Loading...
03-19-13 Searchable Packet Table of Contents Agenda3 2013 Arbor Day Proclamation Staff Report9 Presentation from the Board of Trustees of the Foothill-DeAnza Community College District No written materials in packet10 Approve the March 5 City Council minutes Draft Minutes11 Accept Accounts Payable for period ending February 22, 2013 Draft Resolution22 Accept Accounts Payable for period ending March 1, 2013 Draft Resolution29 Modify the Cupertino Employees Association (CEA) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to add a new position category Staff Report40 A - Redlined CEA MOU Salary Schedule42 Adopt resolution supporting Senate Bill 629- Tax Equity Allocation (TEA) Staff Report43 A - Draft Resolution45 B - TEA Fact sheet46 Approve criteria for City sponsorship of a special event Staff Report47 A - City Festival Breakdown49 B - Community Special Events Policy_Memorial Park50 Approve the Tract Map, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, APN 359-22-077, Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road Staff Report54 A - Draft Resolution55 B - Area Map56 C - Tract Map57 Approve the Improvement Agreement, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, Tract 10157, Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road, APN: 359-22-077 Staff Report59 A - Draft Resolution60 B - Improvement Agreement62 C - Map75 Alcoholic Beverage License, Ajito Izakaya Dining, 7335 Bollinger Road, #C1 Staff Report76 A - Application78 1 Approval of minor amendments to Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal Code, Protected Trees, and request for Council direction on future amendments to Chapter 14.18. (postponed from the March 5, 2013 meeting) Staff Report79 A - Ordinance Amendment (No Redlines)86 B - CC Staff Report 11-5-2012107 C - Updated Tree Ordinance Survey115 D - Protected Trees Ordinance Revised (Redlines)118 Appeal of a decision of the Director of Public Works regarding the relocation of a utility pole Staff Report137 A - Appeal140 B - Street View Photograph of Utility Pole Location143 C - Portion of Plan Showing Required Street Improvements and Pole Relocation144 Approve actions to further streamline City Council’s Consent Calendar Staff Report145 A - Draft Resolution147 B - Draft Ordinance for Bingo permits148 C - Redline Version of Draft Ordinance for Bingo permits153 D - Draft Ordinance for Acceptance of Public Improvements159 E - Redline Version of Draft Ordinance for Acceptance of Public Improvements162 Authorize City Manager to execute lease agreement for property known as The Blue Pheasant Restaurant Staff Report165 2 AGENDA CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ~ SPECIALMEETING SUCCESSOR TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~ REGULAR MEETING 10350 Torre Avenue, Community Hall Council Chamber Tuesday, March 19, 2013 5:30 PM CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROLL CALL 5:30 PM CLOSED SESSION 1.Subject: Conference with Real Property Negotiator (Gov't Code Sec. 54956. Property: Pruneridge Avenue between Wolfe and Tantau, with the e portion of Pruneridgethat fronts along the Hamptons; 2. Negotiating Parties: City Manager, City Attorney, Special Counsel; 3. Under Negotiation: P PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE6:45 PM ROLL CALL CEREMONIAL MATTERS ANDPRESENTATIONS 2.Subject: 2013 Arbor Day Proclamation Recommended Action: Present proclamation Staff Report Page: 9 3.Subject: Presentation from the Board of Trustees of the Foothill-DeAnza Community College District Recommended Action: Accept Presentation No written materials in packet Page: No written materials in packet 3 Tuesday, March 19, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to theRedevelopment Agency POSTPONEMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to a any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) State law will prohibit the council from making any decisions wiatter not listed on the agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested b member of the public, it is requested that items under the Conse simultaneously. 4.Subject: Approve the March 5 City Council minutes Recommended Action: Approve the minutes Draft Minutes Page: 11 5.Subject: Accept Accounts Payable for period ending February 22, 2013 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-022 accepting Accounts Payable for period ending February 22, 2013 Draft Resolution Page: 22 6.Subject: Accept Accounts Payable for period ending March 1, 2013 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-023 accepting Accounts Payable for period ending March 1, 2013 Draft Resolution Page: 29 7.Subject: Modify the Cupertino Employees Association (CEA) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to add a new position category Recommended Action: Amend the Salary Schedule to reflect new position; Traffic Signal Technician, Apprentice Staff Report A -Redlined CEA MOU Salary Schedule Page: 40 4 Tuesday, March 19, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to theRedevelopment Agency 8.Subject: Adopt resolution supporting Senate Bill 629-Tax Equity Allocation (TEA) Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-024 supporting SB629-TEA Staff Report A - Draft Resolution B - TEA Fact sheet Page: 43 9.Subject: Approve criteria for City sponsorship of a special event Recommended Action: Approve attached criteria for Cupertino support of special event Staff Report A - City Festival Breakdown B -Community Special Events Policy_Memorial Park Page: 47 10.Subject: Approve theTract Map, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, APN 359-22-077, Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-025 approving the Tract Map Description: A resolution approving a tract map that subdivides an approximately 49,650 square foot parcel into five parcels, consisting of five cul-de-sac dedication, ranging in size from 7,130 to 11,101 square feet Staff Report A -Draft Resolution B -Area Map C - Tract Map Page: 54 11.Subject: Approve the Improvement Agreement, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, Tract 10157, Westerly term Road, APN: 359-22-077 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-026 approving the Agreement Description: Through the improvement agreement with the City, the applicants five lot subdivision for five residential houses will be obligat- specified street improvements, including asphalt pavement, street light, curb, gutter, sidewalk and driveway approaches completing the cul-de-sac at the Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road 5 Tuesday, March 19, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to theRedevelopment Agency Staff Report A - Draft Resolution B - Improvement Agreement C - Map Page: 59 12.Subject: Alcoholic Beverage License, Ajito Izakaya Dining, 7335 Bollinger Recommended Action: Approve Alcoholic Beverage License, Ajito Izakaya Dining Staff Report A - Application Page: 76 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES PUBLIC HEARINGS 13.Subject: Approval of minor amendments to Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal C Protected Trees, and request for Council direction on future ameChapter 14.18. (postponed from the March 5, 2013 meeting) Recommended Action: 1. Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 13-2107 "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Protected Trees, of the Municipal Code" to clarify references to public trees and modify penalties for violations; and; 2. Provide direction to st amendments to Chapter 14.18 to be studied and authorize the City into a consultant services contract in an amount not to exceed $65,000 Description: Application No.: MCA-2012-02; Applicant: City of Cupertino; Location: Citywide; Municipal Code Amendment to Chapter 14.18, Protected T review for future potential amendments Staff Report A -Ordinance Amendment (No Redlines) B -CC Staff Report 11-5-2012 C -Updated Tree Ordinance Survey D -Protected Trees Ordinance Revised (Redlines) Page: 79 6 Tuesday, March 19, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to theRedevelopment Agency 14.Subject: Appeal of a decision of the Director of Public Works regarding t relocation of autility pole Recommended Action: Deny the appeal, upholding the Directors decision to require the relocation of the existing utility pole, located nea appellants property, to a location behind the proposed new curber required along the property frontage Staff Report A - Appeal B - Street View Photograph of Utility Pole Location C - Portion of Plan Showing Required Street Improvements and Pole Relocation Page: 137 ORDINANCES AND ACTION ITEMS 15.Subject: Approve actions to further streamline City Councils Consent Cal Recommended Action: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 13-027 approving streamlining of the consent calendar by amending the approval authority for Alcohol Beverage Control Licenses, Bingo Permits, Improvement Agreements and Publ Improvement Acceptance; 2) Conduct first reading of Ordinance No-2108 for Bingo permits: "An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 5.32 of the Cupertino Municipal Code regarding bingo"; 3 reading of Ordinance No. 13-2109 for Acceptance of Public Improvements: "An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending sections 14.04.170 and 18.32.390 of the Cupertino municipal code regarding acceptan improvements" Staff Report A -Draft Resolution B -Draft Ordinance for Bingo permits C -Redline Version of Draft Ordinance for Bingo permits D -Draft Ordinance for Acceptance of Public Improvements E -Redline Version of Draft Ordinance for Acceptance of Public Impr Page: 145 16.Subject: Authorize City Manager to execute lease agreement for property k The Blue Pheasant Restaurant Recommended Action: Authorize City Manager to execute lease agreement for property known as The Blue Pheasant Restaurant with Hungry Jack' Corporation and Mike Tsachres Staff Report Page: 165 7 Tuesday, March 19, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to theRedevelopment Agency REPORTSBY COUNCIL AND STAFF ADJOURNMENT SUCCESSOR TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Canceled for lack of business. The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation challenging a final decision of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency must be brought within 90 days after a decision is announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law. Anyinterested person, including the applicant, prior to seeking judicial review of the city council’s decision with respect to quasi-judicial actions, must first file a petition for reconsideration with the city clerk within ten days after the council’s decision. Any petition so filed must comply with municipal ordinance code §2.08.096. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the City of Cupertino will make reasonable efforts to accommodate persons with qualified disabilities. If you require special assistance, please contact the city clerk’s office at 408-777-3223 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, during normal business hours and in Council packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the Cupertino web site. 8 PUBLIC WORKSDEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March 19, 2013 Subject 2013 Arbor Day Proclamation. Recommended Action Present proclamation. Discussion October 22, 2011 was the first observance of Arbor Day for Cupertino. This first observance symbolized the commitment by Council, the community,and the efforts of staff to promote a healthy and sustainable urban forest.To further exemplifythis commitment and effort, staff applied for the City tobecome a Tree City USA in 2011. In January 2013, the California Department of Forestry and Fire and forwarded the Tree City USA application to the National Arbor Day Foundation.In February 2013,the City received signs and a plaque from the National Arbor Day Foundation proclaiming that the City of Cupertino is a Tree City and significant designation shared with only150 agencies in California. A sign and plaque are being displayed thisevening in the Council chambers for review. Tree City USA signs will be mounted on existing poles positionednear the gateways into the City within the next month. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Roger Lee, Assistant Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Timm Borden, Director of Public Works Approved for Submission by:David Brandt, City Manager Attachments: 9 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting:March 19, 2013 Subject: Presentation from the Board of Trustees of the Foothill-DeAnza Community College District NO WRITTEN MATERIALS IN PACKET 10 DRAFT MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Tuesday, March 5, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROLL CALL At 4:35 p.m. Mayor Orrin Mahoney called the Special City Council meeting Present: Mayor Orrin Mahoney, Vice Mayor Gilbert Wong, and Council members Barry Chang, Mark Santoro, and Rod Sinks. Absent: None. STUDY SESSION 1. Subject: Work Program Study Session Recommended Action: Review the 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 Work Programs City Manager David Brandt introduced the Work Programs which con status of projects from last years Work Plan and projects for this coming fiscal year: 1) Status of 2012/2013 City Council Work Program:Major Developments, Capital Improvements and Plans, Organizational Improvements, Public Safety, Housing, Economic Development / Redevelopment, Planning, Planning, Community Organizations, Go Green; and 2.) Proposed FY 2013-2014 City of Cupertino Work Plan: City Managers Office Communications, Economic Development, and Environmental Strategies; Community Development Department; Public Works Department; Parks and Recreation Department; Administrative Serv Department. Mr. Brandt noted the one major change is the addition of new items that staff is proposing for the upcoming year, and also the deletion of comp items and ongoing projects. Council directed staff on the following items: provide informati regarding the cell towers at the Miller Avenue church site and Results Way office park; pursue an increased lease term for the Citys water system at 11 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency Strategic Plan level; continued coordination with the utility co program and the City pavement program; the inclusion of quarterl Improvement Program(CIP) timelines in next years Work Program; explore intermediate-term bond strategies at the Fiscal Strategic Plan level; overall to enhance the fiber-link connection at the Quinlan Community Center and confirm this expenditure is included in next years budget request; provide a map of all City- owned fiber conduit, and consider installing fiber conduit concu projects involving excavating the streets; incorporate evacuatio Homestead and Cupertino high schools into the Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU); hold a study session air and water quality, and inviting the regulatory agencies; get Cupertino Historical Society on a possible Historical Society Ceer at the Stocklmeir property, and update the Work Program accordingly; hold a worksh and Recreation and Planning Work Program projects, and re-prioritize amongst the list to establish a quarterly timeline; continue progress in crenteractive budget game on-line, similar to the City created Balance or Bust game; provid data from a previous geographical study surveying resident cell the data or perform a new survey to include more data; look into-friendly public Wi-Fi; examine investing in existing infrastructure to encourage an commercial space for small businesses; continue exploring option potential plan regarding traffic mitigation in the school distri updates from staff and the districts; prioritize and perform an im work up for a parking structure and a solar plan around the Civi the stated goal of the measurement and management of the geese p follow-up on continued efforts to hold a Levering Ethnic Diversity (LED) workshop Jennifer Griffin spoke about the Citys future projects and supp Lawrence - Mitty Park and Stevens Creek Corridor Park items on the list. S the Rancho Rinconada neighborhood has been waiting a long time for Parks, the Sterling Barnhart Park is much utilized; and the potential for L- Mitty Corridor Park would provide exercise opportunities for that east neighborhood and would establish a connection corridor for students crossing Lawrence Expressway. Council recessed from 6:33 p.m. to 7:03 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 12 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency At 7:03p.m. Mayor Orrin Mahoney reconvened the Special City Council mee led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Orrin Mahoney, Vice Mayor Gilbert Wong, and Counc Chang, Mark Santoro, and Rod Sinks. Absent: none. CEREMONIAL MATTERS ANDPRESENTATIONS-None POSTPONEMENTS  Postpone Item No. 13 to March 19 Wong moved and Sinks seconded to postpone item number 13 to March 19. The motion carried unanimously. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Carol Repucci and Debi Chessen from Relay for Life thanked Council and the community for its support and noted that this would be the 7year for the relay. Ms. th Repucci said that to date the Relay for Life has raised over $50 relay will begin on Saturday, July 13 at Cupertino High School a 24 hours ending on Sunday, July 14 at 10:00 a.m. She explained tt this year the group would like Council to endorse a Cupertino Cancer Awareness Week the relay. The group will be speaking at various organizations b Cupertino Senior Center on July 8 at 10:00 a.m. People can sign he relay at www.relayforlife.org/cupertinoca. Mayor Mahoney said that the group could work with him and Public Affairs Director Rick Kitsonfor anyCitysupport that might be needed. Jennifer Griffin noted a couple of recent accidents in San Jose an people accidentally drove their car into a perculation pond and that in the case of the perculation pond accident, it took 20 mi came to rescue the person and that the person didnt make it. Ms.noted thatshe was concerned this could happen in Cupertino at the Bubb Rd.perculation pond in Monta Vista. She said shewanted to make sure the barrier was strong enough around the pond to avoid any accidents and that any emergency vehicles coularrive faster than 20 minutes. 13 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency TamonNorimotowith PG&E said that hegave an electricand gas safety class today to City staff. He noted that the goal was to work closely withthe Cityto provide clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy to the community and to continue to foster cooperation with City staff. Michael gottwald invited Council tothe Cupertino National Little League on Saturday at 1:00 and noted that he would be throwing out the first pitch. CONSENT CALENDAR Sinks moved and Wong seconded to approve the items on the Consent Calendar as recommended with the exception of item number 7 which was pulled for discussion. Ayes: Chang, Mahoney, Santoro, Sinks, and Wong. Noes: None. Abstain: None. 2. Subject: Approve the February 19 City Council minutes Recommended Action: Approve the minutes 3. Subject: Accept Accounts Payable for period ending February 1, 2013 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-018accepting Accounts Payable for period ending February 1, 2013 4. Subject: Accept Accounts Payable for period ending February 8, 2013 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-019 accepting Accounts Payable for period ending February 8, 2013 5. Subject: Accept Accounts Payable for period ending February 15, 2013 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-020accepting Accounts Payable for period ending February 15, 2013 6. Subject: Approve the destruction of records from the Parks and Recreat Center, Quinlan Community Center, and Administration) department Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-021approving the destruction of records 7. Subject: Set thedates for the Teen Commission application deadlines and intervie Recommended Action: Staff recommends the following deadlines: 1.) Applications due in the City Clerk's office on Friday, May 10 by 4:30 p.m.; a beginning at 3:30 PM on Tuesday, May 28 and Wednesday, May 29 (as needed) 14 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency Sinks moved and Wongseconded to set the dates as recommended. The motion carried unanimously. 8. Subject: Confirm the appointment of Don Sun to the Environmental Revie Committee Recommended Action: Confirm the appointment Description: On February 12, 2013, the Planning Commission made its annual recommendations for the selection of a member to the Environment Committee (ERC). In accordance with City of Cupertino Municipalthe City Council shall review and affirm the selection. The recommendatio 9. Subject: Accept City Project, 2012 Pavement Maintenance Project, Proje- 01 Recommended Action: Accept Project No. 2012-01 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 10. Subject: Adopt the Addendum to the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Findings of Fact regarding-Use Carryout Bags. Conduct second readings of a Single-Use Carryout Bag Ordinance and a Litter Enforcement Ordinance (continued from February 5) Recommended Action: A. Adopt Resolution No. 13-011 certifying the Addendum to the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopting California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings ofFact pursuant to the EIR Addendum for the City of Cupertinos Ordinance Regulating Single-Use Carryout Bags; B. Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 13-2102: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino adding Chapter 9.17 tortino Municipal Code regarding regulation of single-use carryout bags"; C. Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 13-2103: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 9.18 (Stormwater Pollution Pr Watershed Protection) of the Cupertino Municipal Code to address litter management and anti-litter enforcement in conjunction with the Citys Stormwater Permit" Written communications for this item included a staff report, Ad Program Environmental Impact Report, an administrative correction to the Addendum to Council of San Mateo reusable bag ordinance final pr Program EIR and an amended version of single-use carryout bag ordinance. 15 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency Director of Public Works Timm Borden reviewed the staff report and read the eight points concerning the Addendum into the record. A handout was p Council containing the eight points. Jennifer Griffin said that Cupertino needs to do what it needs to do but that it was important to giveout free shopping bags to seniors, handicapped, and low income individuals and also look at the politics of this issue. Wong moved and Sinks seconded to adopt Resolution No. 13-011 011 certifying the Addendum to the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), approving the Program EIR and adopting associated California Environmental Qua (CEQA) Findings of Fact pursuant to the EIR Addendum for the Cit Ordinance Regulating Single-Use Carryout Bags as amended to include the followingadditional finding as read into the record by outside counsel Ga The City council finds that the environmental impact report and amended adequately covers the adoption of the plastic bag ordina The motion carried unanimously. City Clerk Grace Schmidt read the title of Ordinance No. 13-2102. Sinks moved and Chang seconded to read the ordinance by title only and that the City Clerks reading would constitute the second reading thereof Mahoney, Santoro, Sinks, and Wong. Noes: None. Sinksmoved and Wongseconded to enact Ordinance No. 13-2102as amended to adopt a 10 cent fee in October 1, 2013 followed by an increase t January 1, 2015. Ayes: Chang, Mahoney, Santoro, Sinks, and Wong. Noes: None. City Clerk Grace Schmidt read the title of Ordinance No. 13-2103. Changmoved and Wongseconded to read the ordinance by title only and that the City Clerks reading would constitute the second reading thereof Mahoney, Santoro, Sinks, and Wong. Noes: None. Changmoved and Wongseconded to enact Ordinance No. 13-2102. Ayes: Chang, Mahoney, Santoro, Sinks, and Wong. Noes: None. 11. Subject: Second reading of an ordinance providing an exception to allo-leash professional dog services for City-authorized waterfowl management at City Parks 16 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency Recommended Action: Conduct the second reading and enact Ordinance No. 13- 2105: "An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino 8.03.010 and 13.04.130(d) of the Cupertino Municipal Code to all management by adding an off leash dog exception for City-authorized events and programs" Dick Weaver said that the solution to drive geese from the parks wont solve the issue, is socially irresponsible, and will simply move the publi someplace else in the City such as to the local college, busines property. He urged Council to get together with the cities of Sunnyvale and Mountain View and get a federal permit to reduce the geese popul City Clerk Grace Schmidt read the title of Ordinance No. 13-2105. Sinks moved and Chang seconded to read the ordinance by title only and that the City Clerks reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Ayes: Chang, Mahoney, Santoro, and Sinks. Noes: Wong. Sinks moved and Chang seconded to enact Ordinance No. 13-2105. Ayes: Chang, Mahoney, Santoro, and Sinks. Noes: Wong. 12. Subject: Second reading and enactment of an ordinance moving the date City's general municipal election to consolidate it with the sta commencing in November 2014 Recommended Action: Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 13-2106: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino moving th general municipal election to the first Tuesday after the first of even numbered years beginning in November 2014" Jennifer Griffin said that this item has come to Council a number of times in the past and she questioned why it has come up again now. She noted that and cons, the pro being having a consistent Council for hot tick the future, the con being not having an election for a year. She explained that Council members were elected for a certain length of time and sh Council members extending their own terms. She noted that she ha school district decided to change its election dateor not and asked Council to carefully think about what message this change would send to the Mahoney commented that the school district has done thefirst reading to change its election date. 17 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency City Clerk Grace Schmidt read the title of Ordinance No. 13-2106. Wong moved and Sinks seconded to read the ordinance by title only and that the City Clerks reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Ayes: Mahoney, Santoro, Sinks, and Wong. Noes: Chang. Wongmoved and Sinksseconded to enact Ordinance No. 13-2106. Ayes: Mahoney, Santoro, Sinks, and Wong. Noes: Chang. PUBLIC HEARINGS 13. Subject: Municipal Code Amendment to Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees (cont to March 19) Recommended Action: Continue to March 19 Description: Application No.(s): MCA-2012-02; Applicant: City of Cupertino; Location: citywide; Municipal Code Amendment to Chapter 14.18, P and review for future potential amendments Under postponements, this item was continued to March 19. Council recessed from 8:10 to 8:19. ORDINANCES AND ACTION ITEMS 14. Subject: Update on the General Plan Amendment process, Council authorizat a budget amendment to add $150,507 to the budget for the General Amendment process, and approval of contracts with MIG as the planning consultant and The Planning Center/DC&E as the environmental consultant (co February 19) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the following: 1.) Scopes of work for the General Plan Amendment (GPA), Vallco Shopping District Specific Plan and associated Environmental Imp and 2.) Budget amendment for an additional amount of $150,507 to General Plan Amendment process not currently budgeted, for a total budget amount of $1,036,545; and 3.) Authorize the City Manager to approve the with MIG as the planning consultant for the General Plan Amendme amount not to exceed $476,096. The scope for this contract wouldthe GPA with an option for the City to authorize the Vallco Shopping District 18 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency later date. If the City decides to proceed with the Vallco plan would return to Council with a contract amendment to add the necnds for the Vallco Plan; and 4.) Authorize the City Manager to approve t with The Planning Center/DC&E to prepare the Environmental Impac for the General Plan Amendment in the amount not to exceed $393, would also include the option for the City to authorize an EIR fo Plan at a later date; and 5.) Authorize the City Manager to appr Orders (CCO) for contracts for Items 3 and 4 above to the extent expenditures do not exceed the total amount of the project budget Written communications for this item included a staff PowerPoint Director of Community Development Aarti Shrivastava and Senior Planner Aki Honda Snelling reviewed the staff report via a PowerPoint presentation. Staff noted that they would provide Council with information about The Planning Center/DC&E before hiring them. Richard Abdalah said that the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce supports the pla to proceed with the GPA. Jennifer Griffin said that this would be an important year and a half and the public isnt used to going through General Plan Amendments since the Ci four in a year. She said she hopes that the PG&E and church sites wont have housing overlays because Cupertino needs retail. She asked Council to make su not to increase the traffic load in the City and to respect the making its decision. Tamon Norimoto representing PG&E said that the site on N. BlaneyAve. has been included in the GPA for potential commercial use. He noted that PG&E is not looking to sell the yard on N. Blaney Ave. and wont be participating in the fair share allocation. He said they look forward to continued partnership with the City. Jerry Leap representing Cupertino Inn and Mr. John Vidovich said that they support the GPA as recommended in staff report and urged Council to move forward with the process. Wong moved and Sinksseconded, accepting friendly amendments by Wong and Sinks, to approve Scopes of work for the General Plan Amendment (GPA), Vallco 19 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency Shopping District Specific Plan and associated Environmental Imp as recommended with an amendment to: 1. Exclude the church site and Stelling Roads as an opportunity site; and 2. Include the PG&E site at Blaney Avenue and Homestead Road as an opportunity site -review adding CG (General Commercial) zoning and/or School (BA Public Facility) uses to the BQ (Quasi- Public Building) zoning. The motion carried unanimously. Wong moved and Sinks seconded to authorize a Budget amendment for an additional amount of $150,507 to fund costs of the General Plan not currently budgeted, for a total budget amount of $1,036,545. unanimously. Wong moved and Sinks seconded to authorize the City Manager to approve a contract with MIG as the planning consultant for the General Pla the amount not to exceed $476,096. The scope for this contract w with an option for the City to authorize the Vallco Shopping District Specific Plan at a later date. If the City decides to proceed with the Vallco pl would return to Council with a contract amendment to add the nec the Vallco Plan. The motion carried unanimously. Wong moved and Sinks seconded to authorize the City Manager to approve a contract with The Planning Center/DC&E to prepare the Environmen Report (EIR) for the General Plan Amendment in the amount not to This contract would also include the option for the City to authorize Vallco Specific Plan at a later date. The motion carried unanimo Wong moved and Sinks seconded to authorize the City Manager to approve Contract Change Orders (CCO) for contracts for Items 3 and 4 above to the extent that total expenditures do not exceed the total amount of the pr motion carried unanimously. REPORTS BY COUNCIL AND STAFF Written communications for this item included a letter from the Mayor of Copertino, Italy. Council members highlighted the activities of their committees a events. 20 Tuesday, March 5, 2013 Cupertino City Council Successor to the Redevelopment Agency ADJOURNMENT At 10:35 p.m., the meeting was adjourned in memory of Marilyn Howards husband Sandy Howard. Marilyn is a Director of the League of Women Voters and a Crest Award winner. ____________________________ Grace Schmidt, City Clerk Staff reports, backup materials, and items distributed at the Ci available for review at the City Clerks Office, 777-3223, and also on the Internet at www.cupertino.org. Click on Agendas & Minutes, then click on the appropriate Pack Most Council meetings are shown live on Comcast Channel 26 and A-verse Channel 99 and are available at your convenience at www.cupertino.org. Click on Agendas & Minutes, thenclick Archived Webcast. Videotapes are available at the Cupertino Library, or may be purchased from the Cupertino City C-2364. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESDEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3227www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting:March 19, 2013 Subject Authorize a new position categoryinthe salary schedule for the Cupertino City Employees Association (CEA) Memorandum of Understanding. Recommended Action Amend the salary schedule. Description The City currently has identified one modification to the CEA salary schedule which sets forth all positions established for that bargaining unit. Discussion Periodically, the City will look at staffing levels within the o the resources are in place for desired service levels, to identi service and to accommodate staffing requirements in conjunction with news or reorganizations. Staff performed such a review in conjunction with our upcoming Traffic Signal Technician recruitment. Instead of having two Traffic Signal Technicians, Public Works has requested staffing this division with an entry levelTraffic Signal Technician and a journey level Traffic Signal Technician to provide additional promotional opportunities within our workforce for individuals with some experience but who have not, as yet, met the minimum qualifications of 2 years experience.This is similar to our office assistant, planner and maintenance worker series where individuals can be a position based on current experience levels. Staff is proposing the new position pay rate to start at 15% below the existing Traffic Signal Technician.This action adds a new position category but does not authorize an increase in staffing We have discussed this change with CEA and they concur with the al. Before a promotional exam can be announced, the new position needs to be salary schedule and approved by the City Council. 40 Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact is anticipated. Could result in up to a 15% salary savings for the Traffic Signal Technician recruitment. ___________________________________ Prepared by:Carol Atwood, Director of Administrative Services Approved for Submission by:David Brandt, City Manager Attachments: A- Redlined CEA MOU -Section 2: Salary Schedule 2012/13 Admin Services/Staff Reports/Amend CEA Salary Positions.doc 41 SECTION 2: SALARY SCHEDULE 2012/13 ATTACHMENT A Classification Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Account Clerk $4,531 $4,757 $4,995 $5,245 $5,507 Administrative Clerk $4,802 $5,042 $5,294 $5,559 $5,837 Assistant Civil Engineer $6,803 $7,142 $7,499 $7,875 $8,268 Assistant Planner $6,139 $6,446 $6,768 $7,107 $7,462 Assistant Traffic Signal Technician $5,655 $5,937 $6,234 $6,546 $6,873 Associate Civil Engineer $7,331 $7,697 $8,082 $8,487 $8,910 Associate Planner $6,616 $6,947 $7,294 $7,659 $8,042 Building Inspector $7,012 $7,363 $7,731 $8,118 $8,524 Case Manager $4,911 $5,157 $5,415 $5,686 $5,970 Code Enforcement Officer $5,675 $5,959 $6,257 $6,570 $6,898 Engineering Technician $5,785 $6,074 $6,378 $6,696 $7,031 Environmental Programs Assistant $5,825 $6,116 $6,422 $6,743 $7,081 Facility Attendant $3,448 $3,621 $3,802 $3,992 $4,191 Media Coordinator $5,160 $5,418 $5,688 $5,973 $6,272 Office Assistant $3,837 $4,029 $4,230 $4,442 $4,664 Permit Technician $4,669 $4,903 $5,148 $5,405 $5,676 Plan Check Engineer $7,331 $7,697 $8,082 $8,487 $8,910 Pro Shop Attendant $3,280 $3,444 $3,616 $3,797 $3,987 Producer $5,052 $5,305 $5,570 $5,849 $6,141 Program Promotions Director $4,696 $4,931 $5,177 $5,436 $5,708 Public Works Inspector $7,012 $7,363 $7,731 $8,118 $8,524 Receptionist/Clerk $3,472 $3,646 $3,828 $4,020 $4,221 Recreation Assistant $2,471 $2,595 $2,725 $2,861 $3,004 Recreation Coordinator $4,696 $4,931 $5,177 $5,436 $5,708 Senior Building Inspector $7,493 $7,868 $8,261 $8,674 $9,108 Senior Code Enforcement Officer $5,959 $6,257 $6,570 $6,898 $7,243 Senior Engineering Technician $6,234 $6,546 $6,873 $7,217 $7,578 Senior Office Assistant $4,260 $4,473 $4,697 $4,932 $5,178 Senior Planner $7,094 $7,449 $7,822 $8,213 $8,623 Senior Traffic Technician $6,234 $6,546 $6,873 $7,217 $7,578 Special Programs Coordinator $4,231 $4,442 $4,664 $4,898 $5,143 Traffic Signal Technician/Apprentice $5,604.82 $5,885.06 $6,179.31 $6,488.28 $6,812.69 Traffic Signal Technician $6,488 $6,812 $7,153 $7,510 $7,886 Traffic Technician $5,785 $6,074 $6,378 $6,696 $7,031 1 42 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESDEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3227www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting:March19, 2013 Subject AdoptResolution supporting SenateBill 629Tax Equity Allocation(TEA) Recommended Action Adopt resolutionsupporting Senate Bill 629 -TEA Description Senate Bill629 affects the cities of Cupertino, Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno and Saratoga. While AB 117 (Chapter 342, Statutes of 2006) made significant improvements forthe four cities in regards to obtaining their full 7% of TEA funding, the citiesare still being treated inequitably in that no other cities are subject tocountyERAF percentage payments on those funds. SB 629 will finally resolve three decades of inequality for these four cities by treating them like every othno/low property taxcity in the state. Discussion When Proposition 13 passed in 1978, it froze property taxes at thecurrent levels. Proposition 13 created significant problems for cities with lowproperty tax rates at the time as these cities could not raise property tax rates to meet their com Property tax share was frozen by the Legislature in the distribu passed in1979. In Santa Clara County, four cities were significantly below the Cupertino, Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno and Saratoga. In 1987, legislation was passed to correct this situation, givin as Tax Equity Allocation (TEA). The tax equity allocation for these four cities was 7%. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, these four cities did n of TEA funds.Subsequent legislation by Assembly Member Vasconcellos changed t four Santa Clara cities ERAF from 7% down to 4%share. AB117 restored the TEA back to 7% but changed the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERA the County had been remitting (47.7%) compared to the rate for t (7.53% to 17.05%). The result had no fiscal impact on the State but cost th Cupertino approximately $1.2 million per year in additional ERAF 43 SB 629 will eliminatethe County ERAF rate on additional TEA property tax revenues. Fiscal Impact Estimated annual property tax revenues of $1.2 million. ____________________________________ Prepared by: Jacqueline Guzman, Sr. Management Analyst Reviewed by: Carol A. Atwood, Director of Administrative Services Approved for Submission by: David Brandt, City Manager Attachments: A-Draft Resolution B-Tax Equity Allocation Fact Sheet 44 RESOLUTION NO. 13-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 629TAX EQUITY ALLOCATION WHEREAS, when Proposition 13 passed in 1978, it decreased property taxes by assessing property taxes at their 1975 levels and restricted annual increa an inflation factor, not to exceed 2% per year; and WHEREAS, in 1979, the California State Legislature passed Assembly Bill (AB) 8, which included a provision to bring all no-low tax cities share of the property tax up to 7%.; and WHEREAS, subsequent legislation sponsored by Senator Vasconcellos reduced AB 8 property tax distribution for the cities of Cupertino, Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga; and WHEREAS, AB 117 sponsored by Assembly Member Rebecca Cohn in 2006, restor of the Tax Equity Allocation (TEA) to the four cities; and WHEREAS, this legislation changed the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) shares for Cupertino, Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga from .07 to .04 and these cities lost their proportion share of ERAF based on what they received in property tax at that time; and WHEREAS, the ERAF rate that the County was remitting was 47.7%, compared to t the four separate cities, which ranged from 7.53% to 17.05%; and WHEREAS, all other no-and low-property tax cities received TEA allocations and were not subject to ERAF deductions; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 629 introduced by Senator Jill Beall, Jr., would finally resolve the inequality of property tax allocations by treating Cupertino, Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga like all other no-and low-property tax cities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino endorses Senate Bill 629 introduced by State Senator Jim Beall, Jr. Passed and Adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino held on the 19 th day of March 2013, by the following vote: VoteMembers of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN ATTEST: APPROVED: Grace Schmidt, City ClerkOrrin Mahoney, Mayor, City of Cupertino 45 Tax Equity Allocation (TEA) Santa Clara County/Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, Cupertino Fact Sheet THIS REQUEST PROBLEM The ERAF rate that the County was remitting was When Proposition 13 passed in 1978, it froze 47.7%, compared to therate for the four separate property taxes at their current levels. This action cities, which ranged from 7.53% to 17.05%. Due to created significant problems for cities that at the this difference, approximately $2.1million in time had low property tax rates, because they property tax dollars is still not vesting to these cities. couldn’t raise those rates to meet their community They are being treated differently than the other TEA cities adjusted with Section 98 of the needs. In Santa Clara County, four cities were California Revenue and Tax Code. significantly below the average rate: Los Altos Hills, Cupertino, Saratoga and Monte Sereno. SUMMARY Section 98 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code was passed to correct this situation, giving Legislative reallocation of scarce property tax qualified cities what is referred to as Tax Equity dollars frequently leads to bitter local controversies. Allocation (TEA). If the County accepted trial court By repealing Santa Clara County's unique 55% limit funding, it also had to provide at least 7% of the on TEA funding, AB 117 eliminated a long-standing Impacts to ERAF created property tax to its cities. source of contention between the County and by the shift were backfilled by the State. Santa its four-no/low cities. Clara County told its TEA cities that the amount of revenues the County would receive from trial court The inconsistency of ERAF requirements for all funding would not offset the amount it would lose TEA cities however still exists. Impacts to ERAF bybringing its TEA cities up to 7%. as a result of the shift in property tax should be automatically backfilled by the State for these Consequently, legislation was enacted which limited last four affected cities per current law, like every the four TEA cities in Santa Clarato just 55% of other county and city in California. The what other TEA cities in the State received. four TEA cities in the Santa Clara County were the only cities in the State disadvantaged by this Staff Contact: Carol Atwood (408) 777-3226 legislation. Revised: December 12, 2012 In 2006, Assembly Bill 117 repealed the 55% limit in the County of Santa Clara on Tax Equity Allocation (TEA) funding for the county's four The State, however, no/low-property-tax cities. required the cities to continue to remit the County’s ERAF rate on these funds so that the bill would have no effect on the State budget and would avoid the Appropriations Committee. 46 PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10 10UPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3110 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March 19, 2013 Subject Approve criteria for City sponsorship of a special event. Recommended Action Staff, and the Parks and Recreation Commission, recommends that the City Council approve the criteria for City sponsorship of a special event. Description In conjunction with the 2012-2013 Budget process, the Council voted to add Happy Kids Day as a Cupertino sponsored special event. When Cupertino helps sponsor an event, it is in the form of in-kind services (waiving rental fees, and providing two and Parks and Recreation staff support). A list of special events sponsored by Cupertino is found on Attachment A. During the Budget discussion, a question was raised as to the criteria for Cupertino Sponsorship of a special event. adopted by the City Council on August 16, 2005. The policy detato apply for a special event, the logistics involved, and several criteria requirements. The policy has some criteria included. A copy of this policy is Attachment Discussion Staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission are recommending t Cupertino support of a special event be presented in a separate section of the current policy. The focus of the criteria is the benefit the event brings to Cupertino. The current policy will remain in place as it is a thorough outline of the p special event permit and a guide for operating a special event. The recommended criteria for Council consideration are found on page 4 of the policy. The Parks and Recreation Commission voted to recommend these criteria at its D Commission meeting. Special events are important cultural activities in Cupertino. Special events are one of the ways we learn about and celebrate our diversity and our comm 47 Sustainability Impact There are no new sustainability requirements in these criteria. operating policies include having bins for composting and recycling. Fiscal Impact There will be no fiscal impact in FY 2012/2013 with the approval the special events for this fiscal year are in the budget and th event requests. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Carol Atwood, Acting Director, Parks and Recreation Approved for Submission by: David Brandt, City Manager Attachments: Attachment A City-sponsored Special Events at Memorial Park Attachment B Current Policy 48 49 50 51 52 53 PUBLIC WORKSDEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March 19, 2013 Subject Tract Map, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, APN 359- 22-077, Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road. Recommended Action Adopt Resolution No. 13-_____. Description A resolution approving a tract map that subdivides an approximately 49,650square foot parcel into fiveparcels,consisting of fiveresidential lots and a cul-de-sac dedication, ranging in size from 7,130to 11,101square feet in area. Discussion The subject parcel is located at the westerlyend of Bollinger Road, APN 359-22-077. On May 17, 2012, the tentative map forthe Tract 10157Bollinger Roadsubdivision was presented to the City Council and was approved unanimously. The current tract mapsubstantially conforms to the approvedtentative map. Subdivision improvements includeconstruction of a new cul-de-sac from the westerly terminus of Bollinger Road, complete with curb and gutter, aspha and allnewundergroundutility services to the properties. Onsite storm water improvements have been required, and consist of grass swales and infiltration basins. These facilitieswill allow for onsite storm water to infiltrate into the ground, and thus reduce potential impacts from storm drainage runoff to the City storm drain system. The cul-de-sac at the westerly terminus of Bollinger Road, once completed to City standards,will be dedicated to the Cityas a public street terminus. ____________________________________ Prepared by: Chad Mosley, Associate Civil Engineer Reviewed by:Timm Borden, Directorof Public Works Approved for Submission by:David Brandt, City Manager Attachments: A Draft Resolution B Area Map C Tract Map 54 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A TRACT MAP, BOLLINGER VENTURE, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, WESTERLY TERMINUS OF BOLLINGER ROAD, APN 359-22-077 WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council for approval and for authorization to record a tract map located at the westerly terminus of Bollinger Road, APN 359-22-077, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT a.Said tract map is hereby approved. b.The City Engineer and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign said tractmap. PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the City Councilof the City of Cupertino this 19thday March, 2013, by the following vote: Vote MembersoftheCityCouncil AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST:APPROVED: _________________________________________________ Grace Schmidt, City ClerkOrrin Mahoney, Mayor 55 ATTACHMENT B 10710 10695 05 10720 5 10725 10735 7561 . Subject: Tract Map, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, APN 359-22- 077, Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-_____. 56 PUBLIC WORKSDEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting:March 19, 2013 Subject Improvement Agreement, Bollinger Venture, LLC,a California Limited Liability Company, Tract 10157, Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road, APN: 359-22-077. Recommended Action Adopt Resolution No. 13-_____. Discussion Through the improvement agreement with the City, the applicants ofa five lot subdivision for five residential houses will be obligated to construct City-specified street improvements, including asphalt pavement, street light, curb, gutter, sidewalk and driveway approaches completing the cul-de-sac at the Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road. _____________________________________ Prepared by:Chad Mosley, Associate Civil Engineer Reviewed by:Timm Borden, Director of Public Works Approved for Submission by:DavidBrandt, City Manager Attachments: Draft Resolution A- Improvement Agreement B- Map C- 59 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DEVELOPER, BOLLINGER VENTURE, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, TRACT10157, WESTERLY TERMINUS OF BOLLINGER ROAD,APN: 359-22-077 WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed improvement agreement between the City of Cupertino and Developer, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company,for the installation of certain municipal improvements at the Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road, and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Develop fees as outlined in the attached Exhibit A; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk hereby authorized to sign the aforementioned agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 19th day of March, 2013, by the following vote: VoteMembers of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: ________________________________ Grace Schmidt, City ClerkOrrin Mahoney, Mayor 60 Resolution No. 13- Page 2 EXHIBIT A SCHEDULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS DEVELOPER: BOLLINGER VENTURE, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY LOCATION: TRACT 10157, WESTERLY TERMINUS OF BOLLINGER ROAD, APN: 359-22-077 PART A.Faithful Performance Bond:$71,500.00 110-2211 PART B.Labor and Material Bond:$71,500.00 110-2211 PART C.Checking and Inspection Fee:$3,575.00 110-4538 PART D.Development Maintenance Deposit:$2,000.00 110-2211 PART E.Storm Drainage Fee –Basin 2$4,783.59 215-4072 PART F.Street Light –One-Year Power Cost:$150.00 110-4537 PART G.Map Checking Fee:$8,213.00 110-4539 PART H.Park Fee: Zone II$78,750.00 280-4082 PART I.Reimbursement FeeN/A 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ATTACHMENT C 10710 10695 05 10720 5 10725 10735 7561 . Subject: Improvement Agreement, Bollinger Venture, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, Tract 10157, Westerly terminus of Bollinger Road, APN: 359-22-077. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 13-_____. 75 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March19, 2013 th Subject Alcoholic Beverage License, Ajito Izakaya Dining, 7335 Bollinger Road, #C1 Recommended Action Approve applicationfor On-Sale Beer and Wine Description Name of Business: Ajito Izakaya Dining Location: 7335 Bollinger Road, #C1 Type of Business:Restaurant Type of License: On-Sale Beer and Wine(41) Reason for Application: Person to Person Transfer, Annual Fee Discussion There are no zoning or use permit restrictions which would prohibit the sale of alcohol as proposed and staff has no objection to the issuance of this license. License Type 41 authorizes the sale of beer and winefor consumption onor offthepremises where sold. _____________________________________ Prepared by:Julia Kinst, Planning Department Reviewed by:Gary Chao, City Planner; Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Communit Development Approved for Submission by:David Brandt,City Manager Attachment:A -Application 76 August 3, 2010 CupertinoCity Councilpage 2 77 78 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010UPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March 19, 2013 Subject Approval of minor amendments to Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal Code, Protected Trees, and request for Council direction on future amendments to Chapter 14.18. Recommended Action 1.Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 13-____ "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees, of the Municipal Code" (Attachment A) to clarify references to public trees and modify penalties for v 2.Provide direction to staff on scope offurther amendments to Chapter 14.18 to be studied and authorize the City Manager to enter into a consultant services contract in an amount not to exceed $65,000. Description Application: MCA-2012-02 Applicant: City of Cupertino Property Location: City-wide Application Summary: Municipal Code Amendments to Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees, to eliminate references to public trees and changing illegal tree r misdemeanor to an infraction. Discuss options for future amendments to the ordinance including, but not limited to, streamlining the tree removal process in R1/A1/A/RHS and R2 zones, reviewing diameter size of specimen trees, reviewing the they are native and reviewing process for illegal tree removals. Discussion B: ACKGROUND On November 5, 2012, a staff reportsummarizing the Citys current regulationsrelated to protected trees located on private property and a comparison of the Citys regulations with neighboring foothill communities was provided at a City Council were provided for Council consideration to get direction on the type of changes the wanted staff to study along with a discussion on the level of environmental review and associated budget estimates. See Attachments B & C for more information. 79 At the meeting, the City Council directed staff to complete the following actions: Present an ordinance amendment to the Protected Trees chapter to public trees and change the penalty from a misdemeanor to an i Present a report regarding the following: Streamline the tree removal process in R1/A1/A/RHS zones and con o zones for smaller protected trees with required mitigation Review the size of trees in diameter for protected specimen trees o Review the list of specimen trees to ensure that they are native o Review whether greater penalties should be imposed for illegal r trees Other comments from Council members that were considered by staff in the proposal for future amendments include: The current process is a disincentive for people who voluntarily wan trees on their site (since they would be considered protected tr certain size). The Citys goal of preserving the oak woodland is not achieved brarily assigning a tree size that would determine whether specimen trees are protec people are incentivized to cut down specimen trees before they a tree size. Staff has researched and reviewed these issues and recommends the two-step process discussed below. 1.PCPTO ROPOSED HANGES TO ROTECTED REES RDINANCE Two minor changes can be made immediately to address the Council (a)Clarifications on References to Public Trees: In April 2012, Chapter 14.12 was amended to provide comprehensive rules related to public trees. As a resuldirected staff to amend Chapter 14.18 to clarify that public trees are subject to the requirements of Chapter 14.12 rather than the requirements of Chapter 14.18 (see Attachment D). Two references to public trees have been added to Chapter 14.18. This is to clarify that: i. Heritage trees on Public Property may not be removed without a t permit ii. Street trees that are required to be protected during constructibe adequately protected in conformance with the requirements of this Chapter. (b)Modifying Enforcement Options to eliminate Misdemeanors and add Infraction: Per City Council direction, staff has reduced violations of the Protected 80 misdemeanor to an infraction. However, it is important to note that changing violations from a misdemeanor to an infraction limits the Citys options to resolve violations. Although staff does not anticipate that this amendment will resues to practice since a majority of cases are handled administrativeremoving the option to charge as a misdemeanor, which can be an effective enforcement tthe most egregious cases, will limit the Citys enforcement options in addressing difficult cases. A broad range of administrative, civil, and criminal options, si provision in Chapter 14.12 that staff could choose from in addressing individual cases would likely provide the greatest flexibility to effectively addnd resolve violations. As discussed below, if the Council authorizes staff to proceed on reviewing further changes to Chapter 14.18, a consulting arborist will evaluate the existing penalties and replacement requirements and recommend changes. Staff may recommend additional enforcement provisions as a component of future amendments. Environmental Review for Proposed Minor Changes to Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees Ordinance: CEQA review is not required for the proposed ordinance changes because it can be seen with certainty that changing the type of penalty and clean up of redundancies between Chapters 14.12 and 14.18 would not have either a potentially direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. The proposed changes are therefore, not considered a project and not subject to CEQA. 2.CCD: ITY OUNCIL IRECTIONFOR FUTURE AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE The following issues that the City Council directed staff to explore on the November meeting will require additional study and environmental review before the Council may approve additional changes: The overall intent of the Ordinance is to maintain the Citys native tree canopy. In addition, the Protected Trees ordinance recognizes the value Cupertinos urban forest and its role in creating a sustainable, liveable environment. With t goal in mind, staff is proposing the following approach to amend (a)Review the specimen tree list to include only native trees and remove non-native trees and invasive species (b)Protect all native specimen trees regardless of size (c)Create an approach that allows a more streamlined process for re-mature, specimen trees in R1/A/A1 and RHS zones as well as for R2 prope (d)Provide a definition of mature vs non-mature specimen trees to help define the streamline process noted above (e)Continue to encourage replacement and renewal of the Citys urban forest (f)A process to encourage voluntary tree planting (g)A more effective approach to review the illegal removal of trees 81 (a)Native Specimen Trees Preliminary discussions with an arborist indicate that two of th Specimen Tree list in the current ordinance are not native and t reviewed for possible replacements. Specimen Tree Native Quercus species Yes Aesculus californica (California Buckeye); Yes Acer macrophyllum (Big Leaf Maple); Yes Cedrus deodara (Deodar Cedar); No Cedrus atlantica 'Glauca' (Blue Atlas Cedar); No Umbellularia californica (Bay Laurel or California Bay);Review Platanus racemosa (Western Sycamore) Review Staff will be discussing revising the specimen tree list to remo-native trees and proposing additional native tree varieties, if appropriate. (b)Protection of Native Specimen Trees Based on the finalized list of Specimen trees, staff is proposing the follo The standard removal permit process for the mature or larger spe- - Tree removal applications for trees below the mature size would not be requiredto provide an arborist report for removal. Only mitigation will be required. Mitigation could be in the form of in-kind replacement of removed trees somewhere on-site, or payment of an in-lieu fee which would cover the cost of planting an equivalent s property off-site. Tree removal application process for mature trees  Tree removal applications for mature trees will require an arborist report and replacements. (c)Streamlined Process for R1/A1/A/RHS Zones and Projects in R2 Zones The above approach will be implemented for all projects in R1/A1/A/RHS zones and projects in R2 zones. (d)Mature vs Non-Mature Trees Currently, the ordinance defines specimen trees as those of a cea minimum single-trunk diameter of 10 inches (31-inch circumference) or minimum multi- trunk diameter of 20 inches (63-inch circumference) measured four and one-half feet from natural grade. Preliminary discussions with an arborist have indicated that, at the time when a tree grows to about 8-10 in diameter, it transforms from a shrub-like to a tree-like form, securing itself as an established tree. The understory, which is the lower bran begins to die off and the plant begins to resemble a tree with the top canopy starting to mature. This lower branch area forms a protective barrier over the root system and is critical for the health of the tree. Each tree has a different growing pattern but an average of 82 10-12 inches could be established as a typical size for a mature trtaff will consult with the arborist to determine the appropriate size (diameter and circumference) at which point specimen tree may be considered a mature tree. (e)Encourage Replacement and Renewal of the Citys Urban Forest Larger Projects that have approved landscape plans as part of a planning application (larger residential, commercial, retail and office projects) will still be required to provide an arborist report and replacements for tree removals. (f)Process for Illegal Removal of Protected Trees A preliminary review of other cities, similar to Cupertino, indicates that most cities replacement requirements for illegal tree removals are larger th regular tree removal permit (See Attachment C). Tree removal fees for the illegal removal of public trees is based on the diameter inch for the removed tree. Heritage trees or unusually large trees that are removed illegally are required to provide larger replacements or penalties based on landscape unit value. In preliminary discussions, the consultant arborist recommends the approach adopted by these other cities rather than requiring larger fees for permits. The funds from the penalties could be put into the Citys street fund and thereby achieve the goal of protecting the Citys overall tree canopy. Staff would like further direction from Council if this approach for penalti appropriate. (g)Process to Encourage Voluntary Tree Planting Staff is proposing a new process for property owners in the R1/A1/A/RHS/R2 zoning districts who desire to voluntarily plant specimen trees as identified in the ordinance. Under this proposed process, property owners may register these trees registration, and record it on their deeds (similar to privacy protection trees). These voluntarily planted and registered trees would not be subject totree removal permits or mitigation requirements, if removed. Upon further direction from the City Council, the details and pr will be finalized by staff and presented to the City Council in conjunction with the a ordinance at a later date. Staff would like to note that this process may result in potentially significant staff time spent in administering and reviewing tree permits and in this category. Environmental Review, Fiscal Impact& Budget Amendment Request Environmental review will be required before the Council may app changes. As discussed in the previous staff report November 5, 2012, the level of environmental review will be based on the scope of the amendment and the proposed mitigations for tree removal. The environmental review levels will range from a Categ ordinance that maintains and/or increases the level of mitigatiopossibly an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for an ordinance that potentially eliminates 83 protected trees. Adjusted estimates for various levels of environmental review are provided below. Relax Regulations Amendment TypeMore Regulations Provide additional Without mitigation mitigation Environmental Environmentally less Less than significant Environmentally Impact than significant with mitigations Significant Type of CEQA Categorical Mitigated Negative Environmental Review Exemption Declaration Impact Report (EIR) Est. Environmental $8,000 $35,000 $90,000 Consultant Fees Est. Arborist $6,000 $17,000 $20,000 Consultant Fees Outreach & $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 Noticing County Filing Fees$50 $2,206 $3,045 Total (Est.) $25,050 $65,206 $124,045 Time Frame 5-6 months 7-9 months 12-15 months If the Council wishes to move forward with staffs recommended approach, staff anticipates that a Mitigated Negative Declaration will likely be appropriate. Therefore, staff is requesting authority for the City Manager to execute a contract for an envi amount not to exceed $65,000. If the City Council wishes to proceed with a different approach, staff will preliminarily determine the level of environmental review and request an appropriate budget to proceeding with the amendments. Noticing The following table is a brief summary of the noticing done for Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal AdAgenda Legal ad placed in newspaper Posted on the City's official notice (at least 10 days prior to the hearing)bulletin board (at leastone week 6 notices mailed/emailed to interested parties prior to the hearing) (at least 10 days prior to the hearing) Posted on the City of Cupertinos Web site (at least one week prior to the hearing) 84 If the City Council authorizes the project, a postcard notice wi owners, the Citys website will be updated, appropriate ads willnd a community meeting will be held to create opportunities for input. Permit Streamlining Act This project is legislative in nature and not subject to the Per Code Section 65920  65964). Sustainability Impact If City Council decides to move forward with staffs recommendations, th impact of this project would be identified once the environmental review documents are prepared. Fiscal Impact This action would require an expenditure of $65,000. It is currently projected that there are sufficient funds in the Community Development Department fund foFollowing direction from the City Council and authorization of the budget request, staff will contract with the environmental and other consultants as needed to proceed with the environmental review and begin drafting a second revised Protected Trees Ordinance. Mitigated Negative Declaration, the earliest a revised ordinance is expected to be late Fall 2013. Prepared by:Simon Vuong, Assistant Planner Reviewed by: Gary Chao, City Planner Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Community Development Approved for Submission by:David Brandt, City Manager Attachments: A-An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees, of the Municipal Code B-City Council Staff Report dated November 5, 2012 regarding study trees C-Tree Regulation comparison for cities of Cupertino, Saratoga, Lolto & Los Altos (Updated with Mountain View, Santa Clara, & Sunnyvale) D-Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees, of the Cupertino Municipal Code (redlines) 85 ATTACHMENTA OrdinanceNo. ANORDINANCEOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCUPERTINOAMENDING CHAPTER14.18,PROTECTEDTREES,OFTHEMUNICIPALCODE. THECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCUPERTINOORDAINSASFOLLOWS: Section1.StatementofPurpose. ThisordinanceamendmentimprovesreadabilityandconsistencywithotherCityordinances. Section2.CodeAmendment. TheCupertinoMunicipalCodeisamendedtoreadasshowninAttachment1. Section3.Severability. ShouldanyprovisionofthisOrdinance,oritsapplicationtoanypersonorcircumstance,be determinedbyacourtofcompetentjurisdictiontobeunlawful,unenforceableorotherwise void,thatdeterminationshallhavenoeffectonanyotherprovisionofthisOrdinanceorthe applicationofthisOrdinancetoanyotherpersonorcircumstanceand,tothatend,the provisionshereofareseverable.TheCityCouncildeclaresthatitwouldhaveadoptedthis ordinanceandeachsection,subsection,sentence,clause,phraseorportionthereofirrespective ofthefactthatanyoneormoresections,subsection,sentenceclause,phrasesorportionsbe declaredvalidorunconstitutional. Section4.EffectiveDate. ThisOrdinanceshalltakeeffectandbeinforcethirty(30)daysfromandafteradoptionas providedbyGovernmentCodeSection36937. Section5.Certification. TheCityClerkshallcertifytothepassageandadoptionofthisOrdinanceandshallgivenotice ofitsadoptionasrequiredbylaw.PursuanttoGovernmentCodeSection36933,asummaryof thisOrdinancemaybepublishedandpostedinlieuofpublicationandpostingoftheentire text. Section6.CEQA. Theseordinanceamendmentswouldnothaveeitherapotentiallydirectorindirectphysical changetotheenvironment,andthusisnotconsidereda ¶¸µ°«©º!andnotsubjecttoCEQA. Section7.Continuity. TotheextenttheprovisionsofthisOrdinancearesubstantiallythesameaspreviousprovisions oftheCupertinoMunicipalCode,theseprovisionsshallbeconstruedascontinuationsofthose provisionsandnotasamendmentsoftheearlierprovisions. 86 INTRODUCED ataregularmeetingoftheCupertinoCityCouncilthe19dayofMarch2013 th and ENACTED ataregularmeetingoftheCupertinoCityCouncilonthis2dayofApril2013 2d bythefollowingvote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST:APPROVED: CityClerkMayor,CityofCupertino 87 ATTACHMENT1 CHAPTER14.18:PROTECTEDTREES Section 14.18.010Purpose. 14.18.020Definitions. 14.18.030ActionsProhibited. 14.18.040RetentionPromoted. 14.18.050ProtectedTrees. 14.18.060HeritageTreeDesignation. 14.18.070HeritageTreeList. 14.18.080PlanofProtection. 14.18.090Recordation. 14.18.100HeritageTreeIdentificationTag. 14.18.110EnforcingAuthority. 14.18.120Exemptions. 14.18.130TreeManagementPlan. 14.18.140ApplicationandApprovalAuthorityforTreeRemovalPermit. 14.18.150DirectortoInspect. 14.18.160ApplicationRequirements. 14.18.170NoticeandPosting. 14.18.180ReviewandDeterminationofApplication. 14.18.190TreeReplacement. 14.18.200RetroactiveTreeRemovalPermit. 14.18.210ProtectionDuringConstruction. 14.18.220ProtectionPlanBeforePermitGranted. 14.18.230NoticeofActionon/«¸³¯ºK ¶¶«§² 14.18.240Penalty. 14.18.010Purpose. Inenactingthischapter,theCityofCupertinorecognizesthesubstantialeconomic, environmentalandaestheticimportanceofitstreepopulation.Protectedtreesareconsidereda valuableassettothecommunity.Theprotectionofsuchtreesinallzoningdistrictsisintended topreservethisvaluableasset.TheCityfindsthatthepreservationofprotectedtrees,andthe protectionofalltreesduringconstruction,isnecessaryforthebestinterestsoftheCityandof thecitizensandpublicthereof,inorderto: A.Protectpropertyvalues; B.Assurethecontinuanceofqualitydevelopment; 88 C.Protectaestheticandscenicbeauty; D.Assistintheabsorptionofrainwaters,therebypreventingerosionoftopsoil,protecting againstfloodhazardsandtheriskoflandslides; E.Counteractairpollutantsbyprotectingtheknowncapacityoftreestoproducepure oxygenfromcarbondioxide; F.Maintaintheclimaticbalance(e.g.,provideshade); G.Helpdecreasepotentialdamagefromwindvelocities; Fortheabovereasons,theCityfindsitisinthepublicinterest,convenienceandnecessityto enactregulationscontrollingthecareandremovalofprotectedtreeswithintheCityinorderto retainasmanytreesaspossible,consistentwiththeindividualrightstodevelop,maintainand enjoytheirpropertytothefullestpossibleextent. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§2,1991;Ord.1543,§2,1991) 14.18.020Definitions. Unlessotherwisestated,thefollowingdefinitionspertaintothischapter. A.CitymeanstheCityofCupertinosituatedintheCountyofSantaClara,California. B.Developedresidentialmeansanylegallotofrecord,zonedsinglefamily,duplex, agriculturalresidentialandresidentialhillside,withanystructure(principaloraccessory) constructedthereon. C.Developmentapplicationmeansanapplicationforlandalterationordevelopment, includingbutnotlimitedtosubdivisionofproperty,rezoning,architecturalandsiteapproval, twostoryresidentialpermit,minorresidentialpermit,planneddevelopmentpermit,variance, andusepermit. D.Heritagetreemeansanytreeorgroveoftreeswhich,becauseoffactorsincluding,but notlimitedto,itshistoricvalue,uniquequality,girth,heightorspecies,hasbeenfoundbythe PlanningCommissiontohaveaspecialsignificancetothecommunity.SeeAttachedAppendix A. E.OwnershallincludethelegalownerofrealpropertywithintheCity,andanylesseeof suchowner. F.Personshallincludeanindividual,afirm,anassociation,acorporation,aco partnership,andthelessees,trustees,receivers,agents,servantsandemployeesofanysuch person. G.PrivatepropertyshallincludeallpropertynotownedbytheCityoranyotherpublic agency. H.PublicpropertyincludesallpropertyownedbytheCityoranyotherpublicagency. I.ProtectedtreemeansanyclassoftreespecifiedinSection14.18.050. J.SpecimentreemeansanyclassoftreespecifiedinSection14.18.050B. K.Treeremovalmeansanyofthefollowing: 1.Completeremoval,suchascuttingtothegroundorextraction,ofaprotectedtree;or 89 2.Severepruning,whichmeanstheremovalofmorethanonefourthofthefunctioning leafandstemareaofaprotectedtreeinanytwelvemonthperiodasdeterminedbythe CommunityDevelopmentDirector. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2056,(part),2010;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1886,(part),2001;Ord. 1835,(part),1999;Ord.1810,(part),1999;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord.1573,§3,1991;Ord.1543, §3,1991) 14.18.030ActionsProhibited. A.Itisunlawfultoremoveorkillanyprotectedtree;and B.Itisunlawfultoremoveanyprotectedtreeinanyzoningdistrictwithoutfirstobtaining atreeremovalpermitasrequiredbythischapter. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.040RetentionPromoted. Protectedtreesareconsideredanassettothecommunityandtheprideofownershipand retentionofthesespeciesshallbepromoted.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmay conductanannualreviewofthestatusofheritagetreesandreportthefindingstothePlanning Commission. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord.1543,§4.1,1991) 14.18.050ProtectedTrees. ExceptasotherwiseprovidedinSection14.18.120,thefollowingtreesshallnotberemoved withoutfirstobtainingatreeremovalpermit: A.Heritagetreesinallzoningdistricts. B.Alltreesofthefollowingspeciesonprivateproperty(SeeAppendixB)thathavea minimumsingletrunkdiameterofteninches(thirtyoneinchcircumference)orminimum multitrunkdiameteroftwentyinches(sixtythreeinchcircumference)measuredfourand onehalffeetfromnaturalgradeareconsideredSpecimentrees: 1.Quercus(nativeoaktreespecies),including: a.Quercusagrifolia(CoastLiveOak); b.Quercuslobata(ValleyOak); c.Quercuskelloggii(BlackOak); d.Quercusdouglasii(BlueOak); e.Quercuswislizeni(InteriorLiveOak); 2.Aesculuscalifornica(CaliforniaBuckeye); 3.Acermacrophyllum(BigLeafMaple); 4.Cedrusdeodara(DeodarCedar); 5.CedrusatlanticaGlauca(BlueAtlasCedar); 6.Umbellulariacalifornica(BayLaurelorCaliforniaBay);and 7.Platanusracemosa(WesternSycamore). 90 C.Anytreerequiredtobeplantedorretainedaspartofanapproveddevelopment application,buildingpermit,treeremovalpermitorcodeenforcementactioninallzoning districts. D.ApprovedprivacyprotectionplantinginR1zoningdistricts. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.060HeritageTreeDesignation. Applicationfordesignationofaheritagetreemayonlybeinitiatedbytheownerofpropertyon whichthetreeislocated,unlessthetreeislocatedonpublicorquasipublicproperty.Any personmayapplyfordesignationofaheritagetreeifthetree(s)arelocatedonpublicorquasi publicproperty.Anapplicationforaheritagetreedesignationshallinclude: 1.Assessorsparcelnumberofthesite; 2.Descriptiondetailingtheproposedheritagetreesspecialaesthetic,cultural,orhistorical valueofsignificancetothecommunity;and 3.Photographsofthetree(s). ApplicationfordesignationofaheritagetreeshallbereferredtothePlanningCommissionfor reviewanddeterminationinaccordancewithChapter19.12oftheCupertinoMunicipalCode. ThePlanningCommission,may,byresolution,designateatreeorgroveoftreesasaheritage tree(s). (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord. 1543,§4.2,1991) 14.18.070HeritageTreeList. Aheritagetreelistshallbecreatedandamendedbyresolution.Thelistshallincludethereason fordesignation,treecircumference,speciesname,commonname,locationandheritagetree number. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§4.3,1991) 14.18.080PlanofProtection. Aspartofadevelopmentapplication: A.Theapprovalauthorityshalladoptamaintenanceplanforprotectedtrees.Itshallbethe propertyowner(s)responsibilitytoprotectthetrees. B.PrivacyprotectionplantinginR1zoningdistrictsshallbemaintained.Landscape plantingmaintenanceincludesirrigation,fertilizationandpruningasnecessarytoyielda growthrateexpectedforaparticularspecies.Whereprivacyprotectionplantingdiesitmustbe replacedwithinthirtydayswiththelocation,sizeandspeciesdescribedinOrdinanceNo.1799 (privacyprotection)anditsappendix.Theaffectedpropertyowner,withprivacyprotection plantingonhisorherlot,isrequiredtomaintaintherequiredplantingandshallberequiredto complywithSection14.18.090. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1810,(part),1999;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord. 1543,§§4.4,4.5,1991) 91 14.18.090Recordation. AllprotectedtreesrequiredtoberetainedaspartofadevelopmentapplicationunderSection 14.18.050Cshallhaveretentioninformationplacedonthepropertydeedviaaconservation easementinfavoroftheCity,privatecovenant,orothermethodasdeemedappropriatebythe Director.Therecordationshallbecompletedbythepropertyownerpriortofinalmapor buildingpermitissuance,oratatimeasdesignatedbytheDirectorofCommunity Developmentwhennotassociatedwithafinalmaporbuildingpermitissuance. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§4.6,1991;Ord.1543,§4.6,1991) 14.18.100HeritageTreeIdentificationTag. Heritagetreesshallhaveonthemanidentificationtag,purchasedandplacedbytheCity, inscribedwiththefollowinginformation: CITYOFCUPERTINOHERITAGETREENO._______isprotectedbytheProtectedTrees Ordinance.DonotpruneorcutbeforecontactingtheCityPlanningDepartmentat(408)777 3308. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§4.7,1991) 14.18.110EnforcingAuthority. TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment,orhisorherauthorizedrepresentative,shallbe chargedwiththeenforcementofthischapter. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011) 14.18.120Exemptions. Thefollowingsituationsdonotrequireatreeremovalpermitpriortoremoval: A.Removalofaprotectedtreeincaseofemergencycausedbythehazardousordangerous conditionofatree,requiringimmediateactionforthesafetyoflifeorproperty(e.g.,atree abouttotoppleontoaprincipledwellingduetoheavywindvelocities,atreedeemedunsafe,or atreehavingthepotentialtodamageexistingorproposedessentialstructures),uponorderof theDirectorofCommunityDevelopment,oranymemberofthesherifforfiredepartment. However,asubsequentapplicationfortreeremovalmustbefiledwithinfiveworkingdaysas describedinSections14.18.140through14.18.160.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment willapprovetheretroactivetreeremovalpermitapplicationandmayrequiretreereplacements inconjunctionwiththeapproval.Noapplicationfeeorotherapprovalprocessshallberequired inthissituation. B.Deadtrees,intheopinionoftheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment.However,a subsequentapplicationforatreeremovalmustbefiledwithinfiveworkingdaysasdescribed inSection14.18.140through14.18.160.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentwillapprove theretroactivetreeremovalpermitapplicationandmayrequiretreereplacementsin conjunctionwiththeapproval.Noapplicationfeeorotherapprovalprocessshallberequired inthissituation. C.Thinningout/removingoftreesinaccordancewitharecordedtreemanagementplan thathasbeenapprovedinaccordancewithSection14.18.130.Notreeremovalpermitis required. D.Publicutilityactions,underthejurisdictionofthePublicUtilitiesCommissionofthe 92 StateofCalifornia;asmaybenecessarytocomplywiththeirsafetyregulations,ortomaintain thesafeoperationoftheirfacilities. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1835,(part),1999;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord. 1630,(part),1993;Ord.1543,§7.1,1991) 14.18.130TreeManagementPlan. Atreemanagementplanmaybeapprovedforapropertythatincludescriteriafortheremoval ofcertaintreesinthefuturebyanticipatingtheeventualgrowthoftreesonthepropertyand specifyingatimeframeinwhichthetreesmayrequireremovaltopreventovercrowdingof trees.Thepropertyownershallhaveretentioninformationplacedonthepropertyin accordancewithSection14.18.090,referringtotheapprovedtreemanagementplan.Foratree managementplanassociatedwithadevelopmentapplication,thetreemanagementplanshall beapprovedinconjunctionwiththeapprovalofalandscapeplanonthesubjectproperty.The treemanagementplanshallincludethefollowing: A.Atreeplanindicatingallexistingtreestoberetainedandallnewtreestobeplantedthat arepartoftheapprovedlandscapeplan. B.Labelingofthespecies,sizeinDBHatplantingtimeorattimeoftreemanagementplan approval,locationandeventualgrowthsizeofeachtreeontheplan. C.Awrittenexplanationofthespecifictree(s)toberemovedtopreventovercrowding, includingtheeventualgrowthsizeinDBHatwhichtimethetreeistoberemoved,andatime frameinwhichthetree(s)willreachtheeventualgrowthsize. Thetreemanagementplanshallbeapprovedbytheauthorityapprovingthelandscapeplan priortorecordationofthetreemanagementplan.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment shallreviewandapprovethetreemanagementplanwherenolandscapeplanisrequired. Treesthatarelistedtoberemovedinthetreemanagementplanmayberemovedwithinthe specifiedtimeframeperthetreemanagementplanwithoutatreeremovalpermit,exceptfor treesdesignatedasheritagetrees.Noheritagetreesshallbepermittedtoberemovedin conjunctionwithanapprovedtreemanagementplan. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.140ApplicationandApprovalAuthorityforTreeRemovalPermit. A.Nopersonshalldirectlyorindirectlyremoveorcausetoberemovedanyprotectedtree withoutfirstobtainingatreeremovalpermit,unlesssuchtreeremovalisexemptperSection 14.18.130.ApplicationforatreeremovalpermitshallbefiledwiththeDepartmentof CommunityDevelopmentonformsprescribedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment andshallstatethenumberandlocationofthetreestoberemoved,andthereasonforremoval ofeach. B.ApplicationsforprotectedtreeremovalshallbereferredtotheDirectorofCommunity DevelopmentforfinalreviewanddeterminationinaccordancewithChapter19.12,exceptfor heritagetreeremovalsandtreeremovalsinconjunctionwithdevelopmentapplications.The DirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmayapprove,conditionallyapprove,ordenythe applicationforatreeremovalpermit.Atreereplacementrequirementmayberequiredin conjunctionwiththetreeremovalpermit.Theapplicabletreeremovalpermitfeeshallapply. 93 C.Applicationfortreeremovalsinconjunctionwithadevelopmentapplicationshallbe consideredbytheapprovalauthorityconcerningthesamepropertyastheaffectedtreeremoval permitapplication,andthedeterminationonthetreeremovalpermitshallbemade concurrentlybytheapprovalauthority. D.ApplicationforremovalofaheritagetreeshallbereferredtothePlanningCommission forfinalreviewanddeterminationinaccordancewithChapter19.12. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord.1573,§8.1(part),1991; Ord.1543,§8.1(part),1991) 14.18.150DirectortoInspect. Uponreceiptofanapplicationforremovalofaprotectedtree,theDirectorofCommunity Developmentorhisorherauthorizedrepresentativewill,withinfourteendays,inspectthe premisesandevaluatetherequestpursuanttoSection14.18.180ofthischapter.Priorityof inspectionshallbegiventothoserequestsbasedonhazardordisease.TheDirectorof CommunityDevelopmentmayreferanysuchapplicationtoanotherdepartmentortothe PlanningCommissionoranappropriatecommitteeoftheCityforareportand recommendation.Whereappropriate,theDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmayalso requiretheapplicant,athisorherownexpense,tofurnishareportfromanarboristcertifiedby theInternationalSocietyofArboriculture. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§8.1(part),1991;Ord.1543,§8.1(part), 1991) 14.18.160ApplicationRequirements. Arequestforremovalofanyheritageorprotectedtreeshallincludethefollowing: A.Applicationinformation.Applicationforatreeremovalpermitshallbeavailablefrom andfiledwiththeCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentandshallcontainthefollowing information,unlesswaivedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment: 1.Awrittenexplanationofwhythetree(s)shouldberemoved; 2.Photograph(s)ofthetree(s); 3.AnarboristreportfromanarboristcertifiedbytheInternationalSocietyof ArboriculturewhenrequiredbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment; 4.Signatureofthepropertyownerandhomeownersassociation(whenapplicable) withproofofavoteofthehomeownersassociation; 5.Replantingplan; 6.OtherinformationdeemednecessarybytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentto evaluatethetreeremovalrequest; 7.Permitfee,whereapplicable; 8.Treesurveyplanindicatingthenumber,location(s),varietyandsize(measuredfour andahalffeetabovegrade)oftree(s)toberemoved. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1835,(part),1999;Ord.1715,(part),1996; amendedduring12/93supplement;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord.1543,§8.1(part),1991) 94 14.18.170NoticeandPosting. A.NoticeshallbeprovidedasindicatedinSection19.12.030. B.Anoticeshallbepostedinaccordwiththerequirementsof19.12.110(F). C.WhereapprovalofatreeremovalpermitisgrantedbytheCity,thepropertyowner shallpostthetreeremovalpermitonsiteuntilthetreeisremovedorshallpresentproofofthe treeremovalpermituponrequest. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.180ReviewandDeterminationofApplication. A.Theapprovalauthorityshallapproveatreeremovalpermitonlyaftermakingatleast oneofthefollowingfindings: 1.Thatthetreeortreesareirreversiblydiseased,areindangeroffalling,cancause potentialdamagetoexistingorproposedessentialstructures,orinterfereswithprivateon siteutilityservicesandcannotbecontrolledorremediedthroughreasonablerelocationor modificationofthestructureorutilityservices; 2.Thatthelocationofthetreesrestrictstheeconomicenjoymentofthepropertyby severelylimitingtheuseofpropertyinamannernottypicallyexperiencedbyownersof similarlyzonedandsituatedproperty,andtheapplicanthasdemonstratedtothe satisfactionoftheapprovalauthoritythattherearenoreasonablealternativestopreserve thetree(s). 3.Thattheprotectedtree(s)areadetrimenttothesubjectpropertyandcannotbe adequatelysupportedaccordingtogoodurbanforestrypracticesduetotheoverplantingor overcrowdingoftreesonthesubjectproperty. B.Theapprovalauthoritymayrefertheapplicationtoanotherdepartmentorcommission forareportandrecommendation. C.Theapprovalauthorityshalleitherapprove,conditionallyapproveordenythe application. D.Theapprovalauthoritymayrequireatreereplacementrequirementinconjunctionwith atreeremovalpermit. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§9.1,1991;Ord.1543,§9.1,1991) 14.18.190TreeReplacement. A.Theapprovalauthoritymayimposethefollowingreplacementstandardsforapproval ofeachtreetoberemovedinconjunctionwithanapprovedtreeremovalpermit,unless deemedotherwisebytheapprovalauthority:Replacementtrees,ofaspeciesandsizeas designatedbytheapprovalauthorityandconsistentwiththereplacementvalueofeachtreeto beremoved,shallbeplantedonthesubjectpropertyonwhichthetree(s)aretoberemoved. Theapprovalauthorityshallworkwiththeapplicant/propertyownerofthetreeremoval permittodeterminethelocationofthereplacementtree(s).TableAmaybeusedasabasisfor thisrequirement.Thepersonrequestingthetreeremovalpermitshallpaythecostof purchasing,plantingandmaintainingthereplacementtrees. B.Ifareplacementtreefortheremovalofanonheritagetreeortreewithtrunksizeequal toorlessthanthirtysixinchescannotbereasonablyplantedonthesubjectproperty,aninlieu 95 treereplacementfeebaseduponthepurchaseandinstallationcostofthereplacementtreeas determinedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentshallbepaidtotheCitystreefundto: 1.Addorreplacetreesonpublicpropertyinthevicinityofthesubjectproperty;or 2.AddtreesorlandscapingonotherCityproperty. C.Forremovalofaheritagetreeortreewithatrunksizegreaterthanthirtysixinches,the inlieutreereplacementfeeshallbebaseduponthevaluationoftheremovedtreebyusingthe mostrecenteditionoftheISAGuideforPlantAppraisalpublishedbytheCouncilofTreeand LandscapeAppraisers. TableAReplacementTreeGuidelines TrunkSizeofRemovedTree(MeasuredReplacementTrees 4½feetabovegrade) Upto12inchesOne24boxtree Over12inchesandupto18inchesTwo24boxtrees Over18inchesandupto36inchesTwo24boxtreesorOne36boxtree Over36inchesOne36boxtree HeritagetreeOne48boxtree (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011) 14.18.200RetroactiveTreeRemovalPermit. Anapplicationforaretroactivetreeremovalshallberequiredforanyprotectedtreeremoved priortoapprovalofatreeremovalpermit.TheapplicationshallbefiledwiththeDepartmentof CommunityDevelopmentonformsprescribedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment andshallbesubjecttotherequirementsofatreeremovalpermit.Theapplicationshallpaya retroactivetreeremovalpermitfee. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.210ProtectionDuringConstruction. Protectedtreesandothertrees/plantingsrequiredtoberetainedbyvirtueofadevelopment application,buildingpermit,ortreeremovalpermitshallbeprotectedduringdemolition, gradingandconstructionoperations.Theapplicantshallguaranteetheprotectionofthe existingtree(s)onthesitethroughafinancialinstrumentacceptabletotheDirectorof CommunityDevelopment. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§10.1,1991) 14.18.220ProtectionPlanBeforePermitGranted. A.AplantoprotecttreesdescribedinSection14.18.210shallbesubmittedtotheDirector ofPublicWorksandtotheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentpriortoissuanceofa demolition,gradingorbuildingpermit.Theplanshallbepreparedandsignedbyalicensed landscapearchitectorarboristcertifiedbytheInternationalSocietyofArboricultureandshall beapprovedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment.TheDirectorofCommunity Developmentshallevaluatethetreeprotectionplanbaseduponthetreeprotectionstandards containedinAppendixAattheendofthischapter. B.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmaywaivetherequirementforatree 96 protectionplanbothwheretheconstructionactivityisdeterminedtobeminorinnature(minor buildingorsitemodificationinanyzone)andwheretheproposedactivitywillnotsignificantly modifythegroundareawithinthedriplineortheareaimmediatelysurroundingthedripline ofthetree.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentshalldeterminewhethertheconstruction activityisminorinnatureandwhethertheactivitywillsignificantlymodifythegroundarea aroundthetreedripline. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§10.2,1991) 14.18.230NoticeofActionon0¤±¬¨³!¯¯¤ « A.Noticeofthedecisiononanapplicationforaprotectedtreeremovalpermitbythe approvalauthorityshallbemailedtotheapplicant. B.Anydecisionmadebytheapprovalauthorityonthetreeremovalapplicationmaybe appealedinaccordancewithChapter19.12. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011) 14.18.240Penalty. Violationofthischapterisdeemedaninfractionunlessotherwisespecified.Anypersonor propertyowners,orhisorheragentorrepresentativewhoengagesintreecuttingorremoval withoutavalidtreeremovalpermitisguiltyofaninfractionasoutlinedinChapter1.12ofthis codeand/ormayberequiredtocomplywithSections14.18.140and14.18.160.(Ord.2085,§2 (part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1810,(part),1999;Ord.1731,(part),1996;Ord.1543,§12.1, 1991) 97 Appendix A 98 99 APPENDIXB STANDARDSFORTHEPROTECTIONOFTREESDURINGGRADINGAND CONSTRUCTIONOPERATIONS Thepurposeofthisappendixistooutlinestandardspertainingtotheprotectionoftrees describedinSection14.18.220ofChapter14.18.Thestandardsarebroad.Alicensedlandscape architectorInternationalSocietyofArboriculturecertifiedarboristshallberetainedtocertify theapplicabilityofthestandardsanddevelopadditionalstandardsasnecessarytoensurethe propertycare,maintenance,andsurvivaloftreesdesignatedforprotection. Standards 1.Asiteplanshallbeprepareddescribingtherelationshipofproposedgradingandutility trenchingtothetreesdesignatedforpreservation.Constructionandgradingshouldnot significantlyraiseorlowerthegroundlevelbeneathtreedriplines.Ifthegroundlevelis proposedformodificationbeneaththedripline,thearchitect/arboristshalladdressand mitigatetheimpacttothetree(s). 2.Alltreestobepreservedonthepropertyandalltreesadjacenttothepropertyshallbe protectedagainstdamageduringconstructionoperationsbyconstructingafourfoothighfence aroundthedripline,andarmorasneeded.Theextentoffencingandarmoringshallbe determinedbythelandscapearchitect.Thetreeprotectionshallbeplacedbeforeanyexcavation orgradingisbegunandshallbemaintainedinrepairforthedurationoftheconstructionwork. 3.Noconstructionoperationsshallbecarriedonwithinthedriplineareaofanytree designatedtobesavedexceptasisauthorizedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment. 4.Iftrenchingisrequiredtopenetratetheprotectionbarrierforthetree,thesectionof trenchinthedriplineshallbehanddugsoastoprecludethecuttingofroots.Priortoinitiating anytrenchingwithinthebarrierapprovalbystaffwithconsultationofanarboristshallbe completed. 5.Treeswhichrequireanydegreeoffillaroundthenaturalgradeshallbeguardedby recognizedstandardsoftreeprotectionanddesignoftreewells. 6.Theareaunderthedriplineofthetreeshallbekeptclean.Noconstructionmaterialsnor chemicalsolventsshallbestoredordumpedunderatree. 7.Firesforanyreasonshallnotbemadewithinfiftyfeetofanytreeselectedtoremainand shallbelimitedinsizeandkeptunderconstantsurveillance. 8.Thegeneralcontractorshalluseatreeservicelicensee,asdefinedbyCaliforniaBusiness andProfessionalCode,topruneandcutoffthebranchesthatmustberemovedduringthe gradingorconstruction.Nobranchesorrootsshallbecutunlessatfirstreviewedbythe landscapearchitect/arboristwithapprovalofstaff. 100 9.Anydamagetoexistingtreecrownsorrootsystemsshallberepairedimmediatelybyan approvedtreesurgeon. 10.Nostorageofconstructionmaterialsorparkingshallbepermittedwithinthedripline areaofanytreedesignatedtobesaved. 11.Treeprotectionregulationsshallbepostedonprotectivefencingaroundtreestobe protected.(Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 101 APPENDIXC REFERENCEPHOTOSOFSPECIMENTREESPROTECTEDINACCORDANCEWITH SECTION14.18.035 EXAMPLESOFSOMEOAKTREEVARIETIES VALLEYOAK (Quercuslobata) COASTLIVEOAK (Quercusagrifolia) 102 BLUE OAK ›vÒ;©-Ò­7šÒmŒ­zzœ BLACKOAK (Quercuskelloggii) INTERIORLIVEOAK (Quercuswislizeni) 103 CALIFORNIABUCKEYE (Aesculuscalifornica) BIGLEAFMAPLE (Acermacrophyllum) 104 DEODARCEDAR (Cedrusdeodara) BLUEATLASCEDAR (Cedrusatlantica&²§»©§ 105 WESTERNSYCAMORE (Platanusracemosa) BAYLAURELORCALIFORNIABAY (Umbellulariacalifornica) 106 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010UPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: November 5, 2012 Subject Study Session regarding Protected Trees on private property. Recommended Action Review options and provide staff with direction on the type of changes to be studiedin amendments to Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees. Description Application: MCA-2012-02 Applicant: City of Cupertino Property Location: City-wide Application Summary: Consider potential Amendments to Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees, of the Cupertino Municipal Code Discussion B: ACKGROUND On October 2, 2012, the City Council directed staff to initiate Protected Tree Ordinance and present ordinance amendment options for its consideration. The Protected Tree Ordinance was last amended in 2007. At thetime, the City Council was concerned about the reported illegal removal of protected trees and permits. The Council at the time wished to encourage property owners to o Removal permit prior to removing protected trees and not resort to removing trees illegally. The Council also wished to increase penalties on protected trees without permits. As a result the following changes were made to Ordinance and Fee 1.The process was revised to allow the Community Development Director to approve removal of Protected Trees. Previously, approval was required by Commission for all trees. 107 2.The Tree Removal Application fee was significantly lowered from $2,662 (intended to cover staff cost) to $150 for the first tree and $75 for each subsequent tree. A list of current fees for FY 2012-13 is provided later in this report. 3.To discourage illegal removals of Protected Trees, a Retroactive was instituted. This fee amount was set to the same amount as the prior Tree Removal Application Fee ($2,662), so that the Retroactive Tree Removal Fee would remain a cost recovery fee. 4.A permit process for a Tree Management Plan was created - several property owners expressed the desire to have the ability to thin out trees by removing them without having to obtain multiple individual Tree Removal Permits to deal with tree overcrowding and better manage trees on their property. The Councreated a permit category to allow property owners the ability to prepare a Tree Management P approvable by the Director of Community Development. The plan would include allowing the consideration of phased tree removals and replacements for t that cause overcrowding of the site or are not suitable for any variety of reasons. The fee for this was set at $1,041. 5.The Tree Removal Application fee for removing dead or diseased or hazardous trees was reduced from $860 to $0. Replacements would still be required. A summary of the number of Tree Removal Permits and Retroactive including total number of trees for which approval was granted i 2012 2009 2010 2011 Total (to date) Tree Removal Permit 21367035162 Applications Number of Protected Tree 1693025502311,252 Removals approved Retroactive Tree Removal 6168838 Permit Applications Tree Management Plan 00000 Applications 108 CR: URRENT EGULATIONS The current regulations regarding Protected Trees are briefly highlighted below: Tree Removal Permit Requirements (Section 14.18.050) A Permit is required for the complete removal or severe pruning functioning leaf and stem area) of the following four categoriess: 1.Heritage Trees - Trees found to have special significance to the community by the Planning Commission. Application for this designation may on by the current property owner of the property the tree is locate public or quasi-public property, anyone may apply for heritage tree designation. 2.Specimen Trees  Trees (multi- a.species) b. c.Big Leaf Maple d.Deodar Cedar e.Blue Atlas Cedar f.Bay Laurel or California Bay g.Western Sycamore 3.Other protected trees  Any tree required to be planted or retained as part of an approved development application, building permit, tree removal permit or code enforcement action in any zoning district 4.Privacy Protection trees in the R1 zoning districts. Tree Removal PermitFees(Section 14.18.160) The current fee schedule sets the tree removal permit fee for thevery tree thereafter is at $85. The fee for a Tree Management Plan is $1,148. There is no fee to apply for a permit to remove trees that are dead, diseased or pose a hazardous or dangerous condition requiring immediate action for the safety ofoperty. Environmental fees, including county filing fees associated with paid (typically Categorically Exempt under CEQA). Deposits that may be collected include deposits for the Citys consulting arborist, if needed, and for neighbor notification. When a protected tree is removed without a Tree Removal Permit, Removal Permit must be filed along with a Retroactive Tree Remov 109 Retroactive Tree Removal Permit fee is $2,996.00 in the current fee schedule (FY 2012-2013). Environmental fees and deposits would apply as with a regular Tr Tree Removal Findings (Section 14.18.180) Tree Removal is allowed when one of the following findings can b authority: 1.The tree(s) is/are irreversibly damaged, are in danger of fallin damage to existing or proposed essential structures or interfere- site utility services and cannot be controlled or remedied throu relocation or modification of the structure or utility services; 2.That the location of the tree(s) restricts the economic enjoymen severely limiting the use of property in a manner not typically owners of similar zoned and situated property, and the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the approval authority that reasonable alternatives to preserve the tree(s); 3.That the tree(s) is/are a detriment to the property and cannot b supported according to good urban forestry practices due to overplanting or overcrowding of trees on the subject property. Exemptions (Section 14.18.120) The Ordinance allows certain exemptions under which a Tree Remov not required prior to removal of the Protected Tree. In some cases, however, a permit must be filed within 5 days of removal of the tree and replacements are requir Permit Required Exemptions Replacement Fees after removal? 1.Removal in case of an emergency Yes  within 5 caused by the hazardous or dangerous Yes No condition of a tree requiring immediate removal action for the safety of life or property 2.Dead Trees as determined by the Yeswithin 5 Director of Community Development Yes No removal 3.Thinning out/removal of trees with a No No N/A pre-approved tree management plan 4.Public Utility actions NoNoN/A 110 Replacement Trees and In-lieu Tree Replacement fees (Section 14.18.190) Replacement tree(s) of equivalent value is (are) required to be planted to mitigate the removed tree. However, the Ordinance provides the table below as a guideline for determining replacements. Trunk Size of Removed Tree Replacement Trees (Measured 4½ feet above grade) Up to 12 inches One 24" box tree Over 12 inches and up to 18 inchesTwo 24" box trees Over 18 inches and up to 36 inches Two 24" box trees or One 36" box tree Over 36 inches One 36" box tree Heritage treeOne 48" box tree If it is determined that the replacement tree(s) cannot be planted on the site, the Ordinance allows the payment of in-lieu fees which go toward the Citys public tree planting fund. The in-lieu fee is based on the current purchase and installation cost the replacement tree as determined by the City Arborist. Currently, the fees for a 2 tree are approximately $350 and $500, respectively. The in-lieu fee for tree replacements over 36 inches and/or Heritage trees are assessed based upon the valuation of the tree by an ISA certified arborist and verified by the Citys consulting Arborist. OC THER ITIES Staff has conducted a survey of neighboring cities with similar geographic characteristics and located in the foothills (See Attachment C). The cities surveyed include Saratoga, Los Gatos, Palo Alto, and Los Altos. A summary of findings is provided below: 1)Protected Trees, for which a Tree Removal Permit is required, in these cities include: Trees above a certain size, regardless of species. Most cities set this at 10 to 12 inches diameter. above the grade. . 111 2)Most cities allow certain exemptions in which case a Tree Remova not required prior to removal of the tree such as emergency tree diseased trees. 3)Tree removal permit fees range from no fees at the City of Los Al City of Palo Alto. Some cities charge a flat fee. 4)All cities require that certain removal criteria/findings be met in order to allow the removal of Protected Trees. 5)Tree replacement is determined differently in each city. While Los Gatos and Palo Alto determine replacement by canopy size, Valuation as determined by the City Arborist. Los Altos and Los replacement up to the discretion of the approving body. In most cities the applicant is allowed to pay in-lieu fees, based on valuation of the removed tree, if it is determined that there is no room to plant an adequate replacement on the site. In some cities this value is doubled for illegally removed trees to account for inst 6)All cities require greater mitigation than for a permit, if a tree is removed without a permit. 7)Most cities also require that a multi-year bond or other form of financial security be posted with the City to ensure that trees are adequately maintai The City of Cupertino does not require the posting of a bond for OAPTRR: PTIONS FOR MENDING ROTECTED REE EMOVAL EGULATIONS There are several options that the City Council may consider for amending the Protected Tree Ordinance. These options include: 1.Increasing regulations (including higher /replacement requiremen findings) 2.Relaxing regulations: a.Deregulate all trees City-wide b.Deregulate all trees in the residential zones (R1, R2, A, A1 and c.Deregulate all trees located at the rear and/or side yards of ho zones (R1, R2, A, A1 and RHS zones) 3.Options for amending the mitigation requirements for the removal of protected trees: a.Continue to require mitigations (replacements/in-lieu fees). b.Reduce mitigations c.Remove mitigation requirements 112 Environmental Review The ordinance amendments would be subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the level of environmental review will depend on the scope of the amendment and the proposed mitigations for tree removal. The environmental review levels will range from a Categorical Exemption for an ordinance that maintains and/or increases the l mitigations to possibly an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for an ordinance that potentially eliminates mitigation for the removal of protected trees. Fiscal Impact The budget estimates for the project are provided in the table below and inclu estimated cost for an environmental consultant, a consultant arb public noticing. The budget estimate is exclusive of staff time required for the project. Relax Regulations Amendment Type More Regulations Provide additional Without mitigation mitigation Environmental Environmentally less Less than significant Environmentally Impact than significant with mitigations Significant Type of CEQA Categorical Mitigated Negative Environmental Review Exemption Declaration Impact Report (EIR) Est. Environmental $5,000 $30,000 $85,000 Consultant Fees Est. Arborist $5,000 $15,000 $15,000 Consultant Fees Outreach & $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 Noticing County Filing Fees$50 $2,206$3,045 Total (Est.)$18,050 $55,206$111,045 Time Frame 5-6 months7-9 months12-15 months Public Noticing and Outreach The estimateaboveanticipates that public noticing and outreach following manner: One (1) postcard to all residents and property owners, Two (2) ½ page newspaper advertisements for the hearings One (1) for Nov. 5, 2012 study session o 113 One (1) for future City Council hearing for review of draft ordi o One (1) facilitated community meeting and A project webpage. Sustainability Impact the City Council. Increasing mitigations for the removal of Protected Trees and/or increasing restrictions on removal of Protected Trees reduce Greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality in the City. Reducing mitigations and/or relaxing regulations increase Greenhouse gases impacts to air quality. The environmental review will identify impacts and mitigations in greater detail. Permit Streamlining Act This projectis legislativein natureand not subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920  65964). Next Steps Following direction from Council, staff will determine the level required and bring a budget amendment to Council to fund the project. Following which, staff will contract with the environmental and other consultants as needed to proceed with the environmental review. The time frame for presenting the draft ordinance will depend on review and level of public outreach. . It is anticipated that the earliest a revised ordinance may be presented to the City Council is late Summer/early Fall 2013, assuming that an EIR is not required. Prepared by:Piu Ghosh, Associate Planner Reviewed by:Gary Chao, City Planner Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Community Development Approved for Submission by:David Brandt, City Manager Attachments: A.Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees, of the Cupertino Municipal Code B.City Council Report dated August 21, 2007 regarding implementati C.Tree Regulation comparison for cities of Cupertino, Saratoga, Los Gatos, Palo Alto & Los Altos 114 CityCupertinoSaratogaLosGatosPaloAltoLos 'Alltrees12dia,Formultitrunk,diasum musttotal12 'Thefollowingtrees8india: 'HeritageTrees BlueOak&BlackOak, 'Thefollowingtrees,10india(22for'Anynativetree6india: CaliforniaBuckeye, multitrunk):CoastLive,Valley,Tan,Black,Blue,or PacificMadrone ProtectedTrees NativeOakTrees,ScrubOaks 'Alltrees4indiainzoningorsubdivision CaliforniaBuckeye,BigLeafMaple,CaliforniaBuckeye, 'ProtectedTrees(CoastLiveOakorValley applications BigLeafMaple,DouglasFir,andCoastRedwood). 11.5diaandCoastRedwood18dia) 'Alltreesexistingattimeofzoningor DeodarCedar&BlueAtlasCedar,'Anyothertree10india 'HeritageTrees subdivisionapprovalandspecificallycalled BayLaurelorCaliforniaBay,'Anystreettree 'DesignatedTrees(whenassociatedwith out,aswellasonanyvacantorundeveloped WesternSycamore'Anyheritagetree,regardlessofsize developmentproject) property,ordeveloped 'Anytreerequiredaspartofanapproved'Anytreerequiredtobeplantedor commercial,office,orindustrialproject developmentappretainedasaconditionofanyapproval 'Anytreerequiredtobeplantedorretained 'PrivacytreesrequiredinR1zoningdistricts'Anytreesrequiredasreplacements byconditionofdevelopmentapplication TreesinROWareprotectedunderaseparate 'Allpublictrees ordinance ordinancep 'Mayalsobeastandoftrees,inwhicheach isdependentonotherforsurvival. Measured4.5abovethegroundwhileAlltreesmeasured3abovenaturalgrade.For Measuredat:Alltreesmeasured4.5abovenaturalgradeAlltreesmeasuredat4.5abovenaturalgradeAll standingonhighsideoftreemultitrunk,measuredabovetrunkunion 'Diseased,dangeroffallingorstructural 'Diseased,dangeroffalling,proximitytofailure,proximitytoproposedorexistingInallcasesifitisdeterminedtobedead, proposedorexistingstructures,andstructures,structuraldamagetoabuilding,orhazardous,adetrimenttoorcrowdingan interferencewithutilityservicespublicnuisance.adjacentprotectedtree,oraPublicNuisance. 'Physicaldamageorthreateneddamageto'Conditionoftreecannotreducedtoless'ForSingleFamilyHomes: 'Irreversiblydiseased,indangeroffalling, improvementsorimpervioussurfacesthansignificantlevelTreetrunkorbasalflareistouchingorunder cancausepotentialdamagetoproposedor 'Thetopographyofthelandandeffectof'Removaloftreewillnotresultinbuildingfootprintofanexistingbuilding existingessentialstructures,orinterfereswith treeremovaluponerosion,soilretentioninconsistentdensityortreecoverinexample,uplifting onsiteutilityservicesorstructures anddiversionofincreasedflowofsurfaceneighborhoodfoundation,contactordamagetoeves,gutter, 'Restrictstheeconomicenjoymentofthe water,particularlyonsteepslopes.'No.ofhealthytreespropertycansupportetc.). RemovalCriteria/propertybyseverelylimitingtheuseofthe 'Theeffectoftheremovalonshade,'Forsubdivisions,treeremovalnotallowedIfnobuildingfootprint,itisdetermined Findings propertynotexperiencedbyothersimilar privacyimpact,scenicbeauty,propertyunlessitrestrictsaccesstopropertythetreeisinthepotentialbuildingarea. properties values,erosioncontlro,generalwelfareandisnecessarytorepairgeoliogchdazarIftheDitrecorhasdtideermnethtathetree propertieslitlllfditilihdIfthDithdtidthttht 'Treesareadetrimenttothesubjectproperty 'No.&ageofhealthytreespropertycan'Retentionofthetreewouldresultinclosetothebuildingareathatconstruction andcannotbeadequatelysupportedaccording supportreductionofotherwiseallowedbuildingwouldresultinthedeathofthetree. togoodurbanforestrypracticesdueto 'Whetherapprovalisindirectconflictwithenvelopeby>25%'Forotherdevelopment,Retentionofthe overplantingorovercrowding purposeorintentofthisArticle'Removalwillnotresultinsubstantialwouldresultinreductionofotherwiseallowed 'Anyotherinformationrelevanttopublicadversechangetositeaestheticandbiologicalbuildingby>25%. health,safety,orgeneralwelfaresignificance,topography,soilretentionand'Forsubdivision,removalisunavoidable 'Restrictionofeconomicenjoymentofdiversionofincreasedflowofsurfacewaterrestrictedaccesstothepropertyornecessary propertyandwhetherornotthereisa'Iftreehasasignificantimpacttopropertyrepairageologichazard(e.g.landslide). feasiblealternative 'Emergency,hazard,ordangerouscondition requiringimmediateaction.Treeremoval'Emergencies,ImmediateHazard(must permitmustbefiledwithin5workingdaysnotifyTownforstafftoconfirmemergency 'Emergencies(immediatehazard) afterremoval.situationandapplyforTreeRemovalPermit 'Deadtrees.Permitmustbefiledwithin5within2daysofdateofremoval).'Emergencies(immediatehazard)(must 'ItfnererencewithPbliucUtilities 'ItfithPbliUtilitiy)g()( Exemptions workingdaysafterremoval.Cityandapplyforpermitwithin5daysof 'Thinningout/removingoftreesin'Deadtreesemergencyremoval) 'Treesspecificallyauthorizedtobe accordancewithatreemanagementplan. removedaspartofanyprojectapproval 'Publicutilityactions,underjurisdictionof'FruitorNuttreelessthan18india(57 PublicUtilitiesCommissionofCA,tomaintaincircumference) safeoperationoffacilities.Nopermitrequired. '$145FilingFee(forreviewandrecords '$130FirstTree '$168FirstTreeApplicationProcessingFee:$125(regardlessmanagement) ApplicationFees'$65AdditionalTree '$85AdditionalTreeofnumberoftrees)'$275TreeRemoval (Ifappdenied,50%refund) '$25PaperworkFee CityCupertinoSaratogaLosGatosPaloAltoLos 'Noticingrequiredforadjacentneighbors 'Iftreeremovalneedspublichearing,thenNonoticinginvolvedwithprivatetrees,only Noticing Noticingrequiredforneighborswithin150$121for150Notice 300feet.publictrees. '$200NoticingDeposit DirectorofPlanningandCommunity ApprovingBody DirectorofCommunityDevelopmentArboristTownArborist Environment AppealingBody PlanningCommissionPlanningCommissionPlanningCommissionCityCouncilCity Required(unlessdeemeddeadorhazardousNotrequiredifstandalonetreeremoval ArboristReport bystaff,arborist,orothercertifiedNotrequiredapplication.RequiredifinconjunctionwithRequired professional)developmentapplication. ArboristPeer MayberequiredifapplicantarboristreportMayberequiredifapplicantarboristreportMayberequiredifapplicantarboristreportMayberequiredifapplicantarboristreport Review notdeemedadequate.notdeemedadequate.notdeemedadequate.deemedadequate. PublicNuisance&Infraction.Inaddition,Infraction.Inaddition,Civilpenaltylevied Misdemeanor.UnauthorizedremovaloftreesCivilpenaltiesofupto$5,000pertreeremoved Misdemeanor/Civilpenaltylevied(nottoexceed$5,000(nottoexceed$5,000perviolation,or usedsolelyforprivacyprotectionshallthereplacementvalueofeachremovedtree, Infraction perviolation,orreplacementvalue,replacementvalueoftree,whicheveris constituteanInfraction.whicheverishighermayalsobeimposed. whicheverishigherexcludesinstallation)higher) Species:Thereplacementtreesshallbethe speciesunlessDirectordeterminesanother specieswouldbemoresuitable. 'Canopysize:49:Two24BoxorOne36 SizeandNumbe r: Box. 'CanopySize49:Two24orOne36Box PerTreeRemoved,measuredbytrunksize(the'Canopysize:1027:Three24BoxorTwo 'CanopySize1027:Three24BoxorTwo TreeReplacement/ followingareguidelines):36Box. Box Sizes/Inlieu 'Upto12inches:One24boxtreeOneormorereplacementsarerequiredat'Canopysize:2840:Four24BoxorTwo 'CanopySize2840:Four24BoxorTwo replacementfee 'Over12ihncesandupto18ihnces:Two24ltiocaonsacceptblaetotheDitrecor.48Box. replacementfee O12ihdt18ihT24ltitbltthDit48Bpy Box boxtrees'Canopysize:4056:Six24BoxorTwo36 'CanopySize4056:Six24BoxorTwo 'Over18inchesandupto36inches:Two24Fordevelopmentapproval:Box&Two48Box. Size+Two36Box boxtreesorone36boxtreeValueofremovedtreesisassessedbasedon'Canopysize:5660:Two24Box&Two36 'CanopySize5660:Two24Box+Two 'Over36inches:One36boxtreeISATreeValuationFormula,andthebox&Two48Box Box,andTwo48BoxSizeorcombination 'HeritageTree:One48boxtreeapplicantisrequiredtoreplantthevaluein'Canopysize:60+:determinedbyDirector. bothTreeCanopy/ValueStandards theformofnewtrees,ortheyhavetheTreereplacementsrequiredunlessitisdead. '60+:Replacethetreewithacombination InlieufeespossibleonlyifanarboristcanoptionofpayingthatamountintothetreeRefertotreereplacementmasterlistfor bothTreeCanopy/ValueStandards. confirmthatthesubjectsitecannotsupportfund.species,residentmaychoose. additionaltrees. Valuedeterminedbyusingmostrecentedition '(¬treecannotbereasonablyplantedonsite, theGuideforPlantAppraisalbytheCouncil ForHeritagetreesandtreesgreaterthan36inthevalueoftheremovedtreeshallbe Tree&LandscapeAppraisers. dia,inlieufeedeterminedbyISATreedeterminedusingtheGuidetoPlant ValuationFormula.AppraisalpreparedbytheCouncilofTree Whendeemedimpossibleorundesirarable andLandscapeAppraisersandshallbepaid plantinsameplace,valuecomputedand toaddorreplacetreesonpublicproperty. elsewhereonsiteorplanttreesonpublic property. CityCupertinoSaratogaLosGatosPaloAltoLos 'Applicationfeeistwiceasmuch. 'Replacementwithmultiplenewtreesto provideequivalentqualityintermsofin termsofcost,aestheticandenvironmental quality,size,height,location,appearance andcharacteristicsoftheremovedtree. 'Thevalueoftheremovedtreeshallbe calculatedperISATreeValuation 'Wherereplacementtreescannotbe $240AdminFee(illegaltreeremoval)+ accomodatedonsiteorcannotprovidethe RetroactiveTreeRemovalFee($2,996)pertreeActualApplicationFee. Replacementratioshallbegreaterthanthat sameaestheticqualityoftheremovedtree, RetroactiveTree removed.Treereplacementsshallfollowthe requiredinaccordwiththeprovisionsof treesshallbeplanted RemovalFees/aboveguidelinesforreplacement.TreeReplacementratioshallbegreaterthanthat ordinance. offsite,orcashpaymenttothestreetfund Requirements removalapplicationmustbefiled(nodeadlinerequiredinaccordancewiththestandardsset shallbemadeoranycombinationofthetwo indicated)intheordinance. shallberequired. 'Ifpaymentintostreetfundonly,then pyy, paymentshallbedoubledtoreflectthe estimatedinstallationcosts 'Ifcombinationofreplacementtreesand paymentintostreetfund,credittothe amountdeterminedforvaluationforthe retailcostofplantedtreesshallbegivenbut nocreditforanyotherinstallation, maintenanceandothercostsincurred. MaintenanceBondorsecuritydeposit MaintenanceBondrequiredfortreeswithBondrequiredfor25%100%ofvalueof requiredfortreeswithdevelopmentAdequatesecurityneedstobeprovidedto Maintenance developmentapplications.beingpreserved/requiredtobepreserved applicationandforreplacementtreesforallensurethatreplacementtreesforillegally Bond NotrequiredforRetroactiveReplacementdevelopment.Includesreplacementforillegally removedtreesfor5yrs,toberecordedwithremovedtreesareprotected. trees.removedtrees. CountyRecorder. ATTACHMENTD CHAPTER14.18:PROTECTEDTREES Section 14.18.010Purpose. 14.18.020Definitions. 14.18.030ActionsProhibited. 14.18.040RetentionPromoted. 14.18.050ProtectedTrees. 14.18.060HeritageTreeDesignation. 14.18.070HeritageTreeList. 14.18.080PlanofProtection. 14.18.090Recordation. 14.18.100HeritageTreeIdentificationTag. 14.18.110EnforcingAuthority. 14.18.120Exemptions. 14.18.130TreeManagementPlan. 14.18.140ApplicationandApprovalAuthorityforTreeRemovalPermit. 14.18.150DirectortoInspect. 14.18.160ApplicationRequirements. 14.18.170NoticeandPosting. 14.18.180ReviewandDeterminationofApplication. 14.18.190TreeReplacement. 14.18.200RetroactiveTreeRemovalPermit. 14.18.210ProtectionDuringConstruction. 14.18.220ProtectionPlanBeforePermitGranted. 14.18.230NoticeofActionon/«¸³¯ºK ¶¶«§² 14.18.240Penalty. 14.18.010Purpose. Inenactingthischapter,theCityofCupertinorecognizesthesubstantialeconomic, environmentalandaestheticimportanceofitstreepopulation.Protectedtreesareconsidereda valuableassettothecommunity.Theprotectionofsuchtreesinallzoningdistrictsisintended topreservethisvaluableasset.TheCityfindsthatthepreservationofprotectedtreesonprivate andpublicproperty,andtheprotectionofalltreesduringconstruction,isnecessaryforthebest interestsoftheCityandofthecitizensandpublicthereof,inorderto: 118 A.Protectpropertyvalues; B.Assurethecontinuanceofqualitydevelopment; C.Protectaestheticandscenicbeauty; D.Assistintheabsorptionofrainwaters,therebypreventingerosionoftopsoil,protecting againstfloodhazardsandtheriskoflandslides; E.Counteractairpollutantsbyprotectingtheknowncapacityoftreestoproducepure oxygenfromcarbondioxide; F.Maintaintheclimaticbalance(e.g.,provideshade); G.Helpdecreasepotentialdamagefromwindvelocities; Fortheabovereasons,theCityfindsitisinthepublicinterest,convenienceandnecessityto enactregulationscontrollingthecareandremovalofprotectedtreeswithintheCityinorderto retainasmanytreesaspossible,consistentwiththeindividualrightstodevelop,maintainand enjoyprivateandpublictheirpropertytothefullestpossibleextent. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§2,1991;Ord.1543,§2,1991) 14.18.020Definitions. Unlessotherwisestated,thefollowingdefinitionspertaintothischapter. A.CitymeanstheCityofCupertinosituatedintheCountyofSantaClara,California. B.Developedresidentialmeansanylegallotofrecord,zonedsinglefamily,duplex, agriculturalresidentialandresidentialhillside,withanystructure(principaloraccessory) constructedthereon. C.Developmentapplicationmeansanapplicationforlandalterationordevelopment, includingbutnotlimitedtosubdivisionofproperty,rezoning,architecturalandsiteapproval, twostoryresidentialpermit,minorresidentialpermit,planneddevelopmentpermit,variance, andusepermit. D.Heritagetreemeansanytreeorgroveoftreeswhich,becauseoffactorsincluding,but notlimitedto,itshistoricvalue,uniquequality,girth,heightorspecies,hasbeenfoundbythe PlanningCommissiontohaveaspecialsignificancetothecommunity.SeeAttachedAppendix A. E.OwnershallincludethelegalownerofrealpropertywithintheCity,andanylesseeof suchowner. F.Personshallincludeanindividual,afirm,anassociation,acorporation,aco partnership,andthelessees,trustees,receivers,agents,servantsandemployeesofanysuch person. G.PrivatepropertyshallincludeallpropertynotownedbytheCityoranyotherpublic agency. H.PublicpropertyincludesallpropertyownedbytheCityoranyotherpublicagency. I.ProtectedtreemeansanyclassoftreespecifiedinSection14.18.050. 119 J.SpecimentreemeansanyclassoftreespecifiedinSection14.18.050B. K.Treeremovalmeansanyofthefollowing: 1.Completeremoval,suchascuttingtothegroundorextraction,ofaprotectedtree;or 2.Severepruning,whichmeanstheremovalofmorethanonefourthofthefunctioning leafandstemareaofaprotectedtreeinanytwelvemonthperiodasdeterminedbythe CommunityDevelopmentDirector. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2056,(part),2010;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1886,(part),2001;Ord. 1835,(part),1999;Ord.1810,(part),1999;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord.1573,§3,1991;Ord.1543, §3,1991) 14.18.030ActionsProhibited. A.Itisunlawfultoremoveorkillanyprotectedtree;and B.Itisunlawfultoremoveanyprotectedtreeinanyzoningdistrictwithoutfirstobtaining atreeremovalpermitasrequiredbythischapter. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.040RetentionPromoted. Protectedtreesareconsideredanassettothecommunityandtheprideofownershipand retentionofthesespeciesshallbepromoted.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmay conductanannualreviewofthestatusofheritagetreesandreportthefindingstothePlanning Commission. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord.1543,§4.1,1991) 14.18.050ProtectedTrees. ExceptasotherwiseprovidedinSection14.18.120,thefollowingtreesshallnotberemoved fromprivateorpublicproperty,includingstreettreessubjecttoChapter14.12oftheCupertino MunicipalCode,withoutfirstobtainingatreeremovalpermit: A.Heritagetreesinallzoningdistricts. B.Alltreesofthefollowingspeciesonprivateproperty(SeeAppendixB)thathavea minimumsingletrunkdiameterofteninches(thirtyoneinchcircumference)orminimum multitrunkdiameteroftwentyinches(sixtythreeinchcircumference)measuredfourand onehalffeetfromnaturalgradeareconsideredSpecimentrees: 1.Quercus(nativeoaktreespecies),including: a.Quercusagrifolia(CoastLiveOak); b.Quercuslobata(ValleyOak); c.Quercuskelloggii(BlackOak); d.Quercusdouglasii(BlueOak); e.Quercuswislizeni(InteriorLiveOak); 2.Aesculuscalifornica(CaliforniaBuckeye); 120 3.Acermacrophyllum(BigLeafMaple); 4.Cedrusdeodara(DeodarCedar); 5.CedrusatlanticaGlauca(BlueAtlasCedar); 6.Umbellulariacalifornica(BayLaurelorCaliforniaBay);and 7.Platanusracemosa(WesternSycamore). C.Anytreerequiredtobeplantedorretainedaspartofanapproveddevelopment application,buildingpermit,treeremovalpermitorcodeenforcementactioninallzoning districts. D.ApprovedprivacyprotectionplantinginR1zoningdistricts. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.060HeritageTreeDesignation. Applicationfordesignationofaheritagetreemayonlybeinitiatedbytheownerofpropertyon whichthetreeislocated,unlessthetreeislocatedonpublicorquasipublicproperty.Any personmayapplyfordesignationofaheritagetreeifthetree(s)arelocatedonpublicorquasi publicproperty.Anapplicationforaheritagetreedesignationshallinclude: 1.Assessorsparcelnumberofthesite; 2.Descriptiondetailingtheproposedheritagetreesspecialaesthetic,cultural,orhistorical valueofsignificancetothecommunity;and 3.Photographsofthetree(s). ApplicationfordesignationofaheritagetreeshallbereferredtothePlanningCommissionfor reviewanddeterminationinaccordancewithChapter19.12oftheCupertinoMunicipalCode. ThePlanningCommission,may,byresolution,designateatreeorgroveoftreesasaheritage tree(s). (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord. 1543,§4.2,1991) 14.18.070HeritageTreeList. Aheritagetreelistshallbecreatedandamendedbyresolution.Thelistshallincludethereason fordesignation,treecircumference,speciesname,commonname,locationandheritagetree number. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§4.3,1991) 14.18.080PlanofProtection. Aspartofadevelopmentapplication: A.Theapprovalauthorityshalladoptamaintenanceplanforprotectedtrees.Itshallbethe propertyowner(s)responsibilitytoprotectthetrees. B.PrivacyprotectionplantinginR1zoningdistrictsshallbemaintained.Landscape plantingmaintenanceincludesirrigation,fertilizationandpruningasnecessarytoyielda 121 growthrateexpectedforaparticularspecies.Whereprivacyprotectionplantingdiesitmustbe replacedwithinthirtydayswiththelocation,sizeandspeciesdescribedinOrdinanceNo.1799 (privacyprotection)anditsappendix.Theaffectedpropertyowner,withprivacyprotection plantingonhisorherlot,isrequiredtomaintaintherequiredplantingandshallberequiredto complywithSection14.18.090. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1810,(part),1999;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord. 1543,§§4.4,4.5,1991) 14.18.090Recordation. AllprotectedtreesrequiredtoberetainedaspartofadevelopmentapplicationunderSection 14.18.050C,exceptfortreesonpublicproperty,shallhaveretentioninformationplacedonthe propertydeedviaaconservationeasementinfavoroftheCity,privatecovenant,orother methodasdeemedappropriatebytheDirector.Therecordationshallbecompletedbythe propertyownerpriortofinalmaporbuildingpermitissuance,oratatimeasdesignatedbythe DirectorofCommunityDevelopmentwhennotassociatedwithafinalmaporbuildingpermit issuance. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§4.6,1991;Ord.1543,§4.6,1991) 14.18.100HeritageTreeIdentificationTag. Heritagetreesshallhaveonthemanidentificationtag,purchasedandplacedbytheCity, inscribedwiththefollowinginformation: CITYOFCUPERTINOHERITAGETREENO._______isprotectedbytheProtectedTrees Ordinance.DonotpruneorcutbeforecontactingtheCityPlanningDepartmentat(408)777 3308. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§4.7,1991) 14.18.110EnforcingAuthority. TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment,orhisorherauthorizedrepresentative,shallbe chargedwiththeenforcementofthischapter. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011) 14.18.120Exemptions. Thefollowingsituationsdonotrequireatreeremovalpermitpriortoremoval: A.Removalofaprotectedtreeincaseofemergencycausedbythehazardousordangerous conditionofatree,requiringimmediateactionforthesafetyoflifeorproperty(e.g.,atree abouttotoppleontoaprincipledwellingduetoheavywindvelocities,atreedeemedunsafe,or atreehavingthepotentialtodamageexistingorproposedessentialstructures),uponorderof theDirectorofCommunityDevelopment,oranymemberofthesherifforfiredepartment. However,asubsequentapplicationfortreeremovalmustbefiledwithinfiveworkingdaysas describedinSections14.18.140through14.18.160.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment willapprovetheretroactivetreeremovalpermitapplicationandmayrequiretreereplacements inconjunctionwiththeapproval.Noapplicationfeeorotherapprovalprocessshallberequired inthissituation. 122 B.Deadtrees,intheopinionoftheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment.However,a subsequentapplicationforatreeremovalmustbefiledwithinfiveworkingdaysasdescribed inSection14.18.140through14.18.160.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentwillapprove theretroactivetreeremovalpermitapplicationandmayrequiretreereplacementsin conjunctionwiththeapproval.Noapplicationfeeorotherapprovalprocessshallberequired inthissituation. C.Thinningout/removingoftreesinaccordancewitharecordedtreemanagementplan thathasbeenapprovedinaccordancewithSection14.18.130.Notreeremovalpermitis required. D.Publicutilityactions,underthejurisdictionofthePublicUtilitiesCommissionofthe StateofCalifornia;asmaybenecessarytocomplywiththeirsafetyregulations,ortomaintain thesafeoperationoftheirfacilities. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1835,(part),1999;Ord.1715,(part),1996;Ord. 1630,(part),1993;Ord.1543,§7.1,1991) 14.18.130TreeManagementPlan. Atreemanagementplanmaybeapprovedforapropertythatincludescriteriafortheremoval ofcertaintreesinthefuturebyanticipatingtheeventualgrowthoftreesonthepropertyand specifyingatimeframeinwhichthetreesmayrequireremovaltopreventovercrowdingof trees.Thepropertyownershallhaveretentioninformationplacedonthepropertyin accordancewithSection14.18.090,referringtotheapprovedtreemanagementplan.Foratree managementplanassociatedwithadevelopmentapplication,thetreemanagementplanshall beapprovedinconjunctionwiththeapprovalofalandscapeplanonthesubjectproperty.The treemanagementplanshallincludethefollowing: A.Atreeplanindicatingallexistingtreestoberetainedandallnewtreestobeplantedthat arepartoftheapprovedlandscapeplan. B.Labelingofthespecies,sizeinDBHatplantingtimeorattimeoftreemanagementplan approval,locationandeventualgrowthsizeofeachtreeontheplan. C.Awrittenexplanationofthespecifictree(s)toberemovedtopreventovercrowding, includingtheeventualgrowthsizeinDBHatwhichtimethetreeistoberemoved,andatime frameinwhichthetree(s)willreachtheeventualgrowthsize. Thetreemanagementplanshallbeapprovedbytheauthorityapprovingthelandscapeplan priortorecordationofthetreemanagementplan.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment shallreviewandapprovethetreemanagementplanwherenolandscapeplanisrequired. Treesthatarelistedtoberemovedinthetreemanagementplanmayberemovedwithinthe specifiedtimeframeperthetreemanagementplanwithoutatreeremovalpermit,exceptfor treesdesignatedasheritagetrees.Noheritagetreesshallbepermittedtoberemovedin conjunctionwithanapprovedtreemanagementplan. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 123 14.18.140ApplicationandApprovalAuthorityforTreeRemovalPermit. A.Nopersonshalldirectlyorindirectlyremoveorcausetoberemovedanyprotectedtree withoutfirstobtainingatreeremovalpermit,unlesssuchtreeremovalisexemptperSection 14.18.130.ApplicationforatreeremovalpermitshallbefiledwiththeDepartmentof CommunityDevelopmentonformsprescribedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment andshallstatethenumberandlocationofthetreestoberemoved,andthereasonforremoval ofeach. B.ApplicationsforprotectedtreeremovalshallbereferredtotheDirectorofCommunity DevelopmentforfinalreviewanddeterminationinaccordancewithChapter19.12,exceptfor heritagetreeremovalsandtreeremovalsinconjunctionwithdevelopmentapplications.The DirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmayapprove,conditionallyapprove,ordenythe applicationforatreeremovalpermit.Atreereplacementrequirementmayberequiredin conjunctionwiththetreeremovalpermit.Theapplicabletreeremovalpermitfeeshallapply. C.Applicationfortreeremovalsinconjunctionwithadevelopmentapplicationshallbe consideredbytheapprovalauthorityconcerningthesamepropertyastheaffectedtreeremoval permitapplication,andthedeterminationonthetreeremovalpermitshallbemade concurrentlybytheapprovalauthority. D.ApplicationforremovalofaheritagetreeshallbereferredtothePlanningCommission forfinalreviewanddeterminationinaccordancewithChapter19.12. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord.1573,§8.1(part),1991; Ord.1543,§8.1(part),1991) 14.18.150DirectortoInspect. Uponreceiptofanapplicationforremovalofaprotectedtree,theDirectorofCommunity Developmentorhisorherauthorizedrepresentativewill,withinfourteendays,inspectthe premisesandevaluatetherequestpursuanttoSection14.18.180ofthischapter.Priorityof inspectionshallbegiventothoserequestsbasedonhazardordisease.TheDirectorof CommunityDevelopmentmayreferanysuchapplicationtoanotherdepartmentortothe PlanningCommissionoranappropriatecommitteeoftheCityforareportand recommendation.Whereappropriate,theDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmayalso requiretheapplicant,athisorherownexpense,tofurnishareportfromanarboristcertifiedby theInternationalSocietyofArboriculture. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§8.1(part),1991;Ord.1543,§8.1(part), 1991) 14.18.160ApplicationRequirements. Arequestforremovalofanyheritageorprotectedtreeshallincludethefollowing: A.Applicationinformation.Applicationforatreeremovalpermitshallbeavailablefrom andfiledwiththeCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentandshallcontainthefollowing information,unlesswaivedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment: 1.Awrittenexplanationofwhythetree(s)shouldberemoved; 2.Photograph(s)ofthetree(s); 124 3.AnarboristreportfromanarboristcertifiedbytheInternationalSocietyof ArboriculturewhenrequiredbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment; 4.Signatureofthepropertyownerandhomeownersassociation(whenapplicable) withproofofavoteofthehomeownersassociation; 5.Replantingplan; 6.OtherinformationdeemednecessarybytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentto evaluatethetreeremovalrequest; 7.Permitfee,whereapplicable; 8.Treesurveyplanindicatingthenumber,location(s),varietyandsize(measuredfour andahalffeetabovegrade)oftree(s)toberemoved. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1835,(part),1999;Ord.1715,(part),1996; amendedduring12/93supplement;Ord.1630,(part),1993;Ord.1543,§8.1(part),1991) 14.18.170NoticeandPosting. A.NoticeshallbeprovidedasindicatedinSection19.12.030. B.Anoticeshallbepostedinaccordwiththerequirementsof19.12.110(F). C.WhereapprovalofatreeremovalpermitisgrantedbytheCity,thepropertyowner shallpostthetreeremovalpermitonsiteuntilthetreeisremovedorshallpresentproofofthe treeremovalpermituponrequest. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 14.18.180ReviewandDeterminationofApplication. A.Theapprovalauthorityshallapproveatreeremovalpermitonlyaftermakingatleast oneofthefollowingfindings: 1.Thatthetreeortreesareirreversiblydiseased,areindangeroffalling,cancause potentialdamagetoexistingorproposedessentialstructures,orinterfereswithprivateon siteutilityservicesandcannotbecontrolledorremediedthroughreasonablerelocationor modificationofthestructureorutilityservices; 2.Thatthelocationofthetreesrestrictstheeconomicenjoymentofthepropertyby severelylimitingtheuseofpropertyinamannernottypicallyexperiencedbyownersof similarlyzonedandsituatedproperty,andtheapplicanthasdemonstratedtothe satisfactionoftheapprovalauthoritythattherearenoreasonablealternativestopreserve thetree(s). 3.Thattheprotectedtree(s)areadetrimenttothesubjectpropertyandcannotbe adequatelysupportedaccordingtogoodurbanforestrypracticesduetotheoverplantingor overcrowdingoftreesonthesubjectproperty. B.Theapprovalauthoritymayrefertheapplicationtoanotherdepartmentorcommission forareportandrecommendation. C.Theapprovalauthorityshalleitherapprove,conditionallyapproveordenythe application. 125 D.Theapprovalauthoritymayrequireatreereplacementrequirementinconjunctionwith atreeremovalpermit. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1573,§9.1,1991;Ord.1543,§9.1,1991) 14.18.190TreeReplacement. A.Theapprovalauthoritymayimposethefollowingreplacementstandardsforapproval ofeachtreetoberemovedinconjunctionwithanapprovedtreeremovalpermit,unless deemedotherwisebytheapprovalauthority:Replacementtrees,ofaspeciesandsizeas designatedbytheapprovalauthorityandconsistentwiththereplacementvalueofeachtreeto beremoved,shallbeplantedonthesubjectpropertyonwhichthetree(s)aretoberemoved. Theapprovalauthorityshallworkwiththeapplicant/propertyownerofthetreeremoval permittodeterminethelocationofthereplacementtree(s).TableAmaybeusedasabasisfor thisrequirement.Thepersonrequestingthetreeremovalpermitshallpaythecostof purchasing,plantingandmaintainingthereplacementtrees. B.Ifareplacementtreefortheremovalofanonheritagetreeortreewithtrunksizeequal toorlessthanthirtysixinchescannotbereasonablyplantedonthesubjectproperty,aninlieu treereplacementfeebaseduponthepurchaseandinstallationcostofthereplacementtreeas determinedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentshallbepaidtotheCitystreefundto: 1.Addorreplacetreesonpublicpropertyinthevicinityofthesubjectproperty;or 2.AddtreesorlandscapingonotherCityproperty. C.Forremovalofaheritagetreeortreewithatrunksizegreaterthanthirtysixinches,the inlieutreereplacementfeeshallbebaseduponthevaluationoftheremovedtreebyusingthe mostrecenteditionoftheISAGuideforPlantAppraisalpublishedbytheCouncilofTreeand LandscapeAppraisers. TableAReplacementTreeGuidelines TrunkSizeofRemovedTree(MeasuredReplacementTrees 4½feetabovegrade) Upto12inchesOne24boxtree Over12inchesandupto18inchesTwo24boxtrees Over18inchesandupto36inchesTwo24boxtreesorOne36boxtree Over36inchesOne36boxtree HeritagetreeOne48boxtree (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011) 14.18.200RetroactiveTreeRemovalPermit. Anapplicationforaretroactivetreeremovalshallberequiredforanyprotectedtreeremoved priortoapprovalofatreeremovalpermit.TheapplicationshallbefiledwiththeDepartmentof CommunityDevelopmentonformsprescribedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment andshallbesubjecttotherequirementsofatreeremovalpermit.Theapplicationshallpaya retroactivetreeremovalpermitfee. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 126 14.18.210ProtectionDuringConstruction. Protectedtreesandothertrees/plantingsrequiredtoberetainedbyvirtueofadevelopment application,buildingpermit,ortreeremovalpermitshallbeprotectedduringdemolition, gradingandconstructionoperations.Theapplicantshallguaranteetheprotectionofthe existingtree(s)onthesitethroughafinancialinstrumentacceptabletotheDirectorof CommunityDevelopment. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§10.1,1991) 14.18.220ProtectionPlanBeforePermitGranted. A.AplantoprotecttreesdescribedinSection14.18.210shallbesubmittedtotheDirector ofPublicWorksandtotheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentpriortoissuanceofa demolition,gradingorbuildingpermit.Theplanshallbepreparedandsignedbyalicensed landscapearchitectorarboristcertifiedbytheInternationalSocietyofArboricultureandshall beapprovedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment.TheDirectorofCommunity Developmentshallevaluatethetreeprotectionplanbaseduponthetreeprotectionstandards containedinAppendixAattheendofthischapter. B.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmaywaivetherequirementforatree protectionplanbothwheretheconstructionactivityisdeterminedtobeminorinnature(minor buildingorsitemodificationinanyzone)andwheretheproposedactivitywillnotsignificantly modifythegroundareawithinthedriplineortheareaimmediatelysurroundingthedripline ofthetree.TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentshalldeterminewhethertheconstruction activityisminorinnatureandwhethertheactivitywillsignificantlymodifythegroundarea aroundthetreedripline. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1543,§10.2,1991) 14.18.230NoticeofActionon0¤±¬¨³!¯¯¤ « A.Noticeofthedecisiononanapplicationforaprotectedtreeremovalpermitbythe approvalauthorityshallbemailedtotheapplicant. B.Anydecisionmadebytheapprovalauthorityonthetreeremovalapplicationmaybe appealedinaccordancewithChapter19.12. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011) 14.18.240Penalty. Violationofthischapterisdeemedanmisdemeanorinfractionunlessotherwisespecified.Any personorpropertyowners,orhisorheragentorrepresentativewhoengagesintreecuttingor removalwithoutavalidtreeremovalpermitisguiltyofanmisdemeanorinfractionasoutlined inChapter1.12ofthiscodeand/ormayberequiredtocomplywithSections14.18.140and 14.18.160.Notwithstandinganyotherprovisionsofthissection,theunauthorizedremovalofa treeplantedsolelyforprivacyprotectionpurposespursuanttoSection14.18.080(C)shall constituteaninfraction. (Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007;Ord.1810,(part),1999;Ord.1731,(part),1996;Ord. 1543,§12.1,1991) 127 Appendix A 128 129 APPENDIXBA STANDARDSFORTHEPROTECTIONOFTREESDURINGGRADINGAND CONSTRUCTIONOPERATIONS Thepurposeofthisappendixistooutlinestandardspertainingtotheprotectionoftrees describedinSection14.18.220ofChapter14.18.Thestandardsarebroad.Alicensedlandscape architectorInternationalSocietyofArboriculturecertifiedarboristshallberetainedtocertify theapplicabilityofthestandardsanddevelopadditionalstandardsasnecessarytoensurethe propertycare,maintenance,andsurvivaloftreesdesignatedforprotection. Standards 1.Asiteplanshallbeprepareddescribingtherelationshipofproposedgradingandutility trenchingtothetreesdesignatedforpreservation.Constructionandgradingshouldnot significantlyraiseorlowerthegroundlevelbeneathtreedriplines.Ifthegroundlevelis proposedformodificationbeneaththedripline,thearchitect/arboristshalladdressand mitigatetheimpacttothetree(s). 2.Alltreestobepreservedonthepropertyandalltreesadjacenttothepropertyshallbe protectedagainstdamageduringconstructionoperationsbyconstructingafourfoothighfence aroundthedripline,andarmorasneeded.Theextentoffencingandarmoringshallbe determinedbythelandscapearchitect.Thetreeprotectionshallbeplacedbeforeanyexcavation orgradingisbegunandshallbemaintainedinrepairforthedurationoftheconstructionwork. 3.Noconstructionoperationsshallbecarriedonwithinthedriplineareaofanytree designatedtobesavedexceptasisauthorizedbytheDirectorofCommunityDevelopment. 4.Iftrenchingisrequiredtopenetratetheprotectionbarrierforthetree,thesectionof trenchinthedriplineshallbehanddugsoastoprecludethecuttingofroots.Priortoinitiating anytrenchingwithinthebarrierapprovalbystaffwithconsultationofanarboristshallbe completed. 5.Treeswhichrequireanydegreeoffillaroundthenaturalgradeshallbeguardedby recognizedstandardsoftreeprotectionanddesignoftreewells. 6.Theareaunderthedriplineofthetreeshallbekeptclean.Noconstructionmaterialsnor chemicalsolventsshallbestoredordumpedunderatree. 7.Firesforanyreasonshallnotbemadewithinfiftyfeetofanytreeselectedtoremainand shallbelimitedinsizeandkeptunderconstantsurveillance. 8.Thegeneralcontractorshalluseatreeservicelicensee,asdefinedbyCaliforniaBusiness andProfessionalCode,topruneandcutoffthebranchesthatmustberemovedduringthe gradingorconstruction.Nobranchesorrootsshallbecutunlessatfirstreviewedbythe landscapearchitect/arboristwithapprovalofstaff. 130 9.Anydamagetoexistingtreecrownsorrootsystemsshallberepairedimmediatelybyan approvedtreesurgeon. 10.Nostorageofconstructionmaterialsorparkingshallbepermittedwithinthedripline areaofanytreedesignatedtobesaved. 11.Treeprotectionregulationsshallbepostedonprotectivefencingaroundtreestobe protected.(Ord.2085,§2(part),2011;Ord.2003,2007) 131 APPENDIXBC REFERENCEPHOTOSOFSPECIMENTREESPROTECTEDINACCORDANCEWITH SECTION14.18.035 EXAMPLESOFSOMEOAKTREEVARIETIES VALLEYOAK (Quercuslobata) COASTLIVEOAK (Quercusagrifolia) 132 BLUE OAK ›vÒ;©-Ò­7šÒmŒ­zzœ BLACKOAK (Quercuskelloggii) INTERIORLIVEOAK (Quercuswislizeni) 133 CALIFORNIABUCKEYE (Aesculuscalifornica) BIGLEAFMAPLE (Acermacrophyllum) 134 DEODARCEDAR (Cedrusdeodara) BLUEATLASCEDAR (Cedrusatlantica&²§»©§ 135 WESTERNSYCAMORE (Platanusracemosa) BAYLAURELORCALIFORNIABAY (Umbellulariacalifornica) 136 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010UPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March 19, 2013 Subject Appeal of a decision of the Director of Public Works regarding the relocation of a utility pole. Recommended Action Deny the appeal,upholding the Directors decision to require the relocation ofthe existingutility pole,located near the northeast corner of appellants property, to a location behind the proposed new curb and gutter required along the property frontage. Description Mr. Paul Kalra, owner and developer of a property located at 105 Avenue, has appealedaPublic Works requirement to relocate an existing utility pole as shownon the approved building permit plan set,dated August 3, 2012,for the construction of a new two-story single family residence and a new secondary dwelling unit on the subject property. Discussion On August 3, 2012, the Building Department approved apermit to construct a new two- story single family dwelling,withasecondary dwelling unit,at10569 San Leandro Drive. The Public Works Department, as part of the building permit approval,required construction of approximately 25 linear feet ofsidewalk, curb and gutter, and associated asphalt pavement. Due to the location of these improvements, an existing utility pole,located near the northeast corner of the subject property, wouldbe located on the street side of the curb and gutter. The Public WorksDepartment requiredthat the property ownerrelocate the existing utility pole to a locationbehind the curb and gutter.Therequired frontageimprovementsand pole relocation werebondedby the propertyownerprior to issuance of the building permit, and the City currently possesses a bond in the amount of $30,000 as security for the entire amount of work in the right-of-way, including the pole relocation. 137 On August 14, 2012, after the property owner had received his building permit, a letter was sent to the Public Works Department requesting the City release the portion of the bond associated with the pole relocation. This correspondence indicated that the pole was not located on the appellants property and that an easement would be needed from the adjacent property owner in order to have the pole relocated. The responded by showing that the required frontage improvements wer utility pole. Also, the City requested a utility easement from the adjacent property owner, which was subsequently granted to the City. Since the initial correspondence, numerous meetings and letters have been exchanged, concluding with a formal appeal submitted by the property owner, February 27, 2013 (See Attachment A for the appeal form). Basis of Appeal (appellantscomments in Italic): According to the appellant, and as stated on the appeal form: Applicant has been ordered to relocate pole on neighbors proper The applicant, prior to officially filing for a permit, was notified in March 2012 that the pole relocation would be required as part of the street improvem development. This was also a condition of his planning permit iJune 2012 and his Public Works permit issued in August2012. Applicants driveway doesnot create any safety issues. With the pavement widening and installation of curb, gutter, and the project, the utility pole would be located in the paved areaof the street. When right- of-way or easements are not available to support pole relocation, bollards and reflective markers are typically used to make the roadway safe, however thisituation is not desirable from a long-term aesthetic perspective. Relocating the pole enhances both vehicular and bicycle safety. Applicants deposit was obtained with misrepresentations contrary to municipa and related precedents. It is acknowledged that a guy wire, used to support the utility pole, was not known to be required by PG&E at the time of permit issuance. However, once the necessity of the guy wire was established, it was determined that the proposed relocation of the pole would cause the guy wire to be located within the neighboring pr, and that an easement would be necessary to accommodate the guy wire. If the City was unable to obtain an easement to address the guy wire, it would have been determined the pole would need to be left in its existing location with safety improvements such as bollards and reflective markers installed. The portion of the bthe pole 138 relocation would have been released;however a contribution equivalent tohalf the cost of the relocation would have likely been required for the future City is creating disputes between neighbors. The City always seeks to find the most equitable solutions to complete infrastructure required to support new development. It is not apparent how the requirement has created disputes. Conclusion The Public Works Department has determined that the utility pole is being impactedby the development of 10569 San Leandro Drive, and hasrequired the relocation of the utility pole as part of the public street frontage improvements for the development. Leaving the pole in its current location creates a less than ideere the pole would remain within the limits of the paved roadway, and where the responsibility to relocate the pole would be placed solely upon future development of the neighboring property. ____________________________________ Prepared by:Chad Mosley, Associate Civil Engineer Reviewed by:Timm Borden, Director of Public Works Approved for Submission by:David Brandt,City Manager Attachments: A Appeal B  Street View Photograph of Utility Pole Location C  Portion of Plan Showing Required Street Improvements and Pole Relocation 139 140 141 142 NEIGHBOR'S POLE ATTACHMENT B STREET VIEW PHOTOGRAPH OF UTILITY POLE LOCATION 143 POLEINQUESTION NEWPAVEMENT NEWFACEOFCURB ATTACHMENTC PORTIONOFPLANSHOWINGREQUIREDSTREET IMPROVEMENTSANDPOLERELOCATION 144 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March 19, 2013 Subject Approve actions to further streamlineCityCouncils Consent Calendar. Recommended Action Adopt Draft Resolution No. 13-____approving streamlining of the consent calendar by amending the approval authority for Alcohol Beverage Control Licenses, Bingo Permits, Improvement Agreements and Public Improvement Acceptance. Conduct first reading of draft Ordinance No. 13-___ for Bingo permits. Conduct first reading of draft Ordinance No. 13-___ for Acceptance of Public Improvements. Background The Citys current audit firm, Maze & Associates, proposed streamlining of the Citys Consent Calendar in conjunction with the Fiscal Year 9/10 manage recommendation was offered to save Council and staff time and cost. Council implemented several of these recommendations in 2011. The diffeapprovals recommended to be deferred to staff in this report are proposed would save Council and staff time and cost and the approvals are off of the consent calendar for discussion. Discussion Research has been performed on the categories listed above via the City Attorneys office and with other municipalities with the following results: Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) LicensesThe Director of Community Development, or permitted designee, is recommended to approve permits for Public Convenience and Necessity for Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) licenses. No municipal codechange is needed. 145 Bingo Permits New bingo permits and renewal of existing bingo permits are recommended to be approved by the City Manager. Amunicipal code change is required to enact this modification. Improvement Agreements Related to DevelopmentThe municipal code currently allows for Improvement Agreements for the installation of public infrastructure to be accepted by the City Engineer and approved as to form by the City Attorney. Acceptance of this resolution would align this process with what is already allowed in the municipal code. No municipal code change is required. Acceptance of Public Improvements  The municipal code currently allows for Public Improvements, constructed for projects that are less than four lots, to be accepted by the City Engineer. This streamlining action would also permit the City Engineer to accept public improvements for projects with five or more lots. A municipal code change is required to enact this modification. Fiscal Impact Elimination of these categories from the Consent Calendar is est considerable staff and Council time per meeting for compilation, indexing, aproving and reviewing these items. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approvthe streamlining ofAlcoholic Beverage Control licenses, Bingo Permits, Improvement Acceptance of Public Improvements. _____________________________________ Preparedby:Chad Mosley, Associate Engineer Reviewed by:Timm Borden, Director of Public Works Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Community Development Approved for Submission by:David Brandt, City Manager Attachment(s): A-Draft Resolution B -Draft Ordinance for Bingo permits C -Redline Version of Draft Ordinance for Bingo permits D -Draft Ordinance for Acceptance of Public Improvements E-Redline Version of Draft Ordinance for Acceptance of Public Improvements 146 RESOLUTION NO. 13-___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO TO APPROVESTREAMLING OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR RATIFICATION PROCESS WHEREAS, the Citys audit firm, Maze & Associates, proposed streamlining of the Consent Calendar in 2010 and Council implemented several of these recommendations in 2011; and WHEREAS, this implementation of Council consent calendar items willsave Council and staff timeand cost;and WHEREAS, the Government Code and best practices have eliminated the necessity of additional Council approval for items such asAlcohol Beverage Control Licenses, Bingo Permits, approval of Improvement Agreements and Acceptance of Public Improvements installed by private development projects; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby approves these actions to further streamlineCitys Councils Consent Calendar. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of t Cupertino this 19th day of March,2013by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST:APPROVED: _______________________________________________________ Grace Schmidt, City ClerkOrrin Mahoney, Mayor 147 ORDINANCE NO. 13- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 5.32 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BINGO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 5.32 arehereby amended to read as follows: 5.32.060 Staffing and Operation. A bingo game shall be operated and staffed only by members of th organization which organized it. Thosemembers shall not receive a profit, wage or salary from any bingo game. Only an organization authorized to c by license issued pursuant to this chapter shall operate a game, promotion, supervision or any other phase of such game. This section does not preclude the employment of security personnel who are not members of the organization at such a bingo game by the authorized organization 5.32.090 Bingo Equipment. All equipment used in the operation of bingo games shall be owned by the organization authorized by license to conduct such bingo games. 5.32.100 Financial Interest. No individual corporation, partnership or other legal entity exc organization authorized by license to conduct a bingo game shall hold a financial interest in the conduct of such bingo game. 5.32.190License Required. No organization shall conduct a bingo game without first obtaininlicense from the City Manager to do so. 148 5.32.200Application for License Required. Written application for a license required by this chapter shall under penalty of perjury and filed with the City Clerk. Such ap A. Name of organization; names, signatures and addresses of organization; B. Days and hours of operation of bingo games; C. Attached copies of certificates or letters evidencing exe in Section 5.32.030; D. Address of premises where bingo games will be conducted; E. Statement of ownership or lease of premises; F. Purpose(s) for which such premises are used by the organi G. Statement of ownership of bingo equipment used in the operation of bingo games; H. Statement of consent for Sheriff to inspect any bank acco derived from bingo games; I. Name of each individual, corporation, partnership or otheentity which has a financial interest in the conduct of the bingo games; J. Name of person responsible for the operation of the bingo K. Such further information as may be required by the City Manager. 5.32.210 Authority of the Investigation and Recommendation by Sheriff. A. The City Manager shall submit each application to the Sheriff fo investigation and recommendation. B. The Sheriff shall have the authority to obtain criminal h for each person operating or assisting in the operation of a bingo game for purpo of his investigation. If he finds that such operators or person operation of a bingo game have been convicted within the past fi involving lotteries, gambling, larceny, perjury, bribery, extortion, fraud or similar 149 crimes involving moral turpitude, he may not recommend issuance question. 5.32.220 Investigation and Recommendation by Other City Departme Agencies. The City Manager shall submit each application to the following City departments or other agencies for investigation and recommendati A. Chief of the Central Fire District as to any fire hazard question; B. County Health Officer as to the health and sanitary condi in question; C. Chief Building Inspector as to compliance with City build D. Director of Planning as to compliance with City zoningrequirements. 5.32.230 Opportunity for Applicant to Review Records. A.Each applicant shall have the opportunity, upon request,to review all records, papers, files and any other evidence relating to the ap license except criminal history informationbefore the application is signed by the City Manager. 5.32.240 Final Action by the City Manager. A.Within thirty (30)days of receipt of a complete application, the City Manager shall consider the records, papers, files and any other evidenceithe or she deems relevant and shall rendera decision either granting or denying the license. B.If the licenseis approved, the City Manager may include such restrictions and conditions inthe licenseas the City Manager deems reasonable and necessary under the circumstances to insure compliance with the purposes a chapter. 5.32.250 Denial of License. The City Manager may refuse to issue a licenseif, after consideration of the application and any other papers, records and files he or she deems relevant, it is 150 determined that the operation of a bingo game would be injurious safety and morals of the people of the City, or that the permit proposed mode of operation of the bingo game is not in complianc provisions of this chapter. 5.32.260 Further Investigation by Sheriff. A. Any changes as to the staff operating or assisting in the game, or any other changes in the information furnished under Se subsequent to the issuance of a bingo license, shall be reported to the She further investigation which he deems necessary and appropriate. B. If, after such investigation, the Sheriff finds that the changes suspension or revocation of the bingo license, such determination shall be transmitted to the City Manager for appropriate action. 5.32.280 License Fee. A. The fee for a license shall be set by resolution of the City Council and payable at the time the application is submitted. B. If an application for a license is denied one-half of the license fee paid shall be refunded. 5.32.290 License Renewal. A. Licenses are granted for termsup to one yearand may be renewable annuallyeach January. Written applications for renewal of a license shall be made to the City Manager by December 1 of each year. 5.32.300 Filing of Annual Report. Each authorized organization which has been issued a license shalat the end of each fiscal year a report made under penalty of perjury with the City clerk containing the following information: 1. Any changes in or additions to the information required under Section 5.32.190; 2. The total amount of money received from the operation of the bingo games in the previous fiscal year; 151 3.The total amount paid out in prizes; 4. Detailed costs to the organization for the operation of the bing games. 5.32.310 Licenses Nontransferable. Licenses granted under this chapter shall not be transferable, either as to the license or the location. Any attempt to transfer shall render th invalid. 5.32.320 Revocation, Suspension of License Authorized. Any license issued under this chapter may be suspended or revoke City Manager on his or her own motion or on application of the Sheriff, District Attorney o City Attorney for violation of any of the provisions of this cha this code or of federal or state law. The holder of a bingo license shall be given prompt notice of revocation or suspension of said license and shall imm conducting or operating any bingo game 5.32.330 Appeal of Revocation, Suspension. Appeals of revocations or suspensions of bingo licenses shall be Chapter 1.16. Section 2. All other provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 5.32 sh remain unchanged. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council the 19th day of March, 2013 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council t ____ day of _______, 2013 by the following vote: VoteMembers of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: ____________________________________________________________ Grace Schmidt, City Clerk Orrin Mahoney, Mayor, City of Cupertino 152 ORDINANCE NO. 13- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 5.32 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BINGO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 5.32 arehereby amended to read as follows: 5.32.060 Staffing and Operation. A bingo game shall be operated and staffed only by members of th organization which organized it. Thosemembers shall not receive a profit, wage or salary from any bingo game. Only an organization authorized to c by permitandlicense issued pursuant to this chapter shall operate a game, or engage the promotion, supervision or any other phase of such game. This section does not preclude the employment of security personnel who are not member organization at such a bingo game by the authorized organization 5.32.090 Bingo Equipment. All equipment used in the operation of bingo games shall be owned by th organization authorized by permitandlicense to conduct such bingo games. 5.32.100 Financial Interest. No individual corporation, partnership or other legal entity exc organization authorized by permit andlicense to conduct a bingo game shall hold a financial interest in the conduct of such bingo game. 5.32.190Permit License Required. No organization shall conduct a bingo game without first obtaininpermit license from the City Council Manager to do so. 153 5.32.200Application for Permit License Required. Written application for a permit licenserequired by this chapter shall bemade by affidavit under penalty of perjury and filed with the City Clerk contain: A. Name of organization; names, signatures and addresses of organization; B. Days and hours of operation of bingo games; C. Attached copies of certificates or letters evidencing exe in Section 5.32.030; D. Address of premises wherebingo games will be conducted; E. Statement of ownership or lease of premises; F. Purpose(s) for which such premises are used by the organi G. Statement of ownership of bingo equipment used in the ope games; H. Statement of consent for Sheriff to inspect any bank acco derived from bingo games; I. Name of each individual, corporation, partnership or othe has a financial interest in the conduct of the bingo games; J. Name of person responsible for the operation of the bingo K. Such further information as may be required by the City Council Manager. 5.32.210 Authority of the Investigation and Recommendation by Sh A.The City Council Manager shall submit each application to the Sheriff for investigation and recommendation. B. The Sheriff shall have the authority to obtain criminal h for each person operating or assisting in the operation of a bin of his investigation. If he finds that such operators or person operation of a bingo game have been convicted within the past five y 154 involving lotteries, gambling, larceny, perjury, bribery, extort crimes involving moral turpitude, he may not recommend issuance question. 5.32.220 Investigation and Recommendation by Other City Departme Agencies. The City Council Manager shall submit each application to the following City departments or other agencies for investigation and recommendati A. Chief of the Central Fire District as to any fire hazard on the premises in question; B. County Health Officer as to the health and sanitary condins of the premises in question; C. Chief Building Inspector as to compliance with City buildgulations; D. Director of Planning as to compliance with City zoning requirements. 5.32.230 Notice and Hearing by City Council,Opportunity for Applicant to Review Records. A. The City Clerk shall set the time and place for public hearing oach applicant for bingo permit and shall mail notice thereof to the other person who has filed a written request for such notice. A. B.Each applicant shall have the opportunity, upon request,to review all records, papers, files and any other evidence relating to the ap permit license except criminal history information, at least five days prior to the time set for public hearing on such application before the application is signed by the City Manager. 5.32.240 Final Action by the City Council Manager. A.At the time and place set for public hearing on the application permit, the Within thirty (30)days of receipt of a complete application, Tthe City Council Manager shall consider the records, papers, files and any other evidenceit he or she deems relevant and shall render its a decision either granting or denying the permit license. 155 B.If the permitlicenseis approved, the City Council Manager may include such restrictions and conditions in the permitlicenseas the City Council Manager deems reasonable and necessary under the circumstances to insure the purposes and intent of this chapter. 5.32.250 Denial of Permit License. The City Council Manager may refuse to issue a permit license if, after consideration of the application and any other papers, records ait he or she deems relevant, it is determined that the operation of a bingo g injurious to the health, safety and morals of the people of the City, or that the permit application or proposed mode of operation of the bingo game is n with the provisions of this chapter. 5.32.260 Further Investigation by Sheriff. A. Any changes as to the staff operating or assisting in the game, or any other changes in the information furnished under Se subsequent to the issuance of a bingo permit and license, shall be reported to the Sheriff for any further investigation which he deems necessary and B. If, after such investigation, the Sheriff finds that the changes suspension or revocation of the bingo permitandlicense, such determination shall be transmitted to the City Council Manager for appropriate action. 5.32.270 License Required. A.In addition to obtaining a permit as required by this chapter, e organization conducting a bingo game shall obtain a license from collector; no license shall be issued until the applicant therefor has a valid permit covering the organization and the premises. B.Each organization proposing to conduct ten bingo games or less a shall obtain a special license from the license collector for ea special license shall be valid only for the bingo game specified C.Each organization proposing to conduct more than ten bingo games shall obtain a general license from the license collector. 5.32.280 License Fee. 156 A.The fee for a license shall be five dollars set by resolution of the City Council and payable at the time of issuance thereof the application is submitted. B. The fee for a general license shall be five dollars, payable at issuance and each renewal therof. CB. If an application for a license is denied one-half of any the license fee paid shall be refunded. 5.32.290 License Renewal. A.GeneralLlicenses are granted for one-year termsup to one year; each term isand may berenewable annually each January. Written applications for renewal of a general license shall be made to the City Council Managerat least one month prior to the scheduled public hearingby December 1 of each year.There will be one annual public hearing for each license renewal application. Such public for the second City Council meeting of the month of January. B. A special license is granted only for a one-day term for each bingo game; said special license shall not be renewable. 5.32.300 Filing of Annual Report. A. During the term of the permit and license, eEach authorized organization which has been issued a permit and license shall file at the end of each fiscal year a report made under penalty of perjury with the City clerk containing the following information: 1.Any changes in or additions to the information required under Section 5.32.190; 2.The total amount of money received from the operation of the bingo games in the previous fiscal year; 3.The total amount paid out in prizes; 4.Detailed costs to the organization for the operation of the bing games. B.Each authorized organization which has been issued a general lic shall file said report at the end of each fiscal year. Each authorized organization which has been issued a special license shall file said report within authorized bingo game. 157 5.32.310 PermitsandLicenses Nontransferable. Permits andLlicenses granted under this chapter shall notbe transferable, either as to the license or the location.Any attempt to transfer shall render the permit and license in question invalid. 5.32.320 Revocation, Suspension of Permitand License Authorized. Any permit andlicense issued under this chapter may be suspended or revoked by the City Council Manager on its his or her own motion or on application of the Sheriff, District Attorney or City Attorney for violation of any of the p or any provisions of this code or of federal or state law. The holder of a bingo license shall be given prompt notice ofrevocation or suspension of said license and shall immediately desist from conducting or operating any bingo game 5.32.330 Notice, Hearing on Appeal of Revocation, Suspension. The holder of a bingo license shall be given prompt notice of re suspension of said permit and license and shall immediately desist from conducting or operating any bingo game. Said notice shall fix a time and place, not less than five nor more than thirty days after service thereof, at which time the holder appear before the City Council Manager and be granted a hearing upon the merits of said suspension or revocation.Appeals of revocations or suspensions of bingo licenses shall be as provided in Chapter 1.16. Section 2. All other provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 5.32 sh remain unchanged. INTRODUCED at a regularmeeting of the Cupertino City Council the 19th day of March, 2013and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council t ____day of_______, 2013by the following vote: VoteMembers of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST:APPROVED: ____________________________________________________________ Grace Schmidt, City ClerkOrrin Mahoney, Mayor, City of Cupertino 158 ORDINANCE NO. 13- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING SECTIONS 14.04.170 AND 18.32.390 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 14.04 are hereby amended to read as follows: 14.04.170 Installation AgreementBondOther Security. A. Whenever an installation agreement is executed pursuant t this chapter, the permittee shall file with the City at the time a faithful performance bond to assure his full and faithful perfe agreement. The penal sum of the faithful performance bond shall payment to be made under the agreement; the value of any land ag and any improvements to be made under the agreement. In the eve improvements are to be made under said agreement, the permittee shall, the faithful performance, file with the City at the time of maki and materials bond in a penal sum adequate to assure full paymen materials required to construct said improvements. The amount of th as designated by the City Engineer. The bonds shall be executed authorized to transact a surety business in the State of Califor by the City Attorney as to form and by the City Engineer as to su that the permittee fails faithfully to perform the covenants and agreement, or to make any payment, or any dedication of land, or therein required, the City shall call on the surety to perform the indemnify the City for the permittees failure to do so. B. In lieu of a surety bond, the permittee may elect to secu depositing with the City: 1. Cash; or, 2. A cashiers check, or a certified check, payable to the o 159 3. A certificate of deposit or irrevocable letters of credit Attorney. C. The amount of said cash, checks, certificate of deposit, credit, shall be as designated by the City Engineer, and shall b which would have been required had the permittee furnished the Ca surety bond. In the event that the permittee fails faithfully to perfo conditions of said agreements, or to make any payment, or any de any improvements therein required, the City may apply the proceeecurity thereto. D. No release of surety bond, cash deposit, check, certifica irrevocable letters of credit, shall be made except upon approvaEngineer. E. No interest shall be paid on any security depositedwith the City. F. The security for any agreement executed pursuant to the p chapter may, nevertheless, be waived pursuant to the requirement procedures set forth in Section 14.04.230. Section 2. The following provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 18.32are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.32.390 General A. When all improvement deficiencies have been corrected and as-built improvement plans filed, the subdivision improvements shall be cthe City Engineerfor acceptance. B. Acceptance of the improvements shall imply only that the impr been completed satisfactorily and that public improvements have public use. Section 3. All other provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapters 14.04 and 18.32 shall remain unchanged. // // 160 INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council the 19th day of March, 2013 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council t ____ day of _______, 2013 by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: ____________________________________________________________ Grace Schmidt, City Clerk Orrin Mahoney, Mayor, City of Cupertino 161 ORDINANCE NO. 13- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING SECTIONS 14.04.170 AND 18.32.390 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 14.04 are hereby amended to read as follows: 14.04.170 Installation AgreementBondOther Security. A. Whenever an installation agreement is executed pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the permittee shall file with the City at the time a faithful performance bond to assure his full and faithful perf agreement. The penal sum of the faithful performance bond shall be the full cost of any payment to be made under the agreement; the value of any land ag and any improvements to be made under the agreement. In the eve improvements are to be made under said agreement, the permittee n addition to the faithful performance, file with the City at the time of maki and materials bond in a penal sum adequate to assure full paymen materials required to construct said improvements. The amount o bonds shall be as designated by the City Engineer. The bonds shall be executed authorized to transact a surety business in the State of Califor by the City Attorney as to form and by the City Engineer as to sficiency. In the event that the permittee fails faithfully to perform the covenants and agreement, or to make any payment, or any dedication of land, or therein required, the City shall call on the surety to perform tagreement or otherwise B. In lieu of a surety bond, the permittee may elect to secu depositing with the City: 1. Cash; or, 2. A cashier 162 3. A certificate of deposit or irrevocable letters of credit Attorney. C. The amount of said cash, checks, certificate of deposit, evocable letters of credit, shall be as designated by the City Engineer, and shall b which would have been required had the permittee furnished the C bond. In the event that the permittee fails faithfully to perfom the covenants and conditions of said agreements, or to make any payment, or any de any improvements therein required, the City may apply the procee thereto. D. No release of surety bond, cash deposit, check, certificate of deposit, or irrevocable letters of credit, shall be made except upon approva CouncilEngineer. E. No interest shall be paid on any security deposited with F. The security for any agreement executed pursuant to the provision of this chapter may, nevertheless, be waived pursuant to the requirement procedures set forth in Section 14.04.230. Section 2. The following provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 18.32 are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.32.390 General A. When all improvement deficiencies have been corrected and as-built improvement plans filed, the subdivision improvements shall be c Engineer for acceptance. Subdivisions of five or more parcels must be accepted by the City Council. The City Engineer or authorized representative shall be responsi the acceptance of subdivisions of four or less parcels. B. Acceptance of the improvements shall imply only that the impr been completed satisfactorily and that public improvements have been ac public use. // // 163 Section 3. All other provisions of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapters 14.04 and 18.32 shall remain unchanged. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council the 19th day of March, 2013 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council t ____ day of _______, 2013 by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: _______________________ _____________________________________ Grace Schmidt, City Clerk Orrin Mahoney, Mayor, City of Cupertino 164 PARKS AND RECREATIONDEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE •CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408)777-3110 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: March 19, 2013 Subject Authorize the City Manager to execute a lease agreement for the property known as The Blue Pheasant Restaurant with Hungry Jacks Restaurant Corporation an. Recommended Action AuthorizeCity Managerto execute alease agreementfor a five yeartermwith an option foran additional five-year extension, which can only be executed by mutual agreement of the parties, for the monthly base rent to start April 1, 2013 at $9152, with an annual increase at 4%. Description The Blue Pheasant Restaurant property includes a building of approximately 6800 square feet including the kitchen, bar, banquet room, and the non-exclusive use of 92 parking spaces. The current lease with Hungry Jacks Restaurant Corporation and Mike March 31, 2013. Discussion Staff met with Mr. Tsachres on February 6, 2013 to discuss the terms for a new lease. After discussion, staff and Mr. Tsachres came to a tentative agreement for the fol There will be parking lot impacts from May 2013 to December 2013 the Citys Stevens Creek Restoration Project The City has plans for striping the new on-street parking on Stevens Creek Blvd., which will help reduce the impact of the temporary loss of parking The City is submitting in the upcoming budget funds to paint exterior of building The City will be developing in the spring of 2013 a Blackberry Farm Golf Course Master Plan that will include discussion on restaurant building Mr. Tsachres has plans to install new restaurant equipment, redecorate the interior with new carpeting, repaint interior walls, and install new exterior sign The new lease terms are for five years with an option that is mutually agreed upon for an additional five-year extension. The new lease rate for first five years is at an annual 4% increase 165 Staff has informed Mr. Tsachres that the subsequent Blackberry Farm Master Plan may result in significant changes to the operations of the Blue Pheasant or ev of the building. Sustainability Impact N/A Fiscal Impact The new lease rate for first five years is at an annual 4% increase: Commencing Monthly Base Date Rent Annual Rent April 1, 2013$9152$109,824 April 1, 2014$9518$114,216 April 1, 2015 $9898 $118,776 April 1, 2016 $10,293 $123,516 April 1, 2017$10,704$128,448 Lease Rent Total $594,780 Prepared by: Julia Lamy, Senior Recreation Supervisor Reviewed by:Carol Atwood, Acting Parks and Recreation Director Approved for Submission by:David Brandt, City Manager Attachments:None 166