The URL can be used to link to this page

.01 CP-2007-02 City of Cupertino . CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: CP-2007-02 (EA-2007-04) Applicant: City of Cupertino Property Location: Citywide Agenda Date: June 12, 2007 Application Summary: Review of the 5-Year Capital Improvement Program, Fiscal Years 2007-08 to 2011-12, for General Plan Consistency RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission: 1) recommend a mitigated negative declaration, file no. EA-2007-04, on the CIP, and 2) find the proposed 5-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), file no. CP-2007-02, consistent with the General Plan. Background: Each year the City Council adopts a five-year spending plan for capital improvements throughout the City. The CIP is critical because it prioritizes significant city expenditures on capital projects of importance to the City. Funding is not fixed or committed during the five year term. Typically, funding may shift in the second through fifth years as priorities change and project schedules accelerate or decelerate during the lifetime of the project. State law and the Cupertino Municipal Code (Section 2.32.070.C) requires the Planning Commission to review the CIP for consistency with the General Plan and to recommend the appropriate environmental review action. The Planning Commission is not responsible for setting or recommending CIP funding priorities. Discussion: Exhibit A is the draft CIP that will be presented to the City Council. This CIP focuses on funding repairs, renovations and relatively minor improvements or additions to existing City infrastructure: streets and public facilities. Environmental Review The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the CIP at its meeting of May 23, 2007. The four important aspects of the environmental analysis are: 1) Since the environmental analysis is conducted annually, only the first year- funded projects are analyzed. 2) Larger, more significant projects are not included in this environmental analysis and were expected to conduct their own separate environmental analysis as part of their ongoing project development. This was the case for the Stevens Creek Park Master Plan, and the Mary Avenue pedestrian and bicycle bridge. }-I 2 3) Environmental review is not performed for any projects where another agency is the lead agency for project development. This was the case for the Bollinger bicycle lanes over Calabazas Creek bridge where the Santa Clara Valley Water District is the lead agency, and the Lawrence Expressway pedestrian crossing at Mitty High School where Santa Clara County is the lead agency. 4) Two second year funded projects were analyzed because of the possibility that their funding may be advanced to the first fiscal year by the City Council. The Initial Study attachment lists each first-year funded project and staff's environmental review notes. While staff determined that most projects were categorically exempt from environmental review, the replacement of the City Hall emergency generator to an outdoor location has potentially significant noise impacts that require mitigation. As a result, the ERC recommended a mitigated negative declaration for the CIP. General Plan Consistency Exhibit B lists the proposed capital projects and staff notes describing how the project relates to the General Plan. The General Plan consistency findings are summarized below: 1. Projects that improve the safety and functioning of the City's primary circulation system. See general plan policies 4-1, 4-6 and 4-12 Projects in this category include: Pavement Management, Traffic Signal Upgrades, Yellow & Ped Head LED Traffic Signal Upgrade, Rancho Rinconada Street Study, Red Light Runner Program, De Anza Blvd.fMcClellan Signal Modifications and SVITS Extensions. 2. Transportation Projects that manage neighborhood traffic, decrease reliance on usage of private cars and promote pedestrian activity. See general plan policies 4- 2,4-3,4-7,4-13. Projects in this category include: Stevens Creek Corridor Park, McClellan Ranch Facility Improvements, Bollinger Bicycle Lanes over Calabazas Creek Bridge, Sidewalk Repairs, Neighborhood Traffic Calming Measures, Countdown Ped Heads, Safe Routes to School project for Garden Gate, SCB/SR85 crosswalk improvements, and Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge. 3. Projects that provide distinctive community gateways at major entry points. See general plan policy 2-8. There is one project in this category - the City Monument Signs Replacement. 4. Projects that-maintain the usability of the City's parks and recreation inventory. While much of the Parks section of the General Plan focuses.on acquiring and developing new parkland, the plan also recognizes that a well-managed park I-~ 3 system enhances the quality of life for its citizens. See general plan policy text pages 2-46, 2-51. Projects in this category include: Stevens Creek Corridor Park, Memorial Park Softball Field, Library Field Renovation, McClellan Ranch Facility Improvements, Stocklmeir Property Preservation, Sports Center Tennis Court Lighting, HV AC Replacement at Monta Vista Park, Quinlan Center Fountain Replacement, Sports Center Upgrade and Pool Demo. 5. Projects that increase the inventory of parklands, particularly in neighborhoods that are deficient in parks. See general plan policies 2-74, 2-82 and 2-83 There is one project in this category -- the Sterling Barnhart Park land acquisition and construction. 6. Projects that improve library service. See general plan policy 2-61. There is one project in this category-- Library Improvements and Upgrades, and Library Court Yard Improvements. 7. Projects that reduce flood risks. See Flood Hazards General Plan text, starting page 6-25. The projects in this category include: Gutter & Curb Repairs, Minor Storm Drainage Improvements, Monta Vista Storm Drainage System and Master Storm Drain Plan Update. 8. Other projects that are not addressed in the General Plan, but do not conflict with the text, policy or goals of the General Plan. There are no specific policies or general plan language that discusses the importance of maintaining existing public facilities and structures for public access and execution of general plan policies. Projects in the above category include: City Hall Emergency GeneratorfPG& E upgrade, and Service Center Security Gate. Enclosures: ERC Recommendation, Initial Study and attachment Model Resolution Exhibit A: Five Year Capital Improvement Program, FY 2007-08 to 2011-12 Exhibit B: Matrix of CIP projects and General Plan notes Prepared by: Colin Jung~ Senior Planner C::::::::;:::, Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developm~ G:plarming/ pdreport; pcCPreports/ 2007CPreports/ CP-2007-02 1-.3 4 Exhibit B Exhibit B City of Cupertino Programmed Projects 5- Year Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2007-08 to 20011-12 And General Plan Coqsistenc Notes Stevens Creek Corridor Park McClellan Ranch Facility Improvements Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge Bollinger Bike Lanes over Calabazas Creek Bridge Lawrence Expwy/ Mitty High School Pedestrian Crossing Memorial Park Softball Field Sterling Barnhart Park land acquisition & constniction Library Field Renovation Stocklmeir Property Preservation Restoration of Stevens Creek btw. Stevens Creek Blvd. & McClellan Rd. Reduce picnicking from 4,000 to 800, install multiuse trail, reconstruct facilities Reconfigure 4H facility and construct trail from parking lot to 4H. Demo & reconstruct blacksmith shop,fencing & drainage improvements Construction of a bicycle footbridge on Mary Ave. ali ent over Highway 280. City's contribution to widen bridge for bicycle lanes over Calabazas Creek. City share of County project to upgrade pedestrian connection Renovation of existing softball field Acquisition of SJW property for neighbor park purposes; design studies Renovation of existing play field, with irrigation & turf restoration Various restoration and preservation projects Decreases reliance on private autos by implementing trail plan. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7, 4-13. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan text pages 2-46, 2-51. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan text pages 2-46, 2-51. Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2,4-3,4-7,4-13. Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7, 4-13. Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7, 4-13. Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7,4-13. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan policy text pages 2-46, 2-51. Increases the inventory of parklands, particularly in neighborhoods that are deficient in parks. See general plan policies 2- 74,2-82 and 2-83 Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan text pages 2-46,2-51. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general.plan text pages 2-46,2-51. I-if 5 City Hall Emergency GeneratorfPG&E Upgrade Sport Center Tennis Court Lighting Library Improvements & Upgrades Quinlan Center Fountain Replacement Monta Vista Park Building HV AC Replacement Service Center Security Gate Library Court Yard Improvements Sport Center Upgrade and Pool Demo Pavement Management Pavement Management STP Portion Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repairs Neighborhood Traffic Calming Measures Remove existing emergency generator and undersized transformer. Upgrade main electrical panel. Design of Tennis Court Lights for Night Time Use Lighting upgrade to various interior areas in the library Demolition and removal of nonfunctional fountain and reconfigure space for comm. Events and rivate rental Replace existing HV AC system on building. Install a more secure automatic gate at the Service Center Install upgraded landscaping and shade areas in the existing courtyard. Removal of the existing pool and bathhouse. Replace with multi- pose sorts court and restroom Ongoing maintenance of street pavement, which may include pothole filling, slurry sealing and. overlayment. Ongoing maintenance of street pavement. Funds for the repair of curb, gutter and sidewalks when they meet repair criteria Funds for roadway modifications to slow and redirect auto traffic Maintains usability of City facility. No direct policy connection to General Plan. No conflicts with Plan. Noise mitigation consistent with City noise policies. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan policy text pages 2-46, 2-51. Improves library service. See policy 2-61. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan text pages 2-46, 2-51. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan text ages 2-46, 2-51. Maintains usability of City facility. No direct policy connection to General Plan. No conflicts with Plan Improves library service. See policy 2-61. Maintains usability of City parks and rec. facilities. See general plan text pages 2-46, 2-51. Maintains safety and functioning of the City's circulation system. See general plan policies 4-1, 4-6 and 4-12 Maintains safety and functioning of the City's circulation system. See general plan policies 4-1, 4-6 and 4-12 Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7, 4-13. Reduce flooding risks. See Flood Hazard text page 6-25. Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2,4-3,4-7,4-13. /-5 6 Safe Routes to School Garden Gate & Signal Upgrade at Stelling Rd.lGreenleaf Yellow & Ped Head LED Traffic Signal Upgrade Countdown Ped Heads SCB/SR85 on Ramp Crosswalk Imps. De Anza Blvd./McClellan! Pacifica Signal Mod. SVITS Extensions Various traffic signal! intersection mods. Red Light Runner Program Minor Storm Drain Improvements Monta Vista Storm Drainage System Master Storm Drain Plan Update City Monument Signs Replacement Rancho Rinconada Street Study Install sidewalks where gaps exist on Stelling Road, Greenleaf Dr & on Ann Arbor Ave. to provide safe route to Garden Gate School. Traffic signal upgrade of County installed traffic signal. Re-Iamp all yellow & ped head indicators with LED in all traffic signals. Re-Iamp existing ped traffic signals with LED countdown units throughout the City. Funds will complete 20 intersections. Improve crosswalks at Stevens Creek Blvd. and SR85 Relocate two 55' mast arms and poles, related electrical, concrete and striping work. Install cable and boxes to connect City traffic facilities to Regional Intelligent Transportation System Minor upgrades to various traffic signals Citywide & 4 lighted crosswalks New RLC enforcement system will be installed at one test site Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7, 4-13. Safety and functioning of the circulation system. Policies 4-1, 4- 6 and 4-12 Maintains safety & functioning of circulation system. Policies 4-1, 4- 6 and 4-12 Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2,4-3,4-7,4-13. Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7,4-13. Maintains safety and functioning of the circulation system. See olicies 4-1, 4-6 and 4-12 Maintains safety and functioning of the circulation system. See policies 4-1, 4-6 and 4-12 Maintains safety and functioning of the circulation system. See policies 4-1, 4-6 and 4-12 Manages neighborhood traffic and decreases reliance on private autos. Policies 4-2, 4-3, 4-7, 4-13. Reduces flooding risks. See Flood Hazard text page 6-25. Reduces flooding risks. See Flood Hazard text page 6-25. Funding for emergency repairs as needed in various locations. . Installation of new storm drainage system in Monta Vista area. Lines to be installed on Orange Ave and Byrne Avenue Update 1993 plan by evaluating existing system and make recommendations, including fee update. 2007-08 ProOects Listed as 2" Year Funded One on Foothill Blvd. to be moved Provides distinctive community to SCB at SR85. Replace one at gateways at major entry points. SCB at Tantau Avenue See olicy 2-8. Neighborhood street circulation Maintains Safety and functioning study. of the circulation system. See policies 4-1,4-6 and 4-12 Reduces flooding risks. See Flood Hazard text page 6-25. I-(P CP-2007 -02 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FINDING THE PROPOSED FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FISCAL YEARS 2007- 08 TO 2011-12 CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: CP-2007-02 (EA-2007-04) City of Cupertino Citywide SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received the proposed five-year capital improvement program, fiscal years 2007-08 to 2011-12, as described in Section I of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held at least one public hearing in regard to the application; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the Planning Commission finds in accordance with CMC Section 2.32.070C, that application CP- 2007-02 is consistent with the City of Cupertino's General Plan. That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application CP-2007-02 as set forth in the Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2007, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 2007, 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 Lisa Giefer, Chair Cupertino Planning Commission g :/plann ing/pdreportjres(200 7jCP- 2007-02 res /-7 CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE May 23, 2007 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 May 23, 2007. PROTECT DESCRIPTION AND tOCA TION Application No.: Applicant: Location: CP-2007-02 (EA-2007-04) City of Cupertino Citywide DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST Review of the 5-year Capital Improvement Program, fiscal years 2007-08 to 2011-12, for General plan consistency FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that the project with incorporated noise mitigations has no significant environmental impacts. / s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development g/ercjREC EA-2007-04 /-Ib City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department ITV F CUPEI(fINO PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project Location: Citywide Project Description: Various City capital proiects to repair. renovate. replace or uporade existino City facilities and structures. Environmental Setting: Various urban settinos that include public parks. city streets and city buildinos: city hall. library. community center. park buildino and service center PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Area (ac.) - N/A Building Coverage - N/A % Exist. Building -_s.f. Proposed Bldg. -_s.f. Zone - BA. PR G.P. Designation - Public Facilities. Transporatiion. Parks & Open Space Assessor's Parcel No. - various If Residential, Units/Gross Acre - N/A 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) o Monta Vista Design Guidelines o S. De Anza Conceptual o N. De Anza Conceptual o S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual o Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual o Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & Landscape If Non-Residential, Building Area - N/A Employees/Shift - _Parking Required N/A Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area - s.f. FAR - Parking Provided N/ A YES X NO 0 Max. I-q A. CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SOURCES D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES (Continued) 1. Land Use Element 26. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 2. Public Safety Element 27. County Parks and Recreation Department 3. Housing Element 28. Cupertino Sanitary District 4. Transportation Element 29. Fremont Union High School District 5. Environmental Resources 30. Cupertino Union School District 6. Appendix A- Hillside Development 31. Pacific Gas and Electric 7. Land Use Map 32. Santa Clara County Fire Department 8. Noise Element Amendment 33. County Sheriff 9. City Ridgeline Policy 34. CAL TRANS 10. Constraint Maps 35. County Transportation Agency 36. Santa Clara Valley Water District B. CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 11. Tree PreseNation ordinance 778 E. OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS 12. City Aerial Photography Maps 37. BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant 13. "Cupertino Chronicle" (California History Excesses Center, 1976) 38. FEMA Flood Maps/SCVWD Flood Maps 14. Geological Report (site speCific) 39. USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County" 15. Parking Ordinance 1277 40. County Hazardous Waste Management 16. Zoning Map Plan 17. Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents 41. County Heritage Resources Inventory 18. City Noise Ordinance 42. Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel Leak Site C. CITY AGENCIES Site 43. CalEPA Hazardous Waste and 19. Community Development Dept. List Substances Site 20. Public Works Dept. 21. Parks & Recreation Department F. OTHER SOURCES 22. Cupertino Water Utility 44. Project Plan Set/Application Materials 45. Field Reconnaissance D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 46. Experience w/project of similar 23. County Planning Department scope/characteristics 24. Adjacent Cities' Planning Departments 47. ABAG Projection Series 25. County Departmental of Environmental Health A. Complete all information requested on the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE BLANK SPACES ONLY WHEN A SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT APPLICABLE. B. Consult the Initial Study Source List; use the materials listed therein to complete, the checklist information in Categories A through O. C. 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. D. 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. E. 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 oaae. F. Upon completing the checklist, sign and date the Preparer's Affidavit. G. Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the City. ""Project Plan Set of Legislative Document ""Location map with site clearly marked (when applicable) /-/D EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: '~'ri"""_'_"'_""'_"'_'__"_'_ . -....-.......-...-..............---.-.---..--....--..... .....--.......-........-........--........- .............. .....................--] ~- 0 - c C1: c;; c1: i -C'lS- C'lS C'lS 0 C'lS C'lSC'lS- U i .! u u .c u .c .- "- . .cUU ! ISSUES: 1:!E ~ 1-Cj:_1Uo 1-Cj:C'lS 0 C'lS I en.-.i me. en.- e. z e. [and Supporting Information Sources] Q) C E en C .- "- en C E E 1).~ - Q)m :=0 Q) .~- ..J .- :E U D..en en C ..Jen i ; I I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: ...... ......-..----......-..... a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a 0 0 0 I [8J scenic vista? [5,9,24,41,44] ...--......----..---..---..---.. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, 0 0 0 [8J including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [5,9,11,24,34,41,44] c) Substantially degrade the existing visual 0 0 0 [R] character or quality of the site and its I I surroundings? [1,17,19,44] I d) Create a new source of substantial light or 0 0 I 0 [R] I glare, which would adversely affect day or I nighttime views in the area? [1,16,44] 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 on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: i a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique ; 0 0 0 [R] i I i I Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide I i I ! Importance (Farmland), as shown on the I i ! maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland I i I j i I Mapping and Monitoring Program of the , i California Resources Agency, to non- i i ! I ! agricultural use? [5,7,39] I I f--..--..-..----.-------------.-------------------------- I [8J i i b) Conflict with existing zoning for 0 0 0 I i ! agricultural use, or a Williamson Act i i i I contract? [5,7,23] I ~._.._..__.._-_._--~-_.__.._- , -I i c) Involve other changes in the existing 0 0 0 [R] I environment which, due to their location or I i i I nature, could result in conversion of I i ; ! Farmland, to non-agricultural use? [5,7,39] I I I ; I ; t:~:::::~.::::~==_~:~:~~~_=~:::=~~~~~=~_~=:=__=.~~~=~===~=~===_===-~:~=====-.__ ------ -._-~--~:_-- -.J 1-11 ! e) Create objectionable odors affecting aDD i i substantial number of people? [4,37,44] I i-----..-.-..-.-.-.--.----.---.-.-------.-------- -- --.-------- --.---t i IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would ! I the project: I I I I I I I I I I I I ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] 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] b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? [5,37,42,44] 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] 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] i i b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any ! riparian habitat or other sensitive natural ! community identified in local or regional I i plans, policies, regulations or by the I California Department of Fish and Game or i US Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44] f..-.----....-..-.---.-.-..---.--.-. ~- -I: -tel- .! (.) (.) -.- ! I: ~ ~ Q) I: E 1),2' - o..tn o o o o o o o I: C I: ;:: tel tel 0 tel .c: (.) .c: .- '- I- .- _ 1G 0 (I) ~ .; C) c. (I) I: ;>.- '- Q)C) ~o ..J .- :!!: (.) tn I: o o o o o o 1:- I: tel teI- .c:(.)(.) 1-,- tel (I) ~ c. (I) I: E Q) .2'- ..Jtn I ; i I I ; 0 ; ! i i i 0 ; I ; I I i 0 o o o o u o tel zc. E IRI IRI IRI I IRI ; I I I i I IRI i t IRI IRI ! I i ! i i __0 ~o __~__! o i c) Have a substantial adverse effect on I federally protected wetlands as defined by I Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 1..nlJ_~J_~~!!:'.9L~!!LQ_Q!_Jj~.tt~9.__tQ!__!!.l_9rs~_'~er~L_ __.______._ /-!R __h_.____._..__ .--..--------.-..-.--- ----------- -.--.---.---..-... >.- 0 c- ; -c C1: c;:; c -ns- nsns ons nsns- - I .! u u .c u..c .- ... .cuU u ISSUES: 1:!E 3 I-it:_nio I- .- ns o ns ; I/).-.i C)Q. I/) ~ Q. zQ. i [and Supporting Information Sources] (I,) c E I/) C .-... I/) C E E i cL~- (I,) C) ~ 0 (I,).~- ...I .- ~ U ! Q.t/) t/) c ...It/) I pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, I filling, hydrological interruption, or other I means? [20,36,44] I d) Interfere substantially with the movement 0 0 I 0 [8] I of any native resident or migratory fish or I ! ! I i wildlife species or with established native i resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or i i impede the use of native wildlife nursery I i sites? [5,10,12,21,26] I -..-.----..-.-..- ......---..---..-------------+-..-....-..--....----..-.--..-..-- e) Conflict with any local policies or 0 I 0 I 0 [8] I ordinances protecting biological resources, ! such as a tree preservation policy or i I I ordinance? [11,12,41] , f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted ! I I Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural 0 0 I 0 [8] Community Conservation Plan, or other I I approved local, regional, or state habitat I conservation plan? [5,10,26,27] I I V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the I project: I I a) Cause a substantial adverse change in 0 0 I 0 [8] ! the significance of a historical resource as i defined in 915064.5? [5,13,41] I b) Cause a substantial adverse change in 0 0 0 [8] the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 915064.5? [5,13,41] c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 0 0 I 0 [8] paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [5,13,41] I d) Disturb any human remains, including 0 0 I 0 IRl those interred outside of formal cemeteries? i ! [1,5] i 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 ! i i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as 0 0 I 0 [8] i I i delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo U~.9.~.b_g~~~_~E~~lL?.Q!1jng Ma.e issued py th~.~ L.___. I -~-- J /-/3 ...--.----.....----..-- --.-~-..:.------..-~T--.----:-.-..--- -...-.--.-...---.--........--) ~- I -E: E: E:;I E:E: i -ns- nsns ons nsns- _ i .!! u u J: U J: .-... J: U U U j ISSUES: -lj:ns ~lj:_1Uo ~lj:ns o ns I E:._ g. en .- .j tn Co en.- c. zc. i [and Supporting Information Sources] cu E: E en E: .-... en E: E E j i o.~- cu tn ~ 0 cu tn_ I Il.CI) -J en :E g -J en ! j i 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? D D D [R] [2,5,10,44] i ..-.... ...........-.---_.~..._. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including D 0 0 [R] liquefaction? [2,5,10,39,44] iv) Landslides? [2,5,10,39,44] D 0 I 0 [R] I I i b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the D D I D [R] loss of topsoil? [2,5,10,44] I I I ---..- -----.t----------.-- I c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is D 0 i D [BJ I unstable, or that would become unstable as I ! a result of the project, and potentially result I in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, I i subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? , [2,5,10,39] d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined D D D [R] in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? [2,5,10] e) Have soils incapable of adequately D 0 0 [BJ 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] I VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS I i MATERIALS - Would the project: I ! a) Create a significant hazard to the public or 0 0 I 0 [R] I the environment through the routine I transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ! materials? [32,40,42,43,44] 1.-..-.-..-....-------.---------------.---------.----------- ------ --- I--- I b) Create a significant hazard to the public or 0 0 0 [BJ I the environment through reasonably I foreseeable upset and accident conditions I i involving the release of hazardous materials I into the environment? [32,40,42,43,44] I i c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle 0 0 0 [BJ I i I hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, i i !_~~_~!9._IlC~~L<?I_ wa~!~_~~b.LI:U?_~~!:!art~~mile__ I i ---- '--- ,--_.-J /-)+ ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] 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? [ ] !I' g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency I response plan or emergency evacuation I plan? [2,32,33,44] ~_______________M.'_~M I h) Expose people or structures to a I significant risk of loss, injury or death I involving wildland fires, including where I wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or ! where residences are intermixed with I wildlands?[1 ,2,44] I VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY I -- Would the project: r-.R--.M--.-----.----.--.-.- I a) Violate any water quality standards or ! waste discharge requirements? [20,36,37] I r-.~.;~ubst~ntial~;~~~le~ groundwater -'--'--- I supplies or interfere substantially with i groundwater recharge such that there would I be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a I lowering of the local groundwater table level I (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing I nearby wells would drop to a level I which would not support existing land uses I or planned uses for which permits have been I granted)? [20,36,42] .._.._._._._.____._.__ ___.__..__._______...._m..._....~--.-----....--- _....___....__.., i I i ~- -c -ns- .! u u -.- ! c ~ ~ ev C E ci.~ - Q.t/) D o C'C C; nsns ons .z= u .z= .- ... 1-It:_1ao U).-.:;: Ole. U) C :> .- ... eve') ~o ....J .- :i: U t/) C D C- C nsns_ .z=uU I- It: ns U).- e. U) C E ev .~- ....Jt/) D '0 I 0 ns I i Z e. ! E I I I I I i , ; i ! IRI I D DID IRI I I i i i I I -D---ot~ l&l D D D D ; I I I D I I + I D I I I I I i I I I I ~__~_I~- D D l. D i I ! I i I I I IRI --------1 ; IRI i I I i ; ; ! I I I i ! ! J -. t----~ IRI ! I ; ._-_._--_...__.._~ IRI ; I ! i I i ; I I I I ! I-IS ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion of siltation on- or off-site? [14,20,36] d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site [20,36,38] e) 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] f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [20,36,37] g) 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? [2,38] h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? [2,38] i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? [2,36,38] j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [2,36,38] IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? [7,12,22,41] I b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, l_R9-ligYl.__Q~_T~9~1~.~2!l_gL~n ag~_~y_\yith____._.____ ~- - c -ca- .!! u u c!E ~ (I) C E 15.2>> - I:L.U) ..........-.-.....-.....-..-...-.-.- -.-.-.-----------.--..r..---~--..-.-.-..-- 01 C - C .-. ca:; 01U1 .c u .c .- .... 1-li:_1UOI tn.-.S; enD. tn C ;> .- ... (l)en ~Ol ....I .- :E U t/) C C- C caca- .cUU I-li:ca tn'- D. tn C E (I) .2>>- ....It/) i i ! I ! I ! i I I ! i I -----...---- -.-.------------.-+--.----- I o 0 I 0 I I I I o o o o o o o -.-----..... 1 I o ~ I z D. I E I I I IRI IRI IRI IRI IRI [8] ! I I I ! i I i I 0 IRI I 1 I .----------l------- ---~ I I I 0 IRI I I . i I i I 0 IRI I ! ! .. _____ _.______L_________...._ _._.___.._____.! o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o IRI /"'/ ~ --------~r~------ , ~_ C _ 0 _ i -c C c..cc ! -~- ~~ O~ ~~_ _i .! (,) (,) .c (,) .. '- .c (,) (,) (,) i ISSUES: -1;:3, I-I;:;~o I-I;:~ o~1 c._ en.-.ima. en.-a. za.! [and Supporting Information Sources] (l)cE enC .-'- cE E i - m_ (I) m :t:: 01 en m_ _ i o .- ...J .- ::::!: (,) (I) .- ! a.. (I) (I) C I ...J (I) : . -, I jurisdiction over the project (including, but I 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] ............ .....- ..................... c) Conflict with any applicable habitat 0 0 0 [R] conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? [1,5,6,9,26] .---------. X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known i 0 0 I 0 [R] I mineral resource that would be of value to i I the region and the residents of the state? ! [5.10] b) Result in the loss of availability of a 0 0 0 [R] , locally-important mineral resource recovery , site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? [5.10] XI. NOISE -- Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, 0 [R] 0 0 noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise I ordinance, or applicable standards of other I agencies? [8,18,44] b) Exposure of persons to or generation of 0 0 I 0 [R] excessive ground borne vibration or I ground borne noise levels? [8,18,44] i c) A substantial permanent increase in 0 [R] I 0 0 I , ambient noise levels in the project vicinity I I above levels existing without the project? [8,18] d) A substantial temporary or periodic 0 [R] 0 0 increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8.18,44] I Noise: The outdoor emergency power generator with the best acoustical enclosure can I generate noise at 62-64 dBA, which is in excess of City Noise Ordinance limits of 60 dBA I for residential property line exposures. Mitigations: Acquire the best acoustical enclosure I available with a maximum noise level in any direction of 76 dBA at 23 feet. Limit test runs i of the generator to a 10-15 minute duration during the daytime. Select a test period that is I outside normal City Hall working hours. I i..__~_____._.___.._..._.____._.__.___________________--~--- /-/1 ...-.-----...-.- -.-.--.--.----..-.---- -_.._-----_._..._~ -_.._~ i I i I I I I I XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would I I I the project: I: i'-....-..---.---.--.-.--.--.-.----.---.-.------.----.---.--.-.-------.--------.-------.--.- -.------.--.---- ------.-t-.----.--.------ ----'--1 i a) Indu?e su~stantial population growth in an 0 0 I 0 [RI i i area, either directly (for example, by I j i proposing new homes and businesses) or I I I indirectly (for example, through extension of II ! I roads or other infrastructure)? [3,16,47,44] I i--.---------.---. I I b) Displace substantial numbers of existing 0 0 I 0 [RI i housing, necessitating the construction of j i replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] I I' c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 0 0 I I necessitating the construction of I replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] I I XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES ; i o 0 0 [g) I o 0 0 [g) I I __._..._______.___._ _._.___._..._____ ___.______..__"'__._______.~_l___._._._______.___._.__. ________.__] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] ~- -c -ns- .!!! u u 1:!E ! Q) C E c),~ - Cl..tn C _ 0 C C;:; nsns ons .c u .-... 1-'t:;i1Uo 1/1'-'- C)e. 1/1 C 3= .- ... Q)C) ::0 ..J .- -== u tn ..c;c I e) For a project located within an airport land I use plan or, where such a plan has not been i adopted, within two miles of a public airport i or public use airport, would the project ! expose people residing or working in the : project area to excessive noise levels? I [8,18,44] i o o I f) For a project within the vicinity of a private i airstrip, would the project expose people : residing or working in the project area to ! excessive noise levels? [8,18] o o 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 public services: I I I 1 Fire protection? [19,32,44] Police protection? [33,44] Schools? [29,30,44] Parks? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] o o o o L__ .....__......_.___._.._ c- c nsns- .cuU I-'t:ns 1/1'- e. 1/1 C E Q) .~- ..Jtn o o o o o I _i U , o ns i z ~ I I i j j [g) [RI [g) [g) [g) /-1'6 ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] ~- - c -ns- .! u u 1:!E g CI) C E 15 .2'- Q,Cf) --..-.-.-..--.-..-.---. ------.---- ---._-- --....-.----..., i i i 1>1 o ns ! Z ~ I ! Other public facilities? [19,20,44] r-..---.-----------..----.--.-- I XIV. RECREATION -- o 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? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] o o 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] i XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC -- I Would the project: I a) Cause an increase in traffic which is 0 I substantial in relation to the existing traffic I load and capacity of the street system (Le., I result in a substantial increase in either the I number of vehicle trips, the volume to i capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at I intersections)? [4,20,35,44] r----..------..--------..-.-.---- ------- --- j I b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, 0 I a level of service standard established by the I county congestion management agency for ! designated roads or highways? [4,20,44] c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, 0 including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? [4,?] 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] o e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [2,19,32,33,44] o f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [17,44] o i I g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or Lp~9._g ra.!!!.~_.~~_P...eor!Lr:!g~~~rnative _... o ------ o c1: C;:; nsns ons .c u .c .- ... 1-lt:_1Uo 1/)'-';; O)~ I/) C ;> .- ... CI) C) :: 0 ...J .- ::::!E U Cf) C _. o o o o o o o o o o C- C nsns_ .cuU I-lt:ns 1/)'- ~ I/) C E CI) .2'- ...JCf) o o o i i I i I i i I I I i I I I I I I j I I I o o o o o o o ! __~J 1RI I i I 1RI 1RI 1RI ! i I I I _J 1RI 1RI 1RI i i i ; i ! ! i ! i ! i I I I I I i i 1RI 1RI I-/q ! ! I ISSUES: I [and Supporting Information Sources] ! ..............................-...........-..............--........--.---......-.-...-.--.. -...----.-...--,--.----.;-r--..-.-.-.-..-- ---....--.....--.i ~~ C ~ C ~I C ~ I - C'IS - C'IS C'IS 0 C'lSI C'IS C'IS _ _ ! .!!! u u .c u .c ..... .c u u u i -G:~ ~G:_C'lSO ~G:C'IS OC'lSj c._ ~ tn.--S; O)e. ",-- e. z e.1 SCE tnc;>..... UicE E O 0)_ (1) 0) -- 0 ... tn_ _ I -- ..J .- -== u - .- n. CI) CI) c:; C ..J CI) ; - I L I transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle I racks)? [4,34] I XVI_ UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment 0 0 0 IKI requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? [5,22,28,36,44] b) Require or result in the construction of 0 0 0 IKI new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [36,22,28,36] I c) Require or result in the construction of 0 0 0 IKI i new storm water drainage facilities or I expansion of existing facilities, the I construction of which could cause significant I environmental effects? [5,22,28,36,44] ! i j--------------- --'"-- Ie) Result in a determination by the 0 0 0 I wastewater treatment provider which serves I IKI I I or may serve the project that it has adequate I . capacity to serve the project's projected I I demand in addition to the provider's existing I I I commitments? [5,22,28,36,44] I ! f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient 0 0 I 0 lR1 I permitted capacity to accommodate the I project's solid waste disposal needs? [?] g) Comply with federal, state, and local 0 0 ! 0 IKI I I statutes and regulations related to solid I waste? [?] f"'~o a) Does the project have the potential to 0 0 0 [8] 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 i i the major periods of California history or i i prehistory? 0 I I ----r-- b) Does the project have impacts that are 0 0 i 0 [8] I I individually limited, but cumulatively I considerable? ("Cumulatively I , considerable" means that the incremental I effects of a project are considerable when I viewed in connection with the effects of past i I projects, the effects of other current projects, I and the effects of probable future projects)? I D c) Does the project have environmental 0 0 0 [8] effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? D I 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. J '_ 0 Preparer's Signature M~_ Print Preparer's Name Colin ~nq I'~I 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. 0 Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality 0 Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources 0 Geology ISoils 0 Hazards & Hazardous 0 Hydrology 1 Water 0 Land Use 1 Planning Materials Quality 0 Mineral Resources [R] Noise 0 Population 1 Housing 0 Public Services 0 Recreation 0 T ransportation/T raffic 0 Utilities / Service 0 Mandatory Findings of Systems Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) finds that: 0 The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [R] 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. 0 The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 0 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. 0 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. St 5/15/07 Date .. '23 5f2tf107 ERC Chairperson Date I ":l~ Environmental Consulting Services 18488 Prospect Road - Suite 1, Saratoga, CA 95070 Phone: (408) 257-1045 stanshe1l99@toast.net FAX: (408) 257-7235 June 12, 2006 Mr. Jim Fitzwater, AlA Sugimura & Associates Architects 2155 South Bascom Ave., Suite 200 Campbell, CA 95008 Re: Noise Assessment and Mitigation Study - New City Hall Emergency Generator Installation, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino Dear Mr. Fitzwater, At your request I have performed a study of the potential noise impacts from the proposed new emergency generator to be installed on the City Hall property. This report includes: · measurements or ambient noise levels in the area · description of nearby residential and commercial receptor locations · results of the noise analysis of the proposed new generator installation · relevant City of Cupertino noise ordinance standards · general recommendations for mitigation measures to allow compliance with the City noise ordinance when the generator is tested · general recommendations for avoiding significant construction noise impacts PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Cupertino is proposing to install a new diesel emergency generator with a high quality sound-attenuated enclosure adjacent to an existing basement-level outdoor patio at the northwest comer of the City Hall building. Other than during an emergency causing loss of utility power, the generator would only be operated during a brief weekly test period. NEARBY RESIDENTIAL RECEPTORS The nearest sensitive receptor locations to the project are a group of two-story multifamily residential units across Rodrigues Avenue from the City Hall and approximately 150 feet from the proposed generator installation. There are also commercial businesses across Torre Avenue at a distance of about 140 feet. AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS Ambient noise measurements were made at the sidewalk in front of the nearest Rodrigues residence across from the City Hall, during the afternoon of May 27, 2006, with a CEL-440 Precision Noise Meter and Analyzer, calibrated with a B & K Model 4230 Sound Level Calibrator. Noise levels were measured and are reported using percentile noise descriptors: L90 (the background noise level exceeded 90 % of the time), LSO (the median noise level exceeded SO% of the time), Ll (the peak level exceeded 1 % of the time), and Leg (the average energy-equivalent noise level). The measurements use A-weighting (commonly abbreviated dBA) to de-emphasize the low frequencies and high frequencies to match human hearing sensitivity. Community noise readings typically are taken using dBA, and most noise ordinance standards are specified in dBA, including the City of Cupertino Noise Ordinance. The measurements are shown in Exhibit 1 following. 1- e23 t; I ,O'f.f::' r-I Noise Impact and Mitigation Study, City Hall Emergency Generator, Cupertino Page 2 of3 EXIllBIT 1 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS (dBA) Rodrigues and Torre Avenue, Cupertino Period L90 LSO Leq Ll Late afternoon 46 51 57 67 The ambient noise levels at the project location are produced almost entirely by traffic on the local streets, Rodrigues A venue and Torre A venue. Background noise levels ,are set by traffic on major arterials De Anza Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard, one block west and north, respectively. With no nearby traffic passing, noise levels are very low, as indicated by the 46 dBA L90 noise level. MODELED GENERATOR NOISE LEVELS Data on noise levels produced by two different generator brands, Generac and Cummins, were obtained from the manufacturers via the mechanical engineering consultant for the project, American Consulting Engineers Electrical, Inc., Campbell. The best available acoustical enclosure is assumed to be installed for each generator unit. Both brands with the best acoustic enclosure have a maximum noise level in the worst direction of76 dBA at a distance of23 feet, according to manufacturer's specs. The receptor location noise levels from generator operation was modeled at the nearest residential property line across Rodrigues Avenue and at the nearest commercial property line across Torre A venue. Based on the distances, shielding, reflection and generator noise levels, the worst-case property line noise levels at both the residential and commercial property lines would be 62-64 dBA. COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF CUPERTINO NOISE ORDINANCE Under actual emergency conditions, when utility electrical power is down, there is no legal requirement, or indeed expectation, that City activities responding to the emergency would meet the noise ordinance. The primary concern with noise impact involves the scheduled weekly generator test operating period. The testing period is not determined, but is assumed to be once a week for 10 to 15 minutes. Operational Noise Limits. The Cupertino Noise Ordinance, section 10.48.040, requires noise sources to produce noise levels 60 dBA or less on nearby residential property during daytime hours, 8 am to 8 pm, and 50 dBA or less during the remaining nighttime period. Either of the new generator types would be 2-4 dBA above the 60 dBA daytime limit for residences across Rodrigues A venue and in compliance with the commercial daytime limits across Torre A venue. At night the equipment would be above the Residential Noise Ordinance limit of 50 dBA, and marginally above the Commercial limit of 60 dBA. However, there is no known reason the weekly testing of the generators would need to be done at night. "Brief Daytime Incidents" are controlled by ordinance section 10.48.050, which allows events 10 dBA above the normal noise limits for 10 minutes, or 5 dBA above the normal limits for 15 minutes, which would allow generator compliance with the daytime limit on both nearby residential and business properties if the weekly testing period was 10-15 minutes and during the daytime 8 am to 8 pm period. Construction Noise Limits. Section 10.48.053 requires that daytime demolition and construction activities must have no equipment producing more than 87 dB at 25 feet, and the overall noise level at any nearby property must be less than 80 dBA. Environmental Consulting Services Saratoga ( .... a...f.- Noise Impact and Mitigation Study, City Hall Emergency Generator, Cupertino Page 3 of3 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES To comply with Cupertino requirements, the following methods for mitigation of emergency generator equipment noise are recommended: 1. Purchase the best generator noise enclosure available, with a maximum noise level in any direction of76 dBA at 23 feet. 2. Limit test runs of the generator to a 10 to 15 minute duration during the daytime period. 3. To reduce disturbance to City Hall employees, select a generator test period that is outside of normal City Hall working hours. RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES - CONSTRUCTION NOISE 1. Choose construction equipment that is of quiet design, has a high- quality muffler system, and is well maintained. This includes trucks used to haul materials. 2. Install superior mufflers and engine enclosure panels as needed on gas, diesel or pneumatic impact machines. 3. Erect temporary plywood enclosures around equipment or activity areas that produce significant noise at nearby receptors. 4. Restrict construction hours to normal daytime hours. 5. Eliminate unnecessary idling of machines not in use. 6. Ifpossible, locate equipment as far from sensitive receptors as possible. If you require additional information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully submitted, ~ SML, H. Stanton Shelly Acoustical Consultant Board Certified Member (1982) Institute of Noise Control Engineering Environmental Consulting Services Saratoga I'" :2S Exhibit A Environmental Assessment of File No. CP-2007-02 City of Cupertino First Year Programmed Projects 5- Year Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2007-08 to 2011-12 Stevens Creek Restoration of Stevens Creek btw. Separate environmental analysis Corridor Park Stevens Creek Blvd. & McClellan Rd. was completed. Mitigated (Phase I) Reduce picnicking from 4,000 to 800, negative declaration adopted by install multiuse trail, reconstruct facilities the City Council. McClellan Ranch Reconfigure 4H facility and Mitigated negative declaration Facility construct trail from parking lot adopted by the City Council. Improvements to 4H. Demo & reconstruct Categorically Exempt. CEQA blacksmith shop, fencing & section 15301, Class Id: drainage improvements restoration of deteriorated facilities. Mary Avenue Construction of a bicycle Separate environmental analysis Bicycle footbridge on Mary Ave. was completed. Mitigated Footbridge alignment over Highway 280. negative declaration adopted by the Ci Council. Bollinger Bike City's contribution to widen SCVWD is the lead agency for Lanes over bridge for bicycle lanes over the project and environmental Calabazas Creek Calabazas Creek. review. Brid e Lawrence Expwy/ City share of County project to Project was completed by the Mitty High School upgrade pedestrian connection County. Pedestrian Crossin Memorial Park Renovation of existing softball Categorically Exempt. CEQA Softball Field field section 15301, Class Id: Renovation restoration of deteriorated facilities. S terlingIB arnhart Acquisition of SJW property for Categorically Exempt. CEQA section Park Land neighborhood park purposes 15316, Class 16: acquisition ofland Acquisition for park purposes Library Field Renovation of existing play field, Categorically Exempt. CEQA Renovation with irrigation & turf restoration section 15301, Class ld: restoration of deteriorated facilities. Stocklmeir Property Various restoration and Categorically Exempt. CEQA Preservation preservation projects section 15301, Class Id: restoration of deteriorated facilities. I"~ Exhibit A Sterling Barnhart Park Construction City Hall Emergency PowerlElectrical Systems Upgrade Sport Center Tennis Court Lighting Library Improvements & Upgrades Quinlan Center Fountain Replacement Monta Vista Park Building HV AC Replacement Service Center Security Gate Library Court Yard Improvements Sports Center Upgrade & Pool Demo Pavement Management Pavement Management STP portion Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repairs Neighborhood Traffic Calming Measures Construction of neighborhood park: design studies/plans. Replace existing emergency generator and undersized transformer. Upgrade main electrical panel. Design of tennis court lighting for night time use. May require transformer replacement Lighting upgrade to various interior areas in the library Demolition and removal of nonfunctional fountain and reconfiguration of space for community events & private rental Replace existing HV AC system on building. Install a more secure automatic gate at the Service Center Install upgraded landscaping & shade areas in the existing courtyard Removal of the existing pool and bathhouse. Replace with multi- pu ose sorts court and restroom Ongoing maintenance of street pavement, which may include pothole filling, slurry sealing and overlayment. Ongoing maintenance of street pavement. Funds for the repair of curb, gutter and sidewalks when they meet repair criteria Funds for roadway modifications to slow and redirect auto traffic Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15304, Class 4: minor alteration to land Outside generation must be enclosed acoustically. Testing must be done outside of City Hall hours and not more than 15 mins. Mitigated Ne ative Declaration Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class la: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class la: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class Id: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class Id: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class Id: minor alteration of existin facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15304, Class 4: minor alteration to land Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class Id: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities which includes streets. Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities which includes streets. Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities which includes streets. Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existin streets. 2 l-bl7 Exhibit A Safe Routes to School Garden Gate & Signal Upgrade at Stelling Rd./Greenleaf Yellow & Ped Head LED Traffic Signal Upgrade Countdown Ped Heads SCB/SR85 on Ramp Crosswalk Improvements De Anza Blvd./McClellan! Pacifica Signal Mod. SVITS Extensions Various traffic signal! intersection mods. Red Light Runner Program Minor Storm Drain Improvements Monta Vista Storm Drainage System Master Storm Drain Plan Update City Monument Signs Replacement Rancho Rinconada Street Study Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existin facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15303, Class 3d: utility extensions to service existing develo ment. Categorically Exempt: CEQA section 15306, Class 6: data collection Other Potential 2007-08 Funded Pro.ects One on Foothill Blvd. to be moved Categorically Exempt. CEQA to SCB at SR85. Replace one at section 15301, Class lc: minor SCB at Tantau Avenue alteration of existing facilities Neighborhood street circulation Categorically Exempt: CEQA study. section 15306, Class 6: data collection Install sidewalks where gaps exist on Stelling Road, Greenleaf Dr & on Ann Arbor Ave. to provide safe route to Garden Gate School. Traffic signal upgrade of County installed traffic signal. Re-Iamp all yellow & ped head indicators with LED in all traffic signals. Re-Iamp existing ped traffic signals with LED countdown units throughout the City. Funds will complete 20 intersections. Improve crosswalks at Stevens Creek Blvd. and SR85 Relocate two 55' mast arms and poles, related electrical, concrete and striping work. Install cable and boxes to connect City traffic facilities to Regional Intelligent Transportation System Minor upgrades to various traffic signals Citywide & 4 lighted crosswalks New RLC enforcement system will be installed at one test site Funding for emergency repairs as needed in various locations. Installation of new storm drainage system in Monta Vista area. Lines to be installed on Orange Ave and Byrne Avenue Update 1993 plan by evaluating existing system and make recommendations, including fee update. Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities, which includes streets. Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class 1 c: minor alteration of existing facilities .Categorically Exempt. CEQA section 15301, Class lc: minor alteration of existing facilities 3 /~f6 Proposed Five Year Capital Improvement Program Current Fund Description 2006-07 2007 -08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 9100 Parks 420-9121 Memorial Park Softball Field Renovation 20,000 230,000 420-9122 Sterling Barnhart Park Acquisition 1,000,000 420-9123 Library Field Renovation 100,000 420-9124 McClellan Ranch Facility Improvements 226,000 420-9125 Stocklmeir Property Preservation 35,000 15,000 New Project 420-9126 Sterling Barnhart Park Construction 10,000 40,000 800,000 Sports Center Soundwall Replacement 350,000 Lawrence&Mitty Park (Saratoga Creek) 1,500,000 Total 65,000 1,611,000 2,650,000 0 0 0 9200 Buildings 420-9229 City Hall Emergency Power/Electrical System 40,000 400,000 420-9236 Sports Center Tennis Court Lighting 250,000 420-9232 Library Improvements & Upgrades 20,000 100,000 420-9234 Monta Vista Park Building Replace HVAC System 60,000 90,000 420-9235 Service Center Security Gate 50,000 New Projects 420-9237 Quinlan Center Fountain Replacement 20,000 220,000 Library Court Yard Improvements 50,000 570-9231 Sports Center Upgrade & Pool Demo 500,000 Total 140,000 1,660,000 0 0 0 0 * EF = Enterprise Fund 9400 Streets 270-9450 Pavement Management 2,808;000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 270-9450 Pavement Management - STP Portion 529,000 . 372,000 270-9451 Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Repairs 500,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 270-9453 City Monument Signs Replacement (4) 100,000 270-9452 Rancho Rinconada Street Study 100,000 Total 3,837,000 1,872,000 1,700,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 - , ~ Proposed Five Year Capital Improvement Program Current Fund Description 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 9500 Traffic Facilities 270-9435 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Measures 5,000 50,000 420-9549 Safe Routes to School-Garden Gate & Sig. Upgrade 475,000 at Stelling/Greenleaf (Grant Pending) 420-9547 Yellow & Ped Head LED& Traffic Signal 65,000 55,000 30,000 Battery Backup System 420-9547 Countdown Ped Heads 50,000 50,000 50,000 420-9551 Lawrence Exppwy./Mitty Xing (Cupertino Share) 75,000 420-9552 Stevens Cr. Blvd./SR85 on Ramp x Walk Improv. (HES) 75,000 420-9555 SVITS Extensions (FO Cable & Boxes) 35,000 15,000 420-9556 Remove Traffic Sig. Flashing Red L T Arrows(4 Locations) 60,000 New Projects DeAnzas Blvd./McClellan/Pacifica Signal Modification 200,000 Various Traffic Signal/Intersection Modifications 75,000 Red Light Runner Program 250,000 250,000 250,000 Total 165,000 1,320,000 330,000 300,000 0 0 9700 Storm Drainage 210-9612 Minor Storm Drain Improvements 118,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 215-9620 Monta Vista Storm Drainage Syst. 134,000 800,000 215-9612 Master Storm Drain Plan Update 30,000 270-9443 Bollinger Bike Lanes/Calabazas Cr. Bridge(SCVWD) 90,000 250,000 25,000 Total 342,000 1,155,000 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Major Projects 428-9449 Mary Ave. Bicycle Footbridge 8,165,000 427-9112 Stevens Creek Corridor Park (Phase I) 1,800,000 9,300,000 1,000,000 1,800,000 17,465,000 1,000,000 0 0 0 Total Capital Improve. Prog. 6,349,000 25,083,000 5,780,000 1,875,000 . 1,575,000 1,575,000 Total Outside Revenue Share 2,355,000 14,704,358 1,350,000 825,000 825,000 825,000 Net City General Fu~d Funding 3,994,000 10,378,642 4,430,000 1,050,000 750,000 750,000 , ~ REVENUE Proposed Five Year Capital Improvement Program Current Fund Description Funding Source 2006-07 2007 -08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 9100 Parks 420-9124 McClellan Ranch Facility Improvements Land&Water Conservation 81,165 420-9122 Sterling Barnhart Park Acquisition Sale of City Owned Property 1,000,000 Memorial Park Softball Field Renovation Recreation 230,000 Library Field Renovation 100,000 Sports Center Soundwall Replacement 350,000 Total 0 1,411,165 350,000 0 0 0 9400 Streets 270-9450 Pavement Management Safe,Accoountable,Flexible, Efficient Transp. 468,000 330,000 Equity Act, A legacy for users-SAFETEA-LU City Monument Signs Replacement (2) Developer and Insurance Settlement 50,000 Rancho Rinconada Street Study 01TA Local Streets & County Roads) 100,000 Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Repairs Gas Tax 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 Total 1,218,000 1,080,000 900,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 9500 Traffic Facilities 420-9549 Safe Routes to School-Garden Gate & SR2S 427,500 Sig. Upgrade at Stelling/Greenleaf 420-9552 SCB/SR85 on Ramp x walk Improvements (Hazard Elimination Safety Pgm - Hes Caltrans) 67,500 DeAnzas /McClellan/Pacifica Sig. Mod. Developer 200,000 Total 0 695,000 0 0 0 0 9600 Storm Drainage 210-9612 Minor Storm Drain Improvements Storm Drain Account 47,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 215-9620 Monta Vista Storm Drainage Syst. Storm Drain Account 10,000 800,000 215-9612 Master Storm Drain Plan Update Storm Drain Account 30,000 270-9443 Bollinger Bike Lanes/Calabazas Cr. Brdg. Storm Drain Account 95,000 25,000 Total 57,000 1,000,000 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Major Projects 427-9112 Stevens Creek Corridor Park Urban Park Act, Land&Water Conservation, 400,000 2,520,000 Roberti-Z'Berg-Harris, SCVWD FACHE Settlement, Dept. of Water Resources, SCVWD Collaborative 427-9112 Stevens Creek Corridor Park (EF)* Blackberry Farm Revenue Account 680,000 200,000 427-9112 Stevens Creek Corridor Park Sale of City Owned Property 500,000 270-9449 Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge VT A Measure BITFCAlTDA 6,111,000 270-9449 Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge City of Sunnyvale 110,000 270-9449 Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge Caltrans 304/BT A - 2003/2004 600,000 270-9449 Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge TDA (Non BEP)2004-05:$65,000;2005-06:$38,OOO 103,000 270-9449 Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge Caltrans 304/BT A - 2005/2006 300,000 270-9447, Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge TDA 06/07 42,193 270-9447 Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge TDA 07/08 32,000 Total 1,080.000 10,518,193 0 0 0 0 - ~ TOTAL OUTSIDE REVENUE SHARE 2,355,000 14,704,358 1,350,000 825,000 825,000 825,000 J.) Unfunded Five Year Capital Improvement Program Current Fund Description 2006-07 2007 -08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 9100 Parks Rancho Rinconada Park Construction 2,000,000 Stevens Creek Corridor Park (Phase 2) 3,000,000 0 0 0 5,000,000 0 0 9200 Buildings City Hall Remodel with Seismic/ADA! 3,000,000 Fire Code Upgrades (Essential Building) 0 0 3,000,000 0 0 0 9300 Trails 0 0 0 0 0 0 9500 Traffic Facilities Memorial Park Sidewalk Enhancements on SCB 150,000 Pedestrian Enhancements on Overpasses 350,000 0 0 0 0 0 500,000 9700 Storm Drainage Bubb/McClellan Storm Sewer Upgrade 750,000 2000000 0 0 0 0 750,000 2,000,000 Total Unfunded Projects 0 0 3,000,000 5,000,000 750,000 2,500,000 - , ~ OJ ... ............ ... ..... ... FIVE' YEAR' PROGRAM.... ........ . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . SUMMARY' .. .. ...... . ........ '" . . . ... . .. .......... ... ... ................ .......... . ........... P.J" 'e' .YEAR.... ... ............ ... ........ . ... .. .. ..... ........... . . . ....... ....... ... ................ ........ ....... . ... .......... . :~~::::/::::+.8+A~)/ . .. ............... ... ............ ... ........ . .. ... . .. . . .... ........... . . ...... ....... ... ................ ::~e~~:::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::;::: :o~~d::;:::::;:::::;:::::::;:;:::::::: :1~~i .......... . ..... .'. ......... ..... .'. .'. ............ ........ ...... ... ............ ... .......... . ......................... ....... ... ................ .......... . ........................ ....... ::::;: ::oN)~:::::: ;::::: ::::::: .......,.. . ~~~; ......................... ....... .......... . ........................ ....... ,.....,.... . ......................... ....... .......... . ........................ ....... ........... . SUMMARY;OF;:FUNOlNG;;$OURCE$:::;;: ........................,.......,..............................,....,............"".,...... ""........,.,..., .,.....,...,..".... . ...............".,.,."."....,...,.,....,...................."..,.",...,.,.".",.,.". ..'.".",."..... ....."..".,.,.,.... . .,.,.........,."..,.,..,...........................,..."........,.".,..,....,.,.""."., ""..,.".,..,.,.. .,.,....."...,...., . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . ~ . , . . . , , , . . , . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . , , . . . . , . . . , . , , . , . . , . . . . , , . , , , , , , " '" . . , . , . . . . , . . . . . , ."..."....,.,., ...... .................,..........",........,....,.......,....,....,.,.,."....."......."".... ...",..,........, .'".,......,....... . .......,....,..."..,....,...,.,.,.".,......,.,......,..,...."..,.".....,.,.,....,...,.,..",..,....,.....,. . ,.....,...,...,.,.... . GF=GENERAL FUND 17,579,335 4,455,000 1,050,000 750,000 750,000 24,584,335 RC=RECREATION FUND 530,000 350,000 0 0 0 880,000 GT=GAS TAX 847,500 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 3,847,500 EI=ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 0 0 0 0 0 0 PD=PARK DEDICATION 0 0 0 0 0 0 SD=STORM DRAIN 1,000,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,300,000 RA=RESERVE ACCOUNT 0 0 0 0 0 0 TG=TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUND 825,000 100,000 0 0 0 925,000 PG=PARK GRANT 2,601,165 0 0 0 0 2,601,165 DV=DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION 200,000 50,000 0 0 0 250,000 SC=SPORTS CENTER 0 0 0 0 0 0 SP=SALE OF PROPERTY 1,500,000 0 0 0 0 1,500,000 --------...-- ---- ---------...----- ---..---..--------- -- -------------- TOTALS 25,083,000 5,780,000 1,875,000 1,575,000 1,575,000 35,888,000 SUMMARY'OF'PROGRAMS' ............. ...... .,....",.... ....,...,'."....",...,..,... ,..... "..,.".,.., ".... .,....",... .....,.......,.., .",., ,.".,...,.,.,. .. .. . ....,.......,. .........,..,.,.................",..."..........,.......,..............,.......,...,...... ,.,...........". .................... . .. . . . .. , .....,..... ..........,..............,......,..,................,....,......".........,.....,.,.,.., ..".,.,.....,..." ."..,..,.....,...,.. . . . . : , . , , , . .', .', : ,':-. : . .<-: .-: . .'. . . . . .'. .'. , .'. . .-: . <-:<-:.>>>>>>>> ,.......,.,..........."...,........................,.,.........,.,...,...,............... ..,...,.............. ...,...,..,....,.... . ......,......,...."........,........"............,.."..,.,.,.........,........,...,.., .............,..,..... .".........,........ . ........ ,............, ............................ .,..,.,.. ......"......,.,.., ...,............ ...,..... ........... PARKS 1,611,000 2,650,000 0 0 0 4,261,000 BUILDINGS 1,660,000 0 0 0 0 1,660,000 STREETS 1,872,000 1,700,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 8,072,000 TRAFFIC FACILITIES 1,320,000 330,000 300,000 0 0 1,950,000 STORM DRAIN 1,155,000 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,480,000 MAJOR PROJECTS 17,465,000 1,000,000 0 0 0 18,465,000 ---------- --- ------------- --------------- ----...--- ------------ TOTALS 25,083,000 5,780,000 1,875,000 1,575,000 1,575,000 35,888,000 SUMM . . RY OF OPERAT NG MAINTENANCE' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. ...... . . . .. ...... ... .".. . ...... .... A . :. :::... ..;..':: .': :. .....: ::I... .': . ..:.... : :'.:. . :. .... . .': ;:;:::;:;:::::::::;:::::::::;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:;:;:::;:::::::::;:::;:::;:;:::;:;:;:;:::;:;:::;:;:;:;:::;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:::::::::;:::;:::;:;:;:;:::::;:::;:; ..:' : :-::::<:::::::::::;:;::.>,::: ........,............ . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . ..................... . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,..... ..........,... OM=OPERATING MAINTENANCE 0 0 0 0 0 SUMMARY - , ~. P., "'RK' S"'S-~uo~-M'- MAoRo--y:~~, . . . .. .... ..}~..:..:,:,,::...;:;..:....:,:.............:-::-,::,,:;:: Qt~Q8: .... .. 'FIVE YE'A" . OR' 'p""Rn'OT-~G' 0 'RA'M' ....... . .. ... .. .. ........ .. . .. . . . .... ....... .... .. .. ... ......... ...... .. .. . :b~~~ ~:; ~::;:::;: ~;;;:;::::::: ~;:;:: :ti~i~: ~:::;:::;:; ~;;::;:::::::::;:::: ~ d.i ~ ;::::::::::::I~~~~~M~~:~~;;;;j. j:i~~:i ciJRRsNt:OQ(:t.;AR:S:' ................................. . ................................. . ................................. . ................................. . :::::::::::1:;:;:::;:::::::::::::;:;:::;:;:::;:;:::;:::::;:;:::::;:::::;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:::;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:::;;::::;:::;:::::::;:;:::::;:;:;:::::;:::;:::;::::::::;::::;:;;::::::::::::::::;::::::: :::;:;:::;:;:;:;:::::;:;:;:::;:;:1:::;:::::::;:;:;:;:;:::;:::;:::::::::;:;:;1 .....................,............. ..... ......,... . GF=GENERAL FUND RC=RECREATION FUND GT=GAS TAX EI=ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PD=PARKDEDICATION SD=STORM DRAIN TG=TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUND PG=PARK GRANT DV=DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION SP=SALE OF PROPERTY 199,835 330,000 2,300,000 350,000 81,165 1,000,000 PARKS TOTAL 1,611,000 2,650,000 $VMNJA~;.r:Qf:;~RQ~~M~:: . '.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::1:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::" MEMORIAL PARK SOFTBALL FIELD RENOVATE. STERLING BARNHART PARK ACQUISITION LIBRARY FIELD RENOVATION MCCLELLAN RANCH FAC. IMPROVEMENTS STOCKLMEIR PROPERTY PRESERVATION STERLING BARNHART PARK CONSTRUCTION SPORTS CENTER SOUNDWALL REPLACEMENT LAWRENCE & MITTY PARK (SARATOGA CK.) 230,000 1,000,000 100,000 226,000 15,000 40,000 800,000 350,000 1,500,000 TOTAL 1,611,000 2,650,000 ................ -..... -........ -......... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- .. .. ... ..... . .............................................................................. .. . . . .. .. .. .. .............................................................................. ~~J:I\II:MA:~y::qF:()e:E:~lJ~:G:: IVI~INJ]:NANGI::::::: :::::::: :::::: ::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::: :::: :::::::::: ::::: :::::: :::: ::::::::::::: :::: ::::.' . "::::::;:::::::;:::::::::1:;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.. OM=OPERATING MAINTENANCE PARKS , OJ 0'\ :PA' <RK'S::: ... ... ." . .............. . ............. . .............. . ............. . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . MEMORIAL PARK SOFTBALL FIELD RENOVATION 9121 Renovation of existing softball field, This project may need to be deferred to accommodate the Veterans Memorial Construction, Project Cost STERLING BARNHART PARK ACQUISITION 9122 Purchase the existing vacant San Jose Water parcels located at Sterling and Barnhart for future neighborhood park. Purchase Cost LIBRARY FIELD RENOVATION 9123 Renovation of existing play field, with irrigation and turf restoration, Project Cost MCCLELLAN RANCH FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS 9124 Reconfigure 4.H facilities and construct trail from McClellan parking lotto 4.H, Demo & reconstruct Blacksmith shop, fencing and drainage Improvements, Land &Water Conservation Grant Total Project Cost - , ~ 6"'" ............. . ............ . ............. . ............ . ......... '.' 0.'. ............ . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q1~6::::F:O:,:,:, : 230,000 RC 1,000,000 SP 100,000 RC 81,165 PG 144,835 GF 226,000 .. .. .. , .. , .. .. 'FIVE 'YEA'R' PROGRA' M' .............. .... ... . ............... .. .. .. . ............... .... .. .. . . :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.':::-::,'::.',:::::.'::.'....:..:.-:..::..:::..:-......:....-:....:..:........: ::::: :O~O9:::: f.0::::::::::::::::::::: :Q~i 0::: fP::::::::::::::::::::: :1Q~:f1:::: :FP PARKS :~:;~~;~:!::~h::I~::~~~~c:~~ . . . . , , . . . . . , , , " , . . .,... .,....,...' .,..' .".,."..,.. STOCKLMEIR PROPERTY PRESERVATION 9125 Various restoration and preservation projects. Total Project Cost STERLING BARNHART PARK CONSTRUCTION Construction of neighborhood Park. Total Project Cost SPORTS CENTER SOUNDWALL REPLACEMENT Wall continues to shift as a result of the 1989 earthquake and adjacent large pine tree on private property. Total Project Cost LAWRENCE & MITTY PARK (Saratoga Creek) Construct park a the North end of the San Thomas Aquino Saratoga Creek Trail. Total Project Cost - ~ ~ 15,000 GF 40,000 GF 800,000 GF 350,000 RC 1,500,000 GF PARKS ,". .',.", ,",.. .1,,",. "",".". . . . . . . . . .. '1' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ::::::::::::::::::::::: ~~~~?~~~~P::::I :1:1~12:;:;F[>:: CURRISNT:DOlLAR e:UJ~OlNG:S::$U:MMARV: ...... 'FIVE'YEA'R' PROGRA' M'" ...... ..... . .. .. ....... ... .. ... ... ....... .... .. .. .. ....... . . ...... .... .... ...... .. . .. . .... - . . . .. ......................................'......... . SUMMARy:oP::F.UNDING.::souRc:es<<<<<<<r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:P:i:~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Qe~Q:::::::::::::::::<:<::::::::::Q~1q:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::1~~:1 GF=GENERAL FUND RC=RECREATION FUND GT=GAS TAX EI=ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PD=PARK DEDICATION SD=STORM DRAIN RA=RESERVE ACCOUNT TG=TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUND PG=PARK GRANT DV=DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION SC=SPORTS CENTER 1,660,000 BUILDINGS TOTAL 1,660,000 $VMMAAV::Qf.::~Q~~I\IIs.:. CITY HALL EMERGENCY POWER/ELEC. SYS. SPORTS CENTER TENNIS COURT LIGHTING LIBRARY IMPROVEMENTS & UPGRADES MONTA VISTA PARK BLDG. HVAC REPLACE SERVICE CENTER SECURITY GATE QUINLAN CENTER FOUNTAIN REPLACEMENT LIBRARY COURT YARD MODIFICATIONS SPORTS CENTER UPGRADE & POOL DEMO 400,000 250,000 100,000 90,000 50,000 220,000 50,000 500,000 TOTAL 1,660,000 o o o o ~ . :: . '. .::". .::" . : '.' ..... :.::: ...".: .~ '. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;<:::::::::::::::::::::::::;<:: ..V. ..... . ...ttY..QF..Q~.AAT~NG..N.lAIf~n:r:.t[ANP~.......................................................:.:.:.:.:.:.:.......:.:...:.....:.:.........:...:...:.........:...:...........:. . . . . . .:. . . . OM=OPERATING MAINTENANCE - , ~ BUILDINGS w~P.~o~~r\!i~~P.::::: ~~~:~JQijRR~i\if: oo~~i:i~{ o o o o - , OJ ...s:> ~:g:~~p:~:~~~::: ................ . ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . CITY HALL EMERGENCY POWER/ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Remove the existing emergency generator, at the end of Its useful life, from the City Hall basement and replace it with a new generator mounted on a pad outside. Also remove the existing out of date and undersized transformer and replace It with an efficient and Increased size vaulted transformer In conjunction with an increase In electrical service capacity and an upgrade of the main electrical panel. Project Cost SPORTS CENTER TENNIS COURT LIGHTING Install lighting on sports center tennis courts for night use and additional revenue. May require transformer replacement (cost unknown). Project Cost LIBRARY IMPROVEMENTS & UPGRADES Children's Book Area Lighting Upgrade Children's Story TIme Area Lighting Upgrade Project Cost QUINLAN CENTER FOUNTAIN REPLACEMENT 9237 Demolition and removal of nonfunctional fountain behind the Quinlan Community Center, with reconflguratlon of the space for community events and private rentals. Project Cost . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . ....... . ::::07~rn(j;D 400,000 GF 250,000 GF 50,000 GF 50,000 GF 100,000 GF 220,000 GF ~mnTFIVE E . 'S .. ........... .. .. .. .. . .. ............ ......... :::::::::::::::::::::::.,::: :" ::.:.-:::y.....A:R J~~ijQ.: ..RAM : US;.o9:: :F.D:::::::::::::::::::: :O~~O::: :F.D:: :::::::::::::::::: ~O~~:1::: FO:: BUILDINGS ...... ...1.................... :-:-jG~: :~ili: 6a:~~6<<lk~ ...................... . ...................... . ...................... . ...................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MONTA VISTA PARK BUILDING REPLACE HVAC SYSTEM This project would replace exiting HVAC system which is unusable. Project Cost SERVICE CENTER SECURITY GATE This project would Install a more secure automatic gate at the Service Center. Project Cost LIBRARY COURT YARD IMPROVEMENTS Install upgraded landscaping and shade areas in the existing court yard. . Project Cost SPORTS CENTER UPGRADE & POOL DEMO 9231 Removal of the existing pool and bathhouse occupying approximately 7,000 S.F. of the site. Replace with an all weather multipurpose court for volleyball, badminton, basketball, etc. and a small prefabricated restroom. Project Cost - \ ~ ......... . ......... . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . :Oi:~08.: :F.D: 90,000 GF 50,000 GF 50,000 GF 500,000 GF . . . . . . . ~ . . ......... . ........ . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUILDINGS . . .:::::::::::::::::::::19NP.~9~l0~~8:::: ::::::~:1~~2::P.D: CURRENJ::b.6i.iARS !$'T~tt~S' S'UMMA'RV: .rtti'.;.::,::~:" ...' . . . ::j:: :.:.:::.;..::.:...::..:.;:.::.:.::;::...:..:::..............:....::.::..:: :O:i~08:::: 7fJVE YE PROGR M'-'-'-' ........... .. ... ... . . .... ............ . . .. . .. ... .... ...................... .... .......... .R.... .'. .A' ........ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::f.::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: . . . . .08-09. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o~m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10-.1.1- $~:Nn~llA~YJ,)F:F:lJ~P:IN(;:$:QlJJiqE;$.:::::::) .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. '" . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ". . UNP.RQ$RAMM~D::::: :::::::1: 1~1:216uRRENT: DOLLARS: GF=GENERALFUND RC=RECREATION FUND GT=GAS TAX EI=ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PD=PARK DEDICATION SD=STORM DRAIN RA=RESERVE ACCOUNT TG=TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUND PG=PARK GRANT DV=DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION 792,000 750,000 330,000 STREETS TOTAL 1,872,000 $U~:IYJAR~rQF:::~aQ~RAMS:::: PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT - STP PORTION CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK REPAIRS CITY MONUMENT SIGNS REPLACEMENT (4) RANCHO RINCONADA STREET STUDY TOTAL 750,000 372,000 750,000 1,872,000 ~ - 800,000 750,000 100,000 50,000 1,700,000 750,000 750,000 100,000 100,000 1,700,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 STREETS $T~eI::T$::: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. . ......... ........ .................. . PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT 9450 Annual City funding of $750,000 (maintenance of effort), Actual PMS backlog Is $1,540,000. Additional Grant Funding will be sought on an annual basis for the short fall In the backlog, $330,000 from TEA-21 Project Cost PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT - STP PORTION Funding for pavement maintenance from Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transp. Equity Act, A legacy for users - SAFETEA-LU. Grant Share of Project Cost City Share of Project Cost Total Project Cost CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK REPAIRS 9451 These funds are for the repair of curb, gutter and sidewalks when they meet repair criteria. This is a Council directed increase of $250,000 I yr. Project Cost CITY MONUMENT SIGN REPLACEMENT (2) Replace 2 City monuments signs, one on Foothill Blvd. to be moved to Stevens Creek Blvd. at Hwy 85 and paid for by insurance claim. Replace one on Stevens Creek Blvd, at Tantau, to be paid for by developers fees. Developers and Insurance Contribution City Share of Project Cost Project Cost RANCHO RINCONADA STREET STUDY VTA Local Streets and County Roads money for the neighborhood street circulation study. Project Cost ~ .sl> .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . , . .. . .. FIVE' YEAR' . 'PROGRA'M ............. ................ . . . . ............. ............... . ....... . . . :~;~~~::JbU::: ::::::::::~~~~::~6:U:::\\:j~~d::~8:):):::::::A~~~:~:::~i{: 750,000 GF 330,000 TG 42,000 GF 372,000 750,000 GT 750,000 GF 750,000 GT 50,000 DV 50,000 GF 100,000 100,000 TG 750,000 GF 750,000 GF 750,000 GT 750,000 GT STREETS .. . .. . .. "I" .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. :~t@:~b. ~~~~~~&~~ 750,000 GF 750,000 GT TRA" F"FIC" FACILITI"ES" 'SU"M"M'ARY"' \"."" "" "" ..."" ""." "".".."".. ,..... FIVE' YEAR 'PROG'RA'M" " . . ...... ... ... .. ......... .......... ......... ....... . . . .. . ....... .......................... .. . ... .. ... . ,.. .. ...... .. .......................... .. . . ....... ..... ......... ...... .. ::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::' :':: :::::::::::::::::::::::: : :::::::::::: :::: ~;~k:::::::: :::::::::::::::::: ~~;~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~~~1:6::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i6;1: ::::i:::: ::~:;l:~'~I:&j:~~@br(~~ SUM:MARY:OF::FUND:ING::SO:URCES:::::<:::::::<::.. . " " " . . " " . . . . . , , . . . . . . . GF=GENERALFUND RC=RECREATION FUND GT=GAS TAX EI=ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PD=PARK DEDICATION SD=STORM DRAIN RA=RESERVE ACCOUNT TG=TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUND PG=PARK GRANT DV=DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION 527,500 330,000 300,000 97,500 495,000 200,000 STREETS TOTAL 1,320,000 330,000 300,000 o o .ARY'O~""""" . ........... .... .,.. ............ . .. . . .'.......... NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL-GARDEN GATE & SIG. YELLOW LED TARFF. SIGNAL&BATTERY BACKUP COUNTDOWN PED HEADS LAWRENCE EXPPWY.lMITTY XING - CITY SHARE STEVENS CR. BL./SR85 RAMP X WALK IMPROV. SVITS EXTENSIONS (FO CABLE & BOXES) VARIOUS TRAFFIC SIGNAUINTERSECTION MODS. DeANZA BL./McCLELLAN SIGNAL MODS. RED LIGHT RUNNER PROGRAM 50,000 475,000 55,000 50,000 75,000 75,000 15,000 75,000 200,000 250,000 30,000 50,000 o 50,000 250,000 250,000 TOTAL 1,320,000 330,000 300,000 o o ~VN!MA~Y::PF.::Q~~AAnN~::IY!AI~frt;~ANG:!=:::::::::::::: :::: OM=OPERATING MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC FACILITIES - , ~ ~ TRAf:FIC::fAClL:rrUi;$:: .............. ...................... ............ ....................... .......................... ,.......... ........ ...... ......... ............ ..... ............................ .. ..................................... . .......,.... NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES 9435 Re-establish fund for neighborhood traffic calming which requires modifications of the roadway. Certain criteria must be met before funds are used. Funding as needed during year. This restores the program which was not funded as a budget savings. Project Cost City Share of Project Cost Grant Share of Project Cost Total Project Cost IYELLOW & PED HEAD LED TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPGRADE 9547 This project would re-Iamp all of the yellow & ped head indicators with light emitting diode or LED in all of the traffic signals. This is the last two years of the four-year plan for changing all of the indicators to LED. COUNTDOWN PED HEADS 9547 Project Cost - , t This project Is for the re-Iamplng of existing ped traffic signal units with LED countdown units throughout the City. The Countdown feature advises pedestrian time provided and/or remaining to cross the street. Currently 5 intersections have been completed. 50 intersections remain to be completed. These funds will complete 20 intersections. Project Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......:::: :Qt~Q6:: f.p::::: 50,000 GT 47,500 GT 427,500 TG 475,000 55,000 GF 50,000 GF .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. FIVE' Y EA' R' PROGRA'M' . . ............... .,. . . . .. ............... . ... .,. .. .... ............... ..... . . .. ............... . .. ... ..... ..... ..............1 . .... . .. . . . .. ........................................................ . ..................................................... . :::::::: :Q~Q$ ::FO:::::::::::::::::::: o~~:H):: fO::::::::::::::::::: :~~~~:: :F:O::::::::: 30,000 GF 50,000 GF 50,000 GF TRAFFIC FACILITIES :t~1 ::~W.16~:.~~~~~e:~~: - ~ \J'\ TRAff.:IC::F.AC:lt.rru::$ ...................... ....... .................... ......... ............................. . .............................. . STEVENS CR. BLVD./SR 85 ON RAMP X WALK 9552 This project would Improve the crosswalks at the Stevens Creek BI. And SR 85 NB off ramp. This Is part of a Hazard Elimination Safety Program thru Caltrans. City's Share of Project Cost Grant Share of Project Cost Total Project Cost LAWRENCE EXPPWY./MITTY XING (CUPERTINO'S SHARE) 9551 City's share of proJect Identified from the County-wide Expwy. Study to upgrade the pedestrian Crossing at Milly and Lawrence Expwy. to connect to the CIty's recently completed San Tomas Aquino- Saratoga Creek Trail. The majority of the funding will be provided by the County with a similar share from the City of San Jose. Project Cost DeANZA BLVD./McCLELLAN SIGNAL MODS. This project would Involve relocating two 55' mast arms and poles from the near side to the far side of the Intersection, and related electrical. concrete and striping work. Project Cost ......... . ......... . ......... . ......... . :Qt~Qifr.p: 7,500 GF 67,500 TG 75,000 75,000 GF 200,000 DV ...,..,.... FIVE' YEA'R' 'PROGRA'M' ........... . .. . . . ... ........... . ... ... . . .. ........... ..... .. . : rii~: :~ri::::::::::::::::::: ri~to:: :~~::: ::::::::::::::: :~6i1:~:: :~(;:::: .................................................. . TRAFFIC FACILITIES .......... .\...,..................1 . .. .. .. .. .. U"'4nROncl\'MMED:' . /n~~f~~ ~~i~t8o(~~~ - , -t.. 6' tMF:FJ9::FAPH~lt~:~~ .... . SVITS EXTENSIONS (FO CABLE & BOXES) 9555 This project would install cable and boxes to connect City traffic facilities to Regional Intelligent Transportation System. (ITS) Total Project Cost VARIOUS TRAFFIC SIGNAL/INTERSECTION MODS. This project would involve minor upgrades to various traffic signals Citywide. This project would also upgrade 4 existing lighted crosswalks Project Cost RED LIGHT RUNNER PROGRAM A new technology RLC enforcement system will be installed at one test site in 2007-08. The program will use existing sheriff's personnel for up to three signalized intersections. City will receive approx. 60% of the citation proceeds; at this point no estimate has been made. Project Cost ri7.~ri8:: ~b 15,000 GF 75,000 GF 250,000 GF "FIVE'YEA' "R PRO..S.RA....M. . .. ..... .... . .. .... . ... .. . ........ .. .. . . . :oi.o~::~b: <<<<: 6~~~~::~ri:: ><>::\O~~:1::~b> ..... ..,..,..................... ......".....,..... 250,000 GF 250,000 GF TRAFFIC FACILITIES ~:~~~::F.b:160~~~~r~c:~ ~!BR~ ~~~~~:::~YMM~~~. . . .. .. . .. .. .. " " . FIVE YEAR' PROGRA'M" " ,," .. . " yN#.~9~~~~~b.::::: .. ...... .......... . . . . . .... ... ........ .. ...... ........... . ... .. ..... .. ........ .. ...... .......... .... . . . .... ... ........ .,. ...... ........... . . . . . .. ..... ..... .. ........ ...:..;...............:... :<;:.::.:...::~~:~~~:~:mt:~~:I. . ..... $-:':-: :-:-: :::: rii~ri~: :::< ~i.~~>>::>> ::<<<o~~~~:>><<<<:?::::~:b~~:~ ):: :<~~~~i C0RRENT: :b.6iiARS: . .. .. ..................... . .......................................... ........................... . ...... .. .... .. .................. . . :"'.~:::Qf:.-:~..."'.-r~ ~..."",:.:-:.uR..qE:~ :-:...... ............................................................ ............................ ................ .................... . ....................................,..,...,...,..' .,.,.,....,.,.. ",.",..,..,.,.. ., .,...,......,.,. ..................... . ............,....."..".... ........,."...,......"..,.... '........... .."..,......, ............... ................,... . ...,........ ..,.,..... . ,... .......,.".......,.,.....,.,.,..,.." ....... ................... .....,........ .-... .-... ... .. .. . .. GF=GENERALFUND 155,000 25,000 RC=RECREATION FUND GT=GAS TAX EI=ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PD=PARK DEDICATION SD=STORM DRAIN 1,000,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 RA=RESERVE ACCOUNT TG=TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUND PG=PARK GRANT DV=DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION -------- ------------------ ----------------- ----.. ---------- STREETS TOTAL 1,155,000 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 SUMMARV::OF:P.ROGRAMS:::::::::::::::::::: ....:.:>:::::::::::::::::::: ..,.... ,....."....".....................".."..".,.',.....,.,. .....' ..,."..., .,...,............, ."...,..... . ,.. ...........,.,.."...,.................... .............,.,..",...............,...... ,............... ..................... . ........,......,.............................................................."...,..,.", ,..,.............. .................... . ................,..,....................................................,..........,..,., ...'............. ...,..........,...... . ...,.... ,..,....,........................,....,.... .-,............... ....', ..,.""...".,......."... .........,........., . MINOR STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 MONTA VISTA STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM 800,000 MASTER STROM DRAIN PLAN UPDATE 30,000 BOLLINGER BIKE LANES/CALABAZAS CR. BRIDGE 250,000 25,000 ----------- ------- ------------------ ----------------- -------- --------- TOTAL 1,155,000 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 SUMMARY::OF:OP.~AAT:ING::MA.INTENANc.e:::::::::: ....""".""."....".....,....,.....',...,...",'.",..,............"..",.".",.,.., ".............. ....,.........,...,. . .....",.........,......,................................,.,..,........,.......,........... .,................. ...................,. . .,.................. ,....................................,.........................."..". .......,........... .. .-.................. ..""......,......,.........................,......,......,...,........................", ,.................. ..................... . .....".,...,.....,...,......,...............................,......"..,......,.......... ...,...,.......... ..................,. . OM=OPERATING MAINTENANCE STORM DRAIN - ..l ~ $TOR~tP~AlN: ......................... . ......................... . ......................... . ......................... . ........................ .. ......................... . MINOR STROM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS 9612 Funding for emergency drainage repairs as needed in various locations Project Cost MONTA VISTA STORM DRAINAGE SYST. 9620 Installation of storm drainage system In Monta Vista Area, Unes to be Installed on Orange Avenue and Byrne Avenue. Design and Construction MASTER STORM DRAIN PLAN UPDATE The Master Storm Drain Plan was last updated in 1993, this update would evaluate the existing system and make recommendations, Including fee updates. Design and Construction BOLLINGER BIKE LANES/CALABAZAS CR. BRIDGE 9443 City's share to widen bridge for bicycle lanes over Calabazas Cr. at Bollinger Rd. In partnership with Santa Clara Valley Water District. Project to be managed by SCVWO. Total Project Cost \ ~ ...,...... . .......... . .......... . ....,..... . .......... . .......... . .......... . : :bi4)8:::f~6: .......... . 75,000 SO 800,000 SO 30,000 SO 155,000 GF 95,000 SO 250,000 .. .. .. . .. .. .. 'FIVE YEAR 'PROGRA' M ............. . . . .... . . .............. .. . . . : ~::: :J'J~ ~ :~J: ~::::::::::::::::: ~~1~:: ~~::::::::::: ~::::::::1 ~~~ 1:: :~6::::: 75,000 SO 75,000 SO 75,000 SO 25,000 GF STORM DRAIN 1:1:~1 iJNPRoGRAilitMeD:::: : ~plc0~~eNr.:b6~6\~: 75,000 SO MAJ." O'R' 'PRO' . 'ECTS'" . ... .. .. .... . .. . ... . .., ... .... .. .. .. ........ . .... . .... ..... . .'. .... ............ ..J...... ........... $.....U: 'M': .M:~:~V:>>~<<<<<<< .. ..."~..................... . .. . I "SO . ... . .... . .. . .. . . . '. .... . .... .'. .. .' . .... .'. .-:t. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ........................ 'Flve 'VEA' . R' PRQG" . RAm. TMm~.m.... ......................................... . .. .. .. . ...... ......................................... . .. . .. . . .. .... ......................................... . ... . .. ... ..... .......................................... ...... .. .. . .. ..., ;:;:;:;:::::;:::;:;:;:::;:;:;:;:::;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:::;:;:::::;:::;:::;::::.;:;:::;:::::::::::::::::;::::::::::::.::;:::::::;:::::;::::::::::':':': :::;:::::::::::::::::::: :j)j~j)a:::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::: :oa~j)~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :~~~ Q:::::::::::::::::::::::;::::::::: ~ Q~:1;1:: ............................... . ..................,.... '-'-i'" ..............1................................... ................................................................................................. .......................... . ............ ..............1....................................................................................................................... ......................................................... GF=GENERAL FUND RC=RECREATION FUND GT=GAS TAX EI=ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PD=PARK DEDICATION SD=STORM DRAIN RA=RESERVE ACCOUNT SC=STEVENS CREEK FUND TG=TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUND PG=PARK GRANT DV=DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION SP=SALE OF PROPERTY 14,245,000 200,000 1,000,000 2,520,000 500,000 MEDIANS AND OVERPASSES TOTAL 17,465,000 1,000,000 MS . ... . ... '1' . . :: : : : : : : : : : : : :: ': : ::::::::::....... .:: :' . . .. ..................... ...................................,...................................,............ t\RY..O' F'.PROG'RA . ...................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................ . . . .. .... . ....................................................................................................... .. .. ...... ........................................................................................................ .... ..".................................................................................................... . STEVENS CREEK CORRIDOR PARK (PHASE 1) MARY AVE. BICYCLE FOOTBRIDGE 9,300,000 8,165,000 1,000,000 TOTAL 17,465,000 1,000,000 SU-:MM.A:RY' .::O.-:F::.o.p.e:~:^':T'tN:G::MAJN... .T.ENA'...:C..E:::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::;~:::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::;:::::::::::::::::::;::::::::::::::8::::::;:::::: :::;:::::::::::::::. .:..: .. .. ,.".. ... ... ....~.. .... .. .. .... ... ...................................................~................................. OM=OPERATING MAINTENANCE MAJOR PROJECTS - , i ............ .1.................. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . './-0''''' . . . . . . . . . . . . ::::::: ~::::::::::: ~: ~:~::: :~~~~~?:~~M8?:::: :::::::::::::::: :1:~~:1:2 :CURR'*'t Oo.~L;AR$ . .:...:...........................)..........::.:;:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:........ .. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:-:1:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. . .....:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.::::J:.:::.:.:.:.: .:0::..................... '.::::::::::::: ::: ?::::::::::::::: r:::;::: ;:::::::::: :::::;:::::::::: :;:::: M... A> :'J:"~R. :::P:R.::O" :J.: :E::~T' :5' . .:u. .... ..,v. ................................. . ................................ . ................................. . ................................ . ................................. . .............................. . STEVENS CREEK CORRIDOR PARK 9112 Restoration of Stevens Creek, Stevens Creek Blvd; to McClellan Rd with SCVWD, reduced picnicking from 4,000 to 800, Install multiuse trellthrough the length of the parkland, construct and environmental classroom at McClellan Ranch and reconstruct park amenities and.park maintenance facilities. Grant Share of Project Cost Blackberry Farm Account Sale of Property City Share of Project Cost Total Project Cost MARY AVE. BICYCLE FOOTBRIDGE 9449 The bridge will be underconstrucllon, these funds will be necessary for Items such as speclaltestlng, PG&E design and electrical connection, Pac Bell line relocation, and other cost associated with the construction and project close out. , H' ............ . ............. . ............ . ............. . ........... . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :(}7~08::FD::::::: 2,520,000 PG 200,000 RC 500,000 SP 6,080,000 GF 9,300,000 8,165,000 GF .....s..................G. U(<~)/\ :~~y:::::Jf(~~~::\~g<<~M . . .08::09. .F.D. . . . . . . . . . .0Q:;m. P.O. . . . . . . . . . :1.0.1.1. P.O. 1,000,000 GF MAJOR PROJECTS ::\~~~J:::~ij:~~=~~~~:[ - ~ 'U' NF. UNO'E'O"'PRO'J' E" 'r. s" ':.:::::,:,:,:::::,:,:,:::,:,~:::,,:,:,::::::,,:::,:::,:,::::;:::,.:,:q:,,::,:,,:: .. .. , .. .. , .... ...., '......,........ 'FIVE 'VEA'R' PRO' (S'RA' M ... .................................. . " ... . .. ...................................... .. .. .. .... ... .................................. .. .... .. . . . ....................................... ..... .. ..... . . . , , , ,. ::> <::<6t~b~::~tL<<<<:ti~ti~:~~>>>>::::ti~~~::~tL:>>><io~i~::~~<: PARKS Rancho Rinconada Park Construction Stevens Creek Corridor Park (Phase 2) 2,000,000 3,000,000 BUILDINGS City Hall Remodel with Seismic/ADA Fire Code Upgrades (Essential Building) 3,000,000 TRAFFIC FACILITIES Memorial Park Sidewalk Enhancements on SCB Pedestrian Enhancement on Overpasses STORM DRAINAGE Bubb/McClellan Storm Sewer Upgrade 750,000 TRAILS UNFUNDED PROJECTS ........... . .......... . ............ . <::t~~t2j;t(: 150,000 350,000 2,000,000