The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-21-2010 City Council packet AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL APRIL 21, 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 properlyposted on April 15, 2010) 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 Directionto Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. 1.Joint Meeting with School Districts: Saratoga Union Elementary School District; Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District; Cupertino School District; Campbell School District;Moreland School District; Fremont High School District; Sacred Heart; St. Andrews;and Campbell Union High School District. Recommended Action: Informational only. ADJOURNMENT 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 Community Development Department Director at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us.Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerkat the time they are distributed to the City Council. 1 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 tomake 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 forthe City of Saratoga was posted on April 15, 2010, 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 this15day of April2010at Saratoga, California. Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 2 èÛÚÐ×ÍÖùÍÎÈ×ÎÈÉ ûÕ×ÎØÛ ùÍÏÏ×ÎØÛÈÓÍÎôÍÎÍÊÓÎÕÈÔ×©éÑÓÐÐ×ÈðÓÑÑ×ÊÉ¨ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ùÍÏÏ×ÎØÛÈÓÍÎ ùìêéûÅÛÊØÍÖ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÙ×ÖÍÊê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎå×ÚÉÓÈ× ùìêéûÅÛÊØÍÖ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÙ×ÖÍÊê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎå×ÚÉÓÈ× ìÊÍÙÐÛÏÛÈÓÍÎê×ÙÍÕÎÓÂÓÎÕûÌÊÓÐ ÛÉûÊÚÍÊøÛÃÓÎÈÔ× ùÓÈÃÍÖéÛÊÛÈÍÕÛ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈûûÊÚÍÊøÛÃìÊÍÙÐÛÏÛÈÓÍÎ ùÓÈÃùÍÇÎÙÓÐï××ÈÓÎÕïÓÎÇÈ×É¦ûÌÊÓÐ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ïÓÎÇÈ×É ê×ÆÓ×ÅÍÖûÙÙÍÇÎÈÉìÛÃÛÚÐ×ùÔ×ÙÑê×ÕÓÉÈ×ÊÉ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûÏ×ÎØ×ØûÕ×ÎØÛÖÍÊûÌÊÓÐ ùÓÈÃùÍÇÎÙÓÐï××ÈÓÎÕ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈûÏ×ÎØ×ØûÕ×ÎØÛ éçúò÷ùèûØÍÌÈÓÍÎÍÖÈÔ×ôÍÇÉÓÎÕ÷Ð×Ï×ÎÈóÏÌÐ×Ï×ÎÈÛÈÓÍÎ íÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ôÍÇÉÓÎÕ÷Ð×Ï×ÎÈóÏÌÐ×Ï×ÎÈÛÈÓÍÎíÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× ðÛÎØÉÙÛÌÓÎÕÛÎØðÓÕÔÈÓÎÕûÉÉ×ÉÉÏ×ÎÈøÓÉÈÊÓÙÈððû ìÊ×ÐÓÏÓÎÛÊÃûÌÌÊÍÆÛÐÍÖ÷ÎÕÓÎ××ÊÉê×ÌÍÊÈÛÎØûØÍÌÈÓÍÎÍÖ ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÍÖóÎÈ×ÎÈÓÍÎÖÍÊöã éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎìÊ×ÐÓÏÓÎÛÊÃûÌÌÊÍÆÛÐ ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎóÎÈ×ÎÈÓÍÎ ÷ÎÕÓÎ××ÊÉê×ÌÍÊÈ ûÅÛÊØÍÖùÍÎÈÊÛÙÈÈÍùóïÖÍÊê×ÌÐÛÙ×Ï×ÎÈÍÖôæûùçÎÓÈÉ ûÅÛÊØÍÖùÍÎÈÊÛÙÈÈÍùóïÖÍÊê×ÌÐÛÙ×Ï×ÎÈÍÖôæûù çÎÓÈÉ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈûùóïÙÍÎÈÊÛÙÈ ìÛÆ×Ï×ÎÈïÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈìÊÍÕÊÛÏÛÎØúìÊÍÒ×ÙÈ¦îÍÈÓÙ× ÍÖùÍÏÌÐ×ÈÓÍÎ éÈÛÖÖÊ×ÌÍÊÈ îÍÈÓÙ×ÍÖùÍÏÌÐ×ÈÓÍÎ ê×ÓÎÉÈÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈÍÖìÛÊÈÓÙÓÌÛÈÓÍÎÓÎùÛÐóøìÊÍÕÊÛÏ éÈÛÖÖÊ×ÌÍÊÈ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈ ûØÍÌÈÓÍÎÍÖê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÓÎéÇÌÌÍÊÈÍÖÈÔ×ðÍÙÛÐèÛÄÌÛÃ×ÊìÇÚÐÓÙ éÛÖ×ÈÃÛÎØèÊÛÎÉÌÍÊÈÛÈÓÍÎìÊÍÈ×ÙÈÓÍÎûÙÈÍÖ éÈÛÖÖÊ×ÌÍÊÈÊ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ íÛÑÈÊ××ÍÎöÊÇÓÈÆÛÐ×ûÆ×ÎÇ×ÛÈ×ÎÈÊÛÎÙ×ÈÍùÓÈÃôÛÐÐÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÐÍÈ éÈÛÖÖÊ×ÌÍÊÈÍÛÑÈÊ×× ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈúÊÓÛÎïÙõÍÆ×ÊÎÊ×ÌÍÊÈ ûÈÈÛÙÔÏ×ÎÈ éÛÊÛÈÍÕÛæÓÐÐÛÕ×ì×Ø×ÉÈÊÓÛÎ÷ÎÔÛÎÙ×Ï×ÎÈìÊÍÒ×ÙÈ¦ûÅÛÊØÍÖ ùÍÎÉÈÊÇÙÈÓÍÎùÍÎÈÊÛÙÈ ùÍÇÎÙÓÐê×ÌÍÊÈéÛÊÛÈÍÕÛæÓÐÐÛÕ×ì×ØÉÈÊÓÛÎ ÷ÎÔÛÎÙ×Ï×ÎÈìÊÍÒ×ÙÈûÅÛÊØÍÖùÍÎÈÊÛÙÈ úÓØéÇÏÏÛÊÃ ìÊÍÌÍÉ×ØöÊÛÎÙÔÓÉ×ö××óÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÖÍÊéÍÐÓØåÛÉÈ×ïÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈ ûÕÊ××Ï×ÎÈ ÉÈÛÖÖÊ×ÌÍÊÈ AGENDA REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, April 21, 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 this meeting was properly posted on April 15, 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 the “Skillet Likkers” Recommended action: Read and present commendation. 2.CPRS Award of Excellence for Recreation Website Recommended action: Accept award from Chris Beth, past-President of California Parks and Recreation Society 3.Proclamation Recognizing April 22, 2010 as Arbor Day in the City of Saratoga Recommended action: Acknowledge proclamation declaring April 22, 2010 as Arbor Day in the City of Saratoga. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None 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. 4.City Council Meeting Minutes – April 7, 2010 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 5.Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers Recommended action: That the City Council review and accept the Check Registers for the following Accounts Payable payment cycles: April 01, 2010 April 08, 2010 6.Amended Agenda for April 7, 2010 City Council Meeting Recommended action: Accept report and approve attached amended agenda for April 7, 2010 City Council meeting for historical purposes. 7.Adoption of the Housing Element Implementation Ordinance Recommended action: Staff recommends the City Council waive the Second Reading and adopt the attached Housing Element Implementation Ordinance. 8.Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1; Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report and Adoption of Resolution of Intention for FY 10-11 Recommended action: 1. Move to adopt the Resolution granting preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for FY 2010/11. 2. Move to adopt the Resolution of Intention. 9.Award of Contract to CIM for Replacement of 9 HVAC Units Recommended action: 1. Move to declare CIM Air, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project. 2. Move to award a construction contract to CIM Air, Inc. in the amount of $122,500. 3. Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $2,500. 10.2009 Pavement Management Program and 1B Project– Notice of Completion. Recommended action: Move to accept the 2009 Pavement Management Program and 1B Project as complete and authorize staff to record the Notice of Completion for the construction contract. PUBLIC HEARINGS None OLD BUSINESS 11.Reinstatement of Participation in Cal-ID Program Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff to reinstate Saratoga’s participation in the Cal-ID Program. 12.Adoption of Resolution in Support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Protection Act of 2010 Recommended action: Accept report and adopt attached Resolution. NEW BUSINESS 13.Oak tree on Fruitvale Avenue at entrance to City Hall parking lot Recommended action: As directed by Council 14.Saratoga Village Pedestrian Enhancement Project – Award of Construction Contract. Recommended action: 1. Approve Budget Resolution. 2. Move to declare Robert A. Bothman, Inc of San Jose to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project. 3. Move to award a construction contract to Robert A. Bothman, Inc in the amount of $854,710 and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. 4. Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $65,000. 15.Proposed Franchise Fee Increase for Solid Waste Management Agreement Recommended action: Accept report and provide input to Council member Howard Miller about imposition of a franchise fee increase under the contract with West Valley Collection & Recycling, LLC (WVCR). ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS MayorKathleen King ABAG County HCD Policy Committee Hakone Foundation Executive Committee West ValleyFlood Control Zone & Watershed Advisory Committee SCC CitiesAssociation Selection Committee Santa Clara County Emergency Council West Valley Mayorsand Managers Association Vice MayorJill Hunter Hakone Foundation Board Historical Foundation Library Joint Powers Association SASCC Sister CityLiaison VillageAdHoc Councilmember Howard Miller City School Ad-Hoc Chamberof Commerce Council FinanceCommittee Highway 9 Adhoc KSAR Santa Clara County Cities Association Board West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority West Valley Transportation Authority PAC Councilmember Susie Nagpal Highway 9 Adhoc VillageAdHoc Councilmember Chuck Page City School Ad-Hoc Santa ClaraValley Water District Commission Saratoga MinisterialAssociation West Valley SanitationDistrict Council Finance Committee CITY COUNCIL ITEMS CITY MANAGER’S REPORT ADJOURNMENT In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Council by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community Development Department Director at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the postingof 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, CityClerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council for the City of Saratoga was posted onApril15, 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 15 day of April 2010 at Saratoga, California. Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk NOTE: To view current or previous City Council meetings anytime, go to the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR 2010 5/5 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Youth Commission 5/19 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District and Saratoga Union Elementary District 6/2 Regular Meeting –Joint meeting with Montalvo Arts 6/16 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with HOAPresidents 7/7 Regular Meeting – 7/21 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with SASCC SUMMER RECESS –NO COUNCIL MEETING 8/4 (Tentative) SUMMER RECESS –NO COUNCIL MEETING 8/18 9/1 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with West Valley Board of Trustees Joint meeting with Assemblymember Jim Beall 9/15 Regular Meeting – 10/6 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Traffic Safety Commission 10/20 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Historical Foundation & Heritage Preservation Comm. 11/3 Regular Meeting –Joint meeting with Saratoga Ministerial Association 11/17 Regular Meeting - Joint Meeting with Hakone Foundation 11/30 Council Reorganization 12/1 Regular Meeting - Joint Meeting with Library Commission and Friends of the Saratoga Libraries 12/15 Regular Meeting - SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 ORIGINATING DEPT:CITY MANAGER City Manager’s Office: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: DEPT HEAD: Ann Sullivan, City ClerkDaveAnderson SUBJECT: Commendation Honoring the“Skillet Likkers” RECOMMENDED ACTION: Read and present commendation. REPORT SUMMARY: The attached commendation honors the “Skillet Likkers” for their dedication and service to the community. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOTFOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: None ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Copy of the commendation. COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING “THE SKILLET LIKKERS” WHEREAS , local teacher, principal, author, and musician Les Landin founded the “Skillet Likkers” cowboy band approximately 40 years ago; and WHEREAS , Les proudly asked friends and acquaintances who sang or played guitar, banjo, harmonica, or fiddle, to join him in community performances, both for the City of Saratoga as well as other local organizations and private events; and WHEREAS , there was never any expectation of monetary payment – only that the band would be allowed to eat, or “Lick the Skillet”, if food was served; and WHEREAS , over the years membership has changed, but the mainstay of the group was our founder and leader, Les Landin; and WHEREAS , Les drew the circle of musicians ever wider, including new faces that showed interest and the desire to join the group; and WHEREAS , today the “Skillet Likkers” include Tina Liddie, Ron and Linda Hagelin, Ed Scherf, Vince Garrod, Bob Cancellieri, Saundra Whalen, Harry Shaver, and, when they are available, Barbara Bauer, Elsie Riddle and Lee Anne Welch; and WHEREAS ,the “Skillet Likkers”are carrying on the tradition that was begun by Les Landin by providing musical entertainment for community events, local organizations, schools, retirement celebrations, and nursing home residents. “If you feed us, we will play for you!” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that the Saratoga City Council does hereby commend the members of the “Skillet Likkers” for their many years of hard work and dedication to the community by providing so many people with hours of great entertainment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Saratoga City Council extends to the “Skillet Likkers” its sincere appreciation for their outstanding and on-going contributions to their community. st WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 21 day of April 2010. _________________________ Kathleen M. King, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: Recreation & Facilities Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Kimberly Saxton-Heinrichs, Senior Recreation Supervisor DIRECTOR: Michael Taylor SUBJECT:CPRS Award of Excellence for Recreation Website RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept award. REPORT SUMMARY: The City of Saratoga Recreation Department recently received the 2009 Award of Excellence from the California Park & Recreation Society(CPRS) for its Website. The City’s new website is visually engaging, easily navigated, highly functional, interactive and significantly more intuitive than the old website. It serves as a marketing tool for the Recreation Department to continually promoteactivities for all ages, to promote the benefits of recreation, acquire feedback of our programs, answer questions, and allow online registration. Indeed, the Recreation Department’s website pages receive the second highest number of “hits” after the City’s Homepageevery month. The Recreation Director from the City of Redwood City accepted the honor on our behalf in the category of Agency Showcase – Website at the 2009 California and Pacific Southwest Recreation and Park Training Conference on March 12, 2010 and is here now to deliver the award. BACKGROUND: CPRS is a membership organization with approximately 4,000 members representing the 525 local parks & recreation agencies throughout the state. The mission of CPRS is to provide the leadership and resources to promote the role of parks and recreation in creating community through people parks and programs. The CPRS awards program is the highest statewide recognition our City can receive and our department’s award is a credit to the staff and volunteers that made this happen. Led by Crystal Morrow, AdministrativeAnalyst II, city staff, city council, and community volunteers began researching a new website in March, 2009. Civica Software was eventually chosen to create the site and provided the pages that City staff would organize, update, populate with photos, add content, address FAQs, create and provide feedback forms as well as additional pages to add content, add links, slideshows, subscriptions to newsfeeds, and much more. Each department was responsible for their content, organization, and photographs, spending weeks tailoring their part of the site to their customers/residents needs. The City website was launched in September, 2009. Community members and the city council worked closely with staff to create a website that met the needs and criteria set by the community. CPRS Executive Director Jane H. Adams states, “The City of Saratoga was selected to receive this prestigious award due to its commitment to setting new directions by addressing a community wide issue. The old website was not nearly as useful or informative as the new one recently launched. In addition to addressing this community wide issue, Saratoga identified clear and measurable outcomes and the City played a leading role in bringing together multiple community resources to address this challenge. CPRS and the award sponsors, Hunter, Little Tikes Commercial Play Systems, and RJM Design Group, Inc., are proud to recognize the City of Saratoga for its efforts in improving communication regarding the City, marketing its recreational activities, linking resources, and responding to residents needs among all who browse their website.” The California Park & Recreation Society Awards Committee presented awards in six categories: Recreation/Community Services Agency Showcase (for marketing materials and campaigns) Professional & Service Facility Design Park Planning Maintenance Management and Operations Saratoga Recreation creates community through people, parks & programs. We strengthen community image and sense of place, support economic development, strengthen safety and security, promote health and wellness, foster human development, increase cultural unity, protect environmental resources, facilitate community problem solving and provide recreational experiences. FISCAL IMPACTS: None. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Award will not be accepted. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Place award in public location at the Joan Pisani Community Center. 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: N/A SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR: Crystal MorrowBarbara Powell Administrative Analyst II Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Proclamation Recognizing April 22, 2010 as Arbor Day in the City of Saratoga RECOMMENDED ACTION: Acknowledge proclamation declaring April 22, 2010 as Arbor Day in the City of Saratoga. BACKGROUND: Arbor Day is celebrated throughout the nation to recognize the environmental, economic, and social benefits of trees. On Thursday, April 22, 2010 the City will be celebrating nationalArbor Day in Azule Park at 4:00 p.m. The event will include a ceremonial tree planting to reflect the City’s commitment to preserving Saratoga’s urban canopy, as well as refreshments and free bags of compost and other giveaways. The City of Saratogahas been recognized as a Tree City USA. This award is bestowed to cities that have demonstrated dedication to the preservation of the community’s urban forest. Last fiscal year, the City planted more than150 trees and pruned and treated over 400 trees. The proclamation will be accepted by the Saratoga Heritage Tree Society. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A Page 1of 2 FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Arbor Day Proclamation Page 2of 2 CITY OF SARATOGA PROCLAMATION DECLARING AND SUPPORTING APRIL 22, 2010ASARBOR DAY IN THE CITY OF SARATOGA WHEREAS, in1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees; and WHEREAS , this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska; and WHEREAS , Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world; and WHEREAS , trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce life-giving oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife; and WHEREAS , trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, and fuel for our fires; and WHEREAS ,trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community; and WHEREAS, trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal; NOWTHEREFORE, ,I,Kathleen M. King, Mayor of the City of Saratoga, do hereby proclaim April 22, 2010 as Arbor Day in the City of Saratoga, and urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that I urge all citizens to attend the Saratoga Arbor Day celebration on April 22, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. in Azule Park and plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations. _________________________ Kathleen M. King, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s Office Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Dave Anderson SUBJECT:City CouncilMeetingMinutes – April 7, 2010 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for April 7, 2010 City Council Regular 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: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Minutes fromApril 7, 2010 City Council Regular Meeting. MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCILMEETING APRIL 7, 2010 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session at 5:30 p.m. in the Administrative Conference Room. MAYOR’S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION Mayor King stated there was no reportable information The City Council held a Joint Meeting with representatives from the Mountain Winery in the Administrative Conference Room from 6:00 to 6:55 p.m. Mayor Kingcalled the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and asked citizen LaurelPerusa tolead the Pledge of Allegiance. Richard Taylor addressed the Council at this time noting that Councilmember Chuck Page was attending this evening’s Council meeting from Palm Desert, California, via teleconference. According to the Rules and Procedures of the Brown Act, Section 54953, the agenda for this meeting has been posted at the location where Councilmember Page is participating from. City Attorney Taylor asked Councilmember Page if he could hear the proceedings of the meeting thus far, if the agenda has been posted, if Councilmember Page is located in a reasonable place for the public to attend, and if there is anyone from the public that would like to speak. Councilmember Page responded affirmatively to all the questions and noted there was no one from the public there that would like to speak. ROLL CALL : PRESENTCouncilmembers Chuck Page –Telecommuting from Palm Desert, CA, Howard Miller, Vice Mayor Jill Hunter, Mayor Kathleen King.Councilmember Nagpal arrived at 7:15 p.m. ABSENT: None ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Richard Taylor, City Attorney Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Mary Furey, Administrative Services Director John Cherbone, Public Works Director John Livingstone, Community Development Director Chris Riordan, Senior Planner Cynthia McCormick, Assistant Planner REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA Ann Sullivan, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of April 7, 2010 was properly posted on April 1, 2010. At this time, Mayor King noted she would like to move toCOMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS and asked Council if they would be in agreement with this recommendation. Council concurred and representatives from the Mountain Winery addressed the Council. [Please refer to COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS below for this report.] ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following people requested to speak: Janice Gamper addressed the Council regarding the deer sign on Chester Avenue and stated she would like the deer sign moved towards Allendale Avenue. In addition, she inquired about the 20 MPH blinking sign that she understood would be placed on Chester Avenue. Kathleen Casey addressed the Council regarding an application to demolish a house on Quito Road. She also stated there should be a General Election ballot item regarding public input for what happens in Saratoga Village. DIRECTION TO STAFF Vice Mayor Hunter suggestedthat staff re-schedule the portable speed sign forChester Avenue soon. Council directed Public Works Director John Cherbone to communicate with speaker Janice Gamper regarding her concerns on Chester Avenue. COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Dave House, Owner and Managing Partner of the Mountain Winery and Joan LeMahieu, rd General Manager, noted the Mountain Winery will be starting their 53 Concert Season. th The concert schedule will be released on April 12 and will begin acceptingticket orders th on April 26for this concert season. Mr. House noted May will be the first anniversary of the completion of the facility remodel. Joan LeMahieu commented about the very successful car-pooling policy and noted more than 23% of their attendees participated in the car-pooling option. This option provided benefits to the participants, such as near-by parking with VIP entry into the facility, a special reception, wine tasting coupons, and eligibility for raffles that include signed CD’s from Mountain Winery performing artists. This year they will offer a $5.00 discount on their parking fee for car-pooling patrons as well. She added people can also visit their website at www.TheMountainWinery.com to find out more about event planning at their facility. DIRECTION TO STAFF None 2 At this point M]ayor King noted they would now move to ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. [Please refer to ORAL COMMUNICATIONS above for communications from the public on non-agendized items.] . ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Mayor Hunter noted the Saratoga Village Development Council is sponsoring the th Wine and Wisteria event on Sunday, April 11 from 5:00 to 7:30PM in the Village.She also stated the funds raised from last year’s Wine and Wisteria event paid for the wooden Village entrance sign that will soon be installed at Blaney Plaza. She noted the funds raised at this year’s event will be used to purchase additional bronze plaques for historical buildings in the Village and for upcoming events in the Village. Mayor King noted Health Trust would be holding an Aids Fund Raising event at the th Plumed Horse on April 29 and some of the funds raised at this event would go towards fighting Aids. She also noted she would be forwarding an email to fellow Councilmembers regarding a Chinese event in the Fremont/Milpitas area on Sunday, th April 11 and hoped some of her fellow councilmembers could attend this event. Councilmember Miller reminded everyone to check out the Saratoga Recreation Guide and sign up for fun and interesting classes. CEREMONIAL ITEMS COMMENDATIONHONORING THE SARATOGA HIGH SCHOOL 1. MECHANICAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING TEAM STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read and present commendation. Councilmember Howard Miller read and presented the commendation to 14 members of the Mechanical Science and Engineering Team from Saratoga High School. COMMENDATION HONORING THE SARATOGA VILLAGE GARDENERS 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read and present commendation. Vice Mayor Jill Hunter read and presented the commendation to 17 members of the Saratoga Village Gardeners. COMMENDATION HONORING OUTGOING HERITAGE PRESERVATION 3. COMMISSIONERRITA MCCARTY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read and present commendation. Vice Mayor Jill Hunter read and presented the commendation to Rita McCarty. COMMENDATION HONORING OUTGOING HERITAGEPRESERVATION 4. COMMISSIONER NORMAN KOEPERNIK 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read and present commendation. Vice Mayor Jill Hunter read and presented the commendation to Norman Koepernik. Councilmember Page was disconnected from his teleconference call at 7:43 p.m. and was again teleconferencing in at 7:46 p.m. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGMINUTES – MARCH 17, 2010 5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HUNTER/NAGPAL MOVED TO MINUTES – MARCH 17, 2010. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. REVIEW OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTERS 6. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review and accept the Check Registers for the following Accounts Payable payment cycles: March 11, 2010 March 18, 2010 March 26, 2010 Kathleen Casey requested to speak on this item. ACCEPT THE CHECK REGISTERS FOR THE PAGE/NAGPAL MOVED TO FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAYMENT CYCLES: MARCH 11, 2010, MARCH 18, 2010, AND MARCH 26, 2010. MOTIONPASSED 5-0-0. SILICON VALLEY REGIONAL INTEROPERABILITYPROJECT JOINT 7. POWERS AUTHORITY AGREEMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign the Joint Powers Agreement to become a member of the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority (SVRIA) and to sign the Amendment to the Second Amended Joint Funding Agreement (JFA) to allow the JFA and its assets to transition to the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority JPA. RESOLUTION NO. 10-016 4 ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HUNTER /NAGPALMOVED TO THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE SILICON VALLEY REGIONAL INTEROPERABILITY AUTHORITY (SVRIA) AND TO SIGN THE AMENDMENT TO THE SECOND AMENDED JOINT FUNDING AGREEMENT (JFA) TO ALLOW THE JFA AND ITS ASSETS TO TRANSITION TO THE SILICON VALLEY REGIONAL INTEROPERABILITY AUTHORITY JPA. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. JOE’S TRAIL AT SARATOGA DE ANZA PROJECT –AWARD OF 8. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Move to declare Guerra Construction Group of Santa Clara to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project. 2. Move to award a construction contract to Guerra Construction Group in the amount of $844,014.88 3. Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $250,000. Kathleen Casey requested to speak on this item. Councilmember Miller removed this item for clarification and thanked staff for all their hard work. 1) DECLARE GUERRA CONSTRUCTION MILLER/KING MOVED TO GROUP OF SANTA CLARA TO BE THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER ON THE PROJECT; 2) MOVE TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO GUERRA CONSTRUCTION GROUP INTHE AMOUNT OF $844,014.88; 3) TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO EXECUTE CHANGE ORDERS TO THE CONTRACT UP TO $250,000. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS UPDATE TO THE GENERAL PLAN 2007-2014 HOUSING ELEMENT, 9. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT, A HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE, AND AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THE OPEN SPACEAND CONSERVATION ELEMENTAND SAFETY ELEMENT TO INCLUDE FACTUAL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY STATE LAW & NEGATIVE DECLARATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council open the public hearing, accept public testimony, close the public hearing, and: • Approve the Resolution to adopt the Initial Study/Negative Declaration. • Approve the Resolution to adopt the 2007-2014 General Plan Housing Element which includes the following Attachments: - Land Use Element/Open Space and Conservation Element Conforming 5 Amendments - Amendments to the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines - Safety Element and Open Space Conservation Element AB 162 Amendments • Approve the attached Housing Element Implementation Ordinance; waive the First Reading, and direct staff to schedule this item for a Second Reading for adoption on the consent calendar of the April 21, 2010 City Council meeting. Senior Planner, Chris Riordan, presented the staff report. Council presented questions regarding two stories, three stories, building height limits, and historical buildings. At this time, Mayor King asked Council if they would concur with her suggestion to invite two high school students that were present in the Chambers for school assignments, to come up on the Dias prior to opening the Public Hearing. Council concurred. Mayor King opened the Public Hearing at 8:23 p.m. The following people requested to speak on this item: The following spoke in opposition to the proposed Housing Element: Bob Busse David Sorenson J. J. Salehieh Kathleen Casey Marilyn Marchetti Paula Cappello read a letter fromcitizenLaurel Perusa PeggyKimball John Kimball Dianne Tuley-Brown Jenni Young Taylor Paul Hernandez The following people spoke in support of the proposed Housing Element: EugeneZambetti Bob Shepherd Mayor King closed the Public Hearing at 8:57 p.m. and recessed to a 5 minute break. Mayor King reconvened the Regular meeting at 9:05 p.m. RESOLUTION NO. 10-017 APPROVE THE RESOUTION TO ADOPT NAGPAL/MILLER MOVED TO THE INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH HUNTER OPPOSING. APPROVETHE RESOLUTION TO ADOPT NAGPAL/HUNTER MOVED TO THE 2007-2014 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT WHICH INCLUDES 6 THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS: 1) LAND USE ELEMENT/OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT CONFORMING AMENDMENTS; 2) AMENDMENTS TO THE SARATOGA VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES WITH ADDED LANGUAGE STATING “THE PREFERRED STANDARD IS 2-STORY UP TO 35 FEET”; 3) SAFETY ELEMENT AND OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION ELEMENT AB 162 AMENDMENTS. MOTION FAILED 2-3-0 WITH MILLER, PAGE AND KING OPPOSING. RESOLUTION NO. 10-018 APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE MILLER/PAGEMOVED TO 2007-2014 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT WHICH INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS: 1) LAND USE ELEMENT/OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT CONFORMING AMENDMENTS; 2) AMENDMENTS TO THE SARATOGA VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES; 3) SAFETY ELEMENT AND OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION ELEMENT AB 162 AMENDMENTS. MOTION PASSED 4-1-0 WITH HUNTER OPPOSING. APPROVE THE PROPOSED HOUSING PAGE/MILLERMOVED TO ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE; WAIVE THE FIRST READING, AND DIRECT STAFF TO SCHEDULE THIS ITEM FOR A SECONDREADING FOR ADOPTION ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR AT THE APRIL 21, 2010 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. Mayor King called a break at 9:45 p.m. Councilmember Nagpal thanked everyone and asked to be excused from participating in and discussing the remaining agenda items and left the Diasat 9:45 p.m. Mayor King reconvened the Regular meeting at 9:52 p.m. At this time Vice Mayor Hunter noted she would like to clarify her last vote for the recordand requested that the minutes reflect this clarification. Vice Mayor Hunter statedshe did not intend to vote ‘yes’ on the Staff Recommendationfor Item 9:TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE; WAIVE THE FIRST READING, AND DIRECT STAFF TO SCHEDULE THIS ITEM FOR A SECOND READING FOR ADOPTION ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ATTHE APRIL 21, 2010 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE UPDATE FOR FY 2010/11 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Hold public hearing to review recommendations for proposed fee changes, provide direction, and approve resolution amending the City’s Fee Schedule effective for Fiscal Year 2010/11. Administrative Services Director Mary Furey presented the staff report. 7 Councilmember Page inquired about the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) fee for a generator and why the application fee for a resident to place a generator in theirback yardis the same as for a design review for a house remodel. Community Development Director John Livingstone noted this CUP application is processed through the Administrative Review processand the fee is $3,400. Councilmember Page stated he felt this fee was excessive and that the fee should be considered along the same guidelines as a fence exception or grading exception and proposed that the generatorfee be set at $1,800. Mayor King opened the Public Hearing. No one requested to speak on this item. Mayor King closed the Public Hearing. RESOLUTION NO. 10-019 APPROVETHERESOLUTION AMENDING MILLER/HUNTERMOVED TO THE CITY’S FEE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 WITH AN AMENDMENT TO REDUCE IN HALF THE GENERATOR FEE FROM $3,400 TO $1,700 FOR ONE YEAR AND BRING THIS ITEMBACK FOR RECONSIDERATION AT THE 2011/12 FEE SCHDULE PUBLIC HEARING. Councilmember Page asked for a friendly amendment to the motion to setthe generator fee at $1,800 rather than the $1,700 fee noted in the motion on the table. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH NAGPAL ABSENTDURING THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. OLD BUSINESS At this point Mayor King announced that a new item would be added to the meeting regarding FY 2010/11 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDING INCREASE. City Attorney Richard Taylor noted City staff learned on Monday, April 5, 2010, that Saratoga CDBG monies were increasedover the estimate given earlier in theyear and that the County needs to know before the next Council meeting how the City would like that money allocated. He added that since this item was not included on this evening’s agenda, Council would have to determine ifthis is an Urgency Item by a 4- 1 or 4/5 vote by the Council. APPROVE ADDING THE URGENCY ITEM – MILLER/HUNTER MOVED TO FY 2010/11 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDING INCREASE TO THE AGENDAFOR DISCUSSION. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH NAGPAL ABSENTDURING THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. 8 Assistant Planner Cynthia McCormick presented the staff report. Ms. McCormick noted that the increased amount for non-public service items such as ADA improvements is $9,166 and that Council could allocate all of the increased funding to Phase III of the ADA Accessible Signals program. She also noted that there was an increased amount of $2,050 for public services. 1) APPLY THE $9,166 NON-PUBLIC SERVICE PAGE/MILLER MOVED TO FUNDING TO ADA PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENTS, SPECIFICALLY FOR PHASE III OF THE ADA ACCESSIBLE SIGNALS PROGRAM; 2) DESIGNATE THE $2,050 FOR PUBLIC SERVICES TO SASCC– SARATOGA ADULT CARE CENTER; and 3) MOVE $1,000 FROM SASCC – SARATOGA ADULT CARE CENTER THAT WAS AWARDED AT THE MARCH 17, 2010, CDBG PUBLIC HEARING TO WEST VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES .MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH NAGPAL ABSENT DURING THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. NEW BUSINESS None ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS MayorKathleen King –reported: ABAG –noted there is a meeting on April 22 and she will attend this meeting since City Attorney Richard Taylor is unable to attend. County HCD Policy Committee – has concluded Committee business for this year and has implemented the allocations thatwere recommended by staff. th SCC Cities Association Selection Committee – meets Thursday, April 6 and asked Councilmember Miller to attend in her place since she is scheduled to attend another event. Councilmember Miller noted he has a Chamber of Commercemeeting at 6PM and would try to make it to thismeetingas well. West Valley Mayors and Managers Association – she attended the last meeting and stated there was a presentation on the Water Treatment Plant. She noted there is a potential candidate that has expressed an interest in serving on the Water Pollution Control Plant Master Plan Community Advisory Group (CAG). Vice MayorJill Hunter – reported: She attended the Santa Clara Valley Water District meetingfor Councilmember Page and noted the Districthas not raised fees for three years and may have to implement an 8% rate increase next Fiscal Year. They had to lay off 57 of their 756 employees, and have reduced their vehicle fleet – all due to budgetary constraints. Councilmember Howard Miller–reported: th Council Finance Committee – aBudget/CIP Study Session is scheduled on April 19. The City received 12 proposals for the Request for Bids (RFP) for a new city phone system. Highway 9 Adhoc – met on March 31 to discuss Phase II of the Highway 9 Safety Improvement program, which involves 14 separate projects on Highway 9 starting at Big Basin and continuing on to Highway 17 in Los Gatos. Saratoga was awarded the majority of the grant funding, which was $1.63 million. At that meeting there was 9 substantial public feedback regarding speeding on Highway 9, which resulted in immediate follow-up by the city managers from each jurisdiction. Councilmember Susie Nagpal– Excused Absence for this portion of the meeting. Councilmember Chuck Page –reported: West Valley SanitationDistrict – held the first of two public meetings to discuss an increase in rates, which would be about $1 to $2 per month, per property, and would be added to the annual property tax bill. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS None CITY MANAGER’S REPORT None CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT st City Attorney Richard Taylor noted he is unable to attend the April 21 Council meeting due to another meeting that he is scheduled to attend and give a presentation. He added Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer or his associate, Bill Parkin, would be present st at the April 21 Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no additional business, Mayor King asked for a motion to adjourn. ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING AT 10:35PM. PAGE/MILLER MOVED TO MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH NAGPAL ABSENT DURING THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 10 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Finance & Administrative ServicesDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DEPT. DIRECTOR: Melanie WhittakerMary Furey SUBJECT: Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review and accept the Check Registers for the following Accounts Payable payment cycles: April 01, 2010 April 08, 2010 REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are the Check Registers for: Prior Check Register Starting Ending Total Checks DateEnding Check No. Type of ChecksDateCheck No.Check No.ChecksAmountReleased Accounts Payable04/01/101147721148225098,685.2404/01/1003/26/10114771 Accounts Payable04/08/101148231148987597,363.4604/08/1004/01/10114822 The following is a list of Accounts Payable checks issued for more than $20,000 and a brief description of expenditure: AP DateCheck No. Issued toFundDept.PurposeAmount 04/01/10None- 04/08/10None- The following are Accounts Payable checks that were voided or manually issued: AP DateCheck No. Issued toDescriptionAmount 04/01/10114329Nancy AlanizVoid - Reissued(300.00) 04/01/10114499Reed EquipmentVoid - Reissued(131.26) 04/01/10114699Sierra DisplayVoid - Reissued(100.51) 04/08/10None- The following is a list of cash reduction by fund: Fund #AP 04/01AP 04/08Total Fund Description 111General64,946.22139,245.17 74,298.95 231Village Lighting3,579.47367.893,947.36 232Azule Lighting237.64237.64 233Sarahills Lighting252.25252.25 241Arroyo de Saratoga Landscape85.0085.00 242Bonnet Way Landscape135.00135.00 243Carnelian Glen226.28226.28 244Cunningham/Glasgow Landscape193.25193.25 245Fredericksburg Landscape132.00132.00 246Greenbriar Landscape406.00406.00 247Kerwin Ranch Landscape497.42497.42 248Leutar Court Landscape85.0085.00 249Manor Drive Landscape215.80215.80 251McCartysville Landscape198.34198.34 252Prides Crossing Landscape479.72479.72 253Saratoga Legends Landscape436.28436.28 254Sunland Park Landscape316.74316.74 255Tricia Woods Landscape66.7366.73 271Beauchamps Landscape232.20232.20 272Bellgrove Landscape1,970.9629.812,000.77 273Gateway Landscape203.0026.16229.16 274Horseshoe Landscape/Lighting541.85541.85 275Quito Lighting1,264.741,264.74 276Tollgate LLD90.0090.00 277Village Commercial Landscape547.48547.48 411CIP Street Projects 2,985.968,589.5211,575.48 412CIP Parks Projects19.00327.58346.58 413CIP Facility Projects450.003,660.544,110.54 421Tree Fine Fund5,027.335,027.33 431Grant Fund - CIP Streets1,201.881,201.88 621Office Stores Fund1,193.481,193.48 622Information Technology6,624.76247.506,872.26 623Vehicle & Equipment Maint2,041.633,241.155,282.78 624Building Maintenance6,829.161,314.328,143.48 632IT Equipment Replacement232.71232.71 TOTAL 98,685.24196,048.70 97,363.46 ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Check Registers in the 'A/P Checks By Period and Year' report format SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 ORIGINATING DEPT:CITY MANAGER City Manager’s Office: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: DEPT HEAD: Ann Sullivan, City ClerkDaveAnderson SUBJECT:Amended Agenda for April 7, 2010 City Council Meeting RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and approve attached amended agenda for April 7, 2010 City Council meeting for historical purposes. REPORT SUMMARY: Due to software difficulties, the agenda for the April 7, 2010 City Council meeting, Item 10 – Proposed Fee Schedule Update for FY 2010/11, noted additional ‘Recommended Action’ verbiage that was not applicable to the agenda item. The ‘Recommended Action’ verbiage for Item 9 was electronically imported into the ‘Recommended Action’ for Agenda Item 10, The attached amended April 7, 2010 agenda accurately reflects the Recommended Action for Item 10. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: If Council approves the amended April 7, 2010 Council meeting agenda, staff will retain the amended agenda in Laserfiche for historical purposes. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Amended April 7, 2010 Council Meeting Agenda. AGENDA REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, April 07, 2010 REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUEand [MARRIOTT SHADOW RIDGE AT 9003 SHADOW RIDGE ROAD –PALM DESERT, CA] PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA (Pursuant to Gov’t. Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on April 1, 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 the Saratoga High School Mechanical Science and Engineering Team Recommended action: Read and present commendation. 2.Commendation Honoring the Saratoga Village Gardeners Recommended action: Read and present commendation. 3.Commendation Honoring Outgoing Heritage Preservation Commissioner Rita McCarty Recommended action: Read and present commendation. 4.Commendation Honoring Outgoing Heritage Preservation Commissioner Norman Koepernik Recommended action: Read and present commendation. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None 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. 5.City Council Meeting Minutes – March 17, 2010 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 6.Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers Recommended action: That the City Council review and accept the Check Registers for the following Accounts Payable payment cycles: March 11, 2010 March 18, 2010 March 26, 2010 7.Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Project Joint Powers Authority Agreement Recommended action: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign the Joint Powers Agreement to become a member of the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority (SVRIA) and to sign the Amendment to the Second Amended Joint Funding Agreement (JFA) to allow the JFA and its assets to transition to the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority JPA. 8.Joe’s Trail at Saratoga De Anza Project – Award of Construction Contract. Recommended action: 1. Move to declare Guerra Construction Group of Santa Clara to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project. 2. Move to award a construction contract to Guerra Construction Group in the amount of $844,014.88 3. Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $250,000. PUBLIC HEARINGS Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. 9.Update to the General Plan 2007-2014 Housing Element, Conforming Amendments to the Land Use Element, a Housing Element Implementation Ordinance, and Amendments to the Text of the Open Space and Conservation Element and Safety Element to Include Factual Information Required by State Law & Negative Declaration Recommended action: Staff and the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council open the public hearing, accept public testimony, close the public hearing, and: • Approve the Resolution to adopt the Initial Study/Negative Declaration. • Approve the Resolution to adopt the 2007-2014 General Plan Housing Element which includes the following Attachments: - Land Use Element/Open Space and Conservation Element Conforming Amendments - Amendments to the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines - Safety Element and Open Space Conservation Element AB 162 Amendments • Approve the attached Housing Element Implementation Ordinance; waive the First Reading, and direct staff to schedule this item for a Second Reading for adoption on the consent calendar of the April 21, 2010 City Council meeting. 10.Proposed Fee Schedule Update for FY 2010/11 Recommended action: Hold public hearing to review recommendations for proposed fee changes, provide direction, and approve resolution amending the City’s Fee Schedule effective for Fiscal Year 2010/11. OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS None ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS MayorKathleen King ABAG County HCD Policy Committee Hakone Foundation Executive Committee West ValleyFlood Control Zone & Watershed Advisory Committee SCC CitiesAssociation Selection Committee Santa Clara County Emergency Council West Valley Mayorsand Managers Association Vice MayorJill Hunter Hakone Foundation Board Historical Foundation Library Joint Powers Association SASCC Sister CityLiaison VillageAdHoc Councilmember Howard Miller City School Ad-Hoc Chamberof Commerce Council Finance Committee Highway 9 Adhoc KSAR Santa Clara County Cities Association Board West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority West Valley Transportation Authority PAC Councilmember Susie Nagpal Highway 9 Adhoc VillageAdHoc Councilmember Chuck Page City School Ad-Hoc Santa ClaraValley Water District Commission Saratoga MinisterialAssociation West Valley SanitationDistrict Council Finance Committee CITY COUNCIL ITEMS CITY MANAGER’S REPORT ADJOURNMENT In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Council by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community Development Department Director at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerk at the time they are distributed to the City Council. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II) Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I,Ann Sullivan, CityClerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council for the City of Saratoga was posted onApril1, 2010,of 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 st Signed this 1 day of April 2010 at Saratoga, California. Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk NOTE: To view current or previous City Council meetings anytime, go to the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR 2010 4/21 Regular Meeting ––Joint Meeting with School Districts: Saratoga Union Elementary School District; Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District; Cupertino School District; Campbell School District Moreland School District; Fremont High School District; Sacred Heart; St. Andrews, and Campbell Union High School District 5/5 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Youth Commission 5/19 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District and Saratoga Union Elementary District 6/2 Regular Meeting –Joint meeting with Montalvo Arts 6/16 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with HOA Presidents 7/7 Regular Meeting – 7/21 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with SASCC SUMMER RECESS –NO COUNCIL MEETING 8/4 (Tentative) SUMMER RECESS –NO COUNCIL MEETING 8/18 9/1 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with West Valley Board of Trustees Joint meeting with Assemblymember Jim Beall 9/15 Regular Meeting – 10/6 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Traffic Safety Commission 10/20 Regular Meeting –Joint Meeting with Historical Foundation & Heritage Preservation Comm. 11/3 Regular Meeting –Joint meeting with Saratoga Ministerial Association 11/17 Regular Meeting - Joint Meeting with Hakone Foundation 11/30 Council Reorganization 12/1 Regular Meeting - Joint Meeting with Library Commission and Friends of the Saratoga Libraries 12/15 Regular Meeting - SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: Community DevelopmentDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Christopher A. Riordan, AICP John F. Livingstone, AICP SUBJECT: Adoption of the Housing Element Implementation Ordinance (CONSENT ITEM) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the City Council waive the Second Reading and adopt the attached Housing Element ImplementationOrdinance. REPORT SUMMARY: On April 7, 2010, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the Update to the 2007-2014 General Plan Housing Element. The City Council approved the Resolutions adopting both the Housing Element and the Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The Housing Element Resolution also includedLand Use Element/Open Space and Conservation Element Conforming Amendments, amendments to the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines, andSafety Element and Open Space Conservation Element AB 162 Amendments. The City Council also introduced the Housing Element Implementation Ordinance;waivedthe First Reading,and directedstaff to schedule this item for a Second Reading for adoption on the consent calendar of the April 21, 2010 City Council meeting. DISSCUSSION: Housing Element Implementation Ordinance The attached draft Housing Element ImplementationOrdinance Amendment implements the policies contained in the draft 2007-2014 General Plan Housing Element. The draft Ordinance implements the rezoning program and other aspects of the Housing Policy Program set forth in the Housing Element. The table that follows is a summary of the changes proposed in the Zoning Ordinance for Article 15-10 (Establishment of Zoning Districts), Article 15-19 (Commercial Districts), Article 15-46 (Design Review:Multi-Family Dwellings and Commercial Structures), Article 15-58 (Mixed-Use Development Standards), and Article 15-80 (Miscellaneous Regulations and Exceptions). 1 TopicCurrent Approach and Housing Element Proposed Changes Policy Action or Other Issue Establishment of a new Section 15-10.010 does not describe the new The proposed amendment includes a definition of Zoning DistrictC-N(RHD) Zoning District. Housing the new C-N(RHD) Zoning District as Element Policy Action (“HEPA”) 4-1.3 calls “Neighborhood Commercial Residential High for creation of a new mixed use zoning Density. The amendment includes a zoning map district permitting rental and owneramendment to show the area bounded by occupied multifamily residential Lawrence Expressway and Prospect Avenue as development as a matter of right with a CN(RHD). minimum density of 20 du/net acre. (See Page 1) “Drive through services Currently Section 15-10-010(n) describes the The rezoning between Lawrence Expressway and overlay area”Drive Through Service Overlay area bounded Prospect Avenue from C-N to C-N(RHD) will by Lawrence Expressway and Prospect include drive through services as a conditional Avenue use. The overlay zone will be eliminated. (See Page 2) C-N(RHD) district The City does not have a list of permitted or The proposed amendment includes a new Section regulations.conditional uses or established regulations 15-19.035 setting development standards for the for the new C-N(RHD) district. C-N(RHD) district. These are designed to satisfy the requirements of HEPA 4-1.3 with respect to residential development, HEPA 4-4.3 with respect to emergency shelters and related housing programs, and maintain the C-N standards for commercial development. (See Page 2) Gasoline Service Station Article 15-19 (Commercial Districts) does The proposed new zoning district between not include “Gasoline service station” in the Lawrence Expressway and Prospect Avenue from Allow oil changes and list of permitted or conditional uses in the C-N to C-N(RHD) will include “Gasoline service lubrication as a Commercial District between Lawrence station” as a conditional use which allows oil Conditional Use PermitExpressway and Saratoga Avenue. Since changes for motor vehicles and servicing this type of use is not mentioned it is incidental thereto. assumed too not be an allowed use.(See Page 2) Limitations on the Section 15-19.050(i) (Height of Structures) The proposed amendment to Section 15-19.050(i) number of stories for limits structures in the CH-1district facing states that the maximum structure height in the structures in the CH-1Big Basin Way to two stories and those CH-1district is35 feet and the maximum and CH-2 zoning district.facing Saratoga Creek to three stories. structure height in the CH-2 district is 26 feet. All Structures in the CH-2 district are limited to references to “stories” have been removed. two stories. (See Page 4) Design Review Section 15-46.020 specifies the projects for Add new Subsection 15-46.020(a)(7) to the list of requirement which Design Review Approval is required projects requiring Design Review Approval to in a P-A Office or Commercial Zoning read as follows: (7) Any mixed-use project District. Most mixed-use projects would proposal. require design review under this Section, but (See Page 5) because the ratio of residential floor area to commercial floor area is to be determined by the Planning Commission in the Design Review process, Section 15-46.020 should be amended to expressly require such process for all mixed-use projects. 2 TopicCurrent Approach and Housing Element Proposed Changes Policy Action or Other Issue 50% limitation on the Section 15-58.020(c) limits the residential The proposed amendment will eliminate the residential floor area in floor area of mixed use projects to 50% of themaximum percentage allowed for the residential mixed-use projects. total floor area of all buildings on the site. floor area of mixed use projects and would instead HEPA 4-1.1 and 4.3-2 call for revisions to assure the right to a residential floor area of at these standards to promote greater flexibility least 50% and allow a greater ratio of residential in mixed use projects.to commercial floor area to be determined by the Planning Commission during the Design Review process and specify required findings for such greater ratio. (See Page 5) Rental requirement and Section 15-58.020(k) requires the residential The proposed amendment states that the square foot limits on units in a mixed use project to be rental and residential units in a mixed-use project can be residential development not owner occupied and limits their either rental and/owner occupied. The limitation in a mixed-use project. individual square footage from a minimum of on residential square footage has been removed. 850 square feet to a maximum of 1,250 (See Page 2) square feet. HEPA 4-1.1 calls for revisions to these standards to promote greater flexibility in mixed use projects Citywide. Reasonable The City Code does not include specific The amendments would add new section 15- accommodation provisions describing procedures to provide 80.025 to address this requirement. procedures.relief from zoning requirements that have a (See Page 7) discriminatory effect on housing for individuals with disabilities. State Law and HEPA 4-4.4 require such provisions. FISCAL IMPACTS: None anticipated CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Community Development Department could not implementmany of the programs and policies contained in the General Plan Housing Element. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: 1.Deny the proposed ordinance. 2.Modify the proposed ordinance FOLLOW UP ACTION: 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. 3 ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLICCONTACT: Advertising and other public noticing are not required for the Second Reading and adoption of this item. Staff has not received any written comments on this item as of April 13, 2010. 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. ATTACHMENTS: A.Proposed Housing Element Implementation Ordinance 4 ORDINANCE __________ An Ordinance Amending the Saratoga Municipal Code to Implement the 2007-2014 Housing Element Update Findings 1.The City of Saratoga wishes to update the City Code to implement the policies contained in the 2007-2014 General Plan Housing Element. 2.The Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga considered a range of amendments to the City Code,conducted anoticed public hearing at which public testimony and all written materials were considered, and on March 10, 2010recommended thatthe City Council adopt a Negative Declaration and the proposed amendments to the City Code. 3.The City Council has adopted a resolution pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) adopting a Negative Declaration and finding no evidence thatthis ordinance may have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Therefore, the City Council hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. Adoption . Articles 15-10, 15-19, 15-46, 15-58 and 15-80of the Saratoga City Code arehereby amended as example set forth in Attachment A. Words shown in bold underlined text () are added to the code and words shown in strikeout (example) are deleted from the code. Words in standard font are unchanged from the existing Code. Sections within an Article that are not included in Attachment A are unchanged from the existing Code. Section 2. Zoning Map Change. The City of Saratoga zoning map is amended to show the C-N(RHD) zoning district as indicated onAttachment B. Section 3. 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 4.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 and read at the regular meeting of the City Council of th the City of Saratoga held on the 7day of April, 2010,and was adopted by the following vote st following a second reading on the 21 day of April, 2010: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: ATTEST: _________________________________ _____________________________ Kathleen King Ann Sullivan, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGACLERK OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ Richard Taylor, CITY ATTORNEY 2 Attachment A Amendments to Saratoga City Code Articles 15-10, 15-19, 15-46, 15-58 and 15-80 ( bold double-underlined Text to be added is indicated in bold double-underlined font (e.g., )and text to be deleted is indicated in strikeout (e.g. strikeout). Text in standard font remains unchanged. Direction to delete graphics in is FULL CAPITALIZATION indicated in bold double-underlined full capitalization (e.g., ). Article 15-10 ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS 15-10.010 Designation of districts. The districts established by this Chapter are depicted on the Zoning Map and are described as follows: (a)A: Agricultural district. (b) R-1: Single-family residential districts, consisting of: R-1-40,000 district R-1-20,000 district R-1-15,000 district R-1-12,500 district R-1-10,000 district (c)HR: Hillside residential district. (d) R-OS: Residential open space district. (e) AP/OS: Agricultural preserve/open space overlay district. (f) P-C: Planned community district. (g) R-M: Multi-family residential districts, consisting of: R-M-5,000 R-M-4,000 R-M-3,000 (h) P-A: Professional and administrative office district. (i)C: Commercial districts, consisting of: C-N Neighborhood commercial C-N(RHD)Neighborhood Commercial Residential High Density C-V Visitor commercial CH-1 and CH-2 Commercial historic districts (j)MU-PD: Multiple-use planned development district. (k) E: Equestrian. The equestrian district is an area of the City within which equines may be maintained for private use and commercial or community stables may be maintained. The overlay district is depicted on the equestrian district map. (1) R-1-10,000 single-story overlay district for the Saratoga Woods neighborhood. Any single- story addition or replacement construction shall be limited in height to the height of the contiguous single-story dwellings. The existing two-story dwellings within the Saratoga Woods neighborhood are exempt from the provisions of this single-story limitation. (m)H: Historic resource overlay district showing location of historic landmarks, heritage lanes, and historic districts. (n)CN drive-through overlay district for the CN zone bounded by Lawrence Expressway and Prospect Avenue. Notwithstanding Section 15-19.020(c), uses with drive-through services may be permitted subject to a use permit requirement in the overlay area. A traffic and circulation 1 study shall be prepared for all such applications. Each application shall be evaluated on its own individual merits. Hours of peak operations shall be compared to hours of peak traffic in the general area. [THE MAP INCLUDED IN THE CITY CODE FOLLOWING SECTION 15-10.0100(n) SHOWING THE DRIVE-THROUGH OVERLAY ZONE IS DELETED] Article 15-19 C: COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS 15-19.035 C-N(RHD)district regulations (a)Permitted uses. In addition to the permitted uses listed in Section 15-19.020(a) and 15- 19.030(a) of this Article, the following permitted uses shall also be allowed in a C-N(RHD)district: (1) Mixed-use development with a minimum residential density of twenty dwelling units per net acre and conforming to the design standards found in Article 15-58. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(i)) such development shall not constitute a “project” under CEQA. (2) Emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing for homeless individuals and families. (b) Conditional Uses. In addition to the conditional uses listed in Section 15-19.020(b) and 15-19.030(b) of this Article, the following conditional uses may also be allowed in a C-N(RHD)district, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this Chapter: (1) Drive through services. (2) Gasoline service stations; provided, that all operations except the sale of gasoline and oil shall be conducted within an enclosed structure. (c)Site area. The minimum net site area of any lot in a C-N(RHD) district shall be ten thousand square feet. (d)Site frontage, width and depth. The minimum site frontage, width and depth of any lot in a C-N (RHD)district shall be as follows: Frontage Width Depth 60 feet60 feet100 feet (e)Coverage. The maximum net site area covered by structures on any lot in a C-N (RHD) district shall be eightypercent. 2 (f) Front setback area. The minimum front setback area of any lot in a C-N (RHD) district shall be ten feet; except that on a site adjacent to and fronting on the same street as, or directly across the street from, an A, R-1, HR, R-M or P-A district, the minimum front setback area shall be fifteen feet. (g)Side and rear setback areas. No side or rear setback areas shall be required for any lot in a C-N(RHD)district, subject to the following exceptions: (1)On a reversed corner lot abutting a lot in an A, R-1, or HR district, the minimum exterior side setback area shall be not less than one-half of the required front setback area of the abutting lot. (2)Except as otherwise provided in subsection (g)(1) of this Section, on a lot abutting an A, R-1, or HR district, the minimum side setback area or rear setback area abutting such other district shall be thirty feet. (3)On a lot directly across a street or alley from an A, R-1, or HR district, the minimum side setback area or rear setback area adjacent to such street or alley shall be ten feet. Where a side or rear setback area is required under any of the foregoing provisions, one foot shall be added to the required setback area for each one foot of height or fraction thereof by which a structure within thirty feet of the lot line for such setback area exceeds fourteen feet in height. (h)Height of structures. The maximum height of any structure in a C-N(RHD)district shall be thirtyfeet. (i)Enclosure of uses. All permitted and conditional uses shall be conducted entirely within a completely enclosed structure, except for off-street parking and loading, gasoline service stations, outdoor dining, nurseries, garden shops and Christmas tree and pumpkin sales lots. (j)Screeningand landscaping. An area not less than five feet in depth along all property lines that abut a street shall be landscaped with plant materials and/or improved with sidewalks or pathways as required by the Planning Commission. All planting materials shall permanently be maintained by the owner or occupant of the site. (k)Alternative standards for multi-family dwellings. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, where multi-family dwellings will be located upon a site, the project shall comply with the development standards set forth in Article 15-17 of this Chapter. The density of developmentabove twenty dwelling units per net acreshall be as determined in eachcase by the Planning Commission, based upon its findings that: (1)The project will not constitute overbuilding of the site; and 3 (2)The project is compatible with the structures and density of development on adjacent properties; and (3)The project will preserve a sufficient amount of open space on the site; and (4)The project will provide sufficient light and air for the residents of the site and the occupants of adjacent properties. 15-19.050 C-H district regulations (i) Height of structures. The maximum height of any structure in each C-H district shall be as follows: TABLE INSET: DistrictHeight 35 feet. No portion of a structure facing Big Basin Way shall exceed two stories CH-1 and no portion of a structure facing Saratoga Creek shall exceed three stories. CH-2 26 feet. No structure shall exceed two stories. Article 15-46 DESIGN REVIEW: MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES 15-46.020 Requirementfor design review; public hearing. (a) In each of the following cases, no building permit shall be issued until the proposed improvements have received design review approval by the Planning Commission pursuant to this Article: (1) Any new main structure in an R-M, P-A or C district. (2)Any expansion over five hundred square feet to an existing main structure in an R-M, P- A or C district. (3)Any substantial exterior alteration, as determined by the Community Development Director, to an existing structure in an R-M, P-A or C district. (4)Any addition over twenty-two feet in height to an existing main or accessory structure in an R-M, P-A or C district. (5) Any parking lot in an R-M, P-A or C district covering an area of one thousand square feet or greater. (6)Any structure, except a single-family dwelling or accessory structure, having a floor area of one thousand square feet or greater, located in an A, R-1, HR or R-OS district. (7) Any mixed-use project . (b) A public hearing on the application for design review approval under this Article shall be required. Notice of the public hearing shall be given not less than ten days nor more than thirty 4 days prior to the date of the hearing by mailing, postage prepaid, a notice of the time and place of the hearing to the applicant and to all persons whose names appear on the latest available assessment roll of the County as owning property within five hundred feet of the boundaries of the site upon which the structure, expansion, alteration, addition or parking lot is to be constructed. Notice of the public hearing shall also be published once in a newspaper having general circulation in the City not later than ten days prior to the date of the hearing. Article 15-58 MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 15-58.010Purposes of Article. The purpose of the mixed-use development standards is the implementation of Program 1.1of the Housing Element of the General Plan. The goal is to implement this Housing Programin a consistent manner throughout the various commercial and office zoning districts of the City. It is further the goal of these standards to protect existing and future commercial development. 15-58.020 Development standards. except as provided in Section 15- (a)The maximum density is twenty dwellings per net acre 19.035 of this Code . (b)Only commercial use(s) may be located on the ground floor abutting a street. Dwelling unit(s) may be located in all other portions of the structure. (c)The dwelling unit(s) shall not comprise more than fifty percent of the total floor area of all buildings on the site. The maximum floor area allowed may be increased by ten percent for The City may impose no condition projects providing below market rate rental housing. limiting the percentage of the total allowable residential floor area on the mixed-use site to less than or equal to fifty percent. That percentage may be greater than fifty percent if approved by the Planning Commissionduring a design review process upon the Commission making the following findings: (1)that the proposed location of the mixed-use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Regulations and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and (2) that the proposed location of the mixed-use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and (3) that the proposed mixed-use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this Chapter; and (4) that the proposed mixed-use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated usesin the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. 5 (d)Parking for both the non-residential use and the dwelling unit(s) shall be as specified in the Article 15-35 of this Chapter Zoning Ordinance , provided that the Planning Commission may approveif it determines that it will not resultadverse considershared parking insome cases impacts on adjacent uses. (e)Perimeter fencing shall be required tothe maximum height allowed inthe Zoning Ordinance conform to Article 15-29 of this Chapter. including but not limited to, (f)Each dwelling shall have private, usable outdoor space, i.e., decks, balconies, yards or patios. (g)The maximum height of a mixed-use structureshall betwenty-six feet. Structures that are solely non-residential on a site that has mixed-use, the maximum height is as it is stated in the underlying zoning district. (h)The designof mixed-use projects will be required to conform to the policies and techniques of the Residential Design Handbook and any other design standards in place for the area of application. (h) (i)Overall site coverage may be increased by up to ten percent of the maximum allowed in the Zoning District for projects containing at least ten percent (10%) of the units deed restricted to below market rate housing units. (i) (j)Mixed-use projects shall have sound walls and landscape screening in order to protectthe land privacy and quality of life of abutting single-family residential landsuses. (j)and/or owner (k) The residential component of a mixed-use project shall be rental occupied. The individual dwelling units shall range in size from eight hundred fifty square feet for one bedroom units to one thousand two hundred fifty square feet for three bedroom units sequent mixed-use development. (k) (l)Projects with multiple stories shall be reviewed to ensure that design features such as setbacks and window placement provide adequate privacy protection. (m) Non-residential structures developed or parcels created as part of a mixed-use development or multi-family development may not be redeveloped as a mixed-use development at a greater density or intensity of use. (l) (n)Smaller mixed-use projects (twenty or fewer dwelling units) must pay an in lieu fee for park construction. (m) (o)In larger mixed-use projects (more than twenty dwelling units) either the developer must pay an in-lieu fee for park construction or construct common, useable open space on site at the discretion of the Planning Commission based on the vicinity of existing public parks. 6 Article 15-80 MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS 15-80.025 Reasonable Accommodation Procedure (a)Applicability and Definitions. (1) “Reasonable accommodation” means providing individuals with disabilities or sponsors of projects (including residential and non-residential development usable by an individual with a disability), flexibility in the application of land use and zoning and/or building regulations, policies, practices and/or procedures, or even waiving certain requirements, when it is necessary to eliminate barriers to use by an individual with a disability. (2) “Individual with a disability” means someone who has a physical or mental impairment that limits one or more major life activities; anyone who is regarded as having such impairment; or anyone with a record of such impairment. (3) “Eligible Person” means any individual with a disability, his or her representative, or a sponsor of a project or provider of housingfor individuals with disabilities, when the application of a land use, zoning or building regulation, policy, practice or procedure acts as a barrier to use by an individual with a disability. (b)Notice of Accommodation Process. Notice of the availability of reasonable accommodation shall be prominently displayed at public information counters in the Community Development Department, advising the public of the availability of the procedure for eligible persons. Forms for requesting reasonable accommodation shall be available to the public in the Community Development Department. (c)Authority to Request Reasonable Accommodation. In order to make a project usableto an individual with a disability, any eligible person may request a reasonable accommodation in land use, zoning and building regulations, policies, practices and/or procedures in accordance with this section. (d) Process for Requests for Reasonable Accommodation.Requests for reasonable accommodation shall be in writing and provide the following information: (1) Name and address of the individual(s) requesting reasonable accommodation; (2) Name and address of the property owner(s); (3) Address of the property for which accommodation is requested; (4) Description of the requested accommodation and eachregulation, policy or procedure for which accommodation is sought; and (5) Reason that the requested accommodation may be necessary for the individual(s) with the disability to use and enjoy the dwellingor other use. 7 (e) Any information identified by an applicant as confidential in the application or in connection with any appeal of a decision pursuant to this section shall be retained in a manner so as torespect the privacy rights of the applicant and shall not be made available for public inspection except as otherwise required by law. (f) A request for reasonable accommodation in aregulation, policy, practice and/or procedure may be filed at any time that the accommodation may be necessary to ensure equal use ofthe project. A reasonable accommodation does not affect an individual’s obligations to comply with other applicable regulations not at issue in the requested accommodation. (g) If an individual needs assistance in making the request for reasonable accommodation or in filing an appeal of a decision pursuant to this section , the City shall provide assistance to ensure that the process is accessible. (h) Review of Request. If a request for reasonable accommodation is made in connection with an application for a project approval the request shall be reviewed as part of the application review process and a decision on the request shall be made at the time of a decision on the application. All other requests shall be reviewed by the Community Development Directorand a decision shall be made within thirty days of the date of the application. Decisions may either grant, grant with modifications, or deny a request for reasonable accommodation in accordance with the required findings set forth in Section 15-80.025(i). If necessary to reach a decisionon the request for reasonable accommodation, the Community Development Directormay request further information from the applicant consistent with fair housing or any other applicable laws, specifying in detail the information that is required. In the event that a request for additional information is made, the time period to issue a decision is stayed until the applicant responds to the request. (i)The written decision to grant, grant with modifications, or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with fair housing and any other applicable laws and based on the following factors: (1) Whether the project, which is the subject of the request for reasonable accommodation, will be used by an individual with disabilities protected under fair housing and/or any other applicable laws; (2) Whether the requested accommodation is necessary to make a project usable and available to an individual with disabilities protected under the fair housing and/or any other applicable laws; (3) Whether the requested accommodation would impose an undue financial and/or administrative burden on the jurisdiction and; (4) Whether the requested accommodationwould require a fundamental alteration in the nature of the City’s land use and zoning and/or building regulations. (j)All decisions on the request for reasonable accommodation shall explain in detail the basis of the decision, including the determinationson the factorsset forth above. All 8 written decisions shall give notice of the applicant’s right to appeal. The notice of decision shall be sent to the applicant by regular and certified mail. The written decision of the reviewing authority shall be final unless an applicant appeals in accordance with this Code. If the reviewing authority fails to render a written decision on the request for reasonable accommodation within the time required by this Code, the request shall be deemed granted. While a request for reasonable accommodation is pending, all laws and regulations otherwise applicable to the property that is the subject of the request shall remain in full force and effect. - End of amendments to Article 15-10, 15-19, 15-46, 15-58, and 15-80 - 9 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 21, 2010 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public WorksCITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY:__________________DEPT HEAD: John Cherbone John Cherbone SUBJECT: Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1; Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report and Adoption of Resolution of Intention for FY 10-11 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Move to adopt the Resolution granting preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for FY 2010/11. 2. Move to adopt the Resolution of Intention. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are the next two Resolutions to continue the process for renewing the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1 for FY 10-11. Briefly, the two Resolutions are: A Resolution of Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report ... Fiscal Year 2010-2011 - 1. This is the Resolution required under the State Streets & Highways Code (S&H) section 22623 preliminary which grants approval of the Engineer's Report for the renewal of the District for FY 10-11. A Resolution of Intention to order the levy and collection of assessments ... Fiscal Year 2. 2010-2011 - This is the Resolution required under S&H 22624 which, among other things, fixes the date and time for the Public Hearing on June 2nd. These Resolutions should be adopted by separate vote at your meeting to continue the process of renewing the District foranother year. There are no increases in the parcel assessments, which would require an assessment district election for any of the Zones within the District in FY 10-11. The Engineer’s Report is attached summarizing the proposed assessments for FY 10-11. FISCAL IMPACTS: All of the costs associated with the District are recovered via the assessments. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The Resolutions would not be adopted and the process for renewing the District would not continue. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None in addition to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): The Resolution of Intention will be published. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional at this time. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolutions(2). 2. Engineer’s Report. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA-1 FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011 RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, on the 3rd day of March, 2010, said Council did adopt its Resolution No. 10-009, "A Resolution Describing Improvements and Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report For Fiscal Year 2010-2011", for the City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA-1, in said City and did refer the proposed improvements to the Engineer of the City and did therein direct said Engineer to prepare and file with the City Clerk of said City a report, in writing, all as therein more particularly described: WHEREAS, said City Engineer prepared and filed with the City Clerk a report in writing as called for in said Resolution No. 10-009 and under and pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; WHEREAS, said Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that neither said report, nor any part thereof should be modified in any respect; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and ordered, as follows: 1. That the plans and specifications for the existing improvements and the proposed new improvements to be made within the assessment district or within any zone thereof, contained in said report, be, and they are hereby preliminarily approved. 2.That the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs and expenses of said improvements, maintenance and servicing thereof, and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report, be, and each of them are hereby preliminarily approved. 3. That the diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the assessment district referred to and described in said Resolution No. 10-009 and also the boundaries of any zones therein and the lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within said district as such lot or parcel of land is shown on the County Assessor's maps for the fiscal year to which the report applies, each of which lot or parcel of land has been given a separate number upon said diagram, as contained in said report, be, and it hereby is preliminarily approved. 1 4. That the proposed assessment of the total amount of the estimated costs and expenses of the proposed improvements upon the several lots or parcels of land in said assessment district in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots or parcels, respectively, from said improvements including the maintenance or servicing or both, thereof, and of the expenses incidental thereto, as contained in said report, be, and they are hereby preliminarily approved. 5. That said report shall stand as the Engineer's Report for the purpose of all subsequent proceedings to be had pursuant to said Resolution No. 10-009. * * * * Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting st thereof held on the 21 day of April, 2010 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Kathleen M. King, Mayor City of Saratoga ATTEST: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA-1 FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011 RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, as follows: WHEREAS , pursuant to Resolution No. 10-009, "A Resolution Describing Improvements and Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report for Fiscal Year 2010-2011", for City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA-1, adopted on March 3, 2010, by the City Council of said City, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, the Engineer of said City has prepared and filed with the Clerk of this City the written report called for under said Act and by said Resolution No. 10-009, which said report has been submitted and preliminarily approved by this Council in accordance with said Act; NOW, THEREFORE , it is hereby found, determined and ordered, as follows: 1. In its opinion the public interest and convenience require and it is the intention of this Council to order the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2010-2011 pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the construction or installation of the improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" hereto attached and by reference incorporated herein. 2. The cost and expenses of said improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, are to be made chargeable upon the assessment district designated as "City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA-1," the exterior boundaries of which are the composite and consolidated areas as more particularly described on a map thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of said City, to which reference is hereby made for further particulars. Said map indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory included in the district and of any zone thereof and the general location of said district. 3. Said Engineer's Report prepared by the Engineer of said City, preliminarily approved by this Council, and on file with the City Clerk of this City is hereby referred to for a full and detailed description of the improvements and the boundaries of the assessment district and any zones therein, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the district. 1 4. Notice is hereby given that Wednesday, the 2nd day of June, 2010, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, be and the same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place for a hearing by this Council on the question of the levy and collection of the proposed assessment for the construction or installation of said improvements, including the maintenance and servicing, or both, thereof, and when and where it will consider all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person at or before the conclusion of said hearing, against said improvements, the boundaries of the assessment district and any zone therein, the proposed diagram or the proposed assessment, to the Engineer's estimate of the cost thereof, and when and where it will consider and finally act upon the Engineer's report, and tabulate the ballots. 5. The Clerk of said City be, and hereby is, directed to give notice of said hearing by causing a copy of this Resolution to be published once in the Saratoga News, a newspaper published and circulated in said City, and by conspicuously posting a copy thereof upon the official bulletin board customarily used by the City of Saratoga for the posting of notices, said posting and publication to be had and completed at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing specified herein. 6.The Office of the City Engineer be, and hereby is designated as the office to answer inquiries regarding any protest proceedings to be had herein, and may be contacted during the regular office hours at the City Hall, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070, or by calling (408) 868-1241. * * * * * Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 21st day of April, 2010, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Kathleen M. King, Mayor City of Saratoga Attest: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 2 Exhibit A DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS The design, construction or installation, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, of landscaping, including trees, shrubs, grass or other ornamental vegetation, statuary, fountains and other ornamental structures and facilities, and public lighting facilities for the lighting of any public places, including traffic signals,ornamental standards, luminaries, poles, supports, tunnels, manholes, vaults, conduits, pipes, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, braces, transformers, insulators, contacts, switches, capacitors, meters, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances, including the cost of repair, removal or replacement of all or any part thereof, providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste; electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other improvements; and the operation of any fountains or the maintenance of any other improvements. 3 ùóèãíöéûêûèíõû LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA-1 ENGINEER'S REPORT ÍÎÈÔ× ð×ÆÃÍÖÛÎûÉÉ×ÉÉÏ×ÎÈ ÖÍÊÈÔ× öÓÉÙÛÐã×ÛÊ ûÌÊÓÐ òíôîôô÷óîø÷ðùíîéçðèóîõùóæóð÷îõóî÷÷ê ÷îõóî÷÷êíöåíêñ TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages Assessment & Cost Summary 1-3 Rules for Spreading Assessment 4-5 Description of Improvements 6-8 Cost Detail 9-13 Assessment Roll Assessment Diagram Certificates CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA-1 A S S E S S M E N T for Fiscal Year 2010-2011 ______________________________________ WHEREAS, on ________________________, 2010, the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, adopted its Resolution No. 10- 009 describing improvements and directing preparation of the Engineer's Report for Fiscal year 2010- 2011, more particularly therein described, and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. 10-009 directed the Engineer of Work to prepare and file a report presenting plans and specifications for the proposed improvements, an estimate of costs, a diagram of the assessment district, and an assessment of the estimated costs of the improvements upon all assessable lots or parcels of land within the assessment district, to which Resolution reference is hereby made for further particulars, NOW, THEREFORE, I, John H. Heindel, by virtue of the power vested in me under said Act and the order of the City Council of said City of Saratoga, hereby make the following assessment to cover the portion of the estimated cost of said improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof and the costs and expenses incidental thereto, to be paid by the assessmentdistrict for the Fiscal Year 2010- 2011: ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE SUMMARY* ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS Wages & benefits $ 19,683 Attorney 500 Assessment engineer 10,000 Other 300 $ 30,483 OPERATIONS Wages & benefits $ 75,118 Contract Services 290,750 Repair services -0- Maintenance services 66,128 Irrigation water 43,900 Electric power 69,950 545,846 INDIRECT COSTS 57,632 Total costs $633,961 Previous year carryover (475,566) Estimated property tax revenue (168,655) Net cost $ (10,260) Carryover not recovered (10,910) Carryover not reimbursed 301,067 Assessment $ 279,897 SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT BY ZONE* AsPreliminarily Approved As Confirmed Zone No.Total Per Parcel Total Per Parcel 1 $ 73 2.52 $ $ 2 6,723 79.10 3 18,501 105.12 4 -0- 0.00 5 -0- 0.00 6 8,131 127.04 7A -0- 0.00 7B -0- 0.00 9 14,041 292.52 10 2,560 284.48 11 16,694 66.78 12 3,252 361.34 15 5,215 127.20 16 8,699 158.16 17 14,493 72.46 22 45,942 53.24 24 -0- N/A 25 8,727 581.80 26 73,724 784.30 27 7,128 229.94 28 10,212 638.26 29 9,547 156.50 31 9,958 191.50 32 12,815 7.90** 33 3,462 173.12 Total $279,897 $ * See Cost Detail herein for breakdown ** Plus $12.82 per front foot -2- And I do hereby assess and apportion said portion of the estimated cost of the improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof and the costs and expenses incidental thereto, upon the several lots or parcels of land liable therefor and benefited thereby, and hereinafter numbered to correspond with the numbers upon the attached diagram, upon each, severally and respectively, in proportion to the benefits to be received by such property, respectively, from the construction and installation of the improvements, and from the maintenance and servicing thereof, and more particularly set forth in the Assessment Roll hereto attached and by this reference made a part hereof. As required by said Act, a diagram is hereto attached showing the assessment district, and also the boundaries and dimensions of the respective lots or parcels of land within said assessment district, as the same existed at the time of the passage of said Resolution No. 10-009. The diagram and assessment numbers appearing in the Assessment Roll herein under the column headed "A.P.N." are the diagram numbers appearing on said diagram, towhich reference is hereby made for a more particular description of said property. I hereby place in the Assessment Roll, opposite the number of each lot or parcel of land assessed, the amount assessed thereon. Each lot or parcel of land is described insaid Assessment Roll by reference to its parcel number as shown on the assessor's maps of the County of Santa Clara for the Fiscal Year 2010- 2011, and includes all of such parcel. Respectfully submitted, Dated: _____________________, 2010 ______________________________ John H. Heindel, RCE 13319 Engineer of Work -3- RULES FOR SPREADING ASSESSMENT The amounts to be assessed against the assessable lots or parcels of land to pay the estimated cost of the improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof and the costs and expenses incidental thereto, shall be based upon the estimated benefits to be derived by the various lots or parcels of land within the assessment district. The assessment for administrative costs shall be spread equally to all of the lots or parcels of land located in the assessment district. The assessment for cost of improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof, in Zones 1 through 7B, 9 through 12, 15 through 17, 22, 25 through 29, 31, and 33, as described in Resolution No. 09-008, shall be spread equally to all of the lots or parcels of land located within each said respective zone of the assessment district. The assessment for cost of improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof, in Zone 24, as described in Resolution No. 09-008, shall be spread as follows: Costs related to street lights and street trees shall be spread to all the lots or parcels of land located within said zone, proportional to usable parcel area. Costs related to the Village Parking District (VPD) parking lots shall be spread to all the lots or parcels of land in commercial use located within said zone, proportional to the number of parking spaces existing in the VPD parking lots that are assigned to each parcel within said zone, rounded to the nearest one tenth (0.1) of a parking space. Spaces shall be assigned by adding the total number of spaces in the VPD parking lots and the total private spaces existing on assessable parcels, distributing this sum proportionally by weighted building area, and deducting the number of private spaces, if any, from the resulting number for each parcel. Weighted building area shall be defined as actual building area multiplied by a factor dependent on parcel use, as follows: Retail = 1.0; office/service = 0.5; restaurant = 2.0. The assessment for cost of improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof, in Zone 32, as described in Resolution No. 09-008, shall be spread proportionally to the frontage on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road of each of the lots or parcels of land located and benefited within Zone 32. Zones 0, 8, 13, 14, 18 through 21, 23, and 30 have been either detached or merged with other zones. A portion of Zone 4 was redesignated Zone 26 in 1997. Notwithstanding the above, the assessment levied for Fiscal Year 1999-2000 for each parcel in Zones 2, 3, 6, 11, 16, 22, 25, 26, and 29 shall not exceed the amount indicated in Table 1 attached hereto; the assessment levied for Fiscal Year 2000-2001 for each parcel in Zones 1, 9, 12, 17, 27, and 28, shall not exceed the amount indicated in Table 2 attached hereto; the assessment levied for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 for each parcel in Zone 32 shall not exceed the amount indicated in Table 3 attached hereto; and the assessment levied for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 for each parcel in Zones 31 and 33 shall not exceed the amount indicated in Table 4 attached hereto. In subsequent years, the maximum assessment for each parcel shall be the amount calculatedby multiplying its maximum assessment for the previous year by 1.05. -4- TABLE 1 - MAXIMUM ASSESSMENTS FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR ZONE 1999-2000 2010-2011 2 $ 52.50 $ 89.79 3 $ 63.00 $107.75 6 $ 78.75 $134.69 11 $ 52.50 $ 89.79 16 $ 94.50 $161.63 22 $ 52.50 $ 89.79 25 $341.25 $583.65 26 $498.75 $853.03 29 $100.00 $171.03 TABLE 2 - MAXIMUM ASSESSMENTS FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR ZONE 2000-2001 2010-2011 1 $ 75.00 $122.17 9 $180.00 $293.20 12 $275.00 $447.95 17 $ 60.00 $ 97.73 27 $150.00 $244.33 28 $400.00 $651.56 TABLE 3 - MAXIMUM ASSESSMENTS –ZONE 32 FRONT FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR A. P. N. FEET 2004-2005 2010-2011 366-12-054 110 $ 1,052.16 $ 1,410.00 366-12-065 118 $ 1,125.66 $ 1,508.49 366-12-066 160 $ 1,511.48 $ 2,025.53 366-22-023 149 $ 1,410.44 $ 1,890.12 386-30-035 106 $ 1,015.42 $ 1,360.76 386-30-036 -0- $ 41.66 $ 55.83 386-30-037 50 $ 500.98 $ 671.36 386-30-038 50 $ 500.98 $ 671.36 386-30-039 100 $ 960.30 $ 1,286.89 386-52-032 75 $ 730.64 $ 979.13 386-52-033 75 $ 730.64 $ 979.13 993 TABLE 4 - MAXIMUM ASSESSMENTS FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR ZONE 2008-2009 2010-2011 31 $175.00 $192.94 33 $160.00 $176.40 -5- DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS The design, construction or installation, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, of landscaping, including trees, shrubs, grass or other ornamental vegetation, statuary, fountains and other ornamental structures and facilities, and public lighting facilities for the lighting of any public places, including traffic signals, ornamental standards, luminaires, poles, supports, tunnels, manholes, vaults, conduits, pipes, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, braces, transformers, insulators, contacts, switches, capacitors, meters, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances, including the cost of repair, removal or replacement of all or any part thereof; providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste; electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other improvements; and the operation of any fountains or the maintenance of any other improvements. This work specially benefits the parcels assessed therefor since 1) the work is adjacent to the neighborhoods within which said parcels are located, and results in a) helping to identify, distinguish and enhance these neighborhoods, including the entrances thereto; b) helping to improve the quality of life in these neighborhoods by reducing the potential for graffiti, eliminating dust and litter, providing sound attenuation, eliminating the potential for blight, and providing added security and safety through lighting and an added City presence; and 2) in the absence of this assessment district, the work and improvements would not be otherwise accomplished by the City. Benefits Provided within Each Zone: Zone 1 (Manor Drive Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance of the Manor Drive median and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage along Tract 3822. Zone 2 (Fredericksburg Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Cox Avenue frontage of Tracts 3777, 4041 and 4042. Zone 3 (Greenbriar Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance of the Seagull Way entrance to Tracts 4628, 4725 and 4726, and of the common areas along Goleta Avenue and Guava Court. Zone 4 (Quito Lighting District) - Provides for streetlighting and landscape maintenance in the El Quito Park residential neighborhood: Tracts 669, 708, 748, 6785, 7833, and 8700. Zone 5 (Azule Lighting District) - Provides for streetlighting in the Azule Crossing residential neighborhoods: Tracts 184, 485, 787, 1111, and 1800. Zone 6 (Sarahills Lighting District) - Provides for streetlighting in the Sarahills residential neighborhood: Tracts 3392 and 3439. Zone 7 (Village Lighting District) - Provides for streetlighting in four separate residential neighborhoods surrounding Saratoga Village, and in Saratoga Village. Includes all or a portion of Cunningham Acres, La Paloma Terrace, Mary Springer #1 and #2, McCartysville, Saratoga Park, Williams, and Tracts 270, 336, 416, 2399, 2502, 4477, 5350, 5377, 5503, 5676, 6419, and 6731, and Saratoga Village. -6- Zone 9 (McCartysville Landscape District) - Provides for Landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tract 5944. Zone 10 (Tricia Woods Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tract 7495. (Maintenance and water shared with Zone 27). Zone 11 (Arroyo de Saratoga Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance of the Via Monte entrances to all or a portion of Tracts 2694, 2835, 3036, and 4344. Zone 12 (Leutar Court Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance of the Leutar Court frontage in Tract 6996. Zone 15 (Bonnet Way Landscape District) - Provides for monthly landscape maintenance along Bonnet Way: Tract 5462. Zone 16 (Beauchamps Landscape District) - Provides for landscaping and lighting of the Prospect Road entrance to the Beauchamps subdivision: Tract 7763. Zone 17 (Sunland Park Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Quito Road frontage of Tracts 976 and 977. Zone 22 (Prides Crossing Landscape District) - Provides for periodic landscape maintenance along Prospect Road between the Route 85 overcrossing and Titus Avenue, and along Cox Avenue between the Route 85 overcrossing andSaratoga Creek. Includes all properties bordered by Route 85, Prospect Road and Saratoga Creek with the exception of the Brookview neighborhood (Tracts 1493, 1644, 1695, 1727, 1938, and 1996). Zone 24 (Village Commercial Landscape District)- Provides for routine maintenance of Village Parking Districts 1-4 and Big Basin Way landscaping. Zone 25 (Saratoga Legends Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of, and pedestrian pathways within, Tract 8896. Zone 26 (Bellgrove Landscape and Lighting District) - Provides for common area landscape maintenance and lighting associated with Tract 8700. Zone 27 (Cunningham Place/Glasgow Court Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tracts 6199 and 7928. (Maintenance and water shared with Zone 10). Zone 28 (Kerwin Ranch Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Fruitvale Avenue and Saratoga Avenue frontages of Tracts 8559 and 8560. Zone 29 (Tollgate Landscape and Lighting District) - Provides for maintenance of the common area landscape and lighting improvements along Tollgate Road at the entrance to Tracts 3946 and 5001. -7- Zone 31 (Horseshoe Drive Landscape and Lighting District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Los Gatos Road frontage of Tract 247. Zone 32 (Gateway Landscape and Lighting District) - Provides for maintenance of frontage landscaping along Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road between Prospect Road and the Union Pacific railroad tracks. Zone 33 (Carnelian Glen Landscape and Lighting District) –Provides for maintenance of landscaping along the Saratoga-Los Gatos Road frontage of APNs 397-21-031 and 397-37- 015. -8- COST DETAIL Zone Number 1 2 3 4 5 Administration $ 229 $ 671 $ 1,390 $ 5,514 $ 948 Operations Wages $ 635 1,861 $ 3,853 $ $ Contract Services 3,000 3,000 10,000 75,000 50,000 Repairs Maintenance 1,920 1,584 4,872 1,980 Water 400 250 1,250 Electric ______ ______ ______ 16,100 3,000 $ 5,955 $ 6,695 $ 19,975 $ 93,080 $ 53,000 Indirect Costs 618 737 2,136 9,859 5,395 Total Costs $ 6,802 $ 8,103 $ 23,501 $108,453 $ 59,343 Carryover (8,729) (5,280) (1,500) (92,541) (209,200) Property Tax (3,500) (600) (5,000) (47,000) (23,000) Net cost $ (5,427) 2,223 $ 17,001 $(31,088) $(172,857) C'over not recov. C'over not reimb. 5,500 4,500 1,500 31,088 172,857 Net assess. $ 73 $ 6,723 $ 18,501 $ -0- $ -0- No. of Parcels 29 85 176 698 120 Assmt./Pcl. $ 2.52 $ 79.10 $ 105.12 $ -0- $ -0- -9- COST DETAIL Zone Number 6 7A 7B 9 10 Administration $ 505 $ 3,839 $ 2,323 $ 379 $ 71 Operations Wages $ $ 6,757 $ $ 1,051 $ 197 Contract Services 4,000 20,000 7,400 800 Repairs Maintenance 5,000 2,160 540 Water 1,550 450 Electric 3,500 35,000 ______ 225 125 $ 7,500 $ 66,757 $ -0- $ 12,386 $ 2,112 Indirect Costs 801 7,060 232 1,276 218 Total Costs $ 8,806 $ 77,656 $ 2,555 $ 14,041 2,401 Carryover (8,675) (25,300) (2,500) 159 Property Tax _______ (55,000) (2,555) _______ _______ Net cost $ 131 $ (2,644) $ -0- $ 11,541 $ 2,560 C'over not recov. C'over not reimb. 8,000 2,644 2,500 ______ Net assess. $ 8,131 $ -0- $ -0- $ 14,041 $ 2,560 No. of Parcels 64 486 294 48 9 Assmt./Pcl. $ 127.04 $ -0- $ -0- $ 292.52 $ 284.48 -10- COST DETAIL Zone Number 11 12 15 16 17 Administration $ 1,975 $ 71 $ 324 $ 434 $ 1,580 Operations Wages $ 5,472 $ 197 $ 897 $ 1,204 $ 4,378 Contract Services 20,000 2,500 3,500 5,000 Repairs Maintenance 1,020 1,020 1,620 1,020 2,436 Water 800 350 1,000 1,200 1,600 Electric _______ _______ _______ 550 _______ $ 27,292 $ 4,067 $ 3,517 $ 7,474 $ 13,414 Indirect Costs 2,927 414 384 791 1,499 Total Costs $ 32,194 $ 4,552 $ 4,225 $ 8,699 $ 16,493 Carryover (30,500) (5,300) 2,400 (5,000) (12,000) Property Tax ______ _______ _______ ______ ______ Net cost $ 1,694 $ (748) $ 6,625 $ 3,699 $ 4,493 C'over not recov. (1,410) C'over not reimb. 15,000 4,000 _______ 5,000 10,000 Net assess. $ 16,694 $ 3,252 $ 5,215 $ 8,699 $ 14,493 No. of Parcels 250 9 41 55 200 Assmt./Pcl. $ 66.78 $361.34 $ 127.20 $ 158.16 $ 72.46 -11- COST DETAIL Zone Number 22 24 25 26 27 Administration $ 6,817 $ 1,043 $ 119 $ 742 $ 245 Operations Wages $ 18,891 $ 23,159 $ 328 $ 2,058 $ 678 Contract Services 30,000 17,000 600 25,000 4,000 Repairs Maintenance 5,376 1,896 19,176 1,800 Water 2,000 4,000 1,800 18,000 1,500 Electric 500 ______ 100 7,500 75 $ 56,767 $ 44,159 $ 4,724 $ 71,734 $ 8,054 Indirect Costs 6,358 4,520 484 7,248 830 Total Costs $ 69,942 $ 49,722 $ 5,327 $ 79,724 $ 9,128 Carryover (39,000) (20,500) 3,400 (16,000) (7,000) Property Tax _______ (32,000) _______ _______ _______ Net cost $ 30,942 $ (2,778) $ 8,727 $ 63,724 $ 2,128 C'over not recov. C'over not reimb. 15,000 2,778 ______ 10,000 5,000 Net assess. $ 45,942 $ -0- $ 8,727 $ 73,724 $ 7,128 No. of Parcels 863 132 15 94 31 Assmt./Pcl. $ 53.24 $ -0- $ 581.80 $784.30 $ 229.94 -12- COST DETAIL Zone Number 28 29 31 32 33 . Administration $ 126 $ 482 $ 411 $ 87 158 Operations Wages $ 350 $ 1,335 $ 1,138 $ 241 $ 438 Contract Services 2,500 5,000 1,000 1,200 250 Repairs Maintenance 3,732 1,080 3,840 2,436 1,620 Water 2,500 1,000 1,200 2,550 500 Electric 75 1,600 100 1,500 _______ $ 9,157 $10,015 $ 7,278 $ 7,927 $ 2,808 Indirect Costs 929 1,050 769 801 296 Total Costs $10,212 $11,547 $ 8,458 $ 8,815 $ 3,262 Carryover (700) (7,000) 11,000 4,000 200 Property Tax _______ _______ ______ _______ ______ Net cost $ 9,512 $ 4,547 $ 19,458 $ 12,815 $ 3,462 C'over not recov. (9,500) C'over not reimb. __700 5,000 _______ ______ Net assess. $10,212 $ 9,547 $ 9,958 $ 12,815 $ 3,462 No. of Parcels 16 61 52 11 20 No. of Front Feet 993 Assmt./Pcl. $ 638.26 $ 156.50 $ 191.50 $ 7.90 $ 173.12 Assmt./front foot $ 12.82 -13- I, Ann Sullivan, the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga, hereby certify that the foregoing assessments, in the amounts set forth in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminarily Approved", with the diagram thereto attached, was filed with me on _____________________________, 2010 ______________________________ Ann Sullivan I, John H. Heindel, the Engineer of Work for the City of Saratoga, hereby certify that the foregoing assessments, in the amounts set forth in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminarily Approved", have been recomputed in accordance with the order of the City Council of said City of Saratoga as expressed by Resolution No. 10-0 , duly adopted by said City Council on __________________, 2010, said recomputed assessments being the amounts set forth in the column headed "Assessments as Finally Confirmed"; provided, however,if the column headed "Assessments as Finally Confirmed" is blank, the figures in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminarily Approved" were confirmed without change. Dated _____________________, 2010 ______________________________ John H. Heindel, RCE 13319 I, Ann Sullivan, the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga, hereby certify that the foregoing assessments, in the amounts set forth in the Column headed "Assessments as Finally Confirmed" (unless said column is blank, in which event the amounts in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminarily Approved" apply), with the diagram thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of said City of Saratoga on ____________________, 2010. ______________________________ Ann Sullivan The Assessment and Assessment Diagram were filed in the office of the County Auditor of the County of Santa Clara, California, on ________________________, 2010. ______________________________ County Auditor SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: Recreation and FacilitiesDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Thomas Scott Michael Taylor Facilities Maintenance Supervisor SUBJECT:Replacement of 9 HVAC units at the City Civic Center – Award of Contract. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1.Move to declare CIM Air, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project. 2.Move to award a construction contract to CIM Air, Inc. in the amount of $122,500. 3.Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $2,500. REPORT SUMMARY: In an effort to reduce the City’s electrical usage and carbon foot print a CIP fund was set up to update 9 of the least energy efficient Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) units, and to update some of the City’s HVAC controls for the amount of $125,000.00. The Facilities Department contacted the three HVAC Contractors who have all their paperwork currently on file with the City for bids plus one new Contractor who had recently requested to bid on new projects. The bids were all due by March 26, 2010 and the results are listed below: Air Quality Systems $126,863.00 CIM Air, Inc. $122,500.00 Pacific Air Conditioning & Heating, Inc. No Final Bid turned in Thermal Mechanical, Inc. $128,582.00 The lowest bid came in at $122,500.00 and was submitted by CIM Air, Inc. The HVAC units to be replaced with this project are as follows: City Hall units #3 Planning area, #4 Planning area, #6 Public Works area and the IT Room Community Center units #1 Adult Care, #2 Senior Center, #5 Dance Studio and #7 Recreation Offices Corp Yard unit #1 Office area All replacement unitswill,at minimum, be 30% more efficient than the existing equipment. Each new piece of equipment will utilize a new HFC (hydrofluorocarbons) non ozone depleting refrigerant. The new units will have factory economizers, new roof top ductwork; new disconnect switches, new programmable auto switching thermostats and new roof top sleepers as required.At no time during the project will more than two units be out of service to afford minimum disruption to the building occupants. Page 1of 2 Further, it is recommended that the Council authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to an amount of $2,500.00 to cover any unforeseen circumstances and address additional work, which may arise during the course of this project. FISCAL IMPACTS: The adopted CIP budget covers the funding for this project. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: CIM Air, Inc. will not be declared the lowest responsible bidder and a construction contract will not be awarded to that firm. The Council may make specific findings to declare another bidder to be the lowest responsible bidder. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: The contract will be executed and the contractor will be issued a Notice to Proceed. Work will begin as soon as possible, and be completed by within 80 working days. 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 – Copy of contract Page 2of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: Public WorksDave Anderson PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR: Macedonio Nunez John Cherbone Associate Engineer SUBJECT: 2009 Pavement Management Program and 1B Project – Notice of Completion. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to accept the 2009 Pavement Management Program and 1BProjectas complete and authorize staff to record the Notice of Completion for the construction contract. REPORT SUMMARY: All work for the 2009 Pavement Management Program and 1B Projecthas been completed by the City’s contractor, C.F. Archibald Paving, and has been inspected by Public Work’s staff. The scope of work includes furnishing all materials, equipment, and labor to perform asphalt overlay work and re-stripe segments of public roadway at various locations throughout the City. This contract scope also included the surface treatment of the City maintenance yard parking lot located at Glen Brae Drive. The original contract award amount was $788,539.35, with additional approved work in the amount of $134,000 and change order authority in the amount of $77,460. The total approved budget is $999,999.35.The final contract amount of $990,486.14 is within the Council approved budget. In order to close out the construction contract and begin the one-year maintenance/warranty period, it is recommended that the Council accept the project as complete. Further, it is recommended that the Council authorize staff to record the attached Notice of Completion for the construction contract so that the requisite 30-day Stop Notice for the filing of claims by subcontractors or material providers may commence. FISCAL IMPACTS: This projecthas been paid for through the adopted Pavement Management Program CIP funding. The Proposition1B Bond funding already received in the amount of $505,063.71 is included in the budget for this project. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The project would not be accepted as complete and staff would notify the contractor of any additional work required by the City Council before the project would be accepted as complete. Page 1of 2 ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Staff will record the Notice of Completion for the construction contracts and release the contract sureties and retentions thirty days thereafter. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Notice of Completion for the 2009 Pavement Management Program and 1B Project Page 2of 2 Recording requested by, And to be returned to: City of Saratoga Public Works Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the work agreed and performed under the contract mentioned below between the City of Saratoga, a municipal corporation, whose address is 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070, as Owner of property or property rights, and the Contractor st mentioned below, on property of the Owner, was accepted as complete by the Owner on the 21 day of April, 2010. Contract Number: N/A st Contract Date: April 1, 2009 Contractor’s Name: C.F. Archibald Paving INC. Contractor’s Address: P.O. Box 37, Redwood City, CA, 94064 Description of Work: 2009 Pavement Management Program and 1B Project Notice is given in accordance with the provisions of Section 3093 of the Civil Code of the State of California. The undersigned certifies that he is an officer of the City of Saratoga, that he has read the foregoing Notice of Acceptance of Completion and knows the contents thereof; and that the same is true of his own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein stated on the information or belief, as to those matters the he believes to be true. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California on___________________, 2010. CITY OF SARATOGA BY:____________________________ ATTEST:____________________________ Dave Anderson Ann Sullivan, City Clerk City Manager Gov. Code 40814 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR: Captain Terry Calderone Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office SUBJECT: Reinstatement of Participation in Cal-ID Program RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and direct staff to reinstate Saratoga’s participation in the Cal-ID Program. BACKGROUND: The Cal-ID Program,administered by the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office and run by the City of San Jose,provides an automated fingerprint database. Fingerprints are submitted by participating agencies and are scanned into the system for later retrievaland identification when booked into the jail.When a crime occurs and latent prints are recovered, the prints are scanned into the system and used to search for a match. If a match is not found locally, an inquiry can be submitted to a national database. Many crimes have been solved by using this system.This service is already provided by the Sheriff’s Office as part of Cal-ID. Cal-Id has been funded through: 1.Vehicle License fees dedicated to equipment purchases; and 2.Fees paid by member agencies, based upon a population-based formula. In 2009, Santa Clara County conducted an audit of the program and found that the population- based formula, when compared to system usage, resulted in an inequity for the Cities of Saratoga, Cupertino and Los AltosHills. As a consequence, on April 15, 2009, the Sheriff’s Office recommended, and the City Council agreed to withdraw from the Cal-ID Program and to receive automated fingerprint services from the Sheriff’s Office. Since that time, member agencies met and agreed to a new allocation formula based upon usage. The attached table illustrates the payment Saratoga would have incurred in fiscal year 2010/11 under the old formula--$41,146 – and the significantly reduced rate it willincur under the new formula--$487. In order to make this transition from the population-based to use-based approach, the Program will utilize *SB 720 funds in the amount of $1,907,757to offset booking costs incurred bythe San Jose Police Department Central Identification Unit. An additional $299,944 of SB720 funds will be used to offset County-related costs associated with the Cal-ID Program. Page 1of 2 *SB 720 (Lockyer, 1997) added an additional fee of $1.00 to vehicle license fees, and appropriates the money to fund local programs that enhance local law enforcement by providing fingerprint identification. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the much more favorable proposed payment formula, staff recommends that the City reinstate its participation in the Cal-ID Program. FISCAL IMPACTS: The City would incur a cost of $487.00 for Fiscal Year 2010/11. It is anticipated that customary cost-of-living increases would be incurred for participation in future years. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: The Sheriff’s Office, along with the County, has indicated it is not fiscally responsible for the Sheriff’s Office to continue providing automated fingerprint services to Saratogafor 10 print analyses outside of Cal-ID.There would be additional costs to the County to continue with a separate system. ALTERNATIVE ACTION (S): The City Council may direct staff to provide additional information or to pursue another option. FOLLOW UP ACTION (S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Table Illustrating Current and Proposed Cost Allocation Formulas Page 2of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR: Barbara Powell Assistant City Manager SUBJECT:Adoption of Resolution in Support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Protection Act of 2010 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and adopt attached Resolution. BACKGROUND: This item was agendized on the March 17, 2010 City Council meeting. At the request of Council members Page and Miller, the item is bringing brought back for further consideration at the April 21, 2010 Council meeting. In 2004, California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 1A, which affirmed that local property and sales tax revenue should remain with local governments rather than being appropriated by State government to cover its operating expenses. Unfortunately, loopholes in Proposition 1A have enabled the State to continue “diverting” or “borrowing” from local governments in an effort to address State budgetary shortfalls. In September 2009, many City officials attended the League’s annual conference, at which delegates unanimously voted to support the League of California Cities’ sponsorship of a ballot measure for the November 2010 election, which would tighten protections for City and transportation-related revenues. The State Attorney General has given the ballot measure a title and summary, and signatures are currently being gathered to place it on the ballot. The fiscal year, the State borrowed $2 billion in local property taxes, seized billions in redevelopment agency funds and took $697 million in transit funds. Saratoga lost $674,777 in property tax revenues diverted by the State, which was re-secured via a loan and subsequent sale of bonds by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority. Future takeaways are anticipated given the State’s ongoing fiscal crisis and current loopholes with Proposition 1A. DISCUSSION: The Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Act ballot measure would: Page 1of 4 Prohibit the State from taking, borrowing or redirecting local taxpayer funds dedicated to public safety, emergency response and other vital local government services (including redevelopment). The measure would close loopholes to prevent the taking of local taxpayer funds currently dedicated to cities, counties and special districts. It would also revoke the State’s authority to borrow local government property tax funds or divert local redevelopment funds. Protect vital, dedicated transportation and public transit funds from State raids. The measure would prevent State borrowing, taking or redirecting of the State sales tax on gasoline (Proposition 42) and Highway User Tax on gasoline (HUTAfunds) that are dedicated to transportation maintenance and improvements. It would also prevent the State from redirecting or taking public transit funds. By adopting the attached Resolution, the City Council would: Formally endorse the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, a proposed constitutional amendment; and Authorize the listing of the CITY OF SARATOGA in support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Protection Act of 2010 and instruct staff to fax a copy of this resolution to campaign offices at 916.442.3510. FISCAL IMPACTS: There are no direct financial impacts to the City of Saratoga related to adoption of the attached Resolution. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: The attached Resolution would not be adopted by the City Council. ALTERNATIVE ACTION (S): The City Council may take a position different than staff’s recommendation, or take no position on this issue. FOLLOW UP ACTION (S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Page 2of 4 RESOLUTION NO. ________ RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE LOCAL TAXPAYER, PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION PROTECTION ACT OF 2010 WHEREAS, California voters have repeatedly and overwhelmingly passed separate ballot measures to stop State raids of local government funds, and to dedicate the taxes on gasoline to fund local and state transportation improvement projects; and WHEREAS, these local government funds are critical to provide the police and fire, emergency response, parks, libraries, and other vital local services that residents rely upon every day, and gas tax funds are vital to maintain and improve local streets and roads, to make road safety improvements, relieve traffic congestion, and provide mass transit; and WHEREAS, despite the fact that voters have repeatedly passed measures to prevent the State from taking these revenues dedicated to funding local government services and transportation improvement projects, the State Legislature has seized and borrowed billions of dollars in local government and transportation funds in the past few years; and WHEREAS, this year’s borrowing and raids of local government, redevelopment and transit funds, as well as previous, ongoing raids of local government and transportation funds have lead to severe consequences, such as layoffs of police, fire and paramedic first responders, fire station closures, stalled economic development, healthcare cutbacks, delays in road safety improvements, public transit fare increases and cutbacks in public transit services; and WHEREAS, State politicians in Sacramento have continued to ignore the will of the voters, and current law provides no penalties when state politicians take or borrow these locally- dedicated funds; and WHEREAS, a coalition of local government, transportation and transit advocates recently filed a constitutional amendment with the California Attorney General, called the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, for potential placement on California’s November 2010 statewide ballot; and WHEREAS, approval of this ballot initiative would close loopholes and change the constitution to further prevent State politicians in Sacramento from seizing, diverting, shifting, borrowing, transferring, suspending or otherwise taking or interfering with tax revenues dedicated to funding local government services, including redevelopment, or dedicated to transportation improvement projects and mass transit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF SARATOGA formally endorses the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, a proposed constitutional amendment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the CITY COUNCIL hereby authorizes the listing of the CITY OF SARATOGA in support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Protection Act of 2010 and instructs staff to fax a copy of this resolution to campaign offices at 916.442.3510. Page 3of 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 21st day of April 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: _______________________________ Kathleen M. King, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Page 4of 4 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: Community DevelopmentDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Kate Bear, ArboristJohn F. Livingstone, AICP SUBJECT: Oak tree on Fruitvale Ave at entrance to City Hall parking lot RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct Staff accordingly. REPORT SUMMARY: Over the past six months, the oak tree at the entrance to the City Hall parking lot on Fruitvale Avenue has dropped two limbs measuring between 6 and 10 inches in diameter,and two other limbs of this size have died. The City has maintainedthis treeover the years, by spraying the lower trunk to prevent insect and disease problems, inspecting the cables in the canopy, and pruning the tree.Following the most recent limb failure Staff obtained two outside reports and data on the health and structure of the oak tree at the entrance to the City Hall parking lot on Fruitvale Avenue. Each report is briefly summarized below. The report by Brian McGovern (Woodpecker Certified Arborist, March 21, 2010) provided a visual and surface inspection of the tree.He found the tree to be in decline, with a 10% chance of survival at best. To achieve the best chance of survivaland because of public safety concerns, he recommended that all surrounding asphalt and concrete be removed from under the tree, and that all pedestrian and vehicular traffic be prevented from walking or driving under its canopy. Otherwise, he recommended removal of the tree. The report by Joseph McNeil (Consulting Arborist, March 30, 2010) provided data from drilling into the tree in 20 locations in the trunkandbuttress roots, and a climbing inspection of the canopy. Data in the report includedinterpretations of the data from drilling, findings of his inspection of cavities in the canopy, and an inspection of the cables.He found the tree to be in decline and dying from the upper and outer canopy downwards, and does not expect the tree to survive more than 10 years. He found pockets of decay in the trunkto depths ranging from 4 to 6 inches and intermingled with sound wood. He also estimated a 50% chance of limb failure over the next 5 years, primarily from unsupported limbs in the outer canopy. He did not provide a recommendation toretain or remove the tree. FISCAL IMPACTS: The Department of Public Works has budgeted funds for tree care. Estimated costs to maintain or remove the tree are listed below.The cost to continue to monitor and maintain treeis estimated to be about $2,000/year, and the cost to remove the tree and stump will be $4,200. Page 1of 2 CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: As directed by Council. 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 Arborist report by Brian McGovern, Woodpecker Certified Arborist, March 21, 2010 Arborist report by Joseph McNeil, Consulting Arborist, March 30, 2010 Page 2of 2 òïîùû íé÷ìô÷óðíîéçðèóîõêúíêóéè ù March 30, 2010 Kate Bear City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95060 SUBJECT: Inspection of a large coast live oak at the parking lot to the city offices. I inspected the tree on March 26. You have requested information regarding risk of mechanical failure of the tree. SUMMARY This large oak has experienced two sudden limb failures recently. Supplemental support cables assist the basic framework of the tree, but do not support smaller limbs such as the ones that failed. The entire tree is dying back, a gradual process that cannot be reversed. Decay and termite infestation is obvious on the southeast side of the southernmost of the tree trunks and appears quite alarming. However, this compromised wood presents as a surface feature, for the most part about four to six inches deep into this 37 inch diameter trunk. The ends of all limbs on this trunk have been heavily pruned as they either died or failed mechanically. As a result, there is little weight on the trunk, which is also supported by 1 supplemental cables. Failure of this trunk is possible, but the risk is low over the next five years. A cavity in the northernmost (northeast) trunk extending over the parking lot entrance is limited in extent. Two supplemental cables support this trunk as well, and weight at the ends of limbs on this trunk has been substantially reduced. As with the southernmost trunk, failure of this trunk is possible, but risk is low over the next five years, in my opinion. There is decay in the base of the trunk near the ground, found on the west side in a limited area, not broadly. On the opposite side, toward the street, within the southeast quadrant, but not across the full extent of the quadrant, there is decay in the large roots that physically hold up the tree, and to some extent in the trunk between the roots. However, this occurs in pockets and strips surrounded by sound wood. In particular wood near the surface is sound. The condition of the base of the tree combined with asymmetry of the foliar and large limb structure, with aerial weight more to the northwest, contributes to some risk of 1 I consider a “low” risk as less likely to occur than not occur; a “high” risk as more likely to occur than not occur; a “moderate” risk as equally likely to occur or not occur. ôÛÐÈ×ÎùÍÇÊÈìÐ×ÛÉÛÎÈôÓÐÐùÛÐÓÖÍÊÎÓÛ ISA Certified Arborist # WC0102 D-49 California State Contractors License # 482248 (Tree Care C-61 , Landscaping C-27) ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #299 Live Oak Assessment, City Hall Parking LotPage 2 City of Saratoga, CA whole tree failure in that direction (northwest), over the parking lot, somewhat away from the roadway. The most likely failure risks over the next few years appear to me to be of large (six to ten inch diameter) unsupported limbs or possibly of the entire tree. I would characterize both risks as low/moderate over the next five years, moderate over the next ten years, and high beyond that out to twenty years. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that the tree will survive biologically beyond the next ten years, if that long. It is not a “wrong” or “right” decision to remove the tree now or to retain it for a period of time. Currently the tree provides a visual benefit, and some might have the perception of this benefit as an overriding consideration. Others may see the tree as seriously declining, disfigured, and unattractive as it continues to die, thereby providing insufficient benefit to justify any risk of failure. Both modes of perception of the tree are feasible. Ultimately, this decision falls to the city. There is no correct answer. OBSERVATIONS/DISCUSSION The tree is 72 inches in trunk diameter at about 30 inches above grade. There is extensive bark injury from Western sycamore borer, which is responsible for the roughened appearance of the bark, death of inner bark, and may be connected to some of the dead tissues deeper into the tree. However, the presence of the insect in these places is more a symptom of a particularly stressed or slow growing parts of the tree, or parts that are dying back for other reasons. I understand you have a program in place to manage this insect. The tree divides at four to five feet to three trunks of 37, 35, and 34 inches respectively, roughly south to north relative to one another. The central trunk forms the functional “top” of the tree. This trunk is relatively symmetric in form, and well structured, with 1 good taper. Four cables are attached to this trunk, two to each of the other two trunks. 2 A cavity below the attachment of the cables is small, limited, and not significant. The trunk to the south is one that caused initial concern. A large limb failed recently from this trunk and a zone on the southeast side has exposed decay and loss of structural wood from subterranean termite activity. To the sides of this zone, which appears to be about 18 to perhaps as much as 24 inches wide, the wood appears to be sound. Above this zone dead wood is present on the trunk, in a distinct “bulge”, but is apparently still sound, not decayed nor affected by termites. Decayed and infested wood continues in a narrow column below this zone, into roots roughly in line with that column. The termite colony lives in the ground and consumes dead wood only, starting in the roots and working upward with the grain. 1 A well-tapered trunk or limb has a large diameter at the base and tapers gradually to a small diameter at the top or end. Such a structure distributes stress along it’s length while also avoiding a concentration of mass at the end, and is relatively stable compared to a more cylindrical trunk or limb. 2 I climbed the tree to inspect this and other cavities. Joseph McNeilMarch 20, 2010 Live Oak Assessment, City Hall Parking LotPage 3 City of Saratoga, CA öÓÕÇÊ× From two directions, the arrows illustrate that the south trunk has been cut back significantly. To the right the tree can be seen to be asymmetric toward the north (right) and northwest. This trunk has been reduced by a large amount in height, and particularly in spread. Thus there is much less weight cantilevered beyond this compromised zone than in the past. Further, supplemental cables support both major branches of this trunk. One of these supported limbs extends toward the street and has two features of note. First, there is a cavity near it’s base. Inspection of the cavity revealed it to be minor, not significant in my opinion. Second, the cable was installed in a sub-standard manner that would impair it’s effectiveness were it required to support much load. However, there is little weight remaining on this limb and the cable impairment is acceptable. On the main extension of the south trunk is another injury or shallow cavity below where the support cable is attached. I found this not to be significant. Overall the combination of reduced weight and supplemental cables appears sufficient so that while there is probably more risk of failure of this south trunk than if it were “perfect”, that risk is still low, in my opinion. The trunk to the north has a cavity seen in Figure 2 as a small oblique oval below the number “9” to the lower right. The thinnest wall of sound wood around this cavity appears to be on the limb top above the opening, in one location, where it is about seven inches thick. Elsewhere on the top of the limb and particularly on the bottom the sound wood is much thicker. The green line represents a support cable from the central trunk. Given the öÓÕÇÊ× Looking south over the parking lot entrance, a cavity is seen below the “9”, and a support cable is represented by the green line. Joseph McNeilMarch 20, 2010 Live Oak Assessment, City Hall Parking LotPage 4 City of Saratoga, CA amount of sound wood, moderate weight reduction at the ends of this limb structure, and the support cable this limb appears adequately supported. The limb to the right of Figure 2 extends toward the photographer, over the entrance to the parking lot. The cable to this limb is slightly slack, but it appears that weight of this limb is managed well enough to significantly reduce failure risk. Overall the north trunk appears to be at low risk of failure over the next five years. There are indicators of decay at the base of the tree in the center of the west side, near the ground. This appears to be limited in extent from side to side by a foot or less and is overlain by about seven inches of sound wood at it’s closest to the surface. Much of the buttressing/basal root system visible below the trunk on the southeast side appears at first, by sounding with a mallet, to be relatively hollow. However, with further examination decay is found to be from four to twelve inches beneath the surface, with sound wood intervening. My opinion of this basal decay is that, combined with canopy asymmetry toward the northwest and common storm winds from the south, it somewhat increases the risk of whole tree failure toward the direction of weight of the canopy, over the parking lot entrance. I would characterize this risk, by current assessment as low to moderate over the next five years, moderate for the five years after that and high for ten years and beyond. There is a similar risk of limbs of six to ten inches falling. This has happened twice in the past few months. This risk has been reduced by recent pruning, but I would still characterize the possibility of such an occurrence in the next five years as low to moderate, moderate for the next five years after that, and I would say there is a high chance of failure of such a limb over a period greater than ten years out. Given the health of the tree it is likely that, if you retain it, it will be pruned back, reduced in spread as it dies during this period. This may reduce risk of limb failure but will at the same time make the tree less attractive. DECAY DETECTION I used a hickory mallet as a sounding instrument over all parts of the tree I examined; the entire trunk and trunk junction area, and the upper sides of all exposed roots. Where I 3 found evidence of decay I probed with a Resistograph both into the zones where I suspected decay and adjacent to them. 3 A Resistograph inserts a 3 mm diameter probe to a 15 inch depth into the tree. It measures wood toughness along that track and converts the measurement into a graph that can be used to infer decay, cavities, internal knots, or other features. Joseph McNeilMarch 20, 2010 Live Oak Assessment, City Hall Parking LotPage 5 City of Saratoga, CA I have attached photos to the end of this report that illustrate each of the probe locations. Numbers within yellow fields on these photos correspond to the individual numbers of the probes. I have also attached copies of the probe data strips themselves. Each is numbered at the upper left, with comments to the lower right and a key to different internal conditions at the lower left. The probes proceed left (at the surface/bark of the tree) to the right as the bit enters and extends toward the center of the tree. Horizontal measurement is in inches. There is no vertical calibration. A higher trace typically indicates more resistance and sound wood. I adjust my interpretation depending on how the probe, which has a small “shoulder” at the end of the bit, reacts as it’s withdrawn. For this reason I’ve interpreted areas as sound that look similar to other areas that are interpreted as decayed. For confirmation I occasionally used an eleven inch long 1/8 inch brad point bit to extract actual material from the tree to assist in and confirm interpretation. In particular this was the case for points 15, 16 and 18. After review of this report you may find you still have questions. Please feel free to contact me if you do. Sincerely, Joseph McNeil Certified Arborist #WC0102 Registered Consulting Arborist #299, ASCA Contractors Lic. #482248 (Tree service C-61 D-49, Landscaping C-27, inactive) Joseph McNeilMarch 20, 2010 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT:CITY MANAGER: Public WorksDave Anderson PREPARED BY:DIRECTOR: Macedonio Nunez John Cherbone Associate Engineer SUBJECT: Saratoga Village Pedestrian Enhancement Project – Award of Construction Contract. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Approve Budget Resolution. 2.Move to declare Robert A. Bothman, Inc of San Jose to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project. 3. Move to award a construction contract to Robert A. Bothman, Inc in the amount of $854,710 and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. 4. Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $65,000. REPORT SUMMARY: th . The City Sealed bids for Saratoga Village Pedestrian Enhancement Project were opened on April 13 received 3 bids whichare summarized in Attachment 1. The lowest apparent bid of $951,388 was submitted by Robert A. Bothman, Inc. The City prequalified interested bidders for this project to ensure eachcontractor that submitted a bid would have experience performing complex projects in high use areas. The low bid of $951,388 is 5.4% above the Engineer’s Estimate of $900,000. Staff has carefully checked the bid along with the listed references and has determined that the bid is responsive to the Notice th , 2010. Inviting Sealed Bids dated March 24 thrd Street, 3Street, Starbucks, This project will consist of pedestrian enhancements on Big Basin Way at 4 and Blaney Plaza. Improvements include street crossing improvements and minor sidewalk repair, bicycle enhancements including bike racks, pedestrian bulb outs, landscaping, hangingflower baskets on light poles, irrigation, and street furniture. This Project is partially funded through a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) grant for an amount of $425,000. The budget for the Village Pedestrian Enhancement Project is $920,000 in which $90,000 of the project budget is dedicated to completion of sidewalk and curb repair throughout the Village as well as other Page 1of 3 minor repairs and upgrades; therefore the effective budget available for award of the construction bid is $830,000. In order to bring the project within budget including a construction contingency in the amount of $65,000, staff offers the following proposal: Bid Item Revisions th Eliminate Median at 4Street: ($25,478) Eliminate Light Pole Relocation.Work will be performed by the City: ($16,200) * Postpone Installation of Pedestrian Activated Lights at Starbucks: ($55,000) *Note : The City has a fair chance of success in obtaining future grant funding for the completion of the Pedestrian Conceptual Plan for the Village including the Pedestrian Activated Lights at Starbucks, the mid block crosswalk improvements at thth Buy and Save, pedestrian enhancements at 5 and 6 Streets, and other improvements in the Plan. Budget Adjustments ** Revenue for Adjusting Utility Boxes to Grade: $26,000 Change Order Authority Funded via the 2010CIP: $65,000 **Note : The costs for adjusting utility boxes to grade is a pass through as these costs will be paid by the private utility company who own the box or boxes, therefore the project budget can be increased by the reimbursement amount. Budget Summary ConstructionCosts $951,388 - Construction Bid th ($25,478) - Eliminate Median @ 4Street ($16,200) - Light Pole Relocation ($55,000) - Postpone Ped Lights @ Starbucks $854,710 - Construction Contract Award Amount $65,000 - Construction Contingency $919,710 Construction Funding $830,000 - Available Budget $26,000 - Reimbursement from Utility Companies $65,000 - Construction Contingency via the 2010 CIP $920,000 FISCAL IMPACTS: The adopted CIP budget coupled with the approval of the attached budget resolution will provide the necessary funding for this project. This project will be partially reimbursed through the CMAQgrant in the amount of $425,000 and a $26,000 reimbursement from utility companies. Page 2of 3 CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Robert A. Bothman, Inc will not be declared the lowest responsible bidder and a construction contract will not be awarded to that firm. The Council may make specific findings to declare another bidder to be the lowest responsible bidder. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: City Council can propose to fund, eliminate, or modify bid items not proposed by staff. Any additional modifications to bid items willbe discussed with the low bidder to confirm agreement. FOLLOW UP ACTION: The contract will be executed and the contractor will be issued a Notice to Proceed. Work will begin as th soon as possible, and be completed by November 19, 2010.Additionally the contractor will be required to complete all work in progress prior to the annual Saratoga Chamber event in September ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: No advertising/noticing in additional to the normal agenda posting. Prior to the start of work notices will be distributed to the Village Merchants to inform them about the upcoming work. Merchants directly impacted by the work will be included in meetings with the contractor to minimize any impacts. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Bid Summary. 2. Contract. 3. Budget Resolution. (The Budget Resolution will be distributed to City Council at the City Council Meeting in order to capture direction from Council at the CIP Study Session) Page 3of 3 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM: April 21, 2010 DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER: City Manager’s OfficeDave Anderson PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR: Barbara Powell Assistant City Manager SUBJECT:Proposed Franchise Fee Increase for Solid Waste Management Agreement RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept reportandprovide input to Council member Howard Millerabout imposition of a franchise fee increase under the contract with West Valley Collection & Recycling, LLC (WVCR). BACKGROUND: The West Valley Solid Waste Management Authority (WVSWMA)is a four-member Authority representing the Cities of Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno and Saratoga, overseeing the operation of waste, recyclables and yard trimmings collection services. Howard Miller is Saratoga’s representative on the Authority Board. At its May 6, 2010meeting,the WVSWMA Board will receive a report concerning proposed fiscal year 2010/11 rates for waste management services under the contract withWVCR. New rates are ratified on an annual basis, pursuant to terms and conditions provided for in the contract. Annual contractual rate changes are based uponthe following adjustments: Consumer Price Index (CPI) --80% of CPI for preceding December to December; Disposal Rate – based upon government fees assessed for disposal at landfills; and Vehicle Impact Fee--adopted by Saratoga to mitigate damage to City roads caused by heavy collection vehicles. For fiscal year 2010/11, an additional franchise fee increase is proposed to generate revenues that may be used to offset General Fund costsrelated to the Non-point Source Pollution Prevention Program (Clean Water Program). Each year, regulatory requirements and related expenses have been steadilyincreasing for the Clean Water Program, an unfunded mandate. As an example, in 2009/10, the cost for the Clean Water Program –including the annual fee, inspections, and storm drain cleaning –was $174,495to the General Fund. For 2010/11, Clean Water Program costs have risen to $186,814. Page 1of 3 The franchise fee increase from 16.5% (current) to 19% (proposed) could generate approximately $115,000 annually in General Fundrevenuesthat could be used to partially offset Clean Water Program expenses. As an example, using a monthly, 35-gallon cart service, the impact of the franchise fee increase would be 74centsper month, which, taken together withall the rate adjustments,would result in a $1.10 increase per month: Monthly 35-gallon cart rate – Franchise Fee Increase Only Current Franchise Fee (16.5%) Proposed Franchise Fee Difference (19%) $3.60$4.34$.074 Monthly 35-gallon cart rate Rate Adjustment with Rate Adjustment with Current Franchise Fee Proposed Franchise Fee (16%)(19%) Current Rate$21.37$21.37 CPI Adjustment $ 0.32$ 0.32 Disposal Fee $ 0.03$ 0.03 Vehicle Impact Fee $ 0.01$ 0.01 Franchise Fee $ 0.33$ 0.74 Projected Rate$22.06$22.47 Difference between current rate and new (adjusted) rate$ 0.69$ 1.10 Rate increases would be implemented beginning July 1, 2010. Staff is requesting that Council members provide input on the proposed franchise fee increase. While Council’s input is not binding upon Council member Miller, he may take it under advisement when voting on this issue at the May 6, 2010 WVSWMA Board meeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: Implementation of the franchise fee increase would result in approximately $115,000 annually in General Fund revenues for the City of Saratoga. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): Council may choose not be provide input on this issue. Page 2of 3 FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Council member Miller will attend the May 6, 2010 WVSWMA Board meeting. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of agenda ATTACHMENTS: None Page 3of 3