HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-20-1998 City Council packeti
Public hearings will start promptly at 8`:00, when the Council will m•ve
from whatever item it is considering at that time to public hearings.
Note: Devices to assist the hearing impaired are now available in the
lobby.
3.
7:30 Pledge of Allegiance
ROLL CALL
CEREMONIAL
I/1/2 G
ITEMS
properly posted on May 15.
AGENDA
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
TIME: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 7:30 p.m.
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Ave.
TYPE: Regular Meeting
A. Resolution appointing Heritage Commissioners Nancy
Anderson, Larry Fine, Robert Peepari, and Beth Wyman
3
-0
B. Administration of Oath of Office to the Above
C. Proclamation for Lavonne Marafino, Resource Specialist and
Teacher
D. Proclamation for Jennifer Sandretto, 1997 Southwest YMCA
Volunteer of the Year
E. Proclamation on Lifespan Senior Health and Fitness Day
r
REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC
40 4.
/1c
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS None.
City Council Agenda
C. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
1) Memo from Santa Clara County Cities Association
conce ning AB1614 Internet Tax Compromise
TAA 1" 2
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
These items will be acted upon in one motion for each section unless
they are removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion by
Councilmembers or any interested party. However, items in Section A
have already been considered by the Council at a previous meeting where
the public was invited to comment, after which the hearing was closed.
Those items are not subject to public discussion at this meeting
because the vote taken at the previous meeting was final. Resolutions
concerning decisions made at previous meetings are for the purpose of
memorializing the decision to assure the accuracy of the findings, the
prior vote, and any conditions imposed.
A. Previously Discussed Items
1) Resolution denying Weiser Appeal of Persson Project
B. New Items
HI/ 3-
2 May 20, 1998
1) Planning Commission Actions, 5/13 Note and file.
2) Memo Authorizing Publicity for Upcoming Hearings
Brush Abatement; UUD #8; Class A Roofing Ordinance;
Budget
3) Amendment to Agreement for Countywide AB939
Implementation Fee and Authorization for City Manager
to Execute
4) Approval of Check Register
5) Resolution declaring Weeds and Brush a Public Nuisance
and Setting Hearing
6) Final Map Approval for Tr. 9074 (15 lots at 14135
Douglass Lane and 20325 La Paloma Avenue)(Owner, Pinn
Bros. /Spaich)
City Council Agenda
4. A. Oral Communications (continued) and instructions to staff
regarding actions on current oral communications
8.
C. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS None.
OLD BUSINESS None.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Roofing Issues:
3 May 20, 1998
1) Ordinance establishing Class A Roofing Requirements
throughout City of Saratoga (first reading and
introduction) (Note: Public hearing is to be held for
second reading of ordinance on June 3.)
2
Resolution setting forth Findings of Local Conditions
1`1 9. ROUTINE MATTERS (Note: City Attorney will be excused at this
point if no longer needed.)
A. Approval of Minutes 5/6; 5/12
o
3,z 3
CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
A. Agenda item for next adjourned regular meeting (Note: The
purpose of listing the item immediately following is not
to discuss or take action on it, but simply to decide
whether it is to be placed on the agenda for the meeting
of May 26.)
FY98/99 and 99/00 Budget Discussions with Finance Commission 7 1 04
riv-114
City Council Agenda
B. Other G
g-
Aur
0 11. CITY MANAGER$ RE RT
fl y
2-S
4
Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue.
May 20, 1998
v 1 12. ADJOURNMENT to next meeting at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 26, at
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need
special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Peter
Gonda at 408/868 -1221. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility
to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102- 35.104 ADA Title II]
RESOLUTION NO.
z A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
APPOINTING AND REAPPOINTING MEMBERS OF THE
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the terms of Frank Dutro, Larry Fine, Robert Peepari, and
Beth Wyman on the Heritage Preservation Commission have expired,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted interviews for the Heritage
Preservation Commission, and it is now appropriate to fill the
vacancies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE following reappointments
and appointment are made for terms ending April 2002:
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a
regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 20th day
of May, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
Nancy Anderson
Larry Fine
Robert Peepari
Beth Wyman
Mayor
WHEREAS, Lavonne Marafino has been a Resource Specialist and
Teacher with the Saratoga Union Elementary School District since
1959, and is now retiring after many accomplishments, and
WHEREAS, among these accomplishments are serving in various
capacities in the Saratoga Teacher's Association and on various
committees in the School District and membership in the California
Association of Resource Specialists, Delta Kappa Gamma, Pi Lambda
Theta, California Teachers Association, Linda Mood Bell Learning
Association, and
WHEREAS, in addition, she has served as Co -Chair of the Bond
Measure Committee and as an advisor to the Santa Clara County Girl
Scouts, and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Marafino has received the award as Santa Clara County
1985 Teacher of the Year and a honorary PTA Service Award.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, hereby proclaim
our thanks and commendations to
Mayor
CONCERNING LAVONNE MARAFINO
LAVONNE NARAFINO
zG
for almost thirty years of service to the School District and to
the Community as a whole.
WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 20th
day of May, 1998.
CONCERNING JENNIFER SANDRETTO
WHEREAS, Jennifer Sandretto has been named 1997 Volunteer of the
Year for the Southwest YMCA, which is located in the City of
Saratoga, and
WHEREAS, Jennifer has been volunteering since 1988 and has been a
member of the volunteer program staff for five years, and
WHEREAS, she has been a lead advisor for the Youth and Government
program for seven years, during which she has campaigned and made
presentations to raise funds for that program, and lent it
direction and vision, and
WHEREAS, Jennifer has also encouraged the community to keep fit by
serving as the Race Director for the San Jose Mercury News 10K
Run /5 K Walk.
WHEREAS, in short, Jennifer has been a role model for local
teenagers.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, hereby commend
JENNIFER SANDRETTO
for her work with the Southwest YMCA and for her contributions to
the community, and for the countless hours she has spent enriching
the lives of local teens.
WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 20th
day of May, 1998.
Mayor
CONCERNING LIFESPAN SENIOR HEALTH AND FITNESS DAY
WHEREAS, physical frailty in later years is due to multiple causes,
and research indicates that at least 50% of the usual decline can
be prevented through early detection of weaknesses and appropriate
physical activity interventions, and
WHEREAS, researchers at California State University, Fullerton,
have developed LifeSpan: A Physical Assessment Study Benefiting
Older Adults, which will be conducted nation -wide and will result
in the first national standards for evaluating the physical fitness
and mobility of older adults, and
WHEREAS, the LlfeSpan study is designed to help researchers
identify areas of weakness and assist them in planning exercise
programs for seniors, and
WHEREAS, the LifeSpan Wellness Clinic within the Ruby Gerontology
Center at California State University, Fullerton, has validated the
assessment battery used to collect data, and health care industry
member Pacific Care is a sponsor of the nation -wide study, and
WHEREAS, the senior community of Saratoga is responding
enthusiastically as participants in this study, which can provide
an invaluable screening tool for identifying those at risk of
losing function.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, am pleased to
proclaim May 26 as
LifeSpan Senior Health and Fitness Day
to celebrate local seniors' participation in this collaborative
effort to improve the quality of life by delaying or reversing age
related decline in physical ability.
WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 20th
day of May, 1998.
CITIES ASSOCIATION TEL :408- 736 2014
's
Campbell
Cupertino
Gilroy
Los Altos
Los Altos Hills
Las Gatos
Milpitas
Monte Sereno
Morgan Hill
Mountain View
Palo Alto
San Jose
Santa Clara
Saratoga
Sunnyvale
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
CITIES ASSOCIATION
May 15, 1998
TO: City Managers /City Clerks
FROM: Marty Clevenger
RE: AB1614 Internet Tax Compromise
May 15,96 iu•-Ii 1\10.012 r .mil
Last night the Board of Directors voted unanimously (14 cities present)
to send the following resolution on the Internet tax compromise
proposal to each member city for consideration.
The enclosed letter from Mayor Jim Roberts of Sunnyvale explains the
process which resulted in the revised version of AB1614. The city
representatives from San Carlos and Sunnyvale endorsed the
compromise. Tim Steele, City of San Jose and a member of the
committee, expressed three reservations about the compromise: the
five year sunset is too long; the reference to section 65004 (tax
provision) is not appropriate in this bill and the compromise should be
technically approved by a city attorney.
Each city is urged to agendize this resolution as soon as possible in
order to participate in the June 3rd hearing on AB1614 before the
Senate Committee on Revenue and Taxation.
Included with this memo:
Sample resolution
Letter from Mayor Roberts
Draft compromise AB1614
List of problems with AB1614 as introduced
Letter from Carl Guardino, Pres. SCVMG
505 W. Olive Avenue, Suite 630, Sunnyvale, California 94086 Tel: (408) 730 -7770 Fax: (408) 736 -2014
CITIES ASSOCIATION TEL :408- 736 -2014 May 15,98 10:41 No.UiL r.u.
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING COMPROMISE PROPOSAL TO
THE CALIFORNIA INTERNET TAX FREEDOM ACT
AB 1614
WHEREAS, AB 1614, The Califomla Internet Tax Freedom Act, sponsored by
Assemblyman Ted Lempert is pending in the California State Assembly; and
WHEREAS, AB 1614, The California Internet Tax Freedom Act, prohibits any tax or fee
directly or indirectly on, or In connection with, the Internet, or any interactive computer
services, with specified exceptions preserving existing tax authority of the State and its
political subdivisions; and
WHEREAS, local govemments have expressed concerns that the current legislation
could be Interpreted to reduce or eliminate current taxes and fees collected by local
government to support essential City services; and
WHEREAS, local governments have opposed legislation that does not provide for a
mechanism to fully protect existing revenue sources to local governments, including
sales and use tax, utility franchise fees, etc.;
WHEREAS, State and local leaders recognize that businesses, especially Internet
businesses that transcend state borders, cannot be expected to keep track of different
rules for 6,000 taxing Jurisdictions and there Is a need to significantly simplify the sales
tax systems; and
WHEREAS, the local governments support a sunset on the moratorium that restricts the
ability of the State and any of its political subdivisions to develop a comprehensive, long
term, and equitable solution to streamline the outdated and burdensome sales tax
system to ensure that American business, government, and consumers are well
positioned to prosper in the twenty -first century global marketplace; and
WHEREAS, Industry representatives have expressed concerns that, without legislation,
the State and any of its political subdivisions may impose any tax or fee "directly or
indirectly on, or in connection with" the Internet, any interactive computer service which
would be considered either new or discriminatory on Internet services; and
WHEREAS, both local government and industry representative have Identified two
areas of agreement preservation of the unrestricted growth of the Internet and
protection of existing City revenue sources; and
WHEREAS, local government and Industry representatives have Jointly drafted a
compromise proposal in the nature of a substitute to the September 15, 1997 version of
AB 1614, The California Internet Tax Freedom Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of supports the
compromise proposal and urges Assemblyman Lempert to amend the existing AB 1614
by substituting the draft language attached to this resolution.
CITIES ASSOCIATION TEL :408 -736 -2014
SUN
,,\F
May 15,98 1U:44i fvO.u1L r .uu
Date: May 14, 1998
To: Santa Clara County Cities Association
From: Jim Roberts, Mayor, Sunnyvale
Subject: Internet Tax
As you know, several Internet tax legislative proposals are presently being
debated by the California Legislature and U.S. Congress. I am writing to apprise
you of recent developments with the California legislation (AB 1614, Lempert)
and of a compromise proposal which has been developed locally.
Last month, Sunnyvale city staff was Invited by the Silicon Valley Manufacturing
Group (SVMG) to discuss California's AB 1614 with representatives of a number
of high tech companies and other local governments. The meeting was
designed as an information gathering meeting for the SVMG as they prepared to
take a formal position on Assemblyman Lempert's proposed legislation.
At the meeting, staff from Sunnyvale, San Carlos and San Jose discussed their
concems with the current version of the proposal, including the definition of
taxes, the potential loss of cable franchise fees, and other important Issues.
While It was evident that there were areas of disagreement, it was obvious that
both parties had two clear areas of agreement: preservation of the unrestricted
growth of the Internet and protection of existing City revenue sources. In fact, in
the interim, the SVMG has voted "to support the concept of a moratorium on new
Internet taxes with the assurance that it does not negatively impact existing
revenues of local jurisdictions."
The mutual interests Identified by the business community and local
governments led to the creation of an Informal AB 1614 committee at that
meeting (with the encouragement of the SVMG) comprised of six individuals,
three from the local high tech Industry and three from local government. The
committee was asked.to draft language that preserved the goals outlined above
and was agreeable to all. After several weeks of hard work, a revised version of
AB 1614 has been agreed upon by committee members and is attached for your
review.
ADDRESS ALL MAiL TO: P.O. BOX 3707 SUNNYVALE, CALIFORNIA 94088 3707
For deaf access. call TDD/TTY (408) 730 -7501
CITIES ASSOCIATION TEL :408- 736 2014
May 14, 1998
Santa Clara County Cities Association
Page 2
May i 1U 4i NO .uic r .v4
The attached draft represents an outstanding collaborative effort among the
business community and local govemment. It seeks to avoid preempting
existing local govemment revenue sources while clearly establishing a
moratorium on taxes targeted to the Internet and on -line computer services.
The Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee is expected to conduct a hearing
on AB 1614 on June 3. The City of Sunnyvale plans to testify In support of the
attached language at the June 3 hearing and requests your consideration of this
compromise proposal.
.CITIES ASSOCIATION
To: Mary Bradley
TEL:408 736 -2014 May 15,98 1U :4i No.012 r.uD
Dale: 5/1JIb .ae: 2:12:58 PM
AB 1014 REVISED VERSION BY 1 614 TEAM
May 8, 1998
This draft is in the nature of a substitute of the September 15, 1997 version of AB 1614.
Strike all and replace it with the following:
SECTION 1. Part 32 (commencing with Suction 65001) is added to Division 2 of the Revenue and
Taxation Coda, to read:
PART 32. CALIFORNIA INTERNET TAX FREEDOM ACT
65001. This part shall be known and may be cited as the "California Internet Tax Freedom Act."
65002. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) As a massive global network spanning not only state but international borders, the Internet is
inherently a matter of interstate and foreign commerce within the jurisdiction of the United States
Congress under Section 8 of Article I of the United States Constitution.
(b) Even within the United States, the Internet does not respect state lines and operates
independently of Etate boundaries. Addresses on the Internet are designed to be geographically
indifferent. Internet transmissions are insensitive to physical distance and can have multiple
geographic»! addreses.
(c) The electronic marketplace of services, products, and ideas available through the Internet or
Online Computer Services can be especially beneficial to senior citizens, the physically challenged,
citizens in rural areas, and small businesses. It also offers a variety of uses and benefits for
educational institutions and charitable organizations.
(d) A uniform and coherent national pohoy concerning national and aubnational taxation of the
Internet. In a manner which does not unreasonably burden interstate and foreign commerce, is best
devolopud by the Congress of the United Statca, acting pursuant to the powers granted to it by
Clause 3 of Section 8 of Article I of the United States Constitution. Until that national po!icy is
developed, a limited preemption of state and local taxing authority of the Internet and Online
Computer Services is appropriate.
(o) Services provided by local governments aro important and valuable to both consumers and
businesses, and this bill is not intended to Interfbre with existing sources of revenue that provide
funding for local government services. This bill is intended to impose a moratorium on new taxes
imposed specifically on Internet access and Online Computer Services.
(f) For these reasons, the legislature finds that, subject to certain exceptions designed to protect
existing state and local government revenue. preemption of state and local government authority
and to levy taxes on companies offering Online Computer Services and access to the Internet is a
matter of statewide concern.
1
Pagu 3 of 5
CITIES RSSOCIATION TEL:408- 736 2014
Date: 5/13198 lime, 2:12:58 PM
To: Mary Bradley
AB 1814 REVISED VERSION BY 1014 TEAM
May 6,1998
may 15,9 lU.41 NO.ui r .00
Papa 4 of 5
65003. For purposes of this part:
(a) "Internet" means the global information system that is logically linked together by a globally
unique address space based on the Internet Protocol (IP), or its subsequent extensions; and is able
to support communications using the Transmisstc:, Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP)
suite, or its subsequent extensions, or other IP- compatible protocols; and provides, uses, or makes
accessible, either publicly or privately, high love{ services layered on the communications and
related infrastructure described heroin.
(b) "Online Computer Services" means the offering or provision of information, information
processing, and products or services to a user via the Internet whether or not they are offered as
part of a package of services that are combined with Internet access and offered to the user for a
single price. or provided and billed separately. Online Computer Services includes Internet Service
Providers, Online Service Providers, Internetwork Communication Service Providers or Other
Internet Access Service Providers and World Wide Web Hosting Services. The definition of
Online Computer Services does not include telephone service to the extant that the amounts paid
for such services are subject to the tax imposed under Section 4251 of Title 26 of the United grates
Code.
(c) "Tax" means a charge imposed solely for the purpose of generating revenues for governn'ental
purposes and not in return for a specific benefit. The definition of "Tax" does not include fees or
assessments in the form of any charge unposed by a governmental entity for a specific privilege,
service, or benefit conferred, or in connection with a specific regulated activity.
(d) "Internet Discriminatory Tax" means a tax levied on Online Computer Services or Werner
access:
i At a rate higher than that imposed ore other similar businesses or services generalky; or
2. Which applies to the taxpayer solely by virtue of the offering of Online Computer
Services or Internet access.
65004. (a) MORATORIUM ON INTERNET AND ON -LINE TAXES. Except as provided in
subdivision (b), neither the State nor any political subdivision, may impose or assess:
1. Any Internet or Online Computer Services tax on communications or transactions that
occur through the Internet or Online Computer Services.
2. Any Internet or Online Computer Services tax on the provision of access to or use of
Internet access or Online Computer Cervices.
1. Any Internet Discriminatory Tax.
2
•CITIES ASSOCIATION TEL :408 736 2014
Date: 6113196 low 2:12:58 PM
To: Mary Bradley
AB 1614 REVISED VERNON BY 1614 TEAM
May 5, 1998
May 1 5,96 1Li :iii f' D .U 1L r .u.
Page 5 of 5
(b) PRESERVATION OF STATE AND LOCAL TAXING AUTHORITY. The prohibition
in subdivision (a) against the imposition of Internet or Online Computer Services taxes shat: not
apply to any existing tax, including any sales and use tax or utility user tax, that is impose +l or
assessed without regard to whether the activities or transactions taxed are conducted through the
use of the Internet, Internet access or Online Compuiet Services.
(c) JURISDICTION OF STATE AND LOCAL TAXING AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE
TAX. The use of a computer server on the Internet to create or maintain a World Wide Web page
or site by in out -of -state retailer will not be considered a factor in determining whether any retailer
has a substantial nexus with California. No Online Computer Services shall be deemed the Agent
or representative of any out -of -state retailer as a result of the service provider maintainiu:.t or
taking orders via a web page or site on the service provider that is physically located in this state.
(d) SUNSET DATE. This part shall become inoperati'•o upon the earlier of the following datt....
1. The operative date of provisions of a congressional act that provides for a natr Ina)
policy concerning the taxation of the In:„, net.
2. The date five years from the effective date of the act adding this part.
SEC. 2. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the pt blic
peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into
immediate effect. The Pacts constituting the necessity are:
In order to maintain a uniform policy of taxation relating to Internet activity, it is necessary that
this act take effect immediately.
Remaining Issue/Question:
(1) Beat Approach to Study the Issues in California during the Moratorium Period?
Do we need to include this languagehopic in AB 1614? Or is it better to do that via
SB 1908?
If SD 1908 is the appropriate vehicle, should the bill be amended to include funding
for the study?
Should SB 1908 be amended to have a different study deadline date?
Should the language calling for the study be generic? Or should we suggest specific
items to be studied?
3
CITIES ASSOCIATION TEL:40b- 76b -2U14
To: Mary Bradley
Dole: 6/1111,'• .M9: 2:12:68 PM
LJST OP PROBLEMS MRTM AS 1014
Aprfl0,1999
May 15, ib 1U;4D IVO.U1[ r .uo
Page 2 of 5
1. Sales Tax 2 Hurdle Test
The bill includes two "hurdles" or 'tests" that the state and cities must 'pass" before
they can receive use tax and sales tax revenues from transactions on the Internet and
firms connected to the Internet (pg. 6, line 2).
2. Fen
Even though the intent of the bit is to pre-empt new, Internet -only taxes, AB 1614
has an extensive discussion about City fees. Since City foes arc used to cover the
cost of services to business like permits, plan check review. etc it is
inappropriate to pre -empt City fees u the bill proposes (pg. 5, lino 1).
3. Cable TV Franchise Fees
The language in the bill impacts City franchise fees. It says that the FCC o: any
judge can end franchise foes paid by Cable TV companies if they rule that services
offered by Cable TV firms are not "cable services" (pg. 6. line 32).
Bask Service
Basic Service is defined u "a level of service provided to all customers" of
telephone, cable TV or cellular providers. This means that all services which have
less than 100% usage (such as expanded basic cable TV channels, cable TV premium
channels, caller ID, voice mail) aro now outside of existing City franchise fees, utility
user taxes, etc. (pg. 5, line 7).
A. Definition of Interactive Computes roice
This term is defined so broadly that any business with a "computer server" connected
to the Internet that provides Internet "access by multiple users" would be entitled to
the tax and fee exemptions of the bill (pg. 4, line 26).
6. Definition of Taxes
The definition of taxes in AB 1614 is not consistent with other State laws and
legislation. A different definition of taxes is needed here (pg. 4, lino 36).
7. Cleanup of preamble
The current preamble suggests that local government practices and existing revenues
aro a barrier to the growth of the Internet. It fails to acknowledge tho role cities have
played in hooking up schools via franchise agreements. promoting web commerce to
local firma, developing Net Day and regional initiatives, oto. (pg. 3, tine 19)
9. Sunset Date
The various federal bills on this topic include a Sunset date. Since this is a new
technology area, dos it make sense to pass this bill without a Sunset date? Also,
should AB 1614 sunset once a federal bill on this topic passes to avoid a conflict
between State and Federal law?
9. Flipping the 8111
Does it make more sense to have the bill simply deal with preempting new, Int•lmet
only taxes (author's original intent) vs. talking about that and attempting to list all
other city, county and state revenues in AB 1614?
CITIES ASSOCIATION TEL:408 -736 -2014 May 15,98
05/13/98 11:44 11408 721 1212 EXTIGLNA 1 A11 AIRS
\Sil y�
IVl�n�u�p turinp
226Aipor4 SAM
Son Jost Carlbmis 95110
poepol WG psst F4X 40015014861
Gig
CARL GUARDINO
Ihuld.M CEO
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
O NISHIMURA
ChrYnran
JOHN A. CONOVER
$IOMery/Tnen M
Bank aIAmes
CRAIG R. BARRETT
MldCorpardlon
SHANKAR BHATTACHARYA
PG&E
ROBERT CARET
SenJmo surfs unlwdy
WILFRED J. CORRIGAN
Ls/ Login aorporstbn
JOHN DEAN
Mon Wiley hat
JOHN GINGERICH
lion noel 1/sewrx Capangon
BRIAN HA JJ1
NationalSamloondvdar
JAY T: HARRIS
San dose ►brtuy
DAVID HOUSE
Bay Newts. Irre.
DR. W. KEITH KENNEDY, JR.
Wolkhrs Moon
RICK
Herrlsd.Padratd Canpany
0IX1IN LARNERD
IBAI Capdsgoe
ALEXLEUPP
Samos Incmepaarkr, Inc
SCOTT G. MCNEALY
sun buystems, Mc.
Worsted Oaks Technology, hahro.
RICHARD PREVITE
monadAdarn Del nee, Mo.
ARTHUR L ROBERTS
LM4sd Wines LP
GRANT SAVIERS
kle0c. Inc
JOYCE M. TAYLOR
F Beg
L.'.. VICTORINO
laokheed Wolinkesaee Soon
HELEN M. WILMOT
Mika. Pormenfots
JOHN WOODS
1RW
JAMES N. WOODY. M.D., PH.D.
Noah BlomYnea
DAVID WRIGHT
Arndah1Carpetalbn
Waildng Council Chet
JOE PON
OplltdAerlrule
Founded In 1977 by
DAVID PAOKARD
May 10. 1998
The Honorable Ted Lempsrt
California State Assembly
Post Office Box 942849
Sacramento. CA 94249 -0001
Dear Ted:
10 45 NO .01
al 00
On behalf of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, I am writing to express our
support for the concept of your bill, AB 1814, relative to Internet taxation.
As falow; the ManufaotudAg Group was- formed1wenty.yaere.ago
Packard of Hewlett Packard. Today, it represents 125 of the most respected
employers in Silicon Valley, who collectively provide Jobs for a quart ir of a
million area workers.
The Manufacturing Group Ms reviewed your bill, AB 1614, In Its current form,
and has voted 'to support the conoept of a moratorium on new Internet taxes
with the assurance that It does not negatively Impact existing revenues of local
Jurisdictions.'
I understand that the bill might be amended es you work to find as broad a
consensus as possible to fit this core principle. The Manufacturing Group looks
forward to reviewing the bill In any future amended forms. In the meantime,
however, feel free to use our name In support of the concept of your bill, which I
believe Is captured In the quotation above.
Thanks again for your willingness to author such an Important bill. It Is greatly
appreciated.
Sincerely,
Cart Guardlno
President CEO
CC: Brian Perklns
Terry Ryan
Cliff Jernigan
Robyn Holat
l
MAY -13 -98 WED 15:54 MEYERS,NAVE,RIBRCK &SILV.
RESOLUTION NO. 98
FAX NO. 510 351 4481
THE
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY ROM
CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING
THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
V -97 -011 AND DR -97 -053
PERSSON 21194 Haymeadow Road
P.
WHEREAS, Persson, the applicants, have applied for Variance approval to
allow a proposed residence to encroach into the required front yard setback to adhere
to a standard front yard setback for that zoning district. tild b 62 f et)tand Design setback
based upon a percentage of the lot's depth (which
Review approval to construct a new 4,047 sq. ft. two story residence at 25 feet in
height;
WHEREAS, on February 25, 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of
Saratoga held a duly noticed public hearing on said application at which time all
interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence
and following the conclusion thereof the Planning Commission granted the
application;
WHEREAS, the granting by the Planning Commission has been appealed to
the City Council by Richard and Abby Weiser
WHEREAS, on April 15, 1998, the City Council conducted a de novo public
hearing on the appeal at which time any person interested in the matter was given a
"full opportunity to be heard;
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the staff report,
minutes of proceedings conducted by the Commission relating n support application, and
1
the written and oral evidence presented to the City C pp ort
opposition to the appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of
Saratoga as follows:
MAY -13 -98 WED 15:54 MEYERS,NAVE,R1BACK &SILV. FAX NO. 510 351 4481
Section Y V ri
-011
or
By unanimous vote of the City Council the appeal from the Planning
Commission is hereby denied and the decision of the Planning Commission is
affirmed, to wit: the applicants have met the burden of proof required to support the
application and the following findings have been determined:
(a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the
percentage -based front yard setback would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed
by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and dassified in the same zoning
district, in that:
Because of the unusual shape of the lot and its exceptional depth, the
City's current setback requirement of 20% of a parcel's depth would
result in a required front setback of 62 ft. This large setback would push
the structure down the hill and would require building in an area
identified by geotechnical review as potentially unstable.
The selected building site is the most stable portion of the property.
The selected building site has the gentlest slope of the entire property.
The selected building site contains a low number of ordinance protected
trees, as compared to the lower portion of the lot which is more densely
covered with ordinance protected trees.
The parcel was created under earlier development standards -the current
percentage setback requirements were not adopted until 1992.
The proposal does meet the minimum 30 ft. front yard setback
requirement in place when the parcel was created. It also meets current
side and rear yard setbacks.
Because of the depth of the lot, adhering to the percentage -based front
yard setback would necessitate taller retaining walls to provide a
reasonable driveway approach and significantly increased impervious
area coverage.
(b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
MAY -13 -98 WED 15 :54 MEYERS,NAVE,RIBACK &SILV, FAX NO. 510 351 4481
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and
dassified in the same zoning district in that:
Applicants would otherwise not be able to place their structure
atop relatively stable ground as identified by geotechnical
investigation.
Applicants would otherwise not be able to place their stricture on
a slope less than 30%.
Applicants would otherwise not be able to place their structure on
the most logical building site of the property.
Most homes in this subdivision were approved and constructed
prior to 1992, when percentage -based setbacks became required
for vacant lots. Therefore, applicant is requesting to be held to
exactly the same minimum front yard setback requirements as
was applied to other homes in the vicinity.
The Planning Commission would give any property owner the
same consideration based on these identified special
circumstances and limitations.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity in that:
The variance will permit development on the most stable portion
of the property; denial of the variance would require any
proposed structure to be located atop soils identified by geologic
review to be potentially unstable.
There is no reasonably foreseeable detriment to the public health,
safety, or welfare that might result from the granting of this
variance, nor is there any reasonably foreseeable material injury
to properties or improvements int he vicinity.
Section 2. Design Review Findin For DR- 97 -053_
By unanimous vote of the City Council the appeal from the Planning
(c)
�IHY 1� yd Wt) lb:bb fltYtKb,NHVt,1111JHU1.& ILV, rmA Nu, *1u Jo1 49011
Commission is hereby denied, and the decision of the Planning
Commission is
affirmed, to wit: The applicants have met the burden of proof required to support the
design review application, and the following findings have been determined:
The height, elevations and placement on the site of the proposed residence,
when considered with reference to: (i) the nature and location of residential
structures on adjacent lots and with the neighborhoods; and (ii) community
view sheds will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy in
that the location of the proposed residence meets or exceeds minimum
setback requirements with the exception of the front yard setback as
approved herein, that the structure will be screened by several large trees to
the east, that the structure is designed to step down the sloping lot, that the
substantial majority of the structure is a lower elevation than the roadway,
that windows on the west facing side of the house have been minimized
and/or will utilize translucent glass, that the structure will be at a lower
elevation than the structure immediately to the west, and that the
southernmost portion of the second story element was reduced from
originally submitted plans to further minimize interference with views from
the west. Although, the proposed structure will have an impact on the
easterly view of the residence directly to the west of the proposed structure,
this does not constitute an unreasonable interference of overall community
viewshed or of thc view from the adjacent parcel given the above factors
and the fact that a substantial easterly view will still exist from the adjacent
parcel.
The natural landscape will be preserved insofar as practicable by designing
stnictures to follow the natural contours of the site. The pier and on -grade
beam design of the garage reduces the need for grading and reduces
potential impacts to ordinance protected trees. The locations of thc main
structure and the garage reduce the need for grading and tree removal. The
proposed location has also been judged by geotechnical investigation to be
the most geologically stable portion of the property. The proposal will be in
keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and
undeveloped areas.
The proposed residence in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and the
surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulk and will
be integrated into the natural environment, in that the structure's design
incorporates elements which minimize the perception of bulk and integrate
the residence into the surrounding environment by articulation of the
4
MAY -13 -98 WED 15:55 MEYERS, NAVE, R I BRCK &S I LV, FAX NO. 510 351 4481
facades and rooflines, a design that steps down with often the and thee use
of materials, colors, and other design elements
overall visual impact.
The proposed residence will be compatible in terms of bulk and height with
(1) existing residential structures on adjacent lots and those within the
immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district; and (ii) the
natural environment; and shall not (i) unreasonably impair the light and air
of adjacent properties nor (ii) unreasonably impair the ability of adjacent
properties to utilize solar energy, in that the height and size of the
residence are compatible with surrounding residences in the neighborhood,
that the residence meets or exceeds required setbacks, and that the step
down design will minimize interference with the solar access of adjacent
properties.
The proposed site development or grading plan incorporates current grading
and erosion control standards used by the City.
The proposed residence will conform to each of the applicable design
policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook and
as required by Section 15- 45.055.
Section 3. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings,
plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of
Persson for design review approval and variance approval be and the same is hereby
granted to the extent set forth above and only subject to the following conditions:
1. The development. shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A
incorporated by reference.
2. Prior to the arrival of any construction equipment, the applicant shall
install tree protective fencing as required by the city arborist, meaning five
(5) ft. chain link tree protective fencing (mounted on two -inch galvanized
pipe, driven two feet into the ground) shown on the dripline of each tree as
recommended by the Arborist for trees 1 -3, 5, 6 and 8. The fences are to
remain in place for the duration of the project. They may be relocated only
for the installation of an energy dissipator.
3. Prior to submittal for Building or Grading permits, the following shall be
submitted to Planning Division staff in order to issue a Zoning Clearance:
MAY -13 -98 WED 15 56 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK &S1LV. FAX NO. 510 351 4481
a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this
Resolution as a separate plan page.
b. Four (4) separate sets of engineered grading and drainage plans, also
incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page.
c The applicant shall cause the existing slope easement, as shown on lot
44 of Tract 3946, to be amended by a licensed Land Surveyor for
purposes of absolving any encroachments into the easement caused by
the improvements proposed.
4. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall review and approve all geotechnical
aspects of the final foundation and grading plans (i.e., grading, site drainage
improvements, and design parameters for foundations and retaining walls,
etc.) to ensure the consultant's recommendations have been properly
incorporated. The Project Geotec Engineer shall ensure that the
recommended fill buttress, details of driveway construction, and basement
excavations are adequately depicted on the Final Grading and Drainage
Plan. The results of the plan review shall be summarized in letters by the
Project Geotechnical Engineer and submitted to the City for review and
approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading and building
permits.
S. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall inspect, test (as needed) and
approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. These
inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to: site surface
and subsurface drainage improvements and excavations for foundations and
retaining walls prior to the placement of structural improvements. The
results of these inspections and the as -build conditions of the project shall
be described in letters and submitted to the City Engineer for review prior
to finalization of the Grading Permit.
6. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance, the owner (applicant shall enter
into an agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any daims or
liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope
failure, or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions_
7. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance, the applicant shall pay any
outstanding fees associated with the city geotechnical consultant's review of
the project.
6
MAY -13 -98 WED 15:56
MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK &SILV,
8. No new fcncc or wall shall exceed six feet in height and no fence or wall
located within any required front yard shall exceed three feet in height.
9. Fences and walls shall comply with the R-1 district fencing requirements
contained in Article 15- 29.010 of the City Code.
10. Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance, applicant shall submit a
plan to the planning staff for its approval that, to the maximum feasible
extent, limits the number of construction and construction related
vehicles associated with this project from being on or near the site.
11. Construction activity shall be rcstrictcd to Mondays through Fridays,
7:30 a.ru. to 6:00 p.m. Construction activity shall not be permitted on
Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays on which the city offices are closed in
observation thereof.
12. No ordinance protected tree shall be removed without first obtaining a
Tree Removal Permit. with the exception of trees 4, 7, and 9, for which
the city arborist has determined a replacement value of $5,269;
replacement trees equalling this value must be planted on site prior to
Final Occupancy approval.
13. AU requirements of the city arborist's report dated December 30, 1997,
shall be met. This includes, but is not limited to:
a. Prior issuance of the city of a Zoning Clearance the site and
grading plans shall be revised to indicate the following:
The arborist report shall be attached, as a separate plan
page, to the plan set and all applicable measures noted on
the site and grading plan.
It will be necessary to remove lower branches of tree 5 in
order to permit driveway and garage access. Pruning must
be done by an International Society of Arboriculture
certified arborist. No more than one -third of the total
canopy may be removed, and the essential symmetry of the
tree shall be maintained. Applicant shall survey the
driveway, deck, and comer of the structure to
determine if pruning can be done within the one third
7
FAX NO, 510 351 4481
MAY -13 -98 WED 15:56 MEYERS,NAVE,RIBAOK &S1LV, FAX NO, 510 351 4481
limitation and if the tree's basic symmetry can be retained
while implementing this design.
No grading shall occur within 25 feet of the trunk of tree
5. The garage shall be constructed by pier a
beam design. Adjacent pathway landings must on-grade
installed on top of the existing grade without a soil cut, or
excavation.
The 6 inch PVC energy dissipator shall be located such
that the discharge does not put water into the root zone of
adjacent trees.
Downspout drainage shall be designed to direct the
discharge a minimum of 15 feet away from the root collar
of any tree.
The root zones of trees 10, 11, and 12 must be protected
from fill soil intrusion by excavation up -slope from these
trees. As a prophylactic measure, silt fencing must be
installed and maintained in a vertical condition.
Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance the applicant shall
submit to the City, in a form acceptable to the Community
Development Director, security in the amount of $8,281
pursuant to the report and recommendation by the City
Arborist to guarantee the maintenance and preservation of
trees on the subject site.
b. Prior to issuance of Building or Grading Permits:
Tree protective fencing shall be reinspected by planning
staff.
c. Prior to Final Occupancy approval:
Assuming the removal of trees 4, 7, and 9, native
replacement trees equal to $5,269 (equivalent to one 48
inch box, two 15 gallon, and one 5 gallon trees) shall be
planted on site. Planning staff shall inspect these trees
8
t MAY -13 -98 WED 15:56 MEYERS,NAVE,RIBRCK &SILV, FAX N0, 510 351 4481
prior to approval.
The city arborist shall inspect the site to verify compliance
with tree protective measures. Upon a favorable site
inspection, and approval by the Community Development
Director the bond shall be released.
14. Roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class "A"
prepared or built -up roofing.
15. Early Warning Eire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained in
accordance with the provisions of Article 16 -60 City of Saratoga.
16. Early Warning Fire Alarm System submitted to the Fire District for
the proposed installation an d shall be
approval.
17. Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in newly constructed attached
garages (3 heads per stall). The applicant is to contact the San Jost
Water Company to determine the size of service and meter needed to
meet fire suppression and domestic requirements.
18. Automatic sprinklers are required for the new residential dwelling. A 4-
head calculated sprinkler system is required. Documentation of the
proposed installation and all calculations shall be submitted to the Fire
District for approval. The sprinkler system must be installed by a
licensed contractor.
19. All driveways shall have a minimum 14 foot width plus 1 foot shoulders.
Driveway shall have a minimum insidc radius of 21 feet.
20. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to the New
Development and Construction Best Management Practices as adopted
by the City for the purpose of preventing storm water pollution.
21. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses,
including attomcy's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability
of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any
proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's
action with respect to the applicant's project
MY-13-98 WED 15:57
action with respect to the applicant's project.
22. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this e permit shall l estimate
constitute a violation of the permit. Because
damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated o n. mages of
$250 shall be payable to this City per each day of th iolet
S c_e_ticar....11, Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval
will expire.
ect• n All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other
Governmental entities must be met.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Saratoga held on the day of 1998, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
J:\WPD\MNKSW\273\RES
MEYERS,NAVE,R1BACK &S1LV. FAX NO. 510 351 4481
10
Mayor
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
ACTION MINUTES
DATE: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 7:30 p.m.
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
Roll Call Present: Chair Pierce, Commissioners Martlage, Murakami, Patrick
Absent: Commissioners Bernald Kaplan
Staff: Walgren, Ratcliffe
5L
Pledge of Allegiance
Minutes April 22, 1998
Approval of minutes was postponed until the May 27, 1998 public hearing.
Oral Communications
None.
Report of Posting Agenda
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on May 8, 1998.
Technical Corrections to Packet
Regarding Public Hearing item No. 5 (Cellular One), condition #6 was stricken from the approval
Resolution.
1. DR -97 -060 (APN 503 -78 -038) NEOGY, 22665 Garrod Road; Request for Design Review
approval to construct a new 6,699 sq. ft., two -story home on a vacant 4.48 acre lot in the Hillside
Residential zoning district. CONTINUED 4/0 AT APPLICANTS' REQUEST TO 5/27/98.
2. DR -97 -028 (503 -16 -090) BLACKWELL BROTHERS, 18850 Bella Vina Court; Request
for Design Review approval to construct a new 5,219 sq. ft. two -story home on a vacant lot. The
site is approximately 75,000 sq. ft. gross, 34,438 sq. ft. net (accounting for the Santa Clara
Valley Water District easement). It is accessed by a bridge across Calabazas Creek from Bella
Vina Court and is located within an R -1- 40,000 zoning district. This application was previously
heard at the Planning Commission meeting of January 28, 1998, and the study session of
Planning Commission Action Minutes Page 2
May 13, 1998
3. DR -97 -062 (503 -75 -010) JEPSEN, 21756 Congress Hall Lane; Request for Design Review
approval to construct a new 5,155 sq. ft. two -story home on a vacant lot. The site is approximately
3 acres, located within the Hillside Residential zoning district. APPROVED 4/0 WITH
MODIFICATION.
4. DR -98 -007 (APN 503 -23 -006) JAYAKUMAR, 14265 Burns Way; Request for Design
Review approval to construct a new two- story, single family residence, 4,043 sq. ft. in size, 25 ft.
in height, on a 29,020 sq. ft. lot in the R -1- 15,000 Zoning District. A single story residence
currently exists on the property. DENIED 4/0.
5. UP -98 -005 (403 -24 -001) CELLULAR ONE, East of Quito Road and Adjacent to Hwy 85;
Request for Use Permit approval to install 3 cellular panel antennas on an existing PG &E
transmission tower with an associated radio equipment shelter (approximately 160 sq. ft.) to be
located directly beneath the tower. The site is located within an R- 1- 10,000 residential zoning
district. An Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared for this project pursuant to
the requirements of the California Environment Quality Act. APPROVED 4/0 WITH
MODIFICATION.
DIRECTOR ITEMS
COMMISSION ITEMS
COMMUNICATIONS
Written
February 11, 1998. The parcel is Lot 3 of the recently approved Blackwell 6 Lot Subdivision.
CONTINUED FROM 4/22/98. APPROVED 4/0 WITH MODIFICATION.
1. City Council Minutes dated April 15 and April 21, 1998
2. Notices for Planning Commission Meetings of May 27, 1998
ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT PUBLIC HEARING 9:32 p.m. to
Wednesday, May 27, 1998, Civic Theater
13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
Printed on recycled paper.
B. UUD #8
May 11, 1998
A. Brush Abatement
Ogun7 cDO
C. Class A Roofing Ordinance
S--7zo/9g
13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 868 -1200
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Stan Bogosian
Paul E. Jacobs
Gillian Moran
Jim Shaw
Donald L. Wolfe
To: City Council
From: Deputy City Clerk
Subject: Publicity for Upcoming Hearings Brush Abatement; UUD #8;
Class A Roofing Ordinance; Budget
Hearings have been scheduled on the above items for Wednesday, June
3. Staff requests direction as to any publicity in addition to
that legally required which the Council wishes to have prepared.
In accordance with Council policy, most ordinances will be
introduced at noticed public hearings, including ordinances for
which State law does not require a public hearing. Notices of
appeals are published in the Saratoga News and mailed to all
property owners within 500 feet of the site.
This hearing starts the new cycle of brush abatement actions. All
property owners affected will be notified individually. Staff
recommends no additional notice.
This is the undergrounding utilities hearing approved by the
Council on May 20. Again, all property owners affected will be
notified individually. Staff recommends no additional notice.
This ordinance would amend the City Code to require Class A roofs
throughout the City. Staff recommends notifying the Saratoga /Los
Gatos Board of Realtors, the Building Industry Association, and
roofers, contractors and others who have expressed an interest in
this issue. It would also be desirable to send a press release
to the Saratoga News, the San Jose Mercury, the Community Group
List and KSAR.
D. Budget
This issue should be of interest to all Saratogans. Staff
recommends and sending a press release to the Saratoga News, the
San Jose Mercury, the Community Group List and KSAR.
Grace E. Cory
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM S7
MEETING DATE: May 20, 1998 CITY MANAGER /Mi
ORIGINATING DEPT. Paula Reeve.
Office of the City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Amendment to the Agreement for Countywide AB
939 Implementation Fee
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Authorize the Mayor to execute an _Amendment to the Agency Agreement
for the Countywide AB 939 Implementation Fee.
REPORT SUMMARY:
The Countywide AB 939 Implementation Fee has been collected by the
County Integrated Solid Waste Management Program since 1992 on all
wastes landfilled in Santa Clara County. In 1996, the Board of
Supervisors approved collection of the Fee for a third two -year
term, which ends June 30, 1998. In order to keep the Fee in effect
during FY 99 and FY 2000, it must be reauthorized.
Each city contracts with the County for the collection and
distribution of the Fee for the purpose of funding jurisdiction
specific programs required for meeting AB 939 waste stream
diversion goals. AB 939, or the Integrated Waste Management Act of
1989, sets two goals for the cities and counties of California: to
reduce the amount of waste disposed in landfills by 25% by 1995,
and 50% by the year 2000. Local jurisdictions were successful in
meeting the 1995 goal, and are currently working towards achieving
the year 2000 goal.
The reauthorization of the Fee for a fourth two -year term, at the
current level of $1.30 per ton, will maintain an adequate revenue
stream to ensure funding for ongoing AB 939 related programs to
meet the future 50% reduction requirement.
Changes Proposed by Amendment
The Amendment proposes two changes to the existing Agreement: 1) a
two -year term extension through FY 2000, and 2) implementation of
a new distribution formula. The suggested revenue distribution
method will simplify and streamline processing of payments without
substantially affecting each jurisdiction's share of total revenue.
The new formula relies on disposal data submitted quarterly to the
County by landfills. The data outlines tonnage disposed at each
Page 2 Amendment to Agreement for the Countywide AB 939
Implementation Fee
Changes Proposed by Amendment Continued
site, and is broken down by jurisdiction of origin, as required by
the state mandated Disposal Reporting System (DRS). Using DRS
figures instead of the current formulae will simplify recordkeeping
and Fee distribution. County staff could process payments
immediately following submittal of DRS reports by landfills,
eliminating the need for submission of separate requests for
payment from each jurisdiction.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
The proposed fee would generate about $2,028,000 annually.
Saratoga's estimated revenues will be approximately $20,000 per
year, and will be used to operate the City's Integrated Solid Waste
Management Program.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING and PUBLIC CONTACT:
Nothing additional.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON THE RECOMMENDED MOTIONS:
Each jurisdiction would have to develop an alternative revenue
source to fund AB 939 implementation. In the event that the
Countywide Fee is not approved for FY 99, the City of San Jose will
immediately reactivate its own AB 939 Fee on all waste disposed at
landfills located in the City. Revenues from such a Fee would
benefit only San Jose residents. Other jurisdictions would
strongly object to paying an AB 939 Fee which does not benefit
their residents.
FOLLOW UP ACTIONS:
1. Execution of two Agreements by the Mayor
2. Forward endorsed Agreements to the County
ATTACHMENTS: Amendment to the Agreement for Countywide AB 939
Implementation Fee
SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
This is the second amendment to that certain agreement by and between the
(City) and the County of Santa Clara (County), entitled
Agency Agreement for a Countywide AB 939 Implementation Fee, entered into
on the day of 1994, and previously amended on
the day of 1996.
The parties agree that:
1. Said Agreement is amended as follows:
A. "FORMULA FOR DISTRIBUTION OF FEE," Exhibit "B" to the Agency
Agreement, is amended in full as set forth in the attachment hereto.
B. Paragraph 3 is deleted in its entirety.
C. Paragraph 5 is amended in full to read as follows:
County shall distribute the Fee to the Participating Jurisdictions
pursuant to the formula described in Exhibit B within 90 days of the end
of the calendar quarter for which the fee was collected. Payments shall
begin in late December, 1994, and continue quarterly through August,
2000.
D. Paragraph 10 is amended in full to read as follows:
The term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 1994, to June 30, 2000,
or until all revenue from the last quarter's Fee payments has been
distributed, whichever is later. County will bill the operators of the
landfills listed in Exhibit A for the Fee commencing with the Quarter
ending September 30, 1994. Said landfills will be billed for the Fee
through June 30, 2000.
2. Except as amended herein, all the terms and conditions of said Agreement
and the First Amendment to Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.
3. The effective date of this Amendment is July 1, 1998.
1
WHEREFORE the parties, through their duly authorized representatives, have
entered into this Amendment to Agreement on the dates shown below:
ATTEST:
Clerk, Board of Supervisors Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
C
Kathy Kretchrner
Deputy County Counsel
"COUNTY"
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA,
a political subdivision of the
State of California
by:
"CITY"
Chairperson, Board of Supervisors Date
2
Date
CITY OF
a municipal corporation.
by:
Title: Date
I Fund
I
Name
I Amount I5
8 98
I Checks I
Checks
I Total
I
ss
1
100
110
150
160
170
180
250
260
270
290
292
293
300
310
400
410
420
700
710
720
730
740
800
810
830
990
PAYROLL CHECKS: 823430- B23462 B23423 -Void
Void checks:(Due to Occupational License Refund Entry Module) #991 -1004
TOTAL
O: \JANICE \CERTIFY
14- May -98
Accounts Payable Checks: A74875- A75004
GENERAL
COPS -SLESF
Traffic Safety
Streets Roads
Transit Dev
Hillside Repair
LLA Districts
Dev Services
Environmental
Housing &Comm
Recreation
Facility Ops
Quarry Creek
State Park
Park Devlpmnt
Library Debt
Civic Cnt r COP
Leonard Rd
Quarry Creek
Heritage Prsvn
Cable TV
PD #2
PD #3
Deposit Agency
Deferred Comp
Payroll Agency
SPFA
$55,365.00 (15130.00) $4,377.66
28,349.15
2,134.00 (1,530.00)
12,972.78
2,598.20
18,090.08 (2,088.00)
874.74
1,464.69
66.70
218.36
4,000.00
$44,612.66
$0.00
$0.00
$28,349.15
$0.00
$0.00
$604.00
$12,972.78
$2,598.20
$0.00
$16,002.08
$874.74
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,464.69
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$66.70
$218.36
$4,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
'Subtotal
$126,133.70 ($18,748.00) $4,377.66 $111,763.361
77,574.51
Approved by:
Date:
Prepared by:
Date:
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 1
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF: 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000006 A TO Z NURSERY
1029 002825 03/02/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -14 STORM RELATED -TREE REMOV. CHECK 8: 991 765.00-
1029 003034 03/02/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -14 CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 991 765.00
VENDOR TOTAL .00 1,530.00-
0000001 ABLE EXTERMINATORS, INC.
0000120 OL 03/02/1998 001 1040- 413.05 -00 CHECK 992 210.00
VENDOR TOTAL .00 210.00-
0000001 ABLE EXTERMINATORS, INC.
0000120 OL 03/02/1998 001 -1040- 413.05 -00 CHECK 993 105.00-
0000014 AIRTOUCH PAGING
M7190065 -2 004101
M7190065 -1 004100
M7190065 004099
05/07/1998
05/07/1998
05/07/1998
0000019 ALLIED LOCK KEY
56011 003973 17984 04/30/1998
56028 003974 17984 04/30/1998
0000022 AMERICAN FLEETCARE
3760 004073 05/07/1998 001 1035 512.40 -15 QTRLY. OIL FILTER CHANGE 430.54
0000603 AMERICAN SERVICES GROUP
103448 003975 04/30/1998 001- 1055 513.40 -14 SERVICE DISHWASHER 166.52
0000026 ANDERSON, MARJORIE A.
004035 05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 60.00
0000005 ARCHER, MARGARET
004054 05/06/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 39.00
0000005 AXELSEN, NANCY
001 1060 513.40 -30 RENTAL FEE PAGER KIRK,RAL
001 3030 532.40 -30 RENTAL FEE PAGER MOONEY
260 5015 552.40 -20 RENTAL FEE PAGER ENRIQUEZ
001 1060 513.40 -14 LOCK PARTS DOORSTOP
001 1060 513.40 -14 4LATCH GUARDS
VENDOR TOTAL .00 105.00-
VENDOR TOTAL
VENDOR TOTAL
55.05
24.00
24.00
103.05
106.09
43.30
149.39
VENDOR TOTAL 430.54
VENDOR TOTAL 166.52
VENDOR TOTAL 60.00
VENDOR TOTAL 39.00
PREPARED 05/08/1998,
PROGRAM: GM339L
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000005 AXELSEN, NANCY
003970 04/29/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND
0000005 BARNA, SONYA
004077 05/07/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 REFUND OF OVERPAYMENT 10.00
0001078 BAY TELECOM
IN- 000259 003938
2539 003939
0000005 BAYSIDE OIL II, INC
77715 004129
0000005 BERGSTEN, MARY BETH
004020
0000052
0000765
BOGOSIAN, STAN
003940
BRADLEY, HEATHER
003952
003953
8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 2
AS OF: 05/08/1998
04/29/1998
04/29/1998
VENDOR TOTAL
001 1050 513.40 -20 TELEPHONE /VOICEMAIL
001- 1050 513.40 -20 REPAIRS
VENDOR TOTAL
05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.40 -15 2 -55 GAL DRUMS OF PAINT
VENDOR TOTAL
05/05/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
04/29/1998 001 1005 511.20 -01 EXPENSE ALLOWANCE /MAY 98
04/29/1998
04/29/1998
VENDOR TOTAL
001 1015- 511.40 -04 CPF CONFERENCE FEE
001 1015 511.40 -04 CPF CONFERENCE LUNCH
VENDOR TOTAL
0001389 CARNELIAN ROOM
004026 18624 05/05/1998 290 6005 564.40 -51 DEPOSIT FOR SR TRIP 7/1
VENDOR TOTAL
68.00
68.00
VENDOR TOTAL 10.00
95.00
160.00
255.00
385.00
385.00
34.00
34.00
250.00
250.00
115.00
20.00
135.00
0000704 BURNS, LORI
004001 05/04/1998 001 1045 513.40 -03 98 VOLNTEER RECOG STICKER 9.61
VENDOR TOTAL 9.61
0000005 CAMPBELL, CHRISTINE
004052 05/06/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 39.00
VENDOR TOTAL 39.00
500.00
500.00
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 3
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0001389 CARNELIAN ROOM
0000005 CHEN, SARA
004056 05/06/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 74.00
VENDOR TOTAL 74.00
0000682 CITY OF SARATOGA -PETTY CASH
004062 05/06/1998 290-6005 564.30 -01 KLEENEX 9.41
004059 05/06/1998 290- 6010 564.30 -01 VIDEO RENTAL FOR WHH 63.46
004060 05/06/1998 290-6010 564.30 -01 ICE FOR YOUTH COMMISSION 8.09
004061 05/06/1998 290- 6010 564.30 -01 VIDEO RENTAL FOR WHHOUSE 58.44
VENDOR TOTAL 139.40
0000005 COMMINS, BOB
004055 05/06/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 39.00
VENDOR TOTAL 39.00
0000091 COMMONWEALTH CREDIT UNION
004063 05/04/1998 001 0000 210.20 -01 5 -7 -98 PAYROLL CHECK 74879
VENDOR TOTAL .00
0000434 COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES INC
004071 18070 05/07/1998 250- 4020 542.40 -10 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICE 2/98 7,743.07
VENDOR TOTAL 7,743.07
0000005 DARLING, CAROL
003989 05/04/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 48.00
0000122 DIABLO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
30164 004128 05/07/1998 150- 3025 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004116 200006 05/07/1998 180 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004117 200006 05/07/1998 180 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004118 200006 05/07/1998 180 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004119 200006 05/07/1998 180 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004120 200006 05/07/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004121 200006 05/07/1998 180 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004122 200006 05/07/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004123 200006 05/07/1998 180 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004124 200006 05/07/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004125 200006 05/07/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004126 200006 05/07/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
30164 004127 200006 05/07/1998 180- 3040 532.40 -15 LANDSCAPING SERVICES -APR
VENDOR TOTAL 48.00
285.00
35.00
75.00
150.00
75.00
49.20
60.30
40.50
75.00
75.00
150.00
295.00
850.00
VENDOR TOTAL 2,215.00
3,820.00
3,820.00
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 4
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF: 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000122 DIABLO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
000061'2 DMS INC
54392L 004107 200004 05/07/1998
54381L 004106 200004 05/07/1998
0000005 DONE RIGHT ROOFING GUTTERS
65982 003981 05/04/1998 001 1040 413.05 -00 REFUND BUSINESS LICENSE 45.00
0000005 DROZDIAK, JIM
004021 05/05/1998 290 6005- 445.02 -00 CLASS REFUND 84.00
0000005 EBERTIN, NAOMI
003967 04/29/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 38.00
0000146 ENGINEERING DATA SERVICE
1980405 004090 05/07/1998
I980404 004048 05/06/1998
I980404 004049 05/06/1998
0000155
966
1013
FITZPATRICK BARRICADE
004091 17966 05/07/1998
004092 17966 05/07/1998
0000005 FLORES, JESUS
003983
0001250 FOODY, MIKE
004074
150- 3025 532.40 -15 SERVICES FOR APRIL 98
180 3040 532.40 -15 SERVICES FOR APRIL 98
001 1030 511.40 -10 MAILED LEGAL NOTICES
250 4010 542.40 -40 ADVERTISING- PUBLIC HEARNG
250- 4010 542.40 -40 ADVERTISING- PUBLIC HEARNG
150- 3015 532.30 -01 TRAFFIC CONT -B
150- 3015 532.30 -01 TEMP SIGN CIRC. ARROW
05/04/1998 292 0000- 260.00 -00 REFUND RENTAL DEPOSIT
VENDOR TOTAL
05/07/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
858.00
204.00
1,062.00
VENDOR TOTAL 45.00
VENDOR TOTAL 84.00
VENDOR TOTAL 38.00
VENDOR TOTAL
VENDOR TOTAL
VENDOR TOTAL
61.49
212.66
317.97
592.12
0000150 EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY
27989 004093 17969 05/07/1998 001 3030 532.40 -15 APPLY PESTICIDE HERBICI 360.00
VENDOR TOTAL 360.00
56.83
92.55
149.38
300.00
300.00
35.00
35.00
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31
PROGRAM: GM339L
CITY OF SARATOGA
EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 5
AS OF: 05/08/1998
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0001250 FOODY, MIKE
0000156 FORBES, RYAN
004038
0000162 G. N. RENN, INC.
406335 003959
406488 004131
0000164 GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPMENT
248341 004098 05/07/1998
246265
248334
248345
248343
248338
0000165 GARROD FARMS
004042
0000178 GRUBBS, GERI
004037
0000005 GUZZI, MICHELLE
003985
0000005 HAMBEY, SUSAN
004003
003960 04/29/1998
004109 17941 05/07/1998
004110 17941 05/07/1998
004111 17941 05/07/1998
004112 17941 05/07/1998
05/06/1998 290- 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 350.00
VENDOR TOTAL 350.00
04/29/1998 001 1035 512.30 -20 FUEL PETROLEUM PRODUCTS 1,014.54
05/07/1998 001 1035 512.30 -20 GAS, DIESEL PETROLEUM 51.64
001- 1055- 613.60 -04 EDGER HEDGE SHEARS
001- 3030 532.30 -01 GARDENING SUPPLIES
001- 3030 532.30 -01 GARDENING SUPPLIES
001 3030 532.30 -01 GARDENING SUPPLIES
001 3030 532.30 -01 GARDENING SUPPLIES
001- 3030 532.30 -01 GARDENING SUPPLIES
VENDOR TOTAL 1,066.18
696.04
19.67
22.64
33.30
42.43
16.78
VENDOR TOTAL 830.86
05/06/1998 290-6005-564.40-10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 420.00
VENDOR TOTAL 420.00
05/06/1998 290- 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 5.00
VENDOR TOTAL 5.00
0000179 GTE WIRELESS CUSTOMER CARE
482 -8631 003958 04/29/1998 260 5015 552.40 -20 CELL PHONE 71.20
VENDOR TOTAL 71.20
05/04/1998 292-0000-260.00-00 REFUND RENTAL DEPOSIT 50.00
VENDOR TOTAL 50.00
05/04/1998 290 -6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 35.00
VENDOR TOTAL 35.00
0001405 HANSON CONCRETE PRODUCTS, INC
39546 004115 05/07/1998 001- 3030 532.30 -01 TRASH RECEPTACLES-DOME TP 2,110.88
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 6
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF: 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0001405 HANSON CONCRETE PRODUCTS, INC
VENDOR TOTAL 2,110.88
0000755 HART FLOORING
004067 05/06/1998 001- 1060 513.40 -14 REFINISH DANCE FLOOR IN 550.00
VENDOR TOTAL 550.00
0000194 HUDTLOFF, DIANA L.
004046 05/06/1998 290- 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 2,312.05
VENDOR TOTAL 2,312.05
0001027 HUMAN BEHAVIOR ASSOCIATES
004096 05/07/1998 001 1045 513.40 -10 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE 300.00
VENDOR TOTAL 300.00
0000197 HUMANE SOCIETY OF
698SARA -A 004087 05/07/1998 001 2025 523.40 -10 SHELTER SERVICES 1,284.00
698SARA 004086 05/07/1998 260 5005 552.40 -10 FIELD SERVICES 2,503.00
VENDOR TOTAL 3,787.00
0000200 ICE CHALETS, INC.
004044 05/06/1998 290- 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 1,026.00
VENDOR TOTAL 1,026.00
0000201 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST
004015 05/05/1998 001- 0000 210.20 -01 PAYROLL 5 -7 -98 4,191.52
VENDOR TOTAL 4,191.52
0000005 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
004066 04/27/1998 001 0000 210.20 -01 1ST QTR 98 EMPL P/R TAXES CHECK 74876
VENDOR TOTAL .00
0000208 JACOBS, PAUL
003941 04/29/1998 001- 1005 511.20 -01 EXPENSE ALLOWANCE /MAY 98 250.00
VENDOR TOTAL 250.00
0001264 JEFFERS, JAMES A.
004013 05/05/1998 250- 4010 542.40 -10 TREE INSPECT FEE 4/20 -5/1 220.00
004014 05/05/1998 250- 4010 542.40 -10 TREE INSPECT FEE 4/7 -4/17 200.00
VENDOR TOTAL 420.00
46.58
46.58
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 7
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0001264 JEFFERS, JAMES A.
0000211 JENKINS, TRACY
004068 05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 REFEREE FEE 108.00
0001408 JOE'S GARDEN EQUIPMENT
013022 003966 04/29/1998 001 -1055- 613.60 -04 TRIMMER 303.09
0000005 KAMAN ENTERPRISES, INC.
004130 05/07/1998 250- 3035 443.01 -00 GEOTECHNICAL REFUND 793.82
VENDOR TOTAL 793.82
0000005 KAO, RUEY
004033 05/05/1998 290 6005- 445.02 -00 CLASS REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
0000005 KATTAN, KAREN
003969 04/29/1998 290- 6005- 445.02 -00 CAMP REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
0000005 KENNEY, ANN
003986 05/04/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
0001391 KOVACH, SONIA M.
4/20 -5/1 004012 05/05/1998 001 1040 513.40 -10 PROF SERVICES ACCTNG DEPT
0000647 LAMPSHIRE, YVONNE
003946
003945
0000005 LEVY, STAN
004025
05/05/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL 108.00
VENDOR TOTAL 303.09
VENDOR TOTAL
04/29/1998 290- 6005 564.30 -01 RADIUS L DESK
04/29/1998 292- 6020 564.30 -01 RADIUS L DESK
VENDOR TOTAL
VENDOR TOTAL
84.00
84.00
7.00
7.00
96.00
96.00
2,460.00
2,460.00
91.75
124.74
216.49
185.00
185.00
0000245 LEWIS, HOWARD
004081 18073 05/07/1998 001- 3035 532.40 -16 INSPECTION SERVICES 4/98 7.50
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE B
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF: 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000245 LEWIS, HOWARD
004079 18073 05/07/1998 150- 3005-532.40 -16 INSPECTION SERVICES 4/98 367.50
004080 18073 05/07/1998 250- 4020 542.40 -16 INSPECTION SERVICES 4/98 1,327.50
VENDOR TOTAL 1,702.50
0000005 LEYLAND, JOYCE
004024 05/05/1998 290- 6005- 445.03 -00 SR TRIP REFUND -WOK WIZ 54.00
VENDOR TOTAL 54.00
0000005 MALICK, NANETTE
004022 05/05/1998 290- 6005- 445.02 -00 CLASS REFUND 94.00.
VENDOR TOTAL 94.00
0000291 MCQUEEN, BRYAN
002844 03/02/1998 290- 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE CHECK 994 696.00-
003024 03/02/1998 290- 6005-564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEES CHECK 994 696.00-
003035 03/02/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 994 696.00
VENDOR TOTAL .00 2,088.00-
0000272 METRO PUBLISHING INC.
494 004089 05/07/1998 001 1030 511.40 -40 LEGAL NOTICES 63.75
VENDOR TOTAL 63.75
0000273 MEYER, GREG
004047 05/06/1998 290 6005- 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 97.00
VENDOR TOTAL 97.00
0000005 MEYER, MARINA
003968 04/29/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 74.00
VENDOR TOTAL 74.00
0000001 MISC 0/L VENDOR
0001460 003028 03/02/1998 001 1040 413.05 -00 0/L CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 995 7,070.00-
VENDOR TOTAL .00 7,070.00-
0000001 THE LINDY GROUP
0001460 OL 03/02/1998 001 1040 413.05 -00 CHECK 1002 7,070.00
VENDOR TOTAL .00 7,070.00-
0000005 MOMROW, JUDY
004057 05/06/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 49.00
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31
PROGRAM: GM339L
CITY OF SARATOGA
EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 9
AS OF: 05/08/1998
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000005 MOMROW, JUDY
VENDOR TOTAL 49.00
0000282 MORAN, GILLIAN
003942 04/29/1998 001 1005 511.20 -01 EXPENSE ALLOWANCE /MAY 98 250.00
VENDOR TOTAL 250.00
0000292 NATIONAL PLAN COORDINATOR
004017 05/05/1998 001- 0000 210.20 -01 PAYROLL 5/7/98 2,394.61
VENDOR TOTAL 2,394.61
0000600 NBS- GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP
03209817 003935 04/29/1998 420 8020 733.70 -03 ADMIN FEES -APR 1 -JUNE 30 133.41
03209817 003933 04/29/1998 730 8005- 733.70 -03 ADMIN FEES -APR 1 -JUNE 30 66.70
03209817 003934 04/29/1998 740- 8010 733.70 -03 ADMIN FEES -APR 1 -JUNE 30 133.41
VENDOR TOTAL 333.52
0000296 NUDELMAN, PAMELA
004039 05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 32.00
VENDOR TOTAL 32.00
0000001 0/L MISC VENDOR
0000120 003029 03/02/1998 001 1040 413.05 -00 0/L CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 996 210.00
VENDOR TOTAL .00 210.00-
0000001 0/L MISC VENDOR
0001460 003030 03/02/1998 001- 1040 413.05 -00 0/L CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 997 70.00
VENDOR TOTAL .00 70.00-
0000001 0/L MISC VENDOR
0000120 003031 03/02/1998 001 1040 413.05 -00 0/L CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 998 105.00
VENDOR TOTAL .00 105.00-
0000001 0/L MISC VENDOR
0001321 003032 03/02/1998 001- 1040 413.05 -00 0/L CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 999 55.00-
VENDOR TOTAL .00 55.00-
0000001 0/L MISC VENDOR
0001711 003033 03/02/1998 001- 1040 413.05 -00 O/L CORRECTING ENTRIES CHECK 1000 55.00-
VENDOR TOTAL .00 55.00-
PREPARED 05/08/1998,
PROGRAM: GM339L
CITY OF SARATOGA
8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 10
AS OF: 05/08/1998
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000001 O/L MISC VENDOR
0000866 O'GRADY PAVING
972 004072 C80032 05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.40 -10 1997 PAVEMENT MGMT PROG 21,087.69
VENDOR TOTAL 21,087.69
0000300 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN
004065 04/30/1998 001 1050 513.30 -01 MINIMUM BAL TO KEEP ACCT CHECK 74877
VENDOR TOTAL .00
0000862 ORPHEUM THEATRE GROUP SALES
004027 18550 05/05/1998 290 6005 564.40 -51 TKTS FOR SR TRIP ON 10/21 2,743.00
VENDOR TOTAL 2,743.00
0000005 PARKS, LEE
003990 05/04/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 31.00
VENDOR TOTAL 31.00
0000607 PCI CLEAN FUELS INC
1057 003962 04/29/1998 001 1035 512.30 -20 CNG VEHICLE FUEL 824.46
14064 003963 04/29/1998 001 1035 512.30 -20 CHK OUT CNG FULE STATION 237.95
14071 004114 05/07/1998 001 1035 512.30 -20 CNG VEHICLE FUEL 239.80
VENDOR TOTAL 1,302.21
0001400 PINN BROS. CONSTRUCTION
004007 05/04/1998 800- 0000 260.10 -00 GRADING BOND 2,000.00
004008 05/04/1998 800- 0000 260.10 -00 GRADING BOND 2,000.00
VENDOR TOTAL 4,000.00
0000005 POLCYN, TERESA
004053 05/06/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 34.00
VENDOR TOTAL 34.00
0000326 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL
3/1 3/31 003978 04/30/1998 001 0000 210.20 -01 LIFE INSURANCE 632.03
050498 004005 05/04/1998 001 0000 210.20 -01 LIFE INSURANCE FOR MAY 98 652.29
VENDOR TOTAL 1,284.32
0000327 PROFESSIONAL FLEET SERV.
61855 004105 05/07/1998 001 1035 512.40 -15 MAINTAIN FLEET TIRES 358.39
VENDOR TOTAL 358.39
500.00
500.00
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31
PROGRAM: GM339L
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000327 PROFESSIONAL FLEET SERV.
EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 11
AS OF 05/08/1998
0000593 PUB EMP RETIREMENT SYSTEM
403071 003976 04/30/1998 001 0000 210.20 -01 LONG TERM CARE 2/9/98 11.08
004064 04/30/1998 001-0000-210.20-01 LONG TERM CARE PAYROLLS /7 CHECK 74878 11.08
VENDOR TOTAL 11.08
0000329 PUB. EMP. RETIREMENT SYSTEM
004084 05/07/1998 001 0000 210.20 -01 HEALTH INSURANCE 5/98 12,334.58
VENDOR TOTAL 12,334.58
0000966 REDWOOD ATHLETIC BOOSTERS
003947 04/29/1998 290- 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEES 1,240.00
VENDOR TOTAL 1,240.00
0000334 REED GRAHAM, INC.
365242 003957 04/29/1998 150- 3005 532.30 -01 STREET REPAIR PRODUCTS 66.86
65984 004075 05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.30 -01 STREET REPAIR 43.26
366093 004076 05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.30 -01 STREET PRODUCTS 93.65
VENDOR TOTAL 203.77
0000005 RILEY, HELEN
004058 05/06/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 49.00
VENDOR TOTAL 49.00
0000337 RIXON, JAC
004036 05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 82.50
0000338 ROYAL COACH TOURS
003948 04/29/1998
004028 18626 05/05/1998
004029 18623 05/05/1998
004030 18622 05/05/1998
0000005 SAARI, DIANNA
003988 05/04/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 24.00
0000344 SAN JOSE BLUE PRINT
6463676 004010
290- 6005 564.40 -51 .50 HRS OVERTIME -1 BUS
290 6005 564.40 -51 BUS FOR SR TRIP ON 7/22
290 6005 564.40 -51 BUS FOR SR TRIP ON 7/1
290 6005-564.40 -51 BUS FOR SR TRIP ON 6/27
VENDOR TOTAL 82.50
19.91
505.28
495.81
359.80
VENDOR TOTAL 1,380.80
VENDOR TOTAL 24.00
05/05/1998 250- 4010 542.40 -41 SUPPLIES FOR J. WALGREN 20.57
11.08
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 12
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000344 SAN JOSE BLUE PRINT
VENDOR TOTAL 20.57
0000001 SANTA CLARA CONSTRUCTION
0001321 OL 03/02/1998 001 1040- 413.05 -00 CHECK 1001
VENDOR TOTAL .00
0000097 SANTA CLARA COUNTY
003979 04/30/1998 001- 1040 452.01 -00 FEB 98 PARKING CITATION 105.00
003980 04/30/1998 001 -1040- 452.01 -00 JAN 98 PARKING CITATION 125.00
003993 05/04/1998 001- 1040 452.01 -00 PARKING CITATION -OCT 97 260.00
003994 05/04/1998 001 -1040- 452.01 -00 PARKING CITATION -NOV 97 220.00
003995 05/04/1998 001 1040 452.01 -00 PARKING CITATION -DEC 97 725.00
003996 05/04/1998 001 1040 452.01 -00 PARKING CITATION -MAR 98 425.00
003997 05/04/1998 001 1040 452.01 -00 PARKING CITATION -SEPT 97 350.00
003998 05/04/1998 001- 1040 452.01 -00 PARKING CITATION -AUG 97. 295.00
VENDOR TOTAL 2,505.00
0001371 SANTA CLARA COUNTY
004006 05/04/1998 001 1065 513.40 -10 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4/3 117.93
VENDOR TOTAL 117.93
0000589 SARATOGA LANES
004040 05/06/1998 290- 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 82.80
VENDOR TOTAL 82.80
0000356 SARATOGA TREE SERVICE
1138 004104 05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.40 -15 REMOVE PINE TREE -K MORAN 745.00
VENDOR TOTAL 745.00
0000005 SARRAMI, NASRIN
003982 05/04/1998 292 0000 260.00 -00 REFUND RENTAL DEPOSIT 100.00
VENDOR TOTAL 100.00
0001418 SASO, LOUIS
004034 05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE 310.00
VENDOR TOTAL 310.00
0000359 SAXTON HEINRICHS, KIM
194 001647 04/30/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 REVERSE CORRECTING ENTRIE 1,619.79-
194 001647 04/30/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 CORRECT REVERSE ENTRY 1,619.79
VENDOR TOTAL .00
55.00-
55.00-
PREPARED 05/08/1998,
PROGRAM: GM339L
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000359 SAXTON HEINRICHS, KIM
0001087
2317
SAYF- TEE -BAR
004113
0000360 SCHARPF, PATRICIA
004043
0000365 SHAW, JAMES
003943
0000005 SHELTON, STACY
004031
0000005 SILVERGLIDE, EDYTHE
004018
0000370 SKATEWORLD
004041
0000005 SPEEDY, SUSAN
004019
0000005 STAMOS, MARY ELLEN
004002
0000378 STAPLES, INC.
AD09661001 003977
0000382 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
004085
8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 13
AS OF: 05/08/1998
05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.30 -01 PKING BUMPERS FOR HAKONE
VENDOR TOTAL
05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE
VENDOR TOTAL
04/29/1998 001- 1005 511.20 -01 EXPENSE ALLOWANCE /MAY 98
VENDOR TOTAL
05/05/1998 250- 3035- 443.01 -00 GEOTECHNICAL REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
05/05/1998 290- 6005- 445.02 -00 OVERPAYMENT FOR CLASS
VENDOR TOTAL
05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE
VENDOR TOTAL
05/05/1998 290 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
05/04/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND
VENDOR TOTAL
04/30/1998 001- 1050 513.30 -01 OFFICE SUPPLIES -FILES
VENDOR TOTAL
05/07/1998 001- 0000 210.20 -01 PAYROLL 5/7/98
VENDOR TOTAL
116.91
116.91
51.56
51.56
250.00
250.00
742.19
742.19
10.00
10.00
639.20
639.20
24.00
24.00
35.00
35.00
25.12
25.12
2,733.41
2,733.41
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 14
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF: 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000382 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
0001138 STRATFORD SAFETY PRODUCTS
155888 003949 04/29/1998 150- 3005 532.30 -01 LEATHER GLOVES 345.32
VENDOR TOTAL 345.32
0001416 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS
004004 05/04/1998 001- 1045 513.40 -01 REG FEE AHSBY,LAIR,DEPARD 75.00
0000005 TEVIS, MARY
003984
0000001 THE LINDY GROUP
0001460 OL
0000005 THE MITRE BOX
003972
0001417 THE NAPKIN RING
14419 004009
0000005 THOMPSON, DELORES
003987
0000005
34987
TOMARK SPORTS, INC
003971
03/02/1998 001 -1040- 413.05 -00
VENDOR TOTAL 75.00
05/04/1998 292 0000 260.00 -00 REFUND RENTAL DEPOSIT 300.00
VENDOR TOTAL 300.00
0000125 THE DINI GROUP
004083 18071 05/07/1998 001 3035 532.40 -16 INSPECTION SERVICES 3/98 1,515.00
004082 18071 05/07/1998 250- 4020 542.40 -16 INSPECTION SERVICES 3/98 1,395.00
VENDOR TOTAL 2,910.00
VENDOR TOTAL
0000798 THE LIPMAN COMPANY (TLC)
5593 004088 05/07/1998 001 0000 210.20 -01 SEC. 125 ADMIN. FEE 175.00
VENDOR TOTAL 175.00
04/29/1998 001-1005 511.30 -01 REFRAME COUNCIL PORTRAITS 18.00
VENDOR TOTAL 18.00
05/05/1998 001 1015 511.40 -04 CATERING -PL COMM RETREAT 426.51
VENDOR TOTAL 426.51
05/04/1998 290 6005 445.03 -00 SR TRIP REFUND 4/27 71.00
VENDOR TOTAL 71.00
04/29/1998 001 3030 532.30 -01 LINE MARKER -DRAG MAT 420.96
CHECK 1003 70.00-
.00 70.00-
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 15
PROGRAM: GM339L AS OF 05/08/1998
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000005 TOMARK SPORTS, INC
00004d5 TRACTOR EQUIPMENT SALE COMPANY
006860 -00 004108 05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.40 -30 RENTAL OD LOADER PLANER 589.96
0000409 TUCKER, BEVERLY
004050
004051
05/06/1998
05/06/1998
0000411 U SAVE ROCKERY
56407 004094 17938 05/07/1998
56643 004095 17938 05/07/1998
0001415 U.S. BANK
004000
003999
0001410 WESTERN TRACTION COMPANY
WT 8029 003964 04/29/1998
1391601 003965 04/29/1998
0000005 WILBUR, ANN
003991
05/04/1998
05/04/1998
290 6010- 564.30 -01 FOOD- MIDDLE SCHOOL OVERNT
290 6010 564.30 -01 FOOD- CLEANING SUPPLIES
150 3005 532.30 -01 STREET REPAIR PRODUCTS
150- 3005 532.30 -01 STREET REPAIR PRODUCTS
420 8020 733.70 -03 ADMIN FEES
740- 8010 733.70 -03 ADMIN FEES
150- 3020 532.40 -10 DELIVER BACKHOE
150- 3020 532.40 -10 RENTAL OF HACKHOE
VENDOR TOTAL 420.96
VENDOR TOTAL 589.96
VENDOR TOTAL
VENDOR TOTAL
VENDOR TOTAL
25.95
60.24
86.19
48.71
186.19
234.90
1,331.28
84.95
1,416.23
0000481 UNITED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
4344385 003961 04/29/1998 150- 3005 532.30 -01 ROUNDUP SPRAY 535.30
VENDOR TOTAL 535.30
0001414 VASONA COPYTECH CENTER
004069 05/06/1998 290- 6005 564.30 -01 CONTRACTUAL SERVICE FORMS 115.89
VENDOR TOTAL 115.89
0000005 WALSH, JENNIFER
004032 05/05/1998 290- 6005- 445.02 -00 CLASS REFUND 87.00
VENDOR TOTAL 87.00
VENDOR TOTAL
228.00
2,165.00
2,393.00
05/04/1998 290- 6005- 445.04 -00 CLASS REFUND 69.00
PREPARED 05/08/1998, 8:25:31
PROGRAM: GM339L
CITY OF SARATOGA
VEND NO VENDOR NAME
INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. CHECK /DUE ACCOUNT ITEM EXPENDITURE HAND- ISSUED
NO NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0000005 WILBUR, ANN
VENDOR TOTAL
0000433 WILKINS, LARRY
004045 05/06/1998 290 6005 564.40 -10 INSTRUCTOR FEE
VENDOR TOTAL
0000001 WILLIAM BEAN GENERAL CONTRACT
0001711 OL 03/02/1998 001 -1040- 413.05 -00
VENDOR TOTAL
0000438 WOLFE, DONALD
003944 04/29/1998 001 1005 511.20 -01 EXPENSE ALLOWANCE /MAY 98
VENDOR TOTAL
0001390 WRIGHT, OLIVER L.
004097 05/07/1998 001 1040 513.40 -10 PROFESSIONAL SERVC. 4/98
VENDOR TOTAL
0000005 WU, MEI
004070 05/06/1998 290 6005- 445.02 -00 CAMP REFUNDS
VENDOR TOTAL
0000440 XEROX CORPORATION
062096652 003950 04/29/1998 001 1055 513.40 -30 MONTHLY LEASE -5100A COPIE
600126157 003951 04/29/1998 001- 1055 513.40 -30 MONTHLY LEASE -4 DC220
VENDOR TOTAL
0000443 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
66246157 004078 05/07/1998 001 3030 532.30 -01 FIRST AID SUPPLIES
66246156 -1 004103 05/07/1998 001 3030 532.30 -01 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 50%
66246156 004102 05/07/1998 150- 3005 532.30 -01 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 50%
EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST PAGE 16
AS OF 05/08/1998
VENDOR TOTAL
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
69.00
4,219.94
4,219.94
CHECK 1004
.00
250.00
250.00
10,777.00
10,777.00
377.00
377.00
1,927.50
773.60
2,701.10
27.98
52.42
52.42
132.82
126,133.70
55.00-
55.00-
14,370.34-
GRAND TOTAL 111,763.36
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO.
MEETING DATE: May 20 1998
ORIGINATING DEPT.: City Clerk CITY MGR. APPROVAL
SUBJECT: Resolution Declaring Weeds and Brush Growing on Certain
Described Property to be a Public Nuisance
Recommended Motion:
Adopt resolution declaring weeds and brush growing on certain described
property to be a public nuisance.
Report Summary:
The attached resolution represents the first step in Saratoga's
brush abatement program administered by the County Fire Marshal. The County
has determined that the parcels in Saratoga on the attached list have brush
growth which is a fire hazard or otherwise noxious or dangerous. The
Council should pass the �resolution setting the public hearing for brush
abatement for June 3. cL5
Fiscal Impacts:
None to City. County recovers its costs from administrative portion
of fee charged to property owners.
Follow Up Actions:
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
s-6 Jc"
AGENDA ITEM
The County sends the property owners notices informing them that the brush
must be abated, either by the owners or by the County; when County abatement
will commence; and how they may present any objections at the public
hearing. The public hearing is noticed in the newspapers as well. After
the public hearing, the Council passes another resolution ordering
abatement on properties whose owners did not object or whose objections the
Council felt were invalid. The final steps take place later, when the
County presents the Council with a list of properties whose abatement bills
have not been paid, and the Council, after hearing any objections, passes
a resolution declaring liens on those properties.
Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions:
Brush abatement could not be performed by the County. It would be necessary
to depend upon property owners to take care of their own abatement.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE .CITY OF SARATOGA DECLARING WEEDS AND
BRUSH GROWING ON CERTAIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE
WHEREAS, weeds and brush are growing in the City of Saratoga upon certain
streets, sidewalks, highways, roads and private property; and
WHEREAS, said weeds and brush attain such growth as to become a fire menace
or are otherwise noxious or dangerous; and
WHEREAS, said weeds and brush constitute a public nuisance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga,
as follows:
1. That weeds and brush do now constitute a public nuisance;
2. That said nuisance exists upon all the streets, sidewalks, highways,
roads and private property, more particularly described by common name or by
reference to the tract, block, lot, code area and parcel number on the report
prepared by and on file in the office of the County Fire Marshal;
3. That it is ordered that Wednesday, the 3rd day of June, 1998, at a public
hearing during a regular meeting which will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the
Saratoga Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, is hereby fixed as the time
and place where objections to the proposed destruction and removal of said
weeds and brush shall be heard and given due consideration;
4. That the County Fire Marshal is hereby designated as the person to cause
notice to be given in the manner and form provided in Article 15, Chapter 7
of the Saratoga Municipal Code, and as the person to hereafter cause
abatement of such seasonal and recurring nuisance.
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga
City Council at a regular adjourned meeting held on the 20th day of May,
1998, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
Mayor
UO/ZU/VO
Utf:4/ p4U6 Z U ib3/
Work
APN DA Request Situs
Owner Name Owner Address
Engine Comments
BURNETT CAROLYN P TRUSTEE
BARTON JAMES B AND GAIL K
SLIT /FHA I¢] 002
1998 BRUSH PARCELS FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA
50318045 15 20701 ASHLEY WY S A
20701 ASHLEY WY SARATOGA CA 95070 -3728
51003003 15 A, B, C 15260 PEPPER LN S A
15260 PEPPER LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6450
51003005 15 B 15200 PEPPER LN
MOESSNER HELMUT A AND URSULA 15200 PEPPER LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6450
51003008 15 B 15140 PEPPER LN S A
HARRIS JAMES M AND BARBARA S 15140 PEPPER LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6450
51003009 15 B, C, D 15100 PEPPER LN
PERAZZO ELEANOR K AND JAMES B PO BOX 2222 SARATOGA CA 95070
SA
SA
51003019 15 B 19730 SARATOGA -LOS GATOS RD S A
PRUSS JOSEPH F AND CHERYL I 19730 SARATOGA -LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6449
51006006 15 B, E 19330 SARATOGA -LOS GATOS RD S A
KREYENHAGEN DIANE J ET AL 19330 SARATOGA -LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6435
E- Please provide bigger numbers.
Recommended Motion(s):
Report Summary:
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: MAY 20,1998 CITY MGR.:
Of
fflir
ORIGINATING DEPT.: PUBLIC WORKS PREPARED BY: 4
SUBJECT: Final Map Approval for Tract No. 9074 (15 lots at 14135 Douglass Lane and
20325 La Paloma Avenue), Owner: Pinn Brothers Spaich.
1. Move to adopt Resolution No. SD 97 -012 granting final map approval of Tentative Map
Application No. SD 97 -012 for fifteen lots at 14135 Douglass Lane and 20325 La Paloma
Avenue.
2. Move to authorize the Mayor to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
Attached is Resolution No. SD 97 -012 which, if adopted, will grant final map approval for fifteen
lots located at 14135 Douglass Lane and 20325 La Paloma Avenue. I have examined the final map
and related documents submitted to me in accordance with the provisions of Section 14.40.020 of
the Municipal Code and have determined that:
1. The final map substantially complies with the approved tentative map.
2. All conditions of the approved tentative map, as contained in Planning Commission
Resolution No. SD 97- 012, have been completed or will be completed concurrent with
development of the fifteen lots.
3. The Subdivision Map Act, the City's Subdivision Ordinance and all other applicable
provisions of law have been complied with.
4. The final map is technically correct.
Consequently, I have executed the City Engineer's certificate on the final map and have filed the
final map with the City Clerk pursuant to Section 14.40.040 of the Municipal Code for action by
the City Council.
Fiscal Impacts:
The subdivider has paid $37,937.50 in Engineering Fees, $98,670 in Park Development Fees, and
$20,000 towards future street maintenance of Douglass Lane and La Paloma Avenue required for
this subdivision.
Follow Up Actions:
The signed map will be released to the subdivider's Title Company for recordation along with
recording instructions.
Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions:
The final map must either be approved or rejected by the City Council. If the map is rejected, it
would be returned to the subdivider with findings as to why the map was rejected.
Attachments:
1. Site Map.
2. Tract Map.
3. Resolution No. SD 97 -012 granting final map approval.
4. Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. SD 97 -012 approving the tentative map with conditions.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
ITEM 3
Applicant No./Location: SD -97 -012 20325 La Paloma Ave.& 14315 Douglass Ln.
Applicant/Owner: PINN BROTHERS SPAICH
Staff Planner: James Walgren, Community Development Manager
Date: February 25, 1997
397 -24 -010, 038, 073, 074 075 Division Manager:
APN:
7
[71
G =91
R =7500'
P �`IP I' 1.12392' t: /1�d
J s 95. te.
EC LOT 1 -,5.
4 I P an AC (KT) 3
139 AC 6.''''') di
C�� 1P
5'J9'*}Ri
YC DE IAN 4 A) o f p 'S' r, N8LP408 L1- `o' 4'L
ID RR 57197 PER (A) IP 175 510 ASP 720
A= 4618'11
17.750
1-60 2
LOT 9
100 AC (AMT)
172 AC (060.95)
eti
1.
CORK
CI
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
37.00'
65
2500'
CHI 55 00
11 65
9 00'
C13 2500
CI4 3700
00
715 J7'
C16 3700'
C17 47.E 10
C)8 IS'
C19 2500
C20 37 00'
C21 55 00'
C22
C2J 3700'
774 45 00'
4781
95 06'
2°69'
62 15'
14 45'
J9 17
78 43'
90 88'
8306'
5835'7)'
SB3523�
719111
1177951'
J1D711
78 75 4550
167359
909000
1717655
91'1010
79
66.85'
25 71`
156 97' 947010
777 0605
11 10 91'1!
A 7 17599
65 OJ 36'48'31'
X1191' R:M 14'
SCALE: I" =100'
MR (A)
I0' 3/4' IP. OM M1 •S. 0(n
9
FD 3/1'16
R E. 8307 6 b iE 6 '2
PER (C)
S p.�. p Y 96 115 E�
0 m
LIB AC B7107
6
M 9 M1
P O'
G
CURVE TABLE J 5` 't, 4I \67 LOT J
WG
RADIUS LEIN MLA 05 1.23 AC(AET)
53 00' 1263' 13'39'16' 5 1.18 AC (GP095)
17 985' 3312'40' 49j 94
25. 00' 1609 363306 l4j{'p ue Iry
55 W' 10 33` 10'15'35' 9` .015 (�e
9500 17 84` 10'45'35' rb P j
37.00 J699 5716'46' (1 O J coN ti'
J700' 5472` 811171 �S C A.ffL1(N a
96 29' I49D6 07
2858' 2571 J6
1099' 757136
/u. /4' 1 7
9 59' PLR (73) A' 7.
O
.5 LOT 9
we.,,.
5, LOT 12 P ACT 5575
f ;MD (NCLCct 0(
9 5 11 0. ,P
31 .t 4 OF
4
-VW' 5
'•1.'' 5)
,KA (0T 4
DETAIL "C"
DETAIL
8
ID Veil. 14 940110
�JN YAPS P AGER
335
158844 70(96
N
1
FO (OPEN)
,1 583523'
R =15.00'
=46.28' C
_L37
N81351 1 61/9 2111 ••4 6s OR 390
I L7
czl s
1 14
LOT
1.50 AC 8[T) 1 'TJ,
1.58 AC (01055)
FD 118 IP J
01 .5,- 5• 1 V
Ji °m (A 9'
,S
i
S�. NAG((
LOI
Sh TRACT 6 722
10' E07E541914 a 2
M 67
73 -94 -51/52
LINE TABLE
LNE
U
(2
LJ
14
15
(6
l7
LB
19
110
111
1 122
L13
114
115
aR(cn0N
586'46''77
N7276037
1443'du7
N78'43'477
N5815'057
928 '41467
144411'177
920
N6713 587
94501'161
98930''341
14647325
DISTANCE
74.97'
4861'
3403
IS 2J'
11
8019'
116
4(7
118
9
10
15
122
410>C
OR
0 .5
4E 00 0
065
736' L 7f
10' IRR 48 All01
AMA
LOT 8
087 AC (AEI) y- or,
1.14 AC ((ROSS) TN 7
FD. 3/4 IR.
A-- L.S. 2734
1 10C
a_
70 E 3 198 RE8A R PIER (4)
Y
DURHAM
14: 13337'
333.00
ID 3 /1•, S MDW Om
2 5' PIR 944 TAPS I*CLI a
(,098
1072
TRACT 5893
4111
J
91
E
fo
a aim ENO PUP4819BLK S :FEET f 10' P,S.f
NEON PRIVAR ROAD
ROBER1$O.
658 -Y -2p
III ID. J /1 LP.
8 LS 2731 PER (41
a
105
MAC) 5927
TANG
LOT 1
TRACE 5893
9i
658- y
0' Rif FAf4RR91504 5KA
1Vfl'2 00'
20.00'
N S /1' iP. IS 29 14 FIR (C)
S00/6.41 4�1•
N J /4' (7 80 (4
CI SSE (19477
LOT 6
TRACI 5927
GLAMOR
53636'06'W
59.50'
(03 4'IF
PER (81
SUMO
455 DEEDS 590
25 5113644
16 N1236'44'W
27 55131407 64.73'
28 53808'207 156.24'
90 34' 29 9389820 It 159 37
35 67 JO 9380620 W 175 92
4017 31 538D670 196 38
64 41' 132 N206'2069 BI.BO
32.611' LJJ 538128207 8160'
7311' /31 N3808'04 5 06'
N45121167 58 13' :35 58236171 161 15'
N1492 '461 39. 68' (36 617010007 32797'
97634'381' 4337' 137 56236'17 930 92'
575'47.18 E 5621' 138 144718'30'* 500'
58025'181 150 47' (39 1442'4830'* 500'
1488'40'551 7838 t 4 51/11''30'* i45515
148973241 96 14, 5 4/35.10* 4555
S 7 6 '37_07 98 99 147 5 5974 25 9012
N7010'001 '392' 141 '(701000'1 f24 95
53316 14'8 3311 Iii 148756177 877'
UNE
123
124
1REC6ON
51136'447
N123644W
asr47E
J019'
566 97
7 119.
17 52
05 447/300 9090ER ERIE
1479479 TES 50804701033 101 IRK
1N0CA 5(5 C 9:7(86INE
OMER E9599G PROoERIY OR R10N7- 0r -WAr IRIS
•OCA RS EASEY(NT LINES
9879715 FOUND YONUY(97 DETAILS AS NORO
NOC4R5 FOUND 017 NON18ENr DETAILS AS 71 0710
NDICA Rs !011110 2'84' NOLO 0051 PER (A) AND (B)
8E5E) MM 3/4' IRLN 710E 74=0 E5 5792
O 80ICA715 5E13/4' IRON PIPE TAGGED L5 5792
BRAC0(75 INDICATES RECORD NFORYA nos
AC ACRES
(.V.AE. EMERGENCY KINLLE ACCE55 (45(94(97
IC.E
INGRESS AND EGRESS (4YNENT
0 R. AFI040 R(COR05
P A E. PA MIME ACCESS (A5EY(9 T
P 507, 617451 STAN GRAN (45(MKNT
PST PUEILK SERNCE EASEMENT
(R) R404L 8EARNG
R/6' 81311 Of w4 r
55(. 591079!7 SERER (AS(YEN7
U -Y -8I BOAT U YAPS AT PAGE 81 (Iro)
NOTES
Q 10' 0.5E A7ER(D FOR °EOCAIpN N 8009 488 GE won PAR 25
AND ACGEP7[D ON NNW OF Pt PUBLIC 97 RK CITY A SARA 7OG4.
3' R/w OF/(8f0 Fat 0(079 DON IN BOOK 488 0f YAPS PAGE 25
AN0 REFCRO ON 8ENA(F Of RK MEEK BY RK 077 OF SARATOGA
ALL 051490(5 AND OY(NSIONS ARE OWN N !CET
490 0(0944(5 MERGE.
184 ACR(5 (014/474(0 6104i9 0570677717 8098(8
RFFFRRFNCE MAPS
(A) PARCEL YAP, RECORDED N BOOR 488 YAPS PAGE 25'
(8) TRACT NO 6722, 8(0090!0 N BOOK 473 YAPS, PAGES 59 a 52
(C) PARCEL YAP, RECORDED 94 ROM 658 6405 PAGE 28
PASTS OF BFARINGS
THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR 114(5 MAP IS THE NOR7NNESIERLY
BOUNDARY LINE OF PARCEL B FOUND YONUMENTED AS 5401414
ON MAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP RECORDED IN 80011 488 OF MAPS
AT PACE 25, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS.
HAYFIELD ESTATES TRACT NO. 9074
CONSISTING OF 2 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PARCELS A AND B AS SHOWN IN
BOOK 488 OF MAPS, AT PAGE 25, AND INCLUDING THEREWITH
THAT PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED
IN BOOK 65, OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 590,
SANTA CLARA COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS
LYING IN THE
CITY OF SARATOGA,
SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 1998
re&Gluliani Ku11,Inc.
2 11 Rrreny M I p.n 5.17 10 A
Auburn Lrperlr, 1,11,70'V
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
APPROVING THE FINAL MAP OF SD 97 -012
14315 DOUGLASS LANE AND 20325 LA PALAOMA (PINN BROTHERS SPAICH)
The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as
follows:
SECTION 1: Lots 1 15 as shown on that certain map of Tract No.
9074, prepared by Giuliani Kull, Inc. dated
March, 1998, and filed with the City Clerk of the
City of Saratoga on May 20, 1998, are approved as
FIFTEEN {15)individual parcels.
SECTION 2: All streets and easements shown on said map and
offered for dedication to public use are hereby
rejected on behalf of the public, save and except
for public service easements; and to the limited
extent that any offers for public street purposes
either expressly or implicitly'include offers for
easements for utility purposes along or beneath said
street rights of way, then as to such express or
implied offers of easements for public utility
purposes, the same are hereby accepted on behalf of
the public.
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the
Saratoga City Council at a meeting held on the day of
19 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. SD 97 -012
Mayor
1
CONTRACT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF SD 97 -001
AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
1998, by and between the CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal
corporation of the State of California, hereinafter called
"City and PFEIFFER RANCH INVESTORS, INC. subdivider and
Owner, hereinafter collectively called Subdivider:
W I T N E S E T H:
WHEREAS, Subdivider is engaged in subdividing that certain
tract of land known and designated as 14315 Douglass Lane and
20325 La Paloma Avenue situated in the City of Saratoga, County
of Santa Clara, State of California; and
WHEREAS, a final map of SD 97 -001 has been filed with the
City Clerk of the City of Saratoga for presentation to the Council
for its approval, which map is hereby referred to and by said
reference incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, Owner and Subdivider has requested approval of said
final map prior to the completion of improvements of all streets,
highways or public ways and sewer facilities which are a part of or
appurtenant to the abovementioned subdivision, including, but
without limiting the foregoing, the necessary paving, catch basins,
pipes, culverts, storm drains, sanitary sewers where required,
street trees and street signs where required, and including a water
system and fire hydrants acceptable to the San Jose Water Works and
the City of Saratoga, all in accordance with and as required by the
plans and specifications for all of said improvements in or
appurtenant to said subdivision, which plans and specifications
were prepared by Giuliani Kull, Inc. Civil Engineer, approved
by the City Engineer and now on file in the offices of the Clerk of
said City and /or the City Engineer's Office of said City, and
2
WHEREAS, the City Council of said City did on the
day of 199 adopt a Resolution approving
said Final Map, rejecting certain dedications therein offered which
rejection did not and does not, however, revoke the offers of
dedication therein contained and requiring as a condition precedent
to the future acceptance of said offers of dedication that the
Subdivider improve the streets and easements thereon shown in
accord with the standards of the City's Subdivision Ordinance, as
amended, of the City of Saratoga and in accord with the improvement
plans and specifications on file as hereinabove referred to, and
requiring as a condition precedent to the release of said final map
for recordation that the Subdivider agree in writing to so improve
said streets and easements in accord with this agreement,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and in
consideration of the City accepting all of said dedications after
the hereinafter agreed to covenants on the part of the Owner and
Subdivider have been complied with and in accord with Government
Code Section 66462(a) of the State of California, it is hereby
agreed as follows:
1. Subdivider at this cost and expense shall construct all of
the improvements and do all of the work hereinafter mentioned, all
in accordance with and to the extent and as provided in the above
mentioned plans and specifications on file in the office of said
City, for the construction of said improvements, in, for, or
appurtenant to said subdivision, and all in compliance with the
City's Subdivision Ordinance as amended and the laws of the State
of California, and shall complete the same within one year from
date hereof and shall maintain the same for a period of at least
one year after the satisfactory completion of the same.
2. Subdivider shall, before the release of said final map by
City and as condition precedent to recordation thereof, furnish to
the City and file with the City Clerk a good and sufficient surety
bond or bonds, money or negotiable bonds, in form to be approved by
3
the City Attorney, securing the faithful performance by Subdivider
of all work and the construction of all improvements herein in this
Agreement mentioned within time specified, and securing the
faithful performance by Subdivider of the maintenance of said
improvements for a period of at least one year after completion of
the same, and for such additional period of time as may be
necessary in order that Subdivider may cure and correct all
deficiencies of construction to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer of the City of Saratoga (in all events at least
30,000.00 of said bond to be in cash, with the right of City to use
the same in its discretion for emergency maintenance and repairs in
addition to any other rights of use) the total amount of said bond
to be in the sum of 300, 000.00 and also a good and sufficient
surety bond in form to be approved by the City Attorney securing
the payment by Subdivider of all bills for labor and materials
incurred in the construction of any and all of said improvements,
and the doing of all other work herein agreed to be done by the
said Subdivider, the amount of said bond to be Three Hundred
Thousand Dollars($ 300,000.00
3. Subdivider does hereby expressly agree to indemnify and
hold harmless the City and in their capacity as such, its
councilmen, officers, boards, commissions and its employees, from
any and all loss or damage, and from any and all liability for any
and all loss or damage, and from any and all suits, actions,
damages, or claims filed or brought by any and all person or
persons because of or resulting from the doing by Subdivider or any
and all things required of Subdivider by this contract, or because
of or arising or resulting from the failure or omission by
Subdivider to do any and all things necessary to and required by
this contract or by law, or arising or resulting from the negligent
doing by Subdivider, his agents, employees or subcontractors of any
and all things required to be done by this contract, or arising or
resulting from any dangerous or defective condition arising or
resulting from any of the above said acts or omissions of
4
Subdivider, his agents, subcontractors, or employees. Subdivider
having heretofore certified, by the certificate upon the
abovementioned subdivision map, that he can convey clear title to
the land within said subdivision, and City having relied upon said
certificate and the representation contained therein, the foregoing
provisions of this paragraph are specifically made to apply to any
destruction or damage to or removal of utilities, water lines or
pipe lines of any kinds, and any other improvement, whether said
destruction, damage or removal is required or caused by the plans
or specifications or by direction of an officer, agent or employee
of the City.
4. Subdivider shall, before the release of said final map by
the City, and as a condition precedent to the recordation thereof,
furnish to the City and file with the City Clerk certificates or
policies of public liability and property damage insurance in form
satisfactory to the City Attorney, and Subdivider shall at all
times during the entire term of this agreement maintain the same in
full force and effect, which policies shall insure the City of
Saratoga, its Councilmen, officers, boards, commissions and
employees against loss or liability for bodily injury and property
damages arising or resulting from Subdivider's operations and
activities in the construction of any and all improvements
mentioned in this agreement and the doing of any and all work
mentioned in this agreement, within or outside the abovementioned
subdivision, and /or arising or resulting from the doing or failure
of Subdivider to do all things required to be done pursuant to this
agreement. Said policies of insurance shall cover bodily injury
and property damage on both an accident and occurrence basis, with
completed operations coverage for one (1) year after completion and
acceptance of improvements, and shall be in amounts of not less
than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) for each person, ONE
MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) for each accident or occurrence and
property damage coverage of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($100,000.00) for each accident or occurrence and property damage
5
coverage of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000.00) for each
accident or occurrence. Said policies of insurance shall in
addition contain the following endorsement: "Other insurance the
coverage afforded by this insurance shall be primary coverage to
the full limits of liability stated in the declarations. If the
assured has other insurance against the loss covered by this
policy, that other insurance shall be excess insurance only, after
the entire face value of this policy shall have been exhausted by
payment."
5. In consideration of City allowing Subdivider to connect
said subdivision to certain existing or proposed out -of -tract storm
sewer lines, and in consideration of City relieving Subdivider of
any obligation which City might legally impose on Subdivider to
acquire any right -of -way for, and /or to construct, any out -of -tract
storm sewer drainage pipe lines and appurtenances which might
reasonably be necessary to drain said subdivision and carry storm
waters from said subdivision to natural drains, Subdivider
shall, before the release of said final map by City and as a
condition precedent to the recordation thereof, pay the City the
sum of Zero dollars 0
6. In consideration of City agreeing to accept, in accord
with this agreement, the in -tract storm drain lines and facilities
constructed or to be constructed by Subdivider within or outside of
said subdivision in accord with the plans and specifications now on
file with the City offices, including the streets and other
easements in or beneath which said facilities lie, Subdivider
shall, before the release of said final map by City and as a
condition precedent to the recordation thereof, pay the City the
sum of Zero Dollars 0
7. Subdivider shall, before the release of said final map by
the City and as a condition precedent to the recordation thereof,
pay to the City the sum of Twenty -one Thousand Dollars
21,000.00) to be applied by City to the payment of expenses to be
incurred by City for engineering and inspection services to be
6
performed by the City in connection with said subdivision.
8. Upon Subdivider completing in accord with this agreement
all of the improvements to be made and done by said Subdivider as
hereinabove set forth and as shown on the plans and specifications
on file as hereinabove referred to, and upon Subdivider having
properly maintained the same for a period of at least one year
after the completion of said improvements as hereinabove specified,
and upon the Subdivider complying with all covenants and conditions
on his or its part to be done and performed in accord with the
within agreement, then and in that event, City agrees to rescind
its rejection of the offers of dedication of streets and storm
drain easements contained on the aforesaid final map, and at that
time accept said offers of dedication.
9. Should the Subdivider and Owner hereinabove referred to
not be the same person, firm or corporation, then this agreement
shall only be effective upon both the Subdivider and the Owner
separately executing the same, and wherever the term Subdivider is
used, the same shall include Owner and wherever the term Owner is
used, the same shall include Subdivider.
10. This agreement shall be binding upon the heirs, personal
representatives and assigns of Subdivider and Owner, and time is of
the essence hereof, save and except that the City Council of the.
City of Saratoga may, but need not, extend any time or times for
the doing or performing of any acts as required under the terms of
this agreement by resolution, if in the opinion of the City Council
any such delay is without fault on the part of the Subdivider and
Owner.
Execution of the within agreement by the Owner or Subdivider
shall constitute an irrevocable authorization to City to insert the
date of passage of the Council resolution approving the final map,
and to insert the date of this agreement as of the date of such
resolution.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hand the
day and year first above written.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
7
CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal Corporation
Bv:
By:
By:
Mayor
Subdivider
(Owner, if different from
Subdivider)
RESOLUTION NO. SD -97 -012 V- 98-002
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
Pinn Brothers Spaich; 20325 La Paloma Ave. 14315 Douglass Ln.
WHEREAS, application has been made to the Advisory Agency under the Subdivision Map
Act of the State of California and under the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Saratoga, for
Vesting Tentative Map approval to subdivide an approximately 19 acre site into fifteen individual
lots ranging in net size from 21,780 sq. ft. to 3.08 acres, all as more particularly set forth in File No.
SD -97 -012 of this City; and
WHEREAS, application has also been made to the Advisory Agency for Variance approval to
allow the total proposed building area for Lot 9 to exceed the 7,320 sq. ft. maximum permitted by
Zoning Ordinance for a 3.08 acre parcel, all as more particularly set forth in File No. V -98 -002 of
this City and the following findings have been made:
That because of special circumstances applicable to the history of the property, strict
enforcement of the specified regulations would cause undo hardship and deprive the applicant
of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same
zoning district, in that the preservation of the Julia Morgan designed main residence and guest
cottage, both Saratoga Heritage Resource Inventory structures, benefits the greater community.
Approving the Variance request will only allow these two existing historic resources to remain.
That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent
with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district,
in that similar consideration has been, and would be, given for other property owners who were
requesting to retain buildings historically significant to Saratoga.
That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare,
or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Initial Study has been prepared for this project which concludes
that the net increase of eleven new single family homes on this property will not cause any
significant and/or unavoidable impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration was adopted
by the Planning Commission for the project at the March 25, 1998 public hearing; and
WHEREAS, this Advisory Agency hereby finds that the proposed subdivision, together with
the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan and
with all specific plans relating thereto, and the proposed subdivision and land use is compatible
with the objectives, policies and general land use and programs specified in such General Plan,
reference to the staff report dated February 25, 1998 being hereby made for further particulars; and
WHEREAS, none of the conditions set forth in Government Code Sections 66474 (a) (g) and
66474.6 exist with respect to said subdivision, and tentative approval should be granted in accord
with conditions as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted duly noticed public hearings at which
time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Vesting Tentative Map for the hereinafter
described subdivision, which map is dated March 19, 1998 and marked Exhibit "A `B" and "C
in the herein above referred file, be and the same is hereby conditionally approved. The conditions
of said approval are as follows:
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Complete.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Complete.
File No. SD- 97-012 Be V -98 -002; 20325 La Paloma Ave. 14315 Douglass Ln.
Community Development Division
1. Future development on all lots shall require Design Review approval. The site development
plan reviewed by the Planning Commission shall be used for future yard orientation
determinations. Building setbacks shall be either per the site development plan or then
current Zoning Ordinance requirements, whichever are greater. The architectural style of
the new homes shall be consistent with the architectural plans approved per Exhibit "C
2. Future homes shall be sited and designed to minimize the amount of pad grading necessary.
3. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be required for each new home application. These
plans shall be consistent with the model landscape plan approved per Exhibit `B" and shall
be installed prior to issuance of Final Inspection of each new home.
4. Design review approval shall only be granted upon finding that the proposed structures are
compatible in terms of scale and design with the existing adjacent residences, that they are
in conformance with the City's Residential Design Guidelines and that all of the necessary
Design Review findings can be made.
5. Lots 1, 2, 3, 10, and 15 shall be limited to single story structures not to exceed 18 feet in
height. Lot 8 shall be limited to a single story structure not to exceed 22 feet in height.
These restrictions shall expire upon issuance of Final Inspection of each new home. Future
additions and/or redevelopment shall be govemed by then current Zoning Ordinance
requirements and private Codes, Covenant and Restriction agreements.
6. No ordinance protected trees shall be removed without obtaining a tree removal permit,
with the exception of those trees shown to be removed on the Vesting Tentative Map
marked Exhibit "A" to accommodate subdivision improvements.
7. Subdivision improvement construction hours shall be restricted between 7:30 a.m. and 6:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, except in the event of an emergency which imperils public
safety. The Public Works Director may grant an exemption upon his/her determination of
an emergency. No such construction work shall be permitted on legal holidays.
8. All requirements for tree protection as recommended by the City Arborist shall apply
throughout subdivision improvements construction.
9. Subdivision improvement plans shall include all common area landscaping approved per
Exhibits "A" and `B All required landscaping shall be maintained be the new
homeowners via a maintenance agreement to be prepared by the applicants and recorded
against each new lot prior to Final Map approval.
10. All public and private improvements required for the project shall be completed and
accepted for construction by the Director of Public Works, Community Development
Director, and/or the appropriate officials from other public agencies, including public and
private utility providers, prior to Final Inspection of any permitted homes on any of the lots.
11. The cottage structure shall be relocated to Lot 9 prior to commencement of any on -site
construction activity.
12. The Vesting Tentative Map Exhibit `B" shall be modified to eliminate the gated entrances
at both La Paloma Ave. and Douglass Ln. prior to Final Map approval.
Acknowledged.
Completed.
Completed by
Surveyor.
Completed.
File No. SD -97 -001 V -98 -002; 20325 La Paloma Ave. 14315 Douglass Ln.
13. The Agreement Regarding Spaich Project, attached to this Resolution and incorporated
by reference, has been entered into by the neighbors and the applicants. The following
provisions of this Agreement shall constitute specific conditions of project approval,
enforceable by the City:
a. Onsite construction trailers shall be sited near the project center away from
existing neighborhood residents. All construction equipment, vehicles, and
vehicles of workers, contractors, and subcontractors will be parked onsite.
b. Dust and erosion control will be maximized on -site and streets in the adjacent
neighborhoods shall be maintained in a manner to avoid the accumulation of mud
and dirt in the streets. Adequate litter and debris control shall be provided in the
surrounding neighborhoods and streets.
c. There shall be no street lights installed within the subdivision.
The items of this Agreement that address construction period activity shall be enforceable
by the signatories during construction, with the City's cooperation and assistance. The
remainder of this Agreement that addresses long term property maintenance issues shall
be recorded as Code, Covenant and Restriction (CC&R) items against each new lot.
Enforcement of these restrictions would be the responsibility of the future property
owners and the signatories of the Agreement. Any amendments to the CC &R's would
require Planning Commission approval.
14. The Final Map shall note that the two cul -de -sac private roads, the emergency vehicle
connection/pedestrian pathway and the Wildcat Creek pathway all incorporate public
pedestrian easements, allowing for public pedestrian access through the development and
along the pathways shown per the Vesting Tentative Map marked Exhibit "A
Engineering Division
15. Prior to submittal of the Final Map to the City Engineer for examination, the owner
(applicant) shall cause the property to be surveyed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or an
authorized Civil Engineer. The submitted map shall show the existence of a monument at
all external property corner locations, either found or set. The submitted map shall also
show monuments set at each new comer location, angle point, or as directed by the City
Engineer, all in conformity with the Subdivision Map Act and the Professional Land
Surveyors Act.
16. The owner (applicant) shall submit four (4) copies of a Final Map in substantial
conformance with the approved Tentative Map, along with the additional documents
required by Section 14- 40.020 of the Municipal Code, to the City Engineer for examination.
The Final Map shall contain all of the information required in Section 14- 40.030 of the
Municipal Code and shall be accompanied by the following items:
a. One copy of map checking calculations.
b. Preliminary Title Report for the property dated within ninety (90) days of the date of
submittal for the Final Map.
c. One copy of each map referenced on the Final Map.
d. One copy of each document/deed referenced on the Final Map.
Fee paid.
Bond Posted.
All easements offeredl9.
on Final Map.
Plans submitted and 20.
approved.
Fees Paid.
Agreement signed.
All securities
provided.
Insurance provided. 24.
All utility 25.
commitments provided.
All permits obtained.26.
Fees paid.
File No. SD- 97-001 V- 98-002; 20325 La Paloma Ave. 14315 Douglass Ln.
e. One copy of any other map, document, deed, easement or other resource that will
facilitate the examination process as requested by the City Engineer.
17. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Map Checking fee, as determined by the City Engineer, at
the time of submittal of the Final Map for examination.
18. Interior monuments shall be set at each lot comer either prior to recordation of the Final
Map or some later date to be specified on the Final Map. If the owner (applicant) chooses
to defer the setting of interior monuments to a specified later date, then sufficient security as
determined by the City Engineer shall be furnished prior to Final Map approval, to
guarantee the setting of interior monuments.
The owner (applicant) shall provide Irrevocable Offers of Dedication for all required
easements and/or rights -of -way on the Final Map, in substantial conformance with the
approved Vesting Tentative Map, prior to Final Map approval.
The owner (applicant) shall submit engineered improvement plans to the City Engineer in
conformance with the approved Tentative Map and in accordance with the design and
improvement requirements of Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. The improvement plans
shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and the appropriate officials from
other public agencies having jurisdictional authority, including public and private utility
providers, prior to approval of the Final Map.
The plans shall include improvements for the Durham Court storm drain outfall to Wildcat
Creek.
21. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Subdivision Improvement Plan Checking fee, as
determined by the City Engineer, at the time Improvement Plans are submitted for review.
22. The owner (applicant) shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City in
accordance with Section 14- 60.010 of the Municipal Code prior to Final Map approval.
23. The owner (applicant) shall furnish Improvement Securities in accordance with Section 14-
60.020 of the Municipal Code in the manner and amounts determined by the Public Works
Director prior to Final Map approval.
The owner (applicant) shall fumish a written indemnity agreement and proof of insurance
coverage, in accordance with Section 14- 05.050 of the Municipal Code, prior to Final Map
approval.
Prior to Final Map approval, the owner (applicant) shall furnish the City Engineer with
satisfactory written commitments from all public and private utility providers serving the
subdivision guaranteeing the completion of all required utility improvements to serve the
subdivision.
The owner (applicant) shall secure all necessary permits from the City and any other public
agencies, including public and private utility providers, prior to commencement of subdivi-
sion improvement construction. Copies of permits other than those issued by the City shall
be provided to City Engineer.
27. The owner (applicant) shall pay the applicable Park and Recreation fee prior to Final Map
approval.
Complete.
Acknowledged.
Complete.
Complete.
Acknowledged.
Fees paid.
Fees paid.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
Acknowledged.
File No. SD- 97-001 V -98 -002; 20325 La Paloma Ave. 14315 Douglass Ln.
28. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the
Regional Water Quality Control Board to obtain coverage under the State General
Construction Activity NPDES Permit. Satisfactory evidence of the filing of the NOI shall
be furnished to the City Engineer. The applicant shall comply with all provisions and
conditions of the State Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Copies of the SWPPP shall be submitted to the City
Engineer prior to Final Map Approval and maintained on site at all times during
construction of the subdivision improvements.
29. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to New Development and
Construction Best Management Practices as adopted by the City for the purpose of
preventing storm water pollution.
30. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall review and approve all geotechnical aspect of the
final Tentative Map and related plans to ensure that the consultant's recommendations have
been properly incorporated.
31. The results of the plan shall be summarized in a letter by the Project Geotechnical Engineer
and submitted to the City for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to Final Map
approval.
32. The geotechnical consultants shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical
aspects of the project demolition and construction. Structures should be demolished and
areas of loose debris should be removed prior to site construction. Geotechnical field
inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to: site surface and subsurface
drainage improvements, grading inspection, fill compaction testing, roadway pavement
section preparation, and excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the
placement of steel and concrete.
The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions of the project on an As -Built
Map and Cross Sections and described in a letter(s) or report(s) and submitted to the City
Engineer for review prior to finalization of the subdivision improvements.
33. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical
consultant's review of the project prior to Final Map approval.
34. The owner (applicant) shall pay $20,000 dollars towards the future overlay of Douglass
Lane and for the future slurry seal of La Paloma Ave. prior to Final Map approval.
Utility and Public Safety Providers
35. Sanitary sewer service for all parcels shall be required per the requirements of the West
Valley Sanitation District.
36. Domestic water shall be supplied by San Jose Water Company.
37. The owner (applicant) shall install additional fire hydrants as determined by the Saratoga
Fire District.
General Liability
38. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses incurred by the City or
File No. SD -97 -001 V- 98-002; 20325 La Paloma Ave. 14315 Douglass Ln.
held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any
proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect
to the applicant's project.
Acknowledged. 39. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the
permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the
violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City per each day of the
violation.
Section 1. Conditions must be completed within 24 months or approval will expire.
Section 2. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental
entities must be met.
Section 3. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15 -90 of the Saratoga City
Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California,
this 25th day of March, 1998 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Bernald, Kaplan, Murakami, Pierce, and Chair Patrick
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Martlage
ABSENT: Commissioner Siegfried
Chair, g Commission
ATTEST:
1A 1A
tary, Piaruung Commission
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM g
MEETING DATE: May 20, 1998 CITY MANAGER:
ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT: Review of City -wide Class A Roofing Ordinance Proposal
RECOMMENDED MOTION(S):
1. Approve the proposed resolution adopting findings of fact and need for changes or
modifications to the California Building Code due to local conditions.
2. Introduce the proposed ordinance amending Section 16.15.110 of the Saratoga
Municipal Code by amending certain sections of the 1994 edition of the California
Building Code pertaining to roof coverings.
REPORT SUMMARY:
The Public Safety Commission has had a long standing concern of an uncontrolled fire
throughout the City due to a conflagration or a severe earthquake. This concern was
validated by the Los Gatos fire last summer. An unchecked fire may intensify due to a
combination of "roof jumping" from high winds and /or possible lack of fire fighting
resources during a critical state of emergency. This possible hazardous condition is
further exacerbated by an urban forest within Saratoga. Currently, Class A roofing is
required in one -third of the City, in what is considered the "designated hazardous fire
area." The existing hazardous fire areas are uphill of Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. and
Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd. All other portions of the City require a minimum of Class C
roofing. The proposed ordinance would require Class A roofing throughout the City for
all new construction with the exception of replacement roofs of less than 10 percent of the
total roof.
Roof covering definitions are as follows:
Class A roof coverings are effective against severe fire exposures.
Class B roof coverings are effective against moderate fire exposures.
Class C roof coverings are effective against light fire exposures.
Cost has been a prohibitive obstacle in the past when city -wide Class A roofing was
proposed. In October of last year, the International Conference of Building Official
(ICBO), publishers of the Uniform Building Code, approved and published an Evaluation
Report (ER- 5404). This report introduced an approved and tested assembly for Class A
roof covering which incorporates the use of wood shingles and shakes (Attachment 5). In
the past, residents could have a Class B designation for wood shingle /shake roofs, but
could not meet the Class A roofing requirements. With the approval of Dens -Deck, this
new roofing material is used as sheathing underneath the Class B wood shingle /shake roof
Residents can now meet Class A roofing requirements because the Dens -Deck and wood
shake /shingle roof covering combination creates a Class A roof. Cost for the Dens -Deck
material is $10 per 4 x 8 sheet; this coupled with the installation time may possibly add
approximately $2,000 to $3,000 to the cost of re- roofing (an average 30 squares of
roofing). Moreover, there are many other Class A roofing materials available on the
market other than the wood shake/Dens -Deck combination (Attachment 4).
Aesthetics was another obstacle in the past. Residents who have had a preference for
wood shake application for new re -roof projects and/or any additions did not have other
similar wood shake material available to them to meet Class A roofing requirements. With
the approval of Class B wood shingles /shakes and Dens -Deck material, this other conflict
has been resolved.
The city -wide Class A roofing requirement has been championed by both public and
private agencies. At the February 10, 1998 adjourned meeting between the City Council
and the Public Safety Commission, the Public Safety Commission proposed a city -wide
Class A roofing ordinance and Council directed the Public Safety Commission to work
with City staff to develop a proposal. At the May 14, 1998 Public Safety Commission
meeting, the Commission voted to support the attached city -wide Class A roofing
ordinance. The Saratoga Fire District, the Santa Clara County Fire District, the
Committee for Firesafe Dwellings, a non profit organization, and the PenWest Real Estate
Association, a local real estate association, also support the city -wide Class A roofing
ordinance proposal.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
None.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Notice of the June 3 hearing will be published in the May 20 Saratoga News. In addition,
local roofing companies were sent the May 20, 1998 Council agenda.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S):
The Ordinance would not be introduced, and the current roofing requirements would
continue to apply.
FOLLOW UP ACTIONS:
Schedule the proposed ordinance for second reading and adoption on June 3.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Copy of City Code Section 16.15.110 pertaining to roof covering.
2. Copy of the current Resolution modifying the hazardous fire area maps.
3. Support letter from Saratoga Fire District and Santa Clara County Fire District.
4. Cost and investment analysis from the Committee for Firesafe Dwellings.
5. ICBO Evaluation Report on roof covering and roof deck construction (ER- 5404).
6. April 21, 1998 memo from City Attorney to City staff.
7. Proposed Resolution for adopting findings of fact.
8. Proposed Ordinance amending certain sections of the 1994 edition of the CA Building
Code.
16- 15.100
16- 15.100 Section 1806 is added concerning
reinforcement.
Section 1806, first paragraph, is added to the Building
Code, to read as follows:
Sec. 1806 Reinforcement. A minimum of two
one -half inch bars of metal reinforcement placed
continuous in foundations shall be required for Group
R and M occupancies without engineering design.
(Ord. 71.157 2 (part), 1995)
16- 15.110 Section 1503.1 added concerning
roof covering.
Section 1503.1 of the Building Code is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 1503.1 Roof Covering. Roofs shall be as
specified in this code and as otherwise required by
this chapter.
The foregoing provisions notwithstanding, roof
coverings on all buildings and structures hereafter
erected or constructed in a designated hazardous fire
area in the City, shall be fire- retardant, or shall comply
with the standards established for Class A or B pre-
pared or built -up roofing. All replacement roofs for
existing buildings and structures in a hazardous fire
area shall comply with this requirement, except that
a replacement of less than 10 percent of the total roof
area shall be exempt.
(Ord. 71.157 2 (part), 1995)
16- 15.120 Section 1923.1 is amended
concerning concrete slabs.
Section 1923.1 of the Building Code is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 1923.1 General. The minimum thickness of
concrete floor slabs supported directly on the ground
shall be not less than 3 The slab shall be reinforced
with not less than six inches ten -gage wire mesh or
an approved alternate installed at mid height of the
slab.
(Ord. 71.157 2 (part), 1995)
16- 15.130 Section 2516(n) is added
concerning under floor clearance.
Section 2317.3 is added to the Building Code, to read
as follows:
Sec. 2317.3 Under floor clearance. Unless
otherwise approved by the building official, the mini-
(Saratoga 4-96)
390
Table A -33 -A
Attachment 1
mum under floor clearances between the bottom of
the floor joists, and/or girders, shall not be less than
18 inches to exposed ground in crawl spaces or exca-
vated or unexcavated areas located within the periphery
of the building foundation.
(Ord. 71.157 2 (part), 1995)
16- 15.140 Section 2326.11.3, Item 7, is
amended concerning gypsum
board.
Section 2326.11.3, Item 7, of the Building Code is
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 2326.11.3, Item 7. Portland cement plaster
on studs spaced 16 inches on center installed in accor-
dance with Table No. 47 -I. Limited to single story
R -3 and U -1 occupancies.
(Ord. 71.157 2 (part), 1995)
16- 15.150 Table A -33 -A of Appendix Chapter
33 is amended concerning plan
check fees.
Table A -33 -A of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Building
Code is amended to read as follows:
Plan checking fee. For excavation and fill on the
same site, the fee shall be based on the total combined
volume of the excavation and fill, whichever is greater.
Before accepting a set of plans and specifications for
checking, the building official shall collect a plan
checking fee in an amount as established from time
to time by resolution of the City Council. Separate
permits and fees shall apply to retaining walls or major
drainage structures, as indicated elsewhere in this Code.
There shall be no separate charge for standard terrace
drains and similar facilities. The plan checking fee
for a grading permit authorizing additional work to
that under a valid permit shall be the difference be-
tween the fee paid for the original permit and the fee
shown for the entire project.
(Ord. 71.157 2 (part), 1995)
16- 15.160 Table A -33 -B is amended
concerning grading permit fees.
Table A -33 -B of the Building Code is amended to read
as follows:
1. Grading permit fees. A fee for each grading
permit shall be paid to the building official, in such
amount as established from time to time by resolution
WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga has adopted the 1991 Edition
of the Uniform Fire Code; and
WHEREAS, the Fire Code defines hazardous fire area as any
land which is covered with grass, grain, brush or forest, whether
privately or publicly owned, which is so situated, or is of such
inaccessible location, that a fire originating upon such land would
present an abnormally difficult job of suppression or would result
in great and unusual damage through fire or resulting erosion; and
WHEREAS, the Saratoga City Code, Section 16- 20.300 states
that the Fire Chief shall designate all hazardous fire areas on a
map which shall be maintained in the Office of the Fire Chief and
in the office of the Planning Director; and
WHEREAS, the Hillside Fire Safety Committee recommendations
include the realignment of the current hazardous fire area boundary
to extend to Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga -Los Gatos Road;
and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, WHEREAS, the boundary line
of the current hazardous fire area map is modified to reflect the
expanded areas indicated on the Hazardous Fire Area Map prepared by
the Fire Chief dated January 20, 1993, a copy of which is
maintained in the offices of the Fire Chief and Planning Director.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City
State of California, this 20th day
following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Burger, Kohler, Monia,
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN :None
ATTEST
L,
CITY CL
RESOLUTION NO. q3 0(A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SARATOGA MODIFYING THE HAZARDOUS
FIRE AREA MAPS
Attachment 2
Council, City of Saratoga,
of January, 1993 by the
Tucker and Mayor Anderson
MAP 5
AREAS OF EXTREME
F RE HAZARDS
AREAS Or ER TRER
e+ V I R E NAZAROS
SOURCES'
CITY OF SARATOGA
scIE
NOIITH 0 R00 3.000
LEGEND JUNE IRS,
URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY
CITY SINITS
FIRE DEPARTMENT
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
14700 Winchester Bed.. Los Gatos. CA 95030-1818
140813784010 (phone) (408) 378 -9342 (fax)
06 January 1998
The Honorable Donald Wolfe
Mayor of the City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
Dear Mr. Mayor.
4,4
SARATOGA FIRE DISTRICT
SERVICE SINCE 1921
The recent "Cats Fire" that was experienced in the hills above Los Gatos on 07 August 1997
underscored the need for fire retardant roofing on homes in the hillside areas of Santa Clara County
(see video footage taken of the fire). The homes that were lost in this fire had ordinary
combustible wood roofs which were instrumental in the structures being destroyed. Had those
homes been provided with fire retardant roofing, the outcome may have been dramatically
different.
Although the Cats Fire incident occurred in steep, rugged
possible i�th with vegetation, the
potential for major property loss due to fire is P� typical residential subdivision on
the valley floor (e.g., fires started by earthquakes). This fire loss potential can likewise be
attributed to combustible wood roofs. Combustible wood roofs combined with the vegetation
fuels of the "suburban forest" can create rapidly spreading fires from house to house when
firebrands and embers lofted by wind or convection currents land on readily ignitable rooftops.
Due to this potential, the Santa Clara County Fire Department and the Saratoga Fire District are
recommending that the City of Saratoga allow only "Class A" rated roof assemblies throughout the
city for new roofs or re roofing installations. h is important to note that the Saratoga Public Safety
Commission fully endorses the concept of a "Class A" roofing ordinance for the City of Saratoga.
A "Class A" roof provides the highest level of protection against rooftop fire exposure.
The City of Saratoga currently allows only "Class A" roofs in the hillside Hazardous Fire Area
however, a "Class C" roof is allowed throughout the remainder of the city as per minimum state
standards. A "Class C roof, usually consisting of fire retardant treated wood shakes, is an
improvement over untreated cornbustible roofing material, but does not provide protection against
the most severe fire exposure as does Class A" roofing.
Most new homes today are constructed with "Class A" roof coverings which are preferred by
many architects and builders due to product appearance, durability and fire resistance. For those
homeowners who prefer the appearance of wood shakes, "Class A" rated wood shake roof
coverings are also available.
We believe that "Class A" roof coverings are the best choice for overall community fire safety. We
urge the City of Saratoga to consider this very effective fire protection measure for city-wide
application.
Very truly yours,
D glas Sporl d
Ernest Kraule
Fire of Fire Cluef
Santa ara County Fire Department
c: File
Saratoga Fue District
Attachment 3-
Saratoga Out A Roofs/jmd980106x
04/21/98 14:42 e408 378 9342 CFYll
MARCH, 1104•S
COST AND INVESTMENT ANALYSIS FOR RE— ROOFING _PITCHED ROOFS
ROOFING MATERIAL
TPYE
ASPHALT /FIBERGLASS
THREE TAB SHINGLE
HEAVY LAMINATED
TREATED WOOD SHAKES
UNTREATED WOOD SNAKES
(N /A in Calif.)
COATED METAL PANELS
FIBER-CEMENT SHAKE
FIBER CEMENT PANELS
CONCRETE TILE
STANDARD WEIGHT
LIGHT WEIGHT
CLAY TILE
STANDARD WEIGHT
LIGHT WEIGHT
C
L
A
A
A
A
5
C
N/A
A
B
C
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
INSTALLATION
FRAMING
STANDARD
STANDARD
STANDARD
STANDARD
STANDARD
STANDARD
STANDARD
STANDARD
STANDARD
REINFORCED
STANOARD(f)
REINFORCED
STANDARD(f)
REQUIREMENTS
DECKING
SOLID
SOLID
CL5 B "/DENSDK
SOLID
SPACED
SOLID /SPACED
SOLID or
SPACED
SOLID or
SPACED
SOLID or
SPACED
SOLID
SOLID
SOLID
SOLID
Attachment 4-
COMMITTEE FOR LI
FIItESAFE DWELLINGS
A NON PROFIT CORPORATION
INSTALLED COST
PER SQUARE (s)
(S)
LIFE EXPECTED/
WARRANTED
(YEARS)
LIFE -CYCLE
COST /YEAR
PER SQUARE
(S)
$145 165 15 25 S7 $8 210 235
$175 315 25 40 $6 $10 275 385
$425 475 (b) 10 15 (b) $54 $38 480+
$360 400 (b) 10 15 (b) $29 $32 380+
$280 350 (b) 10 15 (b) $23 $28 350+
$250 300 (b) 10 15 (b) 120 $24 350+
$400 450 (c) 40 50 110 $11 180 (d)
5380 430 (e) 40 50 $10 $11 150 (d)
$350 400 (e) 40 50 $9 $10 150 (d)
5350 380 25 50 $9 $10 400 750
5350 380 25 50 S9 $10 300 600
$270 300 SO S5 S6
5350 375 50 S6 $7
LJ VV�
WEIGHT OF
MATERIAL PER
SQUARE
(tbs.)
9S0
550 700 (g)
5270 300 50 $5 $6 800
5375 400 50 $7 S9 590 (g)
BASIS: Costs of re- roofing of shake roofed single-family residence with 32 sqs. (3,200 sq.ft.)
Figures include: Tear -off of existing roof (unless specifically excepted)
Bracing up roof construction where needed
Installation of solid sheathing where required
(s) A "square" Is an area of 100 square feet.
(b) Virtually no warranty provided in most eases. Costs will vary higher quality shakes /shingles ere more expensive
(c) These costs are based upon the application of the product over en existing wood roof. Class A requires 1/2" gypsum
board; Class B requires A 720 cap sheet or foil backed fiberglass between old wood roof end new metal roofing.
BORE: REMOVAL OF EXISTING W® SNAKES OR MINGLES IS IRECOMMEMM31 FOR ALL BEIDOFUY)
(d) Add 300 pounds if existing shakes end shingles are not removed.
(e) Standard framing should be checked by s structural engineer.
f h- tth lyd vt•__ wet
All estimated costs are based upon: A standard roof of approximately 4:12 pitch and the use of s contractor who is
properly licensed, obtains permits, maintains proper insurance, etc. Actual costs may very significantly due to
location, complexity of roof structure, method of application, and market fluctuations.
Copyright 1997 ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc.
Attachment 5-
ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc.
5360 WORKMAN MILL ROAD WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA 90601 -2299
A subsidiary corporation of the International Conference of Building Officials
EVALUATION REPORT
Filing Category: ROOF COVERING AND ROOF DECK CONSTRUCTION (202)
PRESSURE TREATED WOOD SHAKES AND SHINGLES
CHEMCO, INC.
POST OFFICE BOX 875
FERNDALE, WASHINGTON 98248
1.0 SUBJECT
FTX, CEDARPLUS and Durashake Pressure treated Wood
Shakes and Shingles.
2.0 DESCRIPTION
2.1 General:
The pressure- treated wood shakes and shingles are pro-
duced from No. 1 grade western red cedar shakes or shingles
complying with UBC Standards 15 -3 or 15 -4. The shakes and
shingles, having a maximum moisture content of 25 percent,
are pressure- treated by Chemco, Inc., with a proprietary fire
retardant chemical. Treated products are identified as "Class
B" and "Class C The "Class B" treated shakes and shingles
have higher levels of chemical retention than the "Class C"
shakes and shingles. Products are sold under the trade
names FTX, CEDARPLUS and Durashake.
2.2 Installation:
2.2.1 General: The wood shakes and shingles are installed
on spaced or solid sheathing complying with the code. The
shakes and shingles are installed in accordance with Table
15 -B -2 of the code except as noted in this report. On roof
slopes from 3:12 to less than 4:12, installation requires one
layer of Type 15 asphalt- saturated felt. In addition to the inter
layment between courses, shakes are installed with an un-
derlayment of 36- inch -wide (914 mm), Type 30 asphalt -satu-
rated felt under the 15- or 18- inch -long (381 or 457 mm)
starter course at the eave line. Valley flashing must comply
with Section 1508.5 of the code, and other flashing must com-
ply with Section 1509. Maximum weather exposure of the
shakes and shingles must not exceed those exposures in
Table 15 -C of the code. Weather exposure of hips and ridges
must not exceed those exposures permitted for the field of the
roof. Starter courses at the eave are doubled. Fifteen -inch
(381 mm) or 18 -inch (457 mm) shakes or shingles may be
used for the final course at the ridge. See Figure 1 for typical
installation details.
2.2.2 Class A Roof ig #oducts labeled as "Class
atd
B" st tT shi files are installedin accordance with Section
2.2.1 of this report, over spaced or solid sheathing covered
with one layer of 1 /4- inch -thick (6.4 mm) Dens -Deck Roof
ER -5404
Issued October 1, 1997
Board, manufactured by Georgia- Pacific Corporation. The
Dens -Deck boards are fastened to framing with minimum 9d
common nails, spaced at 6 inches (152 mm) on center at
edges and 12 inches (305 mm) on center at intermediate sup-
ports. The Class A roof covering may be installed in areas
subject to maximum basic wind speeds of 80 miles per hour
(129 km/h), on structures a maximum of 40 feet (12 192 mm)
in height, in Exposure B zones.
2.2.3 Class B Roof Covering: Products labeled as "Class
B" shakes or shingles are installed in accordance with Section
2.2.1 of this report.
2.2.4 Class C Roof Covering: Products labeled as "Class
C" shakes or shingles are installed in accordance with Sec-
tion 2.2.1 of this report.
2.3 Identification:
Bundles of treated wood shakes and shingles bear a Zabel
noting the shingle or shake grading agency and compliance
with UBC Standard 15 or 15 4. An additional label is affixed
to each bundle, and bears the treater's name (Chemco. Inc.),
the ,product name, the name of the quality control agency
(Fire Tech Services, Inc.), the fire classification and the evalu-
ation report number (ICBO ES ER- 5404). Labels for "Class B"
shakes are printed with red ink and labels for "Class C"
shakes are printed with blue ink. See Figure 2 for product la-
bels.
3.0 EVIDENCE SUBMITTED
Reports of tests in accordance with the ICBO ES Acceptance
Criteria for Fire retardant treated Wood Roof Systems
(AC107), dated April 1995, quality control manual and instal-
lation instructions.
4.0 FINDINGS
That the pressure treated wood shakes and shingles de-
scribed in this report comply with the 1994 Uniform
Building Code and the 1996 Accumulative Supple-
ment, subject to the following conditions:
4.1 The shakes and shingles are treated, identified and
installed in accordance with this report.
4.2 The shakes and shingles are pressure- treated by
Chemco, Inc., in Ferndale, Washington, under a
quality control program with inspections by Fire
Tech Services, Inc. (NER- 0A214).
This report is subject to re- examination in one year.
Evaluation reports of ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc., are issued solely to provide information to Class A members of ICBO, utilizing the code upon which the report
is based. Evaluation reports are not to be construed as representing aesthetics or any other attributes not specifically addressed nor as an endorsement or recommen-
dation for use of the subject report.
This report is based upon independent tests or other technical data submitted by the applicant. The ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc., technical staff has reviewed the
test results and/or other data, but does not possess lest facilities to make an independent verification. There is no warranty by ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc., express
or implied, as to any "Finding" or other matter in the report or as to any product covered by the report. This disclaimer includes, but is not limited to, merchantability.
Page 1 of 4
Page 2 of 4
Use minimum nails to hold
metal in place
11 0 01 1 P' N• IIIIIIIIII
Roofing felt �r r l
Valley metal 8'0" long I Underlayment
width 4" t
o
overlapped 6" at joints/ Open valley
8" depending on water
t 1, volume. Mark anticipated
Underlayment Metal to extend as far as water lines (width of open
valley) valley sides with a
chalk line
shingles or shakes
Dormer flashing
Keep nails well away from
r the center of valley
Bwlang paper
Plywood
Step tlashing
Order of applying shingles
or shakes at valley
1. Stop course line here
2. Place pre-cut piece so
that cut -angle is posi-
tioned on chalk line with
tip on course line
Flashing Details For Shingle and Shake Valleys
3. Select a shingle or shake
of the required width to
complete the course
FIGURE 1— TYPICAL INSTALLATION DETAILS
ER -5404
Mastic undenap
Corner flashing
Page 3 of 4
For SI: 1 inch 25.4 mm.
1" minimum clearance
around projection
Nails should not
penetrate flashing
flange underneath
Keep edge of flange
minimum 2" from
edge of shingle joint
Typical Projection
Flashing
Nick with
hatchet to stop
water beading
Counter flashing
Jack
Plumbing stack
3" minimum
6" minimum
1 4,1•1 10 0 1
�N li Caulking
i,
Caulking
2”
Flashing Details for Typical Roof Projections
Typical chimney flashing
not requiring soldering
Step Hashing 3"
minimum overlap
Shingle pint
Apron Hashing
Head flashing
Typical chimney flashing
requiring soldering
FIGURE 1-TYPICAL INSTALLATION DETAILS
Solder pints
ER -5404
Page 4 of 4
FIX
PRESSOR, FRf Airn
SwAAts AND solmILE3
1, f.NU•.i Ww4
FIX
PRESSURE TREATED
SNARES AND SRNGLES
NAND
s 9rsrd(C(J
Class 8 Fire Retardant
ICBO ES ERA NER 215
•NCI
SIIN •NO.
MC.uao wren MAR oN_
Class C Fire Retardant
ICBO ES ERN NER 215
RICN WIRVICES M.O.. W
Me O C MYECIIOr•GIMC•
N! A N• G• sIr
RUST 04 •PSLWO N •CCOIO.SNCE
WIb. APPLIC•TW WSERUCTOIrs
NKLWtU nR TwS MOOING
Class B Fire Retardant TREATED BY
1C80 E5 ERA NER 215
0. SERVICES ISSMNI•R
0C W
`R�N•r.F.r
•.r. E•TION AISTAUC
INCLUO!0 W,I• rma ROOFING
IED3f (T(4)
Class C Fire Retardant
ICBO ES ERR NER 215
.•E TC CR SERVICES ISSAOUAN, W
.00 NSPECIIONSCENCY
lo UJ..) NCR No 04 TIr
•PULIC•nON INSTNtCWONS
.0.00E0 WTrN TwS 11000.3
TREATED BY
ffRNDAI[ w•.24
DURASHAKE® FT
Fire Retardant Treated Shakes Shingles
Class C Fire Retardant ICBO ES ERN NER 215
FIRE TECH SERVICES ISSAOUAH, WA
O.C. INSPECTION AGENCY. N.E.R. No. OA 214. USTING No. 100SA
APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS INCLUDED WITH THIS ROOFING
DURASHAKE IS A
REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF
AMERICAN WOOD PRESERVERS. INC
MISSION, BRITISH COLUMBIA V2V 4U4
TREATED BY
MAGSAIM
FERNDALE. WA NM
DURASHAKE' FT
Fire Retardant Treated Shakes Shingles
Class 8 Fire Retardant ICBO ES ERN NER 215
FIRE TECH SERVICES ISSAOUAH. WA
O.C. INSPECTION AGENCY. N.E.R. No. OA 214. LISTING No 1005A
APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS INCLUDED WITH THIS ROOFING
DURASHAKE IS A
REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF
AMERICAN WOOD PRESERVERS. INC
MISSION. BRITISH COLUMBIA V25 4M4
Class C Fire Retardant
ICBO ES ERa ,NER 215
red TECH SERVICES M4•G AN, WA
AC VWSPEC ERN •GrwCT
0*11.0 b 1014
•PARCATIOrINSTRIICTq l
14IC1U0[0 WON ERIS MOOING
PRESSURE TREATED
SNARES AND SPANGLES
CERTI -GUARD
TREATED BY
FERNDALE. WASHES
TREATED 85
[NEMO
FERNDALE. WA
TREATED 85
Class B R# Retardant
ICB ES Fu NER 215
EIRE TEEN SE AYICES IS SIDUEN, W q
PRESSURE TREATED OC. INSPECriON•EtL,C
s "AREs AND SRNGLES (ISreG MO CHE/IICO
I RuCP,r
RCLUO[o wnn iR,s RDOCwo FERNDALE. w4
CERTI -GUARD
FIGURE 2— PRODUCT LABELS
ER -5404
MICHAEL R. NAVE
STEVEN R. MEYERS
ELIZABETH H. SILVER
MICHAEL S. RIBACK
KENNETH A WILSON
DAVID W. SKINNER
STEVEN T. MATTAS
MICHAEL F. RODRIGUEZ
CLIFFORD F. CAMPBELL
KATHLEEN FAUBION, AICP
RICK W. JARVIS
DEBBIE F. LATHAM
ARNE B. SANDBERG
BENJAMIN P. FAY
DANIEL A MULLER
LIANE M. RANDOLPH
PATRICK WHITNELL
KATHARINE G. WELLMAN
JOHN W. TRUXAW
GARY k WATT
JULIE L HARRYMAN
OF COUNSEL
ANDREA J. SALTZMAN
CERTIFIED APPELLATE SPECIALIST
Attachment 6-
MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER WILSON
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
GATEWAY PLAZA
777 DAVIS STREET, SUITE 300
SAN LEANDRO, CALIFORNIA 94577
TELEPHONE: 1510) 351 -4300
FACSIMILE: (510) 351 -4481
MEMORANDUM
NORTH BAY OFFICE
555 FIFTH STREET, SUITE 230
SANTA ROSA, CA 95401
TELEPHONE: (707) 545 -8009
FACSIMILE: (707) 545 -6617
CENTRAL VALLEY OFFICE
5250 CLAREMONT AVENUE
STOCKTON, CA 95207
TELEPHONE: (209) 951 -4080
FACSIMILE: (209) 951 -3009
TO: Jennie Loft, Administrative Analyst DATE: April 21, 1998
City of Saratoga
FROM: Michael S. Riback, City Attorney
RE: Ordinance Establishing Class A Roofing Requirement
Resolution Setting Forth Findings of Local Conditions
Attached please find an Ordinance amending the Uniform Building Code to
establish the requirement that all new roofs in Saratoga be of a Class -A rating and a
Resolution containing findings justifying the Class -A roofing requirement based upon local
conditions existing in the City of Saratoga.
The Ordinance and the Resolution have been reviewed by both Fire Districts and
by Hugh Hexamer and Frank Lemmon, members of the Public Safety Commission, and
Brad Lind, Senior Building Inspector. All have approved the documents in their present
form.
As you and I discussed, the full Public Safety Commission should review the
documents and provide a recommendation to the City Council. The attached documents
are forwarded for that purpose. Please let me know whether the Commission has any
recommended changes.
I understand from you that Brad Lind has indicated that the latest edition of the
Uniform Building Code will not be ready for adoption until January 1999. Assuming that
the Public Safety Commission and the Fire Districts would prefer that the Class -A roofing
TO: Jennie Loft, Administrative Analyst
FROM: Michael S. Riback, City Attorney
RE: Ordinance Establishing Class A Roofing Requirement
DATE: April 21, 1998
PAGE: 2
requirement be in place prior to the summer construction activity, the Ordinance and
Resolution should be brought to the City Council sometime in May.
MSR/bb
Enclosures
Please give me a call if you should have any questions.
cc: Larry Perlin, City Manager (w /encls.)
J: \W PD\MNRS W \2 73\MEMO\LOFT.421
Michael S. Riback
J
Attachment 7-
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND NEED FOR
CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING
CODE DUE TO LOCAL CONDITIONS
Recitals:
Changes or Modifications: Pursuant to Section 17958 of the State of California
Health and Safety Code, the City Council of the City of Saratoga in its ordinance
amending the 199_ Edition of the California Building Code changes or modifies
certain provisions of the State Building Standards Code as it pertains to the
regulation of buildings used for human habitation. A copy of the text of such
changes or modifications is attached.
Findings: Pursuant to Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7(a) of the State of California
Health and Safety Code, the City Council of the City of Saratoga has determined
and finds that the attached changes or modifications are needed and are reasonably
necessary because of local climatic, geographic, and topographic conditions.
Local Conditions: Local conditions have an adverse effect on the prevention of (1)
major loss fires, (2) major earthquake damage, and (3) the potential for life and
property loss, making necessary changes or modifications in the California Building
Code in order to provide a reasonable degree of property security, and fire and life
safety in this community.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby
Resolve as follows:
A. Below are listed adverse local climatic, geographic and topographic
conditions making necessary the changes set forth herein to the California Building
Code.
1. Climatic
a. Precipitation. Precipitation ranges from 20 to 31 inches
per year. Approximately ninety percent (90 falls during
1
ti
the months of November through April, and 10% from
May through October. This area experiences periodic
droughts; it is possible that droughts will occur in the
future.
b. Relative Humidity. Humidity generally ranges from 60%
during day time to 75% at night. It drops to 20% during
the summer months and occasionally drops lower.
c. Temperatures. Temperatures have been recorded as high
as 105° F. Average summer highs are in the 69-100°F
range.
d. Winds. Prevailing winds are from the Northwest or
Southwest. However, winds are experienced from virtually
every direction at one time or another. Velocities are
generally in the 5 mph to 15 mph range, gusting to 7.4
mph to 30 mph, particularly during the summer months.
Extreme winds, up to 60 mph, have been known to occur.
e. Summary. These local climatic conditions affect the
acceleration, intensity and size of fire in the community.
Times of little or no rainfall, of low humidity, and high
temperatures create extremely hazardous conditions,
particularly as they relate to wood shake and shingle roof
fires and conflagration. The winds experienced in this area
can have a tremendous impact upon structure fires.
During wood shake and shingle roof fires, or exposure fires,
winds can carry sparks and burning brands to other
structures, thus spreading the fire and causing
conflagrations. In building fires, winds can literally force
fires back into the building and can create a blow torch
effect, in addition to preventing "natural" ventilation and
cross ventilation efforts.
2. Geographic and Topographic
a. Geographic location. Saratoga is located in the Southwest portion
of the Santa Clara Valley. The City is rural in character,
although it is adjacent to more urban cities in the valley.
2
b. Seismic Locations. Seismically, the City sits between the active
fault known as San Andreas, which bisects a portion of the City,
and the potentially active Berrocal and Shannon faults. A
majority of the City's land surface is in the high -to- moderate
seismic hazard zones.
c. Size and Population. The City records a current population of
approximately 30,000.
d. Roads and Streets. The number of vehicle miles driven in the
City is steadily increasing and in particular since the recent
completion of Highway 85 traffic congestion resulting from
commuters moving through the city to their homes and places of
work has increased dramatically on certain key surface arterial
streets. This additional traffic has impacted the delivery of fire
services. Many roads in the City are private roads, and are less
likely to meet access and maintenance standards than public
roads. Damage to roadways, the Highway 85 underpass and
bridges can be expected in a major earthquake, cutting off fire
service access.
e. Topography. The topography of Saratoga includes the low -lying
relatively flat valley floor and the Northwestern foothills. The
mountain areas have a solid cover of vegetation. The valley has a
relatively large number of trees of varying species, and has been
referred to as an "urban forest A major portion of the City is
underlined by a geologic stability zone. This type of geologic unit
is moderately stable when dry but moderately unstable when
saturated. There are several areas in Saratoga that contain rock
formations conducive to abundant landslides. Landslides offer
the potential to cut off fire access to entire neighborhoods. The
valley floor of Saratoga is composed of several alluvial fan
deposits from the creeks and streams flowing from the
mountainous area. Flooding hazards resulting from the
secondary effects of seismic activity could occur if landslides are
activated and advance into creekbeds. In some areas, slides could
block both the roadway and the creek, creating substantial access
problems.
f. Summary. The above local geographic and topographic
conditions increase the magnitude, exposure, accessibility
problems, and fire hazards presented to the two fire districts
which serve Saratoga. Lying beneath the valley are thick layers of
sand, gravel and clay, known as alluvium, which amplify the
effects of earthquakes. Based on the damage caused in Santa
Clara Valley by recent earthquakes, and poor performance of
alluvial deposits during earthquakes, this area could be subject to
severe damage. Fire following an earthquake has the potential of
causing greater loss of life and damage than the earthquake itself.
Other variables may tend to intensify the situation:
1. The extent of damage to the water system;
2. The extent of isolation due to bridge and/or freeway
overpass collapse;
3. The extent of roadway damage and/or amount of debris
blocking the roadways;
4. Climatical conditions (hot, dry weather with high winds);
5. Time of day will influence the amount of traffic on
roadways and could intensify the risk to life during normal
business hours;
6. The availability of timely mutual aid or military assistance;
7. The large portion of dwelling with wood shingle roof
coverings could result in conflagrations.
Conclusion: Local climatic, geographic, and topographic conditions impact fire
prevention efforts, and the frequency, spread, acceleration, intensity, and size of fire
involving buildings in this community. Further, they impact potential damage to all
structures from earthquake and subsequent fire. Therefore, it is found to be
reasonably necessary that the California Building Code be changed or modified to
mitigate the effects of the above conditions.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California at
a meeting thereof held on the day of 1998, by the following vote:
Attest:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
MSRdsp:rja
March 19, 1998
J:\ WPD \MNRSW\273\RES98\FINDINGS.CBC
Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 71-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING SECTION 16- 15.110
OF THE SARATOGA MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING
CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE 1994 EDITION OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE PERTAINING TO
ROOF COVERINGS
WHEREAS, based on climatic, geographic and topographic conditions in the
City of Saratoga, the public health, safety and welfare will be served by adoption of
certain amendments to the California Building Code, 1994 Edition relating to the
installation of roof coverings;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
DOES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Section 16- 15.110 of the Saratoga City Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
"16.15.110 Section 1503.1 added concerning roof covering.
Section 1503.1 of the Building Code is added to read as follows:
Sec. 1503.1 Roof Covering. Roofs shall be as specified in this code and
as otherwise required by this chapter.
The foregoing provisions notwithstanding, roof coverings on all
buildings and structures hereafter erected or constructed
hazardous firc arca in the City, shall be fire retardant, et and shall comply with
the standards established for Class A or B prcparcd or built -up roofing. All
replacement roofs for existing buildings and structures in a hazardous firc arca
shall comply with this requirement, except that a replacement of less than 10
percent of the total roof area shall be exempt."
Section 2: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days
after its passage and adoption.
1
Attachment 8-
The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and after the
waiting time required by law, was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting
of the City Council of Saratoga held on the day of 1998,
by the following vote.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
MSR:dsp
April 21, 1998
J: \WPD\MNRSW\2 73 \ORD.98\BLDGCODE.AMD
2
Mayor
TIME: Wednesday, May 6, 1998 6:30 p.m.
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Ave.
TYPE: Regular Meeting
Special Meeting 6:30 p.m. Administration Conference Room
Heritage Commission Interviews
6:30 Anderson
6:40 Fine
6:50 Wyman
7:00 Peepari
Closed Session 7:15 p.m. Cancelled.
Regular Meeting 7:30 p.m.
Mayor's Report on Closed Session None.
7:30 Pledge of Allegiance Led by Jack Mallory, costumed as Thomas
Jefferson.
1. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Bogosian, Jacobs, Moran, Shaw and Mayor Wolfe were
present. City Manager Perlin and Deputy City Clerk Cory were present.
Assistant City Attorney Kit Faubion was present.
2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS
MINUTES
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
3. REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA
A. Resolution commending Angie Fredrick for service on Public
Safety Commission
Commissioner Fredrick accepted the resolution.
B. Proclamation on Hire -A- Veteran Week
The proclamation will be mailed to the Veterans Administration.
C. Proclamation on the Origin and Significance of the Name of
the City of Saratoga
Mayor Wolfe presented the proclamation to interested parties, including
Jack Mallory; Marilyn White costumed as an Iroquois Indian; and members
of the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce.
Councilmember Shaw read a statement supporting the interpretation of
the name "Saratoga" as "scum floating on the water" rather than
"hillside country of the great river, place of the swift water."
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was
properly posted on May 1.
4. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1) Presentation by Keith Relph, General Manager of TCI
Cablevision, on upcoming changes to CATV in Saratoga
Mr. Relph reviewed in detail the plans of TCI Cablevision. The main
points were as follows:
Digital TV, which is used with a Navigator device, should be available
in Saratoga by the end of September. High speed Internet service will
also be offered. A channel realignment will take place in June; among
other changes, the Disney Channel will be accessible to expanded basic
service.
City Council Minutes
2 May b, 1998
KICU requests to be moved from Channel 8 to Channel 6; KSAR would then
move to Channel 8. The second PEG channel should be available by June
15 at the earliest, but no later than July 1 on Channel 27. All
realignments would take place at the same time. KICU has expressed a
desire to cooperate.
Councilmembers questioned Mr. Relph closely.
Councilmember Bogosian questioned TCI's authority to change KSAR to
Channel 8. Mr. Relph cited SEC regulations, Part 76, subsection 57.
He also stated that his company agreed that Saratoga's community access
channel would remain on Channel 6 unless relocation is required to
comply with "must carry" regulations.
Councilmembers challenged Mr. Relph's interpretation and decried TCI's
lack of an earlier response to the question, which had been posed
months earlier.
Councilmember Shaw noted that the franchise agreement states that
Channel 6 is to be assigned to KSAR and it cannot be changed without
a mutual agreement. He also noted that Saratoga had requested a second
PEG channel months ago without results.
Councilmembers told Mr. Relph how inconvenient and unwelcome the change
to Channel 6 would be and asked him further questions. Mr. Relph
stated that the new technology would make it possible for Saratogans
to receive community access stations from other communities, but new
switching equipment would be required.
Councilmember Moran asked if the Council would receive a letter
concerning the legality of the change from Channel 6 to Channel 8 by
May 13. Mr. Relph replied, "Yes."
Mr. Relph then explained that 67% of the price increases were due to
programming costs; the rest was due to expenses for such items as bad
debts. City Manager Perlin noted that the City does not have the
authority to regulate rates.
Councilmember Moran questioned TCI's ability to determine what
programming Saratogans want. Mr. Relph responded that TCI recently
conducted a survey of viewers.
B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS None.
C. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Previously Discussed Items
1) Resolution denying Weiser Appeal of Persson Project
City Manager Perlin explained that the.City Attorney had been unable
to prepare the resolution due to his absence for medical reasons.
MORAN /BOGOSIAN MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO MAY 20. Passed 5 -0.
B. New Items
1) Planning Commission Actions, 4/22 Note and file.
2) Memo Authorising Publicity for Upcoming Hearings No
hearings scheduled for May 20.
3) Approval of Check Register
4) Resolution 98 -09 calling Public Hearing in connection
with Underground Utility District No. 8 along Saratoga
Avenue between Fruitvale Avenue and Baroni Court
5) Final Acceptance and Notice of Completion for
Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. Median Landscaping Project
City Council Minutes
(Capital Project No. 9601)
6) Resolution, 85 -9.110 relating to City Manager
Compensation
MORAN /SHAW MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR B. Passed 5 -0.
C. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY
1) Claim of DiNucci in connection with automobile damage
due to pothole caused by water company
SHAW /MORAN MOVED TO DENY THE CLAIM. Passed 5 -0.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None.
4. A. Oral Communications (continued) and instructions to staff
regarding actions on current oral communications None.
7. OLD BUSINESS
A. Resolution waiving certain Sign Ordinance Requirements
during "Saratoga Market Days"
MORAN /SHAW MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 98 -10. Passed 5 -0.
8. NEW BUSINESS None.
9. ROUTINE MATTERS
A. Approval of Minutes 4/15; 4/21
SHAW /MORAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 15 AS SUBMITTED.
Passed 4 -1 (Jacobs abstaining because he had been absent).
MORAN /BOGOSIAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 21 AS SUBMITTED.
Passed 5 -0.
10. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
A. Agenda items for May 12 adjourned regular meeting
1) Joint Meeting with Youth Commission and Friends of the
Warner Hutton House
2) Proposed Contract with Beals Landscape Architecture
for Project Management Services in connection with
Park Development Projects
B. Other
3) FY 98- 99/99 -00 Budget Presentation
3 May 6, 1998
Councilmember Moran inquired as to the date of the next "Potpourri."
City Manager Perlin replied that he hoped to prepare one in June.
Councilmembers then asked about notes from the Council retreat on March
14. City Manager Perlin replied that the notes had been forwarded to
the Council previously. Councilmembers Moran and Shaw stated that they
had expected more comprehensive notes.
Councilmember Moran then reminded staff that the Council was to hear
presentations from the two sanitation districts.
Councilmember Bogosian expressed interest in the date for the next
closed session. City Manager Perlin replied that it should be May 20,
and Councilmember Bogosian asked that the Council be informed of the
date by fax as soon as it was set.
Mayor Wolfe noted that there had been reports that condom machines were
to be placed in certain public facilities, including libraries. He
expressed objections to any condom machines being placed in the
Saratoga library.
City Council Minutes 4 May 6, 1998
11. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Perlin reported that the valet parking hearing had been
postponed from May 20 to June 3 at the City Attorney's request. After
discussion, the Council agreed to move to June 17, when those
Councilmembers who were most interested in the item would be present.
City Manager Perlin then announced that the resignation of Richard
Siegfried from the Planning Commission had resulted in one vacancy.
Staff is recruiting to fill the vacancy.
12. ADJOURNMENT
At 8:50 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 12,
at the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue.
Respectfully submitted,
Grace E. Cory
Deputy City Clerk
3
MINUTES a A- (3
1. Roll Call
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
TIME: Tuesday, May 12, 1998
PLACE: Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue
TYPE: Adjourned Regular Meeting /Joint Meeting with Youth
Commission /Friends of the Warner Hutton House
The meeting was called to order at 5:45 p.m. Councilmembers Bogosian,
Jacobs, Moran, Shaw and Mayor Wolfe were present. Recreation Director
Joan Pisani, Recreation Supervisor Beverly Tucker, and Deputy City
Clerk Cory were also present.
2. Report of City Clerk on Posting of Agenda
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was
properly posted on May 8. The notice of adjournment from the May 6
Council meeting was properly posted on May 7.
3. Oral Communications from the Public on Non- Agendised Items
None.
4. Joint Meeting with Youth Commission and Friends of the Warner
Hutton House
Youth Commissioners Sarah Adolphson, Tannaz Altafi, Jennifer Chang,
Sidney Cohn, Sheeva Ghassemi, Candice Goodman, Sam Kendall, Brian
Luskey, Alex Scordelis and Chair David Mount were present. The
following members of the Friends of the Warner Hutton House were also
present: Ron Adolphson, Max Cohn, Kathy Hahn, Reiko Iwanaga, Warren
Lampshire, Kathy Weiner.
Youth Commissioners reviewed the following items and answered
Councilmembers' questions:
A. Overview of Accomplishments this Year
Youth Commissioners described and showed slides of activities at the
Warner Hutton House. A number of fundraising events were also
described.
B. Attic Conversion of Warner Hutton House
An architect has prepared plans showing the House in its present state;
another will prepare plans for proposed structural changes and
reinforcement.
C. Fundraising Results
Several successful events have been held.
D. Communications
'Chair Mount read a letter previously submitted by the Commission
explaining their disappointment that they had not been consulted or
informed about the curfew ordinance which was recently passed.
Commissioners expressed their desire to be a part of governmental
affairs.
Councilmember Jacobs explained that the curfew ordinance was not a new
ordinance, but a legalistic correction to an existing ordinance.
Councilmembers stated the Commission would be kept better informed in
the future.
There was consensus to add the Youth Commission to the list of those
receiving Council agendas.
Councilmember Jacobs further explained the Council's commitment to
youth programs by noting that the Council had continued School Resource
Officer funding and various costly teen programs in the Recreation
Department, despite the Council's desire to fund only programs that
City Council Minutes 2 May 12, 1998
recovered their costs.
Mayor Wolfe brought up his desire to increase young people's knowledge
of government. He expressed an interest in having student interns at
the City Hall and having Councilmembers and commission chairs give
lectures at schools.
Friends of the Warner Hutton House
Chair Weiner described the goals of the Friends.
Warren Lampshire told of a Colin Powell speech he attended concerning
the "Alliance for Youth." He asked for Council support in obtaining
funding from the Alliance.
Board Members and Councilmembers then discussed funding of the Warner
Hutton House. Youth Commissioners stated that charging a fee for teens
to use the House is not feasible because they will then go to the
Library, which is free of charge.
E. Discussion of Goals for 1998 -99
Youth Commissioners stated that their main goals were greater public
awareness of the Commission and better communication. Councilmembers
agreed that the goals were meritorious.
The following staff members were present for the next agenda item:
City Manager Larry Perlin and Administrative Analysts Peter Gonda and
Irene Jacobs. Parks and Recreation Commissioners Sheila Ioannou and
Frank Friedrich were also present.
5. Proposed Contract with Beals Landscape Architecture for Project
Management Services in connection with Park Development Projects
Administrative Analyst Jacobs reviewed the staff report and answered
Councilmembers' questions. Commissioners Ioannou and Friedrich
expressed a willingness to serve on the task force mentioned in the
contract, while noting that the Commission had not discussed who would
serve.
BOGOSIAN /MORAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT AS SUBMITTED. Passed 5-
0.
A Councilmember will be appointed to the task force at a later date.
Councilmember Moran felt that the "Project Understanding" in the
contract is discouraging and that a more positive view of the project
should be presented.
6. FY 98 99/99 00 Budget Presentation
City Manager Perlin explained the budget documents submitted and
answered Councilmembers' questions. He then brought up the possibility
that the President of the United States might make a visit to Saratoga,
since his daughter is attending Stanford University. He asked the
Council whether they would authorize funds for presidential protection.
There was consensus that the City Manager is not authorized to provide
money for presidential protection unless he receives permission from
the Council.
Councilmember Moran asked that the Chamber of Commerce be informed of
the discussion.
Councilmembers Bogosian and Moran brought up the question of the
planned painting of the Administration Building. (Clerk's note: At
the adjourned meeting of September 23, 1997, there was consensus to
direct staff to request bids up to $3,000 for painting of redwood
siding and vertical siding of City Hall, including the Administration
Wing, in the same color scheme chosen for the Civic Theater and
Community Center.)
7. Self- Evaluation of Previous Meeting No comments.
City Council Minutes
8. Agency Assignment Reports
Councilmember Shaw reported that the KSAR Board would have a critical
meeting Thursday concerning the apparent abrogation of the cable
television franchise by TCI. Councilmember Jacobs pointed out that the
Council would need to have a closed session before asking for an
injunction.
Councilmember Moran stated that a survey performed by TCI was
misleading; Councilmember Jacobs said TCI is not obligated to do a
representative survey in any case.
Mayor Wolfe commented that Councilmember Lawson of Milpitas agrees that
the two cities should work together on this because Milpitas is in a
situation similar to Saratoga's.
There was consensus to direct staff to find out what other cities are
doing with a view to banding together and perhaps using the same lawyer
if legal action is required.
9. Other
10. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Grace E. Cory
Deputy City Clerk
3 May 12, 1998
City Manager Perlin brought up the difficulty of obtaining a Council
quorum for certain upcoming meetings. There was consensus to make the
following changes: Youth Commission interviews to be held Tuesday,
June 9 rather than Saturday, June 6; Wednesday, June 17 meeting may
be cancelled if quorum not obtainable; no adjourned meeting to be held
Tuesday, June 23; valet parking hearing to be held Wednesday, July 1,
rather than June 17.