR SARATOGA, CA 39307030 JACOBS JUTTA
M TRUSTEE 12990 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39307031 SALIN LEE AND DENISE 12974 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 39307032 MULLEN WILLIAM R AND LINDA E 12960 REGAN LN SARATOGA, CA 50381023 LIN KUEI-CHENG
AND CHEN SHOW-C 12950 BRANDYWINE DR SARATOGA, CA 50381024 PROWSE SCOTT F AND MCBEATH KAT 12960 BRANDYWINE DR SARATOGA, CA 50381025 ELLIS SANDRA M AND RUSSELL A T 12970 BRANDYWINE DR
SARATOGA, CA 50382008 YOUNG CHII-REN AND LAN-CHUN TR 13055 OAKWOOD CT SARATOGA, CA 50382012 PUTHUFF STEVEN H AND JUDITH E 13001 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE RD SARATOGA, CA 50382021 LIU IAN-TAN
TRUSTEE & ET AL 13048 APOLLO WY SARATOGA, CA 50382022 LASCOLA EMILY W AND JOSEPH A 13032 APOLLO WY SARATOGA, CA 185
186 CITY OF SARATOGA APPEAL APPLICATION iUcJ7./, r (? s-.r 0 (/4v (Revised July 2007) , L r_ ( I J u. llB.
Appell ant Name: j vL \ t' 0... l-t i/,-S t-., J fA. ( i a (i) 6 a SU Ie a /. c orv Address: \ Db /-I E:"/) IL c... '\ La <:")1, 0 S
C!r 9 rj'o 3.2.... Telephone #: C 4(8) I> 6 t --7 -) 5 Name of Applicant ' l" I h (If different than Appellant): J lI\. ! fA H 0\.. S V'L e (Y'\ ;c... Proj ect file number and address:
C U'" f 0 C( .-' Cj 0 C) i I :2 0 3=) R g l uU.{ er 'D Decision being appealed: D D D o D City Code Section 2-05 .030 (a) appeals: • No Hearing • With Hearing City Code Section
15-90.010 appeals (Zoning related): • Appeals from Administrative Decisions to the Planning Commission City Code Section 15-90.020 appeals (Zoning related): • Appeals from Planning Commission
to the City Council City Code Section 13-20.060 appeals • Appeals from Heritage Preservation Commission to the Planning Commission. City Code Section 15-50.100 (a) appeals (Trees): •
Appeals from Administrative Decisions to the Planning Planning Commission Request for a Continuance: • First Requests • 2nd Request Date Received: {Jc/o!we 2 ()o1 Hearing
Date: $100.00 $600.00 $400.00 $600.00 No Charge $500.00 No Charge $250.00 Fee: ___$_ ' ---____ Receipt# : ___ P:\Forms
& Procedures\Appeals\Appeal Appl ication.doc
187 Objections Play ground in front Pollution Kids will be kidnap Bring traffic Parking issue Neighbors Kids Ratio Parking in the back not wide Pick up service Security guard RECEIVEirNOV
ug 2009 CITY Or 01'.; -\1'-\ J OGA Waiting period from May 2008 to now
188 Mr. Nader Sarveresth June 18, 2009 Page 80/9 Crosswalks with pedestrian pushbuttons and signal heads are present at the Saratoga Sunnyvale RoadlBlauer Drive intersection. Sidewalks
are present on both sides of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road. Bicycle lanes are present in both travel directions on Saratoga Sunnyvale Road. Conclusions The intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale
Road and Blauer Drive currently operates at acceptable levels of service and would continue to operate at acceptable levels with the addition of project-generated traffic. The proposed
project would generate 64 AM and 66 PM peak hour vehicle trips. The proposed project would generate the need for 27 parking spaces, creating a parking deficiency of 13 parking spaces.
The maximum number of children that the project could serve with the existing on-site parking supply would be 40 children. The daycare could serve 52 children if the four parking spaces
on the project frontage on Blauer Drive were considered on-site parking. The adjacent office complex immediately west of the project site may have a parking surplus and may be willing
to lease the 9 additional required parking spaces for the proposed daycare. It is recommended that the project applicant contact the property owner of the office to discuss the potential
for leasing parking spaces for the proposed daycare center.
189 CALIFORNIA CHILD CARE CENTER LICENSING REGULATION HIGHLIGHTS January 2007 The following are highlights of some of the key regulations from Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1 of the
Manual of Policies and Procedures for Community Care Licensing. Applicants and licensees are responsible for reading and understanding the regulations. To access the complete regulations,
go to the Community Care Licensing Division's web site at: http ://ccld.ca.gov.Click on "Title 22 Regulations" in the gray area at the left hand side of the screen. Then scroll down
to Child Care Centers and click on the blue links. 101152 DEFINITIONS • Child Care Center means any child care facility of any capacity, other than a Family Child Care Home, in which
less than 24-hour per day, non-medical care and supervision are provided to children in a group setting • The Department means the California Department of Social Services or agency
which is authorized to assume licensing responsibilities. 101156 LICENSE REQUIRED • Unless a child care arrangement is exempt from licensure (101158), no adult, partnership, corporation,
public agency or other governmental entity shall operate, establish, manage, conduct or provide care and supervision without a valid license from the Department. 101160 POSTING OF LICENSE
• The license shall be posted in a prominent, publicly accessible location in the center. 101167 TRANSFER AND SALE • A license is not transferable. • The licensee shall provide written
notice to the department and to the child's parent/legal guardian of the intent to sell the day care center at least 20 days prior to the transfer of the property or business. • The
seller shall notify, in writing, a prospective buyer of the necessity to obtain a license. • The prospective buyer shall submit an application for a license within five days of the acceptance
of the offer by the seller. 101169 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE • The applicant shall attend an orientation prior to filing an application. • The orientation will cover how to complete the
application process and the scope of Child Care Center operations subject to regulation by the Department. 7/25/2007 "
190 • A teacher shall have completed with passing grades a least six postsecondary semester units of specified early childhood education classes, or have a valid Child Development Assistant
permit issued by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing. A teacher hired with six units must complete at least two additional units each semester until fully qualified. •
A fully qualified teacher shall have 12 postsecondary semester units in early childhood education from an accredited college and six months of work experience in a licensed Child Care
Center or similar program . The units specified shall include courses covering child growth and development; child, family and community; and program/curriculum. • A teacher shall complete
15 hours of health and safety training , if necessary, pursuant to Health and Safety code, Section 1596.866. 101216.2 TEACHER AIDE QUALIFICATIONS • An aide in a Child Care Center must
be 18 years of age , a high school graduate, or be currently participating in an occupational program at high school. • An aide shall work only under the direct supervision of a teacher.
• An aide may escort or assist children in going to the bathroom and may supervise napping children without being under the direct supervision of a teacher. 101216.3 TEACHER -CHILD RATIO
• There shall be a ratio of one teacher visually observing and supervising no more than 12 children in attendance. The total number of children shall not exceed licensed capacity. •
The licensee may use teacher aides in a teacher-child ratio of one teacher and one aide for every 15 children. • A ratio of one fully qualified teacher and one aide for every 18 children
is allowed if the aide has six semester units of early childhood education from an accredited college. • The director may be included in the teacher-child ratio when the director is
actually teaching a group of children. • Licensees shall maintain an up-to-date list of qualified substitutes. • A teacher should not perform housekeeping or maintenance duties that
prevent him/her from performing duties related to providing care and supervision to children. • Persons employed for clerical, housekeeping and maintenance functions are not included
as teachers in the teacher-child ratio. 101216.4 TODDLER COMPONENT • Licensees serving preschool-age children may create a special program component for children between the ages of
18 months and 30 months. 7/25/2007 5
191 Print Page 1 of 1 From: Cynthia McCormick (cmccormick@saratoga.ca.us) To: alexduvon@yahoo.com; julia.hashemieh@yahoo.com Date: Wed, June 24, 20098:15:46 AM Subject: FW: traffic study
comments for day care center at 20398 Blauer Drive. Please confirm that you received the attachment. Thanks so much! From: Cynthia McCormick Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 2:58 PM To:
'alexduvon@yahoo.com' Subject: RE: traffic study comments for day care center at 20398 Blauer Drive. Dear Alex DuVon, Thank you for submitting the traffic study this morning. Please
see attached regarding comments on the submitted traffic study for the day care center at 20398 Blauer Drive. Once the traffic study has been updated with the attached requirements,
I will forward the study to the City of Saratoga's traffic consultant for peer review and recommendations. Please note that staff cannot schedule the public hearing until all requirements
have been met and all recommendations have been finalized by the City's traffic consultant. Sincerely, Cindy McCormick 408-868-1230 Cc: Hexagon Traffic Consultants http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/lau
nch?.gx=1&.rand=57noinrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
192 OWl l () f' f7t-..-C { (90') r ( 0 Y"" (\J () V\ejh "'5"" f f j Ce ,,1,,\ Figure 2 SITE PLAN Transportation Consultants, Inc. 20398 Blauer
Dr Day Care
193 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
194 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone - l5 h.(II.? ./\ 0 i' Jb htlp://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
195 Print Sent from my iPhone S'I Je.. 1\ e oy' 0" \ I ko.vUL-' htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah Page 2 of2
11/9/2009
196 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone OW( le f'f fEMplj http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojmd7a3ah 11/9/2009
197 Print Page 20f2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=I&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
198 Print Page 2 of2 http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.com/dc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 1119/2009
199 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone \(\ http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojmd7a3ah 1119/2009
200 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone jlJ\o {l \e.Stl fl P( e. <'91 i >'\ P <; '" Y '" -t" 0 "'-P \ 0 . . 0 f(oY\! oW') 1 10'\ Tel" t
"'r U )" $ ct-' 3f" I http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/912009
201 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 1119/2009
202 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx= 1 &.rand=57nojnrd7 a3ah 11/9/2009
203 Print Page 20f2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldcllaunch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/912009
204 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11 /9/2009
205 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/912009
206 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone \(') htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldcllaunch?gx=1 &.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 1119/2009
207 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
208 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone hrtp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
209 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=I&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 1119/2009
210 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldcllaunch?gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/912009
211 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 1119/2009
212 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=I&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
213 Print Page 2 of2 Sent from my iPhone http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=57nojnrd7a3ah 11/9/2009
214 Print From: Julia Hashemieh (julia.hashemieh@yahoo.com) To: Julia Hashemieh Date: Mon, November 9, 2009 2:35 :53 PM Subject: · 7:'00 A.M. to P.M. Serving Age 2 -7 Open
Enrollment Sent from my iPhone 6 po.",?b Otv..lky\ zz-5ilA&Vl--r-p \ ({(9MY\cl \ Y") -frord- htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?gx=1&.rand=57nojmd7a3ah
Page 1 of 1 60 11/9/2009
215 Print From: Julia Hashemieh (julia.hashemieh@yahoo.com) To: Julia Hashemieh Date: Mon, November 9, 2009 2:36:42 PM Subject: Sent from my iPhone htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldcllaunch?gx=I&.rand=5
7nojnrd7a3ah Page 1 of 1 1119/2009
216 Print From: Julia Hashemieh (julia.hashemieh@yahoo.com) To: Julia Hashemieh Date: Mon, November 9, 2009 2:38:12 PM Subject: Sent from my iPhone htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?gx=I&.rand=5
7nojnrd7a3ah Page 1 of 1 11/9/2009
217 Print From: Julia Hashemieh Gulia.hashemieh@yahoo.com) To: Julia Hashemieh Date: Mon, November 9, 2009 2:37:35 PM Subject: Sent from my iPhone http://us.rng2.rnail.yahoo.comldcllaunch?
.gx= 1 &.rand=57nojnrd7 a3ah Page 1 of 1 11/9/2009
218 Print From: Julia Hashemieh (julia.hashemieh@yahoo.com) To: Julia Hashemieh Date: Mon, November 9, 2009 2:36:59 PM Subject: Sent from my iPhone hrtp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldc/launch?gx=I&.rand=5
7nojnrd7a3ah Page 1 of 1 11/912009
219 Print From: Julia Hashemieh (julia.hashemieh@yahoo.com) To: Julia Hashemieh Date: Mon, November 9, 2009 2:36:59 PM Subject: Sent from my iPhone htlp:llus.mg2.mail.yahoo.comldcllaunch?gx=1&.rand=5
7nojnrd7a3ah Page 1 of 1 11/912009
Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Crystal Morrow DIRECTOR: Barbara
Powell Administrative Analyst II Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Website Policy RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and adopt resolution establishing a policy for the City of Saratoga
website. BACKGROUND: Many cities adopt website policies for the purpose of reducing exposure to liability that can arise from a number of laws and legal principles. These policies are
considered a best practice for public agencies with websites as they ensure that users are familiar with the procedures used to develop websites and the acceptable uses of the website.
Website policies typically include statements on the following: -Purpose -Acceptable uses -Privacy -Accessibility -External links -Compatibility requirements The attached website policy
was created at the recommendation of the City Attorney following the launch of the City’s new website. FISCAL IMPACTS: There are no direct financial impacts to the City of Saratoga for
adopting a website policy. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: The City will not have a website policy and could have some increased risk of liability exposure. ALTERNATIVE
ACTION(S): N/A 220
Page 2 of 2 FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Resolution adopting a policy for the City of Saratoga Website Attachment B: Draft Website Policy 221
RESOLUTION NO. ________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ADOPTING A WEBSITE POLICY WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga launched its new website in September 2009; and
WHEREAS, website policies protect municipalities from legal liabilities resulting from a number of laws and legal principles that affect cities with websites; and WHEREAS, website policies
inform users of the procedures used to develop a public agency’s website and acceptable uses of the website; and WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga website policy includes statements on the
website’s purpose, acceptable use, privacy, accessibility, external links, and compatibility requirements; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Saratoga
does hereby approve the attached City of Saratoga website policy. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 18th day of November 2009 by the following
vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: _______________________________ Chuck Page, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 222
Draft City of SaratogaWebsite Policy The purpose of the City of Saratoga website is to provide information about City services, laws, policies, and initiatives. The City of Saratoga
website is not intended to provide a forum for debate or public exchange of information, but rather is maintained for the exclusive use of the City of Saratoga to communicate with the
public on matters of general interest via the Internet. While the City does its best to keep its website accurate and timely, the City neither warrants nor makes representations or endorsements
as to the accuracy, quality, content, or completeness of the information, text, graphics, hyperlinks, and other items contained on its website. Content on the website is compiled from
a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice from the City as a result of updates and corrections. The City of Saratoga website and all materials contained on this site
are distributed and transmitted “as is” without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including without limitation, warranties of title or implied warranties of fitness
for a particular purpose. The City is neither responsible nor liable for any viruses or contaminations of a web visitor's hardware, software, peripherals, or properties nor for any delays,
inaccuracies, errors, or omissions resulting from use of or with respect to the material contained on its website, including without limitation but not limited to, any material posted
on or linked to from the City of Saratoga website. The City is not responsible for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages that may arise from the use of, or the
inability to use, the site and/or the materials contained on the site whether the materials contained on the site are provided by the City of Saratoga, or a third party. Privacy The
City of Saratoga website has been built to provide easy access to information and services to the public. To help ensure the website continues to serve as a resource to the public, the
City of Saratoga collects information about website traffic and allows users to share information with the City. The City of Saratoga is concerned with the privacy of website visitors
who are using the City of Saratoga website. The following outlines treatment of information provided to the City through the website. Personal Information Submitted by Users "Personal
information" is information about a natural person that is readily identifiable to that specific individual. Personal information includes such things as an individual's name, address,
and phone number. A domain name or Internet Protocol address is not considered personal information. On certain occasions, the City of Saratoga may request personal information for the
purpose of correspondence or for City business. Personal information may include an individual’s name, address, phone number, or email address. Personal information provided to the City
is done so on a voluntary basis (i.e. sending an email, filling out a form, or participating in a survey). Individuals can choose not to participate in these activities, doing so will
in no way affect an individual’s ability to use any other feature of the City of Saratoga website. Public Records All information collected by the City of Saratoga website becomes public
records that may be subject to inspection and copying by the public unless an exemption in law exists. This includes communications 223
made via email (including “mailto:” links), online forms, or surveys. If personal information is volunteered by the user, State law and the federal Privacy Act of 1974 may protect it.
However, this information is a public record once it is provided, and may be subject to public inspection and copying if not protected by Federal or State law. Users are cautioned that
the collection of personal information requested from or volunteered by children on-line or by email will be treated the same as information given by an adult, and may be subject to
public access. In the State of California, laws exist to ensure that government is open and that the public has a right to access appropriate records and information possessed by municipalities.
At the same time, there are exceptions to the public's right to access public records that serve various needs including the privacy of individuals. Exceptions are provided by both State
and Federal laws. Information Automatically Collected For the purpose of site management, management, information about visits to the City of Saratoga website is collected. This information
is not reported or used in any manner that would reveal personally identifiable information, and will not be released to any outside parties unless the City is required to do so in connection
with law enforcement investigations or other legal proceedings. The City uses log analysis tools to create summary statistics, which are used for purposes such as assessing the information
that is of interest to the public, determining technical design specifications, and identifying system performance or problem areas.Website logs do not collect personally identifiable
information and the City makes no attempt to link them with the individuals who browse the website. When users visit the City of Saratoga website and browse or download information,
the City automatically collects and stores the following information: · The Internet Protocol Address and domain name used · Browser type used to view the site · Operating system · The
date and time of the visit · The pages or services accessed during a visit · The search engine and terms used to access the City of Saratoga website · The sites visited prior to accessing
the City of Saratoga website If visitors to the City of Saratoga website participate in a survey, fill out an online form, sign up for email subscriptions, or send an email, the following
additional information may be collected: · Email address · Contents of an email · Information volunteered to complete a form or in response to a survey Personally identifiable information
that is submitted to the City via emails, forms, or surveys will be used for the stated purposes, to respond to requests, or analyze trends. The City may redirect messages from website
visitors to another department, division, or program within the City that is in a better position to answer visitor questions or respond to requests. 224
Cookies The City of Saratoga website uses "cookies" to improve user experience. A cookie contains unique information a website can use to track such things as the Internet Protocol address
for the computer used to access the City site, the identification of the browser software and operating system used, the date and time a visitor accessed the site, and the Internet address
of the website from which visitors linked to this site. Cookies created on a visitor’s computer by using the City of Saratoga site do not contain personally identifying information and
do not compromise the visitor’s privacy or security. Visitors can refuse the cookie or delete the cookie file using any of the widely available methods. If visitors choose not to accept
a cookie, it will not prevent or prohibit visitors from gaining access to or using this site. Security Unauthorized attempts to deny service, upload information, change information,
or to attempt to access a non-public site from this service are strictly prohibited and may may be punishable under Title 18 of the U.S. Code to include the Computer Fraud and Abuse
Act of 1986 and the National Information Infrastructure Protection Act. Acceptable Use Using the City of Saratoga website indicates your agreement with this policy. Users should refrain
from using the City of Saratoga if they disagree with this policy. Individuals, organizations and businesses are free to use the City of Saratoga website for any lawful, worthy and ethical
purpose, except as limited by this policy. To the extent permitted by the Public Records Act and otherwise legally permissible, commercial use of the City of Saratoga website materials,
content, and information is explicitly prohibited without the written permission of the City. The website must not be used to solicit customers or sell products or services. The City
of Saratoga retains copyright on all text, graphic images, and other content, unless otherwise noted. No person or entity may do any of the following without written permission from
the City of Saratoga: -Modify and/or re-use text, images, or other web content from the City website -Distribute the City’s website content -Mirror the City’s information on a non-City
server Users with "robots," "spiders," or other automated programs may visit the City of Saratoga website, but are prohibited from resending or redirecting information without the prior
written permission of the City of Saratoga. Website users are asked to use appropriate names and language when filling out online forms or surveys. Users are forbidden from using false
e-mail addresses. Accessibility The City of Saratoga website is designed to offer the public easy and efficient access to municipal resources. The City of Saratoga “Low Graphics Version”
of the website adheres to 508 requirements as set forth by theW3C Accessibility Initiative. This version of the website is optimized for screen readers and other text-based web interfaces.
225
External Links The City of Saratoga website links to a number of other websites. These include links to websites operated by other government agencies, other cities, nonprofit organizations,
and community organizations. Links from the City of Saratoga website to any other site on the Internet do not constitute an endorsement. The City of Saratoga is not responsible for the
content, quality, or accuracy of any materials referenced or linked through the City of Saratoga’s website. By using the City of Saratoga website, users acknowledge and accept that the
City of Saratoga is not responsible for any materials stored on other Internet sites, nor is it liable for any inaccurate, defamatory, offensive, or illegal materials found on other
Internet sites, and the risk of injury from viewing, hearing, downloading, or storing such materials rests entirely with the user. The City of Saratoga does not exercise any editorial
control over the information on external sites. When visitors select a link to another site, they are no longer on the City of Saratoga website. The City of Saratoga website policy is
not applicable. When selecting a link to another website, visitors are subject to the policy of that new site. Video Streaming The City of Saratoga provides video streaming on its website
in the form of both live and archived video streams. All videos available at http://www.saratoga.ca.us/cityhall/video_archive/default.asp. System Requirements for PC Users -Windows 98
or later operating system -At least a 233-MHz processor Pentium II -A minimum of 64 MB of RAM -In order to view the video streams you must haveWindows Media Player version 9 or higher,
or Silverlight Player installed. To download Silverlight visit http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/get-started/install/default.aspx. -TheWindows Media Player Plug-in for Firefox users
can be downloaded at http://port25.technet.com/pages/windows-media-player-firefox-plugin-download.aspx. -Please note that beta versions of Internet Explorer or Windows Media Player are
not supported. Minimum System Requirements for Macintosh Users -A G3 or newer with Mac OS X installed -Silverlight Player, which can be downloaded at http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/getstarted/i
nstall/default.aspx. -Microsoft Silverlight allows Mac OS users on the latest versions of Firefox and Safari to have the same experience as all Windows Media Player users currently enjoy.
There is no difference between a user on Internet Explorer on a PC and a Mac OS 10+ user on a Firefox browser. -Please note that beta versions of players and browsers are not supported.
226
Page 1 of 4 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan DIRECTOR: Dave
Anderson City Clerk City Manager SUBJECT: Commission Qualifications and Expiring Terms RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept the staff report and list of Commission qualifications and Commissioner
terms that will be expiring in the next calendar year and provide staff with additional direction if needed. BACKGROUND: Per Municipal Code 2-12.010(f), “on or before December 31 of
each year, the City Clerk shall prepare and the City Council shall adopt a list of all Commissions containing the following information: 1. A list of the qualifications necessary for
each Commissioner position; and 2. A list of all Commissioner terms which will expire during the next calendar year, including the name of the incumbent Commissioner, the date of appointment,
the date the term expires and the qualifications necessary for the position. This list shall be made available to the public and shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk and at
the Saratoga Library.” A Commissioner must be a Saratoga resident and a registered voter in the City of Saratoga, with the exception that one member of the Library Commission must be
a resident of Monte Sereno and Youth Commissioners are not required to be registered voters. Additionally, each Commission applicant must attend at least one meeting of the Commission
he or she is applying to before being interviewed by the City Council. Commissioners may not hold an elected public office and cannot be employed by the City of Saratoga. Below is a
list detailing special qualifications for each of the City’s Commissions and terms that will be expiring in the next calendar year. Heritage Preservation Commission Special Qualifications
(Municipal Code 13-10.010) -One member to be nominated by the Saratoga Historical Foundation. -Two members must be trained and experienced in the field of construction and structural
rehabilitation, such as a licensed architect, engineer, contractor, or urban planner. 227
Page 2 of 4 Vacancies April 2010: Ø Position A – 3 years and 9 months Ø Position B – 3 years and 9 months Ø Position C – 4 years and 9 months Terms Ending next Calendar Year Norm Koepernik
-Appointed April 2006 -Term ends April 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Rita McCarty -Appointed April 2006 -Term ends April 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Peter Marra -Appointed April
2006 -Term ends April 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Steve Kellond -Appointed April 2006 -Term ends April 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Library Commission Special Qualifications
-One member is nominated by the City of Monte Sereno. No vacancy occurring in 2010 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Qualifications -No special qualifications No vacancy occurring
in 2010 Planning Commission Special Qualifications -No special qualifications, however, members must be able to attend regular meetings that are held on the 2nd and 4th Wednesday of
the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Theater. Vacancies on April 2010 and term length: Ø Position Position D – 4 years Ø Position E – 4 years Terms Ending next Calendar Year Joyce Hlava
-Appointed April 2006 -Term ends April 2010 228
Page 3 of 4 -Eligible for reappointment Yan Zhao -Appointed April 2006 -Term ends April 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Traffic Safety Commission Special Qualifications -No special
qualifications Vacancies April 2010: Ø Position A – 3 years and 9 months Ø Position B – 3 years and 9 months Terms Ending next Calendar Year Corinne Vita -Appointed May 2008 to fill
unexpired term of Brigitte Ballingall -Term ends April 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Kenneth Biester -Appointed April 2006 -Term ends April 2010 -Not eligible for reappointment Youth
Commission Special Qualifications -Members must be a resident of Saratoga in grade 7-12 while serving on the Youth Commission. Terms Ending next Calendar Year Elena Rees -Appointed June
2008 -Term ends July 2010 -Not eligible for reappointment Kia Fariba -Appointed June 2008 -Term ends July 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Sammy Rao -Appointed June 2008 -Term ends July
2010 -Not eligible for reappointment Natalie Tkalovic -Appointed June 2008 -Term ends July 2010 -Not Not eligible for reappointment Kaitlin Finch -Appointed in June 2008 -Term ends July
2010 229
Page 4 of 4 -Eligible for reappointment Aditya Dev -Appointed June 2008 -Term ends July 2010 -Eligible for reappointment Tara Fatemi -Appointed June 2008 -Term ends July 2010 -Not eligible
for reappointment FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING,
NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Nothing additional. 230
Page 1 of 4 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Community Development CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: John F. Livingstone, AICP DIRECTOR:
John F. Livingstone, AICP SUBJECT: Urgency Ordinance forMedical Marijuana Dispensaries RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the proposed interim urgency ordinance placing a 45 day moratorium on
the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries in order to provide the City of Saratoga with time to determine whether to adopt an ordinance regulating the location or operation
of medical marijuana dispensaries. BACKGROUND: The City of Saratoga has received several inquiries from prospective medical marijuana dispensary operators. The City of Saratoga’s Code
does not specifically address the regulation or location of medical marijuana dispensaries or list medical marijuana dispensaries as a permitted use or conditionally permitted use in
any zoning district. In California, some cities that have permitted the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries have reported adverse impacts on public health, safety, and welfare,
including an increase in crimes such as loitering, illegal drug activity, burglaries, robberies and other criminal activity within and around dispensaries, as well as increased pedestrian
and vehicular traffic, noise and parking violations. Some local jurisdictions also report that medical marijuana dispensaries increase demands for police response, as well as maintenance
of public streets and sidewalks. Therefore, staff is proposing the adoption of an interim urgency ordinance imposing a moratorium on the approval, commencement, establishment of medical
marijuana dispensaries until such time staff is able to study the issue and present recommendations to the City Council. DISCUSSION: In November 1996, California voters enacted “The
Compassionate Use Act of 1996,” also known as Proposition 215, codified at Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq. Proposition 215 allows a person to cultivate and possess marijuana
for medical purposes with a doctor’s recommendation without violating certain state criminal laws regarding possession or cultivation of marijuana. 231
Page 2 of 4 In October 2003, the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill 420, the Medical Marijuana Program Act, which, among other things, exempts from certain state criminal sanctions
individuals engaged in collective and cooperative cultivation of medical marijuana. The Medical Marijuana Program Act went into effect on January 1, 2004. In 2008, the California Attorney
General issued guidelines regarding lawful operation of cooperatives and collectives, including organizing under appropriate business forms, generating no profits and complying with
state tax law and local business license requirements. The Attorney General advised that only dispensaries that comply with the recommendations in its guidelines would be protected from
criminal liability under existing state law. The manufacture, distribution, or possession of marijuana is a federal criminal offense pursuant to the federal Controlled Substances Act,
21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq. The Controlled Substances Act may be enforced by federal authorities against persons possessing or using marijuana, regardless of the protections offered by the
Compassionate Use Act and Medical Marijuana Program Act. However, earlier this year, the United States Attorney General announced his intention to ease enforcement of the Controlled
Substances Act against medical marijuana dispensaries, and the United States Department of Justice recently issued a memorandum stating that federal resources should not be focused on
prosecution of individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for medical use of marijuana. The Compassionate Use Act, the Medical
Marijuana Program Act and the recent pronouncements from federal prosecutors, have fostered interest in the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, including within the City
of Saratoga and surrounding cities. Medical marijuana dispensaries have been established throughout California and the Bay Area, including in San Francisco, Oakland, and Santa Cruz.
As a result of the presence of medical marijuana dispensaries, some local agencies have reported increases in illegal drug activity, illegal drug sales, robberies of persons leaving
the dispensaries, loitering around dispensaries, falsely obtained identification cards, and other criminal activity. Some local agencies also report increased demands for police response,
as well as maintenance of public streets and sidewalks, in areas surrounding medical marijuana dispensaries. The City of Saratoga currently does not have regulations regarding licensing
for persons seeking to establish a medical marijuana dispensary. Further, the City of Saratoga Municipal Code does not specifically address the regulation or location of medical marijuana
dispensaries, and a medical marijuana dispensary is not a type of use which is specifically defined in the City of Saratoga’s zoning code regulations. Based upon the experiences of other
local jurisdictions and the rapidly evolving law governing medical marijuana, staff recommends that the City adopt a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries until staff has the
opportunity to further study the issue and advise the City Council regarding options for legally appropriate and effective regulation. The scope of the study resulting from the moratorium
may include, but not limited to, the following: 1. Review processes used by other cities and counties when considering applications from persons seeking to open and operate a medical
marijuana dispensary; 2. Determine whether to establish licensing and criminal background check processes for proposed operators and employees of a medical marijuana dispensary; 232
Page 3 of 4 3. Decide if licensing needs to be regularly renewed; 4. Determine in which zoning districts, if any, medical marijuana dispensaries might be allowed to operate; 5. Decide
whether to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries from locating near schools or other sensitive uses; 6. Decide whether medical marijuana dispensaries should be located a minimum distance
from other medical marijuana dispensaries; 7. Potential regulations regarding the operation, hours, security features, and other conditions for the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries;
and 9. Other related issues. The adoption of a moratorium will give staff sufficient time to study this issue and prevent medical marijuana dispensaries from locating in the City of
Saratoga until proper procedures and regulations are established. Government Code Section 65858 allows a jurisdiction to adopt a zoning ordinance that prohibits any uses that conflict
with a contemplated zoning proposal that the City Council, Planning Commission, or Planning Division is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time to protect
the public safety, health, and welfare. The urgency ordinance requires a four-fifths vote of the City Council for adoption and shall be effective for no more than 45 days. The City Council
may further extend the urgency ordinance for 10 months and 15 days after a noticed public hearing, and may subsequently extend the urgency ordinance for one additional year. Ten days
prior to the expiration of the ordinance, the City must issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions which led to the adoption of the ordinance. Staff
estimates that it will take 12 to 18 months to study issues related to medical marijuana dispensaries; therefore, it is likely that staff will return to the City Council with a request
for a extension of the ordinance. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The proposed moratorium ordinance is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15601(b)(3), because the proposal will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and only directs
that a planning study be undertaken. FISCAL IMPACT: Instituting a study of medical marijuana dispensaries will require a significant commitment of staff time. While funding this staff
time will not require an additional appropriation, it will require staff to adjust its priorities in working on other issues. Failure to adopt a moratorium could require the 233
Page 4 of 4 commitment of additional staff and police resources to deal with any criminal issues associated with medical marijuana dispensaries. Subsequent adoption of a licensing requirement
could increase staffing costs which could be offset by license fees. FOLLOW UP ACTION: As directed. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Notice of this meeting was properly posted.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Urgency Ordinance 234
1 AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE CREATING A TEMPORY MORATORIUM RESTRICTING MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES FROM BEING LOCATED IN THE CITY OF SARATOGA, TO TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY BEFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA FINDS AND DECLARES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, in 1996 the voters of the State of California approved Proposition
215 which was codified as Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5, et seq., and entitled “The Compassionate Use Act of 1996” (“the Act”); and WHEREAS, the intent of the Act was to enable
seriously ill persons to obtain, use and cultivate marijuana for medical use under limited, specified circumstances; and WHEREAS, on January 1, 2004, Senate Bill 420, the Medical Marijuana
Program Act (“MMPA”), became effective to clarify the scope of the Act and to allow cities and counties to adopt and enforce rules and regulations consistent with the MMPA and the Act;
and WHEREAS, as a result of the Act and the MMPA, individuals have established medical marijuana dispensaries in various cities in California, and WHEREAS, on June 6, 2005, the United
States Supreme Court found in Gonzales v. Raich, 125 S. Ct. 2195 (2005) there to be no legally recognizable medical necessity exception under the Federal Controlled Substances Act to
the prohibition of possession, use, manufacture, or distribution of marijuana under federal law, and WHEREAS, in February 2009 the U.S. Attorney General stated that federal law enforcement
official would ease enforcement at medical marijuana dispensaries, and in October 2009, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a memorandum stating that federal resources should not be
focused on prosecution of individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance
with existing state laws providing for medical use of marijuana, and WHEREAS, while the experiences in the regulation and policing of medical marijuana dispensaries have varied from
city to city, several California cities have reported an increase in crime, such as burglary, robbery, odor, loitering around the dispensaries, an increase in vehicular traffic and noise
in the vicinity of dispensaries, and the sale of illegal drugs, including the illegal resale of marijuana from dispensaries, in the areas immediately surrounding such medical marijuana
dispensaries, and WHEREAS, The City of Saratoga has not adopted rules and regulations specifically applicable to the establishment and operation of medical marijuana dispensaries and
the 235
2 lack of such controls may lead to an establishment of dispensaries and the inability for the City to regulate these establishments in a manner that will protect the general public,
homes and businesses adjacent and near such businesses, and the patients or clients of such establishments, and WHEREAS, based on the lack of any consistent experience of cities statewide
and in the absence of any regulatory program in the City regarding the review of the establishment and operation of medical dispensaries, the City should consider whether negative effects
on the public health, safety, and welfare may occur in the City of Saratoga as a result of the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries and the lack of appropriate regulations governing
the establishment and operation of such facilities, and WHEREAS, City staff requires time to evaluate the relevant issues and develop guidance for legally appropriate regulation, and
WHEREAS, the establishment of, or the issuance or approval of any permit, certificate of occupancy, or other entitlement for the legal establishment of a medical marijuana dispensary
in the City of Saratoga will result in a current and immediate threat to public health, safety and welfare in that the Saratoga Municipal Code does not currently regulate the location
and operation of medical marijuana dispensaries and does not have a regulatory program in effect that will appropriately regulate the location, establishment, and operation of medical
dispensaries in the City, and WHEREAS, there is no feasible alternative to satisfactorily study the potential impact identified above as well or better than the adoption of this interim
urgency moratorium ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Saratoga as follows: SECTION 1. For purposes of this ordinance, “medical marijuana dispensary”
means any for profit or not-for-profit facility or location, whether permanent or temporary, where the owner(s) or operator(s) intends to or does possess and distribute marijuana for
any purpose. SECTION 2. For the period of this ordinance, or any extension thereof, a medical marijuana dispensary shall be considered a prohibited use in any zoning district of the
City, even if located within an otherwise permitted use. No permits or authorizations for a medical marijuana dispensary shall issue while this ordinance is in effect. SECTION 3. The
City Manager or his designees shall: (1) review and consider options for the regulation of medical marijuana dispensaries in the City, including, but not limited to, the development
of appropriate rules and regulations governing the location and operation of such establishments in the City; (2) meet with medical patients, advocates, law enforcement representatives,
and other interested parties; 236
3 and (3) provide to the City Council a written report describing the measures which the City has taken to address the conditions which led to the adoption of this ordinance. SECTION
4. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will
not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) (Title 14, of
the California Code of Regulations) because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; it prevents changes in the environment pending
the completion of the contemplated Municipal Code review. SECTION 5. This interim urgency ordinance is adopted pursuant to Section 65858 of the California Government Code. SECTION 6.
This interim urgency ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council. This interim urgency ordinance shall continue in effect
for forty-five (45) days from the date of its adoption and shall thereafter be of no further force and effect unless, after notice pursuant to California Government Code Section 65090
and a public hearing, the City Council extends this interim urgency ordinance for an additional period of time pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858. SECTION 7. If any
section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this Ordinance or any part hereof 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 of effectiveness of the remaining portions of the Ordinance or any part hereof. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,
subsections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases or words be declared unconstitutional. SECTION 8. This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be published
in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption. [Continued next page.] 237
4 The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 18th day of November, 2009, and was adopted by at least
a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council as follows: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: __________________________________ CHUCK PAGE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
Saratoga, California ATTEST: __________________________________ ANN SULLIVAN CLERK OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA Saratoga, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________________________
RICHARD TAYLOR, CITY ATTORNEY 238
1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Recreation & Facilities CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Claudia Cauthorn, Interim Recreation
& Facilities Director DIRECTOR: Claudia Cauthorn SUBJECT: Review of Facility Rental Fees and Criteria for Non-Profit Organizations RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and comment on the existing
Facility Rental policies and rental fees for non-profit group use. REPORT SUMMARY: Recently a few non-profit groups have raised questions regarding the eligibility criteria for not-for-profit
organizations wishing to rent City facilities. This report summarizes current City policy on this subject and provides Council with comparisons of policies from neighboring cities. Alternatives
to the current policies are outlined and discussed. DISCUSSION: The Facility Use Policy that governs the use of all City owned buildings was last revised prior to 2005. The current policy
provides for facility reservations to be made on a firstcome, first-served basis and reservations may not be made more than one year in advance of the use date. A non-refundable processing
fee is paid at the time the reservation is made. This fee covers administrative time to book the reservation, schedule facility attendants and make any other follow up arrangements that
may be needed. A Security Deposit is also collected at the time of reservation. This deposit covers additional charges should the user stay beyond the reserved time, damages to the buildings
or contents, overtime for facility attendant staff or maintenance charges should additional cleanup be required. This deposit is fully refunded if none of these circumstances occur.
If the deposit does not cover the charges, the user is responsible for any additional charges. Non-profit organizations are awarded a 50% discount on rental fees provided they meet the
following criteria: · They must provide evidence of their non-profit status. A copy of their letter from the California Secretary of State’s office with their non-profit profit ID number
indicated is required. · Their membership must be at least 51% Saratoga residents OR at least 51% of the persons in attendance at their event must be Saratoga residents. · The event
must be open to the public, advertised as such and is for the public benefit 239
2 · Non-profit groups requesting the use of City facilities for the purpose of fundraising or when an admission fee is charged will pay the regular rental fee. As an example of how this
would work, if a non-profit group wanted to use the Fellowship Hall every Friday night for 2 to 3 hours and they met all the requirements to qualify for the non-profit rate, this group
would pay approximately $6,000 for the year. If this group did not meet all of the above criteria (say their % of Saratoga residents is only 21% instead of the required 51%), this group
would pay approximately $12,000 for the same use. A survey of the policies from other local cities for use of their facilities by non-profit groups is attached. As can be seen in this
survey, virtually all cities have the requirement that the non-profit group wishing to use their facilities at the non-profit rate must meet a minimum of 51% city residents in order
to qualify. Most of the cities surveyed have the additional requirement that if a non-profit group wishes to conduct a fund-raising activity or charge admission (or other fees), that
group does not qualify for the non-profit rate for that particular activity. The group would then pay the same rate as an individual or other organization. Some cities limit the number
of fundraising events a non-profit can host to one per year and some have a requirement that fund-raising activities are not allowed by non-resident non-profit groups. RECOMMENDATION:
The City of Saratoga’s existing non-profit use policy is consistent with the policies that other cities have for use of their facilities. No changes are recommended at this time. FISCAL
IMPACTS: Retaining the existing policy will enable the City to reach the revenue goals recently set for the Recreation & Facilities Department. Easing the requirements for non-profit
group usage of City facilities would seriously impact the City’s ability to meet those revenue goals as approximately 19% of all uses of City facilities are by non-profit groups. ALTERNATIVE
ACTIONS: · · Alternate A: Should the Council wish to ease the requirements for non-profit uses at City facilities, a replacement revenue source will be needed to meet the 65% cost recovery
revenue goal. This could be in the form of Council grants to the organizations. · Alternate B: Ease the requirements for non-profit group usage and reduce the % cost recovery for the
Recreation & Facilities Department commensurately. FOLLOWUP ACTION: Give direction to staff for policy and fee changes. Publish any changes to the policy and fees on the City website
and make it available to the public. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: City Council meeting noticed on November 12, 2009. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Existing Council Policy for Use of City
Facilities 2. Survey of Neighboring Cities Facility Use Policies re: Non-Profit Use 3. Summary of Non-Profit Uses for FY 08/09 240
RESERVATIONS ! !! "#"#!$! %&''$%(&''$! PROCESSING FEE & SECURITY DEPOSIT ! )! *!"!"!")! *! ! +Facility Use Policy 241
CANCELLATION POLICY ! "!,%(!-!.,!!!%''/.! "!NON-PROFIT GROUPS )!& ! -)!! 0%/! 1! 2)#)!SET UP & CLEAN UP ! ! !! & 11+!-!! 3& !)+*!USE OF ALCOHOL ! ! )4!!!#!+-! (5##& -%''%%6 760%%.85'9:(;;)%(''242
ROOM CAPACITIES !$5'' %6' (;0 %.' 50 .' 0' 5' 0' 5' GENERAL REGULATIONS ! !#!!!#! <8%:8%':!! !!#!! !! =!#! >!!! !(%! !243
Saratoga Facility Rental Fees Processing Fee The non-refundable Processing Fee of $25.00 is to be paid at the time the Reservation form is completed. Security Deposit The refundable
Security Deposit of $300.00 is to be paid at the time the Reservation form is completed. Rental Fees The Rental Fees are to be paid 30 days in advance of event. COMMUNITY CENTER Multipurpose
Rm w/kitchen $120/Hr Senior Center Rm w/kitchen $110/Hr Patio Rm $55/Hr Dance Studio $50/Hr Arts & Craft Rm $50/Hr Garden Patio $225/Day* *Available only when renting a room w/kitchen.
WARNER HUTTON HOUSE House & Garden $115/Hr AVAILABLE DISCOUNTS Saratoga Residents 10% of Rental Fee Non-Profit Organizations 50% of Rental Fee 244
Survey of Rental Rates for Banquet Facilities November 2009 City Banquet Rate Non-Profit Rate Fundraising Rate Comments Saratoga $120/hour $60/hour $120/hour Campbell $135/hour $90/hour
$135/hour Cupertino $230/hour $80/hour $80/hour Mountain View $86/hour $64.25/hour $128/hour To qualify for the non-profit rate, organizations must show evidence of 501(c)3 or similar
status, have at least 51% Saratoga residents in membership, the event must be open to the public& public benefit. All fundraising events or events where admission is charged are To qualify
for the non-profit rate, organizations must show evidence of 501(c)3 or similar status, have at least 51% Campbell residents in membership, the event must be open to the public with
no admission or funds collected at the event. A non-profit organization wishing to hold a fundraising event pays To qualify for the non-profit rate, organizations must show evidence
of 501(c)3 or similar status &have at least 51% Cupertino residnets inmembership. Nonresident non-profit organizations may use the facility at $140/hour. There is no distinction for
fundraising activities. To qualify for the non-profit rate, organizations must show evidence of 501(c)3 or similar status & have at least 51% Mountian View residents in membership. Fundraising
events are limited to one event per organization per year and are only allowed by Mountain 245
Survey of Rental Rates for Banquet Facilities November 2009 City Banquet Rate Non-Profit Rate Fundraising Rate Comments Santa Clara $151/hour no charge 15% of gross or $151/hour Sunnyvale
$200/hour $200/hour $200/hour Milpitas $100/hour $100/hour $100/hour Palo Alto $127.50/hour $85/hour $127.50/hour To qualify for the non-profit rate, organizations must show evidence
of 501(c)3 or similar status & have at least 51% Santa Clara residents in membership. Fundraising events are charged the same rate as private parties or 15% of the gross receipts whichever
is 4-hour minimum is required. Off peak uses (Monday-Thursday & Friday until 6 PM) are billed at $100/hour & $75/hour for non-profits with a 2-hour minimum. Proof of non-profit status
is required (501(c)3 or equivalent) as is 51% Sunnyvale residents inmembership to receive the non-profit rate. 3-hour minimumrequired. To qualify for non-profit rate, organizations must
show evidence of 501(c)3 or similar status & have at least 51% Milpitas residents in membership. Senior Citizen groups, public & private schools, Chamber of Commerce & governmental agencies
are exempt from all fees except staff costs and application fee. 4-hour minimumrequired. To qualify for non-profit rate, organizationsmust show evidence of 510(c)3 or similar status
& have at least 51% Palo Alto residents in membership. Off Peak rates available to non-profits on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays or Thursdays. 246
Survey of Rental Rates for Banquet Facilities November 2009 247
City of Saratoga Facility Rental Data Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue ^ January 30 13 22 8 $ 7,622.25 February 33 17 23 10 $ 9,264.00 March 21 12 12 9 $ 5,749.50
April 23 12 14 9 $ 10,675.00 May 29 13 12 17 $ 10,491.75 June 21 11 10 11 $ 7,295.75 July 25 9 4 21 $ 9,165.00 August 21 6 6 15 $ 8,926.25 September 15 9 4 11 $ 7,116.00 October 31 13
16 15 $ 12,322.00 November 20 8 7 13 $ 4,957.75 December 20 12 11 9 $ 6,216.00 2005 TOTAL 289 0 135 141 148 $ 99,801.25 48% Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue ^
January 28 16 17 11 $ 7,135.00 February 38 23 22 16 $ 10,573.00 March 38 25 27 11 $ 6,271.00 April 22 10 12 10 $ 7,182.50 May 33 18 18 15 $ 8,773.00 June 32 20 19 13 $ 5,727.75 July
28 10 13 15 $ 8,499.00 August 25 14 16 9 $ 9,286.50 September 27 12 15 12 $ 5,656.00 October 37 16 14 23 $ 11,561.00 November 37 16 15 22 $ 10,074.00 December 39 20 19 20 $ 7,472.75
2006 TOTAL 384 0 200 207 177 $ 98,211.50 54% Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue ^ January 46 36 28 18 $ 8,694.44 February * 43 28 26 17 $ 6,739.48 March 46 26 31
15 $ 8,050.50 April 33 17 16 17 $ 6,269.00 May 38 16 15 23 $ 11,920.25 June 38 15 15 23 $ 16,124.75 July 34 1 26 8 $ 12,114.25 August 16 10 6 10 $ 8,355.50 September 29 11 6 23 $ 10,475.50
October 31 10 2 29 $ 20,567.75 November 32 16 6 10 $ 8,600.25 December 30 14 9 21 $ 11,721.00 2007 TOTAL 416 0 200 186 214 $ 129,632.67 this data does not 48% 45% 51% 248 Community Center
Rentals
City of Saratoga Facility Rental Data Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue ^ January 29 8 13 8 $ 9,555.25 February * 33 14 1 18 $ 6,590.00 March 29 7 14 8 $ 4,765.00
April 32 8 6 18 $ 9,731.00 May 37 2 4 31 $ 11,718.50 June 37 2 14 21 $ 9,011.00 July ** 30 3 1 0 26 $ 11,022.00 August * 32 3 6 0 23 $ 11,045.50 September 46 12 5 0 29 $ 12,849.75 October
65 18 9 0 38 $ 15,968.00 November 59 18 10 4 27 $ 12,726.50 December 30 12 11 0 7 $ 7,443.00 2008 TOTAL 459 66 83 56 254 $ 122,425.50 14% 18% 12% 55% Rentals City Non-Profits Residents
Non-Residents Revenue ^ January 57 26 15 0 16 $ 11,821.75 February 55 25 13 1 16 $ 8,373.50 March 54 25 15 0 16 $ 6,497.00 April 0 $ -May 0 $ -June 0 $ -July 0 $ -August 0 $ -September
0 $ -October 0 $ -November 0 $ -December 0 $ -2009 TOTAL 166 76 43 1 48 $ 26,692.25 46% 26% 1% 29% GRAND TOTAL 1714 142 661 591 841 $ 476,763.17 City = non-revenue producing reservations
by employees and Councilmembers for meetings and such. ^ includes "regular" monthly rentals: Bayside Fellowship Church -every Sunday, average $462 revenue each month South Bay Youth
Orchestra -every TU&WE Jan-May, average $280 revenue each month West Valley Weight Loss -1st and 3rd WE, average $90 revenue each month Men's Basketball League -every Sunday night, average
$308 per month Saratoga Rotary -every Friday, average $668 per month ** facility reservationnssnnoowwininRrecTracc Trac * closed for two weeks during patio concrete repair * closed for
two weeks for cleaning/maintenance 249 Community Center Rentals
City of Saratoga Facility Rental Data 0.539063 data does not add up. How can you have 416 rentals total when you have 200 non-profit, 186 resident & 214 non-resident? 250 Community Center
Rentals
City of Saratoga Facility Rental Data 251 Community Center Rentals
City of Saratoga Facility Rental Data Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue Property purchased in Fall of 2002 September 10 3 7 0 0 $ 430.00 October 11 3 8 0 0 $ 620.00
November 20 2 18 0 0 $ 1,270.00 December 14 2 12 0 0 $ 900.00 2002 TOTAL * 55 10 45 0 0 $ 3,220.00 % Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue January 20 12 8 0 0 $ 608.00
February 20 11 9 0 0 $ 350.00 March 16 2 14 0 0 $ 1,370.00 April 14 5 9 0 0 $ 700.00 May 11 3 8 0 0 $ 600.00 June 37 28 9 0 0 $ 870.00 July 56 46 9 1 0 $ 920.00 August 18 8 10 0 0 $
990.00 September 21 2 19 0 0 $ 1,410.00 October 19 2 17 0 0 $ 1,370.00 November 33 1 32 0 0 $ 1,941.00 December 8 0 8 0 0 $ 990.00 2003 TOTAL * 273 120 152 1 0 $ 12,119.00 % Rentals
City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue January 19 1 17 1 0 $ 1,540.00 February 24 1 23 0 0 $ 1,745.00 March 9 1 8 0 0 $ 600.00 April 12 2 10 0 0 $ 790.00 May 9 1 8 0 0 $ 700.00
June 29 19 10 0 0 $ 1,050.00 July 44 42 1 1 0 $ 700.00 August 43 33 10 0 0 $ 900.00 September 12 12 3 9 0 0 $ 760.00 October 21 2 19 0 0 $ 1,280.00 November 17 2 15 0 0 $ 1,120.00 December
18 2 16 0 0 $ 998.00 2004 TOTAL * 257 109 146 2 0 $ 12,183.00 % 252 North Campus Rentals ---------'===-------
City of Saratoga Facility Rental Data Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue January 21 1 19 2 0 $ 1,604.00 February 19 0 8 0 0 $ 700.00 March 12 0 7 1 0 $ 1,450.00
April 9 0 3 1 0 $ 780.00 May 6 0 0 0 0 $ 290.00 June 7 0 0 0 0 $ 1,160.00 July 1 0 0 0 0 $ 100.00 August 0 0 0 0 0 $ -September 1 0 0 0 0 $ 60.00 October 1 0 0 0 0 $ 405.00 November
1 0 1 0 0 $ 60.00 December 0 0 0 0 0 $ -2005 TOTAL * 78 1 38 4 0 $ 6,609.00 % Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue January 8 1 7 0 0 $ 280.00 February 1 0 0 1 0 $
50.00 March 1 1 0 0 0 $ -April 1 0 0 1 0 $ 90.00 May 9 1 8 0 0 $ 420.00 June 7 0 7 0 0 $ 280.00 July 42 42 0 0 0 $ -August 31 28 0 3 0 $ 80.00 September 19 8 4 7 0 $ 748.00 October 22
8 9 5 0 $ 460.00 November 22 9 9 4 0 $ 480.00 December 14 5 7 2 0 $ 380.00 2006 TOTAL * 177 103 51 23 0 $ 3,268.00 % Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue January
16 4 12 0 0 $ 540.00 Administration Building closed for renovation July 15 15 0 0 0 $ -August 11 11 0 0 0 $ --September 20 1 0 19 0 $ 5,400.00 October 1 0 0 1 0 $ 5,400.00 November 0
0 0 0 0 $ -December 1 0 0 1 0 $ 350.00 2009 TOTAL * 64 31 12 21 0 $ 11,690.00 48% 19% 33% 253 North Campus Rentals
City of Saratoga Facility Rental Data Rentals City Non-Profits Residents Non-Residents Revenue January 0 $ -February 0 $ -March 0 $ -April 0 $ -May 0 $ -June 0 $ -July 0 $ -August 0
$ -September 0 $ -October 0 $ -November 0 $ -December 0 $ -2010 TOTAL * 0 0 0 0 0 $ -% GRAND TOTALS 904 374 444 51 0 $ 49,089.00 City of Saratoga Rentals (no charge): Sister City (Taiko
Drummers) Commission Meetings Council Retreat Employee Training Registrar of Voters Sheriff Department training Friends of Saratoga Library meetings Saratoga Fire District Saratoga Historical
Foundation (museum) SASCC Recreation Department Summer Camps Recreation Department Theater group Non-Profit Organizations (50% discount): Boy Scouts Chinese-American Women Eastfield
Ming Quong Religious Groups (various) Saratoga Community of Painters/Artists Residents (receive 10% discount) * INCOMPLETE DATA AVAILABLE 254 North Campus Rentals
SUMMARY OF FACILITY RENTALS Rentals City Non-Profits Private Revenue ^ City Non-Profits Private Community Center 487 143 79 265 $1 00,724.14 $ 55 $ 14,421 $ 86,248 Senior Center 143
42 55 46 $ 10,568.52 $ -$ 6,445 $ 4,124 WH House 73 51 2 20 $ 9,458.54 $ -$ 686 $ 8,772 North Campus 64 31 12 21 $ 11,690.00 $ -$ -$ 11,690 2008/2009 TOTAL 767 267 148 352 $132,441.20
$ 55 $ 21,552 $ 110,834 35% 19% 46% 0% 16% 84% 255
Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Crystal Morrow DIRECTOR: Barbara
Powell Administrative Analyst II Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation Commission North Campus Name Recommendations RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and select one of
the names recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission for the North Campus. BACKGROUND: During the City Council’s joint meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission in 2008,
the Council asked the Commission to lead a public process to rename the North Campus. Following the meeting, the Commission became familiar with the site to gain a better perspective
of potential uses of the site and how the name could help brand the City facility. Additionally, the Commission reviewed the City’s naming policy to develop criteria for a public naming
contest. The Commission then created rules for a public contest to rename the North Campus based on its intended uses and the City’s naming policy. Below are the rules established by
the Commission for the naming contest: -Name must reflect the surrounding environment or make a historic connection with the site -Name must include the word Saratoga -Name must be 5
words or less The public was allowed to submit proposals online, by mail, or in person. Submissions for the contest were accepted between September 24, 2009 and October 23, 2009. During
this time, 58 proposals were received. Parks and Recreation Commissioners reviewed all of the proposals and selected what they considered to be the top 5 submissions during their meeting
on November 10, 2009. The names recommended by the Parks and Recreation are: -Prospect Park Saratoga -Saratoga Grace Campus -Saratoga North Community Center -Saratoga Prospect Campus
-Saratoga Prospect Park 256
Page 2 of 2 The Commission will be presenting these to the Council for decision at the November 18, 2009 City Council meeting. All of the proposals submitted during the contest are listed
in Attachment A. Staff has not removed duplicates or names that did not meet the contest criteria. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: A new name
for the North Campus will not be selected. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The Council may decide to independently select a name for the North Campus or provide further direction to the Parks
and Recreation Commission. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: North Campus Name
Contest Submissions 257
NorthCampusNameContestSubmissions1 NorthCampusNameContestSubmissions 1. CityofSaratogaNorthCampus 2. GraceCenterofSaratoga 3. ProspectParkSara
toga 4. SaratogaActivityCenter 5. SaratogaActivityCenter 6. SaratogaBlueHillsCommunityCenter 7. SaratogaCenterfortheCommunity 8. SaratogaCharm
9. SaratogaCommunityCenter 10. SaratogaCommunityCenterNorth 11. SaratogaCommunityCenterNorth(SCCN) 12. SaratogaCommunityProspect 13. SaratogaCulturalC
enter(S.C.C.) 14. SaratogaCulturalCenter(SCC) 15. SaratogaEventCenter 16. SaratogaFamilyLifeCenter 17. SaratogaFellowshipCenter 18. SaratogaFriendship
FestivalCenter 19. SaratogaFriendshipHall 20. SaratogaFriendshipPark 21. SaratogaGatehouseatBlueHills 22. SaratogaGraceCampus 23. SaratogaGraceCen
ter 24. SaratogaGraceCommunityHouse 25. SaratogaGreenlandsCampus 26. SaratogaHopeHall 27. SaratogaintheNorthWoods 28. SaratogaintheWoods
29. SaratogaInternationalUnityHall 30. SaratogaMultiCulturalCommunityCenter 31. SaratogaNorthCommunityCenter 32. SaratogaNorthCommunityCenter
258
NorthCampusNameContestSubmissions2 33. SaratogaPlace 34. SaratogaProspectCampus 35. SaratogaProspectCampus 36. SaratogaProspectCampus
37. SaratogaProspectCampus(orCenter) 38. SaratogaProspectCenter 39. SaratogaProspectPark 40. SaratogaProspectRotunda 41. SaratogaRanch
42. SaratogaRecreationCenter 43. SaratogaSereneCenter 44. SaratogaTollGateCenter 45. SaratogaUnitedEventsCenter 46. SaratogaUnityCenter
47. Saratoga'sGraceUnitedCommunityCenter 48. SaratogaWestValleyCommunityCenter 49. SaratogaFellowshipCampus 50. SaratogaFellowshipCampus 51.
TheSaratogaFamilyCenter Submissionsthatdidnotmeetcontestcriteria: 52. FamilyLifeCenter 53. GraceCampus 54. GraceCenter 55. ProspectCommunityCent
er 56. TheBeautifulPlace 57. TheGraceCenteratProspect 58. TheRanchonProspect 259
Page 1 of 3 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Crystal Morrow DIRECTOR: Barbara
Powell Administrative Analyst II Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: CaliforniaFIRST Letter of Commitment RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and approve CaliforniaFIRST letter of commitment.
BACKGROUND: CaliforniaFIRST: CaliforniaFIRST is a turnkey property assessed clean energy (PACE) program that was developed by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority
(California Communities), a joint powers authority. The program will be administered by Renewable Funding LLC, which has also managed PACE programs for the City of Berkeley and Boulder
County in Colorado. Additionally, Renewable Funding will soon be launching a
new PACE program in San Francisco. Municipalities can “opt in” to the CaliforniaFIRST program to allow property owners to finance clean energy projects through bonds that are issued
by California Communities. Bonds are then repaid through the property taxes of participating property owners over a 10-20 year period. CaliforniaFIRST is a voluntary program and only
affects property owners that choose to participate in the program. To participate in CaliforniaFIRST, municipalities pay a onetime start up fee. In turn, California Communities handles
all administration of CaliforniaFIRST. The cost for Saratoga to opt in to the CaliforniaFIRST program is $12,500. CaliforniaFIRST Pilot Program: Before CaliforniaFIRST is rolled out
on a statewide basis, it will first be tested in pilot counties and cities throughout the State. The pilot program will be launched sometime between spring and early summer 2010. The
statewide program would then become active late summer 2010. The pilot program will allow CaliforniaFIRST to be implemented in phases and also improve the program’s bond rating before
being introduced statewide. If Santa Clara County participates in the CaliforniaFIRST pilot program, Saratoga will also be eligible to be part of the pilot program. 260
Page 2 of 3 State Energy Program – Municipal Financing Program Grant: As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the State of California has received $226 million for the
State Energy Program (SEP). Of this money, $95 million will be used to fund an Energy Efficiency Program that will provide grants to qualified organizations for residential building
retrofit, municipal and commercial retrofit, and municipal financing programs. The State’s SEP funds are being administered by the California Energy Commission. Renewable Funding and
California Communities have been working with Sacramento County to prepare an SEP municipal financing program grant application to cover the costs of program financing, local coordination,
and marketing for all municipalities participating in the pilot CaliforniaFIRST program. If the grant is awarded to Sacramento County it would cover the City of Saratoga’s start up costs
to participate in the CaliforniaFIRST program. Next Steps: The California Energy Commission is requiring that all of the cities that intend to participate in the CaliforniaFIRST pilot
program submit a letter of commitment. The letter of commitment fulfills two purposes. First, it authorizes Sacramento County to act as the lead agency in submitting the SEP grant application
for CaliforniaFIRST pilot program participants. Second, it will verify the amount of SEP funds needed for the CaliforniaFIRST pilot program. Renewable Funding has indicated that the
letter of commitment is non-binding. Following submission of the letter of commitment, pilot counties and cities will need to adopt a resolution to join the CaliforniaFIRST program by
January 18, 2010. This resolution will authorize CaliforniaFIRST to accept applications from property owners, conduct contractual assessment proceedings, and levy contractual assessments
within the jurisdiction. Pilot municipalities can note in the resolution that participation in the CaliforniaFIRST pilot program is contingent upon SEP funds being awarded to cover the
start up costs of CaliforniaFIRST pilot jurisdictions. FISCAL IMPACTS: There are no fiscal impacts associated with authorizing signature of the letter of commitment. If the City should
decide to move forward in the CaliforniaFIRST pilot program then the cost of participation for Saratoga will be $12,500. However, this cost may be covered by Sacramento County’s SEP
grant for municipal financing and the City can decide to make participation in the CaliforniaFIRST pilot program dependent upon the award of SEP municipal financing funds for the CaliforniaFIRST
pilot program. Alternatively, the Council may decide to use Council Contingency Funds to cover the cost of opting in to the CaliforniaFIRST pilot program if SEP monies are not awarded
to the program. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: The City will not submit a letter of commitment to CaliforniaFIRST and will not be included in the pilot program.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): 261
Page 3 of 3 N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Letter of Commitment for CaliforniaFIRST
program 262
Incorporated October22,1956 CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • www.saratoga.ca.us COUNCIL MEMBERS: Jill Hunter Kathleen King Howard Miller Susie Nagpal
Chuck Page November 18, 2009 Elizabeth Stone, Contracts Officer California Energy Commission 1516 Ninth Street, MS-18 Sacramento, California 95814 RE: PON #400-09-401 Municipal Financing
Program Application: CaliforniaFIRST Program Dear Ms. Stone: The City of Saratoga is pleased to offer this letter of commitment to the State Energy Program application of Sacramento
County regarding the CaliforniaFIRST Program, a property assessed clean energy program, sponsored by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (“California Communities”).
I am authorized to sign this letter of commitment on behalf of the City of Saratoga pending final approval of City Council. Through participation in this municipal financing program,
the City of Saratoga strives to create lasting market and behavioral changes resulting in the increased adoption of distributed generation renewable energy sources and energy efficiency
improvements for the property owners in the our jurisdiction. The City of Saratoga authorizes Sacramento County as the lead agency in submitting this application on behalf of our jurisdiction
to provide funding in two program areas to ensure the long-term success of this innovative municipal financing program: Program Financing Costs—to buy-down the interest rate on the initial
round(s) of projects financed by the CaliforniaFIRST Program; cover fixed costs associated with bond counsel, bond disclosure, and bond rating; and fund set-up fees for counties and
cities which cover legal and validation costs, as well as the deployment of technology to support local programs. Local Coordination and Marketing Costs—to provide for grant administration;
technical assistance; agency coordination; steering committee participation; education, outreach, incentives, and marketing; and community coordination for property owners participating
in the program. 263
Aligned with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and California Energy Commission (CEC) State Energy Program strategies, our proposed program will increase green jobs, increase energy
efficiency and deployment of renewable energy technologies, promote economic activity, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The City of Saratoga will help to guide program development
and implementation in our jurisdiction and throughout the region by serving on the appropriate steering committee, and coordinating with state level CaliforniaFIRST partners, local government
coordination program partners, and relevant internal departments. We will work collaboratively to ensure the success of the pilot and the long-term success of the program. The City of
Saratoga intends to seek City Council approval and provide the CEC with the necessary governing board resolutions contingent upon finalization of the resolutions, proposal selection
for funding, and inclusion in the Notice of Proposed Awards. The resolutions are: 1. Authorization for the collaborative lead agency bidder Sacramento County to apply for and receive
funding on behalf of the City of Saratoga, and 2. Authorization for City of Saratoga to join the California Communities CaliforniaFIRST Program. City of Saratoga is grateful for your
consideration of this proposal. If you have any questions regarding this request, please feel free to contact: Barbara Powell, Assistant City Manager (408) 868-1215 bpowell@saratoga.ca.us
Crystal Morrow, Administrative Analyst II (408) 868-1275 cmorrow@saratoga.ca.us Sincerely, Chuck Page, Mayor City of Saratoga 264
Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: John Cherbone DIRECTOR: John Cherbone
Public Works Director Public Works Director SUBJECT: Energy Efficiency Projects – Funding Resolution RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Accept Report and provide direction to staff. 2. Approve
Budget Resolution. REPORT SUMMARY: The City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) includes various energy efficiency projects, most unfunded, such as replacing the City’s old HVAC units with
energy efficient models and installing solar panels at City Hall Campus. The Mayor and Vice Mayor are proposing to move existing funds in the amount $250,000 from the Multi-Purpose Room
Improvement Fund Project to fund the replacement of HVAC units at City Hall and Community Center and to fund solar energy improvements in the Corporation Yard. High Efficiency HVAC Units
This project would replace the worse performing of the 29 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems at City Hall and the Community Center with high efficiency, Energy
Star rated systems. There are seven (7) HVAC units at City Hall and Community Center that are reaching the end of there lifecycle. HVAC systems account for 30 to 50 percent of the annual
electric bill and high efficiency systems can reduce energy consumption by 20% to 30% per unit per year. New models are also much friendly to the environment as they utilize non ozone
depleting refrigerant. The cost to replace the seven (7) HVAC units is estimated at $125,000. Solar Improvements Two years ago the City Council approved and funded a CIP project to build
a shelter structure for equipment and vehicles at the Corporation Yard which could also support solar panels. If constructed, the structure will have the capacity to house 80 kW of energy
production. Approximately 15 kW can be purchased for $125,000 including connections, etc. If you add this to the 10 kW of solar power the City has through Akeena Solar, the amount of
energy the project will generate will be approximately 25 kW. 265
Page 2 of 2 The Corporation Yard has approximately 16 kW of demand, which will leave 9 kW of additional energy production from the system. This additional energy can be directed to the
Community Center. The annual energy savings will be 100% for the Corporation Yard ($4,500) and approximately 15% for the Community Center ($2,700). FISCAL IMPACTS: Annual savings in
electrical costs will be realized from this project and long term benefits to the City’s rolling stock will occur from the construction of the shelter structure. A Budget Resolution
is attached which transfers $250,000 from the Multi-Purpose Room Improvement Fund Project to the High Efficiency HVAC System Project ($125,000) and the City Hall Solar Project ($125,000).
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The two projects would not be funded and the energy efficiency projects would not move forward. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: None in addition
to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION: Improvements will begin as soon as possible. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: Budget Resolution. 266
RESOLUTION NO.__________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR HIGH EFFICIENCY HVAC SYSTEM
PROJECT AND CITY HALL SOLAR PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council desires to fund energy efficiency projects; and WHEREAS, financing in the amount of $125,000 is needed for the replacement
of seven HVAC units at City Hall and the Community Center; and WHEREAS, financing in the amount of $125,000 is needed for the first phase of the City Hall Solar Project located in the
Corporation Yard; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to make adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2009/10 budget as follows: Account Description Account# Amount To appropriate expenditures for the
High Efficiency HVAC System Project and City Hall Solar Project High Efficiency HVAC System Project – Exp Appropriation: TBD $125,000 City Hall Solar Project – Exp Appropriation: TBD
$125,000 To transfer funds from Multi Purpose Room Improvement Fund to the High Efficiency HVAC System Project and City Hall Solar Project: Multi Purpose Room Improvement Fund – Transfer
Out (close) TBD ($250,000) High Efficiency HVAC System Project – Transfer In: TBD $125,000 City Hall Solar Project – Transfer In: TBD $125,000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the
City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby approves the above adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2009/10 Capital Improvement Budget. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the above and foregoing resolution
was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on 18th day of November 2009 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________
Chuck Page, Mayor City of Saratoga Attest: _______________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 267