Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-06-2004 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL LAND USE AGENDA TUESDAY, APRIL 6, 2004 3:00 P.M. SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR APRIL 6, 2004 ON APRIL 7, 2004 ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1) APPLICATION #03-269 (397-03-057) ASHJAY,14403 Sobey Road; Request for design review approval to construct a ground floor addition of 303 square feet to an existing 5,346 square foot home. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15- 45.060(6), design review approval is required because the proposal will result in a total floor area of all structures on the property of more than 6,000 square feet. The property is 55,989 square feet and is zoned R-1 -40,000. The City Council conducts site visits to properties which are new items on the City Council agenda. The site visits are held on Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing between 3 :00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Site visits only occur when there is an appeal scheduled before the City Council. It is not necessary for the applicant to be present, but you are invited to join the Council at the site visit to answer any questions which may arise. Site visits are generally short (5 to 10 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the public hearing. Please contact staff Tuesday morning for an estimated time of the site visit. ARCHIVE COPY AGENDA REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL APRIL 7, 2004 - OPEN SESSION - 5: 30 P.M. JOINT MEETING WITH SARATOGA HISTORICAL FOUNDATION CLOSED SESSION- 6:30 P.M. -ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS CALL MEETING TO ORDER - 6:30 P.M. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION - 6:30 P.M. Conference with Legal Counsel -Initiation of litigation (Gov't Code section 54956.9(c): (1 potential case). Conference With Legal Counsel -Existing Litigation: (Government Code section 54956.9(a)) Name of case: Saratoga Union School District v. City of Saratoga (No. CV803595) Name of case: City of Saratoga v. Hinz (6a' District Court of Appeals No. H023549) Name of case: Calvello Electric, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court No. CV 812704) Name of case; Residential Development Group v. Saratoga (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 103CV011391) Conference With Labor Negotiators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager & John Cherbone, Public Works Director Employee organization: SEA Conference With Labor Negotiators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager & Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director Employee organization: Non SEA Members Conference With Labor Negotiators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Dave Anderson, City Manager Employee organization: SMO REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 P.M. -CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA (Pursuant to Gov't. Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on April 1, 2004) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC Oral Communications on Non-Aeendized Items Arry member of the public will be allowed to address the City Council for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Council from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff. Communications from Boards and Commissions The City Council will receive reports from the Boards and Commissions listed below and may provide direction regarding nsatters to be considered by those Boards and Commissions. RecommendQtions from Boards and Commissions requiring City Council approval are considered as independent agenda items. Report from the Saratoga Historical Foundation. Written Communications Saratoga Historical Foundation -request that the City joint them in presenting a community program about the history of the Muwekma Ohlone. Oral Communications -Council Direction to Staff Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. ANNOUNCEMENTS The City is advertising for volunteers to participate on a citizen advisory committee for the General Plan Land Use Element update. It is anticipated that the committee will meet over atwo-year period with monthly or bi-monthly meetings. Interested persons should contact the Community Development Department for more information. CEREMONIAL ITEMS 1 A. Commendations for Outgoing Commissioners Recommended action: Present commendations. 1B. Appointment and Oath of Office for the Arts, Heritage Preservation, Planning, & Public Safety Commissions Recommended action: Adopt resolutions and administer Oath of Office. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar contains routine items of business. Items in this section will be acted in one motion, unless removed by the Mayor or a Council member. Any member of the public may speak to an item on the Consent Calendar at this time, or request the Mayor remove an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Public Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. 2A. City Council Minutes -Regular Meeting March 3, 2004 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 2B. City Council Minutes -Regular Meeting March 17, 2004 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 2C. Review of Check Register Recommended action: Approve check register. 2D. Building Site Approval for One Lot Located at 13800 Pierce Road. Owner: Thomas Walker Recommended action: Adopt resolution granting final building site approval. 2E. Agreement Among Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (SVACA) and Its Member Cities Regarding Purchase of Thomas Road Property Recommended action: Approve and authorize City Manager to execute agreement. 2F. Request to Change Library Commission Meeting Time Recommended action: Approve request. 2G. Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program Contract Recommended action: Approve contact. PUBLIC HEARINGS Applicants/Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested for continuance are subject to Council 's approval at the Council meeting. Appeal of the Planning Commission Decision to Conditionally Approve Design Review Application No. 03-269 to Construct a 302.5 Square Foot Addition to a Home at 14403 Sobey Road Recommended action: Conduct public hearing and adopt resolution upholding the Planning Commission's decision. 4. Zoning Ordinance to Create Mixed Use Standards Recommended action: Conduct the public hearing; Grant first reading; Direct staff to place the matter on the next agenda; adopt resolution granting a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. OLD BUSINESS Budget Status Report Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. 6. Grant Writer Service Provider Selection Recommended action: Authorize City Manager to execute contract with Randall Funding & Development, Inc. NEW BUSINESS Sazatoga-Sunnyvale Road "Gateway" Improvements -Approval of Corner Entry Redesign Recommended action: Approve Gateway entry redesign plan. 8. "Gateway" Annexation to Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1 - Preliminazy Approval of Engineer's Report and Adoption of Resolution of Intention Recommended action: Adopt resolution approving the Engineer's Report & Resolution of Intention. Community-wide Emergency Preparedness Plan Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Waltonsmith Finance Commission VTA Restroom Ad-Hoc Vice Mayor King Arts Commission City/School Ad-Hoc Committee Parks and Recreation Commission Councilmember Bo oe sian Council Policies AD-Hoc Committee Heritage Preservation Commission Councilmember Kline Council Policies AD-Hoc Committee LAFCO Ad-Hoc Committee Library Commission Planning Commission RDA Ad-Hoc Committee Councilmember Streit Norton Road Fire Access Ad-Hoc Committee Public Safety Commission Vision for Saratoga AdHoc Youth Commission CITY MANAGER'S REPORT OTHER ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104ADA Title II). Certificate of Posing of Agenda: I, Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga was posted on April 1, 2004 at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City's website at www saratoga.ca.us Signed this Is` day of April 2004 at Saratoga, California. Cathleen Boyer, CMC, City Clerk CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR 2004 4/21 Regulaz Meeting -Joint Meeting with Pazks and Recreation Commission 5/5 Regular Meeting -Joint Meeting with Youth Commission 5/19 Regular Meeting - Hakone Foundation 6/2 Regular Meeting -Joint Meeting with Public Safety Commission 6/16 Regular Meeting -Joint Meeting with Friends of the Saratoga Librayy 7/7 Regular Meeting -Joint Meeting with Library Commission 7/21 Regular Meeting 8/4 Regular Meeting 8/18 Summer Recess 9/1 Regulaz Meeting 9/15 Regular Meeting 10/6 Regular Meeting 10/20 Regulaz Meeting 11/3 Regular Meeting 11/17 Regular Meeting 12/1 Regulaz Meeting 12/15 Regular Meeting -Council Reorganization y~~ MAR 2 3 2004 SARATOGA HISTORICAL FOUNDATION POST OFFICE BOX 172, SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95071 March 20, 2004 To: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor of Saratoga To: Heritage Preservation Commission, City of Saratoga The Saratoga Historical Foundation respectfully requests that the City of Saratoga join us in presenting a community program about the history of the Muwekma Ohlone. The Foundation recently invited a speaker, Malcolm Toriumi, to speak on the topic of Saratoga's native Americans. We found the program to be so interesting and so important that we feel it deserves a larger venue. We feel that many other Saratoga citizens would also be interested in Saratoga's archaeologic past. Nearly 30 years ago, the construction of an apartment complex at 6th and Big Basin uncovered a major archaeologic site. The artifacts and information learned from this dig have been known to local archeologists, but have not been easily available to the general public. This presentation will begin to make the public aware that Saratoga has an important native American history. We respectfully request that the City join with us in hosting a program about the Muwekma Ohlone, and that we request our local educational television station, KSAR to film this important presentation. ~cerely, ,~<, ob Lou en, president Saratoga Historical Foundation CC: Saratoga City Council SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: ~~~ PREPARED BY: John Cherbone DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: "Gateway" annexation to Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1; Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report and Adoption of Resolution of Intention RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Move to adopt the Resolution preliminarily approving the Engineer's Report. 2. Move to adopt the Resolution of Intention. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are the next two Resolutions the Council must adopt to continue the process initiated on February 4 for annexing the "Gateway" area of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road to the Landscaping and -" Lighting Assessment District LLA-1. Briefly, the two Resolutions are: A Resolution of Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report ... Fiscal Year 2004-2005 - This is the Resolution required under Streets & Highways Code Section 22623 which grants preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for the annexation of the Gateway area to the existing Assessment District. 2. A Resolution of Intention to order the levy and collection of assessments ... Fiscal Year 2004-2005 - This is the Resolution required under S&H Code Sec. 22624 which, among other things, fixes the date and time for the Public (Protest) Hearing on the annexation proposal. This is proposed for your June 2 meeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: These are noted in the Engineer's Report. Each property in the proposed district will be assessed an amount proportional to their frontage length. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The Resolutions would not be adopted and the annexation process would not continue. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None in addition to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): The Resolution of Intention will be published and mailed along with the other required information and materials noted below. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: The Resolution of Intention will be published and mailed, along with a separate notice to each property owner informing them of the June 2 Public Hearing, and which will also include, 1) the ballot required under Proposition 218 and 2) ballot instructions. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolutions (2). 2. Engineer's Report. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA-1 ANNEXATION 2004-1 FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, on the 4th day of February, 2004, said Council did adopt its Resolution No. 04-010, "A Resolution Describing Improvements and Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report For Fiscal Year 2004-2005", for the City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA-1, Annexation 2004-1, in said City and did refer the proposed improvements to the Engineer of the City and did therein direct said Engineer to prepare and file with the City Clerk of said City a report, in writing, all as therein more particularly described: WHEREAS, said City Engineer prepazed and filed with the City Clerk a report in writing as called for in said Resolution No. 04-010 and under and pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; WHEREAS, said Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that neither said report, nor any part thereof should be modified in any respect; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and ordered, as follows: 1. That the plans and specifications for the existing improvements and the proposed new improvements to be made within the assessment district or within any zone thereof, contained in said report, be, and they aze hereby preliminarily approved. 2. That the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs and expenses of said improvements, maintenance and servicing thereof, and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report, be, and each of them are hereby preliminarily approved. 3. That the diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the assessment district referred to and described in said Resolution No. 04-010 and also the boundaries of any zones therein and the lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within said district as such lot or parcel of land is shown on the County Assessor's maps for the fiscal year to which the report applies, each of which lot or parcel of land has been given a sepazate number upon said diagram, as contained in said report, be, and it hereby is preliminarily approved. 4. That the proposed assessment of the total amount of the estimated costs and expenses of the proposed improvements upon the several lots or parcels of land in said assessment district in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots or parcels, respectively, from said improvements including the maintenance or servicing or both, thereof, and of the expenses incidental thereto, as contained in said report, be, and they are hereby preliminarily approved. 5. That said report shall stand as the Engineer's Report for the purpose of all subsequent proceedings to be had pursuant to said Resolution No. 04-010. r Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 7th day of April, 2004 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga RESOLUTION NO. _ A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA-1 ANNEXATION 2004-1 FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 04-010, "A Resolution Describing Improvements and Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report for Fiscal Year 2004-2005", for City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA-1, adopted on February 4, 2004, by the City Council of said City, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, the Engineer of said City has prepared and filed with the Clerk of this City the written report called for under said Act and by said Resolution No. 04-010, which said report has been submitted and preliminarily approved by this Council in accordance with said Act; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and ordered, as follows: 1. In its opinion the public interest and convenience require and it is the intention of this Council to order the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Yeaz 2004-2005 pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the construction or installation of the improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" hereto attached and by reference incorporated herein. 2. The cost and expenses of said improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, are to be made chargeable upon the assessment district designated as "City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting District LLA-1," the exterior boundaries of which are the composite and consolidated areas as more particulazly described on a map thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of said City, to which reference is hereby made for further particulazs. Said map indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory included in the district and of any zone thereof and the general location of said district. 3. Said Engineer's Report prepared by the Engineer of said City, preliminarily approved by this Council, and on file with the City Clerk of this City is hereby referred to for a full and detailed description of the improvements and the boundaries of the assessment district and any zones therein, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and pazcels of land within the district. 4. Notice is hereby given that Wednesday, the 2nd day of June, 2004, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, Califomia, be and the same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place for a hearing by this Council on the question of the levy and collection of the proposed assessment for the construction or installation of said improvements, including the maintenance and servicing, or both, thereof, and when and where it will consider all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person at or before the conclusion of said hearing, against said improvements, the boundaries of the assessment district and any zone therein, the proposed diagram or the proposed assessment, to the Engineer's estimate of the cost thereof, and when and where it will consider and finally act upon the Engineer's report, and tabulate the ballots. 5. The Clerk of said City be, and hereby is, directed to give notice of said hearing by causing a copy of this Resolution to be published once in the Sazatoga News, a newspaper published and circulated in said City, and by conspicuously posting a copy thereof upon the official bulletin board customarily used by the City of Saratoga for the posting of notices, said posting and publication to be had and completed at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing specified herein. 6. The Office of the City Engineer be, and hereby is designated as the office to answer inquiries regazding any protest proceedings to be had herein, and maybe contacted during the regular office hours at the City Hall, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, Califomia 95070, or by calling (408) 868-1241. *r*+* Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 7th day of April, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Attest: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA-1 ANNEXATION NO. 1 (ZONE NO. 32) ENGINEER'S REPORT on the Levy of an Assessment for the 2004-2005 Fiscal Year April 2004 JOHN H. HEINDEL -CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEER ENGINEER OF WORK TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages Assessment & Cost Summary 1-2 Rules for Spreading Assessment Description of Improvements 4 Assessment Roll Assessment Diagram 6 Certificates 7 CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA-1 ANNEXATION NO. 1 (Zone No. 32) ASSESSMENT for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 WHEREAS, on Februazy 4, 2004, the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, adopted its Resolution No. 04- OI Odescribing improvements and directing preparation of the Fiscal year 2004-2005 Engineer's Report for Landscaping and Lighting District LLA-1, Annexation No. 1, more particularly therein described, and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. 04-010 directed the Engineer of Work to prepare and file a report presenting plans and specifications for the proposed new improvements, an estimate of costs, a diagram of the territory proposed to be annexed into said assessment district, and a proposed assessment of the total amount of the estimated costs and expenses of the proposed new improvements upon the several lots or parcels of land in said territory proposed to be annexed, to which Resolution reference is hereby made for further particulars, NOW, THEREFORE, I, John H. Heindel, by virtue of the power vested in me under said Act and the order of the City Council of said City of Saratoga, hereby make the following assessment to cover the portion of the estimated cost of said improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof and the costs and expenses incidental thereto, to be paid by the assessment district for the Fiscal Year 2004-2005: ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE SUMMARY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS City overhead $ 165 Assessment engineer 335 $ 500 MAINTENANCE COSTS Contract services $8,500 Irrigation water 2 10,500 Assessment $11,000 And I do hereby assess and apportion said portion of the estimated cost of the improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof, and the costs and expenses incidental thereto, upon the several lots or parcels of land liable therefor and benefited thereby, and hereinafrer numbered to correspond with the numbers upon the attached diagram, upon each, severally and respectively in proportion to the benefits to be received by such property, respectively, from the construction and installation of the improvements, and from the maintenance and servicing thereof, and more particularly set forth in the Assessment Roll hereto attached and by this reference made a part hereof. As required by said Act, a diagram is hereto attached showing the proposed annexation to the assessment district, and also the boundaries and dimensions of the respective lots or parcels of land within said proposed annexation to the assessment district, as the same existed at the time of the passage of said Resolution No. 04-010. The diagram and assessment numbers appearing in the Assessment Roll herein under the column headed "Assessor's Parcel No." are the diagram numbers appearing on said diagram, to which reference is hereby made for a more particular description of said property. I hereby place in the Assessment Roll, opposite the number of each lot or parcel of land assessed, the amount assessed thereon. Each lot or pazcel of land is described in said Assessment Roll by reference to its parcel number as shown on the assessor's maps of the County of Santa Clara for the Fiscal Year 2004-2005, and includes all of such pazcel. Respectfully submitted, Dated: ¢ ~/ , 2004 John H. Hei~eyE,~I3~-i~; ~".~`. Engineer ol'1~afk~ '' ; s~ V, - 4 ``. "`Y~. 3~3/los~ . ~ V it `~: r' -2- RULES FOR SPREADING ASSESSMENT The amounts to be assessed against the assessable lots or pazcels of land to pay the estimated cost of the improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof and the costs and expenses incidental thereto, shall be based upon the estimated benefits to be derived by the various lots or parcels of land within the proposed annexation to the assessment district. The assessment for administrative costs shall be spread equally to all of the lots or parcels of land located and benefited in this proposed annexation to the assessment district. The assessment for the cost of improvements, including the maintenance and servicing thereof, as described in Resolution No. 04-010, shall be spread proportionally to the frontage on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road of each of the lots or parcels of land located and benefited within Zone 32, the proposed annexation to the assessment district. The maximum assessment levied for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 for each pazcel in this Zone 32 shall be the amount calculated by multiplying its assessment for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 by 1.05. In subsequent years, the maximum assessment for each parcel shall be the amount calculated by multiplying its maximum assessment for the previous year by 1.05. -3- DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS The design, construction or installation, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, of landscaping, including trees, shrubs, grass or other ornamental vegetation, statuary, fountains and other ornamental structures and facilities, and public lighting facilities for the lighting of any public places, including traffic signals, ornamental standards, luminaires, poles, supports, tunnels, manholes, vaults, conduits, pipes, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, braces, transformers, insulators, contacts, switches, capacitors, meters, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances, including the cost of repair, removal or replacement of all or any part thereof; providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste; electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other improvements; and the operation of any fountains or the maintenance of any other improvements. -4- ASSESSMENT ROLL ASSESSMENT ASSESSOR'S AS PRELIMINARILY PARCEL NO FRONTAGE APPROVED . 366-12-054 110 $ 1,052.16 366-12-065 118 $ 1,125.66 366-12-066 160 $ 1,511.48 366-22-023 149 $ 1,410.44 386-01-025 150 $ 1,419.62 386-30-035 106 $ 1,015.42 386-30-036 0 $ 41.66 386-30-037 50 $ 500.98 386-30-038 50 $ 500.98 386-30-039 100 $ 960.30 386-52-032 75 $ 730.64 386-52-033 75 $ 730.64 1,143 $10,999.98 AS FINALLY CONIRMED -5- PROPOSED GATEWAY LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ZONE ~~7 / ~ i r ~~;~~_ .- ~~ G~ OPK -JULIE LN. w J z z U7 Q Ur ' 36612054 -- O 6 0_ 36612065 ~ i ~ ~m SRISBANE ROAD MON RIUM CIRCLE SEA GULL __ - ___ _~, I, Cathleen Boyer, the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga, hereby certify that the foregoing assessments, in the amounts set forth in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminarily 2004. Approved", with the diagram thereto attached, was filed with me on Cathleen Boyer I, John H. Heindel, the Engineer of Work for the City of Sazatoga, hereby certify that the foregoing assessments, in the amounts set forth in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminarily Approved", have been computed or recomputed in accordance with the order of the City Council of said City of Saratoga as expressed by Resolution No. 04- ,duly adopted by said City Council on , 2004, said computed or recomputed assessments being the amounts set forth in the column headed "Assessments as Finally Confirmed"; provided, however, if the column headed "Assessments as Finally Confirmed" is blank, the figures in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminazily Approved" were confirmed without change. Dated: , 2004 John H. Heindel I, Cathleen Boyer, the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga, hereby certify that the foregoing assessments, in the amounts set forth in the Column headed "Assessments as Finally Confirmed" (unless said column is blank, in which event the amounts in the column headed "Assessments as Preliminarily Approved" apply), with the diagram thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of said City of Saratoga on , 2004. Cathleen Boyer The Assessment and Assessment Diagram were filed in the office of the County Auditor of the County of Santa Clara, California, on , 2004. County Auditor -7- SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ~ MEETING DATE: April 7, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT _City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER: O~-~~~ PREPARED BY: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Commendations -Outgoing Arts, Heritage Preservation, Parks & Recreation, Planning and Public Safety Commissioners RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present commendations. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are commendations for the following outgoing Commissioners: Arts Commission Mary Ann Henderson Betty Peck Herita a Preservation Commission_ Norman Koepernik Willys Peck Dora Grens Parks & Recreation Commission Sandra Dodge Angela Frazier PlanninE Commission Cynthia Bany Public Safetv Commission Fran Andresen Thomas Edel Ronny Santana FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -Copies of commendations 2 of 2 COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING MARY ANN HENDERSON FOR HER SERVICE ON THE ARTS COMMISSION WHEREAS, Mary Ann Henderson has served on the Arts Commission since December 19, 2001; and WHEREAS, Mary Ann worked on the Arts Commission Subcommittees that focused on the local artists; and WHEREAS, Mary Ann worked with many artists in creating and installing the inaugural exhibit of orchard art for the Library Art Wall entitled "Honoring our Heritage as the Valley of Heart's Delight"; and WHEREAS, Mary Ann was instrumental in coordinating the artists for two Mustard Walk events; and WHEREAS, Mary Ann helped establish the first Art in the Park and continued supporting the artists in the second annual Art in the Park; and WHEREAS, Mary Ann has been a dedicated Arts Commissioner; her insights into the needs and desires of local artists are greatly appreciated by the City Council and the staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga are proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to their community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Mary Ann Henderson is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Arts Commission. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7th day of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING BETTY PECK FOR HER SERVICE ON THE ARTS COMMISSION WHEREAS, Betty Peck has served on the Arts Commission since December 19, 2001; and WHEREAS, Betty worked on the Arts Commission Subcommittees that focused on the Saratoga Library Art Wall; and WHEREAS, Betty worked with the Pacific Scribes in creating and installing their exhibit for the Library Art Wall as part of the Building Bridges event; and WHEREAS, Betty was instrumental in coordinating the art for the preschool mural; and WHEREAS, Betty helped establish the first Art in the Park and continued supporting the second annual Art in the Park; and WHEREAS, Betty has been a dedicated Arts Commissioner, missing only one meeting of her entire term; her contributions and insight into preserving the quality of life and beauty in Saratoga are greatly appreciated by the City Council and the staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of are proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to their community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Betty Peck is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Arts Commission. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7th day of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING DORA GRENS FOR HER SERVICE ON THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, Dora Grens has served on the Heritage Preservation Commission since March 21, 2001; and WHEREAS, Dora's innovative thinking and spirited activism transformed the Commission during her tenure which included the now very successful Historic Calendar; and WHEREAS, Dora's knowledge and skills were supplemented by the unquenchable enthusiasm for Saratoga's unique historic character which she brought to the Commission; and WHEREAS, Dora's enthusiasm and tireless contributions have revealed her passion for Saratoga's history and its preservation; and WHEREAS, Dora has been a dedicated and hard working Heritage Preservation Commissioner, her contributions are greatly appreciated by the City Council and the staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Dora Grens is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Heritage Preservation Commission. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7th day of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING NORMAN KOEPERNIK FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, Norman Koepernik has served the City of Saratoga as a Heritage Preservation Commissioner since May 1992; and WHEREAS, Norman provided his professional experience regarding architectural design and construction in a number of matters considered by the Commission during his tenure such as various development applications, Heritage Resource Inventory, and general items of historical significance; and WHEREAS, Norman's sense of purpose, creative thinking and leadership made him an effective chairperson for many years; and WHEREAS, Norman's knowledge and skills were supplemented by the unquenchable enthusiasm for Saratoga's unique historic character which he brought to the Commission through programs such as the "Mustard Walk"; and WHEREAS, Norman has been a dedicated and hard working Heritage Preservation Commissioner, his contributions are greatly appreciated by the City Council and the staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Saratoga City Council does hereby commend Norman Koepernik for his many years of hard work and dedication on the Heritage Preservation Commission and extends to him its appreciation and best wishes for the future. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7"' day of April 2004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING WILLYS PECK FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, Willys Peck has served City of Saratoga as a Heritage Preservation Commissioner since April 1993; and WHEREAS, Willys has lived in Saratoga his entire life, the Heritage Preservation Commission could always rely on his unfailing memory of how it "used to be". His encyclopedic knowledge has been enormously helpful to the Heritage Preservation Commission in the performance of the Commission's duties; and WHEREAS, Willys has consistently participated in and contributed greatly to the research and preparation involved in many projects such as the Heritage Resource Inventory, Historic Park Restoration, Heritage Orchard, Mustard Walk, and the Mills Act Program; and WHEREAS, Willys's enthusiasm and tireless contributions have revealed his passion for Saratoga's history and its preservation; and WHEREAS, Willys has been a dedicated and hard working Heritage Preservation Commissioner, his contributions are greatly appreciated by the City Council and the staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Saratoga City Council does hereby commend Willys Peck for the many years of hard work and dedication to the Heritage Preservation Commission and extends to him its appreciation and best wishes for the future. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7`n day of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING SANDRA DODGE FOR HER SERVICE ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, Sandra Dodge has served on the Parks and Recreation Commission since October 2000; and WHEREAS, Sandra has given many hours to the Parks and Recreation Commission and has demonstrated commitment and willingness to work on projects whenever needed; and WHEREAS, Sandra served as the Chair from 2002-2003 and served on the Skate Park Task Force, Gardiner Park Task Force, Wildwood Park Task Force, and Commissioner Handbook Task Force; and WHEREAS, during Sandra's term on the Parks and Recreation Commission, significant milestones were accomplished such as: • Dedication of renovated Congress Springs Park • Development and dedication of Azule Park Completion of El Quito Park drainage and imgation project. • Improvement of the trails network throughout Saratoga. • Commencement of the Playground Equipment Replacement Projects at Brookglen, El Quito and Wildwood Parks. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga are proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Sandra Dodge is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Parks and Recreation Commission. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7th of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING ANGELA FRAZIER FOR HER SERVICE ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, Angela Frazier has served on the Parks and Recreation Commission since October 17, 2001; and WHEREAS, Angela has given many hours to the Parks and Recreation Commission and has demonstrated commitment and willingness to work on projects whenever needed; and WHEREAS, Angela has also served on the City Use Fees Subcommittee, El Quito Park Task Force, Dog Park Task Force and was involved in several events during her term; and WHEREAS, during Angela's term on the Parks and Recreation Commission, significant milestones were accomplished such as: • Development and dedication of Azule Park Completion of El Quito Park drainage and irrigation project. • Improvement of the trails network throughout Saratoga. • Commencement of the Playground Equipment Replacement Projects at Brookglen, El Quito and Wildwood Parks. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga are proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Angela Frazier is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Parks and Recreation Commission. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7th of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING CYNTHIA BARRY FOR HER SERVICE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, Cynthia Bany has served on the Planning Commission since November 3, 1999; and WHEREAS, Cynthia participated in the preparation and adoption of the Certified Housing Element and the Circulation Element of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, Cynthia played a vital role in the review and updating of several Code Sections, including Design Review, Tree Regulations and Second Dwelling Units; and WHEREAS, Cynthia was a subcommittee member for the Gateway Design Guidelines and was the Chair of the Planning Commission from 2001-2002; and WHEREAS, since it is apparent to all who worked with her that Cynthia has been a dedicated and hard working Planning Commissioner, her years of service are greatly appreciated by the Planning Commission, the City Council and the staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Cynthia Barry is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Planning Commission; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7`h day of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING FRAN ANDRESON FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION WHEREAS, Fran Andreson has served on the Public Safety Commission since January 1997; and WHEREAS, Fran served on the Public Safety Commission Subcommittee School Task Force, working to review and provide recommendations on school traffic plans for Oak Street School, Blue Hills Elementary School, and Redwood Middle School; and WHEREAS, Fran served as the Public Safety Commission liaison to the Library Expansion Committee for the new Saratoga Librazy; and WHEREAS, Fran provided recommendations and great leadership for the Traffic Plan for the new Saratoga Librazy; and WHEREAS, Fran participated on behalf of the Public Safety Commission in the Heritage Orchard Walk through; and WHEREAS, Fran assisted with reviewing and revising the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program; and WHEREAS, Fran served as the Chair of the Pubic Safety Commission in 2001, and hosted many discussions for the creation of a fire access trail on Bohlman Road; and WHEREAS, Fran participated in the development of the new Saratoga Fire Department Complex; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga are proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Fran Andreson is hereby commended and thanked for his hard work and dedication on the Public Safety Commission; and WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7`h day of April 2004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING THOMAS EDEL FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION WHEREAS, Thomas Edel has served on the Public Safety Commission since February 2002; and WHEREAS, Thomas served on Public Safety Commission subcommittees of law enforcement and fire protection; and WHEREAS, Thomas participated in the Santa Claza County Fire Needs Assessment focus groups providing leadership and recommendations on providing Fire Protection Services in the City of Saratoga; and WHEREAS, Thomas participated in the development of the new Saratoga Fire Department Complex; and WHEREAS, Thomas reviewed many traffic related issues during his tenure on the commission and always made improving safety and protecting community aesthetics of any new traffic improvement a priority within the City of Saratoga; and WHEREAS, Thomas provided traffic safety recommendations on the Blue Hills Elementazy School traffic plan; and WHEREAS, Thomas assisted with reviewing and revising the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program; and WHEREAS, Thomas worked closely with law enforcement and participated in numerous Sheriff ride-alongs within the City of Sazatoga; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga are proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Thomas Edel is hereby commended and thanked for his hard work and dedication on the Public Safety Commission; and WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7~' day of Apri12004. Arm Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga COMMENDATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HONORING RONNY SANTANA FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION WHEREAS, Ronny Santana has served on the Public Safety Commission since September 2001; and WHEREAS, Ronny served on Public Safety Commission subcommittees of Traffic Safety and Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP); and WHEREAS, Ronny provided recommendations on traffic safety improvements for the Blue Hills Elementary School traffic plan; and WHEREAS, Ronny assisted with reviewing and revising the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program; and WHEREAS, Ronny worked closely with Public Safety Commission to preserve the character of the community from sign clutter; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga is proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Ronny Santana is hereby commended and thanked for his hard work and dedication on the Public Safety Commission; and WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 7`h day of Apri12004. Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL I MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER: ~~~ PREPARED BY: ( ,~fr~l .~~ DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Appointment of Arts, Heritage Preservation, Plauning and Public Safety Commissioners and Oath of Office RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council approve the attached resolutions appointing members to the Arts, Heritage Preservation, Planning and Public Safety Commissions. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are resolutions appointing the following people: Arts Commission Tracy Halgren - 04/01/07 Judith Klock - 04/01/08 Bob Ray - 04/01 /08 Heritage Preservation Commission Phylis Ballingall - 04/01/08 Sandra Dodge - 04/01/06 Bob Louden - 04/01/08 Beth Wyman-04/01/07 Planning Commission Linda Rodgers - 04/01/07 Public Safety Commission Michael Bustamante - 04/01/08 Peggy Guichard - 04/01/07 Mitch Kane - 04/01/07 The Oath of Office will be administered and signed by the Commissioners. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Appointments would not be made to Arts, Heritage Preservation, Planning and Public Safety Commissions. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Update City's Official Roster. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the Council Agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -Resolutions of Appointment Attachment B -Oath of Office RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING FOUR MEMBERS TO THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, four vacancies were created on the Heritage Preservation Commission resulting from the expired terms of Phylis Ballingall, Norman Keopernick, Willys Peck ,and unexpired term of Dora Grens; and WHEREAS, a notice of vacancy was posted, applications were received, interviews have been conducted, and it is now appropriate to fill four vacancies. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Sazatoga hereby resolves that the following appointments were made: Phylis Ballingall - 04/01/08 Sandra Dodge - 04/01/06 Bob Louden - 04/01/08 Beth Wyman - 04/01/07 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 7th day of Apri12004 by the following vote: __ AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING THREE MEMBERS TO THE ARTS COMMISSION WHEREAS, three vacancies were created on the Arts Commission resulting from the expired terms of Tracy Halgren, Mary Ann Henderson, and Betty Peck; and WHEREAS, a notice of vacancy was posted, applications were received, interviews have been conducted, and it is now appropriate to fill four vacancies. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves that the following appointments were made: Tract Halgren - 04/01/07 Judith Klock - 04/01/08 Bob Ray - 04/01/08 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 7th day of April 2004 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor ATTEST: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING ONE MEMBER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, one vacancy was created on the Planning Commission resulting from the expired term of Cynthia Barry; and WHEREAS, a notice of vacancy was posted, applications were received, interviews have been conducted, and it is now appropriate to fill four vacancies. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves that the following appointments were made: Linda Rodgers - 04/01/07 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 7th day of Apri12004 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor ATTEST Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO.04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING FOUR MEMBERS TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION WHEREAS, four vacancies were created on the Public Safety Commission resulting from the expired terms of Francis Andresen, Thomas Edel, Mitch Kane, and Ronny Santana; and WHEREAS, a notice of vacancy was posted, applications were received, interviews have been conducted, and it is now appropriate to fill four vacancies. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves that the following appointments were made: Michael Bustamante - 04/01/08 Peggy Guichard - 04/01/07 Mitch Kane - 04/01 /07 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 7th day of Apri12004 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor ATTEST Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA I 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. Commissioner Subscribed and sworn to before me on This 7`h day of Apri12004. Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 ORIGINATING DEP :City Manager's Office PREPARED BY: Cathleen Boy City Clerk AGENDA ITEM: ~ ' CITY MANAGER: ~/---/G~--~-- DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: City Council Minutes RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the following City Council Meeting: Regular Meeting -March 3, 2004 FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -Minutes March 3, 2004 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MARCH 4, 2004 The City Council of the City of Saratoga held a Joint Session with the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) in the Administrative Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, at 5:30 p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Patricia Bailey, Phylis Ballingall, Paul Corrado, Norman Koepernik, Tom Lowdermilk, Willys Peck, John Livingstone, Staff Liaison. Chair Bailey briefly highlighted the Commission's accomplishments from March 2003 - February 2004 including: • Heritage Orchard Oversight • Heritage Resource and Mills Act Criteria Review Austin Way Heritage Lane -Design and Installation of Sign • McWilliams House and Book-Go-Round Restoration Recommendations • Historic Park Master Plan • Historic Park Grant Application & Preservation to County • Historic Calendar • 3`a Annul Mustard Walk Chair Bailey briefly highlighted the Commission's ongoing activities such as: • Heritage Resource Project Review • Heritage Resource List Management • Historic Park Restoration Project • Historic Home Plaques • Adopt- Tree-Program • Mustard Walk • Historic Calendar After considerable discussion the consensus of the City Council was to direct the HPC to add the following to their coming year's work plan: Investigate SHL 435 • Focus on designating more lanes and landmarks • Landmark status of the Heritage Orchard • Status on heritage signs Mayor Waltonsmith thanked the HPC for attending tonight's Joint Session. The City Council met in Closed Session in the Administrative Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, at 6:3 0 p.m. Conference With Labor Negotiators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager & John Cherbone, Public Works Director Employee organization: SEA Conference With Labor Negotiators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager & Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director Employee organization: Non SEA Members Conference With Labor Negotiators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Dave Anderson, City Manager Employee organization: SMO Conference with Legal Counsel -Threatened litigation (Gov't Code 54956.9(b): (1 potential case) Conference with Legal Counsel -Initiation of litigation (Gov't Code section 54956.9(c): (1 potential case). Conference With Legal Counsel -Existing Litigation: (Government Code section 54956.9(a)) Name of case: City of Saratoga v. Hinz (6"'District Court of Appeals No. H023549) MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Waltonsmith reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Waltonsmith called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, Norman Kline, Nick Streit, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Ann Waltonsmith ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Danielle Surdin, Administrative Analyst Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director John Livingstone, Associate Planner Christie Oosterhous, Associate Planner Ann Welsh, Assistant Planner John Cherbone, Public Works Director Cay Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst 2 REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR MARCH 3, 2004 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of March 3, 2004 was properly posted on February 26, 2004. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following person requested to speak: Bert Martell requested that the City Council address the current policy on the City Council agenda section called "Written Communications". COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS Patricia Bailey, Chair/HPC thanked the Council for the opportunity to meet with them prior to the meeting. Chair Bailey pointed out the direction the HPC received from the City Council as follows: • Investigate SHL 435 • Focus on designating more lanes and landmarks • Landmark status of the Heritage Orchard • Status on heritage signs Chair Bailey stated that the City Council would like the Mustard Walk to continue, but suggested that the HPC look for another organization to take the lead. Marylyn White, Chair/ Saratoga Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC), announced that on March 16`h SASCC would be having their annual St. Patrick's Day Dinner. Ms. White noted that the entertainment would be by the "Uncalled Four" Quartet. Ms. White noted that the De Anza Kiwanis Club are the sponsor for this year's event. CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Refemng to Mr. Martell's comments, Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she would look into the matter. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Waltonsmith reported that on March 4, 2003 at 3:00 p.m. the City Council would be having a Joint Meeting with Supervisor Liz Kniss at the Historic Museum. CEREMONIAL ITEMS PROCLAMATION -DECLARING THE MONTH OF MARCH 2004 COLORECTAL AWARENESS MONTH STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read proclamation. Mayor Waltonsmith read the proclamation and presented it to Julie Shaver and Larry Sheahan. Ms. Chaver thanked the City Council for issuing the proclamation. Mr. Sheahan noted that he was a colon cancer survivor and thanked the American Cancer Society for everything they did for him and thanked the City Council for issuing the proclamation. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 2A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -JANUARY 7, 2004 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM JANUARY 7, 2004. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -JANUARY 21, 2004 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM JANUARY 21, 2004. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2C. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -FEBRUARY 4, 2004 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 4, 2004. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 4 2D. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2E. STREET IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD & SEAGULL WAY TRAFFIC SIGNAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve an increase to existing contract with Republic Electric. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE INCREASE OF $124,980 PLUS (10% CONTINGENCY) TO EXISTING CONTRACT WITH REPUBLIC ELECTRIC TO PERFORM STREET IMPROVEMENTS WORK IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE INSTALLATION OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD AND SEAGULL WAY. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2F. REVIEW OF PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Informational only. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE THE PARK USE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SAME WITH VARIOUS GROUPS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2G. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE SUBMITTAL OF SB 1346 RUBBERIZED ASPHALT CONCRETE GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION AND DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE FUNDING AGREEMENTS WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution; authorize City Manager to execute funding agreements. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-020 STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE SB 1346 RUBBERIZED ASPHALT GRANT PROGRAM AND DELEGATING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2H. PARK USE AGREEMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Park Use Agreement; authorize the City Manager to execute the same with various user groups. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE THE PARK USE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SAME WITH VARIOUS USER GROUPS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. 2004/05 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing; adopt resolutions. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-021 John Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Planner Livingstone explained that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) makes annual disbursements of Housing and Community Development Act (HCDA) funds for eligible projects and activities. Saratoga and seven other "non-entitlement" cities within Santa Clara County receive federal HCDA funds from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. Non-entitlement cities receive funds through a cooperative agreement with the County of Santa Clara, the locally responsible grant recipient. Planner Livingstone explained that expenditures of these funds is restricted by federal and county regulations. Planner Livingstone explained that the tota] amount available for FY 2004/05 is $166,440. Of that amount, a maximum $37,716 maybe spent on public service activities. Planner Livingstone explained that the availability of CDBG funds for eligible projects and activities was publicized in the Saratoga News funding the month of January 2004. Planner Livingstone explained the following funding recommendations that have been recommended by Councilmember Bogosian and Betty Feldheym: 1. CDBG PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES SASCC -Adult Day Care Program Requests $36,288, which is 18% of estimated annual budget to operate the Adult Care Center. The maximum that can be allocated to public service is $37,716. Planner Livingstone stated that the recommendation was to fund the Saratoga Adult Day Care Program with the $36,288. 2. CDBG CAPITAL AND NON-PUBLIC SERVICE PROJECTS -- Proiect Match - is requesting $33,990 to cover full cost of lease payments to the landlord on its group home on Blauer Drive in Saratoga. 6 ADA hnnrovements Project at Hakone Gardens -per the lease agreement with Hakone Foundation, the City will provrde $50,000 per year for five years, to update ADA requirements at the park. FY 04-OS will be the fourth yeaz that CDBG funds are allocated to ADA Improvements at Hakone Gazdens. SASCC - is requesting $12,500 to purchase furnishings such as Storage cabinets, shelving and tables for the Adult Care Center and Modular Buildings. SHARP Revolving Housing, Rehabilitation Loan Program - $9,162 is recommended to be allocated to this program. Planner Livingstone explained that yesterday a "for sale" sign was placed at the house on Blauer Avenue; staff is not recommending changing the recommendation in the staff report. Project Match currently receives funding on a month-to-month basis and is working to continue the lease, work with the new owner or find another location in Sazatoga. If something changes staff would come back to the Council. Planner Livingstone stated that the recommendations were to fund Project Match at $33,990, $50,000 to Hakone Gardens, $2,000 Saratoga Adult Caze Center, $9,162 to the SHARP Progam and reallocate and $25,061.81 form the Sanitary Sewer Connection Ordinance project to the SHARP Program fund. 3. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION County Rehabilitation Assistance -The City's SHARP Revolving Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program is administrated by the Santa Clara County Housing and Community Development (HCD) staff. HCD chazges $20,000 of CDBG funds per year to administer the SHARP program for the City. City Program Administration - $15,000 is set aside for the genera] program administration costs incurred by the City. 4. REALLOCATION OF PRIOR CDBG FUNDS A balance of $25,061.81 in CDBG funds remains in the Sanitary Sewer Connection Project to assist low-income homeowners who are required to abate their septic tanks and connect to the public sewer system. In Spring of 2003, Staff sent a letter to each homeowner currently using a septic system informing them of the availability of CDBG funds. One low income Sazatoga resident received a CDBG grant to connect to the sewer system last surnrner. Given the extent of public outreach and lack of activity, it is recommended that the remaining balance be transferred to the SHARP Progam. In regards to the $25,061.81 from the Sanitazy Sewer Connection Program, Mayor Waltonsmith asked why the funds could not be used on ADA Improvements at the North Campus. City Manager Anderson responded that if those funds were combined with CDBG funds the rules for the entire project fall under the complex CDBG rules. Mayor Waltonsmith opened the public hearing and invited public comments. Genie Dee, Executive Director/Senior Center, thanked the City Council for their continued support. Ms. Dee reported that she is expecting to have a saving of $1,400 on the automatic door project and would like to the Council to approve the use of the funds on the installation of a security door in the computer room. Secondly, Ms. Dee asked if the Council would apply $1,428 to furnishings for the Senior Center out of the funds available for Public Services. Chris Ray, Board President/Project Match, thanked the Council for their continued support. Mr. Ray stated that since the house is currently on the market, they are actively searching for a new house for their tenants. Mayor Waltonsmith closed the public hearing. Referring to the required ADA improvements at Hakone Gardens, Councilmember Bogosian asked why no improvements have been made. Planner Livingstone responded that the project has started. Japanese Consultants have been working on the bid proposal, which should be going out soon. The project should start late May early June 2004. Consensus of the City Council to authorize staff to include any unspent funds in the Automatic Door contract for SASCC FY03/04 Project 04-54 to be used towazds installation of a security door in the modulaz building and to reallocate the amount of $25,061.81 form the Sanitary Sewer Connection Ordinance project to the SHARP Revolving Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program fund. KINGBOGOSIAN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION A`S AMEivncE RnM SA1V~I~E1 I.LAI(H l.vvi~a i ......~.'_ --- -. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT FOR FY 04-05. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 4. INITIATION OF ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS FOR SHANKAR PROPERTY, 22461 MOUNT EDEN ROAD STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing; adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-022 Ann Welsh, Assistant Planner, presented staff report. Assistant Planner Welsh explained that the applicant for the property located at 22461 Mount Eden Road has submitted an annexation application. This application is submitted in concert with an application for approval to demolish the existing _ dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling on the 1.89-acres pazcel. The subj ect parcel abuts the municipal boundary and is within the City's Sphere of Influence. Due to the location ofthe parcel and proposed development, the City's policy is to evaluate the annexation. Assistant Planner Welsh briefly explained the Cortese-Know Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, the process of the initiation of annexation, waiver of protest proceedings and annexation approval. Mayor Waltonsmith opened the public hearing and invited public comments. Cherie] Jensen requested that before the City Council annexes Mt. Eden Road they should examine the expenses that the City has already incurred. Mayor Waltonsmith closed the public hearing. In regazds to the road. Councilmember Bogosian noted that the geotechnical report recommends that the road not be a part of the annexation. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he supports the annexation without the road. STREIT/KING MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22461 MOUNT EDEN ROAD EXCLUDING MT. EDEN ROAD AND SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND ACCEPT PROTESTS OF SAID_ANNEXATION. MOTION PASSED 5-0. AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 14,15 AND 16 RELATED TO THE VARIOUS SECTIONS THAT DEAL WITH STORM WATER RUNOFF (NPDES); AMENDMENTS TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE (ARTICLE 14) SECTIONS THAT DEAL WITH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS; AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 14 TO REMOVE REMAINING SECTIONS DEALING WITH BUILDING SITE APPROVALS (BSA) FROM THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing; Adopt resolution granting Negative Declazation of Enviromnental Impact; Waive first reading and direct staff to place the Ordinance on the March 17, 2004 Council Meeting Consent Calendar for Second Reading and Adoption. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-023 Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan reported that on January 14, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing and adopted a resolution recommending the City Council make the following amendments to the City Code. 9 Director Sullivan explained the following amendments and each section of the City Code it effected: Storm Drain Amendments The current sections of the Subdivision, Zoning and Building sections of the City Code are not consistent with the provisions of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (NPDES). The proposed amendments would make the codes consistent with the program requirements. Lot Line Adiustments Amendments to the Lot Line Adjustment section of the Subdivision Ordinance to further strengthen the provisions of the ordinance so that the Lot Line Adjustment process is not used to create additional buildable subdividable sites. Also the Assistant City Attorney has recommended some changes in order to establish consistency with Government Code Section 66412 (as amended by SB 497) and address other technical legal terms. Building Site Approval Last year the Planning Commission and City Council made many changes to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance of the City Code. One of the changes was to remove the entire Building Site Approval process. Somehow between the second reading and adoption of the ordinance its "codification" included all of the sections intended to be deleted. Mayor Waltonsmith opened the public hearing and invited public comments. Seeing none, Mayor Waltonsmith closed the public hearing. KINGBOGOSIAN MOVED TO WAIVE FIRST READING AND DIRECT STAFF TO PLACE THE ORDINANCE ON THE MARCH 17, 2004 COUNCIL MEETING CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION. MOTION PASSED 5-0. STREITBOGOSIAN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION GRANTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE SARATOGA CITY CODE RELATED TO STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: LOT LINE ADNSTMENTS AND BUILDING SITE APPROVALS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. OLD BUSINESS 6. NORTON ROAD FIRE ACCESS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. 10 Director Cherbone explained that this report would provide the City Council with information on several options to develop an emergency access road to facilitate the evacuation of residents out of Bohlman Road Area. A notice was mailed to approximately 160 Bohlman Road area residents, including some County residents, notifying them of tonight's meeting. Director Cherbone briefly explained that background of the issue. Director Cherbone stated that two main areas have been identified to facilitate the development of an emergency access road, Villa Montalvo and Tract 9330. Two routes have been identified through Villa Montalvo and three routes have been identified through Tract 9330. Director Cherbone explained each option and the estimated cost. Director Cherbone stated that Option lA was the first route identified as an emergency access road candidate and is the easiest to construct of the two routes through Villa Montalvo. However, because Villa Montalvo is adamantly against this route, mainly because it goes through their Artist in Residency project, it is not necessarily the more economical of the two. Director Cherbone explained that when you add the cost of the easement procurement, legal costs, and the antagonistic nature of condemnation proceedings, this option maybe more costly and take more time to implement. Director Cherbone stated that Option 1B which follows an existing equestrian trail through Villa Montalvo, meets al] the same levels of desirability as the Artist in Residency route, except that it is more difficult to construct. However, what makes this option desirable and most likely the easiest to implement is Villa Montalvo's willingness to dedicate an easement for the road. at no cost. Director Cherbone explained that if Council determines that Option 1B is the preferable route; staff will work with Montalvo and the Saratoga Fire District to implement an easement arrangement. Director Cherbone noted that once the easement is established, via Villa Montalvo's offer, condemnation, or other arrangements, the funding mechanism for constructing the fire access road would need to be determined. In regards to Option 1B, Councilmember Kline asked if it could physically be done with the narrow hillside and the slant in the hillside. Director Cherbone responded yes the road could be constructed and added that the Fire District has given the access road a construction width of 10 feet -used only for evacuation. Mayor Waltonsmith asked where the funding would come from for the access road. 11 Once the easement is procured, Director Cherbone responded that there are a few options to investigate such as: • Assessment district • Direct improvement fees • Grants David Dolloff stated that he feels Montalvo is "blackmailing" the City by giving us an easement that is more expensive and more dangerous. Mr. Dolloff stated that he feels Option 1 is still the best option. Robert LoPresto noted that he has lived in Saratoga for the past 34 years and has been on the Montalvo Board of Trustees for 14 years. Mr. LoPresto thanked the City Council for working with Montalvo on this issue. Mr. LoPresto stated that Montavlo recently had a successful neighborhood meeting. Tim Harris stated that he is a Montalvo resident and fully supports the Artist Colony and he is opposed to any access road that would disrupt the intent of the facility. Mr. Hams stated that he supports Option IB. Beverly Phipps provided a brief background on why the access road is needed. Mr. Phipps provided and analysis of the areas of Option lA & Option 1B. Mr. Phipps stated that Option lA is three times shorter, less expensive, and less of an environmental impact on the area. Mr. Phipps stated that each of the options would greatly enhance the safety of the people who live on the hill in the Bohlman area by providing an emergency exit for cars so the Fire engines can get to the fire. Mickie Anderson stated that she is on the Montalvo Board of Trustees. Ms. Anderson stated that Villa Montalvo is one of the jewels of the City and provides quality programs. David Stanley stated that although he is not a resident of Saratoga he has been affiliated with Montalvo for the past 7 years. Mr. Stanley stated that he supports Option 1B. Ed Ferrell thanked Montalvo for the recently held neighborhood meeting in which he was invited and attended. Mr. Ferrell stated that the fire access is needed and hopefully will never be used. Robert Mills stated that as a mountain biker he would love an additional road to ride on. Mr. Mills stated that he doesn't support Option lA because the Artist Colony needs its privacy. Greg Prow stated that he was the current President of the Montalvo Board of Trustees. Mr. Prow stated that they have met 17 times with different groups regarding this project. Mr. Prow stated that he supports Option 1B and noted that Montalvo is giving the City the easement for free. 12 Gordon Knox stated that he has had 20 years of building artist colonies azound the world. Mr. Knox stated that this facility has the potential to bring in artist from around the world. Mr. Knox stated that Option lA would have profound effects on the artists. Elizabeth Challener stated that she is the Executive Director at Montalvo. Ms. Challener stated that Montalvo cares about the neighborhood, is proud to be a part of this community and would like to continue to work closely with the City. Ms Chal]ener thanked the City Council for walking the site and thanked the neighbors for attending their neighborhood meeting. Kevin McLaznel stated that he is a resident and a Montalvo Board Trustee. Mr. McLarnel stated that the concerns regarding Wildcat Creek aze not a big issue. Barry Fernald stated that he was a volunteer architect for the project. Option lA isn't safer nor is it cheaper. Mr. Fernald stated that adding the road after the project has been completed would cause problems. Cheriel Jensen stated that she was a County of Santa Clara planner for 15 years. Ms. Jensen stated that the land azound Montalvo should have never been developed. Ms. Jensen stated that an EIR should be required for either option. Councilmember Kline asked if there would be a locked gate on the access road Director Cherbone responded that both options would have a locked gate. Mayor Waltonsmith pointed out that Option 1B is already a hiking path. Director Cherbone stated that it is a trailhead and the road would require widening and a minimal surface covering to allow vehicles safely out. Referring to Ms. Jensen's request of an EIR, Councilmember Bogosian asked if there are any exemption options of doing an EIR. City Attorney Taylor responded that there would need to be an assessment on whether or not the project would have an impact. City Attorney Taylor noted that further investigation would have to take place including reviewing over 50 CEQA exemptions. Councilmember Bogosian thanked Montalvo for working with the neighbors and the City. Councilmember Bogosian stated that supported Option 1B. Councilmember Kline stated that Option lA is might be easier to build but it is extremely steep and the process would be time consuming and costly. Councilmember Kline stated that Option 1B may be safer and cheaper to maintain. Councilmember Kline noted that he supported Option 1B. 13 Councilmember Streit stated that Option lA & 1B is not the issue -the issue is the safety of the residents. Councilmember Streit stated that he supports Option 1B. Vice Mayor King stated that she fully supports Option 1B. Mayor Waltonsmith noted that she supports Option 1B and appreciated Montalvo's willingness to provide the easement. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to work with Montalvo on Option 1B. Mayor Waltonsmith declared a 10-minute break at 9:00 p.m. Mayor Waltonsmith reconvened the meeting at 9:10 p.m. 7. DEANZA/PG&E TRAIL PUBLIC PROCESS OPTIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Determine type and composition of body to conduct the public input process and project development; Provide direction to staff regarding the use of a professional facilitator to assist with the public input process. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst, presented staff report. Analyst Bloomquist stated that on February 4, 2004 City Council provided feedback and directed staff to move forward with the process of developing a pedestrian/cycling trail on PG&E right-of--way lands running parallel to the railroad tracks between Saratoga and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Avenues. Council specifically requested staff generate options for developing an active public process and project development, which will occur over an estimated eight month time frame, and to bring these options back for review by the City Council at a future meeting. Analyst Bloomquist explained that in addition Council expressed interest in retaining the services of a professional meeting facilitator to assist in the public process. If Council so directs, staff would generate a Request for Proposal to retain the services of a facilitator and bring a contract back to Council for approval at a future meeting. Analyst Bloomquist described the proposed options for the public input process as follows: 1) Public Hearings conducted by the City Council 2) Facilitated Council Adhoc/Task Force Meetings (membership consisting of two Councilmembers and key project stakeholders) 3) Community meetings conducted by the Park sand Recreation Commission Councilmember Kline asked who would pay for the facilitator. Analyst Bloomquist stated that the funds would come out of the Phase I grant from the County. 14 Councilmember Bogosian asked when would the public find out how much the trail will cost over the life span of the trail. Director Cherbone noted that usually those costs are found in the feasibility study after the type of trail has been decided upon. Director Cherbone suggested that Council could direct staff to return to Council regularly with benchmarks. Councilmember Kline asked if there was a defined project plan that the AdHoc group will be working on. Director Cherbone stated that there isn't a defined plan yet; staff would like to use the professional facilitator to develop a feasibility plan in terms of the process. Councilmember Bogosian suggested a scoping meeting to open up the process initially to the public to receive everyone's comments. Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she supported hiring a consultant along with appointing two Councilmembers and PRC members. Councilmember Bogosian requested that staff provide Council with all of the resumes of the consultants who respond to the RFP. Consensus of the City Council: • Direct staff to prepare a Request for Proposals for a professional facilitator to assist with the public input process Mayor Waltonsmith and Councilmember Bogosian would represent Council on the AdHoc STATE BUDGET UPDATE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report. Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director, presented staff report. Director Baloca explained the current budget scenario as follows: The City will lose approximately $576k of its current year VLF revenue stream, which is considered a backfill gap to be repaid in 2006 $156k is permanently lost beginning in FY 2004-OS in property taxes as a result of Governor's proposed expansion of the ERAF shift of local property taxes to support school funding. Director Baloca briefly explained Proposition 57 & 58 and the State's budget process. Mayor Waltonsmith thanked Director Baloca for the update. 15 NEW BUSINESS 9. CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE GENERAL. PLAN, LAND USE ELEMENT UPDATE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to advertise for volunteers to participate on the committee. Christie Oosterhous, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Planner Oosterhous stated that public participation would play an important role in updating the Land Use Element of Sazatoga's Genera] Plan, which was last adopted in 1983. At the direction of the Council, staff would advertise for volunteers to participate on a citizen advisory committee for the Land Use Element Update. Staff would organize interviews to be conducted by the Council with interested persons. The Council would appoint approximately five citizens to work with staff on the advisory committee. Gary Smith volunteered to service on the citizen advisory committee. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to advertise for volunteers to participate on the task force. 10. QUITO ROAD HOUSING CONTRACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize City Manager to execute contract. Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, presented staff report. Director Sullivan explained that the City has received and application for development of a 60-unit condominium, from Barry Swenson Builders. Based on an Initial Study prepared in-house, staff has determined that an environmental impact report is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Request for Proposals (RFP) was sent to five consulting firms on December 11, 2003. Two firms, Placemakers ($109,402) and David J. Powers ($158,054), were the only two firms that submitted a proposal. Director Sullivan stated that staff conducted a thorough review of both proposals and contacted references provided by the two firms. Director Sullivan stated that staff recommends Powers because of their local experience and selection of subcontractors. In regards to the EIR, Councilmember Bogosian asked if there was a conflict of interest and items were left out of the EIR would the City be responsible to defend the EIIZ. 16 City Attorney Taylor responded that if there was a lawsuit the City would require the developer to indemnify the City, the developer would be responsible for costs but the City is still accountable for the document. Councihnember Bogosian stated after searching the Internet he discovered of the principals with David J. Powers belongs to organizations in support of high- densityprojects. Councilmember Bogosian requested support from his colleagues to direct staff to send the RFP out again. Vice Mayor King stated that she would not support sending the RFP out again. Councilmember Kline stated that David J. Powers is a respectable firm and noted that any organization in this valley would most likely have someone on their staff who supports high-density. Cheriel Jensen stated that there is no General Plan designation that would allow this type of density. Ms. Jensen stated that to have a principal author of the EIR who is an advocate for high density isn't right -the City should get a neutral party. Ms. Jensen stated that she supports Councilmember Bogosian's request to send the RFP out to a broader audience. Mayor Waltonsmith noted that this project would eventually go to the vote of the people. The EIIt is the first step in the process. Director Sullivan explained that once the EIR is done would go to the Planning Commission. Once scenario is that could happen is that the Planning Commission would deny the project based on the EIR and the developer could appeal to the Council. There is no guarantee that the Council has to let it go to an election. Councilmember Streit noted that he understands Councilmember Bogosian's concerns, but trust staff's recommendation. KING/KLINE MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT WITH DAVID J. POWERS. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH BOGOSIAN OPPOSED. 11. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR SARATOGA REDEVELOPMENT FEASIBILITY STUDY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Danielle Surdin, Administrative Analyst, presented staff report. Analyst Surdin stated that many of Saratoga's commercial districts continue to struggle to retain and attract retail businesses. Aging infrastructure, few public monies available for faced/beautificationprograins, and lack ofbusiness attraction incentives have made the City's economic development efforts a challenge. 17 Analyst Surdin stated that the City has been working in partnership with local landlords, current business owners, and prospective business owners to improve the overall business climate and to keep a good mixture of goods and services within each district. At the City Council retreat, Analyst Surdin stated that staff was directed to explore the option of creating a Redevelopment Agency. The first step was to conduct a feasibility study. Staff has identified three commercial districts and the immediate surrounding residential areas for evaluation. Councilmember Kline suggested staff look at additional residential areas around the proposed RDA districts. Analyst Surdin responded that staff has kept the boundaries broad with the plan to allowing the consultant the opportunity to shape the feasibility of the RDA districts. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to move forward with the RFP for Sazatoga Redevelopment Feasibility Study. 12. CITY'S SOTn ANNIVERSARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. _ Joan Pisani, Recreation Director, presented staff report. Director Pisani stated that the City would be celebrating its 50`h anniversazy in 2006. In 1981, for the 25`h anniversary, special events were held all year. A 25"' Anniversary Committee was formed well in advance to schedule and plan activities al] thru the year. In anticipation of the 50`h year of incorporation, Director Pisani suggested that the Council might want to start thinking of ways to commemorate the occasion. Director Pisani briefly described program ideas and stated that if anyone was interested in helping to contact her. Consensus of the direct staff to start organizing groups to participate in the celebration. Mayor Waltonsmith thanked Director Pisani for her report 13. FORMATION OF LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND COMMITTEE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. 18 Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that last spring, Council designated two council members to meet with selected community leaders and librazy bond counsel to discuss use of the remaining library bond funds and the interest income. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that discussions included whether to put the remaining funds towards paying the debt service or use the fiznds for additional future capital improvements. The consensus of the group was rather than use the remaining funds to pay debt services and thereby pass on a credit of about $111 per household; the funds should be programmed for high cost future improvements such as replacing the roof. Bond counsel said that the funds could be used for any improvement to the library building or site with a life of more than a yeaz. Funds cannot be used for annual maintenance, administrative or staffing costs, or for furniture, fixtures and equipment. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that Councilmembers Bogosian and Streit met with staff in February 2004 to determine the next step. Approximately $700,000 remains in total library funds. Staff was directed to prepare a spreadsheet that programs costs for improvements such as a new roof, replacement of HVAC equipment and resaining the exterior of the building. Funds for these expenses would then be set aside with the remainder available for other improvements. Assistant City Manager Tinfow described the compositions of the Committee. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that the LCIF Committee would be responsible for making recommendations to the City Council related to use of remaining funds. They would become a regular standing committee, subject to the Brown Act, and would meet as needed. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that the Citizen's Oversight Committee would continue to exist for the life of the bond funds and be responsible for ensuring that funds aze spent appropriately. Councilmember Kline asked if the bond funds could be used to cover the items on the punch list. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that the bond funds could be used for anything that has a life longer than a year or to finish construction. Councilmember Kline suggested that this task be given to the Librazy Commission. The Library Capital Improvement Fund Committee may have a conflict with the current Librazy Commission. Councilmember Bogosian and Councilmember Streit noted that they preferred the formation of the Library Capital Improvement Fund Committee. Vice Mayor King stated that she completely supported Councilmember Kline's suggestion. Vice Mayor King clearly stated that she doesn't support another commission that Council or staff would have to attend. 19 KLINE/KING MOVED TO DIRECT THE LIBRARY COMMISSION TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMAINING $700 000 IN LIBRARY BOND FUNDS. MOTION PASSED 4-1 WITH STREIT OPPOSED. 14. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO SPEND ADDITIONAL LIBRARY BOND FUNDS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to use up to $10,000 from librazy bond funds to complete projects for the library. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that as the construction punch list nears completion, there remains a number of tasks that have not been completed by contractor Thompson Pacific as specified in the contract but either need additional work or fall short of what the library really needs. Assistant City Manager Tinfow sited a few examples. Assistant City Manager Tinfow reported that staff has collected price quotes for two of the items. The gate alarm will cost about $2,000 to connect to the interior alarm system and the art hanging system will cost about $2,200 plus the cost of installation. In addition, Assistant City Manager Tinfow reported that there aze a number of safety related issues that staff would like to complete: • Signs for emergency exists and fire extinguishers • Controls for shade draw stings • Rounding comers of the circulation desk BOGOSIAN/KING MOVED TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO USE UP TO $10 000 FROM LIBRARY BOND FUNDS TO COMPLETE PROJECTS FOR THE LIBRARY. MOTION PASSED 5-0. COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Waltonsmith had no reportable information Vice Mayor King reported the following information: City/Schoo] Ad-Hoc Committee -recently met with the Sazatoga Union School District. Superintendent was interested in discussing with the City the use of their flat grass in exchange for the maintenance of it by the City. Parks and Recreation Commission -currently working on a map of the City's parks. Councilmember Bogosian had no reportable information 20 Councilmember Kline had no reportable information. Councilmember Streit stated that he would like to discuss his assignments with the Mayor due to scheduling conflicts. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Bogosian requested that flagpoles be installed in Blaney Plaza before Memorial Day. Councilmember Kline concurred with Councilmember Bogosian's request. Mayor Waltonsmith mentioned a letter received from NASA Ames Research Center inviting the City to rent their facility for up to 400 people to view their Mars exhibit and landing of the Rover at their IMAX Theater. Mayor Waltonsmith also stated that she provided Director Pisani a copy of the letter who was going to take it to Rotary. Vice Mayor King suggested inviting the schools In regards to the LAFCO Fire Service Report, Councilmember Bogosian asked if the citizens' comments that were placed with the City's comments were placed elsewhere. City Manager Anderson responded that he contacted the Execute Director at LAFCO and requested that the citizen's comments be placed elsewhere. Referring to the Wildlife Center, Councilmember Kline stated that in the past the City has provided funding to them directly. Councilmember Kline stated that with the upcoming San Jose animal control services contract, the City should continue funding with the Wildlife Center. OTHER City Attorney Taylor noted that he has been working with the Mid Peninsula Open Space District with their San Mateo County Coastal Annexation. Unfortunately their final LAFCO hearing is scheduled for March 17, 2004. City Attomey Taylor noted that Assistant City Attomey 7onathan Wittwer would be attending the March 17 City Council meeting. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None 21 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Waltonsmith adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk 22 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 7, 2004 ORIGINATING DEPT: Ci Manager's O e PREPARED BY: Cathleen Boyer, Ci lerk SUBJECT: City Council Minutes AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: ~~~ DEPT HEAD: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the following City Council Meeting: Regular Meeting -March 17, 2004 FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -Minutes March 17, 2004 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MARCH 17, 2004 The City Council of the City of Saratoga held a Joint Session with the Planning Commission in the Administrative Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, at 5:30 p.m. The following Planning Commissioners were present: Chair Jill Hunter, Mohammad Garakani, Susie Nagpal, Michael Schallop, Ruchi Zutshi, and Community Development Director Tom Sullivan. Chair Hunter listed some of the Planning Commission's accomplishments over the past year including the following: • Tree Regulations • Single-Family Residential Districts • Design Review: Single-Family Dwelling • Subdivision Ordinance • Definitions • Overlay Zone to allow drive through windows in CN Zone bounded by Lawrence and Prospect • Storm Water Pollution Control amendments Chair Hunter noted that the Planning Commission is scheduled to update the following Zoning Codes for 2004/05: • Mixed Use Development Standards Public and Quasi Public Facilities Districts • P-A: Professional and Administrative Office District • Sign Ordinance Mayor Waltonsmith asked if the Planning Commission would be addressing the City's sign ordinance and a generator ordinance. Director Sullivan responded that they are both on their project list. Vice Mayor King asked if the Planning Commission ever meets with other city's Planning Commission. Consensus of the Planning Commission that meeting with other Planning Commission's would be a great way to share information. Director Sullivan suggested that the Chair of each Planning Commission meet. A discussion took place in regards to the recently adopted Tree Ordinance. Councilmember Kline explained why the City is investigating the formation of a Redevelopment Agency and what it could do for the City. A discussion took place in regards to the Council's desire to aggressively annex property especially in the hillsides. Providing pictures of security cameras on a house and noting that he brought this item up at the last Planning Commission meeting, Planning Commission Garakani noted that City's Code doesn't address security cameras in regards to privacy issues. Director Sullivan responded that it is on the Planning Commission project list. Mayor Waltonsmith thanked Planning Commission for attending tonight's Joint Session. The City Council met in Closed Session in the Administrative Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, at 6:30 p.m. ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION - 6:30 P.M. Conference with Legal Counse] - Initiation of litigation (Gov't Code section 54956.9(c): (1 potential case). Conference With Lega] Counsel -Existing Litigation: (Government Code section 54956.9(a)) Name of case: City of Saratoga v. Escamilla (Santa Clara County Superior Court No. 1-03-CV-00531) Name of case: Sazatoga Union School District v. City of Saratoga (No. CV803595) Conference with Leal Counsel -Consideration of Liability Claims (Gov't Code 54956.95): Claimant: Claim of Fireman's Fund Insurance Company (Subrogee for Mauch Trucking, Inc) (Claim No. GL-055216)) Agency claimed against: City of Saratoga Claimant Leah Faith Hawkins (Claim No. GL-055394) Agency claimed against: City of Sazatoga M_AYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 n.m• Mayor Waltonsmith reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Waltonsmith called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, Norman Kline, Nick Streit, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Ann Waltonsmith ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager Jonathan Witttwer, Assistant City Attorney Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Jesse Baloca, Administrative Services Director Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director John Livingstone, Associate Planner John Cherbone, Public Works Director Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR MARCH 17.2004 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of March 17, 2004 was properly posted on March 11, 2004. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS Report from the Planning Commission Chair, Jill Hunter. Chair Hunter noted that prior to the City Council meeting the Planning Commission met with the City Council. Chair Hunter briefly highlighted the Commissions accomplishments and future work plan. Chair Hunter thanked Councilmember Kline for explaining the City's plan to investigate developing a Redevelopment Agency. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF None ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Waltonsmith announced that the City is advertising for volunteers to participate on a citizen advisory committee for the General Plan Land Use Element update. It is anticipated that the committee will meet over atwo-year period with monthly or bi- monthlymeetings. Interested persons should contact the Community Development Department for more information. Mayor Waltonsmith also announced the Vice Mayor King has been named "Woman of the Year" by Assembly District 24. CEREMONIAL ITEMS PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 6, 2004 "TARTAN DAY" STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Read proclamation. Mayor Waltonsmith read the proclamation. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None - CONSENT CALENDAR 2A. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. BOGOSIAN/STREIT MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2B. MID-YEAR REVIEW AND 3RD QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and approve 3r Quarter Budget Amendments. BOGOSIAN/STREIT MOVED TO APPROVE San QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENTS. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2C. CLAIM OF FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY (SUBROGEE FOR MAUCH TRUCKING, INC.); CLAIM NO. GL-055216 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize ABAG to reject claim. 4 BOGOSIAN/STRETT MOVED TO AUTHORIZE ABAG TO REJECT CLAIM. MOTION ASSED 5-0. 2D. CLAIM OF LEAH FAITH HAWHINS; CLAIM NO. GL- GL-055394 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize ABAG to reject claim. BOGOSIAN/STREIT MOVED TO AUTHORIZE ABAG TO REJECT CLAIM. MOTION ASSED 5-0. 2E. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 14,15 AND 16 RELATED TO THE VARIOUS SECTIONS THAT DEAL WITH STORM WATER RUNOFF (NPDES); AMENDMENTS TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE (ARTICLE 14) SECTIONS THAT DEAL WITH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS; AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 14 TO REMOVE REMAINING SECTIONS DEALING WITH BUILDING SITE APPROVALS (BSA) FROM THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive second reading and adopt the ordinance directing staff to publish summary of the ordinance. TITLE OF ORDINANCE: 229 Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, requested that item 2E be removed from the Consent Calendaz. Director Sullivan stated that there were some technical corrections that need to be made to the ordinance. BOGOSIAN/KLINE MOVED TO WAIVE SECOND READING AND ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS AMENDED BY STAFF. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2F. ADOPTION OF STANDARDIZED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (BEMs) MULTIHAZARD FUNCTIONAL PLAN STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt SEMS Multihazazd Functional Plan. Councilmember Bogosian requested that item 2F be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Bogosian stated he read the document and thought it was more of manual for staff in the event of an emergency rather that emergency plan for the City. Councilmember Bogosian requested that an emergency plan be developed for the whole community. Councilmember Kline suggested that this item be agendized for a future meeting. Consensus of the Council to bring a discussion regarding city wide emergency plan back at a future meeting. BOGOSIAN/STREIT MOVED TO ADOPT SEMS MULTIHAZARD FUNCTIONAL PLAN. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2G. COUNCIL AGENCY ASSIGNMENTS AND COMMISSION LIAISONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-024 BOGOSIAN/STREIT MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 03-078. MOTION PASSED 5-0. 2H. Celebrate Saratoga 2004 -"Fun Zone" Sponsorship STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve sponsorship of "Fun Zone" BOGOSIAN/STREIT MOVED TO APPROVE SPONSORSHIP OF THE °°FUN ZONE". MOTION PASSED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 3. EXPAND THE CITY OF SARATOGA'S URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY TO INCLUDE TWO NEW PARCELS, APN 503-48-029 AND APN 503-48-028. THE AREA HAS ALREADY BEEN PREZONED AS A RESIDENTIAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (ROS) AND HAS THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF HILLSIDE OPEN SPACE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution requesting the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) expand the City of Sazatoga's Urban Service Area Boundary to include two new parcels. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-025 John Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Planner Livingstone explained that at the August 6, 2003 City Council meeting staff was directed to proceed with consideration of a proposed expansion of the City's Urban Service Area Boundary to include the area neaz Hakone Gardens. 6 Planner Livingstone explained on January 14, 2004 the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed boundary adjustment. At that meeting one of the property owners of the proposed adjustment area expressed concerns with the noticing. In response the Planning Commission continued the item to the next meeting on January 28, 2004 in which they recommended approval of the boundary adjustment to the City Council. Planner Livingstone explained the reasons why the expansion of the Urban Service Area is appropriate: • Would give the City greater influence over any future development on properties neaz Hakone Gardens. • Count typically provides cities greater opportunities for review and comment on proposed projects within a city's Urban Service Area. • Would make annexations easier if the property was in the Urban Service Area. Planner Livingstone explained the zoning, General Plan conformity and the environmental determination of the proposed boundary adjustment. Mayor Waltonsmith pointed out that just because a piece of property is in the City's Urban Service Boundazy doesn't give the City control over the land it just allows the City to make comments to the County. Planner Livingstone agreed. Mayor Waltonsmith opened the public hearing and invited public comments. David Britton noted that he was one of the property owners in the proposed Urban Service Area Boundary adjustment. Mr. Britton requested that the City Council do not extend the Urban Service Boundazy to include his property. Mr. Britton stated that he is in the process of selling his house and this change could potentially jeopazdize any sale. Mayor Waltonsmith closed the public hearing. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION TO EXPAND THE URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY FOR PARCELS 503-48-029 7 503- 48-028 LOCATED AT AND NEARBY 21170 BIG BASIN WAY. MOTION PASSED 5-0. OLD BUSINESS 4. ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF SAN JOSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: rovide direction to staff regarding Authorize City Manager to execute agreement; p funding for Wildlife Center of Silicon Valley. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that at the Januazy 21, 2004 City Council meeting staff was directed to complete negotiations with the City of San Jose for anima] control services starting July 1, 2004. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained the contract terms as follows: • Agreement length is for twenty years • Payments are fixed for 3-year terms so year 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, Saratoga will pay $155,000 each yeaz for animal control services • The capital contribution of $300,000 is refundable to Saratoga within the first 3 years if the agreement is terminated • Either party may terminate Assistant City Manager Tinfow reported that for the past two years, the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (SVACA) has included in their budget contributions to the Wildlife Center of Silicon Valley (WCSV) for all member cities including Sazatoga. With Saratoga's withdrawal from SVACA, the question of how to pay and how much to pay the WCSV have been raised. The agreement with San Jose will cover the costs of Saratoga animals that hey "handle" but the animals brought directly to WCSV by other means will not be covered. Assistant City Manager Tinfow reported that the WCSV is requesting Saratoga to contribute $4955. Councilmember Streit asked if the San Jose shelter was still expected to open June 30, 2004. Jon Cicirelli, noted that he represented the City of San Jose and stated that the shelter is expected to open June 30, 2004. In the event that the shelter did not open, Mr. Cicirelli guaranteed the City Council that Saratoga animals would be taken care of. Truth Burney noted that she represented the Wildlife Center and thanked the City Council for continued support over the yeazs. Councilmember Bogosian asked Ms. Bumey how the Center's operations were going since they changed locations. Ms. Burney responded that the new location was great and they have not seen a decrease in the numbers of animals they support. Ms. Burney added that they have always had a great relationship with the City of San Jose. KINGBOGOSIAN MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF SAN JOSE• COUNCIL DIRECTION TO FUND THE WILDLIFE CENTER DIRECTLY. MOTION PASSED 5-0. Councilmember Bogosian thanked Assistant City Manager Tinfow for her efforts negotiating the contract with the City of San Jose. RELINQUISHMENT OF VILLAGE SIDEWALKS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve draft Cooperative Agreement with the State of California. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. Director Cherbone explained that over the past year the City has been pursuing the relinquishment of the Village sidewalks and the corresponding right-of--way from the State. The agreement would provide further funding in the amount of $771,000 to perform needed infrastructure improvements and in return the City would assume maintenance responsibility and liability of the sidewalk. Director Cherbone explained the pros and cons of the take over. Councilmember Kline requested that the City Council place the $711,000 into the Village CIP project Director Cherbone stated that the next item on the agenda is the CIP and the Council could direct him to place the money into the Village CIP. Councilmember Kline asked Director Cherbone if Assembly member Rebecca Cohen helped with this issue. Director Cherbone responded that Assembly member Cohen and her staff helped this issue move through the process quickly. Councilmember Kline suggested to the Mayor that a thank you letter be sent to Assembly member Cohen. Vice Mayor King asked if the street was also being relinquished. Director Cherbone stated the streets, stone drains and the signs were still under Caltrans jurisdiction. BOGOSIAN/KING MOVED TO APPROVE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. MOTION PASSED 5-0. FIVE YEAR (2001-20060 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) -CIP BUDGET PRIORITIZATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff in regards to CIP can-ently on hold. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report Director Cherbone reported that on January 7, 2004 the City Council placed a majority of CIP projects on hold until the City financial situation became clearer. In light of the passage of Proposition 57 & 58 the City Council may wish to move forward with some or all of the CIP projects currently on hold. A discussion took place in regards to the Gateway CIP project and Blaney Plaza Director Cherbone noted that he would like to begin the Gateway in the new fiscal yeaz. Mayor Waltonsmith asked when the stairs at the Museum were going to be repaired. Director Cherbone noted that the repair of the stairs were under Director Pisani's department and perhaps she could allocate money in FY 04-05. Vice Mayor King stated that the stairs should be fixed immediately due to safety hazazds. Duffy Eldridge noted that he was present this evening speaking on behalf of the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC). Mr. Eldridge stated that at their last Board meeting they discussed their continued desire to utilize the North Campus to extend their programs. Councilmember Bogosian asked if the Board discussed how much it would cost to renovate the Campus to meet their needs. Mr. Eldridge stated that approximately $150,000 would be needed to renovate the Fellowship Hall enough to be able to use it. Mr. Eldridge also thanked the City Council for printing their community survey in the latest Saratogan. Mayor Waltonsmith thanked Mr. Eldridge for his cornments. In regards to the North Campus, Mayor Waltonsmith requested that the property be brought back to Council for further discussion. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he fully supported Mayor Waltonsmith's request. KLINEBOGOSIAN MOVED TO REVERSE COUNCIL DECISION ON JANUARY 7 2004 TO FREEZE THE CIP. MOTION PASSED 5-0. GRANT WRITER SERVICE PROVIDER SELECTION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize City Manager to execute professional grant writing service agreement. Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst, presented staff report. 10 Analyst Bloomquist stated that on several occasions Council was presented information by staff regarding professional Grant Writing Services for the City. On January 7, 2004 Council decided the Grant Writing function for competitive grants should be contracted out given our present level of staffing. Council directed staff to go out for an Request for Proposal (RFP) in an effort to retain the services of a n aggressive, proactive, professional grant writer to go afrer the competitive and more complicated, time intensive grants. Analyst Bloomquist reported that only two firms, Seliger Associates & Randall Funding & Development, Inc., responded to the RFP. After detailed analysis, Analyst Bloomquist explained that each firm is nearly equally qualified. However, staff recommends Randall Funding Development, which has a local office. Analyst Bloomquist explained that if Council selects Randall Funding, the following was a summazy of cost analysis: 1) If 12 or ore grant proposals are anticipated to be generated each year, the Monthly Fee Structure program is the most cost effective altemative. 2) If less than l l,the Affordable Funding program is the most cost effective altemative. Analyst Bloomquist noted that he spoke to Randall Funding last week and they proposed that if the City decided to go with the monthly program they would waive the $3,000 initial fee. If they weren't able to provide the City with at least $500,000 in a fourteen-month period they would continue to pursue grants without charging the City until they reached that level. Although Randall Funding's resume was very impressive, Councilmember Bogosian stated that Sazatoga is one of the most affluent communites in United States. Councilmember Bogosian stated sometimes this status goes against a city when it comes to obtaining grants. Councilmember Bogosian requested that Randall provide success rates from cities similaz to Saratoga. Vice Mayor King asked Analyst Bloomquist if he contacted their references and if they submit the same grant application for more than one client. Analyst Bloomquist stated that he did not contract all of the references listed in their proposal. Dan Hamilton/Randal] Funding, explained that cities aze going to compete for grants no matter who writes them. Brain Gallagher/ Randall Funding, stated that grants are highly competitive nature. Mr. Gallagher noted that they mostly seek federal grants but they are familiar with state grants. Mr. Gallagher stated that their company is the process used to put together the best proposal. 11 Mr. Hamilton stated that if the City of Saratoga hired them they would assign a funding advisor to the City and would do perform an initial needs assessment. In reviewing Randall's examples of success, Vice Mayor King stated that her concern was that not many of them compazed to Saratoga needs of historic building, parks, and trail grants. Mr. Hamilton stated that he would be happy to provide the Council with examples of cities comparable to Saratoga needs. Vice Mayor King asked if the City's contract with Randall could be used throughout the City. Mr. Gallagher responded that the contract stretches beyond the City. Mr. Hamilton continued to explain that Randal] funding has 42 grant writers with the average experience 12 years. Mr. Hamilton stated that they can guarantee $500,000 because they know they can get it. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he supports hiring a grant writing company but requested staff provide information on the following: • What other cities similar to Saratoga do for grant services • Contact al] of Randall's references • A general needs assessment Examples of success rates with similaz cities Vice Mayor King noted that she supported Councilmember Bogosian's request. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to provide the Council with the requested information and return on Apri17, 2004. NEW BUSINESS 8. COLON CANCER CHALLENGE OPTIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer explained that on February 19, 2004 Mayor Waltonsmith received a letter from Erin Garner, Mayor of Monte Sereno. Mayor Garner requested that the City of Saratoga join Monte Sereno and the American Cancer Society (ACS) by issuing a proclamation declaring the month of Mazch "Colon Cancer Awareness Month"" and declaring the City of Saratoga a "Colon Cancer Free Zone" 12 City Clerk Boyer stated that at the March 3, 2004 City Council meeting the Sazatoga City Council issued the proclamation as requested by the City of Monte Sereno and the American Cancer Society. In regards to the ACS's second request, declaring the City of Saratoga a "Colon Cancer Free Zone", City Clerk Boyer explained that Mayor Waltonsmith asked that this part of the request be brought back to the full Council. The following is a list of the number of ways ACS recommends that the City declaze Saratoga a "Colon Cancer Free Zone": • Use our communications system to educate our citizens and employees about the disease, which is the second leading cause of cancer death in the Country • Involve key businesses and community leaders in the awazeness campaign Provide appropriate city employees time off to get screened for colon cancer • Involve City Council in the awareness campaign • Provide pledge cards for the City Council an/or city employees • Enlist a speaker from the ACS to come to city and business Julie Goldbury noted that she is as Los Gatos resident but grew up in Saratoga. Ms. Goldbury noted that he mom died of colon cancer three years ago. Ms. Goldbury noted that she fully supports Sazatoga's efforts and hope to encourage the Los Gatos Council to do the same. KING/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO SUPPORT DESIGNATING THE CITY AS A "COLON CANCER FREE ZONE". MOTION PASSED 5-0. AGENCY ASSIGNMENTS Mayor Ann Waltonsmith reported that following information: Hakone Foundation -May 22 & 23, 2004 San Francisco Counsel General will be installed. On May 22, 2004 at Hakone Gardens a celebration will take place for the 150`h Peace Treaty. Also the HCD recently tamed over the below market rate house on the property back over to Hakone Foundation. Vice Mayor Kathleen King reported that following information: Chamber ofCommerce -supported the Leagues initiative. Recently attended their Annual Crab Feed -good turn out. County Cities Association Legislative Task Force -stated there is never a quorum. Councilmember Stan Bogosian reported that following information: KSAR Community Access TV Board -recently started a fundraising g campaign. Councilmember Norman Kline reported the following information: Library Joint Powers Association - in response to the failure by only 6% of Measure B, major impacts will be taking place immediately. JPA voted to use reserves to pay for technology improvements. Councilmember Kline stated he supports building the reserves back up to $5-6 million. 13 Councilmember Streit stated that he had no reportable information. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Mayor Waltonsmith stated that the Santa Clara County Cities Association formed an Ad Hoc Economic Development Sub-Committee. The Ad Hoc has developed a regional job retention strategy and is working towards ways for local cities to share their economic strategies with one another. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Waltonsmith adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk 14 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: MEETING DATE: March 25, 2004 L ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: O~%/-~`'~- PREPARED BY: Julie Ingraham DEPT HEA SUBJECT: Check Register: 3/25/04 RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Approve the Check Register. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is the Check Register. FISCAL IMPACTS: None CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): None ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): None ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Check Register Certification. und# Fund Name Date Manual Void Total 3/25/2004 Checks Checks AP CHECKS A95906-96015 001 GENERAL 38,210.28 10,616.94 100 COPS-SLESF 110 Traffc Safety 551.60 150 Streets & Roads 33,297.47 180 LLA Districts 7,095.08 250 Dev Services 13,505.40 260 Environmental 4,372.07 270 Housing & Comm 5,500.00 290 Recreation 11,963.03 291 Teen Services 169.50 292 Facility Ops 1,720.00 293 Theatre Surcharge 310 Park Develpmt 320 Library Expansion 336.08 351 Public Safety 35,170.80 352 Infrastructure 353 Facility 354 Park and Trail 107.24 400 Library Debt 420 Leonard Creek 720 Cable TV 740 PD #3 800 Deposit Agency Subtotal 151, 998.55 10,616.94 PAYROLL CHECKS: 629803-29830 TOTAL Prepared by: (},.'~,-~, ~J,,w~ Date: 3jaslcy Apr-99 z z w Fz NO .l F U .] W as >w ON " 2 W 2 Gm aF W ~ S 1- h o gF ao zz ~~ =r z oa zNivN vv m ~ A N d d M M v v Z „ . p d M 4 O O ~O p C G v v v C . ~' >> m m u v v ~, N . i o o v a E, m p vL % .,w ZA+A+ v ~ ~ ~AOVO i~C 3 ' n a a o N" o- a° m o F ~ ~ 2 ~ m~' b v° .] /, 9 O~~ E D 0 7 ~ ~ Z~ p~~ O A Y w w N m F T ~.] 2~m m wn N~2]avi m.~ P O F ~ U N OOP J J v C - rv m U~ti Z~ O ~~~ W .T O T N ~ F W'0 NY1 'O 00A6 E m£ W .l ~ Y tJ ~ C 4 O. C LL V M N OV' KNN~ON 4'~ODWMNy'OM D U L I N O ~~~ ~ v u G W£ N C V 'O Y'0 'O 'r-. N U C 41 N C 4 41 W J~ F C C C C O~n O~~ ti 4 K O 2 O .-~ C N T O a M .C 4 M M .ti WU' U7aOD 01WW6FdWU0 fil0 .]~ G W W 41 ~ K .~ p W 'a N i y W U o a a z~ rv ` 0 wW ° ° •~ '" ~ o o m m ~ 0 F N N ~ m ri ~ N w < V U W Q i ry C N YI N N Jl N N V C ° ti N N Z m Nv W~~ ~ y N N ~ G K w W z V ° ' ~ . ~ ° . . a . . W F F a W a a a a~ a u .] a a m a a u u a a K F F K F K F _ ' a F F W F F C K F W F F F w ~% D F O ' O ~ O O F F O 4. O W O O W W O Z 3 F F ' W O F . F F m F E P F H N U F W , a H F K F a N Z H w W W m h K >> w N a K C a ~ K C N w o a w w W r i K w o m ° F~ a w m O w ~ o W O z °' W o ° ~ ° o W o w s o ~ o z Ada z mm z Z aW g ° ~ ao m z a z ma z W z oo z W > > > > > > m m > 4 ~ > > o N w ~ w > W > s ~ ~ £ ~ w W r a N ~ . . N o o ~ ~ w a s W z a n F u g ~ w K F U W W £ o „ U WO O m n £ r. 4 n ~ m z a zd C 4 a d ~ 3£ U n w° W a 4 o w n u w 4 >> 4 w ~ o a z c' ~ u i * a NN eN ~ x c W N ' O N OZ U ~ 0 0 0 ti °' ~ m n °m N a O ~ N N rv °° N ° N O ° O y U P V a c< W o o o o ° Wo ~ ~ N °o N N N N N Vl \ O\ \ a \ \ T m i X a W ~\ \ i~mm a Ury \ \ \ 1 3 \ 2 O~ \\ \ \ N 0 2 ° V o Om wN Ka oo Uo ° 00 ° m o ~ 0 W W o O ~° ° ~° o o O O o V 0 m w°o H°° oo a ° °° N o a ° ° w ° l m s ~ a z w ~ w ~i o f ?? ° ~ m m rv a o w . o ~ z NN a O J '$ aZ 4 , R UN b W O £m z qa y Z .-~ K a P ~ yP 4 5~ a rv r ~ P ' Orv ° n ' P N £ Un j . i v aP ~~d WZ x ~ ~d°m m. . wmm m ~ g w ~ ~ c c £ < £ q o F o O o W o o o ° K ~ a o o F H° ° o o o m ° ° ° ° \ a ~ w > p ° Z o U G O P 0 ~ pp ~ W O > W c 3 A W w N N n n F~ Z m .a] a £ £ n Z Z Q q m ~ m m q~W > ~m a a a 4 4 o £U' p 4 i ° W~ P w 4. ~ OU r iy N N P r ° ~ f U ~ Z e ~° ° c W ' z~ F o N o ° o o o n o ypW, U ~ > ~ aPa °.+ a o a °.+ °nN o0 oc oas °~o .c N P w a C N r N w Q ! < V 0. T4iJ 2 i ~ O N N b P O O O ~ ~ ~ m ° r N m O N F O N P N N 1i m rl N W N N b o` m m N N O N ~ O m N N! m m N ° m `~ N N C g°£ ~ .. W4 u w x x w U w U ~ w ZZZZZ F FUw ~ . U rgU . 00000 ww £U£OZUz F Z„ V' V~ r 5 r 0 4 4 F F F F F W 4 4 2 = 4= a Z U Q, ' ~ ~ ~ w ~ Vi N ~ u u u u u a w a a N F F W F w W N L' a K C K F S F F F ZFZ N W F F x O O K ~ 0 0 F tFil N t"n vi m OF C ~ F F F F F £ 4£ 4 ~ W~ ~ u a as zHZZZ ° ~ z~22,~ w .a ~a °u mo a w a a w a m a a w a o; £ ~ w z £ ~ ~~ ~ a °i W o aaaaa o amaw as g aWaaa w g ££s££ °z \N\N~u~ w o000o w w a W N w a w W w w w w W ~ ~ g a w a a w d a > a w a o ~~ r > o~ ~H °w > ~ > w > as > FF > ~ > .F, > aaaaa oaoau a ~F~zZ~ uuuuu YaYa w^ mwNwN azazawm an ~ ,F,u ~~ W z a wm wwwww w m w OU £££££ W O 'pGOZ yPy OZOZ £O£OFWF w\ w~ W O a Ny rYYrY J w '44484 aaaaa ~a~aa '~sas~OUm waj~ ~~ tF/1 C £ w W W W (Yww V O W O O O N N N N P<< 4< FO Z 4 0 0 o a a a a a c a c a o a ace n w y o e X ~ N m N N N N N w ~ NNN omac o0 Oi ° O O Z ~ ° V O N ' U ' ~ P m '{ N O O° O° O O a ~ ry O N 0° NNNNN O N °'y~ c w v e e a e c c e c c a c e s ] p N O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ W ~ ~ N V1 \ \ N N ~ N \ \ x4 ~~ \ \ \ r \ mNm xnnNmmnn V O i h m 4\\\\\\\ Z \ \ \ \ \ o0o Umo°oooo V o WNO 00000 0 0° [~-. O° Zo n F0 x ' o ° Fo O° °o tF` 000000 m o 0 0 ~oo o°o°o Fo vo0ooo w a '^ F y ~ wnarv„rv 4 .. O~ a r K a .] aNN.+ U' N fYZ w w W Kw F O Z NO N N N N N Fa ., z a FN Z ~ ~~+ ~oN ~nN Qrm zm N 4.m+,.rvoNO Ne< ; w£ Iwu °z ~'i IZO n Q q ~i m a m m O .m'. P .P+ p fait n Y m ..1 0 o N N f/ n 42 h'i U a -e 2 c< ryNN ,.]N ao ~^ i Z j o Z o a o° .° o 0 0 o a 0 T o t9 0 0 0 0 0 O o° o 0 0 0 0 ~~U;O> WO w° OFO Oo ZO° w° ? 2 r O. ^ O r F .] z O H ~ N a s i w w w w U U V U U V °Ua ~ > ' a [0 4 U " ~ w 4 N N m£W;OU ~i o ~P N ° \ \ \ \ w N NY i w > N Z i N O \ O w N~ \ \ \ wOF ~ ZZ ° \ °a .~.~n Om N mm~ nm aw, ow, ~ ; j ~ o n oc ° m o ac or.+.~-t .+ oU ono on.. N r rFQi U F a r r O r n W w W W m W O a O i c a L $ i Wy e N °o m o °° W O~ Fa . m m °~ o mmm win n rv e e e N N N Z p i N ry N 1!~ .i 0 N 'i N N rl m W a£ .. ., a s x W x u W x U WW W Z FF W W O m O a0 a0 . ~ Z • . ~ • F r V r • F • a W • r + O a a a a a> a a 5 a a z a a a~ a a F x F w F x F F C F ~~ F F m F F F F O U O F O W O O F O O O O W O Y O O O O h ~i a F K F N F ~n F F N F N Z F ~ F ~ F F aw F F a w a ~ w ~ a w W .+ w u z a W ~ o a o 0 a z ~~ F o 0 0 .z, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a°o [. ~ o~~ w a~£ g ~ m a m uc~ w a m o m a w o m~ w >N £d ~ z > x > > ~ > zd > > > z > a > > s > W > °s u~i ~~ [w.z ~ ° `~ z z zwa ~ as ° x ~ z w a ry ~ r U ~ F w W W F ~+ w x x F W H W a~ x ~ a W z w aza £ Fz ~' a a a m a a n W ~ Z W N F d a !~ H W o~ o a a z W a w a o o W W W a W° W u a W£ w a ££ u W a o u c Fo <~nw °za o 00 0 0~ 0 0 W e e a o ~ m ~ n n K N 'i C O W N '$F'$ VI ° m C o 00 O O ~j O O 00 O O 0 O 02~ N pp U ~ i ~ o r U ~+ o oa o w n a ~ p ry O O O N NN O O N N U M W e °o mo Mo O ° Y a ~i N N N ry W~~ w m N N i UO ~ N N.~n U.i w W .1 ~ ~ ~ Z w° O O .~o O DO „°° ° WO ° 4o O i m 50 ° o o° Oo Fo V,° N u w° zN m Er .z. ^ - u w Z O' y r vi W W O N N rZi O j w N O 'L ~ a W w, W N N N a Z N N d' > Z W w w a m ~ N •• ~~ W w o ~~ s c ~ c w N m rv e r o r Y m m o m< o o u a x o '~ z z~ N o w .Oi x o o w m u a e u a 4 a £ a o e a m iZU Fm O p O 30 a~ W 00 Z o vi o 50.0 P F o Z o 0 o C° O o o F O O O Z° p° 'v D a W W O u a O I m o o> ~ £ a W w s u a F > W W a N ~'1 F E Z £ V £ ~j W N n£ K ~> OU °o O O O V Q 0 N O O O W W °ua~ N ~ W w n ~ ~ a ~ 4K~~xOOi r0 Ni ^N rm N G~U'Y ~i w>2~ o N NO nn WON Z O\ on G y U i j ~ o n ° m o a o c O n a N O rv O m~ o m O ry ° w o n O .+ C W rc F P Q r F u W P w .7 VI N W a ° ° m r m mm m Y1 O b t't rv 1~ r o b m w ~ N ° Q o' ry m a r r mr o a ti . ° m .N O N r N m m P N N F m O~ '1 'V b V ,+~ P N N N N 1 Yl N 0 o „ 0 ' '-' Z~~ w V V N nl N 1~ 'i N ri m H n N W w w o 'w N ~ w w w w w w w w w w w w w w V '~ • • H • • ~ w u U U u t~ U u u u u u u u w u u O , Z 2 Z 2 z y4yq 2~,, Z4 rZ Z4Z y z4z Z4 Z4 F ZZ2 x 2 2 ~ F F F ~ F F F Z Z Z ' Z >ZxZ2Z O O F Y F C O w O w W w ~~w w w w w w w w [w[ w w NO w = O U O F N O O z W F [-- -- [.. [.. ( (++[ [--~~ [-.~ [ {.. [ [ [--~~ [ [--.~[ [ [ yaZZH~Z~ZZ2ZZ~Z~ s w F N F Zw w O ¢ w £ ~ ' j p a O f°+l O K O £ £ ~% 0 J p Z f y U £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ S S £ £ £ a , j ~ w w N w w ° O 3 3 Z £ Z 3 Z U Z Z ; m m rc w w w w w w w w w w w w w w > > ^' ' w w w > a > ~ ~ w > °aaaaaaaaaaaaaa w ary , m ww > > o ~~ ay uuu £ Y £ oa, p uwrcuuuuuuuuuuu V w l w W 5N F~ „„ w O Q ~ V iN [ V I V I N VINN N V lCaw Q ~ y yy y ggqqq 4 r i q ~ Z ZZ ,, ZZ ZZ ZZ Z~Z ZZ yy Z ~ 4 a~ j a ~~~ 4 ~ 0 O 7 N a a x ~ j a a a a j O p ] w U W . n~N N N N ~~~ F O a a o ° 0 0 ° v a c v e a a c a e m s c ° z a T a P ^ . . rv rv w ~ ~ m m N rv N N NnN W NmN N m n m m / % N ry m m I N VI N Yl /, N N N N '" w .o ~ ~, ~ ~ o na ~ '^'^ ° ° a °O~acacaa i A o a , y , , o000 ° .~ m mm , o 02~ omo mo ° m° u m m om.. .. .. .. .. N.. ., .. .. N.. ., .. .. N a m .. o 0 om o mm 0° ° v o 0 0 ao °O w P° a OOOO o ooa rv ry N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N \ f \ F YQ ~ mm y Piw m nr P m P m P nnm P rv i UPS U n Z i . i i i + +. -,-, . i iunrvH nmmn ~~~ \ W ~ Y ~ ~ nnnnnmm~ ~~~ m m O 'Z \ o [/' o o O o O o O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 o O U Noo o o N o ~mm0 a o 20 X w Oo q wo Fo oo 0 m ~ooooo°moomooooo0o Oo m ~o° O ~1O N ° g1o Nn o 4 ~] G U ri nr. .i n N.y 'In b w.i N N N I O D o m ry N ry N N N N N N N NN ~ C a ry w Ur N N + Inc N 4 w N .O O R' ry P P i a ", wm a" . .~ N ., N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N F W , y ° N N > N ry N N N K n M N 1~ b 0 4(, b m m Q m V C P C ~ W m N ~ W ~ N ' P ~ ~ p .Ni n v m P o ° o a ° ° ggq ,' L gg4 i.] NN° ~O P wo Wm ~ N NN VI YI VI NNNYINN wO i2~ Um P 3o a WO oomoooomo aooo Z° ~m ~ o ~ o ° ° a°m ° moo o ' ° ~ o° x z ~ a °~ ° g ~ ° \,~ I F w w w w a N . w w o m u£i w w e W ~ u ou a~> a a o `° w ~ r ~" ~ m w~ ~ou ~ W X ~ w P, ~ N o C O~ Z ~ c a a c a N w v a c N c a m ° o U Y°> 2 i o ° e P o m c rc ~ m F ,NN mm O44 eeem~~e~w`°'°~°~° m. aW .+ i ~ . U ~ > ~ °o Nin om oe o.. om mm w w d C w 3 O 0Z 4 Z q N a w a m m w u a a ~~ Po wed w x m r a O 4o i F o~ wa arNi Fu a~ Fw 4 n w a w° w .. 'Fo Pw wa a w FF 20 02 4 w F Ya UO w U x m 00 ~ N m rv no m o r rv rv n o .+ .i m m o N ~n u~ o c iv rv w w r r m m rv m c o n N N r e r .o a NPi rv a < r '^ n xzx zx w Nory N 000 00 FFF } FF a a u u u a u u a m a a w a a a u u u a u a m a a aaa a as a a a u a a z a aaa a a a W F F w w w F w w F ~n F F 2 F Z F O F w 5 w F w F O O F F F O F F O O O 4 O O O O F F F O F O .] F F ~/ N v1 F N w F 5 F F F F F F F w w m F w F W rxi H H rxi Z U rNi F Z H ixi H rxr a s w a w ~a w w w a w w a w w a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o w o .o. o F o 0 0 w Z W' G: 4' O C C P £ P O w O O w C C K K z a ~e o0o x oo z z ~u z a z w z a~ o0o i o c~ w W w W w w w w w w a w W w w a w w a W a w W w z > z > ~~~ > ~~ > o > a > ~ > > M > FF > F > z r w ~ZZ z w w W W w w W W m O N w w w w p w £ £ £ £ £ W N a a £ £ £ £ 6C 4 N N N N N a a W a W i~ N i~ h a aaa as F a £ w a aaa a u u a a a a s m u w a o a a a a P O O C C C C O ~p ~O ~ b P ~p ~ ~p N N N N p o0 O~ b N b 0o N O N N N N N N N N O H O N N N N N U p Nd P vOa 'n N N N N Z P ~~ ~ Z \ ` m ~ a ~ ~ w n o 0 o O o 0 a £0 0 omo 0o Fa,o tlo a wm 'Fjo 0 000 00 0 o VOO 20 0 000 0 O w O w w w m " O~ w~ 2 4 F N N OZ ~ 3 N w ry. i K O N 2 ., a N 1N a C w a h n „ e w w a n ~q Z ~£ w z i ^ voi H m a s p £ P N P ~ P i o i ~ ~ a N a ~n 4 4 a ~2U ZZ qumi B aO~ a 4 he ~0 w 3v we o urn w < oc a w K m o a ao o K - 0 0 0 o o 0 m ° [ -o £o 00 0 ~ .to aU' ~ O 7 ~ m 0 m X 0 ~ o £ v Z C 2 0 5 ? P rv N K n F ~ w 4 a K K O a ~ Y Y Y q i n£C~> i U' U V' U' S 5 5 5 oU4~ m £ ' I j U ~ x a~ p r O O~ 4 C O r ti N n m N N N N O VI > p > P2Z o NO ON WOFi F m O ON O'1 O'1 rlH O r1 O yaU i > ~ O a~ O OtirlH O'i '1 On O'1 V ~ ^ i W a N m W a w a w o o ° 0 0 0 0 0 o m a o o m H~ I~ o o Q o 0 o rv N o c rv N r .moo m e m n uoi rv rv ~. c m o ~ e o o N° N r a .+ rv e o .. rv rv m e e wed w x w ~' W w V i Z'L Z2 Yp W U r r r O O O O r r • W~ r 'd r i F F F F r r .] ,a rZi ~ d ^ .l a J m .~ .] P 4 i U V U U .] ~ Q, a m a w a F m F w F ~ Fa y 2 o O K C K C F F ~ O V O F w O O U O y of N vi F OF F F N F m F F U F O F N F Z Z F ~ F F r r r r O Y' S ^ W W w C W S ti K C o ^ o ~a O ^ °o m °pz b m °pz ~ z m ~ a °o ^ ^s ^ s °^ ° ~~ o 0 0 o z ~ i w ~. m m K w ~ o ~ o ~ Q o i s ~ w w p[-~ w[-~ ~ m > w > m h W c7 2. ~ O > y > 4 > > K in F w ~ ~~~ W m m p S .~ N S 5 W a~ ~w ~~ ££££ °' F o.N w a n W i N Y !~ Y a w a w °' a s w o o H w p £ N F y Q VI S£ Vl W O ^ pa. p µ p U O F ~w O ga ~~ o a< °< w ao« ~n p a ~ o Y ~ ~ ,~ ,~ W N V1 N /i N /~ Vp01 F ca 0~~ oz~ N N N N N N N P C W p< P O O p O ^ w~ O O O ry\ \ N N N F i N N N N \ \\ Xa~ \ m m rN m N\ w^ N \ iZ\ yYy\ \ ~ S ~ \\ 40 o O 40 00 0 V o000 0 o O 0O p Y £ O O ~ p O O O Z O o 0 o O o O o o U p~ 00o U a m ? m i O I~ 4n Z U yN 3 O Z i qm C rv .? O >W ~ rv N WZ °i ~ w xq a a N ,~ ~ w m ^~ F m ~W£po~ ~.°o .+Nm w~ qqq a~ uN oo° mn ao mo wN am, 1 k5Z ~ eee qm £m °` '+ ~o taj v~ £~n as k mmmm ~Q Fo 400 ~o Uo a ~2'o m°ocae £a - w £a moo - N°o ao -o ~ ^ w° m £ a ~~ > a ~ ~ Z O O ~ £ £ £ r £ £ Y a a J J o£u~~ ~ a rv a m W a O~ Z N m O \ m O m N m N O b O Vl N p~ 'V a px.. w ° ,~„ o.+ oe o.. o N o00 o N o0 0~ o nm On p W U i> i O ri N £z 4q 4 O w H r w c~ a w W w N 0 zd z F~ °z °~~ a x W i F N a ao rc~ wN w~ am we a •• ~O x4 W W 0 F ~ H F~ r W O JO OZ U a W ~w Ya uo V O N OZ~ 4 h i ~£w£ ao ~iaSZi z? ~~u~o~ NmF x m a ~ W n£a > ooa W m w~ou a~o~zF doY~W~z K SrFi . wt. G W U ~ N p O ry ry 0 0 0~ m O O r O a m °. °. ~ nom O C m 'i ry r r r rv m N N r n w ~p 10 N N N N m r 'i N n m N O N /"1 N N m m N 'I N m m m a O F W a ~ O w w \\ ~ a > F m m vI FF ~ ZZ Ww W as W N O O N N \ ~U rVN Z O O W ygQao 4 a o.~. °£e Woo .a. ze me 'ate oNN z zzxzxzzzzzzzzzzxz 000000000000000000 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F a a U U U U U U U U U U U V U U U U U U JJJJJJ'J a'J JJJJJJJJO a .~ 4 4 F aaaaaaawaaaaaaaaaa FFFFF ~ F O O EFFFFFFfFFFFF NNNNNNVi VI VIN V F F F I VINVINVi V1 Ul zzzzzzzzxzzzzz x o Q zzs FFF FFr/. i-+rwr "'F r a0 ~ O a aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 00o g w w z o00000000000000 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww ~ a ~ w > ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~ h w ~mm w m h Y Y Y Y Y ~' Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y d 1 W 6 G W d M W G W h L W F d h 6 O 0 0 o a O o c e c m e p m p m p m a p m c~ c c~ e o ~ y~ N N YI N N VI N N N N O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~ ~ O O O N ~~ \ q~ P~ m P~ ~~ m ry m m\ 000000000000000000 ~o 000000000000000000 ao a F U ~ Frmmm~~~~~q~P~ m ~m mm mmm £e Qoe ao '~O 00000000 uooooo0000o N° vI F £ z aaaaaaaaaaaNaaNaaa o ..., ..., .+ . ..... .........~ .+ ....., .. o e F F _ z z 00 a O O £ £ F U Z Z Z UUaa4 a q > ~ > w w In w W m W °' z .W..wi .w. WWi .w..w. q a a a a a ~ a £ a, w a w w w w a W w w W M w w a F J J J» b J Vi N Vi Vl f% Vl VI ~ omooo m y m ~ VI N V1 N o O O O o O NO N P O T N o p C P C P Y O O N N N ~xj ` \ N N ry N N N N N N N _ a^ \ooooo 20 0 00 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F~ ~ b O m ~N ~N we ayo ww o 0 0 aN - o,°n u°iN V°i ,n ~°nN qo Yo rymagoooo w °o oa m """' o 0 0 x O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r N ~ m ~ ~ ° m~mti m o m ~ m N ~ O N O 'i O N N N N N N N m O W i .7 y W W N q O d yq 5 o N w r m N m r a o o m p o 0 N C w w N N r F N N p o N 4 ( ~j i O N 0 N p p ~y N r r N N N p 'i n I 1 ' p0 ~ n ~o npN ~n N z~ w ~ ti NN W d x w x .£.£ a z d W YS ~ ~ K . a rWW+ ~ FF ' i U' ~ ~ a a ` ' a a r] U ~] W d ~] W N rl r] `] S 'J z a a ,~,~~ H q a zd ~d a a a d a Nw F w F °o wo F w F F w o vi W o w W s y o o W w o F o F o a s o 0 o w w ~.. ' w F F w F .l .] O F F U U F ~/ F F£ F a p F ~n F w d N ' ti 0 w Y 4wi .] w U U vFi r K 5 m uzi C ? S N 6 S .'> > K w W w J Z' Z pa ~ w O S 5 '+ w d O O K d' O O d O N Vi Opp ~" O R 4 ,j ~= w W S O w w o o ~~ 2 o t W y 2 Z 2 Z Z d d w w w . d w g >> r° a w ~ ~ z z W w W w a W O o w ~ > ~~ j~ £GF. mm W > qW 'J > m W NmF > W > 00 > > 4Ri .wi > FF > F F C u\i i F 5~ N W m a w F aG tQJ rv 5 C C `' V Z a 5 tOi N fW+l W W dN r V ~ .]r].] 3 W w ~ U a .]N w U d\ vi i a W a CCK FFrmiw U d W.] £ w K C C C C tt F 4 ~' W a w H of N vE'i a^ o'~ 00o aaF as\~Sa rc oW m w£ w° www Sdw zx.+U W F S£ z .. p p F O ry ry ry ry ry z4 ~°,~° ~°,~° rta ea a o ua w ° m o r w rv m ~., m < ,.~ w ma N N N w min ~w oz~ o u ryN ° U ° °o ° .+ ...~ i a O O N O O H O O O O .a N N N N p p p p w p p< ° O O O O p O ~j 000 O O O O O N W F i O O N N N N N N N N N \ N\ N N %4. \\ \Nrv NNN \ \ NN U w ' N N \ w m 5 \ O ° O ° O ° V 00° W000 0000 O °O O ° x o0 0000 0 - °0 0 0 5 ° o° ~ o u° x° ~ N r 2~ u+ u 5ym "o~ ' ° .z. ~ w W sryi F pi x ~] N N N JJ WW 4 m Z V O N N p m T /~ N 'W£m°zl °~~m 5mo aoomor om °P v'im Emm ao ao rcor w° w p N N N N N p N N £ C p p O w d N N O° O p ~ Z U w W~ W w 0 rUi ° ~ o W o U° o X 0 0 5 0 ~ O r7 O O O - V \.]O i 0> ' V 000 KO°O 000°0 °a 0 ~° QO W h0 ~ w w m O i w U 5 'aC \ p O > Q V1 3 Nt~F ~ Z a\Nr\\ d d N W w O 0 d N N d d K w ova~> ~~ o° \~ a W~ ~ o d 4 0~ Z N N r N O N O° \ N\ O N m N ° r acwjr ~~w~z~ m~° \ \ O°° Pc w o ry~ z ° N n a p a .~ ° u~ ° as ~ ~ ~ oNNN ° ee~ o.+.+m .+N o.+ o c o °.+ m m W N W W t9 4 O 6 ~ 2 5 mc w m o ~o " m a ~ ~ r b m m N M n o F ~' N N f~ N YI i m F m i N ~ m .+ .., .a r .i r 'i N N ei ' £ Z 4 i e .y .~ W 6 w .£, o a u a ~ 4 zd a a N a a a a o a O F ~ F F a F } >. F ti rai p rOZi O O O £a£ O a O F O a O W O F F O W W ~% N a F 4 F E, ~ a F N F £ F FO E ~~ F 4 4 4 6 S~ K F x F Z O N ~ a a ~ a ~ a £ a a 4 a P. L 3 3 ry a W a ~ O F O a O .l x~ pOp O tY O O N V O Vi W X Y m '•L £ O pp a °o ~ ~ w x O Z W D 2 W 2 Q P 2 Z x Q a £ O m Z ~ 2 F 2 O~ m,m-, a > {W. > afOl > 4il > ~O > OOrn~ P.al t90 W 44 F ~ N ~ E ~ 3 Z WW £ as z 2 U'33a o a vi ~nww4 Ada Ada u s m~ ~m ', m ~ a.u. rN mc~xXH.+o~~aaaaa u w as omWamm z~a~z~azxa a o o~ F 4 i~ ad a s a a a a W w a o ~ ~ W m a W O u a m m m as ££smu~n>i£F '~ Fo o r r N ~4 000000000 0 c a ~ ° a c v c a a % n ry N n m m ry m N N m N N N N n N W F N ~ o0 0 o ui ino Oa o0 00 0 0 `zao ', 00 OZ~ V i m o m O o a .y N OH N nm OOOOn'i fl 'I N.m Nm N'i O W e J C c T C W C< C C C< P?<~ C ~ ~ \ F ~ N N N N \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \\ \ \ Ya, \ NNN W Q \ N \ \ \ ~ \ ~ \\ ~ \ x w n \ 0 0 0 u o o zoo 0 00 000oooooaaooo Y M y} O O o 0 Z o uoo 0 0 400000000000000 n m u ° ~ F'C O ~ }[} N m O Z N vl W a O ~ J W a N O 'Z ~' H O F W a w a u O D ry N m £ N ~ W F q q WW a0 ~ k2 [~ pn Vla^ ain .] O a N No nna cmmCm O am am m0 ~i 4 5 x K o O P m m o m P N 3 P h o O u1 voi V~ h n u~i N ~a-l c .al a a ' x U N N u1 O DO O O V1 0 00 N O O O o o O o o O o 0 o U O U O O O O .'~ Fo O o <mO ~, P~ Oo y0 lai'O ~O Oo h om4amUeWWa=cU ~ ~0 4 N n F~ x W U O O~ ~ O N O V O o\ O\ O D O O o kkN N N n£K ~,> C a a a N N\~a~c\v<aaaa\a\ O £U' N ~ \N\~O\~O\\\\\\\~n qw' 4 O i Z M 0 \ ~ O\ O N a a e' r Q \ 4a 00~ N.M+ \N\NC\C \C\N OZ \ o. tD } f] > 2 ~ 4 W O„ Z Z \ \ \ ~y 0 n 0 0 wau ~,> oN o.. oNN o0 0~~ o .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .+.. .~..~ on O 4 O N N W O h W O 4 m a H W 0 zd x {WY. o m m N m oo^o Nmo m r o Wy~j~o o ^ r1 H~ ~i g N m m m m ~ n .i ...i .. ~N n n n in ~n N m m ~ ~ .. N N o a v .. .~ ~, w N a X w a o; ao F o~ ma Kin FK d\ i ~VUI~ 4m W' w0 0' K. ~O 24 W a W ~ O oz 4 « 5 ~ ~ a F a ry W Y a 4 a a rWi F Z E W H ~ K a F m F E p O W O £ a p ~~ a' ~ O F F O F W F a y Y W O £ K W C a W ~ WUZ WYµ''F C N N. W W O O D a Z P K W a a vi D a P W 4 £ z x z xKZm o aw z z ~a z W W q W y W U VI 'Y IX !~ 2 W ~ W (u W £ > Z > ?FaPWVWUGH > U' > w > KZ£{WG4Z£2Fa F K N F KUX'J aU'WU'.~W £ W W a a a,aaWmauKi°o ~ a K a aKw W.+x£saz P a FO p wWx£PwWWwa W u NNNNN NNr p o o p C C C P O C n ~~n u~in min ui non in a N N N '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a w ~ 0 0 N 4 N N N N\ N N N N \ X ~ Fry rvrv \ \ \ U W~ a V I V ( V I V Nf N W i \ \ N\ N N\ N N u _ U y p o O O O O p O O O O O O O z ao m W o 0 000000000 0 o N w O~ W U oz o z a m a i a ~ n i a K mmmm Ne~n o .] o g Zi Wa .m 4 o m f aS ~ZU 4m q ae 0 N in NON Vl N JI C ~ W o° Oo O ° ° o O o ¢~KO o0 a m 000 0o 0000 £ a ~ APO O> F F O H O G g U a NnaF ' ~~ Q, p 4 w U vl U l/1 µ' ', VI o Vl vl o U 4 ~ W' P m o 1 W ~ OU 4 .i 1~ < bOm in ~OiZ q ~Oi a (9 Y i O> 2~ N N N N N m N N O N N N a. m. ~y ~ W N N N W EF oF H O O O .~ aaU~> ~ o.+ On FFFm FF N ~~ F F U ~ F £ F F F Z Z ? p ~~ O O £ O K z offi g z z z > > z > w > F F K w H W 6 2 O i Fr 1 as ~ w waww K£KK as a K N C a O O O O p T < C C C < N N N a 000 0o ao ooa oo a0 N N a N ~~~ rv K N N \ ~ U aN 0000 00 o wo W ° zo o 0oo 00 o o W W > 3 FP mm ar b Om ~ , W } O N N N N z Z N ao., Vai .~ o = a ~ a K VI N VI N N 0 Oo U ul £N 00 0 ° O Nooao o 0 ' yam o wo y W Z ~ O W N y W vi Fo Y z f 0 U Y 4 O V H W O ~' m w a ~ N N w o m N r o N a a rv m r `J 00 O N N T m. ~ O N N m N P F ry r N ti ~ nN C N O 5~ ~' n N ~. N r 'i N 'i m N N N w .n N .. .. N .i 'i y S R ~ ax UU ww UU m m w ~ OUO w o Z Z Z ~ ~ a w . . u . ~ , a w ca, , . ' u a a x a r a wmw a a z a a a w a o a> ' F a a d a a m w w a a o a~ F ~ F~ F m F ' U O F F F w F ~/ w w F F F 2 Z O O W O F O w w W O O {. O 'r O 2 O U' O O X F F F .~ F F a a a F F F F a F w F £ F x F a ry K U' Zq PJ h. U' U' U' q V' [. U a 2 ~~ ~~ O Z O N O Z a O 0 0 0 O O a O U O w O F O a O Y a °o '~ ~ ~ x a °z ~ ~ a ~ w o qz ~ ~ ~ g °z z ~ ~ z w °z ~ °z £ °z w ao F~ ww w a w w N w mww w^ w o w w w w W a w z o~ w w ~ o x >Ei > m > a~ > Hasa > 3 > u > ~ > s > 4 > w > s m H a w nrv FUG U~ w ~ ~ZY aCC N F W 4m ~m~ Fina a ~ ~4 FFF iaar N ^ 2 4 j q~ O a w U a .] 44 a a F a N U w° Z a q a w a ££ E W d a £ N a FO ~~ ~ a < ~ N N a o nmN ~ W N m N N ~ O~ O O O O O 02~ U Oi ~ .~i .~ a ' N P 00 000 .y O O N ti N O p ry ry O W o O O xa '~~~ oo ~~ u~ N ~ ' U '"m \ \ 000 O O O O FOO o O ~ o ~° wm X z UO µo a.0 00 m ,2a o 0 0 ~00 Uooa o o Oo ao Vo Zo 0 M i £ O N H N o ~ a W O m w a N H ~ Z N W~ N m O v)N N a 4 W~ m N OZ ~ U N O wN F a.y a W N a `~ a N N N N a N 5 m h N 5 a µ W N F O N a ~ W U N h m ~ n W ~ ~ Wwz ~ ao ao mN mm aNNn u.. r.°. .m ar W Zti a O•+ 4~ W o a.+ a.. yN 3a ~~ ZU >o F~ ain WF o a~, 3 in W in U ~n W m ry o po ~aU~a07 'i uoo ~o £o Qo0 Wooo ;o ~o i.lo ~o ~o m0 N n F ~ z a O £ w d F m ~ N 2a ? ; ~ > N w O x a F = o~yi> N N F F m ° a q ~ µ ~ OU m ^'N ti m p> a r µ~ O i i Z Z' ~ a n rv rv w a i n>~ ~~ o rv N o m o m o m N o 0 0 0 o m o .+ o a a ti o ..~ o m o .+ N N ^ SC W 'J ~a w N N W a 2 .a Z ry oaPN 5 o c m ~ m F ~ Q o n m w ° p£ N n .n n N N n i w a x .. w oo ~ z w aw: ~ a F C K F Q F F ~ ~ O o v O O O w W w W F F f i F w `" F ` E, O~OU , H M y ~ ^ „ a O ~ O O ~ OZa N N ^ y Z w ^ W 4 ~ o O i1K 2 fNil W f 00 A 4 W 26F i a a r C u\i F K~ a W a H Z 2 WW z a^ a~ ~ w ~, a~ a a ££ F ° o a am w aaaw rN o a w FU 0 ^ U W P a £ ^ w UU . K F O N N N N °za <° e e x N N °~ ° N Q ° w N~ F ~ o~ o e~ z c u V O O m rv 4 P O U N O N N N N N U W e a H w o 0o ~Wi rv F N N N N N \ \ r w U^~ U .~ w Y ~ ;m U KO O Y z 0000 00 W "° m w mom m mm o° z o~ wmm o oz mN N N 0 , N N ~ y a N W ~ ~ ~ W [C O~ ~ K P O ~ £ £n s ' xx~ ;ooa aoo 4 UO d , c Z No ~ o o m VO o Nomoo o ~ \,0i0> £ [-i F U' W ~ ~N4~m w r U w > 4 3 3 3 n£K~> ot9 P° N O~ P ^ +] U. ~ OU f eCm ~°~zo ~ ~ ~aN ° o d ~ nom' C~zZ~ , WoH ~ ~ + , o N o , ~ > w a u o .+ ...~ .+ . m . SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ~ 1 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: ~ ~=~"~"~ PREPARED BY: Iveta Harvancik ~ DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Building site approval for one lot located at 13800 Pierce Road. Owner: Thomas Walker RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Move to adopt resolution No. BSA-00-003 granting final building site approval for one lot located at 13800 Pierce Road. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is Resolution No. BSA-00-003, which, if adopted, will grant final building site approval for one lot, located at 13800 Pierce Road. All conditions of the building site approval and design review as contained in attached Planning Commission Resolutions No. 02-030, have been completed or will be completed concurrent with development of the lot. FISCAL IMPACTS: The owner has paid $6,477.81 in Engineering Fees. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The final building site approval must either be granted or denied by the City Council. If the building site approval is denied, no building permit would be issued for the referenced property. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None in addition to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): A copy of the resolution granting final building site approval will be released to the applicant. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Site Map. 2. Resolution No. BSA-00-003 granting final building site approval. 3. Certificate of Compliance No. CC-02-030. 4. Planning Commission Approval of Resolution No. 02-030 approving design review with conditions. ~I~'E MAP Application No.: DR-00-051, BSA-00-003 Location: 13800 Pierce Road Applicant/Owner: Thomas Walker APN: 503-30-002 RESOLUTION NO. BSA-00-003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING THE FINAL BUILDING SITE BSA-00-003 13800 PIERCE ROAD The City Counci] of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: SECTION I: The lot as described on that certain Certificate of Compliance CC-02-030 approved by Warren McDowell, City Surveyor on April 18, 2003, and filed with the Santa Claza County Recorder's Office on March 15, 2004, is approved as ONE (1) individual lot. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Sazatoga City Council held on the 7th day of April , 2004 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor ATTEST: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk RECORDING REQUESTED BY: City of Saratoga RETURN TO. City of Saratoga Department of Public Works 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga CA 95070 COA'_FORMED COPY; This document has not i~een compared with the original. S a.NTA CLARA COUNTY CLERIC-R.ECpltpEkt, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Lands of: Thomas E. Walker and Susan A. Walker, his wife as joint tenants Assessor's Vesting Recording Parcel Number Document Number Dates 503-30-002 4777193 Aprit 31, 1974 Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 66499.35 of the Government Code of the State of Calffornia that the real property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, complies with the provisions of Division 2 of Title 7 enacted pursuant thereof. This certificate relates only to issues of compliance or noncompliance with the Subdivision Map Act and local ordinances enacted pursuant thereto. The parcel or parcels described herein may be sold, leased, or financed without further compliance with the Subdivision Map Act or any local ordinance enacted pursuant thereto. Development of the parcel or parcels may require issuance of a permit or permits, or other grant or grants of approval. {Gov't Code Section 66499.35(f)(E)} CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO.: CC-02-030 Date of Approval: ApriP18, 20 APPROVED BY•-/~J ~ ~ arren E. McDowell, City Surveyor Land Surveyor No. 3414 ~ 'cerise expire 6-30-2004 d+ ATTEST: ~~ City Clerk '4e.3tY~ ~ ~ ,~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION REAL PROPERTY in the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows: BEGINNING at a 3/4 inch iron pipe in the center line of a private road known as Pike Road (30 links wide) at the intersection thereof with the Southeasterly line of Pierce Road (40.00 feet wide), said Point of Begianirtg being South 42°09' West 18.52 feet from a 3/4 inch iron pipe on said Southeasterly line of Pierce Road at the most Northerly corner of that certain 4.294 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Salvatore Abruzzese, et ux, to San Sporofo, et ux, dated July 30, 1927 in Book 339 Official Records, page 117, County of Santa Clara Records; THENCE Southerly along said center line of Pike Road for the following bearings and distances: South 13°36'50" West 70.04 feet, South 11°20'50" West 117.60 feet, South 23°30'40" West 78.77 feet, South 18°56'50" West 84.18 feet, South 17°00'50" West 14.40 feet; THENCE leaving said center line North 36°55'50" West a distance of 176.39 feet to a 1 inch iron pipe set in the said Southerly line of Pierce Road; THENCE North 59°26' East along said Southerly line, 50.69 feet; THENCE North 42°09' East 245.77 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 25856.688 Sq.Ft. or 0.5936 Acres of ]and. As surveyed and monumented in February 1956, and mapped as shown on that certain Record of Survey Map Resolution of the Board of Supervisors approving this map recorded Mazch 30, 1956, Recorder's File Number 1194734; filed at the request of Mazk Thomas & Co. and recorded in Book 67 of Maps, page 53, County of Santa Clara Records on March 30, 1956. APN: 503-30-002 Description prepared by the undersrQned ,.~ ,,,~0 4„AH d * ~ Mo. SIY4 r ~, Ekp• n E. McDowell ~~' ~'3°'zp0, Land Surveyor No. 3414 y~.~ ~~,~,~+c~~ License ezp~res: 06-30-2004 CALIFORNIA ALL•PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of Califosia + } ss. County of `-1 J On ~ before m DW Neme uN T r ( a,w e, Nomry N ~ personally appeared ! Nen,a(c) of al e~ ersonally known to me ^ pr d to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/herftheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the, person(s) ppted, executed the instrument. seal. ~t A~~ OPTIONAL `, Though the inPormaa~an below is not required by law, if may prove valuable ro persons retying on the documenrand court prevent iraudu/eni removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: _ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ^ Individual rop of tmm~b Here ^ Corporate Officer -Title(s): ^ Partner-^Limited ^General ^ Attorney-in-Fact ^ Trustee ^ Guardian or Conservator ^ Other: Signer Is Representing: e+,an renvrvi noeuy neeomeven • aaso w tloio ave., P.O. Boe 2e02 • CM1emwnrM, CA 81313Q<a2 • xww.nefmnelrwtery.oq PmE. No. 58W PagEer. GY Td4Fme M1BOpB]6E92] APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 02-030 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Thomas Walker; 13800 Pierce Road WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for design review and building site approval for the construction of a new 3,324 squaze foot residence on a .594 (gross) squaze foot parcel; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Heazing at which time al] interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heazd and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15302 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to the construction and location of limited numbers of new small facilities or structures. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for design review approval, and the following findings have been determined: Policy #1: Minimize perception of bulk: The proposed two-story residence utilizes materials and azchitectural features which reduce bulls and break up massing, including stone veneer, columns, front porch and railing, barn style gazage doors, and windows. The second story level is stepped back. Elevations aze softened by different materials including stucco and stone. Natural colors and materials aze _. used for the lower level of the proposed residence. Policy #2: Integrate Structures with the Environment: One tree is proposed for removal and replacement trees are required. The proposed stone veneer, earth tone colors, and roof materials blend with the natural environment. Policy #3: Avoid Interference with Privacy: The site is bounded on two of its three lot lines by roadways, thus greatly reducing interference with the privacy of existing residences. However, an adjacent one-story residence will face unreasonable interference with privacy without incorporating the following recommended conditions of approval: ^ Eliminate the portion of the front porch which wraps azound to the northwest elevation. ^ Additional fast-growing landscape screening shall be installed along the entire right side property line to the satisfaction of staff. Landscape screening shall reduce privacy impacts resulting from the proposed window in the dining room. ^ Eliminate proposed French doors in the living room. French doors maybe replaced with 2' x 2' windows at header height. ^ Dining room window shall be opaque. File No. DR-00-O51/BSA-00-003; 13800 Pierce Road Policy #4: Preserve Views and Access to Views: While the project site is located in the hillside residential zone district viewsheds aze not adversely affected due to the lack of sight lines resulting from the location of the site in a narrow canyon area with dense surrounding mature vegetation. Policy #5 Design for Energy Efficiency: The residence has been designed for energy efficiency. A front porch provides shade for the front rooms during the hottest summer days. Most of the main living azeas have windows facing south to maximize use of sunlight. The house will be very well insulated with high efficiency equipment. The house is equipped with double paned windows and patio doors offering the most efficient glazing available. A split zoned furnace system located both in the lower floor and in the attic offers a convenient and efficient way to heat and cool each floor sepazately. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for building site approval, and Ure following findings have been determined: (a) The proposed single family dwelling is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Hillside Specific Plan. The site is zoned and planned for single-family development. (b) The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed. The proposed project has received Geotechnical Cleazance. The conditions of the Geotechnical Cleazance ensure physical suitability of the site for the proposed development. (c) The design of the building site or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There aze no raze, threatened or endangered species on any state or federal list located on this site. (d) The design of the building site or type of improvements are nor likely to cause serious public health or safety problems. The City Geologist, Engineer, Arborist, and Fire District have all reviewed the proposed plans. Their comments and conditions aze incorporated as conditions of approval to ensure physical suitability of the site for the proposed development. (e) The design of the building site or improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired 6y the public at large, for access through or use afproperry within the proposed subdivision or building site. The site does not have any public easements recorded against it nor does the project interfere with easements in the vicinity of the site. (n That a proposed subdivision of land which is subject to a contract executed pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (The "Williamson Act ") would not result in the creation of parcels of insufficient size to sustain their agricultural use, except as otherwise provided in Government Code Section 66474.4. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor does it involve the subdivision of property. Therefore, this finding does not apply to the proposed project. File No. DR-00-051/BSA-00-003; 13800 Pierce Road (~ The discharge of waste from the proposed building site into an existing community sewer system would not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by a State regional water quality control board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the State Water Code. Sanitary sewer is available to the site. The proposed single-family dwelling will not result in overburdening the system capacity. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Sazatoga does hereby resolve as follows: SecBon 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Thomas Walker fordesign review and building site approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Acknowledged . 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" incorporated by reference. Acknowledged . 2. Four sets of complete constmction plans incorporating this Resolution and the City Arborist Report as a sepazate plan page shall be submitted to the Building Division prior to submittal for building pemuts. Acknowledged . 3• The site survey shall be stamped and signed by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor. 4. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: "Prior to foundation Acknowledged . inspection by the City, the RCE or LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks aze per the approved plans." ACknOW ledged. 5. Submit grading and drainage plans to the public works department for review. Acknowledged. 6. Encroachment permit shall be issued by the public works department for the Swale repair and for the installation of new driveway approach. Acknowledged . 7. Storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be retained on-site, and incorporating the New Development and Constmcfion -Best Management Practices. ff all storm water cannot be retained on-site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, an explanatory note shall be provided on the plan. Certificate of 8. CeriificateofcomplianceorrecordedpazcelmaponfilewiththePublicworks Compliance recorded. department prior to final building site approval from City Council. Acknowledged . 9. Eliminate the portion of the front porch which wraps around to the northwest elevation. Acknowledged . 10. Additional fast-growing landscape screening shall be installed along the entire right side property line to the satisfaction of staff. File No. DR-00-051/BSA-00-003; 13800 Pierce Road Acknowledged . 11. Eliminate proposed French doors in the living room. French doors maybe replaced with 2'x 2' windows at header height. Acknowledged . 12. The dining room window shall be opaque. Acknowledged . 13. The grading plan shall be revised so that a minimum clearance of 15 feet from the trunk of tree #3 and #4 shall be left completely undisturbed. Acknowledged . 14. The second story shall be reduced a total of 10% of the floor azea of the house. The reduction shall be in length on both ends of the house. ACknowl edged . 15. A revised landscape plan shall be approved by staff prior to building permit issuance. The revised landscape plan shall include additional landscape screening for privacy along the right property line as viewed from Pierce Road and additional landscape screening osed landscaping shall interfere with d N o prop . between the house and Pierce Roa existing site lines at Pike and Pierce. Acknowledged . 16. A bond shall be placed on file for an amount determined by the City to guazantee Pike Road is restored to its condition prior to the commencement of this project. Acknowledged . 17. A safetyreview shall be conducted to assess the driveway ingress/egress and the project's interference including the building footprint and proposed landscaping with sightlines at the intersection of Pike and Pierce Road. CITY ARBORIST Acknowledged . 18. All recommendations in the City Arborist's Report date stamped and received by the 2000 shall be followed and November 2 t , on Community Development Departmen incorporated into the plans (see attachment 3). Acknowledged . 19. Prior to issuance of a building pemmt, the applicant shall submit to the planning department, security in the amount of $11,621 pursuant to the report and recommendation by the City Arborist to guazantee the maintenance and preservation of trees on the subject site. FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Acknow 1 edged . 20. All development review comments in the Santa Claza County Fire Department plan review number 00-2699 shall be followed and incorporated into the plans (see attachment 4). File No. DR-00-051/BSA-00-003; 13800 Pierce Road PUBLIC WORKS Acknowledged. 21. The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall review and approve all geotechttical aspects of the 5na1 development plans (i.e, site preparation and grading, drainage improvements, and design pazameters for foundations and retaining walls) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. We recornmend that the Project Geotechnical Engineer consider the benefits of extending piers a minimum of 10 feet below the identiSed basal rupture surface. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall ensure that adequate pier embedment depths aze depicted on the final foundation plans. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall evaluate the stability of proposed temporary (construction) slopes, and provide recommended measures to maintain or improve temporary slope stability during construction (e.g., slot-cutting, shoring, etc.). The Project Geotechnical Consultant also shall ensure that an appropriate capillary break has been provided for slabs (e.g., including a minimum 4 to 6 inches of crushed rock or drainrock). The results of the plan reviews shall be summarized by the Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter(s) and submdtted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. Acknowledged . 22, The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The _ inspection shall include, but not necessazily be limited to: site prepazation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for engineered fill, foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of fill, steel and concrete. The Project Engineering Geologist shall specifically observe and log pier holes, to verify that adequate bedrock embedment depths for piers are achieved prior to placement of steel and concrete. Logs of these borings, as well as modsed geologic cross sections shall be prepared as part of the as-built documentation. The results of these inspections, logs of pier excavations, geologic cross sections, and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the geologic and geotechnical consultants in a letter(s), and on appropriate drawings, and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to finalization of the grading pemut. Fees paid. 23. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical Consultant's review of the prior to project Zone Cleazance. Hold Harmless 24. The owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless Agreement Signed. fropefazlureo other soil related and/orerosionrreltedconditions~opeinstability,slides, File No. DR-00-051/BSA-. 003; 13800 Pierce Road CITY ATTORNEY Acknowledged . 25. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, incluc'. ~~., :. ~mey's fees, incurred by the City of held to be liability of City in connection will; ~i:, .lefense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challeugin~ the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. ~~ 26. o ~ ban of the conditions of this ns lute a vio.,.,.on of the permit. Because it is imposst e the City could inct¢ due tc the violation, liquidat es of $250 shall be payable to s ~ da of the viol Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will .:.; ~.. . Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Go~~emmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the S,u::a ~~a City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen days from the date of adoption PASSES AND ADOPTED by the City of Sazatoga Planning Commission. State . 'a forma, the 1~3' 2002 by the following roll call vote: ' 28'A' ~AuY. AYES: Chair 7ackman, Barry, Garakani, Zutshi, Roupe NOES: Kurasch, Hunter ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Pl g Commission File No, DR-00-051/BSA- 003; 13800 Pierce Road ATTEST: r Se retary, Planning Commissi~ This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and s f ll have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Props !: Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby aclarowledges the approved terms u~d :onditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions ~: ithin the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. T ~~~ iz~~z/a7~ Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER: ~~~ ~b PREPARED BY: Lorie Tinfow Assistant City Manager DEPT HE D: SUBJECT: Agreement Among Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (SVACA) and Its Member Cities Regarding Purchase of Thomas Road Property RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Approve and authorize the City Manager to sign the attached agreement regazding SVACA's purchase of the Thomas Road property. REPORT SUMMARY: At their March meeting, the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority Boazd approved the arrangement described in the attached agreement between Withdrawing Cities (Saratoga, Cupertino, Los Gatos) and Continuing Cities (Campbell, Santa Clara, Monte Sereno) regarding the purchase of the Thomas Road property. The intent is to clarify that liability for the purchase falls only on the Continuing Cities and specifies how SVACA will be reimbursed for the purchase deposit. Sazatoga's City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and, together with staff, supports Council approval. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Choose not to approve the agreement. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Staff will transport the executed amendment to the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority Board. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENT: Attachment A: Copy of Agreement Among Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (SVACA) and Its Member Cities Regarding Purchase of Thomas Road Property ATTACHMENT A AGREEMENT AMONG SVACA AND ITS MEMBER CITIES REGARDING PURCHASE OF THOMAS ROAD PROPERTY This Agreement is entered into among the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority ("SVACA") and its member Agencies, Santa Clara, Campbell, Cupertino, Los Gatos, Saratoga and Monte Sereno, on the dates hereafter indicated. WHEREAS, SVACA and its current six Member Agency cities approved and executed the Second Restated and Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Creating the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority in October and November of 2003 ("Joint Powers Agreement"); and WHEREAS, three Member Agencies, Cupertino, Los Gatos and Saratoga, have given notice to SVACA of their intent to withdraw from SVACA as of June 30, 2004 ("Withdrawing Cities"); and WHEREAS, three Member Agencies, Santa Claza, Campbell and Monte Sereno, have elected to remain in SVACA and to carry out its mission, including the construction of an animal shelter ("Continuing Cities"); and WHEREAS, SVACA's Operating Budget for FY 03-04 ("Budget") excluded capital expenditures related to the animal shelter as some Member Agencies were weighing their long- term participation in SVACA when the Budget was developed; and WHEREAS, SVACA is in contract to purchase 3370 Thomas Road ("Property") for its animal shelter but SVACA does not have sufficient funds to cover said purchase based on the agreed upon contributions from Member Agencies to support the Budget; and WHEREAS, the Continuing Cities desire to establish an arrangement to purchase the Property which ensures that no contributions or funds from the Withdrawing Cities are encumbered or used in the Property transaction; and WHEREAS, the Withdrawing Cities recognize their obligation under Section 8.1 of the Joint Powers Agreement not to affect the ability of SVACA and the Continuing Cities to carry out and fulfill the purposes of SVACA; and WHEREAS, in order to achieve these objectives, SVACA and its current Member Agencies have agreed to proceed with the purchase of the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Continuing Cities will arrange among themselves to tender sufficient funding to SVACA to cover the full purchase price of the Property in the amount of $2,450,000, plus any 1091781.2 amounts that maybe needed to cover transactional costs of the Property acquisition ("Payment"). The Payment will be provided to SVACA in a timely manner such that SVACA can meet its financial obligations under the Purchase Agreement for the Property. 2. SVACA will place $100,000 of the Payment from the Continuing Cities in its current operations reserve account to reimburse SVACA for the $100,000 now on deposit in escrow for the Property and previously paid out of SVACA's operations reserve. SVACA will place the balance of the Payment from the Continuing Cities in a sepazate and segregated account for the purchase of the Property. SVACA will only use funding from this segregated account to cover any and all financial obligations related to and necessary for the acquisition of the Property. 3. SVACA shall maintain a complete and accurate accounting of the funding received from the Continuing Cities pursuant to this agreement and the manner in which the funding in the segregated account for the Property acquisition is expended. 4. Upon consummation of the Property acquisition, the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority, a joint powers authority, shall hold title to the Property, as contemplated by the Purchase Agreement for the Property. 5. The Withdrawing Cities, individually and as a group, hereby release, relinquish, discharge and forever disclaim any right, title, interest or entitlement of any kind in the Property. _ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed and attested by their proper officers thereupon duly authorized and their official seals to be hereto affixed on the dates as shown herein. APPROVED AS TO FORM: SILICON VALLEY ANIMAL CONTROL AUTHORITY By: ATTEST: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ATTEST: By: By: Its: Date: CITY OF CAMPBELL, a municipal corporation By: Its: Date: 2 1091781.2 APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation By: By' Its: ATTEST: Date: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF MONTE SERENO, a municipal corporation By: By: Its: ATTEST: Date: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF SANTA CLARA, a municipal corporation By: By' Its: ATTEST: Date: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF LOS GATOS, a municipal corporation By: By' Its: ATTEST: Date: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation By: By. Its: ATTEST: Date: By: 3 ~o9»si.z SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: ~~ MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 /'' ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER: ~~G'~~- PREPARED BY: Lorie Tinfow Assistant City Manager DEPT HE ~'~ SUBJECT: Request to Change Library Commission Meeting Time RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Library Commission's request to change the time of their monthly meeting. REPORT SUMMARY: The Library Commission will be experiencing a major change in participation starting in July 2004. One Commissioner has announced that the June meeting will be his last and in October 2004, at least four additional seats on the Library Commission will be vacant. At the March meeting, the Library Commission discussed shifting their meeting time from evening to daytime as a way to generate interest among a new group of residents to fill the openings. Currently, the Commission meets on the fourth Wednesday at 7:00 pm. They want to maintain the same day but change the meeting time to 12 noon. All but one of the current Commissioners attended the meeting and all agreed to change the time. The one absent Commissioner is likely to support the change as well. Staff will confirm acceptance prior to the Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Library Commission will continue to meet as usual. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Copies of this report were emailed to the Library Commissioners. ATTACHMENTS: None. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ~~ MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Community Development CITY MANAGER: ~~ `. PREPARED BY: John F. Livingstone AICP~~ DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program Contract RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached Mills Act contract. DISCUSSION: On March 5, 2003 the City Council approved the Resolution establishing the City's participation in the Mills Act Program. At this meeting the Council recommended that a subcommittee be established to prepare a standard Mills Act contract to be used by applicants applying for the Mills Act program. The Mills Act is state sponsored legislation granting local governments the authority to enter into an agreement with individual property owners to allow reduced property tax payments for the restoration and continued maintenance of their historic property. This is an economic incentive for property owners to preserve and maintain their buildings. As part of the agreement a formal contract between the property owner and the City is required. In order to simplify the process the subcormittee was assigned the task of preparing a standard Mills Act contract. PROCESS: By Council policy, only three Mills Acts contracts can be approved in a single year. The Subcommittee made the recommendation that the structure needs to be a City of Saratoga Historic Land Mark as described in City Code Section 13-15 to apply for the Mills Act Program. If an applicant's structure is not currently a Historic Landmark the applicant can apply for both the Mills Act Program and Historic Landmark designation simultaneously. The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) would initially screen the applications to ensure that the structure has not been altered significantly and meets the Historic Landmark criteria. The HPC would then make a recommendation to the City Council based on its evaluation of the structure. The City Council would then either approve or deny the request. If the request is approved the actual contract would be brought back to the City Council. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Modify the attached Mills Act contract. 2. Modify the recommended process. FISCAL IMPACT: The City would lose a portion of the property tax normally received from these properties. The City of Sazatoga normally receives approximately $1,750 in property tax based on a $5,000,000 property and $350 fora $1,000,000 property. The Mills Act would reduce this by approximately 60%, or $1,050 and $210 respectively. The reduction in taxes may also impact the schools and other taxing agencies such as the County and the Fire District. The cost of administering the Mills Act Program will be charged to the applicants. A deposit account will be used. The State Office of Historic Preservation has indicated that most jurisdictions charge for the process. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: There have already been several people interested in applying for the Mills Act Program. Staff will contact these individuals and provide them with copies of the contract for their review. If there are fewer than three interested applicants staff will then advertise the availability of the program. ATTACHMENTS: Mills Act Program Contract 2 of 2 RECORD WITHOUT FEE PURSUANT TO GOVT CODE SECTION 6103 Recording Requested by: City Attorney City of Saratoga, California When Recorded, Mail to: Office of the Ciry Clerk City of Sazatoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 per Gov't Code Sec[iou 27361.6 SPACE ABOVE THIS WIVE NUN NEW1(UEN'J uocl MILLS ACT HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT This Agreement, ("Agreement"), is made and entered into this _ day of 200_, by and between, ("Owner"), Owner of the real property described below, and the City of Saratoga, California, a municipal corporation, ("City"). City and Owner may be referred to herein individually as a "Party" or collectively as the "Parties" or the "Parties to this Agreement." A. Recitals. (1) California Government Code Section 50280, et seq. authorizes the City to enter into contracts with owners of qualified historical properties to provide for the use, maintenance, and restoration of historical properties so as to retain characteristics of historical significance. (2) Owner possesses fee title in and to (together with associated structures and improvements thereon) the real property described in Exhibit A to this Agreement and referenced herein as the Historic Property. The Historic Property is shown on the 200_ Santa Clara County Property Tax Rolls as Assessors' Parcel Number ,and as of the Effective Date is generally referenced by the following street address , in the City of Saratoga. (3) The Historic Property was designated by the City as a historic landmark by Ordinance No. and the City has determined that this Agreement is necessary to allow the restoration, rehabilitation, and maintenance of the Historic Property. (4) City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this agreement both to protect and preserve the characteristics of historical significance of the Historic Property and to qualify the Historic Property for an assessment of valuation pursuant to Section 439.2 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. The Resolution of the City Council approving this Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Page 1 of 13 B. Aareement. City and Owner, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein and the recitals set forth above, do hereby agree as follows: (1) Term ofAureement. (a) This Agreement shall be effective and commence on the date recorded in the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office ("Effective Date') and shall remain in effect for a term of ten (10) years thereafter. (b) Each year on the anniversary of the Effective Date ("Renewal Date"), the term of the Agreement shall be extended by one year unless notice of non-renewal is served as provided herein. (c) In accordance with Government Code section 50282 if either Owner or City desire in any year not to renew the Agreement, that Party shall serve on the other Party written notice of non-renewal. Notice of non-renewal by City shall be filed at least sixty days prior to the Renewal Date. Notice of non-renewal by Owner shall be filed at least ninety prior to the Renewal Date. Either party may protest a notice ofnon-renewal. A notice of non-renewal may be withdrawn at any time prior to the Renewal Date by serving the other Party with a notice of withdrawal of the notice of non-renewal. If a Party serves and does not withdraw a notice of non-renewal the Agreement shall remain in effectforten years from the next Renewal Date as stated in this contract. (2) Condition of Historic Propertv. The characteristics that contribute to the historic significance of the Historic Property and the condition of the Historic Property as of the Effective Date are documented in Exhibit C to this Agreement ("Baseline Conditions"). (3) Standards for Historical Propertv. During the term of this Agreement, the Historic Property shall be subject to the following conditions, requirements, and restrictions: (a) Owner shall immediately implement the list of goals and general improvement plans for maintenance, restoration and rehabilitation of the Historic Property asset forth in Exhibit D to this Agreement ("Restoration Plan) in orderto bring the Historic Property into conformance with the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the California Department of Parks and Recreation, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the State of California's Historic Building Code (collectively, the "Applicable Rules"). Thereafter, Owner shall preserve and maintain the characteristics that contribute to the historic significance of the Historic Property. This shall include, but not be limited to, maintaining the Historic Property in good repair and conducting all use, maintenance, repair, restoration, and preservation in accordance with the Applicable Rules and all other City, State, and Federal laws. Page 2 of 13 (b) Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance or repair of any exterior architectural feature in or on the Historic Property that does not involve a change in design, material, or external appearance thereof. Nor does this Agreement prevent the construction, reconstruction, alteration, restoration, demolition, or removal of any such external architectural feature when the Community Development Director determines that such action is required for the public safety due to an unsafe or dangerous condition which cannot be rectified through the use of the California State Historic Building Code and when such architectural feature can be replaced according to the standards described in subsection (a), above. (c) The California State Historic Building Code ("SHBC") provides alternative building regulations for the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration, or relocation of structures designated as Historic Properties. The SHBC shall be used in the City's building permit procedure for the Historic Property, except as otherwise provided in this agreement or the SHBC. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to prevent any fire, building, health, or safety official from enforcing laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and standards to protect the health, safety, welfare, and property of the Owner or occupants of the Historic Property or the public. (d) Owner shall maintain the Historic Property in a manner that does not block the view of the Historic Property from sites accessible to the public with any new structure, fence, shrubbery, or other landscaping. (4) Provision of Information. (a) W ithin thirty days of any request, Owner shall furnish City with any and all information requested by City relevant to this contract to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. (b) Owner shall keep and preserve, for at least ten years beyond the term of this Agreement, all records as may be necessary to determine the eligibility of the property involved, and Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. These records shall include, but not be limited to photographs, blueprints, permits, historical and/or architectural review approvals. In the event the Historic Property is sold, the Owner of the property at the time of sale shall transfer all such records to the new Owner of the Historic Property. (c) Owner shall submit annually to the Community Development Director a report which shall specify all work completed during the preceding twelve months to comply with the requirements of this Agreement and report on such other items as may be specified by the Community Development Director. (d) Owner shall allow for periodic examinations, by prior appointment, of the interior and exterior of the Historic Property by representatives of the County Assessor, Page 3 of 13 State Department of Parks and Recreation, State Board of Equalization, (collectively the "Interested Agencies") and/or the City. The Community Development Director shall determine when periodic examinations by the City may be necessary to determine the eligibility of the property involved, and to determine Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. Examinations by representatives ofthe Interested Agencies shall be made as deemed necessary by those agencies. (5) Cancetlation. (a) CITY, following a duly noticed public hearing as set forth in California Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this Agreement if it determines one or more of the following: (i) Owner has breached any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement; (ii) Owner has allowed the Historic Property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards of the Applicable Rules or no longer qualifies as a City of Saratoga historic landmark; (iii) Owner has allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets standards as provided for in Chapter 16 of the Saratoga City Code including, but are not limited to, the Uniform Housing Code, the Uniform Fire Code, and the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings; (iv) Owner has not complied with other local, state, orfederal laws and regulations. (b) In the event of cancellation, OWNER shall be subject to payment of those cancellation fees set forth in California Government Code Sections 50280, et seq. (6) No Waiver of Breach. No waiver by City of any breach under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach. City does not waive any claim of breach by Owner if City does not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for under the terms of this Agreement or in the City's laws and regulations are available to the City. (7) Enforcement. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the Agreement, City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of the terms of this Agreement. In the event of a default by Owner City shall give written notice of the violation to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address provided for notice in this Agreement. The violation shall be corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within Page 4 of 13 thirty days of the date the notice is mailed. Where the violation cannot reasonably be - cured within sixty days, actions to cure the violation shall be commenced within sixty days and pursued diligently to completion within a reasonable period of time to be determined by the City. If the violation is not timely cured then the City may, without further notice, declare a default and bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of Owner under this Agreement, apply to any state or federal court for injunctive relief or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate. The City's rightto enforce this Agreement shall in noway limit or restrict its rights or legal remedies arising under other provisions of local, state, or federal law, including the historic preservation regulations under the City's municipal code. (8) Binding Effect of Agreement. (a) Owner hereby voluntarily subjects the Historic Property to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. The Parties hereby declare their specific intent and agreement that all of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the Historic Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner pursuant to this Agreement. Each and every contract, deed, or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering, encumbering, or conveying the Historic Property, or any portion thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered, and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions expressed in this Agreement, regardless of whether such covenants, reservations, and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed, or other instrument. Prior to sale of the Historic Property, Owner shall give notice to the City. (b) City and Owner hereby declare their understanding and intent thatthe burden of the covenants, reservations, and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that Owner has a legal interest in the Historic Property and this Agreement relates to and affects the use of the Historic Property. (c) City and Owner hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants, reservations, and restrictions touch and concern the land by enhancing and maintaining the historic characteristics and significance of the Historic Property for the benefit, which includes, but is not limited to the benefit to the public street named in the recitals to this Agreement, City, residents of City and of the State of California, and Owner. (9) Notice. Page 5 of 13 (a) Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided at the address of the respective parties as specified below or at any other address as may be later specified by the parties hereto. CITY: City of Saratoga Attn: City Clerk 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 OWNER: (10) No Partnership or Joint Enterprise Created. None of the terms, provisions, or conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors, or assigns; nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or members of any joint enterprise. (11) Hold Harmless and Indemnification. Owner agrees to protect, defend, hold _ harmless and indemnify City, its City Council, commissions, officers, agents, and employees from and against any claim, injury, liability, loss, cost, and/or expense or damage, however same may be caused, including all costs and reasonable attorney's fees in providing a defense to any claim arising there from for which Owner shall become legally liable arising from Owner's acts, errors, or omissions with respect to or in any way connected with the prosecution of the work performed by Owner pursuant to this Agreement. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the conduct referenced in this Agreement regardless of whether City prepared, supplied, or approved any plans, specifications, other documents, or any proposed conduct relating to the Historic Property. (12) Attorneys' Fees. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any Party or Parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations, or restrictions contained herein, or to determine the rights and duties of any Party hereunder, each party in the proceedings shall pay its own attorney's fees. (13) Recordation and Notice. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties execute and enter into this Agreement, City shall cause this Agreement to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara. Owner shall provide written notice of this agreement to the Office of Historic Preservation of the Department of Page 6 of 13 Parks and Recreation no later than six (6) months of entering into this Agreement and shall provide the City with a copy of such notice at the time it is filed. (14) Fees. The Community Development Director may assess and Owner shall pay such Mills Act Historic Property Contract fees for the administration of this Agreement as may be authorized from time to time by the City Council. (15) Severability. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Agreement is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, such decision shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions of this Agreement, and shall not be affected thereby. City and Owner hereby declare that each would have approved and accepted this Agreement, and each section, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. (16) Intearated Aareement -Totality of Aareement. This Agreement embodies the agreement between City and Owner and its terms and conditions. No other understanding, agreements, or conversations, or otherwise, with any officer, agent, or employee of City prior to execution of this Agreement shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations contained in any documents comprising this Agreement. Any such verbal agreement shall be considered as unofficial information and in noway binding upon City. All Exhibits to this Agreement are hereby incorporated and made a part of this Agreement. (17) Captions. The captions of the various sections, paragraphs and subparagraphs are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of interpretation. (18) Governina Statutes and Law. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the statutes and laws of the State of California. (19) Amendments. This Agreement may be amended, in whole or in part, only by a written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and OW NER have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above. CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA, Page 7 of 13 a California municipal corporation City Manager ATTEST: Address: 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Telephone: (408) 868-1222 Fax Number: (408) 868-8555 City Clerk Approved as to Form: City Attorney OWNER [Notarized Signature(s) Required] By: Name Title: Owner Local Address: Telephone: Exhibit List Exhibit A -Legal Description of Historic Property Exhibit B -City Council Resolution Approving Agreement Exhibit C -Baseline Conditions of Historic Property Exhibit D -Restoration Plan Page 8 of 13 Legal Description of Historic Property Exhibit A The Historic Property that is the subject of this Agreement is the real property described below including all structures and improvements thereon: All that certain real property situated in the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows: APN: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga approving the MILLS ACT HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT Exhibit B Baseline Conditions of Historic Property Exhibit C {{THIS IS AN EXAMPLE}} 1. NAME OF PROPOSED MONUMENT: Provide the name of the proposed Historic Landmark. For example: When it was known by a historic name, such as Union Station, use that name. In the case of a residence, use the name of the first and most prominent resident, such as birthplace of Adlai E. Stevenson. Namee1mac names mlay be used s PICk fair Estate. In the case of non-residential property, g street addeessr can be~usedn sucB as Residenlce e2 00 Eag er Street can be assigned, the 2: ADDRESS: Provide a record street address for the site under consideration. 3 AssessorOs Office andEnotetthe parceltnumber or,numbers.parcel map from the County 4 nfornmationEs ava/ilablDe atChel Cit~of~Saratoga's Community Development Deptship. The 5. RANGE OF ADDRESSES: List all possible addresses for the site. 6. PRESENT OWNER: Give the name, address, and daytime telephone number of the owner. 7. OWNERSHIP: Check one blank only. g. PRESENT AND ORIGINAL USE: If the original use is the same as the present use, write same. If it is unknown, so state. g. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE: Examples -Art Deco, Spanish Colonial Revival, etc. 10. PRESENT PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Provide information about the major features of the proposed landmark. Describe its rep sent condition. Changes from original condition will be described later. Describe the exterior- note the architectural style, exterior construction materials, type of roof (flat, gabled, etc.), number of stories, basic plan (rectangular, L-shaped, etc.) and distinguishing features (placement and type of windows, chimneys, porches, decorative features, etc.) Describe the condition of the exterior, including but not limited to condition of exterior paint. Describe the general suchlals cars age houses, garages, Ibaenseshou d be fully describeddings on the property, 11. CONSTRUCTION DATE: Provide date of construction, if available, or indicate the approximate date. Give the source of the date: Tax Assessor's information, deed, building permit, newspaper, or former owner. Attach copies of all supporting documents. 12. ARCHITECT, ort3lGao R OR Elf no aEc R.ecPsvname s available, so stated attache a copy of a supp 9 13. CONTRACTOR/BUILDER: Provide name if available. 14. PHOTOGRAPHS: Provide good clear photographs of the site and its surroundings. Photographs should be numbered, dated and labeled. 15. CONDITION: Check one blank only. 16. ALTERATIONS: Fully describe any changes that have been made to the structure, for example, additions, porch enclosures, new storefronts, relocation of doors and windows, etc. Give date of alterations, plus sources. 17. THREATS TO THE SITE: Check one or more blanks. 18. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Summarize why the proposed historic landmark is significant. 19. SOURCES: Provide a list of resource material used 20. PREPARER: Provide the name, address, organization and daytime phone number of the person preparing the application. 21. Restoration Plan Exhibit D {{THIS IS AN EXAMPLE}} Year 1 2003 Update Hot & Cold Water to copper pipe, existing old galvanized pipe 1246 Lexington Street Repair dry rot damage to front post in the front of 1246 Lexington sweet Repair dry rot damage to garage wall 1246 Lexington Street Electrical update with GFI 1246 Lexington Street Year 2 2004 Repair foundation strapping & footing 1246 Lexington Street Year 3 2005 Gutters added and replace 796-A&B Jackson Street Screens added to 796-A&B Jackson Street Year 4 2006 Furnace updated 1246 Lexington Street in hallway Gazage doors added with remotes now swing out hand operated doors Year 5 2007 Update water heaters 1246 Lexington Street & 796-A&B Jackson Street Yeaz 6 2008 No improvements, regular maintenance only Year 7 2009 Fencing between 1246 Lexington Street & 796-A&B Jackson Street Walkways repaired & cracked 1246 Lexington Street & 796-A&B Jackson Street Yeaz 8 2010 Driveways updated-trip hazard currently 1246 Lexington Street & 796-A&B Jackson Street Year 9 2011 Add plantings to yard and trees and drainage system to 1246 Lexington Street & 796-A&B Jackson Street Add automatic sprink]er system 1246 Lexington Street & 796-A&B Jackson Street Year 10 2012 Cosmetic improvements to 796-A&B Jackson Street Termite repairs for all the units are in excess of $30,000 to be done over the course of 10 years Report by Homeguard Exterminators SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Community Development CITY MANAGER PREPARED BY: Lata Vasudevan, AICP DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Appeal of a Planning Commission decision to conditionally approve Design Review Application No. 03-269 to construct a 302.5 square foot addition to a home at 14403 Sobey Road. APPELLANT: Javad and Mitra Ashjay, property owners, 14403 Sobey Road. APPLICANT: Javad and Mitra Ashjay, property owners, 14403 Sobey Road. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve attached Resolution upholding Planning Commission's conditional approval of Design Review Application No. 03-269. REPORT SUMMARY: At the February 25, 2004 public hearing, the Planning Commission - in a vote of 4-1-2 (absent) - concurredwith staff's recommendation and approved a 302.5 square foot addition to a home with the condition that the existing perimeter fencing -including but not limited to the stucco wall base with wrought iron above, iron gates and trellis - be brought into compliance with Municipal Code Section 15-29 and other Municipal Codes prior to final inspection approval. This is stated in the attached Resolution 04-008, condition of approval #1 adopted by the Planning Commission in the approval of Application No. 03-269. The applicant is now appealing condition of approval #1 and would like to obtain approval for the 302.5 square foot addition, and maintain the existing perimeter wall with wrought iron above, iron gates and trellis. Minutes and other relevant background documents, including Resolution 04-008 and the staff report are attached. BACKGROUND: Design Review Application No. 03-269 proposes to construct a 302.5 square foot addition to an existing Mediterranean style home with a stucco exterior and concrete the roofing to match the existing structure. The home is currently undergoing some remodeling with additions, which were approved by planning staff last year. The applicant obtained ministerial `over-the-counter' approval by staff since these additions did not fall under the scope of discretionary administrative or public hearing design review. The removal of the tennis court, cabana and shed were approved as part of this previous approval to reduce the amount of impervious coverage. However for this application fora 302.5 square foot buffding addition, Municipal Code Section [MCS] 15-45.060(6) requires public hearing design review approval whenever as a result of expansion the gross floor area of all structures on the site would exceed 6,000 square feet. In reviewing Application No. 03-269, staff conducted a site visit and noted that the existing fencing and gates constructed with a stucco base wall, pilasters, and wrought iron on top are in violation of MCS 15-29.010. This code section - adopted in 1987 -requires that any fence or wall located within a front yard or an exterior side yard of a reversed corner lot' shall not exceed 3 feet in height, with entrance gates not exceeding 5 feet in height. The fencing on the site varies from approximately 4 to 6 feet in height, with pilasters that are approximately 6 feet in height or higher. An approximately 6- foot tall trellis structure is situated at the comer of the site at the intersection of Sobey and Ten Acres Roads, which is also not in compliance with the Municipal Code. MCS 15-29.010 makes a special exception to allow lawfully constructed fences installed prior to March 20, 1987, with a height of up to 6 feet if it did not interfere with safety standards. In the attached appeal application, the applicant explains that the fence has been there for a long time and that a permit was issued for its repair about fourteen years ago. Staff did a permit search and was only able to find a building permit issued in 1989 (attached) for a new side and front masonry wall and pffasters at the same location of the existing fence. The plans accompanying the permit showed a 3-foot high masonry wall with 5-foot tall pilasters incompliance with the Municipal Code. Staff has been informed by a staff member that 3 years ago, the prior interim planning staff gave verbal approval to construct the existing fencing at its current height. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Grant the appeal and overturn the Planning Commission's Resolution 04-008, condition of approval #1, thereby approving the 302.5 square foot addition and allowing the existing perimeter wall, fencing and trellis to remain as is. FISCAL IMPACTS: Not applicable. ADVERTISING, NOTICING, AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Mailed notice to property owners within 500 feet, posted notice, and advertised the notice in the newspaper. ATTACHMENTS: A. Ciry Council Resolution denying the appeal and thereby upholding Planning Commission Resolution 04-008. B. Planning Commission Resolution 04-008. C. Staff Report including attachments from the Planning Commission meeting. D. Minutes from the February 25, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. E. Copy of Building Permit issued in 1989. F. Applicant's appeal statement. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION #03-269 LOCATED AT 14403 SOBEY ROAD WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga has received an appeal of Resolution 04-008 condition of approval #1 adopted by the Planning Commission for Design Review Application #03-269 for the construction of a 302.5 square foot addition to a home located at 14403 Sobey Road; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2004 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing where the above project was conditionally approved in Resolution 04-008 and appealed to the Ciry Council. On Apri17, 2004 the Ciry Council held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the Ciry of Saratoga has considered the application and all testimony and other evidence submitted in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Ciry Council upheld all of the conditions stated in the Planning Commission Resolution 04-008 adopted for Design Review Application #03-269; and WHEREAS, the project, which proposes to construct an addition to a single-famffy home, is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15301 (e) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 1 exemption applies to additions and alterations not exceeding 10,000 sq. ft. The home is located in a developed area; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for design review approval, and the findings specified in Municipal Code Section 15- 45.080 and the following City's Residential Design Handbook have been determined: Policy #1: Minimize Perception of Bulk The proposed addition is minimal in relation to the size of the home, which is situated on a fairly large lot. The addition is neither disproportionate to the existing home, nor would it negatively impact the scale of the existing home. Policy #2: Integrate Structures with the Environment The external appearance of the addition will match the existing structure that has stucco siding, painted with earth tones. Policy #3: Avoid Interference with Privacy and Views Since this is a single story addition and the surrounding homes are either obscured by foliage or are situated far away, there is no interference with views or privacy. The applicant has shown the proposal to the adjacent property owners who have, so far, not voiced any concerns. Policy #4: Preserve Views and Access to Views Impacts on views are not an issue with this proposal. Policy #5: Design for Energy Efficiency The proposed addition will have new insulation, which exceeds State requirements, and will be connected to energy efficient heating and cooling appliances that currently exist at the home. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, Application No. 03-269 for design review approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" incorporated by reference, with the condition that the existing perimeter fencing -including but not limited to the stucco wall base with the wrought iron above, gates and the trellis -shall be brought into compliance with MCS 15-29 and other applicable Municipal Codes prior to final inspection approval. 2. Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page shall be submitted to the Building Division. The complete construction plans shall show details as to how the perimeter fencing is brought into compliance with the Municipal Code. 3. The complete construction plans shall include a final landscape and irrigation plan for 5 Staff review and approval, with the correct species of all protected trees properly labeled. All proposed vegetation shown on the approved landscape plan -including but not limited to the areas where the cabana, shed and tennis court have been removed - shall be completed prior to final inspection approval. 4. The proposed removal of the 120 square foot cabana, tennis court and shed shall be done carefully so as to not damage the roots of the nearby, protected trees. 5. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor. 6. The site plan shall contain 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." FIRE DISTRICT 7. Applicant shall comply with all Santa Clara County Fire Dept. conditions. CITY ATTORNEY 8. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the Ciry or held to be the liability of Ciry in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challenging the Ciry's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, Ciry and other Governmental entities must be met. 6 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Ciry of Saratoga City Council, State of California, the 7th day of Apri12004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor ATTEST: Cathleen Boyer CMC, City Clerk This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION N0.04-008 Application No. 03-269 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ashjay;14403 Sobey Road WHEREAS, the Ciry of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for design review to construct a 302.5 square foot ground floor level house addition with a height of 16 feet, resulting in the gross floor area of all structures on the site to exceed 6,000 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a-full opportunity to be heazd and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the project, which proposes to construct an addition to asingle-family home, is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15301 (e) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 1 exemption applies to additions and alterations not exceeding 10,000 sq. ft. The home is located in a developed area; and WI3EREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for design review approval, and the findings specified in Municipal Code Section 15-45.080 and the following City's Residential Design Handbook have been determined: Policy #1: Minimize Perception of Bulk The proposed addition is minimal in relation to the size of the home, which is situated on a fairly large lot. The addition is neither disproportionate to the existing home, nor would it negatively impact the scale of the existing home. Policy #2: Integrate Structures with the Environment The external appearance of the addition will match the existing stnacture that has stucco siding, painted with earth tones. Policy #3: Avoid Interference with Privacy and Views Since this is a single story addition and the surrounding homes aze either obscured by foliage or aze situated faz away, there is no interference with views or privacy. The applicant has shown the proposal to the adjacent property owners who have, so faz, not voiced any concerns. Policy #4: Preserve Views and Access to Views Impacts on views are not an issue with this proposal. Policy #5: Design for Energy Efficiency The proposed addition will have new insulation, which exceeds State requirements, and will be connected to energy efficient heating and cooling appliances that currently exist at the home. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, Application No. 03-269 for design review approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" incorporated by reference, with the condition that the existing perimeter fencing - including but not limited to the stucco wall base with the wrought iron above, gates and the trellis -shall be brought into compliance with MCS 15-29 and other applicable Municipal Codes prior to final inspection approval. 2. Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page shall be submitted to the Building Division. The complete construction plans shall show details as to how the perimeter fencing is brought into compliance with the Municipal Code. The complete construction plans shall include a final landscape and irrigation plan for Staff review and approval, with the correct species of all protected trees properly labeled. All proposed vegetation shown on the approved landscape plan -including but not limited to the areas where the cabana, shed and tennis court have been removed - shall be completed prior to final inspection approval. 4. The proposed removal of the 120 square foot cabana, tennis court and shed shall be done carefully so as to not damage the roots of the nearby, protected trees. 5. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor. 6. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: "Prior to foundation inspection by the Ciry, the LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans" FIRE DISTRICT 7. Applicant shall comply with all Santa Clara County Fire Dept. conditions. CITY ATTORNEY 8. Applicant agrees to hold Ciry harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the habiliry of City in connection with Ciry's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga Ciry Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Ciry of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, the 25th day of February 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hunter, Nagpal, Schallop, Zutshi NOES: Garakani ABSENT: Barry, Uhl ABSTAIN: I (~ 1 ~ Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date ~ ~ ITEM 1 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 03-269/14403 Sobey Road Type of Application: Design Review Applicant/Owner: Mike Amini (Applicant) / Javad and Mitra Ashjay (Owners) Staff Planner: Lata Vasudevan, AICP, Associate Planner ~1~ Date: February 25, 2004 APN: 397-03-057 Department Head: e ~~ s Road 14403 SoEey Rd. Properties w itEin 500 feet of 16403 SoEey 14403 Sobey Road 0®0®~~ Application No. 03-269.403 Sobey Road CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 12/08/03 Application complete: 01/15/04 Notice published: 02/11/04 Mailing completed: 02/05/04 Posting completed: 02/06/04 ZONING: R-1-40,000 (Single-Family Residential) • GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RVLD (Residential -Very Low Density) MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 55,989 square feet (gross and net) AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 10.9% GRADING REQUIRED: None required ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The project, which proposes to construct an addition to asingle-family home, is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15301 (e) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 1 exemption applies to additions and alterations not exceeding 10,000 sq. ft. The home is located in a developed area. ~o~~~~ Application No. 03-2 694 03 Sobey Road • PROJECT DATA: Proposed Code Requirements Lot Coverage: Maximum Allowable: 33.6 % 35 Building (main): 4.593.5 sq. ft. Walkways, Patios, 14,231.5 sq. ft. Driveways: (3,920 sq. ft.) Tennis Court: (to be removed) TOTAL: 18,825 sq. ft. 19.596 sq. ft. (Impervious Coverage) Average Slope: 10.9 % no change Floor Area: Maximum Allowable: ls` Floor: 4,896 sq. ft. Attached Garage @ lower 752 sq. ft. level: Accessory Structure: 525 sq. ft. Accessory Structure: (119.8 sq. ft.) (to be removed) TOTAL: 6,173 sq. ft. 6,200 sq. ft. Setbacks: Minimum Requirement: (of addition area Front: 76 ft - 0 in. 30 ft. - 0 in. only) Exterior Side: 37 ft. - 0 in. 25 ft. - 0 in. Height: Maximum Allowable: Height of Addition: 16 ft. - 0 in. 26 ft. - 0 in. OQ®®03 Application No. 03-269.403 Sobey Road . PROJECT DISCUSSION: The applicant requests design review approval to construct a 302.5 square foot addition to an existing Mediterranean style home with a stucco exterior and concrete rile roofing to match the existing structure. The height of the addition will be 16 feet. The applicant proposes to remove the existing tenses court and cabana. The home is currently undergoing some remodeling with additions, labeled as `(N) Addition A' and `(N) Addition B' on sheet A2. These additions were approved by Staff last year, and did not fall under the scope of design review. The removal of the tennis court and the cabana were approved as part of this previous approval. However for this application for a building addition, Municipal Code Section [MCS] 15-45.060(6) requires design review approval from the Planning Commission when as a result of expansion the gross Iloor area of all structures on the site would exceed 6,000 square feet. Neighbor Review Staff feels that the proposed addition is m;r,imal in relation to the existing scale of the home and would not have any negative impacts on neighbors. Nevertheless, Staff did require the applicant to show the plans to adjacent property owners who voiced no concerns. Their review letters aze attached. Trees No ordinance-sized trees would be impacted by the proposed addition. The conceptual landscape plans show that the brick patio in front of the 120 squaze foot cabana is to remain. Even though the removal of the tennis court and cabana were approved by Staff under a previous proposal, Staff is requiring in the conditions of approval that the applicant carefully remove the cabana so that the roots of the nearby, protected tree are not damaged. In addition, Staff is requiring a final landscape and irrigation plan for review and approval prior to issuance of permits to ensure there is no trenching within the root zones of protected trees. Perimeter Fencing The existing fencing and gates constructed with a stucco base wall, pilasters, and wrought iron on top is in violation of MCS 15-29.010. This code section requires that any fence or wall located within a front yard or an exterior side yard of a reversed corner lot' shall not exceed 3 feet in height, with entrance gates not exceeding 5 feet in height. The fencing on the site varies from approximately 4 to 6 feet in height, with pilasters that are approximately 6 feet in height or higher. An approximately 6-foot tall trellis structure is situated at the corner of the site at the intersection of Sobey and Ten Acres Roads, which is also not in compliance with the Municipal Code. ~ Please refer to MCS 15-06.420(g) for the definition of `reversed corner lot.' ®®~®®4 Application No. 03-269403 Sobey Road • MCS 15-29.010 makes a special exception to allow lawfully constructed fences installed prior to March 20,1987, with a height of up to 6 feet if it did not interfere with safety standards. Staff did a permit search and was only able to find a buffding permit issued in 1989 fora 3- - foot high masonry wall and 5-foot high pilasters at the same location of the existing fence. The approved building permit was in compliance with MCS 15-29. Apparently, Staff has come to learn that 3 years ago, the prior Planning Staff gave verbal approval to construct the existing fencing at its current height. Nevertheless, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed addition with the condition that the existing fencing is brought into compliance with MCS 15-29. Geotechnical Clearance Geotechnical Clearance is not required for the proposed 302.5 square foot addition, which is located in the relatively flat azea at the front portion of the lot. Residential Design Handbook Policies The proposed addition implements the following policies contained in the Residential Design Handbook: Policy #1: Minimize Perception of Bulk The proposed addition is minimal in relation to the size of the home, which is situated on a fairly large lot. The addition is neither disproportionate to the existing home, nor would it negatively impact the scale of the existing home. Policy #2: Integrate Structures with the Environment The external appearance of the addition will match the existing structure that has stucco siding, painted with earth tones. Policy #3: Avoid Interference with Privacy and Views Since this is a single story addition and the surrounding homes are either obscured by foliage or are situated far away, there is no interference with views or privacy. The applicant has shown the proposal to the adjacent property owners who have, so faz, not voiced any concerns. Policy #4: Preserve Views and Access to Views Impacts on views are not an issue with this proposal. Policy #5: Design for Energy Efficiency The proposed addition will have new insulation, which exceeds State requirements, and will be connected to energy efficient heating and cooling appliances that currently exist at the home. ®~'~©~~ Application No. 03-269403 Sobey Road , Conclusion Staff finds that the proposed addition implements the City's Residential Design Policies. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution approving Design Review Application #03-269 with conditions including the specffic requirement stating that the existing perimeter fencing -including but not limited to the stucco wall base with the wrought iron above, gates and the trellis -shall be brought into compliance with MCS 15-29 and other applicable Municipal Codes prior to final inspection approval. AThACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. Letter signed by neighbors indicating they have reviewed a copy of the proposed plans. 3. Affidavit of Mailing Notices and List of property owners who were sent notices regarding the public hearing for this application. 4. Reduced plans, Exhibit "A". ~Q®®®~ Attachment 1 0®~®0~ APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 03-269 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ashjay;14403 Sobey Road WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for design review to construct a 302.5 square foot ground floor level house addition with a height of 16 feet, resulting in the gross floor area of all structures on the site to exceed 6,000 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Plamung Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the project, which proposes to construct an addition to asingle-family home, is categorically exempt from the California Envirorunental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15301 (e) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 1 exemption applies to additions and alterations not exceeding 10,000 sq. ft. The home is located in a developed area; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for design review approval, and the findings specified in Municipal Code Section 15-45.080 and the following City's Residential Design Handbook have been determined: Policy #1: Minimize Perception of Bulk The proposed addition is minimal in relation to the size of the home, which is situated on a fairly large lot. The addition is neither disproportionate to the existing home, nor would it negatively impact the scale of the existing home. Policy #2: Integrate Structures with the Environment The external appearance of the addition will match the existing structure that has stucco siding, painted with earth tones. Policy #3: Avoid Interference with Privacy and Views Since this is a single story addition and the surrounding homes are either obscured by foliage or are situated faz away, there is no interference with views or privacy. The applicant has shown the proposal to the adjacent property owners who have, so far, not voiced any concerns. Policy #4: Preserve Views and Access to Views Impacts on views are not an issue with this proposal. ~®®~'9~8 ~J Policy #5: Design for Energy Efficiency The proposed addition will have new insulation, which exceeds State requirements, and will be connected to energy efficient heating and cooling appliances that currently exist at the home. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the Ciry of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, Application No. 03-269 for design review approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" incorporated by reference, with the condition that the existing perimeter fencing - including but not limited to the stucco wall base with the wrought iron above, gates and the trellis -shall be brought into compliance with MCS 15-29 and other applicable Municipal Codes prior to final inspection approval. 2. Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a sepazate plan page shall be submitted to the Building Division. The complete construction plans shall show details as to how the perimeter fencing is brought into compliance with the Municipal Code. 3. The complete construction plans shall include a final landscape and irrigation plan for Staff review and approval, with the correct species of all protected trees properly labeled. All proposed vegetation shown on the approved landscape plan -including but not limited to the azeas where the cabana and tennis court have been removed - shall be completed prior to final inspection approval. 4. The proposed removal of the 120 square foot cabana shall be done carefully so as to not damage the roots of the nearby, protected tree. 5. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor. 6. The site plan shall contain 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 aze per the approved plans." FIRE DISTRICT 7. Applicant shall comply with all Santa Clara County Fire Dept. conditions. ~Q~1~®9. CITY ATTORNEY C~ 8. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the Ciry or held to be the liability of Ciry in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. A Building Permit must be issued and constnaction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. ®~~~.0 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Sazatoga Planning Commission, State of California, the 25th day of February 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date d®011 Attachment 2 ®f~®~12 ~~ °~ Z ? ~ ~~,Neigbbor Notification Temp for 't i<~ rv Ulf Development Applications Date:f,7Nual' '7,i~i.(- ~- ,(~,.>~ ~ ~~~t^ea~O~.j'ctt vr'1 PROJECT AD RESS,~,:,// // l~I C' ~ -~~Y ' "• =J~ i ` Applicant Name: 1 1 r K N~ 1't iYlll~ l /~ Application Number: ~ ",Z -' ~ ~r'-'lCl~1 The Saratoga Planning Commission requires appltc' is to work with their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does not look faVOrQbly UIJOIt nelglibOrS who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly to the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date and communicate it to the City of Saratoga. C"My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. CMy signature below certifies the following: ]have reviewed the project plans; 1 understand the scope of work; and I have issues o yconcerns, which after disgcuslease with the applicant, have not been addressed M concerns are the followin (p attach additional sheets if necessary): /.' iY h'C' C Neighbor Name: l"~ ~ ~5 5/ ~ •' ~%A~ ~~ ~~~1si~T Neighbor Address: ~ ~; ~~r~~~~ ~Il! JAN 1 3 2004 CITY OF SAF', ~~~, l ~~~C~ Neighbor Phone #: ~~~ /~~~' ~ ~~ J Signature: City of Saratoga Printed: Planning Department 0®0®13 Neighbor Notification Template for Development Applications / Dale:.T,7r1uc7 Y 'r ,Zq'"l.¢ <, . ~, Y l~'~-Jc~l ~ J~J t^~~~%O~a/ ; ~~ PROJECTS: /~G,~ -~~ ~ Applicant Name: / rrKG rQi77ii~1 ApplicationNtunber: ~ ~ "~~'~ ~ ~E'~`>!n~ /\ ~~~t~%~~ The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applic' nrs to work with their neighbors ro address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does nor look favorably upon neighbors who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior ro the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly ro the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date and communicate it ro the Ci~ry o~f Saratoga. C'My signature below certifies-the following: 1 have reviewed the project plans; 1 understand the scope of work; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. CMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scone of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Neighbor Name: ...) A'I'~~S ~vr~~0 ~ Neighbor Address: 1y`~\~ olDwoo~ f~ u J h. y ~ <= . aJ4! - GTYU;t y;~c„ 'vw,,,.,, ~.~,m-, mow, Neighbor Phone #: ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' Printed: (Pm eS ~~'C'j1'r, or-I~ , Crty of Saratoga Planning Department Q©®®1.~ • Neighbor Notification Temp for Development Applications Applicant Name: 1 t~kC% >Qi'J?i~]l Application Number: ~ ~ "~E ~ lf'~ln/~ 1~JE%VlL''~L~ The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applic' nrs to work with their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does not look faVOrQbIy Upon nelgltbol'S Who fall t0 voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer Ihaf neighbors rake this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly ro the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right ro amend your opinion at a later date and communicate it to the City of Saratoga. C`My signature below certifies the following: 1 have reviewed the project plans; 1 understand the scope of work; and 1 do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. CMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; 1 understand the scoce of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): NeighborName:r I/ ~--~/h /~ "~L~~~ tl ~ ~ ~ ~ tl1 ~r Neighbor Address: 'ru ,/~~ Z „ d / ~~~ O1J W6e~]` °-~ (:Its ,4 5~~6.R- Neighbor Phone #1: ~O~~~G~ ~z','~"! Signature: Printed: ~p~ ~~~ iG~'~~~E~` City of Saratoga Planning Department ®~®®1~ ~ ~ n~ ~5 ~ -~9 ~ Neighbor Notification Templ~ for Development Applications Date:.Tar+Ua N '7 ,i'L~'iq- ~v l^~atC/ . ~.;t PROJECTS,~,:~/ II,, /~~~~ ~~ ~~~'~~~ ~- 1~ Applicant Name: I I r KCi ~ i7'Jl i~ / n ApplicationNtunber: /~ .-z~,~ - ~ F>ICti~ 1~ ~Vtl~r~ly The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applic' is to work with their neighbors ro address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does nor Look favorably upon neighbors who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity ro express any concerto or issues they may have directly to the applicant. Please ensure the signature on Jhis document is representative of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later dare and communicate it to the City of Saratoga. C"My signatwe below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scone of work; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. CMy signatwe below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and 1 have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed My concems are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessan'): ~~w: . Neighbor Name: l_/""'`l s~k'e ~~~ ' c(104; U Neighbor Address: ^ `CiTYL~ 11 •,nw,+„~"a nn, UpA n t n ,,.~. Neighbor Phone tt: ~ ~$~ ~ ~ ~~~ Signature: Printed: City of Saratoga Planning Department ~~~~~~ • Neighbor Notification Temp for Development Applications Date:.l`~Hua l~'7~•ZL'~'~~j- ~• PROJECT- ADDRESS: /~FG~ ~itLJCiY ~>~ac~l `7~~t'~a•tO~~.;i; CA Applicant Name: ~rk~ f1!'Ylll~1 Application Number: G,~ ',Z~'~ ~f'~3/Cth 1l ~ViCiLC~ The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applic is to work wtth their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior ro the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does not look favorably upon neighbors who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly to the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative q~ nll residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right to amend your opinion ar a later date and communicate it to the City of Saratoga. C~ signatwe below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. CMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scone of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed My concems are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Neighbor Name: ,~~GL42n o ^ ~. C~~~ ,nt,~ '/,~Go J Neighbor Address: ~y~as s~,bi-~~ ~~A ~A~ N ' ° ~ ~~~i .CITyOF ~, ''era,,,,, S'AF "~~.; Neighbor Phone #: ?'~ ~ 7 "~ ~ Signature: Printed: ~~~ ~,.,.e~ n- n~in ~ //1 /9 U r F P h ~C_ {r t9 ~ ! a~ e-r'~ City of Saratoga Planning Department ~~~~~~ Attachment 3 0~©®~8 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) I, 1~,~ ~(-S" (~(~(luu ,being duly sworn, deposes and says: that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga ~ ~r Planning Commission on the ~ day of Q~l`1'(`kL~~ 200 that I deposited in the United States Post Office within Santa Tara County, a NOTICE OF HEARING, a copy of which is attached hereto, with postage thereon prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses shown, to-wit: (See list attached hereto and made part hereof) that said persons are the owners of said property who are entitled to a Notice of Hearing pursuant to Section 15-45.060(b) of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga in that said persons and their addresses are those shown on the most recent equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property to be affected by the application; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. Signed ~~{ ~~ ~ ~ 3~_~ ~~ G' 2~ ~ 1~~-E'f~C~ ~~~ ®®~®~y City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408-868-1222 NOTICE OF HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the fo]]owing public hearing on: Wednesday, the 251h day of February 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. APPLICATION #03-269 (397-03-057) ASHJAY, 14403 Sobey Road; Request for design review approval to construct a ground floor addition of 303 square feet to an existing 5,346 square foot home. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15- 45.060(6), design review approval is required because the proposal will result in a total floor area of all structures on the property of more than 6,000 square feet. The property is 55,989 square feet and is zoned R-1-40,000. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before Tuesday, February ] 7, 2004. This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the CounTy Assessor's office annually, in preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S. Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project. Lata Vasudevan, AICP Assistant Planner 0®4420 LUCILLE G GIAMMONA OR CURRENT OWNER 14251 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 VINAY & SONJA KHANNA OR CURRENT OWNER 14451 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 DAVID G & LEE REED OR CURRENT OWNER 18801 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 SAMUEL AND MELANIE EZEKIEL OR CURRENT OWNER ] 8850 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 RUSSELL AND MAUREEN SCHNEIDER OR CURRENT OWNER 14425 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 FRANK F SUEN OR CURRENT OWNER 18840 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 ~EFFREY M & PRISCILLA HO OR CURRENT OWNER 12790 WOODMONT DR SARATOGA CA 95070 RUSSELL T & HARRIET DONOVAN OR CURRENT OWNER 14275 HILLTOP WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 •THINH AND HANH TRUSTEE OR CURRENT OWNER 14341 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 DONALD AND CAROL ORGAN OR CURRENT OWNER 18843 TEN ACRES RD SARATOGA CA 95070 RAYMOND K & NATHA OSTBY JOHN A CHMIEL OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER PO BOX 2474 14469 OMEGA LN SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 JOHN AND PHYLLIS FEEMSTER JAVAD AND MITRA ASHJAY OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 18800 TEN ACRES RD 14403 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 TIMOTHY & CAROL CORCORAN OR CURRENT OWNER 14437 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 EDWARD A & JANICE COSTA OR CURRENT OWNER 14419 EMERALD HILLS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 JOHN N & EILEEN HERINGER OR CURRENT OWNER 18803 HILLTOP WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 HAPPY C & EUGENE HONG OR CURRENT OWNER 14588 DEER SPRING CT SARATOGA CA 95070 JAY & ASHA KUMAR WERNER & MARTHA RAYMOND L & OPAL LEAP OR CURRENT OWNER SCHUERCH OR CURRENT OWNER 14439 EMERALD HILLS CT OR CURRENT OWNER 14525 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 14482 EMERALD HILLS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 TR FORMICO RICHARD AND CAROL FORTE AKASHA T NOELLE OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 14456 SOBEY RD 14474 SOBEY RD 14470 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 RUTH H CREMONA ROBERT & MICHELLE BLAKE TR HILLIG OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 14416 OLD WOOD RD 14394 OLD WOOD RD 14372 OLD WOOD RD SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 GEMMA & JOHN FALCOCCHIA SAIID & MAHNAZ SHAHABI VITO A & BETTYJANE OR CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER DIMUCCI 14275 OLD WOOD RD 14307 OLD WOOD RD OR CURRENT OWNER SARATOGA CA 95070 SARATOGA CA 95070 14343 OLD WOOD RD SARATOGA CA 95070 0®®4321 4 QUP~RTERS INV CO GR CURRENT OWNER 14377 OLD WOOD RD "'\RATOGA CA 95070 WALTER E DONOVAN OR CURRENT OWNER 14226 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 wNELSON AND MARY WALKER • ROBERT H & SHIRLEY OR CURRENT OWNER DONZELLI 14415 OLD WOOD RD OR CURRENT OWNER SARATOGA CA 95070 14268 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 CURRENT OWNER OR CURRENT OWNER 14472 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070 MIKE AMIIVI OR CURRENT OWNER 10566 S. DE ANZA BLVD. CUPERTINO CA 95014 ©~~)022 MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Sazatoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Hunter called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Hunter, Gazakani, Nagpal, Schallop and Zutshi Absent: Commissioners Barry and Uhl Staff: Director Tom Sullivan. Associate Planner Christy Oos[erhous and Assistant Planner Ann Welsh PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of January 28, 2004. As there was not a quorum available of Commissioners present at the January 28, 2004, meeting, the adoption of the minutes for that meeting was deferred to the next regular meeting on Mazch 10, 2004. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of February 11, 2004. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of February 11, 2004, were adopted as submitted with corrections to pages 3,4,6 and 8. (5-0-2; Commissioners Barry and Uhl were absent) ORAL COMMUNICATION There were no Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Tom Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on February 19, 2004. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Chair Hunter announced that appeals are possible for any decision made on this Agenda by filing an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendaz days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15.90.050(b). of February 25, 2004 ~ Page 2 *** CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar Items. *+* PUBLTC HEARING - ITEM NO.1 APPLICATION #03-269 (397-03-0571 ASHJAY 14403 Sobey Road: Request for design review approval to construct a ground floor addition of 303 square feet to an existing 5,346 square foot home. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-45.060(6), design review approval is required because the proposal will result in a total floor azea of all structures on the property of more than 6,000 square feet. The property is 55,989 squaze feet and is zoned R-1-40,000. (I.ATA VASUDEVAN) Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking design review approval to allow a 303 square foot addition that will match the existing Mediterranean architectural style with stucco and roof tiles to match. The maximum height would be 16 feet. • Explained that the applicant will be removing a tennis court, cabana and small shed and that there are current additions underway as approved a[ staff level. • Added that the current 303 square foot addition requires Planning Commission's design review approval as the gross floor azea would exceed 6,000 squaze feet. • Said that no ordinance-protected trees are impacted and that conditions were imposed to protect existing trees during the removal of the tennis court, cabana and shed. Additionally, a final landscape plan must be submitted for approval by staff. • Advised that the existing property frontage and one sideyazd streetside fencing and gates aze in violation of Code as they exceed the allowable three-foot maximum heights. The existing frontage fencing ranges from four to six feet in height and there is also asix-foot high trellis structure located at the corner that also conflicts with Code. Stated that a permit search found approval for athree-foot high masonry wall with five-foot pilasters from 1989. • Informed the Commission that no negative comments were received from adjacent neighbors. • Recommended that the Commission adopt a resolution approving Application #03-269 with the condition that existing fencing is brought into compliance with Code prior to final. Chair Hunter asked staff why the tennis court and cabana need to be taken out. Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that the allowable impervious coverage is exceeded if the tennis court, cabana and shed were to remain. Commissioner Garakani asked when staff approved the remodel currently underway. Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied Fal] 2003. Commissioner Gazakani asked why the fencing violation issue did not come up at that time. 2004 ~ _ Page 3 Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan explained that an administrative review is performed over the counter with no site visit. Rather, it is based upon presented plans. Chair Hunter added that this is especially the case for asingle-story home less than 6,000 square feet. Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan added that there was no mention of any fencing on the application reviewed for the administrative approval. Commissioner Garakani asked if there has been a site visit since the administrative approval. Director Tom Sullivan replied that building inspectors have visited the site. He added that he has been told that previous interim staff may have approved the fencing without any substantiating documentation. Commissioner Nagpa] asked whether there was an existing fence on this property prior to the 1989 permit. Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that she did not know. Commissioner Zutshi asked whether the applicant would be required to comply with the fencing requirements if tonight's request for the 303 squaze foot addition is approved but never constructed. Director Tom Sullivan replied that code enforcement occurs on a complaint basis. To date, there has been no complaint. Chair Hunter asked for clarification that if no complaint is received this fencing can stay. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Chair Hunter opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Mike Amini, Representative for the Ashjays: Said that he has a copy of the permit from 1989 that was for a concrete base with pillazs. • Stated that they have complied with every requirement of the City regarding floor azea. • Advised that the previous owner sold the house with these fences in place and told the Ashjays that all necessary permits had been obtained. • Pointed out that the neighbors like this fence and support its retention. Chair Hunter asked Mr. Mike Amini how high the permit states the fence may be constructed. Mr. Mike Amini replied that the permit does not state the height. Chair Hunter asked staff when the most recent Fence Ordinance was passed. Director Tom Sullivan replied 1987. Commissioner Nagpal asked when the new owners purchased this property. of Februarv 25, 2004 4 Mr. Mike Amini replied about 15 years ago. Commissioner Nagpal said that she recalls this house having a pretty high fence even before this one was installed. Commissioner Garakani pointed out that the decorative side and front are not stucco but wrought iron. Mr. Mike Amini said that he raised the issue of the fence with all neighbors and none had problems with it. Chair Hunter pointed out that when a property owner comes to the City for any new permits, it comes to the attention of staff if fences are too tall and that three foot is the height allowed for property frontage fencing per Ordinance. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the Ashjays are willing to comprormse. Mr. Mike Amini said that they prefer to keep the fence as it is and would rather skip the 300-foot addition over removing or lowering this fence. Chair Hunter advised that they could have a taller fence if set back further on the property. Chair Hunter closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Gazakani: • Pointed out that there aze similar height fences and walls on other properties. • Said that this is an existing condition over 15 years. Stated that he has no objection to this fence or to the 300 squaze foot addition. Commissioner Zutshi said that she has no objection to the 300 square foot addition but does support staff on the issue of the fence height compliance. Commissioner Nagpal: • Said that she is concerned about the fence being in violation of Code requirements. • Said that by allowing this fence to remain, it sends the wrong message to other property owners. • Restated her memory of there being a fence of similar height on this property even prior to this current fence. • Pointed out that the neighbors aze comfortable with this fence and that no one has expressed concern. • Stated that she is not excited about the aesthetic look of this fence. • Supported staff's recommendation to bring the fence into compliance. Commissioner Schallop asked how faz the setback would be to allow [he fence at this height. Director Tom Sullivan replied to the setback line. Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan added that the setback is 30 fee[ on Sobey and 25 feet on [he side street. Commissi~linutes of February 25, 2004 ~ Page 5 Commissioner Schallop: • Said that he does not see a reason to allow an exception. - • Added that Code does not read that fence height exceptions are allowed "if neighbors say it is okay." • Said that the fence issue must be addressed and that he is comfortable with staff's recommendation. Chair Hunter asked if there is a statute of limitations. Director Tom Sullivan replied prior to 1987. Chair Hunter restated that if a fence were installed after 1987, it must be in compliance with current Code. Commissioner Gazakani asked when it might be considered anon-conforming structure. Director Tom Sullivan clarified that this is not a structure but a fence. Chair Hunter asked what if a fence were built prior to 1987. Director Tom Sullivan replied that then nothing could be done. Chair Hunter: • Pointed out that the Commission has made people take down walls and fences they were too high. • Said that the issue of fencing height becomes an issue during the design review process for new permits. • Said that what is [here exceeds what is al]owed and that whoever built it went higher than they should have. • Supported staff's recommendation. Director Tom Sullivan explained that the app]icant could elect to appeal the action of the Commission to Council. Commissioner Nagpal asked if there is existing language in the draft resolution concerning the fence. Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan pointed out Condition #1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution for Application #03-267 to allow a 303 square foot addition to an existing residence at 14403 Sobey Road, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hunter, Nagpal, Schallop and Zutshi NOES: Garakani ABSENT: Barry and Uhl ABSTAIN: None Chair Hunter reminded that this action could be appealed within 15 days. 2004 Commissioner Gazakani explained that his no vote is simply because he does not support the Condition of Approval imposed to bring the existing fence into compliance with current Code. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that the Design Review Section updated the thresholds for when projects need building permits, administrative review or Planning Commission review. Mr. Mike Amini asked whether they would still have to correct the fence if they give up on the 300 squaze foot addition. Chair Hunter replied no, not unless a complaint against this fence is received by the City. Mr. Mike Amini said that it does not make a lot of sense since they obtained letters of support from the surrounding neighbors. Chair Hunter said that these letters indicated that no one from the neighborhood is likely to complain against the fence. She reiterated the possibility to appeal this action to the City Council. ~*~ PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.2 APPLICATION #03 273 (503-27-0361 ESTAHBANATY 14241 Paul Avenue: Request for design review approval to demolish the existing home and construct a 2,876 squaze foot two-story residence with a maximum height of 24 feet. The property is 7,500 square feet and is zoned R-1-10,000. (CHRISTY OOSTERHOUS) Associate Planner Christy Oosterhous presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking approval to demolish an existing home and construct a new 2,876 squaze foot two-story home. • Described the proposed home as having a maximum height of 24 feet and using gray roof tiles and beige stucco finish. • Stated that the neighborhood consists of a mixture of architectural styes. Added that the homes in this neighborhood aze close together. • Advised that the applicant has showed his plans to the neighbors and that only positive comments have been received. • Said that screening trees would be installed to mitigate privacy impacts and existing trees on the site will be retained. • Stated that the project can meet the necessary design review findings for approval. • Recommended approval. Chair Hunter opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. Mohammad Estahbanaty, Applicant and Owner, 14250 Elva Avenue, Sazatoga: • Informed that the previous tenants had lived on the site for 28 yeazs and little had been done to this property over the years. • Advised that everyone in the neighborhood is happy to see a new home constructed. • Assured that additional trees would be planted for privacy. I Y.r ,~+ 1'Y ~ w 1 ~ .D 4~`' 'Y op ~N 5 Y L d s ~ ~ u ~ ~' 3 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ f p] V ~ Q t ~ ~ i C 4`,' N o Z Y ~ v D ~ ~ :: ~ ~ 3 N .~ ~ 7' V v o V I C ~ ~ 4 J ~ ~i ~ 14 ~V ~ I~~ A" @~ ~FFC~ ~5~ ~I'~iilrl 4 ^ '~ 1 ~~ ~°, it ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ N ~ } F ~ ~ ~ ~ I Y `~ o N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F M f C ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ .a ~ ~ ! o ~ ~ J 1 .n .n ~ - e, g ~`\ ~ ~ ^ t N ~ ~N /~ ~j ~ 6 ~ a -~ ~~~rcP ~ ~~~ ~ ~ 4 ~ i ; ~'~ a ~~~~~~ r ~ `~ ~ ~ '~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ a s~e~i ~8 ~i ~~ ~~~# ~`; ~~ f f ~~ t~g~~e~~! ~ u -~~~ s ~~ ~ ~ ~ h<I ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~: ~~ ~' ~~ I~ t It 2Ei E ~~ ~~ a ~~ ~~ "~~ i~l s~ i' ~~ i~~ #~ ~~~ ~~-~ ~~~ 4 ~~f ~~f Rai 2- € ~~~ $Y a~ N 1I ~I ~1~, t~ i 6 P pp ~E i ~~ i~ r L~~~ ~~ 6 {8 ej €~ ~E ~~ ' rf~ ~~i ~~~~ ~~ _~ ~ ias ~ • ~~~ ~~~ THIS B03~ TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CIT DATE RECEIVED: ~~'-y~~I HEARING D ~ FEE: _~ RECEIPT # ~ ~ ~- -a- rn CITY OF SARATOGA ~ `" ~ PLANNING COMMISSION APPEAL APPLICATION This two-part application must be submitted to the City Clerk, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga CA 45070, by 5:00 p.m. within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision. Appellant Name: `~'"}' Address: Telephone #: Name of Applicant .(If different than Appellant): Project file number and address: Decision being appealed: P ~r~a n - 'y~ a 7m r»» ~'~~ l LSI~y Grounds for appeal (letter may be attached): 3/ ~ilr~~i -Date (Please do not sign this application and the attached authorization until it is present at City offices) ~ , Appe lan '~ tur SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 ORIGINATING DEPT: Community Development PREPARED BY: Thomas Sullivan, AICP AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: ~~~ DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Create Mixed Use Standazds RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct the Public Heazing, Grant First Reading to the proposed Ordinance Amendments and direct Staff to place the matter on the next available Ciry Councfl Agenda for Second Reading and Adoption. Staff also recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution granting a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. REPORT SUMMARY: On February 25, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing and adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mixed Use Standards implementing Program 1.2 of the Housing Element of the General Plan. The Ciry's Housing Element contains several housing programs; one of the programs is Program 1.2: Amend Zoning Code to Implement aMixed-Use Overlay Zone. The action that is proposed would start the formal preparation of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to implement the Program 1.2. The areas that are suggested to be studied relate to the development standards. The City Council directed the Planning Commission to study and report on amendments to the City of Saratoga Zoning Code, which will establish a conditionally permitted use in each of the Commercial, and Administrative and Professional Office zoned areas. The mixed use (CommerciaUOffice and Residential) needs development standards to be applied to ensure that the City's sales tax base is protected, that existing residential development is protected and to provide for the orderly (re) development of the City's Commercial and Office azeas. The Planning Commission was directed by the City Council to study and report on Mixed-Use standards that include, but are not limited to, the following: The maximum density is twenty (20) dwellings per net acre. The dwelling unit(s) shall be located either on the second floor or at the rear of the parcel. The dwelling unit(s) shall not comprise more than fifty (50%) percent of the total floor area of all buildings on the site. The maximum floor area allowed may be increased by 10% for projects providing below market rate rental housing • Parking for both the commercial and the dwelling unit(s) shall be as specified in the Zoning Ordinance, provided that the Planning Commission may consider shared parking in some cases. • Perimeter fencing shall be required to the maximum height allowed in the Zoning Ordinance. • Each dwelling shall have private, usable outdoor space, i.e. decks, balconies, yards or patios. • The maximum height of a mixed-use structure shall be 26-feet. Structures that are solely commercial on a site that has mixed use, the maximum height is as is in the underlying zoning. • The design of mixed-use projects will be required to conform to the policies and techniques of the Residential Design Handbook and any other design standards in place for the area of application. • Overall site coverage may be increased up to 10% for projects containing "deed restricted" below market rate housing units. • Mixed-use projects shall have sound walls and landscape screening in order to protect the privacy and quality of life of abutting single-family residential lands uses. • The residential component of a mixed-use project shall be rental. The individual dwelling units shall range in size from 850 sq. ft. for 1-bedrooms units to 1,250 sq. ft. for 3-bedroom units in a mixed-use development. • That the "Multi-Family" use be deleted from the various Commercial Zoned Districts when "Mixed-Use" is amended into the same Zoned Districts. • That multiple stories, setback requirements, window placement and privacy issues be included in the Mixed-Use standards. • Commercial properties created or developed through a previous mixed use or multi- family development are disallowed from further or subsequent mixed use projects • Dedicate an in-lieu fee for park construction for smaller mixed use projects • Require common, useable open space in larger mixed use projects In order to accomplish the foregoing, several individual amendments to the Zoning Code must be made. The attached Resolution lists all of the required Zoning Code amendments. In the text of the Commercial and Office Zoning Districts "multi-family units" are allowed as a conditional use. This is proposed to be deleted and replaced with "mixed use" projects, which are allowed subject to obtaining a Conditional Use Permit. In the CH-1 and CH-2 Zoning Districts (the Village) housing is allowed as a permitted use if on the second floor or not fronting a street. The proposal before you would delete that from the code. The same Zoning Districts allow housing to front the street on the ground floor with a Conditional Use Permit. It is proposed to replace that language with language that makes reference to Mixed Use Developments conforming to the Design Standards found in Article 15-21 and subject to obtaining a Conditional Use Permit. The Zoning Code Amendments would also delete the existing Article 15-21 MU-PD: MULTIPLE USE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT and replace it with the new Mixed Use Development Standards. Staff has used the ~..~~~ to show what is to be eliminated and the Bold Italics to highlight what is to be added the various zoning code sections. 2 of 6 15-18.030 Conditional uses The following conditional uses may be allowed in a P-A district, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this Chapter: (a) Accessory structures and uses located on the same site as a conditional use. (b) Community facilities. (c) Institutional facilities. (d) Police and fire stations and other public buildings, structures and facilities. (e) Religious and charitable institutions. (f) Nursing homes and day care facilities. (g) Public utility and public service pumping stations, power stations, drainage ways and structures, storage tanks and transmission lines. (h) Mixed-Use developments pursuant to the development standards found in Article IS- SS of this code. (i) Bed and breakfast establishments. (j) Antenna facilities operated by a public utility for transmitting and receiving cellular telephone and other wireless communications. (Amended by Ord. 71.91 § 2, 1991; Ord. 71-163 § 1 (part), 1996) 15-19.030 C-N district regulations (a) Permitted uses. In addition to the permitted uses listed in Section 15-19.020(a) of this Article, the following permitted uses shall also be allowed in a C-N district: - (1) Professional and administrative offices. (2) Financial institutions. (3) Religious and charitable institutions. (4) Christmas tree and pumpkin sales lots. (b) Conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses listed in Section 15-19.020(b) of this Article, the following conditional uses may also be allowed in a C-N district, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this chapter. 0 0~ (I) Mixe~Usecdeployments pursuant to the development standards found in Article IS-SS of this code. (2) Medical offices and clinics. 15-19.040 C-V district regulations (a) Permitted uses. In addition to the permitted uses listed in Section 15-19.020(a) of this Article, the following permitted uses shall also be allowed in a C-V district: (1) Professional and administrative offices. (2) Financial institutions. (b) Conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses listed in Section 15-19.020(b) of this Article, the following conditional uses may also be allowed in a C-V district, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this Chapter: (1) Religious and charitable institutions. 3 of 6 ,~ (2~M d-Use developments pursuant to the development standards found in Article 15- 58 of this code. (3) Medical offices and clinics. (4) Mortuaries. (5) Theaters. (6) Automobile upholstering shops provided all operations are conducted within an enclosed structure. 15-19.050 C-H district regulations (a) Permitted uses. In addition to the permitted uses listed in Section 15-19.020(a) of this Article, the following permitted uses shall also be allowed in the CH-1 and CH-2 districts: (1) Professional, administrative and medical offices and financial institutions, when located either above the street level or at the street level if separated from the street frontage by a retail or service establishment. ( ' (b) Conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses listed in Section 15-19.020(b) of this Article, the following conditional uses may also be allowed in the CH-1 and CH-2 districts, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this Chapter: (1) Professional, administrative and medical offices and financial institutions, when located at street level and having street frontage. (2) Theaters. (3) Religious and charitable institutions. (4 r.. (¢) Mixed Use developments pursuant to the development standards found in Article 15- 58 of this code IS-58 MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 15-58.10 Purposes ofArtide The purpose of the mixed-use development standards is the implementation of Program 1.1 of the Housing Element of the General Plan. The goal is to implement this Housing Program in a consistent manner through out the various commercial and office zoned districts of the City. It is further the goal of these standards to protect existing and future commercial development. IS-58.20 Development Standards (a) The maximum densityis twenty (20) dwellings per net acre. (b) The dwelling unit(s) shall be located either on the second floor or at the tear of the parcel. (c) The dwelling unit(s) shall not comprise more than fifty (5096) percent of the total floor area of all buildings on the site. The maximum floor area allowed may be 4of6 increased by IO% for projects providing deed restricted below market rate rental housing (d)Parking for both the commercial and the dwelling unit(s) shall be as specified in the Zoning Ordinance, provided that the Planning Commission may consider shared parkingin some cases. (e) Perimeter fencing shall be required to the maximum height allowed in the Zoning Ordinance. (f) Each dwellingshal/haveprivate, usable outdoor space, i.e. decks, balconies, yards or patios. (g) The maximvmheight of amixed-use structure shall be 26-feet. Structures that are solely commercial on a site that has mixed use, the maximum height is as is it is stated in the underlyingzoning. (h) The design of mixed-use projects will be required to conform to the policies and techniques of the Residential Design Handbook and any other design standards in place for the area ofapplication. (i) Overall site coverage may be increased up to ]0% for projects containing deed restricted below market rate housing units. (j) Mixed-use projects shall have sound walls and landscape screening in order to protect the privacy and quality of life of abutting single-family residential lands uses. The height of the sound walls and the width of the landscape buffer will be determined on a case-by-case basis. (k) The residential component of a mixed-use project shall be rental. The individual dwelling units shall range in size from 850 sq. ft. for 1-bedrooms units to 1,250 sq. ft. for 3-bedroom units Sequent Mixed-Use development. (1) That multiple stories, setback requirements, window placement and privacy issues be included in the review ofany Mi xed-Use development proposals. (m) Commercial properties created or developed through a previous Mixed-Use ormulti-family development are disallowed from further or subsequent mixed-use projects. (n) Smaller Mixed-Use projects (9 or fewer dwelling units) must pay an in lieu fee for park construction. (o) In larger Mixed-Use projects (10 or more dwelling units) common, useable open space will be provided. FISCAL IMPACTS: None CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City's Ordinances will be out of compliance with the adopted Housing Element of the General Plan. This would jeopardize the State's certification of the Housing Element. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Revise the Development Standards in some fashion. 5 of 6 FOLLOW UP ACTION: Place on the Consent Calendar for the next regular meeting of the City Council. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: The Public Hearing for the Ordinance amendment and the Negative Declaration were advertised in the March 17, 2004 edition of the Saratoga News. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Housing Element Program 1.2 3. Initial Study and Resolution granting Negative Declazation 6of6 DRAFT ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CONCERNING MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN ALL COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ZONED DISTRICTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and declares as following: A. The Ordinance is needed to comply with program 1.2 of the adopted Housing Element of the General Plan, which states, "That the City will adopt a Zoning Code amendment to implement a residential mixed-use overlay zone that applies to all commercial zones within the City of Saratoga." B. The Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing to consider amendments to the zoning code with respect to Mixed Use Development Standards on February 25, 2004 C. This ordinance amends the Ciry Code to provide Standards for the development of Mixed Use projects in all of the Commercial and Professional Office Zoned Districts of the City of Saratoga. D. That the proposed Zoning Code amendments will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor be materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the City of Sazatoga in that the Development Standads have been crafted to avoid such injuries. Section 2. Adoption. 15-18.030 Conditional Uses: The following conditional uses maybe allowed in a P-A district, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this Chapter: (a) Accessory structures and uses located on the same site as a conditional use. (b) Community facilities. (c) Institutional facilities. (d) Police and fire stations and other public buildings, structures and facilities. (e) Religious and charitable institutions. (f) Nursing homes and day care facilities. (g) Public utility and public service pumping stations, power stations, drainage ways and structures, storage tanks and transmission lines. (h) Mixed Use Developments conforming to the Mixed Use Design Standards found in Article 15-58 (i) Bed and breakfast establishments. (j) Antenna facilities operated by a public utility for transmitting and receiving cellular telephone and other wireless communications. (Amended by Ord. 71.914 2,1991; Ord. 71- 163 41 (part), 1996) 15-19.030 C-N district regulations: (a) Permitted uses. In addition to the permitted uses listed in Section 15-19.020(a) of this Article, the following permitted uses shall also be allowed in a C-N district: (1) Professional and administrative offices. (2) Financial institutions. (3) Religious and charitable institutions. (4) Christmas tree and pumpkin sales lots. (b) Conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses listed in Section 15-19.020(b) of this Article, the following conditional uses may also be allowed in a C-N district, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this chapter. (1) Mixed-Use Development conforming to the Design Standards found in Article 15-58 (2) Medical offices and clinics. (c) Site area. The minimum net site area of any lot in a C-N district shall be ten thousand square feet. (d) Site frontage, width and depth. The minimum site frontage, width and depth of any lot in a C-N district shall be as follows: aaaFrontage (Width ;Depth - ---- --- -- ----- - ------__ --r-- ----- - 60 feet ~60 feet ;100 feet (e) Coverage. The maximum net site area covered by structures on any lot in a C-N district shall be sixty percent. (f) Front yard. The minimum front yard of any lot in a C-N district shall be ten feet; except that on a site adjacent to and fronting on the same street as, or directly across the street from, an A, R-1, HR, R-M or P-A district, the minimum front yard shall be fifteen feet. (g) Side and rear yards. No side or rear yard shall be required for any lot in a C-N district, subject to the following exceptions: (1) On a reversed corner lot abutting a lot in an A, R-1, or HR district, the minimum exterior side yard shall be not less than one-half of the required front yard of the abutting lot. (2) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (g)(1) of this Section, on a lot abutting an A, R-1, or HR district, the minimum side yard or rear yard abutting such other district shall be thirty feet. (3) On a lot directly across a street or alley from an A, R-1, or HR district, the minimum side yard or rear yard adjacent to such street or alley shall be ten feet. Where a side or rear yard is required under any of the foregoing provisions, one foot shall be added to the required yard for each one foot of height or fraction thereof by which a structure within thirty feet of the lot line for such yard exceeds fourteen feet in height. (h) Height of structures. The maximum height of any structure in a C-N district shall be twenty feet. (i) Enclosure of uses. All permitted and conditional uses shall be conducted entirely within a completely enclosed structure, except for off-street parking and loading, gasoline service stations, outdoor dining, nurseries, garden shops and Christmas tree and pumpkin sales lots. (j) Screening, landscaping and fencing. An area not less than five feet in depth along all property lines that abut a street shall be landscaped with plant materials and/or improved with sidewalks or pathways as required by the Planning Commission. All planting materials shall permanently be maintained by the owner or occupant of the site. (k) Alternative standards for multi-family dwellings. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, where multifamily dwellings will be located upon a site, the Planning Commission shall apply for such dwellings the development standards set forth in Article 15-17 of this Chapter. The density of development shall be as determined in each case by the Planning Commission, based upon its finding that: (1) The project will not constitute overbuilding of the site; and (2) The project is compatible with the structures and density of development on adjacent properties; and (3) The project will preserve a sufficient amount of open space on the site; and (4) The project will provide sufficient light and air for the residents of the site and the occupants of adjacent properties. (Amended by Ord. 71.113 (part), 1992) 15-19.040 C-V district regulations: (a) Permitted uses. In addition to the permitted uses listed in Section 15-19.020(a) of this Article, the following permitted uses shall also be allowed in a C-V district: (1) Professional and administrative offices. (2) Financial institutions. (b) Conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses listed in Section 15-19.020(b) of this Article, the following conditional uses may also be allowed in a C-V district, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this Chapter: (1) Religious and charitable institutions. (2) Mixed Use Developments conforming to the Design Standards found in Article 15-58. (3) Medical offices and clinics. (4) Mortuaries. (5) Theaters. (6) Automobile upholstering shops provided all operations are conducted within an enclosed structure. (c) Site area. The minimum net site area of any lot in a C-V district shall be ten thousand square feet. (d) Site frontage, width and depth. The minimum site frontage, width and depth of any lot in a C-V district shall be as follows: -- -- - Frontage .Width ,Depth - --- - -- ___ ___- - r'--- _._' 60 feet 60 feet :..100 feet (e) Coverage. The maximum net site area covered by structures on any lot in a C-V district shall be sixty percent. (f) Front yard. The minimum front yard of any lot in a C-V district shall be ten feet; except that on a site adjacent to and fronting on the same street as, or directly across the street from, an A, R-1, HR, R-M or P-A district, the minimum front yard shall be fifteen feet. (g) Side and rear yard. The minimum side yards of any lot in a C-V district shall be ten feet and the minimum rear yard of any lot in a C-V district shall be thirty feet, subject to the following exceptions: (1) One foot shall be added to the minimum side yard for each one-foot of height or fraction thereof by which a portion of a structure within thirty feet of the side lot line for such yard exceeds fourteen feet in height. (2) One foot shall be added to the minimum rear yard for each one-foot of height or fraction thereof by which a portion of a structure within sixty feet of the rear lot line for such yard exceeds fourteen feet in height. (3) On a corner lot, the minimum exterior side yard shall be twenty feet. (h) Height of structures. The maximum height of any structure in a C-V district shall be twenty feet. (i) Screening, landscaping and fencing. (1) An area not less than ten feet in depth along all property lines that abut a street shall be landscaped with plant materials and/or improved with sidewalks or pathways as required by the Planning Commission. All planting materials shall permanently be maintained by the owner or occupant of the site. (2) A use not conducted within a completely enclosed structure shall be screened by a solid wall or fence, vine-covered fence or compact evergreen hedge (with solid gates where necessary) not less than six feet in height. This requirement shall not apply to off- streetparking and loading areas, gasoline service stations, outdoor dining areas, nurseries, garden shops, and Christmas tree and pumpkin sales lots. (j) Alternative standards for multi-family dwellings. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, where multi-family dwellings will be located upon a site, the Planning Commission shall apply for such dwellings the development standards set forth in Article 15-17 of this Chapter. The density of development shall be as determined in each case by the Planning Commission, based upon its finding that: (1) The project will not constitute overbuilding of the site; and (2) The project is compatible with the structures and density of development on adjacent properties; and (3) The project will preserve a sufficient amount of open space on the site; and (4) The project will provide sufficient light and air for the residents of the site and the occupants of adjacent properties. (Amended by Ord. 71.113 (part), 1992) 15-19.050 C-H district regulations: (a) Permitted uses. In addition to the permitted uses listed in Section 15-19.020(a) of this Article, the following permitted uses shall also be allowed in the CH-1 and CH-2 districts: (1) Professional, administrative and medical offices and financial institutions, when located either above the street level or at the street level if separated from the street frontage by a retail or service establishment. (2) DELETED (b) Conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses listed in Section 15-19.020(b) of this Article, the following conditional uses may also be allowed in the CH-1 and CH-2 districts, upon the granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15-55 of this Chapter: (1) Professional, administrative and medical offices and financial institutions, when located at street level and having street frontage. (2) Theaters. (3) Religious and charitable institutions. (4) Mixed Use Developments conforming to the Design Standards found in Article 15-58. (c) Site area. The minimum net site area in each C-H district shall be as follows: 'District 'Net Site Area --_ CH-1 5,000 sq. ft. CH 2 -- - - ..,...7,500 sq. ft. (d) Site frontage, width and depth. The minimum site frontage, width and depth in each C-H district shall be as follows: .District rFrontage ',Width ,'Depth CH-1 50 ft. 50 ft. 100 ft. CH-2 (50 ft. 50 ft. '100 ft. (e) Coverage; pedestrian open space. (1) In the CH-1 district, the maximum net site area covered by structures shall be eighty percent, except that up to one hundred percent of the site maybe covered by structures if, for any structure coverage in excess of eighty percent, an equivalent area on the site is devoted to pedestrian open space. (2) In the CH-2 district, the maximum net site area covered by structures shall be sixty percent. In addition, an area equivalent to not less than twenty percent of the net site area shall be devoted to pedestrian open space. All or any portion of the required front yard may be used for pedestrian open space. (3) The term "pedestrian open space," as used in subsections (e)(1) and (2) of this Section, means common areas open to the public where pedestrians may walk or gather, such as plazas and arcades, which are designed to be visible and accessible to pedestrians on streets, sidewalks and parking facilities adjacent to the site. (f) Front yard. No front yard shall be required in the CH-1 district. The minimum front yard of any lot in the CH-2 district shall be fifteen feet. (g) Side yards. No side yards shall be required in either the CH-1 or CH-2 district. (h) Rear yard. No rear yard shall be required in the CH-1 district. No rear yard shall be required for any lot in the CH-2 district having a rear lot line that abuts a public right-of- way, public parking district, Saratoga Creek, or the CH-1 district. Where the rear lot line of any lot in the CH-2 district abuts an A, R-1, HR, or R-M district, the minimum rear yard shall be thirty feet, plus one foot for each two feet of height or fraction thereof by which a portion of a structure within sixty feet of the rear lot line for such yard exceeds fourteen feet in height. (i) Height of structures. The maximum height of any structure in each C-H district shall be as follows: District 'Height 'CH-1 i35 feet. No portion of a structure facing i !Big Basin Way shall exceed two stories, ',and no portion of a structure facing Saratoga Creek shall exceed three 'stories. I ---_ -- CH-2 26 feet. No structure shall exceed two (j) Enclosure of uses. All permitted and conditional uses shall be conducted entirely within a completely enclosed structure, except for off-street pazking and loading, gasoline service stations, garden shops and outdoor dining. (1) Modification of standards for historic structures. The Planning Commission shall have authority to modify any of the development standards contained in this Section, without the granting of a variance, if the subject of the application is a structure, which has been designated as a historic landmark pursuant to Article 13-15 of this Code, and the Planning Commission finds and determines that: (1) The modification will facilitate preservation of the historic structure; and (2) The application and the proposed modification have been reviewed and approved by the City's Heritage Commission; and (3) The modification wffl not be detrimental to the use and enjoyment of other properties in the vicinity; and (4) The modification will not adversely affect the movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, or the availability of on-street parking, and will not create a hazard to the public safety. (Amended by Ord. 71-108 41,1992; Ord. 71.113 (part), 1992) Article 15-21 DELETED Article 15-58 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 15-5H MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 15-58.010 Purposes of Article The purpose of the mixed-use development standards is the implementation of Program 1.1 of the Housing Element of the General Plan. The goal is to implement this Housing Program in a consistent manner through out the various commercial and office zoned districts of the City. It is further the goal of these standards to protect existing and future commercial development. 15-58.020 Development Standards (a) The maximum density is twenty (20) dwellings per net acre. (b) The dwelling unit(s) shall be located either on the second floor or at the rear of the parcel. (c) The dwelling unit(s) shall not comprise more than fifty (50%) percent of the total floor area of all buildings on the site. The maximum floor area allowed may be increased by 10% for projects providing below market rate rental housing (d) Parking for both the commercial and the dwelling unit(s) shall be as specified in the Zoning Ordinance, provided that the Planning Commission may consider shared parking in some cases. (e) Perimeter fencing shall be required to the maximum height allowed in the Zoning Ordinance. (f) Each dwelling shall have private, usable outdoor space, i.e. decks, balconies, yards or patios. (g) The maximum height of a mixed-use structure shall be 26-feet. Structures that are solely commercial on a site that has mixed use, the maximum height is as is it is stated in the underlying zoning. (h) The design of mixed-use projects will be required to conform to the policies and techniques of the Residential Design Handbook and any other design standards in place for the area of application. (i) Overall site coverage may be increased up to 10% for projects containing deed restricted below market rate housing units. (j) Mixed-use projects shall have sound walls and landscape screening in order to protect the privacy and quality of life of abutting single-family residential lands uses. (k) The residential component of a mixed-use project shall be rental. The individual dwelling units shall range in size from 850 sq. ft. for I-bedrooms units to 1,250 sq. ft. for 3-bedroom units sequent mixed-use development. (1) That multiple stories, setback requirements, window placement and privacy issues be included in the design review of any Mixed-Use development proposals. (m) Commercial properties created or developed through a previous mixed use or multi- family development are disallowed from further or subsequent mixed use projects (n) Smaller Mixed-Use projects (9 or fewer dwelling units) must pay an in lieu fee for park construction. (o) In larger Mixed-Use projects (10 or more dwelling units) common, useable open space will be provided. Section 3. Severance Clause. The City Council declares that each section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub-section, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance. If any section, sub- section,paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase is held invalid, the Ciry Council declares that it would have adopted the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective of the portion held invalid, and further declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated. Section 4. Publication. This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption. The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the day of , 2004, and was adopted by the following vote following a second reading on the _ day of _, 2004: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ANN WALTONSMITH, MAYOR ATTEST: CATHLEEN BOYER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: RICHARD TAYLOR, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF sARATOGA 2002 HOUSING ELEMENT • eliminating the annual limit of 20 permits on the approval of second units, and • allowing uncovered pazking if necessary to achieve affordability to very low- or low- ~--~ income occupants. Require property owners receiving permits for new second units to record an affordability covenant for at least 30 years restricting occupancy of their second units to very low- or low- income households at affordable rent level. The City will promote its second unit standazds by posting information on the City's web site, preparing an information brochure to be distributed to public places in the City, and providing annual information to single-family property owners on the benefits of, and permit requirements for, second units. The City will monitor the production of second units through an annual report to the City Council ' ' '" on the number of new second units constructed each year and their affordability by income level. If the number and affordability of second units falls short of the assumptions contained in "Discussion of New Construction Objectives" (five units per year), the City will adopt additional revisions to the Zoning Ordinance and additional incentives to increase the likelihood that the new construction objectives contained in the Rousing Element can be achieved. Timeframe: Adopt Zoning Code amendments by July 1, 2002. Report annually to the City Council, 2002 - 2006. Adopt revisions to zoning requirements or incentives, if needed, by December 2003 to achieve new construction objectives. Responsible Agency: Cotnmunity Development Department, Planning Division (draft Zoning Code amendments); Planning Commission (review and recommend amendments to City Council); City Council (adopt Zoning Code amendments). `~-~ Funding: General Fund. Program 1.2: Amend Zoning Code to Implement aMixed-Use overlay zone The City will adopt a Zoning Code amendment to implement a residential mixed-use overlay zone that will be applied to all commercial zones within the City of Saratoga, including sites with the greatest immediate potential for residential-mixed use shown in Figure 1 and listed in Appendix B. The new mixed-use overlay zone will contain appropriate development standards, including residential density and parking standazds, suitable for the development of low- and moderate-income housing. Projects that include residential-commercial mixed-uses will be subjected to the City's density bonus-affordability requirement (see program 2.1). The City will apply the following standazds for implementation of a mixed-use overlay zone: Maximum net base density of at ]east 20 dwelling units per acre, excluding density bonuses for very ]ow-income, low-income, or senior housing (calculated as the equivalrnt net density for that portion of the site developed for residential use.). Dwelling units shall be located in mixed-use structures above first-floor or to the rear of non- residential uses. The City will permit residential-only structures of two stories to the rear of commercial uses fronting on a street. This provision will ensure that the 26-foot height limit does not impose an impediment to achieving a maximum net residential density on mixed-use site of 25 units per acre with a density bonus for affordable or srnior housing. ,~ CI I Y OF SAR4TOGA 2002 HOUSING ELEMENT City will adopt additional revisions to the Zoning Ordinance and additional incentives to increase the likelihood that the new construction objectives contained in the Housing Element can be achieved. Timeframe: Adopt Zoning Code amendment by July 1, 2002. Prepare information package and distribute by December 2002. Update and distribute armually thereafter. Report annually to the City Council, 2002 - 2006. Adopt revisions to zoning requirements or incentives, if needed, by December 2003 to achieve new construction objectives. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Division (conduct site analysis and draft Zoning Code amendments); Planning Commission (review and recommend amendments to City Council); City Council (accept recommendations and adopt Zoning Code amendments). Funding: General Fund. GOAL 2: ENCOURAGE THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING AFFORDABLE TO LOWER- AND MODERATE-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS Objective: To increase the supply of affordable housing and housing options in Saratoga to house additional households and families earning less than 80% of the Santa Clara County median income. Program 2.1: Density Bonuses and Affordable Requirement for Very Low- and Low-Income Housing The City will amend the Zoning Code to implement state law (Section 65915 of the California Government Code) requiring at least a 25 percent density bonus for any residential project in which at least 10 percent of the units are affordable to very low-income households or 20 percent of the units aze affordable to low-income households or 50 percent of the units aze designed for seniors. )n addition to the density bonus, the City will offer one or more of the following incentives to increase the fmancia] feasibility of constructing the affordable housing: • Fee waivers, reductions, and/or deferrals. • Modified standards for mixed-use projects (such as a higher floor azea ratio) that decrease development costs. • Modified design review process to avoid unnecessary or excessive costs or delays for achieving City development standazds. • Other incentives identified by the project sponsor or the City that will reduce development costs while achieving the overall intent of the City's zoning standards. The City will require that properties rezoned for the mixed-use overlay zone will include the minimum percentages of affordable or senior housing listed above as a condition of permit approval and the granting of density bonuses and/or other incentives. t ~ ' T , Timeframe: Adopt Zoning Code amendment by July 1, 2002. Recommend site(s) to City Council and re-zone property (ies) by December 31, 2002. RESOLUTION NO.04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA GRANTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CREATING MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Environmental Determination for Zoning Ordinance Amendment Relating to Mixed Use Development Standazds. WHEREAS, the Ciry CouncIl held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the Ciry CouncIl has determined that there are no significant environmental impacts related to the proposed creation of Mixed Use Development Standards consistent with program 1.2 of the adopted Housing Element of the City of Saratoga; and WHEREAS, the Ciry CouncIl has reviewed the information included in the Initial Study of Environmental Impact attached hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, the Ciry Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section I. After careful consideration of the information provided in the Staff Report, the Initial Study and from verbal testimony, the Ciry Council determines that there are no environmental impacts associated with the proposed creation of Mixed Use Development Standards consistent with program 1.2 of the adopted Housing Element of the City of Saratoga. Section 2. Pursuant to the requirements of the Saratoga City Code and the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, this Resolution shall become effective fffteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City CouncIl of the Ciry of Saratoga, State of California on March 3, 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor ATTEST: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk CITY OF SARATOGA INITIAL STUDY 1. Project Title: MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2. Lead Agency Name & Address: 13777 F uitva9e Avenue,uSaratoga! CA 950 Department 3. Contact Person & Phone # Thomas Sullivan, AICP, 408.868.1222 4. Project Location ALL COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ZONED DISTRICTS CITYWIDE 5. Project Sponsor's Name 8 Address: 13777 F uitva9e Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 6. General Plan Designation: NIA 7. Zoning: N/a 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limfted to laterphases oftheproject, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.; The proposed project is the implementation of Program 1.2 of the adopted Housing Element of the City of Saratoga. _. The new ordinance will establish development standards which will protect the existing commercial and professional office uses as well as the existing single family homes that back up to the commercial and office zones. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) NIA 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): No other agencies are involved ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ^ Agriculture Resources ^ Air Qualily ^ Aesthetics ^ Cultural Resources ^ Geology/Soils ^ Biological Resources ^ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ^ Hydrology/Water Quality ^ Land Use/Planning ^ population/Housing ^ Mineral Resources ^ Noise ^ Recreation ^ Transportation/rraffic ^ Public Services ^ Mandatory Findings of Significance ^ Utilities/Service Systems DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION X will be prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. - I find that the proposal MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are impos upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ~~ ~ ~<< I ~ 0 Date , Signature Thomas Sullivan, AICP, Director Community Development Department, City of Saratoga Printed Name For EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. Abrief explanation is required for all answers except"Nolmpact"answers that are adequately supported bylhe information sourcesalead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" question is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "NO Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operations impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, and then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significentwith Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Signif cant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses", maybe cross-referenced.) 5. Earlier analyses maybe used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CE~A process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c) (3) (D). In this rase, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) do~ument pursuanlt todapplicable Ilegall standahdsffand srtate whether such effects were ladldressed byem ligation meuastures based on the earlier analysis. c) wereanlcerporated or refined fromtthe earlieedocumen Band the extent to wh ch tthey address site-specific conrditbtns tortthetprojecfasures, w ~c 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources far potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previous prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than signifcance. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact _ Impact Incorporated Impact AESTHETICS. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, X but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a scenic highway? - a) Substantially degrade the existing visual character X or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, X which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion of Aesthetics Impacts: The requirement that Mixed Use projects conform to the City's Residential Design Guidelines will ensure that the aesthetics of the neighborhoods will be protected and enhanced. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whetherimpacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies my refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural ~( use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? X Discussion of Agriculture Resources Impacts: No discussion is required. III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District may 6e relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X applicable air quality plan?) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase X of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact o Impact concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial X number of people? Discussion of Air Quality Impacts: no discussion is required IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: X a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Dept. of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Dept. of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X r c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally X protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any X native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances X protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion of Biological Resources Impacts: No discussion is required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the X significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in §15064.5? X c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic Less Than Significant Potentially nth Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Signircant Mitigation Signircant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of format cemeteries? X Discussion of Cultural Resources Impacts: no discussion is required VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to X Div. of Mines and Geology Pub. 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?) X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table X 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the X use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Discussion of Geology and Soils Impacts: no discussion is required VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Significant Mltigatlon Significant No Impaa Impact Incorporated Impact hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or X acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Gov. Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan X or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?) X g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized - areas or where residences are intermixed with X wildlands? - Discussion of Hazards and Hazardous Materials: no discussion is required VIII.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge X such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of X the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact e) Create or contribute runoff water which would X exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or X Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year floor hazard area structures, X which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow X Discussion of Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts: no discussion is required IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X Discussion of Land Use and Planning Impacts: The Mixed Use Development Standards are set forth in the adopted Housing Element of the General Plan in program 1.2. X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Discussion of Energy and Mineral Resources Impacts: a) There are no known mineral resources within the City limits. XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels X Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Signiricant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion of Noise Impacts: no discussion is required XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X X X X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? - Discussion of Population and Housing Impacts: no discussion is required XIII.PUBLIC SERVICES: a) Would the proposal result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection? Police Protection? Schools? X X X X Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Signifcant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Parks X Other public facilities? X Discussion of Public Services Impacts: no discussion is required XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion of Recreation Impacts: no discussion is required XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffc patterns, including X either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm X equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Discussion of Transportation/Circulation Impacts: no discussion is required XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board? X Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Significant Mitigation Significant No /mpaci Impact Incorporated Impact b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Discussion of Utilities and Service Systems Impacts: no discussion is required XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X X X X X X X X to SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 7, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: o~G%~" -- PREPARED BY: Jesse Balocgh__..~ DEPT HE~ SUBJECT: State Budget Update RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Accept Report. REPORT SUMMARY: At this time, the City anticipates no further adjustments to its 2003/04 budget for the remainder of the fiscal year. The City's third quarter budget adjustment reconciled the projected loss of approximately $576k of its current year VLF revenue stream, which is considered a backfill gap to be repaid in 2006. All current year adjustments have left the City's Economic Uncertainty and Operating reserves intact. The City's 2004-05 Operating Budget process continues and will be presented in May 2004 to reflect the following highlights: 1) The Governor's proposed expansion of the ERAF shift of local property taxes to support school funding where an additional $156k is permanently lost beginning in FY 2004-OS in property taxes; 2) The accounting for the '/o cent triple-flip, which reduces current sales tax revenues with a property tax offset, based prior year sales; 3) Contribution of 4.35% for the Employee's portion of PERS, roughly estimated at approximately $200k; 4) Negotiated employee agreements and the rising cost of benefits; and 5) The negotiated Sheriff's Office contract. The recent proposals received by the Sheriffs Office include an 18.3% and 16% increase or a $521k and $468k increase, respectively. At the State level, most of the Legislatures efforts appear to be on Workers Compensation Reform and the 2004-OS Budget process. Additional proposed impacts to local governments will not be understood till the Governor delivers his proposed 2004-OS Revised Budget on May 14, 2004. Future milestones of the States budget process include the following: • April 1, 2004 -All proposed budget adjustments to the Governor's budget, excluding capital and May revision, aze due to the Legislature. • May 14, 2004 - Governor's May Revised budget for 2004-05. • June 15, 2004 -Legislature is required to pass the budget bill. FISCAL IMPACTS: To be determined. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): N/A. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Continue monitoring the States budget process and its impact on Sazatoga finances. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENT(S): 2 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works ,,`\CITY MANAGER: ~~'~L=~---~-' PREPARED BY: Cary Bloomquist DEPT HEAD: ~ SUBJECT: Grant Writer Service Provider Selection RECOMMENDED ACTION (S): Authorize the City Manager to enter into a professional grant writing service ageement with Randall Funding & Development, Inc. REPORT SUMMARY: Introduction: At their March 17, 2004 meeting, Council directed staff to perform reference checks on Seliger Associates and Randall Funding & Development grant writing firms and to perform demographic analysis on Cities similar to Saratoga in an effort to determine how similar cities meet their grant writing needs. In addition, Council directed staff to look at how our neighboring Cities handle the grant writing function. Discussion: Listed below is a summary of the two firms that responded to the Request for Proposal (RFP): Grant Service Vendor: T e of Services: Fee Structure: Seliger Associates Grant Writing, needs Retainer Based: Based upon assessment, research, $120.00 hourly rate, usually business plans. $2,000-$3,000 per month. Flat Fee Based: Vary from $2,500-$7,500 per individual grant proposal depending upon complexity. For a single project concept, $4,500 for five proposals each to different or anizations Randall Funding Development, Inc. & Grant Writing Services, Onsite needs assessment, Funding Advisor, Funding plan or guide. Affordable Funding program: $5,000 initial fee, $3,000 per grant, 5% incentive fee ($lOK cap) per awarded funding on each grant award. Monthly Fee Structure program: $3,000 flat monthly fee with the first months fee waived, 3% incentive fee (parameter same as Staff conducted the reference checks on both firms by contacting the references listed on the Request for Proposal Documents submitted by them. Most of the references responded, and the overall level of Satisfaction for each firm was high, with all references indicating they would either renew their contract with each firm or use them again For other grants. Listed on Attachment A is summary of this data. Staff also performed a search of all cities in California demogaphically similar to Saratoga utilizing data from the 2000 U.S. Census. Based upon this data, staff generated a profile for Cities most similaz to Saratoga and contacted each of these Cities and asked how they met their gant writing needs. The results are compiled in the table below: Munici ali How Grant Writin Function is erformed: Town of Atherton B Cit Staff (onl a few ants ursued each ear Cit of Belvedere B Cit Staff onl a few ants ursued each ear Town of Danville B Cit Staff mostl in Communit Dev. De t. Town ofHillsborou B Cit Staff rimaril b Police De artment Cit of Los Altos B Cit Staff mostl ublic works related Cit of Palos Verdes Estates B Cit Staff rimazil b Police D artment Town of Ross B Ci Staff onl 1-2 er eaz Cit of San Clemente B Cit Staff and Professional Grant Writer Cit of San Marino B Ci Staff most of the time one time used a Grant Writer Town of Tiburon B Ci Staff in Ci Mana ers Office Town of Woodside Does not o after ants, but would contract out if did. It should be noted that most of the Cities contacted do very limited grant writing. When grant funds aze solicited, they are typically non-competitive grants for relatively small funding awards (usually less than $500 thousand dollars). Staff also contacted neighboring cities to determine how these municipalities handle the grant writing function. Listed in the table below is a brief summary of the results: Munici ali How Grant Writin Function is erformed: Cit of Cam bell B Cit Staff via a ro riate de artment Cit of Cu ertino B Cit Staff via a ro riate d artment 2 of 4 Town of Los Gatos B Cit Staff via a ro riate de artment Cit of Monte Sereno B Cit Staff onl 1 ant ursued within ast 10 ears Cit of Sunn ale B Cit Staff via a ro riate d artment Staff also requested both companies to provide a listing of communities similar to Sazatoga and the past grant funding awarded to these Cities. Seliger and Associates chose not to provide this information, noting when making City to City comparisons, differing variables make these types of assessments difficult. Randall Funding submitted the listing on Attachment "B". In an effort to qualify the data in this report, it should be noted the information contained in the tables above and in the attachments to this report aze comparisons of somewhat similaz cities, and do not necessarily reflect the City of Saratoga's unique circumstance and individual likelihood of receiving grant funding. Summary' After detailed analysis, each firm is nearly equally qualified. Overall, the references for each firm checked out in an equal, balanced manner, with high marks and positive feedback from present and past clients. However, Staff recommends Randall Funding & Development, which has a local office (Council listed this as important at the last meeting), appears to be more aggressive /proactive, and has an excellent track record of winning competitive grant dollazs (74% winning record). FISCAL IMPACTS: Based upon the City of Sazatoga's population, scope of services, grant availability and eligibility criteria, it is likely the City would be submitting 5 or fewer grant applications per yeaz. At this level of activity, an example of costs is stated below: • 5 or less grant proposals each year, one time $5,000 start up fee • Assume 2 grants between April and June 30, 2004, with per application fee of $3,000: 2 x $3,000 = $6,000 • If grant funding awarded, will need to come back to Council for approval to pay 5 percent incentive fee and any applicable local match. • Costs for FY 2004-OS can be integrated into next years budget. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION (S): National Grant Writing Services and City Staff will continue to perform grant-writing services. ALTERNATIVE ACTION (S): Council may choose Seliger Associates or another alternative. FOLLOW UP ACTION (S): 3 of 4 City Manager will execute a professional grant writer service agreement if a firm is chosen. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -Reference Check Table Attachment B- Demographic Data from Randall Funding and Development 4of4 Attachment A Reference Table-Randall Funding & Development Entit Contact: Comments: Unified Govt. of Wyandotte Rosalyn Brown, Did not return several calls. County, Kansas Assistant to the Ma or Fort Bend County, Texas James Edwards, Good experience, exceeded Budget Officer goals, 6-yeaz relationship, approx. $2 million awarded, monthl contract o lion. City of Bell Gazdens, CA Doug Kingery, Excellent experience, 4-yeaz Police Lieutenant relationship, monthly contract o lion. City of Hartford, CT Leo Harrington, Good experience, 3-year Mgmt. Analyst relationship, approx. $3.5 million awazded, incentive contract. City of Cedar Rapids, Iowa Gary Hughes, Good experience, 2-yeaz Grants and relationship, primarily fire Programs Manger. grants, monthly contract o lion. Sacramento Unified School Melissa Brown, Good experience, approx. $11 District Assistant million awarded, 2-yeaz Superintendent relationship. City of Mobile, Alabama Stephen A. Dean, Did not return several calls. Fire Chief City of Camden, NJ Tony Lingo, Did not return several calls. Grants Coordinator Reference Table-Seliger and Associates Entit Contact: Comments: City of Richmond, CA Helen Nicols Excellent experience, 8-year relationship, approx. $11 million awarded, as needed contract. City of Los Angeles, CA Curt Gibbs Good experience, 5-year relationship, approx. 4.5 million awazded, as needed contract. Macoupin County Health Kent Tartu Good experience, 3-year Department, Illinois relationship, approx. $1.6 million awazded for one grant, onl 1 ant ursued. County of Merced, CA Gina Thexton Good experience, 3-year relationship, approx. $1 million awarded, project-by- ro~ect contract. Davidson County Community Ed Morse Good experience, 3-yeaz College, North Cazolina relationship, approx $190 thousand awazded, project-by- ro~ect contract. White Salmon Valley School Heather Weisfield Did not return several calls. District, Washin on City of Mission Viejo, CA David Cendejas Positive experience, recently entered into contract, applied for grant with results pending, ro'ect-b - ro~ect contract. ATTACHMENT B Communities with similar demographics to Saratoga. CA ' Akhough each of the following communities below may have similar demographics to Saratoga, CA, they all have different needs for funding based upon their assessments. Whether a community is small in size or has a high socioeconomic status, you will see that we get money for all our clients. City of Bell Gardens, CA -44,054 pop. DOJ COPS MORE $126,910.00 CA HCD Downtown Rebound Planning $29,005.00 CA Housing and Community Development CALHOME $500,000.00 CA OCJP Law Enforcement Equipment Technology Purchase Program $65,000.00 Big Valley Rancherla, CA - 225 pop. HHS ACF ANA Language Preservation Grant $447,888.00 City of Coral Gables, FL - 42,249 DOJ BJA OJP Bulletproof Vest Partnership 2003 $10,650.00 DOJ COPS School Resource Officers a.k.a. COPS in Schools 2003 $875,000.00 FL DCA Division of Emergency Management FEMA Citizen Corps $4,000.00 FEMA Assistance to Firefighters Grants 2003 $45,000.00 City of Anderson, SC 25,514 pop. EPA National Brownfields Assessment Demo Pilots $200,000.00 HUD Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) $140,502.00 City of Campbell, CA - 38,138 pop. DOJ COPS UHP (Universal Hiring Program) $150,000.00 DOJ COPS MORE $371,175.00 CA OCJP Law Enforcement Equipment Technology Purchase Program $45,000.00 DOJ LLEBG $37,013.00 City of Union City, CA - 66,869 pop. CA HCD Downtown Rebound Planning $42,000.00 FEMA FIRE Act Grant Program $128,981.00 DOJ COPS MORE $456,876.00 DOJ COPS School Resource Officers a.k.a. COPS in Schools 2003 $250,000.00 EPA National Brownfelds Assessment Demo Pilots $250,000.00 FEMA FIRE Act Grant Program $95,287.00 CA Roberti Z'Berg Harris (Prop.12 funds) $116,200.00 CA OCJP Law Enforcement Equipment Technology Purchase Program $79,954.00 City of Tukwila, WA -17,181 pop. FEMA FIRE Act Grant Program $177,030.00 City of Allentown, PA - 106,632 pop. Treasury Dept. ATF GREAT (Gang Reduction) 2003 $73,000.00 EPA Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund Pilots 2002/3 $1,000,000.00 HUD Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control Program 2003 $1,149,077.00 FEMA Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) $73,080.00 City of Fort Myers, FL - 40,214 pop. FL EMPATF -Emergency Management, Preparedness, and Assistance $38,575.00 ESRI CriOcal Data Infrastructure Program $18,000.00 FL Recreation Development Assistance Program (FRDAP) $150,000.00 City of National City, CA -54,260 pop. CA CCEPP (Community Code Enforcement Pilot Program) $337,653.00 City of Roanoke, VA - 94,911 pop HUD Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control Program 2003 $1,543,703.00 FM Global Arson Granl Program $2,900.00 FEMA FIRE Act Grant Programs $437,388.00 VA DCJS V-STOP 2003 $34,023.00 ESRI Critical Data Infrastructure Program 2003 $18,000.00 City of Hampton, VA -146,437 DOI NPS UPARR (Urban Park and Recrea0on Recovery) Program $210,000.00 City of Lynwood, CA - 69,845 pop. CA OCJP Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Program $600,000.00 City of Cedar Rapids, IA -120,758 pop. - FEMA Assistance to Firefghters Grants 2003 $92,443.00 IA Department of Economic Development Vision Iowa Program 2003 $10,500,000.00 Randall Funding & Development Inc 100 Shoreline FLghway, Building A, Suite 200 bLl] Valley, California 94941 Telephore 866-9-RANDAII. (866-972fi325) Fax 415.269.1430 EXPERIENCE Through successful use of our services, many cities and counties have received funding for their projects where they otherwise would have expended general fund dollars. Some of these projects listed below have priority areas similaz to the City of Sazatoga. Institute of Museum and Library Sciences, Learning Opportunities Grant Program - Award: $72,800 The Museum of Art in this southern city will use IMLS Learning Opportunities funding to develop an adult audio tour (for visitors aged thirteen to adult) and a family audio tour (for children aged eight to twelve and their parents/guardians) of a selection of works of art from the permanent collection. Anew dimension will be added to the museum's website to allow young people to access an online interactive exhibition of the museum's permanent collection and educational visual arts activities, designed especially for them, from school, home, or libraries. HUD Economic Development Initiative -Award: $2 Million A $2 million EDI grant and a $6.2 million loan guarantee to provide goods, services and jobs to four underserved target neighborhoods located in the south side of this New England city (pop. 140,000). Funds will be used to construct 6,000 square feet of retain space for the Learning Corridor Project. This activity will complement an on-going project, which includes the development of a new Montessori school, middle school, high school, family resource center, parking garage and a Boys and Girls Club. The $6.2 million in loan guarantees will leverage an additional $2 million in public and private sector support. The project will create an estimated 283 jobs. DOI NPS Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program -Award: $500,000 This grant, awazded to a major city in the Northeastern United States, will help rehabilitation of a park and recreation facility. This is the only recreation area immediately available to residents of the most economically distressed and crime-ridden area in the city. This project will result in the reopening of a Field House and address the deterioration an erosion of a pond. Iowa Department of Economic Development, Vision Iowa Program -Award: $10.5 Million This grant to a city in eastern Iowa will help fund a comprehensive redevelopment program focused on the Southside neighborhood next to downtown. Funds will be used for infrastructure and streetscape improvements, creation of a "Czech Village" that builds on the city's immigrant heritage, construction of a farmer's market building for year-round small-scale commercial activities, and creation of a Family Adventure park to offer recreational opportunities to all age ranges of the regional population. The $10.5 million grant will leverage approximately $140 million of private and public investment in commercial and residential development. Randall Funding & Development 1 Needs Assessment Meeting EPA Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund -Award: $500,000 With the $500,000 Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund grant, this midwestern county (pop. 2,000,000), will leverage funds to transform vacant or underutilized properties into productive industrial and recreational sites. The revolving loan fund will primarily provide low- - interest loans for redevelopment of the county's most distressed areas, where 30% of the Brownfields are located. California Department of Education, Public Charter Schools Grant Program - Award $444,000 This grant will help a large, ethnically diverse urban school system in California to establish a new charter high school focused of preparing students for careers in the high-tech field. The grant will cover startup costs for the new school including cumculum creation, computer equipment, and professional development for school staff. Los Angeles County Urban Tree Planting Program -Award: $90,000 This grant will pay for the planting of new trees along heavily traveled thoroughfares and commercial zones in a South Central Los Angeles city (pop. 66,000). The objective of the project is to bolster civic pride by beautifying the commercial heart of the City and draw potential customers to the area, thereby increasing the area's economic viability. DOI NPS Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program -Award: $500,000 This grant will assist a major city in the Rocky Mountain Region in rehabilitating a portion of the pool facility located adjacent to one of the oldest parks in this city. This facility, which serves an economically depressed neighborhood, would be closed permanently at the end of this season if not renovated. (Five RF&D Clients received awards from this program in 2002!) Randall Funding & Development 2 Needs Assessment Meeting SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Apri17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: ~°""G%`~"-- PREPARED BY: John Cherbone DEPT HEAD: ~-'~--_ SUBJECT: Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road "Gateway" Improvements -Approval of Corner Entry Re- Design RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Approve Gateway entry redesign plan. REPORT SUMMARY: Background: When the original design concepts for the corner entry to the Gateway were developed it was with specific input from the owner of the Union 76 Gas Station that helped define the final conceptual design. Unfortunately, it was discovered, after the initial conceptual design was developed, that the owner of the Union 76 Gas Station was not the owner of the real property. Over the past six months staff has been discussing the project with the owner of the real property, Berto Development. In the course of discussions, Berto Development indicated that in the near future the current use of the property may change and that the conceptual design of the comer entry would be too cumbersome for the small pazcel. Some basic design changes were discussed, which subsequently were agreed to by the property owner. These include: 1) reduce the size of the landscape azea to allow for additional pazking for future development changes to the property, 2) enter into a development agreement with the City limiting additional large landscaping requirements in connection with future redevelopment of the property, 3) vacate an existing unused right-of--way which encumbers the parcel. In return the City would receive a dedicated landscape easemenbright- of-way for the Gateway entrance improvements. The existing landscape easement where the City's existing entry sign is located is connected with the gas station use permit and becomes void when the use permit is changed or concluded. Unfortunately, the requirement to reduce the size of the corner entry area eliminates the proposed water feature. The good news is that there is still sufficient room for all the other amenities planned for the area such as the lazge oak tree, redwood trees, entry sign, and a majority of the original landscaping. The reduced scope of work frees up approximately $200K for City Council consideration on other improvements and amenities such as art, which has a strong interest from the Arts Commission, the Kirkmont Traffic Signal, an improvement supported by the surrounding neighborhood but not in the current project budget, or additional options as duected by the City Council. However, the actual savings, if any, will not be known until the constmction bids are opened. Recently, the City Council opted to use $100K from the Gateway project for a Redevelopment Agency feasibility study, which reduces the estimated redesign savings to $100K. Discussion: In December staff and the City's design consultant, Steve Kikuchi, began working with the Arts Commission to develop a conceptual design for the corner entry. The proposed design plan uses an azch as the main theme. The use of the azch was chosen as an element of design after the Memorial Arch. Where the design of the Memorial Arch and the Gateway entry differs is in the use of stone, which will give the corner a naturalistic creek side appearance. As a substitute for the water feature, the design incorporates a place for art. It is the desire of the Arts Commission to commission a work of art that they anticipate will cost between $SOK - $100K. The Commission understands that until the construction bids are open the amount of funds available for art is unknown. The Arts Commission is interested in developing a process for City Council consideration, which will help determine the most appropriate type of art for the site. FISCAL IMPACTS: There is sufficient funding for this work in the adopted budget in the Sazatoga-Sunnyvale Road Improvement Project. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The comer design modifications would not move forwazd at this time. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None in addition to the above. 2 of 3 FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): If approved, the conceptual plans will be incorporated in the Gateway construction documents. It is anticipated that Gateway project will go out to bid in May with construction corrunencing sometime in the summer. Additionally, a development agreement and a landscape easement dedication, in connection with the corner property, will be submitted to City Council for approval. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Conceptual Design. 3 of 3 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 17, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: -~ ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER: ~~~'" PREPARED BY: Lorie Tinfow DEPT HE ^~ SUBJECT: Community-wide Emergency Preparedness Plan RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Accept report and provide direction to staff. REPORT SUMMARY: As part of the discussion of the new Standazdized Emergency Management System (SEMS) Multihazard Functional Plan adopted by Council on Mazch 17, 2004, Council members expressed interest in further discussion of community-wide emergency prepazedness. As context for the discussion, please keep in mind that the following related activities are already underway: The spring session of Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training began on March 25 (with a full class of 30) and the summer session has been scheduled. ^ Three members of senior City staff completed County-wide Emergency Operations Center (EOC) training this past month. EOC training for Sazatoga staff is scheduled for April 19. In addition, staff has been directed to bring together the Mayor, assigned Public Safety Commissioners, and representatives from the Sheriff s Office and two Fire Districts to meet once a year as the Disaster Council. They will review Sazatoga's level of emergency readiness, confirm compliance with state regulations and report back to the City Council. For 2004, this meeting is expected to occur in June or July. ^ Staff also participates with and attends meetings of the Santa Clara County Emergency Managers Association, and attends the Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Council meetings. ^ In addition, staff has begun to make presentations about CERT to outside groups such as the Saratoga Amateur Radio Association (December 2003) and the Redwood Middle School PTA (February 2004). Staff will be posting information for resident emergency prepazedness on the City website shortly. Other possible activities include the following: ^ Include review of school emergency response plans under the umbrella of the School Ad Hoc Committee Prepare and distribute a document with directions for residents on responding to emergencies ^ Request copies of school emergency plans for coordination with City plans ^ Direct staff from the City, Sheriff's Office or the Fire Departments to hold regular meetings with all stakeholders (such as schools, chamber of commerce, churches, etc.) to coordinate emergency response efforts • Contract with consultant to implement a more extensive Community outreach program Council may determine other appropriate actions not listed. FISCAL IMPACTS: None unless actions requiring additional resources are directed. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): Continue to conduct activities already underway. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Staff will implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: None 2 of 2