Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09-01-2010 City Council agenda packet
AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL & HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND HISTORICAL FOUNDATION SEPTEMBER 1, 2010 SPECIAL MEETING –5:30P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE. CALL MEETING TO ORDER–5:30P.M. REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA (Pursuant to Gov’t. Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 27, 2010) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Any member of the public will be allowed to address the City Council for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the council from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Instructionto Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION–Government Code Section54956.9 (a)): (1 Case) City of Saratoga v. Sumit Dutta and Jaya Dutta, (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 1-10-CV-172734) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Gov’t Code 54957) Title: City Manager OPEN SESSION –6:00 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM –13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE. 1 1.Joint Meeting with Heritage Preservation Commissionand Historical Foundation Recommended Action: Informational only In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Councilby City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the City Clerkat 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us.Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerkat the time they are distributed to the City Council. In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 408/868-1269. Notification 24 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] Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I,Ann Sullivan, City Clerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Councilwas posted on August 27, 2010,at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us th Signed this 27day of August 2010at Saratoga, California. Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 2 èÛÚÐ× ÍÖ ùÍÎÈ×ÎÈÉ ûÕ×ÎØÛ ùÍÏÏ×ÎØÛÈÓÍÎ ôÍÎÍÊÓÎÕ ûÎÇÊÛØÔÛ éÊÓØÔÛÊ éÈÛÖÖ ê×ÌÍÊÈ ùÍÏÏ×ÎØÛÈÓÍÎ çé ù×ÎÉÇÉ úÇÊ×ÛÇ ù×ÊÈÓÖÓÙÛÈ× ÍÖ ûÌÌÊ×ÙÓÛÈÓÍÎ éÈÛÖÖ Ê×ÌÍÊÈ ùÓÈà ùÍÇÎÙÓÐ éÈÇØà É×ÉÉÓÍÎ ïÓÎÇÈ×É òÇÎ× éÈÛÖÖ ê×ÌÍÊÈ òÇÎ× ùÓÈà ùÍÇÎÙÓÐ éÌ×ÙÓÛÐ ï××ÈÓÎÕ ïÓÎÇÈ×É ¦ òÇÐà ÉÈÛÖÖ Ê×ÌÍÊÈ ÏÓÎÇÈ×É ùÓÈà ùÍÇÎÙÓÐ éÌ×ÙÓÛÐ ï××ÈÓÎÕ ïÓÎÇÈ×É ¦ òÇÐà éÈÛÖÖ ê×ÌÍÊÈ ïÓÎÇÈ×É ùÓÈà ùÍÇÎÙÓÐ ï××ÈÓÎÕ ïÓÎÇÈ×É ¦ òÇÐà ÉÈÛÖÖ Ê×ÌÍÊÈ ÏÓÎÇÈ×É ê×ÖÇÎØÓÎÕ ÈÔ× õ×Î×ÊÛÐ íÚÐÓÕÛÈÓÍÎ úÍÎØÉ ê×ÖÇÎØÓÎÕ ÍÖ ûÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ïÛÈÙÔÓÎÕ öÇÎØÉ ÖÍÊ õÊÛÎÈ öÇÎØ×Ø ìÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉ ÉÈÛÖÖ Ê×ÌÍÊÈ ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ûÏ×ÎØÓÎÕ ùÍÇÎÙÓÐ ûÕ×ÎÙà ÛÎØ ûØÔÍÙ ùÍÏÏÓÈÈ×× ðÓÛÓÉÍÎ ûÉÉÓÕÎÏ×ÎÈÉ éÈÛÖÖ ê×ÌÍÊÈ ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ìÛÊÑ×Ê êÛÎÙÔ çÌÌ×Ê èÛÎÑ èÊÛÓÐ ÷ÛÉ×Ï×ÎÈ ê×ÐÍÙÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÎ èÅÍ ìÊÍÌ×ÊÈÓ×É éÈÛÖÖ ê×ÌÍÊÈ æÓÙÓÎÓÈà ïÛÌ íÖÖ×Ê ÈÍ ø×ØÓÙÛÈ× ÷ÛÉ×Ï×ÎÈ ùÍÇÎÈÊà ùÐÇÚ ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ùÍÇÎÈÊà ùÐÇÚ íÖÖ×Ê ÈÍ ø×ØÓÙÛÈ× ÷ÛÉ×Ï×ÎÈ ìÛÊÑ×Ê êÛÎÙÔ ôíû ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ìÛÊÑ×Ê êÛÎÙÔ ôíû ùÍÍÌ×ÊÛÈÓÆ× ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ ÅÓÈÔ éùæåø ¦ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ éÈÛÖÖ ê×ÌÍÊÈ ùÍÍÌ×ÊÛÈÓÆ× ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ úÇØÕ×È ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ âÍÎÓÎÕ íÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ûÏ×ÎØÏ×ÎÈ ÈÍ ûÊÈÓÙÐ× ÈÍ ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈ ÉÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÓÎ ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛ ìÛÊÑÉ éÈÛÖÖ ê×ÌÍÊÈ íÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ìÛÊÑÉ ðÓÉÈ ìÛÊÑÉ ïÛÌ ôé ùÍØ× öÛÉÈ öÛÙÈÉ ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ûÊ×Û ÷ÄÈ×ÎÉÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ùÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ çÉ× ì×ÊÏÓÈ ùçì Ê×ÓÏÚÇÊÉ×Ï×ÎÈ ÓÎÙ×ÎÈÓÆ× ÌÊÍÕÊÛÏ ÇÌ ÈÍ òÇÎ× ùçì óÎÙ×ÎÈÓÆ× ìÊÍÕÊÛÏ ÷ÄÈ×ÎÉÓÍÎ ê×ÌÍÊÈ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈ ìÊÍÌÍÉ×Ø ùÓÈà ìÛÊÈÓÙÓÌÛÈÓÍÎ ÓÎ Û å×ÉÈ æÛÐÐ×à ùÍÐÐ×Õ× ÉÈÇØà ÍÖ ÈÔ× ùÛÊÐÉÍÎ ôÍÇÉ× éÈÛÖÖ Ê×ÌÍÊÈ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈ AGENDA REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, September 1, 2010 REGULAR MEETING –7:00 P.M. –CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA (Pursuant to Gov’t. Code 54954.2, the agenda for thismeeting was properly posted on August 27, 2010. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC Oral Communications on Non-Agendized Items Any member of the public will be allowed to address the City Council for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the council from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff. Oral Communications -Council Direction to Staff Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. Communications from Boards and Commissions Council Direction to Staff Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Communications from Boards & Commissions. ANNOUNCEMENTS CEREMONIAL ITEMS 1.Commendation Honoring Anuradha Sridhar Recommended action: Read and present commendation. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 2.2010 US Census Bureau Certificate of Appreciation Recommended action: Listen to a short presentation by Vince Khanna, US Census 2010 Outreach representative and receive Certificate of Appreciation. CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar contains routine items of business. Items in this section will be acted in one motion, unless removed by the Mayor or a Council member. Any member of the public may speak to an item on the Consent Calendar at this time, or request the Mayor remove an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Public Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. 3.City Council Study session Minutes –June 24, 2010 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 4.City Council Special Meeting Minutes –July 19, 2010 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 5.City Council Special Meeting Minutes –July 21, 2010 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 6.City Council Meeting Minutes –July 21, 2010 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 7.Refunding the 2001 General Obligation Bonds Recommended action: Review report and direct staff to issue Request for Qualifications or Request for Proposals (RFQ/RFP) for refunding the 2001 General Obligation (GO) Bonds. 8.Appropriation of Matching Funds for Grant Funded Projects Recommended action: Approve Budget Resolution for Grant Funded Projects. 9.Resolution Amending Council Agency and Adhoc Committee Liaison Assignments Recommended action: Adopt resolution amending Resolution 10-045 appointing Council representatives to Committees, Agencies and Ad hoc Committees. 10.Parker Ranch Upper Tank Trail Easement Relocation on Two Properties Recommended action: Saratoga Country Club: 1.Accept Offer of Dedication for a Pedestrian and Equestrian Trail Easement on Saratoga Country Club property located at 21990 Prospect Road (APN 366-29-007). 2.Adopt Resolution Accepting Offer of Dedication and Abandonment of the Existing Trail Easement on the same property. Parker Ranch Open Space: 3.Accept Offer of Dedication for a Pedestrian and Equestrian Trail Easement on the Parker Ranch Open Space (Parcel D of Tract 6528). 4.Adopt Resolution Accepting Offer of Dedication and Abandonment of the Existing Trail Easement on the same property. 11.Cooperative Agreement with SCVWD –Calabazas Creek Repair at Padero Court Recommended action: 1. Approve the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Saratoga andthe Santa Clara Valley Water District for Stream Bank Erosion and Storm Drain Outfall Repair along Calabazas Creek at Padero Court and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. 2. Approve attached budget resolution. PUBLIC HEARINGS Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Items requested for continuance are subject to Council’s approval at the Council meeting. 12.Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Article 11-15 to prohibit smoking in City of Saratoga Parks Recommendedaction: Conduct a public hearing considering proposed amendment to adopt Article 11-15 of the City Code to prohibit smoking in City parks. Close the public hearing, introduce and waive the first reading of the ordinance and direct staff to place the ordinance on the consent calendar for adoption at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. OLD BUSINESS 13.Extension of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) reimbursement incentive program up to June 30, 2011 Recommended action: Direct staff on one of the following: 1) End the CUP reimbursement incentive program and allow the three approved businesses to be reimbursed if open by June 30, 2011. 2) Extend the reimbursement incentive program to accommodate a fifth business, if open by June 30, 2011. 3) Extend the CUP reimbursement incentive program to allow conditional use permit fees to be refunded for an additional sixth business if open by June 30, 2011. NEW BUSINESS 14.Proposed City Participation in a West Valley College study of the Carlson House Recommended action: Direct staff accordingly ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS MayorKathleen King ABAG HakoneFoundation Executive Committee West ValleyFlood Control Zone & Watershed Advisory Committee SCC CitiesAssociation Selection Committee West Valley Mayorsand Managers Association Vice MayorJill Hunter HakoneFoundation Board HistoricalFoundation LibraryJoint Powers Association VillageAdHoc Susie’s Garden Adhoc Tree Adhoc Councilmember Howard Miller City SchoolAd-Hoc Council FinanceCommittee Highway 9Adhoc Initiative Adhoc KSAR Santa Clara County Cities Association Board West Valley SolidWaste Joint Powers Authority West Valley TransportationAuthority PAC Councilmember Chuck Page City SchoolAd-Hoc SantaClaraValley Water District Commission Saratoga MinisterialAssociation West Valley SanitationDistrict Council FinanceCommittee Councilmember Manny Cappello Chamber of Commerce County HCD Policy Committee Highway 9 Adhoc Santa Clara County Emergency Council SASCC Sister City Liaison Village Adhoc CITY COUNCIL ITEMS CITY MANAGER’S REPORT ADJOURNMENT In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Council by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerk at the time they are distributed to the City Council. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II) Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Ann Sullivan, City Clerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council for the City of Saratoga was posted on August 27, 2010, atthe City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us th Signed this 27day of August 2010at Saratoga, California. Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk NOTE: To view current or previous City Council meetings anytime, go to the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR 2010 9/1Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Heritage & Historical Foundation Preservation Comm. 9/15Regular Meeting –Joint meeting with Assemblymember Jim Beall 10/6Regular Meeting –Joint meeting with West Valley Board of Trustees 10/20Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Traffic Safety Commission 11/3Regular Meeting –Joint meeting with Saratoga Ministerial Association 11/17Regular Meeting -Joint Meetingwith Hakone Foundation 11/30Council Reorganization 12/1Regular Meeting -Joint Meeting with Library Commission and Friends of the Saratoga Libraries 12/15Regular Meeting - SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1, 2010 ORIGINATING DEPT:CITY MANAGER City Manager’s Office:Dave Anderson PREPARED BY:DEPT HEAD: Ann Sullivan, City ClerkDaveAnderson SUBJECT: CommendationHonoring Anuradha Sridhar RECOMMENDED ACTION: Read and present commendation. REPORT SUMMARY: A commendation recognizing and commendingAnuradha Sridhar, Saratoga resident and founder th year teachingCarnatic music in of Trinity Center for Music. Ms. Sridhar is celebrating her 20 the Bay Area. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: None ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, this item was properly posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s web site in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Commendation COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORINGMUSIC DIRECTOR Anuradha“Anu”Sridhar Anuradha“Anu”Sridhar WHEREAS, Anuradha Sridhar,“Anu”,has been a Saratoga resident for the past ten years; and WHEREAS, Anu,is the fifth generation of musicians belonging to the poet-saint Thyagaraja’s lineage; and WHEREAS, as an accomplished performer, Anu Sridhar has given many solo concerts as well as duet concerts with her mother and guru, Lalgudi Srimathi Brahmanandam; and WHEREAS, Anuhas toured all over the United States, Canada, India, Singapore, New Zealand, Australia, and Hong Kong; and WHEREAS, in1989 Anu established the “Trinity Center for Music” school;promoting and teaching south Indian Carnatic music to students of all ages in the Bay Area; and WHEREAS, the Trinity Center for Music started with humble beginnings and has since flourished to produce skilled and talented students. Trinity’s students have won numerous awards at competitions in Cleveland, the Bay Area, and India, including the concert competition at the Cleveland Aradhana, and the Pratibha Akaanksha award in Bangalore. AnuSridhar’s students have given concerts in various locations in the United Statesand in Chennai during the December music season. Additionally, Trinity Center students have performed at the San Francisco World Music Festival every year since 2007 andwon the Best School competition atthe Cleveland Aradhana in 2009; and WHEREAS , in 2008, Anu won the “Best Teacher in North America” award for Carnatic Music. NNOWTHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Saratoga, does hereby recognize and commend Anuradha “Anu” Sridhar for her dedication to the art of Carnatic music and for bringing this love of Carnatic music to the children in the Saratoga communityand tothe entire Bay Area. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does further commend and congratulate Anu for celebrating twenty years of excellence in promoting Carnatic music in the Bay Area. st WITNESS MYHAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 1day of September2010. Kathleen M. King, Mayor SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: September 1,2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Ann Sullivan, City ClerkDave Anderson SUBJECT: 2010 US Census Bureau Certificate of Appreciation RECOMMENDED ACTION: Listen to a shortpresentation by Vince Khanna, US Census 2010 Outreach representative and receive Certificate of Appreciation. REPORT SUMMARY: On behalf of the US Census Bureau, Mr. Khanna, Team Lead for US Census 2010 Outreach, contacted the City on July 28, 2010, indicatinghe would like to present the City of Saratoga with a Certificate of Appreciation for the outstanding support the City provided during the 2010 Census taking. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, this item was properly posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s web site in advance of the 1 meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: None 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1,2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Debbie Bretschneider,DeputyCity Clerk Dave Anderson SUBJECT:City CouncilMeetingMinutes–June 24, 2010 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Theminutes for the June 24, 2010 Study Session were submitted to the City Council at the July 21, 2010 meeting for consideration and approval. The Council reviewed the minutes and recommended changes. The changes have been made and are highlighted in red or are crossed out. If approved, the red print will be changed to black and the crossed out lines will be omitted. Approve amended minutes as submitted for the June 24, 2010,City CouncilStudy Session meeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLICCONTACT: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, this item was properly posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s web site in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Minutesfromthe June 24,2010City CouncilMeeting. MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 24, 2010 Mayor King called the Special Study Session to order at 6:00 p.m.and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL : PRESENTCouncilmembersChuck Page, Howard Miller, Manny Cappello, Vice Mayor Jill Hunter, Mayor Kathleen King ABSENT:None ALSO PRESENT:Dave Anderson, City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Debbie Bretschneider, Deputy City Clerk JohnLivingstone, Community Development Director Bob Busse, Initiative Steering Committee Marcia Fariss, Initiative Steering Committee Jim Foley, Initiative Steering Committee Jeff Schwartz, Initiative Steering Committee Emma Wyckoff, InitiativeSteering Committee REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA Debbie Bretschneider, Deputy City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of June 24, 2010, was properly posted on June 22, 2010. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONSON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS None 1 AGENDA ITEM: 1.Proposed Initiative Regarding Second Story Limitations: Consider questions presented regarding effects of the proposed measure and whether to direct staff to preparea formal report on the effects of the proposed measure pursuant to Elections Code 9212. Recommended Action : Accept staff report and direct staff accordingly. City Attorney Richard Taylor presented the staff report. He providedbackground on the initiative process and explained that Council requested this meeting tofind some opportunities for clearer understanding between the Council and the Initiative Steering Committee.He noted that there were several attachments. Attachment4 was requested during the June 16, 2010 Council Meeting and describes the height limits in each zoning district before and after the Housing Element Implementation Ordinance. Attachment 5, Housing Element Implementation Ordinance Summary Table from Prior Staff Reportwas summarized in more detail. This table was in the June 16, 2010 staff report, but a column was added to show changes proposed by the Initiative. Vice Mayor Hunter asked if the General Plan allows for changes 3 times a year. City Attorney Taylor replied that the State allows changes 4 times a year and in April the City amended the Housing Element.The Council will have the Circulation Element on the agenda later this year. That would count as2 changes for this calendar year. Mayor King asked if the Initiative covers residential use. City Attorney Taylor replied that the Initiative covers the entire City of Saratoga and so residential would be limited to 2-story if the Initiative passed. Mayor King questioned whether the Initiative, ifpassed, would consider a house with a basement to be 3 stories? And if the residence is considered 3 stories, would it be able to be rebuilt if it burned down? City Attorney Taylor said that the residences with 3 stories would be considered a legal non-conforming house. He noted thatunder the current codethe residence could not be rebuilt if 75 % of the building was destroyed. Mayor King asked if currently churches and schools(quasi-public)are allowed to be 3 stories and would the Initiative change that? Community Development Director(CDD) Livingstone answered that currently churches and schools can be 3 stories with a conditional use permit and going through the Planning Commission process. The Initiative would place a limit of 2 stories on these structures. The staff report was concluded with the 4 actions the Councilcould take: 1.No Action. 2.Revise the Housing Element Implementation Ordinance and related actions. 3.Place the initiative on the November ballot as a City-sponsored ballot measure. 2 4.Develop a separate city-sponsored ballot measure. PRELIMINARY COMMENTS : Mayor King asked for preliminary comments. Jeff Schwartz spoke on behalf of the Initiative Steering Committee. He said that the summary provided by Staff is in theirview accurate.He stated that hemight have changed some of the emphasis, but the tables are correct. He said that he and four others are here as delegates of the elevenperson Steering committee. This meeting is unprecedented in finding common ground between the Steering Committeeand the Council. He stated that theyappreciate and commend the Council for suggesting this study session. He also stated that theyare appreciative of the time staff took to talk to us and going over the changes in the Housing Element. I especially want to commend Richard Taylor, Dave Anderson, John Livingstone, Chris Riordan, and Ann Sullivan for going beyond the call of dutyto help. Council Member Miller stated that a lot of politics is based on misinformation and mistrust and that undermines democracy. His theory is that if we could all get together and talk about what we wanted done for the city, we could come to mutual agreement. He thanked everyone for coming to the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Jackie Welchstated that Big Basin Way has been the mainstreet of Saratoga for over 100 years. She would not like Big Basin turned into high density condos. She does think Big Basin needs more retail. Cecilia Desmond stated that she is areal estate agent and many of the Saratoga Oaks residences would be considered 3 stories. Banks will not loan to houses that are non-conforming. And it would be difficult to get insurance, if the measure, as written, were to pass. Dwight Nickerson was concerned how the Initiative would affect current residences. His Saratoga Court townhome would be considered 3 stories on the creek side. What ifthe building burned down? Paul Conrado, a resident of 20 years, stated that he is a builder, not a developer. He stated that it would be tragic to put restrictions on hillside homes. He was bothered that the Village might not change. He was disturbed by the cost to the City of the Initiative. Sarah Okunosaid that her family finds the village to be inhospitable to regular people. She stated that she was against the Initiative.She thinks we have made the Village unfriendly to developers. 3 David Rossi asked what does downtown Saratoga need? His development of downtown was put on holdfor environmental reasons, he did not ask for changes in the Code. He does not think the village works in its current configuration. People should do studies about what the Village needs. Michael Shadman statedthat the CH-1 and CH-2 limitations are already set. The 26 foot height limit makes it very difficultto have a 3-story, but a35 feetlimitshould have 3 stories. Every site would have different requirementsand the Planning Commission should decide. The Initiative will drive more businesses out of downtown. Peggy Kimball noted that it does make a difference if the buildings are 2 or 3-story. She wants to keep downtown pretty. She thinks we should have buses to bring people downtown. Mahnaz Khazen states that she has properties downtown in the Village and that she is not representing the Chamber of Commerce when she speaks. She loves the charm of Saratoga. She disagrees with the Initiative. New rules should allow the City to be more welcome. She says the Planning Commission should be allowed to make decisions. She also discussed the high vacancy rate in Saratoga. Councilmember Page asked Mahnaz if rental rates are high in the Village. Mahnaz replied that the current asking price is as low as $.90 a square foot. In comparison, Campbell is $3.25 a square footand the vacancy rate is lower. She said that Saratoga just doesn’t have the foot traffic to support businesses. Trish Cypherthinks the initiative process is a blessing. We should let the whole city decide by votingon it. She wants Saratoga to stay as it is. Scott Eschen, small-time developer, says that he won’t develop in Saratoga, because it’s too difficult. He suggests looking at how other cities that want to preserve their charm handle development. He says that Los Altos has economic vitality without losing their charm.They created a Downtown Development Committee. Doug Robertson, Planning Commission member, stated that he was not there representing the Planning Commission. He believes that 35 feet limit and with 3 stories would still keep the charm of the City. He is not happy with the status quo in the Village. The Villageneeds more foot traffic. We shouldn’t tie the hands of the City to bring revitalization. Some of these problems can be resolved with good architecture. Suggests that those who want to decide what’s best for the Village be part of a Visioning committee. Susan Karlak says that there is nothing charming about the traffic already in Saratoga. She thinks 3 stories of condo’s in QuitoVillage would create enormous traffic. James Imhata, a CH-1 and CH-2 property owner, states that this argument is over 9 feet.This Initiative would create an undue burden on the City for election costs. He asks that everyone please come together and resolve this issue. 4 DISCUSSION BETWEEN COUNCIL AND STEERING COMMITTEE CouncilmemberPage asked what would the Initiative change about the Quito area and what height building could go there. CDD Livingstone statedthat the area is the C-N commercial district and the 20 foot height limit and 2-story would not change as a result ofthe Initiative. Page asked what the codeisfor thenearby professional zone between Saratoga Avenue and the bank.Livingstone statedthat the code is30 feet and 2-story and this would be the same, with or without the initiative. The Abrams areaacross the street is P-N and is 30 feet and 2-story which representsno change. Steering Committee member Schwartz statedthat the Steering Committee was interested in what change happened in mixed-use areaswith the change in the Implementation Ordinance. They are against the Village having a change in mixed-use. The perception is that on an individual project the height requirement could be changed quickly and without public discussion. The public perception is that the Council could put in whatever development they wanted. With an initiative, present and future Councilscould not change things quickly. Councilmember Page asked what the process for a zoning ordinance amendment is.Attorney Taylor replied that by State law, the Council can’t vote on a zoning ordinance without a recommendation from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission has to have a published public hearing before the ordinance goes to the Council. And then the Council holdsa public hearing, plus a second reading before the ordinance passes.There are 2 published newspaper notices –one for each public hearing and the Cityputsit on website, which is not required by law. If a specific property was being changed, notices go out to all property owners within 500 feet of the property. There was discussion on whether residents were noticed about the proposed Quito development. Some thought the proposal was for 3-stories mixed-use when the developer had meetings with residents. Staff statedthat an application was never submitted to the city and that they never received a finished set of plans. They would have noticed the residents after CDD had a set of plans. Mr. Schwartz asked if the group could talk specifics and come to an agreement. Mayor King called for a break at 7:53 pm. Mayor King called the session back to order at 8:10 pm. Mr. Schwartz asked that everyone come to an agreement on the method for change and then get into specifics. He mentioned the staff report with the 4 actions the Councilcould take: 1.No Action. 2.Revise the Housing Element Implementation Ordinance and related actions. 3.Place the initiative on the November ballot as a City-sponsored ballot measure. 5 4.Develop a separate city-sponsored ballot measure. Councilmember Miller asked if some items could be settled with ordinances. And other items on a ballot issue. The Initiative Steering Committee stated that a special election in March 2011, costing $560,000 is not desirable. They had always aimed at a November election. They do not want just an ordinance because it can be changed too readilyby other future Councils. Initiative is harder to change and provides a level of protection to residents. The Steering Committee would like the Council to consider placing their own ballot measure on the November election. The wording of the ballot measure does not have to the same as the Initiative. Mayor Kingasked the Steering Committee if the ballot measure would need to include residential property. This affects property values of every homeowner in Saratoga. Did they need the ballot measure to include toresidential? The Steering Committee said they didn’t want to make current houses to be legal non- conforming.The Committee agreed to take out: 1.Residential 2.Quasi-public 3.Public The Steering Committee asked for these 5 items to be on the ballot measure: 1.2 Story limit. 2.26 foot height limit on mixed-use. 3.Restore wording that in mixed-use buildings, 50% or greater would be retail. 4.In mixed-use buildings, there can be maximum 20 units/acreof residential, except in RHD district. Go back to what it used to say about shared parking and mixed use ëòò The Council and Steering Committee went through each of these issues to find common ground. #4. Attorney Taylor stated that inthe General Plan, high-density housing has to happen somewhere in the City. The area of Lawrence Expressway and Prospect Road (C-N [RHD]) was to be the high-density area for the State to approve the Housing Element. It would be easy to changewith aGeneral Plan amendmentto no more than 20 housing unitsper acrein Saratoga, except for the C-N (RHD) district. The Steering Committee agreed to this change and the Mayor removed #4 from the list. 6 #3. CDD Livingstone stated that the code before April’s Housing Element was passed was a 50% retail in mixed-use buildings. Very specific findings on a project would allow the Planning Commission to change the 50%. Steering Committee stated that they would like to separate large projects from small projects and want the 50% retail on the large projects. They did not want to get into a discussion of the square footage of small and large. It was decided that staff and adhoc committee could take care of these numbers. The intent is for the entire first floor of large projects to retail/professional. The Steering Committee would like the 50% retail in mixed-use to be on the ballot. #5. No sharedparking in mixed-use that includes residential buildings.There was discussion about needing more parking and that large projects need to require no shared parking. Councilmember Pagesuggestedthat we require a parking and traffic study before new development. Councilmember Cappello stated that the Planning Commission takes having enough parking very seriously. Attorney Taylor suggested that the parking issue could be broken up like the retail into large and small projects. The Steering Committee asked for a break to speak among themselves. Mayor King called for a break at 9:14 pm. Mayor King called the meeting back to order at 9:26 pm. The Steering committee came back with these decisions that theyarrived at.Theydid not want to make housing non-confirming and so would take residential, quasi-public, and public off the ballot measure. They want new multi-unit housing toonly be 2 stories above ground, with the basement/garage issue grandfathered in. They also agreed to exclude the C-N (RHD) District and Odd Fellows (Fellowship Plaza)from any ballot measure. The 20-unit density (#4) could be fixed by General Plan amendment, with more units allowed only in the C-N (RHD) district. On the parking issue, they agreed that parking should be changed to no shared parking in large developments and that this could be done through ordinance. Mayor King asked if the 20-unit density and shared parking need to go on the ballot measure. The Steering Committee replied that those two items are off the ballot, but that they need to know that these items are a priority for the Council to fix. Mayor King said that it’s a good idea to keepthe ballot measure simple. If it’s too complicated, then people won’t vote. Steering Committee also stated that they want the 50% retail for large projects (small projects to be exempt) to be on the ballot. Mr. Schwartz states that the 2-story limit and 26 foot limit for mixed-use are the most important subjects. The 26 foot limit would be a net gain for some districts and a net loss for others. Councilmember Miller stated that there werechanges on the Implementation Ordinance that we were comfortable with. The P/A being 2 stories, the C-N being 20 feet limit, with 2 stories. That leaves us with the CH-1 as the problem, as that could currently be 35 feet. Thisgivesflexibility to developers. 7 Mr. Schwartz statedthat there was no change on the CH-1being 35 feet for commercial only use. The change in the Housing Implementation Ordinance that made a difference to them was the 35 feet, no story limit for mixed use. Councilmember Miller said that that he was trying to find out where the two groups had common ground. The Councilhas made somechanges to try to revitalize the village, like changes in fees, and conditional use changes. The change the Council made to the code was to encourage business. It was not our intent to destroy the Village. Mr. Schwartz replied that we know the Councilwanted to help the Village. However, in the last 15 years, 300+ condos have been built near the Village and this hasn’t helped the business climate. We don’t think 20 more townhouses are going to help. The Village is a wonderful business climate for high-end restaurants. They are there for the beautiful atmosphere of the village. Three stories would hurt the restaurants which are our best businesses. We want to keep the traditional values of Saratoga. When we ask people if they want 3 stories in Saratoga, they all want to sign the petition for the Initiative. Councilmember Miller stated that we all have the same goal, but how do we get there? Ms.Fariss said that the residents want to revitalize the Village, but they don’t think having 3 stories is the way for that to happen. Mayor King said that all of us have many times thought we knew what all the voting residents wanted. I’ve been wrong at least twice. You don’t know until you holda vote. She had done some calculations on the Buy and Save area and you can’t get a parking garage and retail on the bottom floor until you get enough housing on the top floor –you need the 20 units to make it feasible. Mr. Schwartz replied that themarket changes and it’s not the city’s job to aid developers. He and Chuck have had discussions about very different ideas for the village. He is very excited about Chuck’s Visioning project and would like to participatein it. Vice MayorHunter mentioned that Los Gatos has a 2 story limit on its historical section of town. Councilmember Page stated that Los Gatos is very different than Saratoga. Because of the major earthquake damage they had, they were able to changemany things,making it more conducive for retail businesses to be successful.The council heard from 14 members of the public, 11 of whom spoke of idea much different than those proposed by the initiative.These 11 people are not part of any organized effort, so for them to show up on short notice and little public information is significantInitiative group is organized.But the ballot measure needs to be very simple. People liked the 2 story idea, but then people were worried about their basements. It’s a good thing we took that out. 8 Mr. Schwartz stated that if the 2 groups can come to agreement about having a ballot measure included in the upcoming election then the Steering committee would be happy. If people vote it down, then we were wrong. We agree that the ballot measure should be simple. Mayor King said that some of the public would like to speak. Everyone agreed to hear the public. PUBLIC COMMENT David Rossi stated that the after listening all evening, it sounds like the initiative is focused on theBuy and Save project. The initiative group is not accurate on what his project would have looked like and it was still a work in progress. His development did have open space and public bathrooms. Saratoga land is expensive and developers need 35 feet. Mr. Foley asked to speak and wanted Mr. Rossi to know that this was not about just his project. The Steering committee was very worried about the Quito and Abrams areas as well. Ms.Wyckoff added that the Steering committee was not just from the village. They had members from all over the City. Paul Hernandezasked the Steering Committee if they were going to drop the petition. How many signatures have you gotten? Do you feel any responsibility to the petition signers? Mr. Schwartz answered that they don’t have a number for who has signed the petition. The heart of the petition is the 26 feet for mixed use and 2 story limit. We recognize there are advantages to the community not going to a special election and the cost related to that. We want to come together with the Council and we don’t think we are doing a disservice to the public by doing that. PaulHernandezagain asked if they would be dropping the petition. Mr. Schwartz answered that if they could reach an agreement with the Council and talked to the rest of their group, then yes, they would drop the petition process. Mr.Foley added that there were anomaly’s in the petitionthat could be resolved with the Council’s ballot measure. This would be better for the public. Mayor King added that as long as you leave the basement issue in the vote, you effect everyone’s home values. The Mayor asked if anyone else wanted to speak. No one else came forward. DISCUSSION BETWEEN COUNCIL AND STEERING COMMITTEE Mayor King saidthat she thought the citizens would support the 2-story and 26 feetheightin the Quito and C-N areas; but not in the Village and if you tie the two together, then you don’t get what the people want in each area. She stated that she did not have a problemwith a ballot 9 measure, although she wished the City did not have to pay for it. She asked for comments from the rest of the Council. Councilmember Page said that the more limits we put on something, the less likely we are to have any project proposed.Hesaid that the members of the Planning Commission were intelligent and were fully capable of making responsible decisions. The architecture of a building makes a big difference. The simplerthe wordingof the ballot measurethe better chance we have of getting an answerfrom the public. Mr. Foley stated that you can’t revitalize the Village with 20 units of condos. Renovations to the shopping center that containsthe old Buy and Save would be a big improvement. Currently no one wants to move inthere, because it looks so bad. Councilmember Cappello stated that he is not fully supportiveofthe 3 story in the Buy and Save area. The 26 feet and 2 story limits anyone’s project and makes our world of possibilities smaller. He worries that we will end up with the same existingcenter in 10 years. The Planning Commission could have come up with a workable solution.He’sseen the Planning Commission ask that projects be redesignedeven after they were far along inthe process. Mayor King suggested that everyonecome up with their own ideas of what should be on the ballot.What would you personally like to see on the ballot.Mr. Schwartz asked if the Steering Committee could presenttheir idea as a groupand this was agreed on. Mayor King called for a break at 10:20 pm. Mayor King called the meeting back to order at 10:30 pm. The Steering Committee expressedtheir ideas. They agreed that the ballot measure should be kept simple. They would support: 1.2 story for commercial and mixed-use, with the C-N (RHD) excepted. Residential, Public, and quasi-public would beexempted. 2.26 feet height throughout the City for all buildings. The Steering Committeeagreeswith the process of a Visioning for the village. The $50,000 spent to get an answer from the people via an election in November is reasonable. A vote of the whole City on the issue would resolve a lot of trust issues. Councilmember Miller: 1.Supports putting themeasureon the ballot. 2.Supports Visioning for Village. 3.Supports 2 story city-widelimit, all uses in commercial zones and mixed-use, with the exemptions mentioned above. 4.Suggests that in the CH-1, use a set-back for the second story. 5.Not in favor of 26 feet, use underlining zoning already in place. The 26 feet is not good for some areas. Councilmember Cappello: 10 1.Supports putting the measure on the ballot. 2.Supports the Visioning for village. 3.Supports 2 story in commercial zones, except for CH-1. 4.Supports 26 feet, except in CH-1. 5.Set-back good idea –Planning Commission has used in the past. 6.Not in favor of2 story limit in CH-1, thinks that area needs a 3 story, 35 feet. Councilmember Page: 1.Supports putting the measure on the ballot. 2.Supports Visioning. This process should go forward even with a ballot measure. 3.Supports 2 story limit formixed-use. 4.No height limit, use what we already have. 5.Not in favor of set-back, good architecture could solve the tunnel problem. Vice Mayor Hunter said she was having difficulties with this process. And that she has always been concerned with3 stories and it disturbed her that the people didn’t get to vote on it. The beauty of the Village is the hills and the view. The city is spending 1. 2 million dollars this summer to make the Village safer and prettier. She is reticent about the ballot measure. Mr. Schwartz stated that no one does more for the Village and the City than Jill. The reality is that if we do nothing, we still have theHousing ImplementationOrdinancethat changed things. If we only make the changes we discussed here by ordinance, it couldbe changed by a couple of votesin the future. By putting this on the ballot we allow the people to speak. This is our best chanceto change this. Vice Mayor Hunter: 1.Supports putting the measure on the ballot. 2.Supports 2 story with conditions already stated above. 3.Supports 26 feet height limit. Mayor King: 1.Supports putting the measure on the ballot. 2.Supports Visioning, if the Village is separate from the rest of the City. 3.Supports 2 separate ballot measures a.A ballot measure just about the Village heights and stories. (could be after Visioning process) b.A separate measure for the rest of the City on 2 story, 26 feet, with the exemptions we described. By having separate measures, we could find out what each neighborhood needed. If the whole City is on ballot measure, she is afraid the Quito voters would overwhelm the Village voters. 11 Mr. Schwartz said that the Village is not a neighborhood issue, but an entire City issue and everyone should vote on it. Councilmember Miller asked Mayor King if until the Visioning for the Village happened, she wouldbe in favor of a moratorium on the Village. Mayor King said she could agree with that. Mr. Schwartz summarizedthat theSteering Committee has been clear that theywant a 2 story, 26 foot limit. There are 3 people on the Council who supporta 2 story limit ballot measure, but 2 out of the 3 don’t support26 feet limitlanguage.Oneperson wants the Village to stay 3 stories and oneperson wants the Village with a separate vote. If we went with a 2 story only, but leave off the 26 feet, we would have a majority of the Council and all of our Steering Committeetogether on what could go on a ballot measure. Mayor King asked to check with the rest of the Council. She said sometimes ideas change after hearing everyone’s opinion. Councilmember Miller summarized that this measure on the ballot would only be 2 story and that would be the only item covered. Mr. Schwartz replied that the Steering Committee needed to talk among themselves. If we drop the 26 feet, then 2 story has its own limitations. We need to agree on what would go on the ballot. We need to have theVillage included. Mayor King asked if the 50% retail needs to be on the ballot. Mr. Foley asked Councilmember Howard if the ballot measure said a maximum of 26 feet height, would he agree to that. Councilmember Miller replied that no, he thinks that some areas can use over 26 feet. He also wants to keep the C-N at a 20 foot height limit. Mayor King asked the Council if there were 3 that would vote for a measure on the ballot for2 story mixed use commercial, excluding residential, public, and quasi-public. Councilmembers Miller, Cappello, Page and Vice Mayor Hunter agreed. Steering Committee asked for a break. Mayor King called for a break at 11:09 pm. Mayor King called the meeting back to order at 11:14 pm. 12 The Steering Committee agrees that theywill accept the 50% retail in large projects as an ordinance, rather than a ballot measure to keep the ballot simple. With some reluctance, theywill drop the 26 footlimit to be able to bring the 2 story limit to voters. Councilmember Miller asked to clarify the issues. 1.2 story City-wide commercial with exemptions already noted for the ballot. 2.26 foot limit not on ballot. 3.50% retail on large projects not onballot. 4.Maximum density clarification in general plan is not on ballot. No shared parking in large projects is not on ballot ëòò Councilmember Miller also asked if the order of execution would be the ordinances come before or afterthe ballot. Mr. Schwartz replied that they would assume in good faith that the Council would move forward to work on the ordinances as soon as possible. On their side, they would stop the Initiative process. Mayor King suggested that these ordnances have to be a priority for the Council. Councilmember Miller asked how soon the Councilwould need to act on the ballot measure. Attorney Taylor replied that the last day the Council could vote is August 6, 2010. He would recommend that the Council vote on the second meeting in July, which is July 21, 2010. PUT 2 STORY LIMIT ON BALLOT, WITH THE MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO EXEMPTIONS OF THE C-N (RHD), RESIDENTIAL, QUASI-PUBLIC, PUBLIC BUILDINGS ,AND TO DO THIS BY THE SECOND COUNCIL MEETING IN JULY, AND TO COMPLETE THE ORDINANCES DESCRIBEDIN THE MEETING. MOTION PASSED 5-0. Mayor King questioned whether we really needed to put anything on the ballot. Everyone has agreed on these issues and $50,000 is a lot to spend from a City with a 15 million general fund budget. Also, do we want to have another public meeting to see if the public wants us to spend this money? Mr. Schwartz replied that this is less costlythan the initiative would be. The 2 story limit is a core value of Saratoga that theywant to protect. A vote by the people would stop the divisiveness. Ms.Fariss said that this is a matter of public trust. We have to take this to the voters. Mayor King asked if this was enough public input. Do we need to have another meeting to let the public speak? 13 Councilmember Page stated that there will be another public hearing when this item comes before the Council for a vote. He was also reticent about spending $50,000, but the City is in good financial condition and this would be money well spent. Vice Mayor Hunter reminded Council that even if the Initiative goes on the ballot, the City still has to pay $50,000. Attorney Taylor recommended that the Council vote to direct staff to bring this item back to them at the second meeting in July. But to add an adhoc of 2 Council members to work with staff. Mr. Schwartz brought up the idea that 2 Steering Committee members should be on that adhoc as well. Attorney Taylor responded that if the Council appoints that many people, it becomes a committee, with Brown Act requirements. However, the 2 member adhoc can invite other people to their meeting. The Steering Committee agreed to the adhoc.Councilmembers Miller, Page, and Cappello volunteered to be on the adhoc. Mayor King stated that Miller and Page would be on the adhoc. Miller recommended a friendly amendment to the prior motion noting who would be serving on the adhoc. TO CREATEAN ADHOC, COMPRISED OF 2 MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED COUNCILMEMBERS -MILLER AND PAGE. MOTION PASSED 5-0. ADJOURN THE SPECIAL MEETING AT 11:32 PM PAGE/MILLER MOVED TO . MOTION PASSED 5-0. Respectfully submitted, Debbie Bretschneider Deputy City Clerk 14 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1,2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Ann Sullivan,City Clerk Dave Anderson SUBJECT:City CouncilSpecial MeetingMinutes–July 19,2010 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the July 19,2010,City CouncilSpecial Meeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, this item was properly posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s web site in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Minutesfromthe July 19,2010City CouncilSpecial Meeting. CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING CIP MODIFICATION STUDY SESSION & PLANNING COMMISSION INTERVIEWS JULY 19, 2010 Vice Mayor Jill Hunter called the Special Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT:Councilmembers Manny Cappello, Chuck Page, Howard Miller, and Vice Mayor Jill Hunter. Mayor Kathleen King arrived at 6:10 p.m. ALSODave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT:Ann Sullivan, City Clerk John Cherbone, Public Works Director REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA City Clerk Ann Sullivan reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of July 19, 2010 was properly posted on July 16, 2010. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS The following people requested to speak at tonight’s meeting: Kathleen Casey addressed the Council regarding a letter that was sent to the Historical Museum, however, the museum never received the letter. She also commented about the number of meetings that Paul Conrado, Heritage Preservation Commissioner, has missed and recommended Commissioner Conrado should step down as the appointed representative from the Historic , Foundation to serve on the Commission. In additionshe commented about the Water District property next to Mr. and Mrs. Willys Peck, noting that it is her understanding that the grant funding for the Peck project was unsuccessful. She also noted that the private property next to the Peck property has been sold and the property will be donated to the Peck family to be used in conjunction with the PeckHeritage Children’s Garden and Saratoga Heritage Creek Trail project that is being considered by members of the Peck family. She thanked Vice Mayor Hunter for the successful “Saratoga Swings” event that was held recently. No one else requested to speak on non-agendized items. Vice Mayor Hunter clarified that the project that was not funded involves the trail along the Creek between the bridge at Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and the Saratoga Inn. She noted that the grant was to conduct the study for the project, not for building a trail. She also noted that it is her understanding that the property next to the Peck property was sold to a local resident and that he has plans to live on the property and that he is considering access to the Peck property over Saratoga Creek. Vice Mayor Hunter clarified that the Historic Foundation has recently designated Warren Heid to fill in for Paul Conrado as their representative on the Heritage Preservation Commission, adding 1 that she is not aware of any member of the Historic Foundation asking for Paul Conrado to step down from this position. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Staff provide Council with the attendance record for the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC). Counilmember Page recommended that the Historic Foundation appoint an alternate to represent them at the HPC meetings. (Mayor King arrived and at this pointresumed her role as Mayor conducting the meeting). Mayor King moved on to the agendized item. I. GRANT FUNDING FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJETS Director John Cherbone presented the staff report noting that since the adoption of the 2010- 2011 Fiscal Year Budget, specific grant opportunities have become available to the City. He added that two of these grants require local matching funds in order to qualify for the grants. Director Cherbone went on to explain the first project and the local matching fund requirements: 1.VILLAGE PEDESTRIAN ENHANCEMENTS –PHASE II Director Cherbone noted that about three months ago the City began pursuing a Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) grant aimed at pedestrian improvements in the Village. He added the City of Saratoga was one of eight applications submitted to the VTA for this funding source and Saratoga’s application scored second best of the group, with a scoreof 70. He noted the VTA Board would be voting on this matter in early August; since Council was not scheduled to meet during the month of August, it was necessary to schedule the Special Meeting this evening in order to receive direction from Council regarding the pursuit of this grant. Director Cherbone provided a brief description of the associated project scope, including the funding recommendations for the local match. He noted that if the City matches 20% of the cost of this new grant to fund PhaseII of the Village improvement project –$256,800; a grant of $1.284 million dollars would be awarded to the City, adding that this project will fund the completion of the approved Village Conceptual Master Plan. He noted that in Phase I of the Village Conceptual Master Plan, various items were included in that plan and only a few of those items were funded, such as enhancements at Fifth and Sixth Streets, Blaney Plaza, beautification of gateways into parking districts, and directional signs. He noted the City is not locked into any specific design and has flexibility to redesign, add, or eliminate specific facets of the Plan. COUNCIL DISCUSSION: Council discussed the VTA grant funding process; the various design enhancement options for the Village improvement; bulb out locations; Phase II details; and the steps Council must take, such as passing a resolution of commitment to the scope of the project and matching grant funding to show VTA the City is committed to this project. 2 Council also discussed theopportunity for the Village Adhoc to reach out to the community regarding the Village visioning. Mayor King invited public comment on this item. Kathleen Casey spoke about the total cost of this project and noted that most residents weren’t in favor of this project, especially the bulb outs, benches, and parking districts. She continued to address the Council on the remaining two agendized items –Electric Vehicle Charging Stations and the Tree Dedication Grants, noting she wouldn’t address the Council on these items during Council discussion of the items. She stated her concerns about the electric vehicle charging stations in Saratoga and hoped that people wouldn’t laugh at this technology if implemented in Saratoga. She also commented on the Tree Dedication Grant program, noting that people don’t know who participates in the tree dedication program and that there should be some documentation noting who purchased what tree, where it was planted, and in whose memory; or which plaque was purchased and in whose memory. Mayor King closed the public comment as no one else requested to speak on this item. DIRECTION TO STAFF: THAT COUNCIL SUPPORT THE MATCHING FUNDS OF PAGE/MILLER MOVED $256,800FOR THE VTA GRANTFOR PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS IN CORE DOWNTOWNS. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. 2.ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS Director Cherbone presented the staff report on the Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. He noted staff recently met with a company called Coulomb Technologies, a company that manufactures “smart”charging stations for electric vehicles. He stated all the major auto makers have announced plans to begin production of electric vehicles in the next five years and in anticipation of a greater need for publicly available charging stations, staff pursued this project because Coulomb Technologies, located in nearby Campbell, California, was awarded a $40 million public grant through the federal government. This is a “buy one charging station and get one free” program in which certain eligibility requirements are needed, adding local jurisdictions are eligible for this program. He added the charging stations cost approximately $5,000 each and assuming a ten unit project, the cost would be $25,000. He stated each station must be located on public property; noting one in the Village and one at City Hall would be excellent locations to start with. He added there are two charges per station, a slow charge –four to six hours or a fast charge –two hours. He added the PG&E and electrical work costs are unknown at this time, however, it is estimated that it would cost $40,000 to install ten electric charging stations in the City. In addition, he noted staff would work with the City’s PG&E representative to achieve cost reduction opportunities to help supplement installation costs and by asking PG&E for assistance with this project by waiving meter fees, etc. Director Cherbone concluded his report by noting that this grant is on a “first come –first served” basis, so being able to take advantage of this program is demand dependent. 3 COUNCIL DISCUSSION : Council discussed the possibility of the City charging a fee for the use of the charging stations to help offset the electrical cost to the City and possible locations for the units. Councilmember Miller noted he would like to help with this project. Councilmember Page suggested working with the designer of the Village beautification plan Phase II to include electric vehicle charging stations in the plan. Mayor King noted she liked the suggested ten unit purchase for a cost of $25,000 and recommended creating a new Adhoc Council Committee consisting of Councilmember Manny Cappello and Councilmember Howard Miller to establish additional public property locations for the charging stations. DIRECTION TO STAFF: PROCEED WITH THE BUY ONE AND GET ONE FREE MILLER/PAGE MOVED TO ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM; ALLOCATE NO MORE THAN $25,000 FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIVE (5) CHARGING STATION UNITS, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL $40,000 FOR INSTALLATION COSTS; AND CREATE AN ADHOC COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF COUNCILMEMBER MILLER AND COUNCILMEMBER CAPPELLO TO DETERMINE THE TOTAL IMPACT AND ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROPERTY LOCATIONS FOR THE CHARGING STATION UNITS. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. 3.TREE DEDICATION GRANT Director John Cherbone presented the staff report on the Tree Dedication Grant program. Director Cherbone noted this program is initiated by the City in response to Council’s expressed desire to assist residents with the cost of participating in the City’s Tree Dedication Program. He noted the current cost to purchase a tree is $500 for a 15 gallon tree and added this amount includes the cost to plant the tree and maintain future care of the tree. He added staff recommends that Council allocate $25,000 to help fundthis program, which would help fund the planting of 100 trees if the program was set up to reduce the cost by 50%. Director Cherbone noted there is an additional cost for a dedication plaque, which can range from $165 to $267. COUNCIL DISCUSSION: Councilmember Page stated Council should consider a sizeable amount to show that the City is serious about subsidizing the Tree Dedication Program. Council discussed location options for planting dedication trees such as on private property or public property. Councilmember Page expressed a concern that if the tree plantings were limited to public property, such as on roadways, it may limit the opportunities for people to plant trees under this 4 program. He suggested that Council may want to create an Adhoc to define rules as to whether or not the tree is planted on private or public property, and if the tree is planted on private property, it has to be visible and accessible from the public right-of-way so that it can be seen by the public. DIRECTION TO STAFF: APPROVE THE ALLOCATION OF $25,000 TO THE CAPPELLO/HUNTER MOVED TO TREE DEDICATION GRANT PROGRAM; AUTHORIZE THE EXISTING TREE ADHOC COMMITTEE, VICE MAYOR HUNTER AND COUNCILMEMBER CAPPELLO, TO CREATE A TREE PLANTING POLICY AND BRING THIS POLICY TO A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. The total amount of approved matching grant funds that Council approved for the above three programs is $346,800 and in order to fund this amount staff recommended a variety of funding sources listed below, including the remaining CIP Reserve intended for matching grants and defunding several smaller, older CIP projects. Council approved the following: Unallocated CIP Reserve:$221,983 (Available for any CIP Project) City Entrance Signs/Monuments:$ 23,788 (Defund Project –Lower Priority Project) Village Creek Trail:$ 20,000 (Defund Grant Match –Water District Grant Unsuccessful) Prospect Road Medians:$ 50,000 (Defund Grant Match –Grant Unlikely in Near Future) Canyon View/Elva Storm Drain:$ 15,000 (Defund Partially –Project Cost Savings Realized via Contractor Proposal) Village Pedestrian Enhancements:$ 16,029 (Defund Partially –Reduced Funding in Phase I Can be absorbed in Phase II) $346,800 Mayor King declared a five minute break at 6:55 before continuing on with the second item on the agenda –Commission Interviews. Mayor King reconvened the Special Meeting at 7 p.m and proceeded to the next item: II.PLANNING COMMISSION INTERVIEWS Council proceeded to interview candidates for one vacancy on the Planning Commission. This vacancy occurred due to the appointment of Planning Commissioner Manny Cappello to the City Council to fill the unexpired two and a half year term of Councilmember Susie Nagpal, who died on May 13, 2010, while still in office. The following applicants were scheduled to interview for one opening on the Planning Commission: 5 David Elgart, Richard Kraus, Rishi Kumar, and Tina Walia. At the conclusion of the interview process, Council appointed applicant Tina Walia to fill the unexpired term of Manny Cappello on the Planning Commission. This term will expire April 1, 2013. Respectfully submitted: Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 6 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1,2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Ann Sullivan,City Clerk Dave Anderson SUBJECT:City CouncilSpecial MeetingMinutes–July 21,2010 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the July 21,2010,City CouncilSpecial Meeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, this item was properly posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s web site in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Minutesfromthe July 21,2010City CouncilSpecial Meeting. CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION 6:00 PMPUBLIC HEARING / SPECIAL MEETING JULY 21, 2010 Vice Mayor Jill Hunter presided over the Public Hearing / Special Meeting during the absence of Mayor Kingand called the meeting to order at6PM. ViceMayor Hunter asked everyone to stand and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL : PRESENTCouncilmembers Manny Cappello, Chuck Page, Howard Miller, Vice Mayor Jill Hunter Planning Commissioners Joyce Hlava, David Reis, Douglas Robertson, Yan Zhao, Mary-Lynne Bernald, and newly appointed commissioner, Tina Walia. ABSENT:Mayor Kathleen King Planning Commissioner Linda Rodgers ALSODave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT:Richard Taylor, City Attorney Ann Sullivan, City Clerk John Livingstone, Community Development Director REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA City Clerk Ann Sullivan reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of July 21, 2010 was properly posted on July 16, 2010. COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS None PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.Legislation concerning Commercial, Professional and Administrative Office, and Mixed Use projects including (1) proposed ballot measure to limit to two stories structures in all Commercial and Professional and Administrative Office Zoning Districts; (2) General Plan Amendment to limit density increases to the existing C-N(RHD) zoning district; and (3) Zoning Ordinance Amendments concerning mixed use projects, nonconforming uses, and related matters. ï Community Development Director John Livingstone, presented the staff report and asked everyone to refer to the supplemental staff report and ballot measure attachment that was made available to Council and Planning Commission later today, after the posting of the July 16, 2010 agenda. City Attorney Richard Taylor noted that this evening’s public hearing was to hearpublic testimony on the proposed ballot measure and on the ordinance amendments that the Planning Commission would be considering, followed by Council and Planning Commission discussion. He added the Planning Commission would be asked to provide the City Council with a recommendation regarding the ballot measure and if the Planning Commission believes the proposed measure should be placed on the November 2010 ballot. In addition, he noted there would be Council discussion of the previously discussed zoning ordinance amendments and General Plan amendments to the mixed use and related areas, followed by Council direction to the Planning Commission to address those amendments and provide Council with a specific proposal. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Doug Robertsoncommented about the provision for the northwest side of Big Basin Way allowing for the provision of a below-grade story permitof no more than 42 inches above grade. He noted there was an earlier provision in the City code that limited this to three stories on the back side of Big Basin and now that is no longer included in this proposal and questioned if this is addressed in our current code. City Attorney Taylor noted there is currently nothing in the City code referring to “stories or story limit” in the CH1 or CH2 Districts, adding the ballot measure has a “two story” limit in all commercial districts, which would apply in all CH Districts as well as the Commercial Districts –except for the RHD. The ballot measure includes an exception to the two-story limit primarily for the below grade structures on Big Basin Way. Commissioner Robertsonnoted that there is a steep slope along Big Basin Way and based on an engineering standpoint,a certain depth has to be consideredin order to provide a foundationto support a structure located in that type of slope. Councilmember Page responded that the reason the “42 inches” is noted in the proposed ballot measure is because that is the City’s standard definition of a basement; a basement is allowed to be up to 42 inches above ground level. Commissioner David Reissasked if that means there could potentially be two basements. Councilmember Page responded that it could include two basements. Councilmember Miller added that the “story” appearance goal was from the street view and that itwould notappear asa “three story” structurefrom Big Basin Way. Commissioner Joyce Hlava asked if it wouldit be possible to build a structure like the existing “Sam Cloud Barn” or the “Inn at Saratoga” based on the proposed measure wording. î Councilmember Page responded that it may be possible based on the fact that currently when you look at the “Inn at Saratoga” from Big Basin Way, you only see two stories above ground, however, from that perspective additional stories could be built below ground on thatproperty.If the entrance is on a different road, which it is, there may be some restrictions if it is more than two stories at any point. He added there could never be more than two stories showing above ground. Commissioner Hlava noted that basically the “Inn at Saratoga” is four or five stories, is in the CH1 District, and meets the requirements regarding the view from Big Basin Way; however, from its entry way, it is five stories and is in the CH1 District. Councilmember Page noted that the proposed two story measure wording refers to the Northwest side of Big Basin Way or the Creek side of Big BasinWay where this two-story structure exception is allowed. Councilmember Miller added that on the Northeast side of Big Basin Way a basement could be allowed by following the normal two-story rules. Commissioner Hlava expressed her concerns regarding the length of time that the measure, if passed,would be in effect, which is until December 31, 2039,addingthat is a very long time. Councilmember Miller noted that the December 31, 2039 date was reflected in the original Initiative wording. Councilmember Page noted that if the ballot measure passes, it reflects a certain set of values that would be in place for a specific amount of time, adding that another vote by the people could change that. Vice Mayor Hunter added that if there was a proposed project that the people supported, a vote by the people could be taken on that project as well. Vice Mayor Hunter openedthe public hearing for comment. The following people requested to speakon this item: Jim Foleythanked the Adhoc committee–Councilmembers Chuck Page and Howard Miller,and staff for their efforts in working with the ballot measure steering committee to come up with language that supported the vision of the Saratoga community. Jeff Schwartz thanked the Council, Adhoc committee, Planning Commission, and staff for their effortsin working together to bring anacceptableconclusionto an adversary initiative process. Marcia Farissthanked all the people involved in the two-story height limit ballot measure for their hard work and efforts regarding the Initiative. The following people spoke in support of the proposed ballot measure: Anthony Fisher Trish Cypher Lorie Ellingboe í Paul Roland Shirley Cancellieri addressed the Council stating she was not supportive of this ballot measure and the restrictions it imposes. No one else requested to speak at this time. Vice Mayor Hunter closed the Public Hearing. Vice Mayor Hunterasked for comments from the Planning Commissioners: David Reis: Doesn’t agree with the Initiative. o Feels the proposed ballot measure wording is constricting. o Supportsputting the measure on the November ballot. o Yan Zhao: Ispleased withthechanges made tothe wording of the original Initiative. o Supportsthe new proposed ballot measure. o Supports putting the measure on the November ballot. o Doug Robertson: Ispleased with some of the changes made to the original Initiative wording regarding the o Northwest side of Big Basin Way. Doesnot supportwhat the Initiative would do. o Supports revitalization of the Village, however, not in favor of big retailers. o Revitalization may be more difficult with this Initiative o Concerned about some of the word changes made in the Initiative. o Supportsputting measure on the ballotfor thevoters to decide. o Hopes supporters of the Initiative make itvery clear to the voters exactly what the o proposed Initiative does and does notdo and that they try tostymie misinformation. Joyce Hlava: Has concerns about the number ofpeople talking about the possibility of three story o development in the Quito Village area or administrative areas,which would never be allowed to be builtdue to the 26 foot height limitations. Concerns about some of the buildings that exist today and that they would not be allowed o to be built if this Initiative passes. Concerned about the entire Initiative process and the lack of Planning Commission o involvement. Feels there may be other property owners that are not aware of the changes that could o affect their property if the measure passes Feels the 30 year time frame fromnow until December 31, 2039is too long. o Would like the Planning Commission to have the opportunity to providemore input o before this measure is placedontheNovemberballot. Tina Walia: (newly appointed Planning Commissioner participating in her first commission meeting) Noted that she has read the information pertaining to this subject and it is clear to her. o Hasno issues with the way the Initiative has been written. o ì Mary-Lynne Bernald: Has mixed feelings about the Initiative. o Noted this is a procedural vote by the PlanningCommissionand wished they had more o time to really discuss theInitiative. Supportsallowing theSaratoga citizens to voice their opinion by voting on the measure o in November. Chair Mary-Lynne Bernald called for a motion to staff’s recommendation. TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION YAN/REISSMOVED . MOTION PASSED 4- 1-1-0 WITH COMMISSIONERHLAVA OPPOSING, COMMISSIONER ROBERTSON ABSTAINING AND COMMISSIONER RODGERS ABSENT. Vice Mayor Hunter asked Council to provide direction to the Planning Commission as a follow- up to the above stated motion. Councilmember Miller noted the followingaction items for the Planning Commission: New changes to General Plan related to maximum density meant to apply to new zoning district off Prospect Avenue. Clarification in General Plan needed. Worked on several issues related to smaller projects, which was tentatively defined as five or fewer units. For projects that are smaller than that, shared parking may be a possibility. Relaxing retail requirements to be less than 50% for Commercial Mixed Use projects may be acceptable.Larger projects would require more rigid rules. Various non-conforming ordinance changes to assure that we are not inadvertently declaring existing structures or properties nonconforming. Clean up to be consistent with ballot measure. Timing issue –needs to fall in sync with ballot measure (Registrar of Voters Office dates) and be brought back to the Council within a reasonable amount of time. THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSIONADDRESS THE MILLER/PAGE MOVED FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CODE: 1) SPECIFY THAT MIXED USE PROJECTS MAY INCLUDE LESS THAN 50% COMMERCIAL SPACE (IF AUTHORIZED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION) ONLY IF PROJECT INCLUDES FEWER THAN FIVE RESIDENTIAL UNITS; 2) SPECIFIY THAT MIXED USE PROJECTS MAY SATISFY SOME OR ALL OF THEIR PARKING REQUIREMENTS THROUGH SHARED PARKING (IF AUTHORIZED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION) ONLY IF PROJECT INCLUDES FEWER THAN FIVE RESIDENTIAL UNITS; 3) CONSIDER A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CLARIFYTHE GENERAL PLAN TO PROVIDE THAT THE HIGHER DENSITIES CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE CN(RHD) DISTRICT AT PROSPECT AND LAWRENCE AVENUE ARE ALLOWED ONLY AT THAT SITE AND NOT ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY; 4) IF ë BALLOT MEASURE IS ADOPTED THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL ALSO BE CONSIDERING: (A) AN AMENDMENT TO THE NON-CONFORMING USE ORDINANCE TO ENSURE THAT EXISTING OR CURRENTLY APPROVED STRUCTURES THAT DO NOT CONFORM TO NEW REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE BALLOT MEASURE MAY REMAIN AS LEGAL CONFORMING STRUCTURES; AND (B) ANY OTHERZONING CODE AMENDMENTS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT THE ZONING CODE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE BALLOT MEASURE AND OTHER AMENDMENTS DESCRIBED ABOVE. MOTION PASSED5-0-0. Councilmember Miller suggested that if the measure passes in November the Planning Commission commence work on the items noted in the motion no later than January2011. Council unanimously concurred with this recommendation. There being no additional business, Mayor King asked for a motion to adjourn the Special Meeting. ADJOURN THE SPECIAL MEETING AT 6:58PM. MILLER/PAGE MOVED TO MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. Respectfully Submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk ê SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1,2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Ann Sullivan,City Clerk Dave Anderson SUBJECT:City CouncilMeetingMinutes–July 21,2010 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the July 21,2010,City CouncilMeeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, this item was properly posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made availableon the City’s web site in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Minutesfromthe July 21,2010City CouncilMeeting. MINUTES SARATOGA REGULAR CITY COUNCILMEETING JULY 21, 2010 The City Council met in Closed Session in the Administrative Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 5:30 p.m. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS(Gov’t Code Section 54956.8): Property Described as APN #503-78-036–Trail Easement Agency negotiator: City Manager Dave Anderson and Public Works Director John Cherbone CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS(Gov’t Code Section 54956.8): PropertyDescribed as APN #503-48-014 and #517-32-001 Agency Negotiator: City Manager Dave Anderson and Public Works Director John Cherbone CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL–Threatened Litigation: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) (1 potential case) – CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSELExisting Litigation–Government Code Section 54956.9 (a): (1 Case) City of Saratoga v. Sumit Dutta and Jaya Dutta, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 1-10-CV-172734 MAYOR’S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION Mayor King announced that Council was unable to address all the items scheduled for Closed Session during the 5:30 to 6PM meeting and Closed Session would be continued in the Administrative Conference Room after the conclusion of the 7PM Regular Meeting. Mayor King called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:10p.m.and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL : PRESENTCouncilmembers Manny Cappello, Chuck Page, Howard Miller, Vice Mayor Jill Hunter and Mayor Kathleen King ABSENT:None ALSODave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT:Richard Taylor, City Attorney Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Barbara Powell, Assistant City Manager Mary Furey, Administrative Services Director John Cherbone, Public Works Director John Livingstone, Community Development Director REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA City Clerk Ann Sullivan reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of July 21, 2010 was properly posted on July 16, 2010. COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS The following people requested to speak at tonight’s meeting: Laurel Perusa addressed the Council regarding the decline in retail shops in the Village and noted this decline has reached a critical point and needs to be addressed. She suggested Council establish a committee to find ways to resolve the decline in retail shops in the Village and find ways for them to succeed. Keith Fox addressed the Council regarding a traffic safety study on Big Basin Way that was initiated by the Department of Transportation (DOT) about a year ago. He added that his neighbors recently learned of an enhancement project planned for Big Basin Way and expressed concerns that neither he, nor his neighbors were contacted about this project. In addition, he voiced a concern about the speeding problem of vehicles coming down the hill on Big Basin Way and asked Council to address this issue with traffic enforcement. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Vice MayorHunter clarified that CalTrans is involved in a portion of the Big Basin Way project and suggested Mr. Fox contact Public Works Director John Cherbone for more information regarding the enhancement projecton Big Basin Way in the Village. City Manager Dave Anderson noted that Captain Calderone, Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office –Westside Sub-station, is aware of the speeding and will address this issue as well as traffic enforcement. ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilmember Cappello reminded everyone that this weekend is the American Cancer Society “Relay for Life” at St. Andrews Church. He noted there were teams honoring Joan Pisani, Michael Taylor and Susie Nagpal. In addition, he invited everyone to the ClassicCar Show being held in the Buy-N-Save parking lot in the Village. th Vice Mayor Hunter noted that on August 8there is a ”Breast Cancer Awareness” event at Wildwood Park, sponsored by one of her neighbors. She noted there will be a lot of fun things to do–including dancing to music from five different bands. She also noted the st third Annual “Bollywood” event will be held on August 21from 6Pm to 9PM on Big Basin Way. 2 Councilmember Page reminded everyone about the annual city-wide Garage Sale on Saturday, July 31. CEREMONIAL ITEMS APPOINTMENT OF ONE (1) PLANNING COMMISSIONER AND OATH OF 1. OFFICE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution appointing one new commissioner to the Planning Commission to fill the unexpired term of Manny Cappello and direct the City Clerk to administer Oath of Office to newly appointed commissioner. RESOLUTION NO.10-042 ADOPT RESOLUTION APPOINTING TINA PAGE/MILLER MOVED TO WALIA TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO FILL UNEXPIRED TERM OF MANNY CAPPELLO. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. City Clerk Ann Sullivan administered the Oath of Office to newly appointed Planning Commissioner, Tina Walia. COMMENDATION HONORING DAVE ANDERSON, CITY MANAGER 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read and present commendation. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS Mayor King invited Nita Anderson, Dave’s wife, to join them on the stage for the presentation. A short video highlighting special events in Dave’s life over the past years was shown and that was followed by Mayor King reading and presenting the commendation honoring Dave Anderson for ten years of service as the Saratoga City Manager. Mr. Anderson thanked everyone for their support over the past ten years and acknowledged other city employees that were present and have ten or more years of service with the City. At approximately 7:30 p.m. Mayor King announced there would be a fifteen minute recess and invited everyone into the theater lobby for a coffee and cake reception in honor of Dave Anderson. Mayor King reconvened the meeting at 7:45 p.m. and suggested moving to Item 10– Public Hearing on the 2010 Weed/Brush Abatement Program. Council concurred. CONSENT CALENDAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES –JUNE 24, 2010 3. 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Councilmember Page removed this item for correction and clarification. Councilmember Page requested staff refine some wording in the minutes and offered to work with staff to clarify wording in the minutes. Council concurred with this recommendation and directed staff to bring the minutes back at the next scheduled Regular Council Meeting for Council approval. CITY COUNCIL MEETINGMINUTES –JULY 7, 2010 4. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MILLER/PAGE MOVED MINUTES –JULY 7, 2010. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. REVIEW OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTERS 5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review and accept the Check Registers for the following Accounts Payable payment cycles: June 30, 2010 July 01, 2010 (Period 12) July 08, 2010 (Period 13 & Period 1) TOACCEPT THE CHECK REGISTERS FOR THE MILLER/PAGE MOVED FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAYMENT CYCLES; JUNE 30, 2010, JULY 01, 2010 (PERIOD 12) AND JULY 08, 2010 (PERIOD 13 AND PERIOD 1). MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF CONGRESSIONAL ACTION REGARDING 6. PROPERTY ASSESSED CLEAN ENERGY (PACE) PROGRAMS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report, approve the resolution in support of congressional action regarding PACE programs, and authorize the Mayor to sign a letter on behalf of the City Council in support of congressional action on PACE programs. RESOLUTION NO.10-043 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF MILLER/PAGE MOVED CONGRESSIONAL ACTION REGARDING PACE PROGRAMS, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LETTER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF CONGRESSIONAL ACTIONON PACE PROGRAMS. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 21 7. 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and decide whether or not to approve the attached resolution supporting Proposition 21, which would establish the State Parks and Wildlife Conservation Trust Fund. Councilmember Page removed this item for clarification. He stated he doesn’t feel Council is ready to take a stand on this issue at this time and recommended continuing the item to a future Council meeting for additional discussion. Vice Mayor Hunter indicated that this is an important issue and appreciates the fact that Saratoga may be one of the first cities supporting this issue. Councilmember Miller stated that he may support this issue as an individual; however, as a councilmember he has a different opinion and would like to have the item continued so that staff can gather additional information. Councilmember Cappello stated he was prepared to vote on the item this evening. Mayor King stated that the Proposition is a good thing and will vote to support it. The following person/s requested to speak on this item: Ann Waltonsmith addressed the Council in support of Proposition 21 and noted this issue may affect the City later on. TO DEFERACTION ON THIS ITEM AT THIS PAGE/MILLER MOVED TIMEAND ADDRESS THIS ISSUE AFTER ADDITIONAL DATA BECOMES AVAILABLE. MOTION FAILED 2-3-0 WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS KING, HUNTER AND CAPPELLO OPPOSING. RESOLUTION NO.10-044 ADOPT RESOLUTION SUPPORTING HUNTER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO PROPOSITION 21, WHICH WOULD ESTABLISH THE STATE PARKS AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND. MOTION PASSED 3-1-1 WITH MILLER ABSTAINING AND PAGE OPPOSING. RESOLUTION AMENDING COUNCIL AGENCY AND ADHOC 8. COMMITTEE LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution amending Resolution 10-038 appointing Council representatives to Committees, Agencies and Ad hoc Committees. RESOLUTION NO.10-045 5 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING MILLER/PAGE MOVED RESOLUTION 10-038 APPOINTING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO COMMITTEES, AGENCIES, AND ADHOC COMMITTEES. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. TRAIL EASEMENT RELOCATION -21789 VILLA OAKS TRAIL 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1.Accept Offer to Dedicate Trail Easement being partially relocated on the property known as 21789 Villa Oaks Lane (APN 503-78-036). 2.Approve summary vacation/abandonment of a portion of the existing trail easement on the same property. 3.Adopt Resolution Accepting Offer to Dedicate Trail Easement and Vacating Portion of Existing Trail Easement. Councilmember Page removed this item for clarification regarding the trail’s existence in the future. City Attorney Richard Taylor noted that there is an encumbrance on the property that could interfere with the City’s easement in the long term and since this is a replacement easement foran easement that already exists, he recommends that Council approve this with a modification to the Resolution stating that the vacation of the original easement not be recorded until the City receives evidence that the new easement has priority over allother interests in the affected land and that the City agree not to use the original easement as long as the new easement is available; which will allow the property owners the flexibility to address the encumbrances on their property and when this has been resolved, they can provide that resolution to the City and the existing easement will evaporate. RESOLUTION NO.10-046 ) ACCEPT OFFER TO DEDICATE TRAIL PAGE/MILLER MOVED TO 1 EASEMENT BEING PARTIALLY RELOCATED ON THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 21789 VILLA OAKS LANE (APN 503-78-036) ; 2) APPROVE SUMMARYVACATION/ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF THE EXISTING TRAIL EASEMENT ON THE SAME PROPERTY;AND 3) ADOPT RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OFFER TO DEDICATE TRAIL EASEMENT AND VACATING PORTION OF EXISTING TRAIL EASEMENT WITH THE MODIFICATION TO THE RESOLUTION STATING THE VACATION OF THE ORIGINAL EASEMENT NOT BE RECORDED UNTIL THE CITY RECEIVES EVIDENCE THAT THE NEW EASEMENT HAS PRIORITY OVER ALL OTHER INTERESTS IN THE AFFECTED LAND AND THAT THE CITY AGREE NOT TO USE THE ORIGINAL EASEMENT AS LONG AS THE NEW EASEMENT IS AVAILABLE. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. [Council moved on to New Business –Item 12.] 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONFIRMATION OF REPORT AND ASSESSMENT OF2010 WEED/BRUSH 10. ABATEMENT PROGRAM STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Open public hearing, close public hearing, and adopt resolution confirming report and assessment of hazardous vegetation abatement charges. City Clerk Ann Sullivan presented the staff report. Ray Moreno, Santa Clara County Inspector, was present to answer questions presented by Council. Mayor King opened the public hearing for comment. No one requested to speak on this item. RESOLUTION NO.10-047 ADOPT RESOLUTION CONFIRMING PAGE/CAPPELLO MOVED TO REPORT AND ASSESSMENT OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION ABATEMENT CHARGES. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. [Council moved on to Old Business –Item 11.] OLD BUSINESS PROPOSED BALLOT MEASURE TO LIMIT STRUCTURES IN ALL 11. COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ZONING DISTRICTS TO TWO STORIES. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1.Adopt the attached resolution placing a measure on the November 2, 2010 ballot to limit structures in all Commercial and Professional and Administrative Office zoning districts to two stories, specifying the ballot question for the measure, and directing that the full text of the measure be made available at City Hall and elsewhere but not be included in the voter information pamphlet; 2.Determine whether the City Council wishes to authorize one or more members of the City Council to file arguments for or against the proposed measure; and 3.Adopt the attached resolution transferring funds to support the election costs associated with the ballot measure. City Attorney Richard Taylor presented the staff report. He noted that the Adhoc Committee –Council members Page and Miller, continued to have meetings with members of the Initiative Steering Committee after the original staff report and proposed ballot measure text was distributed to Council and to the public. He stated thatas a result of those meetings, staff prepared a revised staff report and a revised 7 ballot measure, which was provided to the Council on the Dais and in the theater lobby for public viewing. He added the measure was discussed with the Planning Commission during the Public Hearing held at 6PM earlier in the evening and at the conclusion of that meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that Council place the measure on the nd November 2ballot by a vote of 4 in favor, 1 abstention, 1 opposed, and 1 absence. He added there are three policy issues before the Council this evening, which are: Do you want to place the measure on the November ballot? o If Council does place measure on ballot, do you want to direct that one or more o council members prepare arguments in support or in opposition to the measure? Do you want to adopt a Resolution appropriating funds of $50,000 to defray o election expenses if measure is placed on the ballot? City Attorney Taylor noted there are four changes to the measure that was originally made available to the Council and to the public, which are: 1.The measure was revised to clarify that nothing in the measure would make it difficult for people to have vehicular access to a basement in a multi-story building. 2.Clarification of wording that was in the first measure referencing “Saratoga Creek side of Big Basin Way”, will now reference that as “Northwest side of Big Basin Way”. One additional story that can go up to 42 inches above grade on the Northwest side of Big Basin Way. 3.A changewas made clarifying the sentence in the Findings describing the change to story limits in the Village. 4.There were inaccurate cross references in the measure and these were corrected. Mayor King invited public comment. The following people requested to speak on this item: Jackie Welch stated the ballot measure text should not reference the CH1 and CH2 districts and should instead specify the exact locations that are affected in Village. Cheriel Jensen thanked everyone for their efforts and feels the measure will pass. Adam Montgomery commended the Council for their efforts in working through this process and noted he doesn’t support the measure. Paul Hernandez thanked the Council for their efforts to keep Saratoga the way many citizens would like it to be –a small town environment. Shirley Cancellieri stated she does not support the measure. Jennifer Cauble urged everyone to be clear about what the initiative means, what are the proposed changes, and the ballot text should not reference CH1 or CH2 districts as most residents don’t understand that language. 8 J.J. Salehiehthanked everyone for their hard work and hopes the citizens will exercise their right to vote. Marcia Fariss noted the decision for Council this evening is whether or not to put the measure on the ballot and urged council to place it on the ballot. Jeff Schwartz noted the two story limitation measure is only about returning to the two- story limit that existed six months ago. It will prevent high density / high rise buildings in commercial and professional zones, and has no impact on residential areas. Gene Zambetti voiced a concern that noticing regarding the Two-Story Limit Public Hearing didn’t include areas outside the City of Saratoga. No one else requested to speak on this item. Mayor King closed the public comment. Motion regarding Staff Recommendation Number 1: RESOLUTION NO. 10-048 ADOPT RESOLUTION PLACING A MEASURE ON MILLER/PAGE MOVED TO THE NOVEMBER 2, 2010 BALLOT TO:1) SET A TWO-STORY LIMIT FOR ALL STRUCTURES IN THE PROFESSIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE (PA) ZONING DISTRICT AND ALL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; 2) CREATE AN EXCEPTION FROM THE TWO-STORY LIMIT FOR THE EXISTING CH(RHD) ZONING DISTRICT AND PROPERTIES ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF BIG BASIN WAY WHERE BELOW GRADE STORIES MAY BE PERMITTED IF NO MORE THAN 42” ABOVE THE GRADE AT ANY POINT ON THE BUILDING FAÇADE ALONG BIG BASIN WAY; 3) PROVIDE THAT THE TWO-STORY LIMIT WILL APPLY TO ALL LANDS CURRENTLY IN THE PA AND C DISTRICTS EVEN IF THOSE LANDS ARE RE-ZONED IN THE FUTURE; 4) ADOPT A DEFINITION OF “STORY” TO APPLY IN ADMINISTERING THE TWO-STORY LIMIT IN THE PA AND C DISTRICTS (THE DEFINITION INCLUDES A PROVISION TO ENSURE THAT THE DEFINITION OF “STORY” DOES NOT PRECLUDE ACCESS TO UNDERGROUND PARKING; AND 5) REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL FOR AMENDMENTS TO ANY OF THESE PROVISIONS THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2039. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. Motion regarding Staff Recommendation Number 2: THAT COUNCIL REMAIN NEUTRAL AND NOT PAGE/CAPPELLO MOVED FILE ARGUMENTS FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED MEASURE. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. Motion regarding Staff Recommendation Number 3: RESOLUTION NO. 10-049 9 AUTHORIZE STAFF TO TRANSFER $50,000 MILLER/PAGE MOVED TO FROM THE UNDESIGNATED FUNDS ACCOUNT TO SUPPORT THE ELECTIONCOSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BALLOTMEASURE AND DIRECTING THAT THE FULL TEXT OF THE MEASURE BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE SARATOGA RESIDENTS VIA U.S. MAIL,ATTHECITY CLERK’S OFFICE WITHOUT CHARGE,THE CITY WEBSITE, THE SARATOGA LIBRARY; AND THAT ONLY A SUMMARY BE INCLUDED IN THE VOTER INFORMATIONPAMPHLET . MOTION PASSED5-0-0. Mayor King declared a five minute break at 10:30 p.m. Mayor King reconvened the Regular Meeting at 10:40 p.m. [Council moved to Consent Calendar –Items 3 through 9 after this item.] NEW BUSINESS CITY OF SARATOGA’SRESPONSE TO THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY’S 12. (SCC) CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT ON: “CITIES MUSTREIN IN UNSUSTAINABLE EMPLOYEE COSTS” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Council review and direct staff on the City of Saratoga’s proposed response to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report on “Cities Must Rein in Unsustainable Employee Costs”. Administrative Services Director Mary Furey presented the staff report. Mayor King invited public comment. No one requested to speak on this item. Council directed staffto respond to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report with the following changes: FINDING NO. 1 Add bullet: With a statement that communicates there are many ways to ensure that our budget is balanced and we will look at all of them. FINDING NO.5.3 Add bullet: With a statement that communicates there are many ways to ensure that our budget is balanced and we will look at all of them. DIRECT STAFF TO RESPOND TO THE SCC PAGE/MILLER MOVED TO GRAND JURY REPORT WITH ONE AMENDMENT TO PROPOSED RESPONSE–ADD A THIRD BULLET TO ITEM 1 AND ITEM 3 THAT STATES “THERE ARE MANY WAYS TO ENSURE THAT OUR BUDGET IS BALANCED AND WE WILL LOOK AT ALL OF THEM”. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. 10 DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE FOR LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA 13. CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2010 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Designate a voting delegate and alternate for the League’s Annual Conference. City Clerk Ann Sullivan presented the staff report. DESIGNATE COUNCILMEMBER CHUCK MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO PAGE AS THE VOTING DELEGATE REPRESENTING THECITY OF SARATOGA AT THE LEAGUEOF CALIFORNIACITIES’CONFERENCE IN SEPTEMBER 2010. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS MayorKathleen King –Had nothing to report. Vice MayorJill Hunter –reported: Historical Foundation–She attended the last meeting and noted members are applying for a permit to install a portable storage building in back of their property. Members of the Historical Foundation and Book-Go-Round are planning a special event sometime in October to celebrate their new Historic Park. City Arborist Kate Bear will be joining the group on Thursday to talk with members of the El Quito neighborhood. th Village AdHoc–Will be attending the August 4meeting. Councilmember Howard Miller –reported: Highway 9 Adhoc–The next meeting will be towards the end of August. Initiative Adhoc–the final report was provided to Council earlier this evening. KSAR–Staff is examining station enhancement equipment with the possibility of expanding their broadcasting capability. Councilmember Chuck Page–Had nothing to report. Councilmember Manny Cappello–reported: Chamber of Commerce–He attended the meeting last week. Annual Classic Car Show is on Saturday, July 31. They discussed plans for the two day Art and Wine Festival in September; some restaurant owners have voiced concerns about losing business during the hours that Big Basin Way will be closed off during the event. An agreement allowing access to parking districts and the restaurants via Oak Street to Third and Fourth Street has been reached and signed off by the various members. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Page asked to agendize an item related to the creation of a Citizen Economic Development Committee. This committee could meet for a short period of time to come up with some development ideas for the Village. Councilmember Miller seconded Councilmember Page’s request and added the Chamber of Commerce should be instrumental as a member of this committee. 11 Mayor King concurred to schedule this item for thefirst meeting in October. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT City Manager Dave Anderson thanked everyone for the nice acknowledgement earlier this evening of his ten year anniversary with the City. ADJOURNMENT Mayor King announced there was no additional business for the Regular Meeting and stated Council, City Attorney Richard Taylor, and City Manager Dave Anderson would be proceeding to the Administrative Conference Room immediately after this meeting to discuss the remaining Closed Session items. ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING AT PAGE/HUNTER MOVED TO 11:35PM AND TO PROCEED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS . MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 12 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September1, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Finance & AdministrativeServicesDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Mary FureyMary Furey SUBJECT: Refunding the 2001 General ObligationBonds RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review report and direct staff to issue Request for Qualifications or Request for Proposals(RFQ/RFP) for refunding the 2001 General Obligation (GO) Bonds. REPORT SUMMARY: In 2001, the City of Saratoga issued $15,000,000 of voter-approved General Obligation (GO) Bondsto improve, renovate, and expand the Saratoga Community Library Building. GO Bonds are tax-exempt debt obligationssecured by the City’s power and statutory authority to levy ad valorem taxes on real and personal propertylocated within city boundaries,for payment of the principal and interest due.The City administers the payments onthe bond debt, but does not receive revenue or expend any City funds for this obligation. The 30 year GO Bonds were issued at competitive interest rates at the time(rangingbetween 5-6%); however,with current interest rates at historic lows, the outstanding bonddebt could be reissued at far lower rates today, potentially saving Saratoga taxpayers morethan $2million. OnAugust 1, 2010 the bonds became eligible for redemption. From August 1, 2010 through July 31, 2011, the redemption price is equal to the principal amount plus a 1% premium. As of August 1, 2011, the bondredemption price is equal to the principal amount.The current debt balance is approximately $13million. (See Attachment A-Debt Schedule). Although redemption prior to August 1, 2011would include the additional payment of a 1% premium, (approximately $130,000) staff recommends the City pursue arefunding of the debt issuance without delay to lock in historically low interest rates. Staff will also look at options to delay the bond refunding st of 2011, however it is expected that the lowerinterest rates willoffset the 1% premium. until August 1 As debt issuance is a specialized financial field requiring expertise and access to market information, the City will need to hire afinancial advisor, bond underwriter, and bond counsel to negotiate the bond refunding.This is particularly important in light of the recent changes in the municipal bond market with the collapse of the bond insurers and new regulations. For an initial bond issuance, State law requires the bonds be sold through a “Competitive Sale”. For this, cities hire a Financial Advisor to represent the City and assist staff. The Financial Advisor selects a sale date, prepares a notice of sale and puts out the Invitations to Accept Bids for the bond sale, accepts bids from various underwriters, determines the lowest net interest costs, and then works with the Bond Counsel and Underwriter to complete the required documents and bond sale. For bond refunding, cities may instead reissue a bond through a “Negotiated Sale”. With a negotiated sale, the City hires a Bond Underwriter directly to determine the best structure and market date to offer the bonds, thereby obtaining lower interest rates through the use of market timing. The City would also use the services of a Bond Counsel and Financial Advisor-to ensure the Bond Underwriter offers a competitive price; however the Bond Underwriter is the primary consultant in a negotiated sale. Staff is researching both types of bond sale processes to determine the City’s best option, and requests Council’s permission to issue RFQ/RFPs to pursue the necessary financial assistance for a bond refunding upon determining the better option. The Government FinanceOfficers Association (GFOA) recommends financial bond services be selected through a competitive processon the basis of expertise, the firm most qualified based on the issuer’s scope of services,and the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFQ/RFP. The RFQ/RFPwill include a clear and concise description of the scope of workfor the engagement,as well as specific obligations, constraints,performance requirements and results, timing, fee structure, and references. The scopesof work will include requirementsfor the financial advisors to include: Identify and analyze debt restructuring alternatives. Assistin the development and evaluation of requests for proposals and other bidding documents for various services for the transaction, including procurement of bond insurance. Assist in communicating with rating agencies and addressing their requirements for improvements and maintenance of the City’s rating. Make recommendations regarding the conditions and form of bond sales. Assist in the preparation of official statements or other necessary financing documents. Assist in the negotiation of terms or the evaluation of bids with bond purchasers including preparations for and participation in discussions and meetings with underwriters. Prepare bond amortization schedules at the level necessary to calculate future debt service payments and satisfy accounting, budgetary, and borrowing requirements. Assist as requested in the post offering responsibilities for the sale, including ensuring City compliance with continuing disclosure filing requirements and providing a post-transaction summary report. Additional requirements and criteria will be developed upon Council approval to proceed with the issuance of RFQ/RFPsfor the financial services. FISCAL IMPACTS: Typically, there are no upfront costs for debt issuance financial services. Instead, the Financial Advisors andBond Underwriters charge a transaction fee thatis contingent upon the sale of the bondsand paid from the bond proceeds.If the bonds are notsold, theadvisorsare not paid. However, an agreement mayrequire reimbursementfor out-of-pocket expenses directly related to executing the financing,(with an establisheddollar limit) if the bonds are not issued.These fees would be an expense ofthe Debt Service Fund, not the City. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City would not obtainexpert bondfinancial services to analyze the best options and timing for debt refunding. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Direct staff to delay obtaining financial servicesor refunding the bond. FOLLOW UP ACTION: Determine the City’s better option for either a competitive or negotiated sale, and subsequently prepare and issue RFQ/RFPsfor financial services for debt refunding.Staff will bring consultant proposals back to the Council for approval. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Interested vendors would be provided with the RFQ/RFP,and the RFQ/RFPwould be posted onthe City’s website (which is picked up by clearinghouses for additional distribution) ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Debt Schedule Attachment A City of Saratoga 2001 Series General Obligation Bonds Debt Schedule AugustAugustFebruaryFiscal YearBond FiscalInterestAnnualInterestInterestAnnual Debt Principal YearRatePrincipalPaymentPaymentInterestServiceBalance @ YE Initial Bond Offering at May 9, 2001 15,000,000 -- 2001/025.000%--588,942588,942588,94215,000,000 2002/035.000%60,000392,628391,128783,756843,75614,940,000 2003/045.000%245,000391,128385,003776,1311,021,13114,695,000 2004/055.000%255,000385,003378,628763,6311,018,63114,440,000 2005/065.000%270,000378,628371,878750,5061,020,50614,170,000 2006/075.000%280,000371,878364,878736,7561,016,75613,890,000 2007/086.000%295,000364,878356,028720,9061,015,90613,595,000 2008/096.000%310,000356,028346,728702,7561,012,75613,285,000 2009/106.000%330,000346,728336,828683,5561,013,55612,955,000 2010/116.000%350,000336,828326,328663,1561,013,15612,605,000 2011/126.000%370,000326,328315,228641,5561,011,55612,235,000 2012/135.000%395,000315,228305,353620,5811,015,58111,840,000 2013/145.000%415,000305,353294,978600,3311,015,33111,425,000 2014/155.000%435,000294,978284,103579,0811,014,08110,990,000 2015/165.000%455,000284,103272,728556,8311,011,83110,535,000 2016/175.000%440,000272,728261,728534,456974,45610,095,000 2017/185.000%460,000261,728250,228511,956971,9569,635,000 2018/195.000%485,000250,228238,103488,331973,3319,150,000 2019/205.000%510,000238,103225,353463,456973,4568,640,000 2020/215.125%535,000225,353211,644436,997971,9978,105,000 2021/225.125%565,000211,644197,166408,809973,8097,540,000 2022/235.125%590,000197,166182,047379,213969,2136,950,000 2023/245.125%625,000182,047166,031348,078973,0786,325,000 2024/255.250%655,000166,031148,838314,869969,8695,670,000 2025/265.250%690,000148,838130,725279,563969,5634,980,000 2026/275.250%730,000130,725111,563242,288972,2884,250,000 2027/285.250%765,000111,56391,481203,044968,0443,485,000 2028/295.250%805,00091,48170,350161,831966,8312,680,000 2029/305.250%850,00070,35048,038118,388968,3881,830,000 2030/315.250%890,00048,03824,67572,713962,713940,000 2031/325.250%940,00024,675-24,675964,675- TOTALS 15,000,0007,480,4167,676,73015,157,14630,157,146 Total Bond Principal 15,000,000 Total Bond Interest 15,157,146 Total Cost of Bond30,157,146 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: September 1, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Public WorksDave Anderson PREPARED BY: DEPT HEAD: John CherboneJohn Cherbone Public Works Director SUBJECT: Appropriation of Matching Funds for Grant Funded Projects ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Approve Budget Resolution for Grant Funded Projects. REPORT SUMMARY: th At the July 19City Council Special Meeting, Council was asked to prioritize funding in the CIP to fund local matches for a $1.284 Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) grant awarded for improvements in the Village, Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, and the City’s Tree Dedication Program. A Budget Resolution is attached that will transfer the requisite local match requirement for each project. The following is a brief description of each project which the City Council subsequently th approved for local match funding at the July 19Special Meeting. 1. Village Pedestrian Enhancements -Phase II Approximately three months ago, staff began pursuing a VTA grant opportunity aimed at pedestrian improvements in core downtowns. The completion of the pedestrian and beautification improvements in the Village, as conceived in the approved Village Conceptual Master Plan, was a great candidate project for the grant.In light of the City’s project readiness and other favorable scoring advantages, we askedfor $1.284 million,which is the amount of funding estimated to complete the Plan. VTA received eight applications ranging from a $1.125 million project in San Jose to a $2.572 million project in Campbell.In order for a project to be recommended to the VTA Board of Directors,itmust scorea minimum of 70 points out of 100. Of the eight applications submitted, only two projects scored high enough to be recommended to the Board for funding, a San Jose nd project and Saratoga’s. Saratoga’s application scored 2best of the group with70points.The VTA Board is expected to vote on the matter in early August. In order for the City to be awarded the $1.284 milliongrant a resolution will be required to be passed (most likely in September) along with commitment by the City to meet the local match requirements. The grant requires a 20% local match,which amounts to $256,800. If approved, this project will fund the completion of the approved Village Conceptual Master Plan. The City is not locked into any specific design that was envisioned in thePlan and has flexibility to redesign, add, or eliminate specific facets of the Plan. 2. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations In anticipation of a greater need for publicly available charging stations for electric vehicles, staff recently met with a company called Coulomb Technologies,which manufactures “smart” charging stations. All of the major auto makers, except Volkswagen, have announced plans to begin production of electric vehicles in the next five years. Consequently, an increasing number of electronic vehicles will be available to consumers in the coming years. The battery life of these vehicles is expected to range widely from 40 miles to 220 miles. Due to the limited rangeof these vehicles, many owners will need to charge their cars at home and at their destination.Infrastructure needs to be in place prior to the initial sales of electric vehicles due out by most manufacturers in model year 2011. Furthermore, there area significant number of Americans who do not own a garage. These drivers will need to have access to public charging stations before purchasing an electric vehicle. Ultimately, Coulomb Technologiesargues that by investing in charging stations, cities and other government entities can make it easier for the public to transition to electronic vehicles and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Coulomb Technologieswas awarded a large public grant in the amount of $40 million through the federal government that is basically a buy one charging station and get one free program in which certain eligibility requirements are needed. Local jurisdictions are eligible for this program. Each station costs approximately $5,000. Assuming a ten unit project, the cost willbe $25,000 or half the cost ofpurchasing outside of the federal grant. PG&E and electrical work costs are unknown at this time, but a best guessestimate for two locations in the City is $40,000. Staff will be asking PG&E for assistance with this project to reduce costs. 3. Tree Dedication Grants This grant program is initiated by the City to assist residents with the costs of participating in the City’s Tree Dedication Program. The Program has primarily been used by residents for planting memorial trees for loved ones. The current cost to participate is $500 for the cost of a 15 gallon tree, planting, and future care. There is an additional cost for a dedication plaque, which can range from $165 to $267 depending on plaque size. Although various amounts can be set aside to fund this program, staff recommends $25,000. This amount would help fund the planting of 100 trees if the program was set up to reduce the cost by 50% from $500 to $250. 2of 3 FISCAL IMPACTS: The total amount to fund the above projects is $346,800. In order to fund the matching grant programs listed above staff has used a variety of funding sources listed below; including the remaining CIP Reserve intended for matching grants and defunding several smaller, older CIP projects. Unallocated CIP Reserve: $221,983 (Available for any CIP Project) City Entrance Signs/Monuments: $23,788 (Defund Project –Lower Priority Project) Village Creek Trail: $20,000 (Defund Grant Match –Water District Grant Unsuccessful) Prospect Road Medians: $50,000 (Defund Grant Match –Grant Unlikely in Near Future) Canyon View/Elva Storm Drain: $15,000 (Defund Partially –Project Cost Savings Realized via Contractor Proposal) Village Pedestrian Enhancements: $16,029 (Defund Partially –Reduced Funding in Phase I can be absorbed in Phase II) $346,800 CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The Budget Resolution will not be approved and the grant opportunities and associated projects will not move forward. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): Council can choose other funding sources not listed in the staff report to fund the projects. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): The Budget Resolution approving the above recommendations will be executed by staff. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: This item was posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s web site in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting and residents may subscribe to the agenda on-line by opting in at www.saratoga.ca.us. ATTACHMENTS: Budget Resolution. 3of 3 RESOLUTION NO.__________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 TO PROVIDE LOCAL MATCH GRANT FUNDING FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WHEREAS ,the City Council desires to improve pedestrian safety in the Village by $256,800 appropriating matching funds in the amount offor the Saratoga Village Pedestrian Enhancement Project-Phase IIGrant;and WHEREAS , the City Council desires to install and provide public access to Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in the City for the new generation of electric vehiclesthrough a matching grant programin the amount of $65,000; and WHEREAS , the City Council desires to reforest/replant the City’s Public Spaces by providing matching funds in the amount of $25,000for the City’sTree DedicationProgram;and WHEREAS ,additional financing totaling $346,800 is needed for local matchesforthe above mentioned projects;and WHEREAS, it is necessary to make adjustmentsto the Fiscal Year 2010/11CIP budget as follows: Account DescriptionAccount#Amount To appropriateexpenditures for the Saratoga Village Pedestrian EnhancementProject–PhaseIILocal Match: Expenditure Appropriation:411.xxxx.xxx.81161$256,800 To appropriateexpenditures for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations: Expenditure Appropriation:xxx.xxxx.xxx.81161$65,000 To appropriateexpenditures for the City’s Tree Dedication Program: Expenditure Appropriation:xxx.xxxx.xxx..81161$25,000 Unallocated CIP Reserve,Village Sidewalk Curb and Gutter, andCity Totransfer funds from the Entrance/Monument Signs to the Village Pedestrian EnhancementPhase II Project: Saratoga Village Ped Enhancement II-Transfer In 411.xxxx.xxx.49999$256,800 Unallocated CIP Reserve-Transfer Out111.8101.99999$(221,983) Village Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter- Transfer Out411.9142.004.99999$ (16,029) City Entrance Monument Signs -Transfer Out 411.9132.003.99999$ (18,788) and Prospect Road Medians t Canyon View/Elva Storm Draino the Electric Totransfer funds from the Vehicle Charging StationProject: Electric Vehicle Charging Stations-Transfer In xxx.xxxx.xxx.49999$65,000 Canyon View/Elva Storm Drain-Transfer Out 411.9142.009.99999 $(15,000) Prospect Road Medians -Transfer Out411.9132.002.99999$(50,000) City Entrance/Monument SignsandVillage Creek Trail to the Totransfer funds from the City’s Tree DedicationProgram: Tree DedicationProgram -Transfer In xxx.xxxx.xxx.49999$25,000 Village Creek Trail - Transfer Out411.9277.001.99999$(20,000) City Entrance Monument Signs -Transfer Out 411.9132.003.99999 $(5,000) NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby approves the above adjustmentsto the Fiscal Year 2010/11Capital Improvement Budget. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , the above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga CityCouncil held on 1stdayof September 2010by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________ Kathleen King, Mayor City of Saratoga Attest: _______________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 1, 2010AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT:City Manager’s OfficeCITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City ClerkDEPT HEAD: Dave Anderson SUBJECT:Resolution Amending Council Agency and Adhoc Committee Liaison Assignments RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Adoptresolutionamending Resolution 10-045appointing Council representatives to Committees, Agencies and Ad hoc Committees. REPORT SUMMARY: At the July 19, 2010 CIP Modification Study Session, Council received a report from staff regardingthe possibility of installing Electric Vehicle Charging Stationsin Saratoga. Funding for this program would be available through a Federal grant. Council expressedan interest in this program and felt the need for this service was increasing due to the increased demand for electric vehicles. Council directed staff to proceed with this program and to create a new Adhoc Committee – Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, consisting of Councilmembers Howard Miller and Manny Cappello. At the July 21, 2010Council meeting, Council requested staff to add onenew Adhoc Committee to the Council Agency/Committee Assignment list–Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. Council also noted that the Two Story Initiative/Measure issue has been completedand is scheduled tobe on the November 2010 Election ballot.Council requested staffremove the InitiativeAdhoc Committeefrom the Agency/Committee Assignment list. The following changesto the Council Agency and Adhoc Committee Assignment list havebeen requested by the Mayor and arereflected in the attached resolution: Agency/Adhoc CommitteeCouncilmemberAlternate/Second Member Electric Vehicle Charging StationsHoward MillerManny Cappello Initiative Adhoc Howard Miller Chuck Page FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Council Agencyand Adhoc Committee Liaison Assignment listwould remain the sameand would not reflect the three new Adhoc Committee assignments. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Update Council Agency Assignment list on City website and retain amended resolutionas the new Council Agency Assignment record. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, this item was properly posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s web site in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution Amending Resolution No.10-045 2of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 10– RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING RESOLUTION 10-045APPOINTING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO COMMITTEES, AGENCIES AND ADHOC COMMITTEES WHEREAS , the City Council reorganized on December 1, 2009for the coming year; and WHEREAS , representatives from the City Council serve on various committees, agencies, and Adhoc committees; and WHEREAS , the responsibility for representing the City Council should be shared by all its members; and WHEREAS, onJuly21, 2010, Councilrequested staff add one new Adhoc Committee to the Council Agency/Committee assignment listand to remove one Adhoc Committee from the list;and WHEREAS ,the one new Adhoc committeeadded to the list is–Electric Vehicle Charging Stationsandthe one Adhoc Committeeremoved from the list–Initiative Adhoc. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following changes be madeto the attached Council Agency/Committee assignment list. These changes expire December 2010, or until revised. Agency/Adhoc CommitteeCouncilmemberAlternate/Second Member Electric Vehicle Charging StationsHoward MillerManny Cappello Initiative Adhoc Howard Miller Chuck Page The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 1stday of September2010, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ____ Kathleen M. King, Mayor ATTEST: Date: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk AgencyCouncilmemberAlternate/Second Member * Association of Bay Area GovernmentKingHunter Chamber of CommerceCappelloHunter County HCD Policy CommitteeCappelloKing * Hakone Foundation BoardHunterKing Hakone Foundation Executive KingN/A Committee Historical Foundation HunterCappello KSAR Community Access TV BoardMillerHunter Library Joint Powers AssociationHunterCappello West Valley Flood Control & KingHunter Watershed Advisory Committee Santa Clara Valley Water District PageHunter Commission Santa Clara County Cities Association MillerKing SCC Cities Association Selection KingMiller Committee Santa Clara County Emergency CappelloKing Council * Saratoga Ministerial AssociationPageKing SASCC CappelloHunter* Sister City LiaisonCappelloHunter West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers MillerKing Association Valley Transportation Authority PACMillerKing West Valley Sanitation DistrictPageCappello West Valley Mayors and Managers KingHunter Association (Both Adhoc/Committee members are required to attendthe followingmeetings) City School Ad-HocPageMiller Council Finance CommitteePageMiller Electric Vehicle Charging StationsMillerCappello Highway 9 AdhocMillerCappello Susie’s Garden AdhocHunterKing Tree AdhocHunterCappello Village Ad-HocHunterCappello SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Public WorksDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Iveta HarvancikJohn Cherbone Senior Engineer SUBJECT:Parker Ranch Upper Tank TrailEasement Relocation on Two Properties RECOMMENDED ACTION: Saratoga Country Club 1.AcceptOffer of Dedication for aPedestrian and Equestrian Trail Easement on Saratoga Country Clubpropertylocated at 21990 Prospect Road (APN 366-29-007). 2.Adopt Resolution Accepting Offer of Dedication and Abandonment of the ExistingTrail Easement on the same property. Parker Ranch Open Space 3.Accept Offer of Dedication for aPedestrian and Equestrian Trail Easement on the Parker Ranch Open Space(Parcel D of Tract 6528). 4.Adopt Resolution Accepting Offer of Dedication and Abandonment of the ExistingTrail Easement on the same property. REPORT SUMMARY: In February last year, the Council approved relocation of an existing pedestrian and equestrian trail that runs through the Parker Ranch Open Space and throughthe Saratoga Country Clubdue to extensive erosion. The new trail construction has been completed, the trail location has been surveyed and the trail easement descriptionandplat plan have been prepared. Representatives of both properties executed Offer to Dedicate Trail Easement on their respective properties. To insure trail connectivity at the City limit line,City staff worked with representatives of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District who relocated the connecting trail in Fremont Older Open Space due to the same reasons. Both trails were fully re-opened for pedestrians and equestrianslast spring. Attached Resolutions, if adopted, will confirm acceptance of the dedicated trail easementsand abandon the trail easementsno longer needed. No other easements identified, described or delineated on the Page 1of 2 referenced propertiesare being vacated by the City at this time. Allwork associated with the new trail construction, survey and document preparation was funded by donated funds the City has receivedfor this project. It isthereforerecommended that City Council accept both Offers to Dedicate Trail Easement and adopt the attached Resolutions Accepting Offer to Dedicate Trail Easement and Abandoning Existing Trail Easement. FISCAL IMPACTS: There areno costsassociated with accepting the attached Offersto Dedicate Trail Easementand adopting the Resolutions. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The relocation of the Pedestrian and EquestrianTrail Easement will not be approved at this time. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: None in addition to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION: The Offersto Dedicate Trail Easement and the Resolutionswill be recorded by the City Clerk. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Vicinity Map. 2.Offer to dedicate trail easementon Saratoga Country Club property 3.Resolution Accepting Offer to Dedicate Trail Easementand Abandoning Trail Easement on Saratoga Country Club property 4.Offer to dedicate trail easement on Parker Ranch Open Space property 5.Resolution Accepting Offer to Dedicate Trail Easement and Abandoning Trail Easement on Parker Ranch Open Space property Page 2of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Public WorksDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Iveta HarvancikJohn Cherbone Senior Engineer SUBJECT:Cooperative Agreement with SCVWD –Calabazas Creek Repair at Padero Court RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1.Approve the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Saratoga and the Santa Clara Valley Water District for StreamBank Erosion and Storm Drain Outfall Repairalong Calabazas Creek at Padero Courtandauthorize the City Manager to execute the same. 2.Approve attached budget resolution. REPORT SUMMARY: At the end of the last rainy seasonit was discovered thatCalabazas Creek had caused extensive erosion and a landslide at Padero Court.Inspections by City and District staff revealed the slide hasalso impacted the City’s storm drain system that outfalls into Calabazas Creek.Staff from both agencies worked together and came to the conclusion thatrepairs are required to maintain the creek bank and storm drain outfall. As a result of the cooperation, an agreement between the City and the District wasdeveloped to perform the creek bank stabilization and storm drain repair and toshare the associated costs. The project cost is estimated at$127,000. The City’s portion will be 50% of the actual costof the labor and material up to a maximum of $50,000. The District has expertise, equipment and experience performing stream banks repair and agreed to design, administer and execute the workincluding the City’s storm drain repair. It is therefore recommended the Council approves the attached Agreementand budget resolution. FISCAL IMPACTS: The City shall pay to the District an amount equal to 50% ofthe actual cost of labor and material used for the Project up to a maximum of $50,000. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Page 1of 2 The Agreement will not be executed. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: None in addition to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION: TheCity Manager will execute the Agreement pending the District’s approval, since theAgreement is currently being reviewed by the District’s management. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Agreement(includes a site map) 2.Budget Resolution Page 2of 2 AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARATOGAAND THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT FOR STREAM BANKEROSIONAND STORM DRAIN OUTFALLREPAIR ALONG CALABAZAS CREEKATPADERO COURT èôóé ûõê÷÷ï÷îè Ô×Ê×ÓÎÛÖÈ×Ê ©ûõê÷÷ï÷îè¨ ÓÉ ÏÛØ× ÛÎØ×ÎÈ×Ê×Ø ÓÎÈÍ ÈÔÓÉ ÝÝÝÝÝØÛà ÍÖ ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùóèã íö éûêûèíõûÔ×Ê×ÓÎÛÖÈ×Ê ©ùóèã¨ Û ùÛÐÓÖÍÊÎÓÛ ÏÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐ ÙÍÊÌÍÊÛÈÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÈÔ× éûîèû ùðûêû æûðð÷ã åûè÷ê øóéèêóùè Ô×Ê×ÓÎÛÖÈ×Ê ©øóéèêóùè¨ ÛÉÌ×ÙÓÛÐ ØÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× éÈÛÈ× ÍÖ ùÛÐÓÖÍÊÎÓÛùóèãÛÎØ øóéèêóùè ÏÛà Ú× Ê×Ö×ÊÊ×Ø ÈÍ ÓÎØÓÆÓØÇÛÐÐà ÛÉ Û ©ìÛÊÈè ÍÊ ÙÍÐÐ×ÙÈÓÆ×Ðà ÛÉ ÈÔ× ©ìÛÊÈÓ×ɨ ÍÊ ÈÔ× ©ìÛÊÈÓ×É ÈÍ ÈÔÓÉ ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎȨ RECITALS åô÷ê÷ûé ÈÔ× øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ ÔÛÉ Ö×× ÈÓÈÐ× ÈÍ Ù×ÊÈÛÓÎ Ê×ÛÐÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈà ÛÐÍÎÕÛÎØ ÍÅÎÉ ÛÎ ×ÛÉ×Ï×ÎÈ ÛÙÊÍÉÉÛ ÌÍÊÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× Å×ÉÈ ÚÛÎÑÍÖ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÉ ÏÍÊ× ÌÛÊÈÓÙÇÐÛÊÐà ÉÔÍÅÎ ÍÎ ÷ÄÔÓÚÓÈ û ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ ðÍÙÛÈÓÍÎ ïÛÌÛÎØ ÷ÄÔÓÚÓÈ ú ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ ùÍÎÙ×ÌÈÇÛÐ ø×ÉÓÕÎ ÛÈÈÛÙÔ×Ø Ô×Ê×ÈÍ ÛÎØ ÓÎÙÍÊÌÍÊÛÈ×Ø Ô×Ê×ÓÎ ÛÎØ åô÷ê÷ûé ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÙÍÎÈÓÎÇ×É ÈÍ ÓÏÌÛÙÈ øÓÉÈÊÓÙȪÉÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈà ÛÎØ ×ÛÉ×Ï×ÎÈØ×ÉÙÊÓÚ×Ø ÓÎ ÷ÄÔÓÚÓÈÉ û ÛÎØ úÛÈ ÈÔ×Å×ÉÈ ÚÛÎÑ ÍÖ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÓÎ ÛÎ ÛÌÌÊÍÄÓÏÛÈ×Ðà ÉËÇÛÊ×ÖÍÍÈÛÊ×Û ÛØÒÛÙ×ÎÈ ÈÍ ùóèãªé ÈÅ×ÐÆ× ÓÎÙÔ ÙÍÊÊÇÕÛÈ×Ø Ï×ÈÛÐ ÌÓÌ× ùïìÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ ÛÎØ åô÷ê÷ûé øóéèêóùè Ø×ÉÓÊ×É ÈÍ ÌÊ×Æ×ÎÈ ÖÇÊÈÔ×Ê ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÖÓÎØÉ Ê×ÌÛÓÊÓÎÕ ×ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕ ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØùóèãªÉ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ ÈÍ Ú× ÓÎ øóéèêóùèªÉ Ú×ÉÈ ÓÎÈ×Ê×ÉÈ Ú×ÙÛÇÉ× ÉÇÙÔ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÅÍÊÑ ÏÛÓÎÈÛÓÎÉ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ ÉÈÛÚÓÐÓÈà ÛÎØ ÉÇÌÌÍÊÈÉ øóéèêóùèªÉ ×ÖÖÍÊÈÉ ÈÍ Ê×ØÇÙ× ÈÔ× ÌÍÈ×ÎÈÓÛÐ ÖÍÊ ÓÏÌÛÙÈÓÎÕ ÛØÒÛÙ×ÎÈ ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÓ×É ÛÉ Û Ê×ÉÇÐÈ ÍÖ ÖÐÍÍØÓÎÕ ÛÎØ åô÷ê÷ûé øóéèêóùè ÔÛÉ ÈÔ× ×ÄÌ×ÊÈÓÉ× ÛÎØ ×ËÇÓÌÏ×ÎÈ ÈÍ ÏÛÑ× ÉÇÙÔ Ê×ÌÛÓÊÉ ×ÖÖ×ÙÈÓÆ×Ðà ÛÎØ ×ÄÌ×ØÓÈÓÍÇÉÐà ÛÎØ ÔÛÉ ×ÄÌ×ÊÓ×ÎÙ× Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏÓÎÕ ÉÇÙÔ ÅÍÊÑ ÍÎ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑÉ ÛÎØ åô÷ê÷ûé ùóèã ÅÓÐÐ ÌÊÍÆÓØ× ÖÇÎØÉ ÈÍ øóéèêóùè ÈÍ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÈÔ× ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÓÈÉ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ô×Ê×ÓÎÛÖÈ×Ê ©ìêíò÷ùè¨ÖÍÊ Û ÌÍÊÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÛØÏÓÎÓÉÈÊÛÈÓÆ× Ø×ÉÓÕÎ ÛÎØ ÙÍÎÉÈÊÇÙÈÓÍÎÙÍÉÈÉÍÖ ÐÛÚÍÊ ×ËÇÓÌÏ×ÎÈÛÎØ ÏÛÈ×ÊÓÛÐÉ ÓÎÙÇÊÊ×Ø Úà øóéèêóùè ÍÎ ìêíò÷ùè ÛÎØ åô÷ê÷ûé Úà ×ÎÈ×ÊÓÎÕ ÓÎÈÍ ÈÔÓÉ ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈÈÔ× ìÛÊÈÓ×É ÛÊ× ÎÍÈ ÓÎ ÛÎà ÏÛÎÎ×Ê ÙÍÎÈ×ÎØÓÎÕ ÍÊ ×ÉÈÛÚÐÓÉÔÓÎÕ ÛÎà ÐÓÛÚÓÐÓÈà ÍÊ ÙÛÇÉÛÈÓÍÎ ÈÔÛÈ ùóèãªé ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎÍÇÈÖÐÍÅÉ ÛÊ× ÈÔ× ÙÛÇÉ× ÍÖ ÉÇÙÔ ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ åô÷ê÷ûé øóéèêóùè ÓÉ ÅÓÐÐÓÎÕ ÈÍ Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏ ÈÔ×ìêíò÷ùè ÌÛÊÈÓÛÐÐà ÖÇÎØ×Ø Úà ùóèãÛÉ Ø×ÉÙÊÓÚ×Ø Ô×Ê×ÓÎ îíå èô÷ê÷öíê÷ ÓÎ ÙÍÎÉÓØ×ÊÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ×ÓÊ ÏÇÈÇÛÐ ÌÊÍÏÓÉ×É ÛÎØ ÛÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈÉÛÎØ ÉÇÚÒ×ÙÈ ÈÍ ÈÔ× È×ÊÏÉ ÙÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎÉ ÛÎØ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎÉ Ô×Ê×ÓÎÛÖÈ×Ê É×È ÖÍÊÈÔ ÈÔ× ÌÛÊÈÓ×É Ô×Ê×ÈÍ ÛÕÊ×× ÛÉ ÖÍÐÐÍÅÉ AGREEMENT 1.DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTSITE ûÌÌÊÍÄÓÏÛÈ×Ðà ÉËÇÛÊ× Ö××È ÍÖ ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× Å×ÉÈ ÚÛÎÑ ÍÖ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ×ÄÓÉÈÉÛØÒÛÙ×ÎÈ ÈÍ ùóèãªÉ ÓÎÙÔ ùïìÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐÛÉ ÉÔÍÅÎ ÍÎ ÷ÄÔÓÚÓÈÉûÛÎØ ú ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛÛÎØ ÈÔ× é×ÌÈ×ÏÚ×Ê éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ Ê×ÐÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÐÍÎÕ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ êÍÇÈÓÎ× ÛÎØ ÉÇÌÌÐ×Ï×ÎÈÛÐ ÓÎÉÌ×ÙÈÓÍÎÉ Úà ùóèã ÛÎØ øóéèêóùè ÉÈÛÖÖ ÔÛÆ× Ê×Æ×ÛÐ×Ø ÌÊÍÕÊ×ÉÉÓÆ× Ø×È×ÊÓÍÊÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖÈÔ× ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑÛÎØ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐéÇÙÔ ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÔÛÉ ÙÍÏÌÊÍÏÓÉ×Ø ÈÔ× ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ ÛÈ ÈÔÓÉ ÐÍÙÛÈÓÍÎ ÈÍ Û ÙÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎ ÅÔ×Ê×ÚÃÚÍÈÔ ùóèã ÛÎØ øóéèêóùè Ú×ÐÓ×Æ× Ê×ÌÛÓÊÉ ÛÊ× Ê×ËÇÓÊ×ØÈÍ ÏÛÓÎÈÛÓÎ ÈÔ× ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ ÛÎØ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ 2.SCOPE OF WORK øóéèêóùè ÉÔÛÐÐ Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏ ÈÔ× ÖÍÐÐÍÅÓÎÕ ûØÏÓÎÓÉÈ×Ê Ø×ÉÓÕÎÛÎØ ×Ä×ÙÇÈ× ÈÔ× Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ Ø×ÉÙÊÓÚ×ØÓÎ é×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÙÍÍÊØÓÎÛÈ× ÅÓÈÔ ÛÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈ× ÐÍÙÛÐ ÉÈÛÈ× Ö×Ø×ÊÛÐ ÛÎØ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈÍÊà ÛÕ×ÎÙÓ×É Ê×ÕÛÊØÓÎÕ ÛÎà Ì×ÊÏÓÈÉ ÍÊ ÛÌÌÊÍÆÛÐÉ ÖÍÊ ìêíò÷ùè øóéèêóùèÅÓÐÐ Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏ ÈÔ× Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÅÍÊÑ ÇÎØ×Ê øóéèêóùèªÉ éÈÊ×ÛÏ ïÛÓÎÈ×ÎÛÎÙ× ìÊÍÕÊÛÏ éïì Ì×ÊÏÓÈÉ ÓÖ ÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÂ×Ø Úà ÛÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈ× Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈÍÊà ÛÕ×ÎÙÓ×É èÔ× Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ×ÎÈÛÓÐÉ ÖÓ×ÐØ ÉÇÊÆ×ÃÓÎÕ ÌÐÛÙÓÎÕÛÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈ×ÐÃÉÓÂ×ØÚÍÇÐØ×ÊÉ ÚÛÙÑÖÓÐÐÓÎÕ Ú×ÔÓÎØ ÈÔ× ÚÍÇÐØ×ÊÉ ÅÓÈÔ ÉÇÓÈÛÚÐ× ÓÏÌÍÊÈ ÖÓÐÐ ÛÎØ Ê×ÌÛÓÊÓÎÕùóèãªÉ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ èÔ× ÙÍÏÌÐ×È×Ø ÉÇÊÖÛÙ× ÅÓÐÐ Ú× ÌÐÛÎÈ×ØÈÍ ÏÓÎÓÏÓÂ× ÈÔ× ÌÍÈ×ÎÈÓÛÐ ÖÍÊ ÖÇÈÇÊ× ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ Ê×ØÇÙ× ÈÔ× ÐÓÑ×ÐÓÔÍÍØ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑÚ×ÓÎÕ ÖÇÊÈÔ×Ê ÙÍÏÌÊÍÏÓÉ×Ø ÛÈ ÈÔÓÉ ÐÍÙÛÈÓÍÎ ÷ÎØ×ÛÆÍÊ ÈÍ ÙÍÏÌÐ×È× ìêíò÷ùè ÌÊÓÍÊ ÈÍ íÙÈÍÚ×Ê ÛÎØ ×ÎÉÇÊ× ÙÍÏÌÐ×ÈÓÍÎÎÍ ÐÛÈ×Ê ÈÔÛÎ íÙÈÍÚ×Ê ùóèã ÉÔÛÐÐ Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏ ÈÔ× ÖÍÐÐÍÅÓÎÕ ûÙÈ ÌÊÍÏÌÈÐà ÈÍ ÓÉÉÇ× ÛÎ ×ÎÙÊÍÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈ Ì×ÊÏÓÈÛÈ ÎÍ ÙÍÉÈ ÈÍ øóéèêóùè ÓÖ Ø××Ï×Ø Î×Ù×ÉÉÛÊà Úà ùóèã ÖÍÊ øóéèêóùè ÈÍ Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏÛÎØ ÙÍÏÌÐ×È× ìêíò÷ùè ÓÎ Û ÈÓÏ×Ðà ÏÛÎÎ×Ê ÈÍ Ï××È ÈÔ× ÈÓÏ× Ê×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÉ É×È ÖÍÊÈÔ ÓÎ óÎ ÈÔ× ×Æ×ÎÈ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈÍÊà ÛÕ×ÎÙÓ×É Ø×È×ÊÏÓÎ× ÈÔÛÈ ÈÔ× éïì ÓÉ ÎÍÈ ÛÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈ× ÍÊ ÉÇÖÖÓÙÓ×ÎÈ ÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎ ÈÍ Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏ ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè ùóèã ÉÔÛÐÐ ÇÉ× ÓÈÉ Ú×ÉÈ ×ÖÖÍÊÈÉ ÈÍ É××Ñ ÛÎØ ÍÚÈÛÓÎ ÛØØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ Ê×ËÇÓÊ×Ø Ì×ÊÏÓÈÉ ÛÎØ ÛÌÌÊÍÆÛÐÉ ÖÊÍÏ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈÍÊà ÛÕ×ÎÙÓ×É ÓÎ ÈÓÏ× ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× øóéèêóùè ÈÍ ÈÓÏ×Ðà ÙÍÏÌÐ×È× ÈÔ× ÅÍÊÑ óÎ ÈÔ× ×Æ×ÎÈ Ì×ÊÏÓÈÉ ÛÊ× ÎÍÈ ÍÚÈÛÓÎ×Ø øóéèêóùè ÓÉ ÎÍÈ Ê×ËÇÓÊ×Ø ÈÍ ×Ä×ÙÇÈ× ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè èÔ× Ø×ÉÓÕÎÛÈ×Ø ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈ ÏÛÎÛÕ×Ê ÖÍÊ øóéèêóùè ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× ØÇÊÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè ÓÉêÍÕ×Ê îÛÊÉÓÏ øóéèêóùèªÉ ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈ ÏÛÎÛÕ×Ê ÉÔÛÐÐ ÔÛÆ× ÛÐÐ ÈÔ× Î×Ù×ÉÉÛÊà ÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÈà ÈÍ ØÓÊ×ÙÈ È×ÙÔÎÓÙÛÐ ÛÎØ ÌÊÍÖ×ÉÉÓÍÎÛÐ ÅÍÊÑ ÅÓÈÔÓÎ ÈÔ× ÉÙÍÌ× ÍÖ ÈÔ× ûõê÷÷ï÷îèÛÎØ ÉÔÛÐÐ É×ÊÆ× ÛÉ ÈÔ× ÌÊÓÎÙÓÌÛÐ ÌÍÓÎÈ ÍÖ ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ ÅÓÈÔ ùóèã èÔ× Ø×ÉÓÕÎÛÈ×Ø ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈ ÏÛÎÛÕ×Ê ÖÍÊ ùóèã ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× ØÇÊÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè ÓÉ òÍÔÎ ùÔ×ÊÚÍÎ×÷ÄÙ×ÌÈ ÛÉ ÉÇÌ×ÊÉ×Ø×Ø Úà ×ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕ ùóèã ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÊÇÐ× ÍÊ ÌÊÛÙÈÓÙ× ùóèãªÉ ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈ ÏÛÎÛÕ×Ê ÉÔÛÐÐ ÔÛÆ× ÛÐÐ ÈÔ× Î×Ù×ÉÉÛÊà ÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÈà ÈÍ Ê×ÆÓ×Å ÛÌÌÊÍÆ× ÛÎØ ÛÙÙ×ÌÈ È×ÙÔÎÓÙÛÐ ÛÎØ ÌÊÍÖ×ÉÉÓÍÎÛÐ ÅÍÊÑ ÅÓÈÔÓÎ ÈÔ× ÉÙÍÌ× ÍÖ ÈÔ× ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÛÎØ ÉÔÛÐÐ É×ÊÆ× ÛÉ ÈÔ× ÌÊÓÎÙÓÌÛÐ ÌÍÓÎÈ ÍÖ ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ ÅÓÈÔ øóéèêóùè ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛÛÎØ ÈÔ× é×ÌÈ×ÏÚ×Ê éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ Ê×ÐÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÐÍÎÕ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ 3.COST-SHARING OF PROJECT ùóèã ÉÔÛÐÐ ÌÛà ÈÍ øóéèêóùèÛÎ ÛÏÍÇÎÈ ×ËÇÛÐ ÈÍ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÛÙÈÇÛÐ ÙÍÉÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÐÛÚÍÊ ÛÎØ ÏÛÈ×ÊÓÛÐ ÇÉ×Ø ÖÍÊ ìêíò÷ùè ÇÌ ÈÍ Û ÏÛÄÓÏÇÏ ÍÖ ÛÙÙÍÊØÓÎÕ ÈÍ ÓÎÆÍÓÙ×É ÉÇÚÏÓÈÈ×Ø Úà øóéèêóùè èÍÈÛÐ ìêíò÷ùè ÙÍÉÈ ÓÉ ×ÉÈÓÏÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ Ú× ùóèã ÉÔÛÐÐ ÏÛÑ× ÌÛÃÏ×ÎÈ ÈÍ øóéèêóùè ÎÍ ÐÛÈ×Ê ÈÔÛÎ ØÛÃÉ ÛÖÈ×Ê Ê×Ù×ÓÌÈ ÍÖ øóéèêóùèªÉ ìêíò÷ùè ÙÍÏÌÐ×ÈÓÍÎ ÎÍÈÓÖÓÙÛÈÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÓÎÆÍÓÙ×É ÛÐÍÎÕ ÅÓÈÔ ÛÎà ÉÇÌÌÍÊÈÓÎÕ ØÍÙÇÏ×ÎÈÛÈÓÍÎ 4.INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION óÎ ÐÓ×Ç ÍÖ ÛÎØ ÎÍÈÅÓÈÔÉÈÛÎØÓÎÕ ÈÔ× ÌÊÍ ÊÛÈÛ ÊÓÉÑ ÛÐÐÍÙÛÈÓÍÎ ÅÔÓÙÔ ÏÓÕÔÈ ÍÈÔ×ÊÅÓÉ× Ú× ÓÏÌÍÉ×Ø Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ìÛÊÈÓ×É ÌÇÊÉÇÛÎÈ ÈÍ õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× é×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÈÔ× ìÛÊÈÓ×É ÛÕÊ×× ÈÔÛÈ ÛÐÐ ÐÍÉÉ×É ÍÊ ÐÓÛÚÓÐÓÈÓ×É ÓÎÙÇÊÊ×Ø ÚÃ Û ìÛÊÈà ÉÔÛÐÐ ÎÍÈ Ú× ÉÔÛÊ×Ø ÌÊÍ ÊÛÈÛ ÚÇÈ ÓÎÉÈ×ÛØ øóéèêóùè ÛÎØ ùóèã ÛÕÊ×× ÈÔÛÈ ÌÇÊÉÇÛÎÈ ÈÍ õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× é×ÙÈÓÍÎ ×ÛÙÔ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ìÛÊÈÓ×É Ô×Ê×ÈÍ ÉÔÛÐÐ ÖÇÐÐà ÓÎØ×ÏÎÓÖà ÛÎØ ÔÍÐØ ×ÛÙÔ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÍÈÔ×Ê ÌÛÊÈÓ×É ÈÔ×ÓÊ ÍÖÖÓÙ×ÊÉ ÚÍÛÊØ Ï×ÏÚ×ÊÉ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÛÎØ ÛÕ×ÎÈÉ ÔÛÊÏÐ×ÉÉ ÖÊÍÏ ÛÎà ÙÐÛÓÏ ×ÄÌ×ÎÉ× ÍÊ ÙÍÉÈ ØÛÏÛÕ× ÍÊ ÐÓÛÚÓÐÓÈà ÓÏÌÍÉ×Ø ÖÍÊ ÓÎÒÇÊà ÛÉ Ø×ÖÓÎ×Ø ÓÎ õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× é×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÍÙÙÇÊÊÓÎÕ Úà Ê×ÛÉÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× Î×ÕÐÓÕ×ÎÈ ÛÙÈÉ ÍÊ ÍÏÓÉÉÓÍÎÉ ÍÊ ÅÓÐÐÖÇÐ ÏÓÉÙÍÎØÇÙÈÍÖ ÈÔ× ÓÎØ×ÏÎÓÖÃÓÎÕ ÌÛÊÈà ÓÈÉ ÍÖÖÓÙ×ÊÉ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÍÊ ÛÕ×ÎÈÉ ÇÎØ×Ê ÍÊ ÓÎ ÙÍÎÎ×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÅÓÈÔ ÍÊ ÛÊÓÉÓÎÕ ÍÇÈ ÍÖ ÛÎà ÅÍÊÑ ÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÈÃÍÊ ÒÇÊÓÉØÓÙÈÓÍÎ Ø×Ð×ÕÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÇÙÔ ÌÛÊÈà ÇÎØ×Ê ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè îÍ ÌÛÊÈà ÎÍÊ ÛÎà ÍÖÖÓÙ×Ê ÚÍÛÊØ Ï×ÏÚ×Ê ÍÊ ÛÕ×ÎÈ ÈÔ×Ê×ÍÖ ÉÔÛÐÐ Ú× Ê×ÉÌÍÎÉÓÚÐ× ÖÍÊ ÛÎà ØÛÏÛÕ× ÍÊ ÐÓÛÚÓÐÓÈà ÍÙÙÇÊÊÓÎÕ Úà Ê×ÛÉÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× Î×ÕÐÓÕ×ÎÈ ÛÙÈÉ ÍÊ ÍÏÓÉÉÓÍÎÉ ÍÊ ÅÓÐÐÖÇÐ ÏÓÉÙÍÎØÇÙÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÍÈÔ×Ê ÌÛÊÈÃÔ×Ê×ÈÍ ÓÈÉ ÍÖÖÓÙ×ÊÉ ÚÍÛÊØ Ï×ÏÚ×ÊÉ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÍÊ ÛÕ×ÎÈÉ ÇÎØ×Ê ÍÊ ÓÎ ÙÍÎÎ×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÅÓÈÔ ÍÊ ÛÊÓÉÓÎÕ ÍÇÈ ÍÖ ÛÎà ÅÍÊÑ ÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÈà ÍÊ ÒÇÊÓÉØÓÙÈÓÍÎ Ø×Ð×ÕÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÇÙÔ ÍÈÔ×ÊÌÛÊÈà ÇÎØ×Ê ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè øóéèêóùè ÉÔÛÐÐ Ê×ËÇÓÊ× ÓÈÉ ÅÍÊÑ ÖÍÊÙ× ÛÎØ ÍÊøóéèêóùèªÉ ÙÍÎÈÊÛÙÈÍÊ Ì×ÊÖÍÊÏÓÎÕ ÈÔ× ÅÍÊÑ ÈÍ É×ÙÇÊ× ÛÎØ ÏÛÓÎÈÛÓÎ ÓÎ ÖÇÐÐ ÖÍÊÙ× ÛÎØ ×ÖÖ×ÙÈ ÛÈ ÛÐÐ ÈÓÏ×É ØÇÊÓÎÕ ìêíò÷ùè ×Ä×ÙÇÈÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÇÎÈÓÐ ìêíò÷ùè ÙÍÏÌÐ×ÈÓÍÎ ÚÍØÓÐà ÓÎÒÇÊà ÓÎÉÇÊÛÎÙ× ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈà ØÛÏÛÕ× ÓÎÉÇÊÛÎÙ× ÛÎØ ÙÍÎÈÊÛÙÈÇÛÐ ÐÓÛÚÓÐÓÈà ÅÍÊÑ×Ê ÙÍÏÌ×ÎÉÛÈÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÛÇÈÍ ÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ× ÓÎ ÖÍÊÏÉ ÛÎØ ÐÓÏÓÈÉ ÍÖ ÐÓÛÚÓÐÓÈà ÛÙÙ×ÌÈÛÚÐ× ÈÍ ÚÍÈÔ øóéèêóùè ÛÎØ ùóèã ÎÛÏÓÎÕ øóéèêóùè ÛÎØ ùóèã ÛÎØ ÈÔ×ÓÊ Ê×ÉÌ×ÙÈÓÆ× ÍÖÖÓÙ×ÊÉ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÛÎØ ÛÕ×ÎÈÉ ÛÉ ÛØØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÓÎÉÇÊ×Ø ÖÊÍÏ ÛÎØ ÛÕÛÓÎÉÈ ÛÐÐ ØÛÏÛÕ×É ÛÎØ ÙÐÛÓÏÉ ÐÍÉÉ ÍÖ ÐÓÛÚÓÐÓÈà ÙÍÉÈ ÍÊ ×ÄÌ×ÎÉ× ÛÊÓÉÓÎÕ ÍÇÈ ÍÖ ÍÊ ÓÎ ÛÎà ÅÛà ÙÍÎÎ×ÙÈ×Ø ÅÓÈÔ ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè 5.ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS û ÌÛÊÈêÉÅÛÓÆ×Ê ÍÖ ÛÎà È×ÊÏ ÙÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎÙÍÆ×ÎÛÎÈ ÍÊ ÚÊ×ÛÙÔ ÍÖ ÛÎà È×ÊÏ ÙÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎ ÍÊ ÙÍÆ×ÎÛÎÈ ÉÔÛÐÐ ÎÍÈ Ú× ÙÍÎÉÈÊÇ×Ø ÛÉ Û ÅÛÓÆ×Ê ÍÖ ÛÎà ÍÈÔ×Ê È×ÊÏ ÙÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎÍÊ ÙÍÆ×ÎÛÎÈ ÍÊ ÚÊ×ÛÙÔ ÍÖ ÛÎà ÍÈÔ×Ê È×ÊÏ ÙÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎ ÍÊ ÙÍÆ×ÎÛÎÈ èÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÙÍÎÈÛÓÎÉ ÈÔ× ×ÎÈÓÊ× ûõê÷÷ï÷îè Ú×ÈÅ××Î øóéèêóùè ÛÎØ ùóèã Ê×ÐÛÈÓÎÕ ÈÍ ìêíò÷ùè ûÎà ÌÊÓÍÊ ÛÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈÉ ÌÊÍÏÓÉ×É Î×ÕÍÈÓÛÈÓÍÎÉ ÍÊ ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛÛÎØ ÈÔ× é×ÌÈ×ÏÚ×Ê éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ Ê×ÐÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÐÍÎÕ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ Ê×ÌÊ×É×ÎÈÛÈÓÍÎÉ ÎÍÈ ×ÄÌÊ×ÉÉÐà É×È ÖÍÊÈÔ ÓÎ ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÛÊ× ÍÖ ÎÍ ÖÍÊÙ× ÍÊ ×ÖÖ×ÙÈ óÖ ÛÎà È×ÊÏ ÙÍÎØÓÈÓÍÎ ÍÊ ÙÍÆ×ÎÛÎÈ ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÓÉ Ô×ÐØ ÚÃ Û ÙÍÇÊÈ ÍÖ ÙÍÏÌ×È×ÎÈ ÒÇÊÓÉØÓÙÈÓÍÎ ÈÍ Ú× ÓÎÆÛÐÓØ ÆÍÓØ ÍÊ ÇÎ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×ÛÚÐ× ÈÔ× Ê×ÏÛÓÎÓÎÕ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎÉ ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÉÔÛÐÐ Ú× ÆÛÐÓØ ÛÎØ ÚÓÎØÓÎÕ ÍÎ øóéèêóùè ÛÎØ ùóèã èÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÉÔÛÐÐ Ú× ÕÍÆ×ÊÎ×Ø ÛÎØ ÙÍÎÉÈÊÇ×Ø ÓÎ ÛÙÙÍÊØÛÎÙ× ÅÓÈÔ ÈÔ× ÐÛÅÉ ÍÖ ÈÔ× éÈÛÈ× ÍÖ ùÛÐÓÖÍÊÎÓÛ èÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÏÛà Ú× ×Ä×ÙÇÈ×Ø ÓÎ ÙÍÇÎÈ×ÊÌÛÊÈÉ ÛÎØ ÅÓÐÐ Ú× ÚÓÎØÓÎÕ ÛÉ ×Ä×ÙÇÈ×Ø èÔ× È×ÊÏ ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÉÔÛÐÐ ÙÍÏÏ×ÎÙ× ÇÌÍÎ ×Ä×ÙÇÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ûõê÷÷ï÷îè Úà ÚÍÈÔ ÌÛÊÈÓ×É ÛÎØ È×ÊÏÓÎÛÈ× ÇÌÍÎ ìêíò÷ùè ÙÍÏÌÐ×ÈÓÍÎ ÎÍÈÓÖÓÙÛÈÓÍÎ Úà øóéèêóùèÛÎØ Ê×Ù×ÓÌÈ Úà øóéèêóùè ÍÖ ÌÛÃÏ×ÎÈ ÓÎ ÖÇÐÐ Úà ùóèã ûÐÐ ÙÔÛÎÕ×É ÍÊ ×ÄÈ×ÎÉÓÍÎÉ ÈÍ ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÏÇÉÈ Ú× ÓÎ ÅÊÓÈÓÎÕ ÓÎ ÈÔ× ÖÍÊÏ ÍÖ ÛÎ ÛÏ×ÎØÏ×ÎÈ ÛÌÌÊÍÆ×Ø Úà ÚÍÈÔ ÌÛÊÈÓ×É èÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÓÉ ×ÎÈ×Ê×Ø ÓÎÈÍ ÍÎÐà ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× Ú×Î×ÖÓÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÌÛÊÈÓ×É ×Ä×ÙÇÈÓÎÕ ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÛÎØ ÎÍÈ ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× Ú×Î×ÖÓÈ ÍÖ ÛÎà ÍÈÔ×Ê ÓÎØÓÆÓØÇÛÐ ×ÎÈÓÈà ÍÊ Ì×ÊÉÍÎ 6.TERMINATION ÷ÓÈÔ×Ê øóéèêóùè ÍÊ ùóèã ÏÛà ÇÌÍÎ ÈÔÓÊÈà ØÛÃɪ ÅÊÓÈÈ×Î ÎÍÈÓÙ× È×ÊÏÓÎÛÈ× ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÛÈ ÛÎà ÈÓÏ× ÌÊÓÍÊ ÈÍ øóéèêóùèªÉ ÙÍÏÏ×ÎÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè íÎÙ× ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè ÅÍÊÑÙÍÏÏ×ÎÙ×É ÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÏÛà Ú× È×ÊÏÓÎÛÈ×Ø ÍÎÐà ÇÌÍÎ ÈÔ× ÏÇÈÇÛÐ ÅÊÓÈÈ×Î ÙÍÎÉ×ÎÈ ÛÎØ È×ÊÏÉ ÛÙÙ×ÌÈÛÚÐ× ÈÍ ÚÍÈÔ ÌÛÊÈÓ×É 7.NOTICES ûÐÐ ÙÍÊÊ×ÉÌÍÎØ×ÎÙ× Ê×ÐÛÈÓÎÕ ÈÍ ÈÔ× ìêíò÷ùè ÓÎÙÐÇØÓÎÕ ÛÐÐ ÎÍÈÓÙ×É Ê×ËÇÓÊ×Ø Úà ÈÔ× È×ÊÏÉ ÍÖÈÔÓÉ ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÏÛà Ú× Ø×ÐÓÆ×Ê×Ø Úà ÖÓÊÉÈ ÙÐÛÉÉ ÏÛÓÐ ÛØØÊ×ÉÉ×Ø ÈÍ ÈÔ× ÛÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈ× ÌÛÊÈà ÛÈ ÈÔ× ÖÍÐÐÍÅÓÎÕ ÛØØÊ×ÉÉ×É To DISTRICT: éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ ûÐÏÛØ×Î ÷ÄÌÊ×ÉÉÅÛà éÛÎ òÍÉ× ùû ûÈÈÎ êÍÕ×Ê îÛÊÉÓÏ ÷ÎÕÓÎ××ÊÓÎÕ çÎÓÈ ïÛÎÛÕ×Ê ê÷ïûóîø÷ê íö ìûõ÷ ð÷öè óîè÷îèóíîûððã úðûîñ ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛÛÎØ ÈÔ×é×ÌÈ×ÏÚ×Ê éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ Ê×ÐÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÐÍÎÕ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ To CITY: ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛ öÊÇÓÈÆÛÐ× ûÆ×ÎÇ× éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛ ùû ûÈÈÎ òÍÔÎ ùÔ×ÊÚÍÎ× øÓÊ×ÙÈÍÊ ÍÖ ìÇÚÐÓÙ åÍÊÑÉ INWITNESS WHEREOF, ÈÔ× ÌÛÊÈÓ×É ÔÛÆ× ×Ä×ÙÇÈ×Ø ÈÔ× ûõê÷÷ï÷îè ÈÔ× ØÛà ÛÎØ Ã×ÛÊ É×È ÖÍÊÈÔÛÚÍÆ× ùóèã ùóèã íö éûêûèíõûÛ ùÛÐÓÖÍÊÎÓÛ ÏÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐ ÙÍÊÌÍÊÛÈÓÍÎ úà ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝøÛÈ× ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ øÛÆ× ûÎØ×ÊÉÍÎ ùÓÈà ïÛÎÛÕ×Ê ûììêíæ÷ø ûé èí öíêï úà ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝøÛÈ× ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ êÓÙÔÛÊØ èÛÃÐÍÊ ùÓÈà ûÈÈÍÊÎ×à ûèè÷éè úà ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝøÛÈ× ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ûÎÎ éÇÐÐÓÆÛÎ ùÓÈà ùÐ×ÊÑ øóéèêóùè éûîèû ùðûêû æûðð÷ã åûè÷ê øóéèêóùèÛÉÌ×ÙÓÛÐ ØÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ úà ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝøÛÈ× ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ú×ÛÇ õÍÐØÓ×ùÔÓ×Ö ÷Ä×ÙÇÈÓÆ× íÖÖÓÙ×Ê ûììêíæ÷ø ûé èí öíêï úÃÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝøÛÈ× ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ð×ÉÐÓ× íÊÈÛé×ÎÓÍÊ ûÉÉÓÉÈÛÎÈ øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ ùÍÇÎÉ×Ð ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛÛÎØ ÈÔ×é×ÌÈ×ÏÚ×Ê éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ Ê×ÐÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÐÍÎÕ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ ÷ÄÔÓÚÓÈ û ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ ðÍÙÛÈÓÍÎ ïÛÌ ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛÛÎØ ÈÔ×é×ÌÈ×ÏÚ×Ê éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ Ê×ÐÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÐÍÎÕ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ ÷ÄÔÓÚÓÈ ú ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ ùÍÎÙ×ÌÈÇÛÐ ø×ÉÓÕÎ ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ Úà ÛÎØ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛÛÎØ ÈÔ×é×ÌÈ×ÏÚ×Ê éÛÎÈÛ ùÐÛÊÛ æÛÐÐ×à åÛÈ×Ê øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ Ê×ÐÛÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÉÈÊ×ÛÏ ÚÛÎÑ×ÊÍÉÓÍÎ ÛÎØ ÉÈÍÊÏ ØÊÛÓÎ ÍÇÈÖÛÐÐ Ê×ÌÛÓÊ ÛÐÍÎÕ ùÛÐÛÚÛÂÛÉ ùÊ××Ñ ÛÈ ìÛØ×ÊÍ ùÍÇÊÈ RESOLUTION NO.__________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR LANDSLIDE/EROSION MITIGATION ON PADERO COURT WHEREAS ,the City Council desires to mitigate a landslide/erosion failure at Padero Court in the City; and WHEREAS , financing in the amount of $50,000is needed for the completion of said project; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to make adjustmentsto the Fiscal Year 2010/11budget as follows: Account DescriptionAccount#Amount To appropriate expenditures for the Padero Court Landslide/Erosion Mitigation Project Padero Ct Landslide/Erosion Mitigation –ExpAppropriation:xxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxx$50,000 Totransfer funds from the Hillside Reserve to the Padero Court Landslide/Erosion Mitigation Project: Hillside Reserve –Transfer Out 111.8101.99999$(50,000) Padero Ct Landslide/Erosion Mitigation –TransferIn:xxx.xxxx.xxx.49999$50,000 NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby approves the above adjustmentsto the Fiscal Year 2010/11Capital Improvement Budget. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , the above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on 1stdayof September by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________ Kathleen King, Mayor City of Saratoga Attest: _______________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: September 1, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: Community DevelopmentDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: John Livingstone, AICPJohn Livingstone, AICP SUBJECT:Zoning Ordinance Amendment toArticle 11-15toprohibit smoking in City of Saratoga Parks RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conducta public hearing considering proposed amendment to adopt Article 11-15of the City Code to prohibit smoking in City parks. Close the public hearing, introduce and waive the first reading of the ordinance and direct staff to place the ordinance on the consent calendar for adoption at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. REPORT SUMMARY: City Council members Chuck Page and HowardMiller have requested thisitem be placed on the City Council agenda prohibiting smoking in the City of SaratogaParks. DISSCUSSION: Currently there is aState lawthat prohibits smoking near playgroundsand tot lots used by children (California Health & Safety Code section 104495, see Attachment 4).This is currentlyenforced by the Sheriffs Office.The law applies only to parks designed specifically for use by childrenand does not apply to smokeless tobacco products.State Law also prohibits smoking within 20 feet of public buildings. The Public Health Institute has prepared a model ordinance restricting smoking and use of smokeless tobacco products in recreationareas for use by jurisdictions that wish to prohibit smoking in parks or portions of parks that are not covered by the State law or that wish to also prohibit smokeless tobacco products. (The model ordinance also includes provisions for prohibiting smoking in outdoor areas other than parks.) The proposed ordinance (Attachment 1) is based on the Public Health Institute model and would prohibit smoking and use of tobacco products in all City parks. The Tobacco Institute's full model ordinance in included as Attachment 6 and includes annotations explaining the findings and policy options included in the ordinance. 1 The City of Saratoga’s General Plan Open Space element lists 17 parks (Attachment 2). All of these parks are on city owned property. The list does not include one pocket park that the city does not own that is ona water districteasement on Saratoga Sunnyvale Road near Jake’s Pizza.The ordinance has been drafted to apply to all parks in the City including the pocket park stated above.Attachment 3 is a map showing all City-owned parks. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), this action is exempt under 14 California Code of Regulations (“CEQA Guidelines”) section 15061(b)(3) (the amendments are exempt because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment). FISCAL IMPACTS: Preparation of the staff report and ordinance is partially funded through the advance planning fund. Signs may need to be placed in the parks prohibiting smoking. The Public Works Department has funding available for signs already in their budget. ALTERNATIVES: Provide staff with alternative direction. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Smoking in public parks would be allowedto the extent consistent with State law. FOLLOW UP ACTION: Place the ordinance on the consent calendar for adoption at the September 15, 2010 meeting of the City Council. Recommend the Administrative Services Director incorporate the new policy and associated citation fees into the budget and fees schedule. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: This item was posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s website in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting and residents may subscribe to the agenda on-line by opting in at www.saratoga.ca.us. Notice of this meeting was properly posted at City Hall and published in the Saratoga News. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Proposed Ordinance 2.Excerpts from the City of Saratoga Open Space Element listing City Parks 3.Map of City parks from the Open Space Element 4.Existing Health and Safety Code Excerpt 5.Fast Facts Handout from the Center of Disease Control 6.Public Health Institute Model Ordinance Regulating Smoking in RecreationAreas 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITYOF SARATOGA ADOPTINGARTICLE 11-15 OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE SMOKING AND TOBACCO PRODUCT USEIN CITY PARKS The CityCouncil of the Cityof the City of Saratogadoes ordain as follows: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. WHEREAS, tobacco use causes death and disease and continues to be an urgent public health challenge, as evidenced by the following: Tobacco-related illness is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, accounting for about 443,000 deaths each year; and Scientific studies have concluded that tobacco use can cause chronic lung disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke, in addition to cancer of the lungs, larynx, esophagus, and mouth; and WHEREAS, secondhand smoke has been repeatedly identified as a health hazard, as evidenced by the following: The U.S. Surgeon General concluded that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke;and The California Air Resources Board placed secondhand smoke in the same category as the most toxic automotive and industrial air pollutants by categorizing it as a toxic air contaminant for which there is no safe level of exposure; and The California Environmental Protection Agency included secondhand smoke on the Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer, birth defects, and other reproductive harm; and WHEREAS,exposure to secondhand smoke causes death and disease,as evidenced by the following: Secondhand smoke is responsible for as many as 73,000 deaths among nonsmokers each year in the United States; and Exposure to secondhand smoke increases the risk of coronary heart disease by approximately thirty percent; and Secondhand smoke exposure causes lower respiratory tract infections, such as pneumonia and bronchitis in as many as 300,000 children in the United States under the age of 18 months each year; and exacerbates childhood asthma; and WHEREAS, smokeless tobacco is not a safe alternative to smoking and also causes death and disease, as evidenced by the following: Smokeless tobacco use causes leukoplakia, a disease causing white patches to form in the user’s mouth that can become cancerous; smokeless tobacco products are known to cause lung, larynx, esophageal, and oral cancer; and the regular use of snuff 1 doubles the user’s risk of cardiovascular disease and death; and Prolonged use of snus, a form of smokeless tobacco, contributes to high blood pressure, a factor of cardiovascular disease,and to a higher likelihood of suffering a fatal stroke;and WHEREAS, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration conducted laboratory analysis of electronic cigarette samples and found they contained carcinogens and toxic chemicals to which users and bystanders could potentially be exposed; and WHEREAS, tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke impose great social and economic costs, as evidenced by the following: The total annual economic burden of smoking in the United States is $193 billion; and The total annual cost of smoking in California was estimated at $475 per resident or $3,331 per smoker per year, for a total of nearly $15.8 billion in smoking-related costs in 1999 alone; and WHEREAS, exposure to secondhand smoke anywhere has negative health impacts, and exposure to secondhand smoke does occur atsignificant levels outdoors, as evidenced by the following: Levels of secondhand smoke exposure outdoors can reach levels attained indoors depending on direction and amount of wind and number and proximity of smokers; and Irritation from secondhand smokebegins at levels as low as 4 micrograms per cubic meter, and in some outdoor situations this level can be found as far away as 13 feet from the burning cigarette; and To be completely free from exposure to secondhand smoke in outdoor places, a person mayhave to move nearly 25 feet away from the source of the smoke, about the width of a two lane road; and WHEREAS, cigarette butts pose a health threat to young children, as evidenced by the following: In 2004, American poison control centers received nearly 8,000 reports of children poisoned by the ingestion of cigarettes, cigarette butts, and other tobacco products; and Children who ingest cigarette butts can experience vomiting, nausea, lethargy, and gagging; and WHEREAS, cigarette butts are a major and persistent source of litter, as evidenced by the following: 2 It is estimated that over two billion cigarette butts are discarded every day worldwide, and that Americans alone discard more than 175 million pounds of cigarette butts every year; and Cigarette filters, made of plastic cellulose acetate, take approximately 15 years to decompose; and In just three hours, 340,000 cigarette butts were collected from California beaches during the 2008 Coastal Cleanup Day, making cigarette butts the most common type of trash found 24 years in a row; and Cigarette filters have been found in the stomachs of birds, fish, whales, and other marine creatures that have mistaken the filters for food, causing the animals to ingest harmful plastic and toxic chemicals; and Los Angeles County recorded a 40% decrease in cigarette butts after banning smoking on beaches in three cities; and WHEREAS, creating smokefree areas helps protect the health of the 86.7% of Californians who are nonsmokers; and WHEREAS, state law prohibits smoking within 25 feet of playgrounds and tot lots and expressly authorizes local communities to enact additional restrictions; and WHEREAS, there is no Constitutional right to smoke; NOW THEREFORE, it is the intent of the City Council, in enactingthis ordinance, to provide for the public health, safety, and welfare by discouraging the inherentlydangerous behavior of smoking and tobacco usearoundnon-tobacco users, especially children; by protecting the public from exposure to secondhand smoke where they play, exercise, and relax; by protecting the environment from tobacco-related litter; by reducing the potential for children to wrongly associate smoking and tobacco usewith a healthy lifestyle; and by affirming and promoting a healthy environment in and around the City parks. SECTION 2. Article11-15of the Municipal Code is hereby adoptedto read as follows: ARTICLE 11-15 Tobacco Free Recreation Areas Sec. 11-15.10DEFINITIONS. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this articleshall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise: (a) “Parking Area” means a parking lot or any other area designated or primarily used for parking vehicles of Persons accessing a Recreational Area. (b) “Person” means any natural person, partnership, cooperative association, corporation, personal representative, receiver, trustee, assignee, or any other legal entity except theCity of Saratoga. 3 (c) “Recreational Area” means any outdoor area,that is publicly owned and open to the general public for recreational purposes, regardless of any fee or age requirement. The term “Recreational Area” includes, but is not limited to parks, picnic areas, playgrounds, sports fields, golf courses, walking paths, gardens, hiking trails, bike paths, horseback riding trails, swimming pools, roller-and ice-skating rinks, and skateboard parks. (d) “Smoke” means the gases,particles, or vaporsreleased into the air as a result of combustion, electrical ignition or vaporization,when the apparent or usual purpose of the combustion, electrical ignition or vaporizationis human inhalation of the byproducts, except when the combusting or vaporizing material contains no tobaccoor nicotineandthe purpose of inhalation is solely olfactory,such as, for example, smoke from incense. The term “Smoke” includes, but is not limited to, tobacco smoke, electronic cigarette vapors, and marijuana smoke. (e) “Smoking” means engaging in an act that generates Smoke, such as for example: possessing a lighted pipe, lighted hookah pipe, an operating electronic cigarette, a lighted cigar, or a lighted cigarette of any kind; or; or lighting or igniting of a pipe, cigar, hookah pipe, or cigarette of any kind. (f) “Tobacco Product” means any substance containing tobacco leaf, including but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snus, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco; and any product or formulation of matter containing biologically active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be introduced into the human body, but does not include any cessation product specifically approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use in treating nicotine or tobacco dependence. Sec. 11-15.20SMOKING AND TOBACCO PRODUCT USEPROHIBITED (a) Smoking or using a Tobacco Productis prohibited anywhere in a Recreational Area or in any Parking Area. (b) Nothing in this articleshall be construed to prohibit Smoking or Tobacco Product use in any area in which such Smoking or Tobacco Product useis already prohibited by state or federal law unless the applicable state or federallaw does not preempt additional local regulation. Sec. 11-15.30OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITIONS (a) No ash can, ashtray, or other Smoking waste receptacle shall be placed in any area in which Smoking is prohibited by this article. (b) No Personshall knowingly permit Smoking or the use of Tobacco Productsin an area 4 under the Person’s legal or de facto control in which Smoking or the use of Tobacco Productsis prohibited by this articleor other provisions of this Code, unless otherwise required by state or federal law. (c)No Person shall dispose of used Smoking or Tobacco Productwaste within the boundaries of an area in which Smoking or Tobacco Product useis prohibited by this article. (d)“No Use of Tobacco Products” or “Tobacco-Free”signs shall be posted in a quantity and manner reasonably likely to inform individuals occupying the Recreational Area and Parking Area that Tobacco Product useis prohibited within the area. The signs shall have letters of no less than one inch in height and shall include the international “No Smoking” symbol (consisting of a pictorial representation of a burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle crossed by a red bar). (e) The presence of Smoking waste receptacles in violation of subsection (a) above and the absence of signs required by subsection (d) above shall not be a defense to a violation of any provision of this article. (f) No Person shall intimidate, threaten any reprisal, or effect any reprisal, for the purpose of retaliating against another Person who seeks to attain compliance with this article. (g) Each instance of Smoking or Tobacco Product usein violation of thisarticleshall constitute a separate violation. For violations other than Smoking, each day of a continuing violation of thisarticleshall constitute a separate violation. Sec. 11-15.40 PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT (a) The remedies provided by this article are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity.Enforcement of this article shall be the responsibility of the City. In addition, any peace officer or any enforcement officer designated by the City Manager also may enforce this article. (b) Violations of this article are subject to criminal enforcement as aninfractionbrought by the City ofSaratoga, punishable in accordance with Article 3-05 of this Code. (c) Violations of this article are subject to civil action or administrative citation brought by the City of Saratoga in accordance with Articles 3-10 and 3-30 of this Code, as applicable. (d) Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting or concealing a violation of any provision of this article shall also constitute a violation of the article. (e) Except as otherwise provided, enforcement of this article is at the sole discretion of the City of Saratoga. Nothing in this article shall create a right of action in any person against the City of Saratoga or its agents to compel public enforcement of this article against any party. Section 3. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. 5 Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), this action is exempt under 14 California Code of Regulations (“CEQA Guidelines”) section 15061(b)(3) (the amendments are exempt because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment). Section 4. SEVERANCE CLAUSE. The City Council declares that each section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub- section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance. If any section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held invalid, the City Council declares that it would have adopted the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective of the portion held invalid, and further declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated. Section 5.PUBLICATION. This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption. The foregoing ordinance was introduced andfirst reading waived at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on September 1, 2010, and was adopted by the following vote following a second reading on September 15, 2010: AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: SIGNED: __________ Ann Sullivan,Kathleen M. King, CLERK OF THE CITY OF SARATOGAMAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ Richard Taylor, CITY ATTORNEY 6 City Parks The City controls approximately 87 acres of parkland, of which 63 acres have been improved for park purposes. City parks are generally well-distributed throughout the community. Existing parks are described below, and include a mix of neighborhood, citywide and specialty parks. Azule Park •includes 4.3 acres of city-owned land located at 12777 Goleta Avenue. Improvements include 2 playgrounds, one for 2-5 years olds and one for 6-12 year olds, one tennis court, 2 horseshoe pits, 4 barbecue areas, 2 drinking fountains, several park benches and picnic tables, perimeter pathway with 4 par course stations, grass turf area, security lighting and connection to the VTA crossing point over Hwy. 85. Beauchamps Park contains 2.0 acres and facing east on Beauchamps Lane between Crayside land and Bowhill Court. Improvements include children’s play areas for 2-5 and 6-12 age appropriate equipment, 1 basketball hoop, 1 tennis court, 1 picnic table, pedestrian pathway, security lighting and an open turf area. Bellgrove Park is a linear 2 acre park that parallels State Route 85 and contains a children’s play area and picnic tables. Brookglen Park contains 0.7 acres of land at 12734 Brookglen Court. Improvements include a children’s playground, half-court basketball court, night lighting, climbing equipment, picnic tables and an open turf area. Central Park or Heritage Orchard , located near the Civic Center, is bounded on the north by Saratoga Avenue, on the south by Wildcat Creek and the Civic Center, and on the east by Fruitvale Avenue. It is a 17-acre site that contains a 14-acre orchard, the community library and the library parking lot. Congress Springs Park , located at 12970 Glen Brae Drive, contains 9.97 acres of land and is improved with multi-use fields, 2-5and 6-12 year old children’s play areas with age-appropriate play equipment, picnic tables and barbecue, an open turf practice field, concession stand, 2 restrooms, 2 drinking fountains, pedestrian path, benches and an off-street parking area. El Quito Park is located at 12855 Paseo Presada. This park contains 6.3 acres of land and has been developed with a picnic area with barbeques, a children’s play area, a community garden, volleyball courts, ball/soccer fields, horseshoe pits and a fitness course. This park includes night lighting. Foothill Park contains a total of 3 acres of land (0.9 acres owned by the City and 2.1 acres of land owned by the school district), It fronts on Seaton Avenue, and facing north and south of the park is Foothill School. The City- owned portion includes benches and turf area. Gardiner Park, •at 19085 Portos Drive, includes two children’s playground areas, for 2-5 and 6-12 year-olds, benches and picnic tables, a drinking fountain, an open turf area and a pedestrian pathway on 2.1 acres of land. Hakone Gardenss is a specialty park operated by a non-profit organization and consistof 15.5 acres of land located at 21000 Big Basin Way. It contains a picnic area, hillside and high trails, a bamboo park and water- strolling gardens, a Cultural Exchange Center, tea ceremonies, foundation offices, food service, restrooms and off-street parking. The park is one of 12 sites designated by the National Trust as part of the Trust’s Save America’s Treasures program. It is available for weddingsand special events. Historical Park , includes .5 acre of park located at 20460 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road. It is the ite of three of Saratoga’s historic buildings: the Historical Heritage Museum, Saratoga’s first library building (circa 1927), and the McWilliams House that was built in 1865 by the town’s blacksmith. The site also contains a eucalyptus tree grove, off-street parking and security lighting. Kevin Moran Park •includes 10.3 acres, of which 4 acres are developed, and is located at 12415 Scully Avenue. Improvements include picnic tables, benches, a drinking fountain, a basketball hoop, a perimeter pathway with 4 par course stations, a grass turf area, security lighting and a connection to a VTA crossing point over Hwy. 85. Pollard and Quito property. At the northeast corner of Quito Road and Pollard Road is a .6 acre open space parcel that contains an improved path. Ravenwood Park is located at 13830 Ravenwood Drive, across from Raven Court and includes a small tot playground area and benches on 0.45acre. San Marcos Wilderness Park •includes 10 acres of land between Sobey Road and Fruitvale Avenue at Crisp Avenue. This is a natural open space area with a trail that goes through it. Springhill Court property includes a 0.2 acre parcel at the end of Springhill Court that was dedicated to the city as park land as part of the development of the adjacent subdivision. The parcel is in its natural state with no improvements. Wildwood Park •is a 4.1 acre park located at 20764 Fourth Street that includes 2-5and 6-12 year old children’s play area with age appropriate play equipment, a volleyball area, horseshoe pits, bike paths, stage and amphitheatre, barbecues, drinking fountains, a grass turf area, a pedestrian pathway and security lighting. In addition toCity parks, there are several regional parks that, while not owned by the City of Saratoga, are located partially or wholly within its Sphere of Influence and/or immediately adjacent to its boundaries, and thus provide an additional source of parklands for the community. These parks include Villa Montalvo, Stevens Creek Park, Sanborn Skyline County Park and Fremont Older. (See discussion under Regional Parks). Exhibit OSC-1 shows the location of existing Parks and Open Space Resources within or adjacent to the Saratoga Planning Area. Current Health and Safety Code Section concerning smoking near playgrounds and tot lots: 104495 .(a) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions shall govern: (1) "Playground" means any park or recreational area specifically designed to be used by children that has play equipment installed, or any similar facility located on public or private school grounds, or on city, county, or state park grounds. (2) "Tot lot sandbox area" means a designated play area within a public park for the use by children under five years of age. Where the area is not contained by a fence, the boundary of a tot lot sandbox area shall be defined by the edge of the resilient surface of safety material, such as concrete or wood, or any other material surrounding the tot lot sandbox area. (3) "Public park" includes a park operated by a public agency. (4) "Smoke or smoking" means the carrying of a lighted pipe, lighted cigar, or lighted cigarette of any kind, or the lighting of a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind, including, but not limited to, tobacco, or any other weed or plant. (5) "Cigarette" means the same as defined in Section 104556. (6) "Cigar" means the same as defined in Section 104550. (b) No person shall smoke a cigarette, cigar, or other tobacco-related product within 25 feet of any playground or tot lot sandbox area. (c) No person shall dispose of cigarette butts, cigar butts, or any other tobacco-related waste within 25 feet of a playground or a tot lot sandbox area. (d) No person shall intimidate, threaten any reprisal, or effect any reprisal, for the purpose of retaliating against another person who seeks to attain compliance with this section. (e) Any person who violates this section is guilty of an infraction and shall be punished by a fine of two hundred fifty dollars ($250) for each violation of this section. Punishment under this section shall not preclude punishment pursuant to Section 13002, Code Section 374.4 of the Penal , or any other provision of law proscribing the act of littering. (f) The prohibitions contained in subdivisions (b), (c), and (d) shall not apply to private property. (g) The prohibitions contained in subdivisions (b) and (c) shall not apply to a public sidewalk located within 25 feet of aplayground or a tot lot sandbox area. (h) This section shall not preempt the authority of any county, city, or city and county to regulate smoking around playgrounds or tot lot sandbox areas. Any county, city, or city and county may enforce any ordinance adopted prior to January 1, 2002, or may adopt and enforce new regulations that are more restrictive than this section, on and after January 1, 2002. Smokefree Recreational Areas Ordinance AModel California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas (with Annotations) Revised June 2010 (Originally issued February 2007) Developed by the Technical Assistance Legal Center (TALC), a project of Public Health Law & Policy. This material was made possible by funds received from the California Department of Public Health, under contract #09-11182. Public Health Law & Policy is a nonprofit organization thatprovides legal information on matters relating to public health. The legal information provided in this document does not constitute legal advice or legal representation. For legal advice, readers should consult a lawyer in their state. www.phlpnet.org • talc@phlpnet.org • (510) 302-3380 Introduction The Technical Assistance Legal Center (TALC) developed this Model Ordinance to help California cities and counties limit exposure to secondhand smoke and limit tobacco use in recreational areas such as parks, playgrounds, or sports fields. As the dangers ofsecondhand tobacco smoke become increasingly well documented, one of the most important steps a community can take to improve the health of its residents is to create more smokefree or tobacco- free spaces. Local ordinances limiting exposure to secondhand smoke are the most direct and effective way to improve the public’s health. By addressing tobacco use outdoors, this Model Ordinance also helps limit tobacco-related litter. This Model Ordinance offers a variety of options. Communities may choose some or all of the options. In some instances blanks have been left (e.g., [____] ) for the language to be customized to fit the needs of a specific community. In other cases, the ordinance offers you a choice of options (e.g., [ choice one/choice two] ). Some of the ordinance options are followed by a comment that describes the legal provisions in more detail. Some degree of customization is always necessary in order to make sure that the ordinance is consistent with a community’s existing laws. Your City Attorney or County Counsel will likely be the best person to check this for you. If you have questions about how to adapt this ordinance for your community, please contact TALC for assistance at (510) 302-3380 or submityourquestion via our website at www.phlpnet.org/tobaccoquestions. Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 1 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 AN ORDINANCE OF THE [CITY/COUNTY] OF [____] AMENDING THE [____] MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE SMOKING [ AND TOBACCO PRODUCT USE] IN RECREATIONAL AREAS The [City Council of the City/Board of Supervisors of the County] of [____] does ordain as follows: : èÔÓÉ ÓÉ ÓÎÈÊÍØÇÙÈÍÊà ÚÍÓÐ×ÊÌÐÛÈ× ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× ÈÔÛÈ ÉÔÍÇÐØ Ú× COMMENT ÛØÛÌÈ×Ø ÈÍ ÈÔ× ÙÍÎÆ×ÎÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÖÍÊÏ ÇÉ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔ× ÒÇÊÓÉØÓÙÈÓÍÎ SECTION I. FINDINGS. The [City Council of the City/Board of Supervisors of the County] of [____] hereby finds and declares as follows: WHEREAS, tobacco use causes death and disease and continues to be an urgent public health challenge, as evidenced by the following: 1 Tobacco-related illness is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, 2 accounting for about 443,000 deaths each year;and Scientific studies have concluded that tobacco use can cause chronic lung disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke, in addition to cancer of the lungs, larynx, 3 esophagus, and mouth;and WHEREAS, secondhand smoke has been repeatedly identified as a health hazard, as evidenced by the following: The U.S. Surgeon General concluded that there is no risk-free level of exposure to 4 secondhand smoke;and The California Air Resources Board placed secondhand smoke in the same category as the most toxic automotive and industrial air pollutants by categorizing it as a toxic 5 air contaminant for which there is no safe level of exposure;and 1 Targeting Tobacco US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Use: The Nation’s Leading Cause of Preventable Death . 2008, p. 2. Available at: www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/aag/pdf/osh.pdf. 2 US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Smoking-Attributable Morbidity and Mortality, Years of Potential Life Lost, and Productivity Losses —United States, 2000-2004.” Mortality Weekly Report, 57(45): 1226-1228, 2008. Available at: www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5745a3.htm. 3 Targeting Tobacco US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Use: The Nation’s Leading Cause of Preventable Death .2008, p. 2. Available at: www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/aag/pdf/osh.pdf. 4 The Health Consequences of USDepartmentof Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General. Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General . 2007. Report highlights available at: www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheets/factsheet7.html. 5 Resolution 06-01, Cal. Air Resources Bd. (2006) at 5. Available at: www.arb.ca.gov/regact/ets2006/res0601.pdf; SeeNews Release, California Identifies California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. Secondhand Smoke as a “Toxic Air Contaminant.” Jan. 26, 2006. Available at: www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr012606.htm. Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 2 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 The California Environmental Protection Agency included secondhand smoke on the Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer, birth 6 defects, and other reproductive harm;and Whereasexposure to secondhand smoke causes death and disease,as evidenced by the following: Secondhand smoke is responsible for as many as 73,000 deaths among nonsmokers 7 each year in the United States;and Exposure to secondhand smoke increases the risk ofcoronary heart disease by 8 approximately thirty percent;and Secondhand smoke exposure causes lower respiratory tract infections, such as pneumonia and bronchitis in as many as 300,000 children in the United States under 910 the age of 18 months each year;and exacerbates childhood asthma;and [Include the following findings about smokeless tobacco if your community will be incorporating the optional language to create completely tobacco-free recreational areas.] WHEREAS, smokeless tobacco is not a safe alternative to smoking and also causes death and disease, as evidenced by the following: Smokeless tobacco use causes leukoplakia, a disease causing white patches to form in 11 the user’s mouth that can become cancerous;smokeless tobacco products are known 12 to cause lung, larynx, esophageal, and oral cancer;and the regular use of snuff 13 doubles the user’s risk of cardiovascular disease and death;and Prolonged use of snus, a form of smokeless tobacco, contributes to high blood 6 Chemicals California Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Known to the State to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity .2006, p. 8 & 17. Available at: www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single081106.pdf. 7 Fact Sheet – US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondhand Smoke .2006. Available at: www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/general_facts/index.htm. 8 Circulation Barnoya J and Glantz S. “Cardiovascular Effects of Secondhand Smoke: Nearly as Large as Smoking.” , 111: 2684-2698, 2005. Available at: www.circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/111/20/2684. 9 Targeting Tobacco US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Use: The Nation’s Leading Cause of Preventable Death . 2008, p. 2. Available at: www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/aag/pdf/osh.pdf. 10 Fact Sheet – US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondhand Smoke .2006. Available at: www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/general_facts/index.htm. 11 Smokeless Tobacco and Cancer: Questions and Answers. National Cancer Institute. 2003, p. 2. Available at: www.smokefree.gov/Docs2/SmokelessTobacco_Q&A.pdf. 12 Targeting Tobacco US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Use: The Nation’s Leading Cause of Preventable Death . 2008, p. 2. Available at: www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/aag/pdf/osh.pdf. 13 Nicotine and Hatsukami DK and Severson HH. “Oral Spit Tobacco: Addiction, Prevention, and Treatment.” Tobacco Research, 1(1): 21-44,1999. Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 3 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 pressure, a factor of cardiovascular disease,and to a higher likelihood of suffering a 14 fatal stroke;and WHEREAS, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration conducted laboratory analysis of electronic cigarette samples and found they contained carcinogens and toxic chemicals to which 15 users and bystanders could potentially be exposed;and WHEREAS, tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke impose great social and economic costs, as evidenced by the following: 16 The total annual economic burden of smoking in the United States is $193 billion; and The total annual cost of smoking in California was estimated at $475 per resident or $3,331 per smoker per year, for a total of nearly $15.8 billion in smoking-related costs 17 in 1999 alone;and WHEREAS, exposure to secondhand smoke anywhere has negative health impacts, and exposure to secondhand smoke does occur at significant levels outdoors, as evidenced by the following: Levels of secondhand smoke exposure outdoors can reach levels attained indoors 18 depending on direction and amount of wind and number and proximity of smokers; and Irritation from secondhand smoke begins at levels as low as 4 micrograms per cubic meter, and in some outdoor situations this level can be found as far away as 13 feet 19 from the burning cigarette;and 14 Karolinska Institutet. “Prolonged Use of Swedish Moist Snuff Increases Risk of Fatal Cardiovascular Disease and Medical News Today, Stroke.” November 15, 2007. Available at: www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/88868.php. 15 News Release, FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic US Food and Drug Administration. Cigaretteswww.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm173222.htm. . 2009. Available at: 16 News Release, SlightlyLower Adult Smoking Rates. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2008. Available at: www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2008/r081113.htm. 17 The Cost of Smoking in California, 1999 Max W, Rice DP, Zhang X, et al. . Sacramento, CA: Tobacco Control Section, California Department of Health Services, 2002, p. 74. Available at: http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=ctcre. 18 Real-Time Monitoring of OutdoorEnvironmental Tobacco Smoke Klepeis NE, Ott WR, and Switzer P. Concentrations: A Pilot Study. San Francisco: University of California, San Francisco and Stanford University, See also 2004, p. 34, 80. Available at: http://exposurescience.org/pub/reports/Outdoor_ETS_Final.pdf;Klepeis Journal of Air and NE, Ott WR and Switzer P. “Real-Time Measurement of Outdoor Tobacco Smoke Particles.” Waste Management Association, 57: 522-534, 2007. Available at: www.ashaust.org.au/pdfs/OutdoorSHS0705.pdf. 19 Junker MH, Danuser B, Monn C, et al. “Acute Sensory Responses of Nonsmokers at Very Low Environmental Environmental Health Perspectives, Tobacco Smoke Concentrations in Controlled Laboratory Settings.” 109(10): www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1242082&blobtype=pdf; 1046-1052, 2001. Available at: Repace JL. “Benefits of Smoke-Free Regulations in Outdoor Settings: Beaches, Golf Courses, Parks, Patios, and William Mitchell Law Review, in Motor Vehicles.” 34(4): 1621-1638, 2008. Available at: http://tobacco.health.usyd.edu.au/site/supersite/contact/pdfs/WilliamMitchellRepace.pdf. Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 4 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 To be completely free from exposure to secondhand smoke in outdoor places, a person may have to move nearly 25 feet away from the source of the smoke, about the 20 width of a two lane road;and WHEREAS, cigarette butts pose a health threat to young children, as evidenced by the following: In 2004, American poison control centers received nearly 8,000 reports of children 21 poisoned by the ingestion of cigarettes, cigarette butts, and other tobacco products; and Children who ingest cigarette butts can experience vomiting, nausea, lethargy, and 22 gagging;and WHEREAS, cigarette butts are a major and persistent source of litter, as evidenced by the following: It is estimated that over two billion cigarette butts are discarded every day worldwide, and that Americans alone discard more than 175 million pounds of cigarette butts 23 every year;and Cigarette filters, made of plastic cellulose acetate, take approximately 15 years to 24 decompose;and In just three hours, 340,000 cigarette butts were collected from California beaches during the 2008 Coastal Cleanup Day, making cigarette butts the most common type 25 of trash found 24 years in a row;and Cigarette filters have been found in the stomachs of birds, fish, whales, and other marine creatures that have mistaken the filters for food, causing the animals to ingest 26 harmful plastic and toxic chemicals;and Los Angeles County recorded a 40% decrease in cigarette butts after banning smoking 27 on beaches in three cities;and 20 Repace JL. “Benefits of Smoke-Free Regulations in Outdoor Settings: Beaches, Golf Courses, Parks, Patios, and William Mitchell Law Review, in Motor Vehicles.”34(4): 1621-1638, 2008. Available at: http://tobacco.health.usyd.edu.au/site/supersite/contact/pdfs/WilliamMitchellRepace.pdf. 21 2004 Annual Report of the American Association of Poison American Association of Poison Control Centers. Control Centers Toxic Exposure Surveillance System . Elsevier Inc., 2004, p. 645. Available at: www.poison.org/prevent/documents/TESS%20Annual%20Report%202004.pdf. 22 US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Ingestion of Morbidity and Mortality Cigarettes and Cigarette Butts by Children –Rhode Island, January 1994-July 1996.” Weekly Reportwww.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00046181.htm. ,46(06):125-128, 1997. Available at: 23 Surfrider Foundation, San Diego Chapter, Hold on to Your Butt, www.surfridersd.org/hotyb.php. 24 Surfrider Foundation, San Diego Chapter, Hold on to Your Butt, www.surfridersd.org/hotyb.php. 25th Press Release: California Finds Silver Lining at the 25Annual California California Coastal Commission. Coastal Cleanup Day. Nov. 30, 2009. Available at:www.coastal.ca.gov/publiced/ccd/11.30.09.pressrelease.pdf. 26 Cigarette Butt Litter. Surfrider Foundation, Available at:www.surfrider.org/a-z/cig_but.php. 27 Brooke Williams. “Volunteers Comb Coast: Annual Cleanup Turns UpTons of Trash, Which Generates Helpful San Diego Union-Tribune Data.” , Sept. 17, 2006. Available at:www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20060917- Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 5 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 WHEREAS, creating smokefree areas helps protect thehealth of the 86.7% of Californians 28 who are nonsmokers;and WHEREAS, state law prohibits smoking within 25 feet of playgrounds and tot lots and 29 expressly authorizes local communities to enact additional restrictions;and 30 WHEREAS, there is no Constitutional right to smoke; NOW THEREFORE, it is the intent of the [City Council/Board of Supervisors], in enacting this ordinance, to provide for the public health, safety, and welfare by discouraging the inherently dangerous behavior of smoking [ and tobacco use]aroundnon-tobacco users, especially children; by protecting the public from exposure to secondhand smoke where they play, exercise, and relax; by protecting the environment from tobacco-related litter; by reducing the potential for children to wrongly associate smoking [ and tobacco use] with a healthy lifestyle; and by affirming and promoting a healthy environment in and around the [City’s/ County’s] recreational areas. SECTION II. [Article/Section] of the [____] Municipal Code ishereby amended to read as follows: Sec. [____(*1)]. DEFINITIONS. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this [article/chapter], shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise: (a) “Parking Area” means a parking lot or any other area designated or primarily used for parking vehicles of Persons accessing a Recreational Area. : óÖ ìÛÊÑÓÎÕ ûÊ×ÛÉ ÛÊ× ÎÍÈ ÕÍÓÎÕ ÈÍ Ú× ÓÎÙÐÇØ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔ× COMMENT éÏÍÑÓÎÕ Ê×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÍÎ ÈÔ×Î ÈÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÉÔÍÇÐØ Ú× Ø×Ð×È×Ø (b) “Person” means any natural person, partnership, cooperative association, corporation, personal representative, receiver, trustee, assignee, or any other legal entity except the [City/ ____ Countyof ]. : èÔ× ïÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐ ùÍØ× ÐÓÑ×Ðà ÙÍÎÈÛÓÎÉ Û Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ì×ÊÉÍÎ COMMENT ÛÎØ ÓÖ ÉÍ ÈÔ× Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÌÊÍÆÓØ×Ø Ô×Ê× ÙÛÎ Ú× Ø×Ð×È×Ø èÔ× ÙÓÈà ÍÊ ÙÍÇÎÈà ÓÉ ×ÄÙÐÇØ×Ø ÖÊÍÏ ÈÔ× Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÉÍ ÈÔÛÈ ÓÈ ØÍ×É ÎÍÈ ÏÛÑ× ÓÈÉ×ÐÖ ÌÍÈ×ÎÈÓÛÐÐà ÐÓÛÚÐ× ÖÍÊ ÎÍÈ ÖÇÐÐà ×ÎÖÍÊÙÓÎÕ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ØÇ× ÈÍ ÌÊÛÙÈÓÙÛÐ ÐÓÏÓÈÛÈÓÍÎÉ 9999-2m17cleanup.html. 28 Tobacco Control in California 2003-2007: Missed Opportunities Hong M, Barnes RL and Glantz SA. . San Francisco: Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, 2007, p. 9. Available at: http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1074&context=ctcre. 29 Cal. Health & Safety Code § 104495 (West 2008). 30 There Is No Constitutional Right to Smoke Public Health Law & Policy, Technical Assistance Legal Center. . 2005. www.phlpnet.org/tobacco-control/products/there-no-constitutional-right-smoke. Available at: Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 6 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 (c) “Recreational Area” means any outdoor area [ , including streets and sidewalks,] that is [ publicly or privately owned/owned or operated by the[City/Countyof____]] and open to the general public for recreational purposes, regardless of any fee or age requirement. The term “Recreational Area” includes, but is not limited to parks, picnic areas, , playgrounds, sports fields, golf courses, walking paths, gardens, hiking trails, bike paths, horseback riding trails, swimming pools, roller-and ice-skating rinks, skateboard parks, amusement parks, and beaches. : èÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÙÛÎ ÛÌÌÐà ÈÍ ÛÐÐ Ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÛÊ×ÛÉ ÈÔÛÈ ÛÊ× COMMENT ÍÌ×Î ÈÍ ÈÔ× Õ×Î×ÊÛÐ ÌÇÚÐÓÙ ÅÔ×ÈÔ×Ê ÍÎ ÌÇÚÐÓÙ ÍÊ ÌÊÓÆÛÈ× ÐÛÎØóÖ ÈÔ× ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈà ÅÛÎÈÉ ÈÍ ÐÓÏÓÈ ÈÔ× Ê×ÛÙÔ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÈÍ ÍÎÐà ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ÌÇÚÐÓÙÐà ÍÅÎ×Ø ÍÊ ÍÌ×ÊÛÈ×Ø Ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÖÛÙÓÐÓÈÓ×É ÈÔ×Î É×Ð×ÙÈ ÈÔ× ____ ÌÔÛÉ× ©owned or operated by the City / County of ”. èÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÙÛÎ ÛÐÉÍ Ú× ×ÄÌÛÎØ×Ø ÈÍ ×ÎÙÍÏÌÛÉÉ ÉÈÊ××ÈÉ ÛÎØ ÉÓØ×ÅÛÐÑÉ ÈÔÛÈ ÛÊ× ÇÉ×Ø ÛÉ ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ûÊ×ÛÉ ÚÃÛØØÓÎÕ ÈÔ× ÍÌÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÚÊÛÙÑ×È×Ø ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× ©including streets and sidewalks¨ èÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÓÎÙÐÇØ×É Ú×ÛÙÔ×É ÅÔÓÙÔ ÓÉ ÎÍÈ Ø×ÖÓÎ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔÓÉ ïÍØ×Ð íÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× óÖ ÃÍÇ ÅÍÇÐØ ÐÓÑ× ÈÍ ÓÎÙÐÇØ× Û É×ÌÛÊÛÈ× ÏÍÊ× ÉÌ×ÙÓÖÓÙ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× È×ÊÏ ©ú×ÛÙÔ¨ ÌÐ×ÛÉ× É×× ÈÔ× Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÓÎ èûðùªÉ ïÍØ×Ð éÏÍÑ×ÖÊ×× ú×ÛÙÔ×É íÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ× ÍÎ èûðùªÉ Å×ÚÉÓÈ× ÛÈ www.phlpnet.org (d) “Smoke” means the gases,particles, or vaporsreleased into the air as a result of combustion, electrical ignition or vaporization,when the apparent or usual purpose of the combustion, electrical ignition or vaporizationis human inhalation of the byproducts, except when the combusting or vaporizing material contains no tobaccoor nicotineandthe purpose of inhalation is solely olfactory,such as, for example, smoke from incense. The term “Smoke” includes, but is not limited to, tobacco smoke, electronic cigarette vapors, and marijuana smoke. : èÔÓÉ ÓÉ Û ÉÌ×ÙÓÛÐ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÈÔÛÈ ÓÉ ÏÍÊ× ÐÓÏÓÈ×Ø ÈÔÛÎ ÈÔ× COMMENT ÙÍÏÏÍÎ ÇÎØ×ÊÉÈÛÎØÓÎÕ ÍÖ ÅÔÛÈ ÉÏÍÑ× ÓÉ öÍÊ ×ÄÛÏÌÐ× ÉÏÍÑ× ÖÊÍÏ Û ÚÛÊÚ×ËÇ× ÕÊÓÐÐ ÍÊ Û ÙÛÏÌÖÓÊ× ÓÉ ÎÍÈ ©éÏÍÑר ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× ÌÇÊÌÍÉ×É ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× Ú×ÙÛÇÉ× ÈÔ× ÉÏÍÑ× Õ×Î×ÊÛÈ×Ø Úà ÈÔÍÉ× ÛÙÈÓÆÓÈÓ×É ÓÉ ÎÍÈ ÌÊÍØÇÙ×Ø ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× ÌÇÊÌÍÉ× ÍÖ ÓÎÔÛÐÓÎÕ ÓÈ èÔ× ÐÓÏÓÈÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÐÛÙ×Ø ÍÎ ©éÏÍÑר Úà ÈÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÓÉ ÓÏÌÍÊÈÛÎÈ ÈÍ ÛÆÍÓØ ÇÎÓÎÈ×ÎØ×Ø ÙÍÎÉ×ËÇ×ÎÙ×É ÉÇÙÔ ÛÉ ÓÎÛØÆ×ÊÈ×ÎÈÐà ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈÓÎÕ ÚÛÊÚ×ËÇÓÎÕ èÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÓÎÙÐÇØ×É ÏÛÊÓÒÇÛÎÛ ÚÇÈ éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÏÛÊÓÒÇÛÎÛ ÖÍÊ Ï×ØÓÙÛÐ ÌÇÊÌÍÉ×É ÙÛÎ Ú× ×ÄÙÐÇØ×Ø ÖÊÍÏ ÈÔ× ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈÓÍÎÉ ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÉÔÍÇÐØ Û ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈà Ø×ÙÓØ× ÈÍ ØÍ ÉÍ ìÐ×ÛÉ× ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ èûðù ÖÍÊ ÛÉÉÓÉÈÛÎÙ× ÓÎ ØÊÛÖÈÓÎÕ Û Ï×ØÓÙÛÐ ÏÛÊÓÒÇÛÎÛ ×ÄÙ×ÌÈÓÍÎ (e) “Smoking” means engaging in an act that generates Smoke, such as for example: possessing a lighted pipe, lighted hookah pipe, an operating electronic cigarette, a lighted cigar, or a lighted cigarette of any kind; or; or lighting or igniting of a pipe, cigar, hookah pipe, or cigarette of any kind. Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 7 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 (f) “Tobacco Product” means any substance containing tobacco leaf, including but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snus, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco; and any product or formulation of matter containing biologically active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be introduced into the human body, but does not include any cessation product specifically approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use in treating nicotine or tobacco dependence. : èÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÓÉ ÅÊÓÈÈ×Î ÚÊÍÛØÐà ÈÍ ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ÎÍÎÈÊÛØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ COMMENT ÈÍÚÛÙÙÍ ÛÎØ ÎÓÙÍÈÓÎ× ÌÊÍØÇÙÈÉ ÉÇÙÔ ÛÉ ÎÓÙÍÈÓÎ× ÅÛÈ×Ê ÛÎØ ÎÓÙÍÈÓÎ× ÐÍÐÐÓÌÍÌÉ ÚÇÈ ÅÓÈÔÍÇÈ ÓÎÈ×ÊÖ×ÊÓÎÕ ÅÓÈÔ ÈÔ× öøûªÉ ÏÓÉÉÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÛÌÌÊÍÆÓÎÕ ÌÊÍØÇÙÈÉ ÓÎÈ×ÎØ×Ø ÈÍ Ú×Î×ÖÓÈ ÌÇÚÐÓÙ Ô×ÛÐÈÔ ÉÇÙÔ ÛÉ ÎÓÙÍÈÓÎ× ÌÛÈÙÔ×É ÛÎØ ÍÈÔ×Ê ÎÓÙÍÈÓÎ× Ù×ÉÉÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÊÍØÇÙÈÉ óÖ èÍÚÛÙÙÍ ìÊÍØÇÙÈÉ ÛÊ× ÎÍÈ ÕÍÓÎÕ ÈÍ Ú× ÓÎÙÐÇØ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔ× éÏÍÑÓÎÕ Ê×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÍÎ ÈÔ×Î ÈÔÓÉ Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÉÔÍÇÐØ Ú× Ø×Ð×È×Ø Sec. [____(*2)].SMOKING [ AND TOBACCO PRODUCT USE] PROHIBITED (a) Smoking [or using a Tobacco Product] is prohibited anywhere in a Recreational Area [or in any Parking Area] [ except in a designated Smoking area]. : óÖ Û ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈà ÅÛÎÈÉ ÈÍ ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈ ÈÔ× ÇÉ× ÍÖ ÛÐÐ èÍÚÛÙÙÍ COMMENT ìÊÍØÇÙÈÉ ÓÎ ÛØØÓÈÓÍÎ ÈÍ éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÈÔ×Î ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ÈÔ× ÖÓÊÉÈ É×È ÍÖ ÚÊÛÙÑ×È×Ø È×ÄÈ ©or using a Tobacco Product¨ û ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈà ÛÐÉÍ ÅÓÐÐ Î××Ø ÈÍ Ø×ÙÓØ× ÓÖ ÓÈ ÅÛÎÈÉ ÈÍ Ê×ÉÈÊÓÙÈ éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÓÎ ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ûÊ×Û ìÛÊÑÓÎÕ ûÊ×ÛÉ óÖ ÉÍ ÇÉ× ÈÔ× É×ÙÍÎØ É×È ÍÖ ÚÊÛÙÑ×È×Ø ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× ©or in anyParking Area¨ óÖ Û ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈà ÅÛÎÈÉ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÈÍ ÛÌÌÐà ÈÍ ÛÐÐ èÍÚÛÙÙÍ ìÊÍØÇÙÈÉ ÓÎÙÐÇØÓÎÕ ÉÏÍÑ×Ð×ÉÉ ÖÍÊÏÉ ÈÔ×Î ÓÈ ÉÔÍÇÐØ ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ÈÔ× Ê×Ö×Ê×ÎÙ×É ÈÍ ÈÔ×É× È×ÊÏÉ ×ÛÙÔ ÈÓÏ× éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÓÉ Ê×Ö×Ê×ÎÙ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× öÓÎÛÐÐà ÓÖ Û ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈà ÅÛÎÈÉ ÈÍ ÙÊ×ÛÈ× Ø×ÉÓÕÎÛÈ×Ø éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÛÊ×ÛÉ ÈÔ×Î ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ÈÔ× ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× ÓÎ ÈÔ× ÖÓÎÛÐ ÚÊÛÙÑ×È ÛÎØ É×× Ú×ÐÍÅ ÖÍÊ ÌÍÉÉÓÚÐ× ÙÊÓÈ×ÊÓÛ ÈÍ Ø×ÖÓÎ× ÈÔ× ÚÍÇÎØÛÊÓ×É ÍÖ ÈÔ× éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÛÊ×Û èÔ×É× ÙÊÓÈ×ÊÓÛ ÏÛà Ú× ÏÍØÓÖÓ×Ø ÛÉ ÛÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈ× ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× ÌÛÊÈÓÙÇÐÛÊ ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃÛÎØ ÈÔ×Î ÈÔ× Ø×ÉÓÊ×Ø ÉÌ×ÙÓÖÓÙÛÈÓÍÎÉ ÉÔÍÇÐØ Ú× ÓÎÙÐÇØ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÓÈÉ×ÐÖ A designated Smoking area: (1) must be outside; (2) must not overlap with any area in which Smoking is otherwise prohibited by other provisions of this Code, state law, or federal law; (3) must be located at least [ twenty-five (25) feet] from any indoor area where Smoking is prohibited; (4) must not include areas primarily used by children and must be located at least [ (twenty-five (25) feet] from such areas; Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 8 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 (5) must be no more than [ five percent (5%)] of the total outdoor area of the property on which it is located; (6) must have a clearly marked perimeter; and (7) must be identified by conspicuous signs. (b) Nothing in this [article/chapter] shall be construed to prohibit Smoking[or Tobacco Product use] in any area in which such Smoking [or Tobacco Product use] is already prohibited by state or federal law unless the applicable state or federal law does not preempt additional local regulation. : èÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ Ñ××ÌÉ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÖÊÍÏ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈÓÎÕ ÛÊ×ÛÉ COMMENT ÅÔ×Ê× éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÓÉ ÛÐÊ×ÛØà ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈ×Ø Úà ÛÎÍÈÔ×Ê ÐÛÅ ÈÔÛÈ ÖÍÊÚÓØÉ ÛØØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÐÍÙÛÐ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈÓÍÎ ÛÐÉÍ ÑÎÍÅÎ ÛÉ ©ÌÊ××ÏÌÈÓÍΨ ôÍÅ×Æ×Ê ÈÔ× ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× ÓÉ Ø×ÉÓÕÎ×Ø ÈÍ ÛÐÐÍÅ ÈÔ× ÐÍÙÛÐ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÈÍ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈ× éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÓÎ ÛÊ×ÛÉ ÈÔÛÈ ÛÊ× ÛÐÐÍÅ×Ø Úà ÉÈÛÈ× ÍÊ Ö×Ø×ÊÛÐ ÐÛÅ ÚÇÈ ÅÓÈÔÍÇÈ Ð×ÛÆÓÎÕ ÛÎà ÕÛÌÉ Ú×ÈÅ××Î ÈÔ× ÐÍÙÛÐ ÛÎØ ÉÈÛÈ× ÍÊ Ö×Ø×ÊÛÐ ÐÛÅ ûÕÛÓÎ ÓÖ ÃÍÇ ÅÛÎÈ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÈÍ ÛÌÌÐà ÈÍ ÛÐÐ èÍÚÛÙÙÍ ìÊÍØÇÙÈÉ ÌÐ×ÛÉ× ÇÉ× ÈÔ× ÚÊÛÙÑ×È×Ø È×ÄÈ Ê×Ö×ÊÊÓÎÕ ÈÍ èÍÚÛÙÙÍ ìÊÍØÇÙÈ ÇÉ× Sec. [____ (*3)]. OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITIONS (a) No ash can, ashtray, or other Smoking waste receptacle shall be placed in any area in which Smoking is prohibited by this [article/chapter]. : èÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÏÛÑ×É ÌÐÛÙÓÎÕ ÛÉÔ Ê×Ù×ÌÈÛÙÐ×É ÅÓÈÔÓÎ Û COMMENT ÎÍÉÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÛÊ×Û ÓÐÐ×ÕÛÐ (b) No Person shall knowingly permit Smoking [or the use of Tobacco Products] in an area under the Person’s legal or de facto control in which Smoking [or the use of Tobacco Products] is prohibited by this [chapter/article] or other provisions of this Code, unless otherwise required by state or federal law. : èÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÏÛÑ×É ÛÎÃÍÎ× ÅÔÍ ÓÉ ÓÎ ÙÍÎÈÊÍÐ ÍÖ ÛÎ ÛÊ×Û COMMENT Ê×ÉÌÍÎÉÓÚÐ× ÖÍÊ ÛÎà éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ØÍÎ× ÓÎ ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× èÔÓÉ ÉÇÚÉ×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÓÉ ÍÎÐà Î××Ø×Ø ÓÖ ÈÔ×ÍÌÈÓÍÎÉ ÈÍ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈ× éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÍÎ ÌÊÓÆÛÈ× ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈà ÍÊ ÌÊÓÆÛÈ× ÉÈÊÇÙÈÇÊ×É ÓÎ Û ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ûÊ×Û ÍÌ×Î ÈÍ ÈÔ× ÌÇÚÐÓÙ ÛÊ× ÓÎÙÐÇØ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔ× Ø×ÖÓÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ©ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ûÊ×Û¨ (c)No Person shall dispose of used Smoking [ or Tobacco Product] waste within the boundaries of an area in which Smoking [ or Tobacco Productuse] is prohibited by this [article/chapter]. (d) “No Smoking” [or “No Use of Tobacco Products”]or “Smokefree” [ or “Tobacco- Free”] signs shall be posted in a quantity and manner reasonably likely to inform individuals occupying the Recreational Area [ and Parking Area]that Smoking [or Tobacco Productuse ]is prohibited within the area. The signs shall have letters of no less than one inch in height and shall include the international “No Smoking” symbol (consisting of a pictorial representation of a burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle crossed by a red bar). [At least Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 9 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 one sign with the[City/County]phone number where complaints can be directed must be conspicuously posted ineach place in which Smoking is prohibited.] : û ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈà ÈÔÛÈ ÙÔÍÍÉ×É ÈÍ Ê×ÕÇÐÛÈ× ÛÐÐ èÍÚÛÙÙÍ COMMENT ìÊÍØÇÙÈ ÇÉ× ÓÎ ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ûÊ×ÛÉ ÎÍÈ ÒÇÉÈ éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÙÍÇÐØ ÙÍÎÉÓØ×Ê Ê×ËÇÓÊÓÎÕ ÛØØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× ÍÊ ÛØØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÉÓÕÎÉ ÈÍ ÙÐÛÊÓÖà ÈÔÛÈ ÛÐÐ ÖÍÊÏÉ ÍÖ ÈÍÚÛÙÙÍ ÇÉ× ÛÊ× ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈ×Ø ùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÓ×É ÙÍÎÙ×ÊÎ×Ø ÛÚÍÇÈ ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÛÎØ ÅÓÈÔ ÈÔ× ÖÇÎØÉ ÈÍ ÌÊÓÎÈ ÐÍÙÛÐ ÉÓÕÎÉ ÏÛà ÅÓÉÔ ÈÍ ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ÈÔ× ÚÊÛÙÑ×È×Ø É×ÎÈ×ÎÙ× ÅÔÓÙÔ Ê×ËÇÓÊ×É ÉÓÕÎÉ ÈÍ ÔÛÆ× ÈÔ× ÌÔÍÎ× ÎÇÏÚ×Ê ÖÍÊ ÙÍÏÌÐÛÓÎÈÉ îÍÈ× ÈÔÛÈ ÈÔÓÉ ÅÓÐÐ Ú× ÏÍÊ× ×ÄÌ×ÎÉÓÆ× ÈÔÛÎ ÇÉÓÎÕ ÉÈÛÎØÛÊØ ÉÓÕÎÉ (e) The presence of Smoking waste receptacles in violation of subsection (a) above and the absence of signs required by subsection (d) above shall not be a defense to a violation of any provision of this [article/chapter]. (f) No Person shall intimidate, threaten any reprisal, or effect any reprisal, for the purpose of retaliating against another Person who seeks to attain compliance with this [article/ chapter]. (g) Each instance of Smoking [or Tobacco Product use] in violation of this [article/ chapter] shall constitute a separate violation. For violations other than Smoking, each day of a continuing violation of this [article/chapter] shall constitute a separate violation. Sec. [____(*4)]. PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT (a) The remedies provided by this [article/chapter] are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. : èÔ× ÖÍÐÐÍÅÓÎÕ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎÉ ÛÊ× Ø×ÉÓÕÎ×Ø ÈÍ ÍÖÖ×Ê Û ÆÛÊÓ×Èà ÍÖ COMMENT ÍÌÈÓÍÎÉ ÈÍ ÈÔ× ØÊÛÖÈ×Ê ÛÎØ ÈÍ ÈÔ× ×ÎÖÍÊÙÓÎÕ ÛÕ×ÎÙà øÊÛÖÈ×ÊÉ ÏÛà ÙÔÍÍÉ× ÈÍ ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ÉÍÏ× ÍÊ ÛÐÐ ÍÖ ÈÔ×É× ÍÌÈÓÍÎÉ íÎÙ× ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÓÉ ×ÎÛÙÈ×Ø ÈÔ× ×ÎÖÍÊÙÓÎÕ ÛÕ×ÎÙà ÅÓÐÐ ÔÛÆ× ÈÔ× ØÓÉÙÊ×ÈÓÍÎ ÈÍ ÙÔÍÍÉ× ÅÔÓÙÔ ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÈÍÍÐÉ ÈÍ ÇÉ× ûÉ Û ÌÊÛÙÈÓÙÛÐ ÏÛÈÈ×Ê ÈÔ×É× ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÍÌÈÓÍÎÉ ÅÍÇÐØ ÎÍÈ Ú× ÛÌÌÐÓ×Ø ÉÓÏÇÐÈÛÎ×ÍÇÉÐà ÛÐÈÔÍÇÕÔ ÏÇÐÈÓÌÐ× Ê×Ï×ØÓ×É ÏÓÕÔÈ Ú× ÇÉ×Ø ÛÕÛÓÎÉÈ Û ÌÛÊÈÓÙÇÐÛÊÐà ×ÕÊ×ÕÓÍÇÉ ÆÓÍÐÛÈÍÊ ÍÆ×Ê ÈÓÏ× (b) Each incident of Smoking [or Tobacco Product use] in violation of this [article/ chapter] is an infraction subject to a [one hundred dollar ($100)] fine [ or otherwise punishable pursuant to section ____ of this code]. Other violations of this [article/chapter] may, in the discretion of the [City Prosecutor/District Attorney], be prosecuted as infractions or misdemeanors when the interests of justice so require . Enforcement of this ____ [article/chapter]shall be the responsibility of []. In addition, any peace officer or code enforcement official also may enforce this [article/chapter]. : èÔ× ÖÓÊÉÈ É×ÎÈ×ÎÙ× ×ÉÈÛÚÐÓÉÔ×É ÈÔ× Ì×ÎÛÐÈà ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× ÙÍÊ× COMMENT ÈÃÌ× ÍÖ ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎ éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÅÔ×Ê× ÓÈ ÓÉ ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈ×Ø èÔ× ÖÓÎ× ÛÏÍÇÎÈ ÙÛÎ Ú× ÏÍØÓÖÓ×Ø ÚÇÈ ÙÛÎÎÍÈ ×ÄÙ××Ø ÖÍÊ Û ÖÓÊÉÈ ÓÎÖÊÛÙÈÓÍÎ èÔÓÉ Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 10 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÛÐÐÍÅÉ ÐÛÅ ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÍÖÖÓÙ×ÊÉ ÈÍ ÉÓÏÌÐà ÅÊÓÈ× Û ÈÓÙÑ×È ÖÍÊ ÓÐÐ×ÕÛÐ éÏÍÑÓÎÕ èÔ× É×ÙÍÎØ É×ÎÈ×ÎÙ× ÉÍÏ×ÈÓÏ×É ÙÛÐÐ×Ø Û ©ÅÍÚÚÐ×ʨ ÛÖÖÍÊØÉ ÈÔ× ÌÊÍÉ×ÙÇÈÓÎÕ ÛÈÈÍÊÎ×à ØÓÉÙÊ×ÈÓÍÎ ÅÔ×ÈÔ×Ê ÈÍ ÌÇÊÉÇ× ÍÈÔ×Ê ÈÃÌ×É ÍÖ ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎÉ ÉÇÙÔ ÛÉ ÛÎ ÓÎÖÊÛÙÈÓÍÎ ÐÓÑ× Û ÌÛÊÑÓÎÕ ÈÓÙÑ×È ÍÊ Û ÏÓÉØ×Ï×ÛÎÍÊ Û ÙÊÓÏ× ÌÇÎÓÉÔÛÚÐ× Úà ÇÌ ÈÍ Û ÖÓÎ× ÛÎØ ÍÊ ÉÓÄ ÏÍÎÈÔÉ ÓÎ ùÍÇÎÈà òÛÓÐ ïÓÉØ×Ï×ÛÎÍÊÉ ÛÊ× ÏÍÊ× É×ÊÓÍÇÉ ÙÊÓÏ×É ÖÍÊ ÅÔÓÙÔ Û ÒÇÊà ÈÊÓÛÐ ÓÉ ÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ× ÈÍ Ø×Ö×ÎØÛÎÈÉ öÓÎ×É ÛÎØ ÍÈÔ×Ê ÙÊÓÏÓÎÛÐ Ì×ÎÛÐÈÓ×É ÛÊ× ×ÉÈÛÚÐÓÉÔ×Ø Úà ÈÔ× ì×ÎÛÐ ùÍØ× ÛÎØ ÛÊ× ÈÃÌÓÙÛÐÐà Ê×ÖÐ×ÙÈ×Ø ÓÎ ÈÔ× Õ×Î×ÊÛÐ ÌÇÎÓÉÔÏ×ÎÈÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÍÖ Û ÐÍÙÛÐ ÙÍØ× èÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÛÐÉÍ Ø×ÉÓÕÎÛÈ×É Û ÌÊÓÏÛÊà ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÛÕ×ÎÙà ÅÔÓÙÔ ÓÉ Ê×ÙÍÏÏ×ÎØ×Ø ÚÇÈ Ê×ÏÛÓÎÉ ÖÐ×ÄÓÚÐ× Úà Ì×ÊÏÓÈÈÓÎÕ ÛÎà ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÛÕ×ÎÙà ÈÍ ×ÎÖÍÊÙ× ÈÔ× ÐÛÅ (c) Violations of this [article/chapter] are subject to a civil action brought by the ____ [City/Countyof ], punishable by a civil fine not less than [two hundred fifty dollars ($250)] and not exceeding [one thousand dollars ($1,000)] per violation. : èÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÌÊÍÆÓØ×É ÙÓÆÓÐ ÖÓÎ×É ÖÍÊ ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÎÕ ÈÔ× COMMENT ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× óÈ Ê×ËÇÓÊ×É ÈÔÛÈ Û ÈÊÛØÓÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÙÓÆÓÐ ÉÇÓÈ Ú× ÖÓÐ×Ø Úà ÈÔ× ÙÓÈà ÍÊ ÙÍÇÎÈà ÌÍÉÉÓÚÐà ÓÎ ÉÏÛÐÐ ÙÐÛÓÏÉ ÙÍÇÊÈ èÔ× ÖÓÎ× ÛÏÍÇÎÈÉ ÙÛÎ Ú× ÛØÒÇÉÈ×Ø ÚÇÈ ÙÛÎÎÍÈ ×ÄÙ××Ø Ì×Ê ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎ é×× ùÛÐÓÖÍÊÎÓÛ õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× É×ÙÈÓÍÎ (d) Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of this [article/chapter] shall also constitute a violation of this [article/chapter]. : èÔÓÉ ÓÉ ÉÈÛÎØÛÊØ ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× ÈÔÛÈ ÓÉ ÈÃÌÓÙÛÐÐà ÓÎÙÐÇØ×Ø ÓÎ Û COMMENT ÙÓÈà ÍÊ ÙÍÇÎÈà ÙÍØ× ÛÎØ ÏÛà Ú× ÍÏÓÈÈ×Ø ÓÖ ØÇÌÐÓÙÛÈÓÆ× ÍÖ ×ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕ ÙÍØ× ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎÉ (e) Any violation of this [article/chapter] is hereby declared to be a nuisance. : úà ×ÄÌÊ×ÉÉÐà Ø×ÙÐÛÊÓÎÕ ÈÔÛÈ Û ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÓÉ COMMENT Û ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÈÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÛÐÐÍÅÉ×ÎÖÍÊÙ×Ï×ÎÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× Úà ÈÔ× ÙÓÈà ÍÊ ÙÍÇÎÈà ÆÓÛ ÈÔ× ÛØÏÓÎÓÉÈÊÛÈÓÆ× ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈ ÌÊÍÙ×ØÇÊ×É ÙÍÏÏÍÎÐà ÖÍÇÎØ ÓÎ ÏÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐ ÙÍØ×É îÍÈ× ÈÔÛÈ ÈÔÓÉ Ø×ÙÐÛÊÛÈÓÍÎ Ï×Ê×Ðà ÉÛÃÉ ÈÔÛÈ violating ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ËÇÛÐÓÖÓ×É ÛÉ Û ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ×Õ ÅÔ×Î éÏÍÑÓÎÕ ÓÎÛ ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐ ûÊ×Û ÈÔ× violation ÓÉ ÈÔ× ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÎÍÈ ÈÔ× Smoke óÈ ÓÉ ÎÍÈ ÈÔ× ÉÛÏ× ÈÔÓÎÕ ÛÉ Û ÐÍÙÛÐ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× Ø×ÙÐÛÊÓÎÕ É×ÙÍÎØÔÛÎØ ÉÏÍÑ× Û ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ìÐ×ÛÉ× ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ èûðù ÖÍÊ ÏÍÊ× ÓÎÖÍÊÏÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÎ ÔÍÅ Û ÐÍÙÛÐ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÙÛÎ Ø×ÙÐÛÊ× ÈÔÛÈ ÛÐÐ ÎÍÎÙÍÎÉ×ÎÉÇÛÐ ×ÄÌÍÉÇÊ× ÈÍ É×ÙÍÎØÔÛÎØ ÉÏÍÑ× ÓÉ Û ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× (f) In addition to other remedies provided by this [article/chapter] or by other law, any violation of this [article/chapter] may be remedied by a civil action brought by the [City Attorney/County Counsel], including, but not limited to, administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings, civil or criminal code enforcement proceedings, and suits for injunctive relief. Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 11 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 : óÈ ÓÉ ÙÍÏÏÍÎ ÈÍ ÌÊÍÆÓØ× ÈÔÛÈ ÈÔ× ÐÍÙÛÐ ÕÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ’É COMMENT ÐÛÅÃ×ÊÉ ÏÛà ÕÍ ÈÍ ÙÍÇÊÈ ÈÍ É××Ñ ÓÎÒÇÎÙÈÓÍÎÉ ÛÎØ ÍÈÔ×Ê Ì×ÎÛÐÈÓ×É ÓÎ ÛØØÓÈÓÍÎ ÈÍ ÖÓÎ×É èÔ× ×ÄÌÊ×ÉÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÖÍÊ ÓÎÒÇÎÙÈÓÆ× Ê×ÐÓ×Ö ÐÍÅ×ÊÉ ÈÔ× ÉÔÍÅÓÎÕ Ê×ËÇÓÊ×Ø ÈÍ ÍÚÈÛÓÎ Û ÌÊ×ÐÓÏÓÎÛÊà ÍÊ Ì×ÊÏÛÎ×ÎÈ ÓÎÒÇÎÙÈÓÍÎ ÛÉ Ø×ÉÙÊÓÚ×Ø ÓÎ IT Corp. v. County of Imperial ùÛÐ Ø û ÌÇÚÐÓÙ ÛÕ×ÎÙà ÉÔÍÇÐØ ÈÔÓÎÑ ÙÛÊ×ÖÇÐÐà ÛÚÍÇÈ ÈÔ× ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈ ÌÊÍÙ×ØÇÊ× ÓÈ ÙÔÍÍÉ×É ÓÎ ×ÎÖÍÊÙÓÎÕ ÈÔÓÉ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÛÖÈ×Ê ÓÈ ÓÉ ÛØÍÌÈ×Ø û ÐÍÙÛÐ ÕÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ÏÛà ÌÊÍÆÓØ× ÖÍÊ ÈÊ×ÚÐ× ØÛÏÛÕ×É ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× É×ÙÍÎØ ÍÊ ÉÇÚÉ×ËÇ×ÎÈ ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈ ÒÇØÕÏ×ÎÈ ÅÓÈÔÓÎ Û ÈÅÍÃ×ÛÊ Ì×ÊÓÍØ ÛÉ ÐÍÎÕ ÛÉ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÓÉ ×ÎÛÙÈ×Ø ÌÇÊÉÇÛÎÈ ÈÍ õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× É×ÙÈÓÍÎ é×× õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× É×ÙÈÓÍÎ èÊ×ÚÐ× ØÛÏÛÕ×É ÛÊ× ÎÍÈ ÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ× ÔÍÅ×Æ×Ê ÇÎØ×Ê ÈÔ× ÛÐÈ×ÊÎÛÈÓÆ× ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈ ÌÊÍÙ×ØÇÊ×É ÓÎ õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× É×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈ ÐÓ×ÎÉ ÛÎØ ô×ÛÐÈÔ éÛÖ×Èà ùÍØ× É×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈ ÍÖ ÉÇÚÉÈÛÎØÛÊØ ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉ õÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈ ùÍØ× É×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÓÎÕ ÈÊ×ÚÐ× ØÛÏÛÕ×É ×ÉÈÛÚÐÓÉÔ×É Û ÌÊÍÙ×ØÇÊ× ÖÍÊ ÎÇÓÉÛÎÙ× ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈ ÅÔ×Ê× ÈÔ× ÙÍÉÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈÙÛÎ Ú× ÙÍÐÐ×ÙÈ×Ø ÆÓÛ ÈÔ× ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈà ÈÛÄ ÊÍÐÐ ÛÉ Û ÉÌ×ÙÓÛÐ ÛÉÉ×ÉÉÏ×ÎÈ ÛÕÛÓÎÉÈ ÈÔ× ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈà ÍÎ ÅÔÓÙÔ ÈÔ× ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÙÙÇÊÉ [(g)Except as otherwise provided, enforcement of this[article/chapter]is at the sole discretion of the[City/County].Nothing in this[article/chapter]shall create a right of action in any Person against the[City/County]or its agents to compel public enforcement of this[article/chapter]against private parties.] : èÔÓÉ ÓÉ ÛÎ ÍÌÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ÅÔÓÙÔ ÏÛÑ×É ÙÐ×ÛÊ ÈÔÛÈ Û COMMENT ùÓÈà ÍÊ ùÍÇÎÈà ÙÛÎÎÍÈ Ú× ÐÓÛÚÐ× ÈÍ ÛÎà ì×ÊÉÍÎ ÖÍÊ ÖÛÓÐÇÊ× ÈÍ ×ÎÖÍÊÙ× ÈÔ× éÏÍÑÓÎÕ Ê×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÍÎÉ ÓÎ ÈÔÓÉ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× (h) Any Person acting for the interests of itself, its members, or the general public may bring a civil action to enjoin a violation of this [article/chapter] by a business or to enjoin repeat violations of this [article/chapter] by an individual. : èÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ ×ÎÛÚÐ×É ÌÊÓÆÛÈ× ÙÓÈÓÂ×ÎÉ ÈÍ ÕÍ ÈÍ ÙÍÇÊÈ ÈÍ COMMENT É××Ñ compliance ÅÓÈÔ ÈÔ× ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× Úà ÛÎ ÓÎØÓÆÓØÇÛÐ ÍÊ ÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉ ÈÔÊÍÇÕÔ ÛÎ ÓÎÒÇÎÙÈÓÍÎ Û ÙÍÇÊÈ ÍÊØ×Ê ÈÍ ØÍ ÍÊ ÎÍÈ ØÍ ÉÍÏ×ÈÔÓÎÕ ïÍÎ×à ØÛÏÛÕ×É ÛÊ× ÎÍÈ ÛÎ ÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ× Ê×Ï×Øà ú×ÙÛÇÉ× ÛÎ ÓÎÒÇÎÙÈÓÍÎ ÓÉ ÈÔ× ÍÎÐà Ê×Ï×Øà ÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ× ÉÏÛÐÐ ÙÐÛÓÏÉ ÙÍÇÊÈ ÓÉ ÎÍÈ ÛÎ ÛÌÌÊÍÌÊÓÛÈ× Æ×ÎÇ× ÖÍÊ ÖÓÐÓÎÕ Û ÐÛÅÉÇÓÈ ÇÎØ×Ê ÈÔÓÉ ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎ îÍÈ× ÈÔÛÈ ÅÔÓÐ× Û ÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉ ÏÛà Ú× ÉÇ×Ø ÖÍÊ ÍÎ× ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔÓÉ ÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ÛÎ ÓÎØÓÆÓØÇÛÐ ÙÛÎ Ú× ÉÇ×Ø ÍÎÐà ÖÍÊ Ê×Ì×ÛÈ ÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎÉ èÔÓÉ ÐÓÏÓÈÛÈÓÍÎ ÓÉ ÓÎÈ×ÎØ×Ø ÈÍ ÛØØÊ×ÉÉ ÙÍÎÙ×ÊÎÉ ÛÚÍÇÈ ÈÔ× ÌÍÈ×ÎÈÓÛÐ ÖÍÊ ÛÚÇÉÓÆ× ÐÛÅÉÇÓÈÉ SECTION III. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION & SEVERABILITY. It is the intent of the [City Council/Board of Supervisors] of the [City/County] of [____] to supplement applicable state and federal law and not to duplicate or contradict such law and this ordinance shall be construed consistently with that intention. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 12 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The [City Council/Board of Supervisors] of the [City/County] of [____] hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable. : èÔÓÉ ÓÉ ÉÈÛÎØÛÊØ ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ× COMMENT Model California Ordinance Regulating Smoking and Tobacco Product Use in Recreational Areas—page 13 Technical Assistance Legal Center—revised June 2010 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September1, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Community DevelopmentDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Rina Shah, Planning TechnicianJohn F. Livingstone, AICP Extensionof theConditional Use Permit(CUP)reimbursement incentive SUBJECT: programup to June 30, 2011 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct staff on one of the following: 1)End the CUP reimbursement incentive programand allow the twoapproved businesses to be reimbursed if open by June 30, 2011. 2)Extend theCUP reimbursement incentive program to accommodate a fifth business, if open by June 30, 2011. 3)Extend the CUP reimbursement incentive program to allow conditional use permit fees to be refundedfor an additional sixth business if open by June 30, 2011(This is possible due to the cost savings of the newly created Administrative CUPprocess). REPORT SUMMARY: On April 1, 2009, the City Council recommended that incentives be made available for the next 18 months to the first five businesses that receive CUP approvalfrom thespecific uselist in the table below: Name of Business with a No.Specific UseProject StatusReimbursed CUP 1.Family Style ___ Restaurant BakeryUnder 2.BelltowerBistro_ Construction Grocery Store___ 3. Big Basin VineyardsOpen Yes 4.Wine Tasting Under St. Stan’s Brewery_ Construction Ice Cream or Yogurt OpenYes 5.Yolatea store Art and Crafts 6.___ Instruction Undesignated 7.___ The CUP reimbursement incentive program will expire on October 1, 2010. Page 1of 2 DISCUSSION: On March 3, 2009, the City Council reviewed the fees associated withconditional use permits and expressed aninterest in reducing the cost, time, and uncertainty of obtaining a CUP.On March 18, 2009, the City Council discussed the incentives for new businesses to encourage business growth and economic development in the City of Saratoga. On July 1, 2009, the City Council approved an expedited Conditional Use Permit zoning ordinance amendment for certain businesses to be processed administratively. The cost of the Administrative CUP process was lowered from $4,400 to $3,400. Since then, twobusinesses havebeen reimbursed for CUP processing costs and twoother approved businesses are under various stages of construction. In the fiscal year 2009-2010,twoapproved CUP projects,Yolatea and Big Basin Vineyards, have opened for business and received CUP cost reimbursements.Currently, there are twomore businesseswith approved CUPswhich will beeligibleto receivereimbursementsafter theyopen. Thiswill leave funds available forafifthbusiness, if the program is extended. FISCAL IMPACTS: TheCUPreimbursement incentive programhas refunded twobusinesses.Twoapproved CUP projectsarecurrently underconstruction.Thefunds in the CUP reimbursement incentive program have been carriedover from the last fiscal year to accommodate reimbursements for CUP approvedprojects.If the program is extended, a fifth business could be accommodated.Due to the reducedcosts associated with the newly created Administrative CUP, a sixthbusiness could be supported, if approved by the City Council. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: TheCouncil could extend the program and increase the limit to more than sixbusinesses. FOLLOW UP ACTION: As directed. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: This item was posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s website in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting and residents may subscribe to the agenda on-line by opting in at www.saratoga.ca.us. Notice of this meeting was properly posted at City Hall. ATTACHMENTS: CC Staff report from April 1, 2010 Page 2of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 1, 2009 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Community DevelopmentDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: John F. Livingstone, AICPJohn F. Livingstone, AICP SUBJECT:Reviewincentivesrelated to Conditional Use Permits to encourage new businesses in the City RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct Staff Accordingly. REPORT SUMMARY: On March 3, 2009 the City Council reviewed the fees associated with Conditional Use Permits and expressed interest in reducing the cost, time, and uncertainty of obtaining a Conditional Use Permit(CUP).This item was place on the March 18, 2009 City Council agenda.At this meeting the City Council discussed various incentives that included allowing certain businessesto have the fees associated with a Conditional Use Permit reimbursed by the City. The City Council also created anad-hoc committee comprised of Council members Jill Hunter and Susie Nagpal to review specific types of uses that the incentives could be applied to. The Council recommended that $25,000 be made available for five new businesses. The Committee recommended that the incentives be made available for the next 18 months to the first fivebusinesses that receive CUP approval from the list below. The intention was to allow any combination of the below listed businesses and to telegraph the message that Saratoga is interested in these types of businesses in our commercial districts throughout the city. The Committee also created an “undesignated”categoryto allow for the possibility of a business, consistent with the Council’s efforts to vitalize the commercial areas,to comeinto the City of Saratogaeven if it doesnot fit into one of the specific categories listed below.This business would need to come to the City Council prior to submitting for a Conditional Use Permit for the incentive recommendation. The following are thespecific uses recommended by the Committee: Family Style Restaurantthat serves breakfast, lunch and dinner Bakery Grocery store Wine Tasting Page 1of 2 Ice Cream or Yogurt store Artand Crafts Instructional Activities including but not limited to art lessons or martial arts instruction Undesignated FISCAL IMPACTS: The City Councilhas approximately $43,300 remaining in their discretionary fund. Funding for an incentive program would reduce the funds in this accountby $25,000 which would reduce the fund to $18,300. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The Council could recommend maintaining the existing Conditional Use processwith no incentives. FOLLOW UP ACTION: Direct the City Manger to reimburse any business that meets the recommended criteria and obtains an approved Conditional Use Permit. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Notice of this meeting was properly posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Matrix of Permitted and Conditional Uses 2.Code excerpts for Permitted and Conditional Uses Page 2of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: September 1, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Community DevelopmentDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Michael FossatiJohn F. Livingstone, AICP SUBJECT:Proposed City Participation in a West Valley Collegestudy of the Carlson House RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct staff accordingly. REPORT SUMMARY: TheCarlson House, located on the West Valley College (WVC) campus, is a historic asset for both the college and the Cityof Saratoga. West Valley College held an initial workshop onApril 28,2010 with college representatives, City staff, and other interested partiesto determine the next steps regarding the future of the Carlson House. The result of this meeting was to further study thepotential opportunities and constraints of the property.At the August 10, 2010 Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC)meeting,the HPCrecommended thatthe City of Saratoga participate in an exploratorystudy concerning thefutureof theCarlson House. The exploratory study will examine the concept of a joint-use facility with the West Valley- Mission Community College District, City of Saratoga, Rotary Club of Saratoga, and other community partners. The study will also access the viability of such a vision, develop a preliminary business planfor funding, and identify operational space needs of the project. FISCAL IMPACTS: WVC has estimated that the study would cost approximately $47,000. If the City decides to participate in the studyof the Carlson House, itmay be asked to assistwith some of the costs associated with the study, along with other organizations. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Depending on council’s direction, the City’s participation in the studyof the Carlson House could range from a direct and active position to a more indirect role. FOLLOW UP ACTION: As directed. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: This item was posted as a City Council agenda item and was included in the packet made available on the City’s website in advance of the meeting.A copy of the agenda packet is also made available at the Saratoga Branch Library each Monday in advance of the Council meeting and residents may subscribe to the agenda on-line by opting in at www.saratoga.ca.us. Notice of this meeting was properly posted at City Hall and published in the Saratoga News. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Agenda for Carlson House Opportunity Study Workshop –4/28/2010 2.West Valley College Chancellor’s Recommendation –8/3/2010 ABA NDERSONRULÉRCHITECTS ............................... CH ARLSONOUSE Opportunity Study Workshop April 28, 2010 MD:L:West Valley College, EETINGATEOCATION MT: 2:30 pm – 4:30 pm Fox Building, Room 211 EETINGIME Cindy Schelcher, Dean of Advancement, West Valley-Mission Community College District A: TTENDEES Dave Anderson, City Manager, City of Saratoga Ed Maduli, Vice Chancellor, Administrative Services, West Valley-Mission Community College District John Hendrickson, Chancellor, West Valley-Mission Community College District Lori Gaskin, President, West Valley College Paul Conrado, Community Member, Rotary President, Historic Preservation Commission Member Ernie Kraule, Saratoga Historical Foundation Representative Pamela Anderson-Brulé, Community Member; Architect Monique Wood, Community Member, Architect C:The Carlson House, located on the West Valley College campus, is a historic asset for both the ONTEXT college and the community of Saratoga. However, the condition of the property is in a state of decay, and West Valley is determining possible next steps for this facility. This workshop is an opportunity to meet with interested community and college members to brainstorm ideas for the home’s future. P:The purpose of the meeting is to: URPOSE Share Information on the History and Significance of the Carlson House Discuss Process for Engaging in Formulation of Community Based Projects Engage in a Collaborative Discussion on the Potential Opportunities and Constraints of Future Scenarios for the House Identify the Potential Benefits Provided to the Campus and Community by this Facility IR:The intended results of the meeting are to: NTENDEDESULTS Gain a Shared Understanding of the History of the Carlson House Overview the Steps to Project Development Brainstorm Potential Development Scenarios for the Carlson House Identify Opportunities and Constraints of the Scenarios Discuss Potential Next Steps towards Project Visioning Agenda on Next Page Strategies, Architecture & Interiors ÈÔ öÐÍÍÊ éÛÎ òÍÉ× ùÛÐÓÖÍÊÎÓÛ ûÎØ×ÊÉÍÎ úÊÇÐS ûÊÙÔÓÈ×ÙÈÉ óÎÙ éÍÇÈÔ öÓÊÉÈ éÈÊ××È è×Ð öÛÄ Anderson Brulé Architects Carlson House Opportunity Study Workshop | Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 6 April 28, 2010 I A GENDATEMS I.Introductions / Agenda Review II.Project Overview A.Brief Property History 1.Source: Carlson Home Restoration Status Report (Date Unknown) 2.The Cowan Home, ~1930 a)House Designed by Higgins and Root Architects b)Described as ‘Pseudo-Spanish’ Architecture c)Multiple Bedrooms, Three Bathrooms, Attached Terrace, Detached Garage d)12 Acre Plot of Prune and Apricot Trees e)Cowan Family Lived in the House for 12-13 Years 3.The Carlson House, ~1942-43 a)Mrs. Cowan Sold the House to the Carlson Family b)Mr. Carlson was Noted as the Last Active Blacksmith in Santa Clara County 4.West Valley Property, Late 1960s a)WVC Police Department Headquarters b)WVC Campus Bookstore c)Seismic Issues Caused the Home to be Abandoned 5.Next Stages of Development a)Carlson Family Member Offered to Purchase the House and Move it from the Site to Preserve its Architecture (No Longer an Option) b)Cowan Family Very Interested in Helping and Supporting the Restoration (1)Open to Any Use that would Keep the Home from Further Decline (2)Plans No Longer Exist to the Family’s Knowledge B.Past Project Efforts 1.To the group’s understanding, there have not been assessments performed on the house beyond the historic report referenced above. 2.Assessments of the following should be considered: a)What is the current historic registration status of the property? (1)This will help to determine what jurisdiction would prevail as the regulatory agency and which codes must be met through the renovation design. b)Current state of the existing condition – what structural repairs would be needed? What aesthetic condition is the existing building in and what level of repairs and renovations would be needed? 3.What new spaces could be added to the existing structure for functional reasons a)What land would the college be willing to add to allow for additions? (1)The college does not have land outside of the current property perimeter to offer to this project planning. b)What would be the affects of the additions on the historic value of the property? III.Project Formulation Overview A.Steps to Project Development for Community Based Project s 1.Building Blocks to Project Formulation 2.Business Plan Scenarios a)What – Services and Vision b)How – Operations/Funding/Financing and Cost Recovery Plan c)Where - Program d)Who – Ownership Structure/Partnership e)Opportunities and Constraints of Scenarios f)Outreach: Test Scenarios and Identify Potential Available Grants 3.Vision Anderson Brulé Architects Carlson House Opportunity Study Workshop | Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 6 April 28, 2010 a)Project Vision b)Business Plan Refinement c)Outreach: Campaign Readiness Assessment 4.Feasibility Study a)Conceptual Plan/Program b)Conceptual Cost Model c)(E) Conditions Analysis (1)Determine options for Historic Status (2)Seismic conditions (3)Mechanical/Plumbing/Electrical and Life Safety (4)Accessibility and Exiting d)Outreach: Status Update to Interested Parties 5.Develop Collateral a)Plans b)Renderings c)Models d)Outreach: ‘Quiet Launch’ – Donor Profile Development and Prospect Identification 6.Capital Endowment/Fundraising Campaign B.Introduction to Scenario Development Exercise IV.Scenario Development for Carlson House Future A.Stakeholders and Interests 1.Community Counseling Services – This is a potential fundraising enterprise that could aid in the development of funds. 2.College Specific Interests a)College’s interest is bifurcated: (1)Very few colleges in CA have a historic building on campus – this is a unique and positive aspect of this campus (2)Want to break out of the perception that WV is an island in the community – this project could be a way to initiate this shift in perception (3)The college could make use of this in the effort to ‘friend-raise’ and this could eventually turn into funding (4)Chancellor’s office and the boardroom could move to the Carlson House (5)Can’t get into a long-term situation where this facility drains the resources of the college – don’t want to set up a potential liability for the college b)Foundation Comments (1)Allied Arts Guild as a benchmark facility – they have toured this facility with numerous chancellors to see the work that was done there (2)The Guild has offered to share their funding resources (3)The Foundation serves both colleges – ancillary businesses are usually handled under a Foundation (similar to an Auxiliary club) (4)The college has a culinary arts institute program – this could be a potential use of the facility – could they use this as a kitchen for the program participants to use or could the students be the catering group for this facility? (5)This could also be an income strain for the arts program – have arts programs and lectures in the garden c)Chancellor’s office (1)You don’t have community if you don’t have history (2)Elimination of the blight of the facility and the landscaping (a)Current state hurts the image, access, environment, etc. of the college (3) Anderson Brulé Architects Carlson House Opportunity Study Workshop | Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 6 April 28, 2010 (4)Don’t see any student activities occurring within this facility (5)Their interest is that they own the property and the facility and would like to see it preserved and have the blight removed (6)Potentially moving non-instructional spaces into this facility to free up space on the campus (7)Legal issues – would they want to deed the property and get it outside of the campus’ responsibility? d)Engineering and Facilities (1)Would have to be self-supporting for the future 3.Community Specific Interests a)Rotary (1)Desire to have a place to have their Friday lunches other than the community center – need a room for seating for 100 people at tables and a catering kitchen (2)Vision for the facility: (a)Want to see the building restored and potentially an addition (b)Want to see an enclosed garden where weddings and parties could be held (c)Would like to have a Rotary office in the facility (3)Rotary would be willing to put $200-400k into the facility in exchange to have their monthly meetings there and have 2-3 meetings per year (4)Suggested talking to Bob Grimm with reference to the Los Altos historic facility and the process they went through there b)Historic Foundation (1)Obviously interested in historical preservation (2)Would like to have a place to display some of the Saratoga artifacts and photos (3)Docents support spaces and programs would be nice to have as a part of the program (4)Also, outreach program through students at local elementary schools – tours of historic facilities that could also be incorporated (5)It was noted that the college also has a repository of historical documents that could be added to the display c)City and the Historic Commission (1)Interest in general to preserve historic buildings, no matter where they are located (2)City has been looking for a project to partner with the college – a good example of this is the MLK facility (ABA provided the consulting service for this collaboration) – a collaborative between the City and the College (3)Envisions this as a joint-use building – potentially a community center with senior facilities, activity center, ‘friendly gateway to the college’, lower the barriers of access to the college, get a taste of the college, but be in a familiar joint use setting where everyone is a stakeholder and has an interest in its success (4)Would like to find a City Council chambers that isn’t the Theater – it isn’t very comfortable for their City Council meetings (5)The City has this kind of relationship with the Library and the Community Center, among others, and can bring this knowledge and history to this project and relationship (6)He wanted to assure the campus of the City’s flexibility and interest in renovating and reusing this facility (7)It was noted that it must be hard to know how much room the City Council space would take up – Paul had estimated this from the existing City Council space within their community center, and feels that it could Anderson Brulé Architects Carlson House Opportunity Study Workshop | Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 6 April 28, 2010 be a consistently sized space to that of the potential Rotary meeting space. d)Others? (1)Architecture program at the campus should be involved in some aspect of this project (2)Alumni – could potentially great source of funding (3)Faculty and staff – need to make sure that it is clear that campus funding is not going to be used for this project (4)Other Important Community Organizations (a)Saratoga League of Women Voters (b)Saratoga Men’s Club (c)Saratoga Foothill Club – probably not very interested because they have their own historic facility (d)Saratoga/Monte Sereno Community Foundation (e)Others - ? (5)Major donors and philanthropists within the community, for possible naming and investment opportunities that are within their own community (6)California Historic Site – may be others interested outside of the community? The project development should look at a regional level of interest (7)If the project developed continuous work and job opportunities, there may be federal stimulus funding available; it may also be important to consider LEED certification standards B.Scenario Development: Scenario A 1.Joint use with the city and the foundation 2.Brings together City Council, Board, Trustees, Rotary, others 3.Public Meeting space 4.Catering kitchen 5.Gardens – this is felt to be really important – could potentially have the local Master Gardeners program be a part of the garden maintenance? 6.Select Mission/WV College District Offices could be located here 7.Art exhibits – would intend this to be something that ‘doesn’t get in the way’ of the functions that need to happen 8.Opportunities a)Fundraising and meet and greet center b)Potentially have the Foundation provide management and operations – would potentially have to deed the property to someone other than the college? c)Historic Foundation could potentially run this facility as they do other facilities within the community d)City has the ‘talent and the systems’ set up, but not funding capacity to run this facility e)Potential increase to property values f)LEED on an existing historic building as an interesting proposal 9.Constraints a)Potentially with all of the joint uses the schedule would fill up pretty quickly and they may not have much timing for other functions and community use b)Funding availability c)Ongoing management and operations d)Fitting all of the program into the building and scheduling them (1)City Council – Wednesday nights (2)College – Monday and Tuesday nights (3)Rotary – Friday lunch (4)Community tends to want the weekends for functions e)Shared use parking – some of these events would potentially be during school hours Anderson Brulé Architects Carlson House Opportunity Study Workshop | Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 6 April 28, 2010 f)Identify seed money to begin the pre-planning activities 10.What is the attraction of this facility to get people excited? a)It is a community gathering place just like Montalvo (the state owns it and it is run by the Arts Foundation) b)Historical significance c)Naming opportunity d)A beautiful Community Center that people would want to hold their weddings there e)Addition that includes the displays and carries the historic properties through the site f)Saratoga/Monte Sereno Community Foundation – could help out with this – there is a lot of interest g)Labor Council could be an asset C.Scenario Development: 1.Other scenarios were discussed, but none were felt to be either viable or preferred, so the conversation focused mainly on the scenario above. 2.There was great agreement among the group for the identified scenario V.Conclusion and Feedback A.Action Items 1.ABA to forward the ‘Steps to Project Development’ slide to attendees 2.ABA to lay out the process of how this could move forward to get through the Visioning portion of the Project Development B.Next Steps 1.There is a need to get seed money to get to the conceptual design 2.Business Plan a)Need a Steering Committee to form – someone would have to have seed money to get that started and they would have to be dedicated to getting this moving – responsibilities would need to be defined for this group. b)Need an Oversight Committee as well – this should be separate from the Steering Committee – responsibilities would have to be defined for this group but would be the communications protocol and approval body directly linked to the leadership of each partner group 3.Define Size of the project through a programming process 4.Design a Successful Fundraising Process 5.What is the cost to get to the first step? a)Need to define scope and schedule of initial effort b)Initial thought is that this could be ~$50k to get to the first step of Initial Outreach and Visioning (based on other projects of similar size and complexity) 6.Need to identify a partner organizations’ Project Manager – this could potentially be from the Foundation C.Feedback