CC 10-07-02 AGENDA
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING
CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~ REGULAR MEETING
10300 Torre Avenue, City Hall Council Chamber
Monday October 7, 2002
6:45 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
1. Receive a report from the Cupertino Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC)
regarding its accomplishments.
POSTPONEMENTS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter
not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will
prohibit the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff or a member of
the public, it is requ~ested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously.
2. Approve the minutes from the September 16 City Council meeting.
Adopt a resolution accepting Accounts Payable for September 13, 20, and 27, Resolution
Nos. 02-177, 02-178, and 02-179.
Adopt a resolution accepting Payroll for September 27, Resolution No. 02-180.
5. Accept the Treasurer's Budget Report - August 2002.
6. Approve the destruction of records from Finance and Code Enforcement files which are
in excess of two years old, Resolution No. 02-181.
7. Adopt a resolution setting the date of November 4 to approve the annexation of area
designated "Byme Avenue 02-06", property located on the west side of Byrne Avenue
October 7, 2002 Cupertino City Council & Page 2
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
between McClellan Road and Dolores Avenue; approximately 0.149 acre, Xu (APN 357-
12-038), Resolution No. 02-182.
Adopt a resolution setting the date of November 4 to approve the reorganization of area
designated "Creston Drive 01-04", property located on the north side of Creston Drive
between Berkeley Court and Alderney Court; approximately 0.335 acre, Hsu and Chen
(APN 326-12-060), Resolution No. 02-183.
Adopt a resolution making determinations and approving the reorganization of area
designated "Creston Drive 02-03", property located on the north side of Creston Drive
between Berkeley Court and Foothill Boulevard; approximately 0.541 acre, Johnson and
Whittaker (APN 326-12-062), Resolution No. 02-184.
10.
Approve a fee waiver request from the Cupertino Symphonic Band in the approximate
mount of $487.50 in facility use fees for two free public events: 1). A Veterans Day
Concert on November 8, 2002 ($375.50). 2). A Holiday Concert on December 11, 2002
($112.00). Both events will be at the Quinlan Center.
11.
Approve a fee waiver request from the League of Women Voters of Cupertino-Sunnyvale
in the approximate amount of $100.00 in facility use fees for a Candidates Forum for
citizens of Cupertino on October 23, 2002, at the Quinlan Center.
12.
Approve a fee waiver request from the Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD)
Board of Trustees in the approximate amount of $75.00 in facility use fees for a FUHSD
reception for a new superintendent on October 10, 2002, at the Quinlan Center.
13.
Approve a fee waiver request from the Iranian Federated Women's Club and Payvand
Cultural School in the approximate amount of $2,974.00 in facility use fees for its Sixth
Annual Arts and Cultural event that was held at the Quinlan Community Center on
Sunday, September 29, 2002.
14.
Approve a fee waiver request from the Cupertino Rotary Club in the amount of $9,133.00
in facility use fees for the 2002 Oktoberfest.
15.
Accept improvements: Roger and Annie Wang (grading, off-site improvements.), 11631
Upland Way, APN 316-21-029. (No documentation in packet).
16. Accept progress report on E-Waste program.
17. Accept informational report on environmental policies.
18.
Receive a report on the schedule to revise Chapter 10.48 (Noise Ordinance) of the
Cupertino Municipal Code regarding home maintenance activities - leaf blowers.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above)
October 7, 2002 Cupertino City Council & Page 3
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
19.
Approve applications M~2002-07 and EA-2002-13 located at 10441 Bandley Avenue,
City of Cupertino (APN 369-33-079). The Cupertino public library proposes to occupy
this space while the new library is being constructed.
a).
Grant a Negative Declaration
Approve modification of an approved use permit (2-U-77) to allow a temporary
library use (Cupertino Public Library) in an existing industrial office building at
10441 Bandley Drive
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
20.
Receive a report on the Community Survey conducted by Godbe Research for the
Blackberry Farm Master Plan.
21.
Consider setting the date of November 4 at 5:00 p.m. for a study session with the
representatives of the Chamber of Commeme regarding the General Plan revision.
ORDINANCES
22.
Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 1901: "An Ordinance of the City Council
of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.84, Second Dwelling Units in R-l, RHS,
A and A-1 Zones, of the Cupertino Municipal Code."
23.
Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 1903: "An Ordinance of the City Council
of the City of Cupertino Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City
Council of the City of Cupertino and the Board of Administration of the California Public
Employees' Retirement System to enhance 1959 survivor benefits."
STAFF REPORTS
COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Richard Lowenthal:
Economic Development Committee
North Central Flood Alternate
Northwest Flood Alternate
Public Dialog Consortium
Santa Clara County Cities Association
Santa Clara County Cities Legislative Alternate
Santa Clara County Library Joint Powers Authority
October 7, 2002
Cupertino City Council &
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Toyokawa Sister City Alternate
Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee ~ Alternate
West Valley Mayors and Managers
Vice-Mayor Michael Chang:
Audit Committee
Leadership Cupertino
Legislative Review Committee
Library Steering Committee
Public Dialog Liaison
Santa Clara County Housing and
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Alternate
Santa Clara County Library JPA Alternate
West Valley Mayors and Managers Alternate
Councilmember Sandra James:
Association of Bay Area Governments
Economic Development Committee
Environmental Review Committee Alternate
Library Steering Committee
Skate Park Committee
Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness
Santa Clara Valley Water Alternate
Councilmember Patrick Kwok:
Leadership Cupertino
Library Steering Committee Alternate
North Central Flood Zone
Northwest Flood Zone
Santa Clara Valley Water
Santa Clara_County Cities Alternate
Skate Park Alternate
Toyokawa Sister City
Councilmember Dolly Sandoval:
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABA) Alternate
Audit Committee
Environmental Review Committee
Legislative Review Committee
Santa Clara County Cities Legislative Review
Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Alternate
Santa Clara County Housing and
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee
Page 4
October 7, 2002 Cupertino City Council & Page 5
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to October 14 at 3:30 p.m. at Blackberry Farm for a closed session regarding
performance evaluation pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 for an evaluation of the
City Manager.
The next regular adjourned meeting will be held on October 21 at 5:30 p.m. in Conference Room
A of City Hall to conduct interviews for the Bicycle Pedestrian Conunission.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
Canceled for lack of business.
CITY OF
CUPER TINO
DRAFT MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Adjourned Meeting
Monday, September 16, 2002
ROLL CALL
At 4:40 p.m. Mayor Lowenthal called the meeting to order in Conference Room C of City Hall,
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California.
City Council members present: Mayor Richard Lowenthal, Vice-Mayor Michael Chang, and
Council members Sandra James, Patrick Kwok, and Dolly Sandoval. Council members absent:
None.
Planning Commission members present:, Commissioners Marc Auerbach, Taghi Saadati, and
Gilbert Wong. Absent: Chairperson Charles Corr and Angela Chen.
Staff present: City Manager David Knapp, Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood, City
Attorney Charles Kilian, Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith, Public Information
Officer Rick Kitson, Public Works Director Ralph Quails, and City Clerk Kimberly Smith.
STUDY SESSION
Conduct a joint study session with the Planning Commission regarding the Cupertino
Town Center.
Senior Planner Aarti Shrivastava compared the newest plans with the previous proposal
and highlighted the changes. She said that the applicant will be required to pay for the
cost of a traffic analysis, and a traffic calming plan for Rodrigues and Pacific Avenues
will be needed.
Ed Storm of Hunter/Storm, applicants, talked about the improvements to the parking
plans and the better jobs/housing balance in this current plan.
Landscape architect, Vince Lattanzio, discussed the landscaping plan, including a 15-foot
wide "central park" with a water feature and gateway elements on each end. These
features also serve as traffic calming elements. He said that they would retain existing
oak trees, and would catch and re-use runoff water. The street trees will be replaced with
plane trees, and special pavers and markers will be used to show pedestrian zones.
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 2
Sean Kelley, architect, discussed the plans for the two residential buildings, which
included subterranean parking. He explained how one of the 3-story buildings would
actually have four interior levels. The residential buildings will have stoops on the park
side to create a pedestrian friendly environment.
Dennis Medinger, architect, explained that the application for which they requested
approval tonight is a two-story office building and restaurant on a plaza near City Hall.
Ed Storm said that the height and central park both add impact and create a sense of place
that would still work well even if the master plan is denied.
Shrivastava read comments from Planning Commissioner Charles Corr (not present at the
meeting) which recommended more work on the east face of Building R1; a step-up in
the elevation on DeAnza at Building R2; and concern about whether there will be enough
parking, and if angled parking is a safe solution.
Planner Commissioner Gilbert Wong said he would not discuss or vote on this item
because his family owns a building in this area that would be affected. He asked that the
developer be sure to notify property owners if there is to be a community event in the
area.
In response to questions by Council, the applicant and the architects discussed in more
detail how the pitched roof on one building creates a fourth level in one of the buildings,
as well as the amenities to be offered by the play garden with bench seating on the
perimeter, and the other open space available. The streets can be shut down to make the
whole park available for community events, and in the future they plan to add light
fixtures on podiums that are historical markers which will connect to the civic area as
well, to enrich both the pedestrian and driver experience. The residential housing will be
junior I bedroom, as well as 1-, 2- and 3-bedroom units ranging from 600 sq. ft. to 1200
sq. foot.
Lowenthal asked staff to request that the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission investigate ways
to tie in pedestrian access between this project and the City Center development.
James said she would prefer that the retail footage was not reduced, and she still wanted
the housing to be for sale instead of rental units.
Auerbach suggested that this project include signs directing pedestrians to the library, city
hall, and nearby hotel, etc.
Kwok said he had concerns about traffic, and the other side of DeAnza may feel
unbalanced. He would like more analysis from the staff regarding public benefit. He also
agreed with Charles Corr's suggestions about a step up from DeAnza Boulevard.
Chang asked whether the civic park housing would have sufficient sound protection.
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 3
Deke Hunter of Hunter/Storm, applicants, distributed the latest version of the Civic Park
plans and elevations.
RECESS
At 6:00 p.m. the Planning Commission adjourned to September 23 at 5:00 p.m. for a study
session on the Crossroads Downtown Village concept, and the City Council recessed.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 6:45 p.m. Mayor Lowenthal called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300
Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
City Council members present: Mayor Richard Lowenthal, Vice-Mayor Michael Chang, and
Council members Sandra James, Patrick Kwok, and Dolly Sandoval. Council members absent:
None.
Staff present: City Manager David Knapp, Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood, City
Attorney Charles Kilian, Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith, Public Information
Officer Rick Kitson, City Planner Cynthia Wordell, Senior Planner Aarti Shrivastava, Senior
Planner Vera Gil, Senior Planner Colin Jung, Assistant Planner Gary Chao, Public Works
Director Ralph Quails, and City Clerk Kimberly Smith.
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
2. Proclamation for Jerry Kayser in recognition of his lifesaving aid to a motorist in distress.
Mayor Lowenthal presented a proclamation from the City, and Fire Chief Ben Lopes and
Santa Clara County Sheriff's Captain Dennis Bacon presented a plaque in recognition of
Mr. Kayser's life-saving actions.
3. Proclamation for Michael Gottwald in recognition of his support for community activism.
A video roll-in was shown of Mr. Gottwald throwing the ceremonial first pitch at a recent
San Jose Giants baseball game on Cupertino Day. Mayor Lowenthal presented the
proclamation.
4. Proclamation for the Cupertino National Little League Champions, the Cardinals.
5. Proclamation for the Cupertino National Little League 11-year old Tournament Team.
6. Proclamation for the Cupertino National Little League Major All-Stars.
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 4
Mayor Lowenthal presented proclamations and city pins to the players, team
representatives, coaches, and manager.
POSTPONEMENTS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Shiloh Ballard & Rebecca Elliot from the Peninsula Division of the League of California Cities
invited the Council to attend a tour of affordable housing developments in the West Valley cities,
tentatively scheduled for September 27.
CONSENTCALENDAR
Sandoval/James moved to approve items 7-22 on the Consent Calendar as recommended, with
the exception of items 7 and 22, which were pulled for discussion. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James,
Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
Adopt a resolution accepting Accounts Payable for August 30 and September 6,
Resolution Nos. 02-162 and 02-163.
9. Adopt a resolution accepting Payroll for September 13, Resolution No. 02-164
10. Accept the Treasurer's Budget Report - July 2002.
11. Review and approve year-end close 2001/02 budget adjustments.
12.
Approve the destruction of records from the City Clerk files, which are in excess of two
years old, Resolution No. 02-165.
13.
Adopt a resolution making determinations and approving the reorganization of area
designated "San Fernando Avenue 02-02", property located on the north side of San
Fernando Avenue between Orange Avenue and Byme Avenue; approximately 0.228 acre,
Liu (APN 357-15-039), Resolution No. 02-166.
14.
Amend Resolution No. 02-065, which established a Cupertino Teen Commission, to set a
limit of one term, Resolution No. 02-167.
15.
Approve a fee waiver request in the approximate amount of $14,833 for the Moon
Festival of Silicon Valley's event scheduled for September 21 and 22, 2002, at Memorial
Park.
16.
Accept improvements: Peizhen Zhang and Xiao-Bai Gu (grading and street), 21905 San
Fernando Avenue, APN 357-15-046; William Joseph Choe (grading, street
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 5
improvemems, street lights), 10388 Byrne Avenue, APN 357-14-032. (No
documentation in packet).
17.
Accept city projects performed under contract: Foothill Boulevard Bicycle Facility
Improvements Project, Project No. 9448 (Republic Electric). (No documentation in
packet).
18.
Accept improvement agreement: Gholamreza Javanmard and Ezat Loukzadeh, 10071
Orange Avenue, APN 357-16-029, Resolution No. 02-168.
19.
20.
Accept quitclaim deed: Gholamreza Javanmard and Ezat Loukzadeh, husband and wife
as community property with fight of survivorship, 10071 Orange Avenue, APN 357-16-
029, Resolution No. 02-169.
Accept grant of easement, roadway: Gholamreza Javanmard and Ezat Loukzadeh,
husband and wife as community property with right of survivorship, 10071 Orange
Avenue, APN 357-16-029, Resolution No. 02-170.
21.
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement
between the City and The GnT~ardo Partnership, Inc., for the design and construction
administration of the City Center Park (Four Seasons Comer), for a fee not to exceed
$101,500, and authorize the Director of Public Works to execute up to an additional
$15,000 of additional services, as may be required to complete the work, Resolution No.
02-171.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above)
7. Approve the minutes from the September 3 City Council meeting.
Chang/Kwok moved to approve the minutes with a typographical amendment to page 5.
Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
22.
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement
between the City and artist Roger Berry for the design, fabrication, and installation of a
piece of public art at the City Center Park (Four Seasons Comer) called "Perspectives",
for a fee not to exceed $143,788, Resolution No. 02-172.
Kwok expressed concern about spending funds for this sculpture at a time when the city
budget is tight. Staff explained the capital improvement budget had $150,000 set aside
for this project for some years. Recently, Council had voted to assign $100,000
earmarked for public art from Apple Computer on this project. Discussion followed
regarding the high visibility of this site at the major crossroads in the city. Public Works
Director Ralph Quails said that the resolution should not have included a paragraph
regarding $75,000 for additional services.
James/Sandoval moved to adopt Resolution 02-172, deleting the second-to-last paragraph
that authorized the Director of Public Works to execute up to an additional $75,000 for
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 6
additional services as may be required to complete the project. Vote: Ayes: Chang,
James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
Mayor Lowenthal reordered the agenda to discuss New Business item 28 next.
28.
Discuss maintenance at the Loree Center, 10029 Judy Avenue and consider an application
for Alcoholic Beverage License, Loree Liquors, 19050 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Nick Kouretas, property owner, explained his previous attempts to remodel the property
and his current plans to sell it, and he described the frustration he experienced with the
planning process during that effort. He referred to invoices that illustrated the
maintenance activities that were done on a regular basis, including sweeping the street,
garbage and trash hauling, and graffiti removal. He also described the improvements that
his tenants had made to the interiors.
Keith Poe, Cornish and Carey Commemial Encore International, spoke briefly about the
attempts to find a buyer for the property and distributed photographs of the property
behind the Loree Center. Council members commented that they received many
complaints from residents about the property. City Attorney Kilian said there was no
direct connection between the issuance of an alcoholic beverage license and the shopping
center maintenance.
Kwok/Chang moved to support the issuance of an alcoholic beverage license, and to ask
Mr. Kouretas to work diligently with staff to address the code violations regarding signs,
outside storage, graffiti, and the storage trailer. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok,
Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
23.
Approve applications U-2002-03, EXC-2002-04, EA-2002-05, CTC Funding, LLC
(Cupertino Town Center) located at the Southwest comer of Rodrigues and Torte
Avenues), APN (s) 369-40-017 and 369-40-002. (This item was continued from August
19th):
The Council members had conducted a study session on this topic earlier in the evening.
Senior Planner Aarti Slxrivastava briefly reviewed the project, and said that Phase 1 can
stand on its own if the rest of the master plan is not developed. The Planning'
Commission recommends approval.
The public hearing was opened at 9:12 p.m. There were no speakers, and the heating was
closed.
Sandoval/James moved the following. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Lowenthal,
Sandoval. Noes: None.
a). Grant a Negative Declaration
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 7
b).
c).
Approve an application for a Use Permit to demolish two office buildings (for a
temporary parking lot) and construct a 28,000 square, foot, two-story office
building and a 2,500 square foot commercial building, and approved a
modification to the condition of approval No. 13 in Section IV of the Planning
Commission resolution Nos. 6140 and 6141 regarding the use of pavers on sand.
Approve an exception to the Heart of the City Specific Plan to increase the height
of an office building from 36' to 45'.
RECESS
The City Council meeting was in recess from 9:20 to 9:29 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - continued
24.
Approve applications MCA-2001-04, EA-2002-10 for amendments to Chapter 19.84 of
the Cupertino Municipal Code and other sections of the code, if needed, related to
changes to Second Dwelling Unit Regulations, City of Cupertino located Citywide.
a).
Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 1901: "An Ordinance of the City
Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.84, Second Dwelling
Units in R-l, RHS, A and A-1 Zones, of the Cupertino Municipal Code."
Senior Planner Vera Gil gave a brief slide presentation.
Kwok/Chang moved to grant a Negative Declaration and approve the applications. Vote:
Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Kwok/Sandoval moved and seconded to
read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the
first reading thereof. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes:
None.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
25.
Request to initiate revisions to Chapter 10.48 (Noise Ordinance) of the Cupertino
Municipal Code regarding home maintenance activities - leaf blowers, City of Cupertino,
located Citywide.
Jeff Herman, 20350 Stevens Creek Boulevard, presented a short video illustrating two
maintenance workers using leaf blowers in his apartment complex. He talked about the
health hazard and physical stress from the noise, which is 2 to 3 times over the safety
limits. He asked that the ordinance be changed to prohibit the use of leaf blowers before
8 a.m. on weekdays and before 9 a.m. on weekends.
Jason Chen, a resident in the same complex, said that the complex is currently in a
construction zone because of the new hotel and apartments. However, the tracks and
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 8
jackhammers are less annoying than the leaf blowers, which are used every morning at 7
a.m.
Council directed staff to bring a report back to the next City Council meeting that would
give a time-line on making changes to the noise ordinance.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS
26. Approve items for the Cupertino Public Library and Civic Center Project:
Public Works Director Ralph Qualls showed slides of the 3-dimensional model on
display in the City Hall lobby.
Cathy Simon, SMWM Architects, gave a slide show of the elevations and floor plans.
Quails said the library would be relocating in November, then the old building would be
demolished and the site graded in January. A second contract will be awarded in June
2003 for the new construction.
In response to questions from Council, Quails stated that the design shows trees in the
parking lot, but the budget does not cover them at this time. Also, them is no budget for
the special paving on Torm Avenue. They will salvage and recycle materials wherever
possible.
Chang asked that the international language section be named on the plans, since it may
help in the fundraising associated with naming oppommities. He also asked for more
information on how the library is identified from the outside, and what other low-cost
options would be available for people who are currently using the community meeting
room in the old library.
Julie Famsworth, Deputy County Librarian, said they have a detailed list of shelving
materials and costs, etc., partly based upon bid information from the new Saratoga library
and the State. Some of the money may come out of the construction budget and some
shelving might be reused. In that case, another $650,000 will be needed for furnishings.
Bob Levy, 10802 Wilkinson, asked about emergency exits and staircases in case of
earthquake. He also asked whether solar panels would be feasible, and whether the
southern exposure through the clerestory windows would be a problem. Simon explained
that some of the windows are translucent and others are clear, but they all will provide a
substantial amount of light with low heat gain.
Chang asked that the rows of trees feature varieties that are easy to maintain. He asked
for a conceptual drawing of the community meeting room and what other low-cost
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 9
options would be available for people who are currently using the community meeting
room in the old library.
Lowenthal said that he still hoped for a drive-through book drop.
Council received the status report on the project design of the Cupertino Public Library
and Civic Center Project.
James/Chang moved to adopt Resolution 02-173 authorizing the City Manager to
negotiate and execute an agreement between the City and Nova Parmers for the
construction management services on Civic Center Project, for a fee not to exceed
$850,000, and authorize the Director of Public Works to execute up to an additional
$75,000 of additional services, as may be required to complete the work. Vote: Ayes:
Chang, James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
James/Chang moved to adopt Resolution No. 02-174 authorizing and directing the
preparation and execution of certain lease financing documents, authorizing the
preparation and distribution of a preliminary official statement in connection with the
offering and sale of Certificates of Participation relating thereto, and authorizing and
directing certain actions with respect thereto, Resolution No. 02-174
RECESS
At 9:07 the City Council meeting recessed and the Public Facilities Corporation convened.
At 9:08 the Public Facilities Corporation adjourned and the City Council reconvened.
NEW BUSINESS - continued
27.
Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Apple Computer,
Inc. for a six-month pilot program for the disposal of consumer electronics products and
computers (e-waste) in an amount not to exceed $25,000 and authorize funding for the
contract from the Resource recovery Fund in the amount of $25,000, Resolution No. 02-
175.
A short video presentation was made.
Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson Avenue, asked if all types of waste would be included,
and suggested putting information in the garage sale packet so people with old computers,
etc., would know about disposal resources.
Sandoval/Kwok moved to adopt Resolution 02-175. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok,
Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
28.
Discuss maintenance at the Loree Center, 10029 Judy Avenue and consider an application
for Alcoholic Beverage License, Loree Liquors, 19050 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 10
29.
30.
31.
This item was discussed earlier in the meeting.
Review development regulations affecting Randy Lane and Larry Way Neighborhood (Al
Zoning District) and conduct the first and only reading of Ordinance No. 1902: "An
Interim Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Adopting Interim
Measures to Immediately Rezone Approximately 9.7 Acres, Consisting of Sixty-Eight
Single-Family Residences, from A 1-43 Agricultural-Residential Zone to the P(A 1)
Planned Development Zone with Agricultural-Residential Intent and Declaring the
Urgency Thereof."
Senior Planner Colin Jung explained that although the R1 residential zone was amended
in 1999 to address mass and bulk issues, the A1 zoning ordinance was not changed, and
therefore does not have design regulations or design review. This interim ordinance
would prohibit new construction, which would give staff time to work with the
neighborhood residents to determine appropriate regulations for the neighborhood.
Chang/Kwok moved to enact the ordinance. Staff pointed out some typographical errors
and recommended additional provisions.
Chang/Kwok moved to withdraw the first motion, and moved to conduct the first and
only reading and enact interim Ordinance No. 1902 as corrected, with staff's
recommendations: "An Interim Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino
Adopting Interim Measures to Immediately Rezone Approximately 19 Acres, Consisting
of Sixty-Eight Single-Family Residences, from A1-43 Agricultural-Residential Zone and
the R1-7.5 Single Family Residence Zone to the P(A1) Planned Development Zone with
Agricultural-Residential Intent and Declaring the Urgency Thereof." Vote: Ayes: Chang,
James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None. The additional staff recommendations
adopted were as follows:
Chapter 4, Reeulations: 2. Requests for new construction shall be made to the
Design Review Committee for design approval to allow for the development,
subject to Chapter 19.28.080, 19.28.090 and 19.28.110 of the Cupertino
Municipal Code, except that all additions must receive a special permit.
Chapter 7. Pipeline: Applications for building permits filed prior to September 16,
2002 may be processed under the former zoning regulations in the A1-43 zoning
district subject to approval by the Director of Community Development.
Consider canceling the meeting of January 6, 2003.
Council concurred to cancel the first meeting in January.
First reading of Ordinance No. 1903: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City Council of the
City of Cupertino and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees'
Retirement System to enhance 1959 survivor benefits."
September 16, 2002 Cupertino City Council 11
Sandoval/James moved and seconded to approve the application. Vote: Ayes: Chang,
James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None.
The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Sandoval/James moved and seconded to
read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the
first reading thereof. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes:
None.
ORDINANCES
STAFF REPORTS
32. Receive informational report on weekly recycling service options and costs.
Public Works Director Ralph Qualls said that staff recommended waiting for
improvements in technology in order that the recycling service could accept single-
stream, commingled garbage. The City Council members concurred, and received the
report.
COUNCIL REPORTS
CLOSED SESSION
At 10:40 p.m., Council recessed to a closed session to discuss pending litigation - Government
Code Section 54956.9(a), City of Cupertino vs. International Disposal Corporation (IDC),
Califomia, case #CV793115.
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:50 p.m., the Council meeting was adjourned to Monday, September 23, at 4:00 p.m. in the
City Hall lobby to meet for a tour of Stevens Creek Trail. A hearing to review the Stevens Creek
Trail feasibility study was set for 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers on the same evening.
Kimberly Smith, City Clerk
For more information: Staff reports, backup materials, and items distributed at the meeting are
available for review at the City Clerk's Office, 777-3223.
Televised Council meetings may be viewed live on Cable Channel 26, and may also be viewed
live or on demand at www.cupertino.om. Videotapes of the televised meetings are available at
the Cupertino Library, or may be purchased from the Cupertino City Channel, 777-2364.
DI AFT
RESOLUTION NO. 02-177
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING
SEPTEMBER 13, 2002
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated
representative has certified to accuracy of the following claim.~ and demands and to the
availability of funds for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows
the following claims and demands in the mounts and from the funds as hereinafter set
forth in Exhibit "A".
CERTIFIED:
Director of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 7th dayof October ,2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
1020 595890
1020 595890
1020 595890
TOTAL CHECK
1020 595891
1020 595893
1020 595894
1020 595894
TOTAL CHECK
1020 595895
1020 595895
1020 595895
1020 595895
1020 595895
1020 595895
TOTAL CHECK
595896
1020 595897
1020 595898
1020 595899
1020 595899
TOTAL CHECK
1020 595900
1020 595901
1020 595902
1020 595903
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
09/06/02 1186 T~ PRINTEP~ 5506549
09/09/02 1550 ADONIS L NECESITO 1103500
09/13/02 2110 A~C BACKF~0W TESTING P~EP 1108312
09/19/02 1504 AG VENTURE TOURS LLC 5506549
09/13/02 2276 A~RA 1104510
09/13/02 2275 ~S.~HAMBP. A 1104510
09/19/02 1795
09/19/02 44
09/13/02 44
ALL CHEM SUPPLY CO INC 5208003
09/13/02 2298 ARCH WIRELESS 1106265
09/13/02 2298 ARCH WIRELESS 1106400
09/13/02 2298 ARCH WIRELESS 1104400
09/13/02 2298 ARCH WIRELESS 1107501
09/13/02 2298 ARCH WIRELESS 6104800
09/13/02 2295 ARCH WIRELESS 1105501
09/13/02 96
09/13/02 2601
09/13/02 2184
09/15/02 100
09/13/02 100
A~OWHEAD MTN SPRING WAT 5606620
BALL BITCH RAMPS 1106343
BLOSSOM SOFTWARE 6104800
BMI IMAGING SYST~ 1104300
BMI IMAGING SYSTEMS 1104300
09/13/02 ~2009
09/19/02 1066
09/13/02 M
09/13/02 127
PAGE 1
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX ;~4OUNT
NAME TAGS 0.00 -201.35
SERVICE 8/19-8/23/02 0.00 : 525.00
HEPAIN/EATON SCHOOL 0.00 125.00
RL~ pROG CITATIONS 7/2 0.00 10412.00
SEC~ITY INSTALLATION 0.00 1561.88
0.00 155.00
0.00 294.90
0.00 231.00
0.00 525.90
0.00 186.46
0.00 25.00
0.00 65.00
0.00 90.00
SERVICE JL'LY2002 0.00 11.59
SERVICE J~LY2002 0.00 13.18
SERVICE JULY2002 0.00 19.09
SERVICE JULY2002 0.00 7.59
SERVICE JULY2002 0.00 13.59
SERVICE JULY2002 0.00 85.55
0.00 131.14
0.00 1275.00
0.00 300.00
0.00 895.31
0.00 857.46
0.00 1752.77
0.00 350.00
0.00 19876.35
0.00 112.00
ENTERTAINER/VOL LUNCH
ADDITION TO 7/2002 PYM
Refund: Cheek - Bill C
SE~T2002 PROG~ING
0.00 760.98
RUN DATE 09/12/02 TIHE 09:49:05
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/12/02 CITY OF CUP~TINO PAGE 2
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK R~GIST~ - DISB~I~ F~RD
FUND - 110 - G]~'qE]~,L FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSU~ DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 595504 09/13/02 2779 CALIFORNIA HYDRONICS COR 1108504
1020 595905 09/13/02 1024 C~IFOP. NIA JOUP/~AL 1103300
1020 695906 09/13/02 132
1020 595906 09/13/02 132
1020 595906 09/13/02 132
1020 595906 09/15/02 132
1020 595906 09/15/02 132
TOTA~ CHECK
CALIFOP. NIA WATI~ SERVICE 1108407
CALIFOP. NIA WATER SERVICE 1105407
1D20 595907 09/13/02 2232 CARIAGA, LOOP. DES 110
1020 595907 09/13/02 2232 C~RIAGA, LOOP. DES 110
TOTAL CHECK
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 ~ 1107301
1020 595909 09/19/02 149 CA~ 1104510
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 CASH 1104000
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 CASH 1107200
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 CASH 1104310
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 C~H 2204010
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 CASH 1101070
1020 599909 09/13/02 149 C~SH 2204011
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 C~H 1107301
1020 595909 09/13/02 149 C~H 1104400
TOTAL CHECK
1020 595910 09/13/02 1057
1020 595910 09/13/02 1057
C~IDIAN B]~NEFITS SERVIC 110
C~RIDIAN B~NEFITS SERVIC 110
1020 595912 09/13/02 2626 CHANG, CH~-YA 1103300
1020 595913 09/13/02 2704 BRITON COP. DIEL 5606620
1020 595915 09/13/02
1020 595915 09/13/02
1020 595915 09/13/02
194 CD~ERTINO SUPPLY INC 5606620
194 C~ERTINO SUPPLY INC 5606640
194 CU~TINO SUPPLY INC 1105407
1020 595916 09/13/02 M2003 DARlq, MCTEAGUE 1101500
1020 595917 09/13/02 211
1020 595917 09/13/02 211
1020 595917 09/13/02 211
..... DESCEIPTION ...... SALES TAX
B+6 80-1 PUMP A~D MOTO 0.00
1337.95
JULY2002 S~RVIC~ 0.00 6233.76
J~LY2002 SERVICE 0.00 506.13
SSGAR~S~!T 0.00 103.84
CSGARNS~,"T 0.00 306.50
0.00 410.34
S~PT2002 CUP SCENE 0.00 3102.00
SERVICES 9/3-9/5/02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
UN~EP 1539-001
OE3 1539-002
C~,A1539-003
25.00
38.20
43.30
20.00
7.71
12.97
13.54
12.98
40.00
33.79
247.49
426.94
165.40
592.34
132.00__
200.00
240.00
527.93
36.06
281.98
96.21
414.27
212.50
3302.64
4176.46
6370.83
RUN DATE 09/12/02 TIM 09:49:06
= FINANCIAL ACCO~ZNG
1020 599918
1820 595919
1020 595921
1028 995921
1020 595921
TOTAL C~CK
1O20 595922
1020 S95923
1020 595929
1020 595923
1020 595923
TOTAL CHECK
1020 595924
1020 595925
1020 595926
1020 595927
1020 595927
TOTAL CHECK
ISSUE DT .............. %'~NDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
09/13/82 211 DELTA DENTAL pLAN OF CA 110
09/19/02 M2005
09/19/02 214
09/13/02 850
09/13/02 1242
09/13/02 1242
09/13/02 1242
09/13/02 220
09/13/02 220
09/13/02 220
09/13/02 220
09/13/02 1958
09/13/02 1104
09/13/02 223
09/13/02 1494
09/13/02 1434
DEPART~NT OF ADMINIETP. A 960
DEPAR'f~ OF TRANSPORTA 1108602
DIDD~4~ A~ING PARTY ST 1101065
DIGIT/%L PRINT IM~P~SSION 1104530
DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1101065
DIGITAL PRINT IMPP. ESSION 1101000
1020 595928 09/13/02 242
1020 595929 09/13/02 243
1020 595930
1020 595930
1020 595930
1020 595930
1020 595930
TOTAL C~ECK
DISPENSING TECHNOLOGY 2708404
DIVERSIFIED RISK 1104540
~ON & MIKE'S SWEEPING IN 2308004
09/13/02 260
09/13/02 260
09/13/02 260
09/13/02 260
09/19/02 260
09/13/02 2989
09/13/02 2619
09/13/02 1295
09/19/02 2361
09/13/02 2361
..... DESCRIPTION
MOBIL~ FIRST AID KITS
SDI/776-5260-0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
~OUNT
-450.36
13399.59
1000.00
45.03
22.97
56.21
429.43
241.32
726.96
308.50
1394.15
47.04
20.41
458.94
1919.94
11632.61
60.53
17605.79
8?8.49
15.48
15.46
20.64
30.,75
98.82
161.17
50,00
4080.00
3.07
12.67
39.00
RUN DAT~ 09/12/02 Tim 09:49:06
09/12/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURS~NT FUND
SELECTION C~ITERIA: =ransact.trans_date between "09/09/2002" &nd "09/19/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
ISSUE DT .............. V~NDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 595934 09/13/02 2361 FIRST BANKCARD S$06549
1020 595955 09/13/02 2271 FLINT TRADING COMPANY 6308840
1020 595936 09/13/02 2783 FLYING LOGO SISTERE 5506549
1020 895997 09/13/02 1808 KIMFREY 1106900
1020 595938 09/12/02 278 GAB CONSTRUCTION INC 2709440
1020 595938 09/13/02 278 GAB CONSTRUCTION INC 2709443
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 595939
1020 595940
1020 595940
TOTAL C~ECK
09/13/02 281 GARDENLAND 6308840
09/13/02 298 ~RAIN~ER INC 2708405
1020 595941 09/13/02 2531 GDRU ELECTRIC 5708510
1020 595942 09/13/02 M2003 HAZARD, ALYNE 5506549
1020 595946 09/19/02 M
1020 595947 09/13/02 343
1020 595949 09/13/02 346
1020 595949 09/13/02 2528
1020 595950 09/13/02 347
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SA.LES TAX
AUGUST 2002 STATEM~ 0.00
AUGUST 2002 STAI~MENT 0.00
PARTS 9342 0.00
SUPPLIES 16048 0.00
F~N EXPO 9/16-9/21 0.00
RETENTION 0.00
RETENTION 0.00
0.00
INSTALL 220 ~LT PLUG
PAGE 4
47.80
1062.50
107.18
237.59
456.06
126.00
2942.70
8442.85
11385.55
0.00 93.25
0.00 6.53
0.00 15.24
0.00 21.77
0.00 975.00
0.00 630.00
0.00 226.78
PARTS/SUPPLIRS 15902 0,00 105.60
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 260.19
PARTS/SUPPLIES 15794 O.00 106.99
Refund: Check - Bill C 0.00 112.00
SUPPLIES 0.00 123.76
RUN DATE 09/12/02 TZM~ 09:49:07
1020 595951 09/13/02 359
1020 595952 09/13/02 M2003
MISDU 110
MOON FESTIVAL 1103300
OFFICE DEPOT 1104000
OFFICE DEPOT 1104510
OFFICE DEPOT 5906249
OFFICE DEPOT 2308004
OFFICE DEPOT 1108101
PA~E 5
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX ~MOUNT
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 218.97
HSINCHU CI~ DELEGATIO 0.00 500.00
PARTS/POOL VACLK]M 0.00 246.74
Refund: Check - Facili 0.00 300.00
FL~N EXPO 9/17-9/20 0.00 126.00
09/I2/02 CZTY OF C~TIN0 PAGE
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~I~CK REGZ~I~ - DISBURSEmeNT FUND
FUND - 110 - GEN~RltL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSU~ DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 595970 09/13/02 500 OPERATING ~NGINE~ PUB 1104510
1020 595971 09/13/02 807 DAN OSBOP,~ DRA:OSBORIqE 2706405
1020 $95971 09/13/02 807 DAN OSBOP~ DBA:OSBOF~NE 1108321
1020 995971 09/13/02 507 DAN OSBOE~ DBA:OSBORI~ 1108315
1020 695971 09/13/02 507 DAN OSBOP~ DBA:OSBOR~ 1108503
1029 $99971 09/13/02 507 DAN OSBOP,~ DBA:OSBOP/~ 1108902
1020 995971 09/13/02 507 DAN OSBOP~ DBA:OSBOPJ{E 6308540
1020 995971 09/19/02 507 DAN OSBOP~ DBA:OSBOP-NE 1108312
1020 995971 09/12/02 507 DAN OSEOP-~ DBA:OSBOP, NE 1108302
1020 399972 09/13/02 833 P E R S 110
1020 695972 99/19/02 893 P E R S 110
1020 595972 09/13/02 899 P E R S 110
1020 395972 09/13/02 833 P E R S 110
1020 595972 09/13/02 833 P E R S 110
1020 395972 09/18/02 833 P E R S 110
1020 595972 09/13/02 839 P E R S 110
TOTkL C~ECK
1020 595973 09/13/02 2692 PACIFIC BELL
1108507
1020 598974 09/13/02 2692 PACIFIC BEI~L
1020 $95974 09/13/02 2~692 PACIFIC BELL
1020 595974 09/13/02 2692 PACIFIC BELL
1020 595974 09/13/02 2692 PACIFIC BELL
1020 595974 09/12/02 2892 PACIFIC BELL
1020 595974 09/13/02 2692 PACIFIC BELL
1020 595974 09/13/02 2692 PACIFIC BELL
TOTAL CHECK
1108501
1108503
1108201
1108908
1108509
5606640
5606620
1020 595975 09/13/02 819
1020 595975 09/13/02 513
TOTAL CHECK
PACIFIC C~ & ELECTRIC ( 1109407
PACIFIC C~ & ELECTRIC ( 1108602
1020 393976 09/13/02 1528
1020 595976 09/13/02 1528
1020 595976 09/13/02 1528
1020 995976 09/13/02 1528
TOTAL C~CK
PACIFIC UTILI~"f RQUIPI~EN 6308840
PACIFIC D'TILITY EQUIP~N 6908840
..... DESCRIPTION ......
W P.W. TIREE 9/02
CONSULTING
CONSULTING
CONSULTING
CONSULTING
CONSULTING
CONSULTING
CONS~TING
CONSULTING
*PERS BYBK
PER~ SPEC
PERS E)4PLY
8/o1-a/3o
8/02-9/03
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AMOUNT
BgB.O0
10996.50
140.41
140.42
140.41
140.42
140.42
140.41
140.41
140.42
140.42
1000.00
1172.47
1672.32
432.77
140.42
140.42
140.42
9962.56
180.14
104.27
216.60
118.11
25320.77
95.47
55.47
232.79
55.47
169.21
162.79
872.85
9.96
47.82
57,78
382.25
981.28
382.25
668.24
1814.02
RUN DA~/'E 09/12/02 TI)(~ 09:49:08
09/12/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 7
ACCOb'~TING PERIOD: 3/03 C~CK ERGISTER - DISBDRSE~NT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/09/2002" and "09/13/2002"
CASH ACCT CH~CK NO ISSUE DT .............. %'ENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 595977
09/13/02 533 PEP~ LON~ T~RM CARE PRCG 110
1020 595978 09/13/02 542 PINE CONE LLI~ER 5606620
1020 595979
09/13/02 1929 PLAITING E~SOUECR ASS0CI 1107302
1020 595981 09/13/02 2770 PROSIONS, INC. 5208003
1020 595981 09/13/02 2770 PROSIG'NS. INC. 6208003
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 595982 09/13/02 2380 Pi]RC~E POWER 1104310
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 598983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 809
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595953 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 D9/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
1020 595983 09/13/02 509
~OTAL CHECK --
1020 595984
09/13/02 1480 PAGING WATEP~
5806349
5706450
1020 595985
09/13/02 2608 ERIC
1020 595986
1020 595986
TOTAL CRECK
09/13/02 1071 NEIq~LIC ELECTRIC 1108601
09/13/02 1071 P, EPUELIC ELEC~RIC 1108830
1020 595987
09/13/02 590 RIUE VOSS TRUCKING INC 5208003
1020 595988
09/13/02 602 ROYAL COAUE TOUP~ 5506549
1020 595989
1020 595989
1020 595989
1020 595989
09/13/02 625 SAN JOSE WATER CO, ANY 1108407
09/13/82 625 SA~ JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407
09/13/02 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP%NY 1108407
09/13/02 625 SAR JOSE WATER CO,ANY 1108407
..... DESCRIPTION ...... S~E TAX AMOUNT
PENS LTC/#2405 0.00 159.24
MATERIAI~ 15795/15796 0.00 : 639.83
SERVICE AUGUST2002 0.00 1980.00
DUPL PI~ SEPT2000 0.00 -111.50
N~ TAGS/M~SRSHIP 0.00 201.35
0.00 89.85
C4%RA~E SALE BANNER 2ND 0.00 692.90
(~E S~ HAiR 0.00 1009.97
0.00 1702.77
POSTAGE ~R P~-SET 0.00 10100.00
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25291 0.00 21.98
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25261 0.00 6.58
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25372 0.00 44.44
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25103 0.00 49.31
PARTS/SUPPLIES 23228 0.00 18.45
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25254 0.80 15.98
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25113 0.00 43.76
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25110 0.00 16.14
PARTS/SUPPLIeS 25265 0.00 30.88
PARTS/SUPPLIES 17511 0.00 106.11
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25253 0.00 21.46
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25251 0.00 8.31
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25259 0.00 8.57
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25258 0.00 16.51
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25255 0.00 4.68
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25107 0.00 34.73
PARTS/SUPPLIES 25262 0.00 19.09
0.00 467.24
TICKETS/S~R CAMP 0.00 2925.00
7 PT SESSIONS 0.00 231,00
4 LO~S AUGUST2002 0.00 700,00
TRIP 8/25-B/26 0.00 768,77
7/15-8/29 0.00 121.96
6/28-8/29 0.00 47.23
6/28-8/29 0.00 67.45
6/28-8/30 0.00 129.73
RUN DATE 09/12/02 TINE 09:49:09
ACCOLr~TING PERIOD: 3/03 ~CK F~GISTER - DISB~TT F0~D
.............. FENDOR ............. F~D/DEPT
1020 599999 09/13/02 625
1020 595989 09/13/02 625
1020 595989 09/13/02 625
1020 595989 09/13/02 625
1020 595989 09/13/02 625
1020 $95990 09/13/02 626
1020 595991 09/13/02 626
1020 590992 09/13/02 258
1020 595993 09/13/02 1754
1020 595994 09/13/02 M
1020 595995 09/13/02 1648
1020 595996 09/13/02 1890
1020 596997 09/13/02 M2005
1020 595998 09/13/02 2076
1020 595999 09/13/02 1954
1020 596000 09/13/02 671
2020 596001 09/13/02~1011
1020 996002 09/13/02 1090
1020 996003 09/13/02 677
1020 596054 09/13/02 2045
1020 596054 09/13/02 2045
1020 596004 09/13/02 2049
1020 596005 09/13/02 M
1020 596006 09/13/02 698
1020 596007 09/13/02 701
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
SAN JOSE NAT~ COMPANY 1109407 7/01-9/30 0.00
SAN JOSE RATER C~4PA/IY 1108407 7/01-8/30 0.00
SAN JOSE WATE~ C~A~Y 1105407 6/27-8/29 0.00
SANTA CLARA CO DEPT OF R 1102100
SANTA CLARA CO DEPT OF R 1102100
SANTA CLARA COUNTY 110
SAnTA CLARA, CO~ OF 1104510
SATHYAN~RAYAN, PARIMALA 580
SAVIN CORPORATION {SUPPL 1104310
SCHWAA~ INC 5605600
SHAMSI ~SI~4ATI 5506549
SILICON VALLEY MANUFACTU 1101000
SPHERION CORPORATI~ 1108201
STANDARD BUSINESS MAC'IN 1101500
1104300
1104300
1104300
1104300
1104300
119.65
32.10
394.01
242.53
4853.89
40.50
170.14
75.86
17.99
6313.04
CITATIONS JANUARY2002 0,00 1799.00
CITATIONS ~JLY2002 0.00 2340.00
V OR~ 583312780 0.00 552.62
Refund: Check - Btll C 0.00 112.00
PUBLIC HOP, ES CONTRACT 0.00 83284.70
09/12/02 T~ME 09:49:10
09/12/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOL~NTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~CK ~EGISTER - DISBURSE~ F~
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/09/2002" and "09/13/2002"
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
09/13/02 799 Z~R ROAD I~FILL 5208003
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SUPPLIES 17567
S~/PPLIES 28123
SUPPLIES 25120
A LOPEZ JR 566398126
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
PARTS 8317
SUPPLIES 8323
UNI/TED WAY
C~INESE/ENGLISH T~S.
T~SLATION
S~/PPLIES
SUPPLIES 17084
FY 2002-2003 OPEN ptrRC
%308957246 AUG2002 SER
HAZ WASTE DISPOSAL
HAZ WASTE DISPOSAL
COMPOST DLVRy JUNE2002
PAGE 9
AMOUNT
63.82
81.45
31.36
219.76
161.84
500.00
237.44
234.41
108.00
1273.80
240.00
1513.80
290.88
85.08
847.96
43.59
454,00
910.00
9169.00
RUN DATE 09/12/02 TIME 09:49:10
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 02-178
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING
SEPTEMBER 20, 2002
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated
representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the
availability of funds for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows
the following claims and demands in the mounts and from the funds as hereinafter set
forth in Exhibit "A".
CERTIFIED:
Director of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 7th day of October ,2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
09/20/02
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.:rans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DSPT
1020 594204 V 07/05/02 M NAGUIB, MIRAN 580
1020 595900 V 09/13/02 M2003 BRIAN CONNOR 5506549
1020 596024 09/20/02 4 A T & T 1108501
1020 596024 09/20/02 4 A T & T 1108501
1020 596024 09/20/02 4 A T & T 1108501
1020 596024 09/20/02 4 A T & T 1108501
1020 696024 09/20/02 4 A T & T 1108501
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596028 09/20/02 13
1020 596025 09/20/02 13
TOTAL CHECK
ACME & SONS SANITATION C 1108321
ACME & SONS SANITATION C 5606640
1020 596026 09/20/02 2634 ADT 5606620
1020 596027 09/20/02 1680 ~Vi~AOE G]~%FIX 1104530
1020 596028 09/20/02 28 AIRGA~ 6308840
1020 596026 09/20/02 28 AIEGAS 1108303
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596029 09/20/02 M ALA~, ROMILA 580
1020 596030
09/20/02 918 Ai~O WORLD TRAVEL A~ T 5506549
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
1020 596031 09/20/82 1884
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
{020 596031 09/20/02'18~84
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
1020 596031 09/20/02 1684
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
1020 596031 09/20/02 1884
TOTAL CHECK
ALBERTSONS-NORTHEP~N DIVI 1106342
kLBERTSONS-NORTHEAN DIVI 5806349
ALBERTSONS-NORTHERN DIVI 9806349
ALBERTSONS-NORTHEAN DIVI 5806349
;~LBERTSONS-NORT~ERNDIVI 5606620
AI~ERTSONS-NORTNEAN DIVI 5806349
ALBERTSONS-NORT%4EAN DIVI 1106342
ALBERTSONS-NORT~ERN DIVI 5806349
ALBERTSONS-NORT~ER/~ DIVI 5806349
AL~ERTSONS-NORTHERN DIVI 5806349
/tLBERTSONS-NORTHERN DIVI 1106342
A/~ERTSONS-NORTUERN DIVI 5606620
1020 596032
1020 596033 09/20/02 2676 AM~RIGAS 5606620
1020 596034 09/20/02 57 ARAMARK 1104510
1020 596035
09/20/02 M BAI2%JI, KANC~Abl~LA 580
1020 596036
09/20/02 968 SAP AUTO PARTS
6308840
DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
Refund; Check - SU~94ER 0.00
ENTERTAINER/VOL LUNCH 0.00
PAGE 1
AMOUNT
-32.00
-350.00
SEPT2002 STATEMENT 0.00 35.33
SEPT2002 STATEMENT 0.00 17.05
SEPT2002 STATEMENT 0.00 17.05
SEPT2002 STATEMENT 0.00 17.05
SEPT2002 STATEMENT 0.00 17.05
0.00 103.53
SUPPLIES 0.00 154.13
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 168.83
0.00 322.96
0.00 301.54
0.00 256.45
ALARM
WARRING NOTICES 17408
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PUEC
Refund: Check - FALL P
0,00 38.12
0,00 175.69
0.00 213.81
0.00 408.00
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TIME 16:06:47
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 2
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
transact.frans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 S96037
1020 596038
1020 596039
1020 596040
1020 596041
1020 596041
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 596042
1020 596043
1020 596044
1020 596045
1020 596046
1020 596047
1020 596048
1020 596048
1020 S96048
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596049
1020 596050
1020 596050
1020 596050
~020 596050
1020 596050
TOTAL CNECK
1020 896051
1020 596051
1020 596051
1020 596051
1020 596051
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596052
1020 596053
1020 596053
TOTAL CHECK
09/20/02 2787
09/20/02 720
09/20/02 2013
09/20/02 88
09/20/02 1305
09/20/02 1305
BARTLETT TREE RESEARCH L 1108201
BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308840
BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING CO 6308840
BAY AREASHELVING INC 1108501
RETYERPLY BusINESS FORMS 1107501
EETTERPLY BUSINESS FORMS 1107501
09/20/02 2i79
09/20/02 100
09/20/02 1165
09/20/02 M
09/20/02 2788
09/20/02 2194
09/20/02 130
09/20/02 180
09/20/02 130
BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES 2709430
EMI IMAGING SYSTEMS 1100000
BRUCE BARTON PUMP SERVIC 1108504
BRUCE, FRANCES 580
09/20/02 130
09/20/02 147 CASE 5506549
09/20/02 147 CASH 5506549
09/20/02 149 CASE 1101040
09/20/02 149 CASH 1104000
09/20/02 149 C-~H 2204010
09/20/02 149 CASH 1108503
09/20/02 149 CASE 1104000
09/20/02 2125
09/20/02 1820
09/20/02 1820
CASEIER-DEPT OF PESTICID 1108408
CERIDIAN BENEFITS SERVIC 110
CERIDIAN BENEFITS SERVIC 1104510
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES
ARBORIST CLASSES 0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC
SUPPLIES/PO 8373
SUPPLIES 0.00
SUPPLIES 0.00
DISCOUNT 0.00
0.00
518.00
194.69
344.38
173.23
502.13
493.13
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 682.50
MICROFILM PROC 0.00 54.13
PARTS 0.00 651.93
Refund: Check - FALL. 0.00 48.00
GROUP DINNER 0.00 912.93
CALENDARS FOR 2003 0.00 46.10
CPRS CONF 0,00 1845.00
0.00 30.00
SPEAY LIC.RNWL G.JENSE
ADM FEES AUGUST 2002
MED/DEP CARE AUGUST 20
0.00 22.50
0.00 27.50
0.00 50.00
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TINE 16:06:48
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOU~ING PERIOD: 3/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSE~/~T FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
CASS ACCT C7{ECK NO
1020 596054 09/20/02 M
1020 596055 09/20/02 2769
1020 596056 09/20/02 NE2003
1020 596057 09/20/02 192
1020 596058 09/20/02 ~2003
1020 596059 09/20/02 M2003
1020 596060 09/20/02 184
1020 596061 09/20/02 M2003
1020 596062 09/20/02 194
1020 896062 09/20/02 194
1020 596062 09/20/02 194
1020 596062 09/20/02 194
1020 596062 09/20/02 194
TOT~-L CT{ECK
1020 596063 09/20/02 201
1020 596063 09/20/02 201
1020 596063 09/20/02 201
TOT;~L CHECK
1020 596064 09/20/02 676
1020 596065 09/20/02 1596
1020 596066 09/20/02 2790
~020 596067 09/20/02'12-'--42
1020 596068 09/20/02 228
1020 996068 09/20/02 228
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596069 09/20/02 2578
1020 596070 09/20/02 M2003
1020 596071 09/20/02 249
1020 596071 09/20/02 249
1020 596071 09/20/02 249
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596072 09/20/02 251
1020 596072 09/20/02 251
DAPPER TIRE CO 6308840
DAPPER TIRE CO 6308840
DAPPER TIRE CO 6306940
DEPAR~NT OF J~3STICE 1104510
DESIGN IN HOOD F~ITL~RE 1106647
DIGITAL J73ICE, INC. 1103500
DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1106529
DL~AY'S TIRE SERVICE INC 6308840
DUBAY'S TIRE SERVICE INC 6308840
EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1108314
EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1108303
PAGE 3
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES T;~{ AMOU~
Refund: Check - Rental 0.00 300.00
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 1494 .11
REINB 0.00 78.77
PRO SRVS 0.00 70.00
DEPOSIT JAN 9 TOLZR 0.00 217.50
COPY SERVICE 0.00 12.18
SERVICE AGREE~T FOR 0.00 100.00
DATE 09/20/02 TIME 16:06:49
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 4
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURS~4ENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002-
CASH ACCT C~ECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 596073 09/20/02 1949 EVENT SERVICES 1108503
1020 596073 09/20/02 1949 E~ENT SERVICES 5208003
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 596074 09/20/02 253 EXC~GE LINEN SERVICE 5606620
1020 596074 09/20/02 253 EXC~L~NGE LINEN SERVIC~ 5606620
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 596075 09/20/02 2191 EYERS HITCH CENTER, INC. 6309820
1020 596076
09/20/02 2304 FIELD PAOLI ARCHITECTURE 4269212
1020 596077 09/20/02 1255 FIRST AUTOMOTIVE DIS~"RIB 6308840
1020 596078 09/20/02 266 FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 1108303
1020 596079 09/20/02 275 SUSA~ FU~3BA 5806449
1020 596080 09/20/02 2476
1020 596080 09/20/02 2476
TOTAL CHECK
GARDEN EQUIPMENT CLINIC 1108314
GARDEN EQUIPMENT CLINIC 1108314
1020 596081 09/20/02 281 GARDENLAND 1108315
1020 596081 09/20/02 281 GARDENLA~D 6308840
1020 596081 09/20/02 281 G~E~ 6308840
1020 596081 09/20/02 281 C~EN~ 6308840
1020 596081 09/20/02 281 GARDENLAND 5308840
1020 896081 09/20/02 281 C~E~ 6308840
1020 596061 09/20/02 281 ~E~ 1108408
1020 596081 09/20/02 281 C~ 1108315
TOTAL CHECK
~020 596082 09/20/02 17----41 GOVCO~EOTION, INC. 6104800
1020 596083 09/20/02 298 GRAINGER INC 6308840
1020 596083 09/20/02 298 GRAINGER INC 6308840
1020 596083 09/20/02 298 GRAINGER INC 1108312
1020 596063 09/20/02 298 C,~AINGSR INC 5606620
1020 596083 09/20/02 298 GRAINGER INC 1108312
1020 596083 09/20/02 298 GRAINGER INC 6308840
1020 596083 09/20/02 298 GP~AINGER INC 6308840
1020 596083 09/20/02 298 GRAINGER INC 5606620
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596084 09/20/02 2500 TERRY GREENE 4239222
1020 596085 09/20/02 M Gupta, A~ar 550
1020 596086
09/28/02 2791 H & L INTEP~NATIONAL, INC 1108312
DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
0.00
3000.00
8/01-8/31 0.00 162.88
8/01-8/31/02 0,00 102.84
0.00 265.22
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN P~'RC 0.00
0.00
291.55
195.96
487.51
HITCh/PO 8348 0.00 343.64
PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT 0.00 53804.23
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PI/RC 0.00 108.79
SUPPLIES/PO 8361 0.00 432.96
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 210.42
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 173.03
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 186.49
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 27.44
RE~ P.O.52975 0.00 -54.38
SUPPLIES/PO 8369 0.00 529.28
SUPPLIES/PO 8362 0.00 173.16
0.00 1676.40
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
SUPPLIES 0.00
SUPPLIES 0.00
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
SUPPLIES 0.00
0.00
1409.98
101.40
16.30
316.00
148.73
204.86
246.56
433.99
1592.95
CIVIC CENTER C~GES 0.00 39.49
Refund: Check - Rental 0.00 750.00
SUPPLIES/PO 8351 0.00 533.45
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TI~ 16:06:50
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
PAGE 5
..... DESCRIPTION ...... S~LES TA~ AMOU~
1020 596067
1020 596088
1020 896088
TOTAL CHECK
09/20/02 M
09/20/02 1235
09/20/02 1235
1020 596089 09/20/02 1410 HILLYARD 5606620
1020 596090 09/20/02 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108501
1020 596090 09/20/02 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108407
1020 596090 89/20/02 334 HOME DEP0T/GRCF 1108507
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596091 09/20/02 1898 AUTOMATIC RAIN CO. 1108314
1020 596091 09/20/02 1898 AUTOMATIC RAIN CO. 1108314
1020 596091 09/20/02 1898 AUTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1106314
1020 596091 09/20/02 1898 AL~TOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108312
1020 596091 09/20/02 1898 AUTO~4ATIC PAIN CO. 1106314
1020 596091 09/20/02 1898 AUTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108312
1020 596091 09/20/02 1896 AUTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108315
1020 596091 09/20/02 1898 AUTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108303
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596092
1020 596093
1020 596094
1020 596094
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596095
1020 596095
~020 596095
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596096
1020 596097
1020 596096
1020 596098
TOT;iL CHECK
1020 596099
1020 596099
TOTAL CHECK
09/20/02 2027
09/20/02 341
09/20/02 2181
09/20/02 2181
09/20/02 995
09/20/02 995
09/20/02 995
09/20/02 1708
09/20/02 1977
09/20/02 2285
09/20/02 2285
09/20/02 369
09/20/02 369
09/20/02 1927
1020 596100
MARS~AHOVEY 1104400
ICE CENTER OF CUPERTINO 5806449
IMSA:INT'L MUNICIPAL SIG 1108201
IMEA:INT'L MUNICIPAL SIG 1108601
INSERV COMPA2;Y 1108502
INSERV COMPANY 1108501
INSERV COMPAN~ 1108504
FRANK JELINCH 1101060
JOE'S T~CTOR SERVICE 1108302
KAT~R~fN KELLY JOESTEN 1106265
KATHRYN KELLY JOESTEN 1106500
GARY KOP. NA~RENS 1104590
Refund: Check - FALL.
LIFR/AD&D
LTD
0.00 578.00
0.00 7946.66
0.00 6156.36
0.00 14103.02
SUPPLIES 0.00 463.04
SUPPLIES/PO 24367 0.00 17.26
pARTS/SUPPLIES 24530 0.00 42.65
PARTS/SUPPLIES 5345 0.00 103.17
0.00 163.08
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 37.48
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 177.78
FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC 0.00 11.70
FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC 0.00 46.50
FY 2002-2003 OPF/~ PURC 0.00 75.99
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 189.27
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 2109.80
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 344.99
0.00 2993.51
PLEXIGLA~S/EOC
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
DUES
IMSA ANNUAL DUES
WATER TRT~ SEPT2002
WATER TRT~ SEPT2002
WATER TRT~ SEPT2002
STATE BRD MTG
SERVICE/MCCELLAN RANCH
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
SUPPLIES/PO 8692
SUPPLIES 8341
0.00 223.14
0.00 3212.00
0.00 120.00
0.00 40.00
0.00 160.00
0.00 175.73
0.00 175.73
0.00 175.72 --
0.00 527.18
0.00 208.50
0.00 450.00
0.00 400.00
0.00 137.50
0.00 537.50
0.00 109.47
0.00 354.67
0.00 464.14
ANNUAL CONF 9/3-9/6 0.00 134.00
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TIME 16:06:50
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
05/20/02
ACCOUNTING PERIOD:
CITY OF CUPERTINO
3/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
transact.trans_date between "09/16/2082" and "09/20/2002"
FUND - 110 ' GENERAL FUND
1020 596101
1020 596101
1020 596101
1020 596101
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 596102
1020 596103
1020 596104
1020 596105
1020 596106
1020 596106
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596107
1020 596108
1020 596109
1020 596110
1020 996111
1020 596111
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596112
1020 596113
~020 596114
1020 596115
1020 596115
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596116
1020 596117
1020 596118
1020 596119
1020 596119
1020 596119
1020 596119
TOTAL CHECK
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
09/20/02 2118
09/20/02 2118
09/20/02 2118
09/20/02 2118
L~SER IMPRESSIONS INC 4240000
LA,HR IMPRESSIONS INC 1106500
LA~ER IMPRESSIONS INC 4240000
LASER IMPRESSIONS INC 5506549
09/20/02 2300
09/20/02 390
09/20/02 1642
09/20/02 396
09/20/02 1395
09/20/02 1393
09/20/02 1347
09/20/02 2515
09/20/02 397
09/20/02 1356
09/20/02 408
09/20/02 408
09/20/02 M
09/20/02 2588
09/20/02 M2003
09/20/02 1698
09/20/02 1698
09/20/02 1968
09/20/02 1602
09/20/02 M2009
09/20/02 1175
09/20/02 1175
09/20/02 1175
09/20/02 1175
DESCRIPTION
FINAL PMT
LOGO TILES
LOGO TILES
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8330
D.C CONF 9/3-9/8
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
REC Lt~NCR GIFTS
BALLOONS/VOL. REC LUNC~
SERVICE AGREE~NT FOR
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES/PO ' S 15579/15
PUBLICATION
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PUBC
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PUBC
Refund: Check - FALL,
SRVS
0.00
0.00
PAGE 6
AMOUNT
18.94
38.97
822.70
242.48
1123.09
360.00
431.53
896.86
227.50
DATE 09/20/02 TIME 16:06:51
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
1020 596120 09/20/02 1987
MILESTEK CORPORATION 1103500
1020 996121 09/20/02 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108314
1020 596121 09/20/02 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108315
1020 596121 09/20/02 444 MINTON'S L~]~BER 1108503
1020 596121 09/20/02 444 MINTON'S L~ER 5708510
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596122 09/20/02 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201
1020 596122 09/20/02 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108281
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596123 09/20/02 465
1020 596123 09/20/02 465
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596124 09/20/02 M
1020 596125 09/20/02 2604
1020 596126 09/20/02 475
1020 596127 09/20/02 479
1020 596128 09/20/02 M
1020 596129 09/20/02 ME2003
1020 596130 09/20/02 2639
1020 596131 09/20/02 491
1020 596131 09/20/02 491
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596132 09/20/02 499
1020 596133 09/20/02 493
1020 596133 09/20/02 493
1020 596133 09/20/02 483
1020 596133 09/20/02 493
1020 596134 09/20/02 1190
1020 596135 09/20/02 1220
1020 596135 09/20/02 1220
MOD/~TAIN VIEW ~EN CEN 1108314
MOUNTAIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 1108312
NAGUIB, DALIA 580
NAT'L NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH 1102100
NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RE 1108314
NATURES WOOD 5606620
~EJAT, FARIBA 580
NEMETZ, SCOTT 5606620
NOVA PARTNERS INC 4259313
NUNES MANUFACTURING 6308840
N~JNES MANUFAC~ING 6308840
DEBBIE O'NEILL 5606620
OFFICE DEPOT 1101000
OFFICE DEPOT 1107503
OFFICE DEPOT 1104400
OFFICE DEPOT 1106300
OFFICE DEPOT 5806249
OFFICE DEPOT 5806449
OFFICE DEPOT 5806349
OFFICE DEPOT 2204010
RONALD OLDS 1103500
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
PAGE 7
AMOUN~
SUPPLIES/PO 16456 0.00 60.83
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8357 0.08 40.91
SUPPLIES/PO 16139 0.00 17.19
SUPPLIES/PO 24369 0.00 38.13
PARTS/SUPPLIES 24368 0.00 12.74
0.00 108.97
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
O.O0
78.93
78.93
157.86
56.75
172.38
229.13
REPLACE CK594204 0.00 32.00
~L~BOOKS 16560 0.00 347.35
SUPPLIES 0.00 91.63
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PHBC 0.00 462.23
Refund: Check - Rental 0.00 750.00
TRAINING & MATERIALS 0.00
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00
91.42
12920.00
SUPPLIES 0.00 17.60
sLrPPLIES 0.00 140.80
0.00 186.40
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 380.00
SUPPLIES 0.00 43.74
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 58.89
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 243.12
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 14.04
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 91.84
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 6.32
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 21.65
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 193.09
0.O0 674.69
PRO SHVS 0.00 522.50
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 32.45
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 37.09
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TINE 16:06:52
- FINARCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CRECK REGISTER - DI$BURSE~ FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.%rans_da~e between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT C~ECK NO ISSUE DT .............. V~/~DOR ............. FUND/DSPT
1020 S96135 09/20/02 1220 0RC~ SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108830
1020 596135 09/20/02 1220 ORCI~ SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108503
1020 596135 09/20/02 1220 ORC~ SUPPLY H~DWARS 1108501
1020 596135 09/20/02 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLY F~R/)WARE 1108507
1020 596135 09/20/02 1220 ORC~ SUPPLY N3~RDWARE 1108505
1020 596135 09/20/02 1220 ORC~ SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108830
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596136
09/20/02 981 ORC~ S~/PPLY ~W;%RS 1108503
1020 596137 09/20/02 505 ORLANDI T~AIL~R 6308840
1020 596137 09/20/02 505 OPJ~I TRAILER 6308840
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 596138 09/20/82 2692 PACIFIC DELL 6104800
1020 596138 09/20/02 2692 PACIFIC DELL 1108501
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596139 09/20/02 518
1020 596139 09/20/02 818
1020 596139 09/20/02 515
1020 596139 09/20/02 915
TOT~J~ CHECK
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1102403
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 8708510
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108505
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 5708510
1020 596140
09/20/02 520 PAPERDIRECT INC
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
1020 596141 09/20/02 526
1020 596141 09/20/02 526
1020 596141 09/20/02 526
1020 596141 09/20/02 526
TOTAL CHECK
AMOUNT
1020 596142 09/20/02 1675
~020 596143 09/20/02 54--'-5
1020 596143 09/20/02 545
TOTAL CHECK
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 61.09
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 38.88
P~3~ PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 -43.29
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 26.37
PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 14.10
DISCO[~4T STMT 8/26 0.00 -15.32
0.00 151.37
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
SUPPLIES 8338
SUPPLIES/PO 8374
PARTS/SUPPLIDS 8374
42.07
168 . 94
71.23
240.17
0650215331481159N0 0.00 894.78
0650213488414159N6 0.00 299.00
0.00 1193.78
5506549 SUPPLIES 0.00
C~OL PHILLIPS 5506549
JEFF PISERCHIO 5606640
JEFF PISERUEIO 8606640
R#18410 0.00 -417.63
R#18410 5/24/02 0.00 344.34
IMPg~fr pLNS 0.00 536.81
0.00
SHIPPING EXPENSES
BBF GOLF CONCDSSIONAIR
1020 596144 09/20/02 ME2003 POLITO, RUSS
1020 596145 09/20/02 F~2003 POLITO, RUSS
0.00
0.00
0.00
1108408 SUPPLIES 0.00
1108408 SUPPLIES 0.00
1020 596146 09/20/02 M2003 QUOTA OF CUPERTINO 1104400
09/20/02 2418 R & R PRINT S~RVICES 5806349
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1020 596147
1020 596148 09/20/02 570 ~DIO S~ACK 1108501
1020 596149 09/20/02 1406 RAINES CF~VORLET 6308840
1020 596150 09/20/02 M SANG~, PP~D~ 580
329.79
74.99
1899.00
1973.99
270.00
4259.33
21.64
14.73
108.00
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TIME 16:06:52
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER ' DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between ',09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 596151
1020 596152
1020 596152
TOTAL CHECK
09/20/02 M RAVADGE, CYNTHIA 580
09/20/02 581 RELIABLE 1104300
09/20/02 581 RELIABLE 1104300
I020 596153 09/20/02 599
1020 596154 09/20/02 601
ROES RECREATION EQUIPMEN 1108314
ROYAL B~ASS INC 6308840
1020 596155 09/20/02 2043 RUDE'S PEST MANAGEMENT 1108506
1020 596155 09/20/02 2843 RUDE'S PEST MANAGEMENT 1108505
1020 596155 09/20/02 2043 RUDE'S PEST MANAGEMENT 1108321
1020 596155 09/20/02 2043 RUDE'S PEST MANAGEMENT 1108504
1020 596155 09/20/02 2043 RUDE'S PEST MANAGEMENT 1108503
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596156 09/20/02 959
1020 596157 09/20/02 2784
1020 596158 09/20/02 628
1020 596159 09/20/02 633
1020 596159 09/20/02 633
1020 596159 09/20/02 633
1020 596159 09/20/02 633
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596160 09/20/02 M2003
1020 596161 09/20/02 1919
~020 596162 09/20/02 ~-
1020 596163 09/20/02 M
1020 596164 09/20/02 2397
1020 596165 09/20/02 644
1020 596166 09/20/02 646
1020 596167 09/20/02 1449
1020 596166 09/20/02 651
1020 596169 09/20/02 652
1020 596169 09/20/02 652
TOTAL CHECK
SANTA CLARA VALLEY 1106647
SANTA CLARA VALLEY TP. ANS 5500000
SARFATY, ORJgA 580
SATO, BUNJI 580
SAVIN CREDIT CORPORATION 1104310
SCREEN DESIGNS 5806349
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
PAGE 9
AMOUNT
Reftund: Check - Rental 0.00 100.00
OFFICE SUPPLIES 17111 0.00 60.89
OFFICE SUPPLIES 17112 0.00 21.51
0,00 81.90
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8314 0.00 583.25
SUPPLIES/PO 8363 0.00 118.92
SP~AY FOR RODENTS 0.00 225.00
SPP, AYFOR BEES/WASPS 0.00 100.00
SPP~AY FOR RODENTS 0.00 225.00
SPEAY FOR RODENTS 0.00 225.00
SPRAY FOR RODENTS 0.00 225.00
0.00 1000.00
9/22-12/21 #2997045 0.00 47.67
TIME/MATERIALS 15905 0.00 595.38
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TIME 16:06:53
09/20/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.tra~s_da~e between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
PAGE 10
DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT
1020 596170 09/20/02 2076
1020 596170 09/20/02 2076
1020 596170 09/20/02 2076
1020 596170 09/20/02 2076
TOT~.L C~ECK
1020 596171 09/20/02 2415
1020 596172 09/20/02 1954
1020 596173 09/20/02 571
1020 596174 09/20/02 1421
1020 896175 09/20/02 886
1020 896176 09/20/02 529
1020 596177 09/20/02 695
1020 596177 09/20/02 695
1020 596177 09/20/02 695
TOTAL CRECK
1020 596178 09/20/02 701
1020 596178 09/20/02 701
1020 596178 09/20/02 701
1020 596178 09/20/02 701
1020 596178 09/20/02 701
1020 596178 09/20/02 701
1020 596178 09/20/02 701
TOTAL CEECK
1020 596179 09/20/02 1794
~020 596179 09/20/02 1'--~94
TOTAL CEECK
1020 596180
1020 596181
1020 596181
TOT~tL C7/ECK
1020 596182
1020 596183
1020 596183
TOTAL CHECK
09/20/02 ME2003
09/20/02 2781
09/20/02 2781
09/20/02 2792
09/20/02 2584
09/20/02 2584
1020 596184 09/20/02 1445
SIMON M~TIN-VEGUE WINKE 4239222
SPHERION CORPORATION 1108201
STAND~RD BUSINESS F~CEIN 1101500
STANLEY ST~ENER 1108505
DARRYL STOW 2204010
SUNGARD P~NTAMATION, INC 6104800
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5806849
TARGET STORES 5806349
TARGET STORES 1106647
T;tRGET STORES 5806349
TARGET STORES 5806349
TARGET STORES 5806449
TARGET STORES 5706450
TARGET STORES 5806349
TMT-PA774WAy LLC 6308840
TMT-PAI~{WAY LLC 2708404
TRYBUS, JEFF 1104530
AL TSUGAWA 1104400
AL TSUGAWA 1104400
U S HE~TEWORKS 5806449
US GA~S 5806449
M. CFJ~NG 0.00 10.00
PI2~ING CO~ 0.00 30.00
HOUSING CO~ 0.00 30.00
S. JAMES 0.00 10.00
0.00 B0.00
PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT 0.00 175748.47
TEMP N. LA 0.00 672.00
SERVICE 0.00 2.07
C3%RPET/FLg~NIT~URE 0.00 760.00
NEINE 0.00 106.89
SUPPLIES 0.00 48.53
SUPPLIES 23004 0.00 19.87
SUPPLIES 23003 0.00 44.12
SUPPLIES 17568 0.00 66.65
SUPPLIES 23002 0.00 21.90
SUPPLIES 21758 0.00 8.62
SUPPLIES 17517 0.00 64.66
0.00 274.35
TI~E/MATERI;tLS 0.00 629.81
SUPPLIES/PO 8356 0.00 84.22
0.00 714.03
A~;%L CONF 9/03-9/06
SERVICE AGR~ W/E 9/1
SERVICE AGPJ~ W/E 9/8
SRVS
SRVS
SRVS
0.00 360.00
0.00 360.00
0.00 720.00
0.00 60.00
0.00 1487.40
0.00 624.90
0.80 2112.30
SUPPLIES 17082 0.00 150.19
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TI~ 16:06:53
- FIN;tNCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/20/02 CITY OP CUPERTINO PAGE 1!
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT
SELECTION CRITERIA: ~ransact.trans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
C~H ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 596185 09/20/02 M VAN DEN ELSHOUT, KARIN 580
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108504
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108503
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108501
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108201
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108505
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108602
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 5208003
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 5606620
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 6104800
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1101200
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VSRIZON WIRELESS 1108102
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 V~RIZON WIRELESS 1108005
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1107503
1020 596186 09/20/02 310 VEWIZON WIRELESS 1107501
TOTAJ~ CHECK
1020 596187 09/20/02 746 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS 1106500
1020 596188 09/20/02 1329 VICENT WANG 1106500
1020 596189 09/20/02 M WF~EY, SH~ON 580
1020 596190 09/20/02 761 WEDEMEVER BAKERY 5606620
1020 596190 09/20/02 761 WEDEMEYER BAKERY 5606620
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596191 09/20/02 1937 WEST VALLEY SECURITY 5606620
1020 596192 09/20/02 779
1020 596192 09/20/02 779
TOTAL CHECK
WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO INC 1108504
WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO INC 1108504
~020 596193 09/20/02 7--~5
1020 596193 09/20/02 775
TOTAL CHECK
WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL L 1108602
WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL L 1108602
1020 596194 09/20/02 2745 DORIS WILLIA24S 5506549
1020 596195 09/20/02 2093 ALEX WYKOFF 1104530
1020 596196 09/20/02 M YANG, JA~S 580
1020 596197 09/20/02 962 LINDA YELAVIC~ 5506549
1020 596197 09/20/02 962 LINDA YELAVICH 5506549
1020 596197 09/20/02 962 LINDA YE~AVIUE 5506549
1020 596197 09/20/02 962 LINDA YELAVICH 5506549
TOT;iL CRECK
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
Refund: Check - Full r 0.00
ANOUNT
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 394.81
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 99.75
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 807.87
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 692.69
#4088496999 AUG2002 0.00 98.82
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 195.85
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 47.90
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 447.27
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 51.84
#408456999 AUG2002 0.00 51.84
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 185.99
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 66.25
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 446.50
#4088456999 AUG2002 0.00 111.10
0.00 3695.18
OFPICE SUPPLIES 16053
0,00
PIANO TUNING
Refund: Check - Rental
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
WEB-SERVER ENH/~NCEMENT
AUTO CONFLIC TESTER UP
0.00
0.00
0.00
SERVICE AGREEMENT POR
~TNUAL CONF 9/03-9/06
Refund: Check - Return
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
MONTHLY SOCIALS
ME~ERSHIR
VOL SUPPORT
BIRTHDAY SOCIALS
0.00
283.05
70,00
750.00
330.16
359.26
155.07
80.12
59.54
109.66
2563.71
2489.75
5073.46
200.00
134.00
750.00
21.96
32.18
28.76
51.97
134.87
845183.22
DATE 09/20/02 TIM~ 16:06:54
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/20/02 CIT%{ OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/16/2002" and "09/20/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
TOTAL ~JND
TOTAL REPORT
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUN~T
0.00 845183.22
0.00 845183.22
RUN DATE 09/20/02 TIME 16:06:54
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 02-179
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING
SEPTEMBER 27, 2002
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated
representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the
availability of funds for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows
the following claims and demands m the amounts and fi.om the funds as hereinafter set
forth in Exhibit "A".
CERTIFIED:
Director of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this /th day of October ,2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYE S:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
09/26/02 CZTY OF C~ENTrNO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~CK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
1020 596199 09/24/02 1066 BROWNING-FEP. RI$ INDUSTR~ 520
1020 596203
1020 E96203
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596204
1020 596205
1020 596206
1020 596207
1020 596207
1020 596207
1020 596207
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596205
1020 596209
1020 596210
1020 596211
1020 596212
1020 596213
1020 596214
1020 596215
1020 596215
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596216
1020 596216
TOTAL CI~ECK
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
09/27/02 M2003
09/27/02 1680
09/27/02 25
09/27/02 25
ACCOUNTING UNIT 1108005
ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1101070
AIR COOLED ENGINES INC 6308840
AIR COOLED ENGINES INC 6309840
09/27/02 29
09/27/02 2319
09/27/02 2330
09/27/02 61
09/27/02 61
09/27/02 61
09/27/02 61
09/27/02 63
09/27/02 864
09/27/02 1032
09/27/02 2504
09/27/02 966
09/27/02 95
09/27/02 100
09/27/02 1066
09/27/02 1066
A~fT-~%S PEN & PENCIL CORP 5606640
C~OL ATI4OOD 1104000
AW DIRECT INC 1108830
;~E-LORJ~AINE I~I 5706450
09/27/02 124
09/27/02 124
PAGE 1
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT
AGREEMENT 7/01/02 PG15 0.00 1500000.00
TEMPOP~%RY BUILDING D~P 0.00 · 32969.00
TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 710.88
TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 932.54
LABOR 0.00 107.00
0.00 1780.12
EPA MANIFEST FEES 2001 0.00 275.00
COPIES/PC PACKET 0.00 218.12
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 40.11
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 40.68
0.00 80.79
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 120.00
8/19-8/30/02 0.00 2477.33
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8700 0.00 499.48
P~ ~E 9/2002 0.00 130.00
PLANT CARE 9/2002 0.00 230.00
0.00 590.00
IMPRINTED ~OLF PENCILS 0,00 749.81
PROP TAX 7/1-6/30/03 0.00 5516.09
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8372 0.00 200.70
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TIME 12:23:45
09/26/02 CITY OF C~/PERTINO PAGE 2
ACCOUNTINS PERIOD: 3/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.frans_date between .09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 596217 09/27/02 1476 C~ON DESIGN GROUP 110
1020 596217 09/27/02 1476 CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110
1020 596217 09/27/02 1476 CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110
1020 596217 09/27/02 1476 CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110
1020 596218 09/27/02 2232 CARIAGA, LOU~DES 110
1020 596218 09/27/02 2232 CARIAGA, LOURDEE 110
1020 596219 09/27/02 146 CASH
1020 596219 09/27/02 146 CASH
1020 596219 09/27/02 146 CASH
TOTAL CHECK
5806349
1106265
1020 596220 09/27/82 145 CASH
1020 596220 09/27/02 145 CASH
1020 596220 09/27/02 148 CA~
1020 596220 09/27/02 148 CASH
1020 596220 09/27/02 148 CASH
1020 596220 09/27/02 145 CASH
1020 596220 09/27/02 148 CASH
TOTAL CHECK
1108201
1108312
1108201
1108830
1108201
6308840
6308840
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 C~H
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CAS~
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 169 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
1020 596221 09/27/02 149 CASH
TOTAL CHECK
1101201
1100000
1101000
6305840
1101201
1104300
6308840
1105300
1020 596222 09/27/02 1057
1020 596222 09/27/02 1057
TOTAL CHECK
UERIDIAN BENEFITS SERVIC 110
CERIDIAN BENEFITS SEHVIC 110
1020 596223 09/27/02 1156 C~A
1020 596224 09/27/02 M2003 C~AN, DAVID
1020 596225 09/27/02 1333
1020 596225 09/27/02 1333
TOTAL CHECK
CLASS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS 5806249
CLASS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS 5506549
1020 596226 09/27/02 174 COCA-COLA
1020 596226 09/27/02 174 COCA-COLA
5706450
5706450
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TA~
AMOUNT
660.00
440.00
220.00
440.00
1760.00
SSC~.~NSMNT 0.00 103.84
CSC~SD~T 0.00 306.50
0.00 410.34
PETTY CASH 6/26-9/20 0.00
P~TTY CASH 6/26-9/20 0.00
PETTY CASH 6/26-9/20 0.00
PETTY CASH 6/26-9/20 0.00
PE/"rY CASH 6/26-9/20 0.00
PETTY CASH 6/26-9/20 0.00
237.96
4.87
9.82
252.65
27.85
7.05
15.00
34.38
71.03
179.05
PE/'I~Y ~H 9/18-9/25 0.00 3.24
PETTY CASH SHORT 0.00 0.06
PETTY CASH 9/18-9/25 0.00 40.00
PETTY CASH 9/18-9/25 0.00 39.50
PETTY C.~H 9/18-9/25 0.00 13.05
PE~-fY CASH 9/10-9/25 0.00 44.45
PETTY ~H 9/15-9/25 0.00 30.17
*FLEX DEP/240125 0.00 165.40
*FLEX HLTH/240125 0.00 426.94
0.00 592.34
0.00
0.00
FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
132.00
500.00
575.00
350.00
925.00
177.10
407.50
Rill,] DATE 09/26/02 TI~ 12:25:46
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/26/02 CI/~ OF CUPERTINO PAGE 3
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~ECK REGISTER ~ DISBURSE~ FUND
SEL£C~ION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between #09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
PD/~D - 110 - GENEE.~L FUND
CASH ACC'f CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. %~-~OR ............. FL~/DEET
1020 596226 09/27/02 174 COCA-COI~ 5706450
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596227 09/27/02 2794 COLLEGIATE PACIFIC 5806449
1020 596228 09/27/02 ~12003 CONNOR, BRIAN 5506549
1020 596229 09/27/02 2704 BRIAN CORDIEL 5606620
1020 596230 09/27/02 183
1020 596230 09/27/02
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 596231 09/27/02 1194 COUR~SY TOE 6308540
1020 596232 09/27/02 M2003 CPRS DIS~IC'f IV 5806449
1020 596232 09/27/02 M~2003 CPES DIS~ICT IV 1106300
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 596233 09/27/02 M2003 CPRS DISTRIC~ IV 1106500
1020 596234 09/27/02 N~2003 CPRS DIS~ICT IV 1106300
1020 596235 09/27/02 M C~3B SCO~S PACK 415 580
1020 596236 09/27/02 1579
1020 596236 09/27/02 1579
TOT;%L C~ECK
CUPERTINO LOC-N-STOR LLC 1108503
~PERTINO LOC-N-STOR ~J~C 1108501
1020 596237 09/27/02 2230 N~/~C~ CZOSEK
1101070
1020 596238 09/27/02 2325 DAVIS, JA~S
6308840
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
~020 596240 09/27/02'2~9
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
DE ;%N~ SERVICES INC S708510
DE A NZA SERVICES INC 1108506
DE ANZASERVICES INC 5700510
DE ;~NZ,% SERVICES INC 1108504
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT
FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC 0.00 557.40
0.00 1142.00
SUPPLIES 17573 0.00 430.59
EIqTERTAIN VOL LUNCR 0.00 350.00
0.00 50.00
0.00 25.00
0.00 75.00
WORKSHOP T.MO 0.00 30.00
BAY AREA INSTITLFfE 0.00 25.00
REFLH~DS 171225/171227 0.00 200.00
#G-33 RENT 10/2002 0.00 217.00
#G-34 10/2002 RET 0.00 217.00
0.00 434.00
C.O.D. SRIP~NT 0.00 96.97
ADDL SERV SPORTS C~R 0.00 193.50
JANITORIAL SEPT2002 0.00 338.67
JAk~ITORI/%L SEPT2002 0.00 2~27.65
JANITORIAL SEPT2002 0.00 6097.32
JAMITORI;tL SEPT2002 0.00 2766.34
JAMITORIAL SEPT2002 0.00 9451.80
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TIME 12:23:47
- FIN~CIAL ACCOL~RTING
09/26/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DIS~URSE~ FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transac~.trans_date between "09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
FTJ~ - 110 - GRNRPJ%L FUND
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
1020 596240 09/27/02 209
TOT;~L CHECK
1020 596241 09/27/02 1242
1020 596241 09/27/02 1242
1020 596241 09/27/02 1242
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596242 09/27/02 220
1020 596242 09/27/02 220
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596243 09/27/02 1434
1020 596244 09/27/02 242
1020 596245 09/27/02 243
1020 596246 09/27/02 261
1020 596247 09/27/02 2361
1020 596248 09/27/02 2361
1020 596248 09/27/02 2361
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596249 09/27/02 1808
1020 596250 09/27/02 274
~020 596251 09/27/02 2~--~1
1020 596251 09/27/02 281
1020 596251 09/27/02 281
TOTAL CMECK
1020 596282
1020 596253
1020 596254
1020 596254
TOT~LL CHECK
1020 596255
1020 596255
1020 596255
1020 596255
DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1101070
DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1104530
DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1104400
DISCOL~NT SCHOOL SUPPLY 5806349
EDWARD S. WALSH CO. 1108314
EMPLOYMENT DEVEL DEPT 110
EMPLOY~ DEVELOPME/~T 110
FRFAR & PEERS ASSOC INC 1108101
FIRST BANKCARD 1101000
FIRST B~KC-~ 5906549
FIRST BANKCJ%RD 5506549
KIM FRRY 1106300
FRY'S ELECTRONICS 1108315
GARDENLAND 1108303
GAPdDENLAND 2708404
09/27/02 M
09/27/02 M
09/27/02 1741
09/27/02 1741
GEORGE, BRENDA 580
GERSTNER, MONICA 580
GOVCON~CTION, INC. 6104600
GOVCONNECTION, INC. 6109856
09/27/02 298
09/27/02 298
09/27/02 298
09/27/02 298
GRAINGER INC 6308940
GRAINGER INC 6306840
GF, AINGER INC 6308840
GRAINGER INC 6308840
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SAL~S TAX
PAGE 4
AMOUNT
SPEC SERV PORTAL PRK 0.00 240.00
JANITORIAL SEPT2002 0.00 1366.54
SHAMPOO RUGS/Q.CENTER 0.00 900.00
JANITORIAL SEPT2002 0.00 1961.30
JANITORIAL SEPT2002 0.00 4111.39
0.00 36600.75
B.CARDS/T.SAADATI 0.00 48.71
B.CARDS/J.~YBUS 0.00 68.54
B.CARDS/A.TSUGAWA 0.00 46.71
0.00 165.96
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
PARTS/SUPPLIES 17575
SUPPLIES 17051
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8371
SDI/776-5260-0
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
SEPT2002 STATEMENT
SEPT2002 STATEMENT
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TAXIS/FUN EXPO
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8387
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8382
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8382
PARTS/SUPPLIES 8382
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0O
Refund: Ch~ck - Rental
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.00
Refund: Check - FALL.
PAGEMAKER 7.0 UPGPJ%DE
PAGEMAKER 7.0 UPGP3%DE
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC
FY 2002-2003 OPeN P~C
RETURN P.O.52995
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC
179.39
34.43
213.82
112.00
47.80
149.70
197.50
70.50
340.81
70.29 --
140.58
70.29
281.16
750.00
45.00
947.20
1975.56
2922.78
77.16
32.31
-21.64
13.01
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TIME 12:23:47
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/26/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 5
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENEPJ%L FUND
1020 596268 09/27/02 2355
1020 596269 09/27/02 372
~020 596259 09/27/02~3'~'~2
1020 595269 09/27/02 372
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
HARRIS & A~SOCIATES 2709450
HILTON FARRKOPF & HOB~ON 5208003
RONA~D ROGUE 5506549
MARS}~A HOVEY 1104000
HULBERG & A~SOCIATES, IN 1108101
..... DESCRIPTION ......
FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC
FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC
MEETING W/SMWM
Refund: Check - F~.LL.
TIME/MATERI;tLS
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TI~ 12:23:48
- FINARCIAL ACCOL~ING
09/26/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_da5e between .09/23/2002. and "09/27/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
PAGE 6
AMOUNT
1020 596277 09/27/02
1020 596278 09/27/02
1020 596279 09/27/02
1020 596280 09/27/02
1020 596281 09/27/02
1020 596282 09/27/02
2567 MISDU 110
448 MISSION VALLEY FORD INC 6309820
2726 MOSS & BARNETT 1101031
M2003 NAESAA 1101200
302 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPEN 110
485 NEWMAN TPJ%FFIC SIGNS 2708405
493 OFFIC~ DEPOT 5806249
493 OFFIC~ DEPOT 5706450
493 OFFICE DEPOT 1106200
493 OFFICE DEPOT 1106300
OFFICE DEPOT 1106400
OFFICE DEPOT 5806249
OFFICE DEPOT 5806449
1020 596284 09/27/02 501
1020 596285 09/27/02 587
1020 596285 09/27/02 507
1020 596285 09/27/02 507
TOTAL CHECK
1020 596286 09/27/02 833
1020 596286 09/27/02 833
1020 596286 09/27/02 833
1020 596286 09/27/02 833
1020 596286 09/27/02 833
~020 596286 09/27/02'8-'~3
TOTAL CSECK
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2892
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692
OPERATING ENGINEERS #3 110
DAM OSBOP=NE DBA:OSBORNE 6308840
DAN OSBOP. NE DBA:OSBORNE 1108503
DAN OSBORNE DBA:OSBORNE 1108503
J TRYBUS 385969533 0.00 223.00
FORD F350 UTILITY 0.00 29478.23
211.50
69.00
*NAT'L DEF 0.00 16591.20
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
1092.50
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 315.94
OFFICE SUPPLIES 17036 0.00 64.93
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 52.47
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 63.15
OFFICH SUPPLIES 0.00 32.46
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 112.49
OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 53.64
0.00 694.68
UNION DUES 0.00 601.02
TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 566.47
TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 734.85
TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 400.00
0.00 1701.32
P E R S 110 PERS SPEC 0.00
P E R S 110 *PERS BYBK 0.00
P E R S 110 PERS 1959 0.00
P E R S 110 *PERS BYBK 0.00
P E R S 110 PERS EMPLY 0.00
P E R S 110 PERS BUYBK 0.00
0.00
PACIFIC BELL 5708510 9/07-10/6 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108505 9/07-10/6 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108504 9/07-10/6 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108501 9/07-10/6 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108501 9/07-10/06 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 6104800 9/07-10/06 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1101500 9/07-10/6 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1101500 9/06-10/07 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108505 9/07-10/06 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108605 9/06-10/07 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108603 9/06-10/07 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108501 9/07-10/06 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 5708510 9/06-10/07 0.00
PACIFIC BELL 1108504 9/06-10/7 0.00
120.96
180.14
118.11
327.28
25313.75
37.52
26097.76
89.54
89.94
89.55
89.55
89.54
259.36
89.55
245.43
55.25
245.43
245.43
245.43
245.43
490.84
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TIME 12:23:49
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
09/26/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 7
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692 PACIFIC BELL 5686620
1020 596287 09/27/02 2692 PACIFIC BELL 1108503
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 896288 09/27/02 2444 PACIFIC GAS & ELECtrIC 1108830
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 915
1020 596290 09/27/02 519
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1028 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 586290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 518
-1020 596290 09/27/02
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/82 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
1020 596290 09/27/02 515
TOTAL CWECK
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108507
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108503
PACIFIC WEST SECLTRI'I"f IN 1108511
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108503
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108503
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108505
PACIFIC WEST SECDRITY IN 1108505
PACIFIC NEST SECURITY IN 1108505
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108907
PACIFIC WEST SBCL~I~ IN 1108509
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108507
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108581
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108581
PACIFIC WEST SECURI/"f IN 1108509
PACIFIC NEST SECURITY IN 1108801
PACIFIC NEST SECURITY IN 5708810
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108507
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108504
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY ~N 1108504
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 5708510
PACIFIC WBST SECURITY IN 1108501
PACIFIC WEST SECLTRITY IN 1108506
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108506
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108506
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108509
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108501
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108501
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108587
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108503
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 5708810
PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 9708510
1020 596291
09/27/02 920 PAPERDIRECT INC
5806349
1020 596292 09/27/02 526
1020 596292 09/27/02 526
1020 596292 09/27/02 526
1020 596292 09/27/02 526
PENINBUI~ DIGITAL IMAGIN 1100000
PENINSlrL~ DIGIT~ IMAGIN 1108101
PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 110
PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 110
..... DESCRIPTION ......
9/07-10/6
8/o7-1o/6
SERVICE TO 9/30/02
SECURITY 12/2002
SECURITY SYSTEM 12/200
SEC/FIRE 12/2002
SBCLTRITY SYSTEM 11/200
SECURITY SYSTEM 10/200
SECURITY SYSTEM 10/200
SECURITY 10/2802
SECURITY SYSTEM 11/200
REC FIRE/M,VISTA 12/20
ACCESS SYSTEM 10/2002
ACCESS SYSTEM 11/2002
SBCURITY 10/2002
ACCESS SYSTEM 12/2002
SERV CALL 9/04
REC PIRE/M,VISTA 10/20
FIRE SYSTEM 11/2002
FIRE SYSTEM 10/2082
SEC/FIRE 12/2002
SEC/FIRE 12/2082
SEC/FIRE 12/2002
SEC/FIRE 11/2002
SEC/FIRE 10/2002
SECURITY SYSTEM 12/200
SEC/FIRE 10/2002
BBC/FIRE 11/2002
SEC/FIRE SYSTEM 10/200
SEC/FIRE 11/2002
SEC/FIRE 10/2002
FIRE SYSTEM 12/2002
REC FIRE/M.VISTA 11/20
EEC/FIRE SYSYEM 11/200
SEC/FIRE SYSTEM 12/200
SECURITY/FIRE 10/2002
SECURITY/FIRE 11/2002
SUPPLIES 17580
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
O,O0
O.O0
0.00
0,00
0,00
O,O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
89.54
89.54
2748.95
21633.39
70.00
37.00
37.00
96.00
46.00
46.00
39.00
37.00
165.00
219.00
219.00
37.00
219.00
145.00
169.00
199.00
199.00
136.00
122.00
46.00
46.00
46.00
37.00
122.00
122.00
39.00
81.00 --
136.00
136.00
199.00
165.00
81.00
70.00
?0,00
28.90
69.82
40.27
72.64
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TID~E 12:29:50
09/26/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FT~ND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
CASE ACCT CHECK NO
TOTAL CRECK
1020 596299 09/27/02 533
1020 596294 09/27/02 541
1020 596295 09/27/02 2315
1020 596296 09/27/02 495
1020 596297 09/27/02 2608
1020 596298 09/27/02 1071
i020 596308 09/2./02~-
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
RON'$ T~SMISSION 1103500
ROYAL COACH TOURS 5506S49
JOYCE RUSSUM 5706450
DORIS SALGADO 5706450
CITY OF SAM JOSE 6308840
SHUTE, MI~L~LY & WEINBERG 5208003
S~B~E, ALMA 580
SHERRY WITT SNOW 5706450
SPRRRION CORPORATION 1108201
STA~ARD BUSINESS MACHIN 1102100
STATE STREET BAMK & TRUE 110
STP,~SER, JOE 1107509
SUNGARD PENTA~TION, INC 6104800
SVCN 1104300
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5506549
DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
0.00
PEPS LTC/#2405
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
AMRON 2 STG TILT SEAR
OFFICE SUPPLIES
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR
P~3BLIC WORKS CON--CT
PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT
HOURS 8/05-9/01/02
TRANSPORT 9/18/02
SERVICE AGRERMENT FOR
PAGE 8
AMOUNT
211.63
0.00 159.24
0.00 630.00
0.00 613.13
0.00 177.58
0.00 33.00
o.oo 9090.20
0.00 32944.71
0.00 42034.91
0.00 660.00
0.00 708.94
O.OO 210.00
0.00 60.00
0.00 71.50
0.00 352.62
0.00 900.00
0.00 57.00
0.00 3511.72
0.00 120.00 --
0.00 240.00
0.00 840.00
0.00 148.83
0.00 9074.27
0.00 336.19
0.00 10087.73
0.00 40.00
0.00 271.80
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TIME 12:23:50
- FINARCIA~ ACCOUNTING
09/26/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
FUND -
1020 596316
~020 596328 09/27/02'7-'~5
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
09/27/02 695 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5506549
09/27/02 695 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5506549
TALLY'S ENTERPRISES 1101042
TAP PLASTICS INC 5208003
TARGPT SPECI;tLTY PRODUCT 1108314
TARGET STOPES 5806349
TARGET STORES 5806349
TARGET ETO~ES 5706450
T;%RGET STORES 5806449
TARGET STORES 1101065
..... DESCRIPTION ......
COFFEE
SENIOR SOCIALS
CONCReTE/ART WORK
PAGE 9
AMOUNT
25.60
83.06
980.46
1300.00
23.76
243.77
449.67
693.44
64.89
39.13
22.45
43.29
29.62
199.38
300.00
325.00
11691.00
161.54
360.00
10B.00
2725.27
3074.30
7824.12 --
10898.42
200.00
470.00
750.00
1414.71
950.40
75.70
187.50
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TI~ 12:23:51
3-33
09/26/02 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 10
ACCOL~NTING PERIOD: 3/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FL~
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "09/23/2002" and "09/27/2002"
1020 596336 09/27/02 794 XEROX CORPORATION 1104310
1020 596337 09/27/02 805
1020 596337 09/27/02 805
1020 596337 09/27/02 805
1020 596337 09/27/02 805
1020 595337 09/27/02 805
102O 596337 09/27/02 805
1025 596337 09/27/02 805
1020 596337 09/27/02 805
1020 596337 09/27/02 905
1020 596337 09/27/02 805
1920 596337 09/27/02 805
TOTAL C~ECK
ZIR4WALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209535
ZL~4WALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209541
Z[B4WALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209533
ZL~4WALT ENGINEERING GEOU 4209533
ZI3MWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709531
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209116
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209534
TOTAL REPORT
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00
WORK PLAN COST PROPOSA 0.00
SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AMOUNT
1135.91
2472.77
291.49
4149.82
2147.35
361.73
5743.33
2786,73
767.11
416,42
4642.27
9314.94
33093.96
1893388.94
1893386.94
1893388.94
RUN DATE 09/26/02 TINE 12:23:51
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NUMBER 02-180
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE 1N THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR SALARIES
AND WAGES PAID ON
September 27, 2002
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated representative
has certified to the accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds
for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law:
NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows the
following claims and demands in the mounts and from the funds set forth:
GROSS PAYROLL
Less Employee Deductions
$427,190.97
$(126.896.83)
NET PAYROLL
Payroll check numbers issued 62801 through 63053
Void check number(s)
$300,294.14
CERTIFIED: ~.'~
Director of Admlnistral~ve Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 7th day of October ,2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CITY OF
City Hall
10300 Tore Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3220
FAX: (408) 777-3366
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Agenda Item No. ~
SUMMARY
Meeting Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT
Monthly Treasurer's and Budget Report - August 2002
BACKGROUND
Attached is the Treasurer's and Budget report for the period ended August 31, 2002. The
report includes all funds in control of the City.
Investments
The market value of the City's current portfolio totaled $46.2 million at August 31, 2002,
with a maturity value of $45.5 million. The City intends to hold investments until
maturity to redeem full value of the securities plus interest earnings up through the
maturity date.
The rate of return on the City's portfolio continued to trend downward, despite an
extension of the average length of maturity. During the month the City increased its
investment in mortgage (agency) obligations by $3.0 million, decreasing funds invested in
the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). The City is obtaining slightly higher yields
on the 2-3 year callable agency obligations than the yield on LAIF, which has an average
maturity of less than 7 months. However, investment earnings have decreased over 32%
from the August 31, 2001 portfolio due to a continued decline in overall interest rates.
The investments of the City of Cupertino are in full compliance with our City investment
policy and/or State law. Investments are tiered to adequately provide the City with
sufficient cash flows to pay its obligations over the next six months.
Revenue/Expenditure Trends
Most General fund revenues are well below budget projections at the end of July due to
the timing of major tax payments from the County and other tax revenues submitted in
the month subsequent to collection. There were positive variances experienced in some
of the more seasonal revenues such as permits and charges for services. The State
Printed on Recycled Paper
continues to remit 100% of the allocable vehicle license fees to cities (Intergovernmental
Revenues.) And property transfer taxes (included in Other Taxes) also came in slightly
higher than August of last year. Operating expenditures for the General Fund are slightly
over budget, mostly due to annual payments that are due early in the fiscal year.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council review and accept the August 2002 Treasurer's
and Budget report. The City has finalized it's books for the fiscal year ended June 30,
with no significant adjustments being necessary. A final report will be submitted to
Council once the fiscal year audit is complete and the 2001-02 Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report can be issued.
Submitted by:
Approved for submission:
David W. Knapp
City Manager
City of Cupertino
August 2002
08/07/01
SECURITIES MATURED/CALLED
08/02/04 FHLB(P) ~6k
SECURITIES PURCHASED
08/09/02 08/12/04 FHLB 16k
08/15/02 08/15/05 FHLB ,6k
CA
~CASH
CURRENT PORTFOLIO
08/31/02 iCupertino National Bank
I CORPORATE BONDS
CORP
08/31/02 !State Pool
IMONEY MARKET FUNDS
MM
i6f
08/31/02 Greater Bay Tmst Company 6j
01/00/00 ,Well Fargo Trsry Plus M Mkt
08/3 /02 Cupcrt no NatI-Sw¢¢p account61
MORTGAGE OBLIGATIONS
07/09/93 04/15/07 FHLMC(P)
08/01/01 08/01/05 FHLB(P)
08/02/01 02/07/05 FHLB(P)
09/30/93 05/15/08 FHLMC(P)
06/28/02 02/15/04 FHLMC(P)
06/28/02 04/15/04 1FHLMC(P)
06/28/02 05/14/04 FNMA
06/28/02 03/15/04 FNMA
06/28/02 09/15/04 FNMA
06/28/02 06/15/04 FNMA
06/28/02 11/01704 FNMA
06/28/02 1~7[7/03 FNMA
07/15/02 07/15/04 FNMA--
07/29/02 10/29/04 "~HLB
08/09T0~--'B8/i2/04 FHLB
08/15/02 08/15/0-5 ;FHLB
MO
:US GOVERNMENT SECURITIES
06/25/99
02/07/00
07/01/02
US
11/30/02 'Treasury Note
06/30/03 Treasury Note
12/31/03 Treasury Note
T0t al' [qfa~aged Portfolio
Average Yield
_Average Length to Mat_urity (in years)
,6k
6k
,6k
[6k
6k
6k
6k
~6k
;6k
6k
6k
6k
i6k
!6a
YIELD
ADJUSTED
COST
I MATURITY
VALUE
MARKET
VALUE
UNREALIZED
PROFIT/LOSS
507%i 1.500.000: 1,500.000 1.500.120 120
3.00%
3.28~i
2,59%]
1.56%:
1.10%
1.29%;
2,000,000
1,000,000
400,000:
400 000
0
O;
12,968,02
16.019i
lSll
962,202,
978.372]
570,569
1,500.000
1,500,000
2,922,802
1,346,954
1,319,405
L359,892
1,338,244
1,796,019
1.201,445
69L896
2.068,133
2,400,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
1,0O0,000
24,015,359
2.499,140
2.477,093:
2,528.025!
7,504859 I
6.05%I
5.38%
5.26%
6.62%
2.68%I
2.79%
2.9I%!
2.84%
3.12%
3.34%1
2.56%1
3.15%!
3.01%'
3.00%
3.28%,
2,000,000
1,000,000
400,000
40O,000
0
0
12,968,027
962.202
978,372
504.626
1.500,000:
1,500.000~
2.860,000;
1,300.000
1.300.000;
1.300,0001
1.800.0001
1,200.000
650.000
2,000.000
2.400,000
1.000,000
2.000.000
1,000.000
23,614,626
2,500.000
2.500.000
2,500,000
7,500,00O
45,461,025
5.90%i
6.62%i
2.40%
3.57%
1.431
2.003,274 3,274
1.001,774 1.774
400,000 0
400,00O 0
0: 0
0 0
12,968,027 0
462 (15,557)
43 0
962,202
962.707 (15.665)
526,199 (44,370)
1.539.207 39.207
1,517.864 17.864
2.948.454 25,652
1,358.432 11.478
1,332,726 13,321
1.373,819 13,927
1.351,184 12.940
1.840.999 44,980
1,215,709 14,264
702,958 11.062
2,081.260 13.127
2,424,199 24,199
L001,391 1.391
2.003.274 3,274
1,001.774 1,774
24,219,449 204,000
2.523.885! 24,745
2,574,548 97,454
2,546,915! 18,890
7,645,3481 141,089
46,195,5.tl 329,514
City of Cupertino
August 2002
TRusT & AGENCY PORTFOLIO
. ACTIVITY DATE
PURCHASE MATURITY
CE~.TIFICATES OF DEPOSIT:
07/27/01 06/27/02 CuperfinoNatl(KesterTmst) i6b
ITotal Trust & Agency Portfolio
I BOND RESERVE PORTFOLIO
~Traffic Impact iFranklin Fiducia~ Trust
04/06/93 01/01/03 :Repo - 93 A Reserve Fd (400972)
12/16/92 Money Mkt - 92 A Reserve Fd (400~
12/16/92 Money Mkt - 92 B Reserve Fd (4004
-~l'~al Bond Reserve l~orffolio
YIELD
3.65%
I ADJUSTED
COST
40,408
40,408
19,100
MATURITY
VALUE
40,408
40,408
19,100
MARKET
VALUE
UNREALIZED
PROFIT/LOSS
40,408 0
40,408
i9.ioo ! o
0.60%, 2,833,425 2,921,488 2,833,425 0
1.11%! 836,005 836,005 836,005 0
1.10%[ 1,32%767 1,329,767 1,329,767 0
~ 4,999.196 5,087,259 4.999,196 0
5,018,296
5,106,359 5,018,296 i 0
Investments by Type
Managed Portfo o
Mongage OblipliOn
6 00%
Rate of Return Comparison
500% ~
4 00% : ·
300% ....... I
200%
1 00%
000%
7/01 8/01 9101 16/01 11/01 12/01 1/02 2/02 3/02 4/02 5/02 6/02 7/02 8/02
COMPLIANCE WITH INVESTMENT POLICY
City of Cupertino
August 31, 2002
~ategory
_T~easury Issues
US Agencies (eg FHLMC)
Medium Term Corporate Bonds/Notes
LAIF
Money Market Funds
Maximum Maturities
Per Issuer Max
Bankers Acceptances
_Cpmmercial Paper
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit
Repurchase Agreements
Reverse Repurchase agreements
Standard
!No limit
!No limit
130% with A rating
1540 million
120%
125% upto 15 years
!Remainder up to 5 years
I 10% (except govts)
[ 180 days & 40%
1270 days & 25%
!30%
365 days
i Prohibited
Comment
Complies
IComplies
!Complies
iComplies
]Complies
Complies (FHLMC at 7 yrs)
Complies
Complies
Complies
IComplies
Complies
I Complies
i Complies
City of Cupertino
General Fund Budget Report
8/3 i/02
Taxes:
Sales Tax
Propcr~ Tax
Transcient Occupancy
Utility Tax
Franchise Fees
Other Taxes
Licenses and Permits
200iJ62 Budget 2002J0~ Bud~ei
10,348,000 I 1,000,000
3,789,000 3,700,000
1,460,000 2,365,000
2,699,000 2,880,000
Actual Actual % of Budget
YTD82]i-01 YTD ~-31-02 Over/Under Analysis of Trends
1,942,675
0
102,195
9~,300
2,214,000 2,320,000 49,859
1,120,000 1,140,000 125,875
1,173,600 1,150,000 335,055
1,549,781 -1~.47%
0 -100.00% Payments rec'd Nov- Jan & Apr-June
117,756 -70.13% Payments rec'd in subsequent month
8i,698 -82.98%
60,523 -84.35% Payments rec'd in subsequent month
196,125 3.22%
262,034 36.71% Rec'd City Center, Kimpton plan checks in 7/01.
Use of Money & Property 1,544,500 1,400,000 ~i J64 164,479 -29.51% Interest for August not yet posted
lntergovemmental 3,319,041 3,502,000 589 618 676,738 15.95%
charges b~§~r~ces 429,100 335,000 54,671~ 59,129 5.90%
Fines & Forfeitures 600,000 609,000 38,027 34,1~ -65.81%
Other Revenue 8_0,000 15,815,0_00 l 1,233 7,089 -99.73%
Total Revenue 2~.776.241 ~ ~ ~ ~8.32%
0p~rating E~p~n~itures:
Administrative 1,516,32~ 1,44.4,792 ~70,84.0 1~9,~590 -21.~27%
La~ ~-nforcement 6,123,181 5,335,000 993,299 983 626 I 0.62%
Com~. ~unity service ~ 6~52,882 626,647 73,867 94,10~ -9.03% Gov't Channel equipment purchased in July 02.
Administrative Service 3,~4.4.,477 2,919,077 _707,627 824,145 69.40% Annual in?urance premiums paid in July.
Recreation Service 1,946,332 ! 8~02,99! 3~07_,330 ~397,865 ~ 32~.4~0%
Conmaunity Development 4,042,219 2,~ 1_5,911 305,25~ 344,!98 -6.83%
Public Works 9,273,771 9,274,325 1,212,312 1,279,151 -17.25%
Total Expenditures ~6.899.186 ~ ~ ~ 4.50%
Operating Trans_fers In 2,8 ~25,000 1,7:~5,000 320,8~ ~7,560 ~00.00~A
Operating Transfers Out -9,117,921 -2&742~000 -1,466,168 -4,457,000 100.00% 2002-03 Budget inciude~ Iransfers to CIP for New Library
Net Income/Loss ~4. i ~.8~ ~ ~ ~5.0')2.540
Revenue Comparison
6 000~000
E~YTD 8/31/02
2,000.000
1,000,000
o
I 2 3 4
I 400 000
Expenditure Comparison
i 2 3 4 5 6 7
] EiYTD 8131102 ,
1 Administrative
2 Law Enforcement
3 Community Service
4 Administrative Service
5 Recreabon Service
6 Community Development
7 Public Works
City of Cupertino
Summary of Budget Transfers
8/31/02
Description
2002/03 ADOPTED BUDGET
Debt Reinanancing/lssuance
2001/02 CARRYOVER:
Encumbrances
Department carryovers
_ Project carryovers
REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS:
EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENTS:
Acct #
i various
Budget
Adiustment
5,220,7671
10,033,918:
Budget
46,570,000~
15,665,000
Expenditure
Budget
67,065,000
5,220,767
10,033,918
2i}02/03 ADJUSTED BUDGET
62,235,000:
82,319,685-
Capital Projects
6/30/02
Fund Proi# Description CIO enc
110 9215 Department remodel
210 9612 ~l~nor Storm Drain i~prov
215 9620 Storm Dra_i_n Projects
270 9401 Barrier Removal
270 9411 W.Stev Creek hike lane
270 9412 ,~.Stelling bike lane 0.00
270 9413 De Anza bike lane 0.00
270 9430 Stev Canyon Rd widening 9~4~474.29
270 9431 Stev Crk/Blaney TIS modification _ 0.(30
270 9432 Hmstd belleville T/S modif.
270 9435 Neighborhood traf calming 0.o0
270 9436 Stev Crk Trail Bike facilities 0.00
270 9438 Miller Ave bike facili6es 0.00
270 9440 Wolfe bike facilltiy improv 70,030.00
270 9441 Bike detec'don enhancement 0.00
270 9443 Bollinger Rd bike facility improv. 326,907.86
270 9444 Bubb/McCletlan I/S modE. 1,318.69
270 9446 DeAnza/Stev Crk crosswalk enh.
270 9447 Mary Avenue gateway 13,000.00
270 9448 Foothill bird bike lanes 25,056.50
270 9449 Mary Avenue Footbridge 166,136.14
270 9450 Pavement Management 0.00
270 9531 Ramp me[er signal 280/85 390,674.39
270 9532 SR85/Stev Crk T/S modification 44,627.13
270 9701 Sidewalk gaps umincop.area
270 9702 Citywide bike parking facilities
280 9213 McClellan Ranch bldg improv.
420 9108 Park Renovations 106,490.00
420 9110 Stocklmeir Property Acquisition
420 9113 Stev Crk trail masterplan 12,931.12
420 9115 Skate Park 52,795.00
420 9116 San Thomas trail improvements 137,760.98
420 9117 Stev Crk Trail master plan study
420 9118 Union Pacific RR trail 131,860.04
420 9119 PortalNVilson park improvement
420 9216 Service center expanison 25,541.00
420 9217 Housing assistance 0.00
420 9219 Animal control facility
420 9223 Civic center improvements
420 9224 CMc center plaza improvements
420 9524 DeAnza/Stev Creek arterial mgmt 5,700.00
420 9527 Homsstssd/Tanteu T/S upgrade 17,813.28
420 9528 280NVolfe traffic safety improv. 53,976.83
420 9529 Wolfe Rd.ar~dai 139,990.61
420 9530 Phase III Hmstd artedal mgmt 38,505.00
C/O budflet Adopted
0.00 0
71,051.3~ 155,000
1,~29_,~-04.32
31,843,62
21,115.54
24,712.14
41,163.34
1,070,905.87
60,290.40
75,000.00
0.00 150,000
30,219.99
133,204.32
114,028.98
19,659.15
59,321,40 243,000
0.00
120,000.00 280,000
67,000.00 120,000
209,100.00
0.00 400,000
0.00 1,500,(300
89,209.41
21,692.00
211,652.96
1301716.60
0
0.00
291,830.00
147,539.31
150,000.00
1,819~10
132,728.68
0.00
500,000.00
0.00
0.00
23,575.71
0.00
365,645.03
1,562.00
45,845.17
75,000
100,000
281,000
430,000
200,000
100,000
chan~e Total Budqet Encumbrance Expenditure Current Bal.
320,000____ 320,000.00 74,94250 305,057.50 0.00
226,051.38 9,300.00 84,461.29 132,290.09
1,029,204.32 0.00 4,900.00 1,024,304.32
(30,000) 1,843.00 1,200.00 643.00
21,115.00 0.00 150.00 20,965.00
24,712.00 24,712.00
41,163.00 0.00 640.00 40,523.00
95,000 1~260,379.29 1,078,616.99 156,252.00 25,510.30
39,060 99,350.00 11,330.89 88,019.11 0.00
75,000.00 75,OOO.00
(89,060) 60,940.00 8,230.00 46,590.00 6,120.00
30,219.00 30,219.~
133,204.00 0.00 2,197.50 131,006.50
184,058.00 11,890.43 49,390.89 122,776.68
19,659.00 19,659.00
629,228.86 86,119.35 293,268.99 249,840.52
1,318.69 0.00 868.20 450.49
(200,u-k~9) 200,000.00 0.00 0.00 200,000.00
200,000.00 33,258.59 9,899.89 156,841.52
234,156.50 86,450.00 48,364.55 99,341.95
566,136.14 0.00 176,258.99 389,877.15
305,000 1,805,000.00 67,300.00 1,737,670.55 29 45
479,883.39 389,233.43 10,440.96 80,209.00
66,319.13 0.00 16,940.64 49,378.49
(75,6(73) 0.00 0.00
51,789 51,789.00 51,789.00
211,652.00 211,652.00
(60,3~G) 176,810.00 0.00 104,264.16 72,545.84
0.00 0.00 0.00
12,931.12 0.00 6,670.42 6,260.70
444,625.00 0.00 42,671.60 401,953.40
566,299.98 21,807.60 117,390.48 427,101.90
150,000.00 74,734.84 54,289.16 20,976.00
133,679.04 0.00 129,365.17 4,313.87
201,319 631,319.00 0.00 67,258.95 564,060.05
158,269.00 41,888.00 48,550.00 67,831.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
500,000.00 500,000.00
200,000.00 46.97 199,953.03
100,000.00 36,020.25 63,979.75
29,275.00 0.00 7,425.87 21,849.13
17,813.28 3,733.00 13,908.13 172.15
419,621.83 302,574.31 34,612.88 82,434.64
141,552.61 0.(30 140,645.11 907.50
84,350.00 0.00 40,809.10 43,540.90
Capital Projects
6/30/02
Fund
42O
420
42O
420
42O
420
42O
42O
42O
42O
42O
423
423
424
425
425
426
560
56O
Proi# "- Descril~tion
9533 Green LED T/S lights
9534 Advanced ITS De Anza blvd
9535 Adaptive traf control system
9536 Stelling corridor T/S upgrade
9537 Bubb corridor T/S upgrade
9538 Pruneddge cordder T/S upgrade
9539 Wolfe/Pruneridge T/S upgrade
9540 Speed reduction program
9541 School traffic calming measure
9544 Safe mutes CHS
9703 Apple public art
9214 Library expansion
9222 Library construction
9210 Senior Center Expansion
9313 Four Season Comer
9314 Four Season Art Sculpture
9212 Sports Ctr.fitness expansion
9105 Blackberry Farm
9112 BBF master plan study
Total
260~0__00
500,000
300,000
CIO eric CIO budge~_. Adopted change
0.00 26,036.18
40,838.73 355,120.00
.. 48,993.31 650,0_00.00
10,460.65_ 0.00
6,537.91 0.00
10,460.66
9,806.87 0.00
24,939.12 60.88
__ 60,636.04 333,1~8.00
52,000
500,000
0 100,000
4,985.73 4.61
1,994,349.15 0.00 1,500,000 968,337
230,146.28 221,190.81 {150,000)
0.00 295,108.63 142,863
94,563.70 57,137
2,740.07 1,686,080.62
0.00 314,939.04 175,000
4,300,483.38 9,417,928.89 7,269,000 1,408,049
ok ok ok ok
Total Budqet Encumbrance Expenditure Current Bal.
286,036.00 10,459.86 14,540.14 261,036.00
895,958.73 30,055.47 190,367.26 675,536.00
998,993.31 635,356.48 63,075.83 300,561.00
10,460.65 0.00 5,558.68 4,901.97
6,537.91 QO0 ~,474.19 3,063.72
10,460.66 0.(30 5,558.69 4,901.97
9,806.87 0.00 5,211.29 4,595.58
24,999.12 24,939.12 60.00
445,824.04 163,430.68 260,490.41 21,902.95
500,000.00 500,000.00
100,000.00 100,000.00
4,985.73 0.00 4,985.73 ~0.00,
4,462,686.15 1,725,520.72 1,016,299.40 1,720,866.03
301,336.28 10,952.00 255,900.81 34,483.47
437,971.00 0.00 25,896.05 412,074.95
151,700.00 0.00 7,912.00 143,788.00
1,688,820.07 0.00 58,901.16 1,629,918.91
489,939.00 0.00 38,056.35 451,882.65
150,000.00 34,000.00 0.00 116,000.00
22,395,443.08
4,802,242.64
5,552,608.92 12,006,591.52
DRAI:T
RESOLUTION NO. 02-181
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CUPERTINO APPROVING DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN
RECORDS (CITY CLERK, CODE ENFORCEMENT)
WHEREAS, the City Council did by adoption of Resolution Nos. 8894 and 02-
037 establish roles and regulations for records retention and destruction; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that certain records in excess of two years old
no longer contain data of any historical or administrative significance; and
WHEREAS, the departmental request for permission to destroy all said records in
excess of two years old has been approved by the City Clerk and the City Attorney
pursuant to Resolution Nos. 8894 and 02-037;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino authorizes destruction of the records specified in the schedule attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 7th day of October 2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CITY OF
CUPE INO
Ci~ Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3223
FAX: (408) 777-3366
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
MEMORANDUM
To:
Dave Knapp, City Manager; Carol Atwood, Director of Administrative Services; Therese Smith,
Director of Parks and Recreation; Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development; Ralph Qualls,
Director of Public Works; Sandy Abe, HR Manager; Charles Kilian, City Attorney; Kimberly Smith,
City Clerk.
From:
Grace Johnson, Deputy City Clerk
Subject: RECORDS FOR DESTRUCTION
Date:
September 13, 2002
Listed on the attached sheets are records, which are in excess of two years old and can therefore be destroyed in
accordance with the City's records retention schedule. Please review the list and contact me if you believe any &these
files are of historical or administrative significance and should not be destroyed. If approved, a resolution authorizing
destruction will be on the council agenda for October 7. ~ / ~,
City Clerk ~ Date City Attorney Date
NO OBJECTION TO DESTRUCTION:
Ci~M~er. -- l~,Datet~.~_~
o~C om~fir~i'ty Dev. Dat~
Encls: Code Enforcement, Finance
Dir. of Administrative Services Date
Dir. ol'Parks & Recreation Date
HR Manager ~ Date
No. (to be used
for microfiche
card #)
File Name, Project name
or Developer
Accounts Payable
Payroll Timesheets
Financial Reports
Journal Entries
Business Licenses
(purged)
RECORDS INVENTORY FOR MICROFILMING OR DESTRUCTION
Department: City Clerk Contact: Kimberly Smith or Grace Johnson
Page: of - File Name: Finance September 2002
File Number, Resolution, Subject, Application, Address or Location
Ordinance, Application Permit (if any)
Number
Check copes with
back-up
Timesheets
City's CAFR
Folders
Applications
Date ranges
(or most
recent date)
7/01/90 -
6/30/91
7/01/90 -
6/30/9 l
1980-
1984
1989-
1990
Dec. 1990
Enter
M = to be microfilmed
D = to be destroyed
REQUIREI)
D
D
D
D
D
Page
No. (to be used
for microfiche
card #)
File Name, Project name
or Developer
Code Enforcement
Case Files
Code Enforcement
Case Files
Code Enforcement
Case Files
Code Enforcement
Case Files
Code Enforcement
Case Files
Code Enforcement
Case Files
Alarm Cards
Misc. Memos &
Letters
RECORDS INVENTORY FOR MICROFILMING OR DESTRUCTION
Department: City Clerk Contact: Kimberly Smith or Grace Johnson
Page: of File Name: Code September 2002
File Number, Resolution, Subject, Application, Address or Location
Ordinance, Application Permit (if any)
Number
Date ranges
(or most
recent date)
1/88 -
12/88
1/89 -
7/89
1/92 -
12/92
1/90 -
12/90
8/89 -
12/89
1/91 -
12/91
1992
1984 -
1986
M = to be microfilmed
D = to be destroyed
REQUIREI}
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Page
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 02-182
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
SETTING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF REORGANIZATION OF AREA
DESIGNATED "BYRNE AVENUE 02-06", PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
WEST SIDE OF BYRNE AVENUE BETWEEN MCCLELLAN ROAD AND
DOLORES AVENUE; APPROXIMATELY 0.149 ACRE, XU AND ZHANG
(APN 357-12-038)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has received a request for
annexation of territory designated "Byrne Avenue 02-06" from property owners, Bin Xu
and Chi Zhang; and
WHEREAS, the property, 0.149_+ acre on the west side of Byme Avenue between
McClellan Road and Dolores Avenue (APN 357-12-038) is contiguous to the City of
Cupertino and is within its urban service area; and
WHEREAS, annexation would provide for use of City services; and
WHEREAS, this territory is uninhabited and was prezoned on May 21, 1984, to
City of Cupertino Pre R1-7.5 zone; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino, as Lead Agency for environmental review
completed an initial study and granted a Negative Declaration for annexation; and
WHEREAS, the County Surveyor of Santa Clara county has found the map and
description (Exhibits "A" and "B") to be in accordance with Government Code Section
56826, the boundaries to be definite and certain, and the proposal to be in compliance
with LAFCO's road annexation policies; and
WHEREAS, the fee set by the County of Santa Clara to cover staff cost for above
certification has been paid; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 56826 the City Council of
the City of Cupertino shall be conducting authority for a reorganization including an
annexation to the City; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public hearing;
Resolution No. 02-182 Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby initiates annexation proceedings and will consider annexation of the
territory designated "Byme Avenue 02-06" and detachment from the Santa Clara County
Lighting Service District at their regular meeting of November 4, 2002.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 7th day of October 2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the Cit~ Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
County of Santa Clara
Environmental Resources Agency
Building Inspection/Land Development Engineering and Surveying
County Government Center, East Wtng
70 West Hedding Street. 7th Floor
San Jose. California 95110
Blclg, Inspec. 1408) 299-5700 Land DeveL 299-5730 FAX 279-8537
www.sccbuilding,org
September 16, 2002
Kim Smith, City Clerk
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
The attached map and description dated August 15, 2002 of territory
proposed for annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled BYRNE AVENUE 02-06 is
in accordance with Government Code Section 56757 (c) (2). The boundaries of said
territory are definite and certain. The proposal is in compliance with the Local
Agency Formation Commission's road annexation policies.
Martin D. Marcott
County Survey0Z
Attachment
cc: LAFCO Executive Director (w/attachment)
Board of Supervisors: Donald F. Gage, Blanca Alvarado. Pete McHugh. James T. Beall. Jr,, Liz K/~iss
County Executive: Richard wittenberg
EXHIBIT B
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
TOTHE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ENTITLED
BYRNE AVE. 02-06
LIMITS OF CUPERTINO ...... ""J
ANNEXATION "BYRNE ~. I
AVE. 88-11" ~,.,. ~
SCALE: t" -- 100' APN 357-12-038 I
PROPOSED ANNEXATION --.~ I t
0.14-9 AC (6,500 SQ, FT.)~ iOLORE$1
-- .............. AVE. I
~ ,3 130.00 o ·. _1 _ _ _ -I
O0 o
CITY LIMITS OF CUPERTINO z ~ 130.00 ~ ac J
0
PER ANNEXATION "McCLELLAN WEST / z j
I ROAD 87-04" T.P.O.B. / I~
VICINITY MAP~
~ ALCAZAR
< ~
DOLORES ~
Z
SITE McCLELLAN RD.
/I
/CITY LIMITS CUPERTINO
~PER ANNEXATION "BYRNE
AVE. 85-01"
'== == ='"' ~ CUPERTINO CITY LIMITS
PROPOSED ANNEXATION LIMITS
AUGUST 15, 2002
EXHIBIT A
BYRNE AVENUE 024)6
All of that real property situate in Santa Clare County, California described as follows:
Beginning at a point in the center line of Byme Avenue formerly Buena Vista Avenue (40
feet wide) that is distant thereon South 150.00 feet from the intersection of said center line
with the East prolongation of the South line of Tract No. 139 Stevens Creek Subdivision
Map no. 1 according to the Map thereof recorded in Book 4 of Maps, at page 43, Santa
Claro County records; thence West and Parallel with the South line of said Tract No. 139
and the East prolongation of said line, 20.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of
this description and the Westerly boundary of the annexation to the City of Cupertino
entitled "Byme Ave., 85-01' and the Westerly boundary of Byme Avenue; thence leaving
said Westerly boundary and proceeding West 130.00 feet to a point on the Easterly
boundary of the annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled "McClellan Road, 87-04';
thence proceeding along said annexation boundary North 50.00 feet; thence leaving said
Easterly boundary and proceeding East 130.00 feet to a point on the Westerly boundary of
the annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled 'Byme Ave., 88-11" and the Westerly
boundary of Byme Ave.; thence along said Westerly boundary and the Westerly boundary
of the annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled "Byme Ave., 85-01", South 50.00 feet to
the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 0.149 acro more or less and being a part of the Southwest one-quarter of
Section 14, Township 7 South, Range 2 West, M.D.B.M.
J:tJOBSIXu[E~HIBIT-A.doc
8-15-02
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 02-183
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
SETTING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF REORGANIZATION OF AREA
DESIGNATED "CRESTON DRIVE 01-04", PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF CRESTON DRIVE BETWEEN BERKELEY COURTAND
ALDERNEY COURT; APPROXIMATELY 0.335 ACRE, HSU AND CHEN
(APN 326-12-060)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has received a request for
annexation of territory designated "Creston Drive 01-04" fi.om property owners, Freeman
Hsu and Ming Ming Chen; and
WHEREAS, the property, 0.335+ acre on the north side of Creston Drive between
Berkeley Court and Aldemey Court (APN 326-12-060) is contiguous to the City of
Cupertino and is within its urban service area; and
WHEREAS, annexation would provide for use of City services; and
WHEREAS, this territory is uninhabited and was prezoned on June 17, 1980, to
City of Cupertino RI-10 zone; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino, as Lead Agency for environmental review
completed an initial study and granted a Negative Declaration for annexation; and
WHEREAS, the County Surveyor of Santa Clara county has found the map and
description (Exhibits "A" and "B") to be in accordance with Government Code Section
56826, the boundaries to be definite and certain, and the proposal to be in compliance
with LAFCO's road annexation policies; and
WHEREAS, the fee set by the County of Santa Clara to cover staff cost for above
certification has been paid; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 56826 the City Council of
the City of Cupertino shall be conducting authority for a reorganization including an
annexation to the City; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public heating;
Resolution No. 02-183 Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby initiates annexation proceedings and will consider reorganization of the
territory designated "Creston Drive 01-04" at their regular meeting of November 4, 2002.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 7th day of October 2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
2
County of Santa Clara
Environmental Resources Agency
Building Inspection/Land Development Engineering and Surveying
County Government Center. East wing
70 Wesl Hedding Street, 7th Floor
San .lose. Califomia 951 I 0
Bldg. Inspec (408) 299-5700 Land Devel. 299-5730 FAX 2798537
www. sccbuiK~ing org
September 25, 2002
Kim Smith, City Clerk
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
The attached map and description dated September 18, 2002 of territory
proposed for annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled CRESTON DRIVE 01-04 is
in accordance with Government Code Section 56757 (c) (2). The boundaries of said
territory are definite and certain. The proposal is in compliance with the Local
Agency Formation Commission's road annexation policies.
Martin D. Marcott
County Survey0~'
.Attachment
cc: LAFCO Executive Director (w/attachment)
Board of Supervisors: Donald E Gage. Blanca Alvarado, [~ete McHugh, James T. Beall, Jr., LiZ Ki~ISS
County Executive: Richard wittenberg
EXI RIT A
CRESTON DRIVE 01-.04
ALL THAT REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA BEINO DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHERN CORNER OF LOT 143, AS SHOWN ON THE
MAP FOR TRACT NO. 1456, 'CRESTON,' UNIT NO. 3, RECORDED IN BOOK 55
OF MAPS AT PAGES 40 AND 41, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE
ALONG THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 143 AND THE ANNEXATION
LINE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, AS DEFINED BY THE ANNEXATION
TITLED "HOMESTEAD NO. 3C, REVISED"
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
SOUTH 17° 04' 20' EAST 57.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH $° 41' 50" EAST 28.40 FEET TO THE EASTERN CORNER OF
SAID LOT 143; THENCE LEAVING THE SAID ANNEXATION LINE
ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOLrNDARY OF SAID LOT 143
SOUTH 62° 12' 00" WEST 198.27 FEET TO THE SOUTHERN CORNER OF
SAID LOT 143 ON THE EASTERN LINE OF CRESTON DRIVE; THENCE
NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERN LINE OF CRESTON DRIVE
ALONG A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SO--ST FROM A RADIAL
BEARING OF NORTH 75° 43' 42" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 240.00
FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14° 36' 00" AN ARC DISTANCE
OF 61.16 FEET TO THE WESTERN CORNER OF SAID LOT 143; THENCE
LEAVING SAID EASTERN LINE OF CRESTON DRIVE ALONG THE
NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 143
NoRTH-~6° 12' 27' EAST 212.72 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG'~NING.
CONTAINING 0.335 ACRE, MORE OR LESS, AND CONSISTING OF ALL
OF LOT 143 AS SHOWN ON THE ABOVE SAID MAP.
END OF DESCRIPTION
Revision Date 9-18-02
EXHIBIT B ~
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
TO CITY OF CUPERTINO
ENTITLED
CRESTON DRIVE 01-04 TRACT NO. 1960
....... CUPER'I~NO CITY UMITS
PROPO~[D ANNEXATION uMITS
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ANNEXATION
HOMESTEAD NO. 3C
LAND
2004
VICINITY MAP
NTSC
HIGHWAY 280
DUNBAR &: CRAIG
LICENSED LAND SURVEYORS
1011 CEDAR S'I~EET SANTA CRUZ CA
(831) 4,26-7533
NK
CRESTON DRIVE (60')
TRACT NO. 1456
APN 326--12-060
SCALE 1'"60' JO~ NO, 01142
OA'II~ 28 MAR 2001 INDEX CUPE~'~NO
DRAWN RJC RE~/~S~ON DATE 9--1&-02
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 02-184
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
MAKING DETERMINATIONS AND APPROVING THE REORGANIZATION
OF TERRITORY DESIGNATED "CRESTON DRIVE 02-03", PROPERTY
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CRESTON DRIVE BETWEEN
BERKELEY COURT AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD; APPROXIMATELY
0.541 ACRE, JOHNSON AND WHITTAKER (APN 326-12-062)
WHEREAS, a petition for the annexation of certain territory to the City of
Cupertino in the County of Santa Clara consisting of 0.541+ acre on the north side of
Creston Drive between Berkeley Court and Foothill Boulevard (APN 326-12-062) has
been filed by property owners Jeffrey Johnson and Dolores Whittaker; and
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 02-
160 initiating proceedings for reorganization of the area designated "Creston Drive 02-
03"; and
WHEREAS, said territory is uninhabited and all owners of land included in the
proposal consent to this annexation; and
WHEREAS, Section 56757 of the California Government Code states that the
Local Agency Formation Commission shall not have any authority to review an
annexation to any City in Santa Clara County of unincorporated territory which is within
the urban service area of the city of the annexation if initiated by resolution of the
legislative body and therefore the City Council of the City of Cupertino is now the
conducting authority for said annexation; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public heating; and
WHEREAS, evidence was presented to the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino as follows:
That it is the conducting authority pursuant to Section 56757 of the Government
Code for the reorganization of property designated "Creston Drive 02-03", more
particularly described in Exhibit "A";
2. That the following findings are made by the City Council of the City of Cupertino:
Resolution No. 02-184 Page 2
That said territory is uninhabited and comprises approximately 0.245
acre.
That the annexation is consistent with the orderly annexation of territory
with the City's urban service area and is consistent with the City policy
of annexing when providing City services.
The City Council has completed an initial study and has found that the
annexation of said territory has no significant impact on the environment,
and previously approved the granting of a Negative Declaration.
The City Council on June 17, 1980, enacted an ordinance prezoning
the subject territory to City of Cupertino Pre RI-10 zone.
Annexation to the City of Cupertino will affect no changes in special
districts.
That the territory is within the city urban service area as adopted by the
Local Agency Formation Commission.
g. That the annexation is made subject to no terms and conditions.
That the County Surveyor has determined the boundaries of the proposed
annexation to be definite and certain, and in compliance with the
Commission's road annexation policies. The City shall reimburse the
County for actual costs incurred by the County Surveyor in making this
determination.
That the proposed annexation does not create islands or areas in which it
would be difficult to provide municipal services.
That the proposed annexation does not split line of assessment of
ownership.
k. That the proposed annexation is consistent with the City's General Plan.
That the City has complied with all conditions imposed by the
commission for inclusion of the territory in the City's urban service area.
That the territory to be annexed is contiguous to existing City limits under
provisions of the Government Code.
That said annexation is hereby ordered without election pursuant to Section 56837
et seq. of the Government Code.
Resolution No. 02-184 Page 3
4. That the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Cupertino is directed to give
notice of said annexation as prescribed by law.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Cupertino this 7th day of October 2002, by the following vote:
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAiN:
Members of the City Council
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, CityofCupenino
County of Santa Clara
Environmental Resources Agency
Building Inspection/Land Development Engineering and Surveying
County Government Center. East Wing
70 West Heciding Street, 7Ih Floor
San Jose, California 951 IO
Bldg lnspec. 1408) 299-5700 Land Devel, 299-5730 FAX 279-8537
www. sccbuilding.org
July 31,2002
Kim Smith, City Clerk
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
The attached map and description dated June 4, 2002 of territory proposed
for annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled CRESTON DRIVE 02-03 is in
accordance with Government Code Section 56757 (b) (2). The boundaries of said
territory are definite and certain. The proposal is in compliance with the Local
Agency Formation Commission's road annexation policies.
Martin D. Marcott
County SurveyoZ
Attachment
cc: LAFCO Executive Director (w/attachment)
Board of Supervisors: Donald E Gage, Blanca Alvar~do. Pete McHugh, James T. Beall. Jr., Liz miss
County Executive: Richard Wittenberg
EXHIBIT
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA. ENTITLED:
CRESTON DR. 02-03
All that certain real property situated in the County of Santa
Clara, State of California, said property being delineated and
designated as "NOT A PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION" upon map of Tract
No. 1456, filed in Book 55 of Maps at pages 40 and 41, Santa
Clara County Records, said property being more particularly
described as follows:
Beginning the the most easterly corner of Lot 26 of Tract No.
1180 Creston, a map of which map was filed in book 44 of Maps at
Page 53, Santa Clara County Records, on the southwesterly line of
that certain annexation to the City of Cupertino, California,
entitled "Homestead No. 3C, Revised", in the centerline of
Stevens Creek;
Thence along said southwesterly line of said annexation and and
said Creek centerline, S59°11'E 36.21 feet and S17°04'20"E 90.50
feet to the most northerly corner of Lot 144 of Tract No. 1456 a
map of which was filed in Book 55 of Maps at pages 40 and 41,
Santa Clara County Records;
Thence along the northwesterly line of said Lot 144 of said
Tract, S51°43'W 239.93 feet to a point on the northeasterly
of Creston Drive, 60 feet wide;
line
Thence along a non-tangent curve to the left from a tangent
bearing of N43°28'W having a radius of 240 feet through a central
angle of 7°09'43" an arc length of 30.00 feet;
Thence leavin~_said curve tangentially N50°37'43"W 30.0~ feet to
the most southerly corner of the hereinbefore referred to Lot 26
of Tract No. 1180;
Thence leaving said northeasterly line of
along the southeasterly line of said Lot,
to the point of beginning.
Containing 0.541 of an acre, more or less.
Date: June 4, 2002
APN: 326-12-062
Address: 10550 Creston Dr.,
Los Altos
Creston Drive and
N39°22'16"E 277.15 feet
Lc~c ATI 0 l,,l tut A.P
· ' -- Linc o.f' ¢~is't'{nq ctnnexc~Jdon
$' ¥> ':.:-,' "' PROPOSED AI, tNE%ATION -ro
~ ~,~: ~,.q~//. TI4E CIT't' OF: CUPERTINO, CA-
E N"rI'TLE D:
~ C P..F_STO N DR. o~-~3 ~
SCALE; I" = 50' ,3'UI,tE .4, 200Z
CITY OF
CUPE INO
¢it~ Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-32110
FAX: (408) 777-3366
Website: www.cupertino.org
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Number
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Approve fee waiver requests from The Cupertino Symphonic Band totaling approximately $487.50 in
facility use fees for two free public events: Veterans Day Concert on November 8, 2002 ($375.50) and
a Holiday Concert on December 11, 2002 ($112.00). Both events will be at the Quinlan Center.
BACKGROUND
The Cupertino Symphonic Band is a Cupertino-based, nonprofit organization. Pursuant to the City of
Cupertino's facility use policy, adopted by the City Council, a Cupertino-based, nonprofit organization
providing a service to the conununity shall receive a waiver of fees relative to their event.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council waive the facility use fees in the approximate amount of $375.50
for two Cupertino Symphonic Band events.
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
TO CITY COUNCIL:
Therese Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation
David W. Knapp, City Manager
mp
Pr,r, ted on Recycled Pape,
The Cupertino Symphonic Band
P.O. Box 2692
Cupertino CA 95015-2692
408-262~0471
July 29, 2002
Mr. Tom Walters, Recreation Supervisor
Cupertino Parks and Recreation Dept.
10185 N. Stelling Road
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Mr. Walters:
The Cupertino Symphonic Band has reserved the Cupertino Room in Quinlan
Community Center for two free public events, as follows: the Veterans Day Concert on
Friday, November 8, 2002, and the Holiday Concert on Wednesday, December 11,
2002. We are requestJng a waiver of the rental fees, which total $487.50 for the two
dates. These are annual concerts which we have presented at Quinlan Center for
several years. Our most recent Quinlan concert was in April, for which the City Council
kindly waived the rental.
The band has just concluded its thirteenth season with a performance in the city's
summer park concert series, in which we were the only concert band. Our new season
will begin in September with a concert at the Silicon Valley Moon Festival.
As described in our letter of January 15, 2002, we are a Cupertino-based, nonprofit
group which is dedicated to promoting music appreciation and education. We are
proud to participate in the rich cultural life of our community.
Sin~cerely yours,/~
Robert Shoots, President
CITY OF
CUPEP INO
City Hall
10300 Tone Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-32110
FAX: (408) 777-3366
Websit¢: www.cupertino.org
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Number
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Approve fee waiver request from the League of Women Voters of Cupertino-Sunnyvale of
approximately $100 in facility use fees for a Candidates Forum for citizens of Cupertino on October
23, 2002, at the Quinlan Center.
BACKGROUND
The League of Women Voters Cupertino-Sunnyvale is a nonprofit, nonpartisan political organization.
Pursuant to the City of Cupertino's facility use policy, adopted by the City Council, a nonprofit
organization providing a service to the community shall receive a waiver of fees relative to their event.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council waive the room rental fees in the approximate amount of $100.00.
SUBMITTED BY:
Therese Ambrosi Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
TO CITY COUNCIL:
David W. Knapp, City Manager
mp
Pr,nteo on IReevcled Paper fl ~'l
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CUPERTINO-SUNNYVALE
} Box 2923 Sunnyvale CA 94087-0923
Tom Walters
City of Cupertino
Parks and Recreation Department
Recreation Supervisor
10185 North Stelling Road
Cupertino, CA 95014
September 4, 2002
Dear Mr. Walters,
I am writing to request a fee waiver of $100 from the City for the use of the Cupertino Room at Quinlan
Center on October 23, 2002.
The League of Women Voters, Cupertino/Sunnyvale is sponsoring a Candidates Forum for the citizens
of Cupertino. The candidates participating are those running for the 15th Congressional District and the
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judicial seats #9 and #16.
Enclosed are copies of our 501 (C) form and the proposed contract with the City of Cupertino. Our tax
ID Number is 23-736-8455.
Please let me know if you need additional information.
Thank you very much,
Marilyn Howard, Voter Service
League of Women Voters
867 E. Estates Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014
Phone: (408) 255-0977
FAX (408) 255-0915
The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages the informed and active
participation of citizens in government, worI~ to increase understanding of rnajor public polic*y issues,
and influences public policy through education and advocacy.
Dis:rjr: Director
P 0 BOX 3600[ STOP SF-4-4-4b
Da[e: JUL. 17, 1987
LEAGUE OF WOM~N VOTERS OF
CALIFORNIA EDUCATION FUND
926 J STFdSET SUITE 1000
SACR~NTO, CA 95814
Employer Identification Number:
68-0061260
Case Number:
957168007
Conrac: Person:
ROLAND FORTIER
Contact Telephone Number:
(az5) 556-0319
Our Let:er Dated:
Nov. 7, 1985
Caveat Applies:
Dear Applicant:
This modifies our letter of the above date in which we s:a:ed chat you
would be created as an organize:ion which is no: a private foundation unai!
the expiration of your advance ruling period.
Based on :he information you submitted, we have de:ermined the: you are
not a private foundation wi:him the meaning of sec:ion 509(a) of the Internal
P~avenue Code, because you are an organizatloa of the Cyme described in sec:ion
509(a)(i) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). Your exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of
~he code is still in e£fec:.
Grantors and contributors may rely on :his determination un:il :he
Im:ernal Revenue Service publishes a no:ice co the contrary. However, a
grantor or a contributor may no: rely on this dece~!nation if he or she was
in par: responsible for, or was aware of, the ac: or failure to act
resulted in your loss of sectloa 509(a)(1) sca:ua, or acquired knowledge
:ha: the Internal P. evenue Service had given no,ice that you would be removed
from classification as a sec:ion 509(a)([) organization.
Because this letter could help re~clve amy questions about your privet=
foundation s:atus, please keep i: in your permanemt records.
If ~he heading of ~his letter lhdica:es :ha: a cavea~ applies, [he ca'/ea[
be!ow or om ghe enclosure is an £ncagral par: of ~his let:er.
If you have any questions, please co~:act the person whose name and
~l. ep~[one n~mber are shown above.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick {2. N:[e.l. sen
Lec[~r tOSOr. CG) JUl_
CUPEPxTINO
QCC Rental Contract / Permit
City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation Department
10185 North Stelling Road
Cupertino, CA 95014
Pllone: (408) 777-3120 Fax: (408) 777-3137
P~fnted: 26-Aug-02, 10:25AM
User. chnSq
Contract #: 276t
Date: 26.Aug-02
User: CHRISQ
Status: Tentative
City of Cupertino Pari<$ and Recreation Depadment hereby grant~ LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS (hareina/ter called the "Licensee") represented
by MARILYN HOWARD. perrniasio~ to use the Faclll~es as outJine(t, subject to the Terms and Conditions of t~is Agreement contained herein and
attached hereto all of which fo~m part of this Agreement.
i) Purpose of Uae
Public Event
ii) Conditions of Uae
iii) Date and Times of Uae
Facility
Ouin[an Commu nit y Cemer - Wed
Cupertino Room
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
RESERVATION SUBJECT TO DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL, VERIFICATION OF FEES.
DATES, AND TIMES. UPON APPROVAL. A FIRM RENTAL CONTRACT / PERMIT WILL BE
MAILED TO YOU.
# of Bookings: 1 Starting: 23 Oct Wed 02 06:00 PM Exped:ed: 75
Ending: 23 Oct Wed 02 10:00 PM
Day Start Date Start Time End Date End Time Faa Extra Fee Tax Total
23-Oct-02 06:00 PM 23-Oct-02 10:00 PM $10~.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00
Iv) Additional Fees
v) Payment Method
Rental Fees Extra Fees
$100.00 $0.00
Tax Rental Total Damage Deposit Total Applied Balance Current
$0.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 S 100.0o $0.00
Complete ~ayment of $100.00 due on Wednesday. October 09, 2002
In con s4cleratt~n for the acceptanca of my epl3lic~t~on for participation in or presence at the aformanbol!ed acttv~ty, I HEREBY WAIVE,
RELEASE AND DISCHARGE, the Cul:)e~tino PanXs and RacreatJo~ Department, the Cupertino Public Facil~t ~ Co~3oration, the City of
Cu~)ertJno anc~ t~e County of Santa Clara, t~eir agents and employees FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR ANY LO~S,
PERSONAL INJURY, INCLUDING DEATH. OR PROPERTY DAMAGE THAT MAY HAVE ARISEN OUT OF, OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED
WITH. MY PARTICIPATION OR PRESENCE AT THE AFOR SMENTIONED EVENT, EVEN THOUGH THAT UABI LiTY MAY HAVE ARISEN
OUT OF NEGLIGENCE OR CARELESSNESS ON THE PART OF THE PERSONS OR ENTI33ES MENTIONED ABOVE THE HEREIN
RELEASED, BUT DO NOT RELEASE THEABOVE MENTIONED PERSONS OR ENTITLES FROM THEIR FRAUDULENT OR INTENTIONAL
ACTS OR FOR TH EIR NEGLIGENT VIOLATIONS OF STATUTORY LAW,
Furthem~ore, I assume ell reepon~b~llty ~ agree to i~ni~ the C~y of Cupe~to f~r any Iota. damage or injury to mylllf or my pro~3er~y
which may have 13sen caused hy negligence, or any act. of any pel'-~on conneofe~ in any way with the ato~ernentioned event I unOerltand that
the City o[' Cuper~no does not guarantee the coastructio~, condition, or safety of the facilities or the equil3emnt and that this Release
Agreement ia to be binding o~ ma, my helm and assign&
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
867 E ESTATES DR
CUPERTINO CA 95014
Home it: B~Nness #: 255-0977
Fax #:
X:
TOM WALTERS
RECREATION SUPERVISOR
City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation Department
Date Approved:
Page: 1 of 2
CITY OF
CUPE INO
PARKS AND RECREATION ADMINISTRATION
Agenda Item Number
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT:
Approve a fee waiver request from the Fremont Union High School District Board
of Trustees of approximately $75.00 in facility use fees for a community reception
for the new superintendem on October 10, 2002.
BACKGROUND:
The Fremont Union High School District (FUSD) has traditionally enjoyed use of
city facilities at no cost. This reception is not the type of event for which fees are
typically waived, however, it is open to the public as a community reception.
District staff has asked that this request be forwarded to the City Council.
Staff is preparing a report on fee waivers that will be presented to the Parks and
Recreation Commission at their November meeting and to City Council on
November 18, 2002.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council approve the facility use fee waiver for the
FUSD community reception in the amount of $75.00.
SUBMITTED BY:
Therese Ambrosi Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
TO CITY COUNCIL:
David W. Knapp
City Manager
FREMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
Cupertino. Fremont, Homestead, Lynbrook, Monta V s a H gh Schoo s and Adu t/Community Educat o ~
Stephen R. Rowley, Ph.D.. Superintendent (~['School.t
September 12, 2002
To Whom It May Concern:
The Board of Trustees of the Fremont Union High School District is planning a
reception for our new superintendent, Dr. Stephen R. Rowley. We have reserved
the Cupertino Room in the Quinlan Community Center on October 10, 2002
from 4:30-7:30P~ for this event.
I am writing to request the City of Cupertino waive the Facility Use Fee for this
event. I am enclosing a copy of our QCC Rental Contract / Pernfit. This reception
will be hosted by our Board and we are not charging any fee for attendees.
Thank you very much for considering this request.
Sincerely,
Cind~
Communications Manager
Bo4~t~ or TRUSrEL3: Kathr3'n Ho, Avie Katz. Nan,2v A. Newton, Ram~v Okamura. Homer H.C. Tong
589 West Fremont Avenue (408) 522-2200
Post Office Box F FAX (408) 245-5325
Sunnvvale, CA 94087 AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER http://www.fuhsd.ora/
CITY OF
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3210
FAX: (408) 777-3366
Wcbsite: www.cupertino.org
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Number
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Approve request from the Iranian Federated Women's Club and Payvand Cultural School
for waiver of use fees for its Sixth Annual Arts and Cultural event that was held at the
Quinlan Community Center on Sunday, September 29, 2002, in the approximate amount
of $2,974.00.
BACKGROUND
The one-day cultural event included a variety of community activities such as dance,
music, and food. Pursuant to the City of Cupertino's facility use policy, adopted by the
City Council, a Cupertino-based, non-profit organization providing a service to the
community shall receive a waiver of fees relative to their event.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council waive the room rental fees at the Quinlan
Community Center in the approximate amount of $2,974.00 for the Iranian Federated
Women's Club and Payvand Cultural School's Sixth Annual Arts and Cultural event held
on Sunday, September 29, 2002. IFWC will be responsible for the approximate $161 in
staff costs.
SUBMITTED BY:
Therese Ambrosi Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
TO CITY COUNCIL:
David W. Knapp, City Manager
November 26, 2001
Mr. Tom Wa~e~s
Facility Supervisor for Cupertino Parks and Rec. Dept.
10185 N. Stelling Rd.
Cupertino, C~ 95014
Dear Tom,
The Iranian Federated Women's Club and Pay~and Cultural School are
seeking funding and supporting to bring our cultural perspective to this
wonderful diverse community by sponsoring the Sixth annual Arts and
Cultural event scheduled at Quinlan Community Center in Cupertino on
~.~' ~ V_and 29, 2002.
This support will underwrite a two-days Cultural that will include a
wide variety of community activities such as dance, music, and food.
Our area of focus: Young Iranian Americans, like many i~migrant
children, face the challenge of integrating their ethnical identities in
a new environment. It is imperative for our future young Americans to be
proudly aware of their cultural heritage and use it to continue our
country's unique cosmopolitan fiber.
Our Organization and its Mission: Iranian Federated Women's Club and
Payvand cultural school are non-profit corporations that work to aid our
younger Iranian Americans to become highly trained citizens who maintain
their own cultural heritage. This is done through scholarship programs
and classes in English and Farsi languages, dance, music, painting, and
other activities. In addition we contribute to our American environment
by supporting various activities that integrate our young people and
children to become A/~ericans in a positive way.
I would appreciate if you would be kind enough to once again wave the
fee for using the community room on the above date.
Please do not hesitate to call me at (408) 865- 0969, should you have
any questions. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation.
Sincerely,
Fariba Nejat, President
IRIANIAN FEDERATED WOMEN'S COMMITTEE FESTIVAL 2002
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2002
FEE WAIVER BREAKDOWN
1. Qumlan Center/Memorial Park
2. Parks & Recreation Staffing
$2,974
$161
$3,135
CITY OF
CUPER TINO
PARKS AND RECREATION ADMINISTRATION
Agenda Item Number Iq
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT:
Approve a fee waiver request in the amount of $9,133.00 from the Cupertino
Rotary Club for facility use for the 2002 Oktoberfest.
BACKGROUND:
The Cupertino Rotary Club has traditionally enjoyed use of city facilities for the
annual Oktoberfest at no cost. The proceeds from this fundraiser go back into the
Community; this request is consistent with the City Council policy on fee waivers.
Staffis preparing a report on fee waivers that will be presented to the Parks and
Recreation Commission at their November meeting and to City Council on
November 18, 2002.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council approve the request for a waiver of fees in the
amount of $9,133.00 from the Cupertino Rotary Club for the 2002 Oktoberfest.
SUBMITTED BY:
~ Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
TO CITY COUNCIL:
David W. Knapp
City Manager
OKTOBERFEST 2002
OCTOBER 12 & 13
FACILITY USE / STAFF FESTIVAL
CITY FEE WAIVERS
Quinlan Center - Cupertino Room
Friday, October 11
Saturday, October 12
Sunday, October 13
Cupertino Room Total
$1,125,00
$ 675.00
$ 600.00
$2,400.00
Quinlan Center - Conference Room
Saturday, October 12 $ 375.00
Sunday, October 13 $ 325.00
Conference Room Total $ 700.00
Memorial Park - Picnic Area
Saturday, October 12 $ 55.00
Sunday, October 13 $ 55.00
Picnic Area Total $ 110.00
Memorial Park - Amphitheatre
Saturday, October 12 $ 110.00
Sunday, October 13 $ 110.00
Amphitheatre Total $ 220.00
Public Works Staff
Public Works Staff Total $3,000.00
Parks & Recreation Staff
P & R Staff Total
$ 655.00
Santa Clara County Sheriffs
Sheriffs Total
$2,048.00
FESTIVAL TOTALS
$9,133.00
OCTOBERFEST 2002
FACILITY / STAFF FESTIVAL FEEWAIVER FEES
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Cupertino Room $2,400.00
Conference Room $ 700.00
Picnic Area $ 110.00
Amphitheatre $ 220.00
Public Works Staff $3,000.00
Parks & Recreation Staff $ 655.00
Santa Clara County Sheriffs $2,048.00
FESTIVAL TOTAL $9,133.00
lq--3
CITY ( ~F
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX: (408) 777-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA DATE October 7, 2002
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Accept Progress Report on E-Waste program.
BACKGROUND
On September 16, 2002 the Council authorized the City Manager to negotiate and execute an
agreement with Apple Computer to participate in the Apple developed program for residents of
Cupertino to recycle end-of-life computers and consumer electronic products. Apple already has
an existing facility where they reuse, deconstruct and recycle electronic waste. The Council also
approved the use of $25,000 in funding for the contract from the Resource Recovery Fund.
Since the approval by Council, the contract has been executed and preparations made to
advertise this new service to Cupertino residents. In addition to notice in the "Cupertino Scene",
information is being provided on the City Website. Apple will be accepting, at its facility on
Bubb Road, electronic items that residents wish to dispose of in an environmentally responsible
manner. Apple is using a process designed to divert up to 90% of the end-of-life materials
received through the program from landfills to other beneficial uses through reuse or recycling.
Under this program, currently established as a six-month pilot project between Apple and the
City, Apple will accept computer equipment, selected office electronics and some home
entertainment electronics. For the 6-month pilot period, hours of operation are anticipated to be
Monday, Wednesday and Friday from 8am to 4:30 pm. Apple will provide the labor for tracking
and processing of the materials collected, at no charge to the City or residents.
The City is covering the cost of the disposal of non-working, non-reusable computer monitors,
which, for example is $0.25-$0.45 per pound for monitor disposal (the average weight of a
monitor is 30 pounds). This service began on September 30 and is now available to residents.
The City Staff and Apple will evaluate the program and report back to Council with appropriate
recommendations in the spring of 2003.
RECOMMENDATION
This report has been provided for the Council's information and no action is required.
Submitted by: Approved for submission:
Ralph A. Qualls, Jr.
Director of Public Works
David W. Knapp
City Manager
CITY OF
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
['AX: (408) / //-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENOAITEM iq
AGENDA DATE October 7, 2002
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Accept Informational Report on Environmental Policies
BACKGROUND
This responds to a request by Council member Sandoval to provide the City Council with
a summary of current and proposed environmental and conservation related policies
developed by the City over the last several years. Attachment "A" lists all current policies
as well as the environmental and conservation related topics, which are currently being
considered as part of the General Plan update.
Operational Policies and Procedures
The following topics have policies that been formally incorporated into the City's
operations and a copy of each of the written policies is appended to Attachment "A" for
information:
· Paper procurement
· Employee transportation
· Electric vehicles
· Double-sided copying
· Spare the air campaign
· Energy efficiency efforts
The City also has a citywide solid waste recycling program through its waste hauler, Los
Gatos Garbage, and its disposal contractor, International Disposal Corporation. As pan of
the recycling efforts, the Council has recently approved a contract with Apple Computer
for the recycling of consumer electronics and computer waste products(E-waste).
General Plan Update
The General Plan is currently under revision and the Community development
Department expects it to be considered by the Council by the end of this year.
Environmental and conservation topics expected to considered as part of the General Plan
update are specified by subject matter on Attachment "A". The general list of topics is as
follows:
· Transportation
· Energy Conservation/Efficiency
· Storm Water Pollution Prevention
· Air Quality
· Wildlife and Vegetation
· Preservation of Watersheds
· Ground Water Recharge Facilities
· Urban Conservation
· Urban RunoffPollution
· Hazardous Materials
· Solid Waste
· Energy Awareness
RECOMMENDATION
This report is for the Council's information and no action is required.
Submitted By:
Director of Publi~ Works
Ap~ Submission:
David W. Knapp
City Manager
f'9~..2-
Attachment "A"
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL/CONSERVATION POLICIES
Current City Policies:
· Policy for the Procurement of Recycled Paper and Recycled Paper Products
(4/4/94).
· Employee Transportation Program Policy (11/7/94)-encourages and provides
information and incentives to employees to promote the use of commute
alternatives. The City has been a participant in the ECO-pass program since 1997.
· Policy for the use of double-sided copying (5/1/00).
· Resolution authorizing participation in the "Spare the Air City and County"
Campaign (8/21/02).
· City Energy Efficiency Efforts (see attachment)
Policies under consideration:
· Integrated Pest Management Policy
General Plan Policies (existinu and prooosed):
Circulation Element:
Transportation
· Participate actively in developing regional approaches to transportation needs in
Santa Clara County.
· Reduce reliance on the use of single occupant vehicles.
· Support and encourage the increased use of public transit.
Environmental Resources/Sustainability Element:
Energy Conservation/Efficiency
· Encourage the design and construction of energy and resource
conserving/efficient building (Green Building Design)
· Encourage the maximum feasible conservation and efficient use of electrical
power and natural gas resources for new and existing residences, businesses,
industrial and public uses.
Storm Water Pollution Prevention · Require construction and post construction best management practices and source
controls.
· Require incorporation of stormwater pollution prevention measures addressing
erosion and sediment control into planning, design and construction phases of
development.
· Establish guidelines for erosion and sediment protection.
· Require adequate measures to prevent erosion, sedimentation and stormwatcr
pollution during construction.
· Require post-construction best management practices and source controls be
implemented for development.
· Implement pollution prevention methods supplemented by pollutant source
control and treatment.
· Support automobile pollutant reduction measures.
Air Quality · Review projects for potential generation of toxic air contaminants.
· Continue to use non-polluting dust control methods.
· Establish a citywide public education program regarding thc implications of the
Clean Air Act.
· Assess the potential for air pollution effects of future land use and transportation
planning.
· Home Occupations to reduce the need to commute to work.
· Increase tree planting on city and private property.
· Pursue City use of fuel-efficient and low polluting vehicles.
· Encourage walking, jogging and bicycling instead of driving.
· Provide information to citizens about high pollution potential of fireplace usc.
Wildlife and Vegetation · Encourage public agencies to landscape projects near native vegetation with
native plants.
· Encourage clustering of new development away from sensitive areas.
· Emphasize drought tolerant and pesticide-resistant native plants near natural
vegetation.
· New development shall preserve and enhance existing natural vegetation,
landscape features and open space.
· Confine fencing on hillside property to allow for migration of wild animals.
· Limit recreation in natural areas to activities compatible with preserving natural
vegetation.
· Maximize number of native trees and minimize lawn area.
Preservation of Watersheds · Protect natural water bodies and natural drainage systems.
· Minimize stormwater flow by reducing impervious surfaces.
· Assess pollution and flow impacts prior to land use decisions.
· Encourage compact development away from sensitive areas.
· Projects will conform with watershed-based planning and zoning.
Ground Water Recharge Facilities · Support SCVWD to find and develop groundwater recharge sites.
· Encourage the research of other water sources, including reclamation.
· Encourage industrial projects to have long-term conservation measures.
· Retain and possibly restore watercourses, riparian corridors and associated
vegetation in their natural state.
Urban Conservation · Pursue interagency coordination for regional water supply.
· Maintain citywide efforts of water conservation similar to those conducted on a
regional scale.
· Provide the public information regarding water conservation/efficiency
techniques.
· Prohibit excessive water uses.
· Undertake programs for long-term water conservation at city buildings.
Urban Runoff Pollution · Support and participate in the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution
Prevention Program.
· Prohibit illicit discharge into storm drains and waterways
· Encourage the reduction of impervious surface areas and retain or detain storm
runoff.
· Use CEQA to mitigate measures for potential stormwater pollutant impacts.
· Encourage the consideration of pest-resistant landscaping and design features.
Health and Safety Element:
Hazardous Materials · Continue to require proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials.
· Assess future residents' exposure to hazardous materials.
· Consider potential hazards form electromagnetic fields.
· Continue to endorse County Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
· Encourage contributors to the hazardous waste stream to use non-hazardous
alternative products.
· Continue support of countywide household hazardous waste program.
Solid Waste · Expand commercial and industrial recycling programs to surpass AB939 goals.
· Streamline the residential curbside recycling program.
· Require on-site garbage and recycling area dedication.
· Promote existing public education programs regarding recycling.
· Encourage city staffto recycle at city facilities.
· Encourage residents and businesses to re-distribute reusable materials.
· Encourage the recycling and reuse of building materials.
Energy Awareness
· Ensure that all homes have an acceptable balance of access to sun and protection
fi'om it, as well as control of prevailing winds.
10300 Torre Avenue
Cu0ertino. CA 95014
'Summary
{408) 252-4505
AGENDA ITEM ~;
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
AGENDA DATE April 4. 1994
POLICY FOR 'I'HIS PROCUREMENT OF RECYCLED PAPER
AND RECYCLED PAPER PRODUCTS
The request is to adopt a city policy for utili~ng recycled paper products.
BACKGROUND
In order to maintain and generate paper markets, it is necessary to adopt a paper policy to
encourage the use of recycled paper.
POLICY
The policy proposed would require the city to make a commlmaent to purchasing recycled
paper and recycled paper products to the level that a price preference of up to ten percent
would be given to recycled paper. This would mean that in a bidding process, if recycled
paper were more expensive, city would be willing to pay up to ten percent more. In some
cases recycled products may be less expensive.
Annual purchase of paper products amounts to approximately $5,000.00. This could
mean a commitment of no greater thnn approxima~ly'$500.00 per year, assuming that
recycled product~ will be more expensive in every case.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the city council adopt Resolution No. 9064 approving Policy for Procurement of
Recycled Paper and Recycled Paper Products.
AT~ for Submi~ion:
City Manager
EX.FlIT I
DEFINITIONS FOR RECYCLED PAPER AND
P. APER PRODUCTS
Paper and paper products: Paper and paper products covered by this policy include,
but am not limited to, any City purchases oftbe following:
All grades and types of copy machine paper;
, All grades and types of printing and writing paper;,
· Stationery, note pads, envelopes, business cards, forms and computer papers;
· Paper towels, toilet tissue, facial tissue, paper napkln.~, food plates and food
· containers;
* Corrugated and fiberboard boxes; and
· Newsprint.
Recyclable paper: Recyclable paper is paper which is able to be entered back into the
manufacturing process for future paper products. For purposes of this policy, recyclable
paper is paper able to be handled by the City's Recycling Program. The paper must be
uncoated paper; paper that is waxed or shiny is not recyclable.
The following definitions are adapted from the California Public Contract Code, Section
12200, and will be adopted for purposes of this policy:
Recycled product: All materials, goods, and supplies, no less than 50 percent of the
total weight of which consists of secondary and postconsumer waste with not less than 10
percent of its total weight consisting of postoousumer waste. A recycled product shall
include any product which could have been disposed of as a solid waste having
completed its life cycle as a consumer item, but 9th.e_rw!.se is refurbished for reuse without
substantial alteration of its form.
Postconsumer waste: A finished material which would have been disposed of as a solid
waste, having completed its life cycle as a consumer item, and does not include
Secondary waste: Fragments of finished products or finished products of a
manufacturing process, which has converted a virgin resource into a commodity of real
economic value, and includes postconsumer waste, but.does not include excess virgin
resources of the manufacturing process.
Employee Transportation Program Policy
There seems to be no end to the growing number of commuters in the Bay are~ The high
number of commuters le.a~ls to all increase in tra~c and air pollution, and forces us to
wonder what can be done. In an effort to lessen the problem, the cily of Cupertino has
adopted an employee lransportation policy that is stated as follows:
Policy · It is the policy of the city of Cupertino to encourage and provide information
and incentive~ to employees to promote the use of commute alternatives.
The purpose of the policy is to advocate the use of commute alternatives instead of
driving alone to reduce peak hour congestion, improve air quality, and lower energy
consumpfion~ Because of the smallnumber of employecs and the pro~mlty of the city to
mass transit, suggested commute alternatives are walking, biking, car-pooling and riding
a bus. In order to achieve a reduction in the number of single occupant cars, a number of
incentives have been adopted by the city counsel to assist employees in the use of
commute alternatives. The incentives are as follows:
Showers and lockers: Facilities are available at specific city facilities (City Hall,
Service Center, Sports Center)
Secure bike racks and lockers: Facilities are available at specific city facilities (City
Hall, Senior Center, Service Center)
Check cashing privileges: Services are currently available in the city ' s finance
department
Payroll direct deposit: Employees can arrange to deposit directly payroll checks to
their personal accounts through the finance department.
Ride-share matching: The city furnishes a system to provide employees with
information about potential carpool partners within city work sites (call Para
Ledesma, Public Works, ext. 241)
6. *Alternative work schedule (AY/S): An employee work schedule that eliminates at
least one round-trip commute every two weeks; specifically, a nine hour workday with
one Friday o. ff every two weeks, staggered among the work force.
7. Flexible work hours: A minor alteration to an employee's daily work schedule to
provide an incentive for the employee to use commute alternatives (at the discretion of
the employee's supervisor).
City Hall
10300 Toffe Avenue
Cupe~ino, CA 95014-3255
(4OS) 777-33~.
CffYOF FAX:(408)777-3333
CUPEP TINO
AGENDA ITEM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
AGENDA DATE May 1, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
The request is to adopt a city policy for the use of double-sided copying.
BACKGROUND
In order to assist the City in meeting state-mandated efforts to reduce waste by 50 percent by the year
2000, it is necessary to adopt a double-sided copying policy to reduce waste produced by City
facilities.
POLICY
The policy proposed would require the City to make a commitment to two-sided copying for all
documents prepared for general circulation to other City departments, to other agencies and to the
public. Contracts for printing services shall specify and require using double-sided pages. Preprinted
forms and other printed material shall be on doubled-sided pages. Departments requiring the
preparation or submission of bids, reports, proposals, quotations or other documents shall specify and
required the document to be printed on double-sided pages to the maximum extent possible.
Exceptions shall be made for original letters and memos mailed directly to the addressee and where
legal or other requirements specify that documents must be printed one-sided only. Departments
without access to copiers capable of printing two-sided copies shall be excused from this requirement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 00-~O approving the Policy Regarding the Use of
Double-Sided Copying at City Facilities.
Approveg~ S~~
RESOLUTION NO. 00-224
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING PAKTICIPATION IN TIlE "SPARE THE AIR CITY AND
COUNTY" CAMPAIGN
WHEREAS, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District is conducting its voluntary
Spare the .4ir program from June to October each year in the nine counties that comprise the San
Francisco Bay Area; and
Wltlt, REAS, Spare the ,4ir is now in its tenth year and has more that 1,200 public and
private employers who have pledged to participate in the Spare the Air program; and
W[IEREAS, the San Francisco Bay Area has experienced dramatic improvements in its
air quality over the last 40 years, but still sees a large number of days during the year when
pollution exceeds state and national health standards; and
WHEREAS, Regional air pollution data for 2000 will be especially critical because it
will be used to determine if the Bay Area meets the national EPA ozone standards, adding
greater urgency to voluntary air pollution reduction efforts; and
W}tEREAS, the Bay Area Clean Air Partnership GlayCAP) is a public-private
partnership that supports voluntary efforts to improve the Bay Area's air, including the Spare the
Air program; and
WI:IEREAS, BayCAP will recognize cities and counties that participate in the "Spare the
Air City and County" Campaign and carry the clean air theme city or countywide; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino wishes to obtain the designation of "Spare the Air
City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino pledges that the City will do the following:' - -
Spare the Air City Responsibilities
· Become a Spare the Air Employer by completing a registration form with coordinator
information.
· Educate and notify employees of Spare the ~4ir days.
· Print an article on the Spare the.4ir program in your community'S newsletter.
· Use the city cable station to educate residents about the Spare the Air program.
· Send certificates of appreciation or thank you letters fi.om the City Council to Spare the Air
companies in our jurisdiction.
· Adopt a policy to get all city employees on e-mail notification on Spare the .4ir days.
· Adopt a policy to eliminate the use of two-stroke gas powered equipment by city staffon
Spare the Air days.
City Energy Efficiency Efforts
Equipment changes:
· Recently installed Light Emitting Diodes (Ll:.r~s) in all street traffic control lights,
replacing incandescent bulbs. This change-out will result in an 8~90% savings in tt~ffic
Control lighting costs.
· Installed energy-efficient high-pressure sodium lamps in all street lights.
· Retrofitted all overhead lights, in city offices, with energy efficient lamps and ballasts:
T-12 lamps and ballasts were replaced with T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts. Results in
a 2% reduction in all facilities lighting energy usage.
· Installed auto shut-off motion sensor light switches in several meeting rooms in city hall
and in the corporation yard buildings.
Staff behavior changes:
· Lights are turned offin unused rooms.
· City night watch contractor verifies all lights and appropriate equipment is turned off
when no workers are present.
· Light use is reduced where possible in all city facilities.
· The AV department turns off monitors when not in use (in the past, they typically would
leave them on all day).
· The city's cable station runs promos with energy conservation tips. The station runs a
Blackout planning:
Staff have contacted the at-risk organizations in the city (two retirement/convalescent
communities) to determine if they are prepared to handle any blackouts. Both have
generators onsite.
The city's policy for dealing with power loss at traffic-light-controlled intersections, is to
essentially not change the intersection. Public Works staffhave determined that the safest
thing to do would be to count on drivers knowing they must treat an unlighted traffic light
as if it were a four-way stop. (Placing temporary stop signs will cause confusion when
the power comes back on, and any signs are still in position.)
City of Cupertino
10300 T0rre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
FAX (408) 777-3333
Community Development Depm'hx~ent
Summary
Agenda Item No. 1 ~
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT:
Receive report on the schedule to revise Chapter 10.48 (Noise Ordinance) of the
Cupertino Municipal Code regarding home maintenance activities - leaf blowers.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
· Authorize seal4 to initiate revisions to the Noise Ordinance (Chapter 10.48)
regarding home maintenance activities and other related issues of clarification
according to the attached schedule.
BACKGROUND
On June 3, 2002, Mr. Jeff Herman came before the City Council under Oral
Communications to express his concerns regarding the hours of operation and noise
limits of leaf blowers. On August 29th, 2002, Planning and code enforcement staff met
with Mr. Herman to discuss leaf blowers. Mr. He~umn requested that this issue be
raised with the Council and that the Noise Ordinance be amended to address early
morning home maintenance activities. On September 16, 2002, the Council discussed
the issue and d/rected st-afl to return with a proposed schedule to revise the Noise
Ordinance.
DISCUSSION
Staff intends to present the revised Noise Ordinance language to the Council on its
October 21, 2002 meeting. In the mean while this gives staff sufficient time to contact
the home maintenance industry representatives to give them a chance to evaluate the
proposed changes. Please see the attached schedule for more detail.
Steve Piasecki, Director of
Community Development
G:\ Planning\ PDREPORT~ CC~ MCA-2002-04cc2.doc
APPROVED BY:
David W. Knapp, City Manager
Noise Ordinance Amendment Schedule
10-7- 2002 CC Meeting
Between 10-7-2002 to 10-21-2002
10-21-2002 CC Meeting
11-4-2002 CC Meeting
12-4-2002
Request authorization from the Council to
initiate revision to the Noise Ordinance
according to the proposed schedule
Staff will contact the home maintenance
equipment industry representatives to
give them an opportunity to evaluate the
proposed changes.
1st Reading of the revised Noise Ordinance
language.
2na Reading of the revised Noise
Ordinance language.
30 Days after the 2na Reading, the
amended Noise Ordinance is effective.
G:\ Planning\ PDREPORT\ CC\ MCA-2002-04cc2. doc
CITY OF
CUPE INO
City of Cupertino
10300 Tone Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
Fax: (408) 777-3333
Community Development Department
Housing Services
Summary
Agenda Item No. I__~
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
Application: M-2002-07, EA-2002-13
Applicant (s): City of Cupertino
Property Location: 10441 Bandley Drive (APN#: 369-33-079)
Application Summary:
Modification of an approved use permit (2-U-77) to allow a temporary library use
(Cupertino Public Library) in an existing industrial office building at 10441 Bandley
Drive.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends approval of:
1. Negative Declaration, file number EA-2002-13.
2. The Modification to Use Permit 2-U-77, file number M-2002-07, in accordance with
Resolution No. 6160.
BACKGROUND
On August 19, 2002, the City Council authorized the City Manager to approve a two-
year lease agreement to relocate the temporary Cupertino Public Library into a 10,096
square foot tenant space at 10441Bandley Drive.
The temporary library will comprise approximately 20% of an existing 52,438 square
foot office building on a 3.78 acre site on the west side of Bandley Drive and north of
Lazaneo Drive. The site is bounded by office and commercial uses to the north and
east, multi-family residential to the south and single family homes to the west. The
residential uses are screened by a landscaped buffer and masonry wall along the south
and west property lines.
Applications: M-2002-07, EA-2002-13 City of Cupertino October 7, 2002
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Planning Commission Action
On September 23, 2002, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project
and discussed the following:
1. Signage:
a. Provide signage to indicate additional parking to the rear of the building.
b. Inform the public regarding the new location of the temporary library site with
directional signs, etc.
The above comments have been included in the conditions of approval.
2. Provide bike racks for library customers - The parking code requires provision for 2
bikes or 5% of the required 34 automobile spaces. There are 8 bike lockers in the rear
parking lot that will be available for library use. Additional bike racks for about 8
bicycles are also proposed as part of the project. Therefore, bicycle parking will be
adequate.
Prepare. d by: ,,_, Aarti Shrivastava, Senior Planner
SUB TTE, APPROVED BY:
-- St~ve Piasecki, Director
David W. Knapp, City Manager
of Community Development
ENCLOSURES
Planning Commission Resolution No. 6160
Staff report for the Planning Commission dated September 23, 2002
Exhibit A: Traffic Report prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 9, 2002
Memo from Director of Community Development dated August 13, 2002
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Plan set
G:k Planning\ PDREPORT\pcUserepor ts\ M-2002-07cc.doc
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6160
M-2002-07
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MODIFICATION OF AN APPROVED USE
PER_MIT (2-U-77) TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY LIBRARY USE FOR THE CUPERTINO
PUBLIC LIBRARY IN AN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL OFFICE BUILDING
AT 10441 BANDLEY DRIVE
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
M-2002-07, EA-2002-13
City of Cupertino
10441 Bandley Drive (APN#: 369-33-079)
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application
for modification of an approved Use Permit, 2-U-77, at 10441 Bandley Drive APN#: 369-
33-079, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and'
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the
Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held
one or more public hearings on this matter; and
W'HEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and has satisfied the following requirements:
1. The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, general welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the
Cupertino General Plan and the purpose of this rifle.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, Application no. M-2002-07 is hereby recommended for
approval; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this
Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning
Resolution No. 6160 M-2002-07 September 23, 2002
Page 2
Application M-2002-07, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting
of September 23, 2002, and are incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on plan set dated September 3, 2002, entitled "City of Cupertino -
Temporary Library, and as amended by this resolution.
2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Approval is granted for the use of about 10,096 square feet of space as a library in a
52,438 square foot office building at 10441Bandley Drive.
3. SIGNAGE
Signage shall be provided for the following:
a. To prohibit left-turns into and out of the northernmost driveway of the project
site and minimize the potential for vehicular conflict with the driveway for the
Pluris building across the street on Bandley Drive, as recommended in the Traffic
Report prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 9, 2002.
b. In the front parking lot to indicate availability of parking to the rear of the
building.
c. Directional signs to inform the public regarding the new location of the
temporary library.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of September 2002, at a Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Auerbach, Chen, Saadati, Wong and Chairperson
Corr
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
/ s/Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
APPROVED:
/s/Charles Corr
Charles Corr, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
G: I Planning \ PD REPORT\ RES \ M-2002-07 res2.doc
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application: M-2002-07, EA-2002-13 Agenda Date: September 23, 2002
Applicant (s): City of Cupertino
Property Locatior~ 10441 Bandley Drive (APN#: 369-33-079)
Project Data:
General Plan Designation: Office/Industrial/Commercial/Residential
Zoning Designation: P (CG, ML, Res 4-10) - Planned Development (General
Specific Plan:
Project Consistency with:
General Plan:
Zoning:
Environmental Assessment:.
Negative Declaration
Commercial, Light Industrial, Residential 4-10
units/acre)
North De Anza Conceptual Plan
Yes.
Yes.
Application Summary:
Modification of an approved use permit (2-U-77) to allow a temporary library use
(Cupertino Public Library) in an existing industrial office building at 10441 Bandley
Drive.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of:
1. Negative Declaration, file number EA-2002-13
2. The Modification to Use Permit 2-U-77, file number M-2002-07, in accordance with
the model resolution.
BACKGROUND
On August 19, 2002, the City Council authorized the City Manager to approve a two-
year lease agreement to relocate the temporary Cupertino Public Library in a 10,096
square foot space at 10441Bandley Drive.
DISCUSSION
Project Site
The proposed temporary library is located in an existing 52,438 square foot office
building on a 3.78 acre site on the west side of Bandley Drive and north of Lazaneo
Drive. The site is bounded by office and commercial uses to the north and east, multi-
Applications: M-2002-07, EA-2002-13
Page 2
City of Cupertino
September 23, 2002
family residential to the south and single family homes to the west. The residential uses
are screened by a landscaped buffer and masonry wall along the south and west of the
property. The single-family residences to the west are mostly inaccessible from the
proposed site.
Land Use
The proposed temporary library site at 10441 Bandley Drive is located within the North
De Anza Boulevard Conceptual Planning area. The site consists of 3.78 acres and is
zoned P (CG, ML, Res 4-10). The North De Anza Boulevard Conceptual Plan allows
commercial, industrial and residential uses, subject to issuance of a "definitive
development plan" or use permit. The original use permit approved a 52,438 square
foot industrial/office building on the site. The library will take up approximately
10,096 square feet of the existing building or about 20%.
The Planned Development Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 19.48) allows
modification to a use pet~xdt subject to review and approval of the City Council upon
hearing and recommendation of the Planning Commission. However, the proposed use
must be consistent with the zoning. Municipal Code Section 19.56.030.P for the General
Commercial (CG) zone allows the Director of Community Development to interpret
that a use is permitted if it is similar to other uses pemxitted in the zone. While a library
use is not specifically cited as an allowed use in either the CG or ML zones, the Director
of Community Development has interpreted that it is similar to a retail bookstore in
terms of traffic, parking, hours of operation and the product (see attached memo dated
August 13, 2002). Therefore, the Planning Commission and City Council can consider
an amendment of the existing use permit for the temporary library use.
Traffic Analysis
A Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed project was prepared to assess the potential
traffic, circulation and parking impacts of the proposed project. The analysis indicates
that the library use would be comparable to a retail use when daily trips axe compared
(545 average daily trips for the library versus 504 trips for a retail bookstore), while PM
peak hour trips would be increased for the library use ( 72 PM peak hour trips for the
library versus 38 PM peak hour trips for the retail use). However, the project will not
cause any impacts to the level of service (LOS) at key intersections in the vicinity.
Neighborhood cut-through will be insignificant with a total of 5 trips projected,
possibly on Valley Green Drive, Beardon Drive and Greenleaf Drive.
The analysis also indicates that left-turns in and out of the northernmost driveway will
conflict with southbound left-turns into the parking area for the Pluris building across
the street on Bandley Drive. Therefore, as per the recommendation of the traffic
analysis, left-tums into and out of the northernmost driveway shall be prohibited to
minimize the potential for vehicular conflict with the help of signage.
Applications: M-2002-u7, EA-2002-13
l age 3
City of Cuperlin0
September23, 2002
Pedestrian access will be accorm'nodated via sidewalks on both sides on Bandley Drive
and a designated pedestrian crossing on Bandley Drive north of the middle driveway.
The site also has bicycle access.
Parking
A total of 40 spaces will be available for the library (about 4 spaces/1000 square feet).
The City's Municipal Code does not specify parking spaces for library uses. As per the
traffic study (and attached memo), a library would require approximately 2.92 to 3.33
spaces per 1000 square feet or about 34 spaces. Therefore, parking will be adequate.
Environmental Review
On September 11, 2002, the Environmental Review Committee recommended a
Negative Declaration for the project.
Submitted by: Aarti Shrivastava, Senior Planner
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developmen~---~-~.._
ENCLOSURES
Model Resolution for M-2002-07
Exhibit A: Traffic Report prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 9, 2002
Recon'unendation of the Enviroru'nental Review Committee
Plan set
D :\ A arti \ Projects \ Library \ M-2002 ~07.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
M-2002-07
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MODIFICATION OF AN APPROVED USE
PERMIT (2-U-77) TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY LIBRARY USE FOR THE CUPERTINO
PUBLIC LIBRARY IN AN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL OFFICE BUILDING
AT 10441 BANDLEY DRIVE
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
M-2002-07, EA-2002-13
City of Cupertino
10441 Bandley Drive (APN#: 369-33-079)
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application
for modification of an approved Use Permit, 2-U-77, at 10441 Bandley Drive APN#: 369-
33-079, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the
Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held
one or more public hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and has satisfied the following requirements:
1. The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, general welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the
Cupertino General Plan and the purpose of this title.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, Application no. M-2002-07 is hereby recommended for
approval; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this
Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning
Resolution No.
Page 2
M-2002-07
September 23, 2002
Application M-2002-07, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting
of September 23, 2002, and are incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
APPROVED EXI-IIBITS
Approval is based on plan set dated September 3, 2002, entitled "City of Cupertino -
Temporary Library, and as amended by this resolution.
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Approval is granted for the use of about 10,096 square feet of space as a library in a
52,438 square foot office building at 10441Bandley Drive.
BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL
The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for
full conformance with this approval and prior to issuance of building peri,tits.
4. SIGNAGE TO PREVENT LEFT-TURNS TO AND FROM NORTH DRIVEWAY
Signage shall be provided to prohibit left-tums into and out of the northernmost
driveway of the project site to minimize the potential for vehicular conflict with the
driveway for the Pluris building across the street on Bandley Drive, as
recommended in the Traffic Report prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 9,
2002.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of September 2002, at a Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Charles Corr, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
F: \ Planning \ PDREPORT\ RES \ M-2002-07 res.doc
EXHIBIT A
MEMORANDUM
To:
A~i Shrivastava, City of Cupertino
Cop3' To: David Marks, Nova Partners
FTO1TI:
Jason D. Pack
Kristiann Choy, P.E.
Date:
September 19, 2002
Subject: Cupertino Temporary Library Transportation ,4nalysis
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. recently completed a Transportation hllpact A~mlysis (TIA) for the
proposed library expansion project in Cupertino, California. The proposed expansion includes
demolition of the existing 37,000-square foot library and construction of a new 53,000-square foot
library.
During the demolition and construction of the new library, the existing library prnpos~ to move to a
10,096 s.f. temporary facility located at 10443 Bandley Dr/ye. Fehr & Peers Associates, [nc. has
completed a transportation analysis to assess impacts on the surrounding transportation system
associated with the temporary library. This memorandum presents the results of our analysis.
Introduction
Based on input from City Staff, four intersections were included in the amalysis:
i. Stevens Creek Boulevard/Stelling Road
2. Stevens Creek Boulevard/Saich Way
3. Stevens Creek Boulevard/Bandley Drive
4. Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard
5. De Anza Boulevard/l'.azaneo [)rive
6. Dc Anza Boulevard/Mariani Avenue
The impacts of thc temporary library on thc study intersections were estimated following the
guidelines of the City of Cupexthao amd the Santa Clara Valley 'rranspo~ation Authority (VTA), the
Congestion Management Agency in Santa Clara County. The temporary library is expected to
generate few trips during thc AM peak hour. Therefore, the analysis focused on thc evening (PM)
peak hour under the following scenarios:
Fax (~.08) 278-~.717
~ent By: Fehr & Peers Assoclatesl
&. I)FE~.S
Scenario 1: F. xisting Conditions. Existing volumes obtained fi.om counts, representing
peak one-hour traffic conditions during the evening conmmtc period.
Scenario 2: Background Conditions. Existing pcak-hour volumes plus traffic from
approved but not yet constructed developmen~ in thc study arco.
Scenario 3: Project Conditions. Background peak-hour volumes plus traffic generated by
the proposed temporary, library.,
Project Traffic
Thc amount of traffic generated by the temporary library during the peak hours was estimated by
applying library trip generation rates as presented in the lmsmute of Transportation En gineers' (ITE)
Trifl(Jeneratzon, 6 F. dltlOll. ThCtrlpge~tl~"ationestimatesarcpresenleAinTable 1.Tripgencration
rates and estimates for retail and office land uses are prostrated for comparison. Kates and trip~
during the AM peak hour for the Iibr&,-y are presented tbr informational purposes only. During the
PM peak hour, the temporary library is expected to generate 71 trips (34 inbound/37 outbound).
Table I
Trip Generation. Es~mat~s
Number of Trips
Trip Ratesz AM Peak Hour~ PM Peak Hour
Land AM
Use Size Daily Peak Peak Daily Tn Out Total llz Out Total
Library 10,096 s.tl 54.00 1.06 7.09 545 8 3 11 34 37 71
R~taii~ ........ i'~1'6~'/; ~.1('- 'X~TbS- 1.03 Ji'~a- ....... ~b~'-'--'-~- ...... ~ 1o 18 2o .... 5~-'"
AM r~ak.he, ut ir,l~ pl~aented [*or illu~r~tiv~ D~trlx~es onty.
The trip distribution pattern for the temporary library was estimated based on existing travel patterns
in the vicinity of the site and the relative locations of complementary land uses, primarily residential
neighborhoods and schools. The project-generated traffic was assigned to specific intersections and
turning movements to determine the potcnti.al impacts of the temporary library. The trip distribution
~nt By: Fenr & Peers Assocza[es;
40~ 28~
pattern is shown on Figure 1. The project trips assigned to the study intersections are shown on
Figure 2.
Intersection Levels of Service
The operations of thc key intersections were evaluated using Level of Sm'vice (LOS) calculations.
Level of Service is a qualitative description or an intcrscction's operation, ranging fi.om LOS A, or
free-flow conditions, to LOS F, or oversaturatcd conditions.
Thc level of setw'ice mcthodology, for sigaalizcd intersections, approved by the City of Cupertino,
evaluates a signalized intersection's operation based on thc avcrage stopped vehicular delay as
described in the 1985 Highway CapaciO~ Manual (Spccial Report 209, Transportation Reseamh
Board) with adjustments to the saturation flow rates to accom~t for local conditions. The average
delay for signalized intersections was calculated using the TRAFFIX analysis software and is
correlated to a LOS designation as shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Signalized lntersec~on Level of Service Definitions Using Average Stopped Vehicular Delnv
Level of i Average Stopped Deley
Service Description Per Vehicle (Seconds)
A : Opcratiolls with vrr~ lo~, delay occurring with favorable _<5.0
progression_ancff0r shg[t c~Lql~ lengt_hs.
B~- 5.1 to 7.0
B Operations with Iow delay occurring with good progressionand/or 7.1 to 13.0
B- . short cycle lengths. 13.1 to 15.0
C- '! operations with average delays resulting fro~m~ai/'-p-r0~rcssion 15.1 to 17.0
C : and/or longer cycle lcngnhs. Individual cycle failures bcgm to 17.1 to23.0
C- appear. _23:¥o _2~-0
D+ Opera-ti~ns-~ifli longer dcley~ ~uc t~-a combin:~i'ion of unfavorable 25.1 to 28.0
D progression, long cynic lcngtl~, and high V/C ratio~, Maay veldclc~ 28.1 to 37.0
stop and mdividuaL%v_El_c l:ail, ur~s arc noticeable. . ........... .3.7: ~.._t0 4_0.0
Operations with high delay values illdicatiag poor progrcs,qion long 40.1 to 44.0
cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are 44.1 to 56.0
f~equent 9cctaxcnFcs. 56. I to 60.0
F Operations with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due > 60.0
to over-saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle length&
Thc level of sera, ice standard (i.e., minimum acceptable operations) for the study intersections is LOS
D with one exception, The City's General Plan states that thc acccp 'robie threshold for tho Stevens
(:reek Boulevard/Dc Anza Boulevard intersection is LOS E+ (with no more than 45 seconds
i1
wcightcd average delay).
Thc same operations methodology is used by thc Valley Transports:ion Authority (VTA) to anal)~c
traffic impacts tbr Congcstion Management Program (CMP) facilities. The level o£scr~qce standard
for CMP-dcsignated intersections is LOS E, However, the City's thresholds are used to identify
intersection impacts.
Using thc information supplied by thc City of Cupertino (existing counts, approved projects, and
si~mal timings), data obtained in the field, and project traffic estimates, level of service (LOS)
calculations were conducted under Existing, Background, and Project Conditions, The City of
Cupertino has completed the De Anza Boulevard & Stevens Creek Arterial Management Project.
That project optimized signal coordination on these streets to enhance corridor and intersection
efficiency. The cycle Iongths determined by the arterial mm~agement project were obtained through
the City of Cupertino traffic engineering department and used to calculate LOS at all of the affected
key intersections. The results of the intersection level of set'ce calculations are presented in Table 3.
The levels of service calculatinns are attached.
Xable 3
?M Peak Hour intersection Level of Sen'icc Analysis Results
Intersection Control
_S~vens ~re_ek i~!yd.!~!e_umg R~. Signal
Existing
Delay '
21.7 C
11.4 : B
: 27:6 .....
Dc Anza Blvd./Mariani Ave. Signal 23.1 C-
Notes:
Background
Delay
(sec)t LOS~
21.9
11.2
14.5
29ol
7.8
22-6
Project
Delay :
(~e~)~ LOS2
:_ _!: ..... ~,.v_ . c
i~ ~ t.~ ....~
B- 14.8 ' B-
D 29.3 D
n : s.o i B--
C 22.6 C
The results of the intersection analysis indicate that all of thc study intersections are expected to
operate acceptably (LOS D or better) during the PM peak hour under all analysis scenarios.
Intersection Impacts
Intersection impacts wcrc identified according to the City of Cupertino's Transpotxation Impact
Analysis Guidelines and the Santa Claxa County Congestion Managcrnent Program. Traffic
generated by thc temporary library would result in a significant intersection impact if it causes:
-I-3
FFIIR & P~t:RS
1. The level of service at a Cupertino-monitored intcrscctionoperat~ng at LOS D or bcttcr under
Background Conditions to deteriorate to LOS E or F; or
An increase in the critical movement delay at a Cllpcrtino-monitorcd intersection operating at
LOS E or F under Background Conditions by four (4) or more seconds and increases thc
critical volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio by 0.01 or more; or
3. The level of service at thc Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevaffi intersection to be
LOS E or wome with more than 45 seconds of'average vehicle weighted delay; or
4, Degradation of thc lcvcl ofscrvicc at a CMP-monitored intersection operating at LOS E or
better under Background Conditions m LOS F; or
An increase in the critical movement delay at a CMP-monitored intersection operating at
LOS F under Background Conditions by four (4) or mom seconds mid increases rite critical
V/C Tatio by 0.01 or more.
Based on these significance crittrda, th-' temporary library will not cause a significant impact at any
of the study intersections.
Site Access
Vehicular access to the tea'nporary library xvill be accommodated by three driveways. The
southernmost driveway is right4urns only, inbound and outbound, duc to a center median on Bandley
Drive. The middle driveway is a full-access driveway with a designated northbound left-turn lane
into the site.
Thc northernmost ~ivcway is off-set by approximately 25 to 50 feet from an opposing driveway that
provides access to the Pluris building parking area. Left-roms into and out of the northernmost
driveway will conflict with southbound left-tums into the Pluris building parking area. Therefore, to
minimize thc potential for vehicular conflict, it is recommended that left-roms into and out of the
northernmost driveway be prohibited.
Pedestrian access to the tempor, u~ library ~vill be accommodated via sidewalks on both sides on
Bandley Drive. There is a designated pedestrian crossing on Bandley Drive just north of the middle
driveway serving thc site. Pedestrian access to the site is considered lo be ~'lcquate.
Neighborhood Intrusion
Access to the temporary libra,3~ site is isolated fi'om ucarby neighborhoods. Neighborhood streets to
which the temporary library may add traffic is Valley Green Drive, Bcardon Drive, Greenleal-Drive.
and Aires Drive. It is estimated that the temporary library would add less than five peak hour trips to
all o£these streets, combincd. The addition of temporary library traffic to these neighborhood streets
would be unnoticeable to residents.
Parking
Thc project site provides 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet. For a new San Jose library on
Blossom Hill Road, thc San Jose Public Library Branch Facilities Master Plan iflc-ntified that the
proposed 24,000-square foot Blossom FUll library should have 70 to 80 parking spaces, which
equates to a rate of 2.92 to 3.33 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet. There would be sufficient
parking tbr thc temporary library at the project site.
Conclusions
Thc results of the intersection level of sca'vice analysis indicated that traffic generated by thc
temporary library would not result in a signiticam impact on say of the study intersections. Site
access was reviewed. It was recommended that left-tums into and out of the northernmnst drivcway
bc prohibited.
Attachrncnts
Memo
To:
From:
DIIIE~
Ralph Quails, Director of Public Works
Steve Piesecki, Director of Community Development
August 13, 2002
Process for Review of the Temporary Library on Bandley Drive
The proposed temporary library site at 104~1 Bandley Drive, is located within the North Ds Anza
Boulevard Conceptual Planning ama, which was adopted in 1976 by Ordinance No. 723. The site
consists of 3.78 acres and is zoned Planned DevelopmenL The North De Anza Boulevard Conceptual
Plan allows industrial, commemlal and residential uses, subject to the issuance of a ~definifive
development plan" or use permit. The original 1977 use permit approved a 50,400 square foot
industrial/office building on this property. The library will take up approximately 10,000 square feat of
the existing building, or about 20%.
Int~,
The Planned Development Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 1g.48) allows modifications to use
permits subject to review and approval of the City Council upon hearing and recommendation of the
Planning Commission. However, the pmpesed use must be a use that is othenvise permitted in the
General Commercial (CG) Zoning District orthe Light Industrial (ML) zone. The Director of Community
Development can interpret that a use is permitted if it is similar to other uses permitted in the zone.
While a library use is not specifically cited es an allowed use in the CG or ML zones, I find that it is
similar to a retail.bookstore in terms of traffic, parking, hours of operation and the product. Therefore,
the Planning Commission and City Council can consider an amendment of the existing use permit for
the temporary library use.
ProGessforRe~ew
The Planning Commission must hold a public hearing on the modification to the definitive development
plan and make a recommendation to the City Council on whether to approve the temporary use.
Notice will be provided to surrounding propar[y owners within 500 feet of the property. The City Council
will then hold a hearing and make the final decision on the proposed use. This item can be scheduled
as follows:
Environmental Review Committea
Planning Commission
City Council
Wednesday, August 28, 2002
Monday, September 9, 2002
Monday, September 16, 2002
CITY OF CUPERTINO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure adopted by the City Council
of the City of Cupertino on May 27, 1973, and amended on March 4, 1974, January 17
1977, May 1, 1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was granted a
Negative Declaration by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on October 7, 2002.
PROIECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
EA-2002-13
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
M-2002-07
City of Cupertino (Cupertino Library)
10441 Bandley Avenue (APN#: 369-33-079)
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REOUEST
Modification of an approved use permit to allow a temporary library use in an existing
industrial office building. The Cupertino public library proposes to occupy this space
while the new library is being constructed.
FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY
The City Council granted a Negative Declaration since the project is consistent with the
General Plan and there are no significant environmental impacts.
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK
This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City
Clerk of the City of Cupertino on
City Clerk
g/erc/negEA200213
CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
September 11, 2002
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City Council of
the City of Cupertino on May 27, 1983, as amended, the following described project was
reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Cupertino on September
11, 2002.
PROIECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
M-2002-07 (EA-2002-13)
City of Cupertino (Cupertino Temporary Library)
10441 Bandley Avenue
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REOUEST
Modification of an approved use permit to allow a temporary library use in an
existing industrial office building. The Cupertino public library proposes to occupy
this space while the new library is being constructed.
FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMffTt~E
The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration
finding that the pyoject is consistent with the General Plan and has no significant
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
g/erc/REC EA-2002-13
CUPERTINO
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3251
FAX (408) 777-3333
Community Development Department
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Project Title: Cupertino Temoorarv Librarv
Project Location: 10441 Bandle¥ Drive
Staff Use Only
EA File No.
Case File No.
Attachments
Project Description: The oroiect consists of a use permit change to convert 10,096
sG.ft, of office soace in an existing office building totaling 52,436 sG.ff, into a ternDorarv
library for the Citv of Cupertino for a pedod of two years.
Environmental Setting:
The ternl3orarv library is r)rooosed to be located in 10,096 sG.ft, of an existing 52,436
SG.ft. office buildinG. The Portion to be occuoied by the temporary library is currently
vacant and was previously an office use. The site is bounded by office and cornrnercial
uses to the north and east, multi-family residential to the south and single family homes
to the west. The residential uses are mostly inaccessible from the orooosed site.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Site Area (ac.) - 3.4 acres Building Coverage - 35.41% Exist. Buildings- 52,438 s(Lff. Proposed
Bldg. - NA Zone- P (CG,ML, Res4-10) Planned DevDt. (General Commercial, LiGht Industrial,
Residential 4-10 units/acre) G.P. Designation - OfficellndustriallResidentiallCommercial
Assessor's Parcel No. - 326-33-079
If Residential, Units/Gross Acre -
Total# Rental/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price
Unit Type #1
Unit Type #2
Unit Type #3
Unit Type ;~4
Unit Type #5
Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check)
[] Mcnta Vista Design Guidelines []
[] N. De Anza Conceptual []
[] Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual r~
[] Heart of the City Specific Plan
S. De Anza Conceptual
S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual
Stevens Creek Blvd. SVV & Landscape
If Non-Residential, Building Area - 52.438 s.f. FAR - 35.41% for entire site
Max. EmployeaslShiR - 37 ;for lib) Parking Required 40 spaces Parking Provided 40 spaces
Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area - YES [] NO []
A. CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SOURCES 1. Land Use Element
2. Public Safety Element
3. Housing Element
4. Transportation Element
5. Environmental Resources
6. Appendix A- Hillside Development
7. Land Use Map
8. Noise Element Amendment
9. City Ridgeline Policy
10. Constraint Maps
CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS
11. Tree Preservation ordinance 778
12. City Aerial Photography Maps
13. "Cupertino Chronicle" (California History
Center, 1976)
14. Geological Report (site specific)
15. Parking Ordinance 1277
16. Zoning Map
17. Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents
18. City Noise Ordinance
CITY AGENCIES Site
19. Community Development Dept. List
20. Public Works Dept.
21. Parks & Recreation Department
22. Cupertino Water Utility
D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 23. County Planning Department
24. Adjacent Cities' Planning Departments
25. County Departmental of Environmental
Health
D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES (Continued)
26. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
27. County Parks and Recreation Department
28. Cupertino Sanitary Distdct
29. Fremont Union High School District
30. Cupertino Union School District
31. Pacific Gas and Electdc
32. Santa Clare County Fire Department
33. County Sheriff
34. CALTRANS
35. County Transportation Agency
36. Santa Clara Valley Water Distdct
Eo OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS 37. BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant
Excesses
38. FEMA Flood MapslSCVWD Flood Maps
39. USDA, "Soils of Santa Clare County"
40. County Hazardous Waste Management
Plan
41. County HeHtege Resources Inventory
42. Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel
Leak Site
43. CalEPA Hazardous Waste and
Substances Site
OTHER SOURCES
44. Project Plan Set/Application Materials
45. Field Reconnaissance
46. Experience w/project of similar
scope/characteristics
47. ABAG Projection Series
48. Cupertino Temporary Library Transportation
Analysis, Fehr & Peers, September 5, 2002
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Complete all information requested on the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE BLANK SPACES
ONLY WHEN A SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT APPLICABLE.
Consult the Initial Study Soume List; use the materials listed therein to complete, the checklist
information in Categories A through O.
You are encouraged to cite other relevant sources; if such sources are used, job in their title(s)
in the "Source" column next to the question to which they relate.
If you check any of the "YES" response to any questions, you must attach a sheet explaining the
potential impact and suggest mitigation if needed.
When explaining any yes response, label your answer clearly (Example ~N - 3 Historical") Please
try to respond concisely, and place as many explanatory responses as possible on each Da(3e.
Upon completing the checklist, sign and date the Preparer's AffidaviL
Please attach the following materials before submitting the initial Study to the City.
v' Project Plan Set of Legislative Document
-/Location map with site clearly marked
(when applicable)
2
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAGTS;
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a []
scenic vista? [5,9,24,41,44]
b) Substantially damage scenic resoumes, []
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and histodc buildings within a
state scenic highway? [5,9,11,24,34,41,44]
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual []
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings? [1,17,19,44]
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
d) Create a new soume of substantial light or
glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area? [1,16,44]
[] [] [] []
Item a,b,c- No Iml)act
There are no existing significant scenic elements on the project site. Since the project is
proposed in an existing building, it will not affect the visual character of the existing site.
Item d- Less Than Sionificant /mi)act
The light levels associated with the proposed library use is not expected to significantly
impact day or nighttime views in the area.
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In
determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may 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
Ion agriculture and farmland. Would the
i 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? [5,7,39]
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
3
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract? [5,7,23]
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? [5,7,39]
[] [] [] []
III. AIR QUALITY- Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon
to make the following determinations. Would
the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
[5,37,42,44,48]
[] D [] []
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
[5,37,42,44,48]
[] [] 0 0
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase 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)? [4,37,44]
[] [] [] []
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial []
pollutant concentrations? [4,37,44] ·
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a r-I
substantial number of people? [4,37,44]
Items a- c - Less than Siclnificant Iml~act
[] [] []
The proposed project would have limited air quality impacts resulting from the minor
pollutant emissions related to traffic generated by the proposed project. The Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BMQMD) generally does not recommend that a detailed air
quality impact analysis be prepared for projects generating less than 2,000 vehicle trips per
day. The project is expected to generate an additional 545 average daily trips, which does
not trigger a detailed air quality impact analysis under these BMQMD guidelines. The
proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, which in turn is consistent with
the Clean Air Plan, therefore, no cumulative air quality impacts are expected to result from
this project.
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
Items d-e - No Impact
The project is not expected to expose sensitive receptors (children, the elderly, the acutely
ill, and the chronically ill) to substantial pollutant concentrations.
The proposed development will not have any operations that will subject customers,
employees or neighbors to objectionable odors.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would
the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or 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 Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
[5,10,27,44]
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
! California Department of Fish and Game or
US Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44]
I c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally 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? [20,36,44]
id) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any 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? [5,10,12,21,26]
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? [11,12,41]
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
5
[] []
[] []
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
conservation plan? [5,10,26,27]
Item a-f- No Iml)act
The project is proposed on a developed site and will not impact threatened or endangered
biological resources. The project does not propose changes to the existing landscaping.
No Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans cover the project
area.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5? [5,13,41]
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to §15064.57 [5,13,41]
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique []
paleontological resource or site or unique
! geologic feature? [5,13,41]
d) Disturb any human remains, including []
those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
I[1,5]
' Item a-d No Impact
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
The project is currently developed with office and commercial uses and is not in a sensitive
archeological area of the City. There are no historical resources on the site.
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 Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42. [2,14,44]
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
[2,5,10,44]
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? [2,5,10,39,44]
iv) Landslides? [2,5,10,39,44]
[] [] [] []
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? [2,5,10,44]
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?
[2,5,10,39,44]
[] [] [] []
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1997), creating substantial risks to life or
property? [2,5,10,44]
[] [] [] []
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water? [6,9,36,39,44]
[] [] [] []
Item a(iv),b, e - No Impact
Since the project is proposed on an existing parking Eot on a relatively flat lot no landslide
activity is expected. There will be no soil erosion or loss of topsoil.
The site is served by an existing sewer system.
Item a(I-iii),c,d- Less Than Siclnificant Impact
I According to the Cupertino General Plan, the site is in a VF-3 zone for which specific
hazards may include ground shaking and ground failure. The project is preposed in an
existing building, which was built in 1979 per Uniform Building Code requirements in effect
at that time. Therefore, there will be no significant impact.
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? [32,40,42,43,44]
D [] D []
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the envirenment threugh reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials
7
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
into the environment? [32,40,42,43,44]
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
[2,29,30,40,44]
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962,5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment? [2,42,40,43]
[] [] [] []
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 result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area? [ ]
[] [] [] []
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? [ ]
[] [] [] []
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? [2,32,33,44]
[] [] [] []
h) 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
wiidlands?[1,2,44]
[] [] [] []
Items a-h - No Iml~act
The proposed project will not generate additional hazardous waste, increase risk of
accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances, interfere with emergency
services, increase exposure of people to hazardous waste or increase fire hazard in areas
with flammable brush, grass or trees. The current project site is not listed as a
contaminated site in the State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List.
The project site is not within a two-mile radius of the nearest airport (Moffett Airfield/San
Jose Airport). Therefore, there would be no related impacts on people residing or working
in the project area.
8
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
- Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements? [20,36,37]
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge 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)? [20,36,42]
c) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?. [20,36,42]
d) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality? [20,36,37]
e) Place housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
112,38]
f) Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows? [2,38]
g) 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?
[2,36,38]
h) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow? [2,36,38]
[] [] D []
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
D [] [] []
[] D [] []
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
Items a-h - No Iml~act
The proposed temporary library is in a B flood zone (between the 100 year and 500 year
flood) as per the FIRM maps dated May 1, 1980. The project site is relatively flat.
Since the project does not include site grading or construction, no changes are proposed to
the existing site.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would
the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community? [7,12,22,41]
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or 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?
[1,7,8,16,17,18,44]
[] [] D []
[] [] [] []
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat [] [] [] []
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan? [1,5,6,9,26]
Items a-c- No Impact
The project is in conformance with the City's General Plan and Zoning. Since the project
proposes a temporary use in an existing building, it will not impact any habitat or natural
community conservation plans.
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?
[5,101
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? [5,10]
Items a-b - No Impact
Mineral resources are not known to exist on the project site.
[] [] []
[] [] []
i I I
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
' Xl. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of,
noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
, agencies? [8,18,44]
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundbome noise levels? [8,18,44]
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
[8,18]
d) A substantial temporary or pedodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without
the project? [8,18,44]
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?
[8,18,44]
[] D [] []
D [] [] []
D [] [] []
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private [] [] [] []
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels? [8,18]
Item a-d - Less Than Siclnificant Impact
The project is located in an area with noise levels $0dB-65dB (DNL), which is considered
normally acceptable for non-residential uses. The City's Municipal Code standards
(Chapter 10.48 Community Noise Control) for this type of development are that exterior
noise may not exceed 55 dB at night and 65dB in the daytime. The project is not close to
sources of groundborne vibration or groundbome noise (other than auto traffic). The
proposed project will not result in a substantially increase over current ambient noise levels.
Items e,f - No Iml~act
The project is not within a two-mile radius of any public airports or private airstrips.
Xll. POPULATION AND HOUSING -Would
the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by
11
[] [] [] []
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)? [3,16,47,44]
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing []
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16.44]
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, []
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44]
Items a-c- No Impact
The project involves relocation of existing library services.
residential units on this site.
XlII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project 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
~ublic services:
[] [] []
There are currently no
Fire protection? [19,32,44]
[] [] [] []
Police protection~ [33,44]
Schools? [29,30,44]
[] [] [] D
[] [] [] []
Parks? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44]
[] [] [] []
Other public facilities? [19,20,44] [] [] [] E)
Item a -Less Than Sionificant Iml~act
The project is located in an urbanized area served by municipal services, including fire
protection, police protection, and maintenance of public facilities such as roads.
XlV. RECREATION -
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
[] [] [] []
12
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
115,17,19,21,26,27,44]
! 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? [5,44]
[] D [] []
Item a-b -No Iml~act
Since the project is a temporary relocation of existing library services, it will not involve an
increase in recreational facilities or result in an increased use of existing parks,
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC --
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in 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 tdps, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)? [4,20,35,44,48]
[] [] [] []
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively,
a level of service standard established by the
county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways? [4,20,44,48]
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks? [4,48]
[] E] [] []
[] [] [] []
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [20,35,44,48]
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
[2,19,32,33,44,48]
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
[17,44,48]
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)? [4,34,48]
[] [] [] []
13
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
Items a-f- Less than Siclnificant Iml3act
A Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed project was prepared to assess the potential
traffic, circulation and parking impacts of the proposed project. The analysis indicates that
the library use would be comparable to a retail use when daily trips are compared (545
average daily trips for the library versus 504 trips for a retail bookstore) while PM peak hour
trips would be increased for the library use (72 PM peak hour trips for the library versus 38
PM peak hour trips for the retail use). However, the project will not cause any impacts to
the level of service (LOS) at key intersections in the vicinity. Neighborhood cut-through will
be insignificant with a total of 5 trips projected possibly on Valley Green Drive, Beardon
Drive and Greenleaf Drive. The traffic analysis indicates that left-turns in and out of the
northernmost driveway will conflict with southbound left-turns into the parking area for the
Pluris building across the street on Bandley Ddve. Therefore, as per the recommendation
of the traffic analysis, left-turns into and out of the northernmost driveway shall be
prohibited to minimize the potential for vehicular conflict.
The project will not result in any change in air traffic patterns since it is located in an
existing one-story building.
The project is proposed in an existing building with adequate emergency vehicle access.
A total of 40 spaces will be available for the library (about 4 spaces/1000 square feet).
The City's Municipal Code does not specify parking spaces for library uses. As per the
traffic study (see memo), a library would require approximately 2.92 to 3.33 spaces per
1000 square feet. Therefore, parking will be adequate.
Pedestrian access will be accommodated via sidewalks on both sides on Bandley Drive
and a designated pedestrian crossing on Bandley Drive north of the middle driveway. The
site also has bicycle access.
Items o - No Iml~act
The proposed temporary relocation of the library will not affect policies or plans.
XVl. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board? [5,22,28,36,44]
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? [36,22,28,36]
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? [5,22,28,36,44]
[] [] []
[] [] []
14
i ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
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? [5,22,28,36,44]
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs? [5.44]
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste? [5,44]
Items a-cl - Less than Siclnificant Iml~act
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
Sanitary sewer service, wastewater treatment and water are currently available to the
existing building. The temporary library is not expected to increase demands on the sewer
system, water or wastewater treatment significantly beyond the current use.
i The project will be required to comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste.
15
ISSUES:
[and SuppoSing Info~ation Sources]
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?
[] [] [] []
[] [] [] []
hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding
accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted appropriate source references
when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I
hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause
delay or discontinuance of related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold
harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized agents, from the consequences of
such delay or discontinuance.
Preparer's Signature
Print Preparer's Name
16
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ~T'o be Completed by City Staff)
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.
[] Aesthetics [] Agriculture Resources [] Air Quality
[] Biological Resources [] Cultural Resources [] Geology/Soils
[] Hazards & Hazardous [] Hydrology / Water [] Land Use / Planning
Materials Quality
[] Mineral Resources [] Noise [] Population / Housing
[] Public Services [] Recreation [] Transportation/Traffic
[] Utilities / Service []
Systems
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) finds that:
[] The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
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 by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
The proposed project 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.
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 imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
Staff Evaluator
Date
ERC Chairperson
17
Date
Fo: Lease
10381-10443 Bandley Drive, Cupertino
±52,438 Square Feet of Office / R&D Space
Divisible to +10,900 Square Feet w/New Office Improvements
High Tech Office-Type Improvements
Center Patio / Lunch Area
Good Glass Lines
2 Monument Si~s
4.0 / 1,000 Parking
1 Grade Door with Potential for
6 More Loading Doors
Direct Deal w/Landlord
Available NOW
ASVB Lockbox
Grub Ellis.
l?rope~ Solutions Worldwide
For More Information, Contact Exclusive Agent:
BOB STEINBOCK, SIOR
408.453.2368
bob.steinbock @ grubb-ellls.com
Gmbb & Ellis Company
1732 North First Street, Suite 100 · San Jose. California 95112 · 408.452.5900 · 408.437.0499 Fax
CITY OF
CUPE INO
PARKS AND RECREATION ADMINISTRATION
Agenda Item Number
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Date: October 7, 2002
SUBJECT: Receive a report on the Community Survey conducted by
Godbe Research for the Blackberry Farm Master Plan
BACKGROUND:
Funding for the Blackberry Farm Master Plan (to be renamed the Stevens Creek
Corridor Master Plan) was first included in the capital improvement budget when
the Stocklmeir property was acquired. The acquisition of the Stocklmeir property
brought the number of contiguous city-owned acres in the Stevens Creek corridor
to sixty.
The twenty-momh public process for evaluating the feasibility of constructing the
Stevens Creek Trail within Cupertino resulted in a finding that the trail was not
feasible within Blackberry Farm as long as an entry fee was collected and trail
users were confined to the trail corridor. The Stevens Creek Trail Task Force,
Parks and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission and ultimately City
Council found a "separated" trail unacceptable and directed that the trail
alignment run closer to the creek and be more integrated within the park.
The feasibility study findings regarding Stevens Creek Trail within Blackberry
Farm, and Council direction given at the September 23, 2002 meeting provide a
basis for the master plan effort. Other research conducted over the summer will
be presented to the Council in a report from Brian Godbe, of Godbe Research and
Analysis at the October 7, 2002 meeting. Council will be asked to receive the
report. Staff will return to the Council at a subsequent meeting and ask for policy
direction. Several policy questions need to be addressed before embarking on the
next phase of the project:
· Should the property be open to the public year-round?
· Should the access into the property be reevaluated based on ability of the
streets to carry the expected traffic load?
· Should the trail through the property be multi-use?
· Is a bar, open until 2AM, a business appropriate in a public park within a
residential area?
Blackberry Farm Master Plan
October 7, 2002
Page 2 of 2
The Council has already stated its desire to incorporate the Stevens Creek Trail
within the park and has directed staff to evaluate other revenue collection options
that would permit a free trail to be constructed closer to the creek.
Based on the answers to these questions and other direction received from the City
Council, staff will begin to work with the community on planning for the
property.
The information to be presented at the meeting was gathered during the summer.
The process began with the meeting of eight focus groups in June. Barnett Pierce
of the Public Dialog Consortium ran the focus groups for the city. Participants
were asked for their views of what should happen in the corridor. Brian Godbe of
Godbe Research and Analysis, observed the focus groups, then crafted a survey to
test the ideas that came out of the focus groups across a statistically significant
sample of Cupertino residents. Some clear findings came out of the study; Brian
will report these to the Council at the meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated to receipt of this report.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council receive the report and consider follow up
steps to give staff policy direction on the Blackberry Farm Master Plan (to be
referred to in the future as the Stevens Creek Corridor Master Plan).
SUBMITTED BY:
Therese Ambrosi Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
TO CITY COUNCIL:
David W. Knapp
City Manager
DRAFT
Proposed text is underlined Deleted text appears in strike-through.
ORDINANCE NO. 1901
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.84, SECOND DWELLING UNITS IN R-l, RHS, A AND A-1
ZONES, OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.84 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.84.020 Applicability of regulations.
Notwithstanding any provision of this title to the contrary, a second dwelling unit is permitted on
lots in R-l, RHS, A and A-1 zoning districts, provided that in addition to complying with the site
development regulations specified in those districts for dwelling units, such second dwelling unit
complies with the regulations contained in this chapter and Chapter 19.80, Accessory
Building/Structures.
19.84.030 Site development regulations.
A) A second dwelling unit located on a lot containing less than ten thousand square feet must be
attached to the principal dwelling and integrated therewith except on A and A 1 zoning
districts which can have thc second dwelling unit either attached or detached regardlc~ of lot
::,sc. in any residential zoning district, if the second dwelling unit meets the Architectural
review criteria described in section 19.84.060.
B) All second dwelling units shall have direct outside access without going through the principal
dwelling.
C) All accesses to secondary units shall be screened from a public street.
D) The gross building area of a second dwelling unit shall not exceed six hundred forty aquare
feet the followin~ sauare footage of living space, exclusive of decks and garages:
1) On lots of 10,000 square feet or greater, the second dwelling unit shall not exceed 800
square feet.'
2) On lots less than 10,000 square feet, the second dwelling unit shall not exceed 640 square
feet.
E) Lot coverage of all structures, including second units, shall not exceed forty percent of the
net lot area, except that in RI-tS zones lot coverage of all structures shall not excec, d thirty
percent of thc net lot area.
g-) E~A second dwelling unit may be located on a second story, provided that:
1) Entry to the r, ceond d~velling unit is not provided by an exterior staircaae; and
2) In the opinion of thc Director of Community Dovelopmcnt, the second unit docs not
result in privacy intrusion to adjoining dwellings; and
3) It is attached to the primary residence. (Ord. 1811 (part), 1999; Ord. 1601 Exh. A (part),
1) It is attached to the vrimarv residence; and
2) Entry to the second dwelling unit is not provided by an exterior staircase; and
Ordinance No. 1901
2
3) In the opinion of the Director of Community Development, the second unit does not
result in privacy intrusion to adioinin~ dwellines.
19.84.040 Off-Street Parkim,.
In addition to the parldng requircmants in the applicable zoning district for a particular lot, one
functionally independent, pavod, off street parking space (uncovered) shall be provided for thc
second unit; provided, hoxvevcr, that the additional space shall not, in the opinion of the Diroetor
of Community Development, dominate the front setback areas of the lot in such a manner as to
denigrate those arc, as preserved as landscape space. Impervious surfaces ma), not exeood fifty
percent of the front setback aroa.
If the principal dwelline unit has less than the minimum off-street parking spaces for the
applicable residential zoning district in which it is located, as described in Chapter 19.100,
Parkine Reeulations, then one additional off-street parkine space shall be provided.
19.84.070 Nonconformin~ and illeeal second dwelline units.
A) A second dwelling which was constructed prior to the enactment by the City of any
ordinance which regulates second dwellings in R-l, RHS, A or A-1 zoning districts but
which was constructed in conformance with applicable site development and building code
regulations in effect at the time of construction is governed by the provisions of Chapter
19.108, Nonconforming Uses and Facilities.
B) Illegal Second Units. A second dwelling~ which was constructed without a building permit or
in conflict with the applicable site development or building regulations at the time of
construction, may only be permitted upon the owner of such a unit obtaining approval of the
Desien Review Committee, based upon the Amhitectural review criteria stated in section
19.84.060. a conditional use permit issued by the Director of Community Development.
INTRODUCED at a regular adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 16th day of September, 2002, and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of October 2002, by the following vote:
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN
Members of the City Council
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. 1903
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION
OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino does not belong to the Social Security system;
WHEREAS, employee survivor benefits are provided by CalPERS and are known as the
1959 Survivor Benefit;
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Resolution of Intention on August 19, 2002 to
provide enhanced, fourth level 1959 Survivor Benefits;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS:
.Section 1. That an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of
Cupertino and the Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System is
hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, marked Exhibit, and by such
reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full.
Section 2. The Mayor of the City Council is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed
to executive said amendment for and on behalf of the City of Cupertino.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption,
and prior to the expiration of seven (7) days from the passage thereof shall be published at least
once in the Cupertino Courier, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the
City of Cupertino and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.
INTRODUCED at a regular adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the
16th day of September 2002 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino the 7th day of October 2002, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Counc'il
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
23-1
STEVENS CREEK CORRIDOR
MASTER PLAN pRESENTATION
· :*Simm's Property
~'~Combined total of 60 plus acres
EXHIBIT
CC/~o~7_0~. v, tt- ~.1
Blackberry Farm Acquisition
· 1o pun:hased by City of Cupertino in 1991
· :. Bond Measure T is a 2.4% utility tax for 25 years (until
2016)
· :- The Bond Me~sare T campaign llteralure staled thai
"the City is planning to eontthue to operate the facility as it
PICNIC GROUNDS SEASON
<o Open seasonally from May into October
o:* Generally open 100 days a year
PICNIC GROUNDS VISITORS
o:o Over 80,000 visitors annually
· ~. 7SeA visit on Weekends
0 25% visit on Weekdays
PICNIC GROUNDS VISITORS
PICNIC GROUNDS RESERVATIONS
4
CUPERTINO RESIDENT CONSIDERATIONS:
~'. Control overflow parking by providing ~u~tles and
managing pi~ic reservations
· :' Noise teductlon improvemems by not allowing live bands
PICNIC GROUNDS FEES FOR 2002
General Admission Fees
· :. $8.00 adult on weekend
~' S6.00 child on weekend
PICNIC GROUNDS FEES FOR 2003
'~o Genera{ Ad, nission Fees ~pprov~d by City Council
include an increase by $ 1.00
General Admission Fees
o,*o $9.00 adul! on weekends
· **, $7.00 child on weekends
PICNIC GROUNDS REVENUE
~.o Operating revenue has inereas~d from $$00,000
REVENUE BREAKDOWN in 2001:
Blackberry Farm Retreat Center
4- Purchased in 1997 for $390,000.
7
Golf Course Financial
· :o Operating revcnue ranges fi'om $600,000 to
$700,000 annually
8
Restaurant (Blue Pheasant) Financial
,':. 5,500 square foot ~estauram~ba~ facility
· :. Rent $3,785 per month (69 cents pm' square foot)
· :. Annual income $45~420
e.. Annual maintenance budg¢~ $20,000
o:o Profit approximately $25,000 per year
9
II
MC CLELLAN RANCH MASTER pLAN
IMPLEMENTED IMPROVEMENTS:
McClellan Ranch Master Plan Facilily Improvements
13
Stevens Creek Corridor
Stakeholders' Visions
Final Report
Public Dialogue Conaortium
July 9, 2002
The report consists of:
· The major themes heard in participants'
discussions about the properties as a whole
· Summaries of what participants said about
each of the properties and functions in the
Stevens Creek corridor
· Comments about the Stevens Creek Trail
feasibility study, proposal, and public
participation process
Summary of Themes and Visions
· Preserve and protect the current character of
the park; do not develop the open space;
leverage the environment
- Blackberry Farm should not become more like
Memorial Park
- Few participants articulated wall-worked out
visions of what this would look like for the
property as a whole, virtually all had specific
ideas for specific parts of the prope~y
EXHIBIT
Summary of Themes and Visions
· Repair and maintain buildings and facilities
· Long-term residents perceived the
preservation of the existing character of the
corridor as an important link to the history
and continuity of the community
Summary of Themes and Visions
· Differentiate between properties in the corridor
based on usage
Summary of Themes and Visions
· Expand the historical and educational offerings in
the corridor
- Most common of these suggestions consisted of
expanding current operations, such as the naturalist at
McClellan Ranch, turning gimm's House into the
headquaxters for the Cupenalo Historical Society, and
finding a way of noting historical significance of the
Stoeklmeir properly
- One participant suggested iurning the property into an
"Olde California Ranch," featuring gold panning,
horseback riding, etc., as a family theme paxk
2
Summary of Themes and Visions
· Principles ofdecisionomaking - rather than
specific visions, many participants offered
what can be seen as guiding principles by
which visions can be evaluated including:
- Protecting the open space
- Respecting the character of the parks; don't let
the requirement that it be revenue-generating
dictate decisions that affect the character of the
parks
Summary of Themes and Visions
· Respect and take advantage of the history of the
buildings and property in the canyon
· Improve its accessibility- change thc access to thc
park in such a way as to reduce the impact on the
neighborhoods
- While there was clear consensus on this as a geal, there
were differing ideas about how to accomplish it
· Increase its use by Cupertino residents
· Maintain it as a safe place for kids, families, and
neighborhood residents
Summary of Themes and Visions
· We heard two tales of the Blue Pheasant
- One story was of a neighborhood and coalmunity icon,
and a space used for m~ting for local service clubs and
- Thc other story was of a blight on the neighborhood, a
- Thc dividing line belw~ea these stories was about 10
Summary of Themes and Visions
· If the Stevens Creek Trail is extended
through the park:
- It should be a beaten-earth footpath, not a
multi-use (bicycle, skateboard) paved highway
- It should not be overly developed, out of
character with the environment
- It would be preferable to not charge an entrance
fee to Blackberry Farm; rather, charge a
specific usage fee for particular functions
Summary of Themes and Visions
· Distrust of this public participation process
based on their experience with the Stevens
Creek Trail process
- This issue overshadowed discussions of
everything else and clouded the climate for
discussion
4
EXHIBIT
STEVENS CREEK CORRII~OR:
STAKEHOLDERS' VISIONS
FINAL REPORT
PdC
presented to
Therese Ambrosi Smith and Michael O'Dowd
Parks and Recreation Department
City of Cupertino
by
Barnett Pearce and Suzette Merchant
Public Dialogue Consortium
July 9, 2002
CONTENTS
Executive Summary .................................. . ........................
Summary of Themes and Visions ...........................................
Comments about Specific Parts of the Stevens Creek Corridor .........
Focus Group Flip Chart Notes .............................................
Appendices:
Letter of invitation
Focus group outline
Informational handout
P~e2
Page4
P~e7
Pagell
EXECUTIVE SUNIMARY
The Public Dialogue Consortium was commissioned to support the City in
hearing t~om identified stakeholder groups about long-range plans for 60 acres comprised
by Blackberry Farm, McClellan Ranch, the Blue Pheasant restaurant, the Simm's
property, and the Stocklmeir property. Meeting at the Cupertino Senior Center on the
nights of June 17, 20, 25, and 27, 2002, the PDC facilitated 90-minute focus group
discussions for each of eight stakeholder groups. Participants in the groups responded to a
letter of invitation and self-selected into one of the groups. The groups included: Scenic
Drive, Phar Lap, Stocklmeir, and Byrne Avenue neighborhoods (the Phar Lap and
Stocklkmeir groups were combined); picnic, golf and Blue Pheasant users; and people
interested in the proposed Stevens Creek trail.
This stmxmary of our opening remarks in each discussion provides a comext for
understanding the summaries in the following pages. We began each discussion with an
invitation to think creatively about the properties. We reported that we had been promised
that nothing other than the revenue generating character of Blackberry Farm, and that
only until 2016, was off-limits for their imaginations. When pressed (and this occurred in
about half the sessions), we said that we had been assured that nothing, not even the
decision to run the Stevens Creek trail through the park, was a "done deal." Instead, we
said, the results of these deliberations will provide a context for further thinking about the
trail.
We characterized these discussions as the first of a two- or three- part process. We
described the discussions in which they were participating as hearing in detail from the
most impacted stakeholders, and the second, the survey, as hearing in less detail from a
broader, more representative sample of the City. We introduced the representatives from
Godbe Research and from the Parks and Recreation Department who attended as
observers. We said that after the survey, the city would examine the results and perhaps
initiate a third phase of the project that would bring together people with different points
of view to work out some of the necessary trade-offs between visions and resources.
Finally, we promised that the participants would be given a report summarizing
the results of all the discussions.
The following pages contain:
1) The major themes we heard in participants' discussions about the
properties as a whole;
2) Summaries of what they said about each of the properties and functions
in the Stevens Creek Corridor; and,
3) Comments about the Stevens Creek trail feasibility study, proposal and
public participation process.
It was difficult to engage these groups in a visioning process about potential uses
of the 60-acre property. Despite the wording of the letter of invitation and the direction of
the facilitators, many participants approached the focus groups in a spirit of skepticism.
3
They were motivated to protect what they valued against what they perceived as threats.
This precluded them from thinking creatively and broadly about future opportunities.
Every group named their concem about the proposed Stevens Creek Trail and their
dissatisfaction with the process by which these plans have been developed as the reason
why they were unable to focus on the property as a whole. Although we began the
sessions with an explanation of the process initiated by these discussions, every group
expressed their fears that this process would be intentionally biased or that their
pa~icipation would be disregarded. In every case, we assured the participants that the city
was genuinely interested in what they had to say and incorporate it in their decision-
making.
4
SUMMARY OF THEMES AND VISIONS
The purpose of focus groups is to engage participants in discussions, the richness
of which, ironically, stands in tension with the need to summarize themes. The
summaries below do include everything that was said about every issue (for that, see the
notes in the Appendices). However, several clear themes and visions emerged from the
discussion.
1. Preserve and protect the current character of the park; do not develop the open
space; leveraee the environment. The overwhelming sentiment among these
groups favored preserving the character and functions of the park, particularly its
recreational, open space, historical and educational functions. A number of
participants contrasted Blackberry Farm with Memorial Park, saying that
Blackberry Farm should not become more like Memorial Park. Many favored
minor changes, most of which would restore or improve parts of the property in
pretty much its current function. While few participants articulated well-worked
out visions of what this would look like for the property as a whole, virtually all
had specific ideas for specific parts of the property (see the discussion of specific
parts of the park below) and, in response to urging by the facilitators to think
holistically, this was by far the most frequent and passionate response.
2. Repair and maintain buildinc, s and facilities.
3. Differentiate between properties in the corridor based on usage. Participants
perceived McClellan Ranch, the Stocklmeir property and the Simms property as
appropriate for low-impact, open-space, and educational usages. In contrast,
Blackberry Farm (swimming pools, picnic areas, golf course, conference center)
and the Blue Pheasant restaurant were seen as the areas that could absorb high-
volume recreational functions.
4. Long-term residents perceived the preservation of the existing character of the
corridor as an important link to the history and continuity of the community.
5. Expand the historical and educational offerin~,s in the corridor. Several groups
noted the historical significance of the properties and advocated expanding
historical and educational functions.
1) By far the most common of these suggestions consisted of expanding current
operations, such as the naturalist at McClellan Ranch, turning Simm's House
into the headquarters for the Cupertino Historical Society, and finding a way
of noting historical significance of the Stocklmeir Property.
2) One participant suggested turning the property into an "Olde California
Ranch," featuring gold panning, horseback riding, etc., as a family theme park
6. Principles for decision-making: Rather than specific visions, many participants
offered what can be seen as guiding principles by which visions can be evaluated.
These include:
1) Protect the open space. The parks were described as unique, an island in a
sea of development, etc., and identified as a significant factor in the
quality of life of the community.
2) Respect the character of the parks; don't let the requirement that it be
revenue-generating dictate decisions that affect the character of the parks.
5
3) Respect and take advantage of the history of the buildings and property in
the canyon.
4) Improve its accessibility. Change the access to the park in such a way as to
reduce the impact on the neighborhoods. While there was clear consensus
on this as a goal, there were differing ideas about how to accomplish it.
Many people favored separating the entrance fi.om the exit and moving
traffic on one-way roads. Many liked the idea of having the entrance off
Stevens Creek Boulevard if this can be done without putting in a traffic
light (The residents fi.om Stevens Creek did not like this option, saying
that moving the entrance is just moving the problem. They urged
addressing the issues raised by the traffic rather than just moving it to their
neighborhood.)
5) Increase its use by Cupertino residents.
6) Maintain it as a safe place for kids, families, and neighborhood residents
We heard two tales of the Blue Pheasant. One story was of a neighborhood and
community icon, a restaurant providing distinctive service to the area, and a space
used for meeting for local service clubs and other groups. The other story was of a
blight on the neighborhood, a public nuisance and threat to safety. The dividing
line between these stories was about 10 pm. We were struck by the disparity
between these stories and the comparable passion by those who told both tales.
ffthe Stevens Creek Trail is extended through the l~ark:
1) It should be a beaten-earth footpath, not a multi-use (bicycle, skateboard)
paved highway
2) It should not be overly developed, out of character with the environment
(flyways, tunnels, big fences)
3) It would be preferable to not charge an entrance fee to Blackberry Farm;
rather, charge a specific usage fee for particular functions
Distrust of this l~ublic participation process based on their experience with the
Stevens Creek Trail l~rocess.
1) This issue overshadowed discussions of everything else. The proposal for
extending Stevens Creek Trail through the park, the feasibility study, and
the process by which the proposal was developed, was a primary concern
for all eight groups. Every group challenged us to explain how these
discussions fit into the plans for the trail. Most groups described
themselves as unwilling or unable to think about the 60 acres property as a
whole because they were preoccupied with defending something of value
in the parks that would be lost if the current plans for the trail are
implemented.
2) This issue clouded the climate for our discussions. Most groups expressed
their skepticism about what we were doing together in these focus groups
based on their dissatisfaction with the "trail" process. They perceived the
"trail" as a "done deal" and the public deliberations as a sham; they felt
that many stakeholders who would be most impacted by the trail
(including residents of the county who live adjacent to the trail) were
excluded fi.om the process and/or notified of it too late for meaningful
6
participation; and they believe that the process is being pushed by outside-
the-city special interests or inside-the-city political interests.
COMMENTS ABOUT SPECIFIC PARTS OF THE STEVENS CREEK
CORRIDOR
1. Blackberry Farm I~icnic area
1)
(4)
(5)
(6)
2) Visions:
Kudos:
(1) Like the natural feel
(2) Well-managed
(3) Provides opportunity for regional business and family groups;
some have made it a traditional place to come
Good and well priced food
Wide variety of events
The noise of celebration (during the day) is pleasant
Should remain a regional park (not specific to Cupertino, but also
not attempting to draw visitors from outside the region)
(2) Enhance its use for Cupertino residents
(3) Should remain a "natural" setting with open space and mature
trees
(4) Celebrate Cupertino history and culture
(5) Use for multiculturai celebrations (e.g., Fourth of July); move
some events from Memorial Park to Blackberry Farm
(6) Keep this as a seasonal operation
(7) Maintain use in a way that allows privacy for neighbors
(8) Preserve nature; no cement
3) Imlxovements:
(1) Better trash and litter pick-up
(2) Change the traffic and parking
(3) Provide neighbors better access (pedestrian paths) for walking in
the park
(4) Enable neighbors to use the park for no fee
(5) Separate pedestrian access from driving access
(6) Change the manner of charging fees, from "access" to "use" of
particular facilities or amenities
(7) Reduce the volume on public address systems
2. Golf Course
1) Kudos:
(1) Character: it is "playable," wall<able, and affordable, particularly
for seniors and beginners
(2) Pleasing ambiance ("forest-like")
(3) New maintenance crew is doing a good job; the difference is
noticeable
2) Visions:
(1) Expand the course by widening fairways, etc.
(2) The optimal size of the course was thought of in differing ways.
One person suggested two 18-hole courses; several entertained
the though of expanding to 18 holes (but none advocated that if it
changed the character of the course); and many strongly
advocated keeping it at its existing 9 holes.
(3) Maintain and "protect" the character of the course and its ability
to meet the needs of existing clientele
3) Imorovements:
(1) Provide safe trails, sheltered from errant golf balls
(2) Retain mature trees to shelter residents' homes from errant golf
balls
(3) A better clubhouse (perhaps the Blue Pheasant)
(4) Add a driving range, if it can be done without changing its
character
(5) Offer lessons, particularly for youthful beginners
(6) Manage the amount of usage of the course; increase it without
sacrificing "playability" and walkability
3. Swimming oools
1) Kudos:
(1) Heavily used; much appreciated
2) Visions:
(1) Keep them as they are
(2) Reduced rates for Cupertino residents
(3) Extend swimming hours into the evening, at least for one pool
(4) Free use for senior citizens
3) Improvements:
(I) Enlarge the pools
4. Blue Pheasant
I) Kudos:
(1) A local tradition/institution. It is a good restaurant in a city with a
declining number of them, and serves a cuisine (Continental) that
is rare in the area.
(2) Well run, good food, provides entertainment
(3) Has a wonderful location
2) Criticisms:
(1) Noisy (includes blowers, car alarms, trash pickup as well as loud
music and patrons outside the restaurant)
(2) Dirty (both the restaurant and the patrons outside the restaurant,
includes drunk patrons vomiting while looking for their ears)
(3) Parking problems (overflow from parking lot on private land,
residential streets)
(4) Prostitution
9
(5) Fights
(6) Safety issues (drunks wandering through neighborhoods late at
night)
(7) Inconsiderate patrons (loud, illegal parking, dangerous driving,
litter, fights)
(8) Pollution and chemical smells from trash and cleaning
procedures
(9) Vandalism by patrons
(10) Property damage from traffic, illegal parking
3) Visions: (note: these visions are not compatible with each other)
(1) Maintain it as is. The Blue Pheasant is a local tradition that
serves the needs of several clienteles, including service clubs and
seniors.
(2) Make it into a "good neighbor" by finding acceptable ways of
responding to the needs of the residents
(3) Convert it into a classy clubhouse and pro shop for the golf
COurSe
(4) Make it into a classy, family restaurant, serving breakfast, lunch
and dinner, but not open as a bar into the early morning.
(5) Don't make it the teen center
4) Improvements:
(1) Educate patrons to be more responsible
(2) Improve barriers and lighting to decrease nuisance to the
neighborhood
(3) Change the character of its nighttime clientele
(4) Stronger, more effective policing
(5) Work with neighbors to resolve issues
(6) Rebuild the structure
(7) Don't renew the lease
(8) Sell it, giving first option to the existing operators
5. McClellan Ranch
1) Kudos:
(1) Blacksmith demonstrations
(2) Nature museum
(3) Community gardens
(4) Wildlife; open space
(5) Nature education
2) Visions:
(1) Implement existing Master Plan
(2) Keep it "green"
(3) Tie it in with a Museum of Local History
(4) More footpaths, if consistent with low impact on natural
environment
(5) Was stipulated as a nature preserve; stay with that
I0
3) Improvements: (1) Maintain buildings
(2) Fund sections of the existing Master Plan
(3) Increase funding for educational programs
6. Stevens Creek Trail
1) Kudos:
(1) None
2) Criticisms of current plan:
(1) Calls for multifunctional path, but bikers and hikers don't mix
well on the same path (this was strongly felt, particularly by
senior hikers)
(2) Outsiders coming into the area, causing trouble
(3) A "paved roadway" is incompatible with the natural open space
of the park
3) Visions:
(1) A dirt path for hikers
(2) A natural, meandering footpath with limited access; a "Refuge
by the Creek"
4) Iml~rovements:
(1) Re-do the plan to make it a footpath
(2) It can be separated from the rest of the park by a chain link fence
that would be unobtrusive and inexpensive
(3) Locate the trail so it does not cut offpicnic grounds from the
creek
(4) Match the ambience of the park: no concrete or flyways
7. Stocklmeir
1)
Visions: (1) Preserve what we have; control access
(2) Involve Audubon Society because of the variety of birds
8. Sims:
1)
Visions: (1) Use the house as the headquarters of the Cupertino Historical
Society
(2) Use the grounds as stables for a horse-riding function
11
FOCUS GROUPS FLIP CHART NOTES
Picnic Focus Grouo
4 men, 1 women 06/17/02
What community needs are well served?
· Swimming
· Walking with dogs
· Good and well priced snack food
· Variety of offerings
· Open space and mature trees serve mental health needs
· Nature center-field trips for kids
· Scenic Circle pass thru
What needs are unmet?
· Better trash pickup and litter education
· More natural space - wish it could all be natural
· More of a resource for Cupertinians/the Community
· Should stay regional-one of the last regional parks
· Horses
· Bike path
· Celebration of Cupertino history and culture
Ideas for Improvements
· Improved Parking Area
· Reconfigure Golf Course
· Move entrance to Stevens Creek Blvd.
· Get traffic out of the neighborhood
· Fill in potholes in picnic ground
Overall Themes
· Preserve and add to open space
· Traffic flow issues need resolution (Move entrance, Re-do parking lot)
· Use park to honor Cupertino heritage and culture
· Use park for multicultural celebrations to celebrate diverse Cupertino culture
· Park should remain in seasonal operation (except Golf Course)
Major Issues
· If you are going to change the use of the park, and increase usage, first move the
entrance, deal with traffic issues.
12
Last Thoughts
· Privacy for neighbors/re: Stevens Creek Trail
· Don't want a "regional staging area" path
· Riviera Rd. is eroding
· Protect McClellan Ranch/no mechanized vehicles
Golf Focus Group
5 men, 4 women 06/17/02
What needs are currently well met?
· Golf course is "playable" waikable, and affordable (especially for seniors)
· Golf course is usable by families due to slower pace and "playability"
· Golf course meets exercise needs
· Park's open space is good
What needs are unmet?
· Safe trails (consider stray golf balls when planning trail route)
· More preserved open space
What are the guiding principles you have for the park's future usage?
· Continue to have a mix of open space and activities
Suggestions for improvement
· Increase use by Cupertinians
· Get rid of Blue Pheasant, use space to reconfigure golf course
· Get the greens in better shape
· Do not add holes, keep it "forest like"
· Add a driving range (concerns about noise and congestion raised)
· Driving range might bring in more Cupertinians
· Use the Stocklmeir land for expansion
· Start offering lessons, especially beginning lessons for youth
· Increase golf course usage (concern of how much is too much)
· How will increasing usage affect "playability"
· Work around Stoeklmeir property (preserve part of Orchard) to expand course
· Build a Clubhouse
13
Priorities
· Affordability (esp. for residents and seniors)
· Maintain ambiance of golf course
· Offer programs for youth
· Build a clubhouse
· Make a practice area
· Replace Blue Pheasant with a better facility (ie.clubhouse, cart, etc.)
Challenges
Parking and Traffic
Loss of Dancing if Blue Pheasant closes (Is the city receiving adequate profit
from Blue Pheasant?)
Last Words
· Expand the golf course, yet maintain quality, ambiance, and nine holes (not 18)
· Keep the swimming and picnicking as is
· Maintain and "Protect" the golf course (do not get rid of iQ
· Parking lot improvements
· Keep McClellan Ranch green
Phar Lal~ and Stocklmier Focus Groul~
4 men, 3 women 6/20/02
Reasons for coming to the focus group:
· Want to be involved as a citizen (3)
· Frustrated by the "trail" process; wants an "open" process; concerned about how
the data from this focus group and the survey will be used
· Interested in the low percentage of Cupertino residents among the users of the
park
· Concerned that people from other cities are involved in the trail process and have
their own agendas; frustrated with the trail process, confused about how the trail
process is articulated with the Blackberry Farm master plan process
What do you want to say?
· The property (the Meadows) is unique in the valley: access to green space,
wildlife without a long commute
· In the midst of so much development, preserving a green open space is priceless;
once such spaces are developed, they are gone forever
14
· The proposed trail is more like a road and is inconsistent with open space
· Parking at the park is "a horror"
This person started opposed to any trail, but has come to the position that if we
need to have it, have it as a "natural" meandering footpath with limited access (for
example, with parking only at the Blue Pheasant) - it should have the ambiance of
"Refuge by the Creek"
· Stocklmeir property has great historical value
o For example, Phar Lap road was named for a race horse
· Involve the Audubon Society because there are many birds in the area
· Summary: preserve what we have; control access - specifically, do not connect to
a through trail
· If money talks, what assurance do we have that out-of-tom users won't have a
disproportionate influence on the plans for development?
o Specific issue: want to preserve the golf course with its current character
· Not concerned about non-resident usage, because community demographics
change and with these changes will come changes in pattems of use
· The attraction of Cupertino as a community is that it is quiet
· The building in which the Blue Pheasant restaurant is located is unattractive; it
should be rebuilt (more than just remodeled) for use as a good club house. This
would involve better food, all meals including breakfast, and better banquet
facilities.
· Expansion of the golf course to 18 holes would be good, but only if adequate
parking could be provided. This expansion would take some additional property
but not all of the 60 acres.
Agree that keeping the golf course is important. It adds to property values.
Do not want the noise and parking problems at the Blue Pheasant to continue after
the lease expires
Like the new maintenance policy/crew on the golf course
(A resident living in Phar Lap): Concerned about the Stevens Creek Road
entrance to the trail
Concerned about locating a teen center in the park - has had a bad experience
Would like to expand the golf course
Wants places for kids in the park:
Swimming pools/a swimming pond in the creek
Preserve nature camps
15
· Provide a place where kids can walk in a safe environment and play outdoor
games
· Provide a teen center
· The park is a strange location for a teen center - keep it with De Anza, etc, rather
than in a residential area. But there should be a teen center.
· Put the teen center near the sports center; work with the YMCA
· If the teen center is at Phar Lap/Stevens Creek, there will be a big issue about
traffic and safety
· McClellan Ranch is "neat" - keep it - tie it in which a museum of local history
· Likes the idea of more footpaths through the park if they can be built with a low
impact on the natural environment
· (Another person) agrees with the idea of more footpaths; the vision is of
developing the park property in such a way that it entices people getting out of
their cars
· Some creative way can be found for people to pay (Blackberry Farm requirement)
without separating the park from the trail by fences and tunnels
· There is an unmet need in the city for a dog park
· Keep the trail natural; keep the orchard as an orchard - it is part of Cupertino's
history
· Note the variety of birds in the corridor; open space is a treasure; bikes and
skateboards (on a through trail) don't fit
· Creek needs restoration but is recovering
· Mountain View section of the trail has lots of fast bikes. It is a great trail but
would not like to see this trail extended through Blackberry Farm
· Question: will there be street lights on Phar Lap.'? Answered, "no." Response:
"good."
Discussion about the process by which the trail was discussed, specifically the
"feasibility study" which presented the trail as a "done deal." Great frustration
with the "trail" process and lack of confidence in the decision-making procedure.
What are your final thoughts?
· Keep the park as natural as possible; preserve the quiet; include activities for
teens/kids that are connected to nature; leverage the environment
· Concern about expanding the golf course. This does not serve the needs of
nongolfers. Look for multipurpose uses of the park.
16
Use Cunertino Scene, the Courier, and city access cable as means of including
people in the discussion - people resem something going on that they don't know
about
Suggested perspective for decision-making: what will our grandchildren's
grandchildren think about the decisions we reached?
Much of Cupertino is being paved over; this space should not be developed
Most people in Cupertino don't care about having a trail, and most who do want
the trail want a walking trail, not one for bicycles, etc.
Blue Pheasant Focus Group
5 men 2 women
June 20, 2002
What do you want the city to hear?
· Level the Blue Pheasant structure
· Rebuild a new facility
· The Blue Pheasant should have the first fight of refusal
· Make it a classy-family restaurant
· Make it a Clubhouse
· Create additional parking
· Leave the intimate atmosphere
· Keep the status quo
· Preserve the Continental Menu
· Blue Pheasant provides good recreation for older people
· Service clubs (Kiwanis, Lions) like the ambiance, price, food, and "way of life"
· If the Blue Pheasant closes it will negatively impact the service clubs and their
ability to serve the community
Are there other things you'd like to discuss about the Blue Pheasant?
· Blue Pheasant is the site of undesirable activity, including prostitution
· Patrons leave trash on adjacent streets
· Drunk people wander around the surrounding neighborhood
· Parking problems spill into neighborhood
· Neighbors sometimes afraid to leave their houses at night, due to patron activities
· Noise from dancing (they leave the doors open)
· Pollution and chemical smells from trash and cleaning procedures
· Vandalism, perhaps by patrons
· Blowers, car alarms, trash pickup, are all noisy and disruptive to neighbors
· People throw up in the neighborhood from over consumption of alcohol
17
· Perhaps the Blue Pheasant could be rebuilt and repositioned
· Could the Blue Pheasant hire someone to better monitor their customers outside?'
· Blue Pheasant needs to embrace the neighbors, find an acceptable way to be a
"good neighbor"
· Well mn, good food, entertaining time
· Professionally mn organization
· Enjoy green space location
· Concerned about losing the Blue Pheasant
· Revenue producing
· Enjoy the tradition and comfort of familiar atmosphere and food
· Widely used
· One of the last restaurants like this
· Provides space for service clubs
· Patrons could be educated to better monitor themselves
· Improve barriers and lighting to decrease neighborhood nuisance
· Blue Pheasant wants "very much" to stay, will work on concerns
· Blue Pheasant has outgrown space, needs to address parking issue
· Needs to change the character of its nighttime clientele
· Perhaps add off-duty Police patrols
What are your ideas for the property as a whole?
· "Olde California Ranch" a gold panning, family destination
· Keep future populations in mind
· Seniors like golf course, perhaps expand to 18 holes?
· Build a driving range
Any lastwords?
· Don't close the Blue Pheasant
· Work with neighbors to resolve issues
· Keep current atmosphere at Blue Pheasant
· Don't let proposed trail worsen parking problem
18
Bvrne Avenue Grouo
5 men 4 women June 26
What do you most want to say?
· Move the entrance to Stevens Creek
· Extend swimming hours into the evening (one pool; one lifeguard)
· Senior citizens use the park for free (swimming; picnic)
· Retain the character: affordable, for common folk. Maintain, improve, and keep it
open
· Profit should not be the bottom line - it can be fee based, but it is more important
to be a resource for the community
· Serving the surrounding communities is good
· To have a "private park" would be arrogant
· Concerned about funneling traffic down Bryne Ave. It is designated as a "postal
route" with mailboxes only on one side, requiring residents on one side to cross
the street to check mail. More traffic is dangerous. New houses on this street are
the most expensive in the area.
· Changing the entrance to Stevens Creek is a "no-brainer'
· Main purpose in coming: Blue Pheasant is inappropriate; a disco pick-up bar on
weekends. Parking problems. Fights, Fires. Prostitutes. Noise is an issue, but the
most important concern is strangers loitering on the street and using the street as a
parking lot
· Keep Blue Pheasant, but not as a disco bar
· Blue Pheasant is an important meeting place. If it is being spoiled by the behavior
of patrons, the police should deal with it.
· Better policing would help with some problems, but would not address loitering
and parking
· Traffic is not a problem at my end of the street
· I like the structure and function of Blackberry Farm and McClellan Ranch
· Would like increased access for walking in the parkland. I don't want to pay $8 to
take a walk. I'm interested in the Stevens Creek trail
· I have no objection to the Stevens Creek trail if it is for walking, but the idea for
developing the trail is being pushed by bikers. I don't want busses for bikers on
my street.
· Bikers and hikers don't mix. Bikes are the fad de jour. Accommodate both, but
not on the same trail.
· Don't make Blackberry Farm a parking lot for bikers
· My concern is for outsiders coming into the area, causing trouble
· I don't want a "paved road" (the current Stevens Creek trail proposal); keep it
natural
· I'm not opposed to a trail but I don't like the current proposal (wide, paved,
strangely routed). Scary. I initially assumed that the process of developing the
19
trail would be reasonable based on commitments to the character of the properties
- McClellan Ranch; Blackberry Farm. I think of a dirt trail.
I want easier access to the part properties - now, I just walk through the fence
"When we swim, we pay; when we walk, we don't pay"
I'm opposed to bikers on the trail. I walk with an elderly partner. We can't have a
leisurely walk when we have to watch out for speeding bikers. Bikers are strong,
opinionated, and think that they have superior reasons for living. I like to walk in
nature, and bikers don't fit.
(One person's opinion): excluding bikers from the Stevens Creek trail is
unrealistic.
· (All agreed with the facilitator's summary): we want a walkable, dirt trail with
bikers separated from walkers.
Want access to the park for walkers at no or low cost. In reply to a question about
whether this applied to nonresidents: there is room for everyone, but make it
financially attractive to residents.
· The park now serves various groups and families; it has become a tradition.
What facilities and functions of the parks are particularly important?
· McClellan Ranch - the blacksmith demonstrations, nature museum, community
gardens
· There is nothing like the park in the region: the open space; a working farm
The golf course:
· It's good. Perhaps enlarge it (with the same number of holes)
It doesn't seem to serve very many people
· OK as is, don't want to expand it
· I don't play this course - it is too small and dangerous - but it has its place
· It's a great training course. It could be improved. The crew is doing a good job
maintaining it.
Picnic facilities:
· It's good to see different groups enjoying themselves; the noise of celebration
(during the day) is positive
· It used to be open until 9 pm and it got rowdy; now has become more peaceful
· Would like to see more events specifically for Cupertino. Fourth of July
celebration at Blackberry Farm rather than Memorial Park
20
What is not working well?
Don't want to see development. No condos. No cement. Preserve nature.
· Interested to see what happens when the Blue Pheasant lease ends. Now parking
and traffic pose a danger to the neighborhood. It should be policed more strictly.
It is too crowded. Expand it or do something with it.
· People must go outside to smoke. Do so next to a dry, open field owned in
common by homeowners.
· There are other options for this space, although I have no specific ideas
· Rumor that it will be used for a teen center - this will not solve problems of
parking, traffic, or noise
· Would like to see it serve breakfast and casual lunches
· Curfew at 11 pm would solve many problems, but would make the restaurant
commercially not viable
What's missing?
· Pedestrian path from Byme to the park.
· It is dangerous to walk on the road, but would hate to cut trees to expand the
roadway.
· Could make a path away from the driveway
· More swimming time
· Keep the pools; this is important
What advice would you give the city~principles for making decisions?
· There's a sense that the city is acting as if we HAVE to do something, but it is ok
to leave something as it is. Whatever history Cupertino has is in this canyon. Why
not do nothing?
· This is a very special situation: consider the impact of what we do on the
neighbors who live close to the park
· Consider routing traffic with one way streets - a separate entrance and exit.
People now get lost. Let them egress on Stevens Creek.
· Get traffic away from residential streets
21
· I like the idea of one way streets/separate entrance and exit, but have a care for
the property
Trails: bizarre placement because we need to have a fee - there must be other
models, such as a fee for activities, not for entrance into the park
Following on: a fee to reserve a picnic table (or tables) but a "public" area for
people who just come by. Make it easier to residents to use the park - particularly
the swimming pools. Can use wristbands for access to pools without having to
charge an entrance fee to the park.
Scenic Circle Focus Grouo Notes
4 men 1 women 06/25/02
What do you currently enjoy about the property?
· Old growth trees, resident animals, rustic ambiance, quiet atmosphere
· 9 hole golf course, and Halloween night activities
Concerns
Are we subsidizing non-resident parties?
· Traffic and litter from B.F.
· Picnic grounds are not well maintained
Suggestions
· 18 hole golf course
· High class prestige golf course with a discount for residents
· We want to see the park "preserved, not paved"
· "We have a jewel, don't ruin it"
· Do not build any trail- it will be the cause of too much traffic, noise, undesirable
activity, loitering, drinking, vandalism, etc.
· If you build a trail- don't have a huge parking lot which encourages Rancho San
Antonio sort of attendance
22
· Don't move the entrance, you're just moving the problem
· Address the problems that the traffic causes, don't just move it to another
neighborhood
· Don't make Blackberry Farms another Memorial Park (crowded, noisy,
developed)
· Have a single entrance on Stevens Creek
· Change the Blue Pheasant to something more people would want to visit
· Make a Premier Tennis/Golf complex that people would come to( like the Los
Altos Country Club- but public)
· Give a discount to residents at the new club
· Less noise
· Shift all non-nature activities away from the neighborhoods and towards Stevens
Creek
· Preserve "old time" nature and McClellan Ranch
· Decrease use of P.A. systems
· Don't open year round
· Preserve open space
· Increase use by Cupertinians
· Don't focus on increasing revenue
· We voted for open space not development
· Don't try to maximize revenues at the expense of the open space and the
neighborhood
· Quality of life for people who use the park now, and the neighbors
· Keep the safety of children in mind.
· More notice-more connection to what is going on
· We don't want to be pacified, we want to actually be listened to and have our
opinions respected and factored into decisions
Last Words
· Stop-SLOW DOWN- don't advance your political career at our neighborhoods
expense.
· Once you build something, you can't go back- keep it natural
· It's a resource- treat it that way
· Less Noise
· Preserve the nature
· Decrease or at least no increase in noise and tl'a~lc
· Get the parties out of there
· Keep the crime down- keep security in mind
· Could the park be alcohol free?
· Blue Pheasant site should generate more revenue
· The Blue Pheasant is an icon
· We are angry that the Stevens Creek Trail is talked about like a "done deal"
· We don't want the trail, and we want our views to be heard
23
Stevens Creek Trail Grouo
Six men, three women June 27
What do you want to say tonight?
· Preserve the oak trees
· Preserve the pine trees
· Maintain trees as a screen for houses from stray golf balls
· Want trails for hiking (not biking)
· There are many rumors and concerns about the trail
· Feasibility study did not include representatives from the affected neighborhoods;
neighbors (including those living in the county) heard about the trail process too
late to get involved although they are most impacted by the decisions. Want the
city to take responsibility for notifying those impacted by the decision.
24
· If the city would bring all parties together, they could work out a plan for a
walking trail.
· Preserve the creeks
· Preserve property values
· Want to talk about the Blue Pheasant
· Want to talk about the entrance to the park on Stevens Creek Blvd.
The "process" by which the plans for the trail are being made:
· It should have been residents only; instead businesses were disproportionately
represented
· City should have put out flyers to the people impacted by the trail, including
people who live by the park but are technically in the county
· Don't want to be railroaded and/or taken advantage of
· Taxpayers were not involve in the decision to spend $$ on the trail process, and
have not been involved in it
Afraid that the push for a bike trail is political and comes from ROMP (described
to us as a bicyclers' advocacy group); a success here would be used to leverage
other communities
If the "trail process" had been done better, what would you have told the task force?
· People on the west side fear the traffic that will be going through on the trail - we
are going to get organized to block the plan - we want the city to do "proactive"
planning
· There is space for a trail through the park
As the process went on, the idea moved from a walking path to bicycles - and a
bicycle path will destroy the park, ranch, picnic grounds - our commitment is to
preserve the nature of the park
· The plan to run the trail through Blackberry Farm is NOT firm
· If the trail is a deadend, there should not be too much traffic on the trail - but the
city should do comparisons with existing trails
· Vision: would love to have something like the Stevens Creek trail in Mountain
View in my neighborhood (on Calabasa Creek)
· The trail should not be paved
· There is a disconnect between having a fee for Blackberry Farm and no fee for the
trail and this is driving some strange decisions. It is unconscionable to construct
major buildings to differentiate between them.
· Rancho San Antonio provides a model of what we do not want: overcrowded; no
place to park
· Use of Blackberry Farm is seasonal; having the trail would move it to 365-day
use, and that is an issue. IfI had a choice, there would be no trail at all.
· Don't want access to the park or trail through neighborhoods; keep Nelson's
promise to make access through Stevens Creek.
· Trail would impact picnic groups - people would raid them
· Take away any plans for flyways, fences, etc. Implement a fee-for-use of the
various parts of the park; use wristbands for admission.
· There are engineering and environmental problems with a Stevens Creek Blvd
entrance
· An entrance on Stevens Creek Blvd makes sense and can be done
· Tunnels and stuffare nuts
· Vision: trail going through the park (the "west bank alignment using Stocklmeir
property") but NOT a paved thoroughfare. Rather a pathway with a low-cost
chain-link fence. This should NOT be like Los Gatos.
· The trail can be located so as not to cut picnicers off from the creek
· People who live on the driveway to the park would like to move the access route
· Concern about safety for'neighborhood kids left for the day, unattended, in the
park.
· Don't want a signal light for traffic control at the bottom of the hill
· Whatever design for the trail is developed, match the ambiance of the park - no
trenches or concrete walls
· Would like off-road trail through the city, accessible to bikes
Blue Pheasant:
· Neighborhood has been adversely affected by it
· Would like to see the existing operation not there or changes; replaced by a true
club house (caf6, not serving alcohol) providing breakfast, lunch, and dinner)
Would be open to seeing a teen center
Blue Pheasant is "an institution;" if we need to regulate it, then do so..
25
Go~'
26
· Some want 18 holes and a driving range; others want to retain the character of the
coal'se
McClellen Ranch:
· Was designed to be a natural preserve
McClellan Ranch Grouo
What do you most want to say?
Six men, six women dune 27
The McClellan Ranch Master Plan should be a part of this process
· Concern with joining the nature preserve (McClellan Ranch) with the high-
volume Blackberry Farm park and trail
· The 60-acres concept is new and false; a distraction technique. Having thought it
through, my vision is to leave things alone. Keep it for low density use. Preserve
open space.
· I recoil in horror at lumping McClellan Ranch and Blackberry Farm together.
· McClellan Ranch should not be considered as part of a 60-acre track with
Blackberry Farm; they are different
· Leave B. F. as it is. There are problems but it fits into the concept of high volume
activities. But do not move any of these to McClellan Ranch.
· Preserve the nature education programs (2)
· Add historical education programs (2)
· McClellan Ranch is a unique property, like an island; for years it has received
benign neglect, now it needs maintenance
· Hope that McClellan Ranch maintains its character; don't want it to be overused,
like Rancho San Antonio
· Would like to be able to access McClellan Ranch by bicycle without being on
roads
· Whatever plans are made should have low impact on the Ranch and on wildlife
27
Trail:
City bought the Ranch in 1972; in 1976 declared it a nature preserve and that
there would be no new trails. Mike O'Dowd's proposals (February 21, 2002)
seem reasonable.
The Master Plan includes the idea ora science center on Simm's side toward the
back; other ideas include a nature museum, information kiosk - the plan includes
many ideas, we just need the will to implement them
Repair or tear down the buildings; maintenance is needed
Preserve the buildings if possible for educational purposes
Have a good knowledge of the history of the property, and nothing prepared me
for a "highway for bicycles."
Have many comments about the feasibility study, including 1) proposed tunnels
will flood; 2) the proposal assumes shared usage for bikers and pedestrians, and 3)
the proposal would move Blackberry Farm from seasonal usage to 365 days
Feasibility study ignored existing conditions. As proposed, is inconsistent with the
neighborhoods.
Want a trail but made of dirt, for walking
Ordinance for McClellan Ranch is inconsistent with a bike trail (read appropriate
section)
Opposed to a trail because of noise
Noted that a trail exists; leave it where it is
The number of people coming into McClellan Ranch would deteriorate it and
thwart the intent of the property.
The current proposal retrofits an idea for the usage of the trail into a space that is
inappropriate
I don't understand the motivation. Who is pushing the current proposal for the
trail?
Is this process really about the trail? It has generated so much energy that it is
hard not to focus on it. If the trail goes through as proposed, all the other ideas
will be lost (2)
It is possible to make a low-impact trail that serves the neighborhood
People who live in the neighborhood are willing to accept trade-offs to be near a
park
A bicycle highway is not a good idea; I don t want bikes from the Foothill trail
diverted through Blackberry Farm. Rather, the trail should serve the neighborhood
28
· How can we localize usage of the trail? Models: "The Creek." But if we put the
trail in, maps will be published. It is hard to localize usage.
Blackberry Farm:
The current design of the property makes for difficulties: e.g., the parking lot.
Cupertino has an omstanding historical society that has no headquarters; could
make the Stocklmeir house a "History House"
Remember why the city bought the properties: developers wanted to build in a
flood plain; city wanted to keep the area as recreational. If we sell it, it will go
back to the developers.
Blue Pheasant:
· The traffic is horrendous
· Should sell to the existing owners
· Blue Pheasant was there before the houses in the neighborhood was built
· Would a teen center be better for neighbors? Yes!
· Concerned about traffic and drank driving at the Blue Pheasant
· During the day, used by many seniors and locals
Golf course:
· Don't extend
· Replace with open space
Last thoughts:
· Want information on people who use Balckberry Farm and McClellan Ranch
· Complete the sidewalks on McClellan road; the current situation is dangerous
· Fix the buildings at McClellan Ranch; making Blackberry Farm work; repair the
Blue Pheasant
· Keep the 4-H program;
· Use McClellan Ranch for education,
· Control the volume of people in it
· Support the programs by the Naturalist
· Keep the educational programs
29
· Pools at Blackberry Farm are overcrowded
· Reprioritize values: there seems to be plenty of money for the trail but none for
maintenance
EXHIBIT
City of Cupertino Park and
Recreation Survey
October 7, 2002
Objectives
· Gather unbiased, representative data on residents' opinions
for Stevens Creek Corridor master planning purposes;
· Determine the proportion of residents that visit city facilities in
the Stevens Creek Corridor;
· Determine the level of support for establishing a network of
trails along Stevens Creek;
· Determine the level of importance that residents place upon
facilities in the Stevens Creek Corridor and;
Identify master plan preferences.
Methodology
· Stakeholder Input
· Data Collection
· Universe
· Interview dates
· Interview length
· Sample size
· Margin of Error
View focus groups
Telephone
Residents
August 26-30, 2002
15 minutes
400
+/- 4.87%
City Facility Awareness
I liYes lING I
Blackberr
M cCl·llln Ranch
q'1.5
2
Perceived Facility Ownership
I Iprlvatelvovmed ICItvownKI ICoun~'ovmed IDK/I~J
Blackberry Farm Picnic Grounds Visitation
73.3%
3
Change Blackberry Farm Picnic Grounds
4S.4%
Suggested Changes to Blackberry Farm
Picnic Grounds
4
Blackberry Farm Picnic Grounds Open Year
Round
Reasons for Not Using Blackberry Farm
Picnic Grounds (Tier I)
Reasons for Not Using Blackberry Farm
Picnic Grounds (Tier II)
5% 10% 15% 20%
McClellan Ranch Park Visitation
McClellan Ranch Park Visitation by City
Quadrant
400 44 86 60 140
116 11 21 18 49
29.0% 25.4% 24.4% 30.4% 34.9%
275 30 64 42 90
68.9% 67.7% 74.7% 69.3% 64.4%
8 3 1 0 1
2,1% 6.9% 0.9% 0.3% 0,7%
Change McClellan Ranch Park
7
Suggested Changes to McClellan Ranch
Park
Reasons for Not Using McClellan Ranch
Park
0%
5%
8
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Visitation
Change Blackberry Farm Golf Course
YN
Suggested Changes to Blackberry Farm Golf
Course '~ ~ '~'~,~
Reasons for Not Using Blackberry Farm Golf
Course
l0
Blackberry Farm Swimming Pools
Visitation
Visitation of the Blackberry Farm Swimming
Pools by City Quadrant
400 44 86 60 140
·. 63 7 9 13 24
· Yes: ..
· :.; :?::~' :i15.7% 16.1% 10.5% 22.4% 17.0%
335 36 77 47 116
No
?~.. 83.7% 81.6% 88.8% 77,6% 83.0%
""".,~:,~,;~o! 2 ~ ~
Don't 'k~mV 0.6% 2.3% 0.7%
]1
Visitation of the Blackberry Farm Swimming
Pools by Age
Base ~ ~ 400 26 63 107 84 44 57
63 6 6 31 13 5 2
. · ~ 15.7% 22.3% 9.8% 28.4% 14.9% 10.4% 3.7%
335 20 56 77 71 40 55
83.7% 75.4% 88.8% 71,6% 84.0% 89.6% 96.3%
Don't know or not sure 2 1 1 1
0.6% 2.3% 1.3% 1.1%
Change to Blackberry Farm Swimming Pools
Suggested Changes to Blackberry Farm
Swimming Pools
Blackberry Farm Swimming Pools Open
Year Round
4g*3%
]3
Reasons for Not Using Blackberry Farm
Pools Area
Blue Pheasant Restaurant Visitation
No
14
Visitation of the Blue Pheasant Restaurant
by Age
400 26 63 107 84 44 57
57 3 3 8 14 13 14
:'; Yes. :' . ':~:**
.,:.. ' :. ? . · ~;:,:. ,:';14.1% 10.3% 5.1% 7.6% 16.3% 28.6% 25.0%
335 22 59 98 70 32 39
'" : ' 83.9% 86.3% 92.5% 91.5% 82.8% 71.4% 68.2%
n'~v~ ~u~;;'r;' 8 1 2 I 1 4
Oo~.t,know'or
:. , 2.0% 3.4% 2.4% 0.9% 0,9% 6.8%
Reasons for not Visiting the Blue Pheasant
Restaurant
2O%
1¸5
Support for a Network of Trails for
Non-motorized Transportation Along Stevens
Creek
Support for a Network of Trails Along
Stevens Creek by Age
203 11 37 60 39 25 22
Strongly Suppo~ :~
, , . .. : 50.8% 40.8% 59.0% 55.9% 46.3% 56.8% 38.7%
~ 122 10 23 31 22 8 22
Som~whatsu_o '~" 30.5% 36.8% 35.5% 29.1% 26.7% 17.4% 39.4%
Somew hat °PP°%~,~;; 22 2 0 6 9 3 1
, :;. : .~-.~ ~:. 5.6% 9.3% 0.8% 5.7% 10.2% 6.1% 1.9%
'SO'onglY'ofl~!'" ~' ' i! ii 27 0 I 7 6 5 6
: 6.7% 1.7% 2.0% 6.2% 7.2% 12.3% 10.6%
26 3 2 3 8 3 5
~ i'i · =. 6.4% 11.4% 2.7% 3.1% 9.6% 7.5% 9.4%
Support for a Network of Trails Along Stevens
Creek by City Quadrant
400 44 86 60 140
· Strongly sUp~~ 203 24 39 34 67
122 16 27 16 38
Son'~w,hat support
Sornew hat oppose..
· .,.,. ~,. i==~, 5.6% 4.2% 9.4% 4.2% 6.8%
=rong=w~: ~. 5.7% 2.5% 6.3% 6.1% 9.2%
Trail-Type Preference within McClellan &
Blackberry Farm
]7
Trail-Type Preference within McClellan &
Blackberry Farm by Age
!; 400 26 63 107 84 44 57
~~..~ ~; 183 17 31 56 36 17 19
45.8% 65,4% 48.8% 51.9% 42.7% 38.2% 33.0%
~ependslk~xed 28 2 4 5 4 4 5
opinions ,..:, 6.9% 6.9% 5.8% 4.7% 5.2% 9.4% 9.5%
162 6 24 40 38 22 28
Single use (walking) 40.5% 23.0% 37.3% 37.2% 45.0% 50.2% 50.0%
Neither · ·
2.2% 4.0% 2.4% 4.0% 0.9% 1.9%
Refused ;: i 18 0 4 2 5 1 3
' 4.6% 0.6% 5.7% 2.2% 6.2% 2.3% 5.6%
Support for a Network of Trails Along Stevens
Creek by Preferred Trail Type within McClellan &
Blackberry Farm
Idu~li-u~e . Neilhar ~ Refused
400 183 28 162 9 18
203 110 14 69 5 6
Perceived Importance of Park Facilities (Tier
Preeewlng hlatodc
McClellan Ranch
Stevens Creek
environmental restere~on
Raduced cost to uae
New mixed use t~a0s
More community festlvale
0.00
1.00 2.00
3.00
Perceived Importance of Park Facilities (Tier
II)
McClellan Ranch
1.00 2.00 3.00
19
Perceived Importance of Park Facilities (Tier
Blackberry Farm
Blackberry F~rm
t .00 2.00 3.00
Options for Usage of Recreational Areas -
Preference for Option A or B
20
Options for Usage of Recreational Areas -
Preference for Option C or D
Opbon D
22-4%
Options for Usage of Recreational Areas -
Preference for Option E or F
Options for Usage of Recreational Areas -
Preference for Option G or H
Option H
?0,4%
Options for Usage of Recreational Areas -
Preference for Option I or J
Option I
36.4%
22
Options for Usage of Recreational Areas -
Preference for Option K or L
Optlort K
Preferences for type of recreation facilities
Blackberry Farm and McClellan Ranch Park
areas (Tier I)
23
Preferences for type of recreation facilities
Blackberry Farm and McClellan Ranch Park
areas (Tier II)
15% 20% 25%
Options at Golf Course
- Preference for Alternative 1 or 2
24
Options at Golf Course
- Preference for Alternative 3 or 4
Options at Golf Course
- Preference for Alternative 5 or 6
25
Conclusions
· Over 80 percent of respondents supported the
proposal of adding a network of multi-use trails
along Stevens Creek
· Residents were split (46% to 41%) on whether the
new trails through McCellan and Blackberry Farm
should allow multiple uses or just be used for
walking
· Preservation of McClellan Ranch and restoration of
Stevens Creek among the top three priorities
Conclusions -- II
Overall people are concerned with park revenue,
but strong majorities and pluralities of respondents
support eliminating the entry fee and charging for
picnic or pool use
Less than ten percent of respondents indicated the
City should make changes at Blackberry Farm
Picnic grounds, McClellan Ranch Park, Blackberry
Farm Golf course, or Blackberry Farm Swimming
pool
Conclusions-- III
Blackberry Farm Swimming Pools:
- Reducing fees is a top priority of residents
- Residents would like to see the pool opened year round
- A number of residents indicated they would like to see the
number of pools increased or the current pools enlarged
Conclusions -- IV
· Blackberry Farm Golf Course:
- Overwhelming majorities do not want to see the golf
course changed
- Respondents are much more suppor[ive of maintaining
the Stocklmeir Property and the picnic grounds than
increase the size of the golf course
Conclusions -- V
Blackberry Farms Picnic Grounds:
- Picnic grounds should be moved away from Stevens
Creek to facilitate creek restoration
- Upgrading the Facilities at the picnic grounds, as well as
providing a playground for children were the two most
popular suggestions for changes
- Respondents would like to see more community events
Conclusions -- VI
· McClellan Ranch Park:
- Preserving McClellan Ranch park was among the top
three priority of respondents
· Blue Pheasant Restaurant:
- Most residents preferred keeping the Blue Pheasant
Restaurant as it is, with changes in hours and menu,
rather than converting it to a Golf and Snack Shop
Labor Commissioner, State of California
Depar~ent 0f ~u~al R~at~ns
(4~) 277-9616 FAX (408) 277-~85
Tally's Ente~:~Lses
2175 La Mlet Way
Can'~pbelL CA 95008
E. XI'II BIT
~cZ~o--/- 07- -
NOTICE OF PAYMENT D~JE AND DEMAND FOR PAYMENT
Reconstructlo~ of Cu~,, Gutte~ ond Sldewaiks
TalF~ ~
T~
~ ~ h~ ~t~ a ~ In~ I~o ~e ~nt of ~s to em~oy~ ~ ~ ~ ~d
~l~ons of ~ C~ L~ ~ ~
1.$ ~73.~ W~ ~ to ~ ~e b~ on ~ f~um of ~ ~ to ~ ~ ~ w~e ~d/
~ ~ ~ ~r of h~ w~ by emp~ ~ ~e~b. L~ C~ ~n 1~4.
En~ ~ ~ 1 ~d2
2. $ l~.~ ~ ~ f~ ~ng ~ ~ ~e ~u~ p~ r~s. ~1~ ~
~r ~on. ~C~ ~ 1~5l
3. $ ,, , P~ d~ ~ ~1~ to k~p ~d/~ ~ r~lr~ ~ recks.
~ ~ $~.~ ~ ~o~n. La~ C~e ~on 1776
4. $ 7~ ~e f~ ~llum to c~p~ ~ wo~ng hou~ ~u~e~n~.
3 ~ ~ $~.~ ~r Wol~n. L~ C~e ~ 1813.
5. $ 47~.10 Tr~ ~d c~om ~te~ to ~ due.
~~r La~r, Ce~nt M~n ~d ~n~ Fngln~r
6. $ ~1~.74 TOT~ ~OU~ DUE ~D PAY~.
~e ~ ~ ~ h~ ~d ~ ~llo~:
I) To~ ~te~ w~ ~ ~ ~y ~m to ~ c~a~ ~v~ces and oll ~u~n~ ~1~ re~ed to aB p~e
w~ ~ w~ ~ne ~ Cu~ ~1~ a~ ~ on ~ w~ ~. Ta~ ~l~ to su~ ~ ~nts
r~ng ~ w~ ~ ~ w~ ~ob~ to gNe T~ ~ed~ for ~ w~,
~ ~ ~ard~g ~ ~ ~men~ to ~R ~1~ ~ ~m 1 ~-~I ~e C~ of Cu~o c~
T~ f~ ~ ~ g~er m~ b ~e ~ount of ~,~.~. Yet T~s ~r p~r~ pu~ to ~ CP~ w~ n~ even half
3) ~e ~g ~ ~1~ nu~s d~nts of ~ g~em ~d ~w~ ~ Tal~ ~d ~t to ~e
~, ~dl~ ~ a gr~ ~ of ~t, ~, ~w~k ~d g~ ~r ~ ta~ pl~e.
4) T~ w~ ~ ~ w~er Int~ had b~n ~n~ed ~d w~e~ ~ed ~ ~e m~o~ of ~ ~ did f~
T~ ~ f~ ~ m~ of c~ ~ c~ ~dew~ ~ g~e~ f~ ~e C~ of Cu~no ~d ~ ~e wo~
m~, yet to d~e TaI~ ~ not ~des d~ to ~erco~ ~ Info~
~ W~m ~e~ d~o~d ~ ~ wooers ~ d~ed ~ ~r~ yet ~ey were d~g c~t ~ w~.
~d Is ~y mo~ f~ tot~ am~nt ~ ~ ob~e. ~ a~un~ ore ~e~ ~ ~ o~
In ~ ~.ten d~s ~ to ~e ~ of ~e ~e ~d remit ~y ~unts you concede to ~ ~e.
My I~ ~ of wo~ f~ DIR/D~ ~ ~em~r 6, ~2. ~ ~nta~ ~nlor ~ ~ Affi~ mgar~
dem~d.
~ ~r a~ co~ a notice ~ c~ a~ de~st ~on$ pm~ n~.
~nfl~ ~1~ d ~s ~ wlfl ~11 In a~flo~l u~ald wag~ ~o~ng due and
addlEonal ~ffi~ ~ u~r ~e ~flo~ 1775. 1776, a~ 1813.
October 7, 2002
Fellow Citizens of the City of Cupertino:
EXHIBIT
We have some choices to ~ke about how we will govern o~seNes:
Will we:
permit our elected council to mn mffshod over the
democratic principles in which I trust we all still believe?
Will we accept the status quo, as exemplified by this council's
actions in
a) the "process" used to present information to us, the
citizens of Cupertino,
and
b) the "process" used to solicit input from us, the citizens
o f Cupertino,
about the proposed multi-use "road" that this council has obviously
(by its actions) decided we in the City of Cupertino will have?
Will we permit our elected council to make a decision for which
there is ample documented evidence of severe negative impacts upon
many of us Cupertino citizens and home owners, including many of our
county neighbors, to say nothing of the environment and its inhabitants?
Will we permit our elected council to make its decisions without full
disclosure of possible conflicts of interest?
Will we permit our elected council to:
a) pretend to gather citizen input regarding an important project's
feasibility while making it practically impossible to decide that
the project is infeasible?
Will we permit our elected council to:
b),.th~i-ltt the will of us Cupertino voters by systematically
misrepresenting important facts and withholding other critical
information; both of which are required for voters to make an
informed decision and have the opportunity to influence other
voters, even if the council is impervious to voter input?
Will we permit our elected council to:
Undermine the ability of Cupertino voters to be heard by
systematically disenfranchising them through an orchestrated
process of soliciting input from those who are known to support the
proposal (whether CUPertino residents or not) and by either:
systematically not soliciting proposal opponent's inputs; or by
misrepresenfmg opponent's inputs that manage to get on the record
so as to undermine their effectiveness and ability to be heard?
I believe these are the real issues before us. The multi-use status of the
trail and it's alignment are just two small decisions that this council will make
in "our best interest". If the wrong decision is made, it can be overturned
in the future. The asphalt can be removed; the environment restored; and
the wildlife invited to return. Nature has great recuperative power.
But what of the other projects and decisions that are being made without
full disclosure of the real agenda?
What of the wasted time and effort on the part of naive voters who do not
realize that "the fix is in"? Who do not realize that their best efforts to be
heard and to influence the process are of no consequence because the
decisions that count have already been made?
What of the breaking of trust between elected officials and the voters, to
say nothing of the shattering experience to see democracy not work?
I for one would prefer to have known two years ago that the only way to
communicate with this council is through the "sting of the ballot". One thing
for sure, this council's actions have spoken more than any words it may ever
issue or documents it may ever write.
It is now up to us, the Citizens of Cupertino, to speak with our votes.
If our will is to have a paved multi-use road, so be it. However, we need to
make sure that what ever is decided is indeed our will -- that is the will
of the voters of Cupertino.
G. Wi~m Walster