Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-02-2018 City Council Agenda Packet
Saratoga City Council Agenda – Page 1 of 5 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MAY 2, 2018 6:00 P.M. JOINT MEETING Administrative Conference Room, City Hall | 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 Joint Meeting with Board of Supervisors President Simitian 7:00 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Civic Theater, Council Chambers | 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL REPORT ON POSTING OF THE AGENDA The agenda for this meeting was properly posted on April 27, 2018. REPORT FROM JOINT MEETING ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Any member of the public may address the City Council for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on the Agenda. The law generally prohibits the City Council from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly. ANNOUNCEMENTS CEREMONIAL ITEMS Proclamation Declaring May 2018 as National Preservation Month Recommended Action: Present the proclamation declaring May 2018 as National Preservation Month to the City of Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission. Appointment of Public Safety Task Force Member & Oath of Office Recommended Action: Approve the attached resolution appointing 1 member to the Public Safety Task Force; and direct the City Clerk to administer the Oath of Office. Asian / Pacific American Heritage Month Recommended Action: Declare May 2018 as Asian / Pacific American Heritage Month. Saratoga City Council Agenda – Page 2 of 5 Commendations to Representatives of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and South Eastern Asian Cultural Groups Recommended Action: Present Commendations to Representatives of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and South Eastern Asian Cultural Groups 1. CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar contains routine items of business. Items in this section will be acted on in one motion, unless removed by the Mayor or a Council Member. Any member of the public may speak on an item on the Consent Calendar at this time, or request that the Mayor remove an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Public Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. 1.1. Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers Recommended Action: Review and accept check registers for the following accounts payable payment cycles: 04/17/2018 Period 10; and 04/24/2018 Period 10. 1.2. Treasurer’s Report for the Month Ended March 31, 2018 Recommended Action: Review and accept the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended March 31, 2018. 1.3. City Council Meeting Minutes Recommended Action: Approve the City Council minutes for the Regular City Council Meetings on April 4, 2018 and April 18, 2018. 1.4. Parks and Recreation Commission Fundraising Plan Recommended Action: Approve the Parks and Recreation Commission Fundraising Plan to collect donations and seek sponsorships for Movie Night. 2. PUBLIC HEARING Items placed under this section of the Agenda are those defined by law as requiring a special notice and/or a public hearing or those called by the City Council on its own volition. During Public Hearings for appeals, Applicants/Appellants and/or their representatives have a total of ten (10) minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three (3) minutes. The amount of time for public comment may be reduced by the Mayor or by action of the City Council. After public comment, the Applicant/Appellants and/or their representatives have a total of five (5) minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested for continuance are subject to the City Council's approval at the Council Meeting. Saratoga City Council Agenda – Page 3 of 5 2.1. Appeal of a Fence Exception Approval for 14345 Maclay Court (APPC18-0001) Recommended Action: Conduct a public hearing and de novo review of the appeal, and adopt the attached resolution denying the appeal and approving the Fence Exception application for a recently constructed solid fence at 14345 Maclay Court. 3. GENERAL BUSINESS 3.1. Request to Rename the Administrative Conference Room Recommended Action: Rename the Administrative Conference Room at City Hall the Linda Callon Conference Room. 3.2. Saratoga Senior Coordinating Council Lease Agreement and Update to Support and Facility Use Renewal Agreement Recommended Action: Accept report and adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Lease Agreement with Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) and an update to the previously approved SASCC Support and Use of Facilities Agreement COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS Mayor Mary-Lynne Bernald Cities Association of Santa Clara County-Legislative Action Committee Cities Association of Santa Clara County-City Selection Committee Council Finance Committee Hakone Foundation Board Public Art Committee Saratoga Historical Foundation South Flow Arrivals Ad Hoc Committee West Valley Clean Water Program Authority West Valley Mayors and Managers West Valley Solid Waste Management Joint Powers Authority Vice Mayor Manny Cappello Cities Association of Santa Clara County Board of Directors Santa Clara County Housing and Community Development (HCD) Council Committee Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) West Valley Sanitation District Council Member Howard Miller America in Bloom Committee Council Finance Committee Saratoga Ministerial Association Saratoga Sister City Organization Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority Board of Directors Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Policy Advisory Committee VTA State Route 85 Corridor Policy Advisory Board Saratoga City Council Agenda – Page 4 of 5 Council Member Emily Lo Hakone Foundation Board & Executive Committee KSAR Community Access TV Board Public Art Committee Santa Clara County Library Joint Powers Authority Council Member Rishi Kumar Association of Bay Area Governments Saratoga Chamber of Commerce & Destination Saratoga Santa Clara County Expressway Plan 2040 Policy Advisory Board Santa Clara Valley Water District Commission CITY COUNCIL ITEMS COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF THE AGENDA, DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET, COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT I, Nora Pimentel, City Clerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council was posted and available for review on April 27, 2018 at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Signed this 27th day of April 2018 at Saratoga, California. Nora Pimentel, MMC, City Clerk In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Council by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerk at the time they are distributed to the City Council. These materials are also posted on the City website. In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 408.868.1269. Notification 24 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA title II] Saratoga City Council Agenda – Page 5 of 5 04/30 5:00 p.m. Youth Commission Interviews 05/02 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with Board of Supervisors President Simitian | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 05/16 05/21 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with KSAR | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 6:00 p.m. FEMA class – Role of Elected Officials in a Disaster 06/06 5:30 p.m. Joint Meeting with Saratoga Neighborhood’s & Neighborhood Watch in Community Center, Multipurpose Room | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 06/20 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with Hakone Board | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 07/04 Meeting Cancelled 07/18 Meeting Cancelled 08/01 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with Historical Foundation | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 08/15 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with SASCC | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 09/05 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with Montalvo Arts | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 09/19 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with Youth Commission | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 10/03 5:30 p.m. Joint Meeting with Saratoga School Districts in Senior Center, Saunders Room | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 10/17 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with State Senator Jim Beall Jr | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 11/07 11/21 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with West Valley – Mission Community College Board of Trustees | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with Assembly Member Evan Low | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session 12/05 6:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with Sheriff’s Office |7:00 p.m. Regular Session 12/13 7:00 p.m. Council Reorganization 12/19 6:00 p.m. Study Session – Council Norms | 7:00 p.m. Regular Session Unless otherwise stated, Joint Meetings and Study Sessions begin at 6:00 p.m. in the Administrative Conference Room at Saratoga City Hall at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue and Regular Session begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Theater at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR 2018 City of Saratoga CITY COUNCIL JOINT MEETING Discussion Topics Joint Meeting with Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors President Joe Simitian May 2, 2018 | 6:00 p.m. Saratoga City Hall | Administrative Conference Room 6:00 p.m. Introductions 6:15 p.m.Update on Housing Efforts 6:25 p.m.Age-Friendly Communities 6:35 p.m.Updates from Board President Simitian 6:45 p.m.Other Remarks & Wrap Up Dinner will be provided at the Joint Meeting. The Regular Session of the City Council begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Theater. Joint Meeting attendees are invited to attend the Regular Session and share an overview of the Joint Meeting. 6 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:City Manager’s Office PREPARED BY:Debbie Bretschneider, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT:Proclamation Declaring May 2018 as National Preservation Month RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present the proclamation declaring May 2018 as National Preservation Month to the City of Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission. BACKGROUND: Established in 1973 by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, National Preservation Month is co-sponsored by local preservation groups, State historical societies, and business and civic organizations across the country. During Preservation Month, many events are planned to promote historic places for the purpose of instilling national and community pride, promoting heritage tourism, diversity of cultures, and showing the social and economic benefits of historic preservation. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 –Proclamation Declaring May 2018 as National Preservation 7 PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DECLARING MAY 2018 AS NATIONAL PRESERVATION MONTH WHEREAS, historic preservation is an effective tool revitalizing neighborhoods, fostering local pride and maintaining community character while enhancing livability; and WHEREAS, historic preservation provides the opportunity to celebrate the community’s history and the individuals who have shaped Saratoga, including those who are dedicated to preserving the physical reminders of the City’s past; and WHEREAS, May 2018 is National Preservation Month, which is sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and is celebrated locally by the City of Saratoga and the Saratoga Historical Foundation; and WHEREAS, the Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission, in partnership with the Saratoga Public Library and the Saratoga Historical Foundation, will be hosting several free National Preservation Month events activities; and WHEREAS, there will be a display of the Saratoga Heritage Inventory, Heritage Trees, and other historical assets in the Study Room at the Saratoga Public Library during National Preservation Month; and WHEREAS,on Sunday, May 6 at 2:00 p.m., Craig Awbry will give a presentation on "From a “Circa 1890 Barn to an Award Winning Office Space” at the Saratoga Library; and WHEREAS, the Saratoga Historical Foundation will lead a walking tour of the Village on Saturday, May 26 at 1:00 p.m. starting at the Saratoga Historical Museum. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby recognize May 2018 as National Preservation Month and calls upon the community of Saratoga to learn more about the historical resources in their community by participating in National Preservation Month events and join their fellow citizens across the United States in recognizing and participating in this special observance. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA this 2nd day of May 2018. ___________________________ Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor City of Saratoga 8 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:City Manager’s Office PREPARED BY:Nora Pimentel, City Clerk SUBJECT:Appointment of Public Safety Task Force Member & Oath of Office RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the attached resolution appointing 1 member to the Public Safety Task Force; and direct the City Clerk to administer the Oath of Office. BACKGROUND: Effective March 23, 2018, a member on the Public Safety Task force was removed from the Public Safety Task Force pursuant to City Code 2-12.040. Since each member of the Task Force is nominated by the member of the City Council, a new nominee was requested. Council Member Kumar nominated the following person to serve on the Public Safety Task Force to fill the unexpired term: Name Commission Term Arun Venkatachar Public Safety Task Force May 2, 2018 –November 30, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Resolution of Appointment Attachment B –Oath of Office 9 RESOLUTION NO. 18-___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING ONE MEMBER TO THE SARATOGA PUBLIC SAFETY TASK FORCE WHEREAS, effective March 23, 2018, a member on the Public Safety Task force was removed due to three unexcused absences, therefore creating a vacancy; WHEREAS, Council Member Kumar nominated Arun Venkatachar to serve on the Public safety Task Force to fill an unexpired term ending November 30, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves that the following individual be appointed to the following term: Name Commission Term Arun Venkatachar Public Safety Task Force May 2, 2018 – November 30, 2018 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 2 nd day of May 2018 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor Attest: Nora Pimentel, MMC, City Clerk 10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA I, Arun Venkatachar, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. Arun Venkatachar, Member Public Safety Task Force Subscribed and sworn to before me on this 2nd day of May 2018. Nora Pimentel, MMC City Clerk City of Saratoga 11 Page 1 of 1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:City Manager’s Office PREPARED BY:Debbie Bretschneider, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT:Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month RECOMMENDED ACTION: Declare May 2018 as Asian / Pacific American Heritage Month. BACKGROUND: The attached proclamation recognizes May 2018 as Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month in the City of Saratoga. Communities throughout the United States recognize May as Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month to honor Asian Americans and bring attention to the history of Asian and Pacific Islanders in the United States. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month Proclamation 12 PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DECLARING MAY 2018 AS ASIAN/PACIFIC AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH WHEREAS,in 1978, a Joint Congressional Resolution established Asian/Pacific American Heritage Week to coincide with two important historical milestones in: the arrival of the first Japanese immigrants in the U.S. in May 7, 1843 and contributions of Chinese workers to the building of the transcontinental railroad completed May 10, 1869; and WHEREAS, Asian Americans have had a profound impact on the United States and Saratoga community; and WHEREAS, the United States and the City of Saratoga are enriched by the diverse cultural contributions residents from areas like the Pacific Islands, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and India; and WHEREAS, according to the 2010 Census, Asian Americans constitute more than 41 percent of the City of Saratoga’s population; and WHEREAS, Saratoga is home to a number of Asian Americans who serve as excellent representatives of both the Saratoga Asian American community and the Saratoga community-at-large; and WHEREAS, during the month of May, Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month is celebrated throughout the United States with community festivals, government-sponsored activities, and educational activities for students; and WHEREAS, the City Council celebrates “Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month” by calling upon Saratoga residents to honor Saratoga’s Asian Americans and learn more about the history of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby declare May 2018 as ASIAN/PACIFIC AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 2nd day of May 2018. Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor City of Saratoga 13 Page 1 of 1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:City Manager’s Office PREPARED BY:Debbie Bretschneider, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT:Commendations to Representatives of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and South Eastern Asian Cultural Groups RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present commendations to representatives of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and South Eastern Asian cultural groups that are active in the City of Saratoga. BACKGROUND: The attached proclamations recognize Phyllis Tung, Radica Giri, Yoshihiro Uchida, and Sue and John Tang for their contributions to the City of Saratoga. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Commendation for Phyllis Tung Attachment B: Commendation for Radica Giri Attachment C: Commendation for Yoshihiro Uchida Attachment D: Commendation for Sue and John Tang 14 PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING PHYLLIS TUNG WHEREAS, the United States and the City of Saratoga are enriched by the diverse cultural contributions residents from areas like the Pacific Islands, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and India; and WHEREAS, Asian/Pacific Americans have had a profound impact on the United States and the Saratoga community, which is home to a number of Asian/Pacific Americans who serve as excellent representatives of both the Saratoga Asian/Pacific American community and the Saratoga community-at-large; and WHEREAS, Phyllis Tung moved to Saratoga in 2004, along with her husband Joseph and their children Anouk and Dawson; and WHEREAS, Phyllis is very involved in community service in Saratoga, including election as PTA President for Argonaut Elementary School for 2017-18 and 2018-19, as a Committee Member of the 2018 Hakone Garden Lunar New Year Celebration, as a parent advisor for the Chinese Ensemble Group, and Committee Member for the 2018 Women Leadership Symposium Lions Club District 4-C6; and WHEREAS, in 2017, Phyllis established the Redwood Leo Club, a student volunteer club at Redwood Middle School, which has accomplished many projects including, running a care package drive for students affected by the North Bay fires, volunteering at the Cupertino “Fish-a-thon” for children with Autism, and working with special needs student at Redwood Middle School so they could participate in the Saratoga “Paint the Rocks” program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Saratoga celebrates “Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month” by calling upon Saratoga residents to honor Saratoga’s Asian/Pacific Americans and learn more about the history of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby present this proclamation to Saratoga resident Phyllis Tung and thank her for her contributions to Saratoga. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 2nd day of May 2018. Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor City of Saratoga 15 PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING RADICA GIRI WHEREAS, the United States and the City of Saratoga are enriched by the diverse cultural contributions residents from areas like the Pacific Islands, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and India; and WHEREAS, Asian/Pacific Americans have had a profound impact on the United States and the Saratoga community, which is home to a number of Asian/Pacific Americans who serve as excellent representatives of both the Saratoga Asian/Pacific American community and the Saratoga community-at-large; and WHEREAS, Saratoga resident Radica Giri is the Artistic Director of Anjali Natya dance school, which specializes in the traditional style of Indian classical dance, Bharatanatyam; and WHEREAS, Radica Giri is a dedicated artist, actor, performer, teacher, and choreographer who takes pride in teaching the Indian classical dance to the next generation on inspiring performers; and WHEREAS, Anjali Natya has performed at various cultural events, fundraisers, and school programs in Saratoga and Santa Clara County, including performing at the Saratoga Rotary Art Show from 2014-2018, at Redwood Middle School, and Saratoga High School. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Saratoga celebrates “Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month” by calling upon Saratoga residents to honor Saratoga’s Asian/Pacific Americans and learn more about the history of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby present this proclamation to Saratoga resident Radica Giri and thank her for her contributions to Saratoga. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 2nd day of May 2018. Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor City of Saratoga 16 PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING YOSHIHIRO UCHIDA WHEREAS, the United States and the City of Saratoga are enriched by the diverse cultural contributions residents from areas like the Pacific Islands, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and India; and WHEREAS, Asian/Pacific Americans have had a profound impact on the United States and the Saratoga community, which is home to a number of Asian/Pacific Americans who serve as excellent representatives of both the Saratoga Asian/Pacific American community and the Saratoga community-at-large; and WHEREAS, Yoshihiro Uchida is a long-term resident of Saratoga and was an original Honorary Trustee for Hakone Gardens; and WHEREAS, Yosh Uchida has been the judo coach at San Jose State University for 70 years and San Jose State has won more than 40 national championships under his leadership; and WHEREAS, in 1964, Uchida represented the United States as the team coach of the first Olympic Judo Tournament at the 1964 Summer Olympics in Tokyo; and WHEREAS, Yosh’s many awards include the Tower Award (1992), an honorary doctorate from San Jose State University (2004), the Order of the Sacred Treasure from the Emperor of Japan (1986), and induction into the San Jose Sports Hall of Fame (1996); and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Saratoga celebrates “Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month” by calling upon Saratoga residents to honor Saratoga’s Asian/Pacific Americans and learn more about the history of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby present this proclamation to Saratoga resident Yosh Uchida and thank him for his contributions to Saratoga. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 2nd day of May 2018. Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor City of Saratoga 17 PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING SUE AND JOHN KANG WHEREAS, the United States and the City of Saratoga are enriched by the diverse cultural contributions residents from areas like the Pacific Islands, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and India; and WHEREAS, Asian/Pacific Americans have had a profound impact on the United States and the Saratoga community, which is home to a number of Asian/Pacific Americans who serve as excellent representatives of both the Saratoga Asian/Pacific American community and the Saratoga community-at-large; and WHEREAS, Saratoga residents Sue and John Kang are well-known for building and owning Sue’s Gallery Café in the Saratoga Village and encouraging a sense of community in Saratoga; and WHEREAS, Sue Kang has been molding clay in Korea and the US for 30 years and opened Sue’s Gallery Café in 2015 to make pottery and ceramics as functional pieces for home and kitchen use; and WHEREAS, Sue’s Gallery Café has become a meeting spot for the Saratoga community and has had many special exhibits and events, such as, a Poetry Workshop by Mrs. Judith Sutton & Erica Goss, Olga’s Watercolor Workshops, Calligraphy Workshops, and Sue’s Pottery Workshops; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Saratoga celebrates “Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month” by calling upon Saratoga residents to honor Saratoga’s Asian/Pacific Americans and learn more about the history of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby present this proclamation to Saratoga residents Sue and John Kang and thank them for their contributions to Saratoga. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 2nd day of May 2018. Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor City of Saratoga 18 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:City Manager’s Office PREPARED BY:Nora Pimentel, City Clerk SUBJECT:City Council Meeting Minutes RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the City Council minutes for the Regular City Council Meetings on April 4, 2018 and April 18, 2018. BACKGROUND: Draft City Council minutes for each Council Meeting are taken to the City Council to be reviewed for accuracy and approval. Following City Council approval, minutes are retained for legislative history and posted on the City of Saratoga website. The draft minutes are attached to this report for Council review and approval. FOLLOW UP ACTION: Minutes will be retained for legislative history and posted on the City of Saratoga website. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting on April 4, 2018 Attachment B –Minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting on April 18, 2018 19 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 1 of 6 MINUTES WEDNESDAY, APRIL 4, 2018 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING At 6:00 p.m., the City Council held a Joint Meeting with the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce in the Joan Pisani Community Center, Multipurpose Room at 19655 Allendale Avenue in Saratoga. REGULAR SESSION Mayor Bernald called the regular session to order in the Joan Pisani Community Center Multipurpose Room at 7:04 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT:Mayor Mary-Lynne Bernald, Vice Mayor Manny Cappello Council Members, Howard Miller, Emily Lo, Rishi Kumar ABSENT:None ALSO PRESENT:James Lindsay, City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Crystal Bothelio, Deputy City Manager John Cherbone, Public Works Director Mary Furey, Finance and Administrative Director Debbie Pedro, Community Development Director Michael Taylor, Recreation and Facilities Director Nora Pimentel, City Clerk Lauren Pettipiece, Administrative Analyst Debbie Bretschneider, Executive Assistant/Deputy City Clerk Sandy Baily, Project Manager REPORT ON POSTING OF THE AGENDA City Clerk Nora Pimentel reported that the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 29, 2018. REPORT FROM JOINT MEETING Markus Breitback, President of the Chamber of Commerce, provided an overview of the Joint Meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Laurel Perusa provided positive feedback on the four way stop at Big Basin. Antoinette Romeo expressed concern with the volume and amount of traffic on Pierce Road. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Bernald announced the following upcoming events: Color Dash on April 8, 2018; 20 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 2 of 6 Living Room Conversations on April 24, 2018; Arbor Day on April 25, 3018, and State of the City on April 28, 2018. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS Seventh Annual Global Citizenship Conference at West Valley College Presentation Recommended Action: Receive presentation by Dr. Tim Kelly, Acting Chair of the West Valley College Global Citizenship Committee, about the April 12, 2018 Seventh Annual Global Citizenship Conference at West Valley College. Dr. Tim Kelly presented on the Seventh Annual Global Citizenship Conference at West Valley College. Special Presentation on Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County Long Term Ombudsman Program Recommended Action: Receive presentation from Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County Long Term Ombudsman Program and provide direction to staff, as desired. Wanda Hale presented on the Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County Long term Ombudsman Program. Special Presentation on United Way Bay Area 211 Recommended Action: Receive presentation from United Way Bay Area 211 and provide direction to staff, as desired. Kelly Batson presented on the Unite Way Area 211 assistance program. Special Presentation on West Valley Community Services Recommended Action: Receive presentation from West Valley Community Services and provide direction to staff, as desired. Josh Silo presented on the West Valley Community Services and proposed that the City Council fund a part-time Case Manager for the West Valley Community Services in the amount of $20,000. Vice Mayor Cappello, with support from Council Member Miller, requested that staff include the proposed funding request as a discussion topic at the Budget Study Session for consideration. 1.CONSENT CALENDAR 1.1. City Council Meeting Minutes Recommended Action: Approve the City Council minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting on March 7, 2018. 21 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 3 of 6 MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON MARCH 7, 2018. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 1.2. Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers Recommended Action: Review and accept check registers for the following accounts payable payment cycles: 3/20/2018 Period 9; and 3/27/2018 Period 9. MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO ACCEPT CHECK REGISTERS FOR THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAYMENT CYCLES: 3/20/2018 PERIOD 9; AND 3/27/2018 PERIOD 9. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE 1.3. Treasurer’s Report for the Month Ended February 28, 2018 Recommended Action: Review and accept the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended February 28, 2018. MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO ACCEPT THE TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 2018 MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE 1.4. Consultant Contract for Village Design Guidelines Update Recommended Action: Approve and authorize the City Manager to enter into a professional services agreement with Metropolitan Planning Group (M–Group) to prepare graphics and text amendments to the City’s Village Design Guidelines in the amount not exceeding $34,000. MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP (M–GROUP) TO PREPARE GRAPHICS AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES IN THE AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING $34,000. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE 2.PUBLIC HEARING None 3.GENERAL BUSINESS 3.1. Resolution to Modify the Heritage Tree Inventory Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution adding six new trees and removing one tree on the Heritage Tree Inventory. Sandy Baily, Project Manager, presented the staff report. 22 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 4 of 6 Mayor Bernald invited public comment on this item. No one requested to speak. RESOLUTION NO. 18-012 MILLER/KUMAR MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADDING SIX NEW TREES AND REMOVING ONE TREE ON THE HERITAGE TREE INVENTORY. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE 3.2. Village to Quarry Park Walkway – Phase I Design Contract Award Recommended Action: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to Award a Design Contract to Bellecci and Associates in the amount of $112,000.00. 2. Move to authorize staff to approve change orders up to $5,000. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented the staff report. Mayor Bernald invited public comment on this item. No one requested to speak. MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO AWARD A DESIGN CONTRACT TO BELLECCI AND ASSOCIATES IN THE AMOUNT OF $112,000.00, AND TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDERS UP TO $5,000. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE 3.3. Healthy Beverage & Food Policy Recommended Action: Approve the resolution adopting a Healthy Beverage and Food Policy. Crystal Bothelio, Deputy City Manager, presented the staff report. Mayor Bernald invited public comment on this item. No one requested to speak. RESOLUTION NO. 18-013 LO/KUMAR MOVED TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A HEALTHY BEVERAGE AND FOOD POLICY. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE 3.4. Safe Routes to School Resolution Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution supporting Safe Routes to School in the City of Saratoga. 23 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 5 of 6 Crystal Bothelio, Deputy City Manager, presented the staff report. Mayor Bernald invited public comment on this item. No ne requested to speak. RESOLUTION 18-014 CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL IN THE CITY OF SARATOGA WITH DIRECTION TO STAFF TO COORDINATE WITH THE YOUTH COMMISSION TO OBTAIN COMMISSION INPUT ON STUDENT NEEDS AND COMMISSION ASSISTANCE IN PROMOTING AWARENESS OF THE PROGRAM. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS Mayor Mary-Lynne Bernald Public Art Committee –there will be a meeting on Thursday, April 5, 2018. South Flow Arrivals Ad Hoc Committee –the Committee met on Friday, March 30, 2018 and discussed modified routes, diverting flights and potential noise reduction adjustments to airplanes. West Valley Mayors and Managers –there was a meeting last week and they received information from Santa Clara County Fire Department on their efforts to do more outreach regarding fire prevention and safety. Vice Mayor Manny Cappello Santa Clara County Housing and Community Development (HCD) Council Committee - the March 26 meeting was cancelled, a new date is to be determined. Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC)– there was a meeting which included a discussion about a collaboration with KSAR. The KSAR Station Manager is helping to facilitate the effort. Vice Mayor Cappello also reported that they are in the process of electing Board officers. Council Member Howard Miller Saratoga Sister City Organization –Council Member Miller reported that there is space available for the Japan Trip in July to travel with the Sister City delegation. Council Member Miller reported that there is a current opening on the Board for the historian position. Council Member Emily Lo KSAR Community Access TV Board – there was a meeting on March 28 that included discussion on partnering with SASCC and the update on the Community Loop project. Santa Clara County Library Joint Powers Authority –a new program for library patrons has begun this month, also passport services is being offered at the Cupertino Library and Milpitas Library. Council Member Rishi Kumar Association of Bay Area Governments – a meeting will be scheduled soon. Saratoga Chamber of Commerce & Destination Saratoga -there will be a meeting this week.24 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 6 of 6 CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Vice Mayor Cappello, with the support from Council Member Miller, requested that an item be agendized to discuss the scope and responsibility of the work that the Youth Commission is engaged in. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Council Member Kumar announced the following activities: Sanborn County Park has reopened from 8:00 a.m. to sunset; VTA is conducting a 2 day class for bike training; and, Neighborhood Safety Watch and CERT gathering from 5:00 p.m. -7:30 p.m. on April 21, 2018 at the Saratoga Prospect Center. Mayor Bernald provided a brief report from the San Jose Airport Ad Hoc Committee she is a member of. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT James Lindsay, City Manager, reported that tonight was the first City’s Facebook Live stream. ADJOURNMENT MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:57 P.M. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. Minutes respectfully submitted: Nora Pimentel, MMC City Clerk, City of Saratoga 25 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 1 of 7 MINUTES WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 2018 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING At 6:00 p.m., the City Council held a Joint Meeting with representatives of the Mountain Winery in the Joan Pisani Community Center Multipurpose Room at 19655 Allendale Avenue in Saratoga. Mayor Bernald called the regular session to order in the Joan Pisani Community Center Multipurpose Room at 7:04 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT:Mayor Mary-Lynne Bernald, Vice Mayor Manny Cappello Council Members, Howard Miller, Emily Lo, Rishi Kumar ABSENT:None ALSO PRESENT:James Lindsay, City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Crystal Bothelio, Deputy City Manager John Cherbone, Public Works Director Mary Furey, Finance and Administrative Director Debbie Pedro, Community Development Director Michael Taylor, Parks and Recreation Director Lauren Pettipiece, Administrative Analyst Debbie Bretschneider, Executive Assistant/Deputy City Clerk Kayla Nakamoto, Recreation Coordinator REPORT ON POSTING OF THE AGENDA Deputy City Manager Crystal Bothelio reported that the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on April 13, 2018. REPORT FROM JOINT MEETING Bill Hirschman with the Mountain Winery provided an overview of the Joint Meeting, including upcoming concerns and events. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Manish Agarwal announced the upcoming Brahmakumaris Silicon Valley Event. Donna Poppenhagen requested that the City’s dangerous dog regulations in the City Code be stricter. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Bernald announced that RYDE is looking for volunteer drivers, the Saratoga High School Music Boosters Mattress Fundraising Sale, Living Room Conversations, and the Saratoga Historical Foundation Fundraising Benefit at Historic Old Grandview Ranch, Arbor Day, and State of the City. 26 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 2 of 7 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS Special Presentation on the Montalvo Arts Center Munro Exhibit Recommended Action: Receive presentation from Montalvo Arts Center on the Munro Exhibit. Angela McConnell, Kelly Hudson, and Kelly Sicat presented on the Montalvo Arts Center Munro Exhibit. Mayor Bernald invited public comment on the item. No one requested to speak. 1.CONSENT CALENDAR 1.1. City Council Meeting Minutes Recommended Action: Approve the City Council minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting on March 21, 2018. CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON MARCH 21, 2018. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 1.2. Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers Recommended Action: Review and accept check registers for the following accounts payable payment cycles: 4/3/2018 Period 10; and 4/10/2018 Period 10. CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO ACCEPT CHECK REGISTERS FOR THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAYMENT CYCLES: 4/3/2018 PERIOD 10; AND 4/10/2018 PERIOD 10. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 1.3. AB 939 and Household Hazardous Waste Agreements with Santa Clara County Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to sign the Agreement for Countywide Assembly Bill 939 Implementation Fee and Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program Agreement with a $42,276 augmentation for Fiscal Year 2018/19. CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT FOR COUNTYWIDE ASSEMBLY BILL 939 IMPLEMENTATION FEE AND SANTA CLARA COUNTY HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM AGREEMENT WITH A $42,276 AUGMENTATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018/19. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 27 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 3 of 7 1.4. Acceptance of Pedestrian and Bicycle Path Easement – Subdivision Application No. SUB13-0003 Paramount Court Recommended Action: Move to adopt a resolution accepting the dedication of a pedestrian and bicycle path easement within Subdivision SUB13-0003. RESOLUTION NO. 18-016 CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF A PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATH EASEMENT WITHIN SUBDIVISION SUB13-0003. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: MILLER. ABSENT: NONE. 1.5. Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1; Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report and Adoption of Resolution of Intention for FY 18-19 Recommended Action: 1. Move to adopt the Resolution granting preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for FY 18-19 for renewing the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1 2. Move to adopt the Resolution of Intention RESOLUTIONS NO. 18-017 & 18-018 CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT: 1) THE RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR FY 18-19 FOR RENEWING THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA-1; AND 2) THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 1.6. Resolution to adopt a list of projects funded by SB 1 for FY 2018-19: The Road Repair and Accountability Act for funding the Annual Roadway Improvements Project. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution to adopt a list of projects funded by SB 1 for FY 2018-19: The Road Repair and Accountability Act for funding the Annual Roadway Improvements Project. RESOLUTION NO. 18-019 CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A LIST OF PROJECTS FUNDED BY SB 1 FOR FY 2018-19: THE ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT FOR FUNDING THE ANNUAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 1.7. Replacement of Quito Road Bridges – Approval of Acquisition and Acceptance of Interests in Real Property Recommended Action: Adopt resolution re-approving the acquisition of fee title to a parcel of real property necessary for the Quito Road Bridges project and authorizing the City Manager to accept title to that property on behalf of the City. 28 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 4 of 7 RESOLUTION NO. 18-020 CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION RE-APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF FEE TITLE TO A PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY NECESSARY FOR THE QUITO ROAD BRIDGES PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT TITLE TO THAT PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 2.PUBLIC HEARING 2.1. Proposed Fee Schedule Update for FY 2018/19 Recommended Action: Open the public hearing, listen to public testimony and close public hearing. Adopt the resolution approving the fee schedule for Fiscal Year 2018/19, effective July 1, 2018. Mary Furey, Finance and Administrative Services Director, presented the staff report. Mayor Bernald invited public comment on the item. No one requested to speak. RESOLUTION NO. 18-021 MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018/19, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2018. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 3.GENERAL BUSINESS 3.1. Community Event Grant Program Application Recommended Action: Review Community Event Grant Program application for Fiscal Year 2018/19 and provide direction. Lauren Pettipiece, Administrative Analyst, presented the staff report. Mayor Bernald invited public comment on the item. The following person requested to speak: Paul Milleson No one else requested to speak. 29 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 5 of 7 MILLER/KUMAR MOVED TO ALLOCATE $500 FROM THE CITY COUNCIL DISCRETIONARY FUND IN FISCAL YEAR 2018/19 FOR THE 2019 ANNUAL EASTER EGG HUNT. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 3.2. City of Saratoga’s Youth Commission’s Roles and Responsibilities Recommended Action: Review and discuss the current roles and responsibilities of the Youth Commission and provide staff with any necessary direction. Crystal Bothelio, Deputy City Manager, presented the staff report. Kayla Nakamoto, Recreation Coordinator, addressed questions from the City Council. Mayor Bernald invited public comment on the item. No one requested to speak. CAPPELLO/MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO RETURN WITH A STRATEGY THAT ALLOWS THE YOUTH COMMISSION TO INCORPORATE A GREATER FOCUS ON COMMISSION’S ADVISORY ROLE WITHIN 2018/19 SCHOOL YEAR WORK PLAN, WHICH MAY RESULT IN FEWER EVENTS TO KEEP THE COMMISSION’S WORK LOAD MANAGEABLE; INCLUDE ANALYSIS OF TOPICS OF IMPORTANCE TO YOUTH GENERATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE YOUTH COMMISSION WITH A REPORT OUT TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN MAY OR JUNE 2019 IN THE 2018/19 COMMISSION WORK PLAN; CONDUCT A MEETING WITH THE MAYOR EARLY IN THE 2018/19 SCHOOL YEAR; PROVIDE THE CITY COUNCIL WITH PERIODIC UPDATES, SUCH AS MONTHLY OR QUARTERLY CITY COUNCIL NEWSLETTER ARTICLES ON THE EFFORTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE YOUTH COMMISSION; AND ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSIONERS TO REACH OUT TO THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTLY AS NEEDED TO KEEP THE CITY COUNCIL APPRISED OF EMERGING ISSUES OR TO SEEK SUPPORT. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS Mayor Mary-Lynne Bernald Cities Association of Santa Clara County-Legislative Action Committee – The Committee received reports on Santa Clara County’s RFP for emergency ambulance services, Senate Bill 1, and Senate Bill 827. Council Finance Committee – there was a Finance Committee meeting in advance of the Budget Study Session. Public Art Committee – painting on the utility boxes is in progress. Saratoga Historical Foundation – there is a meeting on April 19, 2018. 30 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 6 of 7 Vice Mayor Manny Cappello Cities Association of Santa Clara County Board of Directors – the Board discussed firearm safety and passed a resolution in support of firearm safety. The Board also considered creation of a firearm safety checklist for local governments. The Board received updates on Measure A, Santa Clara Valley Interoperability Committee, and Santa Clara County Emergency Operations Area Council. Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC)– no meeting was held, but there is a lot of activity in anticipation of the upcoming renovation project. West Valley Sanitation District – there will be a hearing on May 9, 2018 in Campbell on Sanitation District rates. Council Member Howard Miller Council Finance Committee – the Finance Committee discussed the fee schedule and Budget Study Session at the last meeting. Saratoga Sister City Organization – Council Member Miller and his wife will be visiting Japan with the Sister City delegation. Santa Clara Valley Water District Commission – Council Member Miller attended on behalf of Council Member Kumar. He shared that the Commission recommended an increase to the annual ground water production charges, which are expected to increase in future years. Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority Board of Directors – the new CEO has been in position for one month. One of the founding Directors left the Board. There have been some position changes in the organization. A Citizen Engagement Committee was formed. Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Policy Advisory Committee – a Fiscal Stabilization Task Force was formed and a speaker presented on transportation trends. An analysis of express bus routes, similar to that done as part of Next Network, is underway. VTA State Route 85 Corridor Policy Advisory Board – Several Board Members are seeking funding to complete the State Route 85 study. Council Member Emily Lo Hakone Foundation Board & Executive Committee – there is a meeting on April 19, 2018. Public Art Committee – the Committee met and discussed donation of a mural to the City. Artists are making progress on the utility boxes. Council Member Rishi Kumar Santa Clara Valley Water District Commission – Council Member Kumar was unable to attend the Commission meeting. Council Member Miller attended on his behalf. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Council Member Lo requested additional information about the dangerous dog regulations in the City Code. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Council Member Kumar shared information about the Saratoga High School Mattress Fundraising sale and an event on water rates hosted by the League of Women Voters. 31 Saratoga City Council Minutes – Page 7 of 7 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT James Lindsay, City Manager, shared that Finance and Administrative Services Director Mary Furey would be acting City Manager Friday through Tuesday. ADJOURNMENT MILLER/CAPPELLO MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:04 P.M. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BERNALD, CAPPELLO, MILLER, LO, KUMAR. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. Minutes respectfully submitted: Crystal Bothelio, Deputy City Manager City of Saratoga 32 Gina Scott, Accounting Technician SUBJECT: Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and accept check registers for the following accounts payable payment cycles: 4/17/2018 Period 10 4/24/2018 Period 10 BACKGROUND: The information listed below provides detail for weekly City check runs. Checks issued for $20,000 or greater are listed separately as well as any checks that were void during the time period. Fund information, by check run, is also provided in this report. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are Check Registers for: Date Ending Check # 4/17/18 135750 135798 49 541,667.01 04/17/18 04/10/18 135749 4/24/18 135799 135846 48 201,172.74 04/24/18 04/17/18 135798 Accounts Payable checks issued for $20,000 or greater: Date Check # Issued to Dept.Amount 04/17/18 135756 PW 32,770.07 04/17/18 135779 PS 443,278.42 04/24/18 135799 CDD 27,932.69 04/24/18 135807 PW 51,934.50 04/24/18 135808 Rec/Fac 80,563.00 Accounts Payable checks voided during this time period: AP Date Check #Amount ATTACHMENTS: Check Registers in the 'A/P Checks By Period and Year' report format Fund Purpose Plan Check Srvcs PREPARED BY: Ending Check #Type of Checks Date Accounts Payable Accounts Payable Starting Check # SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:Finance & Administrative Services Issued to N/A Reason Capital Buick GMC Prior Check Register Checks Released Total Checks Amount Theater Duct work Veh/Equipment Rplcmnt 2018 Trucks (2) CIM Air, Inc. Veh/Equipment Rplcmnt General Law Enforcement 2018 GMC Truck General SCC Office of the Sheriff Chevrolet of Watsonville 4Leaf, Inc. Bldg FFE Replacement Status 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT: Finance & Administrative Services PREPARED BY: Ann Xu, Accountant SUBJECT: Treasurer’s Report for the Month Ended March 31, 2018 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and accept the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended March 31, 2018. BACKGROUND: California government code section 41004 requires that the City Treasurer submit to the City Clerk and the legislative body a written report and accounting of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances. The Municipal Code of the City of Saratoga, Article 2-20, Section 2-20.035 designates the City Manager as the City Treasurer. This report is prepared to fulfill this requirement. The following attachments provide various financial transaction data for the City of Saratoga’s Funds collectively as well as specifically for the City’s General (Operating) Fund, including an attachment from the State Treasurer’s Office of Quarterly LAIF rates from the 1st Quarter of 1977 to present. FISCAL STATEMENT: Cash and Investments Balance by Fund As of March 31, 2018, the City had $1,615,963 in cash deposit at Comerica bank, and $22,696,418 on deposit with LAIF. The City Council’s adopted policy on the Working Capital Reserve Fund states that effective July 1, 2017: for cash flow purposes and to avoid occurrence of dry period financing, pooled cash from all funds should not be allowed to fall below $1,000,000. The total pooled cash balance as of March 31, 2018 is $24,312,381 and exceeds the minimum limit required. City’s Current Financial Position In accordance with California government code section 53646 (b) (3), the City is financially well positioned and able to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months. As of March 31, 2018, the City’s financial position (Assets $24.7M, Liabilities $3.1M and Fund Equity $21.6M) remains very strong and there are no issues in meeting financial obligations now or in the foreseeable future. Unrestricted Cash Comerica Bank 1,615,963$ Deposit with LAIF 22,696,418$ Total Unrestricted Cash 24,312,381$ Cash Summary 43 The following Fund Balance schedule represents actual funding available for all funds at the end of the monthly period. This amount differs from the above Cash Summary schedule as assets and liabilities are components of the fund balance. As illustrated in the summary below, Total Unrestricted Cash is adjusted by the addition of Total Assets less the amount of Total Liabilities to arrive at the Ending Fund Balance – which represents the actual amount of funds available. Fund Balance Designations In accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions, the components of fund balance are categorized as follows: “non-spendable fund balance”, resources that are inherently non-spendable from the vantage point of the current period; “restricted fund balance”, resources that are subject to enforceable legal restrictions; “committed fund balance”, resources whose use is constrained by limitations the government imposes upon itself through formal action at its highest level of decision making and remains binding unless removed in the same manner; “assigned fund balance”, resources that reflects a government’s intended use of resources, such intent would have to be established at either the highest level of decision making, by a body, or an official designated for that purpose; and “unassigned fund balance”, net resources in excess of what can properly be classified in one of the other four categories. Currently, the City’s fund balance reserves fall into one of the four spendable categories; restricted, committed, assigned, or unassigned fund balance. ATTACHMENTS A – Change in Total Fund Balances by Fund under GASB 54 B – Change in Total Fund Balances by CIP Project C – Change in Cash Balance by Month D – Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Quarterly Apportionment Rates Total Unrestricted Cash 24,312,381$ Plus: Assets 391,782 Less: Liabilities (3,086,488) Ending Fund Balance 21,617,675$ Adjusting Cash to Ending Fund Balance 44 ATTACHMENT A CHANGES IN TOTAL FUND BALANCE UNDER GASB 54 Fund Description Prior Year Carryforward 7/1/17 Increase/ (Decrease) Jul-Feb Current Revenue Current Expenditure Transfer In Transfer Out Fund Balance 3/31/2018 General Fund Restricted Fund Balances: Environmental Services Reserve 263,182 - - - - - 263,182 Committed Fund Balances: Hillside Stability Reserve 790,000 - - - 790,000 Assigned Fund Balances: Future Capital Replacement & Efficiency Project Reserve 1,564,588 - - - 1,564,588 Facility Reserve 1,700,000 - - - 1,700,000 Carryforwards Reserve 7,246 - - - 7,246 Unassigned Fund Balances: Working Capital Reserve 1,000,000 - - - 1,000,000 Fiscal Stabilization Reserve 2,500,000 - - - 2,500,000 Development Services Reserve 719,562 - - - 719,562 Compensated Absences Reserve 209,937 - - - 209,937 Other Unassigned Fund Balance Reserve (Pre YE distribution) 2,229,800 389,158 2,234,764 1,552,676 32,000 1,872,909 1,460,137 General Fund Total 10,984,315 389,158 2,234,764 1,552,676 32,000 1,872,909 10,214,651 Special Revenue Landscape/Lighting Districts 1,152,873 112,245 46,682 52,598 - - 1,259,202 Capital Project Street Projects 2,168,309 (949,237) 29,275 14,245 1,794,000 600,000 2,428,102 Park and Trail Projects 481,868 (40,836) - 6,484 525,000 32,000 927,548 Facility Projects 252,801 14,170 - 1,508 - - 265,463 Administrative Projects 687,313 32,899 4,482 21,393 133,909 - 837,210 Tree Fund Projects 67,995 (2,442) - - 20,000 - 85,553 Park In-Lieu Projects 491,061 14,359 - 47,667 - - 457,752 CIP Grant Street Projects 49,255 (18,378) - 495,132 - - (464,255) CIP Grant Park & Trail Projects 12,809 (5,456) - - - - 7,353 Gas Tax Fund Projects 873,894 323,202 105,438 6,857 482,000 482,000 1,295,677 CIP Fund Total 5,085,305 (631,718) 139,194 593,287 2,954,909 1,114,000 5,840,404 Debt Service Library Bond 959,322 (306,680) 4,403 - - - 657,044 Internal Service Fund Liability/Risk Management 504,481 34,577 - 12,222 - - 526,836 Workers Compensation 294,052 7,813 - 3,887 - - 297,979 Office Support Fund 109,806 6,897 562 4,572 - - 112,693 Information Technology Services 308,072 90,455 956 57,299 - - 342,184 Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance 176,906 65,767 - 14,756 - - 227,917 Building Maintenance 454,606 132,581 - 72,905 - - 514,282 Vehicle & Equipment Replacement 585,986 43,532 - 1,049 - - 628,469 Technology Replacement 315,299 96,777 - 920 - - 411,156 Facility FFE Replacement 498,369 117,208 - 30,710 - - 584,867 Total City 21,429,391 158,612 2,426,558 2,396,882 2,986,909 2,986,909 21,617,675 45 ATTACHMENT B FUND BALANCES BY CIP PROJECT CIP Funds/Projects Prior Year Carryforward 7/1/17 Increase/ (Decrease) Jul-Feb Current Revenue Current Expenditure Transfer In Transfer Out Fund Balance 3/31/2018 Street Projects Annual Road Improvements 839,731 (265,907) 29,275 10,488 295,000 600,000 287,610 Roadway Safety & Traffic Calming 65,514 - - - 50,000 - 115,514 Highway 9 Safety Improvements - Phase IV 74,309 (18,262) - 654 - - 55,394 Prospect/Saratoga Median Improvement - (568) - - 760,000 - 759,432 Big Basin Way Turn Around - (13,217) - - 50,000 - 36,783 Annual Infrastructure Maintenance& Repair 122,667 (200,359) - 3,103 200,000 - 119,205 Village Pedestrian Improvements - Phase II 875 - - - - - 875 EL Camino Grande Storm Drain Pump 247,508 (14,239) - - 145,000 - 378,269 Storm Drain Capture Device 30,000 - - - - - 30,000 Wildcat Creek Outfall 40,000 (40,000) - - - - - Saratoga Village Crosswalk & Sidewalk Rehabilitation - - - - 44,000 - 44,000 Quito Road Sidewalk Improvements - - - - 50,000 - 50,000 Fourth Street Bridge Widening 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Quito Road Bridge Replacement 157,830 - - - - - 157,830 Quito Road Bridge - ROW Acquisition 42,259 (1,413) - - - - 40,846 Annual Retaining Wall Maintenance & Repairs 158,955 (300,170) - - 200,000 - 58,785 Bainter Ave Retaining Wall 189,917 (95,102) - - - - 94,816 Underground Project 98,744 - - - - - 98,744 Total Street Projects 2,168,309 (949,237) 29,275 14,245 1,794,000 600,000 2,428,102 Parks & Trails Projects Park/Trail Repairs 618 (39,974) - - 100,000 - 60,644 Sustainable Landscaping 39,836 - - - - - 39,836 Magical Bridge Playground 32,000 - - - - 32,000 - Hakone Gardens Infrastructure Improvements 114,513 (24,900) - - - - 89,613 Hakone Gardens Koi Pond Improvements 139,548 65,674 - 209 - - 205,012 Joe's Trail at Saratoga/De Anza 33,997 - - - - - 33,997 Guava/Fredericksburg Entrance 21,356 (5,596) - - 125,000 - 140,760 Saratoga Village to Quarry Park Walkway - Design - - - - 50,000 - 50,000 Saratoga to Sea Trail - Construction 100,000 (36,040) - 6,275 250,000 - 307,686 Total Parks & Trails Projects 481,868 (40,836) - 6,484 525,000 32,000 927,548 Facility Projects Civic Theater Improvements 76,286 (19,017) - 1,508 - - 55,760 CC/SC Panel Upgrade 120,000 - - - - - 120,000 SPCC Furniture & Fixtures 7,644 (1,562) - - - - 6,082 Library Building Exterior Maintenance Projects 15,570 5,000 - - - - 20,570 Library - Electric Vehicle Fast Charging Station 33,301 29,750 - - - - 63,051 Total Facility Projects 252,801 14,170 - 1,508 - - 265,463 Administrative and Technology Projects Combined Document Imaging Project 25,230 (3,498) - - - - 21,733 City Website/Intranet 81,717 (64,768) - - - - 16,949 Development Technology 63,171 5,805 4,482 - - - 73,457 Trak-It Software Upgrade 25,883 - - 5,000 - - 20,883 LLD Initiation Match Program 24,000 - - - 26,000 - 50,000 Horseshoe Beautification 25,000 - - - - - 25,000 Citywide Transportation Needs Assessment 10,521 - - - - - 10,521 General Plan Update 222,606 96,644 - 16,393 57,909 - 360,766 Village Façade Program 15,751 - - - - - 15,751 Village Specific Plan Update 89,023 (1,284) - - - - 87,738 Risk Management Project Funding 104,412 - - - 50,000 - 154,412 Total Administrative and Technology Projects 687,314 32,899 4,482 21,393 133,909 - 837,210 46 ATTACHMENT B (Cont.) FUND BALANCES BY CIP PROJECT CIP Funds/Projects Prior Year Carryforward 7/1/17 Increase/ (Decrease) Jul-Feb Current Revenue Current Expenditure Transfer In Transfer Out Fund Balance 3/31/2018 Tree Fund Projects Citywide Tree Planting Program 44,370 (2,692) - - 20,000 - 61,678 Tree Dedication Program 22,250 250 - - - - 22,500 SMSCF Tree Donation Program 1,375 - - - - - 1,375 Total Tree Fund Projects 67,995 (2,442) - - 20,000 - 85,553 CIP Grant Street Projects Highway 9 Safety Improvements - Phase IV - (102,665) - 5,882 - - (108,546) Prospect/Saratoga Median Improvement (40) (2,876) - 487,500 - - (490,417) Citywide Signal Upgrade II (965) - - - - - (965) Saratoga Ave Sidewalk 50,261 - - 1,750 - - 48,511 Village Sidewalk, Curb & Gutter - Phase II Construction - 74,991 - - - - 74,991 Quito Road Bridges - ROW Acquisition - 12,171 - - - - 12,171 Total CIP Grant Street Projects 49,255 (18,378) - 495,132 - - (464,255) CIP Grant Park & Trail Projects Joe's Trail at Saratoga/De Anza 12,809 - - - - - 12,809 Guava/Fredericksburg Entrance - (5,456) - - - - (5,456) Total CIP Grant Park & Trail Projects 12,809 (5,456) - - - - 7,353 Park In-Lieu Projects Magical Bridge Playground 128,000 - - - (128,000) - - Hakone Koi Pond Improvement - - - 46,311 110,000 - 63,689 Quarry Park ADA Access 244,696 (6,416) - 1,356 - - 236,924 Saratoga Village to Quarry Park Walkway - Design - - - - 100,000 - 100,000 Unallocated Park In-Lieu Funds 118,365 20,775 - - (82,000) - 57,140 Total park In-Lieu Projects 491,061 14,359 - 47,667 - - 457,752 Gas Tax Fund Projects Annual Roadway Improvements 488,313 370,948 105,438 5,252 - 482,000 477,446 Prospect/Saratoga Median Improvements 217,748 (7,746) - 1,605 482,000 - 690,397 Citywide Signal Upgrade II 99,759 - - - - - 99,759 Quito Road & Paseo Olivos Storm Drain 40,000 (40,000) - - - - - Big Basin Way Sidewalk Repairs 20,990 - - - - - 20,990 Quito Road Bridges 7,085 - - - - - 7,085 Total Gas Tax Fund Projects 873,894 323,202 105,438 6,857 482,000 482,000 1,295,677 Total CIP Funds 5,085,305 (631,718) 139,194 593,287 2,954,909 1,114,000 5,840,404 47 ATTACHMENT C CHANGE IN CASH BALANCE BY MONTH 48 ATTACHMENT D March June September December 1977 5.68 5.78 5.84 6.45 1978 6.97 7.35 7.86 8.32 1979 8.81 9.10 9.26 10.06 1980 11.11 11.54 10.01 10.47 1981 11.23 11.68 12.40 11.91 1982 11.82 11.99 11.74 10.71 1983 9.87 9.64 10.04 10.18 1984 10.32 10.88 11.53 11.41 1985 10.32 9.98 9.54 9.43 1986 9.09 8.39 7.81 7.48 1987 7.24 7.21 7.54 7.97 1988 8.01 7.87 8.20 8.45 1989 8.76 9.13 8.87 8.68 1990 8.52 8.50 8.39 8.27 1991 7.97 7.38 7.00 6.52 1992 5.87 5.45 4.97 4.67 1993 4.64 4.51 4.44 4.36 1994 4.25 4.45 4.96 5.37 1995 5.76 5.98 5.89 5.76 1996 5.62 5.52 5.57 5.58 1997 5.56 5.63 5.68 5.71 1998 5.70 5.66 5.64 5.46 1999 5.19 5.08 5.21 5.49 2000 5.80 6.18 6.47 6.52 2001 6.16 5.32 4.47 3.52 2002 2.96 2.75 2.63 2.31 2003 1.98 1.77 1.63 1.56 2004 1.47 1.44 1.67 2.00 2005 2.38 2.85 3.18 3.63 2006 4.03 4.53 4.93 5.11 2007 5.17 5.23 5.24 4.96 2008 4.18 3.11 2.77 2.54 2009 1.91 1.51 0.90 0.60 2010 0.56 0.56 0.51 0.46 2011 0.51 0.48 0.38 0.38 2012 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.32 2013 0.28 0.24 0.26 0.26 2014 0.24 0.22 0.24 0.25 2015 0.26 0.28 0.32 0.37 2016 0.46 0.55 0.60 0.68 2017 0.78 0.92 1.07 1.20 2018 1.51 Quarterly Apportionment Rates Local Agency Investment Fund 49 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:Recreation PREPARED BY:Dylan Davis, Recreation Coordinator SUBJECT:Parks and Recreation Commission Fundraising Plan RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Parks and Recreation Commission Fundraising Plan to collect donations and seek sponsorships for Movie Night. BACKGROUND: For Fiscal year 2018/19, a total of $5,000 has been allocated in the City’s budget for Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) activities. The Commission would like permission from the City Council to raise the necessary funds to fully implement the Commission’s work plan. Per the City of Saratoga Donation Policy, adopted via Resolution 15-017 (Attachment A), Commissioners must submit a Fundraising Plan for City Council consideration before soliciting donations more than $500. Since more than $500 is needed to fully fund the Commission’s 2018/19 activities, the Commission is proposing that the City Council approve the attached Fundraising Plan (Attachment B). In the past, the Parks and Recreation Commission collected monetary donations for Movie Night. The Commission would like to reach out to more local organizations for donations and sponsorships and collect monetary donations for Movie Night. Donations and the $5,000 allocated budget will be used to cover costs associated with the Movie Night event. This year, the Commission plans to host Movie Night. Typically, the Commission hosts a family-friendly activity at these events, such as coffee station, hot chocolate stations, popcorn stations and youth activities. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Donation Policy Attachment B –Parks and Recreation Fundraising Plan 50 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 1 of 8 City of Saratoga Donation Policy I. Purpose Members and supporters of the Saratoga community from time to time wish to support the community by making donations to the City of Saratoga. The City Council appreciates this generosity and has adopted this policy regarding donations to the City of Saratoga, including City departments and City sponsored programs, activities, and events. (This policy is distinct from the Employee Gifts Policy, which provides City of Saratoga employees with a clear standard about when it is acceptable and prohibited to accept gifts from a member of the public, a business, an organization, or other entity.) II. Definitions 1. Donation: a contribution made to the City without expectation of goods, services, or significant benefit or recognition in return. Donations may be in the form of money or in-kind contributions of products, services, investment securities, real property (land), or any combination thereof. A donation may be unrestricted, where the donor has placed no limitation on its use, or restricted, where the donor has restricted its use to a specified purpose. Donations that, if accepted, would obligate the City to enter into a service, procurement, or other agreement shall not be considered a donation. Grants to the City from a local, state, or federal agency are not subject to this policy. 2. Donor: Any organization or individual who provides the City with a donation. 3. Donation Agreement: An agreement between the City and the donor that details any restrictions on a donation as well as the respective obligations of the donor and the City. 4. Fundraising: Any activity conducted with the intent of generating donations to the City. Fundraising activities may include, but are not limited to, promoting endowment programs, program adoption or pledge drives, and contacting individuals, companies, foundations, or other entities with a request for a donation to the City. III. General Provisions 1. The City welcomes unrestricted donations as well as restricted donations that enhance City services, reduce costs that the City would incur in the absence of the donation, or that otherwise provide a benefit to the City. The City may decline any donation without comment or cause. 51 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 2 of 8 2. Donors shall not expect, nor shall the City grant, any extra consideration to the donor in relation to City procurement, regulatory matters, or any other business, services, or operations of the City. To avoid the possible appearance of extra considerations, members of the Planning and Heritage Preservation Commissions and staff of the Community Development Department are not authorized to solicit donations to the City. 3. No City Council member, Commissioner, employee, or volunteer shall solicit donations in excess of $500 in money or in-kind services for any City project, program, activity, or event (“supported activity”) unless the City Council has approved a fundraising plan for the supported activity. A recommended form for a fundraising plan is attached as Exhibit A to be revised as appropriate for the fundraising goal and type of supported activity in question. 4. Donations must be directly related to providing goods or services to the public or for another valid public purpose. Donations may not be used for personal financial gain of any City elected or appointed official or employee. 5. The net benefit of a donation should be considered when determining whether to accept a donation. Net benefit includes all lifecycle costs of ownership, including maintenance, repair, clean-up, administrative, and any potential liability or expenses that may be associated with the donation. a. Donations may not be used to implement new on-going programs or services unless a permanent source of revenue is identified to support the program or service. b. Potential costs and liabilities should be considered if a donation of personal property or of a service does not include the same indemnification, insurance, bonding, or warranties that the City would normally receive through procurement of personal property or services. c. Real property may be donated to the City provided that it will not expose the City to an unreasonable risk of litigation or liability, because of the physical condition of the property or existence of claims, liens, and encumbrances against the property. 6. Council members and other City officials are responsible for reporting fundraising activities and donations as required by applicable laws and regulations. IV. Procedures 1. Unrestricted donations of $5,000 or less may be accepted or declined by the City Manager. Restricted donations of $500 or less may be accepted or declined by the 52 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 3 of 8 City Manager. Unrestricted donations of more than $5,000 and restricted donations of more than $500 must be brought to the City Council for consideration. 2. The City Manager may choose to request City Council consideration of any donation, regardless of value. 3. The City Council shall consider proposed donations beyond the authority of the City Manager set forth above and proposed donations referred to it by the City Manager. The City Council may accept or decline any donation at its sole discretion. 4. All donations will receive appropriate recognition as determined by the City Manager or City Council at the time the donation is accepted, taking into consideration the nature and level of the donation. Upon request of the donor or if specified in a City- initiated request for donors, limited forms of promotional activity (such as logo or name placement on signs, flyers, and other materials related to a program or activity supported by the donation) are permitted. The appearance of traditional commercial advertising should be avoided and the size of donor recognition should be in keeping with the size of non-recognition information used in the materials. The agreed upon form of recognition should be identified in the donor receipt or a donation agreement. Any naming of City parks, property, or facilities shall follow the guidelines set forth in the City’s Policy Pertaining to Naming City-Owned Land and Facilities. 5. When donations with a value in excess of $100 are accepted or upon the request of the donor, the City will issue the donor a receipt indicating the amount of the donation or describing the goods or services donated within 30 days of receiving the donation. (In accordance with the Internal Revenue Code the City does not provide an estimated value of in-kind donations; donors may refer to IRS Publication 561 for more information on valuing donated property.) The donation receipt shall also include the date of the donation, the name of the donor, the purpose of the donation (if a restricted donation), a brief description of any public recognition that will be made by the City, and note that the donor received no goods or services in exchange. The original receipt shall be submitted to the donor and the City shall retain a copy. A sample donation receipt is attached as Exhibit B. 6. Before acceptance of a restricted donation valued at more than $500 or an unrestricted donation valued at more than $5,000, the respective obligations of the donor and the City shall be set forth in a donation agreement. A sample donation agreement is attached as Exhibit C. The City Manager or City Council may require donation agreements for donations valued at any amount. 53 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 4 of 8 7. The City shall maintain records for the receipt of all donations and shall comply with all reporting requirements and regulations including, but not limited to, FPPC Regulation 18944.2 Gifts to an Agency. For donations that were made at the behest of a City Council member that person shall determine whether a Form 803 (Behested Payments Report) is required pursuant to the Political Reform Act. 54 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 5 of 8 EXHIBIT A – FUNDRAISING PLAN FORM City of Saratoga Fundraising Plan Fundraising Plan Title & Purpose: Please provide a title and description for your fundraising project. Fundraising Participants: Please list the names for all groups and individuals that will be conducting fundraising. Donation Type/Amount: Please describe the types and amount of donations that will be sought. Anticipated Donors: Please describe who will be approached for donations. Donor Recognition Plan: Please describe how donors will be recognized. Fundraising Timeline: Council Review of Fundraising Plan: Fundraising Start: Fundraising Completion: Council Review of Donations: Donor Recognition Complete: Restrictions/Reporting: Please identify any restrictions or reporting requirements associated with this fundraising plan. 55 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 6 of 8 EXHIBIT B – SAMPLE DONATION RECEIPT City of Saratoga Donation Receipt This is to confirm that on __________________ [insert date] the City of Saratoga received from __________________________________________________ [insert donor name and address]: a monetary contribution of $_________________ a non‐monetary contribution consisting of [describe goods, services, property, securities, etc.]: No goods or services were provided by the City of Saratoga in return for the contribution. The City sincerely appreciates your donation. _______________________ Mary Furey Administrative Services Director City of Saratoga 56 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 7 of 8 EXHIBIT C – SAMPLE DONATION AGREEMENT City of Saratoga Standard Donation Agreement The undersigned Donor wishes to make a donation to the City of Saratoga as described in more detail below. Donor is (check and complete all that apply): donating $_________________________ in a lump sum donating $_________________________ in __________________ (monthly, quarterly, etc.) payments of $_________________________ in __________________ installments. donating the following (describe products, services, investment securities, real property, etc.): If this box is checked the City’s acceptance of the donation described above is subject to the conditions specified on Attachment 1. If this box is checked this donation is restricted to the following uses: City will publicly recognize donor by (describe recognition): If this box is checked this donation is being made at the behest of Council Member/Commissioner/City Staff Member __________________________. In connection with administering this agreement, Donor and City shall work through the following primary representatives: City of Saratoga Donor Primary Representative: Address: Telephone: Fax: Cell Phone: E-mail: 57 Adopted Via City Council Resolution 15-017 (April 1, 2015) Page 8 of 8 In addition to the foregoing, Donor and City understand and agree that: 1. The City will provide Donor with a donation receipt indicating the amount of the donation or estimated value of goods or services donated within 30 days of receiving the donation. 2. Donor’s contribution to the City will be recognized publicly as described above. 3. Except as provided above, the City may use the donation in any manner at its sole discretion and Donor has no right or obligation to control City’s use of the donation. 4. Donor has not and will not receive any goods or services in exchange for the donation and the City will not grant any extra consideration to the donor in relation to City procurement, regulatory matters, or any other business, services, or operations of the City. 5. Donor confirms that unless indicated otherwise above this donation is not made at the behest of a City Council Member or of any member of the Planning or Heritage Preservation Commissions or staff of the Community Development Department. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement. Donor City of Saratoga James Lindsay, City Manager Name Title Date: Date: ATTEST: Crystal Bothelio, City Clerk Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Richard Taylor, City Attorney Date: 663906.5 58 City of Saratoga Fundraising Plan Fundraising Plan Title & Purpose: Please provide a title and description for your fundraising project. Fundraising Participants: Please list the names for all groups and individuals that will be conducting fundraising. Donation Type/Amount: Please describe the types and amount of donations that will be sought. Anticipated Donors: Please describe who will be approached for donations. Donor Recognition Plan: Please describe how donors will be recognized. Fundraising Timeline: Council Review of Fundraising Plan: Fundraising Start: Fundraising Completion: Council Review of Donations: Donor Recognition Complete: Restrictions/Reporting: Please identify any restrictions or reporting requirements associated with this fundraising plan. 59 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:Community Development PREPARED BY:Christopher Riordan SUBJECT: Appeal of a Fence Exception Approval for 14345 Maclay Court (APPC18- 0001) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct a public hearing and de novo review of the appeal, and adopt the attached resolution denying the appeal and approving the Fence Exception application for a recently constructed solid fence at 14345 Maclay Court. BACKGROUND: On February 14, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the Fence Exception application (FER17-0003) submitted by Sharon Gaines (Applicant) for an 11’1-1/2” solid fence built in association with a new single-family residence at 14345 Maclay Court. The Planning Commission approved the Fence Exception application. A copy of the development plan for the fence at issue is included as Attachment #10. At the hearing, the Commission discussed the application and received public comments from an adjacent property owner. A copy of the Planning Commission staff report is included as Attachment #5. On March 1, 2018, Michael and Kathy Scandling (Appellants) appealed the Planning Commission’s approval (Attachment #1). The Appellants live at 14381 Maclay Court, which is an adjacent parcel to the south of the project site. The Appellants’ stated reasons for submitting the appeal are itemized within that attachment and are summarized below: The wall is not a fence and therefore a fence exception is not applicable; The Commission improperly approved the Fence Exceptions because all of the required findings cannot be made; Inappropriate information was provided by the applicant during Commission public hearing; Granting the fence exception would create a negative precedent. On April 16, 2018 the Appellants submitted supplemental materials related to their appeal, which include an additional letter and timeline (Attachment #2). The supplemental letter contends as follows: The structure is not a fence because it is wall of a building The findings for a fence exception cannot be made 60 2 | P a g e The structure is not in compliance with the City Code regarding setbacks The architect for the Applicant agreed to modify the design of the wall Applicant raised irrelevant testimony at the Planning Commission hearing Granting the fence exception would create bad precedent The Appellants rely on the City to protect their rights by seeing the City Code adhered to and enforced A discussion of the appeal considerations raised by the Appellants can be found under the APPEAL section of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site is located at 14345 Maclay Court. Surrounding uses include single-family residential structures on all sides. The left side property line is adjacent to an access corridor of two flag lots located to the rear of the subject site. In December 2015 the Applicant received Administrative Design Review approval (Attachment #7) to construct a new one story, 13 feet tall, contemporary designed single-family home. Exterior materials include smooth painted stucco, glass, and wood. Construction of the residence is nearing completion. At the front of the residence is an 11’1-1/2” tall continuous stucco solid fence which is 12” wide that projects approximately 9’10” beyond the edge of the building into the side yard setback area along the eastern property line. Photographs of the solid fence are included as Attachment #9. In October 2016, the Applicant’s architect was made aware that the stucco fence did not comply with City Code requirements and agreed to modify the fence consistent with City Code requirements. However, no modifications were actually made. Subsequently, the Applicant requested a Fence Exception pursuant to City Code Section 15-29.090. The feature is attached to the residence but may be considered a solid fence per Section 15-06.261 of the City Code. Fence “means any structural device forming a physical barrier by means of glass, wood, masonry, metal, chain, brick, stake, plastic, concrete block, wrought iron, wire, or other similar materials. A wall, other than a wall of a building or a retaining wall, is considered a fence.” Under City Code, solid fences or walls are limited to a height of six feet: “Except as otherwise specified in this Article, no solid fence shall exceed six feet in height.” City Code Section 15- 29.010(a)(1). As constructed the fence is 11’1-1/2” in height and exceeds the maximum allowable height for solid fences by 5’6”. The Applicant is requesting approval of a fence exception for the fence to exceed the maximum height. APPEAL: The Appellants initially listed four items within their Appeal submittal as to why they believe the City Council should overturn the Planning Commission’s decision and deny this application for a Fence Exception. 1. The structure is not a fence. The Appellants argue that the structure is not a fence because it is a “wall of a building” and contiguous with the wall of the front elevation of the house. City Code Section 15-06.261 defines fence as “any structural device forming a physical barrier by means of glass, wood, masonry, metal, 61 3 | P a g e chain, brick, stake, plastic, concrete block, wrought iron, wire, or other similar materials. A wall, other than a wall of a building or a retaining wall, is considered a fence.” In this instance, the fence at issue is not a wall of a building or a retaining wall and therefore qualifies as a fence under City Code. During the February 14, 2018 Planning Commission meeting, staff discussed the City’s Plan Check Engineer’s determination that the fence could be shortened or removed without negatively affecting the structural integrity of the residence. Staff has also requested that the City’s Plan Check Engineering Consultant, 4Leaf, Inc., to review the structural calculations for the residence to determine the role of the fence in relationship to the residence as a whole. The written response from the Consultant, included as Attachment #8, states that the fence can be truncated without substantially reducing the required lateral resistance, or shear, of the residence and therefore could be removed. This analysis supports the reasonable inference that the structure at issue is not the wall of a building so that it qualifies as a fence under City Code. 2. The findings for a fence exception cannot be made. The Appellants argue that two of the five required findings: Finding #1: that the subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood and Finding #3: that the modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located, cannot be made. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-29.090, the Planning Commission may grant a Fence Exception if five findings are made. As part of its review of this application, a majority of the members of the Planning Commission were able to find that: 1) the proposed solid fence is compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood; 2) the entirety of the fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable; 3) the fence will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood; 4) the fence will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity; and 5) the fence will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. Because this appeal requires de novo consideration by the City Council staff recommends that the City Council make each of the required findings for a Fence Exception: Finding #1: The subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood. The proposed solid fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood in that there are other fences in the area which are similar in height and appearance or location and placement. The site across the street at 14332 Maclay Court has a front yard masonry solid fence extending across its entire frontage. This fence has an average height of five feet with pilasters that have an average height of six and a half feet. This fence includes a nine foot tall wrought iron entrance gate flanked on opposite sides by eight foot tall posts which support the gate. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the fence on the subject site is compatible with other fences in the neighborhood. 62 4 | P a g e Finding #2: The entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable. The solid fence is constructed of cement with a white colored smooth stucco finish. All of the materials are durable, are of high quality, and would be able to weather the outdoor environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Finding #3: The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located. The solid fence incorporates materials and an architectural design consistent with the main residence. In addition, the fence is setback 50 feet from the street. Over time the landscaping near the fence will increase in height to soften its appearance. Approving this fence exception would not create precedence whereby fences in the neighborhood could progressively increase in height thereby impairing the integrity and character of the neighborhood. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Finding #4: The granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located. The fence is setback 50 feet from the street and because it is located within a side setback area it will not block views from adjacent sites or site distances from the street or driveways. The fence was inspected by the building department during construction of the residence to ensure that its construction would not be detrimental or injurious to the property or adjacent neighbors. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Finding #5: The granting of the exception will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. As previously stated, the proposed fence would provide the required sight distance for the driveway. The proposed fence would not interfere with visibility for pedestrian, bicyclist, and vehicular traffic within the area. This finding can be made in the affirmative. 3. The Applicant submitted improper and inappropriate evidence at the hearing The Appellants argue that the Commission considered improper and inappropriate evidence at the hearing. At the Planning Commission hearing, the Applicant mentioned private settlement negotiations and mediation between the Applicant and Appellants though the Applicant did not expound on the specifics of that private matter. The Planning Commission’s discussions and analysis were based on the staff report, pertinent information as to the issue regarding the design of the solid fence, and all other relevant evidence. At no point did the Commission’s deliberations extend into any private dispute between the Applicant and Appellants. 63 5 | P a g e 4. Granting the Fence Exception sets bad precedent and encourages misconduct Appellants argue that granting the Fence Exception would set bad precedent and encourage misconduct. The Appellants argue that the Applicant’s architect was on notice that the fence failed to comply with City Code but did nothing to correct it. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to approve the Fence Exception because the Commissioners were able to make the required findings for the Fence Exception. For this reason, staff believes that the City Council could reasonably make the required findings and grant the Fence Exception without setting bad precedent. Additional issues raised by Appellants in their supplemental letter: The wall is not in compliance with the City Code regarding setbacks The Appellants’ argument regarding setbacks is premised on their argument that the structure is not a fence and therefore cannot be located in the setback area. However, as explained above, based on the definition of fence under City Code as well as the City’s Plan Check Engineering Consultant’s analysis, staff believes that the City could reasonably conclude that the structure is a fence under City Code. The City Code regulates fences in setbacks in limited circumstances, none of which are applicable here. Fences located within any required exterior side setback area of a reversed corner lot shall not exceed three feet in height. City Code section 15-29.010(c). However, the lot at issue is not a reversed corner lot. The City Code also regulates fences within setbacks where the fence is adjacent to a commercial district (City Code section 15-29.030), a scenic highway (City Code section 15-29.050(b)), or a heritage lane (City Code section 15- 29.070(c)). None of these provisions are applicable here. The architect for the Applicant agreed to modify the design of the wall Testimony presented at the Planning Commission hearing indicated that there were conversations between the City staff and the architect for the Applicant regarding modification of the design of the structure but ultimately the Applicant did not pursue any design modifications and instead sought a Fence Exception for the subject fence. The Appellants rely on the City to protect their rights by seeing the City Code adhered to and enforced The written response from the City’s Plan Check Engineering Consultant, 4Leaf, Inc., included as Attachment #8, states that the fence can be truncated without substantially reducing the required lateral resistance, or shear, of the residence and therefore could be removed. This structure qualifies as a fence for which all of the Fence Exception findings can be made in compliance with the City Code. FISCAL STATEMENT: No fiscal impact is anticipated with this review. 64 6 | P a g e ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Pursuant to City Code Section 15-90.070(c), the City Council may affirm, reverse, or modify the decision of the Planning Commission, and may refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for such further action as may be directed by the City Council. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: All notice requirements for the appeal have been satisfied. Notice of the public hearing was mailed to property owners and residents and the hearing was advertised in the Saratoga News. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 – Appeal Application Attachment 2 – Supplemental Information from the Appellant Attachment 3 – Resolution of the City Council to Deny the Appeal Attachment 4 – February 14, 2018 Planning Commission Resolution of Approval Attachment 5 – February 14, 2018 Planning Commission Staff Report (w/out attachments) Attachment 6 – February 14, 2018 Planning Commission Action Minutes Attachment 7 – December 14, 2015 Administrative Design Review Approval Attachment 8 – April 11, 2018 Plan Review Letter from 4 Leaf, Inc. Attachment 9 -Site Photographs Attachment 10 – Development Plans 65 Attachment 1 66 67 68 69 Appeal of Fence Exception / FER17-0003 by Michael and Kathy Scandling Submitted April 16, 2018 Introduction The Planning Commission granted “Fence Exception / FER17-0003” to Shannon Gaines, the owner of 14345 Maclay court (the Applicant), on February 14, 2018. This document summarizes the arguments of an Appeal by Michael and Kathy Scandling, owners of 14381 Maclay Court (the Appellants). This presentation extensively quotes the video record of the Planning Commission meeting on February 14, 2018. It would be best to view the entire meeting for context. This is the URL: http://www.saratoga.ca.us/361/Agenda-Packets-Meeting-Videos The quotes presented in this document are timed from the absolute beginning of the video, which starts before the meeting—not from the beginning of the meeting itself. The timings are approximate. Argument 1: Changing the Definition of a Fence The structure for which a Fence Exception was requested is not a “fence” per Saratoga Municipal Code 15-06.261 because it is a “wall of a building.” The submitted plans and the photographs provided by the Planning Department in the hearing indicate that the structure extending into the setback is monolithic and contiguous with the wall of the front elevation of the house. The fact that the entire front elevation to the east of the front door is specified in the plans as uninterrupted shear wall and that new foundation was created specifically for the structure further support the truth that this is a wall. It is noteworthy that in the February 14 Planning Commission meeting, the structure was referred to as a wall no less than 42 times including all mention of the structure by the Applicant and her architect. For the record, the introduction of the Staff Report regarding “Fence Exception / FER17-0003” incorrectly calls out this structure as “referred to as a solid fence in the City Code” and incorrectly states that the “wall is attached to the residence and considered to be a solid fence per Section 15-06.261 of the City Code.” The two above statements in the Staff Report are incorrect because Section 15-06.261 of the City Code specifically excludes a “wall of a building” from the definition of a fence. The wall in question is not attached to the residence. It is—and according to the plans was specifically designed to be—a continuous “wall of a building” as the same report correctly states: the wall “is a horizontal extension of the front elevation of the structure” and “is an 11’-6” tall continuous stucco wall.” Attachment 2 70 The structure, being a “wall of a building,” is thus not the proper subject of a fence exception in the first place. The Applicant’s structure is a continuous “wall of a building” that is an integral extension of the front elevation of the building, extending past the corner of the building and into the side setback. The plan shows that the wall was designed to be a continuous integral “wall of a building.” 71 This code-compliant solid fence wall is not a “wall of a building” but is attached to the building. Argument 2: Findings While the structure is not—by definition—a fence, nonetheless the Planning Commission heard arguments that it is a fence. But even in this context, the arguments in favor of a Fence Exception fail. The Applicant did not and cannot meet the burden of proof as to two of the required five findings for a fence exception, and the Planning Commission, by a four to three vote, improperly made those two findings. The Applicant cannot meet the burden of proof as to Finding #1 (“The subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood.”) because, as the Planning Department stated in its Report to the Commission, “[t]he proposed solid fence would not be compatible with other similar structure in the neighborhood in that there are no other fences in the adjacent area which are similar in height and appearance or location and placement.” The Applicant cannot meet the burden of proof as to Finding #3 (“The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located.”) because, as the Planning Department stated in its Report to the Commission, “[t]he predominant pattern in the neighborhood, including sites on Maclay Court and Ten Oaks (sic) Road, is sites without front fences” and “[a]pproving this fence exception could create precedence whereby fences in the neighborhood could progressively increase in height thereby impairing the integrity and character of the neighborhood.” 72 The Commission was clearly confused by Finding #1 and #3 because more than one Commissioner voting in favor of the fence exception stated on the record that they were able to make Finding #1 and/or #3 because there were no fences or structures similar to the structure at issue and thus nothing to compare the structure at issue with. The confusion on both Findings appears to stem from a confusion several Commissioners had about the wording of Finding #1—whether it says “comparable” or “compatible.” Finding #1 says, “The subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood.” The word is “compatible.” The structure is not compatible. The Planning Department Staff Report is correct in not making Finding #1. The American Heritage Dictionary defines “compatible” as “Capable of existing or performing in harmonious, agreeable, or congenial combination with another or others.” This structure is not compatible because, in the words of the Staff Report, it “would not be compatible with other similar structure in the neighborhood in that there are no other fences in the adjacent area which are similar in height and appearance or location and placement.” Within a quarter mile radius there are very few solid wall fences at all, none that are a wall of a building, and none that are 11’-6” tall. Houses on Ten Acres Road and Sobey Road Houses visible on Maclay Court 73 In addition, we maintain that the Staff should not have been able to make Finding #4 (“The granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located.”) According to the Planning Department’s measurements, the wall extends 9’-10” into the side setback, which is an extremely significant—and as will be shown below, intentional— encroachment and is injurious to our property rights. Argument 3: Setback Violation The wall is not in compliance with the setback rules of the Saratoga Municipal Code. The Staff Report states that it “is an 11’-6” tall continuous stucco wall which is 12” wide that projects approximately 9’-10” beyond the edge of the building into the side yard setback area along the eastern property line. The required side yard setback is 20 feet.” In his testimony in the Planning Commission hearing, the architect, Curt Cline, at various points shows either disregard for or ignorance of the setback rules. He said, “it was deliberately designed to be that length” (00:38:25). When Commissioner Sunil Ahuja asked, “When you designed this house, was it purposely designed with this wall in the setback?” Curt Cline replied, “Yes.” (00:40:20) Later Mr. Cline said, “I didn’t look at it as a setback infraction. I looked at as an architectural element that would be an accepted element going into the setback.” (00:40:50) Later still he said, “Architects that do these types of homes usually aren’t just working in one community; you’re working in 20 or 30 different jurisdictions, so you don’t have intimate 74 knowledge necessarily of those ordinances and you look to staff to sort of comment on those things. We look to those comments to point us in the right direction because I’m not memorizing ordinances in all the cities we work in.” (00:42:50) For the record, as part of its examination criteria, the California Architects Board requires architects to be able to: Prepare construction documents and verify conformance with the conditions of prior agency approvals and applicable codes and regulations. Manage the submittal of construction documents to regulatory agencies through initial submittal, coordinating responses, and obtaining approvals. And architects must have the following knowledge: Knowledge of methods and procedures for demonstrating design compliance with local regulations: zoning, planning, general plan, CBSC modifications, etc. Knowledge of methods for performing a QA/QC review of construction docs including constructability, code compliance, etc. A non-expert can find the setback area rules on the Saratoga city website in less than five minutes. Argument 4: Agreement to Modify the Wall In his testimony, Senior Planner Chris Riordan said that in October, 2016, “the applicant agreed to modify the design of the wall to be no wider than three feet, so it could be defined as an ‘architectural feature’.” (00:14:40) Later in the hearing, Mr. Riordan reiterated this agreement had been made during subsequent questioning. He told Commissioner Kookie Fitzimmons, “I met with applicant’s architect and we talked about the wall at the planning counter. Present was myself and the former Community Development Director and we talked about different solutions to it, we brainstormed through the code of what we could do perhaps to reach a midpoint and it was decided that we could define it as architectural feature if the wall was no more than 3 feet in width. The architect did leave the meeting and we understood that would be perceived and the project would be constructed in that manner.” (21:30) Commissioner Fitzimmons then asked, “Just to be clear, do you feel that at that point in time the Applicant was aware, first of all, that the City made a mistake, they’re acknowledging the mistake, the City is saying ‘Ok, let’s fix it’, are you saying that the applicant, at that time, agreed to fix it?” Riordan replied, “I would agree with that, yes.” (22:25) 75 The fix never occurred. Later in the hearing when referring to the modification, Curt Cline said, “At that time I thought we could shorten the wall but after talking with Shannon, you know, I didn't want to shorten the wall. It was deliberately designed to be that length. . . [the engineer] indicated that that would be extremely difficult. There’s lateral resisting forces . . .” (00:37:30) To this, responding to Commissioner Fitzsimmons’s question about structural impact, Community Development Director Debbie Pedro read from the city Structural engineer’s report, which concluded, “It appears that the shear wall were (sic) designed appears to be approximately twice the shear strength needed per the calculations; so according to the staff engineer, the lowering of the wall or the removal of the wall should not have an impact to the structural design of the building.” Following up, Commissioner Fitzsimmons asked Mr. Cline, “When you realized there could be an engineering impact, what did you do next?” Mr. Cline replied, “We didn’t do anything next. I believe there were discussions about putting it into language as a fence exception to see if we could move it along.” Later in the hearing, Mr. Cline said, “we don’t want to lop off an arm.” (00:46:30) Pursuing the point, Commissioner Razi Mohiuddin asked about the steps Mr. Cline took when he was made aware of the issue. Mr. Cline said that he didn’t recall the exact date that he was made aware of the issue, but that he trusted the date given in Chris Riordan’s testimony: October 2016. Commissioner Mohiuddin asked, “Is there any report that you had Westfall prepare or your engineer prepare and submit to the city as an issue?” Mr. Cline replied, “No. We didn’t take it that far. Again, I think that discussions had moved then in describing it as a fence vs. a wall.” (00:48:00) Commissioner Mohiuddin then asked, “In that case, why not file that exception at that point in time, or the request for that? Because it seems like it’s been 16 months or so approximately.” Mr. Cline replied, “I don’t know why that lag happened, but I know we were discussing it that that point.” (00:48:45) In contrast to Mr. Cline’s statement that a fence exception was discussed in October, 2016, later in the hearing, Chris Riordan said in reply to questions from Commissioner Mohiuddin that there was no discussion of a fence in the first meeting on October 16, 2016 nor any discussion of a fence until November 2017. (Questions start at 01:04:25) The Applicant and property owner, Shannon Gaines, said, “I wasn’t involved in these meetings.” (00:28:50) Later she said, “I hire the best person for the job and I give them carte blanche. I don’t micromanage.” (00:45:35) Argument 5: Irrelevant Testimony Early in the hearing, Commissioner Fitzsimmons stated that at the Planning Commission’s site visit on February 13, 2018, the Applicant made comments to the Commissioners on five points that were immaterial and outside the scope of the application. In the hearing on February 14, Commissioner Fitzsimmons listed these points and stated for the record that they were outside the scope of the hearing. She said, “These points have already been determined as immaterial. 76 They should not be brought up in this meeting. If they are, please remember they are immaterial.” (00:24:55) Nonetheless, the Applicant submitted, and the Commission considered, improper inappropriate evidence at the hearing itself. (Starting at 00:33:10) Applicant raised several points in detail (including points labeled above as immaterial) in an apparent attempt misdirect the Commissioners and to discredit Appellants and the objections that Appellants were raising to the structure at issue and the requested fence exception. Among these was a detailed statement regarding the failed settlement negotiations at a mediation between Applicant and Appellant on February 6, 2018. This mediation was subject to a strict and explicit non-disclosure agreement signed by all parties, including Ms. Gaines, prior to the mediation. Such a disclosure of communications during a mediation is strictly forbidden. Section 1119 of the California Evidence Code provides that “[n]o evidence of anything said or any admission made for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation or a mediation consultation is admissible or subject to discovery . . . in any arbitration, administrative adjudication, civil action, or other noncriminal proceeding in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given” and “[a]ll communications, negotiations, or settlement discussions by and between participants in the course of a mediation or a mediation consultation shall remain confidential.” Later in the hearing, in clarifying the criteria for approving or denying the Fence Exception and from her position as Chairwoman, Commissioner Tina Walia confirmed with Community Development Director Debbie Pedro that “we are only looking at Fence Exception, yes or no; whether we can make the Findings, the five Findings.” Director Pedro replied “Yes.” (1:03:10) Commissioner Walia went on the clarify, “aesthetically pleasing or not; that is not what we are here discussing tonight.” Director Pedro replied, “That is not before you this evening.” (1:03:35) Further clarifying, Commissioner Walia said, “So for purposes of clarification, when I’m thinking as just a Commissioner, I just need to look at it, the five Findings, and everything else is outside our purview from tonight’s decision.” Director Pedro replied “Yes.” (1:04:05) Despite this clarification from the Chair of what was admissible in coming to a decision, four Commissioners said that they could make the findings based on factors that were immaterial to the Findings. The first Commissioner to make a statement was Sunil Ahuja, who expressed his opinion that (a) the initial plan was approved and that the Applicant shouldn’t be penalized for the Planning Department’s error in not noticing the setback violation, (b) that the design is unique, and (c) that the Applicant had spent a significant amount of money. For these reasons he said that he could make all five findings. Commissioner Leonard Almalech, Commissioner Joyce Hlava, and Wendy Chang all said that they could make all five findings, agreeing with the views expressed by Commissioner Ahuja. Commissioner Chang reiterated that she could make the Findings based on aesthetics. Despite the clarifications of the Commissioners’ scope of purview, these four Commissioners all “made the Findings” based on matters that had been deemed completely outside the scope of discussion. 77 Argument 6: Precedent Granting the Fence Exception here sets bad precedent and encourages misconduct. The Senior Planner testified, and Applicant’s agent did not deny, that (a) Applicant’s agent was aware of the setback violation at least as early as October 2016, (b) Applicant’s agent committed to resolve the problem, and (c) Applicant took no steps to resolve the setback violation until filing the fence exception over a year later. These points strongly suggest that the Applicant hoped to avoid the problem during construction and, only when construction was effectively complete, seek an exception claiming hardship. Granting the Fence Exception rewards this conduct and will encourage other parties to not take proactive steps to resolve known issues, and to attempt to gain similar exceptions by changing definitions in the Municipal Code. Argument 7: Rights of the Appellants This entire matter should have been entirely between the Applicant, her architect, and the Planning Department. All were negligent: the Planning Department in not spotting the encroaching wall in the plans and rejecting the plans in the design stage, and the Applicant and architect in reneging on their agreement to correct the intentional setback violation when it was discovered. The Planning Department was again negligent in enforcing the code after our repeated visits to the Planning Department to see that this was done. We, as neighbors, should never have had to be involved. We, as citizens, property owners, and taxpayers rely on the City to protect our rights by seeing that the Municipal Code is adhered to and enforced. For all of the above reasons, the Fence Exception / FER17-0003 granted on February 14, 2018 should be reversed. Respectfully Submitted, Michael and Kathy Scandling 14381 Maclay Ct., Saratoga 78 Appeal of Fence Exception / FER17-0003 by Michael and Kathy Scandling Addendum: Timeline Regarding the Encroaching Wall (“Fence”) December, 2015 Plans for the house at 14345 Maclay Court, showing the current configuration of the wall/”fence” encroaching the setback were approved by the Design Review Committee. October 25, 2016 Kathy Scandling notices new front wall just constructed and is almost certainly extending into the setback. October 2016 Staff inspected the site and confirmed that a wall was being framed within the side setback area. City met with the project architect at City Hall to discuss the wall. The applicant agreed to modify the design of the wall to be no wider than 3 feet so that it could be defined as an architectural feature. December 21, 2016 The wall is prepped for plaster and has not been shortened. Scandlings express their concern to Chris Riordan, who told us he warned the architect about it. Chris told us that the architect told him it was being modified to remove the foundation, thus making it an “architectural element.” This would allow it to encroach by 3 feet into the setback. The architect, according to Chris, told Chris that the house wall is already positioned two feet further away from the setback shown on the drawn plans. He told the architect that a survey was required to show this. We have seen no evidence that this survey was ever performed. September 6, 2017 Scandlings see Chris Riordan and reiterate that even an eyeball, cursory inspection will show that the front wall is protruding further into the setback than the plans show and further than allowable by code. Chris said he had not heard back from the architect. He would contact the architect again, and if there was no response he would call Ms. Gaines. He said he would also drive by and inspect. He reiterated that an encroachment would not pass final inspection. We asked if there was any possibility that the owner might apply for and get a variance. Chris went over the criteria for a variance and said 79 that the property met none of the criteria, and said emphatically that “variances are not given simply because the person wants to break the law.” November 2017 1. Planning staff conducted a final inspection and found the subject wall was not modified as agreed to. Staff informed the architect that the project would not receive final inspection by the building department until the wall was brought into compliance with the City regulations. 2. Property owner submitted an application for a fence exeption to the maximum allowable height. November 7, 2017 Michael Scandling goes to City Planning to talk to Riordan about the wall. Riordan said there had been “lots of activity and traffic concerning it” in the last couple of days. He said Curt Cline finally called Chris back (from the September 2017 message) regarding the issue and the architect said there was a foundation under it that would be very difficult to remove. (Note: Architect Curt Cline had previously told Chris he was going to remove part of the foundation to change it into an architectural element, not a house wall – see 12/21/2016. Further note that the plans show that foundation was poured specifically to support that wall. See attached photos of the house plans showing new foundation to be poured and that the wall is an integral part of the shear wall structure of the house.) Chris told Michael that the owner will probably ask for a variance. Chris said he had been at the site very recently and said the final inspection process was in process. Chris said that there would be no pass on final inspection until the wall was addressed and met the Municipal Code. A few days later Chris again says that there would be no pass on final inspection until the wall was addressed and met the Municipal Code. He further said that there is no such thing as a provisional pass pending the remediation of a code violation, and that if the owner chose to apply for a variance, final inspection would not occur until after the extremely unlikely event of a variance being granted; or if—more likely—denied, the wall brought into compliance with the Municipal Code. November 13, 2017 Shannon Gaines applies for “Fence Exception for an 11 ft. fence.” Ref: FER17-0003. The Saratoga City website shows that a thirty-day Notice of Planning Commission hearing will be sent out on 1/12/2018 by Chris Riordan. 80 December 14, 2017 Scandlings accidentally learn of the requested Fence Exception and the scheduled final inspection on December 19 by inquiring at the Planning Commission desk on other matters. December 19, 2017 Michael and Kathy Scandling, accompanied by their attorney, meet with Chris Riordan at the Planning Office. Mr. Riordan says that the Planning Department “does not support” the Fence Exception. February 2, 2018 Scandlings receive notice of Public Hearing regarding the Fence Exception. 81 RESOLUTION NO: XX-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING APPEAL APPC18-0001, AND APPROVING FENCE EXCEPTION NO. FER17-0003 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 11’-6” SOLID FENCE LOCATED AT 14345 MACLAY COURT (APN 397-03-033) WHEREAS, a Fence Exception application was submitted by Shannon Gaines (“Applicant”) for an 11’-6” solid tall wall built in association with a recently constructed single- family residence at 14345 Maclay Court (“Project”) and a Fence Exception approval is required pursuant to Section 15-29.090 of the City Code because the wall exceeds a height of six (6) feet; and WHEREAS, on February 14, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project, and considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties, and approved the Fence Exception application for the Project (FER17-0003); and WHEREAS, on March 1, 2018, an appeal to the City Council was filed by Michael and Kathy Scandling (“Appellants”); and WHEREAS, on May 2, 2018, following a duly noticed public hearing where the City Council conducted a de novo review of the appeal, at which all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence, the City Council considered the application, site plan, architectural drawings, CEQA documentation, and other materials, exhibits, and evidence presented by City Staff, the appellant, the applicant, and other interested parties; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department recommends that the City Council determine that this Project is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines § 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby denies the appeal of the appellants, affirms the decision of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga on February 14, 2018, and approves the applicant’s Fence Exception application and further finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. The documents constituting the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based are located in the City of Saratoga Department of Community Development and are maintained by the Director of that Department. Section 2: The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, Section 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.” This provision exempts construction of accessory structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences, and no exception to that exemption applies. Attachment 3 82 Resolution No. XX-XXX 2 Section 3: City Code Section 15-29.090 requires Fence Exception approval for any new solid fence over six (6) feet in height. The Fence Exception approval requirement implements the Saratoga General Plan, including but not limited to: Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. Section 4: The required Fence Exception approval findings under Section 15-29.090 of the City Code can be made and are set forth as follows: 15-29.090(a)(1): The subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood. The proposed solid fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood in that there are other fences in the adjacent area which are similar in height and appearance or location and placement. The site across the street at 14332 Maclay Court has a front yard masonry solid fence extending across its entire frontage. This fence has an average height of five feet with pilasters that have an average height of six and a half feet. This fence includes a nine foot tall wrought iron entrance gate flanked on opposite sides by eight foot tall posts which support the gate. The finding can be made in the affirmative in that the fence on the subject site is compatible with other fences in the neighborhood. 15-29.090(a)(2): The entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable. The solid fence is constructed of cement with a white colored smooth stucco finish. All of the materials are durable, are of high quality and would be able to weather the outdoor environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative. 15-29.090(a)(3): The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located. The solid fence incorporates materials and an architectural design consistent with the main residence. In addition, the fence is setback 50 feet from the street. Over time the landscaping near the fence will increase in height to soften its appearance. Approving this fence exception would not create precedence whereby fences in the neighborhood could progressively increase in height thereby impairing the integrity and character of the neighborhood. This finding can be made in the affirmative. 15-29.090(a)(4): The granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located. The fence is setback 50 feet from the street and because it is located within a side setback area it will not block views from adjacent sites or site distances from the street or driveways. The fence was inspected by the building department during construction of 83 Resolution No. XX-XXX 3 the residence to ensure that its construction would not be detrimental or injurious to the property or adjacent neighbors. This finding can be made in the affirmative. 15-29.090(a)(5): The granting of the exception will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. As previously stated, the proposed fence would provide the required sight distances for the driveway. The proposed fence would not interfere with visibility for pedestrian, bicyclist and vehicular traffic within the area. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Section 5: The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby approves Fence Exception Application FER17-0003 for the fence located at 14345 Maclay Court. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Conditions may be modified only by the Planning Commission unless modification is expressly otherwise allowed by applicable sections of the City Code, including but not limited to Sections 15-80.120 and/or 16-05.035. 2. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Fence Exception Approval and may, at any time, modify, delete, or impose, any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 3. The Community Development Director shall mail to the Owner and Applicant a notice in writing, on or after the time the Resolution granting the Fence Exception Approval is duly executed by the City, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). THIS APPROVAL SHALL EXPIRE SIXTY (60) DAYS AFTER THE DATE SAID NOTICE IS MAILED IF ALL PROCESSING FEES CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE HAVE NOT BEEN PAID IN FULL. No Building Permit may be issued until the Community Development Director certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 4. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference. 5. Prior to final sign-off of any Building Permit to implement this Fence Exception Approval the Owner or Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the Community Development Director by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the Community Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements of this Resolution. 6. Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend City as to Action Challenging Approval of Application and as to Damage from Performance of Work Authorized by Design Review Approval. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree 84 Resolution No. XX-XXX 4 to defend, indemnify, and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. In addition, prior to issuance of an approved final inspection (i.e., a “finaled”) Building Permit from the Community Development Director, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the Community Development Director and the City Attorney. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Saratoga on this 2nd day of May 2018 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor Attest: Nora Pimentel, City Clerk 85 RESOLUTION NO. 18-001 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARA TOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A FENCE EXCEPTION FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14345 MACLAY COU RT WHEREA S, an application was submitted to the City of Saratoga by Shannon Gaines for Fence Exception approval for an 11 '-6" tall solid fence located within a side yard setback area. A Fence Exception is requested for the solid fence to exceed the maximum height of six feet allowed for such fences. The site has a net lot size area of 40,040 square feet and is zoned R-1-40,000. The foregoing are collectively described as the "Project" in this Resolution; and WHEREA S, on February 14, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, provided all interested parties a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and argument, and considered all evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: After careful consideration of the architec tural drawings and other exhibits and evidence submitted in connection with this matter, the findi ngs for approval of a Fence Exception application set forth below are hereby made, Application No. FERl 7-0003 for Fence Exception approval was voted on and is hereby approved by the Planning Commission. Section 3: The Planning Commission finds that the Project is consistent with the Fence Exception findings in that 1) the proposed solid fence is compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood; 2)the entirety of the fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable; 3) the fence will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood; 4) the fence will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity; and 5) the fence will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. Section 4: Per City Code Section 15-29.010(1), all solid fences are to comply with the fence. regulations unless the Planning Commission grants a fence exception from the fence regulations pursuant to City Code Section 15-29.090. The Planning Commission did make all the findings to approve the fence exception for additional fence height and Application No. FERl 7-0003 is hereby approved. Section 5: Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen ( 15) days from the date of its adoption. Attachment 4 86 87 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date: February 14, 2018 Application: Fence Exception / FER17-0003 Location/APN: 14345 Maclay Court / 397-03-033 Owner / Applicant: Shannon Gaines Staff Planner: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner 14345 MACLAY COURT SITE Attachment 5 88 Summary PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Fence Exception for an 11’-1 1/2” tall wall, referred to as a solid fence in the City Code, built in association with a recently constructed new single-family residence. The wall, which is a horizontal extension of the front elevation of the structure, projects into the left side setback area by approximately 9’-10”. The City Code limits solid fences, or walls to a height not exceeding six feet. No trees are proposed for removal. The net lot area is 40,040 square feet and the site is zoned R-1-40,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 18-001 denying the request for additional height as staff is unable to make all the findings to grant a fence exception. Fence Exception review by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to City Code Section 15-29.090 [Fence Exceptions]. PROJECT DATA: Gross/Net Site Area: 40,040 square feet General Plan Designation: RVLD (Very Low Density Residential) Zoning: R-1-40,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site is located at 14345 Maclay Court. Surrounding uses include single-family residential structures on all sides. The left side property line is adjacent to an access corridor of two flag lots located to the rear of the subject site. In December 2015 the applicant received Administrative Design Review approval to construct a new one story, 13 feet tall, contemporary designed single-family home. Exterior materials include smooth painted stucco, glass, and wood. Construction of the residence is nearing completion. An architectural feature of the front façade of the residence is an 11’-1 1/2” tall continuous stucco wall which is 12” wide that projects approximately 9’-10” beyond the edge of the building into the side yard setback area along the eastern property line. The required side yard setback is 20 feet. Photographs of the wall are included as Attachment #2. The wall is attached to the residence and considered to be a solid fence per Section 15-06.261 of the City Code. The definition of a fence is that it is a structural device forming a physical barrier which can be made of materials including masonry. Fences may be located within side setback areas. However, solid fences or walls are limited to a height of six feet. As constructed the wall is 11’-6” in height and exceeds the maximum allowable height for solid fences by 5’-6”. The applicant is requesting approval of fence exception for the wall to exceed the maximum height allowed for solid fences. Arborist Review: A protected olive tree is located in the vicinity of the wall. This tree was reviewed by the City Arborist prior to the project being approved and was protected during construction of the project. 89 3 | P a g e Neighbor Notification: The applicant didn’t submit neighbor notification forms signed by adjacent neighbors. The public hearing notice was mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. A copy is of the notice is included as Attachment #3. FINDINGS: The five findings required for issuance of a Fence Exception pursuant to City Code Section 15-29.090 are set forth below. The applicant has not met the burden of proof to support all of the required findings as follows: Finding #1: The subject fence will be compatible with other similar st ructures in the neighborhood. The proposed solid fence would not be compatible with other similar structure in the neighborhood in that there are no other fences in the adjacent area which are similar in height and appearance or location and placement. The predominant pattern in the neighborhood, including sites on Maclay Court and Ten Oaks Road, is sites without front fences. An exception is the site across the street at 14332 Maclay Court which has a front yard masonry solid fence extending across its entire frontage. This fence has an average height of five feet with pilasters that have an average height of six and a half feet. This fence includes a nine foot tall wrought iron entrance gate flanked on opposite sides by eight foot tall posts which support the gate. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative in that with the exception of the site across the street, which has an existing fence with an average height of five feet, the fence on the subject site is 11’-1 1/2” which is not compatible with other fences in the neighborhood. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. Finding #2: The entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable. The solid fence is constructed of cement with a white colored smooth stucco finish. All of the materials are durable, are of high quality and would be able to weather the outdoor environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Finding #3: The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located. The solid fence incorporates materials and an architectural design consistent with the main residence. In addition, the fence is setback 50 feet from the street. Over time the landscaping near the fence will increase in height to soften its appearance. However, an important justification in reviewing requests for fence exceptions is compatibility with similar structures, such as fences, in the neighborhood. Approving this fence exception could create precedence whereby fences in the neighborhood could progressively increase in height thereby impairing the integrity and character of the neighborhood. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. Finding #4: The granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located. The fence is setback 50 feet from the street and because it is located within a side setback area it will not block views from adjacent sites or site distances from the street or driveways. The fence was inspected by the building department during construction of the residence to ensure that its construction would not be detrimental or injurious to the property or adjacent neighbors. This finding can be made in the affirmative. 90 4 | P a g e Finding #5: The granting of the exception will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. As previously stated, the proposed fence would provide the required sight distances for the driveway. The proposed fence would not interfere with visibility for pedestrian, bicyclist and vehicular traffic within the area. This finding can be made in the affirmative. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed Fence Exception Request is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. Section 15303) “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. This exemption allows for the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures and no exception to that exemption applies. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission not approve the application for a fence exception by adopting the attached Resolution as all the required findings cannot me made to grant the exception. To bring the subject wall into conformance with City Codes, the applicant may consider the following design options: 1. Reduce the height of the wall within the setback from 11’1 1/2” to 6’, or 2. Remove the portion of the wall encroaching within the setback. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of Denial 2. Site Photographs 3. Mailed Notice 4. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A". 91 Saratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING ACTION MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 2018 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING Civic Theater | 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga CA 95070 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Tina Walia, Vice Chair Wendy Chang, Commissioners Kookie Fitzsimmons, Sunil Ahuja, Joyce Hlava, Len Almalech, Razi Mohiuddin ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Debbie Pedro, Community Development Director Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of January 10, 2018. Recommended Action: Approve Minutes of January 10, 2018 meeting. ALMALECH/AHUJA MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 10, 2018. MOTION PASSED. AYES: WALIA, HLAVA, ALMALECH, AHUJA, CHANG, MOHIUDDIN. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: FITZSIMMONS. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Any member of the public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. This law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications. REPORT ON APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision. 1. NEW BUSINESS 2. PUBLIC HEARING Attachment 6 92 Saratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 2 of 2 Applicants and/or their representatives have a total of ten (10) minutes maximum for opening statements. All interested persons may appear and be heard during this meeting regarding the items on this agenda. If items on this agenda are challenged in court, members of the public may be limited to raising only issues raised at the Public Hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to the close of the Public Hearing. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three (3) minutes. Applicants and/or their representatives have a total of five (5) minutes maximum for closing statements. 2.1. Application FER17-0003; 14345 Maclay Court (397-03-033); Gaines The applicant is requesting a Fence Exception for an 11’-6” tall wall, referred to as a solid fence in the City Code, built in association with a recently constructed new single-family residence. The wall, which is a horizontal extension of the front elevation of the structure, projects into the left side setback area by 9’-10”. The City Code limits solid fences, or walls to a height not exceeding six feet. No trees are proposed for removal. The net lot area is 40,040 square feet and the site is zoned R-1-40,000. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 18-001 denying the request for additional height as staff is unable to make all the findings to grant a fence exception. AHUJA/HLAVA MOVED TO NOT ADOPT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO DENY THE FENCE EXCEPTION AND APPROVE THE FENCE EXCEPTION WITH A MODIFIED RESOLUTION. MOTION PASSED. AYES: HLAVA, AHUJA, CHANG, ALMALECH. NOES: WALIA, FITZSIMMONS, MOHIUDDIN. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. DIRECTOR ITEMS Community Development Director Pedro mentioned the City Council Retreat will be held at the Foothill Club this Friday from 9am to 3pm. The item that may be of interest to the Planning Commission is a report on the 2017 Housing Legislation presented by City Attorney Richard Taylor. Ms. Pedro also reminded the Planning Commission about the dates of the General Plan Study Sessions coming up in February and March. COMMISSION ITEMS Chair Walia invites the public to attend the General Plan Update Study Sessions. She added that the 2/28/18 Regular Planning Commission Meeting has been cancelled. Chair Walia announced that there are 2 Planning Commission vacancies, and applications are due on 2/26/18, and interviews with the Council are scheduled for 3/7/18. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:32 PM. Minutes respectfully submitted: Janet Costa, Administrative Assistant City of Saratoga 93 Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 NOTICE OF APPROVAL Via E-mail To: Curt Cline 1265 Indiana St. San Francisco, CA 94107 From: Michael Fossati, Planner Date: 12/14/15 Subject: Application No. ADR15-0036; Administrative Design Review 14345 Maclay Ct., Saratoga, California Your application for the demolition of an existing one-story residence in order to construct a new 4,406 sq. ft. one-story residence at 14345 Maclay Ct. (APN 397-03-033) has been approved subject to a 15-day appeal period (which starts from the date of this approval letter) and the following findings have been made: FINDINGS ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures,” Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The project site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure and consists of remodeling and adding to one single-family residence. DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS The following findings have been made per City Code Section 15-45.080. a)Site development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints. The project meets this finding because the new residence is located approximately where the existing residence resided. Therefore, grading will be limited in preparing the site since there is limited slope within and around the building footprint. Attachment 7 94 ADR15-0036 / ADR Notice of Approval Cline & Gaines / 14345 Maclay Ct. 12/14/15 2 b) All protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree Regulations). If constraints existing on the property, the number of protected trees, heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute minimum. Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City Arborist shall be minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080. The applicant has been able to preserve approximately 86% of the existing trees located onsite by designing a structure to utilize the previously existing footprint. Only two of the seven trees (two coast live oaks) had been proposed for removal. The applicant, as conditioned, will be required to install $18,510 in new landscaping in order to offset the trees to be removed. Lastly, the applicant shall be required to install tree protection fencing and a bond in the amount of $43,810 to protect the remaining trees onsite. c) The height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds. The project meets this finding because the project will incorporate a long, flat roof that will be no taller than 13 feet in height. The low building height and one-story design will not unreasonably impact privacy of adjoining properties and community viewsheds. d) The overall mass and the height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood. The project meets this finding because the structure itself has been designed to be low profile with limited mass. The simple lines and limited architectural elements allow the building to be in scale with itself. The project shall fit into the neighborhood because of its low profile design and limited material pallet. The recessed tempered glass, smooth stucco in an off-white color, and wood horizontal tongue and groove siding allows the design to remain modern without dominating the neighborhood due to its appearance. e) The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. The project meets this finding because the applicant has incorporated a Mexican Feathergrass “Nasella Tenuissima” and up to five olive trees along the front and exterior side of the private driveway. Both Mexican Feathergrass and olive trees need the majority of water to become established, but once set, need limited watering. These elements will minimize the hardscape associated with the project and complement the natural environment currently in the neighborhood. f) Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. The project meets this finding because, due to the proposed low profile height and distance from neighboring structures allows the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. 95 ADR15-0036 / ADR Notice of Approval Cline & Gaines / 14345 Maclay Ct. 12/14/15 3 g) The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. The project meets this finding because: The design of the structure incorporates simple and well-proportioned massing. (pg. 4) The project has minimized the use of excessive colors and materials. (pg. 4) The structure has completely removed any large expanse of roof seen from the street. (pg. 6) The design has a site plan that will minimize view impacts from adjacent neighbors. (pg. 9) The structure has been setback in proportion to the size and the shape of the lot (pg. 10) The structure has been located and designed to minimize shadows on neighbors’ pool, yard areas or solar systems. (pg. 12) h) On hillside lots, the location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable impacts to ridgelines, significant hillside features, community viewsheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100. The finding can be made because although the site is not located in a Hillside-Residential zoning district, it is considered a Hillside lot by definition. Construction of the proposed structure would not impact ridgelines, significant hillside features, or community viewsheds due to the proposed location. Thus the above analysis concludes that the findings required for granting administrative design review approval can be met. The proposed application was properly noticed and circulated to property owners within 250-feet of the subject site. The review period for their comments ended November 18, 2015. Staff received one comment letter regarding the project. A summary of the letters and City’s action has been discussed below: Comment Letter #1 – The property owner of 14381 Maclay Court commented that the project, as proposed, is incompatible with the character of the neighborhood. The letter references examples of existing residences which include contemporary and Mediterranean architectural elements, followed by examples on how the project “has not been designed in a manner that recognizes and respects the unique features and characteristics of our neighborhood, and thus according to the Design Review Handbook cannot be approved as proposed.” Staff believes, as described above, the project meets the necessary findings associated with the Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines (SFRDG). For example, within the SFRDG, the perception of mass is a reflection of how large a home appears in a neighborhood. Excessive mass can be an issue because it can make a structure appear bulky and out of context with the neighborhood. The mass of the project proposed has been maintained with a design that has incorporated simple lines and well-proportioned architectural elements. Although the exterior materials are different then the some residences in the neighborhood, the project design style is a large single-story 96 ADR15-0036 / ADR Notice of Approval Cline & Gaines / 14345 Maclay Ct. 12/14/15 4 residence with a low-slung roofing system, which is in character with the homes in the area. Furthermore, the neighborhood isn’t a typical tract subdivision. The area is comprised with acre size lots and large one and two-story residences. The unique features associated with the neighborhood are not the architectural styles or similar roof forms. The unique features are how these residences are situated on the site and the incorporation of existing vegetation. The project, as proposed, has met the required setbacks similar to other residences in the area. The applicant has retained over 85% of the trees currently onsite and limited the amount of grading to 77 c.y., with approximately 17 c.y. of soil to be exported. Lastly, the largest setback and majority of existing vegetation has been maintained between the closest neighbors located to the south, in order to protect from potential privacy impacts. The project is subject to the following conditions: CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL CONDITIONS 1. All Applicable Requirements. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. 2. Hold Harmless Agreement. Applicant agrees to hold City Harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City’s defense of its action with respect to the applicant’s project. Planning and Building Department 3. Appeal and Effective Date. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of City Code Section 15-90, this Approval shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of this Notice of Approval. 4. Expiration. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within thirty-six (36) months from the date of adoption (12/14/15) of this Notice of Approval or approval will expire. 5. Conformance to Plans. The project shall be constructed as shown on Exhibit A of the Administrative Design Review application. Any proposed changes, including but not limited to façade design and materials to the approved plans shall be submitted in writing with a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Proposed changes to the approved plans are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. Staff will not approve downgrading of the exterior from what is shown on the approved plans. Any exterior changes to approved plans may require filing an additional application and fees as a modification to approved plans. 6. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to staff review prior to issuance of Zone Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum, include the following: 97 ADR15-0036 / ADR Notice of Approval Cline & Gaines / 14345 Maclay Ct. 12/14/15 5 Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as “Exhibit A” in the planning department file; and Drawings/reports/materials required by the Building Department; and This Notice of Approval printed onto separate plan pages; and An Arborist Report, dated April 22, 2015, printed onto separate plan pages: and A boundary survey, stamped and signed by a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer authorized to practice land surveying. The stamp shall reflect a current license for the land surveyor/engineer, the document shall be labeled “Boundary Survey,” and the document shall not contain any disclaimers. A Site Plan containing a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans.” A utility plan that shows location of air condition units; and A drainage plan combined with a storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be managed, to the extent feasible, and incorporating the New Development and Construction – Best Management Practices. An explanatory note shall be provided if all storm water cannot be maintained on site. 7. Fences, Walls and Hedges. All fences, walls and hedges shall conform to height requirements provided in City Code Section 15-29. 8. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public right-of-way. 9. Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan. The final landscaping and irrigation plan shall take into account the following: To the extent feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. 98 ADR15-0036 / ADR Notice of Approval Cline & Gaines / 14345 Maclay Ct. 12/14/15 6 Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. 10. Fire Department Requirements. Owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. 11. Noise and Construction Hours. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 12. Front yard landscaping. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Department valued at 150% of the estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City. 13. Construction Management Plan. The applicant shall submit a construction management plan prior to obtaining a building permit. The plan shall address work hours and schedule, equipment/material staging and parking, estimated vehicular traffic, contaminated soil management, dust control measures, noise mitigation, and general health and safety. Public Works Department 14. Encroachment Permit. An Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department is required for improvements in any portion of the public right-of-way or City easement prior to obtaining a building permit. ***************** END OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ****************** 99 Engineering • Construction Management • Inspection • Plan Check Residential Wall Dispute Review of Plans – City of Saratoga 14345 Maclay Court 4LEAF, INC. Job No. 598-18-027 Page 1 of 1 2126 Rheem Drive •Pleasanton, CA 94588 • Phone (925) 462-5959 • Fax (925) 462-5958 8896 North Winding Way •Fair Oaks, CA 95628 •Phone (916) 965-0010 • Fax (916) 965-0013 April 11, 2018 City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Email: criordan@saratoga.ca.us; jstyczynski@saratoga.ca.us; dpedro@saratoga.ca.us The construction drawings for the Gaines Residence, dated 02.24.15 by MODERN House Architecture and Design, have been reviewed to answer a question about the role of the wing wall extending 10-feet from the living room into the side yard. This wall is shown architecturally on sheets A1.0 and A2.1 in plan view, and in South Elevation 1 on Sheet A3.3. The corresponding wall is shown on Sheet S.2, the Lateral Resistance Plan (House). The entire element, from the freestanding eastern wall end to the intersection at the end of the kitchen wall along grid line D, is noted as wall number 4. This wall is specified with a length of (4) 45-feet, and wall sheathing of D2/A1 at face 1 and D2/- at face 2. The W estfall Engineers, Inc. calculations dated February 3, 2015 and March 12, 2015 correspond to these plans. Page C9 features two alternatives for resisting the 5314# lateral load applied to grid line 6. The first option is a tightly nailed 4-foot long segment, with D2 plywood on both faces resisting 1328 pounds per foot. Alternately, the lateral force can be resisted by 45 feet of type A1 shear wall at 118 pounds per foot. A quick check confirms that either of these would develop sufficient resistance. (4•1328 = 5312#, 45•118=5310#, both within rounding error of 5314#.) On Sheet S.2, the 45 foot version of the wall, with a loading of 118 points per foot, is drawn. This wall incorporates a 10 foot long wing wall projecting into the side yard. If the wing wall were truncated, the remaining wall would still feature about 35 feet of type A1 shear wall. With a designed 230 pounds per foot capacity, the truncated wall would still be conservatively designed. If the dispute results in a requirement to remove the wing wall, revised plans should be submitted to document the wall truncation. An engineer should calculate the uplift force on the reduced wall segment and specify a holddown device to resist the uplift at the new end of wall. This will likely involve installing an epoxied rod in the 30-inch x30-inch x12-inch footing noted on page S.1 at the grid A & 6 intersection. Consideration should be given to allow a short stub wall of less than 12 inches at the building exterior to be retained. That would allow the new holddown device and epoxy tie to be installed at the exterior of the residence, instead of disturbing the finishes of the living room for this retrofit. This review was based on examination of the provided approved plans and structural calculations, an engineer’s understanding of lateral force development under ASCE 7-10 and resisting system design under the 2013 CBC and 2008 NDS. Respectfully Submitted, Scott Martin Plan Review Engineer Attachment 8 100 14345 Maclay Court 1/30/18 Attachment 9 101 SITE PLAN AND FENCE ELEVATIONS A1.1 AS NOTEDSCALE : SHEET : Revisions: DATE :THESE DRAWINGS ARE THE ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED WORKOF THE ARCHITECT AND MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED OR USEDWITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE ARCHITECT.Curt Cline© MODERN HOUSE1/24/18FILE PATH: /Volumes/Curt/01 Projects/Gaines/GAINESpostpermit_WITHFENCESUBMITTAL.pln • LAST SAVED BY: Modern House - Natsumi • PRINTED ON 1/24/18 @ 10:08 AM***PROJECT COMPANY*** • GAINES RESIDENCE • 397-03-033 • A1.1GAINES RESIDENCE14345 MACLAY CT.SARATOGA, CAARCHITECTURE & DESIGN Curt Cline Architect 1265 Indiana Street San Francisco Ca. 94107 P. 415.800.8520 C. 415.596.7281 modernhouse@mac.com www.modernhousearchitects.com 397-03-033COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW20' 22.714'0.667'41.614'0.667' 46.234' 15.691' 5 0 ' - 0 " 0'-0" -2.0' -1'-3" -4.9' -4.9' -6.7' -6.7' -9.7' -9.7' -10.0' -9.8' 30'-0" FRONT YARD SETBACK20'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACKS 0° 09' 01" E 327.77'N 89° 50' 59" E 136.78'N 0° 09' 01" W 157.77'N 54° 15' 13" E 184.47' MACLAY CT. ST.SLOPECHANGESLOPECHANGESLOPECHANGEGRADE LEVEL PLANTER 370 380 370 380 18"OAK 18"OAK 3-8"OLIVE 18"OAK 10"OAK 8"OAK 8"OAK 11"OAK 2-18"OAK 10"OAK 18"OAK 16"OAK 30"EUC. 20"EUC 8"OAK 8"OAK 8"OAK 8"OAK 10"OAK 18"OAK 9"OAK 9"OAK 10"TREE 24"OAK 12"OAK 8"ACA 18"OAK 19"OAK 12"OAK (E) 5-9"OLIVE 18"RDW 12"RDW 10'P.U.E. 8"OAK GAS & ELEC. METERS 10"OAK 12"OAK 2-6"OAK 19"OAK 14"OAK 22",18",19" OAK 30" OAK 4" B.E. 24" OAK 15" OAK T E L . P G E W M W M IRRIG CABLE SSMH SEWER PROTECTIVE FENCING, TYP. 12"OAK 2-6"OAK 24" OAK 0.771'50'-0" REAR Y A R D S ET B A C K 25.803'67.583'2 A1.1 (E) ONE-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SEE 2/A1.1 FOR ENLARGED PLAN 5 6 12'-4"7'-8"16'-8"4 A1.1 5 A1.1 GAS AND ELEC. METERS ALIGN 20'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK(N) 6'-0" FENCE LIVING 104 A B 9'-9 5/8" 65 (N) BLACK VINYL COATED WIRE MESH FENCE 6'-0" MAX11'-1 1/2"ABOVE GRADEAVERAGE GRADE 379 NOT TO SCALE 1 SITE PLAN FOR FENCE SUBMITTAL A1.1 NOT TO SCALE 3 ENLARGED PARTIAL PLAN AT FENCE A1.1 NOT TO SCALE 4 ELEVATION AT FENCE A1.1NOT TO SCALE 5 ELEVATION AT FENCE A1.1 NOT TO SCALE 2 SOUTH ELEVATION WITH PROPOSED FENCE A1.1 Attachment 10 102 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:Recreation & Facilities PREPARED BY:Dylan Davis, Recreation Coordinator SUBJECT:Request to Rename the Administrative Conference Room RECOMMENDED ACTION: Rename the Administrative Conference Room at City Hall the Linda Callon Conference Room. BACKGROUND: Joyce Hlava submitted an application requesting the City’s Administrative Conference Room be renamed the Linda Callon Conference Room. Linda Callon,the first female mayor of Saratoga, passed away on January 6 of this year. Linda served on the City Council from 1978 to 1986 and held the office of Mayor from 1980 to 1983. Pursuant to the City Council’s naming policy,Mayor Bernald designated the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) as the appropriate City Commission to review the application and make a recommendation to the City Council. The PRC reviewed the application at their March 20th meeting and recommend the City Council approve the renaming as requested. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Application Attachment B –City Council’s Naming Policy -Resolution 08-009 Attachment C –Letters of Support 103 104 105 106 RESOLUTION N0.08-009 POLICY PERTAINING TO NAMING CITY-OWNED LAND AND FACILITIES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga desires to establish a policy to establish criteria and procedures for the naming and renaming of City-owned land, facilities and portion of facilities e.g. rooms, fields, etc.); and WHEREAS, the policy would pertain to all City-owned lands, facilities and portions of facilities with the exception of City streets, which is managed by the City's Community Development Department under a separate set of policies and procedures; NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, State of California, that a policy pertaining to Naming City-owned Land and Facilities is hereby established as follows: NAMING CITY-OWNED LAND AND FACILITIES I. PURPOSE The intent of this policy is to establish criteria and procedures for the naming and renaming of City-owned land and facilities. II. OVERVIEW 1. This policy provides a mechanism for citizens to suggest names they believe should be considered for new City facilities, lands and/or portions of facilities (e.g. rooms, fields, etc.) and for the renaming of existing facilities, lands and/or portions of facilities (e.g. rooms, fields, etc.). 2. This policy pertains to all City-owned lands and facilities with the exception of City streets. The naming of streets is managed by the City's Community Development Department under a separate set of policies and procedures. III. GENERAL POLICIES The City Council shall have the authority to name and rename City-owned lands and facilities. NOTE: The City has a separate "Tree and Bench Dedication" Program. Information about this program can be found on the City's website (currently located at http://www.saratoga.ca.us/pdf/treebenchapplicationl.pdf), or by contacting the City Clerk. 2. The donation of land(s), facility(ies), or funds for the acquisition, renovation or maintenance of land(s) or facilities, shall not constitute an obligation by the City to name the land(s) and/or facility(ies) or any portion thereof after an individual, family or organization. 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:May 2, 2018 DEPARTMENT:City Attorney PREPARED BY:Richard Taylor, City Attorney SUBJECT:Saratoga Senior Coordinating Council Lease Agreement and Update to Support and Facility Use Renewal Agreement RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Lease Agreement with Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) and an update to the previously approved SASCC Support and Use of Facilities Agreement. DISCUSSION: At its June 7, 2017 meeting the City Council approved a Support and Facility Use Agreement with SASCC, building on prior agreements dating back to 1981. That agreement provided SASCC with a license to use various City facilities, including the Senior Center and Adult Day Care Center. Since approval of the 2017 agreement, SASCC and staff have determined that SASCC would be better able to serve the senior community with a lease specifically for use of the Senior Center and Adult Day Care Center (including the Senior Portable). The attached lease provides SASCC with exclusive use of the Senior Center and Adult Day Care facilities during SASCC’s operating hours. The attached Support and Use of Facilities Agreement retains all the earlier provisions but removes reference to the City facilities now covered by the lease. The documents also include minor technical changes reflecting actual practices in connection with facility operations. A link to the June 7, 2017 staff report is here. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Proposed Resolution Attachment B –Proposed Lease Agreement Attachment C –Proposed Updated Support and Use of Facilities Agreement 995632.1 121 RESOLUTION 18-___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT AND SUPPORT AND USE AGREEMENT FOR THE SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga is the owner of the various facilities in the City and desires to allow the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) to use of those facilities for the benefit of Senior Citizens in the Saratoga area; and WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga desires to assist SASCC in maintaining the facilities and City – owned equipment and in providing insurance coverage for the Facilities; and WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga desires to foster the provision of services tailored to meet the needs of Senior Citizens, for example, to optimize services to customers, outreach to diverse populations and socialization benefits for seniors; and WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga desires to optimize the beneficial use of its facilities by linking this agreement to specific measurable performance objectives; and WHEREAS, SASCC desires to operate the facilities for the benefit of Senior Citizens in the Saratoga area. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves that the City Manager is directed to sign the attached (1) Lease Agreement for the Senior Center and Adult Day Care Center and (2) updated Support and Facility Use Agreement with the Saratoga Senior Coordinating Council. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 2d day of May 2018 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________________ Mary-Lynne Bernald, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ DATE:_______________ Nora Pimentel, City Clerk 122 LEASE AGREEMENT SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL THIS LEASE AGREEMENT is made and entered into between CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter called “Lessor” or “City”, and the SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, hereinafter called "Lessee" or "SASCC," as of the Effective Date specified below. WHEREAS, Lessor owns real property located at 19655 Allendale Avenue in the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California (Assessor's Parcel No. 397-30-053), as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto (“Property”); WHEREAS, Lessor currently authorizes lessee to make use of certain facilities on the portion of the Property shown in Exhibits B-1 and B-2 attached hereto (“Premises”) for the maintenance and operation of a Senior Center and Adult Day Care Center as part of a Support and Facility Use Agreement and the parties wish to replace with this Lease the portions of the Support and Facility Use Agreement that pertained to the Premises. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of, and subject to, the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Lessor and Lessee agree as follows: 1. Description of Property. Lessor hereby agrees to lease to Lessee, and Lessee agrees to lease from Lessor the Premises on the terms set forth herein. 2. Effective Date; Term of Lease. This agreement becomes effective (“Effective Date”) upon its execution by both parties and its Term shall be five (5) years beginning on the first day of the first month following the Effective Date. The agreement shall automatically renew for a second and third five year term unless one party provides the other with a notice of non-renewal at least sixty (60) days prior to the start of the next Term. 3. Use of Premises. A. The Premises shall be used by Lessee for the maintenance and operation of a Senior Center and Adult Care Center and for no other purpose. Lessee shall have the following responsibilities: a. Provide licensed Adult Day Care Services Monday through Friday between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. Such Services must comply with Title 22. Division 6. Chapter 3 of the California Department of Social Services Manual of Policies and Procedures. b. Maintain and support a Senior Center providing services including the following on-going community services to City residents: Blood Pressure 123 Page 2 Checks, Podiatric Checks, Tax Assistance, Vision Screening, Hearing Tests, Senior Nutrition Programs, Fifty-Five Alive Driving Program, Flu Shots, and other services as available to the senior population. c. Provide Lessor with a Quarterly Program Report quantifying levels of accomplishment for each measurable objective during the previous quarter. d. Ensure that all use of the Premises complies with the policies set forth in Exhibit C. e. The Director of SASCC shall serve as a liaison between Lessee and Lessor and shall bring all matters pertaining to items (a) through (d), above, to the attention of the City Manager or designee. B. Lessee shall allow Lessor to use the Premises for any municipal purpose at any time other than between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. In addition, Lessee may allow Lessor to use all or a portion of the Premises during those hours at its discretion. C. Lessee shall not lease or sublease the whole or any part of the Premises, nor sell or assign this lease, either voluntarily or by operation of law, nor allow the Premises to be occupied by anyone contrary to the terms hereof, nor permit their use for any purpose other than as hereinabove specified, nor abandon or vacate the Premises, nor fail or refuse to actively cause the Premises to be used as hereinabove specified for the purposes of this lease, without the prior written consent of Lessor. For uses by third parties providing senior or adult day care services in cooperation with Lessee, Lessor’s consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 4. Alterations, Additions, Maintenance. A. During the term of this lease or any extensions thereof, Lessor shall provide janitorial and building maintenance and repair services for the Premises, provided, however that Lessee shall have the obligation to furnish and install, and keep in good condition and repair all such furniture, fixtures, and equipment as may be necessary or proper in order to carry on the use of a senior center and adult care center. B. Lessee shall not make any alterations, changes or additions to the Premises without obtaining prior written consent of Lessor which consent, however, shall not be unreasonably withheld. Alterations, changes, or additions requiring Lessor consent shall include, but not be limited to moving interior or exterior walls, or changing any fixed wall or flooring other than carpeting. Any such alterations, changes or additions made by Lessee shall be at the sole cost and expense of Lessee, and, upon termination hereof, said alterations, changes or additions shall inure to the benefit of Lessor, excepting however, partitions, appliances, equipment, furniture and other improvements placed on the Premises by Lessee; providing that upon termination of this lease, Lessee shall have thirty (30) days in which to remove said 124 Page 3 partitions, appliances, equipment, furniture and other improvements installed by it on the Premises. If requested by Lessor at any time during the term of this Lease, Lessee shall promptly remove, at its sole cost and expense, any alterations, changes or additions to the Premises made without obtaining prior written consent of Lessor. C. Lessee shall comply with state prevailing wage laws for maintenance, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work on the Premises and any pre-construction work on the Premises that meet the definition of public work under Labor Code sections 1771 and 1720, including registering the contract with the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), requiring the contractor to register with DIR, and including required notices in the contract. 5. Taxes and Utilities. Lessor shall pay for all water, gas, heat, light, power, sewage, and any and all other utilities and services (other than telephone, internet, cable, or similar telecommunication services) which may be furnished to or used in or upon the Premises during the term of this lease. In addition, Lessor shall pay any and all taxes and all special assessments for public improvements as may be levied against the Premises or any part thereof. 6. Indemnification. Lessee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of Saratoga, its officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, orders, decrees, or judgments for personal injury or death, damage to or loss of property or any other damage and/or liability (including all costs and attorney's fees incurred in defending any claim, demand or cause of action) occasioned by, growing out of, or arising or resulting from any act or omission on the part of Lessee or any assistant(s) of Lessee in connection with the Premises, except for any liabilities or losses adjudicated to have proximately resulted from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of Lessor. This provision sets forth the exclusive allocation of liability between the parties, and no other allocation, whether in law or equity shall apply. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement for the full period allowed by law. The defense and indemnification obligations of this agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this agreement. 7. Responsibility for Damage and Insurance. A. Lessee shall be responsible for all loss or damage to the Premises related to Lessee’s use thereof, howsoever caused. Lessor shall be responsible all loss or damage to the Premises related to Lessor’s use thereof, howsoever caused. B. Lessor shall provide property insurance coverage for the Premises on the same terms that all other City property is insured. City shall not provide insurance of any kind for any Lessee’s property, nor will Lessor provide insurance for any of Lessee’s programs or activities. 125 Page 4 Lessee is solely responsible for insuring Lessee’s property, programs and activities in the Premises. Lessor's maximum liability under this paragraph shall be limited to the replacement cost of the building with like kind and quality, excepting for destruction caused by flood, earthquake, seismic activity, earth movement, and other natural disasters. In the event of such destruction either party may terminate this agreement. C. Lessee agrees to procure and maintain insurance as required by the provisions set forth in Exhibit D and to otherwise comply with the requirements therein. Certificates of such insurance and additional insured endorsements shall be delivered to City before execution of this Lease Agreement by Lessor. Neither insurance nor the absence thereof shall abrogate or limit the responsibility of the Lessee for damage to the building as called for herein. 8. Dispute Resolution. A. The parties recognize the unique nature of the senior center and adult day care center uses covered by this Agreement and the beneficial effects to both parties of providing these resources to the residents of Saratoga and other members of the public. The Parties therefore agree to cooperate in order to resolve disputes and to assist each other in responding to public inquiries arising from implementation of this Agreement. B. The Parties acknowledge that issues may arise that require resolution between the Parties. The Parties agree to meet and confer to resolve such issues. The Lessee hereby appoints SASCC Executive Director, or his or her designee, and the Lessor appoints the City Manager or his or her designee, as its representative for dispute resolution. The party desiring to meet and confer shall notify the other party in writing (“Dispute Notice”) of the subject matter of the dispute (“Contract Issue”) and the parties shall meet and confer at a mutually agreed upon date, time and location not less than three nor more than ten days following the non-requesting party’s receipt of notice. C. If within thirty days after issuance of a Dispute Notice, the parties still have not been able to come to a mutually satisfactory resolution, then either party may refer the matter to mediation for informal advice and/or resolution. The parties shall mutually agree upon a mediator to assist them in resolving their differences. If the parties are unable to agree upon a mediator, the parties shall jointly obtain a list of seven mediators from a reputable dispute resolution organization and alternate striking mediators on that list until one remains. A coin toss shall determine who may strike the first name. If a party fails to notify the other party of which mediator it has stricken within two business days, the other party shall have the option of selecting the mediator from those mediators remaining on the list. Any expenses incidental to mediation shall be borne equally by the parties. If either party is dissatisfied with the outcome of the mediation, that party may then submit the matter for resolution to binding arbitration in accordance with subsection 9.D, below. D. Any matter that cannot be settled by mediation may, upon the demand by either 126 Page 5 party, be submitted to binding arbitration by an Arbitrator. The Arbitrator shall be JAMS, or if JAMS is not then in operation or is not then available, the American Arbitration Association, and the arbitration shall be in accordance with the Arbitrator’s then applicable rules, as amended by the following: 1. Any demand for arbitration shall be given in writing to the other party to the Lease and to the Arbitrator. The demand shall specifically describe the matter in dispute, including the amounts in controversy and/or other relief sought. A demand for arbitration shall be made within a reasonable time after the right to demand arbitration under the Lease has arisen, and in no event shall it be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such matter in dispute would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. A party who files a notice of demand for arbitration shall assert in the demand all disputes arising under the Lease then known to that party. 2. The matter shall be heard by one arbitrator mutually selected by the parties, or if the parties cannot agree on a single arbitrator within ten days following the demand for arbitration, the matter shall be heard by an arbitrator selected in accordance with the procedure for selection of a mediator in subparagraph 9.C, above, provided, however, that the selected arbitrator will be a former trial judge of the federal or state courts in California. 3. The arbitrator shall take reasonable steps as may be necessary to hold a private hearing within sixty (60) days after the initial demand for arbitration and to conclude the hearing within two (2) days thereafter. Not later than seven (7) days prior to the hearing date set by the arbitrator each party shall submit a brief with a single proposal for settlement. Evidence concerning the financial position of the parties, any offer made or the details of any negotiations prior to arbitration and the cost to the parties of their representatives, selected arbitrators and counsel shall not be permissible. The place of the arbitration hearing shall be Saratoga, California. 4. The arbitrator may award only such relief or remedy as would be available pursuant to judicial proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction, including injunctive and affirmative relief; except that the arbitrator may not award punitive damages. The decision of the arbitrator shall be in writing. NOTICE: BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE AGREEING TO HAVE ANY DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE “ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES” PROVISION DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT POSSESS TO HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN A COURT OR JURY TRIAL. BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGHTS TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, UNLESS THOSE RIGHTS ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE “ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES” PROVISION. IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO 127 Page 6 ARBITRATION AFTER AGREEING TO THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE AUTHORITY F THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY. WE HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUBMIT DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE “ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES” PROVISION TO NEUTRAL BINDING ARBITRATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS LEASE AGREEMENT. Lessor’s Initials ________________ Lessee’s Initials__________________ 9. Termination. This lease may be canceled and terminated by either party at any time upon ninety (90) days’ notice to the other party. 10. Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given under this Lease must be in writing and may be given by personal delivery, certified mail, or Express Mail, Federal Express or other such express delivery service. Notices shall be deemed communicated immediately if personally delivered. Notices shall be deemed communicated within forty-eight (48) hours from the time of mailing if mailed by certified mail, and within twenty-four (24) hours if mailed by express delivery service, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. Any such notice shall be deemed sufficiently given if addressed to Lessor or Lessee at the address specified below. Either party may specify a different address for notice purposes, or specify that a copy of any notice given to such party be concurrently given to another person, by giving appropriate notice to the other party. To Lessor: City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408.868.1213 With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to: City Recreation and Facilities Director City of Saratoga 128 Page 7 19655 Allendale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 408.868.1250 To Lessee: Tylor Taylor 19655 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408.868.1257 11. Non-Waiver of Breach. In the event of a breach of any term, covenant or condition of this Lease by Lessee, Lessor may with knowledge of such breach permit Lessee to continue in possession of the Premises, but any waiver by Lessor of any term, covenant or condition herein contained, or of any breach thereof, shall neither vitiate the same, nor any other term, covenant or condition contained herein, nor operate as a waiver of any other or future breach. 12. Surrender of Possession on Termination. Upon the cancellation or termination of this lease, Lessee shall surrender the Premises in good order, condition and repair, reasonable wear and tear excepted. If Lessee elects to remove its fixtures, it shall have the obligation at its sole cost and expense to repair any and all damages caused in the removal of said fixtures. Lessee shall remove all trash and debris and leave the Premises broom-clean. 13. General Provisions. A. No officer, member or employee of City and no member of the City Council shall have any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this agreement or any proceeds related to Lessor’s use of the Premises. B. This agreement shall be administered and interpreted under the laws of the State of California. Jurisdiction of litigation arising from this agreement shall be in that state and venue shall be in Santa Clara County, California. If any part of this agreement is found to conflict with applicable laws, such part shall be inoperative, null and void insofar as it conflicts with said laws, but the remainder of this agreement shall be in full force and effect. C. Lessee understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that Lessor will renew this agreement or authorize use of the Premises under a new agreement following expiration or termination of this 129 Page 8 agreement. Lessee waives all rights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to renew or extend this agreement or any other authorization to use the Premises except as otherwise explicitly stated herein. D. This agreement is entered only for the benefit of the parties executing this agreement and not for the benefit of any other individual, entity or person. E. The provisions of this Agreement which by their nature should survive expiration or termination of this Agreement, including but not limited to provisions regarding indemnity and insurance shall survive such expiration or termination. F. Both Lessor and Lessee have drafted and reviewed this agreement, and accordingly, the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party, and shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendment of it. G. This agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties with regard to the matters set forth, except as otherwise specifically set forth in this agreement. This agreement may be amended or modified only by an agreement in writing executed in the same manner as this agreement. H. Each of the exhibits listed in the Exhibit List below are a part of this agreement and hereby incorporated herein IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as set forth below. City of Saratoga SASCC By: _________________________ _________________________ James Lindsay City Manager Date: ________________________ By: _________________________ _________________________ Tylor Taylor Executive Director Date: ________________________ Exhibit List Exhibit A -- Property Description Exhibits B-1 and B-2– Diagrams of Premises Exhibit C – Premises Rules of Use Exhibit D – Insurance Requirements 130 Page 9 Exhibit A Property Description Assessors Parcel 397-30-053 as illustrated on the attached page. 131 132 Page 10 Exhibit B-1 Location of Premises The diagram on the attached page shows the location of the premises on the Property described in Exhibit A. 133 Imagery ©2018 Google, Map data ©2018 Google 20 ft 134 Index Facility / Room Square Footage 1 Adult Care Center 1,385 2 Adult Care Center Office 83 3 Adult Care Center Office 127 4 Senior Center (Saunders Room) 2,112 5 Senior Center Kitchen 507 6 Senior Center Lounge (Fireside Room) 566 7 Storage 332 8 Reception Area 115 9 Senior Center Office 159 10 Senior Center Office 428 R1 Adult Care Restroom 56 R2 Adult Care Restroom 56 R3 Senior Center Restroom 184 R4 Senior Center Restroom 176 SP Senior Portable 1,440 TOTAL 7,726 ’ SP Exhibit B-2 Diagram of Premises 135 Exhibit C Premises Rules of Use 1. Alcoholic beverages are not allowed on the Premises except with pre-approval by Lessor’s contact and subject to all applicable alcoholic beverage control laws and the following: A. Lessor’s Permission to Serve Alcohol form has been completed and approved. B. Events larger than 30 people where alcohol is consumed require one security guard and events larger than 100 people require two security guards unless Lessee provides City with information demonstrating that such security is not required and this requirement is waived by City’s Contact. C. Sale of alcoholic beverages or charging an admission price, which includes alcoholic beverages requires (at Lessee’s expense), the appropriate license from the Alcoholic Beverage Control Dept. A 24-hour liquor license can be acquired at: Alcoholic Beverage Control Dept., 100 Paseo de San Antonio, Suite 119, San Jose, CA 95113. (408) 277-1200. D. Beer and wine only are permitted. No hard alcohol is allowed. 2. Smoking is not allowed in the Premises (including any lobby areas) or within 20 feet of the Premises. 3. Lessee shall maintain safe exit pathways in the Premises at all times. No obstructions are allowed which will interfere or prohibit passage by occupants to the “exit” doors in case of an emergency building evacuation. The number of people at the event shall not exceed the building capacity designated by the City. 4. Lessee shall observe, obey and comply with all applicable City, County, State and Federal laws including, but not limited to, the following: a. City of Saratoga business license requirements; b. County Health Department requirements regarding food services; c. State of California, Department of Social Services regulations in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations; d. Copyright laws and all related licensing requirements; e. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other laws prohibiting discrimination and providing that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, religion, Vietnam era veteran's status, political affiliation, or any other non-merit factors be 136 excluded from participating in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under this agreement; f. Lessee shall submit a complete set of fingerprints of all Lessee’s personnel (including employees, contractors, and volunteers) to the Department of Justice along with authorization to release a criminal history summary to Lessee. Lessee shall maintain this information in its files, provide a copy to the City Contact, and review all criminal history summaries before using the Premises, and ensure that no personnel pose a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of any participant. g. Lessee shall screen for tuberculosis, pursuant to Public Resources Code 5163, all of Lessee’s personnel (including employees, contractors, and volunteers) who will have supervisory or disciplinary authority over minors and the elderly in Lessee programs at City facilities, and ensure that Lessee has on file and has provided to the City Contact certificates showing that within the last two years each of Lessee’s personnel has been examined and has been found to be free of communicable tuberculosis. 5. City is not responsible for any materials stored in connection with this agreement. 6. Lessee shall provide its own personal tools; supplies and equipment at his/her own cost and shall coordinate pertinent media activities with City Contact. 7. Lessee shall report all maintenance problems (burnt-out light bulbs, faulty bathroom sinks, toilets, etc.) to the City Facilities Department (408-868-1277). 8. Lessee events or other activities generating noise in excess of City standards must obtain a noise exemption permit in accordance with the noise ordinance in effect at the time of the event or activity. 9. Additional restroom facilities will be required for events where the number of people exceed the toilet to person ratio of 1:300. 10. Photographs or recordings taken of Lessee activities that include Lessee’s image or the image of Lessee’s personnel may be used by Lessor for any purpose subject to any applicable copyright restrictions held by a third-party copyright holder. 11. Lessee and its personnel shall comply with Lessor’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. If Lessee or any of its personnel is convicted or pleads nolo contendere to a criminal drug statute violation occurring at the Premises, Lessee, within five days thereafter, shall notify Lessor. 137 Exhibit D Insurance Requirements 1. Lessee shall procure and maintain insurance during the entire term of this Lease Agreement against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which in any way relate to, arise from, or relate to use of the Premises and any acts or omissions of Lessee. This insurance shall meet the following specifications, unless waived in writing by Lessor’s Risk Manager: a. Lessee shall procure and maintain for the duration of the agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or about the use of the Premises by Lessee or its agents, representatives, or employees. b. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 01 04 13 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products-completed operations, personal & advertising injury, with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. (2) Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (3) Any deductibles or self-insured retentions (“SIR”) must be declared to and approved by Lessor and shall not reduce the limits of liability. Policies containing any SIR provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that either the named Insured or Lessor may satisfy the SIR. Lessor may require Lessee to provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. c. All policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with the maximum scope and amount of overage available under the policy with respect to liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Lessee including materials and parts or equipment furnished in connection with such activity. (2) The Additional Insured coverage under Lessee’s policy shall be ''primary and non-contributory" and will not seek contribution from Lessor’s insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04 13. 138 (3) For any claims related to this agreement, Lessee’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. (4) The Insurance Company agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, agents and employees for losses paid under the terms of any policy which arise from activity of Lessee. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice (10 days for non-payment) has been given to the City. d. The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the City (if agreed to in a written agreement) before the City's own insurance or self- insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured. e. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. The City reserves the right to obtain a full-certified copy of any Insurance policy and endorsements at any time. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later. f. Lessee shall furnish Lessor with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause on an annual basis. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by Lessor before work related to the covered activity commences. Lessor reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications, at any time. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later. g. City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances. Lessor reserves the right to modify or waive insurance requirements for certain low risk activities. Such modifications or waivers must be in writing from the Risk Manager. h. Any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the City as an additional insured. Furthermore, the requirement for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in the Agreement; 139 or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured; whichever is greater. i. Lessee agrees to include with all contractors in their contracts the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the contractor's work. Contractors hired by Lessee shall agree to be bound to Lessee and City in the same manner and to the same extent as Lessee is bound to City under this Agreement. A copy of the indemnity and insurance requirements from this agreement shall be furnished to all such contractors. Lessee shall require all contractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the agreement prior to commencement of any work for Lessee and will provide proof of compliance to the City. 990079.5 140 SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT - Page 1 This agreement is made and entered into between the City of Saratoga, a municipal corporation ("City") and the Saratoga Senior Coordinating Council (“SASCC”), a California non-profit public benefit corporation for the period effective May 1, 2018 through June 30, 2023. 1.This agreement sets forth the terms of City’s support for community services offered by SASCC and for SASCC’s use of City facilities other than the Senior Center and Adult Care Center which is the subject of a separate agreement. 2.Responsibilities of SASCC. a.SASCC shall provide licensed Adult Day Care Services Monday through Friday between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. Such Services must comply with Title 22. Division 6. Chapter 3 of the California Department of Social Services Manual of Policies and Procedures. b.SASCC shall maintain and support a Senior Center providing services including the following on-going community services to City residents: Blood Pressure Checks, Podiatric Checks, Tax Assistance, Vision Screening, Hearing Tests, Senior Nutrition Programs, Fifty-Five Alive Driving Program, Flu Shots, and other services as available to the senior population. c.SASCC shall provide the City with a Quarterly Program Report quantifying levels of accomplishment for each measurable objective during the previous quarter. d.The Director of SASCC shall serve as a liaison between SASCC and the City and shall bring all matters pertaining to items (a) through (c), above, to the attention of the City Manager or Manager’s designee. 3.Responsibilities of the City. a.City shall allow SASCC exclusive use City facilities as set forth in this agreement. The City shall pay the cost for gas, electric, water, and sewer in the Senior Center (at approximately $15,595 per year), advertising in the Recreation Activity Guide (at about $5,100 annually), and provide regular janitorial and building maintenance services. The City shall provide the Facilities at no charge as outlined in section 4. b.In support of SASCC’s responsibilities, the City shall provide monetary support of $62,670 in Fiscal Year 2017/18, which includes $22,000 for operating the Adult Day Care Center. This amount shall be increased by 2.5% per year during the term of this agreement starting in Fiscal Year 2018/19. This contribution shall be paid in four equal payments of one quarter the total amount. SASCC shall invoice the City for payment with the Quarterly Program Report referenced above and City shall make payment within 30 days. 141 SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT - Page 2 c.The CITY shall make available up to two pages in each quarterly City Activity Guide for SASCC use to promote senior programs and activities. 4.Use of City Facilities. a.SASCC may reserve all City facilities between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. at no charge subject to the approval of the Recreation & Facilities Director. b.On weekends and after 4:00 P.M. on weekdays (“After Hours”) use of City facilities shall be in accordance with Saratoga’s policies and procedures for space reservation in effect at the time of the reservation. For all After Hours uses, SASCC shall set-up and take-down all equipment and furnishings. c.SASCC may reserve and use, on the same terms as the public, all City facilities normally available for reservation and use by the public except as provided in this agreement. Reservations must be made on a quarterly basis through the City Facilities Coordinator. Request of use and space availability in accordance with standard City procedures is required. No advance deposit and no processing fee shall be required. Use fees (but not fees for any required Facility Attendant) shall be waived for SASCC for certain facilities as described below: i.The Community Center Multi-Purpose Room shall be available for reservation After Hours for a maximum use of twice annually on a waived use fee basis, and thereafter SASCC will be charged 50% of the City’s regular rental rate. ii.The Saunders Room shall be available for reservation After Hours for a maximum use of twice annually on a waived use fee basis, and thereafter SASCC will be charged 50% of the City’s regular rental rate. iii.The Prospect Center shall be available for reservation for a maximum use of twice annually on a waived use fee basis, and thereafter SASCC will be charged 50% of the City’s regular rental rate. iv.The Senior Portable shall be available for reservation After Hours on waived fee use basis. A portion of the portable is currently used for storage of equipment owned by KSAR for use in collaboration with SASCC; this use may continue without need for a reservation. d.SASCC agrees that, except as set forth above, the facility use fees and City staff fees, rates and charges in effect at the time a City facility is used apply to use of City facilities. 5.Contact Information. a.SASCC’s Contact information is as follows: 142 SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT - Page 3 Contact Name: Tylor Taylor Street: 19655 Allendale Avenue City, State, Zip: Saratoga, CA 95070 Telephone: 408-868-1257 E-mail: tylortaylor@sascc.org b.Except where a different City official is named in this agreement, the City Contact for this agreement is Nina Walker, Facility Coordinator, who may be contacted at 19655 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga, California, 95070 or via e-mail at nwalker@saratoga.ca.us or via phone at 408-868-1259. c.This contact information may be updated by notice from one party to the other without an amendment to this agreement. 6.SASCC agrees to the Saratoga Facility Rules of Use set forth in Exhibit A. 7.SASCC agrees to procure and maintain insurance as required by the provisions set forth in Exhibit B. Certificates of such insurance and additional insured endorsements shall be delivered to City before execution of this agreement by the City. 8.SASCC agrees to use City facilities in accordance with the General Provisions set forth in Exhibit C and agrees that the City may change these rules at any time upon 30 days’ notice to SASCC and that such changes shall not require amendment of this agreement. 9.Either party may terminate the agreement with a ninety (90) day advance written notice. 10.Each of the exhibits listed in the Exhibit List below are a part of this agreement and hereby incorporated herein. 11.The SASCC representative signing below hereby represents to the City that s/he is SASCC’s authorized representative with full power and authority to bind SASCC to the terms and provisions of this Agreement. 12.Both CITY and SASCC have drafted and reviewed this agreement, and accordingly, the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party, and shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendment of it. 13.This agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties with regard to the matters set forth, except as otherwise specifically set forth in this agreement. This agreement may be amended or modified only by an agreement in writing executed in the same manner as this agreement. Two five-year extensions of this agreement may be allowed by mutual written agreement of the Parties. 143 SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT SASCC SUPPORT AND FACILITY USE AGREEMENT - Page 4 14.This Agreement is neither assignable nor transferable to any other party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as set forth below. City of Saratoga SASCC By: _________________________ James Lindsay City Manager Date: ________________________ By: _________________________ Tylor Taylor Executive Director Date: ________________________ Exhibit List Exhibit A – Saratoga Facility Rules of Use Exhibit B - Insurance Requirements Exhibit C - General Provisions 144 Exhibit A – Saratoga Rental Facility Rules of Use – Page 1 Exhibit A Exhibit A Saratoga Rental Facility Rules of Use 1.Alcoholic beverages are not allowed in City facilities except with pre-approval by the City’s contact and subject to all applicable alcoholic beverage control laws and the following: a.The City’s Permission to Serve Alcohol form has been completed and approved. b.Events larger than 30 people where alcohol is consumed require one security guard and events larger than 100 people require two security guards unless SASCC provides City with information demonstrating that such security is not required and this requirement is waived by City’s Contact. c.Sale of alcoholic beverages or charging an admission price, which includes alcoholic beverages requires (at SASCC’s expense), the appropriate license from the Alcoholic Beverage Control Dept. A 24-hour liquor license can be acquired at: Alcoholic Beverage Control Dept., 100 Paseo de San Antonio, Suite 119, San Jose, CA 95113. (408) 277-1200. 2.Beer and wine only are permitted. No hard alcohol is allowed. 3.Smoking is not allowed in City facilities, including any lobby areas. Smoking is not permitted within 20 feet of City facilities. 4.SASCC shall maintain safe exit pathways in City facilities at all times. No obstructions are allowed which will interfere or prohibit passage by occupants to the “exit” doors in case of an emergency building evacuation. The number of people at the event shall not exceed the building capacity for City facilities specified in this Exhibit. 5.SASCC shall submit a complete set of fingerprints of all SASCC’s personnel (including employees, contractors, and volunteers) to the Department of Justice along with authorization to release a criminal history summary to SASCC. SASCC shall maintain this information in its files, provide a copy to the City Contact, and review all criminal history summaries before using City facilities, and ensure that no personnel pose a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of any participant. 6.SASCC shall screen for tuberculosis, pursuant to Public Resources Code 5163, all of SASCC’s personnel (including employees, contractors, and volunteers) who will have supervisory or disciplinary authority over minors and the elderly in SASCC programs at City facilities, and ensure that SASCC has on file and has provided to the City Contact certificates showing that within the last two years each of SASCC’s personnel has been examined and has been found to be free of communicable tuberculosis. 7.SASCC shall observe, obey and comply with all applicable City, County, State and Federal laws including, but not limited to, the following: 145 Exhibit A – Saratoga Rental Facility Rules of Use – Page 2 Exhibit A a.City of Saratoga business license requirements; b.County Health Department requirements regarding food services; c.State of California, Department of Social Services regulations in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations; d.Copyright laws and all related licensing requirements; and d.Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other laws prohibiting discrimination and providing that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, religion, Vietnam era veteran's status, political affiliation, or any other non-merit factors be excluded from participating in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under this agreement. 8.City facilities and all equipment and furnishings shall be properly respected. SASCC shall leave facilities in the same condition received, including areas outside of building. There shall be no garbage or litter, marks on floors, walls, or furniture or breakage of equipment. The use of nails, staples, screws, etc. on walls, tables or other equipment is not permitted. Blue masking tape is allowed and, if used, must be carefully removed immediately following the event. SASCC shall replace or repair any cables or other Rental facilities damaged by SASCC’s use of the Facility. 9.No storage of materials (banners, rental dishes, decorations, chairs, etc.) at Facility is permitted without prior approval of City Contact. City is not responsible for any materials stored in connection with this agreement. 10.SASCC shall provide its own personal tools; supplies and equipment at his/her own cost and shall coordinate pertinent media activities with City Contact. 11.While using City facilities, SASCC shall report all maintenance problems (burnt-out light bulbs, faulty bathroom sinks, toilets, etc.) to the City Facilities Department (408-868- 1277). Upon SASCC’s request, the City shall perform maintenance and repair work to the extent that staff is available. SASCC will be charged a cost that is in accordance with the City’s direct cost rate for applicable personnel at the time the service is provided. The City’s current direct cost rates are available from City’s contact. 12.SASCC may only exceed their reservation time limit if room schedules and staff availability permit it. SASCC shall pay for additional time at the rate applicable to the place and time of use after 4:00 P.M. 13.Any Saratoga Prospect Center activities must end by 10:00 P.M. and the premises (including the parking lot) must be vacated by 11:00 P.M. 14.SASCC is responsible for the set-up and take-down of all facilities and equipment and general clean-up of the Facility. Cleaning supplies and ladders are not provided. Clean up responsibilities include: 146 Exhibit A – Saratoga Rental Facility Rules of Use – Page 3 Exhibit A Cleaning and returning tables and chairs to proper storage areas. Replacing all mats, weights, equipment and other materials to their proper place. Removing all decorations. Emptying excess trash and garbage into the outdoor dumpster. Excess debris on floors must be swept. The stove, sinks and counters are to be wiped clean. The garbage disposal is to be used for food wastes only – (NO coffee grounds). 15.If there are additional charges associated with SASCC’s use of a facility or damage to a facility or contents, overtime, or maintenance charges, then the City will invoice SASCC for the additional charges and SASCC shall pay the invoice within 30 (thirty) days of the date on the invoice. 16.SASCC events or other activities generating noise in excess of City standards must obtain a noise exemption permit in accordance with the noise ordinance in effect at the time of the event or activity. 17.Additional restroom facilities will be required for events where the number of people exceed the toilet to person ratio of 1:300. FACILITY ROOM CAPACITIES The numbers listed below are room capacities determined by the Fire Marshall. ROOM Dimensions Square Feet Banquet Seating Theater Seating Classroom Seating Reception Civic Center Theater 74’ x 56’4,144 n/a 300 300 100 CC Multi- Purpose Room 65’ x 50’3,250 190 250 200 200 CC Patio Room 25’ x 29’725 40 40 40 40 CC Arts & Crafts Room 25’ x 25’625 40 40 40 40 CC Dance Studio 25’ x 32’800 n/a n/a 30 45 SC Saunders Room 40’ x 49’1,960 130 175 150 200 Warner Hutton House 52’ x 35’1,820 30 50 40 75 147 Exhibit A – Saratoga Rental Facility Rules of Use – Page 4 Exhibit A SPC Friendship Hall 52’ x 45’2,340 150 150 150 150 SPC Grace Building 43’ x 27’1,161 30 45 60 75 148 Exhibit B – Insurance Requirements - Page 1 Exhibit B Exhibit B Insurance Requirements 1.SASCC shall procure and maintain insurance during the entire term of this Agreement against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which in any way relate to, arise from, or relate to use of City facilities and any acts or omissions of SASCC. This insurance shall meet the following specifications, unless waived in writing by the City’s Risk Manager: a.SASCC shall procure and maintain for the duration of the agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or about the use of City facilities by SASCC or SASCC’s agents, representatives, employees. b.Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1)Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 01 04 13 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products-completed operations, personal & advertising injury, with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. (2)Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (3)Any deductibles or self-insured retentions (“SIR”) must be declared to and approved by the City and shall not reduce the limits of liability. Policies containing any SIR provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that either the named Insured or the City may satisfy the SIR. The City may require the SASCC to provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. c.All policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1)The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with the maximum scope and amount of overage available under the policy with respect to liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the SASCC including materials and parts or equipment furnished in connection with such activity. (2)The Additional Insured coverage under SASCC’s policy shall be ''primary and non-contributory" and will not seek contribution from the City’s insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04 13. 149 Exhibit B – Insurance Requirements - Page 2 Exhibit B (3)For any claims related to this agreement, the SASCC’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. (4)The Insurance Company agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, agents and employees for losses paid under the terms of any policy which arise from activity of the SASCC. (5)Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice (10 days for non-payment) has been given to the City. d.The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the City (if agreed to in a written agreement) before the City's own insurance or self- insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured. e.Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. The City reserves the right to obtain a full-certified copy of any Insurance policy and endorsements at any time. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later. f.SASCC shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause on an annual basis. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications, at any time. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later. g.City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances. The City reserves the right to modify or waive insurance requirements for certain low risk activities. Such modifications or waivers must be in writing from the Risk Manager. h.Any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the City as an additional insured. Furthermore, the requirement for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in the Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured; whichever is greater. 150 Exhibit B – Insurance Requirements - Page 3 Exhibit B i.SASCC agrees to include with all contractors in their contracts the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the contractor's work. Contractors hired by SASCC shall agree to be bound to SASCC and City in the same manner and to the same extent as SASCC is bound to City under this Agreement. A copy of the indemnity and insurance requirements from this agreement shall be furnished to all such contractors. SASCC shall require all contractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the agreement prior to commencement of any work for SASCC and will provide proof of compliance to the City. 151 Exhibit C – General Provisions – Page 1 Exhibit C Exhibit C General Provisions 1.The City shall retain ownership of all City facilities, including the building, all fixtures, wall and floor coverings, built-in appliances, improvements and telephone equipment. City does not own any of SASCC’s equipment, supplies, and materials. SASCC has provided City a list of SASCC’s equipment, supplies, and materials (“Equipment / Inventory List”) and will provide City an updated list annually at the start of the fiscal year. 2.It is understood and agreed that with respect to City facilities this is solely a use agreement and that SASCC has not been given and is not given a lease of said premises or any part thereof and acquires no easement, license, or other interest in said property owned or constructed by City. Storage of SASCC’s equipment, supplies, and materials is not authorized under this agreement except as approved by City contact. 3.The City shall provide property insurance coverage for City facilities on the same terms that all other City property is insured. City shall not provide insurance of any kind for any SASCC property, including the property listed on the Equipment List, nor will the City provide insurance for any SASCC programs or activities. SASCC is solely responsible for insuring SASCC property and programs and activities in City facilities. 4.The City shall provide routine maintenance and janitorial services for City facilities like that provided for all City premises. 5.It is understood and agreed that SASCC shall use City facilities solely to conduct activities described in this agreement and all times in accord with all applicable laws. City may terminate this agreement at any time if it determines that SASCC is using City facilities for any other purpose or is conducting activities in a manner that does not meet the standards observed by a competent adult care provider for comparable activity in Santa Clara County. 6.Photographs or recordings taken of SASCC activities that include SASCC’s image or the image of SASCC’s personnel may be used by the City for any purpose subject to any applicable copyright restrictions held by a third-party copyright holder. 7.SASCC shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of Saratoga, its officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, orders, decrees, or judgments for personal injury or death, damage to or loss of property or any other damage and/or liability (including all costs and attorney's fees incurred in defending any claim, demand or cause of action) occasioned by, growing out of, or arising or resulting from any act or omission on the part of SASCC or any assistant(s) of SASCC in connection with City facilities, except for any liabilities or losses adjudicated to have proximately resulted from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision sets forth the exclusive allocation of liability between the parties, and no other allocation, whether in law or equity shall apply. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement for the full period allowed by law. The defense and 152 Exhibit C – General Provisions – Page 2 Exhibit C indemnification obligations of this agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this agreement. 8.SASCC and SASCC's personnel shall comply with the City's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. If SASCC or any of SASCC’s personnel is convicted or pleads nolo contendere to a criminal drug statute violation occurring at such a Rental, premises, or worksite, the SASCC, within five days thereafter, shall notify the City. 9.SASCC and any employees, contractors, or volunteers are independent and not agents, sub-agents, or employees of City. SASCC shall not have any claim under this agreement or otherwise against the City of Saratoga for any social security, worker’s compensation, or employee benefits extended to employees of the City. 10.SASCC shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws and ordinances, including, but not limited to the Saratoga City Code, unemployment insurance benefits, worker’s compensation, ADA compliance, and F.I.C.A. laws. 11.SASCC may not assign any right or obligation under this agreement. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation under this agreement shall be void and of no effect. 12.No officer, member or employee of City and no member of the City Council shall have any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this agreement or any proceeds related to SASCC’s use of City facilities. 13.Either party may terminate this agreement with or without cause by providing ninety (90) days’ notice in writing to the other party. The City may terminate this agreement at any time without prior notice if SASCC commits a material breach of the terms of this agreement. Upon termination, this agreement shall become of no further force or effect whatsoever and each of the parties hereto shall be relieved and discharged from the rights and obligations of this agreement, subject to payment of amounts due for use of City facilities prior to the expiration of the notice of termination. 14.The parties shall make a good faith effort to settle any dispute or claim arising under this agreement. If any litigation is commenced between parties to this agreement concerning any provision hereof or the rights and duties of any person in relation thereto, each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 15.This agreement shall be administered and interpreted under the laws of the State of California. Jurisdiction of litigation arising from this agreement shall be in that state and venue shall be in Santa Clara County, California. If any part of this agreement is found to conflict with applicable laws, such part shall be inoperative, null and void insofar as it conflicts with said laws, but the remainder of this agreement shall be in full force and effect. 16.SASCC understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that the City will renew this agreement or authorize use of City facilities under a new agreement following expiration or termination of this agreement. SASCC 153 Exhibit C – General Provisions – Page 3 Exhibit C waives all rights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to renew or extend this agreement or any other authorization to use City facilities. 17.This agreement is entered only for the benefit of the parties executing this agreement and not for the benefit of any other individual, entity or person. 18.The failure by the City to enforce any of SASCC’s obligations or to exercise City's rights shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. 19.The provisions of this Agreement which by their nature should survive expiration or termination of this Agreement, including but not limited to provisions regarding indemnity and insurance shall survive such expiration or termination. SARATOG.1-S120 990331.3 154